Three more mutilated Greyhounds

by Mike Novack Fri Jun 05, 2009 11:48

It seems despicable to me that people would bet on the outcome of animals killing animals. Weird having dogs chasin hares in an unnatural setting. And certainly despicable killing ones that don't "perform" well. But someting about this piece bothers me ......

"At the coursing events, the greyhounds, which have been transformed into virtual killing machines via “blooding” (being fed live rabbits or cats-hares are now too scarce in many parts of Ireland to “waste” as training fodder) are unleashed upon the hares to terrorise all of them and inflict injury or death on those that fail to reach the escape hatch in time."

1) natural vs unnatural --- Are you meaning to say that you would have no objections to "field coursing"? Somehow I doubt that.

2) the nature of dogs ----- not "killing machines" but killing ANIMALS. That's the sort of critter a dog is and a healthy dog needs absolutely no outside inducement to chase down and if it can catch it, rip apart some prey animal. At least that's true for dogs over here, perhaps Irish dogs are different? To the extent that dogs do no behave in this manner that is the result of selective breeding by humans for unnatural characteristics. Pretty soft pussy ambushes small rodents and birds; by and large human fancy for various fur colors and patterns hasn't damaged their hunting abilities too much. But some dog breeds are too slow and clumsy to catch much of anything, that's all.

In other words, when my dog is outdoors and a bunny (or anything else pops into view -- a border collie/Australian shepherd crosss so a "sight hound"). off he goes. Or a deer. Or a moose or bear which he has sense enough to harrass but not close in on. An it's by experience that he leaves skunks and porcupines alone (their defenses are quite sufficient against a dog). That's NORMAL behavior for a dog. It's what that sort of animal is supposed to do. Not bad/wrong.

This is not "just a dumb animal; doesn't know any better". If you think that there is something bad/wrong about the situation then essentially you are saying nature/life is bad/wrong. Which is your perogative of course. By all means seeks a better higher plane of existence if that is what you believe in. Just count me out.

by Catlady Sun Jun 07, 2009 02:06

Mike I think you hav missed the point of this article. It is certainly not to demonise dogs, from my reading!

Much of what you say is true - horribly inbred dogs who can no longer perform naturally and so on.... however there is a VAST difference between a dog (or cat or whatever the predatory animal in question) following his or her instinct to hunt, and a gang of humans snatching endangered wilddlife so this can be done for bets, whilst at the same time treating the hunting animal (in this case the greys) with such utter contempt once they are no longer "useful".

I have 7 cats, 2 snakes and 2 dogs, so I can see the predatory instincts in various stages of "domestication" if you will. The dogs are crossbreeds, a Jack russell cross who certainly has the instinct to hunt but is deathly afraid of thrushes and chickens (you'd have to ask her why!) but licks snakes (??? once again) and a collie cross who just loves everyone..... This is obviously a result of domestication and both are a far cry from wolves!

The cats are obviously different. Some of the 7 hunt (unfortunately and thankfully none seem very good at it) but it certainly has not been bred out of them yet. As cats are most useful as hunters of mice and rats, I suppose it was never intended to breed them for anything other than "prettiness".

The snakes don't get the chance to hunt as obviously the cold here in Ireland would kill them if they were set free. And it's illegal to do so for obvious reasons. But they most certainly still have that instinct and I keep them well away from the cats!

If I were a gambling woman (as are those brought to light in the above article) I could place a cat against the python and see who wins/escapes. I don't because it is horrific and cruel and yes, unnatural A grey chasing a trrapped animal is as unnatural as 2 pitbulls thrown into a pit or me chucking the python and the cat into a cage. It is horrific and totally unnatural.

by Mike Novack Sun Jun 07, 2009 18:29

No, I wasn't missing the intended point of the article and I thought that I had been clear enough about that (the people betting on the outcome, the unnatural setting, etc.)

I was trying to be helpful, because sorry, using doubtful language/thought in a piece makes it easier for enemies to discount the entire thing.

Dogs have been messed up by their breeding in some cases but probably more generally by their living in overly "indoor" settings and in overly built up areas. I don't live in the city and out here dogs except for little yappers that have to be kept in lest they end up as fisher food often get to wander. Ours always have. Just trained not to cross the bridge out to the road and they can be loose when outdoors. Mind we have around 87 acres of our own woods and that's part of several square kms of continuous forest canopy with no drivable roads in it.

Lots of wildlife (up to bear and moose) and every dog that has ever lived here has hunted/scavenged. How good at it to a certain extent depending on the dog. And after all the biomass in voles exceeds the biomass in deer (so much of what even the large dogs catch are voles, wood rats, etc.). But this is about chasing, not necessarily catching, and never has a rabbit or hare been sighted by one of the dogs that they didn't take off chasing. Pretty rare for them to ever catch a squirrel or chipmunk as those are fast and wary, but they don't give up trying.

I was objecting to talking about sight hounds like greyhounds needing to be trained to chase -- to that being called "machine". Quite the converse, to the extent that a greyhound has to be trained to the chase is a measure of breeding damaging to the "purpose" of the animal (I mean natural purpose)

by Pete. Mon Jun 08, 2009 17:02

"The cats are obviously different. Some of the 7 hunt (unfortunately and thankfully none seem very good at it) but it certainly has not been bred out of them yet. As cats are most useful as hunters of mice and rats, I suppose it was never intended to breed them for anything other than "prettiness"."

Maybe not!

The cats are probably the wildest animals in your house...as they are almost untouched by human "breeding".

Probably,they don't bother hunting because you feed them so well !

For the very latest on the origins of house-cats see this month's Scientific American:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-ta...e-cat

by catlady Tue Jun 09, 2009 01:42

Pete I'm fairly sure the snakes are wilder judging by their personalities, biology and history with humans. One of my cats is semi wild. Why would you think a snake would be more domesticated than a cat???? Genuine question!

by Catlady Tue Jun 09, 2009 01:54

But (to me anyway!) the point of thisd article is to highlight the cruelty involved in human exploitation of these dogs.

I fail to see how your response helps that argument. |Perhaps I am missing something?

Either way there is a vast vast difference between your dogs running and catching voles/rats/rabbits and a pack of profit-lustful humans trapping endangered wild animals to train them to escape via a hole in a fence. Sorry but cats/dogs can hunt all they like in nature, nothing excuses idiots trapping animals so it can be done to make money!
Cat

by Pete. Tue Jun 09, 2009 08:23

"Why would you think a snake would be more domesticated than a cat????"

By "wildest" I should have written "most savage".

A hungry house-cat is a ferociously efficient,and merciless, killer.

As was pointed out in the Scientific American article most "house-cats" are feral, running wild in the back streets of cities etc.living off their own wits.

As the article pointed out,the genetic different between house-cats and the true "Wildcat" ( which has never been domesticated) are so trivial that they are about the same as between the French and the Italians..

Spot the differences....

The true Scottish Wildcat:
http://www.scottishwildcats.co.uk/

Quote:
"The Scottish wildcat is infamously the only wild animal to be completely untameable, even when captive reared; they may look a little like your pet cat but these are incredibly tough superpredators, sometimes called the Tiger of the Highlands."

Untamed Frenchman:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uxb0JHqzlA

Untamed Italian:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Silvio_Berlusconi_in_...n.jpg

No difference...

by John Carmody - Animal Rights Action Network (ARAN) Tue Jun 09, 2009 22:27 [email protected]

The helpless dog featured in that picture above is called 'angel'. Myself and another volunteer Niamh Allen rescued her in the most horrific circumstances several years ago. She was dieing when we got to her, children in the local area abused her so much and stuck nails in her.

Thankfully we got her out of this situation and she now lives with devoted guardians in Co Limerick and she is doing very very well, but of course for everyone grey we find there are always so many that are in need of our help.

Over the coming weeks ARAN will be announcing a national day of action against greyhound racing, contact ARAN for more information.

by Josh B Sat Sep 25, 2010 17:03

I agree with Mike. I dont "blood train" my hound and she goes absolutely bonkers for any quick, little creature. It is truly written in them.
However i think the biggest offense here is the fact that they kill their dogs when they do not do well in the sport. That is horrendous...how could you kill your own dog?
So i say, if it takes a little slanderous propaganda to get these dogs some help, go right ahead and say these people blood train and torture, and even molest children. If you can kill your own dog you're probably capable of a lot worse, especially if the big money is hanging in front of your face. Human life only seems so great and superior because we ARE human, but it is all the same for every life. These people should be killed too and i would not shed a tear for them.

by Realist Sun Sep 26, 2010 18:50

Look around you
Human life is not that important either
just money.