Greys make the Nationals

[robbo]

Good to see that the plight of some ex-racers has made the Times, Guardian and Daily Mail amongst others. Even got a mention on TV News. (Slow or injured dogs destroyed by a guy for £10, then buried in his field)Not the way we want Greys in the news really, but, who knows, it might well encourage some people to adopt. Let's hope so, anyway.
Germaine Greer followed the story up with an article about her adoption of an ex-racer and, whilst funny in parts, it contained some emotional misinformation about the needs of greys. Angie got quite angry and said GG should come round to see Tel and Tootsie if she thought that you shouldn't adopt if you don't have at least a paddock for the dog to run in.
I really don't think that some people help the problem by getting so emotive about things and bandying words like 'murder' around, or humanising the animals.

[Sighthound Fan]

In case anyone missed the article, here's one from the Mirror
www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_object...00-greyhou nds--name_page.html

17 July 2006
THE MAN WHO'S SHOT 10,000 GREYHOUNDS
Fury over builder's killing field for dogs too old to keep racing
By Jeremy Armstrong
BUILDER David Smith leads two greyhounds to a secret slaughterhouse where he has killed 10,000 of the dogs for 15 a time.

Within seconds of them entering the breeze block shed, Smith shot both of the retired racing dogs with a bolt gun.

He then emerged with their bodies in a blood-spattered wheelbarrow at the back of his builders' merchant yard.

Smith buried them using a mechanical digger in his one-acre plot - a hidden graveyard of Britain's 3.5billion dog-racing industry.

Animal groups yesterday reacted with shock and anger and called for action.

Smith told a man posing as a greyhound owner that he had filled his plot in three years.

"Within a year the bodies have gone," he said. Gesturing to the far side of the field, he explained: "It takes me about three years to get across there and by then I can start back here again and there are only a few bones left." Racing insiders say Smith of Seaham, Co Durham, has killed at least 10,000 dog at the unofficial abattoir during the past 15 years.

One source revealed: "It is not unheard of for him to do around 40 dogs a day. If anyone ever digs up that garden it will be like the killing fields.

"These dogs have made a lot of people a lot of money and do not deserve to be shot in the head. It is a scandal the industry should be ashamed of."

Yet, amazingly, what Smith is doing is not against the law. Once racing greyhounds reach three-and-a-half most are considered too old to compete, even though they have a lifespan of 12 to 14 years.

The RSPCA says around 12,000 greyhounds a year disappear. It added: "There is no justification for killing these animals simply because they can't do their job any more."

When confronted, Smith, who is in his 50s, initially denied running a slaughterhouse until told he had been filmed.

Then he claimed he was "doing society a favour". Restraining a pair of Rottweilers, Smith said: "These are sick and injured dogs that would otherwise be thrown out on the streets because owners can't afford vet's bills. I'm not doing it any more. The little bit of cash I was paid went to children's charities."

Alistair McLean, chief executive of the UK's National Greyhound Racing Club said yesterday: "This is disgraceful. We categorically do not endorse this kind of thing."

Britian's minister for animal welfare Ben Bradshaw promised to investigate. He added: "It sounds horrendous."

Since 1997 anyone can own a bolt gun to kill animals without a licence.

They can be prosecuted if animals are put down inhumanely or without the owner's consent.

A new code of practice proposed under the UK animal welfare bill would restrict the killing of greyhounds to vets using lethal injections.

[e-mail]

[Johnny]

So much for the way we treat "man's best friend".
Kitty & I are very proud to say that we have never been to a greyhound race track, and we never intend to.
If everybody done that - the problem with the tens of thousands of surplus gerys would not exist.

[robbo]

Since starting this thread, I have noticed a marked increase in the number of people stopping me , T 'n' T to talk about this story. Awareness is certainly on the increase and I hope we'll see an increasing demand for greys as pets. There's no doubt that the general public have been affected by this story

[Johnny]

It's nice (in the short term) to see people taking greyhounds on as pets.
In the long term, it would be nice to see the huge numbers of ex-racing dogs reduce in number - following the general public gaining an increased knowledge on what the end result of the racing industry is.

I do not advocate banning racing.
I'm simply stating, that if more people were aware of the problem, which really stems primarily from it being a multi-million pound industry - the more liklihood they are of seeing what the best solution for the dogs would be.

It's a bit like any other sport.
The more greed and money involved in it - the more the animals get placed at the bottom of the list of priorities.
Yes, there are good, responsible owners. But unfortunately, there's also those who care nothing for their dogs.

It's a sad reflection on the purely materialistic values that our modern society has adopted as a replacement to the morals of our previous generations.

[lyndajayne]

Well I am definitely anti-racing!! In fact I'm not at all happy that one of your "links" is to a most definitely pro-racing forum. I know, each to their own and we are all entitled to our own opinions!
This man has provided a cheap, nasty and very easy way of the owners to dispose of their dogs. No questions asked. And the racing fraternity tell me the owners love their dogs? I think not.

[Johnny]

Well, I appreciate your opinion, and I can understand where you are coming from.

This has got to be the most devisive issue I've ever come across amongst gery owners.

As you can see - both Stuart and I have never closed threads like this, as we think it's important that people's opinions should be heard.

Some people may think I'm looking at it all wrong, but I look at it very simply - If people look after their dogs, and are responsible owners, then that's alright by me.
If people abuse their animals, and cause them unnecessary suffering and neglect - then that's not acceptable, and in my opinion, that goes for ANY type of dog, in any situation. Be it greyhound racing, or if any animal is being kept as a pet.

As I've already stated, I know that some greyhound owners are not responsible, and treat their animals very cruelly. But there's also those in the industry that are responsible, and do show a duty of care towards their animals. It is clearly not acceptable to simply have a poor dog shot dead, just because it's not earning money for it's owner any more. I don't agree with that.
But, I know of racing owners, that do show considerable "aftercare" towards their dogs, and would never have them shot.
Now, I will never attend greyhound racing, because in my opinion (and Kitty's), it is just expoilting greyhounds, purely for money (ie-human greed).

I realise that my stance could be interpreted as "sitting on the fence", but in reality it's not. With the passing of years, I am very aware of the fact that there's no "black" and "white" when it comes to most issues, and I think it's important to judge dog owners purely on how they treat their animals. That goes for greyhounds, or a little mongrel, living in a flat in a deprived, built-up area of London.
All deserve respect, and a "duty of care" towards them.

I personally believe that the dog licence should be re-introduced, dogs should be micro-chipped, tail-docking should be banned, and that irresponsible dog owners should be fined heavily for not clearing up dog poo from public parks, and that judges should impose prison sentences on people who are deliberately cruel to their animals. I'm sure you would agree with me on some (if not most) of those points?

[lyndajayne]

It's a very emotive subject and I'm glad that you don't close threads like this.
My opinion is that even one owner/trainer mis-treating a greyhound is one too many. Ears hacked off, nail guns to the head, sold on to Ireland and Spain where the life, if at all possible, is even worse! I could go on but I won't!
I agree that all mis-treatment of animals, obviously not only greyhounds, derserves punishment. The main difference is though that racing is big business and where money is concerned more often than not, that's all that matters. If the dog isn't winning and making money, get rid of it! The lucky ones are kept as pets or rehomed. The not so lucky get a "humane" death. As to the others... well, I've seen enough evidence to convince me that there are an awful lot of owners that really don't give a d**n.

[Johnny]

lyndajayne said:

It's a very emotive subject and I'm glad that you don't close threads like this.
My opinion is that even one owner/trainer mis-treating a greyhound is one too many. Ears hacked off, nail guns to the head, sold on to Ireland and Spain where the life, if at all possible, is even worse! I could go on but I won't!
I agree that all mis-treatment of animals, obviously not only greyhounds, derserves punishment. The main difference is though that racing is big business and where money is concerned more often than not, that's all that matters. If the dog isn't winning and making money, get rid of it! The lucky ones are kept as pets or rehomed. The not so lucky get a "humane" death. As to the others... well, I've seen enough evidence to convince me that there are an awful lot of owners that really don't give a d**n.

I agree with much of what you have said, but I beg to differ with the idea that if one occurrence of mistreatment occurs in an industry (eg-Greyhound Racing Industry) then that should automatically constitute a ban of that particular activity.
If you were to extend that line of thought in a broader sense - you could say that there should be no keeping of dogs at all. You've got to remember that it's not just the racing industry where abuse occurs - it's in everyday life as well.
It's like those poor two dogs who I wrote about in the post about the RSPCA. If you were to apply the argument "one is one too many" - then surely the keeping of dogs should be banned altogether, as there's plenty of abuse cases in every neighbourhood throughout the country, and those cases of abuse are not motivated by greed or money. They are there because some people are so selfish - they do not think that the life of a dog is worth anything at all, and subsequently their inactions cause abuse to their animals by willful neglect.

That's why it is so important that there should be fair and adequate laws that are there to protect the vulnerable.
I'm straining at the lease not to get political, so I will choose my words carefully, and say only this: The present system of "justice" in this country always seems to favour the wrong-doer over the victim, and it is vitally important that the existing laws of this land (eg-up to six months imprisonment for animal cruelty) be applied by judges, and not ignored, simply because of the will of their political masters!

[crazyhounds]

I agree that it isn't black and white.

I don't think that all trainers abandon their dogs or have them shot, although I do think that may be more common than the industry would like to accept.

IMO the majority of the trainers and owners that some people would class as 'caring' are still contributing to the welfare problem. Greyhound pups are churned out in numbers that can never ever hope to be homed.

The RGT homepage says that they have homed 35,000 greyhounds over a 30 year period I believe. That seems impressive until you consider that the industry estimated that 10,000 per year were retiring. That isn't intended to slight the work of volunteers who worked to home those dogs. I'm pointing out the potentially massive surplus of dogs that could exist.

Yes regulation could help reduce the numbers being disposed of but I don't believe it will stop it happening - far from it! There are only so many homes on offer to these dogs. Therefore I'd like to see commercial racing phased out. I don't think dogs should be racing as part of an industry that is profit orientated.