Talk:American Staffordshire Terrier

Addressing Controversial Issues Fairly

Some key facts need to be addressed on this page. First, we need to make clear that American Staffordshire Terriers can be dangerous, without saying that they cannot also be loving and kind. Both can be true. Secondly, it needs to be clear that this dog is commonly considered a pit bull type of dog. These facts are especially important to users who rely on Wikipedia for encyclopedic accuracy. WP:NPOV requires that we provide a balanced view. I am asking that the page be semi-protected as it seems as if any attempt to address attacks where AmStaffs have clearly been identified have been removed.

01:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC) Veritas Aeterna (talk) 01:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

No, you need to read WP:RS. Please, please - stay away with the pit bull crap.These are registered purebred dogs and they are not "pit bulls". We avoid citing and quoting tertiary sources. If you are here on a mission to paint all terrier x bulldog breeds with a wide paint brush in the color of dangerous, biters, etc., just move along. Each dog is different, and respond to their respective environments and level of training. Any untrained dog can bite and pose a danger and it doesn't matter what breed. News media likes the attention they get when they use certain terms like pit bull. Atsme 💬 📧 01:32, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I know this is controversial. These dogs are a kind of pit bull, I am sorry. The examples I provided specifically call out that the dogs in the attack were American Staffordshire Terriers in each news article I have provided. Encyclopedia Britannica is authoritative.

Much of what you are saying echoes the propaganda espoused by the pit bull lobby.

"I am glad to add: "(Generalizations about dog breeds are well established and widely accepted, but individual dogs may differ in behaviour from others of their breed.)", which is also part of the Encyclopedia Britannica article.

01:46, 17 April 2023 (UTC) Veritas Aeterna (talk) 01:46, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

WP:WikiProject Dogs, and dog experts/professionals watch these articles, myself included. You need to get off Britannica because it is considered marginally reliable, and we don't use marginally RS for controversial material. Let's not get into an edit war. Much of what you're saying echos the propaganda of BSL advocates, and pit bull haters. We go through this all the time, and they end up getting blocked. We have Project Dog to help people learn that purebred dog breeds that are recognized by reputable registries are not the crossbreeds and mongrels called pit bulls that are used in illegal clandestine dog fighting, or are also unlikely to be the dogs identified by sight. I don't have time to educate every single editor who wants to make these breeds controversial when there are so many variables. The article already addresses the topic so unless you're doing something to improve the article, please do not add controversial material sourced to Britannica. Atsme 💬 📧 02:12, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Veritas Aeterna, on second thought, I just read that paragraph and was appalled over the incidents that were included in that section. It doesn't belong in that section, because isolated incidents are not representative of the breed, especially when the breed is identified based only on sight, which has a high percentage of inaccuracy. Those incidents really shouldn't be included in this article at all. This article is about show dogs and family pets, not dogs that were improperly trained to be aggressive. Dogs like that come in all breeds. I don't have the time tonight to fix it, but would very much appreciate your help and working with you in getting this article neutral and far more accurate than it is now. Atsme 💬 📧 02:23, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the more civil replies, some of the earlier comments sound a bit like WP:OWN. I think these cases need to appear somewhere in the article. Prospective owners need to know these dogs have the potential to be dangerous and thus are suited for more experienced dog owners.

Also, the purebred dogs may be somewhat different than Rescue dogs that are labeled, correctly or not, American Staffordshire Terrier. The article also needs to address those potential owners, too, who are less knowledgeable. I have heard of cases where AmStaffs were adopted and then only later did they find out that colloquially they are considered a kind of pit bull.

I am open to moving the cases to a section such as Controversy. But they need to be somewhere.

I am open to working with you on this. We can leave aside the issue as to whether it is always the owner or not—perhaps agreeing to disagree there. People just need to be aware of the danger. It can be truly, truly horrendous.

The third case, the one in Sweden, was added by an anonymous user. So, I just wanted to point out that this may be an unpopular view—that the dogs can be very dangerous—but it is still needs to represented.

07:22, 17 April 2023 (UTC) Veritas Aeterna (talk) 07:22, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

You are quite welcome. Text tends to come across matter-of-factly, and my participation here is certainly not OWN because prior to my recent 2 reverts, I have only made 11 edits to this article over the years, and they involved fixing what vandals had done, a few citation updates/fixes, and I added a little material a while back. I do watch the dog articles as a member of Project Dogs but we welcome good writing, copy editing, and accurate updates. The problems we encounter most often are born of ignorance and fear, in the pragmatic sense, and we get more than our share of BSL advocates, pit bull haters, and people who think everything is a pit bull when they know very little about dog breeds or dog ownership beyond having a family pet. I would very much appreciate, and highly recommend, you reading the following: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dogs/Archive 15#Critical updates about phenotypes, genetics and selective breeding. Science has yet to substantially prove the claims that temperament (not behavioral traits) is inherited (we should probably change that section header); therefore, adding contentious or controversial material relative to temperament in our registered dog breed articles requires updated, top quality, science-based sources, and a good understanding of how a dog's temperament is established. Here is a classic example of a "scientific paper" that contains inaccuracies:

The most frequently reported dog breeds who had bitten (and were not classified as mixed) were Pit Bull (27.2%), German Shepherd (10.5%), Labrador Retriever (7.2%), Boxer (4.6%), Rottweiler (3.9%), Beagle (3.3%), Jack Russell (2.9%), Bulldog (2.9%), Chihuahua (2.6%), Husky (2.3%), Golden Retriever (2.3%), Dachshund (2.2%), Mastiff (1.9%), Shih-tzu (1.9%), Poodle (1.6%), and Cocker Spaniel (1.5%). Eight additional breeds each representing <1.5% of bites were also identified (Yorkshire Terrier, Great Dane, Australian Shepherd, Doberman, Boston Terrier, Akita, Collie).30 Though these studies identified dog breeds involved in bite injuries, it is difficult to draw conclusions on the involvement of specific breeds in pediatric dog bites as the overall underlying dog population is not available for comparison, and breed stratification is not possible.

The first sentence is misinformation because a pit bull is a ubiquitous term, not a breed, and most dogs identified as pit bulls are mixed breeds. For centuries, high level, experienced dog trainers and breeders already knew temperament, which directly affects behavior, is highly influenced by environment and training. Science is just now getting around to validating it. Most of the reports about pit bulls and the naming of breeds by sight ID are anecdotal and most often these dogs are misidentified. Unless a report provides significant data that the dog was indeed a specific breed of dog, not a mongrel or mixed breed, (DNA confirmed registration papers), and the only proof is (a) a visual ID by terrified witnesses, (b) owners who purchased their dogs from a puppy mill or SPCA, and the like, and (c) have no registration papers, then we do not include that material in the article. News media is the worst source for reporting dog bites, and that is why the CDC stopped including breed names in their dog bite/fatality statistics. Every mixed breed dog that bites a person or another dog tends to be labeled pit bull, so please consider what has already been discussed and agreed upon. Verifiable facts that are supported by real science are what speak loudest. Atsme 💬 📧 18:34, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I read the paper. I wish she had tracked behaviors more related to the prey-drive, e.g., the bite-shake-hold-on pattern of pit bull type dogs. That is why new owners need to understand the dangers of having a pit-bull type dog as that kind of bite-force combined with that shaking and holding on causes great damage. Here is a study I recommend (tinyURL link to the PDF, it won't let me type the full link in directly so you have to put together the tinyURL dot com part):

https:// + tinyURL + dot + com + /yc5yb4by

In terms of what I view as bad science, this would be the one:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10997153/

It is an AVMA report. The data show that pit bulls are a problem even back in the late 1990s. They only look at the two year data, where Rottweilers play a larger role and gloss over the 20 year data. Then rather than analyzing the 20 year data in more detail they launch into a long discussion session that is less science than their interpretation of proper policies.

Anyway, you may disagree with me on one, the other, or both, but I am hoping that you would agree that potential owners should know what they are getting into. For example, AmStaffs were a recommended breed for seniors by AARP according to this lawyer’s video:

https:// + tinyURL + dot + com + /yckp7jbf

Fortunately, it appears they have retracted that recommendation. Veritas Aeterna (talk) 02:28, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

It is not I who disagrees with you, Veritas Aeterna, it is science that disagrees with you. WP should not be misinforming owners by including breaking news reports which are typically anecdotal accounts resulting from visual IDs, and stereotypes. Encyclopedias do not pigeon hole purebred dogs that are registered with a reputable breed registry with breed types that are identified based only on a visual ID, especially when there is no science-based evidence that supports the claim. Read bull and terrier for some insight into the history of the heterogenous group of dogs referred to today as "pit bulls". As WP editors, we simply provide the facts based on material that is supported by good science and/or RS that publish verifiable material that is neither outdated nor recently debunked. For example, your comment, "the bite-shake-hold-on pattern of pit bull type dogs" is a myth. The behavior is inherent in Canis familiaris. Anyone who has ever owned a puppy and played tug of war with it using a toy knows that simple fact. Another known fact: dogs become what their owners and environments make them. There are television shows and dog trainers that are making a fortune showing how easily it is to train that bad behavior out of a dog...any breed. Breeding simply makes a dog more suitable for the jobs they are tasked to perform. The bite-shake-hold behavior is common, and has nothing to do with the breed of a dog. Back in the 18th and 19th centuries, dogs were bred for function, not looks. They came in all shapes and sizes, and were named after the function they served (they had no breed registries back then) such as "bull dog" (a dog that was used to bait bulls), "pit bull" (a dog that fought in the pits) "rat terrier" (a dog that killed rats), "fox terrier", etc. Please read the linked article from the University of Pennsylvania, Scholarly Commons, and the article published in The Cut titled How Both Sides of the Pit Bull Debate Get It Wrong. Remember, the American Staffordshire Terrier is not a pit bull; rather, it is a purebred dog that, over generations of careful breeding, has evolved into a completely different dog than those used for blood sports some 200 years ago. Atsme 💬 📧 02:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Happy to discuss this purely on the basis of science! There is a lot to address here:

• How the pit bull lobby distorts and muddies the science
• How pit bulls attack
• The history of pit bulls
• Data supporting the danger of American Staffordshire Terriers

First, we have to address the pit bull lobby, which is deliberately muddying the science, just as the tobacco lobby did for smoking.  Please watch this Canadian Investigative video on pit bulls and their lobby as an introduction:

    Pit Bulls Unleashed: Should They Be Banned? - The Fifth Estate

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFa8HOdegZA

Yes, I read the Wikipedia Page you mentioned. Thank you. Please check out the following pages which I find to be an even more comprehensive history:

• Bear-baiting
• Bull-baiting
• Dog fighting
• Dog fighting in the United States

Dog fighting is still a problem and people are still looking for “game dogs”.

To show that dog fighting still affects breeding, try Googling:

kennels +(“game dog" or “game bred” or “game pit*”)

To see the results of the pit bull lobby propaganda, go to GoFundMe and try this query:

pitbull attack

I agree we debate on the merits of the science. As you can see the studies in AVMA are biased. The multi-million dollar pit-bull lobby is funded by Animal Farm Foundation (AFF), owned by Jane Berkey, has its own front organization to run biased studies, the National Canine Research Council (NCRC). These studies appear in AVMA, which is also pro-pit. Wikipedia is about truth, not biased studies.

Accurate statistics, not those subsidized by lobbying, are available here:

https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-studies-level-1-trauma-table-2011-present.php

Since this article is about American Staffordshire Terriers, we have to look elsewhere. There are two articles below from non-US countries that we could include. One is from Canada and the other from Australia. Two more data points, with local attack numbers, not just anecdotal stories.

Canada

Pit bulls are worst offenders in fatal dog-on-dog attacks, Edmonton stats show | CBC News

A 2017 article:

American Staffordshire terriers were responsible for 23 of the 81 fatal attacks reported since 2013.

Statistics collected by the City of Edmonton reveal that American Staffordshire terriers — one of several breeds that are commonly known as pit bulls — were responsible for nearly 30 per cent of all reported fatal dog-on-dog attacks in the city between January 2013 and September 2017.

…

The number of attacks that resulted in the death of another pet has been rising.

• 2012 - 0
• 2013 - 7
• 2014 - 21
• 2015 - 15
• 2016 - 30

Ward said the numbers spiked because restrictions on pit bulls in Edmonton were repealed in 2012.

"I do believe in animal rights but I don't know how you can say you're an animal advocate and strongly advocate for pit bulls because they are the very things that are killing so many pets," Ward said.

According to the city, there are approximately 1,848 dogs licensed as either American Staffordshire terrier or Staffordshire bull terrier, which equates to three per cent of the city's dog population.

"Staffordshire terriers are a small per cent of our population, so it's a very disproportionate number," Ward said.

"We shouldn't see them killing more than double the next highest breed, when there are so few of them in the city."

Australia

Unfortunately, American Staffordshire Terriers are not yet banned in Australia although the APBT is.

Canine expert says American Staffy dog that killed baby while parents slept saw newborn ‘as prey’ | The Independent

The tragic incident of a family pet killing a five-week-old baby while his parents slept has prompted calls to ban potentially dangerous dogs in Australia, and brought on warnings against allowing them near children.

The American Staffordshire terrier – which is considered to be a pit bull-type breed and is banned in the UK – killed the baby boy in Kariong, just outside Sydney, in New South Wales (NSW) in the early hours of Sunday morning.

Emergency services arrived at the bungalow just after 2am, but the baby could not be revived. It was reported by Australian media that the 26-year-old mother was extremely distressed, and was taken to hospital and sedated.

…

About a month before the dog attacked the baby, it had killed the neighbour’s spaniel in the family’s own backyard, according to reports. The parents had been told by the local authority to take their pet for a temperament assessment.

The dog may have thought that the baby was “prey” rather than a human, due to the infant’s size, a dog behavioural expert has said.

…

A spate of attacks by large and muscly dogs on people and animals in the NSW region, where the family has lived, has prompted calls to restrict ownership of them.

American Staffies are the most-highly represented in the number of dog attacks in NSW, with 881 cases reported in 15 months – according to data from the NSW Office of Local Government.

—————

So we could include more data from Canada or Australia if you like.

Since this page is on American Staffordshire Terriers, one of several pit-bull kind of dogs, I think the burden of proof is on the breeders to show that in some 50+ years since the stud books were closed to APBTs, which were bred for “game” in the fighting ring, that their temperament is significantly different from APBTs. Where is that proof? Something more scientific than the AKC Temperament Test (ATT), of course.

Anyway, I hope you watch the Fifth Estate video. You’ll see why we have to fairly warn Wikipedia readers of potential dangers.

Finally, you are right that I need to further characterize the biting style of pit bulls as going far beyond bite-shake-and-hold-on, the following is a better characterization: “Instead of a warning bite, we saw wounds where the flesh was torn from the victim. There were multiple bite wounds covering many different anatomical sites. The attacks were generally unprovoked, persistent and often involved more than one dog. In every instance the dog involved was a pit bull or a pit bull mix.” That’s from Dr. Billmire, professor and director of the Division of Craniofacial and Pediatric Plastic Surgery at Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center.

[Billmire, M.D., David (2014-06-29). "Opinion: There is no need for pit bulls" (News site). Cincinnati.com | The Enquirer. Retrieved 2023-04-27.]

Also, if you are interested in more detail on the pit bull lobby, see below, for a description of the 5 levels on which it operates.

More on the Pit Bull lobby

Pit Bulls are the only breed type with their own political lobby. Key points are that the lobby conducts and publishes its own research and has encouraged unfounded beliefs such as they were America’s “nanny dogs” and that they are good family dogs (ridiculous, if it were not so dangerous).

Here is a description of the pit bull lobby, from Responsible Citizens for Public Safety: https://rc4ps.org/who-is-the-pit-bull-lobby/

Five Levels of the Pit Bull Lobby

Level 1: The financing source. Animal Farm Foundation (AFF), owned by Jane Berkey. OThe company’s motto is: “Securing equal treatment and opportunity for pit bull dogs.” AFF devotes itself entirely to fighting pit bull regulations. “After inheriting a fortune from her father, Jane Berkey, who also owns a literary agency, turned over at least $6 million to her group, $2.85 million in 2013, according to government records. She pays 9 employees (one of whom, the director, makes more than $100,000 a year) and finances numerous groups that share her philosophy,” La Presse reports.

Level 2: The researchers. “To produce studies, AFF bought a private research body in 2007. The acquisition was kept secret until the victims’ group Dogsbite discovered this during litigation. The National Canine Research Council (NCRC) was created by a veterinary technician, Karen Delise. Neither an academic researcher nor a veterinarian, she self proclaims as the ‘greatest national expert on deaths caused by dog bites,’” La Presse reports. NCRC co-authors and finances studies, like the ones cited by the OMVQ, which chiefly attempt to show pit bulls cannot be identified.

Level 3: Publication. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (JAVMA).“The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) publishes NCRC studies in its journal. On its own website it proposes sample letters [for readers to write] contesting any law aimed at pit bulls. Moreover, its site has a link to AFF,” La Presse reports. The journalist even points out the AVMA’s notice on the embargoed 2000 fatal dog attack study, which falsely and fraudulently states: “In contrast to what has been reported in the news media, the data contained within this report CANNOT be used to infer any breed-specific risk for dog bite fatalities.”

Level 4: The political lobby. Best Friends Animal Society. Their senior legislative analyst, Ledy VanKavage, drafts state-level bills to eliminate local pit bull ordinances (state preemption laws) and is also a board member of AFF. VanKavage boasts on Best Friends’ corporate website that she commissioned an ex-economist from the tobacco industry, John Dunham, to create a fiscal calculator designed to advise governments on the cost of breed banning. Dunham’s sham BSL calculator, financed by the NCRC, over exaggerates these costs by nearly two orders of magnitude.

Level 5: The distributors. The animal care industry. “All the lobby studies are abundantly distributed by animal-based companies like shelters, breeders, trainers, etc. In Montreal, they are [distributed] by, amongst others, the SPCA, whose mission is to avoid euthanizing dogs and whose two most senior executives are themselves owners of pit bulls,” states La Presse. “On social media, pit bull owners deploy these studies relentlessly and accuse all their opponents of ignorance,” La Presse reports. More aggressive ones have even threatened the mayor of Québec City with death. Veritas Aeterna (talk) 02:24, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

The focus here should be on the actual science of the respective modern show dog's breed, its genetics, the breed standard, and inheritable traits, not how owners train/treat their dogs, or how each dog adapts to its environment that contributes to random dog bite fatalities in ALL breeds of dogs. The latter indicates the temperate of an individual dog, regardless of their breed. Opinions and many of the reports published by lobbies and advocacies are not reliable because they are known to spread questionable material and debunked information. Sensationalism, drama and fear are great for clickbait. WP editors are obligated to AGF assuming that other editors would not purposely create disruption over a topic they know little to nothing about. That is the kind of behavior we expect from POV warriors, trolls and vandals pushing noncompliant, biased material. Please do not revert edits that have been removed because the material is noncompliant with WP:PAGs, or that is considered irrelevant to the subject. Dog bite/fatality cases do not qualify for inclusion in the Temperament section of a purebred show dog article. To do so is a gross misrepresentation of the entire breed in an attempt to portray them as evil and dangerous. WP:CIR is expected when editing these types of contentious topics.

Following quote is from Broad Institute.

By comparing dog genomes to identify genetic variations tracking along breed, as well as along individual physical and behavioral traits, Karlsson and Morrill identified 11 loci of the dog genome strongly associated with behavioral differences – none of which were specific for breed – and another 136 suggestively associated. The genetic differences between breeds such as golden retrievers, Chihuahuas, Labrador retrievers, German shepherd dogs, and others, primarily affected genes that control physical traits – far more than breed differences affected behavioral genes.
"The majority of behaviors that we think of as characteristics of specific modern dog breeds have most likely come about from thousands of years of evolution from wolf to wild canine to domesticated dog, and finally to modern breeds," said Karlsson. "These heritable traits predate our concept of modern dog breeds by thousands of years. Each breed inherited the genetic variation carried by those ancient dogs, but not always at exactly the same frequencies. Today, those differences show up as differences in personality and behavior seen in some, but not all, dogs from a breed."

POV pushing material and/or random dog bite fatalities into WP's modern purebred dog articles as being representative of the breed's temperament will be reverted. Atsme 💬 📧 20:18, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Amstaff are pitbull https://avmajournals.avma.org/view/journals/javma/aop/javma.23.01.0025/javma.23.01.0025.xml https://www.npr.org/2016/05/10/477350069/friend-or-fiend-pit-bull-explores-the-history-of-americas-most-feared-dog https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pit%20bull https://vault.si.com/vault/1987/07/27/the-pit-bull-friend-and-killer-is-the-pit-bull-a-fine-animal-as-its-admirers-claim-or-is-it-a-vicious-dog-unfit-for-society https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4160292/ https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/04/style/pit-bull-pibble.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.123.186.150 (talk) 22:12, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Breed-specific legislation

I read that American Staffordshire terriers are banned in the UK, they are not the same breed as the American pitbull terrier and should not be mistaken for the American pitbull terrier Dennis the mennis (talk) 20:42, 24 August 2023 (UTC)