Pitbulls attack a bull

I am almost positive those are not pit bulls. Also since the owner wasnt around and couldnt explain, how do we not know if these dogs were trained as bull baiters or herders? they could have done alot more damage to that animal than that. Plus they seemde to look like they were going for places on the bull that trained bull baiter would go for. Where as if they were trying to kill it they would more likely do for the throat and anal regions. Anyways, I dont think they should have been killed personally, they are looking for food, and a that is a prey animal. they were biting off more than they could chew with just the two of them, but oh well. I can understand why they were shot, btu just dont necessarily agree with it, since they clearly showed no aggression towards people.
 
I cannot see blaming the dogs. Realize the circumstances of the event. They are without their owner after a hurricane.

To me it looks like they are more likely antagonizing the bull than doing any serious damage. Don't get me wrong but how is it any different then a dog nipping at the heels of cattle when herding. I can't imagine these dogs attacking the bull without some sort of previous training. A bull is a formidable opponent and I am sure would have been the victor had the fight continued.

Please do not misunderstand me. I am in no way condone the training for animals to attack other animals. I just do not feel that the actions of the dog can be blamed on breed alone. The way they were attacking only the mouth of the bull gives reason to believe that they were trained to do so.

And as labon states, are they really pitbulls?
 
I think they are Pit Bulls, just not the kind you see here in the states. In Japan, Russia, Italy, etc, Pit Bulls are still as they were 60 years ago. These look like true Pit Bulls to me. (APBTs)

If these dogs are actually lost or abandoned from Katrina, I don't blame them for trying to live. Wouldn't you do the same???

And partly agreeing with labont, these don't look like your run of the mill, lost dogs. Notice how muscular they are, and what they are trying to bite. In no picture do they have the neck or butt. Look at how animals truly hunt, and then look at sport catching.

This was the first job that APBTs had, catching bulls. That is why old timers still call them "bulldogs". That's what they were called back then. Ever seen White Fang? There is a fight scene between the wolf and an APBT. When it comes out of it's cage, everyone calls it a "bulldog". Notice what era that movie was based on. That is a true APBT, and that is what these two "killers" look like too. (just a different, and odd color)
 
Although I haven't checked the source out, But I would question it on a For several reasons.

#1. Pit Bulls are well known for not letting go once they have a grip. It would seem unlikely that the Bull would throw them off repeatedly, without a lot more appearant damage to the bull

#2. The story overall has the genral vibe of "everyone should be afraid", kind of a "pit bulls will take over and destroy us all feel to it". Although I realize the media feeds on negative emotion, and sensationalizes everything, I just don't think pit bull packs are that big of a concern in New Orleans or anywhere else. There is concern I'm sure of stray dogs forming packs and hunting (natural instinct) but This would be all breeds large and small, so the entire Pit Bull concept strikes me as negative propoganda.

#3. Although it may be that the dog was shot twice before it stopped attacking, It definately did not attack after being hit in the head with a .223 (I'm guessing ) at reasonably close range. Even is a small pistol was used it would seem unlikely. headshots are rather final with most anything. My guess is the first shot probably struck the dog in a fairly non-lethal or non debilitating spot and a second shot was needed to finish it.


The story and photo's may be true as far as the dogs going after the bull, and being shot. I agree that the dogs were not attacking in a typical hunting style, but It would stand to reason that they don't have much practice at bringing down large game, and although there is a lot of instinct in play, there is also a lot of trainging and trial and error in wild dogs.

The additional comments in the article are a bunch of bunk in one sense or another as far as I'm concerned. If it had been Blue tick hounds trying to kill a meal no one would have thought twice about it because it would not have made a good story.
Dave
 
I don't believe these are APBT either, they look more like Staffordshire Bull Terriers personally...

a breed which was developed for bull baiting.

145.png
 
I'm not sure about this but I've heard a bull's temperment is really bad and they will attack, and seeing the weight of a bull, any kick, tromp or even it somehow pinning a much smaller dog to the ground with its head, might cause physical injury. I dont know which story is true, but I dont doubt that one male bull can kill two dogs that size. One thing strikes me odd though (maybe I dont know enough about cows and bulls), but how come no horns?
 
Farmers often remove horns... you'll see a lot of bull riding bulls without horns either... lower risk of impalement.

Cows also have their horns removed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom