By Jennifer Ng
For anyone who loves greyhounds, please do some independent research and keep an open mind as the information provided by this organization is extremely biased, and often untrue. I wonder how many of those who "Like" and donate to this organization are aware that they:
- Allocate very little, if any, money toward the actual care and placement of retired racing greyhounds.
- Advocate for goals that would be severely detrimental to the gene pool and future health of the greyhound breed.
- Wouldn't care if their actions led to the destruction of the greyhound as a breed.
- Strictly censor discussions to suppress any positive information about greyhound racing to prevent people from getting an objective view and making up their own minds.
- Use photos and info that are outdated (often from decades ago), out of context (some from other countries), or from isolated incidents to mislead people about the current state of professional greyhound racing.
- May have ties to extremist animal rights organizations that would like to see the end of pet ownership or the 'use' of animals by humans in any capacity.
My review generated a bit of discussion, but none that really addressed the points I brought up. Within a few days, Grey2K had completely taken down the Reviews section of their page, a platform where they apparently couldn't selectively delete comments and block people.
Why is it that anti-greyhound racing groups like this one won't tolerate any kind of rational discussion on their sites? Like anything else in life, there is both good and bad in the greyhound racing industry. Also like most other groups of people, the good outweigh the bad, although the bad tends to get more publicity.
But anyone who has tried to point this out, to share the positive side and the reality of greyhound racing on forums managed by anti-racing admins, has quickly found out their comments are promptly deleted and they are blocked from posting. This invariably happens, regardless of how politely and rationally the comments are phrased.
Why are the anti-racing extremists so quick to suppress any opposing viewpoints? Is it because their whole stance is based on very biased and often misleading information? Because they don't want their followers to be exposed to the truth and learn that there is another side to the story?
The anti-racing activists have controlled the dialogue, through their well-funded campaigns and taking advantage of the media's preference for sensational headlines, for far too long. It's scary how the anti-racing propaganda has created a mentality against greyhound racing that is almost like a hate group, blindly prejudiced against anyone associated with greyhound racing.
To give an example of this, I recently commented on the NGA page applauding them for rescuing 141 greyhounds from a bad situation. In response to this, someone who was obviously anti-racing asked me, "As a vet how many greyhounds have you killed just because some loser couldn't suck a buck out of them?"
I think it's time that people learn the truth about what things are like behind the scenes for racing greyhounds. The racing community is a relatively small one, with many members who spend too many long hours caring for their dogs to post online, or are just not very tech-savvy. For these reasons, and an apparent lack of media interest in the boring, everyday, feel-good stories, there has not been much inside information shared publicly about greyhound racing in past years.
As social media has become more popular, I'm encouraged to see more people involved in the sport being more active about sharing their lives and love of these remarkable dogs. It feels like an uphill battle because of the ingrained prejudice created by years of anti-racing propaganda which is all that many people have been exposed to. I can only hope that there are enough open-minded people out there, willing to learn the truth, to make a difference.
My stake in wanting to see greyhound racing continue has nothing to do with profit. I am pro-racing simply because I am pro-greyhound, and I believe that the U.S. racing industry is integral to the long term health and future of the greyhound breed. I am primarily involved with greyhounds after retirement from their professional racing career, through my adopted ex-racers and volunteering with a greyhound group.
More recently, I've had some limited direct involvement with the industry through co-owning an active racing greyhound with a friend. She is now retired and happily living with her co-owner, and we have a commitment to partner on another racer who is currently still a puppy growing up on the farm. My involvement in the greyhound racing industry is but a drop in the bucket, but I am glad to contribute to a community that values all the awesome qualities that make greyhounds what they are, and works to preserve the breed's working heritage.
I am very open to learning the truth. I figured out on my own that most of the images are from years ago and there has been great improvements in the quality of life for the racing greyhound. That being said, I do believe that if it were not for the efforts of animal rights advocates, these changes would not exist. It is public pressure that created these changes, and I believe that if the racing industry falls out of the eye of public scrutiny the tide of change would reverse. It costs money for better care and there are too many people out there that will do anything to save a buck if allowed to. As long as greyhounds are still being euthanized at the end of their careers, there is still a problem. I dont know what the figures are, but I am pretty sure that it still exists and the euthanizing of healthy pets because they are unwanted is not acceptable under any circumstances. I really would like to see a time where we can have both racing and and an end of euthanizing but I don't know if that is possible.
ReplyDeleteNo one wants to see healthy pets euthanized, especially the dog men in racing. I think any decision to euthanize a dog or any animal is best made between that animal's veterinarian and the owner, not someone removed from the animal and situation and not by legislation.
DeleteWhat a person not closely tied to any particular animal may see as unnecessary, the person closest to that animal may see as a way to relieve the animal's suffering from a painful injury or a debilitating condition such as grand mal seizures. Or, it could be that an animal may be put down because of temperament issues making that animal dangerous.
Your comment is much appreciated. Shame you did not sign your name.