Maddy

I feel this way as well I have to say. How that can happen, I am not sure. There does need to be closer monitoring and much tighter regulations adn yes the amount of surplus dogs needs to be dealt with in a much more satisfactory way. I know of Whippets injured racing each other in the back yard and yes the odd one dieing from injuries gained in racing around with their friends. So yes there are injuries adn yes they are under more pressure but injuries on the track should not be a main reason to stop racing. My Whippet injured her knee after running around with my dog at home and zagged when she should have zigged. The photo below was taken this morning. Idiot Dog did that to himself, just chasing the Shitty Whippet around our perfectly flat front lawn. He has also ripped off his dew claw (a couple of times) running around the house like a twit and on the one occasion we let him offlead in a fenced dog park, he ran through a low-growing tree and gashed himself from his wrist up to his elbow. He has also skinned his thighs falling over, grazed skin off both wrists (you can actually see a scar on his wrist in that photo) and on several occasions, run directly into solid objects. While I'd agree there are definitely things the racing industry could do to improve safety in races, letting a greyhound run (whether on a track or just in its own yard) is taking a risk. Personally, I'm on the fence when it comes to the question of banning the sport. On one hand, I can't see the industry cleaning up enough to satisfy the welfare concerns but on the other hand, I absolutely love ex racers as pets. Ban the sport and once all the current dogs have passed away, that'll be it- no more greyhounds except the showbreds and those backyard bred for hunting. Admittedly the reasoning against banning is selfish but how many people arguing for the ban are currently enjoying the companionship of an ex racer? I think the only way to satisfy both sides of the issue would be a return of the sport to a hobby: with strict breeding limits, straight grass tracks and the requirement that every dog bred is accounted for and given the chance of rehoming once retired. Not that it'll happen, of course, so.. meh

Thyroid cancer was what my older greyhound girl (almost 11 years old) had and in her case, it was very aggressive and had already spread by the time the lump was visible. She had no obvious symptoms besides that small lump. In our case, it spread into the nearby veins/arteries and that was what made the removal impossible- she bled very badly during just the biopsy- and as I understand it, she would have had a decent chance otherwise.

When Sally first got sick, it was a big neck lump that came up out of nowhere and went away again before our vet appointment (~48 hours). Because it was gone by the time we got there and hadn't been weeping, oozing or doing anything else worrying, the vet told us to just keep an eye on the area in case it came back. When it did come back, it was cancer, incredibly aggressive and by the time I noticed the new small lump on her neck (in a different spot), it had already spread into the major veins and arteries there, meaning we only had two options- let the cancer kill her or have her put to sleep. Sally also had the weird loose skin, there's a picture in the thread about it on here somewhere. I'm not saying it's the same thing for your dog but with that area, I think it pays to be much more cautious.

A lot of greyhound properties definitely leave a lot to be desired but then again, the same could be said for some (well respected) registered breeders :/ I can think of a very good example there but the breeder in question is a member of Dol so.. not touching that one. Standards in general (not just for greyhounds) need to be looked at but I can't see it happening any time soon.

Greyt was trying to make it sound as if that's what others were saying but it is absolutely not the case. No one here wants to see the welfare of these dogs compromised, especially not those of us who actually rescue. Prey drive is just one of many factors that determine a dog's success. Motivation to chase has to exist beside physical fitness and correct conformation.

Now, I don't respect the breed? Will it ever end? Where have I implied that? Er, it is right there above. If I can't respect the breed, implies I don't respect the breed. Oh, that's right, I haven't. Nice work there, cutting and pasting quotes to make it look like I said something I didn't. This is what I was replying to- And I'm sure you were aware of that. But whatever, I'm not feeding the crazy any further.

Now, I don't respect the breed? Will it ever end? If you believe that greyhounds should be kept in tiny cages or runs their whole life while in training, please just say it. If you believe that keeping greyhounds in tiny cages or runs their whole life while in training does not produce a greater preponderance of behavioural issues vs the way we normally raise pets please just say it. Where have I implied that? Oh, that's right, I haven't. Once again, you are putting words in other peoples' mouth to deflect from the fact that your arguments have been torn down by people who actually understand the breed. Constantly moving the goal posts whenever you are proven to be incorrect is starting to get really old. As for prey drive, it's not a behavioural issue so I don't know why you're implying that it is.

I pick, Afghan Basenji Borzoi Deerhound Ibizan Irish Wolfhound Italian Greyhound Pharoah Hound Saluki Whippett All fast, all bred to hunt independently, lots have terrible recall. None are routinely kept in tiny cages for 20 hours per day. Kirty sums it up well, "As for your other comments, of course their behaviour is due to their upbringing. Everybody knows that. The same is true for all dogs. However no other breed of dog is routinely raised in kennels and runs, not properly trained or socialised, taught to chase and potentially kill small animals - and then turfed out into the community. When raised as a pet as part of a family, they are no different to any other dog. But when raised in the manner described above, care must be taken when rehoming." All sighthounds and all have higher prey drive. And for all of them, testing the level of that drive before placing them in a home with cats would be the sensible thing to do. I'd disagree that greyhounds raised in homes are somehow different- I have a greyhound who was raised as a pet from 13 weeks of age- he still has prey drive. He was never taught to chase anything but if given the chance, he would. Greyhounds are greyhounds. If you can't respect the breed for what it is, you shouldn't be involved in rehoming them.

I agree.... that's exactly the same for humans, too. One or other factors can affect how prey drive is expressed, even at the strongest levels. I thought of mentioning that, but I knew it would muddy the simple bell-shaped curve explanation with its concrete picture, for those not familiar....& who might have been resistant to anything else but a blank slate idea. Yeah, I'm not sure how you'd chart prey drive to account for all the factors, in a way the average person can understand. The amount of people who confuse prey drive for aggression is considerable, which I've always found odd. Many people eat meat but would never consider themselves aggressive towards cows and if anything, want their meat to die the quickest, most humane death possible. And this. Put some liver treats in the basket of a UK yard muzzle and you can teach them to put their head in the muzzle themselves. Most of mine have loved their muzzles because muzzles mean either walks or trips somewhere.

I wonder if that could be inserted into an article that looked into behavioral assessment of greyhounds. It's reasonable to say greys have marked prey drive and the strength of the drive varies across the breed. Just as the traits of other breeds vary across the breed. There's a bell-shaped curve for strength of specific trait distribution among humans. Most lumped around the middle...with weaker & much stronger at the two extremities. Think of intelligence as one example. Same would be true for dogs ... like greys re drive. I can't see why you should be attacked when you're pointing out that the top extremity exists. In fact, if a thousand greyhounds were tested on drive & the extent of drive scores plotted along a graph... you'd see a bell-shaped curve forming. Most clustered around the middle...with fewer stronger to very strong up one end, and fewer weaker to very weak ones at the other. Behaviour testing 'admits' that extreme ends exist across the one group. Which is what you're saying for the top end. And given that a very strong trait has some genetic base...not going to be 'managed out' by training. There's also that bottom end of the bell-shape, where there are those with a weaker drive... who'll never be managed into having high drive. So it's reasonable for you to be saying that some greys are not suitable for the requirements of regular households and standard access to the society. .. because some will have an exceptionally high drive. You're right, tho... as 'simple' as this is & it's nothing you don't know already ... it's how it's received. I have illusions that drawings of bell-shaped curves might help! Definitely. I've had two girls (from the same trainer) who were safe with pretty much everything, you could throw a squeaky toy and they'd just look at it with that sad confused hound look- there was just no drive there at all. On the other hand, I've had dogs so drivey that we've had to cut tests short and send the test dog home because even once he was removed from their sight, they were completely wound up and very difficult to handle. Most dogs are somewhere in the middle and even then, you still get oddities like the cat safes who aren't chook safe, the rabbit safes who aren't cat safe and so on. I think more than one or two things might factor into prey drive (and how it is expressed) and that complicates things a bit more when trying to explain prey drive to people who aren't familiar with it. The trouble is, some people refuse to admit prey drive is even a thing, even though that the basic drive to attain food contributes to many other behaviours we see (a lot of them play behaviours- things like death shaking their squeaky toys or playing tug).

So sorry, Anna

My bad then - I apologise for taking your words out of context. Aussielover seems to have a genuine fear that Greyhounds provide a greater risk to children around toys/balls in public places than other breeds of dogs. I contend that Greys are amongst the least likely of breeds to bite a child. I understand that you use the green collar program to provide 2 assessments. 1 around re-homing and the other around wearing muzzles in public. She said nothing of the sort.

If I honestly thought it wouldn't just result in a pile of abuse from people who didn't know better, I'd make that effort. Unfortunately, experience in these kinds of situations has informed me that trying to educate those who refuse to even entertain the idea that they might have it wrong is not only pointless but sometimes also leads to death threats and crazy people putting your phone number up on FB. I wish the above was hyperbole but even though this should be a very simple issue of compiling empirical evidence to form a realistic representation of the breed in general, some people get all kinds of crazy over it. Despite the fact that greyhounds are dogs and dogs are predators, they cannot believe a greyhound would willingly kill unless its brain had somehow been damaged by the training process and god forbid you even consider pointing out that some have such high levels of drive that they aren't even safe to rehome. I've explained again and again that greyhounds are a breed that was developed for prey drive, keenness to chase was a trait selected for over many generations and they simply can't be compared to something like a labrador (or pick your pet breed of dog) or treated in the same way. We have to be respectful of the traits of our chosen breed and honest about them because denying them doesn't make them go away. Unfortunately, my views are not popular with the AR sorts who believe the dogs are forced to chase and I'd be just banging my head against a brick wall there.

I've seen the video and I still don't think they've got it quite right. Greyhounds playing with kittens is cute and all but that's still not the average greyhound. The average greyhound would chase a cat but happily cuddle up with a small dog or a person. When the public see minorities of the breed in that sort of unbalanced way, they assume it is the average- video of a few greyhounds ripping up possums = all greyhounds are vicious. Video of a few greyhounds cuddling with kittens = all greyhounds love kittens. An honest, balanced representation of the breed is what is needed.

Greyt, I can't be bothered with you any further. Either you are being deliberately obtuse or you are simply incapable of understanding. Whichever it is, I'm done. You have ignored information provided, you keep repeating pointless things (with piles of annoying font formatting) that have nothing to do with the issues in question and frankly, you've railroaded the thread into your own crazy circus. If anyone is drawing attention away from the original issue, it's you.

Temperament testing is done by all reputable rescues, regardless of breed, where the dogs came from or how they were raised. Temperament testing is NOT done because of how racing greyhounds are kept. I feel like a broken record here but you seem to keep missing this point, over and over again. Get to what point? Most of the greyhounds I've assessed have been lovely dogs with probably less issues overall than the "pet" breeds I've dealt with. Except you. The legislation is entirely irrelevant here so I don't know why you keep pushing that issue. Old legislation is not the reason anyone tests and it has nothing to do with any of this. Did we not just cover this? Like.. two posts ago. Resource guarding makes up part of a larger assessment that determines what home the dog is suitable for, it has NOTHING to do with muzzling. Your reading skills could do with some work. I did reply and once again, you ignored it (seeing a theme here?) to go off on some other nut hunt. Dogs who bite children often end up being returned to rescue or PTS. Go to any pound and there will be dogs in there who have nipped kids (and were surrendered for it). So you're saying- a few breaths after saying you don't disagree with temperament testing- that you do disagree with temperament testing? Right. If you're going to suggest that the RSPCA put down 40% of all unclaimed animals based soley on temperament testing, I'm afraid you're going to have to back that up with some evidence because it smell like bullsh*t. Not that it matters anyway. Greyhound rescue groups aren't the RSPCA. And here we come to the crux of the matter.. the old "prey drive can be trained out" line, used as justification for why everything with a pulse gets rehomed, and coincidentally, why incidents of greyhounds chasing and killing small dogs happen. To be honest, I had a feeling it was going to come down to this. If you can remove a dog's most basic of instincts with just simple methods, I'm sure rehoming programs all country would love to hear from you. You have to be joking. Do you want to know what I do for the welfare of greyhounds, besides putting my life into rehoming them? I deal with people like you- people who would damage the reputation of the breed because they are too willfully ignorant to educate themselves, even though they obviously have absolutely no idea. What a joke.

I agree entirely. FWIW,I never once took my fosters out for a walk without a muzzle. That said, I find many of the tests that make up the assessment have no bearing on weather a dog should be allowed out without a muzzle. And to have the tests done in a strange environment, without the owner present in atypical situations... well, I won't go on. Which tests would those be? Well look at the WA Law Here: 33. Special provision for greyhounds (1) A greyhound must be muzzled in such a manner as will prevent it from biting a person or animal unless: (a) it is in or at premises occupied by its owner; or (b) it has successfully completed a prescribed training programme. Is there a body of evidence suggesting that Greyhounds bite people more than other dogs do? And yet here is the law..."must be muzzled in such a manner as will prevent it from biting a person" Any test that needs to asses Greyhounds to ensure they will not bite humans in my opinion is way off base. Just my opinion, by I think all new owners should be given access to a course with supplementary reading material, videos etc explaining how to be a wonderful handler... and it should be paid for IMO by the industry. Assessing a dog out of its home environment eg at a kennel for 4 days will not always produce a result consistent with the dogs everyday behaviour at home (IMO) I know great strides forward have been made and sooo much effort have been put in by sooo many people and I don't want to see any backward steps at all. *facepalm* Firstly, regurgitating legislation at me isn't answering my question and neither is making bizarre claims about the purpose of testing. You seem to keep not understanding that the tests have no more to do with human aggression than a standard test for any breed. The point of testing is to assess a number of behaviours in each dog to work out what (if anything) needs addressing, to help pick the most suitable foster home and eventually, for selecting final home. Testing is done to ensure the best possible outcome and it's beyond me how anyone could disagree with it.

I agree entirely. FWIW,I never once took my fosters out for a walk without a muzzle. That said, I find many of the tests that make up the assessment have no bearing on weather a dog should be allowed out without a muzzle. And to have the tests done in a strange environment, without the owner present in atypical situations... well, I won't go on. Which tests would those be?

No surprises there. For most of those sorts of groups, it's not at all about helping actual animals, it's about getting certain things abolished. Interestingly, I saw this today and although it sounds all really great in theory, the idea of a group like AA managing the actual welfare of actual animals concerns me greatly. Well, I am glad to hear you speak to the motivations of "most of these sorts of groups". You have such insight. "the idea of a group like AA managing the actual welfare of actual animals concerns me greatly." Interestingly, it doesn't concern me at all because I fear the status quo far more. See http://www.smh.com.a...221-13kyps.html "It cost $50 to get rid of them."They took the dogs out the back shot them in the head and dropped the bodies in a deep pit." A veteran greyhound trainer who has tried to raise the issue of animal welfare told Fairfax Media that he was shocked at the way the dogs were treated at one property when they were considered not good enough or fast enough to race. He was so disturbed about the "disgusting" conditions for kennelled dogs at the same place, he took photos to show a parliamentary inquiry which was examining the industry which attracts $1 billion a year in bets. He also complained to the industry regulator Greyhound Racing NSW (GRNSW) and told them the property had been owned by one of its own employees. Groups like AA are not much different to PETA. They are not rescue groups, they do not deal with the day-to-day welfare of actual animals. Should a group such as AA be given the responsibility of caring for and rehoming large numbers of greys, the outcome could be lasting damage to the reputation of the breed when improperly tested dogs are adopted out to pet homes. Getting snide at me doesn't change the facts This isn't a case of one or the other because there are better options (as I pointed out in a previous post). Ok, lets talk facts: [x] Some within the Greyhound industry use live baiting as a training method. AA does not. [x] In 20112, the now disgraced and stood aside CEO of GRNSW admitted that 3000 Greyhounds per year were put down. 1 Trainer gave evidence to a parliamentary inquiry that dogs are taken to a property and shot for $50.00 then dumped in a pit. Nope, AA doesn't do that. [x] Many racing greyhounds have been systematically doped by those in the greyhound racing industry.[x]The Victorian Greyhound Racing Integrity Commissioner voluntarily resigned because he knew he was not given the authority to actually bring about integrity to the industry. No sign of AA there. [x] An ex Steward has been implicated in the live-baiting scandal [x]An ex employee of GRNSW has been accused of shooting unwanted dogs for $50.00, then dumping them. [x] An ex GR board member has been accused of doping [x] The whole GHNSW board has been stood down in disgrace [x] The Greyhound Racing Industry breeds far too many dogs year in, year out [x] The Greyhound racing industry has been saying for years that they are increasing the welfare of greyhounds. [x]Nobody believes them. You are right, my snide attitude doesn't change any of the above facts. BTW, do you believe that only 3000 dogs per year are killed in NSW? Given the source is from GRNSW, I am erring on the side of not believing. You know, on the AA website, they say 90% of all dogs are disposed of every year. Well, if 7000, were whelped in NSW in 2012, that would mean over 6000 were disposed of according to AA's guestimates. But GRNSW says "only" 3000 were destroyed. Hmmm, who should I believe? Did you miss the part where I said AA or the industry were not the only two options available? My quoted post does mention that but just in case you missed it..

Not worth getting banned over.

Two or three years? Government sanctioned? Where on earth are you getting your information from? Temperament testing has been around and evolving for a very long time. The government has never had anything to do with it, groups do it because IT HAS BENEFITS and I can't believe the validity of assessment is even being argued here I'm sorry but it's plainly obvious to me that you don't understand aggression or any of the behavioural issues assessed for. How many dogs (of all breeds) get dumped because they've bitten kids? Lots. But human aggression and resource guarding are not the same thing. Resource guarding is not aggression, just as prey drive is not aggression. Resource guarding in greyhounds is tested for because it is an issue which can come up. Have I made that nice and easy for you to understand? Resource guarding =/= aggression. What the hell are you talking about? Go to any branch of the RSPCA and watch a temperament assessment being done. ALL BREEDS ARE TESTED FOR RESOURCE GUARDING. Firstly, see above. Second, I'm beginning to think you must be trolling me. You also don't understand the differences between resource guarding and aggression. What are you even asking here?

No surprises there. For most of those sorts of groups, it's not at all about helping actual animals, it's about getting certain things abolished. Interestingly, I saw this today and although it sounds all really great in theory, the idea of a group like AA managing the actual welfare of actual animals concerns me greatly. Well, I am glad to hear you speak to the motivations of "most of these sorts of groups". You have such insight. "the idea of a group like AA managing the actual welfare of actual animals concerns me greatly." Interestingly, it doesn't concern me at all because I fear the status quo far more. See http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/greyhound-welfare-its-50-for-the-bullet-and-the-dog-is-dead-20150221-13kyps.html "It cost $50 to get rid of them."They took the dogs out the back shot them in the head and dropped the bodies in a deep pit." A veteran greyhound trainer who has tried to raise the issue of animal welfare told Fairfax Media that he was shocked at the way the dogs were treated at one property when they were considered not good enough or fast enough to race. He was so disturbed about the "disgusting" conditions for kennelled dogs at the same place, he took photos to show a parliamentary inquiry which was examining the industry which attracts $1 billion a year in bets. He also complained to the industry regulator Greyhound Racing NSW (GRNSW) and told them the property had been owned by one of its own employees. Groups like AA are not much different to PETA. They are not rescue groups, they do not deal with the day-to-day welfare of actual animals. Should a group such as AA be given the responsibility of caring for and rehoming large numbers of greys, the outcome could be lasting damage to the reputation of the breed when improperly tested dogs are adopted out to pet homes. Getting snide at me doesn't change the facts This isn't a case of one or the other because there are better options (as I pointed out in a previous post).

Prey drive is not aggression, humans are not a typical prey species for the breed, you argument is based on a misunderstanding of assessment for greys. Basic temperament testing (resource guarding, handling, children, etc) is done by most reputable rescues, not strictly for the sake of excluding dogs but to help with placement and give the rescue/shelter a list of issues that need to be addressed. For example.. if you don't test for resource guarding, it may not be seen by the rescue and if it isn't seen, it can't be dealt with. The dog gets rehomed with young kids, young kid goes near dog while dog is eating, dog bites kid, dog goes for a one-way trip to vet, leaves in a garbage bag. If supplements are the devil's work, you should check out the Health/Nutrition/Grooming section of the forum, it's practically Sodom and Gomorrah in there.

No surprises there. For most of those sorts of groups, it's not at all about helping actual animals, it's about getting certain things abolished. Interestingly, I saw this today and although it sounds all really great in theory, the idea of a group like AA managing the actual welfare of actual animals concerns me greatly.

what just stand by and accept that gross animal cruelty and cheating is part of the greyhound racing industry?????? THe very fact that there are big identities and people of influence caught up in this will be more of a blow to the credibility of greyhound racing than anything else. perhaps the BLAME need to be slated exactly where it belongs on the shoulders of the bastards who for money and, it would seem, pleasure broke not only the regulation of their own organisation but also the laws of the state. with the HUGE numbers of greys being bred this appalling tragedy was just waiting to happen.... and now the greys will be the first to suffer as a result of the fallout. on friday i went to collect feed at a local produce store where the owners were whining about how unfair all the fuss was, it was all labors fault,the owners were just starting to make decent money, blah blah blah.. so big mouth here put in her two cents worth about why the sympathy with people who had knowingly cheated, knowingly broken the law of the state, knowingly disregarded the regulation of their own organisation? now they think i am nuts and i did not even yell. just venting a bit H Where did I say that the cruelty of the racing industry was acceptable? The fact is there are thousands of racing dogs that would need homes if racing was shut down tomorrow and if I turned up on your doorstep tomorrow with half a dozen homeless hounds would you take them? Maybe you would but the hundreds of thousands of people screaming blue murder behind their keyboards would not. I have grown up in a racing family, my father was a bookmaker I am well aware of what goes on so what do I do? I have two adopted greys myself, have fostered many, have driven many miles doing transports of greys on death row in pounds, have done blanket and food drives for greyhound rescue orgs, organised fundraising events yet ask people that are screaming in capslock what THEY are going to do and its *crickets*. As Maddy posted "outrage is free, helping is not" I gave a guy in a pub on Friday a spray when I overheard a stupid comment and then walked away shaking my head, I'm sure they thought I was nuts as well. As I have always said the over breeding of greyhounds needs to stop that's JMO and yes....I am just venting a bit as well. I hear what you are saying..i was merely posing a question. The numbers of dogs is the problem that needs desperately to be addressed.. thank the gods that horses only have one foal. Yes outrage is free ... i have been involved with helping out at a local "shelter" where the person not only has greyhounds but also what she refers to as domnestics.. ie non greys hounds. The place is like some sort of dog hell. A friend and I would take it in turns to go outside and sob. and yes we have reported this and yes there has been some action but the person does not see this as anything other than persecution. on another tack read this article in the Australian Financial Review dated 7 april 2014. http://www.afr.com/p/lifestyle/sport/going_to_the_dogs_in_good_way_TyS5YOl2lG2gQb1xwMq8Nespecially here: ” The industry, however, has faced heavy criticism in recent times on animal welfare matters, with the ABC’s 7.30 making allegations late last year about widespread doping, animal cruelty and collusion in greyhound racing in NSW. yet the authorities continued to sweep this under the carpet.. and now we know why.. member of the board were also involved. H The industry probably does need to go (I can't see any reasonable way to ensure compliance on certain welfare issues) but the only way to do it- without landfill in Australia suddenly filling up with dead greyhounds- is for the sport to be slowly phased out. Ban any breeding, accept no new dog registrations after X date and allow the sport to die out by natural attrition, which could take a few years. The trouble is, a lot of people want some sort of immediate resolution and with tens of thousands of dogs to consider, that just isn't possible.