Talk:Staffordshire Bull Terrier/Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Contents |
Mixxed up histories
This article seems to be mixing up the Staffordshire Bull Terrier and the Bull Terrier. It's the Bull Terrier that was developed by James Hinks according to what I've read so far. I will do some more reading on this though befre making any major changes. -- sannse (talk) 18:49, 5 May 2004 (UTC) This appears to be correct (i.e. that Hinks "developed" the Bull Terrier; however the "bull and terrier" breads were relatively common in 18th and 19th century England. Breeders appear to have been mixing varieties in order to create an ideal "pit" breed. "Today's Bull Terrier is the direct descendant of the original bull-and-terrier crosses made in England, specifically to bait bulls and, later to fight in pits. The breed was standardized in England in the early 1850's by James Hinks. The first accepted color was white, but colored dogs were later allowed." (http://www.ukcdogs.com/RegistrationBreeds.htm). "The Staffordshire Bull Terrier is a descendant of the Bull and Terrier crosses made in Great Britain in the late 1700's. It was given the name "Staffordshire" in reference to an area where it was very popular, to differentiate it from the other Bull and Terrier breeds." http://www.ukcdogs.com/RegistrationBreeds.htm
The Staffordshire Bull Terrier was recognized by the United Kennel Club in 1975.
The Bull Terrier was recognized by the United Kennel Club in 1948.
I was just coming here to type the same thing. See for example: history of staffordshire and bull terrier. Elf | Talk 19:26, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
I have read into this also quite extensively but i believe the staffe was derived from a version of the bull terrier, the bull terrier being the original "legitimate" breed of dog with the staffe evolving as a spin off, either way every article i read seems to contradict the next so this article seems a fair representation seing as it cites the bull terrier as the first dog of this type to be recognised by the kenel club.
- If you study the old paintings and drawings of dogs used for bull and bear baiting you'll find the modern day Staffordshire bull terrier to be a far closer match than the Bull terrier. I highly doubt that the staffie is a "spin off" of the bull terrier, more likely the other way around.
Woops I just stuffed this page up - umm can someone fix it thanks
No Mention of the Staffies lockjaw it is poorly written please can this be cleaned up
- Not sure what you're referring to by "lockjaw". I did a search and found this info (for the APBT but I suspect it applies to all BTs...)
- "The few studies which have been conducted of the structure of the skulls, mandibles and teeth of pit bulls show that, in proportion to their size, their jaw structure and thus its inferred functional morphology, is no different than that of any breed of dog. There is absolutely no evidence of the existence of any kind of 'locking mechanism' unique to the structure of the jaw and/or teeth of the American Pit Bull Terrier."[1]
- There's more of that sort of thing out there; also comments that "lock jaw" just means that they have very strong jaws (don't know about comparison of strength to other dog breeds). So not much to add so far... Elf | Talk 22:56, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
never heard of jimmy Hinks in relation to the SBT
Hi there, I'm going to be adding a few new articles on the development and early history of the SBT. These articles will solely focus on the Uk where the breed originates. Any objections if I make a few alterations to the introduction of this article?? Seems rather incomplete and inaccurate at this stage. Cheers.
- Edit away. But is there any reason that there need to be "a few new articles"? I'm having trouble picturing anything other than additions to this same article in the History section--let alone more than one other article--even if it gets quite long. That would be fine--lots of long articles in Wikipedia. Elf | Talk 21:16, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
Hello!
there were several holes in this write up i made some changes. I think the entire section about the BT should be deleted as it really has little bearing to the SBT. Cheers! Tony Avenson Thunderstruck! Staffordshire Bull Terriers
Neutral
This article is not written in the neutral point of view. Especally this passage-
"But visit that family at home and you’re likely to be met by a boisterous though very affectionate human-orientated dog who is happy to see you, loves nothing more than playing with the kids and will roll over if given the slightest opportunity for a tummy rub."
Come now, whoever wrote this was an strong dog lover but it shouldnt be on wikipedia. Jesus On Wheels 17:29, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Random Rant at the bottom of the page
Firstly if I'm messing this talk page up, sorry; I haven't posted on many talk pages in my time. Anyway I noticed this at the bottom of Breed Specific Legislation: "By the way if anyone thinks that the staffordshire bull terrier is bred to be a killer, then you are wrong!! there are plenty of people that own staffies and they know as well as i do that they are a family dog and that they love children and have a very good nature! so there!!!" I presume it should be removed, but I thought I'd post here first just in case. Get back to me someone with more experience/judgement please? Sakrotac 19:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC) there is a ban in clay center kansas wed site www.cityofclaycenter.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.18.0.16 (talk) 05:22:30, August 19, 2007 (UTC)
attacking other dogs?
i notice this article states 'They will not start fights with other dogs...' is this true? i know for a fact that this is untrue, but may have been specific to this one staffie. this particular staffie attacked a jack russell, ripped a huge chunk out of the jack russell's neck, and bit it's bottom. luckily the jack russell is still alive and doing well, and the staffie's owner is being charged. the staffie was not on a lead and not wearing a muzzle, and the owner did nothing to stop her dog. there's also the possibility this has happened before.
anyway, with this in mind, again, is it true that staffie's don't start fights with other dogs, or is this staffie the exception? if this can't be verified, i think this statement should be removed, as it's misleading.
---
You can't say that staffs do or don't start fights. A dog that starts a fight does so for reasons such as feeling threatened, protecting territory/owner, or maybe it has been handled in a way that has taught the dog to become violent. A dog does not start a fight because it is an SBT. It is purely based on circumstance not breed. It could have been the Jack Russell attacking the SBT and not the other way around, it is just as likely. 'They will not start fights with other dogs...' I do not believe this can be said with certainty as every dog is different, but then again I doubt a dog will attack another just because of what breed it is.
---
exactly what i said above, it can't be said that they do or don't. therefore i will remove the statement. in the case above, however, it was definitely the SBT that attacked the Jack Russell. the SBT wasn't on a lead, and wasn't muzzled, and the dog ran across the road to get to the Jack Russell, so i don't think this is a case of feeling threatened or protecting it's owner. the owner shouted to the jack russell owner, please, keep your dog away from mine, it's not safe, and then the SBT attacked. the fact the owner knew her SBT was like this, she should have had it on a lead and possibly muzzled. i don't have any respect for owners who don't train their dogs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.221.133.211 (talk) 09:15, August 22, 2007 (UTC)
The Staffordshire Bull Terrier is a fairly uncommon dog in the United States. If you look at the number of SBT breeders listed around the internet and puppies that are actually available for sale on some of the puppy for sale websites you will find that the number of breeders with Staffordshire Bull Terriers is very small. The most reputable kennel club is the AKC and that is what nearly all SBT are registered under, also the UKC has a growing number of SBT's. The breed standard for a SBT according to any of the breed registries is 38 pounds or less. While some are larger than the 38 pounds, I know for a fact that Sonshine Stafford’s in CA has a couple males that are 45-48 pounds which is huge according to the standard. Many people do not know the difference between a SBT and an American Staffordshire Terrier. The American Staffordshire Terrier is registered in the AKC as the American Staffordshire Terrier and is registered under the UKC and several other registries as an American Pit-bull Terrier. If you go to any AMStaff page you will see that if they are dual registered they are AKC and UKC, but with two different names. With the SBT this is not the case a Staffordshire Bull Terrier is a Staffordshire Bull Terrier no matter what registry you look at. It is its own breed and is as related to the AMstaff and Pit Bull as an English Bulldog is. They come from the same lines but are bred with different reasons. Another thing about all bully breeds is they commonly do not start fights it is body language that will set off a dog to attack. If you are nervous as the handler, the dog will be nervous. If you are calm the dog will be calm or it will try to take control. For that reason being calm is good, but with being calm a sense of Assertiveness, like you have a feeling of power is necessary to control a dog, especially a bully breed. Many of these dogs attack due to a look from another dog, which is one of the forms of body language that dogs use to challenge or stand up to other dogs. With bully breeds including SBT, Amstaffs, and APBT they are not the ones to sit back and have a staring contest they will be the ones to initiate a physical attack after being provoked with something as simple as a stare from the biggest dog out there to the smallest dog out there. If someone had the time I would like to try and figure out of all of attacks by "pitbulls" were the dogs AKC registered in the USA and KC registered in England for the UK which is the most reputable and recognized registries in the world. It is a lack of education and knowledge about the differences between the cousins SBT, Amstaff, and Pitbulls. They are generally assumed as one due to their similar appearance to each other. I have owned an Amstaff and currently own two Staffordshire Bull terriers whom are AKC registered and there is a tremendous difference between the two temperaments wise. It is mostly due to AKC registered Staffordshire Bull Terrier breeders breed for the right reasons which are temperament first, looks second, and that there are such a small number of breeders/dogs throughout the US in comparison to other dogs such as the Pit-bull which is commonly a backyard bred dog from my experience living in Montgomery, AL. In the newspaper classifieds there are at least twenty to thirty listings a week for Pit bulls. Not AKC Amstaffs or SBT's. I take my dogs to the vet here and they have never seen a SBT in person which I would say literally 85% of the US population hasn’t either. And there is different temperaments between breeders and bloodlines, plus the average price for an AKC or UKC registered Staffordshire bull terrier is $1200 which keeps the dog in such good quality whereas you can find $100-$200 pit bull puppies in excess due to irresponsible backyard breeders and puppy mills and irresponsible owners breeding unregistered dogs to make a couple hundred dollars having no clue where their back round comes from, which is becoming a problem with SBT's in England in recent years(I lived there for two years as well) the cheap backyard breeding promotes irresponsible breeding and irresponsible ownership in some cases where the owner doesn’t get the dog spayed or neutered, which should be automatic with a non-registered dog, because it is in every breeds best interest to breed the best of their breed and strive to keep those breeds quality dogs. Don’t take this as my opinion it is what I have found through personal experience and research for the last 4 years of just about every breeder in the United States for SBT and Amstaffs and Pitbulls. SBT are unique dogs and should only be classified as a cousin to the Amstaff and Pitbulls just as an English bulldog would be and never included in the same group for research or other statistical purposes. The only thing SBT are guilty of is having the appearance of smaller version of a pit-bull. Meet just one SBT and you will like the dog. (I know this distracts from the original reason for the discussion here but I felt I would share my knowledge for more understanding of persons who did not know. Well now you know and knowing is half the battle! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rlause (talk • contribs) 21:57, August 23, 2007 (UTC).
A correctly trained Staffie is unlikely to start a fight with another dog although like any dog if they are not familiarised with other dogs they can be agressive. Generally where a Staffie is blamed for starting a fight with another dog the other dog involved is a smaller breed as in the example above a Jack Russel Terrier the fight is started by the smaller dog as it feels threatened by the presence of the larger dog for want of a better term "small man syndrome" I have seen a Staffie happily playing with smaller dogs when a male JRT joined in and imediatly set on the Staffie with what could have been a sad ending for both dogs but luckily the owner of the Staffie like any good owner of any animal should do was paying attention and reacted quickly and called his dog off not only did the Staffie walk away from the fight it was also the only animal injured in the scuffle having a peice of cheek torn away while walking away from the encounter as it did no more then growl and bear its teeth —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.53.167 (talk) 09:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
The 'Miscellaneous' section
I think that the part of the miscellaneous section about the way that staffies lie on the ground is completely unverifiable (and false?). It says: "'Staffies' have another peculiar characteristic. When lying down in a resting position they sit, rather than domestic dogs or wolves, with their hind legs tucked in, but rather with them splayed out behind them... Why Staffies are otherwise unique in the dog family for doing so remains unclear." Many dogs lie on the ground like this, it is not a trait specific to staffies. This section needs to be edited (or removed) to reflect this. Randomlyred 12:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
- Fixed. Indeed, it's hardly a unique behavior to Staffies - it's commonly observed in puppies, although most dogs stop doing it as they grow older. Zetawoof(ζ) 02:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
While it is common for alot of dog breeds to lie with their legs splayed behind them it is a characteristic of the more muscular breeds in particular as it allows the muscles in the animals hind legs rest in a different position and increase circulation to the muscles much like an athlete having a massage. Another reason for the animal to do this Staffies in particular is to act as a heat transfer with the legs out behind more area is in contact with the ground effecting greater heat loss as Staffies are prone to overheating
While it is true that Staffies ride low in the water it is untrue they are poor swimmers as I often take my dog to the beach I have seen him outswim many other breeds. This perhaps may be due to muscle mass as when most dogs swim their front legs do the most work and while not as muscled as the hind quaters of the dogs the fore-limbs are still quite large and muscular this coupled with the fore-paws of the breed that while bearing weight look smaller then they actually are, when splayed the fore-paws are quite large and work extremely effectively as paddles —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.53.167 (talk) 09:54, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
House Style
Isn't the use of gender-specific pronouns - 'him/her', 'he/she', etc. - in this piece rather clumsy and naive? Surely 'it' is the appropriate pronoun for animals and breeds..?
86.130.68.17 23:38, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Actually, using 'he' or 'she' is much better than it. These are living creatures, not inanimate objects. The article is talking about them and referring to them using 'he/she' is prefectly reasonable. RiotMonday 23:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Coffee?
Does it really need to be said that Staffies enjoy coffee? It seems too childish, and varying, to me. The Staffie I know of does not like the taste of coffee. RiotMonday 23:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Health?
Anyone care to add a health section for this breed? One of the biggest concerns, of course, being that they are short-nosed dogs, meaning they have more difficulty breathing in hot weather and tend to overheat faster than long-nosed dogs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RiotMonday (talk • contribs) 23:27, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Odd phrase in passage
The phrase "There is no doubt that Staffies are the safest and friendliest of the bull terrier breeds." is completely subjective and is impossible to prove. Should probably be removed.
Actually, it should not be removed, but rather the author should give statistics and sources supporting this. If one researches the breed online, there are numerous articles pointing out how there are no documented deadly attacks by Staffordshire Bull Terriers in North America. Also, in spite of erroneous assumptions to the contrary by many who are ignorant about the breed (those who lump it in with other "Pit Bulls" that have attacked people), Staffordshire Bull Terriers (not the same breed as the American Staffordshire Bull Terrier or the American Pit Bull Terrier) are not known for attacking humans. In fact, it has been bred into them not to attack people. It has also been bred into them to be particularly affectionate toward and protecive of children).
The above is true antecdotally. I own a Staffie and I have friends who own Staffies (although it's an uncommon breed in the U.S.). Every Staffie that I've come across loves people and particularly children. They are hit and miss with other dogs, but reliable with humans. Moreover, every owner of a bully breed, and particulalry an APBT or AmStaff should know the definition of gameness, which has nothing to do with aggressiveness. I would challenge anyone to prove that Staffies, or other bully breeds, are human-agressive. Gameness is a canine virtue that is most akin to the human virtue of unflagging courage. It is a determination to master any situation and never back down out of fear. Generally speaking, a game dog is an emotionally stable, easy-going dog, especially good with kids. Gameness should not be confused with aggressiveness. There are plenty of aggressive dogs that are not game, and there are game pit bulls who are not aggressive toward other types of dogs.
I own a SBT and so do many friends they are all very good with children and will let the children do many things to them that other dogs would get angry with, such as sit on them, pull their ears, i have even seen one staffie draging a child round on his harness like some kind of game. But i would never live any child on their own with ANY kind of dog, this is becaue at the end of the day a dog is an animal and if a small child does something to annoy it it may resond in a way which seem fine towards an adult but not towards a child. I love my staff hes the best dog i have ever had. But a word of warnig about them they are very greedy and will chew your funriture so make sure you have plenty of chew toys —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.29.143.113 (talk) 16:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
French law
I just want to add that according to French law, Staffordshire Bull Terriers with pedigrees are not subject to the law on dangerous dogs in France: they are neither 1st cat (attack) dogs nor 2nd cat (defence) dogs. French law recognizes that there is no proof that they present a particular danger (as opposed to the Pitbull, Boerbull, American bull, Tosa etc....) [2]--Scotchorama (talk) 13:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Copyvio?
This article is basically lifted verbatim from the Burkes Backyard website. Probably a pretty good reference, but they should have been acknowledged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.72.96 (talk) 17:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- Can you be more specific about what you feel has been copied from the site and give a URL? Collectonian (talk) 17:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Facts box
Hi, I have altered the facts box slightly. I have changed the guard dog and watch dog ability to LOW, as before it stated HIGH. The stafford is an extremely poor guard dog and are not meant to be subjected to any training that ceates aggression towards humans. Although they can be protective of family members and their car they rarely guard their homes. I also changed the temperment by removing humourous, friendly and adoring to bold, fearless and totally reliable (KC standards). Staffords are certainly NOT naturally obedient. They were bred to think for themselves not to be commanded. Whoever has added this section does not have a Stafford!! Thanks, Rachel—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.72.96 (talk) 17:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
- If you wish to change it, you need to give a reliable source supporting. Collectonian (talk) 17:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Lee, Clare (1998). Pet Owner's Guide To The Staffordshire Bull Terrier. Pg 18 "The stafford was not developed as a watchdog - he rarely barks, greets all your visitors and may well let them walk off with the family silver." "Staffords may 'guard' their car, but rarely their own home"
"Most tasks that dogs perform for man require the dog to follow instruction. In the fighting situation the dog has to think for himself - his very existence may depend upon it" - not naturally obedient.
Temperament as described in the Kennel Club standards. "Bold, fearless and totally reliable" http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=87 The characteristics humourous, friendly and adoring are biased and presumably have no reliable source.
Could you give me the original, reliable source of the facts box?! Thanks, Rachel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.72.96 (talk) 18:08, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
