It has taken me a couple of days to gather my thoughts about the Government’s announcement to ban greyhound racing. A 20-month notice period has been given to enable the industry to wind down and to find homes for the estimated 2,900 greyhounds in its care.
The ban is a decision that has been long in coming. There has been an abundance of evidence to show the negative animal welfare implications of an industry that relies on the use of these dogs solely for the purpose of providing entertainment.
I support the decision to ban the industry out of concerns for animal welfare. Here’s why.
Over the last two days I have seen comments from people who take a very strategic definition of animal welfare. For example, the claims that the industry has been brought down by a few bad players. These would be the trainers that abuse their dogs, use aversive training methods, and perhaps even drug them with meth or other substances.
In other words, these claims would have you believe that the only animal welfare concerns about the industry are largely off-track. They are not.
The primary animal welfare concern is on the track for all to see.
The act of commercial greyhound racing requires that the dogs be trained to get very excited and use their sighthound instincts to chase the moving lure and run like hell to get to it. Because they are dogs, they don’t have a sense of self-preservation. They run, and run hard.[1]
In the process of running, a greyhound will often have all four paws off the ground.
Now imagine when another greyhound involved in the chase runs into that other greyhound because they are running in a tight pack. It’s a high-speed crash. And one, may I add, with no safety equipment. No air bags, no steel body of a car to protect them. Nothing.
These crashes lead to horrific injuries and are the ones that most commonly reach the news outlets when the dog is so severely injured that racetrack euthanasia is required.
There are others.
Bruising, hock (tarsus) fractures, concussions and muscle tears are common injuries that I have encountered as I have read through the health histories of ex-racers, which often have to be pieced together using the racing steward notes. Note: I don’t work at the race track – the greyhounds I work with are all ex-racers whose adoptive families seek out my help.
A dog can be injured many times in their career before they are retired from racing. They may be rested for as little as three days as evidenced in the racing records. They are back racing as soon as possible.
The industry responded to criticism of injuries by creating a Rehab to Rehome (R to R) programme. On the face of it, it sounds kind. A dog breaks a hock, or has a leg amputated, and they are put through rehabilitation so they can find a home where the adopter can assume responsibility for their ongoing care and the inevitable conditions like arthritis that they will present with.
The fact that the industry needs a rehabilitation programme shows that it accepts injuries as a normal part of operations. Yes, the R to R dogs can go on to have a good pet life – but is it really acceptable to hurt them so badly in the first place?
(It is said that the trainers love their dogs. I just don’t understand the kind of love that enables you to kiss the dog on the head as you load it into the start boxes knowing that within seconds it may be severely maimed or killed.)
And now for the bad players
In the 15 years I have been in practice, I have seen the evidence of the bad players in the industry.
These include:
- A greyhound surrendered by his trainer with injuries from a mauling; no vet treatment was sought. His foreleg was frozen with scar tissue so he was unable to use it properly
- A small female greyhound who tested positive for steroids which likely caused her malformed genitalia that pre-disposed her to urinary tract infections
- A greyhound who was deaf from neglect; her ear passages were so severely scarred from untreated ear infections that she lost her hearing
- A greyhound who came from a large breeder well-known for the poor living conditions of his dogs. She had to be wormed numerous times because her worm burden was so high.
In short, I have seen too much.
I accept that there are good players in the industry; I’m pretty sure every industry will have good players and bad ones. Back in the Dickensian times when child labour was an accepted practice, I’m sure that there were factory owners who were nicer than others. In time, however, society realised it wasn’t right to place children in harm’s way for profit and introduced child labour laws.
Are you seeing a theme yet?
I might add here that when greyhounds were raced at Addington last summer in 30+ degree heat, was it only the dogs of the bad players who were raced? I doubt it.
The human cost of closure
At this point, I would like to acknowledge that Greyhound Racing NZ says that 1,054 people are employed by the industry. Having lost my job several times during my career, I know how stressful redundancy can be.
If you love your job, being forced to give up what you love is a tough pill to swallow.
However, these job losses must also be put into context. Radio New Zealand has updated the total loss of jobs this year in the public sector alone to be 7,000 and companies across New Zealand have also laid off staff due to tough economic conditions. None of these people were given a 20-month notice period when they could continue to earn income and look for work. Today, most staff made redundant get about a month’s notice – maybe three if they are lucky.
Numerous reviews and promises – why a surprise?
The industry has been the subject of numerous reviews with a litany of animal welfare problems. I’m not going to go through all three reports in this post but quote only from the most recent one, released in May 2023:
- There remains much to do
- The industry has a way to go to convince stakeholders that animal welfare is the overriding imperative
- Race day injuries have been a long-standing concern. The injury reduction strategy has not yet delivered improved outcomes.
- Progress on track standards has been slow. Track assessments were completed but did not always result in timely remediation. This leads to the inevitable conclusion that greyhounds could have been injured unnecessarily.
- Adoption of the Greyhound Australasia rules was a significant undertaking, underestimated by GRNZ (Greyhound Racing NZ).
- The Racing Integrity Board (RIB) is confident progress would not have been achieved to the extent it has without the work programme in combination with close monitoring.
- A broader range of greyhound registration process issues remain unresolved and are affecting traceability.
- Implement education programmes that ensure all licensed persons understand their obligations under the standards, rules and policies. This is a long-standing issue, for which progress remains slow.
- Should the industry continue, a high degree of monitoring will be essential.
- If the RIB is asked to continue its role in the implementation and monitoring of a future work programme, there will be cost implications not currently budgeted
- Inevitably there will be cost implications for the industry if greyhound racing is to continue based on a revised work programme.
I think we are all guilty of misleading ourselves at one time or another. In terms of the greyhound racing industry, it seems to be the workplace culture.
Scroll through the news feed about the industry and there have been consistent claims of making progress. The industry has survived and been allowed to continue after so many damning reviews. With a change in government late last year, and a Minister of Racing who was widely regarded as a racing supporter, they must have thought they were home free.
Politics can be a bitch.
Our current Government, one year into its term, has had its share of bad publicity. We’ve made worldwide headlines with the introduction of the Treaty Principles Bill, for example, while teenagers from boot camps have absconded. Heading into the Christmas break, this Government needed a win – something that most of the public would feel good about. (Surveys have shown that up to 75% of the NZ public would vote to ban the sport.)
In my opinion, that’s why Winston Peters decided it was time to pull the plug. I never expected him to do it and I’m sure that was the opinion of the industry, too. Winston, however, is a shrewd politician.
It’s rare for animals to come out the winners of any political maneuver. I’ll take the win.
RIP Diamond Roman
It should not be lost on anyone that hours after the ban was announced, on a Southland racing track, a greyhound named Diamond Roman was severely injured. The race report states that the greyhound was, “checked and fell into bend. Referred to the veterinarian and reported to have a compound fracture of right tibia/fibula which was severely comminuted[2] and displaced. Due to the catastrophic nature of this injury the greyhound was euthanised on humane grounds.”
Anyone still think there isn’t an animal welfare problem with greyhound racing?
[1] A racing greyhound, according to Greyhound Racing NZ, runs at a pace of 17 m per second, reaching speeds of up to 60 kilometres per hour. https://www.grnz.co.nz/greyhounds.aspx
[2] A comminuted fracture is caused by severe trauma resulting in a bone broken in at least 2 places.
Kathleen Crisley, is Fear-Free certified dog massage therapist and canine fitness trainer. She has a particular passion for working with dogs and their families to ensure injury prevention and quality of life. She specialises in working with anxious and emotionally damaged dogs. Her mobile practice, The Balanced Dog, is based in Christchurch, New Zealand. She has never worked for the greyhound racing industry.
DoggyMom.com 