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.

Perhaps we can put this theory to bed once and for all!

Terry,
You need to look further when referring to tidal charts!

The moon dictates the tidal movements, so that means the tidal charts must be cross referenced to the phases of the moon.

Many years of scientific research has shown that with a full moon, and the tide going out, the better dogs perform best. This is clearly shown in the strike rate of favorites under these conditions.

Conversely, when there is no moon and the tide is coming in, there are many form reversals.

You mentioned something about putting a theory to bed, which has now prompted me to head to my bedroom, to sleep off the effects of the moonshine whiskey, I have over indulged in.

Bruce Teague wrote:

.....Whatever else Newson did, the WDA report and the UTS track study represent the only significant moves in the last 50 years to drag the industry out of its 1950s cocoon. Too late, perhaps, as the damage is proving near lethal but those two efforts at least give the industry a faint hope.........

To me that read as at least they are trying to address something albeit too late - that's all........................then came that absolutely disgraceful, totally unrelated, attack of yours, it appears, as soon as you read the letters "WDA" ? None of us(quite likely including Bruce), reading what you wrote wld agree with what the report said, but nonetheless you turned it all on him.

The guy's choc full of info and data, whether you agree with it or not. These guys are people anyone learns off and has thought provoking ideas. It's not a case of being precious at all, I just like reading his thoughts which now (thx to the likes of you and yours interpretational skills),we may not be hearing anymore.

If I were him reading the derogatory remarks aimed at him I'd be thinking you deserve what you get! And that type of reaction is reflective of what trainers/greyhound industry got.

FGS wise up.

Michael Geraghty wrote:

.......I take into account missed starts and stumbles, checks, decisions made in running(good and bad) and interference to arrive at a realistic time it actually ran........

Now I am impressed with those efforts of yours,seriously.

The only issue there is you wld be unable to rate the track as you wld need to rate the whole meeting as well as previous meetings to make a call on that. It is important because the Albion track for example fluctuates a lot from meeting to meeting, and to use a Bruce parlance.......just rating your dogs are too small a sample size to come up with an effective track rating. btw happy to help you out here as I r8 the Mon/Thurs Albion meets, if your dogs race there let me know.

As for your 'Generalisation' comment......it's not.

Major racehorse stables have form analysts working for them. Often these form analysts also walk the track on raceday and offer their views to trainers as well as r8 their horses runs previous and on the day. Now the trainer need not take notice of them if they so wish, but unlike the greyhound trainer, they are at least informed and have another angle to consider with the future preparation of their horses.

Now if this ends with you bagging the sh1t outa my breeding theories again(which btw you still do not understand), I will consider you the village idiot and not respond - be warned(tic)

avagoodnite

----------------------------------------------------------------

tried it Mathew in 1985, hated waiting to race and didn't understand the animal very well back then, so wasn't very good at it.

Worst piece of drivel I have ever read! Who Bruce declared WDA as experts on all things Greyhounds? Have we evidence of their research experiments? Time frames to achieve these results?

And then there is always the bloke who paints a spurious patch on his dog to avoid detection.

When/where has this EVER happened??? I think you might be confusing anecdotes from the 70's with real life.