RTE Investigates programme on greyhound racing industry

Igotadose

[Deleted User] wrote: »

They have been doing. Unfortunately the IGB saw us as troublemakers.

So what's your proposal for change given your experience with the IGB?

Bannasidhe

The Irish Greyhound Owners and Breeders Federation is scathing in it's criticism of the IGB. http://igobf.ie/wp/?p=1143

It would seem not everyone involved in the industry is of the opinion that this was all 'ages ago'/'has been dealt with' and general nothing to see here is just the 'usual suspects' wanting to 'ban everything'. Nor do they agree that the industry employs thousands and thousands of people ...

In fact - industry insiders raised may of the same concerns as posters here 3 years ago.

Members of the IGOBF met with Minister Andrew Doyle and Brendan Gleeson on June 5th 2016 The full report of our meeting is here http://igobf.ie/wp/?p=573

This was the summary that I wrote following the meeting

The Irish greyhound industry has three basic challenges it needs to address if it is to have a future.
1) Greyhound Welfare, this is a growing issue but can be dealt with. Token gestures fool nobody.

2) Restoration of Integrity. A board that have shown scant regard for rules will find it difficult to convince anyone that they have changed their ways.

3) Finance; The IGB is devoid of ideas and has now become totally dependent on Government funding. The general public perception which will become more negative due to the failure to address welfare issues suggests this money may not always be available.

It is 3 years since we had this meeting and prior to the Prime Time Investigates, none of the issues were taken seriously. The failure of IGB to understand that all 3 issues are intertwined and each one has a bearing on the next may have finally dawned on the IGB following the reaction to the programme on RTE. The failure of IGB to control illegal drug use is a welfare issue, it also damages the integrity of the racing product which has obvious financial implications http://igobf.ie/wp/?p=1116

The flouting of Artificial Insemination regulations by the Irish Coursing Club was another issue that contributed to the oversupply of dogs and reinforced the perception that the industry was incapable of abiding by rules. Successive Ministers of Ag including Coveney, Doyle, Creed and Hayes were all fully aware of the breaches but chose to turn a blind eye.

Understandably the drug use and the over production of dogs have provoked the immediate outcry, but the focus will soon shift to question marks over the financial viability of the industry. The IGB has received €256 million in state funding since 2001 and a further €23 million for the sale of a state asset, Harold Cross. The IGB’s claims that the greyhound industry employs in excess of 10,000 people will be more tightly scrutinised and many people suggest that the real number employed in the industry is less than 1,000 people. As a business, the industry is currently worth nothing. The irony of the situation is that if the IGB folds, as now seems like a real possibility, the value of the assets (Shelbourne Park, Tralee etc) will be used to pay the redundancy of the very people whose non-performance was the cause of the collapse.

Following the RTE programme the IGOBF wrote to Minister Creed on 4/07/2019

Dear Minister Creed,

The total disregard for animal welfare and the widespread use of illegal drugs that was exposed on the RTE Prime Time Investigates programme should not be a surprise to you as you have repeatedly been given warnings by IGOBF regarding these issues.

The reaction of IGB was typical of what we have come to expect from this shambolic organisation.

Chairman of the Irish Greyhound Board, Frank Nyhan, commented: “We completely condemn the deplorable actions towards greyhounds highlighted in the RTE broadcast. As a result of the newly signed Greyhound Racing Act 2019, the industry now has an opportunity to further progress and modernise. When the Act is in full effect, it will add to existing legislation and ensure that the racing greyhound is the most regulated of all canine breeds in Ireland. The IGB is fully supportive of these measures.”

Mr Nyhan needs to realise that there already was legislation in place prior to this new Greyhound Racing Act 2019 that made it illegal to give dogs cocaine, amphetamines, stanozolol, pentobarbital etc. Why does IGB allow trainers to use these illegal substances? How does a dog that test positive 3 times for cocaine get invited to the Night of Stars? How does the same dog get nominated for Greyhound of The Year? Does Mr Nyhan not understand that the constant eulogising on Talking Dogs (IGB’s own website news) of trainers found to be dopers reduces the stigma of using illegal drugs and all these actions combined suggests to participants and the general public that doping is acceptable. Mr Nyhan was also on the Board when the IGB announced breeding incentives in 2018 without any regard to the already obvious over supply problem.

CEO of the Irish Greyhound Board, Gerard Dollard, said: “Any person who knowingly harms a greyhound brings shame upon our industry. The IGB will continue to investigate any matters brought to its attention. Any situations where it is alleged a breach of the Welfare of Greyhounds Act 2011 has occurred should be brought to the attention of the IGB.”

Mr Dollard who has been a total failure since he was appointed in 2017 should also add the following to his statement. “Any employee of IGB who fails to do their job which results in harm to a greyhound will be dismissed”

Anybody that knows the IGB will realise how disingenuous Mr Dollard is being when he states that breaches of welfare should be brought to the attention of the IGB. Mr Dollard might recall to you what action he took when he was informed about the multiple breaches of sales regulations, and he might also confirm that IGB had been aware of the breaches for years and typically had chosen to ignore them. You might also ask Mr Dollard to enquire from his Head of Regulations, Pat Herbert, as to what Mr Herbert found when he investigated the positive stanozolol test in The UK of Stay For Ruby following a written submission from IGOBF. Mr Dollard should also be aware that people do not trust the IGB to confidentially handle any type of whistle-blower disclosure.

IGB Veterinary Director, Denis Healy, added: “A raft of regulatory improvements introduced in the past two years, including a €400,000 state-of-the-art analytical system at the National Greyhound Laboratory in Limerick, demonstrates the IGB’s intent in the area of medication control. The IGB conducts approximately 5,000 tests in this laboratory annually, including testing for EPO as referenced in the broadcast. The last adverse finding relating to EPO was found in July 2005, with approximately 71,000 tests being conducted on greyhounds both inside and outside of competition since then.”

This IGB goes on to say that “On regulation and integrity, 5,288 samples were analysed by the state-of-the-art National Greyhound Laboratory located at the IGB’s offices in Limerick in 2018, which is far in excess of the amount of tests conducted in sports involving humans. These included out-of-competition tests. Just 22 of these tests (0.41%) resulted in adverse analytical findings”

If the situation was not so serious this statement from Healy would be laughable. The incredibly low detection rate of the IGB does not contradict the generally held view that illegal drug use is widespread in Irish greyhounds but instead confirms the incompetence of IGB when it comes to detection. How does Mr Healy explain the Galway trainer that (according to RTE) had a huge stash of illegal drugs, that sent 2 dogs to race in England and they both tested positive, the same trainer has had 2221 runners (according to IGB website) in Irish tracks and never had a failed test?

The IGOBF welcomes the range of aids and measures announced by IGB on June 28 to assist with rehoming. These are normal measures, certainly nothing extraordinary and of course in typical IGB fire brigade fashion, very weak on detail. One could still question the commitment of IGB to welfare issues if all this money is now available and why were these measures not put in place before the Prime Time Investigates programme?

The RTE programme highlighted serious failure of regulation and greyhound welfare at the IGB and further confirms the short comings of the highly paid executives with these particular responsibilities. The failure of Mr Dollard to identify and deal decisively with these non-performers has moved the entire industry closer to total collapse. The IGOBF have been consistent in their warnings, and you as Minister have been consistent with your refusal to listen. The RTE programme of last week is the result of the inept Board appointments by you and your predecessor, Simon Coveney. The obstinate refusal by the two of you to admit that you made terrible mistakes may have moved the industry beyond recovery. The people that got the industry into its present state do not have the ability to turn it around. This is no time for your normal flip flopping, immediate removals are imperative.

Regards

Tony Walsh

Chairman Irish Greyhound Owners and Breeders Federation

gozunda

Bannasidhe wrote: »

The Irish Greyhound Owners and Breeders Federation is scathing in it's criticism of the IGB. http://igobf.ie/wp/?p=1143it would seem not everyone involved in the industry is of the opinion that this was all 'ages ago'/'has been dealt with' and general nothing to see here is just the 'usual suspects' wanting to 'ban everything'. Nor do they agree that the industry employs thousands and thousands of people ...In fact - industry insiders raised may of the same concerns as posters here 3 years ago.
Following the RTE programme the IGOBF wrote to Minister Creed on 4/07/2019

So there have been 'industry insiders' reporting and calling out the issues? So not everyone is sticking their head in the sand and pretending otherwise? Good to hear tbh

But seriously how many more little pointy verbal jabs is it possible to fit in there ? It's true plenty here have been screaming for a ban with only rte as their guide and blaming everyone. Pity more people take a good look around before starting the that bs tbh.

ILoveYourVibes

What about if you just ban betting on it?

Turn it into crufts???

Or sheepdog trials?

whisky_galore

"The irony of the situation is that if the IGB folds, as now seems like a real possibility, the value of the assets (Shelbourne Park, Tralee etc) will be used to pay the redundancy of the very people whose non-performance was the cause of the collapse."

Incompetents rewarded, where have we seen this before, so many, many times? Almost a given in Paddyland.

Discodog

gozunda wrote: »

So there have been 'industry insiders' reporting and calling out the issues? So not everyone is sticking their head in the sand and pretending otherwise? Good to hear tbh

But seriously how many more little pointy verbal jabs is it possible to fit in there ? It's true plenty here have been screaming for a ban with only rte as their guide and blaming everyone. Pity more people take a good look around before starting the that bs tbh.

Maybe if the The Irish Greyhound Owners and Breeders Federation stopped breeding the problem would naturally die out over time.

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

Maybe if the The Irish Greyhound Owners and Breeders Federation stopped breeding the problem would naturally die out over time.

Why should we give up the hobby we’ve enjoyed, in my case for over 60 years, jus because of a few bad eggs or because a few people don’t approve of our choice?

InTheShadows

Deleted User wrote: »

Good to see that some aren’t giving in to the bullies. Well Done Red Mills. https://www.thecork.ie/2019/07/04/connollys-red-mills-announced-as-sponsors-of-corks-richest-greyhound-race-for-three-year-period/

Post fail :pac:

InTheShadows

whisky_galore wrote: »

"The irony of the situation is that if the IGB folds, as now seems like a real possibility, the value of the assets (Shelbourne Park, Tralee etc) will be used to pay the redundancy of the very people whose non-performance was the cause of the collapse."

Incompetents rewarded, where have we seen this before, so many, many times? Almost a given in Paddyland.

It's how Ireland works unfortunately. We reward failure.

donkeykong5

Discodog wrote: »

gozunda wrote: »

So there have been 'industry insiders' reporting and calling out the issues? So not everyone is sticking their head in the sand and pretending otherwise? Good to hear tbh

But seriously how many more little pointy verbal jabs is it possible to fit in there ? It's true plenty here have been screaming for a ban with only rte as their guide and blaming everyone. Pity more people take a good look around before starting the that bs tbh.

Maybe if the The Irish Greyhound Owners and Breeders Federation stopped breeding the problem would naturally die out over time.

Stopped breeding..........stopped GREEDING .

gozunda

Discodog wrote: »

Maybe if the The Irish Greyhound Owners and Breeders Federation stopped breeding the problem would naturally die out over time.

Maybe write and tell them that? Or is that just more soapboxing?

Bannasidhe

Deleted User wrote: »

Why should we give up the hobby we’ve enjoyed, in my case for over 60 years, jus because of a few bad eggs or because a few people don’t approve of our choice?

Why should dogs die so you can enjoy your hobby?

Discodog

gozunda wrote: »

Maybe write and tell them that? Or is that just more soapboxing?

You think I haven't? As usual you make sweeping assumptions. Even a relatively quick search of my posts here will show that I have been in contact with the relevant people. They are no different to the IGB & ICC. They still want to breed dogs that will end up surplus to requirements.

You don't solve the problem by continuing to breed.

InTheShadows

People who watch and partake in Greyhound racing like to consider themselves dog lovers but nothing could be further from the truth. Once a dog is done racing or sustains an injury whilst racing they are slung out or shot. It's the people who rescue these beautiful animals from certain death or being boiled alive in some backward sh1thole of a country that are the real dog lovers.

Personally i think Greyhound racing is finished in this country and not before time. Hopefully the will is there from RTE or some other broadcaster to expose the shady practices in horse racing and that begins the demise of that industry also.

InTheShadows

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Why should dogs die so you can enjoy your hobby?

Sense of entitlement i'd say.

Discodog

InTheShadows wrote: »

Sense of entitlement i'd say.

Having met, spoken to & sat in meetings with some of these people it's still a mystery. I know people that have pet dogs that they cherish & Greyhounds that get no real care at all.

I can think of a family that have two little pampered pooches but the Spaniel gun dogs live in a cage, at the bottom of the garden & have no interaction at all.

jackboy

Discodog wrote: »

Having met, spoken to & sat in meetings with some of these people it's still a mystery. I know people that have pet dogs that they cherish & Greyhounds that get no real care at all.

I can think of a family that have two little pampered pooches but the Spaniel gun dogs live in a cage, at the bottom of the garden & have no interaction at all.

Strange that a greyhound owner would give no real care at all. Greyhounds are essentially athletes and they cannot race with success unless they have an extremely high level of health. I would say in general greyhounds have better health than the average pet dog. Remember, almost all overweight pet dogs that you see are abused.

Of course there are the issues with doping and culling that need to be sorted out, there is no denying that.

Bannasidhe

InTheShadows wrote: »

Sense of entitlement i'd say.

People who engage in horrors like dog fighting could make exactly the same argument couldn't they?

Just change 'greyhound racing' to 'dog fighting' and the exact same argument could be made:

"It's my hobby and I enjoy it.
The aim is not for dogs to die but for the dogs to win (and maybe get me a few bob), sure sometimes dogs die but those are acceptable losses. I mind my fighting dogs, it's not my fault if other dog fighters don't. Or if they drug them. Or take them to the knackery for disposal. Most of those things are done by a small minority who give the sport a bad name, I have been dog fighting for years and I can state categorically that the regulators are working hard to clean it up.

Oh, and with ringfenced government subsidises for dog fighting we build stadiums and bring loads of employment and money into the local economy."

Muahahaha

https://www.thejournal.ie/greyhounds-shane-ross-4712044-Jul2019/

TRANSPORT MINISTER SHANE Ross has called on government to say what it’s doing about the greyhound industry in wake of the recent RTÉ Prime Time Investigates programme. It is understood Transport Minister Shane Ross raised the issue at last week’s Cabinet meeting, in which he said he was “unhappy” with the response by government to the matter.

It is believed the minister called for a more “robust” response to the issues raised in the programme. As a result, a memo is to be brought to Cabinet by Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture Andrew Doyle to update ministers about the progress of sector reforms.

The RTÉ programme claimed that the Irish greyhound industry is breeding 1,000% more puppies than it needs, leading to a cull of thousands of racing dogs every year. A review of the industry from 2017 found that 16,000 greyhounds are born every year, and 5,987 of those are killed because they fail to make qualification times or their performance declines.

Ross is dead right here. He cut the €2m annual funding of the FAI and now they are being put through reform. IGB receive €16m and not a peep out of Minister Creed or Junior Minister Doyle on suspending their funding. Double standards or what

Discodog

jackboy wrote: »

Strange that a greyhound owner would give no real care at all. Greyhounds are essentially athletes and they cannot race with success unless they have an extremely high level of health. I would say in general greyhounds have better health than the average pet dog. Remember, almost all overweight pet dogs that you see are abused.

Of course there are the issues with doping and culling that need to be sorted out, there is no denying that.

But, like most with working/sport dogs, you don't see that they need human companionship - they are called companion animals for a reason.

The law is very clear:

“unnecessary suffering” means, in relation to an animal, pain, distress or suffering (whether physical or mental) that in its kind or
degree, or in its object, or in the circumstances in which it occurs, is
unreasonable or unnecessary;

11.—(1) A person who has a protected animal in his or her possession or under his or her control shall, having regard to the animal’s nature, type, species, breed, development, adaptation,
domestication, physiological and behavioural needs and environment, and in accordance with established experience and scientific
knowledge, take all necessary steps to ensure that—
(a) the animal is kept and treated in a manner that—
(i) safeguards the health and welfare of the animal, and
(ii) does not threaten the health or welfare of the animal
or another animal,


Keeping a greyhound, or any other dog in a cage, feeding & exercising it isn't enough any more.

Coursing seriously breaches this law.

strandroad

Could anyone quote the "greyhounds are livestock" piece of legislation please? Thank you.

gozunda

Discodog wrote: »

You think I haven't? As usual you make sweeping assumptions. Even a relatively quick search of my posts here will show that I have been in contact with the relevant people. They are no different to the IGB & ICC. They still want to breed dogs that will end up surplus to requirements.

You don't solve the problem by continuing to breed.

No assumptions. No point throwing ****e around like everyone who doesnt share the same views is the enemy. If you mean ban everything then you are probably correct...

jackboy

Discodog wrote: »

Coursing seriously breaches this law.

It doesn’t. Unless a greyhound is healthy (physically and mentally) it will not be able to successfully race. In general, greyhounds are healthier (physically and mentally) than pet dogs.

Discodog

strandroad wrote: »

Could anyone quote the "greyhounds are livestock" piece of legislation please? Thank you.

No because it doesn't exist. Greyhounds are classed as domestic animals & the same as pet dogs. .

strandroad

Discodog wrote: »

No because it doesn't exist. Greyhounds are classed as domestic animals & the same as pet dogs. .

Thank you; so on what basis are their owners allowed to demand them to be put down when they surrender them to pounds (not in place for pet dogs I believe)?

Bannasidhe

jackboy wrote: »

It doesn’t. Unless a greyhound is healthy (physically and mentally) it will not be able to successfully race.

Except when it's injected with morphine so it can make up the numbers in a race - rather than deal with the complaints from owners and breeders the IGB sit on the report dealing with this issue as revealed in last Sunday's Business Post - which I have linked to twice in this thread already and posted a screenshot of the article - so no action is taken meaning no sanctions are taken meaning it will happen again and again.

Discodog

strandroad wrote: »

Thank you; so on what basis are their owners allowed to demand them to be put down when they surrender them to pounds (not in place for pet dogs I believe)?

That's a very good question. AFAIK when you surrender a dog to the Pound it becomes the property of the Pound/Pound Keeper & he may deal with it as he sees fit.

strandroad

Discodog wrote: »

That's a very good question. AFAIK when you surrender a dog to the Pound it becomes the property of the Pound/Pound Keeper & he may deal with it as he sees fit.

Yes exactly what I am wondering about; it was mentioned up thread, both "greyhounds are treated as livestock" and the killing requests. I am compiling a list of talking points for one of my TDs so if anyone has any research on where these originate from I would appreciate it.

jackboy

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Except when it's injected with morphine so it can make up the numbers in a race - rather than deal with the complaints from owners and breeders the IGB sit on the report dealing with this issue as revealed in last Sunday's Business Post - which I have linked to twice in this thread already and posted a screenshot of the article - so no action is taken meaning no sanctions are taken meaning it will happen again and again.

Of course, there is no excuse for doping. As I have said before, trainers that have failed tests have not been punished. Either the trainers should be punished or the drug testing should be stopped to save money.

Discodog

strandroad wrote: »

Yes exactly what I am wondering about; it was mentioned up thread, both "greyhounds are treated as livestock" and the killing requests. I am compiling a list of talking points for one of my TDs so if anyone has any research on where these originate from I would appreciate it.

The key point is the definition of unnecessary suffering:

“unnecessary suffering” means, in relation to an animal, pain, distress or suffering (whether physical or mental) that in its kind or
degree, or in its object, or in the circumstances in which it occurs, is
unreasonable or unnecessary;

Clearly Greyhound racing & Coursing aren't necessary. The question then is whether the suffering, ill treatment, exploitation etc is reasonable ?

The obvious other question is should anyone have the right to kill a healthy dog if there are other alternatives? And if the dog is suffering illness or injury as a result of poor care, should the owner be made to pay for the cost of treatment & not take the cheap option of killing the dog ?

2.—(1) A local authority may accept from its owner, or from a person authorised by the owner, an unwanted dog and, subject to subsection (2) of this section, may dispose of such dog or arrange for its destruction in a humane manner.

(2) A local authority shall not dispose of a dog pursuant to subsection (1) of this section for the purposes of animal experimentation.

(3) A local authority may, before disposing of a dog under this section, sterilise, or arrange to have sterilised, the dog.

(4) Where a local authority disposes of a dog under this section, the person to whom the dog is given shall become the owner of the dog and the title of its previous owner shall thereupon become extinguished.