They'd be after you, too, if your yard was as worldwidely well known as his!

[rozae]

I want to tell you about a man. A great breeder. An amazing dogman. He's famous -- legendary even! His yard is worldwidely well known about! I am very upset about what happened to him and so should you! If you, too, are upset after reading about this poor, old, legendary dogman, find yourself a backbone and DO SOMETHING to HELP FLOYD.

Without no

Comments

[rinalia]

If this was a quality fighting line - these dogs pose less of a threat than the average backyard bred pit sitting in a shelter. They are often sounder in temperament than pit bulls bred strictly for money or strictly for conformation

[rozae]

I'm not sure I agree with breeding for "gameness," personally, but then I'm not entirely sure that I know what "gameness" is. It seems to me that it goes hand-in-hand with dog fighting. Is there a good reason to breed for "gameness"? Does anyone put that "gameness" to good, constructive use, rather than fighting dog against dog?

[silverblaidd]

A dog's gameness is described as its willingness to continue to attack an opponent, or to scratch, despite being overpowered and despite having been injured.

It's also often described as a willingness to please it's master despite any injury or death to itself. (The problem with that being that dogs aren't 'live to serve' creatures.)

[wirenth]

i'm on the side of the fence that defines gameness as the drive to win a fight even when overpowered or die fighting. i'm on the side of the fence that cannot separate gameness from fighting, period. you do not have a game dog unless that dog has been overpowered in a fight and continued to fight anyway. you do not have a gamebred dog unless it was bred from parents who were fought.

i think some people confuse gameness with other good, positive, sought-after qualities like willingness, drive, boldness, etc. a good bulldog can have all those things without it mattering at all if they're truly "game" or not.

[rozae]

That is the impression I've always gotten about gameness. I have no problem with the idea of gameness, it's the fact I can't imagine any other way to prove it than to fight the dog. And I am deadset against dog fighting. =\

[wirenth]

i see no need for gameness in a dog unless you're going to fight them, anyway, so it's kind of a moot point in my own little world.

[rinalia]

I don't think its confusing gameness with other "good", "positive" traits. Willingness? That's a gamedog trait. Drive? That's a gamedog trait. Boldness? That's a gamedog trait. The only reason we don't like to call them gamedog traits is because of what people THINK of when they hear "game". It's a twisting of language, not of the actual "gameness" traits.

And none of those traits are, in of themselves, positive or negative, just like being game, in of itself, is neither positive or negative. It's all how those behaviors are channelled that make them healthy and safe (and to me, "positive" and "good") for the dog (and person). I think catchdogs (from pits to dogos to lurchers) are gamedogs, but I don't think it's a positive or good form of gameness, just like i don't think dogfighting is a good venue for a gamedog.

But I understand people have different feelings on the matter. :) I certainly respect yours.

[rinalia]

Gameness, to me, is the willingness to keep working. A lot of terriers are game dogs - they continue to work despite dangerous conditions or against all odds (like a small terrier going to ground against a large badger). A lot of molossers and bulldogs are game dogs. It's tenacity. It's courage. It's just the drive of a dog. Willingness to fight another animal, especially if that animal is ten times your size, is a game trait, but it is not gameness, in of itself.

I don't define gameness as the "willingness to fight another dog", since a lot of different breeds and individual dogs exhibit game traits without aggro towards other dogs.

Does anyone put that "gameness" to good, constructive use, rather than fighting dog against dog? Sure. Weight pulling, tracking, obedience work, agility, earth dog trials, sch, french ring, carting, skijoring, therapy work, hunting, search and rescue are all jobs game dogs can engage in without having to fight other dogs. Running long distances or tough hikes can also be venues for a game dog to show

[rozae]

I have been reading about this and talking about this all morning (just about, that is) and I'm inclined to agree. It's just when I hear "gameness" or think "gameness" I automatically picture a dog designed for fighting. I think of a dog who has to be tested. And I'm not really thinking of much else but pit fighting. =\

It's going to be a while before I can hear "gameness" and not imagine a fighting dog. I think I like other words to describe the trait as a result. I don't have any sort of feeling attached to "determined" or "tenacity," for example.

I'm glad this post sparked some discussion as it's something I've wondered about. :]

[rinalia]

I agree - language is very powerful (more so than needs be sometimes). I would not utilize "game" around people who a) feel uncomfortable with the term or b) have a negative connotation.

Like you, I prefer other terms, especially when talking in public about the issue. I just wish the term was not so contentious or associated so much with such a deplorable thing, like dog fighting.

[rozae]

Perhaps in time, with education, it can change?

[silentxsarecool]

Eh, that's a pretty big debate in sheltering. I mean, really, do you try the "risky" dog that could end up a HUGE financial liability to you if it *does* turn out to be extremely reactive in some situation you haven't caught, or do you adopt out the dog that was dropped off simply for peeing on the rug? Granted, the second dog could also turn out to be *extremely* reactive, but at least then you aren't called to task for having knowingly adopted out a fighting dog that the public will perceive as super dangerous. Also, with dogs that DO take a lot of work and rehabilitation because you do know that they're very reactive - do you spend all the time, money, and resources to rehabilitate them, or do you save that money and use it to work with three more dogs that *don't* need as much extensive rehabilitation? As the owner of a dog who used to be very hand-shy and frightened of everything, I can honestly say that I wish there were enough fosters, homes, rescuers, time and money for all of the dogs with extensive rehabilitation needs out

[rinalia]

Now, as to pitbulls that *are* perfectly sweet, even tempered, and nice, I definitely do not feel they should be put down just because of what breed they are

But here's the rub - a lot of fighting dogs fit that description. Just because a dog is from fighting lines does not make them less sweet, less even tempered or less nice.