RTE Investigates programme on greyhound racing industry

NIMAN

Heard on the news this morning that 2 sponsors have pulled financial backing.

FBD and a.n.other

Igotadose

Straffan1979 wrote: »

You want it better regulated but you want to slash its funding and undermine its finance base by that FB campaign;

Correct. It's a business. It needs to meet its goals and if necessary, contract to do so. No different than any other environment.

I work in a regulatory environment- have u any concept of what it takes to get something like a drug test before a court and present a legally sound case against an individual that might result in a conviction- multiply that by no of dogs you want tested routinely ;

We’ll need a lot more staff and funding to get anywhere close to what will be required.

Well, if we use Mod9Maple's recommended amount of dogs per year (around 1800?) surely they can budget appropriately. Assume x% (based on no doubt their high quality records ) will require a court challenge. Work backwards from there. If they can't meet that number, then the number of dogs will have to be reduced. Mod9Maple's numbers were based on retaining the current number of events. It may be that needs to be reduced, too, as there won't be sufficient dogs available for the racing.

Bannasidhe

There is an "undemocratic/mob/usual suspects" etc etc petition here asking Gain Pet Nutrition to stop sponsoring greyhound racing if anyone would like to sign it.

http://chng.it/dRGDVk57Qz

xckjoo

DubInMeath wrote: »

Hate coffee, the wife loves it. Worked in Bewleys as security years ago, thought I would never get the smell out of my clothes.

Anyway, I don't think there was much danger of them losing much home grown business, but they might have lost online business in countries like the U.S. where dog racing is illegal in most states.

There's your problem. Bewleys is muck. Wouldn't give it to me dog :pac:

gozunda

Bannasidhe wrote: »

There is an "undemocratic/mob/usual suspects" etc etc petition here asking Gain Pet Nutrition to stop sponsoring greyhound racing if anyone would like to sign it.
http://chng.it/dRGDVk57Qz

Yet it remains that in the main the current campaign against all greyhound type activities appears to be organised and orchestrated by a small number of extremist interests. These are all over social media and appear to work by means of orchestrated virtual thuggery targeting businesses and others. And btw as per boards tou - no I'm not pointing at anyone in particular.

No one denies there are problems which need to addressed as far as I can see. Are there ordinary people involved in protesting about these issues? - Are there those who support greyhound racing who seek change and improvement ? Yes there are.

Unfortunately much of what is now being pushed is deliberately using these type of mob tactics. Long before the RTE documentary these interests pursued an aggressive ban ban ban campaign and it is evident none of that had changed.

gozunda

Igotadose wrote: »

...Per the Irish examiner, it's the only part of the
One way they can save a bunch of money is reduce the number of IGB and ICC employees. Over 1000 per the data I dug out a few days ago. Can't find their balance sheet (protect), but I'm sure that's a big chunk of their budget. Start with the most expensive employees (typically the top of the hierarchy) .

Why stop with the IGB? - let's get rid of employees across the board in all types of organisations and NGOs. I'm sure that's a few Billion/year right there.

Who needs employment eh?

osarusan

gozunda wrote: »

I dont deal with imaginary conversations thanks all the same

And the very next post is...

gozunda wrote: »

So you are saying 'racism" is the same as those who like greyghound racing? Right so. I'll leave you there ...

:pac:

xckjoo

whisky_galore wrote: »

For now.

Bull baiting was legal here once, now it isn't.
Times change.

Greyhound racing industry is fine because it's legal. Protesting/boycotting poor defenceless corporations is terrible and should be banned.

Stir stir stir the pot. Engagement is just encouraging it.

Graces7 wrote: »

Proof please? Thank you in anticipation.

There are some people out there that think keeping pets is immoral. PIETA are the most obvious example. The discussion in this context is just more what-about-ary though. Trying to suggest keeping a family pet is on the same moral and ethical grounds as the horrendous life greyhounds can experience as part of the racing industry is just a weak attempt to muddy the waters and stir people up.

Hurrache

gozunda wrote: »

Unfortunately much of what is now being pushed is deliberately using these type of mob tactics. Long before the RTE documentary these interests pursued an aggressive ban ban ban campaign and it is evident none of that had changed.

Give it a rest, it's not a mob, as much as you like to say so.

Bannasidhe

xckjoo wrote: »

Greyhound racing industry is fine because it's legal. Protesting/boycotting poor defenceless corporations is terrible and should be banned.

Stir stir stir the pot. Engagement is just encouraging it.




There are some people out there that think keeping pets is immoral. PIETA are the most obvious example. The discussion in this context is just more what-about-ary though. Trying to suggest keeping a family pet is on the same moral and ethical grounds as the horrendous life greyhounds can experience as part of the racing industry is just a weak attempt to muddy the waters and stir people up.

As is drawing comparisons between people signing petitions, emailing companies, posting on FB calling for boycotts of sponsors with unidentified 'extremists" and issuing dire warnings that it will be violence and death threats next. And 'proving' this by linking to a completely unrelated to greyhound racing incident that happened in the UK.

batgoat

gozunda wrote: »

Yet it remains that in the main the current campaign against all greyhound type activities appears to be organised and orchestrated by a small number of extremist interests. These are all over social media and appear to work by means of orchestrated virtual thuggery targeting businesses and others. And btw as per boards tou - no I'm not pointing at anyone in particular.

No one denies there are problems which need to addressed as far as I can see. Are there ordinary people involved in protesting about these issues? - Are there those who support greyhound racing who seek change and improvement ? Yes there are.

Unfortunately much of what is now being pushed is deliberately using these type of mob tactics. Long before the RTE documentary these interests pursued an aggressive ban ban ban campaign and it is evident none of that had changed.

Thanks, inspired me to sign that petition. Because your rhetoric is seeming like the most extreme.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

There is an "undemocratic/mob/usual suspects" etc etc petition here asking Gain Pet Nutrition to stop sponsoring greyhound racing if anyone would like to sign it.

http://chng.it/dRGDVk57Qz

Gain are hardly going to bite the hand that feeds it. Their greyhound nuts are very popular.

gozunda

osarusan wrote: »

And the very next post is...

Well that's what they were saying. Is pointing that out wrong? :pac: indeed.

Bannasidhe

Deleted User wrote: »

Gain are hardly going to bite the hand that feeds it. Their greyhound nuts are very popular.

It's their choice.
Do they want the Irish Mammy and her beloved dog market or the greyhound market.
People in the domestic demographic - some of whom have greyhounds - are entitled to go elsewhere for their dog food.

Again,it makes no difference to me personally as I don't buy any tinned or dry dog food.

Technically, I'm not boycotting any of these companies as I don't purchase their products/services in the first place.

I used to buy Red Mills Simply Natural for my rescue pony but he passed away last Oct (aged 35). If he was still alive I would be looking for a replacement. Which would have been a right pain in the hole as it took me ages to find a feed that suited him as well as that one did.

markodaly

Straffan1979 wrote: »

€16m is a thing of nothing to the government coffers- the Industry should be getting a lot more; in fact it’ll need a lot more to get it’s act together with proper regulation of drug use and to bring in a proper system of managing the breeding end of it etc etc

It’s starved of funding-has it ever crossed your mind that it might require more funding to get it up to standard- again get it out if your head that’ll be banned next week despite the despicable Facebook comments campaign against the likes of Barry’s Tea by NCABS- people aren’t that easily led.

we spent €50/60m on the likes of e voting machines & I can guarantee you there’re 1000’s of examples of other ‘voting machine type’ expenditures or worse use of public money;

to put it in context Horse racing Ireland gets about €70m afaik.

This sport is in obvious decline, yet you propose we spend more taxpayers money on it so we can keep it on life support a bit longer while dogs suffer?

As, I said, if there is demand for greyhound racing in Ireland, perhaps the people who support it should dip into their own pockets and support it.

Irish horse racing is a huge industry in Ireland, worth billions each year. Not remotely the same.
ttps://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/19/sport/horse-racing-ireland-brian-kavanagh/index.html

Greyhound racing is nothing more than a tin shed affair run by amateurs and people who have no care at all for animals. If these people cannot run the sport within the confines of appropriate humane rules, then they are better off jacking it in and saving the taxpayer €16 million.

jackboy

xckjoo wrote: »

Trying to suggest keeping a family pet is on the same moral and ethical grounds as the horrendous life greyhounds can experience as part of the racing industry is just a weak attempt to muddy the waters and stir people up.

No one in this thread is trying to suggest that. The animal rights activists are suggesting that. All the negative things said in this thread about greyhound breeders (scum, vermin and murderers) are also being said by animal rights groups about pet owners.

The animal rights groups have very little influence in Ireland at the moment but as it is expanding in the US it is only a matter of time.

Like most pet owners, most greyhound owners treat their animals very well.

markodaly

gozunda wrote: »

Why stop with the IGB? - let's get rid of employees across the board in all types of organisations and NGOs. I'm sure that's a few Billion/year right there.

Who needs employment eh?

Yes, we need MORE quangos, not less.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

I don’t see animal rights taking off so much here. Certain groups have a culture of bad treatment and well it’s culture.

Mysterypunter

The documentary is a setup so the government can justify cutting the board na gcon funding. It has always been this way, animals are killed for sport and food. The rights and wrongs of it are a separate issue, but the funding will be cut, so they will use the documentary as justification.

Graces7

xckjoo wrote: »

There are some people out there that think keeping pets is immoral. PIETA are the most obvious example. The discussion in this context is just more what-about-ary though. Trying to suggest keeping a family pet is on the same moral and ethical grounds as the horrendous life greyhounds can experience as part of the racing industry is just a weak attempt to muddy the waters and stir people up.

ah yes PETA..releasing mink into the wild... ah yes

Bannasidhe

Mysterypunter wrote: »

The documentary is a setup so the government can justify cutting the board na gcon funding. It has always been this way, animals are killed for sport and food. The rights and wrongs of it are a separate issue, but the funding will be cut, so they will use the documentary as justification.

Ah, the RTE 'set it up' defense.
They 'set up' the killing of a dog with a bolt gun did they?
They 'set-up' the export of greyhounds to China?
They 'set-up' the IGB sitting on reports?
They 'set-up' that 6000+ greys a year are unaccounted for?

Fair dues to RTE - who knew they could organise such a massive 'set-up' eh! Imagine what they could 'set-up' if they had an extra €16m year. :pac:

BTW, 'always been this way' is not a justification for animals being killed for so-called sport. Or perhaps you think all the various ways animals were traditionally killed for 'sport' should be re-introduced?
Bear baiting.
Cock fighting
Dog fighting.

Sure as long as someone 'enjoys' that and can have a flutter let's bring those back.

Graces7

jackboy wrote: »

A quick search in google will show you it is a real thing. I am not prepared to do the work to put links up here. I don't mind if you do not believe this is a real thing.

It's basically down to the difference between animal rights and animal welfare. Most people are pro animal welfare (improving the treatment of animals). Animal rights is very different. This is about giving animals some of the rights of humans. In this context, pet ownership can be viewed as exploitation or slavery. I know this sounds a bit out there, but it is a real thing, which is growing.

slavery! OH My!

Have you read the Four Rights of animals? . You need to.

What has this to do with greyhound racing please? Another deflection? And add PETA to the mix..

Graces7

batgoat wrote: »

Thanks, inspired me to sign that petition. Because your rhetoric is seeming like the most extreme.

Me too. Never seen such a strong incitement to polarisaion,

gozunda

Hurrache wrote: »

Give it a rest, it's not a mob, as much as you like to say so.

How about engaging with the discussion instead of helicoptering in.

Btw Im not the only poster who has pointed out what's going on. Dont want to believe it - fine. Unfortunately the campaign tactics are all to obvious no matter how much they are denied.

gozunda

batgoat wrote: »

Thanks, inspired me to sign that petition. Because your rhetoric is seeming like the most extreme.

Lol. From the postings I somehow reckon you didn't need any 'inspiration' whatsover. But yeah yeah shoot the messenger. That works

xckjoo

jackboy wrote: »

No one in this thread is trying to suggest that. The animal rights activists are suggesting that. All the negative things said in this thread about greyhound breeders (scum, vermin and murderers) are also being said by animal rights groups about pet owners.

Equating them has probably not been outright stated, but it's been brought into the conversation for no other reason than to try create a false equivalence in peoples heads and to keep the waters muddy with whataboutery.

And the majority of animal rights activists are not making that suggesting that, only the extremists. Keep trying to muddy though.

Graces7 wrote: »

ah yes PIETA..releasing mink into the wild... ah yes

Not sure if you're being sarcastic of making a joke of my typo, but PETA have some very strange policies that aren't immediately obvious. Look em up

Graces7

Not sure if you're being sarcastic of making a joke of my typo, but PETA have some very strange policies that aren't immediately obvious. Look em up[/QUOTE]

Not sure how you read anything bad in my post; I abbhor PETA. opps just seen what you mean by typo which I copied; hay fever eyes.. OH DEAR!SORRY. everything is horrible blurred

I lived near a mink farm when they released mink here. The effect on wild life and farm animals..and on pets. PETA and I are well acquainted.

Hurrache

gozunda wrote: »

How about engaging with the discussion instead of helicoptering in.

Btw Im not the only poster who has pointed out what's going on. Dont want to believe it - fine. Unfortunately the campaign tactics are all to obvious no matter how much they are denied.

I just did engage, it's not mob rule.

Everything else worth saying has already been said.

If people chose not to buy a product because they simply don't like it, that's by choice, not mob rule.

Equally if people chose not to buy a product because they don't want some of their cash going towards an activity they wouldn't support themselves, that too is choice, not mob rule.

Then again, maybe they just haven't turned up at my door questioning me as to what tea I drink and subsequently forcing me to never buy it again.

Igotadose

gozunda wrote: »

Why stop with the IGB? - let's get rid of employees across the board in all types of organisations and NGOs. I'm sure that's a few Billion/year right there.

Who needs employment eh?

IGB's the one involved with greyhounds and supposedly is a business. More government agencies doing real budgets with real goals and measures, I can see that as a good thing, can't you? People need employment, but for example does HSE need 40% administrators, much higher than other European countries?

However, this discussion's about greyhounds in Ireland, and hence IGB are in the crosshairs right now.

gozunda

Igotadose wrote: »

IGB's the one involved with greyhounds and supposedly is a business. More government agencies doing real budgets with real goals and measures, I can see that as a good thing, can't you? People need employment, but for example does HSE need 40% administrators, much higher than other European countries?However, this discussion's about greyhounds in Ireland, and hence IGB are in the crosshairs right now.

Yes agreed the discussion is about greyhounds and what is to be done. Plenty of good suggestions so far imo. The only reason for that reply btw was the action proposed again only suits the "shut it down nowers". Laying of employees permanently and not replacing them will do nothing to improve standards or to bring in real reform.

No matter how much screaming goes on - it is highly unlikely that greyhound racing will he banned imo. So we work with that we got, replacing those who need replaced if need be and work from there.