You Both Failed Us So Now I'm Going To Have You Shot.

The BBQ Pit
1

Link.

*The National Greyhound Racing Club.
.
.
.

The fact that these dogs had won recent races is perhaps irrelevant. No dog should meet its end in this way. Yet their winning form, followed by a couple of below par performances, somehow seems to make the situation that much worse. The owners are really expressing the view stated in this thread title. To them, a greyhound is just a commodity, to be disposed of as a matter of expediency rather than in a responsible manner.

Clearly, the NGRC rules have been contravened, in spades. All other options were not properly tried, and the greyhounds (plus about 10,000 others) were not put down by a vet using the prescribed method.

(I am trying not to be too sentimental here but I have a vested interest in this issue. I used to own a greyhound myself. I bought the animal years ago at Walthamstow Stadium in London following an impressive trial. I raced him at Blackpool where he failed to trouble the judge over what turned out to be a distance too short for him.

The trainer did some further trials with the dog and discovered he needed a longer trip. We took him to Keighley in Yorkshire where there was a race held over twice the distance he was used to at Blackpool. We had a serious punt on him and he won doing the proverbial handsprings.

The dog broke a fetlock in its very next race and there was no choice but to have him put down. By the track vet. Using a syringe. In the correct and proper manner.)

I know there are people who personally shoot their dogs when they become infirm and they are in pain. I see nothing wrong with this. It is a way of dealing with a difficult situation and it is quick and clean.

The shooting of Clash Nitro and Rent a Flyer bears no comparison to that circumstance. There was nothing wrong with them physically bar a slight lameness and, crucially, their inability to run as fast as their owners thought they should. They were both under 3 years old and lameness is an eminently curable condition.

I loathe and detest the practice of treating honest working animals in this way. It is just plain wrong. Forget, for a moment, the prize money, which is usually distinctly ungenerous anyway, and forget the return on a successful wager. Forget also the satisfaction of watching your dog race. These are not without
importance because together they provide you with excitement and thrills, and those emotions represent the true essence of what the sport, any sport, should be about.

But a greyhound is essentially a patient and graceful animal and it will give you as much affection as it, in turn, craves from you. You owe the dog something in return.
Even if it is only a humane and dignified exit from a world of shit.

2

God knows I wouldn’t want to be a maid or some such in their house.

3

This is why there are animal rescue groups: to prevent this from happening. For a couple of years my parents (and the rest of my family, for that matter) fostered Great Danes and Doberman Pinschers.

4

Everypne knows athletes on the way down are the most pitiful creatures on earth.

Non-medaling Olympic athletes should be treated the same; either adopted out to a good family who can feed and play with them, or given a painless lethal injection by a qualified vet.

5

A story that is, on its surface, rather shocking.

But i can’t get too worked up. Thousands of animals are killed every day to satisfy various human needs (food, clothing, makeup, medicine, etc., etc.). Many of those animals would also, under ideal conditions, live for much longer. Just because these ones happen to be cute doggies instead of cows or pigs or rats or rabbits doesn’t change very much, IMO.

And anyone who goes to watch greyhounds race, or who bets on them, is in some way responsbile for what happened here.

6

Lady Chance and I have rescued Greyhounds for more than 10 years now. We’ll go on doing it as long as we can. There’s one asleep not 10 feet from me right this moment.

I refer you to Greyhound Pets of America or The Greyhound Project.

Truly great dogs. Easy to train, easy to care for, and even after the abuse most of them have suffered they remain gentle and loving dogs.

Plus, as a SDMB bonus, they’ll take care of any evil Nazi Groundhog problems you might have.

7

[QUOTE=Jonathan Chance]
Lady Chance and I have rescued Greyhounds for more than 10 years now. We’ll go on doing it as long as we can. There’s one asleep not 10 feet from me right this moment.
[/QUOTE]
In your experience, is the problem of killing off ex-racing dogs as big in the US as it apparently is in the UK?

8

Well, that’s what the dogs get for failing to kill Bond.

9

[QUOTE=mhendoBut i can’t get too worked up. Thousands of animals are killed every day to satisfy various human needs (food, clothing, makeup, medicine, etc., etc.). Many of those animals would also, under ideal conditions, live for much longer. Just because these ones happen to be cute doggies instead of cows or pigs or rats or rabbits doesn’t change very much, IMO.

And anyone who goes to watch greyhounds race, or who bets on them, is in some way responsbile for what happened here.[/QUOTE]

I guess I’ve got to go with mhendo on this one.

I cannot tell an absolutely enormous difference in pain between being shot and an injection from a vet. The dogs were not abused in a sadistic manner or deprived of needed care for years.

In many ways, greyhounds, just like beef or chicken or fish, are a commodity.

10

[QUOTE=mhendo]
A story that is, on its surface, rather shocking.

But i can’t get too worked up. Thousands of animals are killed every day to satisfy various human needs (food, clothing, makeup, medicine, etc., etc.). Many of those animals would also, under ideal conditions, live for much longer. Just because these ones happen to be cute doggies instead of cows or pigs or rats or rabbits doesn’t change very much, IMO.

And anyone who goes to watch greyhounds race, or who bets on them, is in some way responsbile for what happened here.
[/QUOTE]

Cute has nothing to do with this incident.

The successful British racehorse trainer Mick Channon was once asked how he felt when a top class filly was removed from his stable to be trained elsewhere. He made the point that he was paid to train horses, not to become attached to them.

I can therefore understand that some trainers of greyhounds view their occupation as a business and not as a lovefest.

Nevertheless I think that greyhound trainers have a responsibility to look after the dogs in their charge. This responsibility applies whether the dog is in training or whether the animal is no longer a viable proposition on the track (in their opinion) and they wish to dispose of it.

The Youngs sought an opportunity to have these greyhounds rehomed but were not prepared to wait a few days for vacancies at the rehoming centre to arise. Instead, they had them shot. Note the quote in the OP regarding the NGRC rule on the disposal of greyhounds:

The Youngs broke these rules three times over. It was not medically necessary to have the dogs put down. All other options were not tried. They were not killed by a vet using an injection.

There is also a difference between the killing of animals for ‘various human needs’ and the killing of an animal which does not satisfy any of these needs.

One might further argue that many greyhounds would not exist if it was not for racing. Also, in my experience, the majority of owners and trainers look after their charges and stick to the fair and understandable NGRC laws concerning disposal.

11

[QUOTE=Jonathan Chance]
Lady Chance and I have rescued Greyhounds for more than 10 years now. We’ll go on doing it as long as we can. There’s one asleep not 10 feet from me right this moment.

I refer you to Greyhound Pets of America or The Greyhound Project.

Truly great dogs. Easy to train, easy to care for, and even after the abuse most of them have suffered they remain gentle and loving dogs.

Plus, as a SDMB bonus, they’ll take care of any evil Nazi Groundhog problems you might have.
[/QUOTE]
My brother has adopted a few retired Greyhounds, too. I was amazed at the breed’s capacity for absorbing and giving affection. They are truly beautiful animals in person, though I personally don’t think they’re very photogenic. They have to learn to be just pets, but the ones that my brother adopted were all very happy to retire, though one of them needed some fairly vigorous play each day. He loved to play fetch with someone. At other times, he was happy to snuggle in his blankie and snooze.

I would urge anyone who is interested in adopting a larger dog to consider a Greyhound.

12

[QUOTE=Boyo Jim]
Everypne knows athletes on the way down are the most pitiful creatures on earth.

Non-medaling Olympic athletes should be treated the same; either adopted out to a good family who can feed and play with them, or given a painless lethal injection by a qualified vet.
[/QUOTE]

I offered to take in the US Women’s Curling team and play with them every day, but they said thay’d rather get a “lethal” injection.

Hrmph.

13

[QUOTE=Chez Guevara]
Nevertheless I think that greyhound trainers have a responsibility to look after the dogs in their charge. This responsibility applies whether the dog is in training or whether the animal is no longer a viable proposition on the track (in their opinion) and they wish to dispose of it.
[/quote]
But as long as greyhound racing continues, you must realize that this is not a practical proposition. From the article in your own OP we learn that this one guy has killed about 10,000 greyhounds over the last 15 years. That’s about 2 dogs a day. And i’m sure this isn’t the only guy who does it.

Do you really think that there are enough loving homes in the UK for all those greyhounds, especially given the dozens of other dog breeds that people might find more desirable as pets? While greyhound racing requires fit, fast animals that can win races, this will continue to happen, and there just aren’t enough potantial owners willing to pick up the scraps of the racing industry. That’s why i said that anyone involved in greyhound racing in any way—as owner, trainer, spectator, punter—bears some responsibility here.
[QUOTE=Chez Guevara]
The Youngs sought an opportunity to have these greyhounds rehomed but were not prepared to wait a few days for vacancies at the rehoming centre to arise. Instead, they had them shot. Note the quote in the OP regarding the NGRC rule on the disposal of greyhounds:

The Youngs broke these rules three times over. It was not medically necessary to have the dogs put down. All other options were not tried. They were not killed by a vet using an injection.
[/quote]
So they broke the NGRC rules. Big fucking deal. The question here is not whether the rules were broken, but whether the killing of these dogs constitutes an immoral act.

In my opinion, the NGRC has to have known what’s been going on in the industry over all these years. That many dogs don’t just dissappear without the governing body of the “sport” having some idea of what’s happening. Your Times article talks about the NGRC taking action against the individuals involved in this case, but that strikes me as very much a rearguard action in response to the newspaper’s expose, rather than standard procedure.
[QUOTE=Chez Guevara]
There is also a difference between the killing of animals for ‘various human needs’ and the killing of an animal which does not satisfy any of these needs.
[/quote]
Why? What’s your alternative? Force people to shelter dogs they don’t want?

Organizations like the RSPCA (UK) and SPCA (US), as well as city pounds and animal shelters, kills thousands (probably tens of thousands) of animals a year precisely because no humans have a use for them, and they cannot simply be released into the wild.

Also, one could quite easily argue that humans have no pressing “need” for makeup, and that any animal killed or hramed in testing cosmetics is simply being tortured to death for our vanity. If anything, this is far worse than what those greyhounds went through; at least the dogs don’t have their heads immobilized and irritating solutions smeared on their eyes for the purpose of making mascara.

[QUOTE=Chez Guevara]
One might further argue that many greyhounds would not exist if it was not for racing.
[/quote]
Sure. And we could say the same about dairy cows or beef cattle or pigs or sheep or chickens. None of these would exist in such numbers without human intervention. But does the fact that we raise such animals specifically for our own purposes leave us with a moral obligation to treat them well? Given the way that many such animals are treated in the course of their normal lives, the conclusion must be that many people feel that the answer to that question is “no.” Or, at least (as the greyhound case shows), “no, as long as we don’t have to know what’s going on.”
[QUOTE=Chez Guevara]
Also, in my experience, the majority of owners and trainers look after their charges and stick to the fair and understandable NGRC laws concerning disposal.
[/QUOTE]
Well, i don’t doubt your honesty, but given the figure of 10,000 dogs killed by one man over 15 years, i’m going to remain skeptical of your implication that this is some isolated incident involving a few bad eggs.

According to Greyhound Action International:

Here’s the link to their website. I’ve deliberately made it a non-clickable link, because the images on that site might be upsetting to some people.

http://www.greyhoundaction.org.uk/imain.html

Of course, industry defenders might dismiss GAI as some fringe animal rights group that just wants to stop racing altogether, but i think the Times expose suggests that there’s probably quite a bit of truth to their allegations. YMMV

14

[QUOTE=Boyo Jim]
Everypne knows athletes on the way down are the most pitiful creatures on earth.

Non-medaling Olympic athletes should be treated the same; either adopted out to a good family who can feed and play with them, or given a painless lethal injection by a qualified vet.
[/QUOTE]

Lethal injection is still better than being forced to retire and sleep with Sheryl Crow.

(Of course, for dogs, that’s still cruel way to go.)

15

[QUOTE=mhendo]
But as long as greyhound racing continues, you must realize that this is not a practical proposition. From the article in your own OP we learn that this one guy has killed about 10,000 greyhounds over the last 15 years. That’s about 2 dogs a day. And i’m sure this isn’t the only guy who does it.
[/QUOTE]

As far as the UK authorities are concerned it is doubtful they will ever legislate for the discontinuation of greyhound racing, at least in the foreseeable future. It is not a practical proposition to consider it. They would be more concerned with the economics of the sport (consequent unemployment of people engaged in the activity, loss of tax revenue etc.). If you consider this attitude to be cynical then I agree.

I cannot comment on the number of people involved in killing greyhounds using the same methods. Hopefully the publicity generated by this story will help to identify any others so involved. If such details are forthcoming I will return to this thread and post the details.

[QUOTE=mhendo]
Do you really think that there are enough loving homes in the UK for all those greyhounds, especially given the dozens of other dog breeds that people might find more desirable as pets? While greyhound racing requires fit, fast animals that can win races, this will continue to happen, and there just aren’t enough potantial owners willing to pick up the scraps of the racing industry. That’s why i said that anyone involved in greyhound racing in any way—as owner, trainer, spectator, punter—bears some responsibility here.
[/QUOTE]

No, there are not enough loving homes for greyhounds which no longer race. Those for which homes cannot be found should be disposed of in the manner laid down by the NGRC. That said, I agree the NGRC is a toothless organisation which seems to have consistently failed to enforce its own rules. The NGRC needs to be compelled to do this by whatever means are possible. If you want to know what those means might be, I have no other reply except for vigilance by the RSPCA and those keen to assist them and honest owners and trainers involved in the sport. Government legislation on this point would be a help but parliamentary time for issues like this is notoriously scarce.

I am unable to supply a more concrete solution but, since it must be understood (as stated in the first paragraph here) that the sport is not going to go away, the associated problems ensuing from that fact should be dealt with by whatever means are available to those who care.

I did not disagree with you comment about all those involved in the sport bearing some responsibility (in fact you omitted to mention bookmakers, who benefit enormously from the existence of greyhound racing) but neither did I address it. That is because I agree with your comment.

[QUOTE=mhendo]
So they broke the NGRC rules. Big fucking deal. The question here is not whether the rules were broken, but whether the killing of these dogs constitutes an immoral act.

In my opinion, the NGRC has to have known what’s been going on in the industry over all these years. That many dogs don’t just dissappear without the governing body of the “sport” having some idea of what’s happening. Your Times article talks about the NGRC taking action against the individuals involved in this case, but that strikes me as very much a rearguard action in response to the newspaper’s expose, rather than standard procedure.
[/QUOTE]

See my previous comment regarding the lack of teeth shown by the NGRC. The killing of these dogs was an immoral act. It is to be hoped that the Times article will propel them into action. In fact, I expect this to happen.

[QUOTE=mhendo]
Why? What’s your alternative? Force people to shelter dogs they don’t want?

Organizations like the RSPCA (UK) and SPCA (US), as well as city pounds and animal shelters, kills thousands (probably tens of thousands) of animals a year precisely because no humans have a use for them, and they cannot simply be released into the wild.
[/QUOTE]

Clearly you cannot force people to shelter dogs they do not want. I have not suggested that killing ex-racing greyhounds is in any way wrong. I have already pointed out that the rules of the NGRC should be better enforced. If dogs cannot be found homes then I have no problem with disposing of greyhounds using a syringe in the hands of a vet. Similarly, the RSPCA employs humane methods when putting animals down but this organisation also makes every effort to avoid doing this by seeking alternatives first.

[QUOTE=mhendo]
Also, one could quite easily argue that humans have no pressing “need” for makeup, and that any animal killed or hramed in testing cosmetics is simply being tortured to death for our vanity. If anything, this is far worse than what those greyhounds went through; at least the dogs don’t have their heads immobilized and irritating solutions smeared on their eyes for the purpose of making mascara.
[/QUOTE]

I think I have already expressed similar views on this board. It was a number of years ago (I am not sure the posts are still available) but my views have not changed. By various human needs I include killing for food and clothing but specifically exclude anything which involves animal torture. I should perhaps have been clearer on this point.

[QUOTE=mhendo]
Sure. And we could say the same about dairy cows or beef cattle or pigs or sheep or chickens. None of these would exist in such numbers without human intervention. But does the fact that we raise such animals specifically for our own purposes leave us with a moral obligation to treat them well? Given the way that many such animals are treated in the course of their normal lives, the conclusion must be that many people feel that the answer to that question is “no.” Or, at least (as the greyhound case shows), “no, as long as we don’t have to know what’s going on.”
[/QUOTE]

Well, the other animals you mention are arguably necessary in large numbers to feed the human race. Vegetarians will disagree. If you read The Animal Contract: Sharing The Planet by Desmond Morris he argues that we do have such moral obligations when raising livestock. I subscribe to his views. Of course some of these animals are treated badly. (My personal ire is primarily directed at those who produce eggs using battery methods but that is by no means the end of it as far as I am concerned). Others animals are treated well, but those that are looked after do not make the news.

Personally I do what I can by buying what I consider to be organically produced products. Even this policy has its problems because the laws governing organic food are remarkably loose. I always read labels very carefully but even that is not always enough to ensure I am eating ethically produced products. I agree that people exist who simply do not care about the way animals are abused, however I think perceptions are changing, albeit slowly. Personally I detest any kind of animal abuse. I repeat, I am with Desmond Morris on these issues.

[QUOTE=mhendo]
Well, i don’t doubt your honesty, but given the figure of 10,000 dogs killed by one man over 15 years, i’m going to remain skeptical of your implication that this is some isolated incident involving a few bad eggs.

According to Greyhound Action International:Here’s the link to their website. I’ve deliberately made it a non-clickable link, because the images on that site might be upsetting to some people.

http://www.greyhoundaction.org.uk/imain.html

Of course, industry defenders might dismiss GAI as some fringe animal rights group that just wants to stop racing altogether, but i think the Times expose suggests that there’s probably quite a bit of truth to their allegations. YMMV
[/QUOTE]

As I said earlier, I cannot comment with any degree of accuracy on the incidence of those who kill greyhounds in the same way as the culprit in the featured link in the OP. Other than that I concede that my day to day involvement in the sport is too far in the past for me to press the issue. (I did say that my ownership days were years ago.) I am not quite totally divorced from greyhound racing but clearly I am unaware of everything that happens in an environment much changed from when I was more involved. I do not mix with the right people (or the wrong people to be more accurate) in order to support my position.

The photos on your given link are disgusting.

16

When quoting mhendo in my previous post I omitted to render his link non-clickable.

Would a moderator please fix that for me.

Many thanks.

17

Kidding aside, saving greyhounds is a noble cause. A friend has one that was recued from the tracks, and that dog has a wonderful personality. It is gentle and kind, great with his kids, and almost too quiet. I have nothing but repect for these dogs and the people who save them.