Sheridan

Woof, I've seen this 'police our own' comment come up quite a lot in relation to the greyhound industry and with pedigree dogs. Somehow every greyhound trainer and breeder is supposed to know what everyone else is doing. Same with ANKC breeders. If like to know how I, as a dog owner, is supposed to know what someone I see once in a while at a dog show, that I don't know personally, does with their dogs. The idea of policing our own is so full of holes that it should be instantly dismissed by anyone with a brain.

Given their reputation for behaving ethically I can see why you'd want to give them the benefit of the doubt...

The reality is that any industry which does not behave ethically as a whole unit will have its rights taken away. No it's not fair for those who do the right thing but in this day and age lack of decisive action against those who do the wrong thing is viewed as complicity.

It's all well and good to say that it takes time to change but how long should they be given? How many lives must be lost in cruel circumstances before it's too many? How much suffering is acceptable during the "transition period"? You are braver and wiser than I if you can quantify such things.

It only takes a heartbeat to take away people's rights - people who have never shown any sign of being party to any of this - thats 80% of them and how do you justify them having the right to find them new homes or sell them interstate rather than killing them as better for the dogs?

can only wonder if its a case of don't care, as long is its not your rights that have been signed away. Then the fat would fly but same scenario here, those unaffected will just look on and say hey they brought it on themselves then too.

As someone who owns and loves animals I do care very much, and I worry that my right to own them wil be taken away, but that doesn't negate the reality, nor does it make it ok for others to abuse animals while I sat back. I do what I can but it takes a majority, so I try to convince people that this is all our responsibility. Each of us every time we hear about someone doing the wrong thing but are afraid to speak up because they are more powerful, they are more respected, but they are the ones who will bring us all down so now is the time to act against them.

Okay, give. What are you doing to ensure this?

Even the standard says that Irish Terriers are not that good with other dogs.

http://ankc.org.au/Breed/Detail/47

And Amstaffs along with Staffords and other bull breeds are not always good with other dogs. If the OP states they would like a breed known for getting along with other dogs, I would not choose these.

I grew up with an Irish terrier and my sister had one. It really depends on the individual dog. If I was going to choose one of the Irish breeds that is more likely (though not always) to get along with another dog I'd choose a wheaten. However, a wheaten would not do at all in this situation and honestly, I'd avoid the terrier group altogether.

Like Gruf I think this is a poor resolution BUT I'm sick to death of RSPCA euth stats being twisted and re-twisted. Argue the case with facts not something somebody said somewhere. It's the same with the report - everywhere on FB people say it's full of lies. Fine - tell me which part of the report and back it up. Most people haven't even bothered to read it.

How are RSPCA stats being twisted?

For a start it would be more appropriate to discuss euth % rather than raw numbers. And discuss dog numbers rather than all animals.

The stats I've seen were solely euth rates not numbers of dogs in shelters. I haven't checked them but the source was cited as annual reports.

I was responding to asal saying "no outcry over 58,000 dogs" and my point is that it is 15% of annual intake nationally. Not 58% like the Greyhounds. No one likes euth'ing animals. I certainly don't. But I do see some of the dogs that make it through behavioural assessments and there are a number that should never have been adopted.

15% of what? All euthanasias nationally or 15% of RSPCA intake? And the 58% of greyhounds is 58% of what? Greyhounds born?

They just failed by using 'learnings'.

Like Gruf I think this is a poor resolution BUT I'm sick to death of RSPCA euth stats being twisted and re-twisted. Argue the case with facts not something somebody said somewhere. It's the same with the report - everywhere on FB people say it's full of lies. Fine - tell me which part of the report and back it up. Most people haven't even bothered to read it.

How are RSPCA stats being twisted?

For a start it would be more appropriate to discuss euth % rather than raw numbers. And discuss dog numbers rather than all animals.

The stats I've seen were solely euth rates not numbers of dogs in shelters. I haven't checked them but the source was cited as annual reports.

Like Gruf I think this is a poor resolution BUT I'm sick to death of RSPCA euth stats being twisted and re-twisted. Argue the case with facts not something somebody said somewhere. It's the same with the report - everywhere on FB people say it's full of lies. Fine - tell me which part of the report and back it up. Most people haven't even bothered to read it.

How are RSPCA stats being twisted?

Curious timing...evidence of mass grave and cattle prod footage referred to police by GRNSW. I hate this. I can clearly see both sides of the argument - the report is horrendous but of course there are decent people being caught up. I don't know what the solution is. GRNSW seem incapable of overseeing the industry that's for sure.

12 months and 4 years ago I believe. Why the delay? And what about the person who has had that footage for 4 years?

Why the delay? Because the campaign against the ban seems to be gaining ground in the media and people's minds are being changed.

I wonder what the story is about the greyhounds that Baird was suppose to have a media presentation with? Seems like they didn't want the media to talk to the man at all since they were all moved inside.

There really shouldn't be outrage that the RSPCA will euth quite a high number of them, they have been saying that from the outset of the announcement.

People can't see the forest for the trees.

--Lhok

Well Im not outraged but why is it better for the RSPCA to take them and put them down when the breeders are perfectly capable of taking them to their own vets and doing the same thing?

The answer to that would be written in some bureaucratese but the actual answer is probably because the RSPCA said so.

I just realised something odd.

Baird is going to save greyhound "wastage" by shutting down the racing in nsw right?

Tb breeders are heading for the same micromanagement to shut down "wastage"

this this same government wants to shoot 5,000 brumbies in Kosiosko National park. Not allow their capture and rehoming, just blast em with high power rifles because its more humane?

is it just me who is confused by this, are some less equal than others somehow?

logic????? there is none in the current trend of various governments haste to respond to whatever they need to do to be seen to be doing something without affecting their voter base too badly...

or perhaps i am becoming totally cynical.

H

Yep and its all about who yells the loudest and who piddles in who's pocket

SA introduced mandatory desexing of baby puppies which I consider much more cruel than many other things but thats O.K.

Norway says it cruel and its against the law SA says who cares it how we will stop dumped dogs.

It won't.

There doesn't seem to be any benefit to being a member of GRNSW right now and certainly, the disadvantages appear to be retrospective given even though if someone resigns membership they're still going to lose their dogs. I don't know what the GRNSW regulations say but I don't see how joining ensures a loss of property rights and I wonder if members knew that was in the small print.

Ah, Steve, true colours come shining through.

yes yours are so pretty, well to you anyway

Breeders who have sold to pet shops are a contributing factor in pedigree dogs PR problem. I don't think I can say it more plainly.

There are two precedents for taking away someone's property and handing it over: Royal Domain and Squatter's Rights. Not sure how much the latter could apply as it depends on state law regarding squatting but certainly Royal Domain is similar.

Hello everyone,

Just to clarify a few things to those who may have concerns about this research and the terminology used in the title of the survey.

Firstly, the term animal caretaker or animal caretakership is one that has become broadly used in animal studies and anthrozoological based literature, as well as the term animal companion as opposed to pet. The term has not been used in this instance to suggest you do not legally own your dog or to delegitimize the relationship you have with your dog. I understand that everyone prefers different terms to describe the human dog relationship, however either way, both terms place obligations on the owners or caretakers to take responsibility to care for their dog and satisfy their needs

Secondly, I am not in any way either personally or professionally associated with PETA or any other animal rights based organisation. As a researcher it is my job to be impartial and explore and consider a range of viewpoints on this issue.

Thirdly, to clarify the purpose of the survey and the broader research, perhaps I should have gone into more depth before posting and in the Participant Information Statement. I am conducting my doctoral thesis at La Trobe University in Melbourne and the survey data will exclusively be used by myself in my thesis, within conferences and journal articles. It will not be sourced to any other external organisation. The overall purpose of my research is to explore if, how and why human and dog relations may be changing in contemporary Victoria. I am focusing on things such as changes in humans lifestyles and how this may be contributing to what dogs we select to be our companions. I will be analysing the greater emphasis on animal adoption, changes in breed popularity and the emergence of designer animals, amongst other things.

This survey and this post was, and is in no way meant to offend anyone or cause any mistrust or anger. Dogs are something I too am very passionate about which is why I have decided to dedicate my thesis to this topic. I hope this has given you some greater clarity on my work.

Thanks for your time and to those who may have already completed the survey.

Clare, you ask why people choose breeds. How can you quantify someone's heart?

ETA on 'designer' animals, please put that in parentheses. There is no design to sticking two unsuitable dog breeds together other than the desire to make money.

Hi there, so far in my reading and research I have found that while a number of people do select dogs based on loving the breed or feelings that as you say they cannot quantify, that other factors also come into consideration. For example their living arrangements, family status, work commitments and so forth. Therefore that is the reason why I have asked the question in the survey. I hope that answers your question.

As for your comment of designer animals, there are a number of perspectives that my research will seek to gather and present, hence why I am seeking the perspective of pedigree owners and breeders to balance out the debate. My survey is also being directed at people with designer animals to canvas the reasons why they selected these particular combinations. I have no interests or opinion on the matter outside of pure scientific curiosity, hence why I am conducting research on this topic. I hope that covers everything for you, and thanks for your contribution.

Thanks for your replies, I on one hand was concerned my suspicions may have offended you, but on the other hand know from experience nothing offends a peta advocate. You will I suspect tend to find older generations are more than a bit gun-shy as they have seen this stealth campaign from its beginnings to today. the complete lack of compassion for those who love and have pets is bad enough but their record of destruction of any animals they get hold of let alone the plans for all breeds and species of animals in their sights is the scariest part.

it is as if they not only detest their own species who have pets but any domesticated species as well.

as for so called 'designer breeds', they are x breds there is no 'design' to be found in crossing some breeds, feel sorry in particular for so many of the poor oodles. they need the same grooming and care as a purebred poodle , except many lack the correct poodle single coat of the purebred, the correct coat and texture is quite resistant to matting, many tend to have to also inherited the soft fluffy undercoat as well and suffer the resulting matting and horrific felting so loved by the publications for shocking the general public.

a friend come home with the cutest boxer x kelpie, if the breeder thought that design was a good one I knew without even asking this cutie was going to grow into and incredibly active perpetual puppy with a strength no kelpie ever had and a tail that could kneecap an adult. lovable absolutely. kids flying like tenpins? absolutely. not a plant left in the yard? absolutely. the first 2 years were a nightmare but unlike many owners of such a high energy behemoth they stuck it out, many pups aren't so lucky and end up dumped or surrendered. she was lucky.

as well the whole idea of the non shedding coat is lost in the next cross, well unless the other parent is again a purebred poodle, a percentage shed anyway and as for crossing the resulting oodles even if neither oodle parent sheds 2/3rds of the puppies will miss out on the non shedding gene and oops will not be any use in preventing allergic reactions to those who need a non shedding pet.

as Rob Zammit pointed out so long ago as he had that cute little Malti tzu or was it malti oodle? any way it had inherited a combination of structural faults from its contributing parents. designer parents need to be conformation sound too or the puppies still inherit malaccluded teeth, navel and or inguinal hernias, luxating patella, hip displacia, even deafness and dry eye to name a few of the bonus genes that can come if the parents arent checked for freedom for these just as thoughly as any potential parent of any breed or cross.

Hi there, no you have not offended me at all. I am happy to answer any concerns or queries anyone may have, it is a key part of my job as researcher.

Let me just reiterate again though that I am in no way, shape or form associated with PETA or any other animal rights groups. I love dogs. I have had dogs my whole life, I have dogs currently and I hope to share my life with many more wonderful dogs in the future. This research is in no way intended to alter the current state of pet ownership in this country. Rather, I am interested in how our lifestyles and the changes in our urban environment may be altering the human and dog relationship on a mirco level and how we as humans can ensure we are providing adequate care and welfare for our animals. I hope this work could one day have positive outcomes for dogs and dog owners as well as councils who manage domestic pets and State and Federal Governments. At this stage I can of course not predict the outcomes of the data, however let me reassure you all it will in no way be used to suggest that pets are something that human beings should not continue to have.

On the matter of designer dogs or cross breeds, thankyou for your input and ideas. These are exactly the perspectives I am interested in hearing about so they are extremely valuable to my research. This is exactly why I had decided to post on this forum, to hear a range of opinions about these changes in breeding. So thankyou once again. If you have any other questions please do not hesitate to ask. I hope we can all have an open and transparent dialogue about these issues.

Apologies for the very long quote. Where do you stand on dog breeding? An abrupt question but an important one.

It's my view Newkirk was bitten by a dog as a child.

Well what happens if you have a couple that have been racing and you simply want to keep them and not race them - seems to be blocked. Its just so hard to believe that your right to decide what happens to you own animals is removed from you.

I think the "owners" are now just the caretakers. I think the greyhound board now has taken ownership of all greyhounds registered with them.

This seems unlawful. I spend my money purchasing goods therefore the goods are my property. What law allows a third party to take control of my goods without my consent?

Some would call that theft.

I was going to take my wheaten to the first lure coursing day in the ACT but didn't cos I had something else on. Guess I won't be bothered now.

The ban affects NSW only. At this stage.

The last LC day in the ACT was cancelled due to lack of numbers

I thought there had only been one.

OT, Rebanne, do you have the link for the above, please.

https://www.thedogs.com.au/NewsArticle.aspx?NewsId=7774

Ta very much.

The environment does not respond.

BUT- It IS shaped by what it contains. Its our collective responsibility to shape it so it favors our purpose.

Here is a hypothetical.

What if the Grey racing industry were not exclusive?

What if, way back when it began, it was a racing DOG interest? Greys would still be the best and fastest. Greys would still be raced against other greys because anything else would be ridiculous.

But if each country race meet at least,there were novelty races held for pet owners. A fun day out for the family and their pet.

I assume those who took up on that service would learn a lot about dogs, training, husbandry etc and racing specificly from the industry leaders. Those people would have accepted a lot of things that a greyhound breeder or sportsman does for the purpose of racing dogs. A lot of them might have enjoyed it so much they would turn to the sport and trying to breed train or race their own Greys.

Some practices would have changed along with community expectations. Maybe more dogs chosen for a love of running in front of a pack, or pleasing their owners than for a prey drive.

The world we have would would be a different shape now. How much we we will never know.

We shape the space we occupy collectively. We cant do it exclusively. A shared purpose is essential. Dogs are the purpose. The values that add to dogs depend on an INDIVIDUALS purpose in keeping them, but they are all dogs.

And what if a handful of ignorant callous trainers used live baiting to attempt to get their dogs to chase better? Like has happened?

Do you think novelty race meets (which, by the way have occurred for a range of breeds) would change the AR agenda?

There is an infant sport in NSW called lure coursing. All breeds and crosses of dog can participate. The dogs chase plastic bags The GR Commission report has roped it in with Greyhound racing calling for any pet who participates to be registered as a "coursing dog" and criminalising ownership of small animals by LC dog owners.

The reason dogs chase ANYTHING is prey drive. It shouldn't be demonised and it can be managed. We have a bunch of people who know sweet FA about dogs and care even less driving the rhetoric. They are shaping the space and dogs are NOT their purpose. The fact that many dog owners are being duped by them is a real and genuine issue.

I was going to take my wheaten to the first lure coursing day in the ACT but didn't cos I had something else on. Guess I won't be bothered now.

Greyhound Racing Regulation 2016

Written by: Greyhound Racing NSW

On 15 July 2016, the NSW Government introduced the Greyhound Racing Regulation 2016 which requires that owners of greyhounds registered in NSW to notify or seek consent from Greyhound Racing NSW (GRNSW) before transferring the ownership of, retiring, exporting or destroying a greyhound.

The Regulation has been prepared following the NSW Government’s decision to close down the greyhound racing industry from 1 July 2017 and will assist in the tracking and welfare of greyhounds during the wind down process.

The new Regulation requires the owner of a registered greyhound to notify GRNSW, in writing, before transferring the greyhound:

• to another registered owner, or

• to an RSPCA approved greyhound adoption program.

Participants can notify GRNSW by completing the Notification of Transfer Form and sending it to GRNSW at [email protected] or post it to PO Box 170, Concord West NSW 2138.

In addition, the Regulation prohibits a registered greyhound owner, except with the written consent of GRNSW, from:

• retiring a greyhound from racing;

• exporting a greyhound overseas;

• transferring a greyhound to a person who is not a registered owner, or

• destroying a greyhound.

To request consent from GRNSW, please complete the Consent Form and send it to GRNSW at [email protected] or post it to PO Box 170, Concord West NSW 2138.

Persons found to have breached the Regulation are liable to a maximum fine of up to $550. GRNSW may also take further action against anyone found to have breached the Regulation.

Participants must not retire a greyhound from racing, export a greyhound, transfer a greyhound to a person who is not a registered owner, or destroy a greyhound unless they have received written consent from GRNSW.

In the case of destruction of a greyhound, GRNSW consent is not required if the greyhound is destroyed by a veterinary practitioner in an emergency in order to relieve it of suffering or distress due to injury or illness.

If they just wanted to stop greyhound racing it wouldn't be this detailed.

well the NSW greyhound board has just taken caretakership on every racing greyhound in NSW. That's why I hate the term. You can't even retire or rehome your own dog.

On 15 July 2016, the NSW Government introduced the Greyhound Racing Regulation 2016 which requires that owners of greyhounds registered in NSW to notify or seek consent from Greyhound Racing NSW (GRNSW) before transferring the ownership of, retiring, exporting or destroying a greyhound.

The Regulation has been prepared following the NSW Government’s decision to close down the greyhound racing industry from 1 July 2017 and will assist in the tracking and welfare of greyhounds during the wind down process.

The new Regulation requires the owner of a registered greyhound to notify GRNSW, in writing, before transferring the greyhound:

• to another registered owner, or

• to an RSPCA approved greyhound adoption program.

Participants can notify GRNSW by completing the Notification of Transfer Form and sending it to GRNSW at [email protected] or post it to PO Box 170, Concord West NSW 2138.

In addition, the Regulation prohibits a registered greyhound owner, except with the written consent of GRNSW, from:

• retiring a greyhound from racing;

• exporting a greyhound overseas;

• transferring a greyhound to a person who is not a registered owner, or

• destroying a greyhound.

To request consent from GRNSW, please complete the Consent Form and send it to GRNSW at [email protected] or post it to PO Box 170, Concord West NSW 2138.

Persons found to have breached the Regulation are liable to a maximum fine of up to $550. GRNSW may also take further action against anyone found to have breached the Regulation.

Participants must not retire a greyhound from racing, export a greyhound, transfer a greyhound to a person who is not a registered owner, or destroy a greyhound unless they have received written consent from GRNSW.

In the case of destruction of a greyhound, GRNSW consent is not required if the greyhound is destroyed by a veterinary practitioner in an emergency in order to relieve it of suffering or distress due to injury or illness.

OT, Rebanne, do you have the link for the above, please.

Hello everyone,

Just to clarify a few things to those who may have concerns about this research and the terminology used in the title of the survey.

Firstly, the term animal caretaker or animal caretakership is one that has become broadly used in animal studies and anthrozoological based literature, as well as the term animal companion as opposed to pet. The term has not been used in this instance to suggest you do not legally own your dog or to delegitimize the relationship you have with your dog. I understand that everyone prefers different terms to describe the human dog relationship, however either way, both terms place obligations on the owners or caretakers to take responsibility to care for their dog and satisfy their needs

Secondly, I am not in any way either personally or professionally associated with PETA or any other animal rights based organisation. As a researcher it is my job to be impartial and explore and consider a range of viewpoints on this issue.

Thirdly, to clarify the purpose of the survey and the broader research, perhaps I should have gone into more depth before posting and in the Participant Information Statement. I am conducting my doctoral thesis at La Trobe University in Melbourne and the survey data will exclusively be used by myself in my thesis, within conferences and journal articles. It will not be sourced to any other external organisation. The overall purpose of my research is to explore if, how and why human and dog relations may be changing in contemporary Victoria. I am focusing on things such as changes in humans lifestyles and how this may be contributing to what dogs we select to be our companions. I will be analysing the greater emphasis on animal adoption, changes in breed popularity and the emergence of designer animals, amongst other things.

This survey and this post was, and is in no way meant to offend anyone or cause any mistrust or anger. Dogs are something I too am very passionate about which is why I have decided to dedicate my thesis to this topic. I hope this has given you some greater clarity on my work.

Thanks for your time and to those who may have already completed the survey.

Clare, you ask why people choose breeds. How can you quantify someone's heart?

ETA on 'designer' animals, please put that in parentheses. There is no design to sticking two unsuitable dog breeds together other than the desire to make money.

And what is the point of the research?

Ah, Steve, true colours come shining through.

You can say that again. Again I say to you play the ball and not the man.

#snert

Ah, Steve, true colours come shining through.