Dapto - you have a good memory. I had to endure a 45 min phone call from the then-secretary asking me to withdraw the whole article because I was putting down the industry. Since then they rebuilt the track for half a million and got back the same rubbish they started with (see Hogan, who even got the Minister to open it). I don't agree the first turn is any good now but it would not matter as the problem is in the first metre. The whole track should have been shifted, say, 5m north and the access road re-routed. Ah well, that's water under the bridge.

UTS - the official reaction to the UTS INTERIM report by GRNSW and the Minister was poorly worded. Dumb, in fact. The report was written and intended to describe many of the elements that had been undertaken to describe the problems. UTS should have been more careful to state its limitations (which I have told them).

A full report will be some months away as they take all the data and test it in various areas so as to set up sound principles for the future. Consequently I would set aside the interim report (but study it if you wish), the official comments and the SKY News comments.

Newson - a chameleon perhaps. Still, I support the WDA and UTS jobs because at least he recognised those issues and took action to attack them.

GBOTA/NCA - libel is a problem for me here.

WPK - I thought the track turn improved a bit when they worked on the camber pre-2001. However, the cutaway work on both turns in Aug 2001 immediately increased interference and affected winning boxes. I have not bet at WPK since. The same issues were involved in Launceston, the old Cannington and Maitland, where they also caused problems.

Governments - yes yes yes. The concept of a managing board/committee is worse than ridiculous in this day and age, as is appointing bureaucrats to manage day to day. But Ministers just do what the last bloke did, occasionally moving the deckchairs a bit.

We need a serious corporation with serious management and positive leadership - state and federal. How you will pay for it - you will have to ask Newson and the Alliance who were both talking about a reduction in races and tracks. Disgraceful!

Lismore trials - basically this emerged from a GRNSW talkfest where they said "it would be a good idea if ..." It was one of those run it up the flagpole deals. Why they picked Lismore with a bend start for its most popular trip and then used lower class dogs is beyond me.

OK. I multi-viewed a lot of those races to see how it might help. Nothing, nil, zero. A complete waste of time.

In any event, there are a large number of 4-5-6-dog races in Oz every week. They offer the opportunity of comparing outcomes with normal 8-dog races. Still do, particularly in Vic where they have finally realised there is a shortage of dogs. This is a candidate for statistical evaluation.

The essence of the argument is that - my theory - apart from the jump, most interference impacts the first few dogs which are nearest and keenest to get to the lure. Oversimplfying, the others tend to be followers. The smaller proportion of injuries and falls (especially falls) occur as a backmarker tries to move up thru the field.

My theory then continues; 6-dog races may well offer a tiny improvement in injury rates but far more important than that are all the other factors involved in running the race - lure, box position, track shape. surface quality, cambers, dog habits, etc. NB, why does the odd dog refuse to pass on the outside of the leader?

Partial proof of the pudding is that, in general, wide hooped lures have tended to separate the dogs a bit - albeit that other aspects of the track (eg tight turns) can overwhelm that benefit.

UK experience is of no use due to the outside lure and box seeding as well as the 6-dog fields. All that would cost squillions to implement here even ignoring the massive loss of exotic betting turnover. (Fewer than 8 runners also cuts in to gallops turnover - it's not rocket science).

Straight tracks - three states run them with success, particularly in Vic where the TAB status is a huge bonus and where meeting frequency has been increased. The failure to continue with Wyong and Appin is an absolute disgrace as it removed from the program opportunities for several sorts of situations ...
1. Dogs which like straight tracks
2. Dogs which cannot handle a turn well
3. Dogs recovering from (leg) injury
4. Conditioning for 700m races (via 366m).
5. Educating learners

In a sense. it can be likened to dogs which handle coursing well and those which do not. And v.v.

Effectively, their absence reduces the economic value of the investment in the average dog - and therefore the viability of the whole industry.

That aside, the Wyong elimination was essentially an outcome of politics - ie of to and fro between the NCA and GRA while they worked out who would get the most favourable outcome (viz Singleton, Gardens, etc).

Whether or not finances influenced the decision there or at Appin, an over-riding factor should have been the need to maintain straight track racing no matter what - including subsidy if necessary. It is that important to the overall industry.

UTS - don't knock it until the exercise is finished (see my other post).

A short answer to your last question is to get rid of bureaucrats and management by committee and replace them with modern accountable organisations.

SANDOWN SUNDAY.................11 RACES

NO SHORTAGE, ITS A FIGMENT OF YOUR IMAGINATION.......

And I don't expect there to be a shortage in Victoria Charles, so your right regarding the examples you've used.

In actual fact, I don't expect Victoria to ever have a shortage in the near future as its the place to race.

I'm sure we both agree with that statement.

Everyone is talking about last week or last month or last year but the problem is much bigger than that.

There are a number of causes of the dog shortage (to which GRV has just reacted) but the underlying issue is simple arithmetic.

Comparing 2015 with 2003 (2016 is not available), Australia has more meetings (up 1.9%) and more races at those meetings (up 6.3%).

Coupled with a decline in breeding that means that average starters per race is down from 7.72 to 7.57. That might not sound like much but we are talking about 300 thousand starters p.a.!

Built in to that fall is a short term but repeating habit of starting with 10 dogs, including the reserves, and ending up with 5, 6 or 7 runners. That's much too big a proportion to make much sense. Injuries and illness will occur, of course, but those mathematics are not helpful. Either trainers are being too ambitious or someone is twisting their arms, or maybe both.

Far more important is the big picture and the policies and actions of people running the industry. Two matters dominate there.

First, over a long period, administrators have concentrated on lifting the number of meetings and the number of races within those meetings. Remember that there was a time when 10-race meetings were standard whereas now they are regarded as a failure and 12 is the normal objective. Due to a combination of greed and TAB pressure, extra meetings were stuck in wherever a hole popped up. If you did not do that, French trots got a run (which further split up the income pie).

Second, the combined pressure of dog population changes and rises in race numbers automatically forced slower dogs into the ring, thereby lowering average field quality. That's why you now see maidens and low grade events at major city tracks. It's also why the fields at better provincial meetings have fallen away - again, more maidens and more bottom grade events (in Victoria's case, accentuated by adding two city meetings to the long existing two).

That situation has been prodded along by paying more attention to the God of welfare - ie via increasing the proportion of each litter that gets to a racetrack. Never mind the quality, just feel the quantity.

In short, the product has been trashed. OK, really top events are doing fine but the rest are a shadow of their former selves. No wonder that serious punters are hard to find.

Who did all that? Short term thinkers in state administrations whose objective is to do what happened last year, plus a bit.

So blinkered have they been that they forgot about customers and they forgot about the public - hence the diabolical outcomes of the live baiting episodes and lashings of abuse about injuries. All the response was post-crisis. Nobody had a plan to address issues like those. Nobody had Plan B, or even thought a Plan B might be useful.

So we now have the public offside, the customers offside, the boxes emptying, the product dying slowly, money running short, government departments in make-work mode, and anti-racing mobs telling politicians what to do.

Major organisational reform is the only answer and only Racing Ministers can bring that about.

To true Bruce, ring Randwick, Flemington, Eagle Farm etc to talk to them. When Pathways or Maiden races are programmed on Thursday night meetings, the Penny will drop with most trainers!
Don't agree about the Public perception re: Live baiting. Majority couldn't care less. Politicians pandering to Animal Activists and Greens. THEY PAINT A PUBLIC HATRED of killing rabbits, totally distorted but LOUD AND IN YOUR FACE! publicity.

Check fields at Wenty, Bris, Angle Park on Thursday night! Invariably noms extended. Shortage of dogs? You bettcha and will get worse. Administration response? lets introduce a Puppy bond! That will help.

And your right Bruce the Quality of racing has dropped significantly over the last 2 years. Does this affect punting turn over? certainly the professional's.

To true Bruce, ring Randwick, Flemington, Eagle Farm etc to talk to them. When Pathways or Maiden races are programmed on Thursday night meetings, the Penny will drop with most trainers!
Don't agree about the Public perception re: Live baiting. Majority couldn't care less. Politicians pandering to Animal Activists and Greens. THEY PAINT A PUBLIC HATRED of killing rabbits, totally distorted but LOUD AND IN YOUR FACE! publicity.

Check fields at Wenty, Bris, Angle Park on Thursday night! Invariably noms extended. Shortage of dogs? You bettcha and will get worse. Administration response? lets introduce a Puppy bond! That will help.

Given the actual social point of view,
the rehoming situation needs to be solved before the situation on the breeding front can get sorted.

Greyhounds make really lovely pets after their racing days. To promote that into EVERYONE'S head must be priority for all of us, unaware what ever sort of Greyhound owner we are.

Talking to a neighbour about your pet Greyhound may be as important as ruling out the right match for your bitch to get the amount of litters back on track. As long as the reputation of racing itself and Greyhounds as pets isn't clear, problems are in the cards.

Steve, I was playing the devils advocate. There is a shortage and there will be a progressive demonstration of this by the extended noms week after week and getting worse. The CEO of GRV was so adamant that over breeding existed on false and misleading info provided by GA. The word around town was that he wanted ways to promote breeding.....a complete turn around.

The next thing for me is the over racing of dogs because of extended noms.....Animal welfare is the GRV corner stone so I hope someone in there will be monitoring this........will not be holding my breath.

Of interest is your point about over-racing - including if trainers are "encouraged" to nominate more dogs, even if they don't really want to. Witness the excessive scratchings on the day before the race - eg quite a few 5 and 6 dog races.

The vital issue here is that there has never been a definitive study into the effect of racing on the average dog's system. While there will always be exceptions, the basic premise must be that a 7 day break is best for any dog, 14 days for stayers, so they can replenish the system.

I make that claim not on any personal experience (indeed, all personal experiences should be ignored just because they are personal and small samples) but on (a) general reading of veterinary statements (eg John Kohnke etc) and (b) 50 years of monitoring the detail of race performances over various distances, especially long trips.

To some extent, that data may be coloured in the middle stages following the arrival of EPO but that's another story.

The concept that dogs can perform like robots is ridiculous, as it is for any animal, including humans. But the key is that there is no real reference point. And you cannot tell by just looking. As with track designs, no-one has really studied the subject comprehensively and are therefore not able to match principles and theories with practical evidence.

A good start would be for authorities to analyse a number of before and after blood samples just to check the numbers.

Meantime, short fields will become more common unless races are cut back. I don't mind much as 12 races is too much to digest properly and so you have to start ignoring some. These days, I seldom bother doing the form for more than 7 or 8 and bet on much less than that.

However, some of the first ones I cut are low grade races at city tracks, all 600s, where rafferty's rules apply, and most long races where you can't be sure how they will back up.

For example, I would not believe anyone that Burn One Down was anywhere near 100% last Saturday at Meadows. He plodded. A likely reason - a record breaking LAW run 6 days earlier at Sale. Kohnke called these "gutbusters". Happens all the time.

Deadset, Bruce, you are a gem, aren't you.

Quote..."The vital issue here is that there has never been a definitive study into the effect of racing on the average dog's system. While there will always be exceptions, the basic premise must be that a 7 day break is best for any dog, 14 days for stayers, so they can replenish the system.

I make that claim not on any personal experience (indeed, all personal experiences should be ignored just because they are personal and small samples) but on (a) general reading of veterinary statements (eg John Kohnke etc) and (b) 50 years of monitoring the detail of race performances over various distances, especially long trips."

You sometimes border on the insane.
You certainly border on pompous, arrogant, and most importantly, IGNORANT!
"indeed, all personal experiences should be ignored just because they are personal and small samples)."
Then you go on about the PERSONAL experiences of Dr. Konke and YOURSELF!
Really?
So, out of convenience, a TRAINER's personal experience should be IGNORED!

You are a lunatic.

You previously wrote this...

"Michael,
For months I have seen many comments from different sources criticising the Working Dog Alliance report and Newson for commissioning it.
Not a single one has backed up their views with reasons or evidence.

I can assume only that some trainers did not like being advised there were better ways of educating, training and caring for dogs than live baiting (plus other points)."

I had no intention to reply because it also borders on arrogance, disrespect, and a waste of bloody time..but I will now...tonite, as painful as it will be.

Have to feed up now, probably feeding completely wrong...what the f#ck would I know being a Greyhound trainer, hey.

I hate going over things that I have previously dismissed as garbage.
I rate the WDA report as garbage. You rate it as one of two significant moves over the last 50 years as a miracle revelation to thrust the industry forward.
With those two opposing viewpoints, we will never agree.

Regardless, I will give you some of my views and reasons for them opposed to those other ignorant, nasty, and rude critics of the WDA report that haven't...the gall of them.
Perhaps they just couldn't be bothered arguing the obvious.

Before I go on, I have to say this...

Quote..."I can assume only that some trainers did not like being advised there were better ways of educating, training and caring for dogs than live baiting (plus other points)."

That, my learned friend, is a pretty pi$$ poor assumption I can only guess is borne from facetiousness.
Totally ill-mannered, ill-informed, and disrespectful.
Very ordinary indeed.
Not the smartest thing you have written on an internet forum.

THE WDA REPORT.

I'll once again say to you I don't disagree with ALL of the report.
Having said that, a large part of it I would class as common knowledge and wasted money as had the GRNSW had the inclination to do some work, they could have written most of it themselves.
I also want to make it clear that some of those people who compiled that report are extremely intelligent and competent people.
One of them isn't.
They did a job, and that job was based on a brief.
GRNSW's (newson's) PUBLIC brief can be viewed in this report.
If you think that this is the ONLY brief newson gave, you are nave.
You would also be a fool if you believed that McHugh was not given extra briefs from baird's cronies.
At a mere glance of the brief makes it very clear that key objectives from newson had to be met.
There is not a hope in hell of me going through the whole report to please you, Bruce...It's painful.

1. GRNSW's very first sentence in its PUBLIC brief...

"GRNSW wants to support a sustainable and vibrant industry and move away from any reliance or association with animal products on lure."

WDA response...
"There is simply no evidence to support the widely-held belief that it is necessary to use either a live animal or an animal-derived product to teach a greyhound to chase a lure."

The very INTEGRITY of the racing Greyhound has just been swept up and thrown in the bin! Just to appease newson and his anti racing pals?
"There is simply no evidence..."????
Really?
Forget the live animal part, we all know that and accept that, but NO ANIMAL DERIVED PRODUCT?
Well, Bruce, they have just revolutionized and at the same time completely wiped out techniques used by thousands of experts that use food as a reward to teach animals tricks!
Absolute genius!
The GREYHOUND is such a unique animal that it can be trained like no other animal on the planet...AMAZING STUFF, Bruce.
Based on this theory, there are millions of dollars to be made manufacturing synthetic schmackos and kibbles. Get cracking, Bruce, otherwise you will miss the boat.
I know you haven't trained Greys, Bruce, but training a Greyhound to chase a lure around a racetrack is a TRICK!
To KEEP them KEEN to do this trick, yep, they occasionally need a REWARD! A dirty old sheep skin will do it or a bit of dried liver from a 500kg - 700kg unlive-baitable bull!
Because you haven't trained before, Bruce, you wouldn't know this and neither would the WDA, but unless the Grey has a relatively high prey drive (less and less do) after a few bumps and crashes, a USELESS synthetic piece of rag WON'T KEEP THEM FOCUSED!!!! "TOO HARD, MATE...BUGGER YOU, I'M NOT DOING IT ANYMORE!!!"
Capish?
Show a dog a piece of nylon in one hand and a Schmacko in the other hand, which one will the dog take first? The Schmacko EVERY time...a 5yo kid could work it out.

Deadset INSULTING.
Dare I say it, also insulting to the majority of the highly intelligent team who had to present that "fact".
Doesn't add up for mine, Bruce.

So, where are all the accounts of the WDA's methodical trials and records of data from testing numerous dogs to arrive at the genius conclusion that "There is simply no evidence,"?
Did they just look on the net and couldn't find anything?
What about all the consultation they said they did? Couldn't find anyone with a Schmacko?

Utter bullsh!t and these other points are no better...

2.
Quote..."It is common practice for greyhounds in Australia to spend a significant period of their adult life under conditions of individual housing. This is unacceptable from an animal welfare standpoint. Dogs are highly social animals and single-housing eliminates their ability to demonstrate one of the Five Freedoms - Freedom to express normal behaviour: by providing sufficient space, proper facilities and company of the animals own kind. Cohousing of compatible dogs should be adopted as standard practice for greyhounds at all stages of their lifecycle."

Well, out of all the composers who contributed to the WDA report, no prizes for you for guessing which one wrote this little doozy.
I am honestly finding it hard to fathom how this got into the report, but on reflection, of course, newson commissioned this, didn't he?

I'll try and break this down, just for you Bruce, as you have no understanding, not having experience as a trainer and all...

1a. "It is common practice for greyhounds in Australia to spend a significant period of their adult life under conditions of individual housing."

Greyhounds have an expected racing life of around 2 years, ie: from 2yo to 4yo, in general.
That is the top end of it...if they have ability and stand up to racing. So the SIGNIFICANT PERIOD of a SUCCESSFUL racer is around 2 years. Not a very significant period of its WHOLE life, is it?
Then we have the not so successful ones who, through no fault of their own, aren't endowed with much ability at all. That is evaluated quite quickly and they don't spend much time in the kennels AT ALL...hopefully they go off to find a couch to lay on.
Then we have the naughty ones...fighters and non-chasers (a growing number with the yummy plastic restrictions, Bruce) yes, well, they are quite quickly evaluated after their discrepancies and move onto GAP...not much kennel time either.
Then there are the others, who for many reasons, ie: injury, owner decides not good enough, etcetera, etcetera, DON'T spend a significant period in kennels.
I wonder why the contributor didn't mention all this???
Any ideas?

1b. "This is unacceptable from an animal welfare standpoint."

Considering my previous points, or don't consider them at all if you wish, what is their viewpoint on the public caging budgies? Unacceptable?
Pet Rabbit...unacceptable?
Galahs...unacceptable?
Pet lizards and snakes...unacceptable?
Goldfish...unacceptable?
Etc, etc...watch out Public!
The dog is a pack animal who is housed with its own kind (pack) and are NOT isolated with no interaction with others.
My dogs express PLENTY of normal behaviour, they have PLENTY of room in their kennels, and they have the BEST facilities.
No, from an animal welfare STANDPOINT, they do very nicely, not like the above group.

1c. Nice one.
"Cohousing of compatible dogs should be adopted as standard practice for greyhounds at all stages of their lifecycle."
Says someone who obviously has NO EXPERIENCE (bit like you, Bruce) in the real world of Greyhound husbandry. No doubt would never have reared a Greyhound, let alone breed a litter and educate and train them.
Ignorance is bliss.
So, Fido and Fidene seem to get along just dandy. Full grown adults that have individuality.
I throw them in the same kennel without muzzles. They can't be muzzled all day and all night, it's cruel and also against the rules.
During the night, young Don Juan next door takes a liking to Fidene, then Fido, completely out of character, through a fit of jealousy, rips the throat out of poor Fidene and she is left to suffocate in her own blood, and experiences a slow excruciatingly painful death.
I walk into my happy kennel in the morning and discover that the IDIOT who wrote that stupid, ignorant, no idea piece of crap that was in the report was WRONG.

Bravo.

I could go on and on but I'm already sick of it, Bruce.

By your genius, the WDA report is a revelation.
Now you want ALL dogs, regardless of distance, to have a mandatory 7 day stepdown before racing again. For stayers you want a mandatory 14 day stepdown.
You also want sires that are perceived as sprinter sires BANNED.
Not least of all, you want all persoanal experiences from trainers to be IGNORED! What, just listen to some antis writing reports for the industry's future?
In the not too distant future our sport will be on its knees with the {{{{ SHORTAGE }}}} as Steve so rightly put it.
Are there any other constructive ideas you wish to put forward to drive us out of the approaching oblivion?

The only way out of this mess is for the PTB to get proactive and meet their obligation to bring changes and implement improvements to secure the industry's future.
All of the above rubbish is destructive and non conducive to welfare of the industry.
They need to stop referring to the antis as THE PUBLIC and supervise general acceptable and realistic welfare initiatives and concentrate on sustainability of the industry.

Its now a political football game and we need a political referee...a strong National body with muscle.

I'm done.

Bruce Please Explain further about how you would like SIRES hand picked ...
Who owns these Sires
Who decides what and how many breedings a Sire can have a Month under your future plans .
Who will own the Breeding rights for any future breeding ...

Will us back yard Owners and Trainers still be able to breed a litter of pups in your future plans ...
What Protection have the smaller Breeders got in the future under your Plan

80% of this Industry relies on the smaller Owner Trainer and Breeder ....
The voice and power always has been with the 80% club.
We just have lost sight of this over the past 10 years or so ...

So tell me Bruce how will your Group be able to bring together everyone ....
Does your Group support Big Commercial Breeding ......

Does your Group feel we need to make two sepperate Groups Pro's and Non Pro's ....

People want answers not bull sh1t ...

What political party does your group support Bruce

14 day break for a stayer?

It's obvious you have never trained a dog in your life.

A stayer needs to be worked and that means either racing or trialling to maintain peak fitness

You don't see any of the Tour De France cyclists having a 14 day break after the mountain stage

To even get to that level of fitness the amount of training required is hard grinding work that tests their body and mind.

Like all types of athletes, greyhounds have different drivers in their bodies that determine the peaks and troughs of their fitness

It's up to the skill of the trainer to determine this.

Your theorising is basically saying that the trainer has no say in whether a dog should back up after 4 ,7, 10 or even 14 days

You want to set a stupid rule, like the ill-thought of GRNSW Water Bucket rule, that takes the decision away form the trainers who live and breath every day with the dog and think that it will solve all the problems of poor performance

Mate, get back on that Yellow Brick Road and go back from whence you came

I hate to be negative towards you but what you are professing is ludicrous.

There are far greater issues such a fairer grading system and more equitable distribution of prizemoney from top to bottom to consider.

Greyhound Racing needs people who know what they are talking about in power that will actually improve the sport for those who operate in it, not those who leach off it for punting value.