The pitbull question

[u/Ok_Ear_5266]

A few days ago, I made a post to inquire about the perspectives of those that believe in investing resources into aggressive/bite risk dogs. The post got a lot of responses and I learned some perspectives from the other side of the viewpoint. Eventually, though, the responses became focused on the tangential issue of Pitbulls. In the hopes of having a similarly engaging conversation, I wanted to make a separate post.

The specific questions that I’m interested to hear from the dog rescue community: - Why are pitbulls and pit mixes the majority type of dog that fills the shelters? - why are pitbulls and pit mixes seemingly the majority of behavioral problem dogs? - and perhaps the nucleus of the question: do the problem dogs have these issues because they are pitbulls? - should there be more stringent regulations on pitbull adoption and lower threshold for behavioral euthanasia? - is there a place in society for dogs from fighting bloodlines?

While I am not involved in dog rescue, I am involved in dog sports and I’m generally interested in canine topics. But my opinion on rescues and pitbulls is admittedly uninformed. That said, I’ll provide my thoughts:

I think the over representation of pitbulls in shelters is due to primarily social reasons and the relationship between pitbull ownership, socio economic disenfranchisement and the effect on responsible ownership. I do think that pitbulls are inherently more likely to seriously bite given their history as fighting dogs and breeding for gameness, however, I also think that there are a lot of pitbull and pit mixes that are extremely detached from their gamebred ancestors. Additionally, I think a lot of “bully” mixes nowadays really aren’t pitbulls.

I am curious to hear from more experienced people in the rescue industry who agree and disagree.

[u/gilatio]

Question 2 & 3 (Why are more pitbulls problems and is it because they are pits)

• I think I covered most of this in my answer to question 1
• The biggest factor imo is the number of pitbull/pit mixes/dogs that get considered pitbulls. Even if everything else was completely equal (it's not imo), there being the most pits means they will be the highest percentage of behavioral problems too.
• Environment. More pits proportionally come from homes that may have been neglectful, violent, abusive or just in a bad area which taught the dog to be protective. Some pits also come from fighting rings where they were literally taught to fight (this is a smaller number imo but still a factor).
• Genetics. Ime a lot of pitbulls do have a tendency towards dog aggression or at least dog reactivity or selectivity. Most likely because dog fighting is what they were originally bred for. A lot/the majority of pitbulls are no longer bred for this purpose, but that doesn't mean the tendency isn't still there. Ime pet sitting this tendency mostly seems to come through in pitbull that look to be all or mostly pit/bully breed. (I personally look for the thinner fur/skin and denser body and this normally correlates with at least 70-80% pit based on what I've learned from r/doggydna. Vs the facial features that seem to come through at a much lower percentage than the personality traits the majority of the time.

[u/gilatio → u/gilatio]

Question 4 (Behavioral Euthanasia)

• I don't think the standards for BE should be any different for pitbulls compared to any strong, medium-large size breed.
• I do think the standard for BE should have a lower threshold than it would be for a small breed like a Chihuahua. That's because a Chi is unlikely to be able to seriously hurt a person or other pet.
• I do think that some (definitely not all) rescues adopt out dogs that should not be adopted out. Based on what I see on Reddit, I think this may happen more in the NE and Northern states were there are less strays/dogs in shelters. I have never lived there tho so I'm not sure tbh. My areas shelter is pretty high kill just for space, so it's not really a thing here to try to save the more difficult dogs. Except for a couple of the more niche smaller rescues.
• I do not think dogs showing signs of human aggression should be adopted out or generally dogs with a bite history (I do think it's ok to look at what the specific incident was,but any exceptions should be rare). I do think the large majority of shelters already avoid adopting out these type of dogs.
• I don't think any dogs with pro-active dog aggression should be adopted out. As in a dog that will try to run towards another dog for the purpose of attacking it. Especially if they will try to escape to do this.
• Dog reactivity is different than dog aggression imo and should be evaluated on a case by case basis. For example, dogs that will occasionally escalate to fighting during play or that will fight over food or toys. This is honestly very common in a lot of dogs of a lot of breeds. And not an issue if it's not severe and the owners are at least somewhat responaible imo. However, adopters should be made aware and if the dog needs a single dog home or to be fed separately this should be made clear. Also, imo adopters should be screened more carefully for dogs with dog reactivity to make sure they understand, don't have other dogs and are physically capable of controlling the dog if needed. (These requirements may make dog reactive dogs less likely to be adopted and eventually eu for space and that is ok imo. But if space is not a consideration I don't see it as a reason for BE on its own, except when severe)
• Aggression towards cats, chickens, etc is not a reason for BE imo. Many dogs of many different breeds have prey drive towards cats or small animals, will chase cats and will even kill them if given the chance. However, if aggression towards any species is known it should be made clear. Also, I don't think people with cats should be able to adopt large,adult dogs that haven't been cat tested.
• For some reason, some people on Reddit seem to think a dog just barking at fences/doors or other dogs is traumatic or a reason for BE. I don't understand this at all, it does not hurt anyone and generally does not indicate anything else about the dog. Tbh I taught my own dog to bark at the door/windows if people walk by because I live alone in a somewhat sketchy area and my neighbor is on meth. (It's working, he no longer comes to my door with weird random paranoias in the middle of the night and I feel safer that the people that walk by to go to their house late at night do not come close. & Yes, I'm trying to move, but I can't do that immediately.)

Question 5

• I don't think a dog's bloodline should have any effect on the decision. Each dog should be evaluated as an individual.

[u/Far_Sky_5240 → u/gilatio]

Well said. We have slightly different tolerances, but very common sense guidelines. 

I’m in the midwest (Ohio) and not long ago we had a huge bully mix in a nearby shelter that failed behavioral evaluations and was slated for BE. The shelter intended to put him down, but it was the rescue community that raised hell, up to the point of needing a police presence for safety. They went through multiple additional assessments with outside trainers, also failed. Eventually the outside rescue groups found someone willing to take him in and someone else willing to train him. They allowed him to be pulled.  It’s dumb, but I can’t blame the shelter staff, that were literally being doxxed and receiving threatening phone calls. 

My county’s shelter is no kill, open intake, and constantly massively overpopulated. 

A few counties north is the “high kill” municipal open intake shelter. 

I can only guess we’d find very different behavioral tolerances and BE related practices at each shelter. I don’t know how much is regional and how much literally varies from one shelter to the next. 

I do know that I’ve seen firsthand on Reddit where shelter workers discuss adopting out dogs with bite histories. My readings from those workers is what most concerns me. I suspect it happens more than you may realize. I’ve seen one where a pit bull bit a kid in the face and the worker proudly explained how they found it a new home after it was returned. 

If everyone in rescue followed your advice here we’d be a heck of a lot better off. 

[u/gilatio → u/Far_Sky_5240]

I don't understand the people who think every dog can be saved tbh, it's not realistic unfortunately. One thing my city does that I highly agree with is that they don't put dogs that are being euthanized for behavioral (or medical) reasons on the euthanasia list. They just make those decisions if they need to be made. When they put out the euthanasia list it is only for dogs that are being euthanized for space. Because those are the dogs they would like the public to help save.

I have seen a couple concerning comments on Reddit also, but they do seem to be in the minority from the replies I see though. However, some of those comments are definitely why I do think some areas must be different than mine though.

[u/Far_Sky_5240 → u/gilatio]

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that in the example by me it was a shelter staffer that couldn’t accept the decision who leaked it to the public. She was fired when all was said and done, but that dog is out there. Hopefully no one gets hurt. 

My wife’s Golden rescue occasionally has to BE. There’s no announcement or fanfare. They just do it.

You want a really crazy example. Just the other day a large Great Pyr mix that had been declared vicious legally was BE’d. The adopting rescue and his owner had tried to appeal all the way to the US Supreme Court. I get the owner struggling to let go. I really do. But I don’t get why the rescue would fight it. Some of the commenters were claiming he should have lived out his life on some fantasy sanctuary. 

It’ll always be wild to me how overtly some people are willing to disregard public safety. Once a dog has actually attacked multiple people it seems like the decision should, generally, be fairly easy. 

[u/gilatio → u/Far_Sky_5240]

-It'll always be wild to me how overtly some people are willing to disregard public safety. Once a dog has actually attacked multiple people it seems like the decision should, generally, be fairly easy.-

Agreed.

[u/Emotional-Ocelot-309 → u/gilatio]

The other thing is that BE is often more humane for the dog too. The dog is basically being tortured having to be in a kennel, then passed around to different homes, then maybe living in the dog equivalent of a padded cell and straight jacket.

I used to be very pro no-kill but I have come to realize it’s a lot more nuanced and there are times when euthanasia is kindest for everyone.

[u/gilatio → u/Emotional-Ocelot-309]

I agree, I do definitely think quality of life/kennel stress is also a valid reason for euthanasia and that shelters should be evaluating for that.

[u/Far_Sky_5240 → u/gilatio]

I don’t know if it makes it better or worse, but fighting rings don’t “teach” them to fight, they just breed for it. Just like you said they have a genetic tendency towards dog aggression, this is exaggerated by magnitudes in fighting lines. 

There’s elaborate systems for putting new dogs against older ones to see who will fight and has the most aptitude. Dogs that don’t want to fight are generally just culled, since dogmen see no use for them.  Dogs with the most gameness are bred, especially if they’re winners. 

Training generally consists of conditioning for strength and stamina. The dogs know and are motivated to do the rest on their own. 

Sadly, there’s far more dogfighting occurring to this day than most people would ever guess. It’s ridiculously hard to prove so tons of goes on nearly in plain site. There’s groups all over Facebook of people discussing it. It’s easy enough to find videos. There’s magazines, websites with pedigrees, and pretty visible breeders.  

Those aren’t generally the dogs we’re seeing in shelters/rescues, but it does muddy the waters when trying to assess how far removed they may be from purpose bred fighting lines compared to a world where the practice died off when it was made illegal. 

It’s interesting that you’ve seen a strong correlation between phenotype and dog aggression. I’ve seen some anti-pit folks make the argument before that “the more it looks like a pit the more it’ll act like a pit,” but I’ve never quite been convinced.  Even more interesting that this would seem to confirm the validity of visual identification.  

[u/gilatio → u/Far_Sky_5240]

I think they are both bred to be good at and want to fight and trained for it tbh. From what I understand, they have a system of building the dogs up with somewhat easier fights and then working towards the harder fights. And the dogs are rewarded/praised for doing well in the ring. That's training imo, fighting just like with people takes strategy/skill and dogs will learn to be better at it over time.

I do agree that it happens a lot more than people sometimes think, but I think it also happens a lot less than others think. I agree that a lot of those dogs are not the ones ending up in shelters, but for sure it likely does keep a higher level of dog aggression in the breed than would be there otherwise. Especially because most byb breeders are not specifically breeding for a different temperament.

The visual id is definitely not 100% accurate, but for me, if I pay attention to only the fur/skin thickness and density (which is hard to assess unless you see the dog in person imo), it gives me a good clue of which dogs to screen a little closer before allowing them into a group setting with other dogs. There are definitely dogs with those features who are very friendly and pass the screening (and dogs of other breeds that fail), but it is a noticeable shift to me. I think the density of bully breeds can also rub other dogs the wrong way too. Because it makes the pitbull much heavier/stronger than they expect in play and pitbulls often do not adjust their play style to account for their comparative strength. So that's also likely part of why that trait specifically seems to correlate with issues. However, I will add that I have not seen any connection between those features and aggression towards me in a 1-on-1 setting, like drop in visits in their home.

[u/Far_Sky_5240 → u/gilatio]

What you’re referring to is “rolling.”  I guess in human fighting you might compare it to sparring, and in that regard you could call it training. In dogfighting there’s no way to instruct the dogs to go 70% though. There’s no pads, no gloves. It’s more like they put them an easier fighter that they know won’t just kill them. It lets them assess their desire to fight, puts just enough pressure to see if they’ll keep going and shows if they’re skilled. 

I’m just not sure if that’s done extensively over time to advance the dogs skill or if it’s only for assessment. 

The more common misconception is that the dogs don’t want or don’t know how to fight and have to be coaxed and instructed, but it doesn’t sound like that was your intention. 

“  I agree that a lot of those dogs are not the ones ending up in shelters, but for sure it likely does keep a higher level of dog aggression in the breed than would be there otherwise.”

You know, I’m honestly not sure about that one, but it’s interesting to discuss. Dogfighters have a vested interest in keeping their dogs out of sight, not commingling with the general population. If fighting dogs show up abandoned, tied to fences then police might start watching. They’d rather just kill and dump them.  

On the other hand there’s been speculation about some folks in the ADBA rubbing elbows with dogfighters. Tom Garner breeds openly and it’s widely believed his dogs are used for fighting.  There’s even times where dogs get bought from a breeder, presumed to be fought, then if they win enough returned to the breeder for more breeding. So long as the authorities don’t catch the dogfighting happening and can’t tie the breeder to the act then it just keeps happening. 

There’s also the fact that many, but not all, dogmen would hard cull their undesirables. They weren’t fighters, but they also knew they wouldn’t make good pets. Other dogmen, because dogmen aren’t exactly individuals of high ethical standards, had no problem soft culling their unwanted dogs, giving them to friends, family, etc. 

The “amateur” dogfights seem even less bound by ethics. I’ve seen groups on Facebook where someone asks what do with their pups and the reply was to abandon them in front of a shelter because people always want house dogs.”  

I’m not sure if there’s any way for us to quantify the impact of dogfighting on the overpopulation. My instincts are the same as yours, that it has at least some impact, but in the end I don’t really know.  It could also just be the genetic propensity of a big, strong bull and terrier breed that has characteristics of both those types.