melzawelza

Yes I was at the vet about 3 months ago and a greyhound breeder bought in 8 dogs to be PTS and said they would prefer to do that than go anywhere near rescue.Turns out they also breed GSD and do the same with their ex breeders rather than have any attention on them for not keeping them. It happens all the time. The two biggest rescues in NSW, not GAP, are loathed by a large majority of trainers. Seems to me that if you want more breeders to hand over dogs to rescue for rehoming rather than quietly asking the vet to PTS then you cant have a situation where the people who are doing what you ask are beaten up and judged etc. Got it in one Devils advocate here - but there have been many times in the general pound/shelter situation whereby pounds are doing the wrong thing, rescues try and work with them and help them improve their practices with absolutely no joy and end up having to go public to finally bring about change. It's a legitimate technique if it's done well (note: death threats are not doing it well), but I guess in that case you're dealing with a government run facility that must account for the animals in their care, as opposed to individuals like Greyhound trainers that can just quietly take their dogs to the vet. Another reason why the industry is unsalvageable. Many many more Greyhounds than 15k per year would be killed? Really? I find that very hard to believe.

Suggestions that some of the dogs may have been beaten to death: Some of the 55 greyhounds in mass grave may have been beaten to death

Legally killed or illegally killed - the fact is the general public is just now really coming to understand the wastage of the Greyhound industry - and the voices that aren't okay with it are getting louder and louder. This is just another nail in the coffin.

Better idea to actually meet the dogs rather than making guesses on their behaviour based on the cross. Cross bred dogs are a lottery and can really turn out like anything.

Hi DanteAndMolly, Good outcome, and good for you for being so proactive. The attack is recorded on the NSW Companion Animals Register and your dog's microchip number will be entered in. This will then link the incident back to your dogs microchip, so when someone looks up the microchip the attack will be 'clickable' and they'll be able to see the details (which presumably will have information regarding no victim statement etc). It doesn't get erased and stays there forever. Personally if I didn't have a statement from a victim I'd be deleting the incident off the register as I don't have enough evidence, but I guess if there's a witness statement that it happened they may feel it necessary to keep it on there.

If their policies concern you, find a place where they'll happily toss the bull breeds in with the SWFs I hardly think that accepting bull breeds as boarders automatically equates to running them loose with small dogs. If their policies concern you, find a place where they'll happily toss the bull breeds in with the SWFs I think it was quite clear that mixing of dogs is something I want to avoid. If a kennel can't keep a DA bull breed away from my dog then they can't keep a DA dog of any breed away from my dog. A kennel not accepting specific breeds would not make me more likely to leave my dog there. Exactly.

Definitely a $ fine for dog unregistered. Not sure about the desexed thing. There are some council areas - mostly in Victoria that require a permit to own an undesexed dog. And many councils give a discount for a desexed dog (eg charge extra for an undesexed dog). In NSW - I think they still have "life time registration" for a dog. Not sure what happens if you move to a different council area if you have to re register for life time or you can just transfer. Or if they bother with discounts for desexed dogs. Eg if you buy a puppy that is whole - and you wait two years (maturity) to desex (based on current knowledge for best bone and joint development) - you'd want to register before the dog was 2 years old. You'd miss out on the discount. Lifetime registration stays with the dog through any council area throughout NSW - you don't have to re-register if you move. The legislation states that the dog must be registered from six months old, so if you haven't desexed them by then you're supposed to pay the non-desexed rego and there's no 'cashback'. Most councils are reasonable though and would allow you an extra month to get them done before rego if you contacted them to ask. No compulsory desex in all of NSW but there is a price differential. Desexed: $51 Non desexed: $188 Desexed owned by pensioner: $20 Non desexed owned by registered breeder $51 Sounds like a good outcome :)

Hi DanteandMolly I've worked in Animal Management investigating these types of incidents so will provide you with the info that I can. It's unlikely given there was no injury that a ranger will go for a Dangerous Dog declaration since the introduction of the 'menacing' dog category in Nov 2013: 33A Meaning of “menacing” and “menacing breed or kind of dog” (1) For the purposes of this Act, a dog is menacing if it: (a) has displayed unreasonable aggression towards a person or animal (other than vermin), or (b) has, without provocation, attacked a person or animal (other than vermin) but without causing serious injury or death. That last bit in bold tends to move rangers away from dangerous dog declarations these days unless there was at least some sort of serious injury OR repeated problems from the same dog. To be honest I think most reasonable rangers in this situation would issue you with a couple of fines and a nuisance order (which is basically a 6-month good behaviour bond) rather than anything more serious. Menacing is a potential, though, if they're more 'hardline'. I think the main thing you need to do which will give you the best chance of only minor action being taken is be able to show the ranger today the steps you have already taken towards ensuring your dog cannot escape again. Nothing impressed me more than when I would turn up a day or so after the attack and the owner had already put things in to place or at least got the wheels in motion to prevent it happening again without me having to have done anything yet. Maybe think about getting a roofed dog run for your dog so that it's unable to have access to the fenceline? Tell the ranger that you are keeping the dog inside the house until you can sort the problem. Don't blame the other dog owner - fact is your dog escaped your property and behaved aggressively towards another dog. Blaming the other owner usually gets rangers thinking that you aren't taking it seriously. The huge size difference between the dogs shows that your dog at least showed bite inhibition/self control. If it had wanted to seriously hurt the dog it would have - end of story. That's a good thing. Offer to provide to the ranger in writingthe action you're going to take and proof of it when it's done. Main thing I would say is have your plan in place for preventing further escapes already so you can tell it to the ranger when they arrive.

Hahaha, the comparison photo is the best!

Oh FFS, can't win with these idiot politicians. So now I've gotta choose between Tones and THIS!?

People down there have worked so, so hard to get to this point and put in so much blood, sweat, tears and cold hard cash of their own to see some big supreme court wins, which is what has prompted this. I'm so happy for them. I REALLY hope the enquiry is a good one, and sees the abolishment of BSL and the introduction of evidence based, effective breed neutral animal management laws. Has anyone got a link re Bill Shorten's comments?

That is out of this world. That poor dog! He's looking so much happier and healthier now. Great work by his new owner.

Oh he's gorgeous <3 Sonja at Fetching Dogs has a real soft spot for the Wolfie types. Not sure if they have room but worth a shot.

I understand what you're saying, and know that you guys are right in the thick of things. But I also think that fresh eyes can also do a world of good. It's possible for people to not be able to see the forest for the trees when in the thick of it. (Not saying this is you guys necessarily, I'm more talking generally). There are a lot of progressive movements in rescue on a whole and it's often the people that have been doing it for 20+ years that stay stuck in their ways and won't move forward, which is a detriment to the dogs. I see a lot of parallels between your dogs and my dogs. There were (and still are) people who say that banning dog fighting was the worst thing that could have been done for the dogs. Lots of dog fighters loved and looked after their dogs and kept them as pets. The dogs received veterinary care but are now much less likely to after the bans. The dogs ended up demonised in the media - BSL came in... There were definitely a lot of negatives for the dogs that came out of the banning of dog fighting as a sport. But there aren't too many people would argue now, 40+ years later, that dog fighting should still be legal because of those reasons. Anyway, at the end of the day all I was saying to you is that there are plenty of normal, non-crazy, non-AR nuts who would like to see an end to Greyhound racing, that don't threaten trainers, that won't attack you and other Grey rescuers etc etc. Your post stated that they don't exist.

There was discussion on this somewhere on FB and below is a rough list of concerns/questions that will need to be addressed- 1. How will the dog be housed? Tasmania can get really cold, especially down in the southern midlands. Dogs will need access to proper indoor areas in winter. 2. How many dogs will this facility hold? If they plan to take every dog offered, space for at least 200 dogs will be needed, along with exercise/day yards to accommodate that number. 3. Will day/exercise yards be graded/maintained for the safety of the dogs? Many greys are a bit clumsy at the best of times, allowing dogs to gallop in rocky paddocks could be costly at the vet. 4. How will the dogs be monitored when out in day/exercise yards? This applies especially if left out in pairs or groups. Muzzles will not prevent squabbles. 5. Assuming this is going to be a kennel situation, how will dogs actually be prepared for life in a home? This applies to housetraining, socialisation, etc. 6. Are the dogs going to be properly temperament and prey drive assessed by an experienced person? I've heard some very worrying stories about greys coming out of Brightside, lack of testing is going to prove entirely unsustainable very quickly, once untested dogs are being put out to the public in large numbers (and the inevitable problems start to occur). 7. What will happen to dogs that fail prey drive or temperament assessment? Will they be housed indefinitely in a shelter situation? If so, the shelter will need to expand on a regular basis to account for the growing number of dogs. 8. Assuming it will be larger numbers of dogs, how will it be managed to ensure individual welfare requirements are met? This especially applies for failed dogs where minimum standards of welfare are not sufficient to maintain the actual welfare. In such dogs, will there be plans in place to ensure their receive adequate mental/physically/social stimulation? 9. Given Animals Australia and Brightside are animal rights organisations, what will the dogs be eating? Vegan kibble? Regular kibble? Fresh meat? Assuming even a low quality kibble ($1.50 per dog/day), feed bills could easily run into the tens of thousands per year, possibly much higher. 10. Where will funding for their care come from? From my experience, each dog costs at least $500 to rehome and this is without any wages being paid and assuming the dog is rehomed within a few weeks of becoming available. To provide adequate care for each dog, there must be staff available to feed, water, exercise and provide social contact for each dog. Volunteers are great but cannot be relied upon for the daily care of the dogs. Considering costs of staff, food, preventative vet care (wormers, flea treatment, etc). I did some very quick numbers and assuming only two staff (working 8 hour days) and the dogs being fed a very basic food and receiving basic preventative vet care, the yearly running cost would be $222,856. This does not include routine vet work for each dog or things like beds, coats, toys, collars, leads, muzzles, emergency vet expenses or anything else. That number also does not include building or maintaining the kennels, power, water. It'd be difficult to calculate an actual number per year but it would probably be in the millions, if it's done properly. All valid concerns and will need to be addressed by the animal rights organisations in setting up and running this sanctuary, otherwise they themselves will be coming in for criticism. Labadore with respect these are not just concerns they are cold, hard facts. There is no room for "otherwise" when you propose to shut down an industry that has thousands of dogs that all of a sudden need somewhere to go and a good percentage of them are not rehomable. Please don't miscontrue my post just because we are on opposing sides of this debate . With regard to proposing to shutdown the industry, nowhere have I proposed that it be shutdown immediately. In fact, in some of my earlier posts, I have metioned that it should be shutdown over a period of time in a "phased-in" approach to avoid the issue of thousands of dogs being dumped at once by their so called "caring owners". Most rational thinking people who oppose the greyhound racing industry and want it shutdown, want it shutdown in a phased-in approach. I find it interesting that pro greyhound racing people like to insinuate that if the industry did shutdown, it would be immediately and this is obviously a "scaremongering" tactic aimed at anti greyhound racing people like myself, rather than applying commonsense and logic to their argument. Obviously pro greyhound racing people have a vested interest in this industry continuing, so I suppose it makes sense they use the arguments and scaremongering that they do to try and ensure its survival. Tis a shame that the killing and suffering of thousands of poor greyhounds in this industry will continue and don't rate a mention from the proponents of this awful industry. Who are these "rational" thinking people who oppose the greyhound racing industry you speak of? The ones that track down people IRL and threaten their families, make anonymous phone calls at 1am and say things like "watch your back scum" those ones? Like the charmer that told me yesterday to get a f*cking real job and stop using my greyhounds for profit, even though I had clearly written that I was in greyhound rescue, not a trainer or owner of racing greys. When I once again explained that fact I was then told that I really do want to get into the industry and that I am just a low piece of sh*t. The poster then deleted the whole thread, when they realize that they maybe god forbid wrong they delete and block. That's how they roll. Can you point out the rational part of that conversation? Scaremonger is a good word actually because that's what the anti extremists do best and as I have said a million times, their threats and intimidation of people makes them no better than the industry they so vehemently despise. HazyWal, it's obvious you've experienced some really shitty stuff, but there are plenty of rational people that would like to see the industry phased out for the welfare of the dogs involved. Unfortunately the crazies in any 'cause' are the loudest and most obvious and often drown out those trying to have a rational conversation.

I agree with you, I don't really think the article is denying that though. Severely dog aggressive dogs can be managed if the owner has realistic expectations (i.e doesn't expect the dog to have dog friends, keeps the dog leashed at all times (and muzzled if necessary), ensures the dog is well contained). Of course sometimes that management is very hard and overwhelming, particularly in busy inner-city living, and euthanasia is a valid decision to make. To the OP - *Most* purebred Amstaffs & Staffords are not Dog Aggressive, but many may be dog tolerant or dog selective (some will be dog social). This is not a problem in itself if you aren't expecting a dog to be best buds with every single dog it meets, to put up with rude behaviour from other dogs, or to go to the dog park and be thrown in with heaps of other dogs. There is a big size difference between an Amstaff and a Cairn and I probably wouldn't leave any dogs alone for extended periods of time unsupervised with such a size difference, regardless of breed, unless I knew the dogs very well. If being able to do all these things are super important to you AND you are set on getting a puppy, then it is probably better for you to get a different/smaller dog, just in case. Dog aggression is not limited to blockheads by any stretch, though - so if you got something the same size I would exercise the same caution with separating and you may still end up with issues. If you aren't set on a puppy, though, I really do recommend considering an adult dog (either breeder rehome or rescue) with known temperament. There are seriously huge amounts of SBT/Amstaff 'type' dogs in rescue that are dog social and would happily live with another dog, just like your previous dog. ETA: I wanted to stay away with personal anedcotes as it doesn't really mean much but seeing as you've got a lot of negatives in this thread I'll give you my positive - my rescued blockhead is 4yo, got her at 10months old from the pound. She is 100% dog social off the property. She can be a bit pushy and bitchy with dogs her size ON the property unless they're good 'buddies' already, but not aggressive. Small dogs and puppies at the property are totally fine. My housemate's parents little JR mix rescue comes over every Monday for playdates and they get on beautifully, even when the littley gets 'small dog sassy' with my girl.

Yes WIW, we all know how you feel about putting any effort in to help non-pedigree dogs caught up in this legislation. The fact is that we have been extremely successful with campaigns like this in the past, and I'm optimistic that we will be with this one, too. I'm having a teleconference with the council on Monday and the story should be running in two local papers in the next week or so which will increase pressure on the council. No they don't *have* to change their procedure, but for many councils it is easier to do so than bear the brunt of public outrage. This pound was killing 80+% of dogs and 99+% of cats only a few years ago, something they are well within their rights to do, but pressure from the public has seen them with much more acceptable stats these days. Of course, if everyone had your attitude then nothing would ever change. Luckily they don't. ETA: Actually, after the 7 or 14 days the Council or impounding facility becomes the owner, the dog is not 'ownerless'. The council can issue the NOI on themselves or the facility, which is was is done by Renbury Farm, Sutherland Shire, Hawkesbury, Blacktown, Wyong and Gosford (plus others). There is no obligation for them to kill a dog that has not been declared as restricted. Sure, they can kill it if they want to, just like any council can kill any dog after it's impound time is up. Whether the community accepts that it was appropriate to do so, and whether they decide that it's less hassle to just follow the process is another matter.

Sounds like Juno is dog social and Hunter is dog selective (maybe could become dog tolerant). BADRAP have a good article on this: http://www.badrap.org/dogdog-tolerance

All dogs are individuals, even within a breed, and dog social issues fall on a scale (dog social, dog tolerant, dog selective, dog aggressive). Most dogs fall in the middle with a smaller amount being totally dog aggressive or totally dog social. Of course the problem with getting a puppy is you don't know where on the scaLe it is going to end up. I'd recommend rescuing an adult dog that is known dog social/dog tolerant. There are plenty of SBT and Amstaff types in rescue that are great with other dogs.

An absolute waste It's hard to fathom how, when we offered to pay all fees associated with having her assessed, they still killed her the first second they had a chance to.

Some of the best news I've heard in a long time. Apparently Sue Conroy is gone too. Absolutely amazing. The LDH now has a chance to stop killing healthy and treatable pets. It will all depend on who replaces them.

So simple yet such a great idea. Love it

Purely personal opinion here but in the welfare work we do we see a lot of 'backyard breeders' (either intentional or accidental). I'd say on the whole those dogs are a hell of a lot better off than your average puppy farm, even the shiny clean ones. They may not be microchipped when they go half the time but at least they are usually being raised as part of a family away from concrete pens and sterile, understimulating environments. They're DEFINITELY better off than the hell hole puppy farms.

Team Dog is currently running a campaign in an attempt to push Wollondilly Pound (just south of Sydney) to adopt better, more humane practices for 'suspected restricted dogs' that come in to their care. This includes having the dogs breed assessed (and temp assessed if needed) while impounded to allow adoption if they pass. After a lot of locals advocating and struggling hard against this pound for the last few years the outcomes are typically very good for most pets coming in to the shelter, but remain abysmal for dogs that rangers arbitrarily label as 'pit bulls' or pit bull cross dogs. Read the full story as to Ruby and how obstructive the council has been with us here: Wollondilly pound - a case of discriminate killing Sign and share our petition which is putting a lot of pressure on the council to do better: Petition And if you can, email the GM and Councillors directly voicing your concerns and asking for the procedure we outline in the campaign. If you're a resident of the shire I can't stress enough how you making personal contact like that will have an impact.

Dogs can still enjoy racing as a hobby activity as opposed to a large scale gambling activity that has huge negative animal welfare rammifications. Lure coursing is becoming increasingly popular as a fun dog sport to do with your pet. Ending the racing industry doesn't mean that no greyhound will ever get a chance for the thrill of the chase.