342 C Lawson strength and demeanour Their ability to protect and fight successfully for their keeper as well as in large-scale military campaigns (see also chapter on Animals in War) and competitive entertainment made them very attractive (Fleig 1996) This resulted in selective breeding for the anatomical traits perceived to provide the best performance in the ring, married with the aim to produce a dog that was human-friendly but aggressive to its own species and often other animals The USA imported dog fighting from the UK in the early 1800s and through selective breeding created the American pit bull terrier, although the Staffordshire bull terrier and other related bull terriers also continued to be used These dogs were attractive, and remain so, to dog fighters for their compact size, agility, ‘gameness’, strength and lack of threat-displays But despite these breeds being carefully bred for docility towards humans—perhaps further than that, a strong social bond with humans (McMillan and Reid 2009)—their use in fighting led to many US states, followed by other countries, including the UK (s1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991), introducing breed specific legislation to ban ownership across the whole of society The intention to eradicate the various breeds banned under this type of legislation—most famously the pit bull terrier—has rather conspicuously failed, nevertheless, there has, undoubtedly, been consequences for these types of dog This is discussed further in the chapter on Status Dogs (herein) The offences related to dog fighting and indeed all animal fighting in the UK are now contained within s8 of the Animal Welfare Act (2006) Harding and Nurse (2015) suggest that the lack of a separate offence for dog fighting is problematic primarily because dog fighting is indiscernible from other animal fighting offences and the variation which exists in the level of offending and the type of offender is invisible in data recorded under s8 While there is no corresponding reference to such a problem made by investigators and enforcers (Lawson forthcoming), there is consensus that the problem of identifying and recording dog fighting is inherently linked to the legislation, and the offences contained within, which does not provide for a clear data set This issue is as much to with the fact, however, that the majority of enforcement is conducted by the RSPCA, and the UK Government is not required to record and report on these private prosecutions In the USA, dog fighting was not made illegal in all states until 1976 and it was not a felony in all states (and at a federal level) until the last decade In addition some states still regard spectating as a mere misdemeanour (Gibson 2014) In most states the situation can be considered to be similar to that of the UK whereby the offences relating to dog fighting are contained within a broader category of