Maddy

How is a 50% reduction of dogs being bred in the last 17mths due to regulations being implemented, more swabs being done, regulations changed by the GRNSW to make owners accountable for their retired dogs and unable to euth them without a vet verifying that it needed to be done, 100's of 1000's being spent on research into better racing conditions and upgrading tracks, education for owners/trainers, more funds poured into GAP be seen as nothing being done??? 50% of way the hell too many is still too many. When you're breeding so many dogs that it would be impossible, even with pouring money into GAP, to rehome even a quarter that were bred per year, a reduction is not good enough. Getting vet verification to euth will be no issue for the less scrupulous. I foresee an increase in "paddock accidents". And the hundreds of thousands spent on research? Like the study that they spent $250,000 on, that was (according to leaked emails) nothing more than expensive smoke and mirrors to get the public off their backs? If the above is what the industry considers sufficient change, the ban can't really have come of that much of a surprise?

He has proposed a ban, it will still have to go through parliament, just like everything else. If the majority supports it, it will pass. The guy might be generally unpopular but a history of proposing unpopular laws doesn't necessarily mean he's wrong on this one. And like I said elsewhere (or maybe here? I forget), while I personally don't think the ban and the way it's being done are quite the right answer, no better alternative has been proposed. And by that, I mean actual alternatives that would actually fix the problem- not just more empty promises from the industry to change. As for pedigree dog breeders.. *zips up flame suit* in my opinion, there are some changes that need to be made there. There was a thread about brachy breeds not long ago and the expected defense of "not my dogs" came up almost straight away. #NotAllPugs is not much different to #NotAllGreyhoundTrainers and as we're learning, if a group refuses to clean their own house, the government might just step in and burn the whole thing down. Avoiding the AR nutters will never be possible but as long as your practices seem reasonable to the average person, you've got nothing to worry about.

I have to admit, when it's an animal, I have no problems but when it's human pus/assorted grossness..

I would pay to go on a holiday to pick them out. Those videos are addictive to watch. Lol me too! But then I have considered getting a Crestie simply so I can squeeze its blackheads... I was about to accuse you of being gross and then I remembered that I sometimes pick dried snot from the corners of my dog's nose (with a tissue though!) so yeah.. people in glass houses and all that

I would pay to go on a holiday to pick them out. Those videos are addictive to watch.

That tiny minority of dogs that might end up over there would be a tiny minority too many. I mentioned the census in a previous post as I also received the email, I didn't read it in time as the cut off date was the day before I read it and therefore my 3 weren't included in those stats, plus the others I have rehomed that are still alive in pet homes. You needed to supply ear brands and the dogs breeding it would have been foolish of them to falsify the census as it could/can be easily checked. I wonder how many others didn't reply as well. So no hard evidence then? Just the dog's ear brands and pedigree? If 40,000 were submitted, confirming them by sighting actual dogs would be next to impossible, hence my skepticism as to their accuracy. I have no doubt that they collected data for 40,000 but I find it very difficult to believe that even a small portion of those dogs submitted were actually confirmed. Mystify, I've met plenty of lovely trainers- decent, hardworking people who you'd never guess chucked possums into their yards or slipped their dogs on pademelons. I've also met plenty of decent trainers who saw nothing wrong with giving their dog some iced coffee before a race (and then just trusting to luck that they wouldn't get swabbed) and even more decent trainers who had no problem with the idea of euthanasing pups that couldn't be raced. People aren't just good or bad- there are a few who are legitimate nasty a*******s and then there is the large majority who don't break major rules (or even technically break rules at all) who are doing things that are not acceptable. You personally might not have euthanased the pups you bred and sold but someone else probably did. And it's easy to say that it was someone else's lack of responsibility or care for the dogs. Same with live baiting, overbreeding and doping- "It's not me, it's that guy over there." And apparently that guy over there is impossible to weed out of the industry. I have a lot of doubts about the ban but I can absolutely see why Mike Baird felt it was the only real solution. Policing welfare to an acceptable level is just not possible, we see examples of that over and over and over again. But anyways, this is a pointless debate to be having. Even if I have solid, reasonable arguments, I'm apparently just some anti racing hippy who knows nothing about the industry or the issues involved. And you personally do the right thing so I guess everything is okay anyway. Glad we sorted that out.

It's creepy with those revolting grey tentacles I hope they've taken the dog to the vets now, instead of asking for advice on facebook. You probably don't want to Google Images canine oral papillomas then, because it can be about 10000% more gross Don't click this if you ever want to eat again. There's a forum somewhere (Google probably knows) where a woman described squeezing out the contents of the warts and then feeding the warts to her dog to cure them. Pictures included. I've seen/heard some pretty gross things but I think that one might actually be the blue ribbon winner. Although that in itself might be the topic of a whole other thread..

There is a difference between the thoroughbred industry being informed of the upcoming announcement and the thoroughbred industry being involved in some secret backroom talks (to their benefit, it is implied). And yes, a handful of pieces of evidence were incorrect. But for every questionable item, there were plenty that could be proven beyond a doubt. And equating a few buried pets with evidence of clubbed or shot dogs dumped in mass graves? Please, rebanne, you can argue better than that. Your backyard is in no way analogous to what was found at Bundaberg and you know it*. *Unless you've been euthanasing your pets with a baseball bat, in which case, accept my apologies for the assumption. From what can gather it is about the money each code gets from the TAB revenue. And you are becoming very offensive particularly since I lost Fern only 4 weeks ago. I won't be responding to you again. As tempting as it is to point out that I can't be aware of the details of your life, I'm sure you're already aware of that and of the fact that it obviously can't have been my intention to upset you. But yes, not replying is probably a good idea. If I said the sky was blue, you'd be in to argue it was green and to be honest, I'm not fond of arguing just for the sake of arguing.

There is a difference between the thoroughbred industry being informed of the upcoming announcement and the thoroughbred industry being involved in some secret backroom talks (to their benefit, it is implied). And yes, a handful of pieces of evidence were incorrect. But for every questionable item, there were plenty that could be proven beyond a doubt. And equating a few buried pets with evidence of clubbed or shot dogs dumped in mass graves? Please, rebanne, you can argue better than that. Your backyard is in no way analogous to what was found at Bundaberg and you know it*. *Unless you've been euthanasing your pets with a baseball bat, in which case, accept my apologies for the assumption.

This does not answer my question. But thanks for the pointless link anyway? If all these secret leaked documents and videos exist, surely you can link to one. You have no idea of just how wrong you are on that one. Up until recently, I'd held my tongue about a lot of the stuff I've seen during my ~10 years involved in rescuing greyhounds. I love the breed and hoped the industry could get itself right for the sake of the dogs and the minority of good trainers/breeders out there. But nothing has gotten better since I first started rescuing greyhounds. There are just as many dogs needing help, the industry is plagued with all the same problems and nothing has changed. I leaned more towards pro racing than anti so no, I don't love to attack innocent people, I can no longer justify any sort of support for people who just want this all to go away so that they can get back to business as usual. You can't be bothered providing any evidence but expect me to dredge up numbers to defend an argument that is beyond absurd. You made the claim that pedigree breeders are killing dogs left, right and center, how about you back that up? Because this was the information you provided? And as for.. That doesn't answer my question. Obviously you sold the puppies but do you know or care what became of them? So, since the ban was announced, some very busy little beavers are GRNSW have been scurrying around, seeing physical proof of 40,000 greyhounds? In less than one month? Wow, that almost seems like it might be untrue.. It also seems like if they actually had all this hard evidence, they'd be shouting it from the rooftops and letting independent bodies verify the information. Oh, I don't know. Maybe the announced ban? The airing of the live baiting footage on Four Corners? Take your pick. Pity you couldn't spit on those well-known and respected trainers who were caught live baiting on camera. Or the many trainers who drop their dogs off at vets or high-kill pounds to be destroyed. But yeah, let's be angry with some other group of people.

If you're going to make claims like that, you have to have some evidence to back them up. You can't just sling this sort of crap around without providing examples and evidence to disprove them. If you can see out from under your tinfoil hat, could you please provide evidence of secret squirrle backroom deals with the thoroughbred people? Sounds like Mike Baird is a busy man, with all these secret backroom deals and meeting and conspiracies. Where does he even find the time to oppress the lower classes? It shows, don't worry. And that's not right either. No one disagrees that there are some issue in the pedigree breeding world. But focusing on one particular issue doesn't mean we don't care about the others- it's a matter of priorities. And right now, the greyhound industry is responsible for a hell of a lot more misery than pedigree breeders are. Keeping 8 dogs out of the many litters you've bred over the years? How generous of you. Where are all the others? Because the industry participants would certainly never lie when their backs were up against the wall, would they? I mean, it's not as if they lied about the issue of live baiting (oh wait!) or that they lied about doping (oh.. hang on) or that they lied about the existence of mass graves (awkward..).

If it's only the tiny minority who are the problem (as the industry claims), there should be nothing to worry about, right? If everyone involved loves the dogs, there's no way they'd send them to China, knowing what will happen to the dogs there.

Dogs are already ending up in China. And the industry has been unable to stop it because legally, all they can do is make it against their own rules. But even then, people do it, people get caught, stewards inquiries are held by poorly trained monkeys (some of whom can be bribed with peanuts) and the people involved are allowed to continue on. In fact, it doesn't seem to matter what you do- if you get banned, you wait a year or so, ask for an appeal, come up with an absurd reason for why you should be trusted with animals again (like "it's my livelihood") and you'll be let back in. I've watched this stuff happening for a long time but felt confident that things would change. Year in and year out. Big trainer down here gets positive swabs, but it all goes away. Fair enough, maybe evidence was shaky. Same trainer swabs positive again, on independent testing (at a lab chosen by the trainer), the control sample also tests positive and the charges dropped. Same trainer tests positive again, same trainer has a f***ing pit of shot dogs up the back of his property, same trainer goes through hundreds of dogs a year and he is untouchable. He could bludgeon a dog to death in front of the Chief of Stewards but you can bet he'd be racing again the next week. I wanted to believe the industry could change but now.. I'm not sure it can, even if it tried.

This, 100%. I saw a post by pro racing people about one single idiot woman who has backyard bred two litters of greyhound puppies. They were gleefully attacking her for "adding to the problem" while trying very hard not to see the massive elephant in the room. An elephant that might as well have been wearing a high-vis vest, a glittery g-string and strobe lights on its head. Now, what that woman was doing was undoubtedly wrong but for them to lay into her.. so much hypocrisy that it was staggering. Meanwhile, for every dog I manage to rehome, eight more are born- with no thought given to their retirements, in most cases. And as much as the future of the breed worries me, I'm sick of cleaning up after people who don't give even the smallest of shits about their dogs. Sick of it. One of my own dogs was going to the vet at 13 weeks old to be destroyed. 13 weeks old. Tell me that his breeder loved him The AR nutters are a problem though- and that problem is that they are muddying the waters of legitimate welfare concerns that should have been addressed 20 years ago.

The Idiot Dog- born neurologically a bit.. different- blind in one eye, epilepsy, a few other things- was destined for a one-way trip to the vet as a puppy. He was fairly well-bred (Cosmic Chief x Kyra Shiraz) but was obviously never going to race. My meat lady heard about him from a trainer who was a customer of hers and she nagged him into letting me take Idiot Dog/Bosley/Roger/Shit-Head. He definitely hasn't been an easy dog with all his health issues and behavioural quirks but that little face.. Cuddling with his boss/self-appointed mum, The Shitty Whippet The OH made me promise not to post this photo of the Shitty Whippet on Facebook :D (technically I haven't broken my promise!) The Shitty Whippet was supposed to be a birthday present for me a few years ago but the OH -he of the "we don't need more dogs"- fell totally in love with her and she's now his dog. Worryingly, she has started turning him into a crazy whippet man/snob and I suspect more shitty whippets are in our future Besides those two, we also have three foster hounds. all greyhounds- Grace, 11; Jelly, 6; Spotty Dawg, 6.

I looked into buying them online- one of my dogs is on a fair bit of medication and will be for the rest of his life- but after checking prices pretty much everywhere, my vet was the cheapest, before even factoring in the cost of postage. I assume he discounts them for me because even if Idiot Dog only makes it to 10 years of age, he will have needed over thirteen thousand tablets to get there. If my vet hadn't been cheaper, I would've spoken to him about the cost. From a business point of view, better to lose a couple of dollars profit and keep your lifetime customer than lose them completely to somewhere cheaper. So perhaps it might be worth finding out what the average price is online and then taking that back to your vet to discuss the possibility of a discount (assuming your vet charges more than the onlines- you might be surprised).

I'd agree with this. A family member of mine has a very elderly pug and although it's still technically "alive", listening to it wheeze and puff even when sitting still, I think it's probably a good thing that dogs aren't self-aware enough to be able to plan suicide :/

Blue is a colour that occurs in greyhounds and I have never seen a greyhound with colour dilution alopecia If the condition occurs in 25% of all blue dogs, I expect I'd have seen it at least once in greyhounds by now, especially considering I mostly deal with adult dogs. The alopecia that greyhounds do suffer from occurs across all colours- although is does seem worse with blacks- and with a lot of time and good, soft bedding, it can be resolved. Regarding colour dilution alopecia, I'd say the same for whippets, too- blue is a popular colour (especially for backyard bred whippets) but I've never met a blue with any alopecia. My own girl is a blue parti (I wanted a black, couldn't get one) and not only does she not have bald spots, her coat is probably the best quality of any greyhound or whippet I've personally seen. It's short and feels smooth to the touch but it's incredibly dense and tight. Diltion alopecia might well be an issue in certain breeds but I think it's a stretch to say it's an any in all breeds that carry the dilution genes.

Do they have an actual office there or something?

Yep. Indicative of the level of knowledge that's driving much of the current discussion. God forbid what is going to happen the dogs placed with inexperienced rescues who think they are just big spindly generic dogs. The idea that Greyhounds are sleepy couch potatoes that require no effort from an owner does the dogs a considerable disservice - especially the young ones. I know owners who will PTS their dogs rather than have them in the wrong homes. Chained to a kennel and used for pigging or left uncoated and ignored in back yards? I'd PTS too. I predict a rise in the abuse of greyhounds. It will move from the racing to the pet environment. A tragedy for the breed. But people on this forum push the adoption of greyhounds on the grounds they are the dog for the lazy person, that they're couch potatoes that only need a 20 minute walk each day. If anyone asks me for information about the breed, they get my honest opinion- they are generally easy dogs in certain respects but they are not a dog for everyone. It's a pros/cons thing, same as any other breed. They don't need much brushing but they do need regular nail trims. They don't need long walks but they do need some opportunity for free running in a safe environment. They are usually very dog sociable but many fret if left without company. And so on and so forth. They are a great dog for people who understand and appreciate sighthounds. For someone who think they're getting a tall, skinny labrador.. they're going to be very disappointed. Kirty (I think?) made a very good point about young greys, too. Until they get to about 2 years of age, most greys are lunatics. Greyhound puppies (up to about 15/6 months) are adorable but they're also a lot of work and seem to spend a lot longer being awful teenagers. Anyways.. debating the pros/cons of the impending ban seems like it's flogging a dead horse at this point. It's not a black or white thing and as I've said before, a lot of the issues are very complicated (and often not even close to what gets reported in the mainstream media). My concern is for the breed I love. It's all too easy to accuse that of being "selfish" when it's not your breed that's potentially on the chopping block.

The only fact is the two types of greyhounds look different. Underneath they are one and the same. I have owned both types and also fosterd for GAP. My current young silly girl had her counterpart in a young silly girl I fostered. My proper old men dogs have had their counterparts in the racing dogs. I have bred dogs with insane prey drive. I haven't bred any fast enough to win on a race track but I'm not alone in that as seen by the many racing greyhounds PTS for being too slow. Your dogs have entirely different blood lines to my dogs. When a dog is 30 years removed from racing lines, it ceases to be the same thing. You breed for conformation to a standard, racing greyhounds are bred for chasing ability. If those two pursuits created the same dog, there would be no difference in looks but very obviously, that's not the case. I stand by what I said- they are not the same dog and for those of us who love and own racing bred greys, a showbred grey is not a substitute. That's not a slight against your dogs, it's a preference for a certain type.

And without function to drive their form, they will cease to be greyhounds as we know them. They will be bred by backyarders who don't care about maintaining their beautiful temperament or selecting the healthiest pups to breed from. They won't be just slow greyhounds, they will be the badly bred dogs. That is nothing to celebrate. HW- If I got a dollar for every misinformed/ignorant thing I've read in the last 24 hours regarding greyhounds, I'd have a lot of dollars. I'd still have a massive headache but I could buy heaps of Nurofen with all my dollars >.>

This is my big concern/ worry, about how the Greyhound breed lives on now that the industry that breeds the bulk will close down?? I always had a Greyhound in my future There will always be greyhounds. Same as as other breeds have survived long after their original jobs were consigned to history. Most huskies bred in this country never see snow or a sled or gig yet the breed exists and thrives. A good dog is a good dog, it doesn't need to be part of an industry entrenched in cruelty just to keep the breed going. Where do these dogs come from though? Greyhounds bred for conformation showing aren't the same as racing bred dogs (And before rebanne jumps in here, that's not an attack on showbred dogs- it's just pointing out a fact). So that leaves backyard breeders. I've seen the outcome of backyard breeding greys and the results were worse than you'd expect so it confirms for me that you have to have people experienced and understanding of the breed to maintain all the traits we currently enjoy. The healthy, stable dogs we currently have are a result of breeding for function and if that function ceases to exist, what then? It's easy to brush these issues off when it's not the breed you love. Someone actually said to me yesterday that I could always just have whippets because they're pretty much the same thing as a greyhound (which is hilariously wrong), and then that they'd be okay with seeing the complete extinction of the racing greyhound in Australia if it meant racing would be gone. Obviously this person doesn't own and love greyhounds. Personally, I can't imagine life without a couple of ex racers but it looks like their days in Australia could be numbered. This is a very good question. I think it needs to be addressed as part of the transition of the industry to shut-down. I've never owned a grey - but have some experience of them. And with DOLs encouragement I will likely bring forward my plans to add a a grey to my pack in the next few months. I think they are an amazing breed which is why I'm so keen to try one with my westies. And if possible, I'll offer to foster at short notice if that becomes necessary. And might be able to 'find' another potential foster home as well. It's interesting - ABC 24 reporting the support for fostering and adopting the industry greys is gathering momentum. Which suggests that as long as the transition through fostering or fostering to adopt can be managed there might well be a large increase in the potential number of homes available. But yes, the assessment and fostering process will certainly be a bottle-neck which will need careful managing. Short-term, there will be a glut of dogs but if the ban works in NSW, other states will follow. And where the industry dies out, the dogs will die out. Enjoy your chance at owning a ex racing greyhound while you've got it. And to those who show dogs but support this ban.. enjoy your show dogs while you've got them because the AR movement will be after your pets, next.

This is my big concern/ worry, about how the Greyhound breed lives on now that the industry that breeds the bulk will close down?? I always had a Greyhound in my future There will always be greyhounds. Same as as other breeds have survived long after their original jobs were consigned to history. Most huskies bred in this country never see snow or a sled or gig yet the breed exists and thrives. A good dog is a good dog, it doesn't need to be part of an industry entrenched in cruelty just to keep the breed going. Where do these dogs come from though? Greyhounds bred for conformation showing aren't the same as racing bred dogs (And before rebanne jumps in here, that's not an attack on showbred dogs- it's just pointing out a fact). So that leaves backyard breeders. I've seen the outcome of backyard breeding greys and the results were worse than you'd expect so it confirms for me that you have to have people experienced and understanding of the breed to maintain all the traits we currently enjoy. The healthy, stable dogs we currently have are a result of breeding for function and if that function ceases to exist, what then? It's easy to brush these issues off when it's not the breed you love. Someone actually said to me yesterday that I could always just have whippets because they're pretty much the same thing as a greyhound (which is hilariously wrong), and then that they'd be okay with seeing the complete extinction of the racing greyhound in Australia if it meant racing would be gone. Obviously this person doesn't own and love greyhounds. Personally, I can't imagine life without a couple of ex racers but it looks like their days in Australia could be numbered.

We had this same problem and ended up just fencing off the whole area to prevent our dogs getting anywhere near the fence. And that worked nicely until this year when the neighbour's dogs started chewing palings off the boundary fence to try to get to our dogs We've already replaced/reinforced several palings but their dogs just move on to a new section so it looks like our only option will be putting up a colourbond fence there, probably at our expense.