Kev, just as a matter of interest, why do you not use the official forms issued by the RGT to log the new owners of ex-racing greyhounds. It only adds to the confusion of actual greyhounds homed.

Navajo, without no effort at all, you have highlighted the terrible price that some greyhounds face at the hands of the Industry.

Are you sure your not a "Anti" LOL

No - not laughing at all.

Navajo's mistake has highlighted a very valid point, in that most people would expect anyone involved in rescue - yes rescue - to be opposed to racing and at the very least sit on fence.

You create a very convincing illusion of being welfare conscious whilst actively promoting greyhound racing but the common denominator, is of course, your 'commercial' involvement in both.

Hardly surprising you will use every trick in the book to protect an industry which satisfies your financial and egotistical needs.

Greyhound protection groups do not judge an entire group of people because of a number of bad ones - we never say 'all' or 'everyone' - so please do not infer we do.

The industry actively promotes the destruction of dogs on economic grounds and there are many who take advantage of this.

However, going back to your article - if the owners were truly responsible, Why on earth didn't they keep him themselves?

Bryan,

Nice easy answer to your question is that LGT is not part of the RGT so why would we use official RGT adoption forms. If you want to check Greyhound Gap, Tia and others also don't use offical RGT forms.

Kev

Again - I have never said ALL dogs are destroyed when they sustain a break - so please do not infer I do.

It is without doubt many dogs are destroyed if the injury is uneconomical to treat.

If the numbers destroyed at Belle Vue can be taken as a guide, then the total amount of greyhounds destroyed because of minor or major injuries has to be in the region of 1,500 annually.

Trudy,

We very rarely rescue apart from when pet owners or pounds get in touch.

Many RGT branches are actually run by racing people and many have involvement and support from the tracks.

What you consider to be an illusion many, including myself, consider to be a fact.

I am not paid a penny by the charity I chair and certainly do not make money from my racing dogs so if I was doing all this for financial reasons then I have made a very big mistake.

To correct another fact Kenny is going to a member of his syndicate, however the person concerned is serving with the British Army so is unable to take for the moment.

I will be unable to answer any more because am about to head off to do a street collection and awareness day in Peterborough as a volunteer of the charity.

Have a good day
Kev

Jiff, keep twisting, you antis are very good at this.

In any sport involving humans or animals as athletes there are risks and injuries and plenty of them, doesn't mean any of them should be abolished.

My greys are living out a lovely retirement, neither are bothered by their former injuries, how many national hunt or flat horses go on to retirement if they break down or break a leg, perhaps you're campaigning to abolish the wrong sport.

Oh! So that will account for why you don't 'rescue' those dogs you knew were going to be and continue to be destroyed by those 10 owners who you referred to a pro racing forum.

The fact you 'very rarely rescue' will also account for why you don't 'rescue' those dogs who you knew were going to be and continue to be destroyed after sustaining only minor injuries?

I understand now - you only re-home dogs if they come with a donation to cover your costs and perhaps make a profit - how enterprising!

So poor old Kenny has been sat in kennels for 6 months?

When do you anticipate he will be rewarded with the lifestyle he has earned and may I add the lifestyle he deserved from birth?

Have you also got a figure for the number of pets that are destroyed because of similar circumstances please...