Greyhound Carcasses Found In Bundaberg Bushland

[The Spotted Devil]

And the irony is that about 35% of a race horse's speed can be attributed to genetics. The rest is training, nutrition, health and nutrition of the pregnant bitch, etc etc. I imagine it's similar in dogs. A friend and I will be watching his recent litter of working Gundogs closely - they have all gone to top trainers so it will be interesting to debate nature vs nurture.

Edited April 7, 2015 by The Spotted Devil

[Greyt]

You're forgetting that the racing was based on something else to start with. Do I think people would set up elaborate underground race tracks? No. I think people would turn back to live coursing. It was a "truer" test of the dogs to start with and there are already people who do it with their sighthounds in Australia.

Some people in this thread think that if gambling is taken away, greyhound racing will "move underground", "like dog fighting". I suggest it will not. Just as owners can race any dog they want now, so they would be able to if gambling is taken away. It is just that the scale would shrink to minuscule levels and it would be for fun or prestige.

If they could make it happen, I would imagine that owner/trainers that love their dogs would enjoy being able to continue watching their dogs compete.

@Sheena, there are some dogs that have poor confirmation that wouldn't make it to sale and then there are those that fail along the way from breaking-in to trials that also never make it to the track

[Maddy]

And the irony is that about 35% of a race horse's speed can be attributed to genetics. The rest is training, nutrition, health and nutrition of the pregnant bitch, etc etc. I imagine it's similar in dogs. A friend and I will be watching his recent litter of working Gundogs closely - they have all gone to top trainers so it will be interesting to debate nature vs nurture.

I don't think I'd be willing to try to guess either way :p I had the litter sister of a Launceston Cup winner here- she and her brother were raised in the same place, given all the same things and he went on to win the cup while she was cat safe and the only thing she'd win would be a cat cuddling contest.

I think there's definitely a relationship between high quality care and success but beyond that, it just seems to be the luck of the draw (excluding, of course, the dogs that are badly bred).

Edited April 7, 2015 by Maddy

[The Spotted Devil]

Oh of course Maddy - I know what you mean. But on average 35% attributable to genetics (using a large sample size) just shows how tough it is to breed "winners."

[Rebanne]

You're forgetting that the racing was based on something else to start with. Do I think people would set up elaborate underground race tracks? No. I think people would turn back to live coursing. It was a "truer" test of the dogs to start with and there are already people who do it with their sighthounds in Australia.

100% agree and people would still bet on the outcome and dogs would still be disposed of if they didn't win and people would still breed trying to find "the one"

[HazyWal]

I doubt 70% of our population would have a high enough income to waste money on gambling, with 13.9% currently living below the poverty line, 27% receiving some form of government benefit

The trouble with gambling is that it is mostly done by people who can't afford it. Pokie money mostly comes from pensioners. And the TAB near where I lived was always full of old men - even during working hours. They all moved outside when they banned smoking inside but they still stayed there all day. They didn't look "wealthy" to me.

It's one thing to buy an occasional lotto ticket (also sold to mostly poor people) but to be in the TAB all day every day - can't be good for the bottom line unless you're the TAB.

And online betting makes it way too easy. Don't even have to go sit with the smelly blokes to make a bet any more.

Correct, my father is a prime example. Although he's not smelly O.o he sits in the TAB all day spending every cent of his age pension on the punt, anything, dogs horses, trots he'll back it chasing that ever elusive big win. He had to sell his house many years ago due to gambling debts and he now rents his own house. He has nothing, is on the bones of his arse yet he's there every day without fail. I was a barmaid for most of my working life and watched people spend every cent they had on a daily basis on the races or the pokies.

This is a photo of Phar Lap winning the 1930 Melbourne Cup, in the depression. Note the crowd, thousands of people with no jobs and no money to feed their families yet they flocked to the track in their droves. That 70% of the population are the ones that punt the hardest.

[Greyt]

You're forgetting that the racing was based on something else to start with. Do I think people would set up elaborate underground race tracks? No. I think people would turn back to live coursing. It was a "truer" test of the dogs to start with and there are already people who do it with their sighthounds in Australia.

100% agree and people would still bet on the outcome and dogs would still be disposed of if they didn't win and people would still breed trying to find "the one"

So just to be clear, you think that the breed is sustainable beyond the current racing industry?

Beyond the sustainability of the breed, there is is nothing to suggest (is there?) that if their was an amateur sport, about 16000 dogs would be bred per year, upwards of 12000 would be killed per year. Breeders would not be able to command anywhere near the money for a good dog that they can now, mating fees would decline tremendously, there wouldn't be firms specialising in greyhound transport, supplements, vet care, er, disposal etc, etc. And their wouldn't be syndicates either.

I don't think you would find too many corporate CEO's hosting their clients at the local races either...., "We will have the corporate Esky and picnic table available at your disposal"...

As to betting, it will not be organised, state sanctioned betting and joe public will not be able to participate.. no tab's, no dot .coms, no televised races etc.

How this leads to your dog disposal scenario, I don't know but if anything, I suspect that disposal may change in practice from killing to re-homing.

[Maddy]

Oh of course Maddy - I know what you mean. But on average 35% attributable to genetics (using a large sample size) just shows how tough it is to breed "winners."

I think part of the problem is the assumption that winners breed winners. Brett Lee (the dog) happened to end up with just the right combination of genes from his parents to be a really successful dog so everyone wanted to breed with him, even though it's obvious that you can't expect that same combination to come up again, especially when breeding outside of those lines.

Idiot Dog's litter was a good example of impressive pedigree producing nothing of interest. On one side of his lines, there's Brett Lee (grandsire), on the other side, Elite State and Black Shiraz. Of the six pups named (from a litter of nine), the most impressive achieved six wins from 25 starts (most down in Hoabrt, so not exactly high quality competition)- making him a fairly average dog.

I'd guess it probably comes down to very minor variations in the body that aren't necessarily things a breeder would notice. It was Aloysha (from memory) who posted a link to a really interesting article about borzoi and the relationship between minor anatomical differences and speed. And.. now I can't find the link :/

[Maddy]

You're forgetting that the racing was based on something else to start with. Do I think people would set up elaborate underground race tracks? No. I think people would turn back to live coursing. It was a "truer" test of the dogs to start with and there are already people who do it with their sighthounds in Australia.

100% agree and people would still bet on the outcome and dogs would still be disposed of if they didn't win and people would still breed trying to find "the one"

So just to be clear, you think that the breed is sustainable beyond the current racing industry?

Beyond the sustainability of the breed, there is is nothing to suggest (is there?) that if their was an amateur sport, about 16000 dogs would be bred per year, upwards of 12000 would be killed per year. Breeders would not be able to command anywhere near the money for a good dog that they can now, mating fees would decline tremendously, there wouldn't be firms specialising in greyhound transport, supplements, vet care, er, disposal etc, etc. And their wouldn't be syndicates either.

Not as we currently know it, no. I don't think dogs would be bred in the same numbers but I think the welfare of the dogs (and bait animals) would be far worse.

The idea that money is a only incentive for people is absurd and only makes it harder to have sensible conversations about likely outcomes for any particular course of action.

Typo

Edited April 7, 2015 by Maddy

[WreckitWhippet]

[

Maybe as a start they could put a limit on the number of dogs a breeder, trainer or owner could cull each year and perhaps there could be incentives for rehoming suitable dogs rather than killing them. That puts everyone on equal footing with their stock and gives existing and future dogs a better chance.

Why not provide incentives for the owners to not even breed their bitch in the first place or purchase less pups by increasing the cost through an increase of fees to get the pups to racing status and make owners think about the pups/dog's life after racing and how much that will cost them rather than which vet they will use.

Why couldn't the owner keep the dog at a spelling kennel until rescue can take it, I could see kennel owners jumping right on board with this one.

That is called warehousing, it happens now with rescues across the country and it's no way for a dog to live. They are better off dead than being warehoused in kennels.

[Greyt]

You're forgetting that the racing was based on something else to start with. Do I think people would set up elaborate underground race tracks? No. I think people would turn back to live coursing. It was a "truer" test of the dogs to start with and there are already people who do it with their sighthounds in Australia.

100% agree and people would still bet on the outcome and dogs would still be disposed of if they didn't win and people would still breed trying to find "the one"

So just to be clear, you think that the breed is sustainable beyond the current racing industry?

Beyond the sustainability of the breed, there is is nothing to suggest (is there?) that if their was an amateur sport, about 16000 dogs would be bred per year, upwards of 12000 would be killed per year. Breeders would not be able to command anywhere near the money for a good dog that they can now, mating fees would decline tremendously, there wouldn't be firms specialising in greyhound transport, supplements, vet care, er, disposal etc, etc. And their wouldn't be syndicates either.

Not as we currently know it, no. I don't think dogs would be bred in the same numbers but I think the welfare of the dogs (and bait animals) would be far worse.

The idea that money is a only incentive for people is absurd and only makes it harder to have sensible conversations about likely outcomes for any particular course of action.

Typo

Money is a powerful incentive - that much is obvious. There simply will not be 16000 dogs whelped every year if there are very few buyers. Live baiting is said to be widespread now. and More than 12000 are killed every year in the prime of their lives. The condition that some dogs are found in and subsequently rescued in large numbers is atrocious.

If the numbers whelped every year fall to sub 1000 year, I am not sure how you think the welfare of Greyhounds overall could be worse than it is now.

There is no evidence from overseas where the greyhound industry has already been banned to support a view that greyhounds (or bait animals) become worse off after the industry is banned.

[Maddy]

You're forgetting that the racing was based on something else to start with. Do I think people would set up elaborate underground race tracks? No. I think people would turn back to live coursing. It was a "truer" test of the dogs to start with and there are already people who do it with their sighthounds in Australia.

100% agree and people would still bet on the outcome and dogs would still be disposed of if they didn't win and people would still breed trying to find "the one"

So just to be clear, you think that the breed is sustainable beyond the current racing industry?

Beyond the sustainability of the breed, there is is nothing to suggest (is there?) that if their was an amateur sport, about 16000 dogs would be bred per year, upwards of 12000 would be killed per year. Breeders would not be able to command anywhere near the money for a good dog that they can now, mating fees would decline tremendously, there wouldn't be firms specialising in greyhound transport, supplements, vet care, er, disposal etc, etc. And their wouldn't be syndicates either.

Not as we currently know it, no. I don't think dogs would be bred in the same numbers but I think the welfare of the dogs (and bait animals) would be far worse.

The idea that money is a only incentive for people is absurd and only makes it harder to have sensible conversations about likely outcomes for any particular course of action.

Typo

Money is a powerful incentive - that much is obvious. There simply will not be 16000 dogs whelped every year if there are very few buyers. Live baiting is said to be widespread now. and More than 12000 are killed every year in the prime of their lives. The condition that some dogs are found in and subsequently rescued in large numbers is atrocious.

If the numbers whelped every year fall to sub 1000 year, I am not sure how you think the welfare of Greyhounds overall could be worse than it is now.

There is no evidence from overseas where the greyhound industry has already been banned to support a view that greyhounds (or bait animals) become worse off after the industry is banned.

Once again, money is not the answer. You can take money away and people will still breed them and compete with them. Without the oversight that the money brings, the welfare of those dogs would almost certainly be compromised.

You can't compare Australia to other countries because Australia isn't those countries and our culture is different. There are already people who use sighthounds here to illegally course and if you created a huge stream of people who could no longer take part in a sport they enjoyed legally, some would undoubtedly drift into the illegal version of it.

As for this..

If the numbers whelped every year fall to sub 1000 year, I am not sure how you think the welfare of Greyhounds overall could be worse than it is now.

You really have no idea, do you?

[WreckitWhippet]

Another fate that awaits the unwanted if racing ceases is to be shipped to the Middle East or China.

[m-j]

The sport will not go underground in any big way if it is banned. As an entertainment product, it is already in serious decline and with the public relations catastrophe it now faces, the decline - without any intervention by the government - will only accelerate.

Take away wealthy benefactors, sponsors, TV, TAB betting and government money and have the general public abhorred by the practices that go in and you do not have much of an offering.

You definitely do not have an outlet for over breeding some 15,000 dogs per year and the subsequent killing that occurs as a result.

Racing would simply become an amateur activity like any other dog sport is today.

If I owned a vet surgery that specialised in Greyhounds now, or a transport company or a food or supplement company or a breaking in facility, I would be looking around for other opportunities.

I wish I had the same faith in these people just giving up as you do. Illegalising the drug trade hasn't made it go away, from what I can gather from reading the paper it is well and truly alive and kicking. Racing and gambling are fuelled by the same motivators, addiction and greed.

Do you really think the TAB is going lie down quietly while their income taken away (as horses will be next)

[Steve]

Personally I think focusing on a potential banning of gambling is taking energy away from a more realistic solution.

I think some may be too emotionally invested and too close to be able to see that grown up people are not going to just give up their rights and its highly unlikely that its all going to come together as you are asking - some people happen to think its O.K. to humanely kill animals and you are never going to stop someone doing what they want with their own property if they dont want it any more if its done without cruelty.There are laws already in place to cover animal cruelty issues and Dead dogs dont suffer. So what - we think gambling is bad but adults get to gamble if they want to as long as they dont break any other laws. Sports people have been under the gun for match fixing, gambling on or against their own team, taking drugs - blah blah blah - you dont hear anyone calling for a ban on gambling on footy games and people not being able to gamble on some other sports didnt stop them from breaking the law to try to get a better result . Way before online gambling or as many sports were included for people to gamble on or big sponsors saw it as a way to promote themselves there were all sorts of things going on to get a better go at winning. Other sports and industries [eg trucking] with law makers are looking at better prevention, management and penalties and thats what will be the end result of anything thats happening to bring public awareness to the greyhound industry.

It wont be just ban gambling or the activity and it will dry up the motivation. Not a chance in my opinion.

[Greyt]

Personally, I think the biggest threat is as WW says, breeders continuing to breed and sending the dogs to Asia where they will face a 100% rate of destruction.

This can be made an illegal activity if it isn't already and dealt with through criminal processes - shutting down racing here in fear that criminals will move in and form dog export rings is no reason not to shut them down. But wouldn't it be far easier to send the dogs and bitches with good bloodlines to Macau directly (in the absence of an industry here) for breeding 1 time rather than establishing a on on-going criminal enterprise here and hope not to be caught?

As you say m-j, societal attitudes are changing, not only here but around the world. If greyhound racing becomes politically unpalatable (if it hasn't already), the pollies will have to act, even if it is kicking and screaming. There will be further financial imposts at least that relate to improved governance and better outcomes around welfare.

@ Maddy, if you think I have no idea, I would genuinely like to be educated as I do have limited experience with the breed and none at all with those in the racing industry.

My observations and ideas are borne of a urban professional who has had a career in management, public relations and running my own business amongst others. Among my skill set is to look at the big picture and provide solutions to problems that work on a large scale.

All I see here is years of chances being royally screwed up by the widespread practices perpetrated by too many in the industry and a PR nightmare to end them all (perhaps except if you are from the Catholic Church).

I feel strongly that if the industry were made up of people like WW, it wouldn't have near the problems it does today, although as an entertainment product it would still face significant competition.

Didn't anybody read the reports that Labore has provided links to that state the industry in NSW was already financially unsustainable without government assistance? Ford, Holden and Toyota didn't have the PR nightmare that the industry has and look what happened to them... and this was published even before even the ABC report which, it turns out was just a pre-curser to the wider issues that all of the inquiries are now looking in to. The sackings and resignations in the industry are a pointer that change is in motion

[Maddy]

@ Maddy, if you think I have no idea, I would genuinely like to be educated as I do have limited experience with the breed and none at all with those in the racing industry.

People here have tried to explain things to you but you continue to ignore them.

As has already been said, it's a complicated issue with a lot of different things to consider. Any mistake in handling it could cost the lives the thousands of dogs and impact the welfare of god knows how many others.

Groups like Animals Australia like to pretend it's a simple issue because they could give exactly zero shits about the actual animals. They want to ban the sport because it is an activity that involves animals, which they are against on principal.

Edited April 7, 2015 by Maddy

[Greyt]

@ Maddy, if you think I have no idea, I would genuinely like to be educated as I do have limited experience with the breed and none at all with those in the racing industry.

People here have tried to explain things to you but you continue to ignore them.

As has already been said, it's a complicated issue with a lot of different things to consider. Any mistake in handling it could cost the lives the thousands of dogs and impact the welfare of god knows how many others.

Groups like Animals Australia like to pretend it's a simple issue because they could give exactly zero shits about the actual animals. They want to ban the sport because it is an activity that involves animals, which they are against on principal.

I accept that we have different points of view. But nobody has explained how the scale of the current problem would get worse, not better. More than 12000+ dogs every year die now - probably closer to 14000. Are you saying more than 14000 dogs would die annually if the sport was banned? Nobody explained how this could occur.

I put forward this as an example of a solution:

They could also have a carbon credit type scheme where there is a fixed amount of credits available for breeders that limit the overall number of dogs produced each year..

This could be linked to welfare outcomes so it would be cheaper for a breeder to buy credits if their previous litters had good welfare outcomes and more expensive if they had bad outcomes or were not discoverable.

Nobody has made a comment about it.

[labadore]

You're forgetting that the racing was based on something else to start with. Do I think people would set up elaborate underground race tracks? No. I think people would turn back to live coursing. It was a "truer" test of the dogs to start with and there are already people who do it with their sighthounds in Australia.

100% agree and people would still bet on the outcome and dogs would still be disposed of if they didn't win and people would still breed trying to find "the one"

So just to be clear, you think that the breed is sustainable beyond the current racing industry?

Beyond the sustainability of the breed, there is is nothing to suggest (is there?) that if their was an amateur sport, about 16000 dogs would be bred per year, upwards of 12000 would be killed per year. Breeders would not be able to command anywhere near the money for a good dog that they can now, mating fees would decline tremendously, there wouldn't be firms specialising in greyhound transport, supplements, vet care, er, disposal etc, etc. And their wouldn't be syndicates either.

Not as we currently know it, no. I don't think dogs would be bred in the same numbers but I think the welfare of the dogs (and bait animals) would be far worse.

The idea that money is a only incentive for people is absurd and only makes it harder to have sensible conversations about likely outcomes for any particular course of action.

Typo

Money is a powerful incentive - that much is obvious. There simply will not be 16000 dogs whelped every year if there are very few buyers. Live baiting is said to be widespread now. and More than 12000 are killed every year in the prime of their lives. The condition that some dogs are found in and subsequently rescued in large numbers is atrocious.

If the numbers whelped every year fall to sub 1000 year, I am not sure how you think the welfare of Greyhounds overall could be worse than it is now.

There is no evidence from overseas where the greyhound industry has already been banned to support a view that greyhounds (or bait animals) become worse off after the industry is banned.

Once again, money is not the answer. You can take money away and people will still breed them and compete with them. Without the oversight that the money brings, the welfare of those dogs would almost certainly be compromised.

You can't compare Australia to other countries because Australia isn't those countries and our culture is different. There are already people who use sighthounds here to illegally course and if you created a huge stream of people who could no longer take part in a sport they enjoyed legally, some would undoubtedly drift into the illegal version of it.

As for this..

If the numbers whelped every year fall to sub 1000 year, I am not sure how you think the welfare of Greyhounds overall could be worse than it is now.

You really have no idea, do you?

Yes you can compare Australia to other countries with regards to the Greyhound Racing Industry as there are many parallels in the issues that beset this industry in the countries, including Australia, where greyhound racing is operating.

Even if the industry went underground if shutdown, it will not be run on the scale it is currently. The industry is already in decline and opposition to this industry is growing louder, so the winds of change are blowing head-on towards this industry and I believe it is only a matter of time before it ceases to exist. Whether that is through govt legislation or becoming financially unviable with govts no longer willing to prop it up, remains to be seen. In the meantime thousands of greyhounds will continue to suffer and be killed en-masse each year this industry continues operating.

[moosmum]

Hmm, I suppose greys may become a restricted breed. If their owners are so irresponsible and won't meet meet the demands of their environment, there is precedent.

Edited April 7, 2015 by moosmum