Injuries - RockingshipSpeak

[rockingship]

gryhnd48 said:

Actually the topic title is an indictment of Rockingship, which should have closed it down before it even started. I have never been involved with a place where there is so much back biting and s**t slinging. We all know that the rhetoric presented by "both sides" is an attempt to make each other look bad, and it is a dirty rotten shame that there are even "sides" to pick. It is also a dirty rotten shame that the "sides" cannot get together amicably and work toward making whatever bad situation (either real or imagined) better instead of attempting to indict each other.

I think that massive strides have been made between the adoption community and greyhound ownership. The fact that the largest adoption undertaking in the country, GPA, and the NGA cooperate with one another for the benefit of retried greyhounds, is a case in point.

We originally conceived our humble contribution to the paradigm, RaceForAdoption, as a way to involve the adoption community, and concerned parties, directly with the racers themselves, and their owners, in hopes that it would foster more understanding and cooperation between the adoption community and racing professionals.

Political action groups who portray racing as a crime (and hence, its participants as criminals), and who call and work for it to be outlawed, do not, by anyone's definition, and by design, fit into that concept of cooperation.

[ctheil]

hounddog:

Can you tell which side isn't willing to find common ground?

Yours,
Carey

[rockingship]

Part of the solution must be phasing out the sport.

This is not part of a solution, but for the racing greyhound breed, which has adapted entirely to the function of racing and by selective breeding to that function, it is the "final solution".

The end of formal, regulated greyhound racing is essentially the functional extinction of the racing greyhound breed. This is not a case of "greyhounds have been around for thousands of years, and they will still be around if and when racing comes to an end". Greyhounds who are functional specimens, have only "been around" (apart form the prehistoric greyhound) when they had a functional purpose. Greyhounds are no longer "around" to kill agricultural pests, and they are no longer kept as coursers who provide food for the family table. The only reason greyhounds, in any significant numbers, are around, is because of racing.

The greyhounds who "are around" outside the realm of racing, are members of a miniscule, dysfunctional and morbidly inbred population, whose custodianship of AKC breeders, have recently again opened their studbook to NGA greyhounds-----so that they can reinvigorate their stagnant bloodlines with the genetics of functionality, diversity and athleticism, which the NGA racing greyhound holds in abundance.

Once those genetic wellsprings are gone, they are gone forever, and so is the genetic diversity and well-being of all greyhounds.

The idea that we can advocate for a population of dogs, by bringing about its virtual extinction, is absolutely chilling.

[gryhnd48]

Carey:

Any talk of the cessation of greyhound RACING is not a solution in my opinion. We in the industry have a right to the occupation of our choice, which happens to be greyhound RACING. I agree that the protection of greyhounds is paramount, and that the quality of life for them while racing should be of the utmost importance. The goals of most people on the PR "side" of this issue are just that.

I cannot talk much about this, but I have presented an idea to the NGA regarding OWNER RESPONSIBILITY for greyhounds. This idea would put the welfare of ALL racing greyhounds in the hands of the people that bred them. The racetracks would work WITH the breeders to accomplish this, and this is the step we need to achieve 100% adoption (or as near it as we can get). The biggest problem that you might argue is the puppy mortality rate which accounts for some of the greyhounds that you claim are unaccounted for. Accurate records must be kept under my plan, so as to appease the groups that would seek to abolish the sport. The undertaking is quite large, and if adopted, I think that both "sides" will be quite happy with the outcome.

If this gets off the ground, I will be more than happy to speak to anyone about the idea, whether you are PR, AR, or just don't care.

Rockingship is correct when he says that great strides have been made. I was working in this industry when the first adoption groups were formed, and we HAVE come a long way since. There are too many people that rest on their past laurels, and there are people that post on this very board that would like to continuously point out the shortcomings of the past which we are so diligently trying to change. Things like this cannot be done overnight. Continuously pointing out incidences that occurred 10 to 15 or more years ago does not help matters. Sure, things still happen. If it could be nipped in the bud, I'm all for it. I run my operation like that. The very minute that I hear of inconsistencies and out of the ordinary treatment or care, I am immediately on the phone to the proper authorities.

So, no matter what your agenda, no matter how AR or PR you are, we all need to work TOGETHER to make what we do for a living the best that it can be DAILY. If you do not want to do this, then you are part of the problem. Shuttering racetracks is not the answer. Putting tens of thousands of people out of work and displacing tens of thousands of healthy young greyhounds bred to race is not the answer.

I realize that rebuttals to this post will be something on the line of "WELL WHAT ABOUT DAYTONA, WHAT ABOUT THE FARM IN OKLAHOMA, WHAT ABOUT THIS, WHAT ABOUT THAT....The wheels of justice turn slowly, but rest assured, they are being greased by the very people that you would like to condemn for doing what we do.

[ctheil]

rockingship said:

The greyhounds who "are around" outside the realm of racing, are members of a miniscule, dysfunctional and morbidly inbred population, whose custodianship of AKC breeders, have recently again opened their studbook to NGA greyhounds-----so that they can reinvigorate their stagnant bloodlines with the genetics of functionality, diversity and athleticism, which the NGA racing greyhound holds in abundance.

Dennis:

I'm always amazed when you use language like this.

Ironically, your theories resemble a form of hero worship, a belief system that is oddly reminiscent of the animal rights philosophy/mysticism you resent so deeply.

Yours,
Carey

[ctheil]

gryhnd48:

Good luck in your effort with the NGA. If I can ever be of assistance, let me know.

I want to remind you that as a society we make decisions all the time about what activies are allowed and what activities are not.

I'm sure you could think of a hundred things that are prohibited, but if legalized would create jobs.

Yours,
Carey

[rockingship]

Carey, the only thing that smacks of mysticism, is your seeming inability or refusal to grasp the scientific facts of genetics, and the role that functional, diverse genetics and objectified selectivity plays in the well being of any population of dogs.

It's not a theory, that dysfunctional and/or marginal populations of dogs suffer from a plethora of congential, degenerative diseases, it is a fact.....which is why there is an OFA, and why millions of dollars are spent on OFA testing, and treating the degenerative orthopedic diseases and the attendent suffering that is intrinsic to so many breeds----but unknown in racing greyhounds.

[hounddog]

rockingship said:

Carey, the only thing that smacks of mysticism, is your seeming inability or refusal to grasp the scientific facts of genetics, and the role that functional, diverse genetics plays in the well being of any population of dogs.

It's not a theory, that dysfunctional and/or marginal populations of dogs suffer from a plethora of congential, degenerative diseases, it is a fact.....which is why there is an OFA, and why millions of dollars are spent on OFA testing, and treating the degenerative orthopedic diseases and the attendent suffering that is intrinsic to so many breeds----but unknown in racing greyhounds.

These arguments about the extinction of the racing greyhound always bring me back to what I believe is the legitimate question.

I believe the AR movement has and does shape public opinion about the sport but at this moment other forces are putting greyhound racing out of business.

Laying blame as the "final solution" may satisfy those who see it ending and the need to demonize someone as the reason.

If you believe as I do, it will end due to other reasons. This has been the case to this point and will continue in my view. Is there any faction within the race community that accepts that this is the reality and has any work gone into how the bloodlines can be preserved? There seems to be what may amount to an unintentional effort to misplace blame on why tracks have closed and why the racing greyhound is at risk as you claim.

[rockingship]

I'm sorry, but "demonizing" people is the realm of the Anti Racing Business, whose preferred tactics have always been to negatively stereotype greyhound professionals, through the mass media.

I have no financial stake or occupation in greyhound racing. I derive zero income from it. If it ends, I lose nothing, other than knowing that the population is genetically sound, and that my future pets will be good examples of racing greyhound temperament, genotype and phenotype.

My interest is in the racing greyhound itself, not only as an individual, but as a population. I put a good deal of study into greyhound geneology, not only because it is fascinating, but because it is critically important to the racing greyhound population, and future populations of racing greyhounds.

Greyhound racing, in some localities, suffers from competition with other forms of gambling, and inequitable taxation of the public's wagering dollars. It might or might not survive there, depending upon many things.

That doesn't mean that other markets would not or could not open up to racing greyhounds. I don't see this happening, however, in light of the well-oiled anti-racing industry propaganda ministries....none of whom have any idea about how to manage a population of dogs, or seemingly, any insight into what makes the racing greyhound the unique and remarkable creature he is.

I have begun to try and identify all the extant families of females in the US, and to keep track of their members, and their whereabouts, and who the best exponents of these families are. In view of the expense of managing a genetically healthy population of greyhounds, even with the financial support of racing for monetary purses, I don't think that there could possibly be a way to preserve them, never mind to objectively evaluate their individual suitability for breeding, without a competitive macro-racing paradigm for them to demonstrate it.

[princecharming]

ctheil said:

hounddog:

Can you tell which side isn't willing to find common ground?

Yours,
Carey

Care to spell out your definition/list some major bullet points of "common ground" with respect to greyhound racing?

My vision of "common ground" is that greyhound racing and greyhound welfare are NOT being mutually exclusive ideas. I see the possibilities of that vision. I live with it all the time. My puppies are well bred, they are born on good farms, they race in good kennels, then the either come home to me, or go to adoption groups I personally work with. If they get hurt along the way, they get the care they need.

OTOH, Grey2K, GPL and the like see racing as BY DEFINITION the antithesis of greyhound welfare. So long as racing exists, the welfare of the dogs is at risk. My vision of that end-state is: when racing stops, the active racers are petted out and the breeding stops. When the breeding stops, the farms go out of business, the broods are petted out and the Stud Masters will turn off their semen storage tanks. The entire genetic history and future of a species will be wiped out in very short order. The last to go will be the adoption groups- without pets, what is their reason for being? There may be some enterprising people that keep breeding a few leftovers for the pet market, but that will only create the situation that Dennis has already mentioned: grossly inbred and defective specimins like we see in those gawd-awful puppy mills and dog show circuit. One can already see the impact of that in other species: the US Military has to go to Europe to buy it's police dogs (GSDs, Belgian Mallinois), because the US lines are defective and largely useless for any real work. I have seen both German GSDs and American GSDs first-hand, and I can tell you that the American variety is a pitiful shadow of what the breed should be. The same thing has happened to draft horses: with the coming of the tractor, the mighty Percherons of 19th and early 20th Centuries have almost vanished. Form always follows function.

Where is the common ground?

[rockingship]

Care to spell out your definition/list some major bullet points of "common ground" with respect to greyhound racing?

I hope this means that Carey went to the Abilene auction, and spent some of those well-meant donations made to Grey2K on a sapling, who will now Race For Adoption....???? ;D

[ctheil]

This kind of logic could be used to justify almost anything.

Take dogfighting, for example.

Should we have legalized dogfighting to ensure the continuation of those breeds?

Yours,
Carey

[princecharming]

Carey,

Aside from the fact that you didn't answer my question, dog fighting is a poor analogy and a typical red herring thrown out there by you AR folks trying to link greyhound people to the scum who conduct dog fights. Properly "conditioned", any dog will fight. I could get a pair of teacup poodles to fight each other if I raised them to do so from puppies. The various breeds of dogs now used to fight were not bred to fight. They happen to have the optimal physical attributes NECESSARY for fighting, but those attributes are not SUFFICIENT for fighting. Dogs are by nature pack animals and by nature cooperative and social creatures. Canine packs do not normally settle their differences through violence. Dominant dogs assert their authority through the use of a combination of pheromones, postures and psychological effects. Rarely do canine disputes result in fatal violence. OTOH, fighting dogs are the product of human "conditioning"- read abuse & brutalization.

Greyhounds are genetically hard-wired to run and chase things. Racing people merely channel those natural talents.

[rockingship]

Should we have legalized dogfighting to ensure the continuation of those breeds?

That's pretty weak, Carey. There is a vast difference between a breed that was developed into a grotesque abberation of a canine, by men, to tear one another to shreds, and a breed of dog who evolved naturally into a graceful and elegant athlete, by coursing its prey, such as the greyhound. The anti-racing industry, apparently, knows much better than Mother Nature, what greyhounds are perfectly---naturally---designed to do.

Do you also propose that people are not entitled to own personal protection dogs, which also have the capacity for mayhem, and who must be significantly and repetitively agitated to be trained---- and that we should then gear up the propaganda machine, and drive them, as well, into extinction?

[rockingship]

According to the OFA statistics for AKC breeds and the emergence of hip dysplasia----a crippling and extremely painful, congenital, degenerative disease----English Bulldogs are 73.6% dysplastic. Should we also extinct this breed, becasue so many of them are born with this hideous, incapacitating disease, and suffer untold agony, and sometimes premature euthanasia because of it?

How about the Pug?....61.7 of the Pugs tested by the OFA were positive hip dysplastic....should we also extinct them, so that none of them might ever suffer from the disease?

46.4% of Chow Chows test positive for elbow dysplasia, another crippling, congenital, degenerative disease, also unknown in NGA racing greyhounds-----should we also cleanse the world of Chow Chows, and end their suffering?