Nsw To Ban Greyhound Racing From July 2017

[HazyWal]

Good posts.

Patience everyone - as I keep saying it will sort itself out - it will just be a slower death to the industry now, given I believe it's completely incapable of change - and it would seem the 'business as usual' since the removal of the bans just proves my point.

And I'm sorry for any 'collateral damage' - but so many of these people stood by and did nothing making them as culpable as the perpetrators of such abject cruelty and misery. asal the paedophile analogy is a good one as exactly the same thing happened there - similarly so many people actively covered it up or turned a blind eye and it took a number of Royal Commissions sadly to get to the bottom it (and sadly I suspect we haven't seen the end of that ) - and those who 'turned a blind eye' are now being seen as culpable as the perpetrators - and the same will happen here - sexual assault of children and young people, abject cruelty to animals - all deserve to have the key thrown away IMO.

I don't believe there is one person - not one - on DOL who in the same position as the majority of this industry who would have stood by and done nothing. We are a great community and set high standards for ourselves and our members - and we expect the same from others.

WM I'm interested to know how many people you personally know in the greyhound industry. Have you been to a kennel or breeding/rearing facility or at least attended a track? Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't you only recently meet a greyhound for the first time?

Correcting Hazy. I grew up in a racing family - we owned race horses, I rode and I went to 'the dogs' many times and have been to kennels owned by friends of my father (he always had to be fully involved in everything he did ) .

It was Andy my westie who met a grey for the first time recently - Harley's beautiful Polly - not me. .

Ah I thought you grew up in a horse racing family, so did I. My father was a bookmaker (I've been to more tracks than most people have had hot dinners)he also drove trotters and owned thoroughbreds and my grandfather and two of my uncles owned greyhounds so I've had a lifetime of experience across all three codes of racing. Ahhhh the good old days but times have changed, thankfully. You should get yourself along to a greyhound kennel in your area and see how different it is these days. I can try and organise it in your state if you would like so you can speak personally to a trainer? There are many trainers across most states that have offered many times for people to visit their facilities to see first hand how they are run but unfortunately people would rather just believe what they read on main stream and social media. The new track at Murray Bridge will be state of the art, go along to a meeting when it opens. Shame you're not in Victoria, you could visit Larissa (gapvic on DOL) and see how the welfare programmes work here, I've been there because I like to see things first hand and it's fantastic. She has been with Greyhound Racing Victoria for many years and I'm sure she would not be involved with an organisation that is rife with this "systematic" cruelty you speak of. Anyway just let me know and I'll see what I can tee up in SA.

[Maddy]

I see the angle you are coming from but to compare the incredibly diverse people who have dogs for equally diverse reasons to being the body of a single dog with cancer that the whole dog has to die because you cant separate the cancer from the dog as an analogy that all dog owners have to be eliminated to get rid of the cancer is just as ingenuious as you accuse me of in comparing the problem with a war. This is a war, ask any AR campaigner, they think this war is in its final stages, is almost won.

Are we talking about greyhounds here or dogs in general? Because this discussion is specifically about greyhound racing and that really narrows down the people involved. The vast majority of participants are involved to make money. If money was not the reason for their involvement, dogs wouldn't be discarded like used tissues. If they were truly in it for the love of the dogs, they wouldn't be shooting the dogs, dumping the dogs, overbeeding the dogs to the point that rehoming them all becomes impossible. If it was "just a hobby", they sure as hell wouldn't be dropping $10k on a pup or constantly looking for ways to illicitly gain an advantage.

I'm starting to think that if you're so cool with the industry, maybe YOU should try cleaning up after them. Put your money where your mouth is- you seem to think nothing much is wrong so if that's the case, becoming a greyhound rescuer should be easy work, right?

in case you havent noticed the war is going on in other fronts, greyhounds was almost a winner, victory may have been postponed for a while but still ongoing, those neat little laws hopefully passed in victoria will be shoved forward for all states it will effectively shut down all as will the greyhound agenda. do you really think this isnt all linked?

If you haven't noticed, the neddys are in the sights too

All these "wars", but you're in here, fighting this one. Don't dodge the question with more long-winded, irrelevant misdirection and absurd arguments. If you support the industry and believe it's all just an AR beat-up, you should have no problems opening up a greyhound rescue. After all, it's not necessary, is it? Trainers all love their dogs, breeding is all under control, everything is just fine.

As for the "sheeple" crap.. please. You're not some enlightened visionary, bravely fighting for the rights of dog owners. People like you are the reason things have gotten to this point.

Not really but I was hoping. legislation is harder to get around and gives people who complain more power and more places to go to when they do complain.

I don't think reforms, research, reviews and smoke and mirrors is what won the day for the industry, these were all present when Baird decided to ban racing, people power is what did it for them, the squeaky wheel etc they were very proactive.

If those outside the industry with knowledge on the rot in the industry had stopped sitting on their hands and spoken up and they be the squeaky wheel, they may have been able to keep Baird from changing his mind.

Squeaky wheels still have to have an argument though, and their argument was my points above.

The sad thing is.. you often hear trainers complaining about X person because their dogs seem very prone to drinking chocolate milk, eating lots of bread with poppy seeds on it or eating meat that was "somehow" contaminated with banned substances but those people will never officially complain because they know that, like whistle blowers before them, they'll be forced out of the industry if they speak up. It's the culture of the industry and changing cultures is not easy. Even with the huge ban scare, they still haven't changed. If the announcement of the ban being passed was not enough to scare them into change, I honestly don't know what could possibly work. More rules and more education doesn't seem to have achieved anything and it never will while people are so willing to cheat or seriously compromise on the dogs' welfare to get ahead.

[westiemum]

Just fixing the quote up as Maddy has jumped in!! .

Edited November 9, 2016 by westiemum

[westiemum]

Good posts.

Patience everyone - as I keep saying it will sort itself out - it will just be a slower death to the industry now, given I believe it's completely incapable of change - and it would seem the 'business as usual' since the removal of the bans just proves my point.

And I'm sorry for any 'collateral damage' - but so many of these people stood by and did nothing making them as culpable as the perpetrators of such abject cruelty and misery. asal the paedophile analogy is a good one as exactly the same thing happened there - similarly so many people actively covered it up or turned a blind eye and it took a number of Royal Commissions sadly to get to the bottom it (and sadly I suspect we haven't seen the end of that ) - and those who 'turned a blind eye' are now being seen as culpable as the perpetrators - and the same will happen here - sexual assault of children and young people, abject cruelty to animals - all deserve to have the key thrown away IMO.

I don't believe there is one person - not one - on DOL who in the same position as the majority of this industry who would have stood by and done nothing. We are a great community and set high standards for ourselves and our members - and we expect the same from others.

WM I'm interested to know how many people you personally know in the greyhound industry. Have you been to a kennel or breeding/rearing facility or at least attended a track? Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't you only recently meet a greyhound for the first time?

Correcting Hazy. I grew up in a racing family - we owned race horses, I rode and I went to 'the dogs' many times and have been to kennels owned by friends of my father (he always had to be fully involved in everything he did ) .

It was Andy my westie who met a grey for the first time recently - Harley's beautiful Polly - not me. .

Ah I thought you grew up in a horse racing family, so did I. My father was a bookmaker (I've been to more tracks than most people have had hot dinners)he also drove trotters and owned thoroughbreds and my grandfather and two of my uncles owned greyhounds so I've had a lifetime of experience across all three codes of racing. Ahhhh the good old days but times have changed, thankfully. You should get yourself along to a greyhound kennel in your area and see how different it is these days. I can try and organise it in your state if you would like so you can speak personally to a trainer? There are many trainers across most states that have offered many times for people to visit their facilities to see first hand how they are run but unfortunately people would rather just believe what they read on main stream and social media. The new track at Murray Bridge will be state of the art, go along to a meeting when it opens. Shame you're not in Victoria, you could visit Larissa (gapvic on DOL) and see how the welfare programmes work here, I've been there because I like to see things first hand and it's fantastic. She has been with Greyhound Racing Victoria for many years and I'm sure she would not be involved with an organisation that is rife with this "systematic" cruelty you speak of. Anyway just let me know and I'll see what I can tee up in SA.

Thanks for your reply Hazy. Need to explain something to you that I haven't talked about in a very very long time... so you understand...

I loved horse racing - the track, the race day atmosphere, the occasional bet, the access it gave me to these beautiful creatures - and never gave the welfare of the horses a single thought. Not one.

It was the 'nobbling' of my families horse who was favourite for the Darwin Cup when I was in my early 20's which first brought me smack bang up against the under belly of animal racing. I loved that horse - he was such beautiful boy - and I rode him on the track at Fannie Bay a couple of times. He died a cruel, painful miserable death alone in his stall two nights before the race. I had no idea people would do such things and my love for horse racing came crashing down and it was the beginning of my growing unease with industries which use animals for profit, status and entertainment in this way. The autopsy proved poison and yet of course the stewards and police investigation didn't go anywhere. I always felt they didn't try very hard and they all just wanted it swept under the carpet and forgotten. I can still cry for that horse and haven't attended a horse racing meeting since.

Later, I never enjoyed attending the dogs either - at the time, my feelings why were vague and undefined but I just felt something was wrong with dogs chasing stuffed bunnies while a mostly drunk crowd cheered (In Darwin in those days 90% of the crowd were off their faces by race 3). It was somehow all a bit macabre. And soon after I decided I would not attend any sort of animal race track again.

So I absolutely take your word for it that things have changed at the dog tracks and thank you for your kind offer. But I'm going to decline - my families horses death (can't write his name without crying) - the sight of him dead in his stall is burned into my brain and the searing grief - that I genuinely can't go near a track of any kind - state of the art or not. Just can't do it.

But when I'm next visiting my brother in Melbourne I'd be very interested to meet you and gapvic and see how GAPVIC works - as long as I don't have to go near a track. And when the time comes (and I hopefully finally have a permanent address!) I'll get in touch with GAP here - I'm sure a grey is in my future!! And so is Andy! Now I'm going back to talk about that menace in the US!

Edited November 9, 2016 by westiemum

[asal]

Maddy, animal rights have one agenda, no pets.

many pure bred breeders are happy to join the get rid of backyarders and that includes adding to the witch hunt any pure bred member of their group who doesn't march to their beat of the drum. as for the millions of backyarders with lovely dogs be they x bred or unpapered purebreds all this legislation isn't going to find them anyway.

once the dust settles it is the ankc's will have some decisions to make. open to studbooks to find outside blood due to too few left like happened with the stumpy tailed cattledogs. The untapped gene pool is where the species is going to survive.

I do not know any grey hound breeders or racers, I do know some friends whose family members who have a brothers or their dads retired racer gracing their lounge and lives though.

such elegant and loving dogs although there doesn't tend to be much room left on a lounge for the human though once those graceful limbs are at full stretch in the gods reclining position

Edited November 9, 2016 by asal

[m-j]

Squeaky wheels still have to have an argument though, and their argument was my points above.

The sad thing is.. you often hear trainers complaining about X person because their dogs seem very prone to drinking chocolate milk, eating lots of bread with poppy seeds on it or eating meat that was "somehow" contaminated with banned substances but those people will never officially complain because they know that, like whistle blowers before them, they'll be forced out of the industry if they speak up. It's the culture of the industry and changing cultures is not easy. Even with the huge ban scare, they still haven't changed. If the announcement of the ban being passed was not enough to scare them into change, I honestly don't know what could possibly work. More rules and more education doesn't seem to have achieved anything and it never will while people are so willing to cheat or seriously compromise on the dogs' welfare to get ahead.

No they weren't, the emphasis was on livelihoods and the misinformation in the inquiry, the reforms that have been implemented were only a very small part of it.

I do know what you are saying is true re whistleblowers that is why if the law outside the industry was on their side they would have had more power to be listened to as I said before. I know you have had dealings with scum just as I have but they are not the only ones in this industry but they are the only ones that are worth giving anecdotal credence to as the good stuff is uninteresting.

Edited November 9, 2016 by m-j

[Maddy]

Squeaky wheels still have to have an argument though, and their argument was my points above.

The sad thing is.. you often hear trainers complaining about X person because their dogs seem very prone to drinking chocolate milk, eating lots of bread with poppy seeds on it or eating meat that was "somehow" contaminated with banned substances but those people will never officially complain because they know that, like whistle blowers before them, they'll be forced out of the industry if they speak up. It's the culture of the industry and changing cultures is not easy. Even with the huge ban scare, they still haven't changed. If the announcement of the ban being passed was not enough to scare them into change, I honestly don't know what could possibly work. More rules and more education doesn't seem to have achieved anything and it never will while people are so willing to cheat or seriously compromise on the dogs' welfare to get ahead.

No they weren't, the emphasis was on livelihoods and the misinformation in the inquiry, the reforms that have been implemented were only a very small part of it.

I do know what you are saying is true re whistleblowers that is why if the law outside the industry was on their side they would have had more power to be listened to as I said before. I know you have had dealings with scum just as I have but they are not the only ones in this industry but they are the only ones that are worth giving anecdotal credence to as the good stuff is uninteresting.

If you look back through this thread, there were people involved in the industry claiming that a lot of reform has happened and that, in itself, was a reason not to support a ban. And outside of this forum, on many of the FB racing groups, the same thing was being argued. Not that any of it matters now, of course. The industry will bully and whine their way out of any of the proposed reforms and nothing will change.

As for people only paying attention to the bad stuff.. maybe part of that is because it outweighs a lot of the good when you're on the disposals end of the business. Last weekend, for the first time in the roughly ten years I have been rescuing greyhounds, a trainer agreed to take back a dog that wasn't suitable for rehoming. The first time. In ten years. The other 99.9% of the time, I get told that if I "won't keep the dog myself" (trying to make me feel guilty for not keeping every dog who fails) that I should take it to a vet to be PTS. My experience with the industry has been overwhelmingly negative. Some trainers are kind enough to let me take the dogs they no longer want, but many will not if it inconveniences them by so much as having to keep the dog for one day longer than they want to. For a very long time, I defended the industry for the sake of the breed but I'm done. I won't be quiet while people like asal obfuscate the discussion with garbage about secret agendas and the RSPCA and immigrants and wars, trying to distract people away from the facts- ironically, to suit the agenda that they have.

I love the breed and I don't want to see it disappear but I can't support what I know to be wrong.

[asal]

Squeaky wheels still have to have an argument though, and their argument was my points above.

The sad thing is.. you often hear trainers complaining about X person because their dogs seem very prone to drinking chocolate milk, eating lots of bread with poppy seeds on it or eating meat that was "somehow" contaminated with banned substances but those people will never officially complain because they know that, like whistle blowers before them, they'll be forced out of the industry if they speak up. It's the culture of the industry and changing cultures is not easy. Even with the huge ban scare, they still haven't changed. If the announcement of the ban being passed was not enough to scare them into change, I honestly don't know what could possibly work. More rules and more education doesn't seem to have achieved anything and it never will while people are so willing to cheat or seriously compromise on the dogs' welfare to get ahead.

No they weren't, the emphasis was on livelihoods and the misinformation in the inquiry, the reforms that have been implemented were only a very small part of it.

I do know what you are saying is true re whistleblowers that is why if the law outside the industry was on their side they would have had more power to be listened to as I said before. I know you have had dealings with scum just as I have but they are not the only ones in this industry but they are the only ones that are worth giving anecdotal credence to as the good stuff is uninteresting.

If you look back through this thread, there were people involved in the industry claiming that a lot of reform has happened and that, in itself, was a reason not to support a ban. And outside of this forum, on many of the FB racing groups, the same thing was being argued. Not that any of it matters now, of course. The industry will bully and whine their way out of any of the proposed reforms and nothing will change.

As for people only paying attention to the bad stuff.. maybe part of that is because it outweighs a lot of the good when you're on the disposals end of the business. Last weekend, for the first time in the roughly ten years I have been rescuing greyhounds, a trainer agreed to take back a dog that wasn't suitable for rehoming. The first time. In ten years. The other 99.9% of the time, I get told that if I "won't keep the dog myself" (trying to make me feel guilty for not keeping every dog who fails) that I should take it to a vet to be PTS. My experience with the industry has been overwhelmingly negative. Some trainers are kind enough to let me take the dogs they no longer want, but many will not if it inconveniences them by so much as having to keep the dog for one day longer than they want to. For a very long time, I defended the industry for the sake of the breed but I'm done. I won't be quiet while people like asal obfuscate the discussion with garbage about secret agendas and the RSPCA and immigrants and wars, trying to distract people away from the facts- ironically, to suit the agenda that they have.

I love the breed and I don't want to see it disappear but I can't support what I know to be wrong.

good post until you mentioned secret agenda's, its not secret.

the only agenda as you put it was AR is not about animal rights its about eliminating domestic animals, even the victorian govt has finally noticed that the rspca is no longer animal welfare focused,I saw the letter In Jacki Kelly's office in Penrith, sent to a member of her staff, the staff member showed it to me personally in 2000 extorting her to get her family and friends to join and vote as PETA was attempting to infiltrate and take over. Considering the change in direction since the coup has been accomplished.

But hey whatever floats your boat.

no one is listening to you or me.

there are bad people , there are good people and millions in between. the majority go with whatever flow is passing with no thought to the future or what it means

[moosmum]

Squeaky wheels still have to have an argument though, and their argument was my points above.

The sad thing is.. you often hear trainers complaining about X person because their dogs seem very prone to drinking chocolate milk, eating lots of bread with poppy seeds on it or eating meat that was "somehow" contaminated with banned substances but those people will never officially complain because they know that, like whistle blowers before them, they'll be forced out of the industry if they speak up. It's the culture of the industry and changing cultures is not easy. Even with the huge ban scare, they still haven't changed. If the announcement of the ban being passed was not enough to scare them into change, I honestly don't know what could possibly work. More rules and more education doesn't seem to have achieved anything and it never will while people are so willing to cheat or seriously compromise on the dogs' welfare to get ahead.

No they weren't, the emphasis was on livelihoods and the misinformation in the inquiry, the reforms that have been implemented were only a very small part of it.

I do know what you are saying is true re whistleblowers that is why if the law outside the industry was on their side they would have had more power to be listened to as I said before. I know you have had dealings with scum just as I have but they are not the only ones in this industry but they are the only ones that are worth giving anecdotal credence to as the good stuff is uninteresting.

If you look back through this thread, there were people involved in the industry claiming that a lot of reform has happened and that, in itself, was a reason not to support a ban. And outside of this forum, on many of the FB racing groups, the same thing was being argued. Not that any of it matters now, of course. The industry will bully and whine their way out of any of the proposed reforms and nothing will change.

As for people only paying attention to the bad stuff.. maybe part of that is because it outweighs a lot of the good when you're on the disposals end of the business. Last weekend, for the first time in the roughly ten years I have been rescuing greyhounds, a trainer agreed to take back a dog that wasn't suitable for rehoming. The first time. In ten years. The other 99.9% of the time, I get told that if I "won't keep the dog myself" (trying to make me feel guilty for not keeping every dog who fails) that I should take it to a vet to be PTS. My experience with the industry has been overwhelmingly negative. Some trainers are kind enough to let me take the dogs they no longer want, but many will not if it inconveniences them by so much as having to keep the dog for one day longer than they want to. For a very long time, I defended the industry for the sake of the breed but I'm done. I won't be quiet while people like asal obfuscate the discussion with garbage about secret agendas and the RSPCA and immigrants and wars, trying to distract people away from the facts- ironically, to suit the agenda that they have.

I love the breed and I don't want to see it disappear but I can't support what I know to be wrong.

By letting the purpose for the breed go. Thats what I find so sad, and frustrating.

No one here is denying facts, or obfuscating them. No one here condones the wastage or cruelty.

You have a set of facts that form your conclusions and solutions. I just think they are incomplete. That you need to look at WHY those ARE facts to deal effectively with them. Not just deal with whats happening, but look for WHY its happening if we aren't going to employ the same 'solution' every time people stuff up, because human nature is that there will always be proportion who stuff up, as long as there is reason for people to keep dogs.

I don't think taking away their purpose to keep dogs is the answer.

Edited November 10, 2016 by moosmum

[Maddy]

Squeaky wheels still have to have an argument though, and their argument was my points above.

The sad thing is.. you often hear trainers complaining about X person because their dogs seem very prone to drinking chocolate milk, eating lots of bread with poppy seeds on it or eating meat that was "somehow" contaminated with banned substances but those people will never officially complain because they know that, like whistle blowers before them, they'll be forced out of the industry if they speak up. It's the culture of the industry and changing cultures is not easy. Even with the huge ban scare, they still haven't changed. If the announcement of the ban being passed was not enough to scare them into change, I honestly don't know what could possibly work. More rules and more education doesn't seem to have achieved anything and it never will while people are so willing to cheat or seriously compromise on the dogs' welfare to get ahead.

No they weren't, the emphasis was on livelihoods and the misinformation in the inquiry, the reforms that have been implemented were only a very small part of it.

I do know what you are saying is true re whistleblowers that is why if the law outside the industry was on their side they would have had more power to be listened to as I said before. I know you have had dealings with scum just as I have but they are not the only ones in this industry but they are the only ones that are worth giving anecdotal credence to as the good stuff is uninteresting.

If you look back through this thread, there were people involved in the industry claiming that a lot of reform has happened and that, in itself, was a reason not to support a ban. And outside of this forum, on many of the FB racing groups, the same thing was being argued. Not that any of it matters now, of course. The industry will bully and whine their way out of any of the proposed reforms and nothing will change.

As for people only paying attention to the bad stuff.. maybe part of that is because it outweighs a lot of the good when you're on the disposals end of the business. Last weekend, for the first time in the roughly ten years I have been rescuing greyhounds, a trainer agreed to take back a dog that wasn't suitable for rehoming. The first time. In ten years. The other 99.9% of the time, I get told that if I "won't keep the dog myself" (trying to make me feel guilty for not keeping every dog who fails) that I should take it to a vet to be PTS. My experience with the industry has been overwhelmingly negative. Some trainers are kind enough to let me take the dogs they no longer want, but many will not if it inconveniences them by so much as having to keep the dog for one day longer than they want to. For a very long time, I defended the industry for the sake of the breed but I'm done. I won't be quiet while people like asal obfuscate the discussion with garbage about secret agendas and the RSPCA and immigrants and wars, trying to distract people away from the facts- ironically, to suit the agenda that they have.

I love the breed and I don't want to see it disappear but I can't support what I know to be wrong.

good post until you mentioned secret agenda's, its not secret.

the only agenda as you put it was AR is not about animal rights its about eliminating domestic animals, even the victorian govt has finally noticed that the rspca is no longer animal welfare focused,I saw the letter In Jacki Kelly's office in Penrith, sent to a member of her staff, the staff member showed it to me personally in 2000 extorting her to get her family and friends to join and vote as PETA was attempting to infiltrate and take over. Considering the change in direction since the coup has been accomplished.

But hey whatever floats your boat.

no one is listening to you or me.

there are bad people , there are good people and millions in between. the majority go with whatever flow is passing with no thought to the future or what it means

You have admitted that you don't actually know shit about what goes on in the industry. Unlike you, my opinion of the industry is formed from knowledge and experience. I am not an AR supporter, I live 27km away from a pit filled with hundreds of dead greyhounds that the industry regulators are well aware of. God only knows how many greyhounds, all from one trainer. So yeah, tell me again about how my feelings about the industry are just buying into AR propaganda.

You have a set of facts that form your conclusions and solutions. I just think they are incomplete. That you need to look at WHY those ARE facts to deal effectively with them. Not just deal with whats happening, but look for WHY its happening if we aren't going to employ the same 'solution' every time people stuff up, because human nature is that there will always be proportion who stuff up, as long as there is reason for people to keep dogs.

You're making assumptions there. I understand perfectly well why the industry does what it does. There is no great mystery to it. Desperately trying to pretend that those of us who feel that the current industry needs to be completely dismantled are somehow ignorant of the causes or possible fixes of the issue is almost as absurd as the arguments that equate greyhound trainers with refugees. If you think people who use small animals to bait dogs, or people who will euthanase 30% of a litter without a second thought, are deserving of even more chances to continue as they are, then I think we'll have to agree to disagree on what is/isn't acceptable for the welfare of the dogs.

Way to represent ANKC breeders, btw- as essentially supportive of an industry that is rife with massive welfare issues, just to protect their own arses. Nice work.

[melzawelza]

You're making assumptions there. I understand perfectly well why the industry does what it does. There is no great mystery to it. Desperately trying to pretend that those of us who feel that the current industry needs to be completely dismantled are somehow ignorant of the causes or possible fixes of the issue is almost as absurd as the arguments that equate greyhound trainers with refugees. If you think people who use small animals to bait dogs, or people who will euthanase 30% of a litter without a second thought, are deserving of even more chances to continue as they are, then I think we'll have to agree to disagree on what is/isn't acceptable for the welfare of the dogs.

Way to represent ANKC breeders, btw- as essentially supportive of an industry that is rife with massive welfare issues, just to protect their own arses. Nice work.

Excellent post.

[HazyWal]

asal Greyhounds will be exempt in Vic. They come unde the racing code.

sarcasm alert perhaps,

interesting, so they wont have to register as a business, get council permit, get an abn or the 10 million insurance? and allowed to keep their retired dogs?

perhaps everyone should call their dogs greyhounds and race them, even if its only once in their lifetime?

Well there are still council approvals required - an article on the paper about a council kicking a Greyhound breeder out. A Local Laws issue rather than a welfare issue by the sounds of it.

If this is the one in the Cranbourne area they were not "kicked out" by council at all. The council rejected the application after a huge push from the Animal Justice Party and anti racing groups (most who wouldn't even know where Cranbourne was) and a neighbour who was concerned about the noise and that the greys could escape and chase her chooks. Yep. They sold the property without appeal to Frankston Council and relocated to South Gippsland.

[HazyWal]

I'm sorry to hear about your families horse Westiemum yes nobbling was quite common back in the day, I think there wouldn't be many people who don't know the story of Phar Lap. I wasn't inviting you to the track I was just saying a new track is due for completion next year in Murray Bridge and if you hadn't been to a track in many years I suggested you go along. I understand completely why you would never go near a track again. My invitation was to visit a kennel facility, no where near a track, to see what goes on today but yes, when you're next in Melbs we would love to meet you and so would Stan and Maddie :) GAPSA were over here not long ago to see how well GAPVIC operates, they are making many improvements in fact GRSA just implemented a track injury fund that will provide funds to help greys involved in race related accidents and after rehab, fast track their entry to the GAPSA programme.

[asal]

Squeaky wheels still have to have an argument though, and their argument was my points above.

The sad thing is.. you often hear trainers complaining about X person because their dogs seem very prone to drinking chocolate milk, eating lots of bread with poppy seeds on it or eating meat that was "somehow" contaminated with banned substances but those people will never officially complain because they know that, like whistle blowers before them, they'll be forced out of the industry if they speak up. It's the culture of the industry and changing cultures is not easy. Even with the huge ban scare, they still haven't changed. If the announcement of the ban being passed was not enough to scare them into change, I honestly don't know what could possibly work. More rules and more education doesn't seem to have achieved anything and it never will while people are so willing to cheat or seriously compromise on the dogs' welfare to get ahead.

No they weren't, the emphasis was on livelihoods and the misinformation in the inquiry, the reforms that have been implemented were only a very small part of it.

I do know what you are saying is true re whistleblowers that is why if the law outside the industry was on their side they would have had more power to be listened to as I said before. I know you have had dealings with scum just as I have but they are not the only ones in this industry but they are the only ones that are worth giving anecdotal credence to as the good stuff is uninteresting.

If you look back through this thread, there were people involved in the industry claiming that a lot of reform has happened and that, in itself, was a reason not to support a ban. And outside of this forum, on many of the FB racing groups, the same thing was being argued. Not that any of it matters now, of course. The industry will bully and whine their way out of any of the proposed reforms and nothing will change.

As for people only paying attention to the bad stuff.. maybe part of that is because it outweighs a lot of the good when you're on the disposals end of the business. Last weekend, for the first time in the roughly ten years I have been rescuing greyhounds, a trainer agreed to take back a dog that wasn't suitable for rehoming. The first time. In ten years. The other 99.9% of the time, I get told that if I "won't keep the dog myself" (trying to make me feel guilty for not keeping every dog who fails) that I should take it to a vet to be PTS. My experience with the industry has been overwhelmingly negative. Some trainers are kind enough to let me take the dogs they no longer want, but many will not if it inconveniences them by so much as having to keep the dog for one day longer than they want to. For a very long time, I defended the industry for the sake of the breed but I'm done. I won't be quiet while people like asal obfuscate the discussion with garbage about secret agendas and the RSPCA and immigrants and wars, trying to distract people away from the facts- ironically, to suit the agenda that they have.

I love the breed and I don't want to see it disappear but I can't support what I know to be wrong.

good post until you mentioned secret agenda's, its not secret.

the only agenda as you put it was AR is not about animal rights its about eliminating domestic animals, even the victorian govt has finally noticed that the rspca is no longer animal welfare focused,I saw the letter In Jacki Kelly's office in Penrith, sent to a member of her staff, the staff member showed it to me personally in 2000 extorting her to get her family and friends to join and vote as PETA was attempting to infiltrate and take over. Considering the change in direction since the coup has been accomplished.

But hey whatever floats your boat.

no one is listening to you or me.

there are bad people , there are good people and millions in between. the majority go with whatever flow is passing with no thought to the future or what it means

You have admitted that you don't actually know shit about what goes on in the industry. Unlike you, my opinion of the industry is formed from knowledge and experience. I am not an AR supporter, I live 27km away from a pit filled with hundreds of dead greyhounds that the industry regulators are well aware of. God only knows how many greyhounds, all from one trainer. So yeah, tell me again about how my feelings about the industry are just buying into AR propaganda.

You have a set of facts that form your conclusions and solutions. I just think they are incomplete. That you need to look at WHY those ARE facts to deal effectively with them. Not just deal with whats happening, but look for WHY its happening if we aren't going to employ the same 'solution' every time people stuff up, because human nature is that there will always be proportion who stuff up, as long as there is reason for people to keep dogs.

You're making assumptions there. I understand perfectly well why the industry does what it does. There is no great mystery to it. Desperately trying to pretend that those of us who feel that the current industry needs to be completely dismantled are somehow ignorant of the causes or possible fixes of the issue is almost as absurd as the arguments that equate greyhound trainers with refugees. If you think people who use small animals to bait dogs, or people who will euthanase 30% of a litter without a second thought, are deserving of even more chances to continue as they are, then I think we'll have to agree to disagree on what is/isn't acceptable for the welfare of the dogs.

Way to represent ANKC breeders, btw- as essentially supportive of an industry that is rife with massive welfare issues, just to protect their own arses. Nice work.

reply and quote what I did say, and dismiss anything I have if you like. but the red is not said by me. I think to be fair attribute it to who did say it when you reply surely

[Maddy]

Squeaky wheels still have to have an argument though, and their argument was my points above.

The sad thing is.. you often hear trainers complaining about X person because their dogs seem very prone to drinking chocolate milk, eating lots of bread with poppy seeds on it or eating meat that was "somehow" contaminated with banned substances but those people will never officially complain because they know that, like whistle blowers before them, they'll be forced out of the industry if they speak up. It's the culture of the industry and changing cultures is not easy. Even with the huge ban scare, they still haven't changed. If the announcement of the ban being passed was not enough to scare them into change, I honestly don't know what could possibly work. More rules and more education doesn't seem to have achieved anything and it never will while people are so willing to cheat or seriously compromise on the dogs' welfare to get ahead.

No they weren't, the emphasis was on livelihoods and the misinformation in the inquiry, the reforms that have been implemented were only a very small part of it.

I do know what you are saying is true re whistleblowers that is why if the law outside the industry was on their side they would have had more power to be listened to as I said before. I know you have had dealings with scum just as I have but they are not the only ones in this industry but they are the only ones that are worth giving anecdotal credence to as the good stuff is uninteresting.

If you look back through this thread, there were people involved in the industry claiming that a lot of reform has happened and that, in itself, was a reason not to support a ban. And outside of this forum, on many of the FB racing groups, the same thing was being argued. Not that any of it matters now, of course. The industry will bully and whine their way out of any of the proposed reforms and nothing will change.

As for people only paying attention to the bad stuff.. maybe part of that is because it outweighs a lot of the good when you're on the disposals end of the business. Last weekend, for the first time in the roughly ten years I have been rescuing greyhounds, a trainer agreed to take back a dog that wasn't suitable for rehoming. The first time. In ten years. The other 99.9% of the time, I get told that if I "won't keep the dog myself" (trying to make me feel guilty for not keeping every dog who fails) that I should take it to a vet to be PTS. My experience with the industry has been overwhelmingly negative. Some trainers are kind enough to let me take the dogs they no longer want, but many will not if it inconveniences them by so much as having to keep the dog for one day longer than they want to. For a very long time, I defended the industry for the sake of the breed but I'm done. I won't be quiet while people like asal obfuscate the discussion with garbage about secret agendas and the RSPCA and immigrants and wars, trying to distract people away from the facts- ironically, to suit the agenda that they have.

I love the breed and I don't want to see it disappear but I can't support what I know to be wrong.

good post until you mentioned secret agenda's, its not secret.

the only agenda as you put it was AR is not about animal rights its about eliminating domestic animals, even the victorian govt has finally noticed that the rspca is no longer animal welfare focused,I saw the letter In Jacki Kelly's office in Penrith, sent to a member of her staff, the staff member showed it to me personally in 2000 extorting her to get her family and friends to join and vote as PETA was attempting to infiltrate and take over. Considering the change in direction since the coup has been accomplished.

But hey whatever floats your boat.

no one is listening to you or me.

there are bad people , there are good people and millions in between. the majority go with whatever flow is passing with no thought to the future or what it means

You have admitted that you don't actually know shit about what goes on in the industry. Unlike you, my opinion of the industry is formed from knowledge and experience. I am not an AR supporter, I live 27km away from a pit filled with hundreds of dead greyhounds that the industry regulators are well aware of. God only knows how many greyhounds, all from one trainer. So yeah, tell me again about how my feelings about the industry are just buying into AR propaganda.

You have a set of facts that form your conclusions and solutions. I just think they are incomplete. That you need to look at WHY those ARE facts to deal effectively with them. Not just deal with whats happening, but look for WHY its happening if we aren't going to employ the same 'solution' every time people stuff up, because human nature is that there will always be proportion who stuff up, as long as there is reason for people to keep dogs.

You're making assumptions there. I understand perfectly well why the industry does what it does. There is no great mystery to it. Desperately trying to pretend that those of us who feel that the current industry needs to be completely dismantled are somehow ignorant of the causes or possible fixes of the issue is almost as absurd as the arguments that equate greyhound trainers with refugees. If you think people who use small animals to bait dogs, or people who will euthanase 30% of a litter without a second thought, are deserving of even more chances to continue as they are, then I think we'll have to agree to disagree on what is/isn't acceptable for the welfare of the dogs.

Way to represent ANKC breeders, btw- as essentially supportive of an industry that is rife with massive welfare issues, just to protect their own arses. Nice work.

reply and quote what I did say, and dismiss anything I have if you like. but the red is not said by me. I think to be fair attribute it to who did say it when you reply surely

I didn't say that you said it? The person who did say it knows who they are, as will anyone else who has been following the thread.

And if anyone is in any doubt as to who said what, they could just.. scroll up! Crazy, I know.

[The Spotted Devil]

asal Greyhounds will be exempt in Vic. They come unde the racing code.

sarcasm alert perhaps,

interesting, so they wont have to register as a business, get council permit, get an abn or the 10 million insurance? and allowed to keep their retired dogs?

perhaps everyone should call their dogs greyhounds and race them, even if its only once in their lifetime?

Well there are still council approvals required - an article on the paper about a council kicking a Greyhound breeder out. A Local Laws issue rather than a welfare issue by the sounds of it.

If this is the one in the Cranbourne area they were not "kicked out" by council at all. The council rejected the application after a huge push from the Animal Justice Party and anti racing groups (most who wouldn't even know where Cranbourne was) and a neighbour who was concerned about the noise and that the greys could escape and chase her chooks. Yep. They sold the property without appeal to Frankston Council and relocated to South Gippsland.

Thanks HW - appreciate the clarification. There's a lot to keep on top of at the moment.

[westiemum]

I'm sorry to hear about your families horse Westiemum yes nobbling was quite common back in the day, I think there wouldn't be many people who don't know the story of Phar Lap. I wasn't inviting you to the track I was just saying a new track is due for completion next year in Murray Bridge and if you hadn't been to a track in many years I suggested you go along. I understand completely why you would never go near a track again. My invitation was to visit a kennel facility, no where near a track, to see what goes on today but yes, when you're next in Melbs we would love to meet you and so would Stan and Maddie :) GAPSA were over here not long ago to see how well GAPVIC operates, they are making many improvements in fact GRSA just implemented a track injury fund that will provide funds to help greys involved in race related accidents and after rehab, fast track their entry to the GAPSA programme.

Thanks tons Hazy - although I don't go back quite as far as Phar Lap! I've known for a long time his death affected me very badly and recognise so much has flowed from that - and I like to think I'm wise enough to know what pushes my buttons and colours my views on so many levels - but i haven't really talked about ti for a long time. So thanks for your understanding and yes lets meet up next time I'm in Melbourne. Will look forward to ti.

[m-j]

If you look back through this thread, there were people involved in the industry claiming that a lot of reform has happened and that, in itself, was a reason not to support a ban. And outside of this forum, on many of the FB racing groups, the same thing was being argued. Not that any of it matters now, of course. The industry will bully and whine their way out of any of the proposed reforms and nothing will change.

Sorry I should have said I wasn't referring to the comments on social media, but to emails I have received regarding the strategies that were/had been used in the 'fight' to oppose the ban. Most of the time when I mentioned the changes in this thread regarding the 50%reduction of dogs being bred, the rules regarding the transparency regarding the fate of the dogs was being used as an example of the fact that the industry could change, but as WM says achieving this in only 12 mths is not fast enough for the general public.

The reforms I mentioned that had been taken off the table were only proposed reforms not actual reforms, pity they weren't made to uphold them before Baird changed his mind.

My experience with the industry has been overwhelmingly negative

I do understand this and while I also have had similar experiences to those that you have mentioned I also have friends at this moment who have as many dogs in their kennels waiting to go into GAP as you mentioned that you have rescued in 10 yrs. Some of them have been there over 12 mths and the 4 they have kept pets, I have shared a couch with and they have done this for many years, it's these people who have a passion for their hobby but above all a love of dogs that I feel for and my friends aren't the only ones that I know of.

The purebred breeders are feeling annoyed that the powers that be feel they need to pay for their hobby, this is how my friends feel plus the whole country believes just because they have a hobby that's been ruined, they are scumbags like the participants that everyone hears about and have judged them without knowing them.

[moosmum]

Squeaky wheels still have to have an argument though, and their argument was my points above.

The sad thing is.. you often hear trainers complaining about X person because their dogs seem very prone to drinking chocolate milk, eating lots of bread with poppy seeds on it or eating meat that was "somehow" contaminated with banned substances but those people will never officially complain because they know that, like whistle blowers before them, they'll be forced out of the industry if they speak up. It's the culture of the industry and changing cultures is not easy. Even with the huge ban scare, they still haven't changed. If the announcement of the ban being passed was not enough to scare them into change, I honestly don't know what could possibly work. More rules and more education doesn't seem to have achieved anything and it never will while people are so willing to cheat or seriously compromise on the dogs' welfare to get ahead.

No they weren't, the emphasis was on livelihoods and the misinformation in the inquiry, the reforms that have been implemented were only a very small part of it.

I do know what you are saying is true re whistleblowers that is why if the law outside the industry was on their side they would have had more power to be listened to as I said before. I know you have had dealings with scum just as I have but they are not the only ones in this industry but they are the only ones that are worth giving anecdotal credence to as the good stuff is uninteresting.

If you look back through this thread, there were people involved in the industry claiming that a lot of reform has happened and that, in itself, was a reason not to support a ban. And outside of this forum, on many of the FB racing groups, the same thing was being argued. Not that any of it matters now, of course. The industry will bully and whine their way out of any of the proposed reforms and nothing will change.

As for people only paying attention to the bad stuff.. maybe part of that is because it outweighs a lot of the good when you're on the disposals end of the business. Last weekend, for the first time in the roughly ten years I have been rescuing greyhounds, a trainer agreed to take back a dog that wasn't suitable for rehoming. The first time. In ten years. The other 99.9% of the time, I get told that if I "won't keep the dog myself" (trying to make me feel guilty for not keeping every dog who fails) that I should take it to a vet to be PTS. My experience with the industry has been overwhelmingly negative. Some trainers are kind enough to let me take the dogs they no longer want, but many will not if it inconveniences them by so much as having to keep the dog for one day longer than they want to. For a very long time, I defended the industry for the sake of the breed but I'm done. I won't be quiet while people like asal obfuscate the discussion with garbage about secret agendas and the RSPCA and immigrants and wars, trying to distract people away from the facts- ironically, to suit the agenda that they have.

I love the breed and I don't want to see it disappear but I can't support what I know to be wrong.

good post until you mentioned secret agenda's, its not secret.

the only agenda as you put it was AR is not about animal rights its about eliminating domestic animals, even the victorian govt has finally noticed that the rspca is no longer animal welfare focused,I saw the letter In Jacki Kelly's office in Penrith, sent to a member of her staff, the staff member showed it to me personally in 2000 extorting her to get her family and friends to join and vote as PETA was attempting to infiltrate and take over. Considering the change in direction since the coup has been accomplished.

But hey whatever floats your boat.

no one is listening to you or me.

there are bad people , there are good people and millions in between. the majority go with whatever flow is passing with no thought to the future or what it means

You have admitted that you don't actually know shit about what goes on in the industry. Unlike you, my opinion of the industry is formed from knowledge and experience. I am not an AR supporter, I live 27km away from a pit filled with hundreds of dead greyhounds that the industry regulators are well aware of. God only knows how many greyhounds, all from one trainer. So yeah, tell me again about how my feelings about the industry are just buying into AR propaganda.

You have a set of facts that form your conclusions and solutions. I just think they are incomplete. That you need to look at WHY those ARE facts to deal effectively with them. Not just deal with whats happening, but look for WHY its happening if we aren't going to employ the same 'solution' every time people stuff up, because human nature is that there will always be proportion who stuff up, as long as there is reason for people to keep dogs.

You're making assumptions there. I understand perfectly well why the industry does what it does. There is no great mystery to it. Desperately trying to pretend that those of us who feel that the current industry needs to be completely dismantled are somehow ignorant of the causes or possible fixes of the issue is almost as absurd as the arguments that equate greyhound trainers with refugees. If you think people who use small animals to bait dogs, or people who will euthanase 30% of a litter without a second thought, are deserving of even more chances to continue as they are, then I think we'll have to agree to disagree on what is/isn't acceptable for the welfare of the dogs.

Way to represent ANKC breeders, btw- as essentially supportive of an industry that is rife with massive welfare issues, just to protect their own arses. Nice work.

No. I think ANKC breeders are dismissive of an industry that is rife with massive welfare issues, to protect their own arses.

But its reassuring you understand causes and fixes to see whats coming.

[The Spotted Devil]

Geez way to generalise.