anewme wrote: » CAGED UK have published a list of which Irish and UK trainers are exporting dogs to China, knowing right well the way those dogs will be treated.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Another dog being boiled alive in China.
Discodog wrote: » Any owner can choose who they sell to. The EU have nothing to do with it. The question was would you support a ban?
[Deleted User] wrote: » Unfortunately, it’s impossible for a total ban. Something to do with EU laws, I think. Many dogs travel to and from the UK for competition’s, safely and with care. Same goes for racehorses. It adds to the competition’s. The old Anglo- Irish rivalry!
Discodog wrote: » Exactly. By the way do you support a total ban on the export of Greyhounds?
[Deleted User] wrote: » If so many knew about it, why didn’t they step in and stop it?
Discodog wrote: » Exactly. It's been blatantly obvious to so many for so long but the Racing lobby have never heard of the abuse.
MIKEKC wrote: » There is none so blind than those that don't want to see
MIKEKC wrote: » The greyhound industry got away very light in that programme. No talk of blooding of the dogs.. There was a programme on Tipp fm (if I recall the station correct) some months ago during a discussion on coursing a man said that they used to go catching hares and give them to the coursing fraternity who would break the hares leg and then set the dogs on the hare
Deleted User wrote: » Trouble is people actually believe this sh1te. The vast majority of greyhound owners wound never stoop so low.
Igotadose wrote: » Proof by blatant assertion, as is typical. If the majority is dissatisfied with the behavior of an individual or group of individual, report them. Yinno, like whistleblowers where the stalwart guardians of the welfare of the greyhound, the dauntless IGB and those noble maintainers of the flawless studbook, the ICC, will carefully guard this information and prosecute to the fullest of their abilities. Doesn't happen. Ergo, the 'vast majority' is complicit.
Deleted User wrote: » If you were involved in greyhounds you’d know how many lies were told. Innocent people named and accused of wrongdoing. A Vet, told how greyhounds were being presented with mutilated ears, when, in fact, he had only come across one, totally ignoring the fact that the greyhounds parentage can be traced via DNA. He also claimed that dogs were presenting that had been pumped full of EPO, when the last case was of EPO was over 10 years ago. A dog, (not a greyhound) being killed with hammer blows in a foreign country. Another dog being boiled alive in China. The only factual piece was the dogs being killed in a knackery. That needed publicising.
angel eyes 2012 wrote: » This is an excellent result, and has stood up to scrutiny by the BAI. Well done to all involved who produced the programme. Absolutely unbelievable that the IGB submitted a complaint. I would love to see the day when all tracks are closed in Ireland, for the moment it is absolutely depressing and shameful that this industry is allowed to continue.
Discodog wrote: » Will you lobby for a total export ban?
The Satanist wrote: » BAI rejects complaint by Irish Greyhound Board over RTÉ documentary As expected, the "Running For Their Lives" documentary was found to be “fair, objective and impartial”.
[Deleted User] wrote: » I’m really glad to see this and would like to see the transporter named and shamed.
anewme wrote: » Dogs seized on the way to Spain. Being transported in a poor condition. Probably to end up the same way as Joy.https://www.fm104.ie/news/fm104-news/12-greyhounds-seized-at-dublin-port/?fbclid=IwAR0LACDzm1OMnubrw2Gol9DxuTsS1yIjaSVTCLlpYgS876uq9r5xeLgtQ90
The Broadcasting Authority of Ireland (BAI) has rejected a complaint by the Irish Greyhound Board about a documentary on the industry broadcast by RTÉ earlier this year, finding the programme was “fair, objective and impartial”. The IGB, the governing body for greyhound racing in Ireland, complained that Running for Their Lives, which aired in June, “was neither objective or impartial and constituted an attack on the Irish greyhound industry”. The programme reported the contents of an expert report, commissioned by the IGB, which stated that up to 6,000 dogs may be culled per year because they do not perform on the track. It reported that 10 times more dogs are bred each year than are needed to sustain the industry. The IGB claimed that the report, which formed a cornerstone of the RTÉ programme, “was inaccurate” and “was disregarded by the IGB”. It claimed the programme contained several inaccuracies and that its offer to take part in a live interview was rejected. The documentary also featured undercover footage shot at knackeries, and showed how these facilities were willing to put down greyhounds for between €10 and €35. The programme generated a negative backlash for the IGB, which has been forced to defend its welfare programmes and corporate governance at Oireachtas committee hearings. While the IGB was invited to take part in a pre-recorded interview, it rejected this opportunity as it was “of the view that the programme makers had a pre-determined agenda in relation to the greyhound industry”. It also claimed RTÉ had used “false information” and “staged and outdated footage without clearly being labelled as such” which “was misleading and provided a biased view of the subject matter”. The IGB’s complaint to the BAI also stated that the programme omitted information about the good practices “which are adopted by the vast majority of people involved in greyhound racing in Ireland, the economic benefit, or the statutory regulation of the industry and reforms introduced in the last decade”. RTÉ successfully defended itself against all these charges, arguing the programme was in the public interest. The broadcaster said it “was fair and did represent the fact that good practices and good intentions were evident in the industry”. RTÉ said it was not possible to accommodate a live interview in a pre-recorded documentary, and pointed out that in June 2018 the IGB had praised the Preferred Results report which it later claimed was inaccurate. “The broadcaster stands over the report and states that while a large number of issues were covered the information contained in the programme was factually accurate”. In rejecting the IGB complaint, the BAI found that the information broadcast was “presented in a factual manner, and sources were clearly identified. In this regard the committee found that information was presented with due accuracy and did not consider that the programme was misleading to viewers”. The committee noted that there is no requirement in the broadcasting code “for a broadcaster to include all possible viewpoints on a matter and the principle of fairness does not require the broadcaster to achieve an artificial balance or give equal airtime to all views”. It found the programme explored its subject matter in “a fair and impartial manner” and “was a comprehensive exploration of the topic in a factual manner which was fair, objective and impartial”.
anewme wrote: » My heart went out to her. Hope she gets a few final years peace in a loving home.
[Deleted User] wrote: » She DID look dreadful. That’s why I noticed her lovely clean teeth. It just didn’t add up.
anewme wrote: » Didn't look well fed to me. Skinny, baldy mangey coat, poor eyes, no spirit. Thought it looked dreadfull.
tuxy wrote: » I imagine it's possible for a dog to be well fed but abused at the same time. Right?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c33618a99b1d02afaf5370e8c02bf147.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f054c80ff399c4eba8d719c617220a57.svg)
