Greyhound Carcasses Found In Bundaberg Bushland

[HazyWal]

Thanks folks. Makes a lot more sense now.

If GAP are ok, it is because all greyhound rescues are tarred with the same brush?

GAP are industry funded and have fairly strict testing procedures in place therefore loathed by the "save em all" groups. According to a lot (not all) of the "rescue" groups every single greyhound should be rehomed. This is not only stupid but dangerous, as it is with any breed. When you work hard at promoting a breed that is still not a popular choice for a family pet by any stretch rehoming every grey does the breed no favours at all. They don't see it that way though and god forbid you say otherwise.

Oh yes.

There seems to be a very clear divide in greyhound rescue- those who are sensible, test the dogs and rehome appropriately and on the other side, those who email death threats to trainers, rehome greyhounds that would kill small dogs and generally damage the reputation of the breed by rehoming anything that moves.

I've been viciously targeted by the latter and I'm a rescuer. I'd hate to think how they treat trainers or breeders.

Yes we have both been targeted and still are, only happened to me yesterday. What people don't understand is not only is it hard to promote greyhounds as pets the clear divide you mentioned is yet another obstacle that we deal with, there is no middle ground. We don't work together it will always be us and them, it's pathetic really.

[Greyt]

One group that I have fostered for want to see the end of the destruction of so many healthy dogs every year. They work with a lot of trainers to take dogs but advocate vigorously to reduce the killing. They never tried to "convert" me in any way and were appreciative of the assistance I could lend. They lose money personally, work tirelessly to provide homes for dogs and go way above and beyond in every way you can imagine like most in rescue.

Politically, they *probably feel* (my own analysis) that GAP is an instrument of the racing industry and therefore is inadequately equipped to thoroughly advocate for the welfare of the breed ie, the public messages GAP convey are very restricted due to receiving funding from the industry.

[HazyWal]

One group that I have fostered for want to see the end of the destruction of so many healthy dogs every year. They work with a lot of trainers to take dogs but advocate vigorously to reduce the killing. They never tried to "convert" me in any way and were appreciative of the assistance I could lend. They lose money personally, work tirelessly to provide homes for dogs and go way above and beyond in every way you can imagine like most in rescue.

Politically, they *probably feel* (my own analysis) that GAP is an instrument of the racing industry and therefore is inadequately equipped to thoroughly advocate for the welfare of the breed ie, the public messages GAP convey are very restricted due to receiving funding from the industry.

But see that's where the hatred of GAP by the anti extremists makes no sense to me. GAPVIC alone rehomed 538 greyhounds last year, how the hell can you (not you personally) think that's a bad thing because they are funded by the racing industry? To me that's 538 bums on seats...or greys on couches. The greyhound industry didn't have to start an adoption programme, damned if they do damned if they don't.

[_PL_]

Could one of you who are posting so knowledgably - please help this idiot out with an explanation? I'm not up on the history.

Why is GAP and the other greyhound rescues so mistrusted and hated by trainers and greyhound breeders??

Because certain nutjob "rescue" groups give all of rescue a bad name by encouraging their supporters to harass trainers, spreading misinformation about the industry and treating everyone involved in the industry as if they were all monsters. It got so bad that even just being neutral on the racing issue is enough to get you abusive messages and death threats.

If you were a greyhound trainer, would you invite someone onto your property to collect a dog if you knew they were probably packing a hidden camera and preparing resources to later raid your kennels and/or home?

You can't call someone a murdering monster and then expect them to be willing to work with you.

Absolutely spot on.

[melzawelza]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

Yes I was at the vet about 3 months ago and a greyhound breeder bought in 8 dogs to be PTS and said they would prefer to do that than go anywhere near rescue.Turns out they also breed GSD and do the same with their ex breeders rather than have any attention on them for not keeping them.

It happens all the time. The two biggest rescues in NSW, not GAP, are loathed by a large majority of trainers.

Seems to me that if you want more breeders to hand over dogs to rescue for rehoming rather than quietly asking the vet to PTS then you cant have a situation where the people who are doing what you ask are beaten up and judged etc.

Got it in one

Devils advocate here - but there have been many times in the general pound/shelter situation whereby pounds are doing the wrong thing, rescues try and work with them and help them improve their practices with absolutely no joy and end up having to go public to finally bring about change. It's a legitimate technique if it's done well (note: death threats are not doing it well), but I guess in that case you're dealing with a government run facility that must account for the animals in their care, as opposed to individuals like Greyhound trainers that can just quietly take their dogs to the vet. Another reason why the industry is unsalvageable.

The facilities for them to be assessed in and live at until they are rehomed. It's a pity that I can't change the mind of you and others who think the industry should go because if the industry is closed down I'm guessing it would go underground MANY MANY more animals WOULD SUFFER and DIE in the long term.

Many many more Greyhounds than 15k per year would be killed? Really? I find that very hard to believe.

[Rebanne]

But see that's where the hatred of GAP by the anti extremists makes no sense to me. GAPVIC alone rehomed 538 greyhounds last year, how the hell can you (not you personally) think that's a bad thing because they are funded by the racing industry? To me that's 538 bums on seats...or greys on couches. The greyhound industry didn't have to start an adoption programme, damned if they do damned if they don't.

There would have been no where near an extra 538 greyhounds on couches if not for GAP. Some rescue's a truly wicked and not in a good way.

Edited April 5, 2015 by Rebanne

[Steve]

You are describing pretty much what happens across the board - Ive been attacked because one of my dogs turned up in rescue - with all the crap and hype about how my dogs were turning up in rescue and I didnt care blah blah blah .What a terrible breeder I am because one out of 100 dogs I bred was dumped when it was 5 years old by its owner - when the owner had the option of returning it to me. Could you imagine what I would catch if I actually asked rescue to help me find a new home for a dog I had owned. Some of the rubbish they do makes anyone who could work with rescue prefer to stay the hell right away from them. Then they wonder why a greyhound breeder or a big commercial breeder would rather humanely PTS rather than be seen to be needing to move them out.

Hard to get the industry to try to identify the ones who might help them without beating the hell out of them so its just a case of stay away from them and do what is needed without them.

There would be a hell of lot more in my opinion than the grey numbers in the rest of the dog population that are killed and never make it passed a bullet or a needle.

[Maddy]

I'm speculating that one reason for the distrust between both sides is that rescue feels like they are cleaning up someone else's mess without all the prize money and glory and so would be quick to want to identify breeders, trainers or owners neglecting their dogs and dumping unwanted ones on an already over burdened system that runs on the smell of oily rag carrying volunteers. Breeders, trainers and owners know they are being judged even when trying to do what they feel is the right thing by those dogs. There is nothing circular about the process so there is no reflection or closure. Different values and ethics and different end results wanted from both sides.

I don't know, to be honest. I've spent tens of thousands of dollars taking in and rehoming other peoples' dogs and although it's not much fun to be constantly scratching for money to do it, other rescue groups actually made it harder by targeting me for my stance on the industry and on testing of the dogs.

I've found that many trainers (if they understand that you aren't out to get them) will actually donate money or goods (food, coats, muzzles, vet work, etc) when they surrender a dog because they do actually want to help. Of course, if you accept those donations, those other groups will accuse you of accepting bribes from the industry so you really can't win there.

[HazyWal]

I have a genuine question. If registration costs are raised, what makes people think that trainers will choose to rehome or place their dogs into rehoming programs rather than opt to euth as many do now?

There are some that use industry funded programs or rehome privately but I've heard first hand what trainers think of GAP and other rescues and it's not positive.

Yes I was at the vet about 3 months ago and a greyhound breeder bought in 8 dogs to be PTS and said they would prefer to do that than go anywhere near rescue.Turns out they also breed GSD and do the same with their ex breeders rather than have any attention on them for not keeping them.

It happens all the time. The two biggest rescues in NSW, not GAP, are loathed by a large majority of trainers.

Seems to me that if you want more breeders to hand over dogs to rescue for rehoming rather than quietly asking the vet to PTS then you cant have a situation where the people who are doing what you ask are beaten up and judged etc.

Got it in one

Devils advocate here - but there have been many times in the general pound/shelter situation whereby pounds are doing the wrong thing, rescues try and work with them and help them improve their practices with absolutely no joy and end up having to go public to finally bring about change. It's a legitimate technique if it's done well (note: death threats are not doing it well), but I guess in that case you're dealing with a government run facility that must account for the animals in their care, as opposed to individuals like Greyhound trainers that can just quietly take their dogs to the vet. Another reason why the industry is unsalvageable.

The facilities for them to be assessed in and live at until they are rehomed. It's a pity that I can't change the mind of you and others who think the industry should go because if the industry is closed down I'm guessing it would go underground MANY MANY more animals WOULD SUFFER and DIE in the long term.

Many many more Greyhounds than 15k per year would be killed? Really? I find that very hard to believe.

m-j has a valid point. Yes there are serious welfare issues within the industry today but nothing like there was back in the 60's and if it was forced underground there would be zilch, nada, no one would have a clue how many dogs were bred and as for welfare? out the door. It would be hidden and become an urban myth like dog fighting is. "Nah doesn't happen, greyhound racing was banned years ago!" Australians are a nation of gamblers whether you like it or not, you only have to look at the crowds at the races in the depression. If you think it wouldn't be worse you're dreamin'.

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

I think there's probably a lot more room for greyhounds on couches...

I vaguely remember hearing number like 200,000 for the number of dogs purchased each year by pet owners. And quite a few of those would be from puppy mills / pet shops.

There are still heaps of people of the "general public" (not the dog obsessed), who think that you go to a pet shop to get a puppy. And they don't understand the downside of it.

Even friends I have - who have puppy mill specials "they got from a good (back yard) breeder" don't understand that all the expensive trouble the dog has with its mouth, teeth, spine, and hips are something to do with the breeder and could have been prevented or avoided. And then there are all the dogs who can't go out for a walk because they freak out at everything, because they never got any people or dog time at that crucial stage of their puppyhood.

I'm thinking maybe the greyhound "industry" could fund independent health and welfare inspectors who can do random spot checks, from a levy on each bet placed with the TAB or betting agency. There's already an admin fee. Eg if you bet $10 and win $20 - you get $20 less the agency fee. So there can be a welfare fee too. Same for horse racing, and drug testing football players.

And there could be a levy on all puppies sold, for random inspection of breeding facilities. Maybe on the council rego fee? But so many states in Australia - they just need to keep track of all puppies - the same as they do for other livestock and then put some sort of fee. $2 per dog should fund quite a few inspections. It could be administered a bit like car rego or other livestock rego systems.

[Steve]

Before you can ever get to a solution - you have to identify the problem and in this case what is being identified as the problem is not the same for everyone.

All well and good to decide on one cause - gambling - that if removed will miraculously cure all the issues but the reality is that's highly unlikely.

[Steve]

I think there's probably a lot more room for greyhounds on couches...

I vaguely remember hearing number like 200,000 for the number of dogs purchased each year by pet owners. And quite a few of those would be from puppy mills / pet shops.

There are still heaps of people of the "general public" (not the dog obsessed), who think that you go to a pet shop to get a puppy. And they don't understand the downside of it.

Even friends I have - who have puppy mill specials "they got from a good (back yard) breeder" don't understand that all the expensive trouble the dog has with its mouth, teeth, spine, and hips are something to do with the breeder and could have been prevented or avoided. And then there are all the dogs who can't go out for a walk because they freak out at everything, because they never got any people or dog time at that crucial stage of their puppyhood.

I'm thinking maybe the greyhound "industry" could fund independent health and welfare inspectors who can do random spot checks, from a levy on each bet placed with the TAB or betting agency. There's already an admin fee. Eg if you bet $10 and win $20 - you get $20 less the agency fee. So there can be a welfare fee too. Same for horse racing, and drug testing football players.

And there could be a levy on all puppies sold, for random inspection of breeding facilities. Maybe on the council rego fee? But so many states in Australia - they just need to keep track of all puppies - the same as they do for other livestock and then put some sort of fee. $2 per dog should fund quite a few inspections. It could be administered a bit like car rego or other livestock rego systems.

From what I have heard there is no issue with the health or welfare of the dogs when they are alive.The greyhound is known to be one of the healthiest breeds and the care the trainers and breeders put into looking after them is of little or minor concern. A healthy non stressed animal is more likely to do what it is required to do. The issue is with the perceived over breeding and what happens to them if they don't cut the grade. Its about how some in society view dogs - any dogs regardless of their intended purpose and how others do .Some feel that if a dog cant do what is required of it that it should be sent to God as quickly and humanely as possible others feel that once it is alive it should live until old age takes it.

One owner will send their much loved family pet off to be PTS because its getting old and they feel it will deteriorate and suffer if it is able to continue to age any longer - a decision made out of love - and someone else will come along and save it and bad mouth the owner because they wanted it to die because it was old.

[m-j]

The facilities for them to be assessed in and live at until they are rehomed. It's a pity that I can't change the mind of you and others who think the industry should go because if the industry is closed down I'm guessing it would go underground MANY MANY more animals WOULD SUFFER and DIE in the long term.

Many many more Greyhounds than 15k per year would be killed? Really? I find that very hard to believe.

If legislation was changed so the owners are made accountable until the dog is rehomed, yes. If the industry comes to an abrupt halt with things as they are there will be lot more than 15,000 dogs needing homes. Maybe it would be only a "one of" mass killing (because like everyone is saying there isn't enough homes and the owners will be able to euth an investment that has just lost the opportunity to hopefully make the owner some money) and the underground industry may not kill as many dogs (as HW said we don't really know that) but nothing can be monitored if it is underground to ensure the wellbeing of the dogs.

The same goes for gambling, a market for SP bookies would be created. I was working in pubs back in day when illegal SP bookies were plentiful and appeared to have thriving business's. One of the pubs I worked at even had a TAB outlet about three shops down the road, the SP bookie there certainly didn't go hungry.

[HazyWal]

The SP bookie would be back big time m-j. I have said this many times but my father was a bookie, a legal one and my brother and I grew up at the track. When kids would ask us if we went to Luna Park we'd say no but we've been to Harold Park, Wentworth Park, Menangle Park I was also a barmaid pretty much my whole working life, we had an SP at the Bowling Club I worked at that even had his own odds board, the old wooden ones with the turning handles and he'd take bets at the phone at the bar, no mobiles back then. People here think I have no idea but I've been in this game for over 50 years, this aint my first rodeo.

Edited April 5, 2015 by HazyWal

[cavNrott]

I believe the rules regarding breeding and raising need to change. You should have to jump through hoops to breed a litter of Greyhounds - explain why the breeding is worthwhile, etc. And then the pups should be socialised with people, dogs, cats, etc. You would have less puppies born, and the puppies would then be much more adoptable. Trying to rehome 12,000 unsocialised large adult dogs every year is trying to close the gate after the horse has bolted.

But there aren't 12,000 homes available every year for one breed no matter how well socialised they are.

The way I understood what Kirty is saying is that there should be alot less greyhounds bred in the first place which I totally agree with.

I agree with Kirty and Rebanne. What I don't quite understand is that some seem to think the current over breeding of Greys and the resulting number of unwanted dogs should become the responsibility of rescue. No, the responsibility for these unwanted dogs sits squarely on the shoulders of those who are breeding litter after litter in their quest for a winning dog. The problem is too big for rescue. Rescue does the best they can and they do a great job but they can't possibly rehome 12,000 unwanted Greyhounds per annum. Stop the indiscriminate breeding of Greyhounds.

[m-j]

I agree with Kirty and Rebanne. What I don't quite understand is that some seem to think the current over breeding of Greys and the resulting number of unwanted dogs should become the responsibility of rescue. No, the responsibility for these unwanted dogs sits squarely on the shoulders of those who are breeding litter after litter in their quest for a winning dog. The problem is too big for rescue. Rescue does the best they can and they do a great job but they can't possibly rehome 12,000 unwanted Greyhounds per annum. Stop the indiscriminate breeding of Greyhounds.

Breeders only breed because the demand (people wanting to buy the next Brett Lee) is there, breeding animals with potential to produce profitable offspring is pretty much standard practise, people realise that breeding with dogs or bitches that aren't proven is a waste of money. Like the example I gave before of Brett Lee having thousands of offspring for very little results and none as good as him, despite knowing this they keep trying. If these owners are going to want to purchase the dog to satisfy whatever desire be it money or self esteem why shouldn't they and others that stand to gain from the dog if it happens to do well, fund that dog's life until it is rehomed. I see that as taking the pressure off rescue. While I've only rehomed about 20 or so dogs they have been funded entirely by me and some were with me for a couple of years. I'm not as well off as many of these owners and I would love some help to clean up the mess they created.

Edited April 5, 2015 by m-j

[Steve]

Would appear the answer for the industry is to

introduce regs or fix the ones they have to say

1. the owner must be responsible for disposal of excess dogs.

2. they must have a vet PTS or someone experienced in euthanasia all dogs they dont need for what they do

3..Never to use rescue or a third party for rehoming which is not financed by or approved by the board.

4. never to discuss what goes on with excess dogs with media AR etc and bring the industry into disrepute,

5.always ensure they dispose of bodies appropriately.

Perhaps they need to set up and help with financing contractors who visit trainers and owners periodically or on request and kill any excess dogs and take away the bodies for burial or cremation to ensure there are no issues with accusations of cruel deaths, body dumping or mass graves which create bad PR.

Laws are already in place for animal cruelty to address such things as using live lures and cruel methods of keeping them and killing them,dumping bodies etc.

[Greyt]

@ Steve,

The public want an end to the killing, not a codification of it.

Read the comments on smh.com.au or similar. They are along the lines of stop the over breeding, end the cruelly stop the killing, shut the industry down.

[Greyt]

@HW, the GAP Vic figures are very impressive. Job well done!

[Pjrt]

Would appear the answer for the industry is to

introduce regs or fix the ones they have to say

1. the owner must be responsible for disposal of excess dogs.

2. they must have a vet PTS or someone experienced in euthanasia all dogs they dont need for what they do

3..Never to use rescue or a third party for rehoming which is not financed by or approved by the board.

4. never to discuss what goes on with excess dogs with media AR etc and bring the industry into disrepute,

5.always ensure they dispose of bodies appropriately.

Perhaps they need to set up and help with financing contractors who visit trainers and owners periodically or on request and kill any excess dogs and take away the bodies for burial or cremation to ensure there are no issues with accusations of cruel deaths, body dumping or mass graves which create bad PR.

Laws are already in place for animal cruelty to address such things as using live lures and cruel methods of keeping them and killing them,dumping bodies etc.

yes that's just lovely. Keep the killing of excess dogs out of the publics eye, problem solved. Are you serious!. People want to stop the dogs being bred to huge excess in the first place. A society that thinks breeding all these dogs to justify a few golden ones on the track, and killing the rest, is not what we should be striving for in the 21st century.

Dog forbid things evolve as time goes by, and animal sports racing & betting belongs in a bygone era.