The Bully Kutta
Here's another breed I'm interested in: The Bully Kutta. I think this breed may fall in the same area as the Neo for me - as in, I am very drawn to them, but I dunno that I would own one.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3026/2765295610_14e6414451.jpg
http://www.freewebs.com/beasts-from-the-east/motheesunc.jpg
http://molosserdogs.com/e107_files/public/1256925097_17623_FT8991_bully_kutta_1.jpg
http://k2bullykutta.com/w/picts/Males/gallery1-pic10.jpg
This breed was once used heavily for fighting, but (I think) dog fighting is no longer allowed in Pakistan and so the breed is finding its way back to its original role of guarding.
I like the breed because, to me, it exemplifies lack of refinement and real rigidness. These dogs are not traditionally treated so well, so their toughness, hardiness, and strength is essential.
Also the breed is probably the closest thing the world has (in phenotype) to the ancient "Alaunt" - the dog that is said to be the primary foundation of the modern Mastiff and Bulldog. Certainly it still shares some of the base bloodlines that go back to that ancient Persian war dog. This breed is probably the foundation for many other molossers that slowly made their way (mixed) through Europe via the Portuguese sea ports (like the English Bulldog).
This guy is working to form his breeding program, he's doing a lot of work to get some really nice dogs into his country. I'm a big fan of his dog "Max"...
A little more info on it's history...
----
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3026/2765295610_14e6414451.jpg
http://www.freewebs.com/beasts-from-the-east/motheesunc.jpg
http://molosserdogs.com/e107_files/public/1256925097_17623_FT8991_bully_kutta_1.jpg
http://k2bullykutta.com/w/picts/Males/gallery1-pic10.jpg
This breed was once used heavily for fighting, but (I think) dog fighting is no longer allowed in Pakistan and so the breed is finding its way back to its original role of guarding.
I like the breed because, to me, it exemplifies lack of refinement and real rigidness. These dogs are not traditionally treated so well, so their toughness, hardiness, and strength is essential.
Also the breed is probably the closest thing the world has (in phenotype) to the ancient "Alaunt" - the dog that is said to be the primary foundation of the modern Mastiff and Bulldog. Certainly it still shares some of the base bloodlines that go back to that ancient Persian war dog. This breed is probably the foundation for many other molossers that slowly made their way (mixed) through Europe via the Portuguese sea ports (like the English Bulldog).
This guy is working to form his breeding program, he's doing a lot of work to get some really nice dogs into his country. I'm a big fan of his dog "Max"...
A little more info on it's history...
----
Comments
But I have to wonder how much of that is hype? How much of that propaganda could really be true when you apply some logic to it?
I mean, this is a dog breed, its been around for a very long time, obviously people live with it. The description above makes them sound like some type of wild predator. We've had just as much time to perfect living with other predators - like Wolves, Bears, Tigers, and Lions - as we have domestic dogs, like the Bully Kutta... Yet here we (people in general) are, not living with those other wild predators - but we are living with the Bully Kutta, and have been for a very long time.
At some point wouldn't the effort of keeping a breed with the description like you (Ann) and I wrote above simply out weigh the reward? Wouldn't a dog breed with that level of aggression simply go extinct (like the Alaunt and EB did) as society matured and other easier to handle (less "wild") breeds became available?
See my point?
----
@Kelly: I do really like the Tosa, a lot actually, but I am not obsessed with them like some of these other breeds - maybe because they lack some man-aggression. I dunno why but I like a molosser breed with man-aggression and dog-aggression (a nice balance), maybe I'm crazy.
As for the Fila, that is a breed I am not really a fan of - I think their heads are a bit too blood hound looking for me. I'm not attracted to them from a looks stand point. There are other man-aggressive breeds I'd get before a Fila - like the Caucasian Ovcharka (surprise) and Presa for example.
Max is badass tho, huh?
----
Jesse
----
Presa Canario's get a bad rap here in the Bay. Two attacked the LaCrosse Coach at my college and killed her. They are usually owned by drug cartels. Here anyways.....But I guess that means they are probably pretty good at guarding.
---
I'm going to go with the whole "super aggression" thing is probably breed hype. Though that's just me....I've gotten to the point where I don't trust breed descriptions anymore
I do agree if they came stateside people would think they were pitties.~
As for my comment on liking a dog with a human-aggressive and dog-aggressive balance, the Cane Corso and Caucasian Ovcharka fall into that category - that's why I like (and own) them. Most Mastiff and Bulldog breeds are human and dog aggressive, that's kinda an important part of their history and temperament. So the Bully Kutta being that way is not abnormal.
----
That reminds me of how Dobermans were said to turn on their owners once they hit a certain age. ~
I've noticed a lot of Dutchies are labeled as pitties too [ & pitties labeled as Dutchies ] because they have the brindle in common. ~
Osy, I've heard all the "these breeds will turn on you!" nonsense. Also the one that really irritates me is the one where If you crate your dog...this will make your dog aggressive. Dogs don't think the way people do! Everytime I hear this..."lack of socialization" pops into mind. Whatever kind of dog you put into a crate...is the same kind of dog that will come out! If the dog comes out aggressive...then the dog was aggressive to begin with. If you put a happy go lucky dog in a crate...then that dog will still come out happy go lucky reguardless of time spent in crate! I would think should the dog not be content with the crate...s/he will be even MORE happy to be out!
Yeah...Max does have a good head. It's very unique...it's almost more "horse-shaped" (when looking at his head from the front).
Maybe it was the description that they don't bond with people. Who knows how much of that is true, but I like a PPD that can bond with you and want to protect you as their family member.
Brad, do you get that impression with Blue that he will protect your family because of a bond?
From his article he writes...
With this in mind, the authors feel that it was very likely a cross between the squat, brachycephalic, oriental breeds (described by Sir Roger Williams as being white in color) which were imported by Portuguese seafarers in Portugal from China before either the Dutch or the English had established trade relations with China, and the fierce bullbaiter known as the Alaunt (a white dog by description) which produced the original dogs of the line we know as Bulldogs (which were also often white dogs). A cross between the early eastern brachycephalic dogs and the produce of the common Alaunt/Mastiff cross is another likely possibility, and would account for early variation in Bulldog coat color.
About the Alaunt he writes...
Many Bulldog historians in their struggle to find the earliest reference to Bulldogs in the literature site the writing of Johannes Caius in his book "Of Englishe Dogges" written in 1576; the earliest of all dog books. Caius writes of a dog which "exceedeth all other in cruell conditions...wheresoever he setteth his tenterhooke teeth, he taketh such sure and fast holde, that a man may sooner teare and render him in sunder, then lose him and separate his chappes." This description does not, despite the beliefs of many Bulldog historians, refer to the Bulldog, in our opinion, but instead refers to the alaunt of which, in addition to describing as a bullbaiter, Edward says "......men have seen Alaunts slay their masters. In all manner of ways Alauntes are treacherous and evil....." Furthermore, Edward tells us of the Alaunt that "....it is the best hound to hold and to nyme (seize) all manner of beasts and hold them fast." In this light it is the obvious absence of the mention of the Bulldog in the Englishman Caius' work of 1576 that is relevant. Caius' work suggests that in 1576 the Bulldog, as we would recognize it's lineage, did not exist in England, if anywhere.
The term "Bully" is used to refer to many different breeds, and if it is being used to refer to any of the true working Bulldogs (ABs, EBs, CCs, Presa, Spanish Alano, Boxer, etc) then it is being used to refer to dogs that are (or should be) historically human-aggressive & dog-aggressive. While the bulk of the "Bully" breeds may not be selected to be human-aggressive today, its historically inaccurate to say all "Bully breeds" are not (or should not be) human-aggressive. Human aggression was an important element in the functional "farm dog" - the role that most of the early Bulldogs plaid in history.
So, I think it depends on what "Bully" breed you are asking about as to whether or not they are human-aggressive dogs.
----
Blue most def has a strong bond with his people, and would protect us, but I don't see his close bond with us as a gauge of his guardian abilities. Its my opinion that the "programming" in/of a breed that pushes them to bond closely with their people is put in place (via selection) more for control than to facilitate a "protective instinct". Dogs guard their resources, a PPD or LGD have been selected to have a strong instinct to guard their resources - which includes their family, home, pets, friends, and so on. When you add a strong bonding instinct with a guardian instinct you get a dog that appears to have "protective instincts".
So, IMHO, Blue would "protect" us because of his guardian instinct, and Blue makes a great PPD because he is obedient and sticks close to us due to his breed being selected for that tight bond they form. Those 2 things put together make Blue appear to have "protective instincts", but his bond is not what pushes him to guard nor does he bond because of his guarding instinct - they are 2 separate breed traits working together.
JMHO
----
That said, what I am talking about is far more political. And what Brad is talking about is far more historical. Different worlds completely.
Wouldn't a dog breed with that level of aggression simply go extinct (like the Alaunt and EB did) as society matured and other easier to handle (less "wild") breeds became available?
This reminds me of the debate that went on in Korea on whether the Jindo should or shouldn't be marketed internationally to "save them", and whether the Jindo's temperament should be soften to cater to the international market.
I can't help but think that people have gone too far with the Jindo. I mean, the Jindo wasn't even listed under the AKC FSS as a working breed. There are people who think a Jindo that catches/kills possums and birds are bad dogs. Instead of bringing *UP* the level of knowledge in handling dogs, dogs are dumbed down or the standard expectation is brought down.
I once visited someone who had imported a show dog and a hunting dog. He believed in sacrificing the Jindo to the international market, changing it to meet more home demands, as it'll save a pocket of "real" Jindos who are owned by the poor breeders who needed money to keep on breeding their dogs.
He was honest, though, in that he told me that he found the show dog to be boring. During the visit, I could see the hunting dog being more lively in scouting the yard, sniffing over the fence to check out other yards (probably calculating an escape route), and generally being more vocal and exaggerated in interacting with the other dogs. That was just one short visit under a controlled environment. How much more difference would be obvious if the two dogs were out and about in a field?
As levels of difficulties go, a Jindo is far less than a Bully Kutta based on sheer size of the dogs, but the question of fitting a dog to meet society is nearly the same. Is it worthwhile? How far would an individual person go before the dogs are extinct in essence but not in name?