AmStaff vs APBT ...?

So in an earlier post on another part of the forum there was debate on which came first and whether or not they are related closely or something around those lines.

you tell me:

"Although the precise origin of the APBT is not known, we can reliably trace its roots back at least one hundred and fifty years or so [1] to England." http://www.riospitbull.com/origin_of_apbt.htm

(I had also said that apbts were bred among other things bull-baiting, this in fact is true)
"During the late 18th and early 19th centuries the sport of bull-baiting was very much alive and dogs were bred to excel in this endeavor. The same type of dog was also used by hunters to catch game and by butchers and farmers to bring down unruly cattle. These dogs were called 'bulldogs.' ...The old, performance-bred, working bulldog was closer in phenotype and spirit to the APBT and/or the modern American Bulldog."


"In any event, it was the cross between the Bulldog and the terrier that resulted in the Staffordshire Terrier, which was originally called the Bull-and-Terrier Dog, Half and Half, and at times Pit Dog or Pit Builterrier. Later, it assumed the name in England of Staffordshire Bull Terrier. ...These dogs began to find their way into America as early as 1870, where they became known as Pit Dog, Pit Bull Terrier, later American Bull Terrier, and still later as Yankee Terrier." http://www.akc.org/breeds/american_staffordshire_terrier/history.cfm

The other confusion is where either breed could be registered.

In 1936 Am Staffs were accepted in the AKC, I have read a few places that people with apbts could register their dogs but ONLY if labeled Am Staffs as the AKC did not want to be affiliated by the apbts past and name "pit bull".
In 1898 a private club was started as the UKC in order to register solely APBTs. Now, I have also heard that there may be 2 cases in which the lines may have been crossed. 1. That those who had registered their apbts as am staffs re-registered their dogs which is where there are apbts and am staffs that are registered as both. 2. That a legislation act passed in 1972 which banned the transportation of apbts across state lines for dog fighting, which (idk how this relates) but ended up crossing breeds/ lowering standards.


A personal End note:
Since I have joined this forum I've had my eyes opened as to how many people turn their noses up to "pits" as a whole...are these not the dogs that used to be just english/ irish immigrant mutts?? I have seen tons on Am Staffs that pretty much look exaaactly the same. APBTs instead I've seen big, small, wide, thin, short snout, long snout.... why should the first Q out of someone's mouth be "what bloodline"?
I hope this is not the actual impression of this forum or the people here.

 

Really?
If you spend any time reading articles and information on this site you should know the answers to your questions. I am sorry to have one of my first posts be this, but seems a little ridiculous to me.

 

I don't care to sift through all the bull sh*t people post on here, so if anyone has any corrections or information for me there should be nothing wrong with posting here

 

Why don't you learn to interpret what you read? Perhaps then you'll be able to avoid bogging down the board with sophomoric nonsense.

 

What I gathered above is put simply through all that I've read, I'm starting to think I just won't bother with any nonsense, with happens to be a lot of the same posts

 

Do you do anything with your animals? Like show, hunt, agility?

The correct year was 1976.

 

The Pit Bull Terrier was made from the Bulldog and the old English White Terrier. It has been said that a cross of the old Spanish Pointer weas used, but this has never been confirmed to be authentic. The exact proportion in which each breed was used to produce the Pit Bull Terrier is not known.
During the Nineteenth Century when bull-baiting and dog-fighting were active sports, the bulldog was found to be too slow for pit purposes, hence the need for a dog with more speed and a good strong, punishing jaw.
This new breed met with success and was much superior to the bulldog for fighting in the pit. One of the first strains that was produced was noted for its gameness and fighting ability.

By John P. Colby

 

bollocks to that

 

to what?........

 

I have also heard that there may be 2 cases in which the lines may have been crossed. 1. That those who had registered their apbts as am staffs re-registered their dogs which is where there are apbts and am staffs that are registered as both. 2. That a legislation act passed in 1972 which banned the transportation of apbts across state lines for dog fighting, which (idk how this relates) but ended up crossing breeds/ lowering standards.


A personal End note:
Since I have joined this forum I've had my eyes opened as to how many people turn their noses up to "pits" as a whole...are these not the dogs that used to be just english/ irish immigrant mutts?? I have seen tons on Am Staffs that pretty much look exaaactly the same. APBTs instead I've seen big, small, wide, thin, short snout, long snout.... why should the first Q out of someone's mouth be "what bloodline"?
I hope this is not the actual impression of this forum or the people here.[/quote] Queenof2Titans,did you come here to learn or argue.I get the impression you seem to think that with the laws enacted against matching dogs and that people started crossing other junk into the APBT,there was no magical force field that went up at every state boundary to actually stop dogs from crossing state lines,you'd be better off to forget most nonsense you read.On your "personal note" the reason APBTs don't all look the same is because they come from different families of dogs(just like people don't all look alike)they weren't bred to look a certain way,they were bred to perform in the [] not like a show dog where they prance around a ring in front of a bunch of people trying to win a pretty dog award.The reason alot of us here ask what bloodline is just simply because we have an interest in these dogs,like when a car guy asks someone what's under the hood.Just interested and making conversation.It's really nothing to get your panties in a bunch about.I don't think anyone here is turning their noses up at APBT,have you noticed what forum this is,I think most here like the breed.So again what you said is kind of ridiculious.

 

Queen:

Man, I'm really not sure just what you are asking. You have some things out of order and mixed up..can you direct me to this "debate" on another part of the forum that you are talking about. Maybe that will help me figure out where you are coming from and just what it is you are confused about. Or, could you just ask your questions without all the other stuff? Really I'm just wanting a starting point! Not trying to dis you or anything...

Methinks you are making something difficult out of something that is not, but your post is so mixed up I don't know where to start....maybe that other thread will help me?

Dreamer

 

hey Dreamer, I imagine anyone who read that thread without reading the "merle" in the introduction forum would be pretty lost, sorry about that. I was pretty riled up at the time I made some of my posts, but hell, I've just never been the type of person to not to talk about what I feel strongly about. I know that bothered a lot of the members and frankly I don't care that I didn't "study" the forum before posting.
Anyway, I promised myself I wouldn't rile myself up anymore, especially on the key issues of merles or the difference between amstaffs and apbts or which came first of the breeds.
I hope the reference above could help, and I've come to the conclusion that there going to be more bias posts than anything else unless there's factual source backing it up. I've done research of my own, and the post above was what I kept finding....so I left it at that.

 

Soooo.....the quesion here is what came first? The AmStaff or the APBT?
Forgive me....i'm usually NOT dense....but i'm not getting the point or questiion behind this thread...:confused:

 

I thought it was just me:confused:.

What difference does it make? What are you trying to find out or acheive by your question. Oh, wait, I know the response I'll probably get, 'it's just a question'.

In your original post you said that the amstaffs you've seen all look the same and you've seen APBT's in all sizes shapes and everything else.Okay???What??? Thats common knowledge around here and everywhere else. What are you getting at??

 

The apbt came first, UKC or AKC (don't remember which one) didn't open up a spot for the (AST) until much later in time, long after the dogs had already arrived here and we had already started tweeking them to be a better sporting dog. The kennel club opened their stud books to 70 APBT's then closed them and they could only be bred to one of the other 69 dogs in the registry, thats when the AST was established as a reconized breed so the answer to the question is, the APBT came first.

 

The APBT came first. The AmStaf branched off of that for the AKC show ring, though AmStafs were still matched. The biggest name for a fighting AmStaf would be Tacoma Jack, which was a foundation dog for the Tacoma line. Now, most are bred for the AKC show ring, and bred for the fad of what's winning rather than the standard.

Not considering the registration of the dogs, but rather the standards and breeding ethics applied to them, they are cousin breeds, imo. The AmStaf has had a closed genetic pool for over 70 years. That's more than enough generations to be it's own breed.

I completely agree. I don't think that AmStafs should be registered as APBTs and vice versa. Crossing the two just makes for confusion, too. It's the same with the American Bully breed. The breeds are so similiar in type, they really need to maintain a genetic seclusion to maintain the breeds.

I think the reason you will see a much larger variation of type among APBTs rather than AmStafs is what they are bred for. A majority of AmStafs are bred for the fad of what's winning in the show ring, so they are going to go for that cookie cutter image of what they think judges are looking for. APBTs are a working bred dog, so as long as the dog can do the job, it doesn't matter what it looks like (for the most part). "Gameness first, the rest will follow" was a primary thought that formed the breed. They are all American Pit Bull Terriers, even if they all don't look the same, as long as they are bred for the true standard of the APBT.

 

Thank you all for your posts...the main point of it was to prove the confusion in the resources I've found on my own, by reference, and by the forum.

Yes the APBT came first, the confusion which I first had and maybe others unadmitindly had is where did the AmStaff come from and when. Although it's clear now, the bias interpretation of their history is what leads to the confusion (on many topics).

*pipbull- well written, good post

 

I´ve never heard of any confusion in this matter. It is common knowledge when and how the Amstaff breed started in the 1930´s and how APBT and Amstaff are related.

Perhaps you think about staff? Staffordshire bull terrier? they are a relatively new breed, registered about the same time as the Amstaff. 1930´s. Both came later as officially registered breeds than the APBT.

 

when a breed was accepted to a registry is not when a breed originated. the Stafforshire Bull is considered by some the oldest of the three, the original bull and terrier or half and half. i read an article somewhere where Lightner had claimed that his family started their line in America before the Civil War....its an ongoing debate, that really is lost in time IMO

 

I am sure they are considered by some. There are always someone considering just about, you name it. There are also people considering the APBT to be the original Bulldog, without no terrier blood whatsoever, the ancestors of all bull dogs, and so on... But are they right, do they have anything reminding of evidence? Not as far as I have ever heard. Who can say what breed a dog is before the breed even exists. there was also dogs before the official APBT registration 1898. How early where they Pit bulls? Impossible to answer and to know.. and a very theorethical question.

What we can say objectively imo is when a breed first was accepted to registry. Everything else is more or less personal believes and speculations so far when it comes to these breeds, as long as no new sensational evidence comes up.