Emma Milne

[Happy Humber]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

Is it not strange that before Hunting was banned these same people were telling us how simple it is to rehome an ex pack Foxhound into a family home and now tell us all Greys should be exteminatet ?

 

[IreneJ]

http://www.emmathevet.co.uk/

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

From which this:

I think I’d like to see a time where every rescue centre in the country wasn’t stuffed full of animals discarded by an industry using animals for human entertainment and also I’d like someone to actually read the article in the way it was intended instead of going off the deep end then telling all and sundry that I said something I absolutely did not.

so - will go out and read the article and try to understand what she was saying.

m

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Well, count me in as another absolutely incensed greyhound owner.

I have read the article, three times. I wanted to get my facts straight before writing a blog on it. I don't know what people were accusing her of that she claims she didn't say, but the article certainly seemed to me to suggest that she wanted all ex-racers dead and the industry shut down. She waffled a lot, with plenty of 'if this is so then maybe' kind of phrases, but that was the intent of the article as far as I could judge.

I thought I was going to have a heart attack I was so angry. If anyone wants to read what I wrote on the subject, it's here.

Since all this blew up, it seems the editor of Dogs Today is trying to do damage limitation and has said she is devoting several pages of the next issue to showing how sweet and gentle greyhounds can be, especially with smaller animals, and has over two pages worth of photographs sent in by people anxious to redress the balance. She is also asking for suitable cover pics to be sent to her. Large files, close up head shots, portrait not landscape. I suspect you'll need to be quick if you want to submit one, because they'll be getting the next issue ready very soon, I think.

GAH! If only she'd followed up on what her staff were telling her and actually READ the thing before allowing it to be published....

 

[Eceni]

You're all going to shoot me for this, and probably ban me from life for K9, but I've just bought and read Dog's Today and can't for the life of me see what the problem is.

as far as I read it, she's saying:

1. racing greyhounds have such a massive prey drive that it over-rides the normal canine responses to calming signals.

2. this makes it very hard for the incredibly honourable people who work in the (utterly overwhelmed) rehoming centres and for those who take on the rehomed greyhounds. the woman in the article was seriously injured trying to protect other dogs from those she had taken on.

3. Given that the greyhounds are doing exactly what they're bred to do, it's hardly their fault. Her point, as far as I could see, was that we don't need to be farming greyhounds for sport, and if we do, why do we then try and treat them as domestic pets.

I thought it was an intelligent, thoughtful, heart-felt, thought-provoking article and she should be commended for it.

It absolutely isn't normal for one dog to kill another - they do it because the prey drive is inherited - and it doesn't have to be. I was at the Whippet Club at the weekend and talked to some show and working whippet people - the two strains can have very different prey drives and it would be entirely possible to breed greyhounds that didn't kill other dogs on sight.

I'm not sure I'd go with Emma on the idea that we shoot them when their life as a racer is done, but let's face it, that's what happens to the overwhelming majority of them ('shoot' here is a euphemism for PTS). I've worked alongside people who were in greyhound rescue and they knew full well that they were barely touching the tip of the iceberg - exactly as the lurcher rescue (and bull rescues) are doing now. There are too many dogs bred in the UK today, period. There are way, way too many racing greyhounds and it isn't necessary.

Greyhounds can make incredibly good pets, but we don't have to select for the ones that live only to run very, very fast at small fluffy moving things and annihilate them.

seems logical to me

manda scott

 

[clairej810]

You're all going to shoot me for this, and probably ban me from life for K9, but I've just bought and read Dog's Today and can't for the life of me see what the problem is.
as far as I read it, she's saying:

1.  racing greyhounds have such a massive prey drive that it over-rides the normal canine responses to calming signals.

2.  this makes it very hard for the incredibly honourable people who work in the (utterly overwhelmed) rehoming centres and for those who take on the rehomed greyhounds.  the woman in the article was seriously injured trying to protect other dogs from those she had taken on. 

3.  Given that the greyhounds are doing exactly what they're bred to do, it's hardly their fault.  Her point, as far as I could see, was that we don't need to be farming greyhounds for sport, and if we do, why do we then try and treat them as domestic pets. 

I thought it was an intelligent, thoughtful, heart-felt, thought-provoking article and she should be commended for it. 

It absolutely isn't normal for one dog to kill another - they do it because the prey drive is inherited - and it doesn't have to be.  I was at the Whippet Club at the weekend and talked to some show and working whippet people - the two strains can have very different prey drives and it would be entirely possible to breed greyhounds that didn't kill other dogs on sight. 

I'm not sure I'd go with Emma on the idea that we shoot them when their life as a racer is done, but let's face it, that's what happens to the overwhelming majority of them ('shoot' here is a euphemism for PTS).  I've worked alongside people who were in greyhound rescue and they knew full well that they were barely touching the tip of the iceberg - exactly as the lurcher rescue (and bull rescues) are doing now.  There are too many dogs bred in the UK today, period.  There are way, way too many racing greyhounds and it isn't necessary.

Greyhounds can make incredibly good pets, but we don't have to select for the ones that live only to run very, very fast at small fluffy moving things and annihilate them.

seems logical to me

manda scott

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

We are all entitled to our own opinion and here is mine.

You say - "1. racing greyhounds have such a massive prey drive that it over-rides the normal canine responses to calming signals." How then does my reasonably successful ex racer live perfectly calmly with my cat (was two but she died a brain tumour not because she was eaten) and on walks does not react to any cats, dogs, foxes, squirrels, pigeons etc beyond a glance?

Your second point about " this makes it very hard for the incredibly honourable people who work in the (utterly overwhelmed) rehoming centres and for those who take on the rehomed greyhounds" - Yes greyhounds can be hard to rehome but not necessarily because of their prey drive, they can be difficult to rehome because people like Emma Milne make sweeping dismissive statements which people who don't know the breed accept as fact and they become scared to even try a greyhound.

And you say - "I thought it was an intelligent, thoughtful, heart-felt, thought-provoking article" Well I for one thought it was a diatribe written in haste and in anger, it was not thought through or balanced in any way.

 

[Eceni]

We are all entitled to our own opinion and here is mine.
You say - "1.  racing greyhounds have such a massive prey drive that it over-rides the normal canine responses to calming signals."  How then does my reasonably successful ex racer live perfectly calmly with my cat (was two but she died a brain tumour not because she was eaten) and on walks does not react to any cats, dogs, foxes, squirrels, pigeons etc beyond a glance?

Your second point about " this makes it very hard for the incredibly honourable people who work in the (utterly overwhelmed) rehoming centres and for those who take on the rehomed greyhounds" - Yes greyhounds can be hard to rehome but not necessarily because of their prey drive, they can be difficult to rehome because people like Emma Milne make sweeping dismissive statements which people who don't know the breed accept as fact and they become scared to even try a greyhound.

And you say - "I thought it was an intelligent, thoughtful, heart-felt, thought-provoking article"  Well I for one thought it was a diatribe written in haste and in anger, it was not thought through or balanced in any way.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Neither of us is saying every racing greyhound is the same - clearly they aren't, I was trying to make that point clear and failed as she did. She actually said that most of the ones that come into her surgery are gorgeous, submissive, beautiful dogs.

In real terms, the rehoming centers start out trying to find the ones that will fit best in pet homes. But it remains the fact that if you breed a dog for a purpose, a high proportion of those dogs will be fit for that purpose and so very hard safely to rehome - it has nothing to do with Emma Milne stating a) a fact - that she had come across two serious dog-dog attacks in a relatively short space of time and both were related to greyhounds and b) this is not surprising and not the greyhounds' fault , they're doing what they were bred for.

so why, in a world when we have way too many dogs being bred and a serious deficit of good, caring homes for them, do we have to keep breeding racing greyhounds? It's a question not a statement of fact, but it seems perfectly viable to me.

ms

 

[IreneJ]

It absolutely isn't normal for one dog to kill another - they do it because the prey drive is inherited - and it doesn't have to be.  I was at the Whippet Club at the weekend and talked to some show and working whippet people - the two strains can have very different prey drives and it would be entirely possible to breed greyhounds that didn't kill other dogs on sight. 

You're overlooking the facts that 1) not all racing greyhounds are inclined to kill small animals (out of the three I've personally owned, only ONE would have done that) and 2) many, many other breeds will indeed kill another dog, given half the chance. Go read the post about the chav in the dogpark. I can tell you from my own experience that the worst cat killer I met was a spaniel, the most vicious all-round was a Westie, and the one who inflicted GBH on a smaller dog merely for being too close was a spaniel too. That one bit the snout clean off a JRT pup which then had to be PTS.

There are too many dogs bred in the UK today, period.  There are way, way too many racing greyhounds and it isn't necessary.

Far too many dogs bred, of all breeds, especially the new 'designer breeds'. I agree with that.

Greyhounds can make incredibly good pets, but we don't have to select for the ones that live only to run very, very fast at small fluffy moving things and annihilate them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Same could be said for other breeds, using different words. You cannot control what people do when choosing which dogs to breed. They have a huge problem in the US with more than 50% of all ex-racers dying of osteosarcoma. This of course, bothers the racing industry not at all, because they're usually done with racing when the disease strikes, but research is being done at Ohio State University and Dr Cuoto tells me that he believes it will be proved that there is a strong genetic component. Unsurprising, since we don't have nearly the incidence of OS here among our Irish or English bred dogs.

On the other hand, neither do we have the two-tier crate system.

Well I for one thought it was a diatribe written in haste and in anger, it was not thought through or balanced in any way.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I agree with that, and it seems to be what the Dogs Today editor thinks, also.

so why, in a world when we have way too many dogs being bred and a serious deficit of good, caring homes for them, do we have to keep breeding racing greyhounds?  It's a question not a statement of fact, but it seems perfectly viable to me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Because unless you ban the industry completely, there is a need to breed replacement dogs, and by it's nature you will always need to breed more than you will use. You will always get a proportion of dogs that don't make it in terms of health or ability. Same with the horse-racing industry, and if I'm not mistaken, they have a similar problem in that ex-racing horses don't always make ideal rehomers.

An unpalatable fact for the anti-racing lobby is that without greyhound racing we would not have the incredible dog that we have today. Show greyhounds look different and have more genetic problems in terms of health - because like greyhound racing or not, they breed for use and performance not looks. My four have all had different builds, shapes, weights and heights, but they could all run very fast and none of them suffered from stuff like congenital hip dysplasia or PRA. Congenital health problems in racing greyhounds on this side of the Pond are actually quite rare. We don't even have the incidence of Pannus that the US greys do.

 

[Eceni]

Because unless you ban the industry completely, there is a need to breed replacement dogs, and by it's nature you will always need to breed more than you will use.  You will always get a proportion of dogs that don't make it in terms of health or ability. Same with the horse-racing industry, and if I'm not mistaken, they have a similar problem in that ex-racing horses don't always make ideal rehomers. 

but we have four on our yard, and they're all stupendously amazingly gorgeous, good-natured horses - but yes, I think the wasteage in Tb racing (which was my professional focus for 10 years) is grim and should be stopped.

we're overpopulating the planet with humans and with all human-related livestock. At some point, we have to stop. And yes, other breeds of dogs are a nightmare and we can't stop idiots breeding dog-dog attackers - tho we can make them muzzle some of them.

we need to do something, though... and there must be another way than constantly churning out more pups

and, for the record, in my opinion, having been more or less where Emma Milne is, I'd say if Beverly Cuddy was less of a knee-jerk supplicant, she'd stand behind what she published, and start a serious debate such as this one where people can begin to tease out the arguments in a less emotive fashion.

how she got/keeps her job is entirely beyond me, but she certainly doesn't seem keen to foster honest, open, adult debate

An unpalatable fact for the anti-racing lobby is that without greyhound racing we would not have the incredible dog that we have today. Show greyhounds look different and have more genetic problems in terms of health - because like greyhound racing or not, they breed for use and performance not looks. My four have all had different builds, shapes, weights and heights, but they could all run very fast and none of them suffered from stuff like congenital hip dysplasia or PRA.  Congenital health problems in racing greyhounds on this side of the Pond are actually quite rare. We don't even have the incidence of Pannus that the US greys do.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

is there no chance of breeding functional greyhounds that aren't the appalling parody of a dog that is the show greyhound? is this not something we should be considering, rather than saying it can't be done?

ms

 

[clairej810]

Greyhounds can make incredibly good pets, but we don't have to select for the ones that live only to run very, very fast at small fluffy moving things and annihilate them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Same could be said for other breeds, using different words. You cannot control what people do when choosing which dogs to breed. They have a huge problem in the US with more than 50% of all ex-racers dying of osteosarcoma. This of course, bothers the racing industry not at all, because they're usually done with racing when the disease strikes, but research is being done at Ohio State University and Dr Cuoto tells me that he believes it will be proved that there is a strong genetic component. Unsurprising, since we don't have nearly the incidence of OS here among our Irish or English bred dogs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Just going off topic for a sec - Guillermo Couto is great isn't he Irene? He helped me get Tiny diagnosed properly - he has AID and megaesophagus and I had trouble getting a diagnosis and he sorted it all out for me.

There is a dog with a genetic tendency to osteosarcoma in the UK (which I won't name) but dogs from his line do get bone cancer quite often I am told.

 

[oakmoorehill]

As most on here know I own 2 greyhounds 1 a show bred and 1 an ex racer. The racer came to me straight from her trainer at 2 1/2 years old. She went to my friends straight from the track in fact she had raced that night. She lived with her dogs both large and small for a week then she came to me and lives happily with my whippets my setter and my other greyhound and also my cat.

She is also now kc registered and goes to ringcraft and shows. The ring craft we attend is run by people who have toy dogs and yes the first time I took her she was muzzled as I didn't know what she would do when she saw the small furries that go. I had no need to worry and after that week never bothered with the muzzle again.

Don't get me wrong I'm not stupid and I would not free run her without a muzzle on especially when you have 2 greyhounds running loose you have to think safety first. She is a happy relaxed dog in the house great with kids.

The show dog is totally the opposite he has always suffered from seperation anxiouty he barks for no reason although is now not as bad as he was. But he is a greyhound he can run not as fast as the racer but due to a RTA lat year is not fit at all. He loves to chase usually my whippets or the racer he is terrified of the chinese cresteds that go to ringcraft.

I take both dogs fun racing at Stapely water gardens which Morgana on here organises whenever we can. Even the show dog races now although mostly he is chasing the racer.

I do know of greyhounds that have attacked small dogs in fact I when young owned a JRT that was attacked by a racing greyhound. I also know a woman who some time ago took on an ex racer that killed a cat that strayed into her garden but if precautions are taken with thes dogs even those with a strong prey drive would not need to be destroyed.

As someone else has already stated the same people who called for a ban on hunting and foxhounds to be rehomed as pets would be easy. Now if anything has a prey drive these dogs do so if they can be homed as pets why not greyhounds?

Sorry to go on but as others have said count me as a very annoyed greyhound owner. As my OH said not long after having Button

If I had realised that racers were like this we would have had one years ago

.Oh and lastly when my JRT was attacked I swore never to have a greyhound I hated them and would cross the road before I would walk past one. I was 14 at the time. I now would not be without my 2

 

[TTT]

"It absolutely isn't normal for one dog to kill another"

I wouldn't necessarily agree with this statement. I think that it comes very natural for some dogs (from all breeds) to behave like this. My own dog was given a right hiding from a dog who he knew very well and spent a lot of time with, he ws a similar size and weight and was lucky not to bleed to death. And of course we all know of instances where dogs have fought/attacked - in streets, in parks etc. and we are horrified by it. I know my own dogs, particularly when they are both loose can be quite bold, they are not so brave when they are alone. I would own up to having dogs, one in particular, that goes wild at cats - that's just what they are like, they were never encouraged to nail cats it just comes NATURALLY to them, just as it comes natrually for some dogs to kill/chase other dogs.

Of course we all like to think that OUR LOVELY ROVER "wouldn't do that sort of thing" but would we bet our lives on it? All we can do is be RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR OWN DOGS.

 

[oakmoorehill]

"It absolutely isn't normal for one dog to kill another"
I wouldn't necessarily agree with this statement.  I think that it comes very natural for some dogs (from all breeds) to behave like this.  My own dog was given a right hiding from a dog who he knew very well and spent a lot of time with, he ws a similar size and weight and was lucky not to bleed to death.  And of course we all know of instances where dogs have fought/attacked - in streets, in parks etc. and we are horrified by it.  I know my own dogs, particularly when they are both loose can be quite bold, they are not so brave when they are alone.  I would own up to having dogs, one in particular, that goes wild at cats - that's just what they are like, they were never encouraged to nail cats it just comes NATURALLY to them, just as it comes natrually for some dogs to kill/chase other dogs.

Of course we all like to think that OUR LOVELY ROVER "wouldn't do that sort of thing" but would we bet our lives on it?  All we can do is be RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR OWN DOGS.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

This is why my greyhounds if I find a safe area to run them in run in muzzles .unfortrunately most people see them muzzled and think they are vicious. But how many times do we hear of rotties staffies etc that have attacked other dogs whilst out of their lead. Does one dog on dog attack make the whole breed vicious?

At a show on Sunday I was watching the working group being judged when the BOB rottie dived across the ring when the handler was moving it out of the ring and straight at my friends dogue de bordeaux that was waiting to go into the puupy group. This rottie was given group 4 but several people watching said it should have been asked to leave the ring. The dogue de bordeaux was fast asleep behind us as we watched another friend in the ring

 

[Eceni]

If you go back to feral dogs/wolves/any non-domestic canids, there's a well-defined system of 'calming signals' which prevents inter-pack carnage. It isn't normal for dogs to attack/kill others of their own species because there are some fairly hard wired behavioural responses that prevent this. They don't need to kill, they can establish pack order without.

When we remove them from their pack situation and domesticate them, when we keep them apart from other dogs and fail to socialise them, or when we breed them for specific prey-drive OR dog-dog aggression, we can destroy their normal responses - either the attacker's ability to read the signals and respond adequately, or the victim's ability to give those signals in the first place.

Turid Rugaas, one of the world's foremost dog behaviourists has written an immensely good monograph on calming signals which is well worth reading and takes very little time - it's short, coherent and well argued. (she's written others on barking and lead-pulling as well. If I were still in practise, I'd give them out to every puppy owner who came in for vaccination or socialisation classes). In it, she describes the process by which she encouraged one of her own dogs to re-find her own calming signals and then used her as the 'stooge' with other dog-dog aggressives for many years afterwards.

so I contend that (to paraphrase Sir Ian McKellan in entirely another context), while it may be common for dogs to attack other dogs, but that's because we put them in unnatural social circumstances (for the dogs, not for us). It isn't normal .

and given that we're not going to go back to living in round houses with our tribal dogs in their pack, we need to address the realities of the world we live in. I freely and completely accept that your rescue dogs may be wonderful, but the rehoming services are overloaded, the wastage from the racing world is horrendous and clearly some of these dogs are dangerous on the street.

so back to Emma's point that we're the ones with the big frontal cortexes and the opposing thumbs and, more to the point, we're the ones that made this mess. Is there no way we can get ourselves and the dogs out of it?

ms

 

[IreneJ]

Same with the horse-racing industry, and if I'm not mistaken, they have a similar problem in that ex-racing horses don't always make ideal rehomers. 

but we have four on our yard, and they're all stupendously amazingly gorgeous, good-natured horses - but yes, I think the wasteage in Tb racing (which was my professional focus for 10 years) is grim and should be stopped.

I merely meant that many of them are not a novice ride and not for everyone - very similar to greyhounds really. I don't think they're everyone's ideal dog, either.

I think that's one of the problems, actually. I wish people would do the research. Someone else (sorry, lost track of who) mentioned that two greyhounds together mean you have to be very watchful and this is so true, and yet I don't know if this is something which adoption agencies mention at all. A person who'd had a solitary greyhound for years could be fooled into thinking that two was the same as one, and it isn't always the case.

Me, I wouldn't have a BC or a JRT if they were the last breeds on earth, because I know I can't give them the exercise and mental stimulation to keep them sane.

Well, maybe a golden oldie might be manageable. :lol:

is there no chance of breeding functional greyhounds that aren't the appalling parody of a dog that is the show greyhound? is this not something we should be considering, rather than saying it can't be done?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

One can only hope, but the sad fact is that if you look at other breeds which have become an anachronism in terms of use, they've often ended up .. shall we say .. not the dog they were. As you say, some of them are positive parodies of the dog they were.

Just going off topic for a sec - Guillermo Couto is great isn't he Irene?  He helped me get Tiny diagnosed properly - he has AID and megaesophagus and I had trouble getting a diagnosis and he sorted it all out for me.
There is a dog with a genetic tendency to osteosarcoma in the UK (which I won't name) but dogs from his line do get bone cancer quite often I am told.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Yes, he's a sweetheart - always has time to reply to people and help you out.

I think I know the dog you mean. He's my 'Lovely Irene's grandfather. I'm not paranoid, but am probably more watchful when she has a limp. However, I've heard my US friends say things like 'I know he'll get OS eventually, but ... ' and they really mean it. So sad. A good friend of mine lost one last autumn. He had LS so was not a good candidate for amputation.

Sorry - back to the topic.

 

[posh totty]

If you go back to feral dogs/wolves/any non-domestic canids, there's a well-defined system of 'calming signals' which prevents inter-pack carnage. It isn't normal for dogs to attack/kill others of their own species because there are some fairly hard wired behavioural responses that prevent this.  They don't need to kill, they can establish pack order without.
When we remove them from their pack situation and domesticate them, when we keep them apart from other dogs and fail to socialise them, or when we breed them for specific prey-drive OR dog-dog aggression, we can destroy their normal responses - either the attacker's ability to read the signals and respond adequately, or the victim's ability to give those signals in the first place.

Turid Rugaas, one of the world's foremost dog behaviourists has written an immensely good monograph on calming signals which is well worth reading and takes very little time - it's short, coherent and well argued.  (she's written others on barking and lead-pulling as well.  If I were still in practise, I'd give them out to every puppy owner  who came in for vaccination or socialisation classes).  In it, she describes the process by which she encouraged one of her own dogs to re-find her own calming signals and then used her as the 'stooge' with other dog-dog aggressives for many years afterwards.

so I contend that (to paraphrase Sir Ian McKellan in entirely another context), while it may be common for dogs to attack other dogs, but that's because we put them in unnatural social circumstances (for the dogs, not for us).  It isn't normal .

and given that we're not going to go back to living in round houses with our tribal dogs in their pack, we need to address the realities of the world we live in. I freely and completely accept that your rescue dogs may be wonderful, but the rehoming services are overloaded,  the wastage from the racing world is horrendous and clearly some of these dogs are dangerous on the street.

so back to Emma's point that we're the ones with the big frontal cortexes and the opposing thumbs and, more to the point, we're the ones that made this mess.  Is there no way we can get ourselves and the dogs out of it?

ms

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

would it be possible for you to put Turids findings on here and im sure a mod could put it in the FAQ sect ? i would be very interested reading it :thumbsup:

 

[IreneJ]

If you go back to feral dogs/wolves/any non-domestic canids, there's a well-defined system of 'calming signals' which prevents inter-pack carnage. It isn't normal for dogs to attack/kill others of their own species because there are some fairly hard wired behavioural responses that prevent this.  They don't need to kill, they can establish pack order without.
When we remove them from their pack situation and domesticate them, when we keep them apart from other dogs and fail to socialise them, or when we breed them for specific prey-drive OR dog-dog aggression, we can destroy their normal responses - either the attacker's ability to read the signals and respond adequately, or the victim's ability to give those signals in the first place.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

But in fact this is where greyhounds have an advantage because they're kept in litter groups far longer than other breeds and have a chance to really learn social signals. IMHO, it's one of the reasons they can be intolerant of 'rude dogs'. I'm not talking about prey drive and attacking small fluffies, I'm talking about getting normal 'dog snarky' and telling off a dog which is bothering them.

An awful lot of pups are taken away too young and never learn that it's not OK to bat a bigger dog about or lick his face or mount him or whatever. They don't seem to read the signals at all when a more mature dog is telling them to back off and leave them alone.

Personally, although I fully acknowledge that there is a problem with prey drive with some greyhounds and those dogs will kill small animals simply because they run, some of the time when a greyhound 'attacks' another dog it's because the other dog simply doesn't understand what the greyhound is telling him. It's not confined to greys, of course. But when a greyhound does it, the public perception is that the greyhound is 'attacking' their dog because it 'thinks he's a rabbit'. And articles like EM's do not help this misconception one little bit.

 

[Eceni]

would it be possible for you to put Turids findings on here and im sure a mod could put it in the FAQ sect ? i would be very interested reading it  :thumbsup:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

This is her website (if I've got the method of posting links right):

Turid Rugaas

When I said 'monograph', I meant a small book - too big to post on here in its entirety - but I got it from Amazon for not very much money and read it in an evening sitting by the fire - and have spent the recent couple of weeks out on walks boring my OH silly by pointing out the tiniest, minutest calming signals in the dogs we meet - or the absolute lack of them in some dogs... (and now she's started spotting them too, and she's never been interested before, so it's clearly working... )

well worth a look, honestly

m

 

[oakmoorehill]

It was me that mentioned that 2 greyhounds together need to be watched and no rescue didn't tell me that simply because if you re read my post you will see that my ex racer came to us straight from her trainer and not from rescue. It is just my opinion and the same applies to my whippets I am very aware of other dogs in the area.

The reason I run Button in a muzzle is because I know she has been taught to chase and IF she did get it into her head to chase another dog I would prefer he not to be able to hurt it. I am also aware that should she be attacked by another dog whilst wearing the muzzle she could not defend herself.

Racing greyhoinds when in training are not kept on their own they are kennelled with at least one other dog

 

[clairej810]

It was me that mentioned that 2 greyhounds together need to be watched and no rescue didn't tell me that simply because if you re read my post you will see that my ex racer came to us straight from her trainer and not from rescue. It is just my opinion and the same applies to my whippets I am very aware of other dogs in the area.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Quite right Helen, I'm always very careful if there are other dogs about if I have both boys out together - I don't let them off the lead in a public place because I know they'd leg it, but also I don't want them to go belting up to other people's dogs for whatever reason because I know how intimidated I feel if a strange dog or two comes belting up to us.

It's common sense to be aware of others, and if everyone did it I think there would be a lot less dog attacks - and I mean ALL breeds not just greys.

I've got the calming signals book and it is very clear and easy to follow. It works for Max but Tiny is a bit dim and doesn't take everything in - he's got a teensy bit of brain damage, I think he was dropped on his head as a baby. He doesn't always understand signals from other dogs.

 

[galty]

You're all going to shoot me for this, and probably ban me from life for K9, but I've just bought and read Dog's Today and can't for the life of me see what the problem is.
as far as I read it, she's saying:

1.  racing greyhounds have such a massive prey drive that it over-rides the normal canine responses to calming signals.

2.  this makes it very hard for the incredibly honourable people who work in the (utterly overwhelmed) rehoming centres and for those who take on the rehomed greyhounds.  the woman in the article was seriously injured trying to protect other dogs from those she had taken on. 

3.  Given that the greyhounds are doing exactly what they're bred to do, it's hardly their fault.  Her point, as far as I could see, was that we don't need to be farming greyhounds for sport, and if we do, why do we then try and treat them as domestic pets. 

I thought it was an intelligent, thoughtful, heart-felt, thought-provoking article and she should be commended for it. 

It absolutely isn't normal for one dog to kill another - they do it because the prey drive is inherited - and it doesn't have to be.  I was at the Whippet Club at the weekend and talked to some show and working whippet people - the two strains can have very different prey drives and it would be entirely possible to breed greyhounds that didn't kill other dogs on sight. 

I'm not sure I'd go with Emma on the idea that we shoot them when their life as a racer is done, but let's face it, that's what happens to the overwhelming majority of them ('shoot' here is a euphemism for PTS).  I've worked alongside people who were in greyhound rescue and they knew full well that they were barely touching the tip of the iceberg - exactly as the lurcher rescue (and bull rescues) are doing now.  There are too many dogs bred in the UK today, period.  There are way, way too many racing greyhounds and it isn't necessary.

Greyhounds can make incredibly good pets, but we don't have to select for the ones that live only to run very, very fast at small fluffy moving things and annihilate them.

seems logical to me

manda scott

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Manda

Take you points one by one, and points you made with your second post

Greyhounds have a massive prey drive.

Wolves in the wild have to survive(50000 genrations have taught them this), wolves in the wild will attack and kill and be killed by another pack of wolves who invade their terriotry.

Your second point was sneering, we are made to be sorry for the Greyhound owner(not the dogs fault????)

Third point.

Because they make very good pets, but as with ALL dogs you have to keep an eye on them, if you no your dog you no if it can turn or not.

Are you saying as Milne said that a breed of dogs should be extermanated because one owner could not controll their dogs,(based on fact stated that Milne stated tis case and mentioned two others she had HEARD ABOUT)

Think it might be normal for one dog to kill another if we as owners let it happen, if we do why blame the dog.(Blame deed not breed)

All dogs will kill cats if they can catch them, A Greyhound can, does that mean that it should be exterminted as Milne is asking?.

Her lack of knowledge in saying that they are taught to CHASE AND KILL makes her a moron with very little knowledge on the schooling of greyhounds.

As a side point she also mentioned Lurchers, what next whippets???

As ireane said they are kept in their litter up till they are a year old, think they are the only dog(sheep dogs and fox hounds included) to understand canine signals.

Will be interesting what this stupid women says in the next issue of Dogs Today(her thinking if this is going to cost her money if she dont say the right thing)