[performanceknls]

Since I know many people on here have different views on breeding AST and APBT's together for the show ring, I think it is a good topic. This would be a good discussion to see what some breeders motivations are (No slamming can we keep this civil please) and why or why not this is a great idea. There are 2sides to this and both are very passionate. I can see both sides of the argument all tho I am partial to one side. So I want to hear it in a nice debate.

 

[redsky]

Since I have never owned an akc dog I really can't say from experience rather it's a good or bad thing. What I can say is I like my ukc style dogs although I like game dogs to but prefer my ukc style dogs. I like a female no taller then 18in no more then 50-55 lbs no overly thin or heavy. Don't want no dog with a huge head either I like a well proportioned dog. I like my males to be no more then 19-19.5 in and I'd like to stay at 70 or less pounds although midas is 21in and 85lbs (i love him but he's not my ideal pit lol).

 

[FloorCandy]

Honestly I think cross-breeding for working is fine, if both dogs are great workers, cross em in hopes of getting great pups. But for conformation I think thee looks are different, and should be kept separate, as each has it's own charm. I know a staffy can do well in UKC conformation, but staffies have their own place in AKC events, and the APBTs have their UKC shows. I can appreciate both types, but it would be a shame to see only hybrids of the two down the line because of cross breeding. If conformation is your thing, stick to one breed. As far as working, like WP, if you have some kind of Pit/Staffy/Mastiff/Catahoula whatever with hung papers like 20 generations back, if it pulls it's heart out, and excells, well the ability and health should really be your only concern. JMO

 

[Bulldoggin]

I think if the cross brings to you what you are looking to acheive from your breeding then it is all good.... My only worries would be health issues, AST have some very serious health issues that have as yet not contaminated all the APBT breeding stock... So I would be doing an aweful lot of research on health issues and peds before I ever crossed that line, either way.

 

[American_Pit13]

I personally see no reason to do Amstaff/APBT breedings. I don't mind that some of my dogs have Amstaff in the line, but the Amstaff look is something I try to avoid. I personally don't like the game look either tho. I like an in between of a Heavier boned dog ( not quite amstaff heavy) but still slender and lean. So I stick to UKC/ADBA lines that are throwing what I want, of course like I said they already have staff mixed somewhere along those lines. So I can't say its bad because it is in my lines and my dogs look fine, but then again its how those breeders went about using it. The Amstaff also tends to add a deeper chest that I really don't care for.


Yeah I don't ever make much seance lmao... But my view is there is nothing the Amstaff can provide that it needs to be mixed in. Anything the Amstaff can offer we can already get with UKC/ADBA dogs.

 

[redsky]

I know I personally only like select lines although I do like ruffian which is an akc based line I dont really have the blood on my yard the one dog that I have ownership to and produced has it back in like the fourth gen off his dam and I have not bred him nor have any plans to right now. My lines of choice happen to be mostly ukc lines and I breed to that structure alone although if Misty were not a blue nose I think she would do well in adba and would probably put her in some of the shows with adba but since she is blue I won't bother most I'll do with adba with my current lines is wp hell the other dogs barking at them would make em go nuts any way and I hate that. I don't like seeing my dogs get da I prefer folks saying i got pet bulls.

 

[Jenna23]

I think if the cross brings to you what you are looking to acheive from your breeding then it is all good.... My only worries would be health issues, AST have some very serious health issues that have as yet not contaminated all the APBT breeding stock... So I would be doing an aweful lot of research on health issues and peds before I ever crossed that line, either way.

Just curious, what are the health issues that AST have that APBT don't? from your statement, I'm assuming you view believe the dogs to now be entirely different breeds. So what is the difference in your opinion, besides looks? (I say besides looks b/c duh :hammer: they look different, what I mean is i guess dog wise)

Anyone else is welcome to answer, lol you know me and my questions :hammer::hammer:

 

[redsky]

well i can tell you lately there are more hip, heart issues and the amstaff has been experience atoxia and epilepsy issues as well. A lot of breeders have covered things up which is totally unethical! It hurts our breed greatly when you stop breeding with a purpose (I'm speaking in reference to working ability). A lot folks do honestly breed just for color and looks and that kills the function of both the pit and the amstaff personally I breed for a total dog not just a pretty one.

 

[Jenna23]

Wow, I knew about hip problems but not epilepsy, heart, or ataxia issues. You are right, not a lot of AST breeders disclose this information. Ataxia is loss of muscle control correct? How or rather what does that look like?

 

[redsky]

no atoxia is more so to do with the brain from what i read when i had the blood but they do loose function and kind of look like they are walking drunk.

Link:
http://www.caninegeneticdiseases.net/ataxia/

 

[Bulldoggin]

It is a shame about the ataxia, Frosha I believe was diagnosed later in life, and most show lines were bred into that blood, There are 3 main dogs gr ch's who carried ataxia, unfortunately they were bred heavily before they were diagnosed... Most ever AST alive today has at least one of the three in their ped.
Day blindness is another one, sorry cannot pull the med term off the top of my head....
kinked tails, heart issues are also on the top of the list...
patellas, hips, god there is a long list.
Now APBT's do also have to worry about those things, but there are still lines which are not affected by them
It's not so much that I feel the dogs are different breeds, I just feel that because of the way they were bred, the AST and the APBT do not have the same percentages of problems on their health issues... Now you can test for Ataxia, but you cannot test for Day blindness yet... and the heart and joint issues I hear about from long time breeders of some ch and grch AST's admittedly say the AM staff's are ruined.
Lower mandible degeneration is prevelent, c'mon, how can you even begin to intigrate an animal with not enough bone structure to NOT break their jaw playing with a bone???? Are they all like that? I doubt it, but it is an evergrowing problem.
Do I know it to be a fact, that there is not enough of a healthy gene pool in AST's to recover, No I do not, but I most certainly would investigate very closely before I would add that blood to my yard.
There are just way too many health issues, and breeders all know someone who has them, but surprisingly every breeder you talk to does not have those problems themselves... Very few will be truthful, so I would be careful. If you breed for pretty, you will inevitably loose in the long run.

 

[cane76]

Bad,unless the breeding results in pups that are superior in working ability to there sire or dam.Both are fine breeds by thereself,and very similar.
Mix breeding of the two creates a ukc show dog in type,jmo.

 

[pitbullfanatic]

Fashion vs. work
Registry preference

That usually determines ones motives and answers on the issue.

The more closed a breeding population is the greater the level of inbreeding depression. The greater the level of inbreeding depression the higher the risk of genetic illness. The UKC pool is considerably larger than that of the AKC.

There are over 500 genetic illnesses known and this is just the top of the ice berg. Most can be eliminated in a large enough stock pool through proper breeding practices and working at limiting/eliminating inbreeding relationships within three prior generations. After three generations of proper out-crossing to non-related (within 3 or more generations) Pit Bulls almost all negative health impact can be removed from inbred consequence. This is due to the increased level of genetic diversity that has been added. Kills bloodlines though unless you are willing to do some serious bloodline research and relate back at the 5th generation.

 

[Bulldoggin]

What do you have left after 3 generations of outcrosses?
Not being sarcastic, just wanna hear your opinion?

 

[pitbullfanatic]

No sarcasm taken. That depends on how varied it gets beyond three. One thing you do get is a lager gene pool and greater genetic diversity. The next thing you get is significantly decreased risk rates with genetic illness. The AKC AST vs. the UKC APBT is a prime example of the more closed the greater the genetic harm. Here is my post on Bloodlines, health and inbreeding. http://www.gopitbull.com/bloodline-discussion/14529-adba-paper.html#post155977

 

[redsky]

Actually if you've not been keeping up the info on hearts the ukc dogs are getting hit worse then the akc dogs in that aspect! It doesn't matter what registry you are in if you are not keeping up with health data (not health testing) you don't know what you have and by the time you find out the dog is probably dead and has been bred a few times so without knowing because you were to ignorant to spend a lil money you just put x amount of sick dogs into the breeding market.... Folks sit and reason why health testing is so unimportant by saying things like oh we have working dogs and blah blah it don't matter if you've never tested that dog you don't know what it carriers simple as that!

I have not done hearts yet but you better believe I'm going to a specialist to get it done not just an average vet. I'm going to do all that I can to ensure that I am indeed breeding up and not making things worse for this breed I love so much!

Now when I got my first pit hip tested it was a nightmare, I had gone to the cheapest vet I could find not realizing he didn't know what the hell he was doing he gave to much anst. my girl didn't come around out of it till five am, she pee herself was walking drunk didn't even know who I was then to top it all off her ofa test was invalid because she was in heat! I was totally pissed off after the fact and said i'd never do hip testing again cause they could have easily killed my baby with as much as they put her under... Long story short I decided well I need this info in my program so I turned to penn hip instead and that is what I've been using since was a great experience they also provide reversal so my boy came out the same way he went in and the vet took me in showed me the xrays assured me his hips were totally fine and also said he'd never personally had a pit done that had bad hips but had been hearing the hips in our breed are degenerating. I then learned the difference between penn hip vets and ofa vets, in order for penn hip to allow a vet to do their testing they have to under go several courses where as with ofa any vet can do the xrays and such which means they may not know a thing about how to read them or what to look for but that was my mistake for putting cost over effectiveness.

 

[Alex004]

Honestly I think cross-breeding for working is fine, if both dogs are great workers, cross em in hopes of getting great pups. But for conformation I think thee looks are different, and should be kept separate, as each has it's own charm. I know a staffy can do well in UKC conformation, but staffies have their own place in AKC events, and the APBTs have their UKC shows. I can appreciate both types, but it would be a shame to see only hybrids of the two down the line because of cross breeding. If conformation is your thing, stick to one breed. As far as working, like WP, if you have some kind of Pit/Staffy/Mastiff/Catahoula whatever with hung papers like 20 generations back, if it pulls it's heart out, and excells, well the ability and health should really be your only concern. JMO

Loving this reply!!!

If you want to cross your dogs it's your business. If you plan on selling or breeding crossed dogs please do so with integrity. Meaning sell or breed them as "cross bred" dogs and not falsely as pure breds. Also health and and genes should be the first and highest priority when doing any breeding of any dogs.

 

[Bulldoggin]

Just a lil FYI and food for thought.

As far as cerf, OFA etc. You can retest your dog as many times as you like and only have the results published if they are good if you choose ( lil box on ofa form) . Not everyone who reviews your info will give the same rating, so some people just keep submitting till they get a good review. I have also known certain kennels who take a dog who has passed and submit the good dogs info with a dog who is not gonna pass Name, and get good ratings on bad dogs. It is a good way for you to know about your own dog if that is what you want to know, but let me add, some people do not like pits, and will fail everyone who gets submitted. It's six of one and 1/2 dozen of the other.
it can be accurate, and it can be misleading, both good and bad.

As far as working dogs.
If you truely work your dogs, genetic flaws will become evident. ( truely working, that would be a whole nother thread)
So yes I would agree that real working dogs who have proven themselves and excelled will produce for the most part more genetically sound offspring.

Inbreeding line bred dogs is a good tool for learning what flaws your dog carries.

I just wanted to throw this out there cause it is my opinion that there is more than one way to skin the genetic mystery cat.

Not knocking health testing, I just do not feel that every single dog that is not tested is a ticking time bomb.
Some methods have been around longer that xrays and have proven their worth time and again.

 

[cane76]

As far as working dogs.
If you truely work your dogs, genetic flaws will become evident. ( truely working, that would be a whole nother thread)
So yes I would agree that real working dogs who have proven themselves and excelled will produce for the most part more genetically sound offspring.

Health testing is not as important as proper selection for working type & temperament,meaning a mildly displastic dog can still be a excellent working dog,dog fighters never health tested yet still produced a dog that was healthier than most breeds[at one time].Of course it couldn't hurt but it isn't absolutely necessary,it is however responsible and provides the prospective puppy breeder with a little more security.I mean some breeds of working dog will only have a ofa score of average,yet still produce hard working stock,a gimp will never be a good working dog And a gimpy dog should be evident vary early,but a pup born from healthy parents usually produce healthy pup,if not time to cull.
IMHO.

 

[wheezie]

Since I know many people on here have different views on breeding AST and APBT's together for the show ring

, I think it is a good topic. This would be a good discussion to see what some breeders motivations are (No slamming can we keep this civil please) and why or why not this is a great idea. There are 2sides to this and both are very passionate. I can see both sides of the argument all tho I am partial to one side. So I want to hear it in a nice debate.

i think it a real shame that people are breeding for the show ring period.