Nsw To Ban Greyhound Racing From July 2017

[BlaznHotAussies]

Academic weasel wording ....

Yes.

- buggered if I understand most of what is said or meant once this stuff starts up.

Sheridan's is an accurate precis.

FFS I'm trying to save your sorry 'victim' butts, poor you and poor my my breed.

Guess you are on your own.

Suggest you start by explaining how you are saving poor us in language we can comprehend.

With you there. I find it incredibly difficult to read mm's posts. I can comprehend basically everyone else's posts, even the longer ones, but there is another language in mm's posts which just don't seem to sink in. I've even read a so-called explanation and it made no sense.

I don't really have much to add to this conversation but I would suggest the reason the owners of Greyhounds are suggesting they'll have to put their dogs down is because the money they were getting in prize money etc. was going toward feeding their dogs.

Maybe I'm just a farmer's daughter but if I don't have a use for an animal (including enjoying their company), it has to go. With the tide of Greyhounds being out of a job, there will most likely be many needing homes & not enough homes - would it be better if people end up on the street just so they can feed their dogs?? Or perhaps it's a sensible choice to put the dogs to sleep rather than risk it ending up in a bad position due to a rushed rehoming process.

[Steve]

Academic weasel wording aside, this is the beginning of the end of animal ownership. All you have to do is visit an AR FB page to see how much these people hate dogs.

Stuff like this from the Animals Australia facebook page, The last quote says it all really.

"Now Mr Baird has no option than to Ban Pet Ownership as well. With Puppy Farms and the fact that 250000 unwanted pets are put down each year. Pretty much the same reason for banning Greyhounds, just on a far bigger scale."

"Great work - now we just need Mike Baird to continue to adopt Animal Justice Party policies, reverse the Ag Gag laws, stop the brumby culls and place a ban on all domestic dog and cat breeding until no shelter animals need to be destroyed."

"stop the over breeding of all animals from back street breeders.."

"The thing is how many dogs and cats are put down in the pounds each year,nobody cares"

"Dogs and cats are bred for the pet industry. When they get too big or dig up the yard or the child grows tied of them they are abandoned, and unless rehoused are put down. I just would like too know how the pet industry stacks up to the greyhound industry."

"its exactly the same issue just a different industry." (Had to take the names out for privacy)

"yep. So go tackle the shelters. These guys are working on the greyhound industry for now. They cant do everything! Just be happy there is progress in this field. But yes please go do something for the shelters. Pitch in. Good on you. Thanks"

"I'm not saying two wrongs make a right at all. If you ban the greyhound industry on the grounds of cruelty that has been highlighted then you must also ban the pet industry."

"It's people doing the wrong thing that is the problem, both with greyhounds and pets. So you must ban both to solve the issues. Otherwise it's just plain Hypocrisy."

"There are a lot of organisations campaigning to stop puppy farms because they are doing some awful things also.

I personally think it should be illegal to own and breed an undesexed dog and only registered breeders with strict limits and welfare rules should be allowed to breed.Fingers crossed that is the next step governments will take."

"it's good to see so many in support of Banning Pet ownership. It's the only way to stop the cruelty."

--Lhok

Nihilists. Dog extinction proponents. And they're saying to Baird, 'Come in, spinner.'

Yep and when I watched his interview today with RSPCA offended because they have been accused of high kill rates and lamenting how hard this breed is to rehome blah blah blah it left no doubt in my mind that's exactly what they have done.

[Steve]

Academic weasel wording ....

Yes.

- buggered if I understand most of what is said or meant once this stuff starts up.

Sheridan's is an accurate precis.

FFS I'm trying to save your sorry 'victim' butts, poor you and poor my my breed.

Guess you are on your own.

Suggest you start by explaining how you are saving poor us in language we can comprehend.

With you there. I find it incredibly difficult to read mm's posts. I can comprehend basically everyone else's posts, even the longer ones, but there is another language in mm's posts which just don't seem to sink in. I've even read a so-called explanation and it made no sense.

I don't really have much to add to this conversation but I would suggest the reason the owners of Greyhounds are suggesting they'll have to put their dogs down is because the money they were getting in prize money etc. was going toward feeding their dogs.

Maybe I'm just a farmer's daughter but if I don't have a use for an animal (including enjoying their company), it has to go. With the tide of Greyhounds being out of a job, there will most likely be many needing homes & not enough homes - would it be better if people end up on the street just so they can feed their dogs?? Or perhaps it's a sensible choice to put the dogs to sleep rather than risk it ending up in a bad position due to a rushed rehoming process.

If it were me and they really do take it to a ban I would simply put them all to sleep if the only other option was the RSPCA.

Think they have overlooked the fact that having a vet kill your dogs is still perfectly legal and just because the bleeding hearts will feel better if there are RSPCA "helping" doesn't mean the owners are going to let them take the bow for taking them on.

[moosmum]

Academic weasel wording ....

Yes.

- buggered if I understand most of what is said or meant once this stuff starts up.

Sheridan's is an accurate precis.

FFS I'm trying to save your sorry 'victim' butts, poor you and poor my my breed.

Guess you are on your own.

Suggest you start by explaining how you are saving poor us in language we can comprehend.

With you there. I find it incredibly difficult to read mm's posts. I can comprehend basically everyone else's posts, even the longer ones, but there is another language in mm's posts which just don't seem to sink in. I've even read a so-called explanation and it made no sense.

I don't really have much to add to this conversation but I would suggest the reason the owners of Greyhounds are suggesting they'll have to put their dogs down is because the money they were getting in prize money etc. was going toward feeding their dogs.

Maybe I'm just a farmer's daughter but if I don't have a use for an animal (including enjoying their company), it has to go. With the tide of Greyhounds being out of a job, there will most likely be many needing homes & not enough homes - would it be better if people end up on the street just so they can feed their dogs?? Or perhaps it's a sensible choice to put the dogs to sleep rather than risk it ending up in a bad position due to a rushed rehoming process.

If I can't be understood maybe a few breeders should make an effort to understand evolutionary biology on their own. Seems an important field to ignore if you are trying to develop breeds for posterity. Its a two tiered system of the dogs being bred in an organized system, and the cultural effects on that by the breeders.

I give up. I suspect your beliefs quite literaly blind you to a logic of any other reality.

Edited July 14, 2016 by moosmum

[Lhok]

Looks like lure coursing is caught up in the ban too.

The NSW Lure Coursing Association is shocked and disappointed by recommendations on lure coursing made in The Report of the Special Commission of Inquiry into the Greyhound Racing Industry in NSW.

The recommendations, if implemented, would make the sport of lure coursing unviable by forcing anyone considering the sport to have to choose between the pets in their home.

Lure coursing is a purely amateur sport for pet dogs. Both pedigree and mixed breed dogs participate in lure coursing. There is no betting and no prize money for participants. Our dogs chase plastic bags around a string course that runs on pulleys. Dogs who do not chase the bag are not euthanased, they are pets first.

The practical impact of two of the Report’s Recommendations is that a pet dog owner who participates in lure coursing would be guilty of a criminal offence if their dog shared its home with any other species of small animal, such as a pet cat, or chickens. Our view is that the authors of the report could not have understood the difference between a coursing dog (live game) and lure coursing (no live game). The sport of lure coursing was developed specifically to provide a safe and humane alternative to the use of live game. We do not understand why our sport has been targeted by the Report.

The Commission actually states in its report that it has no evidence that there is live baiting occurring in lure coursing. That is hardly surprising in the circumstances. The Commission did not consult with the DogsNSW Lure Coursing Representative or indeed with anyone involved in lure coursing before making recommendations that are a slur on our many law abiding, companion animal loving participants. If implemented it is likely that the Recommendations would destroy our sport.

--Lhok

[Sheridan]

Academic weasel wording ....

Yes.

- buggered if I understand most of what is said or meant once this stuff starts up.

Sheridan's is an accurate precis.

FFS I'm trying to save your sorry 'victim' butts, poor you and poor my my breed.

Guess you are on your own.

Suggest you start by explaining how you are saving poor us in language we can comprehend.

With you there. I find it incredibly difficult to read mm's posts. I can comprehend basically everyone else's posts, even the longer ones, but there is another language in mm's posts which just don't seem to sink in. I've even read a so-called explanation and it made no sense.

I don't really have much to add to this conversation but I would suggest the reason the owners of Greyhounds are suggesting they'll have to put their dogs down is because the money they were getting in prize money etc. was going toward feeding their dogs.

Maybe I'm just a farmer's daughter but if I don't have a use for an animal (including enjoying their company), it has to go. With the tide of Greyhounds being out of a job, there will most likely be many needing homes & not enough homes - would it be better if people end up on the street just so they can feed their dogs?? Or perhaps it's a sensible choice to put the dogs to sleep rather than risk it ending up in a bad position due to a rushed rehoming process.

If I can't be understood maybe a few breeders should make an effort to understand evolutionary biology on their own. Seems an important field to ignore if you are trying to develop breeds for posterity. Its a two tiered system of the dogs being bred in an organized system, and the cultural effects on that by the breeders.

I give up. I suspect your beliefs quite literaly blind you to a logic of any other reality.

What?

[Salukifan]

Looks like lure coursing is caught up in the ban too.

The NSW Lure Coursing Association is shocked and disappointed by recommendations on lure coursing made in The Report of the Special Commission of Inquiry into the Greyhound Racing Industry in NSW.

The recommendations, if implemented, would make the sport of lure coursing unviable by forcing anyone considering the sport to have to choose between the pets in their home.

Lure coursing is a purely amateur sport for pet dogs. Both pedigree and mixed breed dogs participate in lure coursing. There is no betting and no prize money for participants. Our dogs chase plastic bags around a string course that runs on pulleys. Dogs who do not chase the bag are not euthanased, they are pets first.

The practical impact of two of the Report’s Recommendations is that a pet dog owner who participates in lure coursing would be guilty of a criminal offence if their dog shared its home with any other species of small animal, such as a pet cat, or chickens. Our view is that the authors of the report could not have understood the difference between a coursing dog (live game) and lure coursing (no live game). The sport of lure coursing was developed specifically to provide a safe and humane alternative to the use of live game. We do not understand why our sport has been targeted by the Report.

The Commission actually states in its report that it has no evidence that there is live baiting occurring in lure coursing. That is hardly surprising in the circumstances. The Commission did not consult with the DogsNSW Lure Coursing Representative or indeed with anyone involved in lure coursing before making recommendations that are a slur on our many law abiding, companion animal loving participants. If implemented it is likely that the Recommendations would destroy our sport.

--Lhok

So this is a sport for pet dogs of all breeds and crossbreeds that has no live baiting, no wastage and no gambling.

Result? Restrictions, legislation and criminalisation of participants.

Just fantastic.

Edited July 14, 2016 by Haredown Whippets

[Lhok]

I guess it is easier just to straight up ban it all.

--Lhok

[grizabella]

That is nothing short of disgusting. I support the end of the greyhound industry, but attacking dog sports that have no wastage and no inherent cruelty is preposterous. What's next, a ban on flyball or agility? I hope common sense will prevail here. It saddens me that no moves can be made for animal welfare without animal rights extremists grabbing it and taking it too far. I'm sick to the back teeth of it.

Edited July 14, 2016 by grizabella

[Sheridan]

That is nothing short of disgusting. I support the end of the greyhound industry, but attacking dog sports that have no wastage and no inherent cruelty is preposterous. What's next, a ban on flyball or agility? I hope common sense will prevail here. It saddens me that no moves can be made for animal welfare without animal rights extremists grabbing it and taking it too far. I'm sick to the back teeth of it.

A ban on flyball and a ban on agility. There goes herding, nose work and forget about trying to get barn hunt up and running. A ban on working dogs because they run over the backs of sheep and nip at the heels of cows. Might frighten the horses, might frighten the children. A ban on breeding, a ban on pets.

[moosmum]

Looks like lure coursing is caught up in the ban too.

The NSW Lure Coursing Association is shocked and disappointed by recommendations on lure coursing made in The Report of the Special Commission of Inquiry into the Greyhound Racing Industry in NSW.

The recommendations, if implemented, would make the sport of lure coursing unviable by forcing anyone considering the sport to have to choose between the pets in their home.

Lure coursing is a purely amateur sport for pet dogs. Both pedigree and mixed breed dogs participate in lure coursing. There is no betting and no prize money for participants. Our dogs chase plastic bags around a string course that runs on pulleys. Dogs who do not chase the bag are not euthanased, they are pets first.

The practical impact of two of the Report’s Recommendations is that a pet dog owner who participates in lure coursing would be guilty of a criminal offence if their dog shared its home with any other species of small animal, such as a pet cat, or chickens. Our view is that the authors of the report could not have understood the difference between a coursing dog (live game) and lure coursing (no live game). The sport of lure coursing was developed specifically to provide a safe and humane alternative to the use of live game. We do not understand why our sport has been targeted by the Report.

The Commission actually states in its report that it has no evidence that there is live baiting occurring in lure coursing. That is hardly surprising in the circumstances. The Commission did not consult with the DogsNSW Lure Coursing Representative or indeed with anyone involved in lure coursing before making recommendations that are a slur on our many law abiding, companion animal loving participants. If implemented it is likely that the Recommendations would destroy our sport.

--Lhok

So this is a sport for pet dogs of all breeds and crossbreeds that has no live baiting, no wastage and no gambling.

Result? Restrictions, legislation and criminalisation of participants.

Just fantastic.

Last attempt.

You ban one environment where things aren't doing well and it will have flow on effects to other environments. How can it not?

The whole environment that supports dogs is a single environment.

There is a belief in the K.Cs that pedigree dogs are the future- Nothing wrong with that belief, except that it comes with a DIS- belief there can be any future in non pedigree dogs.

That Disbelief is actively promoted in the community. Destroying its appreciation and understanding of any purpose for dogs in the community.

Unless you happen to be part of a K.C registered body. ( which sees itself as distinct from the general community anyway)

This disbelief is not based on the dogs themselves, but on the practices of those operating outside of a K.C registered body.

There is nothing definitive about practices that divide a pedigree from a non pedigree breeder. So both are affected.

Every time a part of that community environment is lost it has flow on effects for the K.Cs .And vise versa.

This is entirely predictable.

Edited July 15, 2016 by moosmum

[Salukifan]

Looks like lure coursing is caught up in the ban too.

The NSW Lure Coursing Association is shocked and disappointed by recommendations on lure coursing made in The Report of the Special Commission of Inquiry into the Greyhound Racing Industry in NSW.

The recommendations, if implemented, would make the sport of lure coursing unviable by forcing anyone considering the sport to have to choose between the pets in their home.

Lure coursing is a purely amateur sport for pet dogs. Both pedigree and mixed breed dogs participate in lure coursing. There is no betting and no prize money for participants. Our dogs chase plastic bags around a string course that runs on pulleys. Dogs who do not chase the bag are not euthanased, they are pets first.

The practical impact of two of the Report’s Recommendations is that a pet dog owner who participates in lure coursing would be guilty of a criminal offence if their dog shared its home with any other species of small animal, such as a pet cat, or chickens. Our view is that the authors of the report could not have understood the difference between a coursing dog (live game) and lure coursing (no live game). The sport of lure coursing was developed specifically to provide a safe and humane alternative to the use of live game. We do not understand why our sport has been targeted by the Report.

The Commission actually states in its report that it has no evidence that there is live baiting occurring in lure coursing. That is hardly surprising in the circumstances. The Commission did not consult with the DogsNSW Lure Coursing Representative or indeed with anyone involved in lure coursing before making recommendations that are a slur on our many law abiding, companion animal loving participants. If implemented it is likely that the Recommendations would destroy our sport.

--Lhok

So this is a sport for pet dogs of all breeds and crossbreeds that has no live baiting, no wastage and no gambling.

Result? Restrictions, legislation and criminalisation of participants.

Just fantastic.

Last attempt.

You ban one environment where things aren't doing well and it will have flow on effects to other environments. How can not?

The whole environment that supports dogs is a single environment.

There is a belief in the K.Cs that pedigree dogs are the future- Nothing wrong with that belief, except that it comes with a DIS- belief there can be any future in non pedigree dogs.

That Disbelief is actively promoted in the community. Destroying its appreciation and understanding of any purpose for dogs in the community. Unless you happen to be part of a K.C registered body. ( which sees itself as distinct from the general community anyway)

Every time a part of that community environment is lost it has flow on effects for the K.Cs .And vise versa.

This is entirely predictable.

So glad we're supporting your theory. Bully for you.

Wish it felt better from the inside.

You do realise that crossbred dogs are captured by this too?

Edited July 15, 2016 by Haredown Whippets

[Lhok]

I think what Moosmum is trying to get through to us is that, the public doesn't see that dog breeding is different. There are issues with purebred dogs that has been brought up into the community and like greyhound racing we are left to regulate ourselves when it comes to how we are doing things.

Moosmum believes that the pedigree system is flawed because in the purebred world pedigrees are believed to hold value (i.e you can't/won't get breeders who breed outside of it because it means their dogs are not eligible for registry) and as a result of that more and more issues will come up as it is a closed gene pool.

I believe that Moosmum is trying to say that dogs bred outside of the pedigree system do have inherit value and should be allowed to add that back into the genepool of the closed system. This would be to open stud books and the flow on would be to add genetic variance. This would also show we value dogs and are working towards trying to make healthier pets.

I also think that Moosmum is trying to get this happening before the regulation catches up to us all and bans breeding because we couldn't regulate ourselves. I could be wrong but that is what have taken away from their posts.

--Lhok

[moosmum]

Looks like lure coursing is caught up in the ban too.

The NSW Lure Coursing Association is shocked and disappointed by recommendations on lure coursing made in The Report of the Special Commission of Inquiry into the Greyhound Racing Industry in NSW.

The recommendations, if implemented, would make the sport of lure coursing unviable by forcing anyone considering the sport to have to choose between the pets in their home.

Lure coursing is a purely amateur sport for pet dogs. Both pedigree and mixed breed dogs participate in lure coursing. There is no betting and no prize money for participants. Our dogs chase plastic bags around a string course that runs on pulleys. Dogs who do not chase the bag are not euthanased, they are pets first.

The practical impact of two of the Report’s Recommendations is that a pet dog owner who participates in lure coursing would be guilty of a criminal offence if their dog shared its home with any other species of small animal, such as a pet cat, or chickens. Our view is that the authors of the report could not have understood the difference between a coursing dog (live game) and lure coursing (no live game). The sport of lure coursing was developed specifically to provide a safe and humane alternative to the use of live game. We do not understand why our sport has been targeted by the Report.

The Commission actually states in its report that it has no evidence that there is live baiting occurring in lure coursing. That is hardly surprising in the circumstances. The Commission did not consult with the DogsNSW Lure Coursing Representative or indeed with anyone involved in lure coursing before making recommendations that are a slur on our many law abiding, companion animal loving participants. If implemented it is likely that the Recommendations would destroy our sport.

--Lhok

So this is a sport for pet dogs of all breeds and crossbreeds that has no live baiting, no wastage and no gambling.

Result? Restrictions, legislation and criminalisation of participants.

Just fantastic.

Last attempt.

You ban one environment where things aren't doing well and it will have flow on effects to other environments. How can not?

The whole environment that supports dogs is a single environment.

There is a belief in the K.Cs that pedigree dogs are the future- Nothing wrong with that belief, except that it comes with a DIS- belief there can be any future in non pedigree dogs.

That Disbelief is actively promoted in the community. Destroying its appreciation and understanding of any purpose for dogs in the community. Unless you happen to be part of a K.C registered body. ( which sees itself as distinct from the general community anyway)

Every time a part of that community environment is lost it has flow on effects for the K.Cs .And vise versa.

This is entirely predictable.

So glad we're supporting your theory. Bully for you.

Wish it felt better from the inside.

You do realise that crossbred dogs are captured by this too?

You think this makes me happy!!?

Of course I realize cross bred dogs are caught up in this too. It is a single species. What effects part affects all.

[moosmum]

I think what Moosmum is trying to get through to us is that, the public doesn't see that dog breeding is different. There are issues with purebred dogs that has been brought up into the community and like greyhound racing we are left to regulate ourselves when it comes to how we are doing things.

Moosmum believes that the pedigree system is flawed because in the purebred world pedigrees are believed to hold value (i.e you can't/won't get breeders who breed outside of it because it means their dogs are not eligible for registry) and as a result of that more and more issues will come up as it is a closed gene pool.

I believe that Moosmum is trying to say that dogs bred outside of the pedigree system do have inherit value and should be allowed to add that back into the genepool of the closed system. This would be to open stud books and the flow on would be to add genetic variance. This would also show we value dogs and are working towards trying to make healthier pets.

I also think that Moosmum is trying to get this happening before the regulation catches up to us all and bans breeding because we couldn't regulate ourselves. I could be wrong but that is what have taken away from their posts.

--Lhok

You are mostly right.

The pedigree system is no more or less flawed than any other section. Its all a mess.

As for opening stud books, I am not saying they should be. Thats a case by case thing.

I am saying in the current culture of pedigree breeders thats very unlikely to happen in a timely way when it might BE needed, because there IS a fostered disbelief in 'breaking' a closed line, or altering accepted standards. Cross breeding.

Its seen as a dilution of standards.

The pedigree breeder culture MUST accept that there can be value in a non pedigree dog before they will accept any dilution of pedigrees as they are now, At this point in time.

'Standards' of practice can be brought to dogs with out a pedigree. Standards are not the preserve of pedigrees alone.

The pedigree 'Breed' standards are set in time.

So there needs to be recognition of value in breeding for purposes other than the pedigree itself. For the dogs and the people who want them. Regardless of a pedigree.

And the only way I can see to do that is to encourage good knowledgeable breeders to put that knowledge to use. Show what CAN be accomplished with GOOD practices out side the pedigree standards. Cross breed for purposes outside the pedigree system to meet demands and promote the practices that DO bring value.

Pedigree dogs can contribute to values out side the pedigree system itself, and non pedigree dogs can still contribute to a purpose.

Then you should start to get support for common purpose in keeping dogs instead of this steady attrition.

The opening of stud books would still be up to the breed clubs and the K.Cs. But there would be value on display to compare and choose from. Demonstrated.

Edited July 15, 2016 by moosmum

[Salukifan]

What "inherent value" comes from crossbreeding sighthounds?

What would other breeds or crossbreeds bring to the Whippet?

I remain intrigued by the notion that society's attitude to dogs is driven by the breeding practices of a minority.

I think issues such as increasing disconnection from animals across the board play their part.

And major animal welfare organisations being steered by people who don't believe in companion animals is another factor. The recommendations in the Greyhound report that see LC owner prohibited from owning other pets come from the RSPCA. They wanted it to be unlawful for ALL sighthound owners to have cats.

And it is the RSPCA who've been handed the job of rehoming the Greys. How many do you think they are going to kill as "unsuitable" for pet homes. "Cat friendly greyhounds" don't exist in their universe.

Edited July 15, 2016 by Haredown Whippets

[Sheridan]

Is Moosmum just trying to say all dogs have value to someone no matter their origin?

[Salukifan]

Is Moosmum just trying to say all dogs have value to someone no matter their origin?

[moosmum]

What "inherent value" comes from crossbreeding sighthounds?

What would other breeds or crossbreeds bring to the Whippet?

I don't know.

I don't have a purpose for such a cross myself. It would depend entirely on some one seeing a purpose.

Maybe for increased resiliance over rugged terrain?

But adapting to purpose when you see one is evolution. It needn't change the whippet, or sighthound, but could become a new breed for registration if theres enough need to support that purpose.

The predictable, inherent speed is the obvious value brought to the cross and maybe whippets and sight hounds are just fine as they are for now. As breeds. But let the purpose evolve.

Or would you rather the purpose and standards of the dogs remain frozen in time? Like the greyhound industry?

wWhat is the reason for the disconnect? There is one.

Edited July 15, 2016 by moosmum

[Salukifan]

I don't know.

I don't personaly have a purpose for such a cross and it would depend entirely on some one seeing a purpose.

Maybe for increased resiliance over rugged terrain?

But adapting to a purpose when there is one is evolution. It needn't change the whippet, or sighthound, but could become a new breed for registration if the need is great enough.

That's precisely what happens now. They're called breeds in development.

And of course Lurchers have existed for centuries.

Edited July 15, 2016 by Haredown Whippets