Greyhound Carcasses Found In Bundaberg Bushland

[Steve]

2000 submissions out of a population of how many ? and I've seen all of this play out before with people yelling for what they have decided will be what is best without having the ability to see the multitude of issues they may have missed and things getting progressive worse for the dogs rather than better

If you really think a government is going to put a ceiling on how many they can breed, how many they can kill or whether people can gamble on them you're dreamin.

Years ago I went to a meeting with Clover Moore's people who were already at submission stage to parliment to ban the sale of live animals in pet shops and they didnt even know that Dogs NSW allowed the sale of puppies in pet shops or numerous other things that they should have known could have known to help them if they had of looked outside their animal rights pals they would have known that at the end of the day the people they thought were going to agree with them were in fact against them.

What is best for the dogs is for us all to work together and listen to what others have to say to find realistic solutions which have the best outcome for the dogs but experience tells me there isnt a hope in hell of that happening - so if it makes you feel better ........

Oh dear another tanty! Expecting a consensus on a forum is mission impossible :laugh: , opposing views are the norm, don't know why people seem to get their knickers in a knot over it. Sounds to me like you have become pretty jaded from fighting too many battles for dogs over the years and I can understand the demoralising affect this can have and the pessimistic outlook it creates.

People/groups are working together to find solutions outside of shutting down the industry and have been working on this for some time and before the live baiting program was aired. Some of us want the industry shutdown as an ultimate goal but as a first step, will settle for a signficant overhaul of the industry that includes giving priority to the welfare of the greyhounds.

Another Tanty? That's one way to try and deflect the debate.

You call it jaded - I call it educated and experience. I call it looking beyond the propoganda and sensationalism to try to find realistic solutions which will leave the dogs in a better place so we dont look back in ten years with more dogs suffering than they do now.

[Little Gifts]

Steve, I don't think I've ever not agreed with you before but I can't this time. Change is coming. There are many people who have never had anything to do with greyhound racing who were shocked by the tv program and horrified by the dead bodies found. As an example - a new dog racing track was planned for my area (funded by the state govt) and the general public have had it stopped and their actions were in direct response to what they saw on the tv. The reason change is coming is because there are bad things happening in the industry that are not socially acceptable and need to cease. Too many people now have some knowledge about these things when they had no clue before. And the guts of it is change is feasible - the industry can continue as long as it is willing to act legally and within socially acceptable standards. I don't think that is asking too much when they shouldn't be doing some of what they are doing now anyway.

Actually I should alter everything I said above - change is not coming, it's already happening. Look at everything Greyt listed! And the industry did this to itself. It has no one else to blame.

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

the industry can continue as long as it is willing to act legally and within socially acceptable standards.

This is where things can get very strange. I've just found out that some rural town in QLD routinely has car boot sales of puppies. ARGH.

And when people complained - they were called whingers and do gooders (like that's a bad thing). So that's something I'd see as completely unacceptable in any Australian Capital city but it's just fine for the people in charge somewhere a bit more rural.

Kind of reminds me of the disaster that bit the cattle industry on the bum.

[Steve]

Steve, I don't think I've ever not agreed with you before but I can't this time. Change is coming. There are many people who have never had anything to do with greyhound racing who were shocked by the tv program and horrified by the dead bodies found. As an example - a new dog racing track was planned for my area (funded by the state govt) and the general public have had it stopped and their actions were in direct response to what they saw on the tv. The reason change is coming is because there are bad things happening in the industry that are not socially acceptable and need to cease. Too many people now have some knowledge about these things when they had no clue before. And the guts of it is change is feasible - the industry can continue as long as it is willing to act legally and within socially acceptable standards. I don't think that is asking too much when they shouldn't be doing some of what they are doing now anyway.

Actually I should alter everything I said above - change is not coming, it's already happening. Look at everything Greyt listed! And the industry did this to itself. It has no one else to blame.

I didn't say change wasn't coming - blind freddy can see its gong to happen Im just not convinced that what is being called for is the ideal solution or realistic.

[Little Gifts]

You don't think it is realistic to limit the number of dogs an owner, breeder or trainer can dispose of in a year? Aren't registered breeders limited in the number of litters they can have with each bitch and the duration apart of each litter? Aren't licensed premises limited in the number of dogs they can house on site at any one time? How is taking responsibility for how many dogs you don't want to keep such a different concept? If you already have dogs you can't use why is it ok to just breed more of the same? Why can't they aim for a percentage basis of racing/rehomed versus killed? In what other business is it ok to kill or destroy more than you take to market?

With the amount of money attached to the whole gambling industry I think my desire for animal free gambling is naïve but is my interest in seeing less healthy dogs die or be dumped on rescue each year unreasonable? The industry is focussed on winners, which is fine (and understandable) but the killing of so many healthy dogs as collateral damage to that is not. Nor is it ok to put those healthy dogs into an already overburdened rescue system.

The greyhound racing industry has a problem and it needs to fix it. It also has the money and should fund the repairs if it wants to see a long term solution to current woes.

[Maddy]

The greyhound racing industry has a problem and it needs to fix it. It also has the money and should fund the repairs if it wants to see a long term solution to current woes.

I absolutely agree with you but.. it's really not that simple. Changes have to be made in a number of areas, with the support of the participants and without angling those changes towards ending the industry (because participants will never support changes intended to put them out of business).

The changes needed aren't things like limiting breeding in itself but instead, broadening the grading system (to include slower dogs- as I've pointed out before, a race between a bunch of slow dogs is still a race), changing qualifying requirements so that dogs aren't excluded before they've even had a chance to race and keeping dogs in work longer so that breeding restrictions aren't as necessary to start with.

If the average greyhound could work up until the age of four (or even five), dogs would need "replacing" with less frequency (so less litters bred), which in turn would reduce pressure on rescue/rehoming groups- meaning that those dogs would have a better chance at being rehomed. For dogs who are injured and unable to continue racing at a younger age, the reduced number of dogs flowing into rescues would also benefit them, not just because of more space available but also more resources available for treatment and care. It'd be great to see a change that would bring about the closure of certain greyhound warehousing "rescues" where dogs are living within the bare minimums of welfare standards, while those groups continue to accept numbers beyond their capacity simply because the dogs are there for the taking.

[Steve]

Little Gifts Do I think its realistic to expect that breeders owners and trainers will be restricted in how many dogs per year they can dispose of ? No

Yes registered breeders are restricted in some places as to how many litters one bitch can have and how often - aren't Racing Greyhound breeders restricted in the same way? And how would that keep numbers down? Less litters per bitch and less often means more bitches get put down or out to make room for the next one. Yes Licensed premises with DA are usually restricted in numbers including greyhound breeders.Breeders build bigger kennels and buy bigger properties zoned with out restrictions for intensive livestock to have less restriction in numbers.

How is taking responsibility for how many dogs you don't want to keep a new concept? Well it isn't - that's why they take them to a vet to have them put down or find them new homes, hand them over to rescue etc. Its their property and their choice as long as they don't break animal cruelty laws. The entire current system,requirements for DAs and permits licences , codes is based on encouraging us into keeping less and turning them over more often not less often.

Killing healthy animals because they don't cut the grade is horrible but killing them humanely isn't considered making them suffer under the law. You expect pounds,owners, other breeders, rescue etc to be able to decide which animals cant find homes or are unsuitable to be homed and are put down but not greyhound breeders and trainers?

We all have an interest in seeing less healthy dogs put down or dumped on rescue but the more you judge and alienate them the more likely it is that healthy dogs will be put down more discretely and less dogs go into rescue. This is exactly what happens with some big puppy farmers because they are beaten up if they are seen to be moving them out to new homes or rescue.They would rather kill them than have the grief and be seen to be advertising them. Even for a small breeder to move out ex breeding dogs some will beat them up - on this forum you hear about how horrible a breeder is because they didn't keep their older dogs and moved them out for younger dogs. They nit pick about where they advertise them and actively try to prevent them from doing so. Do you really think a greyhound breeder is going to be keen to advertise ex racers knowing that will get them hell- yet if they don't they get hell for finding another solution - if the goal is less killed,more in new homes and more in rescue if they don't cut the grade then the only way to do that is to make the alternatives more attractive to those who get to decide at least in the short term.

Anyway this isn't my fight and I have no wish to defend the industry - it will be interesting to see how it all turns out.

Edited April 9, 2015 by Steve

[Little Gifts]

Thanks for that info Maddy. I figured they were racing in some kind of similar class structure now so that slower dogs or dogs of a certain weight or age were racing together already? Extending the age they can race to is another good idea. And as you say a race is still a race and as long as the entertainment and winning factors are there does it really matter if not all races involve land speed records?

Little Gifts Do I think its realistic to expect that breeders owners and trainers will be restricted in how many dogs per year they can dispose of ? No

Yes registered breeders are restricted in some places as to how many litters one bitch can have and how often - aren't Racing Greyhound breeders restricted in the same way? And how would that keep numbers down? Less litters per bitch and less often means more bitches get put down or out to make room for the next one. Yes Licensed premises with DA are usually restricted in numbers including greyhound breeders.Breeders build bigger kennels and buy bigger properties zoned with out restrictions for intensive livestock to have less restriction in numbers.

How is taking responsibility for how many dogs you don't want to keep a new concept? Well it isn't - that's why they take them to a vet to have them put down or find them new homes, hand them over to rescue etc. Its their property and their choice as long as they don't break animal cruelty laws. The entire current system,requirements for DAs and permits licences , codes is based on encouraging us into keeping less and turning them over more often not less often.

Killing healthy animals because they don't cut the grade is horrible but killing them humanely isn't considered making them suffer under the law. You expect pounds,owners, other breeders, rescue etc to be able to decide which animals cant find homes or are unsuitable to be homed and are put down but not greyhound breeders and trainers?

We all have an interest in seeing less healthy dogs put down or dumped on rescue but the more you judge and alienate them the more likely it is that healthy dogs will be put down more discretely and less dogs go into rescue. This is exactly what happens with some big puppy farmers because they are beaten up if they are seen to be moving them out to new homes or rescue.They would rather kill them than have the grief and be seen to be advertising them. Even for a small breeder to move out ex breeding dogs some will beat them up - on this forum you hear about how horrible a breeder is because they didn't keep their older dogs and moved them out for younger dogs. They nit pick about where they advertise them and actively try to prevent them from doing so. Do you really think a greyhound breeder is going to be keen to advertise ex racers knowing that will get them hell- yet if they don't they get hell for finding another solution - if the goal is less killed,more in new homes and more in rescue if they don't cut the grade then the only way to do that is to make the alternatives more attractive to those who get to decide at least in the short term.

Anyway this isn't my fight and I have no wish to defend the industry - it will be interesting to see how it all turns out.

Very interesting to me Steve that the current system encourages the turnover of dogs. That is the first time I have seen it spelled out clearly in that light. As for the next bit I bolded, I'd actually prefer breeders, owners and trainers to be an important part of the rehoming process where possible. Rehoming may not be their core business but they sure as hell know the dogs in their care better than anyone and could at least share that knowledge to save time, money and unsuitable dogs being in shelters or foster care.

So how do we share our concerns publicly without the people who have the dogs and are doing nothing wrong with them feeling judged and alienated? This is industry wide, but as we have read in this thread, not every owner, breeder or trainer supports it or does it. I find it sad but not surprising that rescue and racing do not get on well as a whole. They exist for different reasons. But human nature being as it is, when people try to hide what they are doing it makes people more suspicious. And I guess too when there is so much money in the gambling industry (as opposed to the pockets of breeders, owners and trainers) it seems wrong to impose their excess dog problem onto rescue.

I hope some goals to address the key issues over a sustainable period of time will come about so less healthy dogs are placed at risk.

[HazyWal]

Thanks for that info Maddy. I figured they were racing in some kind of similar class structure now so that slower dogs or dogs of a certain weight or age were racing together already? Extending the age they can race to is another good idea. And as you say a race is still a race and as long as the entertainment and winning factors are there does it really matter if not all races involve land speed records?

Little Gifts Do I think its realistic to expect that breeders owners and trainers will be restricted in how many dogs per year they can dispose of ? No

Yes registered breeders are restricted in some places as to how many litters one bitch can have and how often - aren't Racing Greyhound breeders restricted in the same way? And how would that keep numbers down? Less litters per bitch and less often means more bitches get put down or out to make room for the next one. Yes Licensed premises with DA are usually restricted in numbers including greyhound breeders.Breeders build bigger kennels and buy bigger properties zoned with out restrictions for intensive livestock to have less restriction in numbers.

How is taking responsibility for how many dogs you don't want to keep a new concept? Well it isn't - that's why they take them to a vet to have them put down or find them new homes, hand them over to rescue etc. Its their property and their choice as long as they don't break animal cruelty laws. The entire current system,requirements for DAs and permits licences , codes is based on encouraging us into keeping less and turning them over more often not less often.

Killing healthy animals because they don't cut the grade is horrible but killing them humanely isn't considered making them suffer under the law. You expect pounds,owners, other breeders, rescue etc to be able to decide which animals cant find homes or are unsuitable to be homed and are put down but not greyhound breeders and trainers?

We all have an interest in seeing less healthy dogs put down or dumped on rescue but the more you judge and alienate them the more likely it is that healthy dogs will be put down more discretely and less dogs go into rescue. This is exactly what happens with some big puppy farmers because they are beaten up if they are seen to be moving them out to new homes or rescue.They would rather kill them than have the grief and be seen to be advertising them. Even for a small breeder to move out ex breeding dogs some will beat them up - on this forum you hear about how horrible a breeder is because they didn't keep their older dogs and moved them out for younger dogs. They nit pick about where they advertise them and actively try to prevent them from doing so. Do you really think a greyhound breeder is going to be keen to advertise ex racers knowing that will get them hell- yet if they don't they get hell for finding another solution - if the goal is less killed,more in new homes and more in rescue if they don't cut the grade then the only way to do that is to make the alternatives more attractive to those who get to decide at least in the short term.

Anyway this isn't my fight and I have no wish to defend the industry - it will be interesting to see how it all turns out.

Very interesting to me Steve that the current system encourages the turnover of dogs. That is the first time I have seen it spelled out clearly in that light. As for the next bit I bolded, I'd actually prefer breeders, owners and trainers to be an important part of the rehoming process where possible. Rehoming may not be their core business but they sure as hell know the dogs in their care better than anyone and could at least share that knowledge to save time, money and unsuitable dogs being in shelters or foster care.

So how do we share our concerns publicly without the people who have the dogs and are doing nothing wrong with them feeling judged and alienated? This is industry wide, but as we have read in this thread, not every owner, breeder or trainer supports it or does it. I find it sad but not surprising that rescue and racing do not get on well as a whole. They exist for different reasons. But human nature being as it is, when people try to hide what they are doing it makes people more suspicious. And I guess too when there is so much money in the gambling industry (as opposed to the pockets of breeders, owners and trainers) it seems wrong to impose their excess dog problem onto rescue.

I hope some goals to address the key issues over a sustainable period of time will come about so less healthy dogs are placed at risk.

Greyhound rescue is a whole nother ball game. *repeating myself for the 1000th time* greyhounds are still not up there in the family pet stakes. So lets say the average family decide on a rescue dog, we have Labs and Cockers for a family pet with the kids, cattle dogs for the farm, maybe Aussies for agility, a bull breed for the work truck, who actually says lets get a greyhound? Still not many people I guarantee that and unless you are involved in GR you have no idea, bottom line. You can't not alienate the good trainers because they are all lumped in the same box by the nutters, the keyboard warriors whose total experience with greyhounds is seeing one walk past their house one day O.o I see it time after time on greyhound rescue pages where trainers try to say that their dogs are well looked after and they get squashed like a grape by the most disgusting comments like "yeah bullshit, I hope you break your legs and die you scum like what you do to your dogs" Do you know the amount of decent trainers that have contacted programmes like 4 Corners and The Project to ask them to come to their training facilities and show the other side? Nah they're not interested. GRDBOIT posted a pic of greyhound puppies at a fence with the caption "where have the puppies gone?" Outrage and venom was spat until the trainer from SA actually posted on it and said " hey that is my training facility and you have stolen a photo off my public page to beat your drum! how dare you" Within 2 minutes tops it was gone, deleted.

Greyhound racing in this country will never stop, racing be it horses or dogs is a billion dollar industry and people need to understand that and work together, not that I think it will ever happen in my lifetime.

Off to hug my greyhounds.

Edited April 9, 2015 by HazyWal

[WreckitWhippet]

I'm not sure how they could restrict the number of breeding bitches or litters that someone could produce. Put a number on it and you will see mum with the max number of dogs, dad and all the kids with them too.

I think you'll also see a rise in the number of people who don't breed, who will begin to breed on paper, dogs will technically in their name and residing elsewhere and breeding.

[aussielover]

Do you think Greyhounds are becoming more popular as pets?

What would help promote their image as a suitable pet? Why are they much more popular in the US than in australia?

What is the realistic percentage of ex-racers that are safe and would make a good pet?

They aren't a breed that would suit me at the moment but I know plenty of people who would like a low maintenance, couch potato type of dog.

I

[HazyWal]

Do you think Greyhounds are becoming more popular as pets?

What would help promote their image as a suitable pet? Why are they much more popular in the US than in australia?

What is the realistic percentage of ex-racers that are safe and would make a good pet?

They aren't a breed that would suit me at the moment but I know plenty of people who would like a low maintenance, couch potato type of dog.

I

Did you even read my post?

[Rebanne]

Do you think Greyhounds are becoming more popular as pets?

What would help promote their image as a suitable pet? Why are they much more popular in the US than in australia?

What is the realistic percentage of ex-racers that are safe and would make a good pet?

They aren't a breed that would suit me at the moment but I know plenty of people who would like a low maintenance, couch potato type of dog.

I

There just aren't the homes for them. That is the bottom line. There has been and still is plenty of promotion about their suitability as pets. How many more people are there in the USA, with approx the same amount of greyhounds bred? What is safe? Safe with all critters, small ones only, kids, elderly etc? I've got a bird killer here so not safe for some.

[m-j]

Do you think Greyhounds are becoming more popular as pets?

What would help promote their image as a suitable pet? Why are they much more popular in the US than in australia?

What is the realistic percentage of ex-racers that are safe and would make a good pet?

They aren't a breed that would suit me at the moment but I know plenty of people who would like a low maintenance, couch potato type of dog.

I

Make a movie with a greyhound in it :laugh: .

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

Make a movie with a greyhound in it :laugh: .

There's that tv series - upper middle bogan...

That had a greyhound in it. Very cute.

[Little Gifts]

It is actually through the stories and photos shared about Maddie and Stan that I can imagine owning a greyhound one day. My only real experience of them was as a kid - an uncle owned and trained a couple and they lived in their suburban backyard. There were a lot of kids in that family and I can remember my aunt cooking up all these stews on the stove that were for the dogs and not the kids. This was back in the 70s. I never felt unsafe around any of their dogs and they probably had around 8 different ones over the years - usually only two at any one time. Never made much money on them I don't think. Apart from that I haven't interacted with any because I feel they are bit like a working dog on a farm or a guide dog and you aren't supposed to kind of pat and play with them because they are 'training' or 'working'.

Thank you to everyone who is posting information and experiences here. Some of us are trying to absorb it and be better informed about the issue.

[Maddy]

Thanks for that info Maddy. I figured they were racing in some kind of similar class structure now so that slower dogs or dogs of a certain weight or age were racing together already? Extending the age they can race to is another good idea. And as you say a race is still a race and as long as the entertainment and winning factors are there does it really matter if not all races involve land speed records?

There are currently different grades but once a dog grades out, unless it's a good breeding prospect (which it probably isn't if it graded out), that dog will either end up PTS or in rescue.

As I've mentioned before, the majority of the dogs I've taken in have been 15-18 month old dogs who couldn't even qualify to start with. A small number of those dogs won't chase at all, the rest are just a couple of seconds too slow but otherwise fit, healthy dogs with a normal level of drive.

I'm not sure how they could restrict the number of breeding bitches or litters that someone could produce. Put a number on it and you will see mum with the max number of dogs, dad and all the kids with them too.

I think you'll also see a rise in the number of people who don't breed, who will begin to breed on paper, dogs will technically in their name and residing elsewhere and breeding.

Ownership shuffling already happens for suspended trainers so yeah, it'll happen if further breeding restrictions are put in place.

Do you think Greyhounds are becoming more popular as pets?

Part of the problem is that greyhounds aren't suitable for every home. For 95% of greyhounds, homes with cats/poultry/caged birds/small critters are excluded. According to most stats, cat ownership is around 29% in Australia, which means approximately 6,707,700 homes are not going to be suitable. Add on poultry, caged birds and pocket pets and the number of those unsuitable homes goes up even further.

Then you have to consider that however great we think greys are, not everyone is interested in a large sighthound. They can't be walked offlead, they are fairly tall dogs, the skinny/muscly look does not appeal to all, they have specific requirements that make them an unappealing pet to some.

Everyone has their preferences and those preferences are not necessarily based on misunderstanding the breed, either. Personally, I'd never own a bull breed and that's not because I misunderstand them (I've known many and thought they were great dogs), it's because the breed traits don't appeal to me.

On this topic.. Part of the problem in improving popularity is that inevitably, myths start to pop up from the other direction- instead of greyhounds being vicious muzzled monsters, the public come to believe (through hearing it so often) that greyhounds are INCREDIBLY gentle. Which is true so far as people are concerned but may lead some people to assume their greyhound is going to play nicely with their cat and when that doesn't happen, it can swing public opinion violently back in the other direction when incidents start to mount up. of course, dodgy rehoming practices from groups climbing on the greyhound rescue bandwagon do not help with issues of publicity and sooner or later, there will be a backlash there, too :/

[Greyt]

Greys have a lot going against them 25 - 35kg dogs, with often bad recall, misunderstood muzzle laws, not experienced with pet life (often need to be taught to walk up stairs, deal with vacuums, often not house trained), easily injured if bitten, can't defend themselves with a muzzle on and the list goes on.

With that said, they can be an incredible companion dog for older people - low shedding, short coat, very low doggie odour, requires very little exercise and a great height for those with bad backs - whether you are sitting or standing, their head always seem to be at the right height for a pat. Some studies also show that they are the least likely of all dogs to bite humans.

They have different personalities within the breed ranging from - OMG, if we go to the MCG on grand final day, I will get 100,000 pats and it will be the best day of my life!! - to - just me and my human is all I need in life. The process of teaching an adult dog about pet life can be extraordinarily rewarding when you see that they start to "get it".

I met one the other day with an owner that also had a mixed breed and the owner said that the mixed breed whom she had owned first said that the mix would always be her first love, but the Grey is her Soulmate. Kind of sums it up for me.

The Grey was off lead and harassed my Whippet and the owner did not respond well (didn't put the Grey on lead), so I put the Whippet on lead and then there was nothing to chase so the Grey calmed down and that kind of sums up why I think Grey owners should have more education about the breed and be given practical strategies for owning a Greyhound (not withstanding that it was illegal for this particular Grey to be off-lead).

[m-j]

The greyhound racing industry has a problem and it needs to fix it. It also has the money and should fund the repairs if it wants to see a long term solution to current woes.

I absolutely agree with you but.. it's really not that simple. Changes have to be made in a number of areas, with the support of the participants and without angling those changes towards ending the industry (because participants will never support changes intended to put them out of business).

The changes needed aren't things like limiting breeding in itself but instead, broadening the grading system (to include slower dogs- as I've pointed out before, a race between a bunch of slow dogs is still a race), changing qualifying requirements so that dogs aren't excluded before they've even had a chance to race and keeping dogs in work longer so that breeding restrictions aren't as necessary to start with.

If the average greyhound could work up until the age of four (or even five), dogs would need "replacing" with less frequency (so less litters bred), which in turn would reduce pressure on rescue/rehoming groups- meaning that those dogs would have a better chance at being rehomed. For dogs who are injured and unable to continue racing at a younger age, the reduced number of dogs flowing into rescues would also benefit them, not just because of more space available but also more resources available for treatment and care. It'd be great to see a change that would bring about the closure of certain greyhound warehousing "rescues" where dogs are living within the bare minimums of welfare standards, while those groups continue to accept numbers beyond their capacity simply because the dogs are there for the taking.

This is a good idea but it wouldn't have helped two of the babies I helped raise for a bit over 12mths, from one of the lets do a deal litters, whose lives ended a couple of days ago. Their first time owner with stars in his eyes and money to burn didn't want dogs that paid their way (they had both won races), he wanted dogs that won him substantial amounts of money, he wanted to play with the big boys. They weren't even two yrs old, both of those dogs would have made lovely pets. It was a very bitter pill for me to swallow even though I knew that it was inevitable that not all the dogs (who I knew much better than their owners did) were going to live their life out as they should.

An example of this is, one of the owners came to check up on his dogs, I wasn't there and the boss who didn't know the dogs as well as I did accidently showed this owner the wrong dogs. There were dogs with colours in the litter he was shown that weren't in his litter and the owner was none the wiser.

[labadore]

Article on abc.net.au this afternoon, link and full article below:

Qld Govt announces a Commission of Inquiry into the greyhound racing industry replacing the review already underway

Greyhound racing industry Commission of Inquiry launched by Queensland Government after 'serious allegations' in live baiting investigation

10/04/2014

Updated 29 minutes ago 10/04/2014

Map: QLD

The Queensland Government has announced a Commission of Inquiry into the greyhound racing industry, replacing the review already underway.

The review was set up following revelations on the ABC's Four Corners program about the widespread use of the illegal practice of live baiting.

Barrister Alan MacSporran, who was heading up the review, was appointed Commissioner.

The announcement of the Commission of Inquiry comes on the same day the interim report of the review was delivered to the Minister for Sport and Racing Bill Byrne.

He said serious allegations were made, prompting the Government to step up its examination of the Queensland greyhound racing industry.

"The Commissioner has the power to summon a witness to give evidence or produce documents," Mr Byrne said.

"The purpose of the inquiry is to determine how the misconduct of live baiting was able to occur without earlier detection and how widespread these practices are."

The establishment of the Commission of Inquiry comes after four recent arrests by the joint Queensland Police RSCPA Taskforce.

Fourteen people have so far been arrested on 53 charges, including 37 of serious animal cruelty.

More to come.