RTE Investigates programme on greyhound racing industry

Discodog

archer22 wrote: »

Coursing is illegal in Germany and Italy.

In fact hunting with hounds was banned in Germany 85 years ago in 1934.

The only countries where coursing is legal in the EU are Ireland, Spain and Portugal.

Greyhound racing in Italy and Germany is strictly amateur..no betting is allowed

I used to go the Afghan & Saluki races. The breed clubs would hire a track. Great fun, totally safe & hilarious.

MarinersBlues

Igotadose wrote: »

Your proposal has merits. Can it be implemented in Ireland? My proposal is we need a more dramatic, abrupt overhaul than something administered by the usual suspects in what seems like, well, geologic timelines to get anything done. How do we implement your proposal in, say, the next 3 years? What is your timeline? Reducing exports by 50% for next year, followed by subsequent reductions in the subsequent 2 years is my first proposal. Likewise the IGB has had enough opportunities to fail, reduce the subsidy dramatically. Then, implement your 'taxi medallion' proposal, which will leave a smaller but presumably better breeding industry in Ireland.

My fear is, that the IGB and the likes will egg on the protesters knowing that insulates them from actually having to make dramatic change in a short period of time, as they can always 'blame the antis, see we passed more regulations aren't we great, no satisfying everyone yadda yadda.'

I understand your concerns about the IGB but think you may be underestimating how much of a back-lash is coming from whithin the sport.
To be competitive now you have play the numbers game and dope.
The vast majority don't want to do that, and have been leaving the sport.
If they don't clean the sport up quickly it will canabalise itself.

Given my experience of getting a dog ready with family and friends:
Everyone taking turns feeding, walking, galloping, road trips with my grandfather and his friends - 20+ people all turning up on the day to cheer the dog on.
Unbelievable good times when you win, but a shrug of the shoulders, pat the dog and get ready for the next day if you lose.
Commiserating with associates near misses and celebrating winners with the most tenuous of links.
I loved every second of it and would hope that sort of experience would be available to other people - but it won't be if they don't clean up the sport.


It would probably take at least 2 years to restrucuture the breeding side into the licenced breeder system.
Big breeders might actually be better off with this system, but stud dogs would be big losers.
So it would be 5 years before the first cohort of dogs would come through a full life-cycle of this system.

In the mean time dogs outside the system cannot be traced - which is no different to where we are now anyway.
Current racers will have to be chipped, tracked until the full system kicks in.

I wouldn't see the necessity to curb exports, that would happen as a matter of course once the new system was announced.

We would actually lose less dogs than if an outright ban was brought in tomorrow.

jackboy

Strumms wrote: »

Id hope society will always take the high ground against vicious vermin like that..to a greater extent then it does currently.

‘Vicious vermin’. I thought calling greyhound breeders lazy was uncalled for but you have gone 10 levels beyond that. It must be great to be perfect.

Discodog

Deleted User wrote: »

The ICC controls the stud book for all greyhounds bred in Ireland.

Exactly. The same ICC of the notorious €20,000 reward that they never paid out.

MarinersBlues

deleted

Getting sucked in to off topic.
Giving it a break now for a while

Discodog

MarinersBlues wrote: »

I understand your concerns about the IGB but think you may be underestimating how much of a back-lash is coming from whithin the sport.
To be competitive now you have play the numbers game and dope.
The vast majority don't want to do that, and have been leaving the sport.
If they don't clean the sport up quickly it will canabalise itself.

Given my experience of getting a dog ready with family and friends:
Everyone taking turns feeding, walking, galloping, road trips with my grandfather and his friends - 20+ people all turning up on the day to cheer the dog on.
Unbelievable good times when you win, but a shrug of the shoulders, pat the dog and get ready for the next day if you lose.
Commiserating with associates near misses and celebrating winners with the most tenuous of links.
I loved every second of it and would hope that sort of experience would be available to other people - but it won't be if they don't clean up the sport.


It would probably take at least 2 years to restrucuture the breeding side into the licenced breeder system.
Big breeders might actually be better off with this system, but stud dogs would be big losers.
So it would be 5 years before the first cohort of dogs would come through a full life-cycle of this system.

In the mean time dogs outside the system cannot be traced - which is no different to where we are now anyway.
Current racers will have to be chipped, tracked until the full system kicks in.

I wouldn't see the necessity to curb exports, that would happen as a matter of course once the new system was announced.

We would actually lose less dogs than if an outright ban was brought in tomorrow.

So why don't the good owners get together, call the press & protest outside the IGB ? Why doesn't everyone withdraw their memberships? If the good are in the majority then stand up & be counted.

If a ban came in, yes a lot of dogs would die. But that would be it, done & dusted. In the long run thousands more would be saved.

Discodog

MarinersBlues wrote: »

Based on what?
Neither have covered themselves in glory but IMO the ICC have been the better of the two for the last decade or so.

Of the two live Coursing will be banned before racing.

MarinersBlues

Discodog wrote: »

Has the IGB ever tried banded racing here ?

It was pretty much the same as graded racing for greyhounds.
My point was that the standard was very low but there were still plenty of horses entered.

There is a qualifying time that greyhounds have to run to get into a race.
I am proprosing scrapping that if we limit the amount of dogs we breed.

Both proposals go hand in hand.
Neither wil work without the other.

Discodog

MarinersBlues wrote: »

It was pretty much the same as graded racing for greyhounds.
My point was that the standard was very low but there were still plenty of horses entered.

There is a qualifying time that greyhounds have to run to get into a race.
I am proprosing scrapping that if we limit the amount of dogs we breed.

Both proposals go hand in hand.
Neither wil work without the other.

Genuine question & I appreciate if you don't want to reply. Do the responsible owners fear intimidation if they voice their ideas ?

ILoveYourVibes

Discodog wrote: »

Genuine question & I appreciate if you don't want to reply. Do the responsible owners fear intimidation if they voice their ideas ?

Generally in any environment people who do 'Whistleblowers' etc are faced with intimidation.

strandroad

MarinersBlues wrote: »

I understand your concerns about the IGB but think you may be underestimating how much of a back-lash is coming from whithin the sport.
To be competitive now you have play the numbers game and dope.
The vast majority don't want to do that, and have been leaving the sport.
If they don't clean the sport up quickly it will canabalise itself.

Given my experience of getting a dog ready with family and friends:
Everyone taking turns feeding, walking, galloping, road trips with my grandfather and his friends - 20+ people all turning up on the day to cheer the dog on.
Unbelievable good times when you win, but a shrug of the shoulders, pat the dog and get ready for the next day if you lose.
Commiserating with associates near misses and celebrating winners with the most tenuous of links.
I loved every second of it and would hope that sort of experience would be available to other people - but it won't be if they don't clean up the sport.


It would probably take at least 2 years to restrucuture the breeding side into the licenced breeder system.
Big breeders might actually be better off with this system, but stud dogs would be big losers.
So it would be 5 years before the first cohort of dogs would come through a full life-cycle of this system.

In the mean time dogs outside the system cannot be traced - which is no different to where we are now anyway.
Current racers will have to be chipped, tracked until the full system kicks in.

I wouldn't see the necessity to curb exports, that would happen as a matter of course once the new system was announced.

We would actually lose less dogs than if an outright ban was brought in tomorrow.

Very insightful post, thank you. Would it be fair to say that to relive your experience all you need is an amateur system like in Italy?

No betting
No overbreeding
Full traceability
No public funding
Dogs legally dogs not livestock

How many would stay in the game?

ILoveYourVibes

Wow 50,000k yes fifty thousand greyhounds are massacred in spain each year.

https://www.holidogtimes.com/50-000-greyhounds-will-be-massacred-for-being-useless-after-hunting-seasons-closure/

Igotadose

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Wow 50,000k yes fifty thousand greyhounds are massacred in spain each year.

https://www.holidogtimes.com/50-000-greyhounds-will-be-massacred-for-being-useless-after-hunting-seasons-closure/

People suck.

Might want to post this to the other greyhound thread in AH, this one's turned into a solutions-discussion thread which is welcome.

MarinersBlues

MarinersBlues wrote: »

I understand your concerns about the IGB but think you may be underestimating how much of a back-lash is coming from whithin the sport.
To be competitive now you have play the numbers game and dope.
The vast majority don't want to do that, and have been leaving the sport.
If they don't clean the sport up quickly it will canabalise itself.

Given my experience of getting a dog ready with family and friends:
Everyone taking turns feeding, walking, galloping, road trips with my grandfather and his friends - 20+ people all turning up on the day to cheer the dog on.
Unbelievable good times when you win, but a shrug of the shoulders, pat the dog and get ready for the next day if you lose.
Commiserating with associates near misses and celebrating winners with the most tenuous of links.
I loved every second of it and would hope that sort of experience would be available to other people - but it won't be if they don't clean up the sport.


It would probably take at least 2 years to restrucuture the breeding side into the licenced breeder system.
Big breeders might actually be better off with this system, but stud dogs would be big losers.
So it would be 5 years before the first cohort of dogs would come through a full life-cycle of this system.

In the mean time dogs outside the system cannot be traced - which is no different to where we are now anyway.
Current racers will have to be chipped, tracked until the full system kicks in.

I wouldn't see the necessity to curb exports, that would happen as a matter of course once the new system was announced.

We would actually lose less dogs than if an outright ban was brought in tomorrow.

Microchipping is already law.

“Pups – born after 1st June 2015 must be microchipped upon reaching age of 12 weeks.
Adult dogs – from 31st March 2016”
Owners are supposed to let ICC Stud Book know when a dog leaves their premises or ownership. This needs enforcing strictly.

Ordinary owners have been begging IGB to close loopholes and police the game properly. We sincerely hope that they start doing so now.

ILoveYourVibes

Igotadose wrote: »

People suck.

Might want to post this to the other greyhound thread in AH, this one's turned into a solutions-discussion thread which is welcome.

Oh ok sorry yeah its off topic too ...or well not sure. ..

MarinersBlues

Discodog wrote: »

Genuine question & I appreciate if you don't want to reply. Do the responsible owners fear intimidation if they voice their ideas ?

I wouldn't have known of any "intimidation".
Generally people don't want to be in the spotlight.
They have their own opinion and will stand/act by it.

Mostly it's that the dodgy lads don't give a **** what anyone thinks.
The IGB and ICC just need to be able to ban them without starting a decade long legal saga.

It is now possible to clean it up and I hope they do so.
I really don't know if it will happen.
The whole sport is at a crossroads.

I'll be straight out to buy a pup if it does get sorted.

Discodog

Deleted User wrote: »

Microchipping is already law.

“Pups – born after 1st June 2015 must be microchipped upon reaching age of 12 weeks.
Adult dogs – from 31st March 2016”
Owners are supposed to let ICC Stud Book know when a dog leaves their premises or ownership. This needs enforcing strictly.

Ordinary owners have been begging IGB to close loopholes and police the game properly. We sincerely hope that they start doing so now.

Microchips are becoming suspect. Recent criminal events have suggested that a chip might be electronically "killed" & a new one inserted. I wouldn't be surprised if chipping has to be supplemented by DNA.

Discodog

MarinersBlues wrote: »

I wouldn't have known of any "intimidation".
Generally people don't want to be in the spotlight.
They have their own opinion and will stand/act by it.

Mostly it's that the dodgy lads don't give a **** what anyone thinks.
The IGB and ICC just need to be able to ban them without starting a decade long legal saga.

It is now possible to clean it up and I hope they do so.
I really don't know if it will happen.
The whole sport is at a crossroads.

I'll be straight out to buy a pup if it does get sorted.

I don't share your optimism because the only way to avoid "waste" is to ensure that almost every pup ends up racing. The betting industry might have something to say about this.

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

Microchips are becoming suspect. Recent criminal events have suggested that a chip might be electronically "killed" & a new one inserted. I wouldn't be surprised if chipping has to be supplemented by DNA.

It already is. All breeding dogs and bitches have been DNA tested for the past 10 years or so. Have you a link to that claim?

Strumms

jackboy wrote: »

‘Vicious vermin’. I thought calling greyhound breeders lazy was uncalled for but you have gone 10 levels beyond that. It must be great to be perfect.

It’s great not to want to indiscriminately kill animals because they are no longer able to run well and to provide you with money, that’s uncalled for ? Yes, to have to explain that to the likes you or anyone who would question it is uncalled for.

I don’t kill animals...must be great to be perfect ??? Let’s just say...you skipped a ‘few’ school days, growing up, am I right ?

MarinersBlues

Discodog wrote: »

I don't share your optimism because the only way to avoid "waste" is to ensure that almost every pup ends up racing. The betting industry might have something to say about this.

I have just spent nearly a week on this thread showing how it can be done without waste and explaining that betting is not vital for the survival of the sport, and that the online format is actually detrimental to the sport.

The legal issues with enforcing rules and laws, and how the new legislation will remedy that, have been highlighted umpteen times to you.

It is very frustrating to try to have a rational conversation with people who refuse to acknowledge there is a valid alternative view.

I have given one very detailed plan that explains how eliminating waste and getting every pup racing is possible. This sort of response is why you don't get greyhound people trying to discuss practical solutions to welfare issues with antis.

You made up your mind and will never change.
It comes across as "Ban it cos I don't like it and I don't want to understand it".

At the very least you have to say it is possible.

I am definitley out of this thread now.

MarinersBlues

MarinersBlues wrote: »

I have just spent nearly a week on this thread showing how it can be done without waste and explaining that betting is not vital for the survival of the sport, and that the online format is actually detrimental to the sport.

The legal issues with enforcing rules and laws, and how the new legislation will remedy that, have been highlighted umpteen times to you.

It is very frustrating to try to have a rational conversation with people who refuse to acknowledge there is a valid alternative view.

I have given one very detailed plan that explains how eliminating waste and getting every pup racing is possible. This sort of response is why you don't get greyhound people trying to discuss practical solutions to welfare issues with antis.

You made up your mind and will never change.
It comes across as "Ban it cos I don't like it and I don't want to understand it".

At the very least you have to say it is possible.

I am definitley out of this thread now.

To paraphrase the bould Mattie McGrath..... some won’t be happy until they stop the cat chasing the mouse.

xckjoo

MarinersBlues wrote: »

I have just spent nearly a week on this thread showing how it can be done without waste and explaining that betting is not vital for the survival of the sport, and that the online format is actually detrimental to the sport.

The legal issues with enforcing rules and laws, and how the new legislation will remedy that, have been highlighted umpteen times to you.

It is very frustrating to try to have a rational conversation with people who refuse to acknowledge there is a valid alternative view.

I have given one very detailed plan that explains how eliminating waste and getting every pup racing is possible. This sort of response is why you don't get greyhound people trying to discuss practical solutions to welfare issues with antis.

You made up your mind and will never change.
It comes across as "Ban it cos I don't like it and I don't want to understand it".

At the very least you have to say it is possible.

I am definitley out of this thread now.

I can see how your ideas would work but I also share some of the concern about how well they'd be implemented and followed. Unfortunately we've a history of terrible treatment of dogs in this country (though not quite as bad as some other countries). I think it's starting to change so hopefully I'm wrong about my concerns. I'd like to see IGB restructure themselves as protectors of greyhound breed first-and-foremost and business second. Would go a long way to restoring faith in them. They're already not profitable so not much to lose from the business end :pac:
Appreciate the comments though. It's hard to engage rational discussions these days.

Deleted User wrote: »

To paraphrase the bould Mattie McGrath..... some won’t be happy until they stop the cat chasing the mouse.

Well Tom and Jerry was a huge cartoon so maybe he's on to something!

Bannasidhe

MarinersBlues wrote: »

I have just spent nearly a week on this thread showing how it can be done without waste and explaining that betting is not vital for the survival of the sport, and that the online format is actually detrimental to the sport.

The legal issues with enforcing rules and laws, and how the new legislation will remedy that, have been highlighted umpteen times to you.

It is very frustrating to try to have a rational conversation with people who refuse to acknowledge there is a valid alternative view.

I have given one very detailed plan that explains how eliminating waste and getting every pup racing is possible. This sort of response is why you don't get greyhound people trying to discuss practical solutions to welfare issues with antis.

You made up your mind and will never change.
It comes across as "Ban it cos I don't like it and I don't want to understand it".

At the very least you have to say it is possible.

I am definitley out of this thread now.

You have indeed come up with a plan that addresses many of the concerns people like me have, and it's a good plan. Obviously you put a great deal of thought into it.

But - you aren't the IGB.

They have had ample opportunities to put viable plans in place. People have been flagging the issues for years - not just animal rights groups - owners and breeders as well. There have been a plethora of newspaper articles, discussions on radio etc etc.

And the IGB have sat on reports trying to hush things up until concerned insiders leak them. Not only the one RTE based their research on, the Sunday Post published an article about another leaked report just two days ago - the article says owners and breeders are expressing serious concerns about the IGB allowing injured dogs to run to make up the race numbers and tweaking the rules to allow dogs with morphine in their system to compete, and leaving the dogs be taken from the track before blood tests can be completed. I provided a link to the article on Sunday - I did try and attach a screenshot but for some reason couldn't.

Their latest statement is long on what they intend to do and short on what they are doing.

There is no belief among welfare groups that the IGB are willing or capable of acting for the welfare of the dogs and while those involved circle the wagons and claim things are (will) be sorted, that the issues are old and have been dealt with, or just try and deflect to unrelated issues the perception is that nothing will change because vested interests won't acknowledge the depth of the problems.

I wish you were running the IGB - I really do. But you aren't.

Years ago it was common practice to give greyhounds bread, soaked in tea and milk with honey for breakfast. That’s no longer acceptable because of the caffeine in the tea!
Then we had to make sure that there were no poppy seeds in the bread!

Bannasidhe

Deleted User wrote: »

Years ago it was common practice to give greyhounds bread, soaked in tea and milk with honey for breakfast. That’s no longer acceptable because of the caffeine in the tea!
Then we had to make sure that there were no poppy seeds in the bread!

In fairness that has nothing to do with what owners and trainers complained about according to the article in the Business Post last Sunday. It is very clear they are concerned that injured dogs were given morphine injections so they could compete, that the IGB tweaked the rules to allow this, and that when these same concerned owners and trainers requested the dogs be tested they discovered the dogs were already taken from the track despite the rules saying they shouldn't have been.

Talking about poppy seeds is, imho, just the kind of circling the wagons downplaying serious issues that makes people like me seriously doubt the will is there to clean up greyhound racing.

The article is here but it's behind a paywall https://www.businesspost.ie/news/secret-report-board-knew-injured-greyhounds-forced-race-447167?utm_source=twitter&fbclid=IwAR2ul7YckurbR2JXshAST2Vd9RqrhJwesjXxP7j-2V1Cr06IU2IKZYjK6CQ

As I said, I tried to attach a screenshot but couldn't for some reason.

Edit Hopefully this will work

jackboy

Strumms wrote: »

Let’s just say...you skipped a ‘few’ school days, growing up, am I right ?

Classy.

Bannasidhe

Fergus Finley lays it out in today's Irish Examiner.

Ring-fenced funding from taxation (something no other part of Irish society gets). Zero accountability. Deliberate overbreeding with no means for keeping count or tracing all the dogs.

In 2017, the most recent year for which figures are available, its total net income was just under €18m. It lost money on all aspects of its main business. It had a turnover of €22m, but cost half-a-million more than that to run. Its administration costs, including board costs, were €2m. Its income included €16m from the taxpayer.

Without that €16m, the company would be trading recklessly. Because it lost money on all aspects of its core business, it wouldn’t even cover its administrative expenses without State subsidy.

... The subsidy is guaranteed, under a law passed by us, the people of Ireland, in 2001. Under the terms of this law, we have kindly given this company a grand total of just about €240m. No questions asked, no real accountability needed...


...The company is Bord na gCon, which describes itself as responsible for the control and development of the greyhound industry in Ireland. In its published documents, it says that its top priority is the welfare of animals.

But Bord na gCon has been subject to two damning reports in the last five years. The first was conducted by the respected group, Indecon. It was damning, to put it mildly, highlighting falling attendances, falling revenue, a seriously under-funded pension scheme, pathetic governance, and a huge and unwieldy management team.

There were enough question marks in that report to raise a serious issue about the future of the company. But still, the subsidy continued, apparently without any significant scrutiny.

The subsidy has an interesting history. Back in 2001, two members of the government, with a strong interest in racing, decided to set up a Horse and Greyhound Racing Industry Fund. The legislation provided that, into the future, every cent raised in betting taxes would be given back to the industry, subject to an annual minimum payment. Four fifths of the money would go to the horses, and one fifth to the dogs.

That one fifth is the €16m Bord na gCon gets now. (Incidentally, in the period that the dogs got a quarter of a billion, the horse-racing industry got more than €1bn.) This is the only example in the context of Irish public finance of ring-fenced taxation, where one sector is absolutely guaranteed an income from tax revenue — in this case, every cent of the income and a bit more besides.

Sick children don’t benefit from ring-fenced taxation. Neither do people with mental health challenges, nor elderly people, nor homeless people. Nobody does, in fact, except horses and greyhounds.

At least, when you look at the book of estimates, the State sets some targets for Horse Racing Ireland, the other main beneficiary of this largesse, in terms of attendances, bloodstock sales, and tote betting. But apart from giving €16m to Bord na gCon, the book of estimates doesn’t mention them at all
.

The second report into the greyhound industry is the more recent one, by a company called Preferred Results. Bord na gCon had no intention of publishing this report at all, until it discovered that Prime Time Investigates had a copy, and then they published some of it
But it was based on the essential finding of the Preferred Results report, which was that Bord na gCon isn’t centrally focused on greyhound racing at all. Its primary focus is on breeding dogs. And it is responsible — 100% responsible — for the fact that far more dogs are bred than are needed within the industry...


...Bord na gCon doesn’t know how to stop what’s going on, because they have no control over the number of dogs being bred. In fact, their answers in front of a recent Oireachtas committee suggest they don’t know how to count those numbers...

...a quarter of a billion euro later, we are subsidising an industry whose main focus is breeding dogs so they can be killed, in their thousands.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/views/columnists/fergus-finlay/going-to-the-dogs-we-pay-16m-a-year-to-brutalise-animals-why-934069.html

Discodog

MarinersBlues wrote: »

I have just spent nearly a week on this thread showing how it can be done without waste and explaining that betting is not vital for the survival of the sport, and that the online format is actually detrimental to the sport.

The legal issues with enforcing rules and laws, and how the new legislation will remedy that, have been highlighted umpteen times to you.

It is very frustrating to try to have a rational conversation with people who refuse to acknowledge there is a valid alternative view.

I have given one very detailed plan that explains how eliminating waste and getting every pup racing is possible. This sort of response is why you don't get greyhound people trying to discuss practical solutions to welfare issues with antis.

You made up your mind and will never change.
It comes across as "Ban it cos I don't like it and I don't want to understand it".

At the very least you have to say it is possible.

I am definitley out of this thread now.

Others have posted my concerns & I genuinely wish you well even though I strongly suspect that you haven't got a cat in hells chance of this being implemented.

I have been discussing welfare issues for years. I have spent time in meetings with Ministers, read & written reports, submissions etc. It is possible but I would only give it a tiny chance unless a whole new regime takes over the ICC & IGB.

I would love to be positive & happy to be proven wrong.

Bannasidhe

Barry's Tea have issued a statement that they will no longer sponsor greyhound racing.