Letters to the Editor
-
take 'em to the country....
Just a note on this idea that seems to have popped up.
First, Pits usually have light skin which sunburns easily, leading to skin cancer. At least that's what I've read. They are not outdoor dogs, at least that's not the suggested environment for them.
Second, the idea of removing Pits (or any dog perceived to be agressive or dangerous by breed characteristics) to the country is a bad one, IMO.
I have lived in extremely rural environments and densely populated cities like San Fran. I can honestly say I see more dogs running loose in the country than in the city (and personal experience with my redneck relatives confirms this). And the LAST thing you want to see is an (potentially) agressive dog unleashed. Track back through these posts and most of the attacks discussed re: Pits v. human are when UNLEASHED dogs attack. I took a quick peek at some dog attack stats and there were quite a few Pit attacks... the ones that stuck in mind were the Pits left to roam, or who managed to get loose from an unsuitable enclosure.
Bottom line - there are certain dogs that are just not suitable for everyone. Pits are a prime example. Pits should only be posessed by responsible owners, educated in the breed and respectful of their nature and needs. Anything else IS dangerous. Goodness, I turned down about five people because I could tell they didn't know a thing about Pits, didn't want to learn about Pits, and just wanted my foster Pit because she was "so pretty". One idiot even wanted to breed her and make more Pits (like there aren't enough put down every day in shelters!!!).
And this is coming from someone who had a great experience with a Pit(mix).