Bull breeds 'Nanny Dog' myth

[Ffghhhbdbfb]

This dangerous myth that bull breeds, originally bred for fighting, were historically known as 'Nanny Dogs' has to be countered. It is unfair on inexperienced owners and unfair on the dogs, who may not be cared for properly/dumped.

The 'Nanny Dog' myth came from Colby, a US breeder of fighting dogs, seeking to broaden his market. His dogs killed his nephew, so weren't exactly nannying him: https://blog.dogsbite.org/2010/05/1909-fatality-john-p-colbys-fighting.html

The 'Nanny Dog' myth is perpetuated by Pitbull advocates in the US and is occasionally also seen in the UK, with Battersea among those promoting it for Staffordshire Bull Terriers: https://www.battersea.org.uk/pet-advice/dog-advice/finding-right-dog-you/staffies

There is now a social media campaign with owners seeking to 'show the soft side' of their XL Bullies. Some very inexperienced owners who got XL Bullies as their first dogs are speaking out on their dogs being 'misunderstood': https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12519333/My-American-Bully-XL-look-scary-trust-nine-month-old-heartbroken-owners-defend-giant-breed-banned-UK-spate-vicious-dog-attacks.html

Bull breeds are fighting dogs, with the instincts and capabilities to fight, putting children, adults and other animals at risk. Retrievers retrieve, pointers point, herders herd. An animal charity would not have a campaign describing border collies as couch potatoes that can be left alone all day in a flat. So why are bull breeds pushed as 'Nanny Dogs'. There needs to be pressure on those (particularly organisations and media) repeating the 'Nanny Dog' myth to be honest about the origins and capabilities of these dogs, as well as the requirements and responsibilities of owning them.

Oh no I completely agree more than just banning breeds is needed, but banning these literal weapons is a good start IMO…

I think it’s more like saying we shouldn't ban ‘one type’ of gun, because people will just use other types of guns

No dog should be described as a nanny dog, no dog should be seen as being safe around children. I was bit by a Staffordshire bull terrier when I was a child, I've known friends be bit by other types of dogs.

They were used on Game of Thrones as Ramsey Bolton’s dogs

The articles showing the babies with those dogs made me feel sick. No way would I have any dog like that anywhere near my children. Any dog can turn at at moment but those XL Bully dogs look evil.

And I’m sure only certain “types” have them to parade around with to look “hard”

Sorry that was in reply to the poster who mentioned the Cane Carso breed.

Those stating it is 100% fact that bullies are bred for aggression and that is why certain bull breeds are over-represented in bite stats are oversimplifying.

If it is a case of innate, inbred traits then why were GSDs over-represented for a while? They were not bred for bullbaiting or aggression, they were bred for herding just like Collies. Rottweilers, also over-represented for a period were bred for cart pulling just like St Bernards. Huskies for sledding just like Samoyeds and Malamutes.

The things these other breeds do have in common are that they were, at various points, attractive to a certain class of young men.

What happens to a dog when the breed is banned? Are they destroyed?

I’m a dog lover. Had lots of different breeds all my life. I would never trust a dog 100%, especially not with children and it is beyond worrying when owners say this.
I do think there are some breeds that are inappropriate to have with small children IMO, I lost my dog just before I had my babies and made the decision to wait until they were at school before I got another.

Also, young children (toddlers etc.) could nip, pull or hurt a dog, I’ve seen this happen a lot with someone I know. They will react. Even if you are lucky and they don’t, what sort of a life is that for a dog, constantly harassed. Children and dogs should always be supervised.

There are so many irresponsible people, those who get a dog they can’t control even on a leash. Those who have terrible recall but insist on letting them off. One of my rescues was blind, he was always on a leash. The amount of owners who used to let their dog bound over shouting from a distance away “he/she is okay” whilst I had to shout, “recall your dog, mine isn’t” and the abuse I used to get including telling me mine should be put down.
This is before you get to those who have dogs for status and encourage viciousness. The increase in ownership since the pandemic has made the problem greater.

I think wider dog ownership protocols need to be introduced, including some breeds which should not be for first time owners. In the meantime I do think unfortunate steps such as banning these breeds need to happen. I’d rather a smaller, or more docile breed be bounding towards me than a bully with a kill instinct and lock jaw. Some bully’s I’ve known are amazing, but the potential disaster is too risky IMO.

Many weren't. Many were bred from the dogs who were crossed with other breeds to get the temperament and looks desired. English Bull Terrier for one. Not prone to aggression yet often referred to as a more dangerous dog

They were actually bred to be a gentleman's posing, walking dog and are no more prone to aggression that any other breed.

I own one and find such sweeping statements and misunderstandings help nobody.

@VeronicasCloset usually neutering takes place. Owners can do an exemption to keep a neutered dog from a banned breed, there are usually rules such as muzzling in public, always on leash etc. Then the breed dies out naturally. Any infringement on the rules can result in removal and destruction of the dog. If I had a bully I would be making an appointment with the vet and muzzle training.

No dog should be trusted 100%

Staffies were renowned for being good with children 50 years ago, before the XL Bully was even bred. They were recommended for families with kids when I was little.
There seems to be little evidence for this but I’d like to read it if you have it.
There is old evidence that spaniels are good for hunting, pointers point, collies herd.. They’re working breads after all. But 50 year old evidence of Staffies as Nannie dogs? I can’t find it.

What happens to a dog when the breed is banned? Are they destroyed?

Pretty much nothing. It is known that there are just as many Pitbull types registered in the UK now as there were in 1991. And that's just the ones we know about.

The government is not actually interested in solving this problem. They want votes and bringing a proven to be ineffectual ban in on the latest "devil dog" will win them votes.

If the government wanted to resolve the problem they would have followed at least some of the recommendations made to them in the numerous studies they commissioned EFRA, RSPCA, etc. to do for them.

However, this includes licensing and controlling "middle-class" dogs like Golden Noodles and their own Beagles so it's not a vote winner.

I agree

Pictures of kids inappropriately close to dogs so often involve bull breeds (specifically the Pitbull types). It seems to have been driven by Pitbull lobby groups in the US. If you look for images for pitbulls and children, the pictures are overwhelmingly of small babies in very close proximity, often literally face to face with no chance to stop a bite. For other dog types (e.g. Cockapoos, in the screen grab attached), the images typically involve older children who can have some idea of how to behave with dogs and are not face to face.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/pit-bulls-children-1.4299260

"Dr. Michael Golinko, director of plastic surgery at the Arkansas Children's Hospital in Little Rock, cringes when he sees promotional material with children and pit bulls.
"Pit bulls and children are best kept apart," he told The Fifth Estate, based on his studies.
Golinko did his residency in pediatric plastic surgery at the children's hospital in Atlanta a few years ago and was often repairing children injured by dogs.
Severe injuries"Almost every night we saw a dog bite and more often than not, the more severe ones were pit bulls."
He decided to conduct a bite study and once he and his colleagues started looking into it, the data pretty much corroborated what they were seeing in the emergency room night after night.
For the study that was published in July 2016, they analyzed four years of patient charts, which included 1,616 dog bite injuries.
A subsequent bite study Golinko and his colleagues did in Arkansas looked at 540 pediatric bite injury cases and is currently under peer review.
In the two studies, they found incidents involving pit bulls were 2.5 times more likely to involve bites in multiple locations on a child's body than those involving other dogs. The depth and the severity of the bites as well as the number of tissue types injured was also different.
They found those incidents involving pit bulls could also involve bites that went through bone or ripped off a part of a hand or scalp.
In Little Rock, Golinko operated on a three-year-old boy who had part of his scalp ripped off by a family pit bull. It took four years and 21 surgeries to repair his injuries. One ear still needs to be rebuilt.
The Atlanta study also found that if a child required an operation, 50 per cent of the time it was following a pit bull bite.
'Hyper-vigilant'The Atlanta study and multiple other studies have found that children were bitten by family dogs or dogs known to the family in up to 85 per cent of the cases.
Golinko says he's a dog lover, but even with his own dogs — a golden retriever and Great Pyrenees husky — he's "hyper-vigilant" when they are around young children.
"I know that they're dogs at the end of the day, and that accidents can happen."

No, sadly.

They should be.

As for this nanny dog bollocks - it's a convenient myth trotted out by the dim wits who advocate for the breed.

Couldn’t agree more.
Innate , hardwired drives.
These ridiculous pics of monster sized known aggressive types next to babies and toddlers is so irresponsible.
That baby in the pic wouldn’t stand a chance if and when that dog turns.
It’s wanton fecklessness.

What are they trying to prove??

Looking into that Tennessee pitbull attack in which both children were killed and the mother was critically injured - both the dogs had been in the family for several years, raised well, a nice family, no previous incidents and that was the outcome.

But still, people will protest and say it's nothing to do with the breed, it's always the owners.

You just can't reason with stupid!

There is not the evidence. This is the 'Nanny Dog' myth. It originally was spread by a breeder of fighting dogs trying to broaden his market. It cost his two year old nephew his life.
https://blog.dogsbite.org/2010/05/1909-fatality-john-p-colbys-fighting.html

You're a fucking idiot if you leave ANY dog unsupervised around small children.

Very interesting points re children not being face to face.

A very experienced dog person warned me when we got our first ever dog ( an RSPCA Lurcher) to not allow my son ( then aged Nine) to get in her face.

She said that is when a bite is more likely to happen.
We heeded that advice .

Very good advice, no matter WHAT the breed or type .

Any dog can bite, but Bull breeds do significantly more damage when they do because of bite style and the tendency to rag and maul.

Agreed. What the actual fuck is wrong with these people?

As a general rule dogs (and most animals tbh) do not like small children - they are noisy, grabby, all up in their faces.

But then every lambing season my dad finds people dangling small children over the fence to try and pet young lambs.

Nursing ewes have a nasty temper if you interfere with her lambs and a toddler could easily be severly injured by an angry sheep (especially as many of the ones my dad keeps have horns)