NSW bans greyhound racing from July 2017

[castellan]

Originally Posted by danzvtil

What would happen if you banned cows milk production? Overnight hundreds of thousands of cows would have a bullet put between their eyes, they don't just go to some magical pasture to moo and be happy for the rest of their natural lives.

3 things will happen, some of the dogs will be sent interstate to continue racing, some will be sent overseas to race but face worse treatment than here, the rest will have a bullet put in their skull, but the owners wont be dumping the bodies in a national park to be found, this will all be on the down low.

I am going to start off basset hound racing, I think it will take off with the new age crowed.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Pis-ton broke

i don,t agree with it. its all to nanny state or big brother, yes we know that there are problems in the industry but this is an over reaction imo. so wheres the effort to combat the industry problem? where the warning and probation period? = there wasn,t one. just bang , cold turkey.its all over red rover!

i smell a rat, and before the industry can reform , all those racing sites will be sold to mates or developers, with no possibility of a come back, its gone, not coming back ever.

people don,t relise the jobs and spin off industries that it supports, of coarse all the figures will be down played.

http://www.greyhoundracinginquiry.ju...of-inquiry.pdf

[Pis-ton broke]

its ironic that this is an issue if you compare this to breeding practices of some breeders.
im saying that because i watched a doco some years back on dog breeds and the Crufs dog show (largest dog show in the world, in UK). what was happening is that certain breeds have weaknesses in them. for example German Shepard's get back and back end problems , king charles,s brain,s grow to large for there skulls and cause many bad effects and pugs can,t breath due to restricted airways, the list go,s on. what was happening is that top show dogs were being breeding regardless of the bad health issues and that conformation,action and the style were more important, (it could be said that its good to breed healthy and strong animals as a main principle) alot of it is money and or prestige driven. and only a minority do these dogdie practices. its not just a some grey hound owners doing wrong, the well to do top show breeders are abusing dogs as well.

[Pis-ton broke]

they took option one, not option two.

looks like a lot of people knew things that happen, just a big kick in the bum and reform some bad culture practices, govco could have made the effort.

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by Pis-ton broke

its ironic that this is an issue if you compare this to breeding practices of some breeders.
im saying that because i watched a doco some years back on dog breeds and the Crufs dog show (largest dog show in the world, in UK). what was happening is that certain breeds have weaknesses in them. for example German Shepard's get back and back end problems , king charles,s brain,s grow to large for there skulls and cause many bad effects and pugs can,t breath due to restricted airways, the list go,s on. what was happening is that top show dogs were being breeding regardless of the bad health issues and that conformation,action and the style were more important, (it could be said that its good to breed healthy and strong animals as a main principle) alot of it is money and or prestige driven. and only a minority do these dogdie practices. its not just a some grey hound owners doing wrong, the well to do top show breeders are abusing dogs as well.

I agree 100% and it still has no bearing on greyhound racing, which is the issue being addressed here. You are talking about another issues that probably needs addressing as well, but at the moment greyhound racing is being dealt with. There are also homeless people, and ice addicts that need to be dealt with but irrelevant to this issue.

Originally Posted by Pis-ton broke

they took option one, not option two.

looks like a lot of people knew things that happen, just a big kick in the bum and reform some bad culture practices, govco could have made the effort.

Why Govoc make the effort??

Why not the grey hound racing industry make the effort?? They had every opportunity to come clean and clean themselves up, but chose not to do so.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by hawkgirl

No, they are against ALL people/animal interaction & class pet ownership as "forced slavery". The stated aim of peta & by extension, Animals Australia (who follow peta's agenda) is for all domestic animals to become extinct. There's a reason peta shelters have a less than 3% adoption rate.

Make no mistake, I'm all for animal welfare. I fully agree that the overbreeding of racing greys needs to be stopped. But I will bet london to a brick that a lot of the critics of the greyhound overbreeding are the ones who will pay any tom richard or harry stupid amounts of money for the latest must-have designer cross breed, backyard bred mutt with an "oodle" somewhere in its name

I did some research and Animals Australia dont have that stance. They want better regulation.

http://www.animalsaustralia.org/issu...on_animals.php

As for Peta, I do understand their reservations as I've seen some pets being treat appallingly! I think certain things need to come into play. For example, people in Apartments shouldnt be allowed to have big dogs, etc.

I see where they are coming from after seeing a neighbour leave their puppy on the roof of their house in 45 degree heat (black Lab puppy) and this was apparently acceptable!

Link below. It does make sense what they are saying. But I think Animals Australia's idea is the better option (for now). Or mandatory desexing of pets unless you have a breeders license. That will solve a lot of the issues.

http://www.peta.org/about-peta/why-peta/pets/

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by kypez

I used to be like that... I'm slowly making the change. The way animals are treated is something I cant stomach...

Yeah it's nasty business no doubt. I always try to buy local produce from local butchers/green grocers/deli's etc, which I think really helps in making sure the animals I'm eating had at least been treated humanely. Then there's the issue of the centralised food industry and overpopulation but that's another topic... another forum actually.

Originally Posted by snowcone

Baird is the worse thing that has happened to NSW
He is a dictator that refuses to listen to the public and is only interested in Sydney.

He has disrupted the State with forced Council amalgamations and has closed the rail to Newcastle and ripped up the lines so they cannot be relaid down. When challenged on the legality of his moves he had the law changed. when the Save Our rail continued to protest he changed another law and lumbered the group with untold court fees and now the so called public land is being subjected to developers. He is forcing the light rail in Newcastle to travel down the main street instead of using the existing corridor, and he sold of the Port of Newcastle and sent the majority of the money to Sydney.

The Hunter and surrounding regions will never recover from the vandalism he has carried out in this area.

Well there you go, I'm not at all surprised - the guy is clearly rotten to the core and deserves prison time for the damage he's done to Sydney and NSW.

We have politicians like that in Victoria as well but they seem to be mostly in opposition at the moment...

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

The RSPCA puts down thousands of dogs because no one wants them, people keep breeding dogs and then dump them, there are more dogs and cats and horses than people that want them, yet people keep breeding them for greed and profit or just sheer laziness and in responsibility.
.

Then you have people that will buy a dog not suited for their property and buy a dog that needs lots of exercise....so they end up (the lucky ones) hoping someone will give them a new home.

People dont think. I been looking to get a dog but I trying to be careful to get a dog that be able to be happy...but also good with a small child. Go to a fair few dog shelters (there is more then the rspca) and seriously the amount of greyhounds seems quite high. It really annoys me.

Personally couldnt care less about the industry...same goes for horse racing. If it wasnt for the gambling component it would be dead long ago.

[lgpking22]

i must be the only one who doesnt care about dogs or animals in general for that matter

[Pis-ton broke]

Originally Posted by lgpking22

i must be the only one who doesnt care about dogs or animals in general for that matter

well , what is wrong with you?

[MrEL]

Originally Posted by lgpking22

i must be the only one who doesnt care about dogs or animals in general for that matter

The more humans i know , the more i like dogs.

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by lgpking22

i must be the only one who doesnt care about dogs or animals in general for that matter

let's hope so hey?

[b0son]

Originally Posted by kypez

Well, off topic, but Animal agriculture produces more emissions than all fossil fuels combined. That includes energy production, cars, industry, everything. And by considerable margin!

We need to eat...

[b0son]

Originally Posted by hawkgirl

I cannot believe such arrogance in tarring all dog trainers as unethical morons. I hope the trainers sue his butt off, and the ban is thrown out by the courts. Sure, do what the commission report found & bring in more supervisory levels, more enforciment of rules & tighten up the sport to the Nth degree, but a ban is dumb. So many local businesses (not just the trainers) will be hit. I dont like lots of things that some on here like (like smoking cigars, or RC cars) but i'm not out there going trying to ban stuff just cause I dont like it. Last I looked, this wasn't North Korea

Its so hypocritical. Happy to collect the tax windfall this industry brings, then, with the stroke of a pen, wipe the industry out. Surely they owe these people a bit more than this?

If someone can so flippantly take away somebody's livelihood, it shows just how disconnected these bureaucrats are from the average working person. Pretty sure there aren't going to be too many redundancy packages going around....

[The Yeti]

Originally Posted by snowcone

Baird is the worse thing that has happened to NSW
He is a dictator that refuses to listen to the public and is only interested in Sydney.

He has disrupted the State with forced Council amalgamations and has closed the rail to Newcastle and ripped up the lines so they cannot be relaid down. When challenged on the legality of his moves he had the law changed. when the Save Our rail continued to protest he changed another law and lumbered the group with untold court fees and now the so called public land is being subjected to developers. He is forcing the light rail in Newcastle to travel down the main street instead of using the existing corridor, and he sold of the Port of Newcastle and sent the majority of the money to Sydney.

The Hunter and surrounding regions will never recover from the vandalism he has carried out in this area.

I never understanded why that rail line was closed, but I scence that's the core of your concerns with the guy

Personally from a Sydney siders point of view I think he's doing a much better job than the revolving door of corrupt labor union grubs (like Eddie) that came before him, even penfolds Bazza wa a good premier

But what's that got to do with the actual topic of banning the dish lickers???

[aussiblue]

Then you have people that will buy a dog not suited for their property and buy a dog that needs lots of exercise....so they end up (the lucky ones) hoping someone will give them a new home.

It's a myth that greyhounds need lots of exercise. They are 45mph couch potatoes who spend most of their time snoozing. When they do have a sprint they actually need some time to recover (as science has shown that it causes minor limb damage that needs days to heal) so a short run once a week or one a fortnight is enough and as they get older much less. See http://www.45mphcouchpotato.com/ etc Our now old retired rescue greyhound now only shows interest in having a short sprint once a month. We do walk her daily but with her age the distance she want to go has got a lot shorter and she knows how to tell us when she has had enough (she simply turns around and head home).

[kypez]

Originally Posted by b0son

We need to eat...

Lol! :rofl

Going really off topic but... We produce enough grain to feed 10 billion people yet half goes to animals. The conversion rate is terrible. You need 50 kilos of grain to produce 1 kilo of meat (some animals are worse). Most aid given to poor countries is used for animals not people. 91% of the rain forests destroyed are for animal agriculture.

That's not including fresh water usage or emissions.

You could solve world hunger overnight by giving up meat.

Think the issue is flavour of food. I do find it funny, for a country (as it now) established by the English who spent the best part of the last 500 years trying to conquer the world by trading spices, the food has no flavour!

Ever wonder where your protein gets it's protein from?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[kazawaki]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

I agree 100% and it still has no bearing on greyhound racing, which is the issue being addressed here. You are talking about another issues that probably needs addressing as well, but at the moment greyhound racing is being dealt with. There are also homeless people, and ice addicts that need to be dealt with but irrelevant to this issue.



Why Govoc make the effort??

Why not the grey hound racing industry make the effort?? They had every opportunity to come clean and clean themselves up, but chose not to do so.

This goes for Ice addicts as well, i have no sympathy for these people that had a choice ,rob and bash people and destroy other innocent peoples lifes then cry we have an addiction.News flash you did it to yourself nothing but scum.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Stefan

I know its not the same but every sheep farmer does it too, dog no good, it'll be out to the back paddock to administer the lead aspirin.

Garbage, my parents have never shot a dog because it did not cut it as a working dog. They don't go through many dogs as once you have one you have him for many years and if a new dog doesn't make it as a working dog it normally ends up as a family pet or a pet for another family.

Sheep dogs certainly do not have the level of destruction of animals that the greyhound industry has and to suggest it is even comparable is a gross exaggeration. The domestic pet industry would have a higher level of animal destruction than sheep farming.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by kypez

Going really off topic but... We produce enough grain to feed 10 billion people yet half goes to animals. The conversion rate is terrible. You need 50 kilos of grain to produce 1 kilo of meat (some animals are worse). Most aid given to poor countries is used for animals not people. 91% of the rain forests destroyed are for animal agriculture.

Feed conversion rates for beef are around 5-8, lamb is similar, chicken is under 2!

Grains provide us with comparatively little protein, so the apparent low efficiency is the trade-off in order to convert a food that is primarily one macronutrient into another.

You could solve world hunger overnight by giving up meat.

Because grain producers will just give it away.... why should we give up meat? I have no desire to do so, I like the taste, and I prefer to get my protein from a small cut of meat rather than to sit over a giant bowl of veges/etc, or to eat beans/lentils all week.

Your sentiments are admirable, but there's little point preaching. I'm quite happy being at the top of the food chain, and feel little guilt for it.

[Sox]

Originally Posted by b0son

Feed conversion rates for beef are around 5-8, lamb is similar, chicken is under 2!

Grains provide us with comparatively little protein, so the apparent low efficiency is the trade-off in order to convert a food that is primarily one macronutrient into another.



Because grain producers will just give it away.... why should we give up meat? I have no desire to do so, I like the taste, and I prefer to get my protein from a small cut of meat rather than to sit over a giant bowl of veges/etc, or to eat beans/lentils all week.

Your sentiments are admirable, but there's little point preaching. I'm quite happy being at the top of the food chain, and feel little guilt for it.

Not only that, we're meant to eat animal products as well as our greens and other things.
We are omnivores.

Any vegan who tries to tell you otherwise has no clue, which is unfortunately the majority of vegans.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by Sox

Not only that, we're meant to eat animal products as well as our greens and other things.
We are omnivores.

Any vegan who tries to tell you otherwise has no clue, which is unfortunately the majority of vegans.

How about this bloke...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOKeC3sXNCk

And what about Einstein (later years), Steve Jobs, all these idiots... And in sport, World number 1 for Tennis (both mens and womens) are Vegan. What would they know... Though I'm not Vegan.

Originally Posted by b0son

Feed conversion rates for beef are around 5-8, lamb is similar, chicken is under 2!

Grains provide us with comparatively little protein, so the apparent low efficiency is the trade-off in order to convert a food that is primarily one macronutrient into another.



Because grain producers will just give it away.... why should we give up meat? I have no desire to do so, I like the taste, and I prefer to get my protein from a small cut of meat rather than to sit over a giant bowl of veges/etc, or to eat beans/lentils all week.

Your sentiments are admirable, but there's little point preaching. I'm quite happy being at the top of the food chain, and feel little guilt for it.

Do you even know what a food chain is?! I love this rubbish regurgitated. Just from a scientific point of view.

I love the "people" (I use the term loosely) who believe that their eating meat remotely resembles a food chain/food life cycle. I cannot begin to comprehend the stupidity of this claim. I could waste my time showing them that a Food chain see's both sides having population fluctuations as one becomes more or less dominant. If herbivore (prey) populations increase, carnivores (predator) increase to reduce the number of herbivores, and vice versa. If herbivore (predator) numbers increase, the leaves/water/grass (prey) for them reduces and they die of starvation, etc. That is a food chain. I haven't met a Lion that farms animals or a deer that tills their land...

But above all, you are a human that has stepped out and above the life of an animal. You are above food chains which is why we had the brain to create agriculture!

When someone tells me they are part of the food chain, I proceed to show them how to use Kitty Litter boxes because an animal wouldn't use a toilet... Consider yourself an animal and dont be surprised when people treat you like you treat them...

But finally, the crux of it is simple. As you put it, why should you give up something to help someone else. "Because grain producers will just give it away.... why should we give up meat? I have no desire to do so, I like the taste, and I prefer to get my protein from a small cut of meat rather than to sit over a giant bowl of veges/etc, or to eat beans/lentils all week."

Its this thinking that will end up with us wiping ourselves off the planet. The planet itself will be fine. It needs no saving. Its been here 4.5 billion years. No, we need to keep it such that WE can live on. Your point of view will come out in the wash within the next few decades. If you're lucky, you wont have to be around to witness what your choices have resulted in.

OT, one more industry stopped dead by a govt cause people just aren't capable of compassion towards animals.

[kypez]

Sums up the opinion of many here...

https://www.24media.info/2016/06/sci...istant-humans/

Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports.


The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.

“These humans appear to have all the faculties necessary to receive and process information,” Davis Logsdon, one of the scientists who contributed to the study, said. “And yet, somehow, they have developed defenses that, for all intents and purposes, have rendered those faculties totally inactive.”
More worryingly, Logsdon said, “As facts have multiplied, their defenses against those facts have only grown more powerful.”

While scientists have no clear understanding of the mechanisms that prevent the fact-resistant humans from absorbing data, they theorize that the strain may have developed the ability to intercept and discard information en route from the auditory nerve to the brain. “The normal functions of human consciousness have been completely nullified,” Logsdon said.

While reaffirming the gloomy assessments of the study, Logsdon held out hope that the threat of fact-resistant humans could be mitigated in the future. “Our research is very preliminary, but it’s possible that they will become more receptive to facts once they are in an environment without food, water, or oxygen,” he said.

[Mercury Bullet]

Originally Posted by danzvtil

What would happen if you banned cows milk production? Overnight hundreds of thousands of cows would have a bullet put between their eyes, they don't just go to some magical pasture to moo and be happy for the rest of their natural lives.

3 things will happen, some of the dogs will be sent interstate to continue racing, some will be sent overseas to race but face worse treatment than here, the rest will have a bullet put in their skull, but the owners wont be dumping the bodies in a national park to be found, this will all be on the down low.

From what I have seen of the industry none of them will be shot.

They have much nastier ways of putting down the dogs, that I won't go into here.

[Sox]

Originally Posted by kypez

How about this bloke...

Yeh, what about him?

And what about Einstein (later years), Steve Jobs, all these idiots... And in sport, World number 1 for Tennis (both mens and womens) are Vegan. What would they know...

Who knows what they know? Who cares what they know?
I don't even know what your point is.
A tennis player and a computer geek are vegans, big deal.



The science is solid, and incredibly easy to prove.
Most vegans choose to ignore it.

Make no mistake, I'm totally against animal cruelty, but I'm not interested in the propaganda that many (most) vegans like to feed us. Pun intended.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by Sox

Yeh, what about him?

Who knows what they know? Who cares what they know?
I don't even know what your point is.
A tennis player and a computer geek are vegans, big deal.



The science is solid, and incredibly easy to prove.
Most vegans choose to ignore it.

Make no mistake, I'm totally against animal cruelty, but I'm not interested in the propaganda that many (most) vegans like to feed us. Pun intended.

I see... So facts play no part in this and any fact is propaganda...

Could you share this science you say is solid? I ask cause people in other regions (such as India) have been vegetarian for over 5000 years and you suggest science says they should not be alive or malnourished?

[Mercury Bullet]

Originally Posted by Stefan

I know its not the same but every sheep farmer does it too, dog no good, it'll be out to the back paddock to administer the lead aspirin.

I'm sure it does happen, but I have never seen it myself.
Animal cruelty has no class structure nor boundaries.


I shoot our old (dying) animals, it's much kinder and quicker than having a vet use drugs. I give them a powerful tablet beforehand that puts them to sleep.
I have looked after the animal for it's entire life, the last thing I can do for it is put it out of it's pain myself.
FWIW my best mate is a vet and is in total agreement. They only use drugs to keep the owners happy. It looks better.

[Sox]

Originally Posted by kypez

I see... So facts play no part in this and any fact is propaganda...

Much of it is propaganda.
Many vegans even agree that plenty other vegans use this propaganda for their own agenda.
I've seen it first hand.

Could you share this science you say is solid? I ask cause people in other regions (such as India) have been vegetarian for over 5000 years and you suggest science says they should not be alive or malnourished?

Sure, and other parts of the world we're predominantly carnivores.
Take a look at aboriginals and Amazonians.

And at what point did I say a vegetarian should not be alive or undernourished?
If you want to continue a conversation with me, don't claim I said something I didn't.

The facts are, we're hunter gatherers.
We eat whatever we can get a hold of, whether that be a nut, a berry, or a rabbit.
It's always been that way.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by kypez

Lol! :rofl
You need 50 kilos of grain to produce 1 kilo of meat flavour!

Well worth it in my opinion, got to have my steak for Dinner!!!

[kypez]

Originally Posted by Sox

Much of it is propaganda.
Many vegans even agree that plenty pother vegans use this propaganda for their own agenda.
I've seen it first hand.


Sure, and other parts of the world we're predominantly carnivores.
Take a look at aboriginals and Amazonians.

And at what point did I say a vegetarian should not be alive or undernourished?
If you want to continue a conversation with me, don't claim I said something I didn't.

The facts are, we're hunter gatherers.
We eat whatever we can get a hold of, whether that be a nut, a berry, or a rabbit.
It's always been that way.

Originally Posted by Sox

Not only that, we're meant to eat animal products as well as our greens and other things.
We are omnivores.

Any vegan who tries to tell you otherwise has no clue, which is unfortunately the majority of vegans.

Er... you said we are omnivores and then said the science is solid. So it was implied that the evidence you spoke of supported this to be fact that we NEED meat as my point was that we DO NOT need meat. I think its unfair that you think you didn't say that or imply that. But I apologies if you still maintain that you didn't mean it that way and you haven't clarified your position.

We also used to kill and eat one another. In fact, of the 200,000 years of man as we know, we have killed and eaten one another for more than 195,000 years of it. Why have we stopped doing that? If you say its because we have enough animals to do that, we also have enough plants to not eat or harm animals.