Pitbulls - Blue Nose vs Red Nose

edited April 2009 in Other Breeds
This may be a stupid question...but what is the difference between Blue Nose and Red Nose pitbulls? I have been getting some inquiries about Love, and a good amount of people are asking.

I did a search on google and some people say its just a color difference, some people say they have different traits, some people say blue nose are for breeding/showing and red nose are only bred for fighting.

I was just curious - if anyone really knows what the deal is. (Jess?)

Comments

  • edited November -1
    For what I know, they're different bloodlines, with different "paths" to their selection.
    I've read before of Red Nose being selected for their "gameness", even if not for fighting.
  • edited November -1
    Rui has it right.

    Honestly that question makes me a bit weary about the adopter. I mean why are they looking for that trait? Are they trying to find a red nose, or trying to avoid?
  • edited November -1
    I agree with Brandon.
    If, on one hand, the question tells you that the adopter knows a few things about pits, on the other hand you have to question his motives.
  • edited November -1
    Well if it was me I would've asked because I thought it was a color difference and I'd be curious lol. I didn't know they were different bloodlines.
  • edited November -1
    Most pit advocacy groups will tell you, the whole blue nose/red nose thing is a crock. I tend to agree. That is like saying that you should be good at math because you are Japanese. It is a color. That's all. I agree with Rui, if someone asks you that kind of question, I would ask"why do you ask?" and then plan on throwing out their application. They are either buying into the pit hype and shouldn't have one, or are getting one for the wrong reasons.

    Also, I forgot to mention this to you when we were talking about applications, but mention to any applicant that a background check may be run. This will filter out a huge number of douchebags.
  • edited November -1
    I'm good at math and Japanese! :D Can I get a cookie?
  • edited November -1
    Im Japanese and horrible at math.

    Interesting about the Pitt's though. I didn't know this. I thought the color was the color of the nose :P
  • edited November -1
    sure!
  • edited November -1
    Kristin - Now I don't feel so alone, that's what I thought.
  • edited November -1
    I'm going to disagree with you on this one, Jess.
    For years, certain lineages of dogs have been associated with certain temperaments or other characteristics, because they were selected for that.
    It reminds of what was said here about working Shikoku (not sure) in Japan having a sickle tail while conformation lines would have the curly tail the standard requires.
  • edited November -1
    Determining a dogs temperament by their color is no different then determining a persons personality by the color of their skin. I have worked with hundreds of pit bulls (including many many many blue and red noses). There is no steadfast trait attached to a color line. Especially blue is a recessive trait. So that is like saying a white shiba is going to have a certain temperament.
  • edited November -1
    There is a big difference, because dogs get selected for breeding according to their characteristics (talking selective breeding here).
    People do not have to go through that selection process (sometimes I think unfortunately).

    I'm not saying it will be like that all the time, but the fact is that the genes that "code" some information are often associated with other genes, so it's not impossible for a colour to be associated with a specific temperament.
  • edited November -1
    as I mentioned on IM one of the main reasons you cannot apply that thought process to pit bulls is because breeders breed pits for VERY different reasons (fighting vs. companion). And even then there are NO guarantees. Piglet is believed to be a Colby (a rather legendary fighting line) and obviously she is NO fighting dog.

    Therefore unless you know the origin of your dog, and their lineage you cannot judge them on appearances. There are too many factors even when you do know a dogs lineage. But for a rescue dog, especially a pit bull, you can in no way gauge their personality by their appearance.
  • edited November -1
    Thanks guys! Yeah, I'm not sure why they are asking. A friend of a friend asked and then 2 people emailed me and asked. I just told them that I didn't know where she came from but she is the sweetest dog ever!
  • edited November -1
    I never really noticed the color of pitties noses before. Interesting!

    I kinda see what both of you are saying (Rui and Jessica)...

    On the one hand, "type" (aka Phenotype: temperament and looks) certainly does follow bloodlines and so certain physical chararistics and temperament can be found more often in certain lines.

    On the other hand, we need to not over generalize... saying something like "All red nosed pit bulls are dog aggressive" is a gross over generalization... and I don't think anyone (Rui included) is saying that here.

    I do see why it's important for us dog lovers to help get the message out that the color of a pitbull's nose doesn't reflect their personality. Enough of those poor dogs are killed everyday just for being pitbull... we don't need more crazies to target a specific nose color as a reason to kill more of them (faster).

    ----
  • edited November -1
    I hate leaving this discussion in the middle of it, but I'm still at work and had a bit of an emergency. That is done, now it's only a matter of waiting for an approval.

    Going back to my train of thought: I don't claim that every single Red Nose will have more "gameness" than any other Pit or any other dog for that matter.

    Brad ended up making my point, that some traits do go hand in hand in all dogs, not just Pits. It's a general dog thing.
    It's not a matter of saying "any Pit with a red nose will be a fighting machine". What I am saying is it's quite possible for a certain temperament trait (being it aggressiveness or docility) to be associated with a certain physical characteristic (colour of nose, width of chest, whatever).
    And this can be achieved through selection. Now not all selection has to be proof of responsible breeding. A "good" example of irresponsible selection are "breeders" that will select teacups. They are not responsible, by all means, but still they are enforcing a selection over their stock.

    As an example of physical traits following temperament, I can think of GSD and their show bloodlines vs the working ones. The work lines will often have a sharper demeanor, associated with a much straighter back, some of them with almost no slope.
  • edited November -1
    Even closer to us, the whole thing about Kurogoma Shikoku being more a work dog than Akagoma. (I read it here somewhere, don't remember where)
  • edited November -1
    I had a conversation similar to this on several different occasions with several different breeders/exhibitors about B&T Shiba and "off" temperments. Some of them were very heated. It's been written/passed around that tri colour lines may carry undesirable temperment (to quote "kookiness", "snarkiness", "off in the head"), with reds being the steadiest. Some people still firmly feel that this is true. I believe that in current good breeding programes, one of the main focuses is breeding towards good temperments, whatever colour, so that may have been true in the past, but is no longer the case. Perhaps it has to do with the fact that reds have been most popular and have been given more oppurtunity to develop their genetics and refine temperments over B&Ts.
  • edited November -1
    From what I've seen and heard, red noses are bigger and stockier than other colours. A breeder I know of refuses to breed any other colour except red into his dogs. As for the temperament, his red noses are very steady and easy to train although they've got a lot of drive. I don't agree with generalizing due to colour obviously, but this is selective breeding only red to red and only producing red for years so I think this breeders dogs have more predictable traits but this can't be said for all red noses. Of course, most people don't give a damn and will chuck anything to anything because they can make a lot of money from these dogs over here.
  • edited November -1
    I know this is an old thread, but from what I understand (if you are talking about American Pit Bull Terriers) they are a little bit more complicated than comparing it to different colors in the same breed (like black and tan Shibaken to sesame). The UKC registers American Staffordshire Terriers and "American bullies" as APBTs, and the APBT standards are lax enough that they do accomodate for both. Thus there's a huge variation of breed combinations that go into any one perception of what IS an APBT. Other "purebred" dogs have a generally set look, etc, APBTs do not. In the UKC, an APBT who is born from an unregistered (read: untraceable pedigree) can still apply for single registration and thus potentially be introduced into the "purebred" breeding stock. The stud registration book is still open via conditions as set forth by the UKC, so in essence the dogs are not stabilized in the same fashion that many other breeds are stabilized.

    For this reason I can understand why some would say "blue nose" and "Red nose" APBTs can have differences. This can be caused by, for example, more Dogue de Bordeaux in a specific line, or more bulldog in a specific line, etc. APBTs are in my opinion a federation of alike dogs, but not a single homogenized breed. It is confusing that they should be registered as a pure bred dog to me, and I think in part this has a lot to do with their history presence.
Sign In or Register to comment.