Cross posted The Greyhounds Retired Database site [Links removed]in association with Greyhound-Data now has the facility to include private rehomings on its database. A very large number of Greyhounds are homed without ever entering an Adoption Organisation, many of them are simply taken home by their owners once they finish racing. It was decided therefore to set up a section in order to list those Greyhounds that have been privately homed either by the Owners, Trainers or other individuals who may not otherwise show up within the current systems. Anyone wishing to add their greyhounds to this section may do so by sending details of their dogs with the following information to the contact details (email) below. Race name or Sire and Dam details. Pet Name. Birth date. Date of Homing (i.e Month & Year) Location You may be contacted for further verification. This enables all the thousands of greyhounds rehomed by owners and trainers each year to be acknowledged on the site. If you are a pet owner who has taken on a retired racing greyhound direct from an owner or trainer then please get in touch with kev@lincolnshiregreyhoundtrust.com or privatehoming@bgrd.co.uk with details as outlined above and where possible a recent picture to add to the site. Alternatively if you are a racing owner or trainer and would like us to include details of dogs you have either rehomed privately or kept yourself as a pet then please e-mail details to one of the above e-mails along with one or two lines describing where dog is etc. Again if there is no photo on Greyhound-Data then any you have would be much appreciated so we can update the record.
Is that not obvious? Thanks for the link SJ - Will put my un-named pup who we re-homed from the breeder on there.
I just dont get why the privately homed greyhounds need to be "acknowledged on this site"? What do they do with it then? If it is of some use I may do it...if it is of no use I will not do it!! Is it for the record of numbers? If so it could be useful but only in the right hands or i dont see the point.
Hi, Any dogs rehomed through rescues have records kept on them and are accounted for. This is a way so that the greyhounds rehomed privately either by their racing owner or directly from re homing kennels can be accounted for rather than people assuming they have just disappeared. Also it could be helpful for anyone with retired dogs trying to trace littermates etc.
Yes they can but as records are held anway of the amount re homed most rescues don't bother. It's a shame really as it's nice to see those dogs that have found homes.
Why do owners and trainers feel the need to re-home their dogs -why don't they keep them as companion animals when they are no longer of any use for racing? Correct me if I'm wrong but couldn't anyone log details onto this data base. In theory, a trainer or owner could register they have 'privately' re-homed X amount of dogs, with little or no verification and in reality the dogs could have been destroyed - yes?
Hi Honeysmummy I think Kev Stow's post on another forum explains what will be done with these records. "Just to update we now already have over 100 dogs on this list inside a week. These are dogs that will likely be described as missing or dead by certain groups and used against greyhound racing as a sport so it is really important that as many dogs privately rehomed are added to the list. All we need are race names, pet names, date of rehoming and brief description of where they have gone. Cheers Kev" As I said in my previous post - there is no verification process in place and anyone can register a greyhound as being 'privately' re-homed without any proof. This data base is just another attempt by those in support of this exploitative gambling industry - to muddy the waters, fudge the numbers and 'claim' X amount of dogs have been re-homed and are accounted for. The racing industry already keep a data base of every dog that no longer races - including destruction for economic purposes and dogs which their owners and trainers have failed to account for - why do the racing industry continually refuse to declare these details?
Kevin Stow also said this, "One or two have asked us to add dogs rehomed by RGT branches as they haven't included put them on as rehomed themselves. Sadly some RGT branches do not use the site. However all RGT dogs should be included in the national RGT figures they report so in order to try to be honest we are not adding those dogs. Be nice if some of the anti groups could be as honest, hey?"
So who can? Are they involved in the racing industry - would they have a vested interest in seeing this data base grow and where do the people who compile the data base get their information from and how do they verify it to be correct?
I covered the subject of greyhounds homed independently in an article (please see below) in 2007. Little has changed since except the regulatory/governing bodies have changed their name and played musical chairs. I will at some point in the future come back to this subject and highlight more recent cases of dogs given to anyone. Greyhound homing scandal 22 October 2007 Clive Ellis In March this year 2 greyhounds and 5 pups were rescued from a house in Yarmouth. The dogs were found living in dreadful conditions and one of the pups was suffering a broken leg. Both the sire (In The Distance) and dam (Call Her Sophie) had been advertised in a free-ads paper and given away without a home check by the previous owner. Since the exposure of David Smith who was reported killing at least 10,000 young, healthy greyhounds on behalf of trainers and owners, it has become increasingly common for greyhounds to be off-loaded in this way when of no further use or value to the racing fraternity. Smith would kill a greyhound for £10 but a trainer can dispose of a dog quickly and for no cost at all if advertised free and given to anyone. Needless to say the greyhounds are never neutered and the future welfare of the animal is of little importance. The words ‘free to good homes only’ in a scribbled and misspelt pet shop window advert for greyhounds under the ‘care’ of trainer Margaret Bailey are totally meaningless. Blue Ruin is just one of the dogs Bailey (attached to Yarmouth stadium) has given away without neutering or home check. After only 6 months Blue Ruin was no longer wanted by the new owner who left the animal imprisoned in a council house after moving out to live with her boyfriend. The dog showed signs of physical and mental abuse and was found living in terrible conditions in a property that reeked of urine and excrement. The lack of concern by trainers and owners of racing greyhounds for the future welfare of an animal may surprise many but when talking to the industry it is apparent the greyhound is viewed as a commodity. Indeed the National Greyhound Racing Club (NGRC) who regulate racing in Britain refer to these beautiful and majestic animals as ‘units.’ John Lochrane (attached to Shawfield stadium) and Steve Meazer were just two of many trainers off-loading greyhounds through the free-ads in September this year, and neither considered a home check necessary. Meazer, who runs dogs on Swansea’s flapping (unofficial) track, remarked how quickly the animals are gone when advertised and boasts homing over 100 greyhounds. When asked if the dogs are vaccinated or neutered he replied: “No mate, I don’t do anything like that.” An advert for greyhounds submitted by Anne Cossey can be seen in a free-ads publication regularly. She claims to have homed about 500 dogs in the last 10 years but is simply acting as go-between for trainers and owners in Norfolk who are being saved the trouble of advertising themselves. At no stage is any responsible vetting procedure carried out for these unwanted greyhounds. It is not uncommon for Cossey to provide contact details for dogs belonging to trainer Armine Appleton and it is two of his greyhounds that were rescued from a house when their new owner, a drug addict and alcoholic, was found dead from an overdose. The above, however, are not managing a rescue that you would hope and expect to show more compassion for animals. Think again. Whilst Peter Debenham is a breeder, trainer (attached to Yarmouth stadium) and owner he is also homing greyhounds from outside and was recently to say: “I never really see the point in a home check.” In August Debenham was trying to off-load unwanted pups, seemingly to anyone willing to pay £125, and visitors have described the site and kennel block as appalling. A Norwich based campaign group supporting the abolition of racing have intervened on 5 occasions when greyhounds originally homed by Debenham were no longer wanted. The danger of giving anyone the responsibility for care of an animal is perfectly illustrated by the story of Bantes Chic (later named Sally); a brindle female given to Ms C Lewis when the animal was retired from racing. Sally’s new home was a flat in Plymouth where, during a 3 month period, the greyhound was virtually starved. When eventually rescued Sally weighed only 15.4 kg (half the weight for a greyhound of her size), was covered in sores and flea ridden. Described by an RSPCA inspector as one of the worst cases of cruelty he had ever witnessed, it is thought a miracle this poor greyhound ever survived. And the importance of neutering cannot be underestimated as all too often no measures are taken to prevent breeding, or mating is orchestrated by new owners who cannot resist the opportunity to make what is perceived easy money. In spring this year the new owner of greyhounds Drominboy Pretty and On The Dot was advertising 7 pups for £100 each and at the same time the sire was being off-loaded free, as was the dam about 6 weeks later. On The Dot was given to a stranger without advice, questions asked or home check and it would be reasonable to assume the same lack of care was shown to all pups and dam. Such mindless breeding further exacerbates an already dire situation with the number of dogs bred for racing exceeding many times over the most optimistic figure for greyhounds responsibly homed. All greyhounds running on official tracks in Britain come under NGRC rules, and Rule 18 covers disposal of the animal. Various options are open to the last registered owner including euthanasia but section 1, E applies when homing a greyhound independently, and it states this action is to be carried out “responsibly.” When it was put to Luke Taylor - NGRC Retired Greyhound Co-ordinator - that it is not responsible to give an animal to someone when you know nothing about the person or where they live he replied: “I’m not disagreeing there.” Clearly Rule 18 is being broken by trainers and owners but will the industry do anything about it? I wouldn’t hold your breath. A trainer listed above who has flouted the rule more than most was reported to the NGRC, but 5 weeks later the allegation has not been followed through. You cannot, of course, make someone care about the wellbeing of an animal and so the option given to trainers and owners to home greyhounds independently needs reviewing. A simple amendment to Rule l8 that would go a long way to protect dogs was put to the NGRC but dismissed out of hand, and whilst very evident apathy prevails so the tragedy will continue. Lord David Lipsey, Chairman of the industries governing body - the British Greyhound Racing Board (BGRB) - was asked 3 times for his opinion about the scandalous homing practice but has yet to provide a comment. Update: NGRC Investigating Officer Clive Carr, has subsequently visited Norfolk following a number of allegations concerning the independent homing of greyhounds in that area. Carr, however, appeared more interested in those making the allegations than the allegations made, and does not believe there is a case for any trainer or owner to answer. Perhaps, as a representative of the NGRC, this should come as no surprise. The word ‘responsibly’ is, according to Carr, open to interpretation suggesting it was carefully chosen by the industry to allow the last registered owner to do as they please. And it suits the industry to turn a blind eye. When a greyhound is retired the owner/trainer will complete and return an NGRC retirement form, and that’s another greyhound the regulatory body can record as homed. Collectively, national homing figures receive a significant boost without any funding from the industry and it is data that can be used to promote racing. Further evidence, if it was ever needed, that self regulation serves only to protect the BUISNESS of racing and not the greyhounds. [link removed]
What a great intro post Ellis, Im thinking you want to be here for no other reason than spouting about greyhound racing!
I own an ex racing bitch who came to me sttaight from the breeder/trainer and yes just by chance as Ellis was going on about Yarmouth she did come from Yarmouth in october 2007. She was not given free to good home I bought her as a race dog and retired her myself. She is now registered as a retired dog and with my family and myself as her owner. She is also now registered with the kennel club. I have not seen anything in this thread that would make me want to register her on another database.
I own an ex racer - I retired him directly from the track. I am happy that I know where he is. I think the most helpful database would be the one that states - factually - the names of those greyhounds PTS prior to retirement as a direct result of any injury incurred whilst racing or trialling. Unfortunately, the names of those hounds will never appear on ANY of the homing pages. The only way for absolute clarity in the figures relating to the retirement/homing of greyhounds bred for the racing industry is birth to death tracking. In response to a similar question about this, someone on another forum has already pointed out: The racing bosses have chosen not to reveal the figures they have as obviously it would show a number are PTS when their careers end The racing bosses referrring to the GBGB.
