Maddy

So this overpriced store one I rudely shoved her in was 107 L x 71W x 76H

The Vebo place have one that is 107 L x 70W x 80H

and a 122 L x 75 W x 85 H

so perhaps that latter one? I had just noticed they have 30% currently off on crates... but then the sizing guides say not to give too much space?

Could someone let me know if they are indeed as easy to unpack and move around as claimed? :)

(Sorry to hijack scrappi! I had been looking around lately...)

Edit: Woops missed your post Maddy, so suggesting the size you gave me yesterday based off a verbal knock off greyhound description :laugh:

122cm is a 48" and that should give her room to lie down comfortably on her side. Not giving too much space is recommended if toileting in the crate might be an issue (for puppies or adult dogs being toilet trained) but otherwise, there's really no reason to restrict space. A larger crate will be heavier but I can easily carry and put up a 48", most come with a carry handle anyway and to put them up, they just sort of.. unfold in different directions. I'm probably not explaining that very well but they're very easy to put up. You just unclip the clips that hold it closed, unfolded out the one side/the roof and then lift them up. That pops up the other side and then you just have to stand up the ends and clip the clippy bits over the wires to secure it all. Like I said, I'm not great at explaining but it's very simple :p

Larger also means more room for food and water in there, without it being knocked over by turning dog bum.

Edit: Oh! The other thing is, get a crate with a plastic tray, not a metal one. Metal is assumed to be better because.. metal? but trust me, the slightest whiff of something corrosive nearby (bleach, for example) and even the slightest, tiniest chip in the powder coating and that sh*t will rust like nobody's business. After binning a few trays with rust developing on them (and being stuck with crates that are now useless), I've switched to the plastic trays and they're awesome. They're slightly deeper than the metal ones anyway, the plastic seems really thick and sturdy and they come out of a big crate smoothly, unlike the metal ones that wobble around and are a general PITA. Easier to clean, lighter, less noisy.

What would next size up be? I think I am running out of sizes!

Next size up is the 48". From the measurements you gave of that crate, it's a 42"

Re-read your post. Having a hidey spot/bed in the home as Maddy puts it would be a great thing for Thistle when guests come over. She can take herself off when she needs/wants a break. So yeah I'd go larger. Give her room to stretch out.

And a nice crate cover :D

You can get some incredibly pretty ones on Etsy these days Although for travel, I'd also get a cheap oxford/waterproof one to keep other dogs from eyeballing her while she's crated- most of those covers come with velcro windows now so you can pick which bits of the cover are open.

Launching off this, when buying a crate online how do you know you're getting the "right size" for your dog? We have been measuring in person (putting her in crates in stores lol) and comparing prices - I am not sure if should go more space is better, or just enough to sit, stand, turn around and not have her head hitting the roof? Tossing up between 36" and 42"

It would be a wire crate for packing her away at noseworks and tracking.

I am worried about getting the "wrong size" :/

How big is Thistle compared to a greyhound? I've always used 48" crates for my greyhounds and found that size to be reasonable for most of them. The Shitty Whippet has a 36" crate and she's an 11kg whippet, so I'd think that size crate would be way too small for Thistle (judging just from how big she looks in photos, anyway).

Shes a little bit shorter and not quite as long but could probably pass as a small knock off greyhound ????

PK I had not thought about laying on side... thank you for the link. Having never owned a crate before it is hard to picture what we will need ????

For that sort of size, I think you'd probably need at least a 42". A tight fit is usually recommended for puppies to discourage them for toileting in the crate but for an adult, no reason she can't have a bit of room to stretch out. Other thing is, if you get a decent size crate that she can comfortably sleep in, it can be used as a hidey spot/bed for home use.

Launching off this, when buying a crate online how do you know you're getting the "right size" for your dog? We have been measuring in person (putting her in crates in stores lol) and comparing prices - I am not sure if should go more space is better, or just enough to sit, stand, turn around and not have her head hitting the roof? Tossing up between 36" and 42"

It would be a wire crate for packing her away at noseworks and tracking.

I am worried about getting the "wrong size" :/

How big is Thistle compared to a greyhound? I've always used 48" crates for my greyhounds and found that size to be reasonable for most of them. The Shitty Whippet has a 36" crate and she's an 11kg whippet, so I'd think that size crate would be way too small for Thistle (judging just from how big she looks in photos, anyway).

Vebo!!

Otherwise you may find a good quality used crate on Gumtree. People buy them for flights or toilet training then sell them on. When you start researching crates you learn which brand is which and those that haven't been rated very highly, at least by DOLers, and can pick them out online.

thats the best way, but I was dropping off a pup and was so impressed by the crate they put him in I bought one. then thought, hey I need 2

so chuffed. received this today, this is why so many prefer to breed or buy their own instead of a rescue. time will tell how long before freedom of choice no longer survives in the nanny states of australia now.

"Hello

This is Jodie from Mount Gambier SA I purchased a Blue bitch pup off you a couple of years ago and had her flown to Adelaide her registed name is " Callie" out of Princess by Lightning (we call her Ellie)

Just thought I would just let you know she is going GREAT I couldn't be happier with her, a lot of people call her small or think she is still a puppy but I think she is the perfect size and has a perfect temperament she is a fine example of how great the breed is and we are turning heeler haters around where ever we go the usual comment I get is "I don't like heelers but I do love yours she is beautiful" half the time it feels like I am defending the entire breed because someone had a bad run in with a heeler and now don't like or trust heelers even when their owner is standing their with them on a lead??

We have been attending Obedience classes since June as I wanted a bit of me time away from the kids and I LOVE it we have moved up 2 classes already and are now in grade 2. I remember our first club competition to see if we would pass to go up to the next grade I still wasn't sure how it all worked anyway we entered and Ellie had be playing up a bit that day not behaving as she usually did in training/class, anyway I told the judge on the way in she's being a bitch but we will see how we go, and well we came out with a score of 195 out of 200 and took out first place won a ribbon and all I was so excited to show my husband when I got home, we are now into our 3rd week of Agility training and she is doing great as well, at home she climbs the ladder up into the kids cubby house which is quite high but she taught herself that just by following the kids up and down. "

This is a thread about crates. Was the random dig at rescue really necessary?

I went on the then Abel Tasman ferry across the Bass Strait as a kid on a family holiday. We took the car so we could drive around the island for the trip. I would not leave a dog on the car deck for the trip.

Yes carbon monoxide poisoning is a concern, but so is temperature, the car deck is down low so no heat evaporating, plus it's weird and creepy on the car deck, even a dog comfy in the car isn't used to being alone, in the dark, on a rolling ship...

I'd go for the flight and a day with strangers personally.

This.

If you fly her into Launceston, you might be able to organise with Pets Now Boarding to pick her up from the airport and bring her back to their kennels. They're right near the airport at Breadalbane, which is on the way to Hobart (if that's where the OP is going) but still only about 15 minutes out of Launceston.

Their website- http://petsnowboarding.com.au/

I have taken dogs on the boat once and would never do it again. You can't check on them for 12+ hours and if something goes wrong, tough cookies.

My gripe with beds is the rubbish designs they have. The snooza beds are so ugly , hideous green and blue with their logo all over it.

Thats why i brought one like the Orvis back from the states.

I really like the design on the 'Dougue' beds but they dont make anything big at all.

I bought memeory foam and really nice fabric and got my mum to sew a cover for the crate bed.

I'd agree with that, for the most part. I did really like the patterns for the velboa fabric on the trampoline bed covers but there's not much else that suits my tastes. That said.. I think dog beds, generally, are often quite ugly. The only exception was one I saw several years back that was a huge paw-shaped bed made of faux fur. Quite pretty but if I recall correctly, the prize was ~$400 with shipping and my dogs didn't use their own beds enough to justify that sort of expense.

Similar to this- https://www.amazon.com/Scruffs-Grizzly-Bear-Pet-Brown/dp/B00DS6X5ZU

Another Snooza fan here - have had beds still going strong after 7 or 8 years. Definitely value for money.

Same. Snooza are not cheap but they're made well and have a good warranty behind them, in case something does need replacing.

My only complaint is that the range is a bit limited for big dogs, although having said that, at least their large sizes are actually large.

Even more confusing! :laugh:

It seems it's not just calculated on weight. :)

I guess different species metabolise things differently ....

Just to throw another spanner in the works, our VB mentioned that small dogs tend to metabolise some types of medication differently to larger dogs. I think it was faster. (Malcolm as he's wont to do seems to operate in the reverse.)

Anyway, hope you work out a solution Gretel!

[Mass in grams]^0.75/[Mass in grams]

So, 20kg dog = 0.0840

5kg dog = 0.1189

Converting glucose into ATP produces heat energy, which will speed up other reactions. SA:V ratio in smaller dogs is quite high, even more so in breeds with more surface such as IGs, which is why they get cold quite easily. They're efficient at producing heat but also very efficient at losing it.

What the above means is that theoretically, the smaller animal will metabolise things more efficiently so dosage per kg has to be calculated taking that into account. A 70kg mastiff is going to metabolise at a reduced rate compared to a 5kg IG so we can't just say "Well, this was tested with 15kg dogs to be this amount so we'll just apply those numbers upwards and downward per kg" because it doesn't necessarily work.

To give you an example.. Bosley's calculated per/kg dose of KBr was 800mg/day, as calculated by a vet, based on just mg/body weight. This didn't take into account Na intake or MSMR and the result was a dog who was so doped up that he could barely walk. My own calculation was 300mg/day but even that was still too high and we had him at 200mg for quite a long time. That dose controlled his seizures acceptably and had fairly minimal side effects. It's hugely different though from the dose rate calculated from just an average worked out that tries to cover every breed, shape and size of dog out there.

Back on topic..

Ratties are creatures of habit and don't like disturbances or changes. Clearing out the shed would be a good idea, as well at taking away anything that leans or sits up against the walls in there, as they create safe little corridors for ratties to travel along. Take away anything that could be used as nesting material (cardboard boxes, rags, newspapers, etc) and store all smaller items in those plastic storage tubs with lids- the sort you can get at places like Kmart or Bunnings. Also, don't leave uneaten bones outside because rats will eat these and can lift much heavier loads than you'd guess from looking at them.

The above won't kill the rats but they will likely decide to set up camp somewhere more suitable. Baits can work but if the drawcard remains, new ratties will move in soon enough anyway.

Just to clear things up, I don't think he meant that genetics weren't important at all. At one point he did state that the parents could be nut cases and your pup would still turn out alright if raised properly. Then did go on to describe the parents temperaments a little and they sounded lovely. I don't wish to bash this breeder either, I was just looking for opinions on the genetics behind temperament. I'm sure if I was to question further I would get more information from him as he was happy to chat.

Saying that genes aren't important as long as the pup is raised a certain way is.. saying genes aren't important? As I pointed out above, you can do all the right things, put in all the work and certain traits will still always be there.

It sounds to me like quite a good "out" if the puppy grows up to have issues- "Oh, well, the parents have those same issues but you could have prevented them in the puppy by doing this thing, so the dodgy temperament is your own fault"

Oh gosh! temperament is much to do with genetics IMO

How odd that breeder doesn't think so .

This.

Pups from nervy mothers might be socialised and taught to cope with life but if you push them at all, that nervy dog is just under the surface.

Idiot Dog came from a very nervy dam and although he went to puppy classes, got taken on pleasant outings, was raised around some dogs with great social skills and given all the best opportunities, he was still a nervy dog. If he had come from dogs with great temperaments, and was raised in the same way, he would have been a wonderful, social dog. Instead, it took us most of his life and a lot of work for him to not be worried about unfamiliar visitors. I don't regret taking him on because I'd already committed myself to a lot of work because of his health issues anyway, but for the average puppy buyer, I can't imagine they'd want that sort of struggle.

I actually had his half sister for a week recently and if he was bad, she was twenty times worse. The sort of dog who is anxious about everything and very wound-up, and (surprise, surprise) very quick to bite. Lots of anxious energy and to someone not familiar with greyhound temperaments, she probably seemed very friendly and outgoing, if a little silly. The reason she only stayed a week was because her nervy disposition extended into every facet of her life and in her anxiety to eat every little thing within a 20m radius of herself, she was incredibly food aggressive, attacking Spotty for his food as soon as she'd finished her own, unless he was crated for his own protection.

Some problems can be fixed with training or socialisation but others are part of the dog and can only ever be managed.

Personally, if a breeder told me that temperament of parents didn't matter, I'd be finding a different breeder.

I am a meat eater and my dogs are raw fed meat but I find that to work in an abattoir you have to have a cruel streak. I have always advocated that the animal, until their last moments on this earth should be treated with dignity and respect including our food sources. Why oh why do these situations bring out the bad and cruel side of humans

My mother worked in an abattoir and she certainly doesn't have a cruel streak Obviously killing animals for meat is necessary if you want to eat meat. Being the one to do the deed doesn't make you any worse than the person eating the final product. In fact, I think it's pretty bloody hypocritical to sling about statements like yours and then go and enjoy the results of their work. If you believe the industry is populated by cruel people, stop supporting it?

Anyways..

The trouble with larger processing facilities is that time is money: time spent correctly training employees is money, time spent ensuring all equipment is operating correctly is money, time spent on best practice handling of livestock is money. When we want to be able to buy a steak for a few dollars, they have to cut costs to be able to keep turning a profit, simple as that.

You can't expect staff to understand the importance of accuracy in bolt placement if you don't teach them, same goes for understanding how certain methods are intended to work. Back when my mum worked in the industry, they didn't employ random people fresh off the streets to work on the kill floor, you had to work your way up through a lot of unpleasant jobs, learning as you went. The position of slaughterman was considered senior and highly skilled and was paid accordingly.

Gretna, on the other hand, was a very good example of terrible practices and poorly trained staff. If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys with access to captive bolt guns.

Another reason why the industry no longer attracts skilled professionals the way it used to is the stigma attached to it. Even as recently back as when my mum worked in the industry (late 70s), there was no shame in the job. It paid well and was practical work. These days, there is a huge amount of stigma involved and that doesn't help in attracting the best people for the job.

It's easy to see abuse and assume all involved must be f***ed up in some way but more often than not, it's a result of the systems and culture in place. If people were willing to pay more for meat (and to eat it less often or eat poorer cuts/offal), it'd reduce a lot of the pressure but unfortunately, people expect top quality work for rock bottom prices and that's not how things work, ever

(As an aside, the reason my mum left the job was a car accident that shattered the bones in one of her arms. She suffered no trauma as a result of her job. The worst thing she could actually recall were human/knife accidents because the chain-mesh gloves/aprons were not mandatory back then and there were occasionally serious accidents from poor knife handling. Unpleasant but now thoroughly covered by OHS)

Interesting about the comments regarding the different types of drive (herding vs prey). TBH I highly doubt my dog wants to kill them, she's a softie & such a sook, but I'm not sure what she'd do if she got one & don't plan on finding out!

I thought the same about Kokoda until i saw him catch and kill a bearded dragon. It was brutal

Exactly. I've had greyhounds who were sooky, soft-tempered, shy dogs who'd never dream of hurting a human or other dog but a possum on the back fence was a whoooooole other story. Temperament has nothing to do with prey drive, they are two entirely unrelated things.

Steve, it's not that those not involved in the wrong-doing are doing the wrong thing just by being trainers, it's that the vast majority of aware of the issues and refuse to speak up. If an ANKC breeder knew of another ANKC breeder who did something like.. routinely drowned unwanted puppies or who lied on breeding registration papers (used a different sire, etc) but that person did not report it, would you not agree that the person shares some amount of guilt by allowing it to continue?

Maddy if you are so sure that some know that some others are drowning puppies ,how do you think they know this and how many breeders that you know drown puppies have you reported? You cant just rock up and say I think they are routinely drowning puppies and its not something that a breeder brags about. You can say that s not that sire and its easily proven via DNA so if you know its happened then have you reported it ?.How do you know someone else is aware of it or that its not just gossip? If you know these things and dont report them then why are you less guilty of someone else who you think may know something .Why would a greyhound breeder drown puppies?

Regarding your question of why I haven't reported things.. as I mentioned several times, many of the issues are not against any rules. Bosley's mum had litter after litter with epileptic pups and there is no rule or law against creating that misery. As for speaking out about it, I don't mean to sound snarky but what on Earth do you think I'm doing in this thread?

And yes, HazyWal understood what I meant. She and I don't necessarily agree on many of the points of this issue but at least she doesn't base arguments off entirely incorrect interpretations of what I'm saying :/

Steve, using previous posts to back up something that you misunderstood does not make you right. I asked (and I thought I was perfectly clear) what you would do if you knew of an ANKC breeder doing something that was either A) Ethically very questionable or B) an actual breach of rules.

I'm not talking about greyhound breeders drowning puppies, nor do I believe it likely to occur. You misinterpreted my post and instead of just acknowledging that, you felt the need to try to prove yourself right, even though I'm telling you that you weren't.

And asal.. there are no words for how misinformed and ignorant you are in this discussion. This is going to be my last reply to you because pro or anti, my patience gets very short with those who to turn reasonable discussions into circuses.

Steve the "experience" of this person far exceeds anyone on this forum, think its a waste of time having someone like this focusing on just dog owners. This the the kind of lawmakers we need, then once all have been jailed and taken care of there will never be any more cases involving pedophiles, rapists, robbers, domestic violence or any other form of innocents abuse. everyone will be jailed because if you didn't stop it your just as guilty even if you didn't even know what was happening next door or out of your sight or hearing let alone what happened. This is the future

It exceeds your experience with greyhounds and the industry- which is, by your own admission, none. The same applies to Steve; I have a lot of respect for her but I disagree with her opinion, based on my experience. The rest of your reply is an absurd slippery slope argument that deserves exactly none of my time.

Steve, it's not that those not involved in the wrong-doing are doing the wrong thing just by being trainers, it's that the vast majority of aware of the issues and refuse to speak up. If an ANKC breeder knew of another ANKC breeder who did something like.. routinely drowned unwanted puppies or who lied on breeding registration papers (used a different sire, etc) but that person did not report it, would you not agree that the person shares some amount of guilt by allowing it to continue? If you knew of someone who beat their child, would you not report it? I'm not just talking about actual breaches of law or rules that could be reported to governing bodies, by the way, but also breaches of what most of us would consider reasonable standards. To give you an example.. a bitch who carries epilepsy and throws at least one epileptic pup in each litter- to the general public, I think it would be reasonable to expect that after one or two litters when this issue became obvious, that breeding would cease with this bitch. Or, if breeding must continue, that breeding further out of the line be considered. Instead, the exact opposite took place- more litters, even more doubling up on lines. Epilepsy is rife amongst her pups but this is not against any law or rule. It seems like it shouldn't be necessary to police common sense and some basic care for the welfare of the animals but here we are, having this discussion

I think it's worth pointing out (again) that I don't want to see racing gone, what I want is for the current industry to be completely dismantled (because it is entirely beyond saving) and thenrebuilt in such a way that severely limits or even eliminates the factors that lead to the problems. Involving large amounts of money is obviously one of those factors. Let me put it to you this way.. if winning a Best of Breed or Best in Group netted you a couple of thousand dollars, I think you'd quickly see a rise in very dodgy behaviour. The flow-on effects from a change like that are considerable and would change the very nature of the hobby. And that's just one example.

Written by Moosmum (in case asal gets confused again)

The draw back tho' is, you are the experts setting the standard to follow here. It this the ONLY way? 'cos you will have to live with the answer

This is discussion on a dog forum. We're not debating the matter in parliament, there's no vote, it's just an exchange of opinions for the sake of it.

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.

Ultimately, remaining silent is condoning the behaviour of those doing the wrong thing. If enough of the good trainers were willing to come forward, name names, be honest about what goes on, maybe the scum could be cleaned away and things could change. But they don't. In doing nothing, they've made a choice. Back when I was stuck running GAP down here (a short, horrible period that I'd rather forget), I was made to sign an agreement stating that I would never say anything to anyone that would bring the sport into disrepute. This included speaking to the media (besides statements approved by them), it also included not reporting things I'd seen to the RSPCA. A similar clause exists under GAR. A rule that basically prohibits anyone from speaking out if it might damage the image of the sport. A lot of the AR nuts like to grasp at some of the much less common issues while right there, in front of their noses, is the industry enforcing corruption and a culture of secrecy, in a way that can be proven without any effort at all. Go figure.

But that assumes that the good trainers even know what they get up to and what they were doing and from what Im hearing thats just not true. Its hardly something that is advertised and chatted about to anyone who they dont trust. You place EVERYONE who wants to own and train greys in the same basket .They are either animal abusers or they are complicent in it without consideration for how many did really know enough to be able to report it. The second part of your post is about self management and self policing which is always open to corruption and bias and why Vicdogs would be better to advocate for reasonable conditions for everyone who wants to breed dogs rather than sit back and help stick it to everyone else and bathe in the glow that their exemptions won't be removed and they don't become just like the riff raff who choose not to be their members. It attracts dead beats who only join for the exemptions and sets them up for failure sooner rather than later and always makes them a shinier target and open to accusations of corruption,secrecy and bias for AR loonies. If you are going to expect enforcement you have to have a third party arms length party that can accept complaints and have nothing to gain by hushing things up and that includes the RSPCA.

In my experience, many are like teenage girls in that they like to gossip. One person falls out with another, they have a good bitch to anyone who'll listen. There are cliques and certain people go in and out of fashion. In small states like Tasmania, everyone knows everyone elses' business. In places like NSW, I suppose it'd be more of a regional thing, not that it makes a great deal of difference. You're also assuming that those doing the wrong thing are actually going to some sort of effort to hide it and again, from my experience, that's not really true. I've had trainers admit to me that baiting happened on their property (not by them, of course, but a mysterious "someone"). I know of trainers who go through huge numbers of dogs and it's no secret. Then there are the things that happen that aren't against any rule but the public would likely not be comfortable with- dogs being destroyed at the track because of relatively minor injuries (in terms of their health) that are likely to mean they'll never race successfully again. People breeding several litters out of one bitch in the hopes of getting that elusive big winner, etc, etc.

Maybe a few very sheltered trainers could claim ignorance of what goes on but they'd be a tiny minority. What remains and those who do the wrong thing and those who watch the wrong thing happen. This is not saying they are the same- but those who stand by and do nothing cannot complain when the sport does eventually get taken away from them.

Regarding the second part of my post, you could not be more incorrect. In no way was I suggesting self management because that is what is already in place and already very obviously failing. What I was saying was that participants need to take some responsibility, instead of claiming that because it was not them, they shouldn't have to worry about it. This is like witnessing a murder and instead of calling the police, shrugging your shoulders and saying, "Well, I didn't murder anyone so it's not my business and not my problem." It seems obvious to me that if the industry is under threat because of a systemic issue, then all parties concerned should be looking at how to solve the problem. Instead, they're just trying to sweep it back under the rug.

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.

Ultimately, remaining silent is condoning the behaviour of those doing the wrong thing. If enough of the good trainers were willing to come forward, name names, be honest about what goes on, maybe the scum could be cleaned away and things could change. But they don't. In doing nothing, they've made a choice. Back when I was stuck running GAP down here (a short, horrible period that I'd rather forget), I was made to sign an agreement stating that I would never say anything to anyone that would bring the sport into disrepute. This included speaking to the media (besides statements approved by them), it also included not reporting things I'd seen to the RSPCA. A similar clause exists under GAR. A rule that basically prohibits anyone from speaking out if it might damage the image of the sport. A lot of the AR nuts like to grasp at some of the much less common issues while right there, in front of their noses, is the industry enforcing corruption and a culture of secrecy, in a way that can be proven without any effort at all. Go figure.

It falls on deaf ears what is the point! Just like you they and others have been held to ransom. As I have said if there was legislation more places to complain to.

Part of the problem is that no one will admit to anything that goes on because it does not benefit them to do so, in the short term. If the majority are good people, and if they were willing to stand up as a group and demand change, there is a good chance it'd happen. This requires, however, that the majority want what is best for the sport and what is best for the dogs. The selfish attitude of "it's not us, it's them" (See also: pedigree dog world, "It's the bad breeders") achieves absolutely nothing.

Part of me feels sorry for the good trainers but another part of me feels that if they really wanted change, it could be done.

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.

Ultimately, remaining silent is condoning the behaviour of those doing the wrong thing. If enough of the good trainers were willing to come forward, name names, be honest about what goes on, maybe the scum could be cleaned away and things could change. But they don't. In doing nothing, they've made a choice. Back when I was stuck running GAP down here (a short, horrible period that I'd rather forget), I was made to sign an agreement stating that I would never say anything to anyone that would bring the sport into disrepute. This included speaking to the media (besides statements approved by them), it also included not reporting things I'd seen to the RSPCA. A similar clause exists under GAR. A rule that basically prohibits anyone from speaking out if it might damage the image of the sport. A lot of the AR nuts like to grasp at some of the much less common issues while right there, in front of their noses, is the industry enforcing corruption and a culture of secrecy, in a way that can be proven without any effort at all. Go figure.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

Having done major change programmes in big organisations - both the 'slow excruciating tooth pulling' version and the 'short sharp, get in and get out, blood on the floor' version' i prefer the latter - while its bloody in the short term I think its less painful in the long term -

So are you saying that the short sharp version closed the organisations down completely or they went OS, or was it that the participants just had to change their culture, no compromises, so the industry could survive?

The latter m-j usually - it usually involves rapid down-sizing and sophisticated management of change and people - and that so ain't going to happen here. Management by attrition usually takes a long time, and while it works in some situations I doubt it will work here given the public and political pressure.

So yes - I have seen absolutely nothing here to suggest that genuine sustainainble change will happen so this industry will survive in a form that is acceptable to the general public. In fact this decision has probably ensured the slow 'death by a thousand cuts' for this industry, unless it happens again. And yes I'm certain it will all happen again and next time it will be a brutal shutdown.

Look the truth is that the days of using animals for gambling and entertainment are severely numbered - its only a matter of time given its a toxic mix that brings out the worst in human beings. So this industry can evolve to shutdown under its own control or have it done to it eventually. They can take their pick which route they take - but they are going to end up in the same place. Bookmark it.

Thank you for your reply. As I have said before you are probably right except it will be a pity for the good folk in the industry and they do exist and they have complained but it has fallen on deaf ears.

The entertainment and gambling factor of the industry are not to blame for this it is the "win at all cost" mentality. Unfortunately it isn't only in the greyhounds it is across the board in all sports, it is why human athletes get drug tested and are being found positive. Gone are the days when sport was just that sport, now it is business, pity. One example of this is country football/cricket they are paying players from other places to play for them so now the kids that don't make the grade instead of being at the footy or the cricket on Saturday they are entertaining themselves in other ways and not all of them are wholesome.

Generally m-j I think we are in agreement - I just don't believe so much in 'the good people' - not one public whistle blower I'm aware of in all the years of greyhound racing? But anyway, yes it is a pity that what might have been a good clean fun hobby has now become 'business' - and when it involves animals you can absolutely bet that greed will overrule any sense of animal welfare and decrease our collective humanity. I think this is why I'm so angry with this industry - as it not only reflects on them, it reflects on all of us. And I wonder if the huge outcry over greyhounds is because they are closer to us than, say horses. The are a companion animal species who live in our homes - and while some people have horses as well most of us don't. So it hits hard.

And yes absolutely agree - the moment sport becomes 'business' it moves to a different plane. I'm a great AFL supporter - and sooooo angry with Essendon for the disrepute that they have brought to the game through their 'whatever it takes' 'supplements' program. They are a case study for everything m_j talks about. I've seriously considered going back to supporting grass roots footie through the SANFL - and I might still. And no I won't be watching or betting on 'the race that stops the nation' either.

They are out there :) the vet that went onto the ABC show (there is a link at the beginning of this thread) is one example and look what it achieved, nothing. There are many people out there that could tell stories and some have but it got them nowhere. It seems that a certain few of the industry appear to have it sown up so this is why I was hoping legislation would sort it out. I'm not going to hold my breath though the GBOTA put reforms on the table I'm guessing to enhance their chance of keeping the industry and some of those reforms got taken off 3-4 days after the ban was lifted, which really peeved me, same ..... different day. I just hope when the next push to close it comes there will be more thought put into what is going to happen to the dogs.

Can you honestly say you were surprised by this?

I don't want to see the breed disappear through the complete banning of racing but it seems like the arrogance of those involved is just.. incredible. As soon as they believed they had won, it was back to business as usual. Apparently they'd already reformed enough and everything is fine. A greyhound trainer in Sydney was charged with live baiting the day before the ban was lifted but that's okay because reform, reviews, some paid "research", a liberal application of smoke and mirrors and.. everything is fine. The public can stop looking now, back to business.

The arrogance of some is incredible.

the question is, do you destroy all? including the 80% the report said are the honest, the caring in the quest to destroy the arrogant? In war it is called "collateral damage" there are a few million survivors of that fleeing that horror and the loss of their homes and way of life, according to the news, many are drowning in the attempt.

those to have tried it to get to australia are locked up for longer sentences than pedophiles, rapists and murderers.

now add those who have pets for whatever purpose to eliminate the arrogant

Sure, allow me to rephrase that: Those with the power to make changes are incredibly arrogant.

NSW has proven that it's not an issue of just a few "bad eggs", it's a systemic problem that starts at the top and is pervasive, throughout the industry. Comparing it to war is absurd. Absolutely absurd. Bringing up asylum seekers is equally absurd because it has NOTHING to do with the issue and it is, frankly, an attempt to purposely distract the discussion off onto entirely unrelated subjects (while pointedly ignoring some very important points).

But if we're going to use analogies, let me offer you one that actually makes some sense in relation to the discussion: Let's imagine that your dog has cancer. Maybe it started in the bones or lymph nodes, it doesn't really matter too much, all that matters is your dog has cancer and that cancer has spread to many different organs. The organs might not be riddled with cancer but it's there and it damages their normal function and impacts negatively on the dog's welfare. Different treatments for the cancer were tried and although they might have killed a bit of cancer here and there, the cancer is still in every part of your dog. Your dog is in pain, your dog's days are numbered, every other avenue has been tried and has failed. And that only leaves one last option.

That option is obviously not ideal but unfortunately, it is inevitable.

But the ones eager to see an end to this industry are a superior type to Greyhound racing identities, whos loss is for the greater good. Other dog enthusiasts will be an even better type if they lose this portion. The standard will be better.(not)

No offense but we're not talking about minor things like failing to obey leash laws. There is a slight difference between walking your dog off lead and strapping a live animal to a lure arm and allowing dogs to slowly tear it to pieces.

I'm not sure how this is confusing for some people?