# Is he an AST or APBT?



## BlueBuddy (Sep 28, 2012)

Ok so I got this boy around 12wks from an "APBT" breeder. I was an ignorant person like almost everyone else who thinks are Pitbull looking dogs are APBT. I've had Rottweilers and Doberman Pinschers all my life but this time, I wanted a medium sized dog. When looking for a APBT, I noticed that they are so many Pitbulls out there, shelters, backyard breeders, etc. Every ad that I saw claimed that they had "Gottiline" or "RE" bloodline Pitbulls. I was clueless at the time about bloodlines so it didn't mattered to me. I didn't care about papers or anything. I just wanted a good looking dog. So I checked out the parents to make my decision.

I came upon the dog that I have now. The breeder had UKC papers but again, I didn't care about papers. Now after seeing my boy grow, I kinda wish I did get his papers. My question now is... Is he an APBT or an AmStaff? The breeder told me back then that he had APBT. The sire was 60lbs and dam was 50lbs. He said they were Razor's Edge bloodlines. It's been 7 months since I contacted the breeder. Of course, he can't locate him anymore for more information.

My boy is now 8 months old and weighs 38lbs, 17" to the withers. I compare him to APBT and AST pics and he looks more like an AST to me.

What do you think?


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

Probably an American Bully if he's RE. Classic Bullies very closely resemble Amstaff, but there is a difference in breeding between the 2 even though the look is so close. 

Being as he is papered, you just didn't get them, it's not like most who have no papers and want to find out what breed. If you did have the papers we could look at what actual lines the dog is. 

Cute pup. Is it possible to contact the breeders and get the papers?

What area of CA you in?


----------



## Black Rabbit (Nov 14, 2009)

RE is not an APBT bloodline. Depending on which breeder he came from he will either be AmStaff or AmBully. Because the UKC doesn't recognize the AmStaff or the AmBully they are all registered as APBTs on their paperwork, even though they are not truly APBTs. 

I will try to explain the RE thing as easily as possible. The foundation of the RE line were very nice AmStaffs. Clean looking dogs, with nice structure. 
Now some have kept it pure and only bred back to the true AmStaff, while other people took it in another direction of AmBullies. Some lines of Bullies are far to over exaggerated and have some structure problems so they use the RE dogs to clean up their lines. Sine they had good structure it often mixed well will the bully lines. 

The only way to know for sure what you've got would be to get a hold of the breeders and look at papers. If it was the older RE that stayed the same then it would be AmStaff, if it is the new off branch RE then it's most likely classic bully. 
I hope this make sense I tried to keep it as simple as possible


----------



## Black Rabbit (Nov 14, 2009)

American_Pit13 said:


> Probably an American Bully if he's RE. Classic Bullies very closely resemble Amstaff, but there is a difference in breeding between the 2 even though the look is so close.
> 
> Being as he is papered, you just didn't get them, it's not like most who have no papers and want to find out what breed. If you did have the papers we could look at what actual lines the dog is.
> 
> ...


:goodpost:
Lol we were posting at the same time but your much faster


----------



## BlueBuddy (Sep 28, 2012)

I lost the breeder's contact info. I wish I knew more about him. I honestly didn't really care at first about my dogs lineage but as he got older and started going onto forums, I got a little more curious. I do remember the breeder saying he's a RE dog but it seemed like every ad that I saw said their dogs were RE and they looked so ugly. This breeder probably had the best looking sire and dam at the time.

I had no idea there was a difference with American Bullies, ASTs, and APBTs until I came into these forums. When looking for a dog, everyone seem claim that they had American Bullies and from RE. I would have to say that Central California has the most breeders. 

I am happy with my boy. He is the best dog I have ever owned. He's great with kids, other pets, and has never shown any negative signs at all. I just always assumed that he was pure classic APBT but he's definitely thicker than one.


----------



## Black Rabbit (Nov 14, 2009)

Yea there are a ton of people breeding dogs around here, I'm about 2.5 hours north of you 
Most are just BYBing for the money which is why you see so many in the shelters here. Sad. Yea the AmStaff and APBT have been different breeds for a long long time now. Bullies are fairly new, and more common as well as mix breeding in our area. 
I like your pup, very nice looking, but I'm willing to bet she's more along the lines of Classic Bully, which were APBT/AmStaff cross in the beginning. I could be completely wrong, only way to know for sure is the ped, but bassed on the area that's what I'd guess. That's just cause I've personally seen far more Bullies than anything in the area.


----------



## SHARON MOYA (Feb 8, 2007)

In regards to DNA, the Amstaff and the APBT are the same dog. You can go far enough back in both pedigrees and find the exact same dogs..

The AKC registered in UKC registered Pit Bulls and changed the name to Amstaff to reduce stigma. But changing a name doesn't change what a dog is. And continuing to breed pure obviously keeps the breed the same, regardless of what you decide to call it. There are some Amstaff lines that have retained their UKC papers since the beginning. They didn't "forfeit" their right to be APBT's just because they wanted to show in the AKC as Amstaffs... This is why UKC allowed Amstaffs to register in as APBT's. Because they had pedigrees that could be traced back to UKC APBT's....

More appropriately put, the Amstaffs and the APBT are technically just different BLOODLINES of the same breed. Bred to look/work a certain way. Since there was never any outside blood added, the DNA hasn't actually changed. You can compare them to any other breed of dogs where the "show version" looks so very different from the "working version".

The American German Shepherd looks very different from the German Dogs, the Field Working Springer Spaniel looks VASTLY different from the Show Ring Springer (look that one up, it's amazing), the Taco Bell Chihuahua looks nothing like the Chihuahuas in the show ring either... You get my point.... But they are ALL considered the same breed, regardless of which direction they were bred...

The American Bully is not a breed. It's a title. Anyone with a bully looking dog (even purebred English's) can register into the ABKC and call their dog a Bully.(At least until the end of this year, when the books will close and so will the gene pool). If I register my AKC Amstaff into the ABKC as a Bully, that does not change the fact that it is still an Amstaff..

The ABKC was founded because people in the UKC were crossing in different breeds and hanging UKC papers on them. The proverbial shit was about to hit the fan in the UKC so the people doing it decided to start their own registry rather than face DNA testing and punishment... Because paperless pups aren't worth squat. So they invented a registry, slapped a high price tag on them, and voila!

If a UKC registered APBT has NEVER had any outside blood mixed in, then it cannot magically change into an American Bully. It can register into the ABKC and call itself a Bully, but it's DNA is still APBT.... If it's a heavier dog, then it's just a heavier APBT. It's blood did not magically change because someone picked the heavier dogs in the past few generations and selectively bred them together... That's like saying that the people who selectively bred larger Dobermans or Rottweilers made them not Dobermans and Rottweilers anymore.....


----------



## Odin`s_BlueDragon (Mar 11, 2012)

I could be wrong but im pretty sure the ABKC is getting stricter on what they will register. But at this point as far as im concerned its a breed, it has a kennel club and I'd have to do more research but its a breed with different blood. And I also argue that AST and APBT while sharing the same history are now 2 very different structures, and anything that crosses those 2 breeds would be considered a mix or pitterstaff. Cuz im pretty sure that u can no longer dual register with AKC UKC. Again to me the reg papers can say what they want but the blood and the dogs ability speak for itself. The ped does not make the dog, the dog makes the ped. 

I agree with Holly and Krystal... if ur pup truly is RE than she is American Bully. I too am from NorCal


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

Odin's_BlueDragon said:


> I could be wrong but im pretty sure the ABKC is getting stricter on what they will register. But at this point as far as im concerned its a breed, it has a kennel club and I'd have to do more research but its a breed with different blood. And I also argue that AST and APBT while sharing the same history are now 2 very different structures, and anything that crosses those 2 breeds would be considered a mix or pitterstaff. Cuz im pretty sure that u can no longer dual register with AKC UKC. Again to me the reg papers can say what they want but the blood and the dogs ability speak for itself. The ped does not make the dog, the dog makes the ped.
> 
> I agree with Holly and Krystal... if ur pup truly is RE than she is American Bully. I too am from NorCal


The separation of these breeds will always differ to opinion. You can no longer register AKC dogs with the UKC or UKC dogs with the AKC however previously registered dogs can still be dual registered. UKC closed its registration to dogs registered outside the UKC.

The APBT and Amstaff were originally the same dogs, but like I said what they are now will vary from opinion to opinion on what makes a breed what it is.

They are separate by name, registry and type so I look at them separately. However I don't consider an Amstaff/APBT litter a mix bred litter either lol. So go figure.

Also any APBT/AmStaff being called a Bully well is it actually a bully or just an out of standard oversized pitterstaff? If no new breeds have been added your just breeding out of standard not making a new bred.


----------



## SHARON MOYA (Feb 8, 2007)

Odin's_BlueDragon said:


> I could be wrong but im pretty sure the ABKC is getting stricter on what they will register. But at this point as far as im concerned its a breed, it has a kennel club and I'd have to do more research but its a breed with different blood. And I also argue that AST and APBT while sharing the same history are now 2 very different structures, and anything that crosses those 2 breeds would be considered a mix or pitterstaff. Cuz im pretty sure that u can no longer dual register with AKC UKC. Again to me the reg papers can say what they want but the blood and the dogs ability speak for itself. The ped does not make the dog, the dog makes the ped.
> 
> I agree with Holly and Krystal... if ur pup truly is RE than she is American Bully. I too am from NorCal


You just said it yourself. The papers can say what they want to, but the BLOOD is what speaks. So if AKC took a bunch of Pit Bulls and called them Amstaffs on paper, it doesn't mean they don't still have their Pit Bull Blood... Just like I said...

And If you just said that the bully is a "Breed with different blood", then how can a UKC registered APBT truly be a bully?? That makes no sense...

As far as ABKC Bullies go, I could make a new registry too (anyone can) and call a poodle a pit bull on paper, it doesn't mean it's a new breed of pit bull....

The Bullies I have seen are mostly APBT's crossed with English Bulldog or some Mastiff type breed. Though I recently saw some that were crossed with Frenchies! When you can call that many different dogs with different breeds mixed together the same thing, to me it's just a label, not a breed. Why do you think that AKC/UKC will not recognize Cockapoos and Labradoodles? Because mixing 2 breeds does not automatically give you a new one. It gives you a mutt....

The dog above looks nothing like a Bully to me. It looks more like an Amstaff... But I have a few Amstaffs that look like Bullies (with a little more muzzle) because God made them "overdone". Just because they are "overdone" does not magically change them from Amstaffs into Bullies..... They are still Amstaffs. Just like there are Amstaffs that look like game-bred dogs. We call them Pet Quality Amstaffs...

You are also wrong about there not being any AKC/UKC Amstaffs anymore..
All of my Amstaffs are dual registered AKC/UKC. My UKC papers are "PR" too, which means that my Amstaffs have been UKC registered (and show titled) for at least 6 generations as APBT's. Obviously I have some experience in this area.

Again, I will say that, just because a dog has been bred for a specific look/purpose, does not mean it's not a purebred dog of it's breed. If no outside blood was added it is still the same breed. Below is a PERFECT example of this. I am posting two photos. Both are of AKC registered Springer Spaniels. The first photo is of Springer Spaniels bred just for field work. The second photo is a Springer Spaniel after many generations of being bred for the show ring (like the Amstaff). BOTH are AKC registered and BOTH are Springers. Just different bloodlines..... No one would dare look at the breeder/owner of either one and say their dog was not a Springer...

Same difference with the APBT. If someone has a pedigree and DNA that says their dog is a purebred APBT. Then no one has the right to call it anything else just because it doesn't look like what THEIR ideal of the breed should be...

Springer Spaniels bred for field work (this is their natural coat, they have not been shaved)








[/URL] fss by wonderlandamstaffs, on Flickr[/IMG]

And a Springer Spaniel Bred for the Show Ring








[/URL] connor2 by wonderlandamstaffs, on Flickr[/IMG]


----------



## redog (Oct 14, 2005)

Great explanation Sharon. I never really had it explained to me quite like that. I've had springers bred for the field, completely diff from the show bred. I wanted tough, hard working dogs for bird hunting. Plus I love the ticking! A friend acquired a show bred.... Beautiful dog but he was just not my cup of tea. I've always hoped that OUR breeds would eventually be accepted by our peers like the spaniels but it doesn't seem to be happening any time soon.


----------



## ames (Jun 6, 2010)

Yeah I don't buy into them being the same breed, but I see what you are saying in the explanation about. Totally bred for different purposes though. I am sure although no one would call those dogs a different breed, they would not argue their purpose. I have seen many different arguments about some people accepting Amstaff and APBT to be the same breed, but I am one that believes they are not bloodlines, but different breeds since each have their own distinct bloodlines.


----------



## Odin`s_BlueDragon (Mar 11, 2012)

I think u misread me or maybe I explained it wrong. I didn't say that dual reg dogs don't exist any more, I said that they are dual reging dogs anymore. Like Holly said the books have been closed and dogs cannot be dual reged from this point on. Not all Bullies are overdone, there are several that throwbacks to the old AmStaff lines.

And yes I am aware of feild dogs not looking like show dogs but with the unique feild that the APBT was bred for, the AKC wanted to stay away from [] talk. Do u consider American Akitas a different breed than Akita Inus? Or the same bred for different standards?

This might be just splitting hairs, but I always hate the talk about how "God made the dog that way" excuse. God didn't breed the dogs, man did. Dogs in God's eyes were ment to be mutts, so to speak. And no, don't start any religous debate, im not getting into it.


----------



## ::::COACH:::: (Apr 4, 2012)

kg420 said:


> RE is not an APBT bloodline. Depending on which breeder he came from he will either be AmStaff or AmBully. Because the UKC doesn't recognize the AmStaff or the AmBully they are all registered as APBTs on their paperwork, even though they are not truly APBTs.
> 
> I will try to explain the RE thing as easily as possible. The foundation of the RE line were very nice AmStaffs. Clean looking dogs, with nice structure.
> Now some have kept it pure and only bred back to the true AmStaff, while other people took it in another direction of AmBullies. Some lines of Bullies are far to over exaggerated and have some structure problems so they use the RE dogs to clean up their lines. Sine they had good structure it often mixed well will the bully lines.
> ...


Yes!! What she said! :goodpost:


----------



## BlueBuddy (Sep 28, 2012)

Ha. I'd guess its safe to say that my boy is a mutt! I honestly don't care about whether he was an AmStaff or APBT or even a AmBully. I just get asked quite often what bloodline or whether he's a APBT or AmStaff. I always tell them I don't know because I don't know! I just know he's a Razor's Edge bloodline dog but it seems like every dog is a Razor's Edge dog. Thanks for the input everyone. I learned quit a bit from this thread.

I kinda wish I bought his pedigree just to know his history but I got him neutered and didn't plan on breeding him so it was pointless to me.


----------



## SHARON MOYA (Feb 8, 2007)

Odin's_BlueDragon said:


> I think u misread me or maybe I explained it wrong. I didn't say that dual reg dogs don't exist any more, I said that they are dual reging dogs anymore. Like Holly said the books have been closed and dogs cannot be dual reged from this point on. Not all Bullies are overdone, there are several that throwbacks to the old AmStaff lines.
> 
> And yes I am aware of feild dogs not looking like show dogs but with the unique feild that the APBT was bred for, the AKC wanted to stay away from [] talk. Do u consider American Akitas a different breed than Akita Inus? Or the same bred for different standards?
> 
> This might be just splitting hairs, but I always hate the talk about how "God made the dog that way" excuse. God didn't breed the dogs, man did. Dogs in God's eyes were ment to be mutts, so to speak. And no, don't start any religous debate, im not getting into it.


I did not misunderstand. When you say "they are not dual registering dogs anymore" it implies that the AKC Amstaffs can no longer register their litters in the UKC, even if they are registered... So it reads to me.

UKC is planning to reopen the books one day, but according to the UKC people, it will only open to AKC dogs. No more ADBA and such. No idea when this will happen, but I plan on asking the President of the UKC this weekend if he shows up at the Nationals...

I do consider the Akita Inu and the American Akita the same breed. AKC does too. When dogs are imported, they are registered as Akitas. Not American or Inu....

I wasn't being religious. Maybe I should have said "mother nature". Just like you spoke about "throwbacks" with the bullies, there can be a litter with varying types of pups. Particularly with outcrosses. You get some that have more substance and bone (or less) than others. Some have better heads, some have shorter backs, etc. etc...

This is why it is highly unusual for a breeder to produce an entire litter of show quality pups. Mother nature makes them different. Some are ideal, some are pet quality. Can't really say "man" did it. Not unless you work in a lab and can genetically manipulate every embryo..... We can only put the dogs together and hope nature follows our wishes...


----------



## SHARON MOYA (Feb 8, 2007)

redog said:


> Great explanation Sharon. I never really had it explained to me quite like that. I've had springers bred for the field, completely diff from the show bred. I wanted tough, hard working dogs for bird hunting. Plus I love the ticking! A friend acquired a show bred.... Beautiful dog but he was just not my cup of tea. I've always hoped that OUR breeds would eventually be accepted by our peers like the spaniels but it doesn't seem to be happening any time soon.


That is quite evident, here in particular... And Thanks.


----------



## pitbullmamanatl (Jun 1, 2010)

Where's the dog's ped?


----------



## BlueBuddy (Sep 28, 2012)

pitbullmamanatl said:


> Where's the dog's ped?


When I acquired the dog, the breeder gave me the option to buy "with" or "without" papers. I opted to go without papers because he was going to be only a pet, not a show dog or a stud.

As he got older, I get questions regarding his lineage. I just always assumed he was an APBT because that's what the breeder said. Then I hear people saying he's an AmBully or AmStaff.

I made this thread to see what the knowledgable online Pitbull community thinks rather than a regular person walking down the street.










Sent from my iPhone using PG Free


----------



## Goemon (Jun 27, 2012)

BlueBuddy said:


> When I acquired the dog, the breeder gave me the option to buy "with" or "without" papers. I opted to go without papers because he was going to be only a pet, not a show dog or a stud.
> 
> As he got older, I get questions regarding his lineage._* I just always assumed he was an APBT because that's what the breeder said.*_ Then I hear people saying he's an AmBully or AmStaff.
> 
> I made this thread to see what the knowledgable online Pitbull community thinks rather than a regular person walking down the street.


Blue Buddy...
The majority of breeders today have no clue what they are really breeding, regarding the ApBT breed.
That breeder may have actually believed he was breeding ApBT's. 
A majority of people call the blue dogs ApBT's today. Blues are nothing more than a show version. An AST. Some are bullies.
Yours looks more like an AST to me.

Now that you know this fact, next time you look for a pup you'll have a better idea of what you're looking for.
Also I think now you can see a little more value in a pedigree.


----------



## performanceknls (Apr 4, 2009)

I could not disagree more with the AST being the same as an APBT now. They have had the same genetics at one point but the fact is they have been bred for such a different purpose that they are not recognisable as the same breed anymore. At least in the springers you posted they looked similar except coat type. We are talking about totally different structure and IMO most of the AST's have been ruined by show breeding. There are a few good breeders out there who can breed a structurally sound AST but not many.

I know that many AST people feel the same way. At working APBT nationals I was talking with a AST breeder who was our judge for conformation and she told me that they have submitted to the UKC to become a separate breed as an AST and not lumped into the APBT group. I think this is AWESOME!! I hate going to a UKC show and being in the same ring as the AST, I think the ABKC at some point should do the same and we can have varieties or just different breeds all together. Now the big question is what to do with all the pitterstaffs that have been bred and is dominating in the UKC.


----------



## KMdogs (Apr 22, 2011)

Registries give me a migraine thinking about all the nonsense,, function defines all.. Separates all.

Why is such a simple, taught and passed down for years truth so hard to understand. Guess it is pride, people don't want to be told what they thought they knew is 

I've said it countless times, it has all been laid out black and white when it comes to Bulldogs, APBTs.. There is no such thing as a show bred APBT.. The AST exists for that purpose and it functions are directed towards that particular atmosphere.. Same foundation of genetics, different purpose and abilities instilled thus creating the sound structure that is carried generation to generation through proper breeding. As with the APBT, however the instilled abilities and proven abilities are not that of the show ring, worlds apart. Damn near to the poles of the spectrum apart.

The American Bully, its own breed, designer breed, what have you exists much as the AST.. A show animal and a companion animal.. Zero functional use of hard labor, not by design and not by construction and not by foundation.. More mass AST, if you find a gem in the pile of crap.


----------



## Kwhitaker0604 (Aug 6, 2012)

performanceknls said:


> I could not disagree more with the AST being the same as an APBT now. They have had the same genetics at one point but the fact is they have been bred for such a different purpose that they are not recognisable as the same breed anymore. At least in the springers you posted they looked similar except coat type. We are talking about totally different structure and IMO most of the AST's have been ruined by show breeding. There are a few good breeders out there who can breed a structurally sound AST but not many.
> 
> I know that many AST people feel the same way. At working APBT nationals I was talking with a AST breeder who was our judge for conformation and she told me that they have submitted to the UKC to become a separate breed as an AST and not lumped into the APBT group. I think this is AWESOME!! I hate going to a UKC show and being in the same ring as the AST, I think the ABKC at some point should do the same and we can have varieties or just different breeds all together. Now the big question is what to do with all the pitterstaffs that have been bred and is dominating in the UKC.


Great post! My thoughts exactly!


----------



## Black Rabbit (Nov 14, 2009)

performanceknls said:


> I could not disagree more with the AST being the same as an APBT now. They have had the same genetics at one point but the fact is they have been bred for such a different purpose that they are not recognisable as the same breed anymore. At least in the springers you posted they looked similar except coat type. We are talking about totally different structure and IMO most of the AST's have been ruined by show breeding. There are a few good breeders out there who can breed a structurally sound AST but not many.
> 
> I know that many AST people feel the same way. At working APBT nationals I was talking with a AST breeder who was our judge for conformation and she told me that they have submitted to the UKC to become a separate breed as an AST and not lumped into the APBT group. I think this is AWESOME!! I hate going to a UKC show and being in the same ring as the AST, I think the ABKC at some point should do the same and we can have varieties or just different breeds all together. Now the big question is what to do with all the pitterstaffs that have been bred and is dominating in the UKC.


:goodpost:
:woof: :woof:


----------



## Black Rabbit (Nov 14, 2009)

I just don't understand the point here. Why the hell duel register? If the point was to have a separate breed away from the box for show, why continue to duel register? So if the UKC is going to only duel register with AKC and not ADBA are the going to drop the APBT name and just be calling them all AmStaffs now? Cause that's what the AmStaffs were for right? To have a show version. The whole thing kinda sounds a bit ridiculous to me.


----------



## divasmommy2012 (Oct 5, 2012)

hey im new to this site i had a ? and was wondering if you might be able to assist me with some info on how to get papers put on my 15 week old red nose pit she came from quite a horror story and was wondering if its possible


----------



## Odin`s_BlueDragon (Mar 11, 2012)

divasmommy2012 said:


> hey im new to this site i had a ? and was wondering if you might be able to assist me with some info on how to get papers put on my 15 week old red nose pit she came from quite a horror story and was wondering if its possible


the best idea here is to make a new thread so ur not piggybacking off of this one. u'll get more responses that way.


----------



## American_Pit13 (Apr 23, 2007)

divasmommy2012 said:


> hey im new to this site i had a ? and was wondering if you might be able to assist me with some info on how to get papers put on my 15 week old red nose pit she came from quite a horror story and was wondering if its possible


Usually you would make your own thread for a question.  If she wasn't produced with papers from a breeder she has no papers to get.

Gettin pretty quick there Odin lol


----------



## performanceknls (Apr 4, 2009)

kg420 said:


> I just don't understand the point here. Why the hell duel register? If the point was to have a separate breed away from the box for show, why continue to duel register? So if the UKC is going to only duel register with AKC and not ADBA are the going to drop the APBT name and just be calling them all AmStaffs now? Cause that's what the AmStaffs were for right? To have a show version. The whole thing kinda sounds a bit ridiculous to me.


As if now they are not Dual registering any dogs because the stud books are closed in UKC. There is talk of opening it back up but not anytime soon. The AST's have petitioned to the UKC to allow them to have their own breed separate from the APBT so they would be AST and APBT's now the question is what to do with the pitterstaff and APBT's.


----------



## Odin`s_BlueDragon (Mar 11, 2012)

American_Pit13 said:


> Gettin pretty quick there Odin lol


Well I did learn from the best


----------



## SHARON MOYA (Feb 8, 2007)

kg420 said:


> I just don't understand the point here. Why the hell duel register? If the point was to have a separate breed away from the box for show, why continue to duel register? So if the UKC is going to only duel register with AKC and not ADBA are the going to drop the APBT name and just be calling them all AmStaffs now? Cause that's what the AmStaffs were for right? To have a show version. The whole thing kinda sounds a bit ridiculous to me.


 It really does sound ridiculous... Taking a working breed, segregating a small group of them to be bred for show and registering them in another registry for that purpose, but then turning around and having conformation shows in the registry they were originally in, and THEN saying they shouldn't be allowed to compete?

That's like someone from a third world country coming here to play pro football. Then one day someone starts a football league in their own country and they are not allowed to play....

This train of thought leads one to wonder why UKC bothers to have conformation shows at all, if the Amstaff is supposed to be the show dog of the APBT world... But if UKC wants to have conformation shows, then they should let the dogs that were bred for it compete right? Food for thought for sure.

Great post...:clap:

To answer your question, I dual register my pups because the UKC is much more "puppy friendly" and a great learning experience. And I like weight pull too... Amstaffs are not just "pretty faces". A lot of Amstaff people I know weight pull their dogs.



performanceknls said:


> I could not disagree more with the AST being the same as an APBT now. They have had the same genetics at one point but the fact is they have been bred for such a different purpose that they are not recognisable as the same breed anymore. At least in the springers you posted they looked similar except coat type. We are talking about totally different structure and IMO most of the AST's have been ruined by show breeding. There are a few good breeders out there who can breed a structurally sound AST but not many.
> 
> I know that many AST people feel the same way. At working APBT nationals I was talking with a AST breeder who was our judge for conformation and she told me that they have submitted to the UKC to become a separate breed as an AST and not lumped into the APBT group. I think this is AWESOME!! I hate going to a UKC show and being in the same ring as the AST, I think the ABKC at some point should do the same and we can have varieties or just different breeds all together. Now the big question is what to do with all the pitterstaffs that have been bred and is dominating in the UKC.


I said "genetically" the same. Back in the pedigrees behind the AKC and UKC dogs are the exact same dogs. So both groups of dogs are still technically the same breed as long as no outside blood was introduced. It is not incorrect to say that the Amstaff is a selectively bred APBT. Or as I describe it "The AKC Show Version of the APBT"... It is incorrect to say it's not an APBT at all.

Like German Shepherds in Germany and the AKC Show Shepherds. One is bred for work, and the other for show. But if a German dog is imported it is still registered into the AKC as a Shepherd...

I don't think the UKC can separate the Amstaffs/Pits, because there ARE so many out there that are mixed. And how in the world would they be able to go through all those decades of records and figure out who was AST and who was APBT and then change their breed name in the registry now? Can you imagine the difficulty? Imagine having to trace every single registered dog's pedigree back to see if it had AKC blood. And then sending every owner a letter saying that they were changing their dog's breed in the registry...The enormity of that task boggles the mind....


----------



## performanceknls (Apr 4, 2009)

SHARON MOYA said:


> I said "genetically" the same. Back in the pedigrees behind the AKC and UKC dogs are the exact same dogs. So both groups of dogs are still technically the same breed as long as no outside blood was introduced. It is not incorrect to say that the Amstaff is a selectively bred APBT. Or as I describe it "The AKC Show Version of the APBT"... It is incorrect to say it's not an APBT at all.
> 
> Like German Shepherds in Germany and the AKC Show Shepherds. One is bred for work, and the other for show. But if a German dog is imported it is still registered into the AKC as a Shepherd...
> 
> I don't think the UKC can separate the Amstaffs/Pits, because there ARE so many out there that are mixed. And how in the world would they be able to go through all those decades of records and figure out who was AST and who was APBT and then change their breed name in the registry now? Can you imagine the difficulty? Imagine having to trace every single registered dog's pedigree back to see if it had AKC blood. And then sending every owner a letter saying that they were changing their dog's breed in the registry...The enormity of that task boggles the mind....


You are going to get a very different opinion from APBT people. And not UKC APBT people but more ADBA style dogs who feel the AST is no longer an APBT. An AST is NOT an APBT anymore! and the German shep comparison is not even relevant as you can tell it's a german shepherd American or German by looking at them. They are just bred down in the rear since Americans like to fuck up breeds. You look at an AST and a real APBT and they do not look like the same breeds anymore. The breed characteristics are totally different so are the drives and structure. Many AST people try to hold on to the connection of the APBT but they have become two separate breeds even if they started out the same. Breeding for a new purpose, structure, and changing the breed characteristics makes a new breed.

It's going to be very simple with the UKC. If it is a registered AKC AST then it will be an AST, If it's anything else, for now, it will be an APBT. That's pretty cut and dry.


----------



## KMdogs (Apr 22, 2011)

Why the hell are we talking about registries anyway? Show bred Curs are not Pit Dogs.. Short lived the AST / APBT shared the same purpose, before the AST name got added on for show sake.. 

If you want to talk about APBTs and ASTs being the same, drop the registry talk, talk about the functions and instilled purposes.. You got your answer.


----------



## performanceknls (Apr 4, 2009)

LOL Love your "straight to the point" view KM! 

Registries are for those of us who show dogs, you know I show but not in conformation as much as other things like Obedience and Rally. That's the only reason my dogs are UKC registered. UKC agility and WP are a JOKE!! So it AKC agility for that matter but that's a different topic lol.
I also feel the same way about show bred APBT's in ADBA....... nothing more than AST's that look like APBT's...... 

Conformation is nothing more than someone opinion about a dog and in reality I would rather work my dogs and know they are functional than care about someone's opinion. I do show conformation because I breed dogs so it's nice to have CH's but I don't go to many.

Oh and UKC WP is a Joke and most of those dogs wouldn't be able to compete in real WP like the ADBA, APA, NKC, or IWPA.


----------



## KMdogs (Apr 22, 2011)

performanceknls said:


> LOL Love your "straight to the point" view KM!
> 
> Registries are for those of us who show dogs, you know I show but not in conformation as much as other things like Obedience and Rally. That's the only reason my dogs are UKC registered. UKC agility and WP are a JOKE!! So it AKC agility for that matter but that's a different topic lol.
> I also feel the same way about show bred APBT's in ADBA....... nothing more than AST's that look like APBT's......
> ...


Nothing wrong with showing if it benefits your program, I don't doubt your reasonings behind what yoh do, doesn't do anything for me what so ever but then again, I'm not your main clientele,, you got yourself some good performance stock and in the end thats what you need. However if we are going to talk about what is or isn't, simplify and get to the core. That's my views anyway.


----------



## performanceknls (Apr 4, 2009)

I love some of my AST friends and we talk alot about what the breed has become and many are sicked how far and extreme the AST has become. They also Would NEVER call them an APBT or show in UKC against APBT's for that reason. It's just sad they are the minority..... Oh and they also produce quality AST's with good toplines and angulation in the front and rear. Not what you see winning today with tails coming off the back and straight in the front and rear..... Just becuase you have an AST doesn't mean it has to be a train wreck or that you have to call it an APBT...... end rant.... lol


----------



## Black Rabbit (Nov 14, 2009)

performanceknls said:


> As if now they are not Dual registering any dogs because the stud books are closed in UKC. There is talk of opening it back up but not anytime soon. The AST's have petitioned to the UKC to allow them to have their own breed separate from the APBT so they would be AST and APBT's now the question is what to do with the pitterstaff and APBT's.


Thanks for explaining that  it makes a little more sense that way I guess. I just still don't get why people would want to call an AmStaff an APBT if the whole point was to not be associated with APBTs or the box. It just seems a bit silly to me I guess. Damn confusing ass registries lol


----------



## BlueBuddy (Sep 28, 2012)

kg420 said:


> Thanks for explaining that  it makes a little more sense that way I guess. I just still don't get why people would want to call an AmStaff an APBT if the whole point was to not be associated with APBTs or the box. It just seems a bit silly to me I guess. Damn confusing ass registries lol


That's how I feel about the AmStaff vs APBT. They should be considered a different breed or not. It's like you can call an AmStaff an APBT (according to the UKC) but can't call an APBT an AmStaff. I'm sure you can do that but the APBT purists seem to dislike that.

Sent from my iPhone using PG Free


----------



## SHARON MOYA (Feb 8, 2007)

performanceknls said:


> LOL Love your "straight to the point" view KM!
> 
> Registries are for those of us who show dogs, you know I show but not in conformation as much as other things like Obedience and Rally. That's the only reason my dogs are UKC registered. UKC agility and WP are a JOKE!! So it AKC agility for that matter but that's a different topic lol.
> I also feel the same way about show bred APBT's in ADBA....... nothing more than AST's that look like APBT's......
> ...


Having spent 25 years in the Sport horse world, I can tell you that conformation does matter when it comes to soundness and function. Conformation faults cause structural weakness.

If conformation doesn't really mean anything, they wouldn't even bother to write a breed standard.

If work ability was all that mattered to "be a breed" then any dog with that ability could be called that breed??? Wait, that can't be right... 

Instead of calling every dog sport (or venue within) you don't like "a joke", why not just appreciate that people are actually getting out there and doing something fun and interactive with their dogs? I titled a dual conformation CH "Amstaff" in UKC WP yesterday. He had fun, I had fun. I don't think that's "a joke".

And incidentally, it was only my boy's third time weight pulling too, and he actually impressed the people there that do IWPA and ADBA pulling competitions. Everyone was watching him and talking about him. He slammed himself into that harness every time and never backed off at all... He was still going when every other dog had already quit, and lord knows how much he would have actually pulled if I hadn't stopped him because I had to show another dog, and I didn't want to push him too hard so early on in his WP career.....

I plan to continue to pull him and go to different venues with him, to prove that the "pretty package" doesn't mean he can't do the job...


----------



## KMdogs (Apr 22, 2011)

SHARON MOYA said:


> Having spent 25 years in the Sport horse world, I can tell you that conformation does matter when it comes to soundness and function. Conformation faults cause structural weakness.
> 
> If conformation doesn't really mean anything, they wouldn't even bother to write a breed standard.
> 
> ...


You breed for function and ability, soundness in structure and mentality follows suit.. Evidence can be seen through history and you owe your thanks to be able to own dogs by that of those men whom followed this very philosophy. Proof is within the puddin'..

You breed strictly as a show animal yes you lose function and replace it with train wrecks after generations of such practice.. If real lucky, you end up with a sound animal that cannot perform per function of said breed. I can show you thousands of examples just within the GSD community, examples of Show stock attempting courage testing to be laughed out while a fine example of traditional stock.. Same can be said with ALL breeds of which have such a dividing line of prospects and proven animals.

It is VERY difficult to have the best of both worlds, when you do it is typically performance bred animals that have conformation and sound mentality following suit..

Registry standards are always evolving, conformation of what is "approved" is simply nothing more than laughable to me. Nevermind the function and soundness of mind, again, proof in the puddin.. Look no further than the ED as a prime example of what happens. Pathetic.

Your pretty package WPs.. That doesn't show anything, just something for the show folk to brag about thinking they are "working" their dogs. Nothing wrong with it for conditioning or if your just looking for something fun to do, i can respect that if intentions are pure and clarity.. However,,


----------



## performanceknls (Apr 4, 2009)

KMdogs said:


> You breed for function and ability, soundness in structure and mentality follows suit.. Evidence can be seen through history and you owe your thanks to be able to own dogs by that of those men whom followed this very philosophy. Proof is within the puddin'..
> 
> You breed strictly as a show animal yes you lose function and replace it with train wrecks after generations of such practice.. If real lucky, you end up with a sound animal that cannot perform per function of said breed. I can show you thousands of examples just within the GSD community, examples of Show stock attempting courage testing to be laughed out while a fine example of traditional stock.. Same can be said with ALL breeds of which have such a dividing line of prospects and proven animals.
> 
> ...


I think it's great people go out and have fun with their dogs doing sports what ever it may be. However when they get diluted thinking they have a real working dog by doing something like UKC WP or UKC/AKC Agility then it's laughable. Not saying AKC dogs are all bad but when a venue of Agility makes it very easy to qualify by giving you all the time in the world and many faults then it loses it's integrity as a sport. They make is easier for dogs to get titles and that does not say anything for a breed.

Now the breed standard is for show people who like to get out there and show dogs but judges also change the breed according to what they like by putting dogs up who do not fit the standard. Conformation does not serve a purpose than bragging right and serves no function in the working world. I have been an AKC professional handler for many years and for many breeds and trust me those so called CH's..... most could not perform the function they were bred for. MOst of the fat AST's I see can barley run around in the ring in the summer without their tongue hanging to the ground.

I have more respect for kennels who actually work the dogs in real performance events and this also goes for the ADBA too. Many times all those dogs are, are a bunch of good looking APBTs who do nothing but bark and lunge at other dogs in the ring..... where is the performace at?

I have working APBT's and conformation comes last but like KM said conformation follows function. I also know some really nice working AST's but have great structure but would never do good in the ring compared to all the fat over done AST's. So a breed CH when it comes down to working....... I'd take a working dog over a show CH any day!!


----------



## KMdogs (Apr 22, 2011)

performanceknls said:


> I think it's great people go out and have fun with their dogs doing sports what ever it may be. However when they get diluted thinking they have a real working dog by doing something like UKC WP or UKC/AKC Agility then it's laughable. Not saying AKC dogs are all bad but when a venue of Agility makes it very easy to qualify by giving you all the time in the world and many faults then it loses it's integrity as a sport. They make is easier for dogs to get titles and that does not say anything for a breed.
> 
> Now the breed standard is for show people who like to get out there and show dogs but judges also change the breed according to what they like by putting dogs up who do not fit the standard. Conformation does not serve a purpose than bragging right and serves no function in the working world. I have been an AKC professional handler for many years and for many breeds and trust me those so called CH's..... most could not perform the function they were bred for. MOst of the fat AST's I see can barley run around in the ring in the summer without their tongue hanging to the ground.
> 
> ...


Yep, can't have proven stock without a sound mentality and sound structure.. It ALL comes together, whether that meets what any given registry standards SAYS a dog should look like is another story.

Like my OP stated, get to the core of what the breed was created, perfected and instilled for.. You have all the answers you need to know whether its comparing a Pit Dog and a Show Dog (APBT / AST) or any given breed divided by working and show stocks.. To whom is really breeding true to the breeds foundation? To whom is really using their hounds to not only for fill their own daily needs but using the k9s full potential? To whom feeds the healthiest animals, less cancer, diseases, longer life spans.. It ALL goes back to genetics, put to use ON TOP OF care, love, proper diet, etc.

You ain't got no use.. Well, you know how it goes.


----------



## SHARON MOYA (Feb 8, 2007)

KMdogs said:


> You breed for function and ability, soundness in structure and mentality follows suit.. Evidence can be seen through history and you owe your thanks to be able to own dogs by that of those men whom followed this very philosophy. Proof is within the puddin'..
> 
> You breed strictly as a show animal yes you lose function and replace it with train wrecks after generations of such practice.. If real lucky, you end up with a sound animal that cannot perform per function of said breed. I can show you thousands of examples just within the GSD community, examples of Show stock attempting courage testing to be laughed out while a fine example of traditional stock.. Same can be said with ALL breeds of which have such a dividing line of prospects and proven animals.
> 
> ...


I have to slightly disagree with the German Shepherd point. While I had a German imported Shepherd with great conformation and excellent working ability many years ago. There is a new trend overseas of dogs with severely roached and almost broken-looking backs. I have been noting it for several years now. Those dogs are still winning the Seigers and such. So even though they work, they still have problems with conformation going on...

Considering "said functions" of the APBT are now illegal, I don't really think that it is a point worth fighting over. They days of blood sports are gone.

Unless you are breaking the law, then there is no way to even prove a dog truly has what it takes to take down a bear or bull or even another dog anymore. Not without actually doing it.

The Era of the Pit Dog is over. Is it a hugely bad thing for them to find another job? Or evolve into another direction? I don't know... Lots of people have their own opinions about that. And that is exactly what they are, opinions.....

When looking at sport horses, we look at their conformation first. A straight leg means good movement and soundness. A big sloping shoulder usually means tight knees over fences. A big hip means impulsion etc.. There may be oddities out there that have poor conformation and can perform. We would still never breed them, no matter how talented...

Maybe my sport horse background is what makes me value conformation so highly. I still don't see the problem with that. And most serious show breeders would never dream of breeding a dog with an unstable temperament either. We leave that to the puppy mills and BYB's....

I don't have the right to tell anyone what they should be doing with their dog, no one does. And no one has the right to criticize another just because they do something different, or has the right to say they are better than anyone else.

The game people bitch about the show people ruining the dog's working ability, the show people bitch about the game people breeding ugly dogs and not doing any health testing. It doesn't change anything..... My take? I don't give a crap what anyone else is doing in their yard/kennel. I'll do what I think is right with my dogs and not worry about what I can't change...

The absolute WORST thing happening in the dog world today is all the hating, gossip, judgement, and insult slinging etc.... It's like being in High School all over again... People need to relax. These are just dogs and this is just a hobby. No one's lives are depending it. Instead of worrying about what other people are (or aren't doing), just do what you think is right with your dogs and that's it.....



KMdogs said:


> Your pretty package WPs.. That doesn't show anything, just something for the show folk to brag about thinking they are "working" their dogs. Nothing wrong with it for conditioning or if your just looking for something fun to do, i can respect that if intentions are pure and clarity.. However


 The dog I am weight pulling right now is so high energy he needed a job. I chose weight pull for him. How is he not working when he is pulling thousands of pounds down a track? Or dragging weighted sleds all over my property? Out of curiosity, what exactly is he doing then?? I would consider it work if it was my big butt in that harness....


----------



## Kwhitaker0604 (Aug 6, 2012)

You argue that since they came from the same foundation that they are the same breed, but a LOT of dogs come from the same foundation if you go back far enough. That doesn't make them all the same breed. In my opinion, different breed standards, different purposes, make a different dog. Dog fighting is not illegal world wide, so there are still people using this breed to their original purpose. While in the US, a lot of people use their gamebred dogs for hog hunting to test them. So they are finding new purposes while still utilizing the blood that courses through these dogs' veins. And you say that the game bred dogs are ugly.. I'd take a game bred dog over a show AST ANY day.


----------



## KMdogs (Apr 22, 2011)

Just one clear point; The use of catch dogs hunting bear, boar, deer, mountain lions, etc.. IS NOT illegal in all states. South Carolina and Idaho having the least amount of laws revolving in such. True FREEDOM.. different topic all together though. Yes, the [] is illegal in THIS country.. Doesn't stop those from sending their hounds overseas or breaking the law to do so..

Want to keep traditional stock instilled, dip into history and use of catch.. Nothing like a high end Bulldog or Bandog getting it done.  Also, in the end of the day i don't care what you feed, i ain't paying your bills.. Nothing wrong with conversations, teaching, etc..however.

It depends on how you define work, working to me is a function for a dog that is useful to man. Pulling a sled in the Arctic, for instance, is work as it is a function designed to move man from one place to another. Pulling bricks, bags, etc for a means of weight is not benefiting man for any means other than entertainment. In many conditioning programs, this can be used... However, it in the end is a sport if anything.

Also, as to the working conformation.. Those that do not have a strong structure, body and mind will not last long in the real world.. This is simply fact, fads are fads and something to note but nothing else.. To better a program, yard, etc.. I would take a Bulldog that has a longer muzzle, weights too big, slightly high rear, low set tail, too long tail, too long ears, etc.. One that has faults according to registry standards but is fully functional, has the drive, ability and will to perform the task needed flawlessly.. OVER an animal that fits a registry standard to a "T" but has been bred away from consistent use.. To an inconstant package.

Also, if you put much stock into a registry how to do even remotely defend what they have done to many dogs over the years.. Most notably and one i mentioned previously, the English Bulldog.. FULL of health problems, HORRIBLE structure, inconsistent mentality and hardly what one would consider functional.. Yep, while one of the most extreme it has been happening to ALL dog breeds that can register and be shown for years.. Only a matter of time before it becomes as noticeable (if hasnt already, many have) as the ED.

Personally i believe unless you have a real use for an animal, you shouldn't feed one.. This would benefit ALL, less attacks, less to no strays, far less health problems, the list grows considerably.. Of course, not a popular consideration among all "pet owners" but one that works.. For ALL involved. However again, in the end i don't care what anyone feeds or does, not my bills, not my yard and i believe in freedom.. Just telling it how it is.


----------



## Kwhitaker0604 (Aug 6, 2012)

KMdogs said:


> Just one clear point; The use of catch dogs hunting bear, boar, deer, mountain lions, etc.. IS NOT illegal in all states. South Carolina and Idaho having the least amount of laws revolving in such. True FREEDOM.. different topic all together though. Yes, the [] is illegal in THIS country.. Doesn't stop those from sending their hounds overseas or breaking the law to do so..
> 
> Want to keep traditional stock instilled, dip into history and use of catch.. Nothing like a high end Bulldog or Bandog getting it done.  Also, in the end of the day i don't care what you feed, i ain't paying your bills.. Nothing wrong with conversations, teaching, etc..however.
> 
> ...


AWESOME post!


----------



## performanceknls (Apr 4, 2009)

SHARON MOYA said:


> I have to slightly disagree with the German Shepherd point. While I had a German imported Shepherd with great conformation and excellent working ability many years ago. There is a new trend overseas of dogs with severely roached and almost broken-looking backs. I have been noting it for several years now. Those dogs are still winning the Seigers and such. So even though they work, they still have problems with conformation going on...


Um..... no..... Seiger shows are looked at my working GSD people as we are looking at AKC shows..... They are just show GSD just the german version not the working version. I see German working imports on a weekly basis that are being sold and trained here as police dogs. I have never seen a working import sold like you described. NOw our trainer down here buys great stock but still we see them come with sound conformation and oh yeah, no papers! The Germans know what they have when it comes to working dogs and many don't have paper but hand written peds. Same thing with Malinois you never seen them come with papers. We were just talking about this on Sunday at Sch training.



SHARON MOYA said:


> When looking at sport horses, we look at their conformation first. A straight leg means good movement and soundness. A big sloping shoulder usually means tight knees over fences. A big hip means impulsion etc.. There may be oddities out there that have poor conformation and can perform. We would still never breed them, no matter how talented...


And that would be the same of a true working kennel. Although I see time and time again top winning conformation dogs AKC straight in the rear end, tails coming off a table top back, no angulation in the front, and no length of upper arm. In the ADBA we see no angulation in the front all the time! But guess what those dogs are still winning so those people will breed them just because they are CH



SHARON MOYA said:


> I don't have the right to tell anyone what they should be doing with their dog, no one does. And no one has the right to criticize another just because they do something different, or has the right to say they are better than anyone else.
> The absolute WORST thing happening in the dog world today is all the hating, gossip, judgement, and insult slinging etc.... It's like being in High School all over again... People need to relax. These are just dogs and this is just a hobby. No one's lives are depending it. Instead of worrying about what other people are (or aren't doing), just do what you think is right with your dogs and that's it....


Amen I don't care what anyone else feeds just having a conversation about working vs show. You could have (not you Sharon but in general) the worst dogs in the world and while I might have an opinion on them in the end I don't care if that is what you choose to breed!
Also there will always be bickering when it comes to dogs kinda sad most can't get along.



Kwhitaker0604 said:


> You argue that since they came from the same foundation that they are the same breed, but a LOT of dogs come from the same foundation if you go back far enough. That doesn't make them all the same breed. In my opinion, different breed standards, different purposes, make a different dog. Dog fighting is not illegal world wide, so there are still people using this breed to their original purpose. While in the US, a lot of people use their gamebred dogs for hog hunting to test them. So they are finding new purposes while still utilizing the blood that courses through these dogs' veins. And you say that the game bred dogs are ugly.. I'd take a game bred dog over a show AST ANY day.


:goodpost:



KMdogs said:


> Just one clear point; The use of catch dogs hunting bear, boar, deer, mountain lions, etc.. IS NOT illegal in all states. South Carolina and Idaho having the least amount of laws revolving in such. True FREEDOM.. different topic all together though. Yes, the [] is illegal in THIS country.. Doesn't stop those from sending their hounds overseas or breaking the law to do so..
> 
> Want to keep traditional stock instilled, dip into history and use of catch.. Nothing like a high end Bulldog or Bandog getting it done.  Also, in the end of the day i don't care what you feed, i ain't paying your bills.. Nothing wrong with conversations, teaching, etc..however.
> 
> ...


:goodpost::goodpost:


----------



## KMdogs (Apr 22, 2011)

*Um..... no..... Seiger shows are looked at my working GSD people as we are looking at AKC shows..... They are just show GSD just the german version not the working version. I see German working imports on a weekly basis that are being sold and trained here as police dogs. I have never seen a working import sold like you described. NOw our trainer down here buys great stock but still we see them come with sound conformation and oh yeah, no papers! The Germans know what they have when it comes to working dogs and many don't have paper but hand written peds. Same thing with Malinois you never seen them come with papers. We were just talking about this on Sunday at Sch training*
:goodpost:
Yep, the Germans and other European countries tend to take their working stock seriously... That is where Gaines (breeder of my male Bandog) imported his working stock Danes as a foundation, this is where many of your working stock Mastiffs, Mali, GSDs, etc go to be trained, tested or to better your own stock. Hard to imagine they would settle for much less, after all the Germans take much of what they do seriously.. Beer, Automobiles, Dogs, Life.


----------



## SHARON MOYA (Feb 8, 2007)

Kwhitaker0604 said:


> You argue that since they came from the same foundation that they are the same breed, but a LOT of dogs come from the same foundation if you go back far enough. That doesn't make them all the same breed. In my opinion, different breed standards, different purposes, make a different dog. Dog fighting is not illegal world wide, so there are still people using this breed to their original purpose. While in the US, a lot of people use their gamebred dogs for hog hunting to test them. So they are finding new purposes while still utilizing the blood that courses through these dogs' veins. And you say that the game bred dogs are ugly.. I'd take a game bred dog over a show AST ANY day.


There is a big difference between a lot of dogs coming from the same foundation and taking already registered dogs of a specific breed and just selectively breeding them for conformation. The Amstaff was a UKC registered Pit Bull before AKC accepted them and changed their name... We are not talking about centuries of evolution here. Just a few decades of selective breeding of a purebred dog...

In my opinion, the whole argument about APBTs and Amstaffs stems from the fact that AKC changed their name. If they had still been called Pit Bulls this whole time then the argument would not exist at all would it? The AKC Pit Bull would just be considered the same as the American Shepherd. Bred for looks and not work....

I never said that game dogs were ugly, so please don't twist my words. I said that is what the "show people" say. Just like they sit around trashing each other's dogs and kennels....

I, myself, do not participate in that crap. I believe anyone who has dogs should be able to do whatever they want with them, provided they are not being cruel, producing temperamentally unstable dogs, or mass producing cheap, unhealthy dogs for profit and thus victimizing uneducated puppy buyers...

I raise dogs for the sport of showing, just like my horses. It is what I enjoy. It is understandably upsetting when someone makes light of all of the time and money I spend just because they are show dogs and not "working dogs" and infers that everything I am doing with my animals is "a joke". I have worked very hard to breed some top ranked (owner handled!) dogs. I am not in this to make anyone but myself happy. I do not put down anyone or their animals and it would be nice to receive the same respect in return.


----------



## KMdogs (Apr 22, 2011)

SHARON MOYA said:


> There is a big difference between a lot of dogs coming from the same foundation (because weren't they all wolves once?) and taking already registered dogs of a specific breed and just selectively breeding them for conformation. The Amstaff was a UKC registered Pit Bull before AKC accepted them and changed their name... We are not talking about centuries of evolution here. Just a few decades, without any outside blood mixed in at all...
> 
> *Just like American German Shepherds and German dogs. No one says they are a different breed, but everyone knows that one works and the other has been bred just for show...And they look very different now too. *
> 
> ...


Actually, i do. I do not consider the two one of the same, i consider one true to the breed and the other what a group of people suggest is what the breed is but is not. What people think they know.. :flush:

Again, no it stems from the difference of Function.. The whole reason why the path changed and the separation is so defined is that there was no reason for a Pit Dog to be in the show ring and not the Pit.. The reasoning is simple thus the reasoning for the two separate breeds equally simple. Registries are not a god send and get it wrong often.. How many dogs are mis-registered? Registries are a business, you give them money in return for papers to tell you what you should already know OR for services such as their sport events or shows.. It comes down to money and a group of people whom think they know to tell others what they should know.

I don't trash anyones dogs, i'm simply being up front and honest with what i believe.


----------

