A Christmas Tale

Those are neither Cane Corsos (BTW, "Cane" is Italian and pronounced "KAH-nay"; not rhyming with 'Spain') nor are they Neopolitans; they look most like Presa Canarios or Canary Island Mastiffs to me.

I am no Pit Bull apologist, but I think it's important to look at the facts from every angle. Pit Bulls were bred for animal aggression. Not guarding, not hunting, not herding. ANIMAL AGGRESSION. This is the hallmark of the pit bull's temperament and should not be seen as a fault in it's character. If you had a Labrador that didn't swim or a Collie that didn't herd it would be uncharacteristic of the breed. Same goes for Pit Bulls - the 'pit' in their name refers to fighting pits.
SO- these dogs have a naturally increased prey instinct and incredibly strong jaws. That coupled with their tremendous tenacity makes for a difficult 'pet' - ALL dogs fight and every dog owner knows that. When a pit bull fights it's usually with greater consequences than when, say, dachshunds do.
It is because of their need to work with their handlers in the fighting ring that Pits are generally NOT aggressive toward humans. However, as I mentioned before, they have a naturally high prey drive and can be incited to chase and bite.
The news media is more likely to report these stories, as 'Child Bitten By Yorkshire Terrier' doesn't make for very sensational news. But believe me, I'd suspect as many kids are bitten by Shi Tzus as are pit bulls. Also, keep in mind that pit bulls probably are in the genetic makeup of 75% of the dogs adopted out of city shelters; they are tremendously popular pets.

Presa Canarios are native dogs of the Canary Islands. In fact 'Canary' refers not to birds, but to canines-dogs. They were prized for their strength and aggression in the fighting ring, dog fighting being incredibly popular in Spain in the 1800's. They are by no means dogs for the inexperienced dog handler.
CAne Corsos, on the other hand, have become so popular (the post that claims they're rare is only half right; they have been recreated as a breed and, although rarely adhering to any sort of standard, are increasingly common) that their temperament has been softened to the point that they are rarely that formidible. Like any powerful dog, however, they should be extensively socialized and handled wisely.

The police are unfortunately completely impotent in these matters. There is little they can or will do to protect your animal from negligent and irresponsible dogs owners. Nor will they protect your animal from negligent and careless citizens, a lesson I learned when my dog was hit by a car.

Posted by: houseowax at December 27, 2008 4:39 PM

"I hear what you are saying but how many of those Shitzu attacks result in a kid getting a body part ripped off or worse"

Without question, Chaka. I fully agree. But for stats to claim that a higher percentage of attacks are made by pits vs other breeds is misleading for just that reason. Attacks made by Cocker Spaniels probably aren't reported because they often don't require a hospital visit. Let's say we take a cross section of 1000 Pit owners and 1000 Cocker Spaniel owners. Are there more Pit Bull attacks than Cocker Spaniel attacks? I couldn't say for certain, but I would doubt it. Unless, of course, we're discussing attacks on other animals- then I think I can say with authority that the Pit's number would be MUCH higher.

"owning a pit bull should be illegal."

This thinking makes me nervous. I myself have owned several breeds that are commonly considered dangerous ( a Rottweiler, a Siberian Husky, and a Mastiff). I have never- repeat NEVER- had an aggression issue with any of them, they were all gentle and docile animals. If the state were to suddenly tell me that my beloved family pet posed a risk to the public and needed to be surrendered (and then what? Euthanized?)..well, that's a slippery slope.

"they are dangerous animals. they appeal to the most violent and anti-social fringe elements of our society. these people could buy a Lab and train it to be vicious, but it would be more work. pit bulls are born vicious."

Again, this is only HALF true.
Pit Bulls are incredibly common her in NYC. I know quite a few and let my dogs play regularly with them on a daily basis. While it's true that the breed was developed for strength, agility and animal aggression, many of the dogs we see in the streets and identify as 'pits' display little of these characteristics and would likely be worthless as fighting dogs. Temperament DOES vary within the breed. I suspect the man in question has done precious little to socialize his dogs with other dogs, but I likewise doubt he's trained them to be vicious. Dogs, if kept in isolation from other dogs, are more than likely to become suspicious or afraid of them and act out aggressively toward them when confronted.

The old maxim 'there are no bad dogs, only bad owners' needs clarification. To make it seem as if every attack on another animal takes place because the dog's owner somehow trained and/or his dog to do so is, in my opinion, erroneous.In many cases, the owners only fault is not recognizing that his animal is not fit to be trusted in the public arena, and THAT is what makes the owners 'bad'.

Lastly, let's not vilify the animals. Dogs, in their various forms, shapes,and temperaments exist solely because of man's intervention. Almost every pure breed out there exists because mankind selectively eugenically bred them for a certain trait or traits. One need not blame a pit bull for animal aggression any more than one would blame a pug for sitting in his owner's lap. The owner should understand his responsibilities and know his animal before taking it into a situation where he lacks absolute control.

Posted by: houseowax at December 27, 2008 8:21 PM