# Local SPCA chapter doing a mando training on "Bully Breeds"



## HecklingGopher (Mar 16, 2011)

So my apartment complex is doing a mandatory training for those of us that have dogs that belong to the "Bully Breeds" list. In the letter to us, the training is for people that have such dogs so that we know how dangerous our dogs are. My god, I have never heard of such blatant discrimination against people with large dogs. What I find funny though, is that little dogs often times are more aggressive than the big ones. How much longer will it be tolerated for businesses to discriminate against us law abiding citizens for our choice of responsibly owning a large dog? Such crap!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Bully breeds are generally used to define breeds that were originally intended to deal with bulls, bull baiting, and dirivations of these breeds usually used for dog fighting. 

They would most likely be including Pit Bulls, Staffordshire Terriers, Bull Terriers, American Pit Bull Terriers, Boxers, American Bull Dogs, English Bull dogs, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, Cane corsos, bull mastiffs, Dogo Argentinos, and some other dogs that I am forgetting. In short, the dogs that are usually lumped together and called pit bulls, mistaken for pit bulls, etc. 

I don't care, the community of these dogs owners have allowed their dogs too much license, and let their dogs run loose and get into a lot of trouble. So the apartment complex could call a meeting of all residents, to target a few. All dog owners, in which case owners of these dogs still do not take it all seriously. 

The reason they are not asking Yorkie owners to attend is because while Yorkies do bite, yes, they do not usually do serious damage when they do, and they are not usually KILLING other people's dogs. 

Up in the nearest city to me, they just had to kill two bully breed dogs for this reason. People are afraid of them. Many of their owners simply do not get it that it is not funny to see two dogs going at it. they think their dog is the baddest and that is kool. Well??? 

It sounds like they are offering advice/warnings to these people, but not actually saying they cannot have the dogs. Some places are going to make you have a CGC on your dog. They will not discriminate and that will send some people scrambling. 

I will tell you what, My parents old English Setter would never hurt a flea. It is just not the type of dog they are. Any dog can bite, but these dogs are as a rule calm and non-aggressive. Not guarding dogs, not fighting dogs, not terriers, They are hunting dogs that have a super soft mouth because they were supposed to retrieve birds and not hurt them. Why should this dog need a CGC to live in an apartment complex? How many deaths or injuries have been caused by English Setters? How many bites? Just because you do not want to offend someone with a more formidable dog? 

Kudos to them for singling out the trouble making breeds and not just all out banning them. 

I would not want to have to go to a special session because I am a GSD owner, but I understand that GSDs do have a reputation, and there is a higher probability in certain circumstances for my dog to do something different than a less-aggressive breed. I accepted that fact when I chose to own GSDs. So I would go. I would jump a hoop or two to be able to own these dogs.


----------



## wilbanks17 (Feb 11, 2011)

Well that's better than then banning the dogs from the complex completely, like some communities have done.


----------



## jan & jim (Jan 22, 2009)

+1 on what Selzer said. Too many people get a dog without taking into account the dog's needs from a breed standpoint. Not to mention the people that don't make the time to train, discipline, and socialize their puppies! I wouldn't take personal offense to the situation if I were you.
Jim


----------



## Coastie01 (Mar 17, 2011)

I would take offense to this because it is total BS there is no way you can single out "bully breeds". I dont owns a "bully breed" but this is outrageous. Any dog that is poorly/not trained and over 40 lbs can kill so why single out the certain breed? I understand that there are a lot of Pit Bull related attacks but what about all the other attacks? If your going to have a mandatory training then make it for all medium to large breed dog owners. In my 3 years as a vet tech i was only bitten twice by dogs and it was by a Shar-pei and a Basset Hound and some of the nicest dog i saw were Pits. It isnt about the dogs breed its about the owner.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

HecklingGopher said:


> So my apartment complex is doing a mandatory training for those of us that have dogs that belong to the "Bully Breeds" list. In the letter to us, the training is for people that have such dogs so that we know how dangerous our dogs are. My god, I have never heard of such blatant discrimination against people with large dogs. What I find funny though, is that little dogs often times are more aggressive than the big ones. How much longer will it be tolerated for businesses to discriminate against us law abiding citizens for our choice of responsibly owning a large dog? Such crap!


I agree about the breed discrimination - the "pit bulls" are probably one of the few instances where they are more biased against than the GSD breed! Yet all of the many pits of different types that I have met have been extremely friendly with but one exception!

The problem comes from bad publicity and the actual fact that if one of the bully breeds does become aggressive they have a great potential harm capability whereas if one of the little ankle biters goes bad, it is bad but not as dangerous!


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

I'd prefer this rather than just being turned down. Most of the apartments around here don't allow bully breeds period, and that's because there are fence/housing laws in the county I live in for those breeds. Is it wrong? A little, but its to insure against the small percentage of people that own bully breeds for what they are known for. For an apartment complex they would rather keep out the breed then deal with the liability of having just one bad dog. Is it possible in other breeds? Yes, thats why most lists included rotts, dobermans, akitas, and some had GSDs, but the chances are much higher in a bully breed.. Some apartments had a strict weight restriction at like 70, so I just looked at others that would allow my dog. I like the rule about having the CGC or even a pet interview, just to see what the dog is like before making a judgement.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

A CGC you could do, you would just have to require it across the board. That is hard for people to bring in a puppy. You can say the dog must have a CGC or achieve a CGC by 18 months old. But what do you do if a dog flunks it three or four times. Do you kick the people out or force them to get rid of the dog?

Every dog over 40 pounds? People will cry that is discrimination against large breeds. 

I know that it is the unpopular view, but bully breeds get a HUGE percentage of the bad press when bites or attacks are newsworthy. Responsible owners generally have dogs that never have an issue. Many get their dogs from good breeders, but some do rescue them as well. But they ALL take them and train and socialize them. 

The problem across the board is that there is only a small percentage of responsible dog owners. Perhaps many of the irresponsible dog owners are drawn to bully breeds for certain attituded, but it does not matter if there are more irresponsible bully breed owners, or if a similar percenctage of irresponsible or even criminal owners, have dogs that create all the problems attributed to the breeds. 

Doesn't matter really. The facts are their are a lot of irresponsible owners, and bully breeds in the hands of irresponsible owners are a big problem. Just one incident is too much with such formidable dogs. So the rental owners have decided to deal with the problem where the problem is hottest.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

Perhaps while you're there you can point out to them that their misuse of the term "bully breed" is insulting to both owners who own "bully breeds" and those, like yourself who don't?

They're assuming the term refers to "bully" as in the verb "bully"... not that the term is actually used to describe several breeds of dog in the molosser family.

In essance, they're calling *you* a bully for owning what they perceive to be a threatening dog.


----------



## x0emiroxy0x (Nov 29, 2010)

When I signed my pet agreement with Rocky at my apartment, I wrote out an agreement for them to sign and me to sign and made copies of both.

It basically said that:

For as long as I lived at the apartment, as long as Rocky did not break any of the apartment rules about pets (me not picking up his poop, him being off leash etc), I was allowed to keep him there, regardless of how much he weighed. (They don't allow pets over 60 lbs and he is 65 and growing) I also put in, for good will, that I would take Rocky through advanced training class and that my intent was for him to get his CGC between ages 2-4. Also, we wrote in that if the apartment switched management or if 'bully breeds' were no longer allowed, this contract would enable Rocky to stay.

My stepfather is a lawyer and wrote that ramble on above into a legal contract! Basically, I guaranteed that Rocky and I stay unless he is aggressive (which he isn't!). 

The manager has a bull dog and met Rocky and was very nice about the whole thing


----------



## Rerun (Feb 27, 2006)

Better than being banned from owning the dog at all.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

I wish some of the apartment complexes I've visited had mandatory parenting classes!


----------



## K9SHOUSE (Jun 8, 2003)

HecklingGopher said:


> So my apartment complex is doing a mandatory training for those of us that have dogs that belong to the "Bully Breeds" list. In the letter to us, the training is for people that have such dogs so that we know how dangerous our dogs are. My god, I have never heard of such blatant discrimination against people with large dogs. What I find funny though, is that little dogs often times are more aggressive than the big ones. How much longer will it be tolerated for businesses to discriminate against us law abiding citizens for our choice of responsibly owning a large dog? Such crap!


 
That really does seem unfair. I guess it's going to be a really big class then. I consider bully breeds to be both the smaller and larger ones. So you may have Bostons or Frenchie's on up to Neo's and English mastiffs. Perhaps you can bring up how dangerous it is to follow one on a walk or get on their "bad side" since most of them have silent but deadly farts. 

If it was me, I would get a shirt made that was similar to the above comment and list tongue in cheek why my dog was REALLY dangerous and wear it to this meeting. Perhaps even one alreally exists for your breed thru a rescue fundraiser or dog shopping site.


----------



## ranjini (Sep 22, 2011)

Spammity Spam Spam Spam


----------



## Alexandria610 (Dec 2, 2010)

HecklingGopher said:


> So my apartment complex is doing a mandatory training for those of us that have dogs that belong to the "Bully Breeds" list. In the letter to us, the training is for people that have such dogs so that we know how dangerous our dogs are. My god, I have never heard of such blatant discrimination against people with large dogs. What I find funny though, is that little dogs often times are more aggressive than the big ones. How much longer will it be tolerated for businesses to discriminate against us law abiding citizens for our choice of responsibly owning a large dog? Such crap!


 
I volunteer at the SPCA of Central Florida (the chapter you are referring to, I believe) and have attended one of those Incredibulls courses. I do not own a bully breed, but have always liked bully breeds and wished that the bad rap they get will subside (though I know it will never disappear 100%). Anyway, the courses are held for free in hopes that the many owners of pit bulls and bully breeds in Central Florida will come to understand the breed/type of dog itself, and lessen the chances that it may hurt someone or cause havoc in the community. 

Now DON'T take what I stated above in any negative way - I have a huge soft spot for bully breeds, and I don't just assume that each and every bully breed will become aggressive and hurt someone. No, that is not the case. Many friends of mine own beautifully socialized and well-mannered bully breeds that are model citizens in the community. The problem is, that with all the bad media regarding pit bull bites in our community (Central Florida) it is hard to escape the reality that some places (especially an apartment complex that has a liability to its tennants) are afraid of these dogs and what they could potentially do.

Just be grateful that they are being proactive about it before an ill-socialized/ill-trained dog mauls someone in your apartment complex and ruins it for everyone else, banning the breed(s) entirely from the complex. I know that it feels like you are being singled out, but sometimes things just don't work exactly how you want them. As a lover of bully breeds, I would love to own one - but honestly, I don't want the stress of the stereotyping to weigh down on my dog and have to worry about breed bans/insurance companies dismissing me/people being afraid to come over, etc. 

It's just one of those things that we all have to take into consideration when adopting/purchasing a dog of certain breeds. Right now I have a Doberman Pinscher and get similar complaints from people. You know what's comical? She's probably the friendliest, sweetest dog in the neighborhood - but when people see her they tell me to get my 'vicious' dog out of their neighborhood.

Yeah, it does really bite to feel singled out when no other types of breeds are told to attend classes. I totally understand that. But again, be happy that the complex owner is making others (that have bully breeds but are neglectful and/or do not have the intelligence to properly socialize or understand the breed) take this course. It really ends up helping not only the complex, but the community in general.

And in Central Florida (as you should already understand - and more than likely do) our pit bull/bully breed overpopulation is ridiculous. On top of that, there are plethoras of irresponsible people that let their dogs breed time and time again, and it is sadly a lot of these dogs that have to be put down due to overpopulation and aggression issues because the dogs belong to people that have no business breeding them in the first place. As I stated earlier, I volunteer at the SPCA of Central Florida. We have almost 80-90% bully breed mixes at our shelter, and all that are awaiting adoption are just the sweetest dogs you could ever ask for. But guess what? Almost ALL of those bully-mixes are turned over to us because 'our apartment/condo/HOA wouldn't let us keep him/her.' It's a sad reality.


----------



## RedCrown (Feb 23, 2005)

I just want to point out that although it does seem that there is a disproportionate percentage of "bully breeds" that have had bad press or have bit dogs or people compared to other breeds... this is a function of flawed statistics, and not the breed type in and of itself. The reason that it seems that there is more bites by bull breeds is because I believe that there is a disproportionate AMOUNT of those types of dogs. More dogs = more bites by breed percentage. Dog bite statistics have a tendency to be based off of the most popular/recognized breed registries, but there are SO MANY **** stupid APBT registries that have hundreds of thousands of dogs registered that aren't even considered in population percentage. AKC, UKC, ADBA, AAPBA, APBR, CKC, SDR, WDR... Barf.

Agreed- at least they aren't outright banning them. And, IME- most "regular" dog owners/pit bull "adopters" could benefit from being reminded that bull breeds don't often like to "Say Hi" to other dogs..


----------



## Shaina (Apr 2, 2011)

I think it is a good thing as well. In my opinion, the apartment complex is also covering their own tails - most apartment complexes won't even ACCEPT bully breeds, so the fact that this one does is awesome. At least if something does happen, the press can't say that the complex was negligent.


----------



## Alexandria610 (Dec 2, 2010)

RedCrown said:


> The reason that it seems that there is more bites by bull breeds is because I believe that there is a disproportionate AMOUNT of those types of dogs.


Exactly - and in Central Florida it seems that, as I stated, there are SO many compared to other breeds, so it isn't surprising that they are focused on more. 



> And, IME- most "regular" dog owners/pit bull "adopters" could benefit from being reminded that bull breeds don't often like to "Say Hi" to other dogs..


I couldn't agree more. If they offered a free course for GSD's I would love to attend it. I've already learned a lot about owning/training GSD's and GSD mixes, but, it's always nice to get as much information about them as I can.


----------



## Alexandria610 (Dec 2, 2010)

Shaina said:


> I think it is a good thing as well. In my opinion, the apartment complex is also covering their own tails - most apartment complexes won't even ACCEPT bully breeds, so the fact that this one does is awesome. At least if something does happen, the press can't say that the complex was negligent.


It was extremely smart of them to do that. Plus, it helps promote living with the breed, not banning them to the point of breed/type extinction. And it also looks good, media-wise, for the complex.


----------



## fuzzybunny (Apr 29, 2011)

I live in an apartment building so I see many dogs of all breeds and sizes on a daily basis. I think a better approach would have been to having mandatory training for all dog owners. Bully breeds definitely have a bad reputation and more serious ramifications when they do bite but it seems flawed to address only them considering there are aggressive dogs in every breed.


----------



## mikey8270 (Jun 30, 2011)

x0emiroxy0x said:


> When I signed my pet agreement with Rocky at my apartment, I wrote out an agreement for them to sign and me to sign and made copies of both.
> 
> It basically said that:
> 
> ...


x0emiroxy0x, would you mind sharing the agreement you wrote up?

I have to move in a few months and am on the lookout for a pet-friendly landlord, but I would feel much better if I could have an agreement like yours!


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

That is ALOT better than banning. I think there should be mandatory classes for owners of any dog. Too many clueless dog owers out there.


----------



## chelle (Feb 1, 2009)

It is better than banning, definitely, but the sad thing is, the people that need such a thing most will not care what they're being told/taught.

It's probably some kind of insurance requirement of the complex.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

HecklingGopher said:


> So my apartment complex is doing a mandatory training for those of us that have dogs that belong to the "Bully Breeds" list. In the letter to us, the training is for people that have such dogs so that we know how dangerous our dogs are. My god, I have never heard of such blatant discrimination against people with large dogs. What I find funny though, is that little dogs often times are more aggressive than the big ones. How much longer will it be tolerated for businesses to discriminate against us law abiding citizens for our choice of responsibly owning a large dog? Such crap!


Is it "large" dogs or just certain breeds?


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

I also think it's better than to ban them.

There was an apt complex in a city near me, notorious for having pit bulls running loose, gangs etc...New owners took over (this was a huge probably 20 buildings/4 apts each type area)...they BANNED ALL dogs, because of the irresponsibility of some.

If the dogs weren't out by such and such a date, YOU were OUT. This was about 8 years ago, well a new owner has come in and re-allowed people to own dogs within the complex tho they have to be approved by their BOD..which I think is a 'good thing'..


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

How many people would be more afraid (nervous?) about a 140 lb Rottie than a 40lb Bull Terrier, or a 40 lb Staffordshire terrier?

*BSL rules are absolutely ridiculous!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

*There are very few breeds more people friendly than a pit bull - I certainly would not include GSD's among the more friendly to people breeds than any of the common pit bull breeds!*

I have actually been bitten by a **** hound (hunting dog!) and never by the "dangerous" guard dog breeds! Also bitten by a terrier but that is yet another story!


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

I don't agree with BSL, however, the reason it's happening all over is irresponsible ownership. 

And as for being afraid of the dogs you listed? If I were alone and any ONE of those dogs was charging me, I'd be afraid no matter the size..


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

JakodaCD OA said:


> I don't agree with BSL, however, the reason it's happening all over is irresponsible ownership.
> 
> And as for being afraid of the dogs you listed? If I were alone and any ONE of those dogs was charging me, I'd be afraid no matter the size..


Me too! But I would be MORE nervous about the Rottie! Size matters!


----------



## Jessiewessie99 (Mar 6, 2009)

I would be scared of any dog, no matter the size, if it were coming after me.


----------



## kiwilrdg (Aug 26, 2010)

I think the class should be for all dog owners. It should also cover the aggression of smaller dogs and should encourage people to work on those issues as well.


----------

