No , nor could I, but it does happen, some may stay in their homes but many are retired out.

I know a oldish lady how has just received her new guide dog, the old one who was with her for many yrs, has been retired, she was extremely upset when he went... so sad

It's too large a group for me to give you a definitive answer but as a general principle rehoming a dog is an evil - sometimes it is a necessary evil. It will usually stress the dog and it will usually cost a life somewhere down the line in that there are insufficient homes available for adult dogs. In the case, for example, of service dogs for the blind, the quality of life of the disabled person outweighs the detriment to dogs. The benefit to society justifies the subsequent necessary evil of the rehoming. It's pretty obvious that the merit of some functions (e.g guide dogs, police dogs, SAR, etc) is weightier than the recreational use of greyhounds for the purposes of personal enrichment.

I don't approve of breeders who discard their breeding stock once they are done with it, either.

I will second that

[B]"The people who are involved with this never ever contribute on the board, just post more rubbish to ultimately alienate people."

Borderdawn, Who are you talking about? I dont see who you are talking about.

Jodie,

Simon Gower actually said this:-

‘It is critical that we raise the standard of inspection inline
with that imposed by DEFRA and local authorities. As a guide,
local authority inspections of boarding kennels can be expected to be charged at up to £120, and I would anticipate that
most greyhound trainers kennels would command a fee of up to this. The welfare of our racing dogs is the prime concern
for us all.
‘When kennelling dogs for racing, a vet should be able to examine 80+ dogs within a 30 - 40
minute period. I would expect
that a suitably trained veterinary surgeon would be able to do the same during a kennel visit.
‘To do this the vet must have seen every greyhound during a kennel visit, and where special attention to individuals is called
for, then a full examination is warranted, exactly the same as the process adhered to at each race meeting.”In a letter of clarification to Simon Gower from the Certification SubCommittee
at the Royal College of Veterinary
Surgeons, it states:
“As the wording on the certificate is 'inspection' and not 'examination', the subcommittee
feel that veterinary surgeons
should inspect the animals, and only carry out an examination where they feel there is a problem with the animals.‘The veterinary surgeon is certifying that 'inspection' of the animals has taken place, and not examination of each animal.”

When read in context it takes on a whole different meaning to the little one liner you quoted of it. Hardly balanced is it?

Jodie for a start!

Personally , I have no problem with the above, better for a dog to spend its time by someone fire then the rest of it life in kennels

That's so far from word for word that it doesn't reflect what I said. What I posted was to pour scorn on the notion that someone would rehome their dog because they were a lover of the breed.

However that part of my post was based on a misunderstanding of SJ's position which he/she has now clarified and so made my comment redundant.


The motivation makes a big difference. In the case of service dogs a rehoming is part of a process which is altruistic and aimed at the betterment of society. In the case of a greyhound it is a convenience for an owner seeking personal gain. One provides justification for a necesary evil the other, imo, does not.

Naturally but they also occupy that home - which means that another dog cannot - which means that somewhere down the line another homeless dog will die. You would have no difficulty, I imagine, in condemning the pet owner who only kept their dogs a short while and then abandoned them to rescue when they were no longer convenient. Why can you not see that the greyhound industry considers this to be good practice?

The 'one liner' I used was the only one line relevant to what we were debating - inspection at a TRACK not a kennel.

The statement by Simon Gower refers only to kennel inspections - apart from the 'one liner'. The first paragraph of his statement - which you failed to post reads...........

“Although the new kennel inspection form has been widely praised, there have been some misguided rumours that the detail in the inspection will necessitate a 3-4 hour visit by a vet and incur fees of up to £500".

This thread is long enough without including irrelevant text.

The issue is being dealt with.