RTE Investigates programme on greyhound racing industry

gozunda

Choc Chip wrote: »

... you thanked my post #1817 where i included the link to the legislation i think people are referring to?

I thanked you for your reply. Unfortunately that says nothing about 'livestock' or greyhounds. Which is the claim variously made by a few. Someone even posted a newspaper article ranting on about this and couldn't give a reference. Again no definitive answer.

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

They rehome 500 per year - based on the past 10 years. A tiny drop in the ocean.

They pay a paltry €50 per dog & the vast percentage of the rehoming cost is paid by rescues that are always short of money & rely on donations.

When I rehomed through IGB, they paid towards neutering. When I rehomed through a rescue, I paid in full for neutering and a healthy donation was requested. I intended giving it anyway.

xckjoo

xckjoo wrote: »

Is this some kind of shorthand within the greyhound racing industry here? Because to everyone else, a lurcher is basically a mongrel sighthound (sighthound mixed with anything else). It's worrying if they only consider a dog a greyhound when they are "on the books".

Those commas would have been better placed around "money"

Basically, it's because ALL greyhound pups are declared at 2 weeks and tattooed and microchipped at 12 weeks. They cannot race, course or be used for breeding without this legal identification. Therefore, its pedigree is in doubt so is a lurcher.

gozunda

Just in case anyone is being persuaded that pet dog euthanasia is somehow all candles and roses. The truth is that many pet dogs are put down for many reasons including, injury, disability, age related, behavioural problems and yes even there not being suitable homes . The fact is Greyhounds may be properly euthanized for many of the same reasons. And this is legal for both. It may not be nice to put a dog down - but quality of life issues sometimes are more important than the maudlin sentiments of a few.

As to finding suitable homes and from what I learned of the Irish greyhound trust - it would appear that the numbers being rehomed were reported as growing year on year as more people wanted to adopt ex racing greyhounds. And if there are other organisations doing the same well that's good too. Leaving aside the usual hyperbole etc no one said otherwise afaik.

Whatever of the naysayers here - its a good thing. And sadly like much else it appears that nothing greyhound interests can do will ever match the expectations of the ban brigade eternal whinging. But then thats hardly surprising tbh.

xckjoo

Deleted User wrote: »

Basically, it's because ALL greyhound pups are declared at 2 weeks and tattooed and microchipped at 12 weeks. They cannot race, course or be used for breeding without this legal identification. Therefore, its pedigree is in doubt so is a lurcher.

But greyhounds don't exist for the industry alone. They're a breed. There's greyhounds born every day that'll never see a racetrack or a hare or be used for breeding. A lurcher is it's own separate thing. There's genetic tests to determine the breed.

It worries me because that kind of language usage is used to dehumanise (de-dogansie?) things and create a disassociation between how the things people care about are treated (their racing greyhounds) and those they don't care about (the non-racing greyhounds).

Choc Chip

gozunda wrote: »

I thanked you for your reply. Unfortunately that says nothing about 'livestick' or greyhounds. Someone even posted a newspaper article ranting on about this and couldn't give a reference. Again no definitive answer.

I provided the legislative definition of farm animals that includes those used in sport. I think we can agree that greyhounds are used in sport? Therefore, under this definition, they are legally a farm animal. I would assume the "livestock" reference is colloquial.

I've included it again below and cut out the extraneous info, and the link in case you're interested.

I think it's clear that's where this comment comes from, the only reason I'm not saying that I'm 100% sure is that it's not an area I work in.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2...d/en/html#sec2

"farm animal” means an animal—
...

(b) for use in, or for the purposes of ... sport"

Anyway, I'm dropping out of this thread again, i just wanted to clarify that the legislative reference was provided. As you were.

gozunda

Choc Chip wrote: »

I provided the legislative definition of farm animals that includes those used in sport. I think we can agree that greyhounds are used in sport? Therefore, under this definition, they are legally a farm animal. I would assume the "livestock" reference is colloquial.
I've included it again below and cut out the extraneous info, and the link in case you're interested. I think it's clear that's where this comment comes from, the only reason I'm not saying that I'm 100% sure is that it's not an area I work in.
.

Theres a lot of assumptions in that tbh. Indeed you could have 'farm animals' involved in sport but the same does not necessarily preclude animals other than 'farm animals' being involved in sport either.

Do people who race greyhounds but have no land etc - suddenly become farmers if the above was to be applied?

It would also mean an unraced greyhound, retired greyhound, show greyhounds or one used in a non competitive way would not be defined as a 'farm animal'.

It doesn't seem make sense tbh. Wording in such legislation is usually very specific imo.

I would also suggest in law - nothing is colloquial. So until someone comes up with a proper reference - then at best the issue remains unknown.

You say that "It's not an area of law I'm particularly familiar with though." So are you saying you work in some area of law? The fact is lay people looking up the statute books is not the same as being qualified to interpret specific legislation in regard to such questions. It's the one reason we are obliged to pay huge sums to legal professionals

xckjoo

xckjoo wrote: »

But greyhounds don't exist for the industry alone. They're a breed. There's greyhounds born every day that'll never see a racetrack or a hare or be used for breeding. A lurcher is it's own separate thing. There's genetic tests to determine the breed.

It worries me because that kind of language usage is used to dehumanise (de-dogansie?) things and create a disassociation between how the things people care about are treated (their racing greyhounds) and those they don't care about (the non-racing greyhounds).

The subject of the RTÉ program was racing greyhounds. Not show greyhounds, which, I believe have different bloodlines. There was a suggestion in this thread that greyhounds bred for racing are routinely not registered. If they’re not registered with either the greyhound stud book or their pedigree registered with the Irish kennel club, then their pedigree is undetermined, therefore they are lurchers.

xckjoo

Deleted User wrote: »

The subject of the RTÉ program was racing greyhounds. Not show greyhounds, which, I believe have different bloodlines. There was a suggestion in this thread that greyhounds bred for racing are routinely not registered. If they’re not registered with either the greyhound stud book or their pedigree registered with the Irish kennel club, then their pedigree is undetermined, therefore they are lurchers.

The industry doesn't get to decide the breed of a dog. It can decide that they can't determine the lineage of a particular dog and is therefore ineligible to race, but that doesn't change the genetic makeup. Lurchers and greyhounds are distinct animals. Racing greyhounds and non-racing greyhounds are the same thing, just one isn't part of some fancy club.

Edit: Anyway, look it's probably just shorthand in your circles so lets not fall out over it. I just find it 1) a bit arrogant (not that you're arrogant, just the industry usage of the word) and 2) dangerous (for the reasons of disassociation that I outlined before)

xckjoo

xckjoo wrote: »

The industry doesn't get to decide the breed of a dog. It can decide that they can't determine the lineage of a particular dog and is therefore ineligible to race, but that doesn't change the genetic makeup. Lurchers and greyhounds are distinct animals. Racing greyhounds and non-racing greyhounds are the same thing, just one isn't part of some fancy club.

Edit: Anyway, look it's probably just shorthand in your circles so lets not fall out over it. I just find it 1) a bit arrogant (not that you're arrogant, just the industry usage of the word) and 2) dangerous (for the reasons of disassociation that I outlined before)

I suppose that the main reason that the distinction is made is simply if it’s not tattooed and microchipped then the IGB/ICC aren’t responsible for them. A line has to be drawn and this is the simplest way.

Choc Chip

gozunda wrote: »

Theres a lot of assumptions in that tbh. Indeed you could have 'farm animals' involved in sport but the same does not preclude animals other than 'farm animals' being involved in sport either.

It would also mean an unraced greyhound, retired greyhound, show greyhounds or one used in a non competitive way would not be defined as a 'farm animal'.

It doesn't seem make sense tbh. Wording in such legislation is usually very specific imo.

I would also suggest in law - nothing is colloquial. So until someone comes up with a proper reference - then at best the issue remains unknown.

You say that "It's not an area of law I'm particularly familiar with though." So are you saying you work in some area of law? The fact is lay people looking up the statute books is not the same as being qualified to interpret specific legislation in regard to such questions. It's the one reason we are obliged to pay huge sums to legal professionals

I'd suggest exactly that - that racing greyhounds are legally "farm animals" and pet greyhounds are not.

Legislation in often written in such a way as to allow for interpretation so that it continues to apply to various contexts. If things are very strictly codified it is far easier for people to work out ways to avoid the specific wording, e.g. in the above scenario, greyhounds are covered as well as other sporting animals, rather than having to list every single type of animal to be covered and having to amend the legislation if another animal was to be included.

I meant that people are using the word livestock colloquially to mean farm animal. The legislation is not colloquial.

I do work in an area of law, yes. But you can have this for free.

Choc Chip

Choc Chip wrote: »

I'd suggest exactly that - that racing greyhounds are legally "farm animals" and pet greyhounds are not.

Legislation in often written in such a way as to allow for interpretation so that it continues to apply to various contexts. If things are very strictly codified it is far easier for people to work out ways to avoid the specific wording, e.g. in the above scenario, greyhounds are covered as well as other sporting animals, rather than having to list every single type of animal to be covered and having to amend the legislation if another animal was to be included.

I meant that people are using the word livestock colloquially to mean farm animal. The legislation is not colloquial.

I do work in an area of law, yes. But you can have this for free.

I seem to remember back in the early Celtic Tiger era, that grants were being given for greyhound breeding. Maybe that’s when they were classified as livestock.

Choc Chip

Deleted User wrote: »

I seem to remember back in the early Celtic Tiger era, that grants were being given for greyhound breeding. Maybe that’s when they were classified as livestock.

Oh! Good point. I'd forgotten about that.

gozunda

Choc Chip wrote: »

I'd suggest exactly that - that racing greyhounds are legally "farm animals" and pet greyhounds are not.
Legislation in often written in such a way as to allow for interpretation so that it continues to apply to various contexts. If things are very strictly codified it is far easier for people to work out ways to avoid the specific wording, e.g. in the above scenario, greyhounds are covered as well as other sporting animals, rather than having to list every single type of animal to be covered and having to amend the legislation if another animal was to be included.
I meant that people are using the word livestock colloquially to mean farm animal. The legislation is not colloquial.I do work in an area of law, yes. But you can have this for free.

Tbh the only people using the term 'livestock' for greyhounds here - appear to be those against greyhound based sports.

I don't see anyone here who is involved with greyhounds saying 'ah sure - they are only livestock'. Tbh the 'livestock' angle been bandied about as a big stick to beat people over the heads with. Even if this piece of legislation is relevant - it's a legal definition which would require the law to be changed - so that it was not so (and no I'm not saying I agree that this piece of legislation is relevant tbh)

It remains the above piece of legislation makes no references to greyhounds and does not preclude non-farm animals being involved in sports. So in that act is certainly neither clear cut nor prescriptive imo. It also brings up the dilemma of a registered greyhound who retires and becomes a pet. What happens then? The whole thing is all too wishy washy to be definitive tbh.

The one thing that does stand out in all this - is just because let's say a cow is defined as a farm animal - that does not mean that the same animal is somehow magically excluded from animal welfare legislation and especially the five freedoms as detailed in Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013. The act prescribes that people must provide the "five freedoms" to animals under their care: freedom from hunger and thirst, freedom from discomfort (by providing adequate living conditions), freedom from pain, injury and disease, freedom to express normal behaviour, and freedom from fear and distress.  Of course that doesn't mean there are not rogue owners of all types of animals who ignore this and other relevant laws.


Btw thanks for the reply. Anyway good to at least mull the issue over.

Muahahaha

Deleted User wrote: »

I’m from Clonmel. Not Tipperary/Limerick. The person hasn’t been named, no I would imagine that speculation might be seen as against Boards rules.

In all walks of life, there are rogues. That doesn’t make us all so. Don’t paint us all with the same brush. Learn about us. Don’t rely on the prejudices of others.
Do you really want to see greyhounds wiped off the face of the earth? Learn for yourself. Don’t really on the views of others.
It’s been a long hard day. I’m off to the land of nod. Please, please, don’t let others make your mind up for you. Think for yourself. Greyhounds are bred to race. Not to be lapdogs. Night, night.
I haven’t heard any names mentioned.

Not sure why you're now trying to put words in my mouth- I never said anything about the whole industry being rogues- all I said was a nationally renowned greyhound trainer has been arrested in connection with corruption of senior Gardai, drug trafficking and a traveller crime gang.

What I do say is that a substantial proportion of the industry are rogues. This is born out by the fact that out of 30 licensed kncackeries in Ireland 15, i.e. 50% were offering to bolt gun greyhounds to death. Now half of all knackeries weren't offering that service for the craic, they were offering it because there's money in it and a large proportion of the greyhound racing industry was using them and giving them business.

This argument that 'its just a minority' simply doesnt wash when half of all knackeries are illegally killing greyhounds.

ILoveYourVibes

Muahahaha wrote: »

Not sure why you're now trying to put words in my mouth- I never said anything about the whole industry being rogues- all I said was a nationally renowned greyhound trainer has been arrested in connection with corruption of senior Gardai, drug trafficking and a traveller crime gang.

Never heard this who?

Muahahaha

gozunda wrote: »

So provide a proper link if your story of alleged corrutpt garda etc has any relevance to this thread whatsoever

The thread is Greyhounds and greyhounds are dogs as much as certain factions would like to ignore that fact.

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/man-arrested-garda-corruption-limerick-17479319

Gardai investigating alleged garda corruption have arrested a man as they continue their probe. The civilian, from South Limerick, was arrested by gardai from the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation. He is not a serving garda or a member of the garda staff - it is understood that he is involved in sport training.

He was taken by detectives to Thurles Garda Station where he was questioned and later released as a file is being prepared by the gardai. A source said: "The man is an associate of a garda who was previously interviewed.

"The arrested man who has not been arrested before is involved in greyhound racing circles. "This investigation centres around contacts between gardai and a crime gang in South Limerick - there is a part of the investigation that involves interactions." A garda spokesman confirmed that the man was arrested and that it was part of a probe into corruption

There you go, arrested and questioned in Thurles Garda station. This has been big news in the Limerick Tipperary area for weeks now and given the greyhound trainers high profile it surprises me that rural dwellers on here havent heard of it whereas I heard of it in Dublin. I find it remarkable that posters are claiming to know everything about the greyhound industry yet for some reason they didnt know about the arrest of one of the most high profile greyhound trainers in the country. It certainly brings their knowledge of the industry into question.

ILoveYourVibes

Muahahaha wrote: »

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/man-arrested-garda-corruption-limerick-17479319


There you go, arrested and questioned in Thurles Garda station. This has been big news in the Limerick Tipperary area for weeks now and given the greyhound trainers high profile it surprises me that rural dwellers on here havent heard of it whereas I heard of it in Dublin. I find it remarkable that posters are claiming to know everything about the greyhound industry yet for some reason they didnt know about the arrest of one of the most high profile greyhound trainers in the country. It certainly brings their knowledge of the industry into question.

I pasted that quote into google and didn't get the link?

Where is from? And did everything in that quote come from the same source?

THe link says nothing about greyhounds.

Graces7

Deleted User wrote: »

That’s a really good point.

Why is there talk of pet animal ownership in this thread about the greyhound industry ?

deflection and distraction tactics.. :rolleyes:

Muahahaha

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I pasted that quote into google and didn't get the link?

Where is from? And did everything in that quote come from the same source?

THe link says nothing about greyhounds.

Click the link, its all there on the Irish Mirror website

ILoveYourVibes

I am not on either side. But why are these protestors shouting at kids?? That's disgusting behavior.

They also seem to be attacking security.

Shelbourne protestors. And I don't see anyone attacking them like they claim.

I noticed when they see a loose dog none of these 'PROTESTORS' try to help it.

And your one shouting 'you woman beater???' Yeah right.

gozunda

Muahahaha wrote: »

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/man-arrested-garda-corruption-limerick-17479319There you go, arrested and questioned in Thurles Garda station. This has been big news in the Limerick Tipperary area for weeks now and given the greyhound trainers high profile it surprises me that rural dwellers on here havent heard of it whereas I heard of it in Dublin. I find it remarkable that posters are claiming to know everything about the greyhound industry yet for some reason they didnt know about the arrest of one of the most high profile greyhound trainers in the country. It certainly brings their knowledge of the industry into question.

Firstly that story has sfa to do with the topic of this thread imo. I presume whether one heard it on the rumour mill depends where your 'information ' is coming from and etc. And accesing the tabloids isn't exactly rocket science tbh.

As to the relevance of your perceived urban / rural divide. Htf would people living long distances from "South Limerick" be magically privy to such rumours etc?

Secondly like a small number of posters on here - there appears to be woeful and insidious habit of literally putting words in on other people's mouths in some deranged attatemp of discrediting others rather than having a normal discussion. No where and I repeat No where - have I ever claimed "to know everything about the greyhound industry" (sic)
So a little less of the bs personalisations. Thanks.

xckjoo

gozunda wrote: »

Firstly that story has sfa to do with the topic of this thread imo. I presume whether one heard it on the rumour mill depends where your 'information ' is coming from and etc. And accesing the tabloids isn't exactly rocket science tbhb

Secondly like a small number of posters on here - there appears to be woeful and insidious habit of literally putting words in on other people's mouths in some deranged attatemp of discrediting others rather than having a normal discussion. No where and I repeat No where - have I ever claimed "to know everything about the greyhound indistry" (sic)
So a little less of the bs personalisations. Thanks.

They were clearly talking about the other couple of posters that professed to be involved in the industry, are near the area this trainer operated out of, but hadn't heard about it.

Something, something persecution complex....

gozunda

xckjoo wrote: »

They were clearly talking about the other couple of posters that professed to be involved in the industry, are near the area this trainer operated out of, but hadn't heard about it. Something, something persecution complex....

Sorry no dont understand a word of that who is 'they'? Who is being 'persecuted'? The allegedly corrupt Gardai involved or yer man?

Tbh the fact it's been brought up in this thread - stinks of desperation to fling ****e no matter what the relevance may be ...

jackboy

I don't get the issue with people not knowing who this arrested greyhound trainer is. I don't know but will be talking to a few people over the weekend so I am pretty sure I will know in a couple of days. It just takes a bit of time for the information to get around when the individual is not named in the media.

xckjoo

jackboy wrote: »

I don't get the issue with people not knowing who this arrested greyhound trainer is. I don't know but will be talking to a few people over the weekend so I am pretty sure I will know in a couple of days. It just takes a bit of time for the information to get around when the individual is not named in the media.

I don't really understand the relevance of it being discussed here at all. If it was a cohort of trainers across the IGB/ICC then it might show some kind of pattern of bad behaviour, but so far it's just the one lad.

klaaaz

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I am not on either side. But why are these protestors shouting at kids?? That's disgusting behavior.

They also seem to be attacking security.

Shelbourne protestors. And I don't see anyone attacking them like they claim.

I noticed when they see a loose dog none of these 'PROTESTORS' try to help it.

And your one shouting 'you woman beater???' Yeah right.

You have it all wrong, they were not shouting at kids. The greyhound racer supporters attacked at least 2 people at that demo all caught on video. One pro-racer was shouting racist obscenities at a female protester saying "go back where you came from"
Another male pro-racer even dropped the lead of the racing greyhound he had and ran towards a female protester assaulting her leaving marks on her body, a court case will be happening soon as the Garda are heavily involved on that matter. His dog was left wandering on the road for a short while after he attacked her, he didn't give a sh1te about the dog when beating a woman.

klaaaz

klaaaz wrote: »

You have it all wrong, they were not shouting at kids. The greyhound racer supporters attacked at least 2 people at that demo all caught on video. One pro-racer was shouting racist obscenities at a female protester saying "go back where you came from"
Another male pro-racer even dropped the lead of the racing greyhound he had and ran towards a female protester assaulting her leaving marks on her body, a court case will be happening soon as the Garda are heavily involved on that matter. His dog was left wandering on the road for a short while after he attacked her, he didn't give a sh1te about the dog when beating a woman.

He reacted to the physical and verbal abuse directed towards his daughter, as any parent would. He didn’t beat any woman. Just relieved her of her megaphone.

klaaaz

Deleted User wrote: »

He reacted to the physical and verbal abuse directed towards his daughter, as any parent would. He didn’t beat any woman. Just relieved her of her megaphone.

No such abuse towards his kid ever happened, such a lie. He actually abandoned both his kid and his dog to attack the woman who screamed in natural terror at his physical abuse, he wanted to grab the megaphone to shut her up, to silence any protest against greyhound abuse.

klaaaz

klaaaz wrote: »

No such abuse towards his kid ever happened, such a lie. He actually abandoned both his kid and his dog to attack the woman who screamed in natural terror at his physical abuse, he wanted to grab the megaphone to shut her up, to silence any protest against greyhound abuse.

Ya. Right.