bankroll adoption kennels at the low-end tracks. I'm talking about the tracks that all the worn-out dogs from the other tracks roll down to. Since I'm on the east coast, I would probably start with Ebro. I would hire a retired trainer with an adoption mindset to run it, I would select someone who would have the guts to turn in any trainer at that track who is not behaving themselves. Then I would go about looking for funds to do the same at all the other low-end tracks in the country.

So - if you woke up tomorrow and were the head of one of these organizations, what would you do?

NGA- if they haven't stopped leases on the dogs yet, I'd make them stop. This would make the owners responsible for the dog. I would change it so that the owner him/herselves has to personally take the dog to the vet to be put down. None of this "by proxy" crap that gives the kennels the rights to do it. It's awfully easy to tell someone over the phone to put a perfectly healthy dog down. If they were made to have to pay the money to haul the dog to them and then take the dog to the vet and pay for the dog to be put down, and then look into the dogs eyes while they're doing it and I think alot would change their minds.

AGTOA- Everytime there was a track closing I would make sure that the track would be responsible for most of the cost of adopting the dogs out. The switch out would be mandatory- along the same lines of what Melbourne did. I would also be sure that the tracks were not allowed to offer money to the kennels for not leaving pets.

AGC- Change the policy of not giving money to AR adoption groups. If the owners and kennels are giving them dogs, then I sure would want to help them out. If they want to make a stand on not supporting the AR point of view, then don't give them the dogs in the first place.

Here's my 2 cents. If I ran the NGA, I would not allow anyone to register their dogs to race without a written/approved exit plan. I would not allow anyone who killed, abandoned or dumped their dogs to continue registering new dogs to race. I would not consider any form of "euthanasia" acceptable for young, healthy greyhounds, other than that which fits the actual definition of the word. This would not mean I was telling people what they could or could not legally do with their dogs. But the choices they made would affect their membership in my club. The problem of over population would then fall directly on the owners of the dogs. If no adoption groups could help, they would have to consider the possibility that more breeding might not be such a good idea until they get their situation under control. Anyone who was unable (or unwilling) to take responsibility for their dogs would automatically disqualify themselves from future registrations. Then we could truly say that greyhound racing can be done without killing the dogs and the public masses would begin to understand the concept that racing might not be such a bad thing after all.


Jenna