RTE Investigates programme on greyhound racing industry

xckjoo

Discodog wrote: »

Less & less. As I said before there are increasing ethical concerns over killing a healthy dog. Vets don't like doing it & I know many examples of where they rehomed the dog or gave it to a rescue.

There is discussion as to whether killing a healthy dog is in breach of the Hippocratic oath.

They aren't part of a state sponsored industry either. Nor are they interdependent

Discodog

gozunda wrote: »

I did and I did.

The poster in question already replied - here is the quote in case you missed it



I sure someone with close links would be able to give you full breakdown. I'm just an ordinary observer so wouldn't be privy to such information.

A quick check shows approx 12 animal rights groups and they all have extreme views.

Heres a nice sentiment from one of them which I posted previously...

https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=745922418776807&id=212791988756522&set=pb.212791988756522.-2207520000.1459328507.&source=54&refid=13

Scary :eek: Looks like there's 12 of them :eek:

Discodog

xckjoo wrote: »

They aren't part of a state sponsored industry either. Nor are they interdependent

It's not just with Greyhounds - they rehomed a three legged Collie.

Every Vet in Ireland has to swear the following oath.

“I solemnly and sincerely declare that I will, to the best of my ability, uphold the honour, dignity and integrity of the veterinary profession, that I will promote the welfare of animals entrusted to my care and that I will abide by the rulings of the Veterinary Council”

Killing a healthy dog clearly isn't promoting the welfare of animals. Some Pounds refused to kill Greyhounds & the reluctance of vets is one of the reasons why owners are going to knackers.

gozunda

klaaaz wrote: »

How many? 2, 12, 22, 222, 2222, 22222, 222222?

I think that question would be best directed our 'resident expert' (sic) on these matters.

I quoted from a previous discusion on this issue. And yes they stated that it had been hijacked by extremists and they had no interest in animal welfare.

Only probblem - they seem to have done an about face on the matter and it's now all love and cuddles. Go figure eh?

Of interest the animal & pet forum here prohibit the discussion or promotion of specific "militant animal rights organisations or their activities". Interestingly various supporters of these groups have railed against Boards about this policy. Tbh imo its a very good idea. Though it looks like I've stirred up a Hornets nest of those who would have us believe otherwise. But there you go.

Edit: Not sure what happened - hit edit and it reposted! I have deleted the previous comment.

Discodog

gozunda wrote: »

I think you should direct that question would be best directed our resident expert on these matters.

I quoted from a previous discusion on this issue. And yes they stated that it had been hijacked by extremists and they had no interest in animal welfare.

Only probblem - they seem to have done an about face on the matter and it's now all love and cuddles. Go figure eh?

Of interest the animal & pet forum here prohibit the discussion or promotion "of specific "militant animal rights organisations or their activities". Interestingly various supporters of these groups and other groups have railed against Boards about this policy. Tbh imo its a very good idea. Though it looks like I've stirred up a Hornets nest of those who would have us believe otherwise. But there you go.

When was this ? Oh & can you tell me what's extreme about ARAN ?

By the way I apologise to all the sane posters for indulging this very obvious & typical diversion.

First true thing you've said all thread :pac:

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

It's not just with Greyhounds - they rehomed a three legged Collie.

Every Vet in Ireland has to swear the following oath.

“I solemnly and sincerely declare that I will, to the best of my ability, uphold the honour, dignity and integrity of the veterinary profession, that I will promote the welfare of animals entrusted to my care and that I will abide by the rulings of the Veterinary Council”

Killing a healthy dog clearly isn't promoting the welfare of animals. Some Pounds refused to kill Greyhounds & the reluctance of vets is one of the reasons why owners are going to knackers.

Do they also swear to tell the truth? The vet on the RTÉ program would have us believe that hundreds of greyhounds are pumped full of EPO and have their ears cut off to stop their owners being identified. EPO was last detected in a greyhound in 2005. Greyhounds can be identified by microchipping and DNA testing. I wonder how often he actually saw a greyhound in his practice as he’s not known as a greyhound vet.

Discodog

Deleted User wrote: »

Do they also swear to tell the truth? The vet on the RTprogram would have us believe that hundreds of greyhounds are pumped full of EPO and have their ears cut off to stop their owners being identified. EPO was last detected in a greyhound in 2005. Greyhounds can be identified by microchipping and DNA testing. I wonder how often he actually saw a greyhound in his practice as he’s not known as a greyhound vet.

Nope. But, guess what, I totally believe him. If you or the IGB disagree you could always try the legal route.

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

Nope. But, guess what, I totally believe him. If you or the IGB disagree you could always try the legal route.

You see, that’s what was so wrong with that program. Vested interests were allowed said what they liked with an ounce of evidence or truth and gullible people believe them.

xckjoo

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Do they also swear to tell the truth? The vet on the RTÉ program would have us believe that hundreds of greyhounds are pumped full of EPO and have their ears cut off to stop their owners being identified. EPO was last detected in a greyhound in 2005. Greyhounds can be identified by microchipping and DNA testing. I wonder how often he actually saw a greyhound in his practice as he’s not known as a greyhound vet.

There seems to be a discrepancy between your belief in the traceability of greyhounds with respect to doping and the inability to accurately trace those 6k unaccounted for dogs. Am I missing something?

xckjoo

xckjoo wrote: »

There seems to be a discrepancy between your belief in the traceability of greyhounds with respect to doping and the inability to accurately trace those 6k unaccounted for dogs. Am I missing something?

Yes. The requirement for informing the ICC when a greyhound retired and its whereabouts is only now in force. In the UK if a greyhound doesn’t race for a certain length of time, it’s last registered owner is contacted to confirm its whereabouts. Here, we’re only in the last few years expected to inform the ICC when a greyhound leaves our care, but it hadn’t been enforced. That will change with the new legislation being signed into law.

I’m not sure what your point is re doping.

xckjoo

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes. The requirement for informing the ICC when a greyhound retired and its whereabouts is only now in force. In the UK if a greyhound doesn’t race for a certain length of time, it’s last registered owner is contacted to confirm its whereabouts. Here, we’re only in the last few years expected to inform the ICC when a greyhound leaves our care, but it hadn’t been enforced. That will change with the new legislation being signed into law.

I’m not sure what your point is re doping.

Just pointing out the discrepancy in your statements that doping doesn't happen because of the tracking system but conversely it still can't doesn't something as basic as if the dogs are still alive or not. That's not a system I'd put much faith in.

xckjoo

xckjoo wrote: »

Just pointing out the discrepancy in your statements that doping doesn't happen because of the tracking system but conversely it still can't doesn't something as basic as if the dogs are still alive or not. That's not a system I'd put much faith in.

I’m afraid that I don’t follow you.

Discodog

Deleted User wrote: »

You see, that’s what was so wrong with that program. Vested interests were allowed said what they liked with an ounce of evidence or truth and gullible people believe them.

You think it was wrong as do all the other racing supporters. I & the vast majority think it was an excellent & very brave program. I assume that you have complained ?

Igotadose

Deleted User wrote: »

I’m afraid that I don’t follow you.

I think the point is that the tracking system used by the IGB to solved the doping problem is unreliable, so why should anyone trust their ability to track Greyhound births?

Personally, the IGB sure do seem like a shower of incompetents - $16m/year, over 1000 employees and don't know how many greyhounds are
1. Born each year
2. Involved in racing
3. Unaccounted for

Why should they be allowed to fix the problems they caused? Paying for studies, saying good things about them, then when they're confronted with the conclusions of the studies, backpedalling and 'we don't agree.'

Further, I still don't see any point to coursing, and I don't understand why the ICC (the coursing bunch) should be involved with a greyhound 'studbook' to track births. Coursing could just go, and we'd all be better for it including the hares. Putting the 'stud book' with the ICC is just makework for the ICC so there's some reason they stay around. Eliminating live export would put paid to a lot of the overbreeding, too.

Discodog

Igotadose wrote: »

I think the point is that the tracking system used by the IGB to solved the doping problem is unreliable, so why should anyone trust their ability to track Greyhound births?

Personally, the IGB sure do seem like a shower of incompetents - $16m/year, over 1000 employees and don't know how many greyhounds are
1. Born each year
2. Involved in racing
3. Unaccounted for

Why should they be allowed to fix the problems they caused? Paying for studies, saying good things about them, then when they're confronted with the conclusions of the studies, backpedalling and 'we don't agree.'

Further, I still don't see any point to coursing, and I don't understand why the ICC (the coursing bunch) should be involved with a greyhound 'studbook' to track births. Coursing could just go, and we'd all be better for it including the hares. Putting the 'stud book' with the ICC is just makework for the ICC so there's some reason they stay around. Eliminating live export would put paid to a lot of the overbreeding, too.

I think some of the apparent incompetence is deliberate. The IGB have hidden information for years. Was it the Information Commissioner or Data Commissioner that had to raid their premises & search for information ?

They really don't want the true birth figures to emerge. They know that you simply can't operate racing without a lot of unwanted dogs.

I don’t get your point about traceability and doping. When a dog is tested, either at the track or their own kennel, their Identity is not in doubt.

AryaStark

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes. The requirement for informing the ICC when a greyhound retired and its whereabouts is only now in force. In the UK if a greyhound doesn’t race for a certain length of time, it’s last registered owner is contacted to confirm its whereabouts. Here, we’re only in the last few years expected to inform the ICC when a greyhound leaves our care, but it hadn’t been enforced. That will change with the new legislation being signed into law.

I’m not sure what your point is re doping.

I find your wording interesting here when you say "when a greyhound leaves our care"

This is an animal you claim to love and care for and yet when it cant run anymore you get rid! Probably sold to a breeder if not put down... not much love there.

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

I think some of the apparent incompetence is deliberate. The IGB have hidden information for years. Was it the Information Commissioner or Data Commissioner that had to raid their premises & search for information ?

They really don't want the true birth figures to emerge. They know that you simply can't operate racing without a lot of unwanted dogs.

The figures are published in the Stud Book every year. They aren’t a secret. The problem was that the Stud Book didn’t have to be notified about a greyhounds whereabouts when it retired. This has now been rectified and every dog will be accounted for from now on.

jackboy

Discodog wrote: »

You think it was wrong as do all the other racing supporters. I & the vast majority think it was an excellent & very brave program. I assume that you have complained ?

I think it is a fair stretch to say that it was an excellent program. In my opinion it was emotionally manipulative junk journalism. They mentioned some real issues and then instead of going deeper they filled the program with stuff like boiling dogs alive, wild boar hunting and representation of historical issues as current. It was actually a lazily put together program.

RTÉ have done this before and in time were proven to have included basic errors in their programs. Next it’s on to attacking crèches. I am expecting similar emotionally manipulative content along with a shallow investigation.

gozunda

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don’t get your point about traceability and doping. When a dog is tested, either at the track or their own kennel, their Identity is not in doubt.

Mary Anne, tbh I wouldn't bother. Incredible the number of 'experts' who are great on telling all and sundry how it should be done, how vets should practice and the laws changed - all to suit their own deranged opinions about dogs.

Like the screamers on the video posted of Shelbourne park- there is a lot of hot air and little or no substance.

Most of the naysayers are not interested in improving animal welfare - they are abolitionists first and foremost. You could stand on your head and it would make not one bit of difference tbh.

AryaStark

AryaStark wrote: »

I find your wording interesting here when you say "when a greyhound leaves our care"

This is an animal you claim to love and care for and yet when it cant run anymore you get rid! Probably sold to a breeder if not put down... not much love there.

It’s just an expression. If a greyhound dies, is sold, retired etc. many reasons why a greyhound might leave our care. From now on the Stud Book will know the whereabouts of every dog born.

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

Mary Anne, tbh I wouldn't bother. Incredible the number of 'experts' who are great on telling all and sundry how it should be done, how vets should practice and the laws changed - all to suit their own deranged opinions about dogs.

Like the screamers on the video posted of Shelbourne park- there is a lot of hot air and little or no substance.

Most of the naysayers are not interested in improving animal welfare - they are abolitionists first and foremost. You could stand on your head and it would make not one bit of difference tbh.

I take your point, but their lack of knowledge and ignorance of the game that they want abolished is staggering.

gctest50

Discodog wrote: »

.........

They know that you simply can't operate racing without a lot of unwanted dogs.

Maybe they should be brought to a proper meat processing plant, killed humanely and packaged.

Same as pigs...& pigs are more intelligent

Igotadose

Deleted User wrote: »

I take your point, but their lack of knowledge and ignorance of the game that they want abolished is staggering.

If it's a game, what's the loss with abolishing it? Lots of forms of entertainment die out over time.

Especially coursing. We've been over this - the economic impact is overinflated by the IGB, they're doing a bad job tracking litters and can't answer simple questions on greyound populations in Ireland, the thing would disappear completely should gambling be disallowed.

Your words - it's a game. There's reasons it should be abolished that focus on animal cruelty and mismanagement by a well-compensated oversight board. How many chances should the get before the plug's pulled?

Discodog

Pete Wedderburn (Pete the Vet) will be discussing the ethics of killing healthy dogs on Newstalk.

xckjoo

Igotadose wrote: »

I think the point is that the tracking system used by the IGB to solved the doping problem is unreliable, so why should anyone trust their ability to track Greyhound births?

Personally, the IGB sure do seem like a shower of incompetents - $16m/year, over 1000 employees and don't know how many greyhounds are
1. Born each year
2. Involved in racing
3. Unaccounted for

Why should they be allowed to fix the problems they caused? Paying for studies, saying good things about them, then when they're confronted with the conclusions of the studies, backpedalling and 'we don't agree.'

Ya pretty much this. If they haven't detected any epo in more than 10 years it suggests to me that they don't have a very good testing program more than that it's not happening. It's rampant in all sports these days. And the industry's insistence that the figures for the report they commissioned are wrong because they can't prove what happened to them all dogs seems like smoke screening. Even without 100% tracking of the dogs you can make statistical inferences with sampling and the like. I'm not happy with the line that things haven't been enforced because they were waiting for a new regulation or whatever to come in either. Can the IGB/ICC not enforce their own requirements for entering competitions? I.e the dog can't race unless the owners has all paperwork up to date which includes info on things like retired dogs from same kennel. I might be missing something with that though. Not familiar with that side of the sport

gctest50

gctest50 wrote: »

Maybe they should be brought to a proper meat processing plant, killed humanely and packaged.

Same as pigs...& pigs are more intelligent

Spoke to someone on this topic today.
I raised the point about cows, pigs getting slaughtered every day.

But dogs are more than just animals is the answer I got...

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Spoke to someone on this topic today.
I raised the point about cows, pigs getting slaughtered every day.

But dogs are more than just animals is the answer I got...

On your previous post - ‘there’s Way worse animal cruelty out there’

I was wondering if you’d share some with us ?

Snugglebunnies

Can I ask anyone involved in greyhound racing how common is it for trainers to keep the dogs for their whole life span?

Is rehoming more common once the dog has finished its racing career and if so how do they rehome?

dudara

Discodog wrote: »

Looks like you haven't changed

You have been uncivil to numerous posters throughout the duration of that thread. You accused a poster of dog-fighting, asked people if they are members of the 'fluffy brigade', and yes you used a needlessly aggressive and confrontational tone throughout. The yellow card stands.

Attack the post, not the poster. It’s not cool to bring up older infractions to use against a person.

dudara