Well then...you definitely need to get yourself a greyhound! YOu'll have a lifetime supply!;)Quote:
I like debates, and, this is a fantastic one.
Printable View
Well then...you definitely need to get yourself a greyhound! YOu'll have a lifetime supply!;)Quote:
I like debates, and, this is a fantastic one.
Martin, I was actually nervous when on GT you seemed so irritated, I was afraid you would come here and say things in a not-so-tactful way, but I think your post was overall pretty tactful. I do know the dictionary definition of the word ignorant isn't bad, but it does often tend to have a more negative connotation when used in conversation, people tend to feel it is calling them stupid rather than uneducated or misinformed. I agree when speaking about professions, organizations, and agencies (and even message boards ;)), people often tend to get lumped together. I think we're all guilty of it here and there, I admit it, I've made comments like "I'm sick of doctors" after having bad experience with a few doctors, or "you can't trust any politician." How many times has much of society bashed lawyers as greedy scum? Yet we have a close personal family friend who is a lawyer and is passionate about his work.
It all makes a point that lumping all people together is never good, at the same time I think it's a somewhat natural tendency. Heck even men and women tend to do it with the sexes, or older and younger with ages.
I'm as guilty as as anyone of having a pre-made image in my mind of people in the "racing industry." While there are still things that bother me, I have learned a lot too, and I'm reminded again two very important things: 1) Things aren't always exactly as they appear, and more importantly 2) It is never accurate or fair to lump people together into one category.
Ha ha, I am sure I will adopt one eventually. I saw my first greyhound puppy at the dog park a few months ago. I didn't even know what he was, because I'd never seen a young greyhound before! His tail was out of control, like he had a snake stuck to his butt! His name's Derrick, and, he's gorgeous! I never had my camera with me, though, when he was around, but, man, did he ever make me want a puppy like him!Quote:
Originally posted by sherpayluvsgreys
Well then...you definitely need to get yourself a greyhound! YOu'll have a lifetime supply!;)
I wish I could tell you how infuriating it is to hear people toss out words like "disgusting," "inhumane," and "sick" when they talk about racing. The way ARAs casually demonize and slander racing and racing people goes beyond the pale. If you sensed irritation on my part I can assure you it was quite real. I can't tell you how hard it is to face relentless and malicious ignorance on a daily basis.Quote:
Originally posted by K9soul
Martin, I was actually nervous when on GT you seemed so irritated, I was afraid you would come here and say things in a not-so-tactful way, but I think your post was overall pretty tactful.
It all makes a point that lumping all people together is never good, at the same time I think it's a somewhat natural tendency. Heck even men and women tend to do it with the sexes, or older and younger with ages.
I'm as guilty as as anyone of having a pre-made image in my mind of people in the "racing industry." While there are still things that bother me, I have learned a lot too, and I'm reminded again two very important things: 1) Things aren't always exactly as they appear, and more importantly 2) It is never accurate or fair to lump people together into one category.
We are fortunate to have forums like GT and PT so that debate can be engaged and their voices and ours can be heard side-by-side and compared on merit. As hard as it is to resist lashing out at them, I've found that the best thing to do is let them talk. Luckily, most ARAs come off as shrill, mean-spirited and unknowledgeable.
I've enjoyed your posts over on GT. My guess is you're learning a lot.
Martin
K-9Soul, yes, Martin is....uh...."well expressed" to say the least. He, many others, and a few who have posted here, have been fighting this battle for years. Despite years of improvements and tireless efforts made by many, John Q public still likes to take the sympathy line hook line and sinker. As I mentioned earlier, the positive things that are, and have been happening in the industry are overlooked in the media because it doesn't sell.
It's just like the plight of the pit bull. No matter how many people have great stories, great memories, and great pitbulls, the media will always portray them as killers.Quote:
Originally posted by sherpayluvsgreys
K-9Soul, yes, Martin is....uh...."well expressed" to say the least. He, many others, and a few who have posted here, have been fighting this battle for years. Despite years of improvements and tireless efforts made by many, John Q public still likes to take the sympathy line hook line and sinker. As I mentioned earlier, the positive things that are, and have been happening in the industry are overlooked in the media because it doesn't sell.
Aly, I hear you. I tend to do look at it the same way.Quote:
Originally posted by aly
I'm confused. I said that I know there are a lot of racers/breeders who are very well cared for ... and that I was concerned about the ones who aren't. Are you just looking for an argument or did you seriously miss that? I am NOT being sarcastic here. I just thought I was making myself as clear as possible saying that I know you guys love and care for your dogs and that there are good racers out there.
Jay
Neglect of medical care is the biggest problem that greyhound adoption groups have to deal with. Many people in adoption have seen hundreds of greyhounds loaded with internal and external parasites, some with untreated illnesses, open wounds, broken bones, dislocated toes, and occasionally things ilke mange, and ringworm.Quote:
Originally posted by aly
I'm confused. I said that I know there are a lot of racers/breeders who are very well cared for ... and that I was concerned about the ones who aren't. Are you just looking for an argument or did you seriously miss that? I am NOT being sarcastic here. I just thought I was making myself as clear as possible saying that I know you guys love and care for your dogs and that there are good racers out there.
While the good people in racing take excellent care of their dogs, and some even pay for spaying and neutering at retirement, there are others in racing who pay for nothing when the greyhound is finished with his racing career. Adoption groups that are entirely self-supporting struggle to pay for the medical care and treatment of the greyhounds they place for adoption from these other sources.
These people run an adoption/rescue program in FL.
http://www.ahome4greys.org/
One of the sources of continuing irritation and frustration for racing people who do it right are those in the business who do not. I think AR groups tend to see the worst dogs because they get the dogs that people are just handing over. As a result they tend to see a higher proportion of hard cases than PR groups.Quote:
Originally posted by Love Greyhounds
Neglect of medical care is the biggest problem that greyhound adoption groups have to deal with. Many people in adoption have seen hundreds of greyhounds loaded with internal and external parasites, some with untreated illnesses, open wounds, broken bones, dislocated toes, and occasionally things ilke mange, and ringworm.
While the good people in racing take excellent care of their dogs, and some even pay for spaying and neutering at retirement, there are others in racing who pay for nothing when the greyhound is finished with his racing career. Adoption groups that are entirely self-supporting struggle to pay for the medical care and treatment of the greyhounds they place for adoption from these other sources.
The dog owners who do right by their dogs not only take care of any physical problems prior to handing them over, but give the group a donation to cover feed and neutering. That means a portion of the adoption fee can be used for rent and other expenses.
I would never go. Horse racing bothers me also. I can't say that I hate the people that do Greyhound racing because I know nothing about it. But I am not the least bit interested in finding out.
Why does it bother you? Just curious.Quote:
Originally posted by Tonya
I would never go. Horse racing bothers me also. I can't say that I hate the people that do Greyhound racing because I know nothing about it. But I am not the least bit interested in finding out.
I'd like to hear some of the new Greyhound lovers thoughts
about this Greyhound site. http://www.greyhounds.org/
You can skip the intro if you like & get right to the informational
pages. Please read all of it and then give some honest opinions.
:o Oh boy this should be fun....;)
Sensationalism...Quote:
Originally posted by lizbud
I'd like to hear some of the new Greyhound lovers thoughts
about this Greyhound site. http://www.greyhounds.org/
You can skip the intro if you like & get right to the informational
pages. Please read all of it and then give some honest opinions.
Negative propaganda at its best...
I believe that even the average anti-racing fan with any real knowledge will take the info presented there with a grain of salt. Those, however, who know nothing about the greyhound world are liable to believe, and pervertedly enjoy wallowing in, and spreading this gross misrepresentation of the facts.
Why do they want to end greyhound racing? Serious question. What would be the benefit?
If you skim this thread, the acronym GPL comes up quite often. I think you'll get a pretty clear picture of some of our opinions... Anyhow, I'll just say GPL is PeTA for Greyhounds.
I would *guess* less greyhounds bred? Since alot are bred for racing?Quote:
Originally posted by micki76
Why do they want to end greyhound racing? Serious question. What would be the benefit?
Not the same but...Quote:
Originally posted by micki76
Why do they want to end greyhound racing? Serious question. What would be the benefit?
Why do they want to ban Pit bulls? What would be the benefit of banning pitties? Honestly, I think people push this out-of-sight, out-of-mind thing too far.
No, I mean what does GPL gain by banning greyhound racing? Sorry if I wasn't clear.Quote:
Originally posted by Giselle
Not the same but...
Why do they want to ban Pit bulls? What would be the benefit of banning pitties? Honestly, I think people push this out-of-sight, out-of-mind thing too far.
In this case "informational pages" is a misnomer.Quote:
Originally posted by lizbud
I'd like to hear some of the new Greyhound lovers thoughts
about this Greyhound site. http://www.greyhounds.org/
You can skip the intro if you like & get right to the informational
pages. Please read all of it and then give some honest opinions.
GPL is the PETA of the greyhound world. They are the lunatic fringe, the zealots of the greyhound world.
They extrapolate unusual incidents into industry-wide standards. They often invent problems where there are none at all. They exaggerate every number several-fold.
Two of their pillars of belief, puppy culling and the controversy they've created over "4D" meat do not exist at all. Their knowledge of greyhound racing is pitifully small.
It should be noted that GPL is not an adoption or rescue organization. Money sent to them goes to fund their political efforts to get racing banned.
If you have specific questions about their website let me know---I could write a book about the inconsistencies there, but I don't have room for it here.
It's not a matter of gain---it's hard to measure the motivation of a zealot. What does PETA have to gain from banning meat from our diet? It's a nebulous question. I think some people just need to have a cause.Quote:
Originally posted by micki76
No, I mean what does GPL gain by banning greyhound racing? Sorry if I wasn't clear.
Ok. Now you're making blanket statements and saying none of this exists at all. I'm sorry, but surely you must admit that it does happen to some extent. I'm sure there's all level of corruption in Greyhound racing, just as there is in horse racing and other sports that involve humans, money, and anything (or anyone) who can't speak up for themselves.Quote:
Originally posted by jcsperson
Two of their pillars of belief, puppy culling and the controversy they've created over "4D" meat do not exist at all. Their knowledge of greyhound racing is pitifully small.
I hope that doesn't come accross as an attack, I just felt that was an innacurate statement. I realize that not all tracks are evil, or staffed with dog killers, but to close your eyes and say it's all great and nothing the other side says is true, is burying your head in the sand as I stated earlier.
I thought it was something along those lines, but I wasn't sure if they had anything tangible to actually gain from it.Quote:
Originally posted by jcsperson
It's not a matter of gain---it's hard to measure the motivation of a zealot. What does PETA have to gain from banning meat from our diet? It's a nebulous question. I think some people just need to have a cause.
I do not know what the "4D" meat controversy is about, but the puppy culling thing actually does sound very unlikely. Even someone who cared absolutely nothing about their dogs would not randomly kill puppies before racing age since they can't tell how well they will race until nearly adults right? I wouldn't think you could tell how a dog would race as a little pup.Quote:
Two of their pillars of belief, puppy culling and the controversy they've created over "4D" meat do not exist at all.
My group was NOT AR. It was neutral.Quote:
Originally posted by jcsperson
One of the sources of continuing irritation and frustration for racing people who do it right are those in the business who do not. I think AR groups tend to see the worst dogs because they get the dogs that people are just handing over. As a result they tend to see a higher proportion of hard cases than PR groups.
You're indicating that PR groups get cash and medical tx for the dogs, while neutral and AR groups pick up the tab for everything else.
Let's stick with the issues of puppy culling and 4D meat for now to prevent this from going in several directions at once.Quote:
Originally posted by micki76
Ok. Now you're making blanket statements and saying none of this exists at all. I'm sorry, but surely you must admit that it does happen to some extent. I'm sure there's all level of corruption in Greyhound racing, just as there is in horse racing and other sports that involve humans, money, and anything (or anyone) who can't speak up for themselves.
I hope that doesn't come accross as an attack, I just felt that was an innacurate statement. I realize that not all tracks are evil, or staffed with dog killers, but to close your eyes and say it's all great and nothing the other side says is true, is burying your head in the sand as I stated earlier.
Puppy Culling
"As of 2001, the Greyhound Protection League estimated close to 27,000 dogs were registered to race, most born at professional breeding farms. In 2001, close to 18,000 puppies and adult greyhounds were culled or killed, according to the organization."
There is no need to estimate the numbers of dogs registered. The figures are published monthly in Greyhound Review:
2003 26,277
2002 27,142
2001 26,797
2000 26,464
1999 27,059
1998 26,036
1997 28,025
1996 28,877
Note that there has been a downward trend in registrations over the years. Historically, 80% of all pups whelped are registered. In the only five year span I could find recorded, here are the actual whelpings:
2000 34,141
1999 33,256
1998 35,801
1997 35,730
1996 36,688
Using the 2,000 figures as an example, GPL simply subtracts 26,464 from 34,141 and assumes that 7,677 pups were "culled." They do not take into account that every birth, whether stillborn or not, every puppy, whether sickly or not, is factored into that 34,141 figure. Puppy mortality in dogs can be as high as 30%, higher in small breeds, but is typically 15-25 percent. If you do the math on our 2000 example the number is 22.5%. According to the AR crowd, all these puppies were "culled." Additionally, a number of puppies who are obviously unsuitable for the track are sold as pets. These, of course, were "culled," too.
"Puppy culling" is one of the central myths of the Anti-Racing movement. It is the only way they can make their numbers work. The truth is that there is no possible reason to cull puppies in greyhounds. In show dogs, a puppy with a coat color that is not to the breed standard is often destroyed. The only time a puppy will be euthanized at a greyhound farm is when it is born so sickly that its survivability is in doubt and the only question is how much suffering it will endure. At the farm where my greyhounds were raised the farmer goes to extreme measures to save every sick puppy. One such puppy slept in her bed for three weeks until healthy enough to return to his dam. His name is Express Scrapper and he went on to finish third in the 2003 Great Greyhound Race to future Hall-of-Famer EA's Itzaboy. He earned his name Scrapper because of his will to live.
A good dam will cost you $1,000 to $15,000. The breeding to a top sire costs $1,000 to $3,000. The Artificial Implantation fees are around $500. Transportation of the bitch to the sire and back by truck could be $200 depending on distance---by air even more. With up-front costs that could range from $3,000 to $20,000, why would anyone cull the results? Furthermore, pups at the most recent NGA auction fetched $2,500 to $51,000. Why would someone deprive themselves of this income potential? The belief in culling by the AR movement is unfounded, confounding and illogical.
4D meat
The much derided 4D meat (Dead, Decaying, Diseased, Disabled) is a favorite of the AR crowd who do not understand what it is. It is, in fact, any meat not approved for human use. Imagine a line of steers at a slaughterhouse. While in line, a cow falls over and dies of an aneurysm. It could be dragged ten feet into the building and butchered, but is officially unfit for human consumption by the USDA because it died and was not killed. The primary buyer of 4D meat is the pet food induustry. If you use a premium brand of dog food, you fed some to your pet today.
My farmer friend's husband had duties out of town so I volunteered to help pick up a load of beef from a slaughterhouse to take to her farm, a ton in all. We got a little tour of the facility inculding the "kill" floor where several carcasses were being cut up by workers with electric chainsaws suspended from overhead racks. The meat was loaded on pallets and rolled directly to the grinder and then directly into the freezer. From there, the meat was delivered to greyhound kennels, farms and dogfood manufacturers by refrigerated trucks.
To me, the most interesting part of the tour was meeting a USDA inspector. He was there taking samples of the brains of every cow to inspect for Mad Cow Disease. I thought it was especially interesting that they were inspecting for Mad Cow even though none of the meat at this facility was destined for human consumption.
You might also be interested to know that the USDA has mandated that charcoal chips are mixed in with 4D meat to render it unpalatable to human consumption. It seems that many people know that 4D meat is really no different than regular ground beef and found the cost at 20% of grocery store prices appealing.
What jcsperson said :)
As usual Martin - you have a way of relaying the truth in a clear and concise manner. Thanks.
Sighting figures won't make me believe one over the other. This GPL seems extreme (similar to PETA), but I do believe that much of their propaganda does happen to an extent. No, I've never been to a track, never been to a kennel. But! Aha there it is. :) But, I do believe that there's a huge facet of people out there that just don't care about animals. I believe there's a huge facet who just care about money, and what’s in it for them. We’ve all seen and heard about all the animal cruelty in the world, and I just see this as another opportunity for evil people to do their evil deeds. Not everyone, or perhaps even the majority involved in racing are cruel, killing dogs, or crating them for 20+ hours a day. BUT SOME ARE. Honestly, that's what matters to me. I don't go to AKC dogs shows, don't go to dog races, don't go to horse races. I've seen agility done, like many of our members, by companion animals who live in the home with their family and not in a kennel. I don't support any "sport" where animals are a commodity of any sort.
I would most likely be a vegetarian to a large degree if I could be, but I have a medical issue that limits my intake of fruits and vegetables and forces me to eat a larger portion of meats than I like.
I'm sorry that the numbers aren't convincing to you. Anybody who has ever bred dogs knows that puppy mortality is a fact, yet GPL seems to be in complete denial about this.Quote:
Originally posted by micki76
Sighting figures won't make me believe one over the other. This GPL seems extreme (similar to PETA), but I do believe that much of their propaganda does happen to an extent. No, I've never been to a track, never been to a kennel. But! Aha there it is. :) But, I do believe that there's a huge facet of people out there that just don't care about animals. I believe there's a huge facet who just care about money, and what’s in it for them. We’ve all seen and heard about all the animal cruelty in the world, and I just see this as another opportunity for evil people to do their evil deeds. Not everyone, or perhaps even the majority involved in racing are cruel, killing dogs, or crating them for 20+ hours a day. BUT SOME ARE. Honestly, that's what matters to me. I don't go to AKC dogs shows, don't go to dog races, don't go to horse races. I've seen agility done, like many of our members, by companion animals who live in the home with their family and not in a kennel. I don't support any "sport" where animals are a commodity of any sort.
Nobody is disputing that some people in the business don't do the best for their dogs after they are through racing. The evidence is pretty clear about that.
The essential question is whether greyhound racing is inherently bad or that the problems it has are the conduct of individuals. Stated differently; Is the entire concept bad because of the behavior of a minority of the individuals who engage in it? (Keep this question in mind as you read on.)
Some of the worst cases of misconduct, abuse, or neglect I've ever seen were from pet owners, the "companion animals who live in the home" you speak of. In fact, there is an AR adoption group in AZ that shows an emaciated, sore-ridden greyhound on the cover of its brochure and proceeds, through the next several pages, to hurl one accusation after another at greyhound racing. It is not until page 7 that one finds out that the greyhound in the picture was taken out of a home, not from a kennel or farm.
Hardly a day goes by when one doesn't see on the local or national news a story of animal abuse or neglect, whether it is cats, dogs, horses or what have you. Multiply what you see on local TV by every locale nationally and you begin to see the scope of the problem. These aren't racing greyhounds, but Pit Bulls, Labs, Rottweilers, kittens, etc., etc.
(Remember my question above.) If one applied the same criteria to pet ownership that ARA groups apply to dog racing, that some abuse requires banning the sport, then some abuse of companion animals requires banning pet ownership.
Philosophically, this is the ultimate goal of organizations like PETA and HSUS. In the end, they are trying to legislate morality on those who do right by their animals as much as those who don't.
What I also find interesting is that when this same poll in conducted on a PET GREYHOUND forum, with members fairly well educated on the ins and outs of greyhound racing, the outcome is much different....:rolleyes: :cool:
This was an incredible post to read, I'm really looking forward to seeing responses to this. Thanks for taking the time to post in here!Quote:
Originally posted by jcsperson
(Remember my question above.) If one applied the same criteria to pet ownership that ARA groups apply to dog racing, that some abuse requires banning the sport, then some abuse of companion animals requires banning pet ownership.
Philosophically, this is the ultimate goal of organizations like PETA and HSUS. In the end, they are trying to legislate morality on those who do right by their animals as much as those who don't.
Ok in all honesty, I really wish it would become a leisure sport and not a money-making business because I think the fact that money and gambling is involved is what makes it, IN MY OPINION, have more potential for some owners to make the dollar their top priority to the detriment of their dogs. I feel the same about horse racing. Now where my education is limited is just how much money is typically involved in it, and how easy it is to "make it big" by having successful racers. I fully admit to being uneducated on that aspect.
From what I saw and experienced in my time around people in the conformation show world, the truly responsible breeders could not make a living off the breeding and raising of show dogs, the overhead in doing it properly was more than the sales they made, and the ones that seemed more responsible didn't seem to be breeding constantly. I did see breeding that seemed wholly bent on getting that perfect winning dog rather than on health, soundness and diverse bloodlines.
I don't know, I guess what I'm saying is personally I'd like to see it be more like flyball or agility, because if the money and business aspect of it was gone or at least muted, I feel the 'bad apples' would be less prone to get involved with it.
Of course it is different there. A lot of people there are involved in the racing industry and tell the others how great it is. (I am sure it IS great for your members because I'm sure they do it the right way and care for their dogs). Therefore, the members from the forum who don't know anything about it will tend to like it because they are only seeing the good side.Quote:
Originally posted by sherpayluvsgreys
What I also find interesting is that when this same poll in conducted on a PET GREYHOUND forum, with members fairly well educated on the ins and outs of greyhound racing, the outcome is much different....:rolleyes: :cool:
Some of us only see the bad side. Some see both sides. I don't know why it is automatically assumed that we don't know anything about it here. Not one person has ever denied that there is good in it. We have all acknowledged that.
All any of us can do is educate ourselves to the best of our ability and take BOTH sides with a grain of salt. It doesn't make someone ignorant or close-minded if they have a different opinion from your own (not directing this to you sherpayluvsgreys).
Yes, animal abuse occurs in all areas. How realisitic is it to say no one can own pets though? The amount of neglect and abuse towards animals makes me SICK and I do everything I can every day of my life to stop it. But it'd be a bit silly to say no one can own a pet. Why couldn't we take the gambling aspect out of Greyhound racing? That sounds much more realistic to me. Take out the profit to humans and make it solely a fun thing to do for the dogs. Stop mass-producing these puppies at the Greyhound farms and just run your own dogs at the races for the fun of it. After the race, take them home to your bed instead of to a kennel. It would most likely get rid of a lot of the bad apples who keep and race the Greyhounds solely for profit, not because they care if the dog is having fun or not.
I agree Jessica. You said what I've been trying to say, only much better! :)
To compare pet ownership with racing is comparing apples to oranges IMO, but I do get you're point.
Good post, Aly.
I think he was just comparing GPL to PETA, which would like to make it so that no one can own pets, because they see it as only beneficial to the humans, not to the pet.Quote:
Originally posted by aly
Yes, animal abuse occurs in all areas. How realisitic is it to say no one can own pets though?
Oh, I also wanted to say here that I think even on a totally Pet Greyhound forum with no racing people as members, the poll would still have had more people say they were interested in going no matter their stance, because I think people are naturally more curious about their dog's heritage and background. I'm probably not stating this well, so I'll use an example. When I was younger one of my dogs was bred to be a show dog and even though previously I hadn't been interested as much in seeing a dog show, I became MUCH more interested when I had a dog who had shown and been bred to show.Quote:
Originally posted by sherpayluvsgreys
What I also find interesting is that when this same poll in conducted on a PET GREYHOUND forum, with members fairly well educated on the ins and outs of greyhound racing, the outcome is much different....:rolleyes: :cool:
Now I will admit that I did a better job in making sure I was educated on both sides of the situation once I had a "show dog", but a lot of people who have never been involved in showing or owned a show dog have some bad ideas about "show people" and I found, naturally, some of it was true.. more than I was comfortable with for sure, and of course there were showers who were also passionate about their dogs and made all their decisions based on the dog's best interest. I have mixed feelings on the show world, I wish some things about it could be more regulated. I think an inbred dog should not be allowed to be registered or shown for starters.
I just don't see how the two can compare at ALL. Just because both have to do with animals doesn't make them comprable IMO.Quote:
Originally posted by guster girl
I think he was just comparing GPL to PETA, which would like to make it so that no one can own pets, because they see it as only beneficial to the humans, not to the pet.
I think think this may be what Aly was referring to.Quote:
Originally posted by guster girl
I think he was just comparing GPL to PETA, which would like to make it so that no one can own pets, because they see it as only beneficial to the humans, not to the pet.
Quote:
Originally posted by jcsperson
(Remember my question above.) If one applied the same criteria to pet ownership that ARA groups apply to dog racing, that some abuse requires banning the sport, then some abuse of companion animals requires banning pet ownership.
I dunno, I see the comparison. Comparing apples and oranges is still fruit. :) Just my opinion, though.
Regardless of who is influencing who, the point is that the more educated one becomes on greyhound racing, the more accepting one tends to be.Quote:
Originally posted by aly
[B]Of course it is different there. A lot of people there are involved in the racing industry and tell the others how great it is. (I am sure it IS great for your members because I'm sure they do it the right way and care for their dogs). Therefore, the members from the forum who don't know anything about it will tend to like it because they are only seeing the good side.
Greytalk, up until fairly recently, was considered by the greyhound industry to be an anit-racing community. The vast majority of its members do not work within the industry. That's another board called Global Greyhounds.:)
When you look at the GPL web site, this page is the one that says it all.
http://www.greyhounds.org/gpl/conten...ia_cases2.html
One can always point out that the media only reports sensationalism and that facts are not presented with precise accuracy. One can always take each case and argue the intricate details, point out the flaws, etc., etc. But no one can say these things did not happen. This is the history of the "bad side" of greyhound racing.
PETA has videos that can literally break your heart if you have the strength to watch them. I am level headed enough to realize that there can be more to these stories. That people have gone so far as to stage scenes and cause harm to animals for the pupose of filming a sad video. I would not know which one was true, unless I was right there at the time that it happened. I also do not assume all their videos and stories are valid or invalid, based on what I have heard about one.
I have only had the guts to watch two of their videos and all I can say is I wished I hadn't. If there were even the slightest chance that these things happened as they showed, it was well worth showing them. Regardless of what got those animals into their situations, I am grateful that someone cared enough to try and help get them out. What I saw was of no medical benefit to anyone. The animals were clearly being abused. It is not a difficult concept to believe. I feel that PETA's intentions were to help those animals by exposing this abuse and I am grateful that they were able to do so. One video disturbed me so much that I actually wrote PETA, to ask about the status. Their answer was factual and verifiable and did not include a request for money or anything else from me. I never heard from them again. I was actually quite impressed, considering what I have heard about them. That is my only experience with PETA.
I feel the same way about the folks who uncover the abuses in greyhound racing. Whether or not they sensationalize is not important to me. If half the stories on that page were due to outside pet owner abuse, it still would not make any of it okay. I am against any type of pet abuse and I have the same opinion about anyone who is responsible for it.
When people are accused of animal abuse, I am right in there with the rest, encouraging their punishment and calling for any type of restrictions that can be given to prevent them from doing it again. You could even call that pushing for abolishment of pet ownership. If there were an entity, a group or some type of industry that could be identified, I would want restrictions to be placed on that industry and if that were not possible, I would want to see it banned. Whatever is necessary to end the abuse is what I want to happen. And yes, I would also consider the feasability and the overall effects.
I don't want greyhound racing to be banned if it can exist without killing all these hounds. After spending a huge amount of time learning as much as I have, I have come to realize that it is a possibility. But I will never accept it the way it is without the acknowledgement that certain problems do in fact still exist (to a lesser degree) and I am more interested in what can be done to prevent future problems, than how much better things have already gotten. Yep, I still see the half empty glass, but it is filling up.
Greyhound racing has a ways to go before my overall opinion will change. I still think it sucks. I don't care about gambling. I care about greyhounds. I do what I can through adoption and could do even more if I got off my butt more often and I am glad that there are industry people who have the same good intentions and work toward the same goal. It is however, important to me that everyone else is given all the answers, the whole story, the good and the bad. Because without them, greyhound adoption would not be possible. I feel they have the right to know that there are many greyhounds who still don't make it into homes and there always will be a need for help.
Before anyone jumps in and calls that "pity", let me say this. I never pitied a greyhound. I wanted a dog who fit my lifestyle and looked first at the ones who were more in need. I have since made a valuable contribution to the greyhound adoption effort and it is because I learned from my greyhounds how much I love this wonderful breed.
Jay