Nsw To Ban Greyhound Racing From July 2017

[m-j]

Ok we have differing opinions on many issues to do with this industry but I'm guessing none of us want to see a large amount of dogs die. As it is at the moment the industry has been given a reprieve but as WM says it probably will happen again, what measures do you (anybody) think could be put in place now, to enable 1000's of dogs to be saved if/when it does happen? I've mentioned my ideas what feels like a thousand times so I won't bore you again but I'm very interested in ideas others may have.

with a bit of luck by the time it happens there will be so few dogs and puppies of any breed available anyone who really wants a dog but cant find one will snap them up. as for if the vic govt get their planned changes though that will be sooner than you can possibly imagine

I hope that isn't the case but if it did as you said would be good for the Greys maybe they're not everyone's cup of tea.

There won't be any greys. Will that make you finally happy? If there is no dog breeding at all? Cos that's what's happening in Victoria right now. I have no time for people who cannot see past their own nose.

Huh?? Are you talking to me? If so can you please elaborate as I don't understand what you are getting at. This is a thread on racing Greys and the demise of an industry not breeding dogs in general.

[asal]

Ok we have differing opinions on many issues to do with this industry but I'm guessing none of us want to see a large amount of dogs die. As it is at the moment the industry has been given a reprieve but as WM says it probably will happen again, what measures do you (anybody) think could be put in place now, to enable 1000's of dogs to be saved if/when it does happen? I've mentioned my ideas what feels like a thousand times so I won't bore you again but I'm very interested in ideas others may have.

with a bit of luck by the time it happens there will be so few dogs and puppies of any breed available anyone who really wants a dog but cant find one will snap them up. as for if the vic govt get their planned changes though that will be sooner than you can possibly imagine

I hope that isn't the case but if it did as you said would be good for the Greys maybe they're not everyone's cup of tea.

There won't be any greys. Will that make you finally happy? If there is no dog breeding at all? Cos that's what's happening in Victoria right now. I have no time for people who cannot see past their own nose.

Huh?? Are you talking to me? If so can you please elaborate as I don't understand what you are getting at. This is a thread on racing Greys and the demise of an industry not breeding dogs in general.

SOMEDAY, someone will do a history of this and believe it or not, they will see this as all linked, but since the dog world is so utterly divided each is failing to see that. But once the smoke has cleared it will be noticed one day

[m-j]

Ok we have differing opinions on many issues to do with this industry but I'm guessing none of us want to see a large amount of dogs die. As it is at the moment the industry has been given a reprieve but as WM says it probably will happen again, what measures do you (anybody) think could be put in place now, to enable 1000's of dogs to be saved if/when it does happen? I've mentioned my ideas what feels like a thousand times so I won't bore you again but I'm very interested in ideas others may have.

with a bit of luck by the time it happens there will be so few dogs and puppies of any breed available anyone who really wants a dog but cant find one will snap them up. as for if the vic govt get their planned changes though that will be sooner than you can possibly imagine

I hope that isn't the case but if it did as you said would be good for the Greys maybe they're not everyone's cup of tea.

There won't be any greys. Will that make you finally happy? If there is no dog breeding at all? Cos that's what's happening in Victoria right now. I have no time for people who cannot see past their own nose.

Huh?? Are you talking to me? If so can you please elaborate as I don't understand what you are getting at. This is a thread on racing Greys and the demise of an industry not breeding dogs in general.

SOMEDAY, someone will do a history of this and believe it or not, they will see this as all linked, but since the dog world is so utterly divided each is failing to see that. But once the smoke has cleared it will be noticed one day

I can see the link between the push by the pollies for welfare in both industries and how the changes are going to affect the way things are done, but for the moment I'm interested in how to save dog's lives. I had pups in the kennels I worked in that weren't mine but I invested a lot of time and emotion into that may be caught up in this fiasco I want to find ways to help them. I empathise with the breeders but as I have never bred a dog, only ever owned one dog that I bought from a registered breeder (they have all been rescues of many different breeds and xbreds)I don't feel that I am qualified to comment on the issues surrounding registered breeders.

[asal]

Ok we have differing opinions on many issues to do with this industry but I'm guessing none of us want to see a large amount of dogs die. As it is at the moment the industry has been given a reprieve but as WM says it probably will happen again, what measures do you (anybody) think could be put in place now, to enable 1000's of dogs to be saved if/when it does happen? I've mentioned my ideas what feels like a thousand times so I won't bore you again but I'm very interested in ideas others may have.

with a bit of luck by the time it happens there will be so few dogs and puppies of any breed available anyone who really wants a dog but cant find one will snap them up. as for if the vic govt get their planned changes though that will be sooner than you can possibly imagine

I hope that isn't the case but if it did as you said would be good for the Greys maybe they're not everyone's cup of tea.

There won't be any greys. Will that make you finally happy? If there is no dog breeding at all? Cos that's what's happening in Victoria right now. I have no time for people who cannot see past their own nose.

Huh?? Are you talking to me? If so can you please elaborate as I don't understand what you are getting at. This is a thread on racing Greys and the demise of an industry not breeding dogs in general.

SOMEDAY, someone will do a history of this and believe it or not, they will see this as all linked, but since the dog world is so utterly divided each is failing to see that. But once the smoke has cleared it will be noticed one day

I can see the link between the push by the pollies for welfare in both industries and how the changes are going to affect the way things are done, but for the moment I'm interested in how to save dog's lives. I had pups in the kennels I worked in that weren't mine but I invested a lot of time and emotion into that may be caught up in this fiasco I want to find ways to help them. I empathise with the breeders but as I have never bred a dog, only ever owned one dog that I bought from a registered breeder (they have all been rescues of many different breeds and xbreds)I don't feel that I am qualified to comment on the issues surrounding registered breeders.

well if the legislation in vic goes through, then spread through the other states which is what the AR lot are pushing for, there wont be enough left to find let alone get a puppy from, which is what the fate of the greyhounds is intended to achieve as well.

[Sheridan]

Ok we have differing opinions on many issues to do with this industry but I'm guessing none of us want to see a large amount of dogs die. As it is at the moment the industry has been given a reprieve but as WM says it probably will happen again, what measures do you (anybody) think could be put in place now, to enable 1000's of dogs to be saved if/when it does happen? I've mentioned my ideas what feels like a thousand times so I won't bore you again but I'm very interested in ideas others may have.

with a bit of luck by the time it happens there will be so few dogs and puppies of any breed available anyone who really wants a dog but cant find one will snap them up. as for if the vic govt get their planned changes though that will be sooner than you can possibly imagine

I hope that isn't the case but if it did as you said would be good for the Greys maybe they're not everyone's cup of tea.

There won't be any greys. Will that make you finally happy? If there is no dog breeding at all? Cos that's what's happening in Victoria right now. I have no time for people who cannot see past their own nose.

Huh?? Are you talking to me? If so can you please elaborate as I don't understand what you are getting at. This is a thread on racing Greys and the demise of an industry not breeding dogs in general.

Either you're disingenuous or you don't know what you're writing. What did you think asal meant by referencing the Victorian legislation?

[m-j]

Ok we have differing opinions on many issues to do with this industry but I'm guessing none of us want to see a large amount of dogs die. As it is at the moment the industry has been given a reprieve but as WM says it probably will happen again, what measures do you (anybody) think could be put in place now, to enable 1000's of dogs to be saved if/when it does happen? I've mentioned my ideas what feels like a thousand times so I won't bore you again but I'm very interested in ideas others may have.

with a bit of luck by the time it happens there will be so few dogs and puppies of any breed available anyone who really wants a dog but cant find one will snap them up. as for if the vic govt get their planned changes though that will be sooner than you can possibly imagine

I hope that isn't the case but if it did as you said would be good for the Greys maybe they're not everyone's cup of tea.

There won't be any greys. Will that make you finally happy? If there is no dog breeding at all? Cos that's what's happening in Victoria right now. I have no time for people who cannot see past their own nose.

Huh?? Are you talking to me? If so can you please elaborate as I don't understand what you are getting at. This is a thread on racing Greys and the demise of an industry not breeding dogs in general.

Either you're disingenuous or you don't know what you're writing. What did you think asal meant by referencing the Victorian legislation?

And I started my post by writing this "I hope that isn't the case" the rest was sarcasm as I believe they will be gone first because the AR want to stop racing not just make reforms to make it more difficult like they do with the breeding of dogs as is my understanding from the little bit of the thread on the vic legislation I have read, as I mentioned previously. Sorry you didn't understand that.

ETA The sarcasm wasn't directed at asal, it was for the whole mess in both cases.

Edited November 16, 2016 by m-j

[Tempus Fugit]

On ‎8‎/‎08‎/‎2016 at 6:31 PM, mystify said:

Worthwhile to have a read of this (but only for people that have an open clear mind, not for those that have tunnel vision and refuse to see the truth and only wants to keep on believing their own lies and narrow perception of society as a whole).

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/gaping-holes-in-flawed-greyhound-report/news-story/3025f749bc8ad9dc0e489f138dfd9b8b

P.S re greyhounds being exported overseas to Asian countries, I and my many friends are totally against it, I'm not a racist but I do know that their culture and mindset is totally different and the animal lovers are in the minority over there.

It is the Govt's fault that for years they never did anything to prevent the greyhounds from being sold over to China and Macau.

Macau is a totally horrific end of the line for 100% dogs that go over there to race. Barbaric nation, the culture thinks nothing of using cruel inhumane methods to kill the dogs.

For years a minority of trainers sold dogs in Australia to an exporter that specialised in sending the dogs overseas (trainers don't export, they have no idea how to, it's the exporter (usually a dodgy trainer/operator with business skills) who advertises that he is looking for slow dogs to send to Macau and faster more expensive dogs to send to a mainland province in China where there is a brand new racetrack apparently (chinese businessmen pay between $1000 to $250,000 to buy quality greyhounds from Australia to use in two dog match races)...

I've seen those ads years ago and even was approached in an email a few years ago by an agent for a Chinese businessman who was interested in buying a fast racedog I had at that time... he offered quite a large sum of money that could have paid all my bills and bought me a brand new car.. but I had no hesitation in saying NOT FOR SALE AT ANY PRICE TO EXPORTERS.

My friends who are like me, also were approached and big money offered for their fast dogs too.. they all said NO!! It makes me violently sick to my stomach to think of the poor greyhounds being sent to live and die horribly in a foreign country with a different culture.

I made quite some enemies in the racing industry with trainers who had sold their dogs overseas, as they didn't appreciate my viewpoint and didn't want me interfering in their business or try to agitate for a law change to stop it happening.

I've received death threats, knee capping threats, simply for saying I didn't agree with trainers sending dogs to China or Macau. I am a very passionate protester against cruelty and export of dogs to asian countries.

If I knew the racing industry was filled with live baiters, abusers or drug cheats I would have been a very passionate protester against the industry.

So for me not to protest against the industry, it shows that I know what it is like inside and outside the industry and have met more decent people with the same viewpoints as myself, than the minority of scumbags who think nothing of live baiting, cheating by using drugs on their dogs, and using standover tactics on people they don't like.

Just because an extremist Muslim terrorist bombs a city, do you label every single Muslim a criminal and a terrorist and ban them all from living?

No. You're supposed to act like a decent human being that has a rational mind and don't use emotive tactics to destroy all Muslims.

Same with the greyhound racing industry. Just because 10% of trainers are scumbags, you don't try to destroy the other 80% of decent trainers.

Its not only China that the dogs get exported to. Also Vietnam http://e.vnexpress.net/news/travel-life/visit-vietnam-beach-town-and-bet-for-the-fastest-dog-3553782.html

[WoofnHoof]

Trouble is an industry or hobby is not like a religion, particularly one in which animals are used for largely entertainment purposes. The public has increasing expectations that whatever group you belong to, you need to weed out the undesirables, even if they are a small minority. The problem with saying "it's just a small minority" is that it sounds like people within the industry think it's no big deal. Certainly the industry wasn't seen to be taking it seriously until they were forced to, and it's very hard to defend an industry in which the majority of the participants lack the will to enforce basic animal welfare standards. A religion has no authority to expel violent extremists beyond what is already being done (publicly denouncing them) but a sporting group has power over its participants, they can refuse registrations, refuse entries and essentially ban those who are doing the wrong thing from participating at all. We see that all the time in disciplinary action for football players etc (not super effective but at least they are doing something and are seen to be doing something). It is time sporting and hobby groups involving animals used this approach because the social license to continue is going to expire sooner rather than later, it is the wider community who are in charge of what is acceptable and it is clear that live baiting is not acceptable, no matter how small the minority participating in it. By refusing to take a hard line in enforcing standards, the industry is endorsing bad behaviour in the eyes of the wider community. Prior to the news report about live baiting how many trainers were subject to disciplinary action? How many received a life time ban? Was it tolerated because it was "only a minority"? Or because those involved were in positions of power within the organisation? I know how hard it is to try and change institutions and power structures that have been in place forever, but if it doesn't happen there is no long term survival for the sport. Apathy is what kills the sport, no point railing about the unfairness of it all, all who participate have a role to play. 

[asal]

6 hours ago, WoofnHoof said:

Trouble is an industry or hobby is not like a religion, particularly one in which animals are used for largely entertainment purposes. The public has increasing expectations that whatever group you belong to, you need to weed out the undesirables, even if they are a small minority. The problem with saying "it's just a small minority" is that it sounds like people within the industry think it's no big deal. Certainly the industry wasn't seen to be taking it seriously until they were forced to, and it's very hard to defend an industry in which the majority of the participants lack the will to enforce basic animal welfare standards. A religion has no authority to expel violent extremists beyond what is already being done (publicly denouncing them) but a sporting group has power over its participants, they can refuse registrations, refuse entries and essentially ban those who are doing the wrong thing from participating at all. We see that all the time in disciplinary action for football players etc (not super effective but at least they are doing something and are seen to be doing something). It is time sporting and hobby groups involving animals used this approach because the social license to continue is going to expire sooner rather than later, it is the wider community who are in charge of what is acceptable and it is clear that live baiting is not acceptable, no matter how small the minority participating in it. By refusing to take a hard line in enforcing standards, the industry is endorsing bad behaviour in the eyes of the wider community. Prior to the news report about live baiting how many trainers were subject to disciplinary action? How many received a life time ban? Was it tolerated because it was "only a minority"? Or because those involved were in positions of power within the organisation? I know how hard it is to try and change institutions and power structures that have been in place forever, but if it doesn't happen there is no long term survival for the sport. Apathy is what kills the sport, no point railing about the unfairness of it all, all who participate have a role to play. 

your logic is tantalizing and the blanket covering is the animals, all must suffer to protect the animals.

 

those 90% are to be denied their right to innocence and treated as potentially or are. guilty as well, to clean out the 10% of scumbags?

 

if you truly believe that logic then all parents should have their children taken from them to ensure no child is at  risk of  the 10%  of parents who abuse and kill their children.

 

As I recall the last time that was in operation its now called the era of the stolen generations?

 

because a percentage of men kill and rape, all need to be locked up and/or castrated? 

 

same logic, except human children are collateral damage, women killed or maimed just another case of collateral damage (sure know the culture the woman must have asked or it by the way she dressed or behaved, good old blame culture alive and well) but chuck in the word fur baby and EEEK!  all animal owners must be micromanaged or lose their fur baby for its own safety

 

and if you dare ask why the emperor has no clothes, you, like I will be, said to have proven your unfit to speak

Edited March 13, 2017 by asal

[WoofnHoof]

1 hour ago, asal said:

your logic is tantalizing and the blanket covering is the animals, all must suffer to protect the animals.

 

those 90% are to be denied their right to innocence and treated as potentially or are. guilty as well, to clean out the 10% of scumbags?

 

if you truly believe that logic then all parents should have their children taken from them to ensure no child is at  risk of  the 10%  of parents who abuse and kill their children.

 

As I recall the last time that was in operation its now called the era of the stolen generations?

 

because a percentage of men kill and rape, all need to be locked up and/or castrated? 

 

same logic, except human children are collateral damage, women killed or maimed just another case of collateral damage (sure know the culture the woman must have asked or it by the way she dressed or behaved, good old blame culture alive and well) but chuck in the word fur baby and EEEK!  all animal owners must be micromanaged or lose their fur baby for its own safety

 

and if you dare ask why the emperor has no clothes, you, like I will be, said to have proven your unfit to speak

It's not my logic. It's just simple reality. Greyhound racing is a recreational endeavour, it exists simply for entertainment purposes. Therefore the social license is far more precarious than it is for other animal production industries that are relied upon for food or fibre.

 

Riddle me this: Why is dog fighting banned? It's only a small number of dogs in the grand scheme of things after all. A small minority. Why should anyone care enough to stamp it out? 

 

A line has to be drawn somewhere, and we as a society redraw those lines when and if we decide that the benefit is no longer outweighing the cost. So the question must be asked: why is greyhound racing so important that animals must suffer and die as par for the course? Why is it more important than dog fighting? Or cock fighting? So some gambling addicts can bet on it? So a small few of the human population can have a job or a hobby? In some cases it may be argued that the end justifies the means but this isn't one of those times. 

 

All sports and hobbies and even production industries involving animals have been put on notice: stamp it out from within or you'll be stamped out from without, end of story. 

 

[moosmum]

Again, I think this is a modern identity problem that will apply equally to pedigree breeders in the  long run if we don't learn from it.

 

Agree with your post Woof. Its as a Society we redraw lines as to what brings us  benefits or what costs we will no longer bear.

So its as a society that we promote and teach those benefits and the responsibilities that come with participation.

 

The problems as I see it come when we accept that there are 'identities' within society that are exclusive. As has been the case within the grey hound racing industry, and is also the case with pedigree breeders.

 

An exclusive 'identity' within a society is not open to to the  expectations imposed by  society as a whole. Only to those of their own.

An identity by its nature is built from within. It takes nothing from without that doesn't re-inforce or nourish whats there to begin with.

It built on experience, in response to experience. Of its past and what was proven to work at the time of its inception.

 

So change can't be  "recognized" as  meeting societies or common expectations. Instead those expectations are perceived as demands on an exclusive society from a hostile environment intent on destroying an identity. That identity is gone if its changed.

The internalized  'identity' of the industry must rebel against a societies expectation of it, when that society has no understanding or experience of the realities inherent to that environment.

 

Exclusivity closes the avenues of communication our expectations must be based on.

 

So I believe the solution is to find ways to recognize a broader and more inclusive society than is allowed under current rules and regs.

Because Asal is also right, this IS all connected and will continue .

 

Exclusivity creates an environment divorced from the expectations of any society out side its own. BY  choice of exclusivity.

Yet it can't police its own. Not effectively.

 It must accept expectations contrary to the responses  its identity is based on to maintain any purpose to the broader society it exists in. Individual response has no place in an identity. It doesn't fit unless it conforms.

 

Society polices its own, and promotes whats expected . If its exclusive, its not our own. We we have no part of it and can not affect it. Only reject.

We can't even accept it, because it serves no purpose to us, it only imposes costs.

 

 

 

Edited March 14, 2017 by moosmum

[Papillon Kisses]

Not related to greyhounds but a good example of adapting to community expectations before you are stamped out.

 

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-10/harness-racing-australia-to-ban-whips-from-trots/8109250

[Lhok]

22 hours ago, WoofnHoof said:

Trouble is an industry or hobby is not like a religion, particularly one in which animals are used for largely entertainment purposes. The public has increasing expectations that whatever group you belong to, you need to weed out the undesirables, even if they are a small minority. The problem with saying "it's just a small minority" is that it sounds like people within the industry think it's no big deal. Certainly the industry wasn't seen to be taking it seriously until they were forced to, and it's very hard to defend an industry in which the majority of the participants lack the will to enforce basic animal welfare standards. A religion has no authority to expel violent extremists beyond what is already being done (publicly denouncing them) but a sporting group has power over its participants, they can refuse registrations, refuse entries and essentially ban those who are doing the wrong thing from participating at all. We see that all the time in disciplinary action for football players etc (not super effective but at least they are doing something and are seen to be doing something). It is time sporting and hobby groups involving animals used this approach because the social license to continue is going to expire sooner rather than later, it is the wider community who are in charge of what is acceptable and it is clear that live baiting is not acceptable, no matter how small the minority participating in it. By refusing to take a hard line in enforcing standards, the industry is endorsing bad behaviour in the eyes of the wider community. Prior to the news report about live baiting how many trainers were subject to disciplinary action? How many received a life time ban? Was it tolerated because it was "only a minority"? Or because those involved were in positions of power within the organisation? I know how hard it is to try and change institutions and power structures that have been in place forever, but if it doesn't happen there is no long term survival for the sport. Apathy is what kills the sport, no point railing about the unfairness of it all, all who participate have a role to play. 

Does this mean we can ban dressage because of the practice of Rollkur? Which is used by high profile riders even though people deny that they do.

I don't think the measures they are trying to put into practice will work so it would probably be best if we just ban the whole sport of dressage.

I get that live baiting is way worse because other animals also lose their lives.

--Lhok

[WoofnHoof]

2 hours ago, Lhok said:

Does this mean we can ban dressage because of the practice of Rollkur? Which is used by high profile riders even though people deny that they do.

I don't think the measures they are trying to put into practice will work so it would probably be best if we just ban the whole sport of dressage.

I get that live baiting is way worse because other animals also lose their lives.

--Lhok

That is the way it's going. The "measures" being put in place in dressage are half assed and not even remotely effective, and not only that are not being seen to be effective. So yes my sport will suffer and eventually be shut down because of the actions (and lack thereof) of the powers that be within the sport. 

 

Maybe all animal industries will be shut down eventually, maybe that's a good thing, maybe its a bad thing. I don't know. Personally I don't want it to happen, but I can see it happening because not enough is being done to stop it. To much arguing about how "it's only a minority" and "just give us more time to deal with it our way" or "outsiders just don't understand why we do x, y, z", none of these arguments have worked in the past I have no idea why anyone thinks they will now. 

 

Yes PK harness racing is pulling their collective finger out, whether it's too little too late remains to be seen, lots more to do yet if they want to survive. 

[m-j]

Why is dog racing and animal fighting being concluded as parallels the two sports are eons apart. One is about damage or death happening every time the animal participates, the other is about the dog running??? Doing something it intrinsically enjoys not many pet dogs can make that claim.

[WoofnHoof]

3 hours ago, m-j said:

Why is dog racing and animal fighting being concluded as parallels the two sports are eons apart. One is about damage or death happening every time the animal participates, the other is about the dog running??? Doing something it intrinsically enjoys not many pet dogs can make that claim.

I'm confused as to what your question actually is but I'm going to assume that you mean why are the two being compared? Because they both involve cruel (and illegal) practices which are abhorrent to the general public, the only difference is the proportion of animals being subjected to it, if actual raw numbers were available they would make an even more interesting comparison I'd say. 

 

If you hold with the premise that live baiting is impossible to stamp out of the industry, then all dog racing will comprise a percentage (however small) being baited with live animals as an inevitable fact. What percentage of the industry engaging in live baiting would be acceptable to the public do you think? The argument that it's too hard to stamp it out completely implies that if you are in favour of the sport continuing as is, then you are also willing to accept that a proportion of the industry will continue to engage in live baiting. You need to look from the outside in and see what others see: an industry which was largely complacent about acts of blatant cruelty being perpetrated by it's participants, paying lip service and not much else to animal welfare issues within it's ranks, who then scream blue murder about the unfairness of being shut down. 

 

Hence the question that I would ask is this: why is the tolerance for animal cruelty associated with dog fighting 0%, but the tolerance for animal cruelty associated with dog racing is >0%? Any number greater than zero needs to be justified and justifiable. And why has racing in the past not taken a zero tolerance stance on this issue? Why have their animal welfare standards and rules not been enforced? Why did it take exposure in the media and the whole industry threatened with closure before they got serious about it? People knew it went on well before it was brought to the public's attention.

 

And that's not even looking at wastage issues, presently the majority of the general public think that retired greyhounds mostly find lovely forever homes once the industry is done with them, it will only take a graphic news story or two to lay waste to that fairy tale. 

 

You can shoot the messenger all you like but all I'm doing is pointing out the facts and drawing the inevitable conclusions. 

[Tempus Fugit]

Illegal live baiting of greyhounds is moreover a form of cheating just as drugging horses in thoroughbred and harness racing industry and doping of human athletes is  cheating.

Humans are constantly trying to cheat, whether this be in sports or other activities, eg driving over the speed limit or plagiarising student essays. If you are not going to ban the activity associated with the cheating then one is faced with the issues of:

1. Detection of the cheating in the face of people's rights to privacy (you can't simply enter a private greyhound training facility or fly a surveillance drone over it any time you feel like it); and
2. What sanctions do you apply to people found guilty of cheating?

There is also the issue of hypocrisy. As WoofnHoof said, we have zero tolerance for dog fighting, however as a society we tolerate the hunting of animals with dogs (eg pig hunting and I dare say some pig dog pups are blooded during training). Where do we draw the line between cruelty and allowing a dog to express its natural predatory instinct?

 

We also have a lack of understanding of the neurological processes associated with erotic stimulation of the brain of predatory species (ourselves included). Why does a cat enjoy playing with a mouse before killing it? Why do wild canids go on a killing spree when encountering domesticated sheep? Why do some humans get a kick of killing animals for pleasure (recreational hunting) while other humans get addicted to 'pleasures' such as bullfighting, animal baiting & fighting, animal torture? Yet other humans get a kick out of perversions like BDSM, torture of fellow humans (aka ISIS) or get addicted to drugs or the sexual abuse of children. In the past we've used the biblical explanation of sin, but if we accept that all living species evolved from primitive organisms including their electrochemical computers (brains), why and how does erotic stimulation occur?

[moosmum]

On 15/03/2017 at 0:05 AM, WoofnHoof said:

I'm confused as to what your question actually is but I'm going to assume that you mean why are the two being compared? Because they both involve cruel (and illegal) practices which are abhorrent to the general public, the only difference is the proportion of animals being subjected to it, if actual raw numbers were available they would make an even more interesting comparison I'd say. 

 

If you hold with the premise that live baiting is impossible to stamp out of the industry, then all dog racing will comprise a percentage (however small) being baited with live animals as an inevitable fact. What percentage of the industry engaging in live baiting would be acceptable to the public do you think? The argument that it's too hard to stamp it out completely implies that if you are in favour of the sport continuing as is, then you are also willing to accept that a proportion of the industry will continue to engage in live baiting. You need to look from the outside in and see what others see: an industry which was largely complacent about acts of blatant cruelty being perpetrated by it's participants, paying lip service and not much else to animal welfare issues within it's ranks, who then scream blue murder about the unfairness of being shut down. 

 

Hence the question that I would ask is this: why is the tolerance for animal cruelty associated with dog fighting 0%, but the tolerance for animal cruelty associated with dog racing is >0%? Any number greater than zero needs to be justified and justifiable. And why has racing in the past not taken a zero tolerance stance on this issue? Why have their animal welfare standards and rules not been enforced? Why did it take exposure in the media and the whole industry threatened with closure before they got serious about it? People knew it went on well before it was brought to the public's attention.

 

And that's not even looking at wastage issues, presently the majority of the general public think that retired greyhounds mostly find lovely forever homes once the industry is done with them, it will only take a graphic news story or two to lay waste to that fairy tale. 

 

You can shoot the messenger all you like but all I'm doing is pointing out the facts and drawing the inevitable conclusions. 

I disagree. Ones purpose  is cruel ( and Illegal ) practice.

The seconds purpose is to race greyhounds. There is no reason it should be assumed that purpose must involve cruel or illegal practices on the grounds that some belonging to that culture use them.

 

You mention earlier an industry or hobby is not like a religion. I think there are similarities in this case, in that both foster  exclusive member cultures to support their purpose.

Unlike most hobbies or industry.

 

But I don't think just because its cultural, it should be considered O.K. either.  As a human society, we work to change and improve our culture.

That can only be done we accept it, as a human culture. Not by accepting arbitrary cultures as some how exclusive of others.

 

Cultures are just Human Conditions with a degree of choice. You can be born into them, but you can also  leave or improve on them. They are open to influence of the cultures and societies surrounding them.

Once they are considered exclusive though, that culture has taken steps to ensure they will not be influenced by by the society or cultures around them. Isn't that the purpose of exclusivity?

 

So they are built from within and not open to 'corrupting' influence from other cultures or society in general? Exclusive cultures by nature are not accepting of change or  ideals  not included on the beliefs it was founded on. Its Based in its own past, on what was accepted truth in its past.

 There are beliefs being protected by exclusivity.

Edited March 16, 2017 by moosmum

[asal]

On 15/03/2017 at 2:29 AM, Tempus Fugit said:

Illegal live baiting of greyhounds is moreover a form of cheating just as drugging horses in thoroughbred and harness racing industry and doping of human athletes is  cheating.

Humans are constantly trying to cheat, whether this be in sports or other activities, eg driving over the speed limit or plagiarising student essays. If you are not going to ban the activity associated with the cheating then one is faced with the issues of:

1. Detection of the cheating in the face of people's rights to privacy (you can't simply enter a private greyhound training facility or fly a surveillance drone over it any time you feel like it); and
2. What sanctions do you apply to people found guilty of cheating?

There is also the issue of hypocrisy. As WoofnHoof said, we have zero tolerance for dog fighting, however as a society we tolerate the hunting of animals with dogs (eg pig hunting and I dare say some pig dog pups are blooded during training). Where do we draw the line between cruelty and allowing a dog to express its natural predatory instinct?

 

We also have a lack of understanding of the neurological processes associated with erotic stimulation of the brain of predatory species (ourselves included). Why does a cat enjoy playing with a mouse before killing it? Why do wild canids go on a killing spree when encountering domesticated sheep? Why do some humans get a kick of killing animals for pleasure (recreational hunting) while other humans get addicted to 'pleasures' such as bullfighting, animal baiting & fighting, animal torture? Yet other humans get a kick out of perversions like BDSM, torture of fellow humans (aka ISIS) or get addicted to drugs or the sexual abuse of children. In the past we've used the biblical explanation of sin, but if we accept that all living species evolved from primitive organisms including their electrochemical computers (brains), why and how does erotic stimulation occur?

Pity it isnt that simple, feral animal particularly pigs are very hard to eradicate, many are caught by trapping, but hunting is also needed some are too cunning to go into the traps.  feral pigs are dangerous. 

 

I suspect from this line of thinking eradicating ferals animals will also be ultimately banned on the grounds of cruelty. although any farmer faced with the damage they do and the younstock killed will be the losers. Although since so many seem to think all livestock should be phased out as increasingly the press releases are the cruelty of breeding animals that will be slaughtered is cruel.

 

crops dont give gory shots when they are torn to bits by feral pigs so I suppose the farmes left to grow crops will just have to build some darned good fencing if they want to harvest a crop in the 3000"s

[m-j]

This industry  could possibly be subjected to some of the toughest regulation / scrutiny of any animal sport, if the government agrees with the recommendations put forward by the industry itself, see the link I put up in the other thread. These measures will virtually eliminate wastage and cheats will be punished. Drone surveillance and random inspections are very likely to occur.