Sheridan

Given how things have gone so far, I'm going with the latter.

If this 'fact sheet' is the best they can come up with I don't think they will convince anyone! Just the first few things to jump out at me are 'We already know injuries and litters are just a fraction of what was guessed during the Inquiry' Since when is 'We already know' evidence of anything? Who already knows, how do they already know? What evidence is there that "they" know anything? What "fraction" was it? The fraction could be 99% of what was guessed, it is still a fraction. This isn't a fact at all yet they have it listed on a fact sheet. Anyone can read a report and say 'I already know this is wrong', that doesn't prove anything as fact. 'The figure of "50-70%" of greyhound pups being euthanised is a fabrication, with less than one-tenth of that number being the actual figure - and most of that figure is for illness, old age and other' Even if they were going to prove that the actual figure is less than one-tenth... they have just claimed that some of the greyhound PUPS euthanised were done so for reason of old age. Not a great way to state something as fact. 'Many rehomed greyhounds were previously counted as part of 'wastage' when they were actually healthy and happy pets' How many is 'many'? 1,000? 15? It's just a meaningless thing to say, the word 'many' is completely subjective. Looks like you can't read. They're saying that most greyhounds have died of old age, they were not killed. I have heaps of old greyhounds here, I am like most people in the industry, we prefer to keep our old greyhounds for ourselves as pets, we don't like giving away older greyhounds to rehoming groups. Plus, when people try to give older greyhounds to rehoming groups (I know for a fact, because I've been trying to save other trainer's retired greyhounds by helping to rehome them and their older greyhounds were always knocked back by these rehoming groups apparently because people don't want old greyhounds, they want cute puppies or young greyhounds. Just yesterday I asked a rescuer group if they could help my mum rehome 7 of the pet greyhounds (aged between 5 to 11) because the owner died 2 weeks ago of lung cancer and my mum is too ill to take them on herself due to her age, and the rescuer group said they can only help with the younger greys because they find them easier to rehome.) If you look on my FB page friends list, you would see hundreds of them posting on their own walls, pics of their old greys lazing about on their lounge in the house. Most of these friends have between 1 to 18 pet greyhounds EACH. They've never given them away to be rehomed. This is why you don't see many older greyhounds in full sight, because trainers don't generally take them all out for walks in public. I certainly have never taken any of my 8 retired greys out in public as I don't trust the off leash/uncontrolled dogs (esp pitbull types, staffy types, doberman types, german shepherd types etc ) as so many pet owners are just plain irresponsible and don't care about training their pet dogs to be good dogs. Years ago a unleashed Doberman took off from his owners while walking along a highway and he crossed the highway to charge at me walking my 3 greyhounds and it was only my frantic screams while I was trying to get the muzzles off my greys so they could defend themselves against this raving 50kgs monster, that brought a passerby to my rescue with a big stick to beat off the Doberman. He was still trying to mouth at my little grey's throat and I was screaming at the stupid owners to pull the dog off, they finally managed to pull him off but told me off for having greyhounds even though mine were on leads and muzzled.They didn't see anything wrong with their dog charging at my dogs unprovoked. This is just one of the few incidents that's happened to me so 10 years ago I quit taking my greyhounds out in public and just preferred to let them potter on my acreage and gallop about in my paddock. They're happy and safe. And certainly living a longer life not being mauled every day by irresponsible owners' dogs. Ahh, I'm actually quite glad you explained that to me. I thought I was pointing out what nonsense it was that they used the term 'greyhound PUPS' (a pup being a young dog) and then said they had died of old age. But you must be right, the actual problem is that I don't know how to read. What a terrible shame it is that my illiteracy has stopped me from bothering with the utter drivel that was the rest of your post The rest of the post was (a) about dogs being attacked, (b) about people keeping their old greyhounds and © about rescue groups not wanting old dogs. Hardly drivel. I don't walk my greyhounds around the streets either, too many twits and nasty dogs. Exactly. Lisa may not be illiterate but her comprehension skills need some work.

If this 'fact sheet' is the best they can come up with I don't think they will convince anyone! Just the first few things to jump out at me are 'We already know injuries and litters are just a fraction of what was guessed during the Inquiry' Since when is 'We already know' evidence of anything? Who already knows, how do they already know? What evidence is there that "they" know anything? What "fraction" was it? The fraction could be 99% of what was guessed, it is still a fraction. This isn't a fact at all yet they have it listed on a fact sheet. Anyone can read a report and say 'I already know this is wrong', that doesn't prove anything as fact. 'The figure of "50-70%" of greyhound pups being euthanised is a fabrication, with less than one-tenth of that number being the actual figure - and most of that figure is for illness, old age and other' Even if they were going to prove that the actual figure is less than one-tenth... they have just claimed that some of the greyhound PUPS euthanised were done so for reason of old age. Not a great way to state something as fact. 'Many rehomed greyhounds were previously counted as part of 'wastage' when they were actually healthy and happy pets' How many is 'many'? 1,000? 15? It's just a meaningless thing to say, the word 'many' is completely subjective. Looks like you can't read. They're saying that most greyhounds have died of old age, they were not killed. I have heaps of old greyhounds here, I am like most people in the industry, we prefer to keep our old greyhounds for ourselves as pets, we don't like giving away older greyhounds to rehoming groups. Plus, when people try to give older greyhounds to rehoming groups (I know for a fact, because I've been trying to save other trainer's retired greyhounds by helping to rehome them and their older greyhounds were always knocked back by these rehoming groups apparently because people don't want old greyhounds, they want cute puppies or young greyhounds. Just yesterday I asked a rescuer group if they could help my mum rehome 7 of the pet greyhounds (aged between 5 to 11) because the owner died 2 weeks ago of lung cancer and my mum is too ill to take them on herself due to her age, and the rescuer group said they can only help with the younger greys because they find them easier to rehome.) If you look on my FB page friends list, you would see hundreds of them posting on their own walls, pics of their old greys lazing about on their lounge in the house. Most of these friends have between 1 to 18 pet greyhounds EACH. They've never given them away to be rehomed. This is why you don't see many older greyhounds in full sight, because trainers don't generally take them all out for walks in public. I certainly have never taken any of my 8 retired greys out in public as I don't trust the off leash/uncontrolled dogs (esp pitbull types, staffy types, doberman types, german shepherd types etc ) as so many pet owners are just plain irresponsible and don't care about training their pet dogs to be good dogs. Years ago a unleashed Doberman took off from his owners while walking along a highway and he crossed the highway to charge at me walking my 3 greyhounds and it was only my frantic screams while I was trying to get the muzzles off my greys so they could defend themselves against this raving 50kgs monster, that brought a passerby to my rescue with a big stick to beat off the Doberman. He was still trying to mouth at my little grey's throat and I was screaming at the stupid owners to pull the dog off, they finally managed to pull him off but told me off for having greyhounds even though mine were on leads and muzzled.They didn't see anything wrong with their dog charging at my dogs unprovoked. This is just one of the few incidents that's happened to me so 10 years ago I quit taking my greyhounds out in public and just preferred to let them potter on my acreage and gallop about in my paddock. They're happy and safe. And certainly living a longer life not being mauled every day by irresponsible owners' dogs. Ahh, I'm actually quite glad you explained that to me. I thought I was pointing out what nonsense it was that they used the term 'greyhound PUPS' (a pup being a young dog) and then said they had died of old age. But you must be right, the actual problem is that I don't know how to read. What a terrible shame it is that my illiteracy has stopped me from bothering with the utter drivel that was the rest of your post The rest of the post was (a) about dogs being attacked, (b) about people keeping their old greyhounds and © about rescue groups not wanting old dogs.

'Greyhound racing means racing between greyhounds in competitive pursuit of an artificial lure and includes, I) a greyhound trial or training race and II) racing in a test of speed of a greyhound or of greyhounds competing separately.

Steve, by the wording in the legislation people who get their dogs to chase a lure are caught by it, including those who lure course greyhounds.

May be a strange question...do you think that those highly competative in your sport could potentially be doing exactly the same as they do in Greyhound racing to improve performance? About as likely as flyballers doing the same to improve their dogs desire to get the ball ..... In other words, just not going to happen. Flyballers get a ball, lure coursing dogs chase a lure - it's quite different isn't it? Live baiting would work for lure coursing and not for fly ball? Lure coursing and the potential for live baiting in it has been covered by the very people who do it and they have extended an invitation to those who would like to know more about it to go out there and actually see it in action. They have explained why it can't happen and they know the people who are active in the community for it. If you don't like what they have had to say about it take them on their word, go out there and have a look at the activity. --Lhok I was just asking a question actually, not making a statement or accusing anyone of anything. I've lure coursed before and I can see the potential of live baiting in it, so I wanted to ask. It's certainly not an impossible scenario, no different to Greyhounds, I''m sure that started off pretty quietly too and no one told anyone what they were doing to gain a competitive edge. When there is a potential for something and then someone says it's impossible that takes away their credibility. You know you're doing exactly the same as the report writers except yours comes across, with your 'I'm just asking', as artless and suggestive.

You know that the muzzling requirements are already BSL? Why should Greyhounds be subject to Breed Specific Legislation, particularly once they will no longer be being bred for the purposes of racing and live baited? Because greyhounds have a higher prey drive than many other breeds, regardless of baiting or training, and there is a percentage that will see small dogs as prey. It's not discrimination, it's a breed trait. I have owned greys with very high drive (and still do) and while they are lovely dogs with people and larger dogs, they absolutely would kill something small and fluffy if they got the chance. Part of being a responsible owner is recognising and managing breed traits- pretending they don't exist does the breed no favours. Prey drive is a *dog* trait, and not exclusive to any one breed. There are many breeds that have a higher potential for prey drive, and many dogs within many breeds that have a high prey drive. There are plenty of dogs of all breeds that will kill other dogs for non-prey drive reasons too. Breed Specific Legislation has been shown time and time again to be a complete failure in preventing dog attacks. Adequate and well resourced animal management and education programs are what is effective. Roughly 25% of greys are not small dog safe. Let one of those dogs off lead at a park with a small dog and you'll have a dead small dog in less time than it takes you to realise what is happening. If your greyhound is muzzled and on leash, it can't chase down, grab and shake to death someone else's pet. Muzzling/leashing greyhounds is in no way similar to BSL for things like bull breeds. Muzzling/leashing is for their safety and the safety of other dogs/cats/small animals. In a perfect world, everyone would be sensible and responsible but back here in reality, greyhounds could be at risk of actual BSL if ignorant idiots are allowed to let their greys run unmuzzled and offlead. I know you don't understand the issue with greyhounds all that well (given you've had this same argument with Hazywal before) but if you're keen to find out for yourself, you're welcome to have one of my high drive fosters for a few weeks >.> (That is a serious offer, by the way. Nothing educates quite like the sight of your dog chasing down and destroying someone else's dog, while the attacked dog's owner screams for it to stop) Roughly 25 per cent of statistics are made up. Prove I'm wrong.

You know that the muzzling requirements are already BSL? Why should Greyhounds be subject to Breed Specific Legislation, particularly once they will no longer be being bred for the purposes of racing and live baited? Isn't this legislation BSL?

The legislation didn't take into account lure coursing but greyhounds that lure course seem to be caught in it. Doesn't mean there won't be subsequent legislation that covers it.

Very happy about this yet your next sentence is lots of dogs are going to be destroyed. There is no plan in place as yet. Maybe in 3 months according to the Government. What happens to all the greys in Vic, for example, waiting their turn to go into GAP or rescue? Will they be displaced by NSW dogs? Are all the bleeding hearts a suitable home for a greyhound? I'd suggest no. It's not as if they couldn't have adopted a greyhound previously so why didn't they? Cause they don't want one. The homes aren't there. The ANKC world had better hope eyes aren't turned their way, after all they have a few bad eggs who do the wrong thing, much like the greyhound world. And look at what has happened to Greyhounds NSW. The AR whackadoodles don't care if all the greyhounds get euthed. I've seen that in posts on Twitter.

Umm, You don't have to sleep with them. There IS NO Separation of breeder practices by group. No group can ever be exempt from poor practice. No group can ever say sh*t doesn't happen in 'My' space. To insist Pedigree breeders have a 'different' space will see pedigree dogs ( and others) eventualy, go the same way as as the greyhound industry. No doubt. In accepting that all DOGS and BREEDERS have equal legitimacy to Man and his communities, the focus shifts from 'Groups' or environments, back to individuals and their own practices, where it belongs. Does this PERSON live up to the expectations of our community? Forget your 'own' space for that. Doesn't matter if a person lives up to K.C expectations if they are not also community expectations. With SHARED environment, conversation can shift to those values and practices, ( not groups ) that bring bring best results for Dogs and the communities they live in. Bringing shared responsibility of communities, A better educated and informed public. Puppy farms would fail on the expectations of a more responsible and informed public. Its the way to ensure puppy farms DON"T succeed hobby/enthusiast breeders. The way its going ATM, Puppy farms and commercial breeders have all the advantage available. Its a matter of Saving pedigree dogs, and domestic dogs in general. I find it very hard to respect a group that would rather 'die' and destroy a welcoming, valued space for dogs for every one, than change a belief that only a 'pedigree' can give a dog, a breeder or an owner validity. That superiority of pedigrees is a given, regardless of practice and environmental purpose. Thats what it amounts to. Any body claiming to be FOR dogs has a responsibility to shape and form those expectations. For dogs. Or they fail dogs at the most basic level. Its very unlikely puppy farms would ever have become an issue if the premier Breeder bodies had accepted in the 1st place that they are not THE environment for dog breeders, just one of many with a responsibility to the communities that support them to demonstrate value. A responsibility to a healthier environment than whats been left in their wake with a belief superiority is in a pedigree, not a dog or its purpose and values to its own space . You think your 'Group space' can single handedley meet community expectations, for all of us, go for it, But you will be judged by the worst, as a group. You fail my expectations. I have lost hope for my breed, along with most anyone who valued them for their purpose. Oh, right, your incomprehensible posts have actually been about you. Gee, sorry about not wanting to be likened to BYBs and puppyfarmers. Guess your expectations were always going to be dashed on the rocks of other people's ethics. So who coined those terms to be used as a comparison of 'Group"? You want to be seen as some thing 'Other' then don't complain when you are seen and judged as some thing 'Other'. Like the greyhound racing industry. Some thing 'Other', so its loss won't be missed by most. My breed means nothing to you. The value buyers look to find in breeds means nothing to you. Only the 'standard' minus any value that might be sought out side a show ring. Yes, thats the point isn't it? That the environmental expectations that drive development of a species (or breed) are always going to be dashed on the rocks of some 'OTHER' ethics, while those are defined by pedigrees, not practices. Or purpose. Not realities out side a show or trial ring. No value in that for me, and increasingly, no value in that for any one else either. A reduction to the lowest common denominator. The Standard alone, not the values it was built on. Till collapse. But you cling to this idea you are victims of your environment, Some thing 'Other' So you don't have to take responsibility for what the environment IS, or what it throws at you. IN ENGLISH. Get a dictionary. Oh just stop it. You write in this stupid academic claptrap, whine on about people not wanting to get into bed with BYB and puppyfarmers and when you're called on both, start talking about how it's all about your breed. Why do you even bother. No, don't answer because if you wanted people to follow your crap you'd have written it without all the stupid 'OTHER, 'environment', and 'value' nonsense. I really don't care anymore which is a pity because I actually think you're trying to say something.

Very happy about this yet your next sentence is lots of dogs are going to be destroyed.

Umm, You don't have to sleep with them. There IS NO Separation of breeder practices by group. No group can ever be exempt from poor practice. No group can ever say sh*t doesn't happen in 'My' space. To insist Pedigree breeders have a 'different' space will see pedigree dogs ( and others) eventualy, go the same way as as the greyhound industry. No doubt. In accepting that all DOGS and BREEDERS have equal legitimacy to Man and his communities, the focus shifts from 'Groups' or environments, back to individuals and their own practices, where it belongs. Does this PERSON live up to the expectations of our community? Forget your 'own' space for that. Doesn't matter if a person lives up to K.C expectations if they are not also community expectations. With SHARED environment, conversation can shift to those values and practices, ( not groups ) that bring bring best results for Dogs and the communities they live in. Bringing shared responsibility of communities, A better educated and informed public. Puppy farms would fail on the expectations of a more responsible and informed public. Its the way to ensure puppy farms DON"T succeed hobby/enthusiast breeders. The way its going ATM, Puppy farms and commercial breeders have all the advantage available. Its a matter of Saving pedigree dogs, and domestic dogs in general. I find it very hard to respect a group that would rather 'die' and destroy a welcoming, valued space for dogs for every one, than change a belief that only a 'pedigree' can give a dog, a breeder or an owner validity. That superiority of pedigrees is a given, regardless of practice and environmental purpose. Thats what it amounts to. Any body claiming to be FOR dogs has a responsibility to shape and form those expectations. For dogs. Or they fail dogs at the most basic level. Its very unlikely puppy farms would ever have become an issue if the premier Breeder bodies had accepted in the 1st place that they are not THE environment for dog breeders, just one of many with a responsibility to the communities that support them to demonstrate value. A responsibility to a healthier environment than whats been left in their wake with a belief superiority is in a pedigree, not a dog or its purpose and values to its own space . You think your 'Group space' can single handedley meet community expectations, for all of us, go for it, But you will be judged by the worst, as a group. You fail my expectations. I have lost hope for my breed, along with most anyone who valued them for their purpose. Oh, right, your incomprehensible posts have actually been about you. Gee, sorry about not wanting to be likened to BYBs and puppyfarmers. Guess your expectations were always going to be dashed on the rocks of other people's ethics. So who coined those terms to be used as a comparison of 'Group"? You want to be seen as some thing 'Other' then don't complain when you are seen and judged as some thing 'Other'. Like the greyhound racing industry. Some thing 'Other', so its loss won't be missed by most. My breed means nothing to you. The value buyers look to find in breeds means nothing to you. Only the 'standard' minus any value that might be sought out side a show ring. Yes, thats the point isn't it? That the environmental expectations that drive development of a species (or breed) are always going to be dashed on the rocks of some 'OTHER' ethics, while those are defined by pedigrees, not practices. Or purpose. Not realities out side a show or trial ring. No value in that for me, and increasingly, no value in that for any one else either. A reduction to the lowest common denominator. The Standard alone, not the values it was built on. Till collapse. But you cling to this idea you are victims of your environment, Some thing 'Other' So you don't have to take responsibility for what the environment IS, or what it throws at you. IN ENGLISH.

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? Ahem. That is my research you are talking about that they are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on. Obviously I can't be objective on this issue seeing as I lost a lot of sleep over securing that tender and getting the project off the ground, and it seems like it might all be for nothing if other states don't pitch in to keep the study going. Nonetheless, I can assure you that it's not expensive smoke and mirrors. There are actual research agreements with milestones that must be met for the funding to keep flowing, and I don't get paid if the funding stops. *snip* It's expensive when it was never intended to really be used in any meaningful way. You, and whoever else was involved, were paid to make it look like the industry cared and wanted to fix all its problems. And this is not just my opinion, it's all public record now. That doesn't mean the research can't be applied elsewhere but let's not pretend that GRNSW were actually looking to make meaningful changes. Because the public can never be wrong. Presumably you can never be wrong either. How nice that you're so assured about that. I smell the whiff of fanaticism.

Looks like anyone wanting to lure course their pet greyhound in NSW is stuffed.

Umm, You don't have to sleep with them. There IS NO Separation of breeder practices by group. No group can ever be exempt from poor practice. No group can ever say sh*t doesn't happen in 'My' space. To insist Pedigree breeders have a 'different' space will see pedigree dogs ( and others) eventualy, go the same way as as the greyhound industry. No doubt. In accepting that all DOGS and BREEDERS have equal legitimacy to Man and his communities, the focus shifts from 'Groups' or environments, back to individuals and their own practices, where it belongs. Does this PERSON live up to the expectations of our community? Forget your 'own' space for that. Doesn't matter if a person lives up to K.C expectations if they are not also community expectations. With SHARED environment, conversation can shift to those values and practices, ( not groups ) that bring bring best results for Dogs and the communities they live in. Bringing shared responsibility of communities, A better educated and informed public. Puppy farms would fail on the expectations of a more responsible and informed public. Its the way to ensure puppy farms DON"T succeed hobby/enthusiast breeders. The way its going ATM, Puppy farms and commercial breeders have all the advantage available. Its a matter of Saving pedigree dogs, and domestic dogs in general. I find it very hard to respect a group that would rather 'die' and destroy a welcoming, valued space for dogs for every one, than change a belief that only a 'pedigree' can give a dog, a breeder or an owner validity. That superiority of pedigrees is a given, regardless of practice and environmental purpose. Thats what it amounts to. Any body claiming to be FOR dogs has a responsibility to shape and form those expectations. For dogs. Or they fail dogs at the most basic level. Its very unlikely puppy farms would ever have become an issue if the premier Breeder bodies had accepted in the 1st place that they are not THE environment for dog breeders, just one of many with a responsibility to the communities that support them to demonstrate value. A responsibility to a healthier environment than whats been left in their wake with a belief superiority is in a pedigree, not a dog or its purpose and values to its own space . You think your 'Group space' can single handedley meet community expectations, for all of us, go for it, But you will be judged by the worst, as a group. You fail my expectations. I have lost hope for my breed, along with most anyone who valued them for their purpose. Oh, right, your incomprehensible posts have actually been about you. Gee, sorry about not wanting to be likened to BYBs and puppyfarmers. Guess your expectations were always going to be dashed on the rocks of other people's ethics.

Hi Sheridan, Sorry, I was typing fast lol Feel free to use the edit feature.

Hi Mystify, I'm interested in your posts but haven't read them. Why? Because you and paragraphing don't seem to be friends. If you want people, particularly on mobile devices, to read your posts then please use your return key liberally.

Are they using virtual fencing on the UNE smart farm? There were some discussions around that, I think, but I don't recall if the fences were installed. Why the Vic ban?

What sort of regulation changes? Ag or comms?

So, pedigree breeders should get into bed with commercial puppyfarmers because only a few puppyfarmers are bad? Uh, no thanks.

Were they as quick to highlight the daily grooming requirements, too?

I thought Dog Lovers was for purebreds not crossbreeds?

People will recall the story of the dog tied up outside a shop. Someone stole, not the dog, but the lead. Dog went out onto the road and was hit by a car. This isn't victim blaming, it's ensuring your dog is safe from harm.

Any larger low shedding breeds that make good family pets ? I'm thinking Standard Poodle, Airedale,or are they ""Too much dog'' for joe public average family. St.Poo, Portie, IWS, then a little more on the medium size Lagotto, Puli A few other low or non shedders.......afghan, beardie, OES, Bouvier ....... They're all high maintenance coats, and most are very to very very active. Some would make great family pets depending on the level of dedication Airedale shed a bit, not like a Lab, but they do shed fairly. Other large wire coat Deerhound, Wolfhound, Irish Terrier. My sister's Irish terrier shed a lot.