The Frontline Animal Rights&Rural Ireland debate last night

scartman1

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

Can you please point out on the IGB website any statistical information regarding greyhounds born, exported, raced, etc. etc.

While we're at it, could you point out in the greyhound racing act of 1958 and subsequent changes the mention of 'greyhound welfare'. (I've tried, it's a jungle)


This is not a fact, this is your opinion, with which I do not agree.

Its the Irish Coursing Club that hold the Stud Book and not the IGB. The Sporting Press, the official Organ of the Irish Coursing Club, actually print each quarter a summary of all the litters whelped each quarter and compare it with the previous 12 months. The litters go up and down but on average I would say there are 20,000 plus greyhounds borne every year. Regardless, if you buy the Greyhound stud book, it will give you all the statistics you will require. These are published annually and have been done so for up to 80 years by the ICC. Its all there for anybody interested in this issue.

As regards reading the 1958 Greyhound Act and pointing out where the Words Welfare are mentioned, I cannot as I have never read it. But the reality is that the Greyhounds are inspected by the Stewards on registration of the litter, when the saplings are presented for racing, when they race, etc. The broods are also checked intermittently to ensure that they are whelping when they are stated by their owners and the stud dogs are inspected.
While their is no perfect situation with regard to any industry, Greyhounds are by and large well looked after and more inspected than any other breed that we could care to mention.

We discussed briefly previously the Death Certification of Greyhounds. I believe that it would be difficult and costly, and you dissagree. Thats fair enough.

Discodog

scartman1 wrote: »

Discodog, nobody is holding back any information from anybody and the IGB have certainly nothing to hide, it is the IGB, a state body for regulating the Greyhound sport, it is not as you seem determined to protray, the KGB.

The fact is that the IGB have no facility for recording how greyhounds have died, it would be a highly complicated proceedure to do and would cost a lot for little or no benefit. Dara O Brien's dog unfortunately died it seems at the track in a freak accident, there was no cover up, and you seem to dwell in this place where you are constantly evoking innuedo and conspiracy. It is wrong to mislead the other readers with this form of posting.

As regards how the IGB advertise the sport of Greyhound Racing I see nothing wrong with this.
You certainly seem to be dead set against Greyhound Racing and are constantly propogandising against it, which is very unfair. If you are genuinely interested in the welfare of greyhounds and other animals I think you should start to work with these organisations and not be constantly alienating them.
I would like if you could answer this truthfully. Are you against the very fact that Greyhounds are run against each other for the pleasure and entertainment of their owners and public ?

To answer your question. Yes I am because of the consequences to the dogs. If it were possible to race Greyhounds without any risk of death or injury & with a cast iron guarantee that the industry would look after ever dog for it's natural life then it might be acceptable. But we are in fantasy land with any of this. The fact the IGB allocate 2.5% of prize money to welfare shows just how little importance they attach to it yet they get €12 million from us.

Of course the IGB could easily record every death & birth. They could also easily log all changes of ownership, export details etc. All it needs is a mandatory requirement that every owner keeps a central database up to date. The next & key step is that all the records need to be on a publicly accessible website.

Snip Nua wasn't a freak accident. Dogs often die during racing or as a result of racing injuries but we can't know how many because the IGB won't publish the figures. Surely if the numbers are as low as you suggest it would be good PR to release the figures so what are they hiding ? Even the IGB Welfare Committee meetings are held in private.

I am fully aware of the argument for working "within the industry" & that many Irish Greyhound rescues get some funding from the IGB. It has been suggested that these rescues have to agree to not criticising the IGB - perhaps you could confirm or deny this ?.

The decline in racing in the UK has come about because of public awareness. Years of working within the industry achieved nothing.

Especially in these hard times the IGB should have to show us how they operate & use our money. There should be total transparency.

Discodog

scartman1 wrote: »

I would say there are 20,000 plus greyhounds borne every year.

Given a conservative life expectancy of 10 years there should be 200,000 of them !. We should be knee deep in Greyhounds so where are they all ?.

DePurpereWolf

scartman1 wrote: »

Its the Irish Coursing Club that hold the Stud Book and not the IGB. The Sporting Press, the official Organ of the Irish Coursing Club, actually print each quarter a summary of all the litters whelped each quarter and compare it with the previous 12 months.

But this is not a state regulatory body, they are not required to provide information on the welfare of greyhounds. The IGB is a semi-state regulatory body. And this is where the problem lays, it's regulatory, but has commercial interests. For this reason, you can not find a negative note on their website. They have an interest in not showing the people negative things about greyhound racing.

There are problems with other breeds as well, for instance the inbreeding of toy dogs in puppy farms. However, this is a non-argument; let's focus on an industry at a time.

The greyhound industry is powerful, and is preventing the bill from passing. My problem with the IGB is that they have a commercial interest in greyhound racing and therefore are not upfront about the welfare of greyhounds. If this industry was so well regulated, and neutral, it should be no problem obtaining information.

20.000 dogs born each year, 8.000 exported. Does this mean 14.000 are put to sleep each year? Something must happen to these dogs... From working as a volunteer in a rescue agencies, I estimate the number of rehomed greyhounds per year less than 1000. Many trainers will keep their favourite dogs, but many too are destroyed.

When we talk about China and it's culinary peculiarities regarding dogs we think that that's disgusting, but killing ~10.000 greyhounds per year for gambling purposes is even more atrocious.

scartman1

Discodog wrote: »

To answer your question. Yes I am because of the consequences to the dogs. If it were possible to race Greyhounds without any risk of death or injury & with a cast iron guarantee that the industry would look after ever dog for it's natural life then it might be acceptable. But we are in fantasy land with any of this. The fact the IGB allocate 2.5% of prize money to welfare shows just how little importance they attach to it yet they get €12 million from us..

If greyhound racing should be banned then i assume logically that you would also support the banning of Horse Racing. What about circuses and other areas where we use animals for entertainment ?. These are industries that have arisen out of a sporting interest of many people and give a lot of employment and commerce to many people through out the world. Both sports are commercial and must be run accordingly. As you indicate the welfare issue is an important one for the industry and huge efforts are being made to develope this area year on year. Sensationalist figures plucked from thin air don't add to constructive debate.

Discodog wrote: »

Of course the IGB could easily record every death & birth. They could also easily log all changes of ownership, export details etc. All it needs is a mandatory requirement that every owner keeps a central database up to date. The next & key step is that all the records need to be on a publicly accessible website..

I have indicated on an earlier post that the ICC as part of the 1958 Greyhound Act register the greyhounds and their breeders and owners. The facts that a greyhound death is not registered is a difficult process to put in place and would be costly to administer. All registrations are recorded by a steward of the ICC, in which he initially visits the pups when they are whelped, and the greyhounds are brought to him for naming and final registration prior to racing at the greyhound track. It would not be a good practice to bring a dead greyhound around to meet a steward to record how it died. I don't believe either that it would be possible for a steward to go around like a coroner to inspect the corpse of a greyhound and determine how it died and record its death. Sending in the information, should an owner be obliged to do so, would not , if the owner had something to hide, as you will no doubt continually alledge throw much light on the subject either. It would be a continous propoganda war.

Discodog wrote: »

Snip Nua wasn't a freak accident. Dogs often die during racing or as a result of racing injuries but we can't know how many because the IGB won't publish the figures. Surely if the numbers are as low as you suggest it would be good PR to release the figures so what are they hiding ? Even the IGB Welfare Committee meetings are held in private..

I have been racing a long while and i have never actually seen a greyhound being killed in a race. I have seen some injured with leg breaks which would require them to be PTS, but to say Dogs often die during racing is again sensationalising. Again Horse racing is similar in that the situation for which these animal athletes are raced from time to time inflicts injuries on the animals, with some, and i stress some requiring to be PTS as a result. As regards the Welfare meetings being held in private well I cannot comment, but i would expect that any organisation, including charities like Animal Liberation Front would like if they could hold their meetings in private. I'm sure if they held them in the open, Animal Rights activists would ' Contribute positively with open minds' to the meeting.:)

Discodog wrote: »

I am fully aware of the argument for working "within the industry" & that many Irish Greyhound rescues get some funding from the IGB. It has been suggested that these rescues have to agree to not criticising the IGB - perhaps you could confirm or deny this ?. .

as i said earlier I am not a member of the IGB , and thus I cannot confirm or deny anything on their behalf, I'm just a fella with a few greyhounds for some fun, living more in hope than expectation. But they do fund rehoming schemes as far as I know. With regard to Gagging the rescue centers, well this would be impossible to achieve and silly if attempted. I hope that your strategy is not to throw as much dirt as possible and hoping some may stick. I am sure you are a student of the american politician who stated that his chief rival was having a relationship with a pig. When asked if he knew it was true, he answered, 'Heck No, but lets see him deny it'

Discodog wrote: »

The decline in racing in the UK has come about because of public awareness. Years of working within the industry achieved nothing. .

Again, I am not a student of status of the greyhound industry in the UK, but suffice to say that it is the home for many Irish Bred Greyhounds, as the English public recognises that the quality of the Irish Greyhound is world renowned for their speed and robustness. They are extremely well reared here owing to our high levels of animal husbandry built up over generations.

Discodog wrote: »

Especially in these hard times the IGB should have to show us how they operate & use our money. There should be total transparency.

The accounts are published annually and publically. All income and expenditure is acounted for. There is no mystery here, why are you indicating there is?

scartman1

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

But this is not a state regulatory body, they are not required to provide information on the welfare of greyhounds. The IGB is a semi-state regulatory body. And this is where the problem lays, it's regulatory, but has commercial interests. For this reason, you can not find a negative note on their website. They have an interest in not showing the people negative things about greyhound racing.

While I have nothing against advising you or anybody else on how the Greyhound industry is regulated, it is important that you are informed before you protray an opinion as a fact. The IGB never had the figures on their website for the registration, but it was the IGB. The IGB was accussed of deliberately hiding these figures, where patently this was not true and the figures are there for anyone with the time and interest to study them.
The IGB, we both agree is a commercial organisation and endeavours to run its business as such. Much Like the GAA run gaelic games. They rightly try to promote the Greyhound industry in as positive a light as possible, and welfare is one area is one area in which they do. If one was to visit the website, you will see a section devoted to the encouragement of rehoming. Constantly attacking the IGB with mistruths is not constructive and takes away from a constructive outcome. Some Greyhounds are PTS, the same as horses, and other dogs, infact the vast majority of domesticated animals are PTS for one reason or other by mankind. Disco dog might be a little more focussed on the point in that he/she mentioned that the life duration of the animal was primary point.
The fact that an animal may, and one must point only some animals are, be PTS due injuries incurred during racing, which is carried out for human recreation, must be balanced against a Bullock, which is castrated and slaughtered for meat, the eating of which, if i may be light hearted is also very recreational for some. Which animal is better. This is in essence the danger when one goes down when dicussing Animal Rights. Following to its conclusion would simply end in man apologising for existing.

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

There are problems with other breeds as well, for instance the inbreeding of toy dogs in puppy farms. However, this is a non-argument; let's focus on an industry at a time.

Greyhounds are not inbred as you have already acknowledged due to the regulation relating to the pedigrees of greyhound. And they don't suffer from the dangers associated with breeding puppies for their looks. The racing greyhound is fundamentally a working animal and is reared and bred so that the qualities necessary to perform in its work are available. It think the puppy farms that operate on a commercial basis and resort to inbreeding, poor welfare conditions, little or no vetinary inspections are far more pertinent a topic for discussion under the heading of Animal Welfare, rather than the constant attacks on the very well regulated Greyhound Industry by the Animal Rights front under the so called banner of welfare.

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

The greyhound industry is powerful, and is preventing the bill from passing. My problem with the IGB is that they have a commercial interest in greyhound racing and therefore are not upfront about the welfare of greyhounds. If this industry was so well regulated, and neutral, it should be no problem obtaining information.

The main issue is that the Animal Rights Front protagonists, Celine O Donavan and Nuala Donlon and another man whose name unfortunately escapes me right now, being 3 of the 4 members of the Green Party Animal Welfare committee have drafted the legislation proposed by the Green Party in the Dog Breeding Establishments Bill. Their agenda is not Animal Welfare but rather Animal Rights and they are hell bent on getting their way by stealth, by hook or by crook.

The other not insignificant issue is cost, cost to the taxpayer. We shall have another fleet of inpectors with petty agendas driving around the country , with their hand out the window listening to the radio, until they call to some poor unsuspecting dog owner and confiscate his dogs on a technicality.
The ISPCA are already on the ground and do an excellent job in preventing cruelty to animals. They should be getting the funding and not wasting on additional Animal Rights Agenda dressed up none the less in nanny state measures

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

20.000 dogs born each year, 8.000 exported. Does this mean 14.000 are put to sleep each year? Something must happen to these dogs... From working as a volunteer in a rescue agencies, I estimate the number of rehomed greyhounds per year less than 1000. Many trainers will keep their favourite dogs, but many too are destroyed.

You have qouted figures regarding the export of Greyhounds. I'm glad to see that you you are using figures, I trust that you have taken them from the information available in the ICC. i am not confirming if they are right or wrong as I have not studied them , however your mathemathics is rather crude i would respectfully suggest. Dogs as we indicated previously race for about 3 to 4 years, and thus this needs to be taken into consideration. Other Dogs go into the breeding paddocks at the end of their racing career, both as stud dogs and brood bitches. Others are rehomed, while others stay with their original owners as pets and companions, and some are PTS due to injury or sickness.
At all stages greyhounds are by in large the most well looked after of the dog breeds, and this is undeniable. Throwing a few isolated bad cases into the debate should not convince a rational person otherwise.

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

When we talk about China and it's culinary peculiarities regarding dogs we think that that's disgusting, but killing ~10.000 greyhounds per year for gambling purposes is even more atrocious.

I think you are generalising with the figures.
In China, i presume culturally that they look at the dog as we look at the sheep or pig or cow, as a source of protein. Are we better than them because we don't? It sort of comes back to my earlier point relating to why we as people give more credence to a dogs life that that of a bullock. Now don't get me wrong, I too prefer the companionship of a Dog and relate to them very well and they in turn return these affections to me. But I know, in the back of my head, that is because the dog is a pack animal and is protraying these traits which appeal to me as a human.

I would be interested if you would acknowledge that some of the points raised in this email are worth considering, and that, should you still consider that greyhound racing should be banned, then please outline for the sake of consistency what other human practices where we interact with animals would you consider banning.

Discodog

scartman1 wrote: »

If greyhound racing should be banned then i assume logically that you would also support the banning of Horse Racing. What about circuses and other areas where we use animals for entertainment ?. As you indicate the welfare issue is an important one for the industry and huge efforts are being made to develope this area year on year. Sensationalist figures plucked from thin air don't add to constructive debate.

It would not be a good practice to bring a dead greyhound around to meet a steward to record how it died. I don't believe either that it would be possible for a steward to go around like a coroner to inspect the corpse of a greyhound and determine how it died and record its death.

I have been racing a long while and i have never actually seen a greyhound being killed in a race. I have seen some injured with leg breaks which would require them to be PTS, but to say Dogs often die during racing is again sensationalising.

With regard to Gagging the rescue centers, well this would be impossible to achieve and silly if attempted.

The accounts are published annually and publically. All income and expenditure is acounted for. There is no mystery here, why are you indicating there is?

I would certainly ban circuses that feature animals & some towns in Ireland already do. I am not plucking figures out of thin air. You have stated that 20,000 Greyhounds are bred every year but you cannot show figures to show what has happened to them all. As you know a Vet attends every meet therefore it is incredibly easy to record deaths & injuries at meets.
You say that these death are rare & yet 40 dogs have died at Belle Vue in one year - that's 40 dogs from just one track.

Regarding gagging I suggest that you contact ask the IGB. While you are doing that please give a link to where we can read the amounts of money given to Greyhound rescues.

The best measure of how much the IGB care about welfare is how much money that they allocate to it. According to the IGB website & Greyhound data it is 2.5% of winnings. So please show us the accounts & let us know how much actual money is allocated to welfare.

tomybhoy

The IGB support various rehoming groups, the % of prize money is only one of the revenue streams that goes to the retired greyhounds, there are also charity nights which generate substancial funds for the RGT and the rehoming groups which have been passed as fit by the IGB.
<modsnip>

DePurpereWolf

scartman1 wrote: »

... With regard to Gagging the rescue centers, well this would be impossible to achieve and silly if attempted.

This is however true, certain rehoming agencies do not accept donations from the IGB because of this, and certain rehoming agencies do accept this non-written condition. From a personal point of view, a rehoming agency should not protest against the greyhound industry, because they also have to work with the trainers. If they believe you are working against the industry, they will not opt for rehoming and rather destroy the greyhound.

The IGB contributes around 150 euro per greyhound, this is to cover vet bills for spaying and neutering, their injections, and what else pops up, plus transportation, plus kennel costs. On average, 100 to 200 euro needs to be added for a greyhound to find a home. The main reason is because they need to be transported to GB and mainland europe.

Graces7

DePurpereWolf wrote: »

But this is not a state regulatory body, they are not required to provide information on the welfare of greyhounds. The IGB is a semi-state regulatory body. And this is where the problem lays, it's regulatory, but has commercial interests. For this reason, you can not find a negative note on their website. They have an interest in not showing the people negative things about greyhound racing.

There are problems with other breeds as well, for instance the inbreeding of toy dogs in puppy farms. However, this is a non-argument; let's focus on an industry at a time.

The greyhound industry is powerful, and is preventing the bill from passing. My problem with the IGB is that they have a commercial interest in greyhound racing and therefore are not upfront about the welfare of greyhounds. If this industry was so well regulated, and neutral, it should be no problem obtaining information.

20.000 dogs born each year, 8.000 exported. Does this mean 14.000 are put to sleep each year? Something must happen to these dogs... From working as a volunteer in a rescue agencies, I estimate the number of rehomed greyhounds per year less than 1000. Many trainers will keep their favourite dogs, but many too are destroyed.

When we talk about China and it's culinary peculiarities regarding dogs we think that that's disgusting, but killing ~10.000 greyhounds per year for gambling purposes is even more atrocious.

Agree wholeheartedly..


NB I read somewhere that China has now banned dog and cat meat. At last.

hbkloving

Discodog wrote: »

I would certainly ban circuses that feature animals & some towns in Ireland already do. I am not plucking figures out of thin air. You have stated that 20,000 Greyhounds are bred every year but you cannot show figures to show what has happened to them all. As you know a Vet attends every meet therefore it is incredibly easy to record deaths & injuries at meets.
You say that these death are rare & yet 40 dogs have died at Belle Vue in one year - that's 40 dogs from just one track.

Regarding gagging I suggest that you contact ask the IGB. While you are doing that please give a link to where we can read the amounts of money given to Greyhound rescues.

The best measure of how much the IGB care about welfare is how much money that they allocate to it. According to the IGB website & Greyhound data it is 2.5% of winnings. So please show us the accounts & let us know how much actual money is allocated to welfare.

yes greyhound racing in all forms should be banned outright
as should circus zoos and animal farms guide dogs and pets i see people walking there dogs tred to a lead chocking them akin to slavery in the usa years ago

oh look at me walking my dog im so good if you were any good you wouldnt have a pet kept locked up for hours of the day just so you can feel good about your self walking them

DePurpereWolf

tomybhoy wrote: »

The IGB support various rehoming groups, the % of prize money is only one of the revenue streams that goes to the retired greyhounds, there are also charity nights which generate substancial funds for the RGT and the rehoming groups which have been passed as fit by the IGB.
<modsnip>

Could you provide a reference for this please?

scartman1

Discodog wrote: »

I would certainly ban circuses that feature animals & some towns in Ireland already do. I am not plucking figures out of thin air. You have stated that 20,000 Greyhounds are bred every year but you cannot show figures to show what has happened to them all. As you know a Vet attends every meet therefore it is incredibly easy to record deaths & injuries at meets.
You say that these death are rare & yet 40 dogs have died at Belle Vue in one year - that's 40 dogs from just one track..

I see from your posts that you are not a casual observer or participant of greyhound racing like me, and that you are willing to put forward figures such as the 40 greyhounds killed in Belle Vue. I think that in all fairness that if you are to put forward figures like this into a constructive debate that you should support it. This is approximately a greyhound a week, which would be one greyhound every 20 races or so. This is remarkably high. Its like the collosuem , they must be fighting them to death. could you support this information as it would be useful so as to form a fully informed opinion.

Discodog wrote: »

Regarding gagging I suggest that you contact ask the IGB. While you are doing that please give a link to where we can read the amounts of money given to Greyhound rescues. .

I believe what the IGB may doing here is that they may be working with rescues that intend to work with them. Saying that they gag the owners is totally different. Its like the GAA giving funds to clubs that intend to promote their business rather than those who wish to damage them. This is a reasonable position to take i believe most rational people will agree.

Discodog wrote: »

The best measure of how much the IGB care about welfare is how much money that they allocate to it. According to the IGB website & Greyhound data it is 2.5% of winnings. So please show us the accounts & let us know how much actual money is allocated to welfare.

Like I previously stated I myself am not a member of the IGB, but the accounts are freely available if you care to look at it. While i don't know exactly the figure i presume that you will agree that once it is adequate, that talking about percentages is pointless. I also believe that they have an executive dedicated entirely to the retired greyhound rehoming programme, this combined with the funds handed to charities and the fund raising nights is would be a fair size amount of money.

The focus seems to be on Greyhound Racing with you, but should you be casting your net wider to cover horse racing to be consistent. You have indicated that Circus's should be banned in an earlier post, what about zoos, rough shooting, fishing all areas where animals are used for human entertainment?. I think that consistency in an argument is the most powerful element in getting a point across and I would be interested if you could demonstrate this when making your arguments.

The debate is very interesting to date.

HELEN OF TROY

my friend and i really had a good time at the 6 dog racing last saturday . the dublin people were very much friendly and told us how to win money on the dog bets. we won 20 euro and we meet some lovley irish men. we did not see any dog catch the rabbit and people said it does not happen. we were told the people at the two dog hare courses are even more nice but it was not the month of the year for this until september. i got a dvd for 10 euro to send to south africa with the one of the two dog courses. it would be lovely to have these sports in my country some day. thank you sincerely h o t

tomybhoy

I am absolutely delighted that you went along to the dog track to experience the dogs for yourself Helen.
There is some good news for you in South Africa in that you already have greyhound breeding on a limited scale out there, the IGB are looking at setting up a partnership with interested Companies in South Africa to set up a track, the interest has been very upbeat to date.
The ICC are also carrying out a feasibility study on the potential to introduce hare coursing in South Africa.
The ICC requirements are very stringent and might require Government involvement with regards to protecting Hare Preserves if agreement can be reached in this area.
If I was a betting man I would say that within 5 years the people of South Africa can look forward to greyhounds competing in track and field in South Africa.

Last year 2000 greyhounds were exported to Pakistan, they love their coursing!

hbkloving

tomybhoy wrote: »

I am absolutely delighted that you went along to the dog track to experience the dogs for yourself Helen.
There is some good news for you in South Africa in that you already have greyhound breeding on a limited scale out there, the IGB are looking at setting up a partnership with interested Companies in South Africa to set up a track, the interest has been very upbeat to date.
The ICC are also carrying out a feasibility study on the potential to introduce hare coursing in South Africa.
The ICC requirements are very stringent and might involve Government involvement with regards to protecting Hare Preserves if agreement can be reached in this area.
If I was a betting man I would say that within 5 years the people of South Africa can look forward to greyhounds competing in track and field in South Africa.

with any luck this will never happen
we dont need more coutries part taking in this brutal sport which leads to the death of many animals
ALL animal sports need to be banned in all coutries
as well as factory farming such as chickens and pigs
horse fairs should be outlawed as well
with tracks closing in both the states and england hoefull we are seeing the start of the end of greyhound racing then we can move forward to hunting fishing and horse racing

scartman1

HELEN OF TROY wrote: »

my friend and i really had a good time at the 6 dog racing last saturday . the dublin people were very much friendly and told us how to win money on the dog bets. we won 20 euro and we meet some lovley irish men. we did not see any dog catch the rabbit and people said it does not happen. we were told the people at the two dog hare courses are even more nice but it was not the month of the year for this until september. i got a dvd for 10 euro to send to south africa with the one of the two dog courses. it would be lovely to have these sports in my country some day. thank you sincerely h o t

Helen,
Delighted to hear you had a good night. It can be very enjoyable with or without a winner, but having a winner certainly will put the icing on nthe cake.
Beware of the Irish men, they are right charmers.

Graces7

It is not necessary to have/use live hares- period.

Tarsna

hbkloving wrote: »

with any luck this will never happen
we dont need more coutries part taking in this brutal sport which leads to the death of many animals
ALL animal sports need to be banned in all coutries
as well as factory farming such as chickens and pigs
horse fairs should be outlawed as well
with tracks closing in both the states and england hoefull we are seeing the start of the end of greyhound racing then we can move forward to hunting fishing and horse racing

So here we have it in a Nutshell!!

The anti brigade have decided what mankind can and cant do in life...........so beware all of you who resect a frre world:mad:

convert

Graces7 wrote: »

NB I read somewhere that China has now banned dog and cat meat. At last.

So if dog and cat meat are now banned in China, should we follow in an equivalent suit, such as banning beef, pork and mutton?

hbkloving wrote: »

walking there[sic] dogs tred[sic] to a lead chocking[sic] them akin to slavery in the usa[sic] years ago

oh look at me walking my dog im so good if you were any good you wouldnt[sic] have a pet kept locked up for hours of the day just so you can feel good about your self[sic] walking them

My dogs are outside all day long but I'll still take them for walks morning and evening. Sometimes they will pull on the lead if they want to get somewhere quicker than I'm walking. So is it wrong that I should walk them twice a day because they are outside all day and because sometimes they will pull on the lead (without choking themselves, may I add)?

hbkloving wrote: »

with any luck this will never happen
we dont need more coutries part taking in this brutal sport which leads to the death of many animals
ALL animal sports need to be banned in all coutries
as well as factory farming such as chickens and pigs
horse fairs should be outlawed as well
with tracks closing in both the states and england hoefull we are seeing the start of the end of greyhound racing then we can move forward to hunting fishing and horse racing

Ok, animals get hurt racing, so you want it banned. Animals get hurt out in the field/in the garden/in their stable/on the road/playing with their owners - should that be banned, too? Animals also can suffer trauma during labour/when being born ... That should obviously banned, too. Actually, why don't we just stop breeding all animals? That way there will be a definite end to animal suffering in the world! :rolleyes: And maybe after sorting out animal welfare we can turn to sorting out human rights and welfare.

fatmammycat

Or maybe that person offered their opinion on what they would like to see happen. Y'know, like everyone else in the thread.

ppink

hbkloving wrote: »

with any luck this will never happen
we dont need more coutries part taking in this brutal sport which leads to the death of many animals
ALL animal sports need to be banned in all coutries
as well as factory farming such as chickens and pigs
horse fairs should be outlawed as well
with tracks closing in both the states and england hoefull we are seeing the start of the end of greyhound racing then we can move forward to hunting fishing and horse racing

you see statements like this are the ones that make those involved in animal rights look like complete fruit cakes to the average Joe! what do you suggest will happen all of a sudden to the horses in the world when racing is outlawed....and I assume this means other horse riding activities also??

Graces7

So why will noone answer a very simple question?

Why use a live hare? it is not necessary - period. Tradition? Out of date. A meaningless facsimile of an original tradition?

In this day and age, an anachronism that serves no purpose and alienates so many.

Discodog

scartman1 wrote: »

I think that in all fairness that if you are to put forward figures like this into a constructive debate that you should support it.

Like I previously stated I myself am not a member of the IGB, but the accounts are freely available if you care to look at it.

The focus seems to be on Greyhound Racing with you, but should you be casting your net wider to cover horse racing to be consistent.

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.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/17/greyhound-racing-industry-dogs

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1232532_30_injured_greyhounds_put_down_at_dog_track

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

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.

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.

Tomybhoy: The fact that the IGB will sanction Greyhound exports to countries with appalling animal welfare records such as Spain & Pakistan shows that they do not give a damn for the welfare of the dogs.

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.

DePurpereWolf

scartman1 wrote: »

...

You have qouted figures regarding the export of Greyhounds. I'm glad to see that you you are using figures, I trust that you have taken them from the information available in the ICC. i am not confirming if they are right or wrong as I have not studied them , however your mathemathics is rather crude i would respectfully suggest.

Numbers: http://www.ispca.ie/Greyhound-Breedhtml.aspx
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/irish-greyhound-owners-bite-back-2123895.html
http://www.greyhoundaction.org.uk/iIreland.html

I cannot find the source of the reference, but all these above seem to mention an average of 22.000 born and 8.000 exported.

.... Throwing a few isolated bad cases into the debate should not convince a rational person otherwise.

The few isolated cases are the problem, and that's where we need regulations and transparency for. If you have a basket full of apples, and some of them are rotten, you take out the ones that are rotten, you don't go ahead and make an apple pie from all of them.

I think you are generalising with the figures.

And you are not? Why don't you come with numbers? You're generalizing as well. The vast majority that go through our rescue organization are saved from being terminated because they were too slow.

I would be interested if you would acknowledge that some of the points raised in this email are worth considering, and that, should you still consider that greyhound racing should be banned,

I have never considered it, I have said that people should be able to make up their own mind. In all fareness, I would want greyhound gambling to be banned, my personal opinion is that this is the main problem. But what I think is not important. What society thinks is important.

tomybhoy

The hare is designed for the chase, the hare is the animal least likely to be caught by the dogs and that is why it is used, no one wants to see the hare get caught.
We cannot make it any simpler for you!

scartman1

Graces7 wrote: »

So why will noone answer a very simple question?

Why use a live hare? it is not necessary - period. Tradition? Out of date. A meaningless facsimile of an original tradition?

In this day and age, an anachronism that serves no purpose and alienates so many.

Hunting in any form is not an anachronism.
Coursing a hare with a brace of dogs is a natural activity and watching how it unfolds in a natural way is what gives it it's importance.
Why shoot live birds when you can shoot clay pidgeons? Why walk up a mountain when you can go to a gym ? The answer is because we like to do the real thing.

The important issue to consider is that the field sport is sustainable to the state and the people who form the state. Ireland was declared a republic in 1948 I believe and one has to consider what this means to the citizens of this state. Not alone does it mean that we don't have a Monarch as our head of state but the people elect a president to fulfill this role and elect a government from the people, and for the people and by the people, it means the fullest possible civil liberties and keeping Government out of your house and your private life, and forbidding it from imposing the moral beliefs of the Government or its voters on minorities.
The whole issue of coursing or any field sport is that it needs to be sustainable from the perspective of the state or the Republic with regard to conservation, respect for the body and property of others, not being a drain on the resources of the state etc. All our field sports can and do demonstrate this sustainability. Should sections of the Government deem it to be morally unacceptable that is not grounds for it to be banned.

I think many who continually try to impose their beliefs on others damage the republic and effectively no one is free in this soceity if the will of others who are morally opposed to certain issues are allowed to dominate.

Tarsna

I answer for you

A live hare is used because over the last 30 years the breed of coursing dog has split from the Track dogs..........many generations of selecting top sires and broods that are good at chasing live hares have produced ......in the main greyhounds that are not really interested in chasing the drag.

In other words.........when a greyhound knows that he is chasing a live creature...........something they have been bred for for mant thousands of years...........They put maximum effort into the chase...........you get a truer result as to the abillity of the dog.

And now that coursing is so safe for both hound and hare you are able to relax and enjoy watching a hare ot run....twist and turn in order to escape capture...........it is a amazing specticle...........and leaves you speachless at the sight of both these marvelous creatures

Of Course the downside to you getting coursing banned is what will happen to this fantastic breed when they have no job to do...............and of course YOU will go out and Conserve the hare wont you:cool:

Graces7

Tarsna wrote: »

I answer for you

A live hare is used because over the last 30 years the breed of coursing dog has split from the Track dogs..........many generations of selecting top sires and broods that are good at chasing live hares have produced ......in the main greyhounds that are not really interested in chasing the drag.

In other words.........when a greyhound knows that he is chasing a live creature...........something they have been bred for for mant thousands of years...........They put maximum effort into the chase...........you get a truer result as to the abillity of the dog.

And now that coursing is so safe for both hound and hare you are able to relax and enjoy watching a hare ot run....twist and turn in order to escape capture...........it is a amazing specticle...........and leaves you speachless at the sight of both these marvelous creatures

Of Course the downside to you getting coursing banned is what will happen to this fantastic breed when they have no job to do...............and of course YOU will go out and Conserve the hare wont you:cool:

Exactly as we said; a total anachronism that ignores the terror of a pursued animal. Barbaric as we aid way back.

I would not watch such things; nor would I admire anyone who did or who was involved.

It is a sickness that needs barring simply.

To take pleasure in one animal pursuing another...

Interesting that your defence adds to the reasons for banning it; I never knew these things before this thread. For that education, thank you. Before I would never have actively worked towards banning. Different now.

Breeding and "conserving" in order to exploit is not true conservation but a bastardised and corrupted phenomenon.

True conservation is for the love of the animal itself, in its true nature, with no other purpose than that the species lives.

so you are not in fact conserving but by this exploitation you are changing the nature of the hare.

Hounds in nature do not chase hares; unless the owners want them to be shot by farmers for being near livestock.

We will truly conserve; unseen, for the delight of the hare. A wild, shy hiddden creature, never handled or tagged and certainly nver taken to a place among people with hounds after them as the uncouth crowd roars.

OK; is there a petition to sign, please?

This last post has totally convinced me...BAN HARE COURSING.

tomybhoy

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?

Graces,
Do you think all the posters are stupid, you have been peddling the same lies as the other animal rights activists on this forum.

<modsnip>