IT IS PROHIBITED TO COMPROMISE THE INTEGRITY OF A RACING ANIMAL.(THAT MEANS ANYONE - INCLUDING AUTHORITIES)

It cannot be any clearer than that.

It seems there is no representative body willing or courageous enough to work on behalf of the industry, therefore, it is left to the individual, group, and their legal angels to put forward their case. It is then up to the courts to decide whether that law has been broken or not.

As far as I'm concerned, preventing the proper care and needs of the dog is a compromise.
I also think that preventing the use of natural food sources for the training of chase in a dog is also a compromise. (ie: lamb's wool, treats, etc.)
CHASE is THE integrity of a racing Greyhound, that's why there are penalties for failing that integrity...marring, FTP.

Peter,Racing Ministers don't care, Stewards don't care,their mortgages rely on rules ridiculous or not, the answer is Greyhounds Australasia and its anti laden committees force feeding irrelevant information to their members, this is resulting in rules on matters that shouldn't have been on the agenda in the first place.

Greyhounds Australasia should either go through a restructure so as to ensure relevant and proper stewardship is happening or be pi##ed off completely.

Agenda items for GA meetings must be published so participants and reps have a voice prior to the ridiculous outcomes we are being saddled with.

And the terms public perception, social licence etc should never be be part of any discussions at GA because they are primarily the happy hunting ground of the anti.Get rid of those terms in conversations and we might start to get back on track.

Cobalt rule = farce
Testoprop rule = farce
Treatment records = farce
Non treatment on Race day = farce
Lure rules = farce

The list goes on.

Your underlying principle is fine but we must assign the blame correctly.

1. A GA rule emerges because the CEO generated a thought and got the OK to go ahead or was asked to do something by the individual states.

2. Whichever it was, there is repeated evidence of incompetence by either the CEO or the members, or both. In this case there is a prima facie case that the drug investigation was flawed - ie either wrong or unbalanced or inappropriate.

3. Those "members" are no more than the bosses in each state, each defending his own bailiwick.

4. There is no evidence of your "anti" comments. That is different to being incompetent.

4. I have seen no good evidence to dispute "Treatment records = farce, Non treatment on Race day = farce or Lure rules = farce, as you suggest. Best wait until such evidence is available. Fight battles you can win.

5. Absolutely, much of the problem is a function of the absence of independence, transparency and accountability in the structure and operation of GA. To fix that you will need to get 6 states and 2 territories (ACT?) to vote themselves out of a job and then support the creation of a new body. That might sound fanciful but it could happen if only one of the states bites the bullet, and if some of the challenges we are talking about hit home. (Personally, to break the mould, I would suggest forgetting about the east and concentrating on SA and WA. They are newer and not so tied to the 1950s umbilical cord. SA also has an independent board).

Every time GA talks welfare you can bet an anti group is having input.

Many of the new rules cobalt included are an exercise in risk management to cover their backside and some cannot be reliably enforced, others actively impact welfare of travelling in warmer weather or training nervy dogs pre race, others just prove that the trainer had five minutes spare and a biro nothing else.

Prior to the cobalt expose in the tbred industry were there any adverse reports in the greyhound game?, I understand they may have revisited some winners swabs and checked levels and found them to be above what they considered normal,they adjudged there must be a problem and implemented a rule, if they didn't swab results from all dogs in those races how can they judge the winners to be arbitrarily high and warrant a rule.

Cobalt shouldn't have been on the agenda at all in greyhounds unless a distinct issue was identified.

GA should pull their heads in and concentrate on real issues.

May you find justice and sanity.

Yes Pete, you keep stock piling those pallets of Skippy Meaty Bites because I feel a change is a gunna come...
Hopefully along with the cobalt rule tipped on its pathetic head, we will soon be able to look after our dog's health properly and have them chasing little meaty bites, wool, porterhouse steak, etc with enthusiasm, commitment, and happiness.

EXTERNAL LINK

FEI have amended cobalt rule- Lee and Shannon Hope have Derek Major (FEI vet) on board and now we will see some evidence based truth come into the public arena re cobalt.

About time. Cheers

This is MASSIVE.

I wonder if all the people that have had "unnecessary positive cases associated with the use of vitamin B12 supplementation" will now have legal recourse to sue for damages???

This is tantamount to an admission that they got it wrong!

GRV will be treading dangerously if they ping anyone else for low levels of Cobalt.

So what is this table that we are looking at ? Who is it referring to ? What does it mean towards greyhound industry ?
Spell it out for me please

Thx in advance for a simple answer would be good

FEI (Federation Equestrian Internationale) is the international governing body for equestrian sports.

If they have adjusted Cobalt levels in recognition that too many people are getting "accidental" or "false" positives due to Vitamin B12 supplementation then it will have consequences for ALL sports where Cobalt has been deemed "performance enhancing" or is prohibited/restricted.

Most industries play follow the leader when determining drug rules. If they fail to act on this new standard then they will leave themselves wide open for legal challenges.

After all, most drug testing and rules are based on equine research and then adapted for the dogs. There are very few studies that are dog specific....which is why Borsak and the SFF are questioning on what basis they have arrived at the existing Cobalt and Arsenic levels in the first place.

The drug rules are a house of cards.....and this will blow the whole thing over!

Great stuff ! I have a bitch that has low red blood count
So vitamin c was recommended what else was b12
This has cobalt in it I'm sure ! ( cyanocobalamin)
What else is available in natural or can't be penalized ??

Just pure commonsense!
The whole issue of cobalt and arsenic needs to be shelved until proper scientific studies are done, which SHOULD have been done right from the start.
This could snowball into the biggest blooper the racing industry has ever witnessed and there will be plenty going into hiding if it does.
GA should be a wee bit worried right about now.

I'm lost with the recommendation of Vit C, Nathan.
Who said that and why?

Iron and B12 make a bit more sense for low red blood cells.
You can still use them just not too close to race day.
The question is how much, how often, and what else is used in conjunction with them that makes the whole situation a joke.

If she is that low you probably wouldn't race her for a while so using B12 and iron short term should not be a drama.

Another twist. I note that two WA trainers have just been outed for 9 months, one for cobalt, the other for caffeine. Both readings were said to be "high". Neither trainers knew the source and they pleaded not guilty. The cobalt trainer had no previous convictions over many years.

Since vet Derek Major finds that cobalt "is not performance-enhancing" while caffeine obviously is, why should the penalties be equal?

It also begs the question at large - if authorities are to persist with an (unjustified) listing of cobalt at all, then a nominal rap over the knuckles - a warning - would seem to be sufficient.

Which also suggests that all drugs/substances should be put through a filter to establish plus or minus effects on performance (noting that cobalt is not classed as a "drug" anyway).

The problem now is that it is no use complaining to the umpire as he or the appeal body is just applying the rule. It would seem that the only helpful method is to challenge GA and the state authorities legally. My vet v your vet. My lab v your lab.

Why on earth have trainers' associations not done this already?

It might also be worthwhile cross-checking with the gallops trainers.