# What kind of dog?



## Greg Long (Mar 27, 2006)

This is a pic that is supposed to be a german wardog on the russian front in WW2.

What kind of dog do you think this is?

Greg


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Whatever it is, it was someones' poor pet pressed into service! By the ears, would you say herding cross?


----------



## Sarah Hall (Apr 12, 2006)

Most likely a GSD cross, I heard the GSDs were bred with other dogs so their appearance wouldn't be so easily recognized.


----------



## Greg Long (Mar 27, 2006)

Sarah Hall said:


> Most likely a GSD cross, I heard the GSDs were bred with other dogs so their appearance wouldn't be so easily recognized.


Where did you hear this?Im just curiously interested in more info on these war dogs.

I would say just guessing,that it had quite a bit of Mal in there.

Greg


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Greg Long said:


> Sarah Hall said:
> 
> 
> > Most likely a GSD cross, I heard the GSDs were bred with other dogs so their appearance wouldn't be so easily recognized.
> ...


Well, histories of war dogs I've read talked about GSD, Dobes, and Belgian Shepherds a lot. I can try to find those links; I didn't save & file them the way I do now.  

http://www.geocities.com/athens/1878/wardog.html#wwii


----------



## Sarah Hall (Apr 12, 2006)

I did some therapy work at a nursing home where there was an old German captain that worked with wardogs. He said the dogs would be crossed to not obviously look like GSDs because the enemy would kill any GSD on sight. Mals were popular because (at that time) most of them had very little black, so they just looked like a dog and not a BAD dog to shoot. Remember wardogs not only would actually charge into battle (more popular before guns), but they carried important messages from troop to troop, kind of like a carrier pigeon. I think I remember the old captain saying that they bred some for improper ear carriage/cartilage because it made them look like collies, etc. Also, you have to remember in GSDs and Mals the cartilage can be broken and the ear will hang/fly.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Sarah Hall said:


> I did some therapy work at a nursing home where there was an old German captain that worked with wardogs. He said the dogs would be crossed to not obviously look like GSDs because the enemy would kill any GSD on sight. Mals were popular because (at that time) most of them had very little black, so they just looked like a dog and not a BAD dog to shoot. Remember wardogs not only would actually charge into battle (more popular before guns), but they carried important messages from troop to troop, kind of like a carrier pigeon. I think I remember the old captain saying that they bred some for improper ear carriage/cartilage because it made them look like collies, etc. Also, you have to remember in GSDs and Mals the cartilage can be broken and the ear will hang/fly.


I think the Germans used Pit crosses too along the Russian border to pull sleds. Where did I READ that? I swear I'm not making it up.


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

How long have pits been around? They are an american breed right? So is it possible they did that that far back?? I don't know anything about pits, just speculating.


----------



## Guest (Apr 15, 2006)

Pits are a VERY old breed; the APBT is newer, but the type has been around for eons. Look at really old art if you question that. I think I'm going to breed Caleb with a pit; that's one badass looking dog! :lol: It looks like a muscular dutch/GSDish type thingy. :|


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> How long have pits been around? They are an american breed right? So is it possible they did that that far back?? I don't know anything about pits, just speculating.


Staffordshire is in England.


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

Connie Sutherland said:


> Mike Schoonbrood said:
> 
> 
> > How long have pits been around? They are an american breed right? So is it possible they did that that far back?? I don't know anything about pits, just speculating.
> ...


Then why is it called an American Pitbull Terrier? I don't see the word "pit" in the name "Staffordshire Terrier" 

I personally dislike Pit's... I would never own one, not my kinda dog, I don't like that look at all, I've done bitework with a brindle Presa Canario before, the bitework was good, but I didn't care for the dog as far as owning one went.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> How long have pits been around? They are an american breed right? So is it possible they did that that far back?? I don't know anything about pits, just speculating.


But you are definitely right that the APBT was the icon of American dog-dom for at least half a century. They were called the "Nanny Dog;" the Buster Brown dog (Tigue?) was an APBT. There are a zillion pictures of APBTs standing in front of the American flag......

QUOTE:    The breed was one of high visibility. Buster Brown shoes put the image of its mascot Tigre, an American Pit Bull Terrier, in every shoe to enhance its image as a sturdy, dependable shoe; RCA used Nipper, a pit bull of unknown ancestor, to illustrate the clarity of sound emulating from its phonograph by showing the dog being fooled into thinking he was actually hearing his masters voice and not a recording. 

The breed was used to illustrate American neutrality withour fear in 1914 as well as the toughness of Levis jeans, and was also portrayed as a defender of Old Glory. 

In 1917 Sgt Stubby, a pit bull of unknown descent, become a war hero for saving several soldiers lives and capturing a German spy while serving in the trenches of France with 26th Yankee Division. 

About two years later came a sturdy white pooch with a patch over one eye named Petey, who played alongside a loveable bunch of kids called The Little Rascals. The American Pit Bull Terrier was now an international icon, presenting America to the world. END 

from http://home.broadpark.no/~chorstad/history.htm


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> Then why is it called an American Pitbull Terrier? I don't see the word "pit" in the name "Staffordshire Terrier" ..........


There are as many "official histories" as there are APBTs (almost).

QUOTE: The terrier part of the name came from its ability to hunt small game and was one of the reasons why ratters knew it would excel in the rat Pit. The larger the number of kill the better the dog placed in the match. Due to the constraints of space and the agility of Black & Tan and now extinct White terriers of England these terriers were often being mixed with the old bull baiting dogs to achieve dogs which were premium for these purposes. 

It is believed that this practice of mixing bulldog's and terriers began in the town of Staffordshire England and became known as the Staffordshire Bull and terrier.

Due to the agility and gameness of this new found breed many began to also fight dogs with each other. Soon dog on dog fighting and ratting became so popular that practically all Inns and Pubs were equipped with a fighting pit.

As colonization of America and Canada began these people also brought their dogs. These dogs soon became known by the name of "Pitbull Terriers"

As time progressed a gentleman by the name Chauncy Bennett founded the UKC in 1898 with the American PitBull Terrier as its foundation dog breed. Although some are fortunate enough to own a UKC registered Pit's the majority of the public has chose to not register their dogs due to financial constraints and subsequent loss of bloodline determination. END

from http://www.americanpitbullregistry.com/Pit Bull History.htm


----------



## Guest (Apr 16, 2006)

Mike, a Presa is not a Pitbull. Not really even close. I see why you might not like them, but you're really holding the dogs responsible for the trash that owns them and perpetuates this image. I'd be willing to bet that you've known a well-bred pitbull even casually. Hell, there aren't even that many around anymore, so you might never have even SEEN one. I'll tell you that they're not bred for "big heads," ridiculous weight, and they're not all out of "Gator" or "Jeep." (Which is funny, if you know pits at all, b/c there are TONS of Gators and Jeeps, and they almost never mean the good ones! I had a Corvino pit several years ago who was often mistaken for an ABD, because he was very athletically built, tall and slender, very lean, and didn't have to work especially hard to hold up his head. I am going to stop here, or I will start ranting and NO ONE will be able to stop me :lol: ! I even did my final college paper on APBTs, and WOW did I start some controversy :wink: . I suggest anyone interested (or anyone who thinks they don't like pitbulls) read Richard Stratton's books _The American Pitbull Terrier_ and I can't remember the name of the other one, but they're both GREAT books. Talk about a breed that's been RUINED :x :evil: ...


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

Jenni, I don't care about the image, the reputation, or any other factor. Fact of the matter is, I don't like the way pitbulls look. I like the way shepherds look, tall, sleek, pointy nose, pointy ears, proud and handsome. Pits are not a dog I would consider owning purely for aesthetic reasons. They're just not "cute" or "cool" looking to me. They're just muscular weird lookin dogs to me. I don't have anything against people who own them and I'm sure there are some great pits, a friend of mine's brother has one (never met the dog) that is supposed to be an awesome pet... but it's just not for me. And to me Presa's look like Pits on steroids... and I still wouldn't own a Presa, Cane Corso, Pitbull, Staffordshire, Bulldog, or any mastiff breed either, no matter how related, unrelated, friendly, aggressive, social, stable, strong or pretty they are supposed to be


----------



## Linda Graffis (Mar 29, 2006)

*What Kind of Dog?*

*Jenni,

I have to agree with you. While I don't own a pit and am a dobe fanatic, my son has 2 purebred pits and I think they are awesome dogs. They are both stable, friendly and loving, although they are very protective of their family as they should be. My son has 2 small children, 6 years and 2 months and the dogs are so good with them. My son uses them for hog dogs, but they are also members of the household. However, if he puts them on a hog, no matter how big, it's coming down.*


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

That pic is very much like many old WWI and WWII pics of German Shepherds. You have to keep in mind that WORKING ability was MUCH more highly prized then pretty. Personelly, I love the look of that dog. :wink:


----------



## Guest (Apr 22, 2006)

Mike, Mike, Mike, LOOKS?!? EEK! :roll: Sorry, ol pal, looks are not a reason...sounds like somthin' a show person would say :twisted: :lol: I maintain that even crotchety old Mike would like the old time dogs, but where the hell are they?  No one realized what mine was; he looked like a normal dog with floppy little ears and a patch over one eye...I always enjoyed telling people what he was. It *is* the image you don't like based on what you said, because they have started to look like this lately to *perpetuate* the stupid image of the scummy breeders nowadays. This look is not what they were bred for. The ADBA doesn't care what they look like; the APBT was bred for work, and has no physical conformation requirements except the ability to work, which these muscular circus freaks would have a tough time with. <sigh> I hope we can still be friends...  :lol: 

Linda, nice to see someone normal still remembers what these dogs were bred for  . 

Bob, I'm with you 100%. I think that dog is gorgeous!


----------



## Greg Long (Mar 27, 2006)

The dog I posted looks more like a Mal to me.

I had heard from some fairly reliable sources that the germans used Mals and even crossed them into their GSDs.

I have also seen a few Mals with huge heads and mouths that look like crocadiles.

I was just curious.

I doubt their is any pit in that dog but its all just speculation anyway.

Greg


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

Jenni Williams said:


> Mike, Mike, Mike, LOOKS?!? EEK! :roll: Sorry, ol pal, looks are not a reason...sounds like somthin' a show person would say :twisted: :lol:


Looks are a damn good reason, I'm never gonna own a dog that I don't think is a cool looking breed. I like all dogs, but I wouldn't own all dogs, I would only own a breed that I think is a good looking dog, n pits just don't do it for me. I think working line GSD's are great looking dogs, very cool physique, intimidating and just overall a "wow" looking dog, same goes with Mal's and Dutchie's and Dobie's... but I don't like the physique of a pitbull. Is it so hard to believe that someone doesn't like the same dogs you do? Would you still like the pitbull if they were 40lbs n scrawny but with the same temprement? I doubt it. Appearance makes the breed, n not everyone has to like the same breeds that you do.


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

i think you guys are talking apples/oranges here. when working a dog, the dog is only 50% of the team. if the dog's human half doesn't have pride in the dog (which includes the dog appearance), then the team isn't going to work to it's potential. mike isn't talking about the difference between a sable and a black/tan GSD. he's talking BREEDS. to say that looks shouldn't be taken into account when considering a breed is either naive or snobbish. either way, it's not realistic.

now within a breed, if one picked a dog solely on the way it looked, i would question that persons dedication to training a top quality working dog (again the sable vs. black/tan arguement)...


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Tim Martens said:


> i think you guys are talking apples/oranges here. when working a dog, the dog is only 50% of the team. if the dog's human half doesn't have pride in the dog (which includes the dog appearance), then the team isn't going to work to it's potential. mike isn't talking about the difference between a sable and a black/tan GSD. he's talking BREEDS. to say that looks shouldn't be taken into account when considering a breed is either naive or snobbish. either way, it's not realistic.
> 
> now within a breed, if one picked a dog solely on the way it looked, i would question that persons dedication to training a top quality working dog (again the sable vs. black/tan arguement)...


Tim, 

This is a whole line of reasoning that makes total sense, but I had certainly never thought it out.

I knew my gut went with what Mike said about having to like the way the breed looks, but I couldn't analyze *why* that made sense.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

I don't see any pitbull in that dog at all. I keep looking, but can't see it. pits are really stupid looking dogs. :twisted: Just thought I would throw that in there, besides, what do I know about pitbulls??????


----------



## Guest (Apr 23, 2006)

Mike, you're not getting what I'm saying. The APBT is supposed to be much closer to the 40lb dog you're describing. I'm saying that what you are saying you don't like is not what they were intended to be. So, your answer to the question of would I still like them 40lbs, scrawny, w/same temperament, is YES! That's much closer to the real APBT. I need to dig up a few pics.

Tim is right that looks shouldn't be an issue between dogs of the same breed, but that's not what I meant at all; I meant that the looks reason is not a good reason overall to not own a dog if you like the way it works. Not saying it's realistic, but it would be ideal to put that aside. Not that Mike should own one, just that not liking them b/c of their looks is not a good reason. They have a very interesting background and adaptability that's really intriguing if you look into it. 

Now, everyone, get ready to be offended: I am now going to admit that I don't like the looks of Mals, Dutchies, 95% of West German Shepherds, 55% of DDR or Czech GSDs, Rottweilers, Boxers, Labs, long-haired dogs over 10 pounds, solid black dogs, any dog with curly hair, and the list goes on. So, I would never own these dogs. But, if they were of interesting working ability, I would RESPECT them for what they were intended to be, even if I wouldn't let them into my home b/c they're butt-ugly.

I didn't say that dog had pit in it; Mike asked how long they'd been around, and the conversation started. Jeff, the dog DOES have a mid 20's-30's pit look to it, but I wouldn't say it necessarily has any in it; all breeds' looks have done quite a bit of changing over the past decades. This could be a Mal/GSD, or whatever else. Another pic would help.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Maybe it has bull terrier :twisted: 

All in all, who gives a sh$t???? Didn't we beat them? Who wants to know what a losers dog looks likes or is anyway????? :lol: :lol: 

Also, I like pits just fine, I just hate to see them doing manwork. They were bred to be in the pits, and the pits is where they should stay. I also really don't like the way GSD's and all those breeds look like, I really like the way the Maltese looks.  :lol: :lol:


----------



## Guest (Apr 23, 2006)

Totally agree Jeff. Pits are awful at manwork. They're just not cut out for it.


----------



## Guest (Apr 23, 2006)

Oh, and Jeff, you're dead wrong about the Maltese; Pekingese win any day. Now THIS is a breed made for work...agile, intelligent, excellent bitework (well, that part's true :twisted: ), beauty, and cleanliness! :roll: No, I wasn't drunk when I bought this dog (yes, bought  ).


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

Jenni Williams said:


> Now, everyone, get ready to be offended: I am now going to admit that I don't like the looks of Mals, Dutchies, 95% of West German Shepherds, 55% of DDR or Czech GSDs, Rottweilers, Boxers, Labs, long-haired dogs over 10 pounds, solid black dogs, any dog with curly hair, and the list goes on.


So why are you allowed to say that, but I'm not allowed to say I don't like pits because of how they look? I never said I didn't respect them, nor did I say I didn't like their temprement... I just said I don't care what kinda temprement they have, I don't like their looks. I also said I have no problem with people who like them. So how is what I said different to what you said about pretty much every major working breed? :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: Fact of the matter is, I wouldn't own one, not in the 1930's, not now, probably not ever unless some weird sci-fi like situation occured in my life that placed such a dog in my home.


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

Jenni Williams said:


> Now, everyone, get ready to be offended: I am now going to admit that I don't like the looks of Mals, Dutchies, 95% of West German Shepherds, 55% of DDR or Czech GSDs, Rottweilers, Boxers, Labs, long-haired dogs over 10 pounds, solid black dogs, any dog with curly hair, and the list goes on. So, I would never own these dogs. But, if they were of interesting working ability, I would RESPECT them for what they were intended to be, even if I wouldn't let them into my home b/c they're butt-ugly.


nice flip flop...


----------



## Guest (Apr 23, 2006)

Wow, men sure are sensitive. :lol: But, then, I already knew that. :wink: 

Mike, this is futile. You are not understanding what I'm saying at all, or you would see that we're not even disagreeing :roll: . I didn't accuse you of not respecting them or any other breed; not everything in that post was directed at you :wink: . I was just pointing out that it's funny to have *people* say they don't like them, b/c they're SO far removed from what they were meant to be. 9 out of 10 make me sick to look at, and I love the original breed. No need to get testy. Would the sci-fi situation happen now, or would you then be in the 1930's? I can start matching you up with your perfect pit if you tell me which era I should choose from. 8) :lol: 

I hate trying to type quick responses and remember every point I wanted to make and be sure everything comes across right...what a p.i.t.a. Talking is soooo much easier.


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

Jenni Williams said:


> No need to get testy.


can you not see that when you call the administrator of a "working dog" forum, who owns and works two working dogs that when you say he sounds like "a show person" it would incur some pointed feedback?

that was meant to be a low blow and mike took it as such. you've since back pedaled when you saw the reactions and i guess that's good, but the fact is that it wasn't a very smart thing to say...


----------



## Guest (Apr 23, 2006)

Tim, it's cute that you're sticking up for Mike, but I was joking with Mike, and I was not speaking to you at all. I also didn't know you knew Cujo's ped so imtimately :wink: . You seem to have personal issues with me for some reason... :wink: 

I do not back-pedal, either 8) . I dive straight in fulll-force and never back down. Maybe that's why I like pits :lol: . 

Mike and I have had long PM discussions about typifying dogs as show, working, East, West, etc., b/c BOTH of us have been told that we're "wasting our time" trying to get our dogs to do PPD work, because they didn't "have it." The "show person" comment was a joke (note the little joke emoticon next to it :roll: ) between 2 people whose dogs are often criticized, and should have been taken as such. If Mike didn't get the joke, it's Mike's place to say something about it :wink: .

The defense rests.


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

Jenni Williams said:


> Tim, it's cute that you're sticking up for Mike, but I was joking with Mike, and I was not speaking to you at all. I also didn't know you knew Cujo's ped so imtimately :wink: . You seem to have personal issues with me for some reason... :wink:
> 
> I do not back-pedal, either 8) . I dive straight in fulll-force and never back down. Maybe that's why I like pits :lol: .
> 
> ...


personal issues? i don't even know you. how is that even possible?

i simply react to what you write. mike obviously didn't take it as a joke (in spite of the little smiley face, as if that makes anything you have said up to that point a joke and as such you shouldn't be held responsible for it).

if it was a joke between TWO people, and if only TWO people should be able respond to it, then keep it in the aforementioned PM's. otherwise, it's a PUBLIC message and as such the PUBLIC can respond.

it's great that you and mike have this great PM bond. unfortunately, it is very apparent that it does not transcend a derogatory comment.

that's all......for now :wink: <-- see. that makes it ok...


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Don't make me stop the car. I will separate you two, without dinner! :twisted: :twisted: 

How dare people with weak ass dogs get offended.    In my experience, it is weak ass dogs 3, high drive dogs, 0 so there you have it. I have one of these dogs, and it is so much fun to train, you have to do lots of drive building, then some control, then back to the drive building. Plus, as an added bonus, he is an as^h#[email protected] The other dog, you just say "attack", and off he goes. So dull really.

What was this thread about???? Oh yeah, Jenni was being a sissy, or was that Mike? It might have been Tim or I. Or was it the the ugly pitbulls that were sissys???? I am pretty sure that Peke isn't a sissy. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Don't make me stop the car. I will separate you two, without dinner! :twisted: :twisted: .......



LOL! The scariest thing ever to come out of my father's mouth, from the bottom of the stairs: "Don't make me come up there!"


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Tim Martens said:


> ....if it was a joke between TWO people, and if only TWO people should be able respond to it, then keep it in the aforementioned PM's.....


I have to agree.


----------



## Guest (Apr 23, 2006)

Oh, Jeff. You never fail to, uh, do what it is that you do. What exactly *is* that? (Anyone may respond :wink: .)

I guess I am just a stubborn little bulldog who fails to see where Mike was so furious and offended...he didn't tell me if he was, and the discussion was about pit bulls later, not a joke that was posted earlier. I don't like accidentally offending people; it's much more fun to do on purpose :lol: , and Mike is not someone I'm interested in offending. I think Mike's a big enough boy to say something to me if he was annoyed or hurt by the "show" joke. I think he's a bit beyond that kind of thinking, but what do I know? :roll: Just because posts are public doesn't mean that all the information leading to every comment is up there...I stay out of what I don't fully understand, when it's personal, or when I think I'm probably missing some preceding component.

This is SOOOO ridiculous.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jenni Williams said:


> ....This is SOOOO ridiculous.


Agreed.


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

Jenni Williams said:


> I guess I am just a stubborn little bulldog who fails to see where Mike was so furious and offended...he didn't tell me if he was


you dont' think statements like these convey that: 



Mike Schoonbrood said:


> Is it so hard to believe that someone doesn't like the same dogs you do?





Mike Schoonbrood said:


> not everyone has to like the same breeds that you do.





Mike Schoonbrood said:


> So how is what I said different to what you said about pretty much every major working breed? :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:


that one was right after the aforementioned flip flop you performed. 

can you not see at least a slight tone of annoyance in those quotes? whatever. you obviously don't want to see where you went wrong, so i'm done trying to show you....


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

ok im on a PDA on my way home from dog training so I don't care to write a lengthy response to this right now. this thread is way off topic so it's locked. I'll give my thoughts when 1 get home if I can stay awake long enough!


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

OK, yes I deleted my previous post on this topic. I re-read this entire thread, and I was wrong. So Jenni, however much it pains me to do so, I apologize 

Jenni, your point is a very valid one, that the pitbulls of today are bred in the image of the idiots that own them, and that the "original" pitbulls were very different dogs. However, odds are I still don't care for them, they might be very cute dogs, n I love all dogs, yes even the lil ones, but I just wouldn't own one of any era because they don't appeal to me. Pitbulls seem to have somewhat of a cult following as a very controversial type of dog, I don't buy into that stuff, so the breed offers me no novelty. You could be talking about a Yorkie and I'd have about as much interest in them :lol: If Pits didn't have the history they do, they wouldn't have near the attention and focus that they do now and it'd just be "another breed" that nobody pays attention to.


----------



## Guest (Apr 24, 2006)

My hero! O Thanks, Mikey. :wink:


----------

