The Frontline Animal Rights&Rural Ireland debate last night

Discodog wrote: »

Not only have they died at Belle Vue but 33 bodies were given to a University for dissection. To quote:

"Officials told the M.E.N. journalist - Yakub Qureshi - that in the last 12 months, Liverpool University scientists had received 33 dogs from the stadium – 31 of these were put to sleep because of injury and the two others put down because of aggressive behaviour. The new figures reaffirm the huge numbers of greyhounds destroyed track side - estimated to be in the region of 1,500 on the remaining 25 major bookmaker tracks and 8 independent tracks.



Greyhound Action compiled accurate figure which revealed that a total of 40 dogs had been killed in that year at Belle Vue.

Thanks for the info, but it seems this article that you qoute seems to be very well coordinated with the Animal Rights Front and speaks again in generalities. It is designed to hurt the greyhound industry and I would respectfully suggest that it not a balanced piece of journalism.

I attach a comment relating to the article from a greyhound owner who having read the article felt moved to respond to the mistruths contained therein.

As an owner of a greyhound i would like to tell you , of for me a sad story. belle raced round 3 bends and as she went round the last bend she slipped and shattered her shoulder. We did the right thing by her and had her put to sleep because of teh pain she was in.
Now that I have your attention.
Before you all pile in to say how evil it was that she was PTS. I will now tell you the full story. Belle was 12 years old, she retired at 4 years old and came to live with us. In that 8 years she has been to many shows and promoting the retired greyhound and has been responsible for many dogs being rehomed. She did run round the garden and ran into the Kitchen and slipped as she ran round into the utility area and smashed her shoulder. The vet advised us that nothing could be done as she was showing signs of cancer and they could not repair the bone.Do we now say we cant have any dogs as pets as they might have an accident in the home or road or what ever and die.
I am neither for or against racing, I go occasionally for a night out and enjoy seein the dogs do what they enjoy. Believe me greyhounds can be stubborn and will not do what they dont want to do. In all the times i have never seen anyone force the dog to run.
We have all heard about the trainers who mistreat their dogs, I can assure you they are minimal and the greatest critics of them are fellow trainers who are desperate not tio be tarred by the same brush.
I would ask all anti`s and the people who write these articles, whether they have actually been to meet trainersand looked around the kennels. I am sur ALL trainers would be happy to show you their set ups and you would see how happy the greys are.
Its a shame we always hear about the bad stories,but then good stories dont make such good headlines. I know of one of the leading trainers who has his own retirement block for his olduns and looks after RGT dogs for rehoming. In 3 years over 150 dogs have been found homes, just from his kennels.
That wont make the headlines,but I am sure if leading trainer had 150 greyhound put to sleep in 3 years it would be in every paper and the trainer would be rightly condemned by all in the industry as well as every journalist.
It is easy to knock,and seems sport to knock the greyhound industry but maybe someone would like to look into how many show dogs/puppies were PTS because they wouldnt make the grade for Crufts etc. I think it would make the greyhound industry a smaller issue.





This lady is by and large representative of the Greyhound fraternity.

Greyhounds are well looked after and yes some may be injured and PTS during their racing careers, but huge efforts are made to rehome dogs where possible.

Discodog wrote: »

Now I have provided some proof of my statements please can you, as previously requested, back up your statement that the accounts are freely available by providing a link..

Discodog, I am not as professional as you are at these computer links and such presentation skills. You have obviously honed yours over many years of presenting your case to have field sports and Greyhound Racing banned. I am a late comer to the computer technology myself and I will give ground to you in your superior skills in this department. But the IGB is not as I stated previously the KGB and the accounts are available to scrutiny on filing each year, like any other public company. I hope that the other readers will take my word on this.

Discodog wrote: »

Regarding Horse racing, fishing etc we are not debating those issues. One of the standard replies from the Greyhound Industry is to deflect attention to other sports. The proposed legislation does not effect other sports in any way whatsoever..

Well it is important for soceity not to discriminate from one section to another and it behoves you to be consistent in your arguments should you wish to convince the public of their merits. I assume that your goal is to take the house down one brick at a time, and it suits you to concentrate on the one topic. That I may say is your strategy, mine I dare say is to be even handed.

I have no desire to dismantle your misguided impracticable beliefs but I am simply rising to the challenge to defend mine and that of others in soceity as I have a right to do.

It is quite unfair of you to accuse me of using arguments that make it more difficult for you carry the day. You don't want me to fight with one hand tied behind my back, now do you.

.

Discodog wrote: »

I do not propose to show graphic images here but any reader can google "Galgos" to see how Spanish greyhounds are left hanging from lamp posts.

Sensationalist statements don't add up to the truth of the situation. The article refered to 50000 greyhounds being killed in Spain every year by various means from being dispatched by hanging from lamp post to being thrown down wells.
Ireland breeds more greyhounds than any other country at about 20,000. so to qoute 50,000 is blatently wrong. Secondly, to say the Spanish People and Dog Owners are so savage in their treatment of animals is bordering racist. I'm sure they would not be happy to be protrayed as you are so willing to do.

The facts are that the animal rights movement is global and have their advocates in every country including Spain. Their association with rational and reasoned debate is distant to say the least. You are a prime example of the modus operandi with regard to the publicising your movement. The training rec'd by this organisation is impressive in making its case obsessively.

Further the tactics of the Animal Rights Front do not stop at only irrational debate but stretch to terrorist activities. If I figure out this link technology I'll be back with the goods to illustrate this dangerous mindset to interested readers.

This is a typical reponce from someone who no doubt eats meat......but pretends to themselve that the animals in the slaughter house id killed "humamely"........where as they are herded into enclosures where they can smell the blood and killing that is going on...........they can hear the pigs screaming and sence the fear from other animals

Convince yourself that it is for food.........but you can live without meat........Whats the difference..........none to the animal

But please do place yourself on a higher level that others!

Tarsna wrote: »

This is a typical reponce from someone who no doubt eats meat......but pretends to themselve that the animals in the slaughter house id killed "humamely"........where as they are herded into enclosures where they can smell the blood and killing that is going on...........they can hear the pigs screaming and sence the fear from other animals

Have you ever been to a slaughter house?

Pigs don't scream in fear because then the meat turns, it tastes bad. Often in slaughter houses they suffocate the pig by dropping CO2 on them. The pig falls a sleep, after which they are killed. There are many laws in many countries that require the slaughtering of animals to be as quickly and humanely as possible.

It's not a secret where meat comes from.

Greyhounds aren't farm animals, just as hares aren't farm animals.

P.s I like meat.

HELEN OF TROY wrote: »

my family really enjoyed looking at the dvd i post to them and they say the 2 dogs courses is very good . where can i get more information on this as they are coming in sept and would love to see it. they said the 6 dog racing is not nice as the dogs cannot catch the rabbit. i think your 2 dogs courses would become a very good sport in my country as we are always having liking for nature things. thanking you sincerely h o t

How did you send that dvd HOT? It got there very very fast.

tomybhoy wrote: »

More lies discodog, where did you come up with the IGB sanctioning export of dogs to Spain?
What do you know about coursing in Pakistan?
Do you support the animal rights movement?

I have repeatedly stated that I do not support any illegal activity or threats made by anyone. I do not believe that animals have equal rights compared to humans. When are you going to realise that not everyone who opposes bloodsports is an animal rights activist ?. It is also highly offensive of you to assume that anyone who opposes your view is a liar or a criminal. I said that there are extremists on both sides & you are proof of this.

The following is from this article:
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-95545643.html.

It clearly shows the situation regarding exports to Spain & is written by a Vet - no doubt you will suggest that he is an extremist as well.

To quote:

"Mr Taggart (of the IGB) has repeatedly said that the IGB will not participate in the WGRF because of the "Spanish issue." Meantime a truckload of Irish dogs are being exported to race in Spain almost monthly.

While Mr Taggart undoubtedly has the ear of the relevant Government ministers, the IGB makes no move to stop this. The value of this Spanish export trade is tiny, and the conditions under which dogs race in Spain have been widely denounced by greyhound industry insiders worldwide.

If, instead of using the "Spanish situation" as an excuse to absent themselves from the WGRF, Mr Taggart and the IGB joined the world body and took a leading role in it, they could readily exert such pressure for reform on the Spanish authorities that it would be hard for them to resist.

Perhaps Mr Taggart might like to use his undoubted ability and influence to improve the lot of the Spanish greyhounds. Surely there is still time to arrange a speaking engagement in Cork next September?".

MICHAEL WATTS MVB MSc MRCVS
Peninsula Veterinary Clinic
Donaghadee
Co Down

Discodog,
Your info relating to Spanish Galgos being 50,000 killed each year,which you later corrected to include lurchers and others says a lot really for your approach to publicising your intention to ban Greyhound Racing.
Its sensationalist and misleading and bordering on racist. You can't just throw figures around like confetti while making such strong allegations.
Greyhound figures are at least confirmable if you relate to the registration figures but to qoute 50,000 greyhounds are killed everyyear in Spain when in Ireland, the leading country in the World breeds approx 20,000.
I don't know how you can state such an outragious figure and confirm 50,000. Your theory that so many of these are lurchers which are mongrel and have no registration process is equally hard to fathom.
Your tactic of firing enough mud in the hope that it will stick is a low form of canvassing your opinion, but I suspect rational people will not be swayed by this outlandishness.

Your humility when you state that your source of propoganda and your skills in presenting same over the internet are not honed over years of peddling your campaign information are a little disengenious when you can pull a letter from 2002 and throw it into the ring. These nuggets of propoganda seem to be at your fingertips. What this letter stated that was that the IGB were concerned with the welfare situation of greyhounds in Spain( which proves my earlier expression that the IGB have welfare to the fore at all times) and there seemed to be some greyhounds still going to Spain. Please note that Greyhounds are not bought and sold by the IGB as they are owned privately. The greyhounds were purchased as such which is outside the remit of the IGB to influence. I suspect the IGB would have replied to the letter, but unfortunately you perhaps did not want to utilise your undoubted computer acumen to include this for the benefit of the public.
As an important additional point, the Greyhound racing stadium in Spain, which I understood only numbered one closed a number of years ago and no Irish Greyhounds are raced there now. Given my lack of ability to link and research my presentation like you, you might do me a favour and help me out by linking this for the interested public.

If welfare problems exist in Spain I think that it is fair to say that they are more widespread than the greyhound sport and your continous attack on the more regulated and high standarded industry is damaging to overall welfare issues.

My sources are Google !. Anyone can access my sources but maybe one only reads one side of the argument. Greyhound racing will not be banned in my lifetime. It will reduce because racing will end in the UK.

The IGB could ban owners from exporting dogs to any country. They could insist that every export is recorded. They could publish deaths. They could publish injuries etc etc etc. If everything is wonderful then why not publish the figures & prove people like me to be wrong

There is a mass of evidence regarding Galgos. Anyone can do a search. Some of the information regarding Galgos is written by Spanish Nationals so I am hardly being racist. Any Greyhound figures can be misleading because the IGB will not supply the real figures & no one here has been able to provide them or a link to them. The Industry can hardly complain if people make estimates or assume that the IGB have something to hide. I cannot publish an IGB reply because it would not be publicly accessible & that is the whole point.

If the IGB standards are so high why don't they publish the figures to prove it.

Until recently this thread was achieving the impossible by providing a good natured reasoned debate. I welcome those that support racing to debate the issues even in an animal welfare forum.

HELEN OF TROY wrote: »

respect the views of those who see nothing wrong in a predator chasing its quarry be it for food or sport as long as this is done legally.

The legal aspect is one of the problems. It is never good when we make law & then allow exceptions. Law should apply without favour. In Irish law it is illegal to terrify an animal & the Hare is a protected species. The origin of this debate is the DBEB & that the greyhound lobby want to be excluded from it & create another exception.

Society has decided that we should have laws to protect animals from unnecessary suffering. How can an entertainment be necessary ?.

Discodog wrote: »

My sources are Google !. Anyone can access my sources but maybe one only reads one side of the argument. Greyhound racing will not be banned in my lifetime. It will reduce because racing will end in the UK. .

Greyhound racing in the UK may not be as strong as it previously was and this is probably due to a lot of issues. These issues range from such issues as property values, the restricted training system(people cannot own and train their own dogs, they have to place them with a trainer, and the trainers are affiliated to certain tracks), The lack of contribution of the bookies to the sport/industry, poor administration/vision by the boards that run the industry and the Animal rights campaigns over there. However, the ownership of greyhounds and lurchers is at very high levels still. It is sad that people who have a genuine interest in greyhounds are not better served by having a stronger regulated industry. Should it decline further or as you state end altogether Greyhounds and lurchers and peoples interest in them will still exist but have no regulated framework in which to express their interest. This can give rise to a whole new set of issues on welfare and conservation. Hopefully it won't come to this, the English people are resilient and practicable and will arrive at an improved process to reinvigorate their industry.

Discodog wrote: »

The IGB could ban owners from exporting dogs to any country. They could insist that every export is recorded. They could publish deaths. They could publish injuries etc etc etc. If everything is wonderful then why not publish the figures & prove people like me to be wrong.

We have established that it is not the IGB that export greyhounds to Spain. Whether they can impose a ban on exporting greyhounds to locations that are lets say undesireable is a legal issue which is beyond my ability to comment but I would appreciate that it would be very difficult to legislate for without infringing on property rights. Greyhounds are private property and the state cannot willy nilly intervene. Greyhounds are no longer exported to Spain in anycase as the track in Spain closed down a number of years ago.
As regards recording deaths and injuries, this has a lot of practicable difficulties associated with its implementation which I have previously commented. Perhaps you could provide some constructive suggestions as to how it would be processed to arrive at a worthwhile result.

Discodog wrote: »

There is a mass of evidence regarding Galgos. Anyone can do a search. Some of the information regarding Galgos is written by Spanish Nationals so I am hardly being racist. Any Greyhound figures can be misleading because the IGB will not supply the real figures & no one here has been able to provide them or a link to them. The Industry can hardly complain if people make estimates or assume that the IGB have something to hide. I cannot publish an IGB reply because it would not be publicly accessible & that is the whole point..

The figure qouted in the previous post was 50,000 galgos killed per annum. The spanish don't breed anywhere near 50,000 greyhounds per year and they have no greyhound racing industry any longer so I think the point being made to attack the IGB for being complicit in the alledged slaughter of 50000 greyhounds is off the mark. If your allegations are correct and 50000 greyhounds, (which are perhaps mongrel type greyhounds as you later suggest) are killed by various means from hanging from lamp posts to drowning in wells, I believe that this would indicate that the lack of a regulated industry in Spain would contribute to this alledged fiasco. How do the Spanish deal with dogs and cats overall would seem to be a more pertinent area to investigate if such figures are true.

Discodog wrote: »

If the IGB standards are so high why don't they publish the figures to prove it. .

By figures, i presume you mean greyhounds PTS and injured each year. I have previously addressed this issue with regard to the practicalities involved. The only point i would add is that the IGB is the only body with a framework that could if it had the resources required, and these would be considerable, to administer such figures. Other breeds and mongrels would get no such analysis as it would be impossible to administer.
Further, please note the IGB is not a secret organisation, it is a semi state body and is readily accountable to the oireachtas. They can be questioned and will no doubt reply as necessary.

Discodog wrote: »

Until recently this thread was achieving the impossible by providing a good natured reasoned debate. I welcome those that support racing to debate the issues even in an animal welfare forum.

Good natured is always the best way to proceed if one is to present the truth to the public. Greyhound people have a genuine love of dogs, much the same as the general public and provide a high level of welfare for their dogs. Welfare can of course be improved in all aspects on a continous basis, but it is fair to say that the Greyhound industry is ran by people with this in mind.
However, I shall not be able to convince an Animal Rights activist who is morally oppossed to the concept of slavery of an animal, be it for racing, for a circus, for meat, for working and so on, and many of the most ardent attackers of the Greyhound Industry have this agenda in mind, while operating under the guise of Animal Welfare. These Animal Rights campaigners are well funded, very focussed, coordinated and tenacious beyond reason in chipping away at many activities where humans interact with animals.
I am a simple greyhound owner myself and generally like to mind my own business, but recent events such as the frontline debate where I first became aware of this attempt by the animal Rights lobby to double regulate the greyhound industry through the Dog Breeding Establishments Bill, drafted by the Green Party, made some of my apathy dissappear and I decided to get involved in a small way refuting and debunking some of the mistruths and allegations continually slung at the greyhound industry by the Animal Rights Movement.
This is the thin edge of their wedge. I hope that people can see this.

Discodog wrote: »

The legal aspect is one of the problems. It is never good when we make law & then allow exceptions. Law should apply without favour. In Irish law it is illegal to terrify an animal & the Hare is a protected species. The origin of this debate is the DBEB & that the greyhound lobby want to be excluded from it & create another exception.

Society has decided that we should have laws to protect animals from unnecessary suffering. How can an entertainment be necessary ?.

Coursing is necessary on many fronts, however under conservation measures alone it is necessary. Without the hands on interaction of the coursing public and hare and protection of its environment hare numbers would be severely diminished, as the Queens University report has shown.

Horse Racing and Greyhound Racing, sheep dog trials, fishing, shooting, showjumping, going to restaurants and eating steak, falconry, pidgeon racing, shooting vermin, are all areas where people interact with animals for the purpose of entertainment.
Boxing, football, rugby, wrestling, cycling etc are all areas where people compete for the purpose of entertainment.
Some suffering is involved, its part of what makes us and animals what we are.

Rey Rhythmic Sociopath wrote: »

I'm certainly thick! It has taken me until now to realise you will accept anything on any moral grounds, condone any actions, and support any argument once it is in favour of coursing. What a dim cluts I am! You will defend inarticulate ramblings as long as they lean in the right direction. !

Apologies but I don't follow your drift. Surely my earlier posts indicated that the moral objection of an individual to some issue was not a good ground for legislating against it.

Rey Rhythmic Sociopath wrote: »

Let's at least be honest with each other and ourselves. I don't object to betting at all. I do object to coursing with Hares because I have seen it. My Dad had dogs for years and we were reared with the "sport". But I have seen the cruely. I have seen Hares captured in one location where they can thrive and released to find their way in totally unsuitable terrain. I, thankfully, have seen the change to muzzles and while relieving one major concern does not remove the cruely from the event.
One big issue is how you can honestly say coursing aids Hare numbers. That is nonsense in most parts of the country and I suspect you know that. Yes some clubs do good work but the vast, and I emphasise vast, majority are distructive to Hare numbers. In addition to bird census and other field work I have keep records of Hares across a large region for decades. Coursing activity has ebbed and flowed over that period and Hare numbers dropped when coursing clubs were more active.
You know I'm kicking myself for even entering this thread. I think reason has seen through though. I'm off to reclaim my sanity. I'm currently sitting watching a stretch of bog with pasture behind me. I can hear Sedge Warblers in front and Song Thrush behind. Last time here I saw 3 Hares - hopefully I'll see some more to-day. Yes, sanity is returning. Bye!

The following is a link to an independendent report carried out by Queens University College Belfast. It shows when coursing was stopped in the North of Ireland that hare numbers actually decreased while in the republic they actually increased, particularly in areas where Coursing Clubs were active.

This reports demonstrates the link between coursing and conservation.
http://www.qub.ac.uk/sites/Quercus/News/Title,184184,en.html#d.en.184184

As regards your assertion that coursing is ebbing and flowing periodically i would point out that most of the 80 or so clubs, if not all the clubs working through out Ireland are in existance for more than 30 years with some, if indeed most going back to the early twentys when the ICC was founded. Some go back even further. This in itself is evidence enough to show that coursing is sustainable. Coursing clubs are well established in their areas and well supported.

Hares are generally taken from areas in which they thrive, generally the coursing clubs own preserves, and returned to same after the coursing meeting. This is ICC policy and is vetted by the Wildlife Rangers.These preserves are supervised to prevent poaching and vermin control is carried out through out the year with coursing clubs often working in conjuction with local gun clubs to ensure biodiversity in the preserves and adjoining lands. While I can't explain why the coursing club that you were involved with in your youth did not follow this common sense approach, it is strange in the extreme. Can you advise if this club is still in operation. Its unlikely they are if they were acting in this counter productive manner.

I hope the above will help you and others to reconsider your views on coursing and evaluate its importance to conservation. I hope also that we are debunking any myths and untruths that are constantly being protrayed in relation to coursing.

Scartman I will try to address some of the many points that you have made.

Your reasons for the demise of racing in the UK misses out the main one which is that the majority of the British public find it unacceptable as they do with Coursing. The awareness of the welfare issue is much stronger in the UK. Your comment that the death of racing might have a negative effect on welfare just shows how little owners really care. Are you suggesting that these owners would dispose of their dogs ?.

Regarding export the IGB could make it mandatory that no registered dog is exported to a specific country. The IGB do make rules.

As for deaths/injuries I have already pointed out that this is very easy to achieve by making mandatory for owners to notify the IGB as they are supposed to do with changes of ownership. If the IGB are not capable of recording simple data then how can they rely on self regulation. The Pounds record every death so why can't the IGB ?.

Who funds this "well funded" animal rights movement ?. I have never found any animal welfare group in Ireland to be well founded.

Snip Nua's death was only "discovered" because an insider posted on a UK Greyhound welfare forum - Sighthounds online, the thread is still there. The IGB said that they did not know if the dog was alive or dead. As usual there was a discussion regarding getting an FOI order. The death was then confirmed. Greyhound Data shows the results & "performance" of every dog so why can't it show deaths & injuries.

This continuing claim that "greyhound people" care about their dogs is unbelievable. According to your figures there should be about 200,000 Greyhounds alive & well yet you can give no explanation as to where they are.

Coursing is necessary to provide entertainment & lots of money. Are you suggesting that the Coursers, who you claim look after the Hares, would stop if there were no Coursing ?. Any wild animal population will increase if people allow the animals to breed so that they can be abused for entertainment. You don't need a report to confirm the obvious.

scartman1 wrote: »

...
The following is a link to an independendent report carried out by Queens University College Belfast. It shows when coursing was stopped in the North of Ireland that hare numbers actually decreased while in the republic they actually increased, particularly in areas where Coursing Clubs were active.

This reports demonstrates the link between coursing and conservation.
http://www.qub.ac.uk/sites/Quercus/News/Title,184184,en.html#d.en.184184

This link you describe is that there are more hares in conservations due to active population control. So, in some sense the ICC 'breeds' hares to course with, nothing I would be surprised about.
It goes on by declaring that if there are changes in the legal status of coursing in Ireland, the conservation of the Irish hare would fall on the government and may necessitate an increase in subsidies.

The abstract from the paper:

Conflicts between field sports, animal welfare and species conservation are frequently contentious. In Ireland, the Irish Coursing Club (ICC) competitively tests the speed and agility of two greyhounds by using a live hare as a lure. Each coursing club is associated with a number of discrete localities, known as preserves, which are managed favourably for hares including predator control, prohibition of other forms of hunting such as shooting and poaching and the maintenance and enhancement of suitable hare habitat. We indirectly tested the efficacy of such management by comparing hare abundance within preserves to that in the wider countryside. In real terms, mean hare density was 18 times higher, and after controlling for variance in habitat remained 3 times higher, within ICC preserves than the wider countryside. Whilst we cannot rule out the role of habitat, our results suggest that hare numbers are maintained at high levels in ICC preserves either because clubs select areas of high hare density and subsequently have a negligible effect on numbers or that active population management positively increases hare abundance. The Irish hare Lepus timidus hibernicus Bell, 1837 is one of the highest priority species for conservation action in Ireland and without concessions for its role in conservation, any change in the legal status of hare coursing under animal welfare grounds, may necessitate an increase in Government subsidies for conservation on private land together with a strengthened capacity for legislation enforcement.

Digital object identifier (DOI):
10.4098/j.at.0001-7051.030.2009

I am not outright against coursing, and I don't feel that this is what the thread should be about. I believe the hares have a much better live than the greyhounds.
But you have to be correct about your point. Which is that with coursing, the population of hares is actively kept high by the coursers. This doesn't say anything about coursing being 'good' or 'bad'.