Maddy

It seems like they're looking for a particular answer and given how many of the Save Them All brigade will likely complete the survey, I think it's safe to say that GRV will get the answer they are hoping for. Perhaps it was just bad wording in the survey, but I'm surprised and disappointed that GRV would go anywhere near the "retraining" crap that goes on. All it does is create dogs who are time bombs- without even the ticking to alert new owners to the potential risks. If reducing prey drive is the goal, perhaps not breeding from dogs who are prey driven maniacs might help?

Again with the false equivalence garbage. Comparing a football player who cheats to a greyhound trainer who bludgeons dogs to death is absurd. The fact that you cannot see the immense difference between those two things suggests to me that perhaps you and I have very different ideas of what is acceptable practice in an industry involving animals.

Your reply has absolutely nothing to do with what m-j asked. She asked why shouldn't racing be overseen by an independent body, you waffled some paranoid garbage about PETA. M-j, for what it's worth, I entirely agree that self-regulation doesn't work and would welcome an independent body to oversee things. However, I honestly don't believe it will ever happen and if it does, the industry will only want "pro" types or industry participants to make up this group, and essentially, it will become self-regulation all over again. Truly independent regulation/enforcement would be the death of the industry very quickly and they know it.

Because they said they could be trusted to self regulate and to enforce their own rules?

I wouldn't bother replying to asal. Her "argument" is nothing more than an attempt to muddy the waters and draw attention to issues that have nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Not unlike much of her contributions to this thread, actually. Perhaps she honestly believes she is playing devil's advocate but the comparison was so incredibly offensive that I'm having a lot of trouble wording this so that it doesn't sound like a personal attack. Anyway, we're not even just talking about regular participants here. We're talking about stewards. The people who ARE ACTUALLY SUPPOSED TO BE DOING THE POLICING. Did I make that clear enough, asal?

Of course they do, but you're missing my point. We were promised that certain things had changed and that the industry would be cleaning up from within, and it very obviously isn't happening. If the only way that the industry can be kept clean is by constant public reporting, something is very broken with the system.

Why should a member of the public even be required to report this sort of thing? What happened to "we're changing" claims? Surely every member down here who knows about the issue should be obligated to speak up, because only a few months ago, they were (allegedly) all about cleaning up the sport. As for the trainer, yes, he is needed. He trains a large number of dogs (70+) and without his dogs (many of whom are below average and aren't wanted by trainers who keep much smaller numbers), the fields would not be filled. The other issue is that if he quits, the 70-odd dogs will go down with him*, just as a threat of the sort of terrible public attention the industry does not want. And it worked very nicely for him- third charge on the same prohibited substance, business as usual. *To be clear about what was meant here, a visit from the vet for the sort of treatment that costs $45 per dog (excluding disposal fee).

Down here, things are just as corrupt as always. A local trainer had his third positive swab for arsenic. He did it, he knew everyone knew he did it, but this particular trainer has at least two dogs in every race and knows the industry needs him. So he is still racing, despite a history that includes some pretty disgusting allegations. His behaviour is very well-known to everyone within the local industry but he is protected because they need him. An entire industry stands silent because it serves their own interests. As far as I can see, nothing has changed. They've just gotten better at keeping it quiet.

And that's fine, as long as it's communicated very clearly and puppy buyers aren't led to believe otherwise. I recently had a similar experience to Collie- was led to believe we'd have some choice in puppy, paid a very substantial (half the purchase price) deposit after puppies were born, committed ourselves entirely to a puppy from that litter and then discovered that not only did we have no choice at all (although apparently other pet buyers did?) but we ended up with the puppy we least wanted. He's a nice enough puppy but I was disappointed by the experience and it soured what should have been a really exciting, happy occasion. In future, I'd be very reluctant to pay a deposit because it does force you to accept whatever changes or decisions a breeder may make, even if they run directly counter to things said/promised previously.

See, Rebanne, how wrong were we. He doesn't want to kill the other dog, he'd just like to kick it "shove" it with his foot. And given he is forced to walk his dog in some sort of inescapable, one-way gauntlet that somehow also prevents any other reasonable response, who are we to judge.

OP is happy to put his own dog at risk for the principle of it, complains about irresponsible dog owner. Okay then.

https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/pipers-river/dogs-puppies/staghound-pups/1142012208 According to the dates, they've only just been born (17/3) so it's just photos of what I assume is the mum.

@juice, are you still looking for a stag? There's a litter for sale near us at the moment, very staggy stags.

Give the medication time. It can take months to get the dose right (controlling seizures adequately without causing excessive side effects) and it also takes time for them to get used to the medication. The ataxia should settle with time and if not, I'd be discussing dosages with your vet, rather than trying to muck around with it yourself, given you don't have any experience with the drug. If you don't have serum levels high enough, he'll tip over threshold and into a seizure. Probably worth mentioning that while the ataxia should settle and become barely noticeable, the appetite (at least in my experience) never goes away and you'll need to watch his weight. Probably also worth mentioning that Phenomav straight up is fine and all, provided the cause is actually being investigated. If he has something else going on (liver shunt, infection, diabetes, pancreatic cancer or any of the other things that could cause seizures), AEDs will only mask symptoms of the underlying issue. Also worth getting serum peak/troughs done once he's settled a bit to see how much he needs to stay within therapeutic range, and that gives your vet better information to make dosage changes where needed.

The owner of the rescue group seems like a bit of a.. (trying to think of how to word this so that it won't result in tantrumy threats of legal action and/or FB bullying from followers) well, like he has a lot in common with Carey Edwards. Maybe she's lying, maybe he's lying, either way, it reflects poorly on rescue in general.

You'd be surprised. Not that long ago, there was a dog dropped off at a pound in Victoria who had come from Tasmania. Apparently she was picked up in a dog park by a couple of tourists from the mainland but instead of taking her to a local pound (or any pound at all in the state), they brought her back to Victoria and took her to a pound there. A boarding kennel owner down here paid for her to be returned to Tasmania but as far as I know, her original owner was never found. Possibly because they wouldn't have thought to check pounds/shelters in another state Some people do baffling, idiotic things. Hanlon's Razor probably applies in many of these sorts of cases. I read the rescue group's statement and I was pretty unimpressed.. I think what this person fails to understand is that illness is not just limping or inability to move quickly. I could never go on holidays without leaving the OH at home to care for Bosley because he was an unwell dog and needed regular medicating and monitoring by someone who knew him. But serious neurological issues aside, he could run very well and very fast. There were plenty of other things in his statement that are probably worth addressing but the guy sounds like another AWDRI* so there's probably not much point. *He whines about her threatening legal action and then himself threatens legal action. [Insert rolley eyes here]

By this same logic, we should make dog fighting legal. Or maybe live coursing. I mean, if people are going to do it anyway, why not repeal the legislation regarding live baiting? Do you honestly believe that illegal greyhound racing would attract many participants? Bull baiting used to be a popular sport but you don't hear about many underground bull baiting rings these days. I think there are some good arguments for the continuation of greyhound racing (such as the preservation of the racing greyhound type) but I really don't think your argument is one of them.

It absolutely is. A more corrupt, unethical and dangerous organisation, you couldn't hope to find. This doesn't mean that everyone involved in the organisation was guilty but when you have a system in place that rewards unethical behaviour, you're going to have problems. The same applies to the greyhound racing industry, unfortunately. Many changes have been proposed to limit the motivations for cheating (by doping, live baiting, whatever), but the industry has always been reluctant to change, until forced to do so by things like the live baiting scandal. The bit I have trouble understanding is how participants will rush furiously to the defense of the industry but then fight the changes that would ensure its longevity. They got a win with Baird's back down but if they think the same old issues won't get dragged up every other week until the government has no choice but to ban it everywhere, permanently, they're out to breakfast, lunch and tea. Yes, some want the changes, some aren't the problem and so on (this argument has been done to death, over and over again) but some people not being the problem, doesn't fix the problem. I recently found out that a trainer's brother (who is very involved with GAP Tas- if you're reading this, Mr. B, hi!) had been purposely spreading bizarre rumours about my rescue, seemingly to discredit me. This, even though I take dogs for free, pay for everything myself, have an excellent reputation for proper testing/appropriate rehoming and in doing so, I reduce THEIR euthanasia stats and save THEIR participants money in destroying dogs. So yeah, if they want to keep shooting themselves in the foot, whatever. You can lead a horse to water but that doesn't mean it won't kick you in the face for your trouble.

It's not? Quoting myself.. To answer your question, there really isn't. But.. they do get pushed a lot as a "suits everyone" breed when that's not a balanced view. They're great dogs and if you are happy with all the positive/negative traits of a sighthound, they're a really sensible choice. However.. greys, unlike many other breeds of sighthound, are selected for drive. A greyhound that won't chase does not get bred from and overall drive levels tend to be on the higher side. A lot of adopters fail to understand what this drive actually translate to until they suffer the misfortune of seeing it happen (which usually comes about as a result of not understanding it to start with). It's not that we don't want to see greyhounds being adopted- of course we do- but we don't want to see the breed splashed across the headlines every day as a result of things like dog attacks. Down here, we're already seeing issues with offlead/unmuzzled greys and the simple fact of customer service is: When someone has a good experience, they tell four people. When someone has a negative experience, they tell ten. For all the work done by educated owners who do the right thing, that work can be wiped out two times over by an attack/incident involving a greyhound. To be honest, I find your claim that I'm damaging the breed's reputation to be very offensive. I have spent ten years rehoming greys, educating people about greys and responsibly promoting the breed. I want the dogs to go to homes they are suited to, for the good of the dogs and for the good of the people who will end up with them. I absolutely LOVE the breed and I don't think you understand how much it hurts to get on Facebook and read about how an offleash greyhound chased down someone else's dog or to see people complaining to a council's FB page about all the "irresponsible greyhound owners, letting their dogs run amok". The reasons they are not recommended to certain people in certain threads have always been fair, from what I've seen. One person wanted a dog that could be left at home by itself for very long periods of time- SA tends to be a little more common in greys because of how they are raised. This person wants to let his dog off leash and basically leave it to its own devices- totally unacceptable for a greyhound (and probably most other sighthounds). A person with eleventybillion cats is also probably not the most suitable home. A home without fences (unless owner is willing to toilet and exercise dog on leash) is probably not suitable. A home that expects a greyhound to be a skinny version of a labrador is probably not suited. This isn't to say there's anything wrong with greyhounds, but that no one breed fits most, dogs are all individuals (but with tendencies towards certain traits) and that each home should be considered individually. People come here, ask the question and get a response based on the information they provide. That, to me, is a good thing I wouldn't comment on breeds outside of my experience because I don't feel qualified to comment. The fact that there's less discussion around other breeds' pros/cons has nothing to do with greyhound people. There's no snobby greyhound clique (you may have noticed that Rebanne and I are not exactly besties, by any stretch of the imagination) and similarity in opinions is simply based on experience. If people don't want the advice of people experienced, I don't think they'd come here to ask in the first place? If someone suggests a totally inappropriate breed, should we all just nod, smile and agree, to "protect" the breed's reputation?

That muzzle looks like if the dog pressed its mouth to something, it could grab a mouthful of the muzzle and start chewing. If Monty really needs a muzzle to stop him from eating things, I'd suggest a quality basket muzzle with a stool guard.

This. I've had my fair share of complete nutters. They were nice nutters, for the most part, but a 35kg dog that is made of muscles and excitement can be a difficult dog to manage. A lot of people seem to expect a gentle giant who will cuddle all day on the couch, surrounded by kittens and baby bunnies (a dog sold to them by groups like Animals Australia), and they're often disappointed to discover that greys (not unlike other breeds) come in a spectrum of activity and prey drive levels. I've rehomed a handful of kitten-cuddlers but the vast majority are somewhere in the middle- they love a good nap but they're not above wrenching your arm from its socket if they happen to spot a cat while out walking. Also, I think it's worth pointing out that not all GAPs are created equal. Some, like GAP Victoria, have a very good reputation for doings things right. Others.. not so much. It's no different to any other rescue/rehoming group in that you have to do your research.

The other issue is that unless you get a grey with very low drive, there is the possibility that they may lunge after something interesting and pull an elderly owner over. I'm not at all against elderly people owning greys, I just think it's something people need to be aware of. Greys can accelerate with incredible force, with little to no warning and if the person on the other end of the leash isn't strong enough to pull the dog up without a chance to brace themselves, the risk of falls is very high. For a similar reason, it is against the law for people under the age of 16 to control a greyhound in a public place. This isn't to say that all greys will do that sort of thing but matching dogs to elderly owners can be more difficult and not all groups bother to actually place dogs according to suitability.

Not if they want to run it off-leash. Prey drive (and their considerable acceleration ability) aside, a greyhound running loose with other dogs is a recipe for someone to get hurt: little dogs getting mowed down, other dogs chasing the greyhound (which can easily escalate into biting the greyhound) or fall/collision injuries. And all this is assuming it's a fenced off-leash park. If not, your greyhound is as good as gone. Dog parks can be dangerous places at the best of times, without all the associated risks of running sighthounds off-leash.

We use two towels over the top and that way, we just switch out the towels every day and wash the Conni pad every second day. Towels and pad go straight in the wash and because we have a few sets, there's always a fresh set. It's really no more work than any other laundry and it's also a lot more portable, in case you have to travel with the dog or confine it to a crate for some reason..

Conni pads. Machine washable- we wash ours with Canesten and they come out smelling very clean- and very easy to manage. As for the fake grass/pet loo.. I'd bin it. Personally, I can't see the appeal in having a drawer full of dog urine to deal with