Greyhound Carcasses Found In Bundaberg Bushland

[Steve]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

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.

[m-j]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

Because the law will say they need to be responsible and each dog will have a paper trail.

Edited April 5, 2015 by m-j

[Steve]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

Because the law will say they need to be responsible and each dog will have a paper trail.

But how will that stop owners opting to have the dog killed ?

[m-j]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

Because the law will say they need to be responsible and each dog will have a paper trail.

But how will that stop owners opting to have the dog killed ?

Because the law could state that they need to rehome their dog rather than op to euth their dog. I'm not naive enough to believe that all will adhere to the law but if they realise that there are severe consequences that will be dished out .i.e. if it costs a lot more to not obey the law than to foot the bill of looking after that dog until it is rehomed and the chances of them being monitored and caught are also in place, it will stop the majority.

Edited April 5, 2015 by m-j

[Rebanne]

I hope in the rush to ensure everything looks squeaky clean that dogs that never should be adopted out, aren't.

[Little Gifts]

m-j where the hell will 10 - 15,000 unwanted greys go every year? I think a law of that nature is bound for failure as there are simply not enough homes available for them all to go to. Perhaps some breeders will be forced to curb their breeding numbers if they already have a kennel full of duds looking for a home? But I say to you again that there are already laws in place for ALL dog owners and there are additional rules in place for dog breeders and conditions placed on anyone who is a member of a dog related activity and yet all these terrible things are still happening. No-one is policing these things now. These are the people who are ruining it for the entire industry because great trainers and breeders pale in comparison to the number of dodgy ones unfortunately. The majority you talk about now are the wrong doers and I don't think you can turn that around as the baddies will always look for ways around the rules. The industry has effectively killed itself at present (unless something radical comes about).

A couple of you have touched on the financial gains (or lack thereof) of the industry. So who is making the money off these dogs? The punters? Trainers? Breeders? Owners? It sounds all so lucrative but I still can't see the pecking order? With horse racing I'm thinking it would be the owners up top (prize money and status) but with dogs it seems different.

[labadore]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

Because the law will say they need to be responsible and each dog will have a paper trail.

But how will that stop owners opting to have the dog killed ?

Because the law could state that they need to rehome their dog rather than op to euth their dog. I'm not naive enough to believe that all will adhere to the law but if they realise that there are severe consequences that will be dished out .i.e. if it costs a lot more to not obey the law than to foot the bill of looking after that dog until it is rehomed and the chances of them being monitored and caught are also in place, it will stop the majority.

How will that work as currently any dog owner can opt to have their dog euthanised, irrespective of their age, health, condition or breed, so I cannot see how they can make a law to make it illegal for just greyhounds to be euthanised. If they did make this law you are proposing, how on earth will be it monitored and policed, given estimates of say 15,000 - 18,000 greyhounds are born each year into the industry. The current rules and regulations are not being enforced, so I cannot see any new ones being enforced. The greyhound racing industry will just carry on as they have for many years with financial considerations of the industry being placed ahead of the welfare of the greyhounds.

With regards to removing the gambling/betting from the industry and running the industry as a hobby/sport mentioned in some posts, how will this work given the industry revolves around gambling and betting with billions of dollars involved annually and propped up by the state governments as millions of dollars are poured into government coffers from greyound racing annually. The owners that race their greyhounds as a "hobby/sport" are in the minority and may only own one or a couple of greyhounds and are small fish in a big pond of big players who are responsible for breeding and killing thousands of greyhounds each year.

The old argument for keeping the industry going to avoid thousands of greyhounds being killed if the industry were to be shutdown, needs to be questioned as currently thousands are being killed each year anyway and extremely low numbers are being rehomed , so how many of the 15,000-18,000 greyhounds born each year in this industry are actually surviving anyway, to justify keeping the industry going?

[Steve]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

Because the law will say they need to be responsible and each dog will have a paper trail.

But how will that stop owners opting to have the dog killed ?

Because the law could state that they need to rehome their dog rather than op to euth their dog. I'm not naive enough to believe that all will adhere to the law but if they realise that there are severe consequences that will be dished out .i.e. if it costs a lot more to not obey the law than to foot the bill of looking after that dog until it is rehomed and the chances of them being monitored and caught are also in place, it will stop the majority.

Sorry there isnt a snowball's chance in hell that any law will be able to tell someone who owns a dog that they cant opt to have it PTS .You can introduce laws re having vets do the job and you can have guidelines which give a nudge for no bumping them off and rehoming them instead but its just never going to happen.

[Rebanne]

A couple of you have touched on the financial gains (or lack thereof) of the industry. So who is making the money off these dogs? The punters? Trainers? Breeders? Owners? It sounds all so lucrative but I still can't see the pecking order? With horse racing I'm thinking it would be the owners up top (prize money and status) but with dogs it seems different.

Educated guess, it's the big trainers, who have many dogs racing each week. The hobby trainer who may race one one or two dogs every couple of weeks aren't. A lot of dogs are trained for a percentage of the win. ETA Horse owners don't make much money either unless they have a pretty good one. They are in the same boat as the dogs, just not quite as easily disposed off.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Rebanne

[Steve]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

Because the law will say they need to be responsible and each dog will have a paper trail.

But how will that stop owners opting to have the dog killed ?

Because the law could state that they need to rehome their dog rather than op to euth their dog. I'm not naive enough to believe that all will adhere to the law but if they realise that there are severe consequences that will be dished out .i.e. if it costs a lot more to not obey the law than to foot the bill of looking after that dog until it is rehomed and the chances of them being monitored and caught are also in place, it will stop the majority.

How will that work as currently any dog owner can opt to have their dog euthanised, irrespective of their age, health, condition or breed, so I cannot see how they can make a law to make it illegal for just greyhounds to be euthanised. If they did make this law you are proposing, how on earth will be it monitored and policed, given estimates of say 15,000 - 18,000 greyhounds are born each year into the industry. The current rules and regulations are not being enforced, so I cannot see any new ones being enforced. The greyhound racing industry will just carry on as they have for many years with financial considerations of the industry being placed ahead of the welfare of the greyhounds.

With regards to removing the gambling/betting from the industry and running the industry as a hobby/sport mentioned in some posts, how will this work given the industry revolves around gambling and betting with billions of dollars involved annually and propped up by the state governments as millions of dollars are poured into government coffers from greyound racing annually. The owners that race their greyhounds as a "hobby/sport" are in the minority and may only own one or a couple of greyhounds and are small fish in a big pond of big players who are responsible for breeding and killing thousands of greyhounds each year.

The old argument for keeping the industry going to avoid thousands of greyhounds being killed if the industry were to be shutdown, needs to be questioned as currently thousands are being killed each year anyway and extremely low numbers are being rehomed , so how many of the 15,000-18,000 greyhounds born each year in this industry are actually surviving anyway, to justify keeping the industry going?

How do you know owners who do this as a hobby are in the minority/ Where are the stats? When you say the industry is propped up by state government - how? How do individual owners and trainer become rewarded by the state government for breeding and training and racing these dogs? I genuinely dont know these things but it would seem to me the big money would be in the dollars they can ask for stud fees and puppies out of certain sire's and dams or those which have a proven track record - with some prize money chucked in - but where does the prize money come from - is it truly the state governments?

[Maddy]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

Because the law will say they need to be responsible and each dog will have a paper trail.

But how will that stop owners opting to have the dog killed ?

Because the law could state that they need to rehome their dog rather than op to euth their dog. I'm not naive enough to believe that all will adhere to the law but if they realise that there are severe consequences that will be dished out .i.e. if it costs a lot more to not obey the law than to foot the bill of looking after that dog until it is rehomed and the chances of them being monitored and caught are also in place, it will stop the majority.

Sorry there isnt a snowball's chance in hell that any law will be able to tell someone who owns a dog that they cant opt to have it PTS .You can introduce laws re having vets do the job and you can have guidelines which give a nudge for no bumping them off and rehoming them instead but its just never going to happen.

You can, however, introduce new rules to your association that members must abide by.

As I mentioned previously, it is not against the law to shoot a greyhound but it is against Greyhounds Australasia rules and the consequences can be very serious.

What is needed (for the association) is an independent body to oversee disciplinary processes- people who do not profit from the industry in any way.

[HazyWal]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

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.

[Maddy]

How do you know owners who do this as a hobby are in the minority/ Where are the stats? When you say the industry is propped up by state government - how? How do individual owners and trainer become rewarded by the state government for breeding and training and racing these dogs? I genuinely dont know these things but it would seem to me the big money would be in the dollars they can ask for stud fees and puppies out of certain sire's and dams or those which have a proven track record - with some prize money chucked in - but where does the prize money come from - is it truly the state governments?

I can only speak for Tasmania but down here, I'd say hobby trainers make up the majority.

We do have several big trainers (Bullock, Johnson, Medhurst, etc) and between them, those trainers have the majority of dogs but there are many more small trainers than there are big trainers. Most of my dogs come from trainers who have two or three dog runs down the back of their yard and usually only have a couple of dogs at any one time.

Prize money comes from a variety of places- some comes from gambling, some comes from sponsors/advertising, some comes from government and some comes from members fees.

[Little Gifts]

Obviously a percentage of funds raised through gambling comes back into state government coffers (here in QLD anyway) and it is then given out as grants to non-profit groups. It is a relatively new thing though - maybe only over the last 10 years? There are always more applicants than money.

But the QLD government did approve over $12 million in funding for a new greyhound racing track in Logan March last year(currently under fire for obvious reasons) as part of his $110 million Racing Industry Capitol Development Scheme. Have a read what Newman was happy to spend money on when he sacked so many public servants and ceased funding so many community services.

http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/2014/3/15/new-greyhound-racing-track-at-logan-gets-green-light

[WreckitWhippet]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

Because the law will say they need to be responsible and each dog will have a paper trail.

GRA already has a paper trail. Any retired Grey must be accounted for.

If you want to bring in legislation that requires a paper trail for dogs, then this must apply to everyone. All breeders, owners, trainers and the general public. What's good for the goose is good for the gander and this includes the thousands of "pet" owners that dump and or dispose of their animals .

[m-j]

m-j where the hell will 10 - 15,000 unwanted greys go every year? I think a law of that nature is bound for failure as there are simply not enough homes available for them all to go to. Perhaps some breeders will be forced to curb their breeding numbers if they already have a kennel full of duds looking for a home? But I say to you again that there are already laws in place for ALL dog owners and there are additional rules in place for dog breeders and conditions placed on anyone who is a member of a dog related activity and yet all these terrible things are still happening. No-one is policing these things now. These are the people who are ruining it for the entire industry because great trainers and breeders pale in comparison to the number of dodgy ones unfortunately. The majority you talk about now are the wrong doers and I don't think you can turn that around as the baddies will always look for ways around the rules. The industry has effectively killed itself at present (unless something radical comes about).

A couple of you have touched on the financial gains (or lack thereof) of the industry. So who is making the money off these dogs? The punters? Trainers? Breeders? Owners? It sounds all so lucrative but I still can't see the pecking order? With horse racing I'm thinking it would be the owners up top (prize money and status) but with dogs it seems different.

Good dogs do make lots of money but they are a very very very small %. This why slow dogs are destroyed to make room for the next Brett Lee hopeful. For those that don't know Brett Lee is the worlds fastest Greyhound, his service fee (straws) was $32,000 last time I looked, not to mention what he actually won for his owners. Thousands of offspring over many years but none are as good as dad. It is very hard to get a good dog, but that doesn't stop people from trying because if they do make it financially it is worth it, at least the unprofitable dogs won't die if legislation is introduced and the industry is monitored and policed, by an independent body.

[WreckitWhippet]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

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.

They are viewed as the enemy and with suspicion and rightly so by owners and trainers.

[Steve]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

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.

[WreckitWhippet]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

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

[mita]

You can, however, introduce new rules to your association that members must abide by.

As I mentioned previously, it is not against the law to shoot a greyhound but it is against Greyhounds Australasia rules and the consequences can be very serious.

What is needed (for the association) is an independent body to oversee disciplinary processes- people who do not profit from the industry in any way.

Yes to this. Clearly defined ethical guidelines that members of an association must follow. With real monitoring & real consequences for breaches. Good, too, the recommendation about independent overseeing.

Certain actions may not be unlawful, but according to the agreed-on values of an association, they are not tolerated when done by its members. Which is why I've been trying to find a clear set of ethical guidelines laid down by the greyhound racing clubs in the eastern states. I have found 'committees' charged with ethical scrutiny. But I'm trying to find 'scrutiny' of precisely what. Does anyone know?

Any such ethical guidelines for greyhound racing will need to take into consideration, the changing public expectations about how dogs should be treated. After all, the continuance of greyhound racing is linked with public support. There's been changes over recent decades in how police & military dogs are raised and dealt with. Even tho' they're 'working dogs', they now fit into the 'dog as companion' value.

Edited April 5, 2015 by mita