The National Greyhound Association (NGA) has issued the following statement reaffirming the organization’s policy regarding the responsibilities and obligations of greyhound owners when greyhounds are dislocated by seasonal or permanent track closings.


“This weekend will mark the start of the eventual shutdown of racing in Florida with Sarasota and Naples’ closing weekends. Naples will reopen later this year, but this will be the end of the road for Sarasota. With that in mind, we thought it best to remind our members of your obligations with respect to greyhounds racing at those venues as well as greyhounds everywhere. The NGA By-Laws read as follows in this regard:

“SECTION 6. Owner’s Responsibility. It shall be the primary responsibility of the owner of record, whether member or associate member, of every Greyhound registered with the Association to assure that his or her Greyhound is humanely cared for, consistent with industry standards, established by NGA inspection program guidelines and, where applicable, practices recommended in Care of the Racing & Retired Greyhound, that any written lease between the owner of record and the racing kennel clearly outlines a specific procedure for eventual departure of the Greyhound from the track, including whom shall be responsible for hauling and/or other expenses that may be incurred. In the event a Greyhound is placed in an adoption program or otherwise requires care or attention that results in a financial expense to the Association or its affiliate, the American Greyhound Council, Inc., the owner of record shall be responsible for refunding the Association for said expense. Except in dire or emergency situations, it shall furthermore be the responsibility of the owner of record to assure that his or her Greyhound completing its racing tenure at a track is either a) safely transported to a farm or facility designated by the owner of record; b) placed with a creditable pet placement program that requires spaying or neutering; c) safely transported to another track to resume its racing career. Owners of record not fulfilling their responsibilities in this respect shall be subject to whatever disciplinary action the Board of Directors may wish to impose in accordance with the Constitution and By-laws. These responsibilities shall in no way absolve the kennel operator, trainer, board-farm operator or transporter of the responsibility to provide for the care and well-being of any Greyhound under their direct stewardship. The kennel operator shall also notify the owner of record of any impending removal of a Greyhound from the kennel operator’s possession.”
The NGA statement further noted that “many, many adoption groups are willing and able to assist us in these closings, but should not be the sole bearers of the financial or physical burdens.” Members were referred to a list of responsible adoption groups posted on the NGA website.


The American Greyhound Council (AGC) has endorsed a new policy adopted by the National Greyhound Association (NGA) that effectively bans the sale or export of any NGA-registered greyhound to countries where responsible greyhound welfare standards cannot be verified.

“The AGC  strongly supports NGA’s decision to prohibit the export of greyhounds to jurisdictions where there is no well-established system of greyhound welfare oversight or regulation,” said AGC President Jay Childs.

Concerns have skyrocketed in recent years over the export of greyhounds to foreign countries that have no recognized greyhound welfare standards or racing regulations governing greyhound care and treatment.

The full text of the NGA policy is as follows:

Policy Regarding International Sales or Export of Greyhounds from North America – April 18, 2019

The NGA is aware that certain jurisdictions in the world are finding it increasingly difficult to obtain greyhounds for racing or breeding purposes. Some of these jurisdictions have animal welfare standards which are unverified.

While the NGA recognizes that it is not illegal to export greyhounds to such locations, the Association’s policy going forward will be to ban the sale or export of NGA registered greyhounds to any country that does not have recognized welfare standards and/or organized and regulated racing operated under strong legislation, rules and regulations.

 The care and well being of greyhounds is at the core of NGA’s conviction to provide robust regulation for licensed greyhound racing and ensuring the highest standards of care for all greyhounds that fall within its responsibility. Involvement in the export of greyhounds to jurisdictions where welfare standards cannot be verified is unacceptable and the NGA will employ the full powers available to it to prohibit individuals from deliberately undermining the good reputation of licensed greyhound racing in North America.

Information relating to the sale, advertisement, or social media requests offering to purchase or acquire greyhounds in unusual circumstances should be passed on to the NGA.

FORMER HSUS STAFFER BUSTED FOR ARMED ROBBERY, the watchdog organization that frequently calls out the extreme and sometimes questionable activities of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), has reported the arrest of the former head of the animal rights organization’s “animal rescue” team after he allegedly robbed a Washington DC Subway restaurant twice in one week. Here’s the full story, as posted January 29 on the HumaneWatch blog.

It could soon be time to add a new name to the list of HSUS-linked criminals: Scotlund Haisley, who used to run HSUS’s animal rescue team. Haisley is alleged to have robbed a Washington, D.C. Subway restaurant twice in less than a week. If true, it’s quite a fall from a six-figure job to allegedly robbing a restaurant for $300.

Haisley has an extensive background in the animal rights movement. Notably, he held positions at PETA and HSUS, where he was the Director of Emergency Services. He later ran Animal Rescue Corps.

During his time with HSUS, Haisley appears to have been an adrenaline junkie and wannabe SWAT team member. Roughly ten years ago, Haisley was instrumental in helping HSUS execute a search warrant and seize 172 dogs. That warrant was later ruled to be illegal and HSUS faced a $5 million dollar lawsuit as a result.

Even worse, HSUS didn’t stick around to actually help the dogs. As we covered back then:

Less than one week after the raid, KELO-TV reported that HSUS had already packed its bags and left, leaving the local Second Chance Rescue folks to find volunteers to help care for the scores of dogs.

Second Chance Rescue’s director admits that 28 dogs died in the group’s care following their seizure. And while none of the dogs were sick when they were seized, many became ill after HSUS left town.

While working with HSUS, Haisley used some questionable tactics that earned him praise from the former HSUS CEO Wayne Pacelle. As recounted by people who worked with him:

Graves and Schwartz explained to Cox that they were particularly concerned that Haisley had asked them to wear badges resembling those worn by law enforcement officers, and that this could expose them to legal liability.

“I want the scum to think we are law enforcement,” Graves said Haisley told them.

Graves and Schwartz then took their concern to then-Humane Society of the U.S. president Wayne Pacelle.

“I like the cowboy ways that Scotlund brings to the team,” Graves said Pacelle responded.

“Cowboy ways” is a colorful way to describe Haisley’s behavior. The surveillance footage of the robberies shows the suspect may have held a gun to a Subway employee’s head. That’s more like “outlaw ways.”

Another old Pacelle pal, David Wills, is awaiting trial on child sex charges. Wills is a former HSUS VP who was fired after he embezzled money from the organization. Given Pacelle’s associates and Pacelle’s own history—allegations of sexual harassment going back years—it’s worth wondering what other skeletons are in HSUS’s closet, and who in the leadership has knowledge of them.



A National Public Radio affiliate in northern Florida may be the first media outlet in the state to take a closer look at the impact of the recently adopted greyhound racing ban on the families who breed and raise racing greyhounds. WUFT-FM aired the story, and posted it on the station’s website, on December 19.

Greyhound Ban Creates Uncertain Future For Greyhound Breeder
12/20/18, 8:31 AM
By Tobie Perkins

Deborah Elliot kisses her oldest greyhound, Ruffles. Ruffles is 14 and belonged to Elliot’s mother. (Photo courtesy of Katie Redmann)

Greyhounds of every shade of brindle, black, red and white play and bask under a winter sun at Deborah Elliot’s farm. Her 140 dogs run free.

It was her dogs that kept Elliot going after her mother died unexpectedly. She wakes up at 4 each morning to prepare their food, clean up after them, and let the dogs in and out of their kennels. Elliot greets each hound by name, even the ones that appear identical; Hansel and Gretel, Lucy, Ethel, Big Mac, Nugget, Muffin. Each time Elliot walks by, the dogs jump, eagerly wagging their tails. They all want just one moment with her.

Then there’s Ruffles, the grande dame of hounds. She’s a 14-year-old greyhound who, along with this farm, once belonged to Elliot’s mother. It’s dogs like Ruffles that animal rights activists accuse greyhound trainers of throwing away.

Greyhound racing has long been under scrutiny in Florida and, in November, activists were handed a victory at the polls. Nearly 70 percent of Floridians approved Amendment 13 which puts an end to greyhound racing in the state by the end of  2020. The constitutional revision is based on the “humane treatment of animals.”

Greyhounds are a regal breed of dogs that can run at 45 miles per hour. Betting on these fast dogs became a lucrative business in America, especially in sunny and warm Florida. It is one of six remaining states with active racing tracks and one of 11 where dog racing is still legal. Of the 17 operating racing tracks in
America, 11 are in the Sunshine State.

Last year, greyhound racing generated $11 million dollars in state revenue, according to Jack Cory, a representative for the Florida Greyhound Association. But now, Amendment 13 could mean the end of an industry. From dog farms like
Elliot’s to the tracks, the racing ban threatens the livelihoods of the 3,000 direct and 10,000 indirect industry employees.

Those who pushed for the ban argue that greyhound racing amounts to nothing short of animal cruelty. The protection group GREY2K USA alleges dogs are kept in cages for up to 23 hours a day, drugged and forced to race in extreme conditions. The group says thousands of dogs are injured every year and that a dog dies every three days at a Florida racetrack.

“Change is hard, but our economy should not be built on cruelty to dogs,” said Christine Dorchak, president of GREY2K.

While animal welfare has become an increasingly hot political issue, some argue Amendment 13 was all about emotions winning out over the facts. John Parker, vice president of Greyhound Adopters for Racing, said Florida’s ban defies logic.

Parker adopted his first greyhound in 1994. Four months later, he adopted another. He loved the dogs so much that he launched the Southeastern Greyhound Adoption group, which finds new homes for 125 retired greyhounds every year.

At first, Parker assumed greyhound racing was cruel. At the time, he said, there wasn’t a lot of literature available and most of it was negative. But the more greyhounds he met, the more he was convinced that they were hardly neglected or abused.

Parker began visiting kennels and felt that the dogs were happy to be doing their jobs. He believes that interest groups have used heart-tugging PR strategies and advertisements to sway the public.

Even now, he said, there’s a lot of confusion about what will happen to the 3,700 greyhounds that race in Florida. There have been reports of dogs that will become homeless or be euthanized because of the demise of the racing business. But Parker said the opposite is true. He said as breeding operations slow down, his group is experiencing a shortage of dogs available for adoption, and Amendment 13 has already caused a spike in applications.

The transition will be expensive. Trainers and kennel operators use the money from racing to care for the dogs. But Parker said adoption groups will now have to step in. “It’s going to cost money,” he said. “But I’m confident the money will be there.”

There will be at least one more season of greyhound racing in 2019. Those in the racing industry are hoping the ban will be reversed. So is Elliot. But no matter what, Elliot hopes business will continue, as it has for 80 years.

She bred a litter just a week after the election. She will race them in Florida while she still can. But the future is uncertain. Elliot worries for her employees as times get tough. One lives on the property with her disabled husband; another is a mother of five.

“There are five full time people here that the state of Florida decided don’t need jobs,” she said. A former nurse, Elliot will most likely get a second job at a hospital to maintain the kennel.

Still, Elliot doesn’t blame voters. Their hearts are in the right place, she said. They want to help dogs. But she does blame welfare groups like GREY2K who play on emotions to gain votes and donations.

GREY2K’s Dorchak fired back that people at least have an option to find other jobs. The dogs, she said, have no choice in “suffering.”

But there is little evidence of suffering at Elliot’s farm. The dogs aren’t captive. They live outside once they are old enough. Until six months, they live in smaller runs in groups of two to four. After six months, they move to 650-foot runs. The dogs are trained to return to the front of the run by getting a homemade meatball each afternoon.

Elliot is aware of the allegations of drugging and other mistreatment. While she acknowledges that small amounts of testosterone are used as birth control, she says it has nothing to do with increasing racing ability. As a former nurse, she knows the harmful effects other drugs could have.

Racing dogs, she says, are an investment; trainers want a return on that investment, so they have no reason to harm the dogs. She said she would immediately remove her dogs if they were being mistreated by a trainer at
the track.

Many of the dogs are adopted once they are done racing, though some come back to live with her. She has placed a few personally; others have found homes through a trusted agency.

One of her former racers was adopted by an elderly couple – he acts as a caretaker, checking on them each day. Another is an emotional support dog for a Gulf War veteran.

But it can be hard for the dogs at times. At a farm like Elliot’s, they are never separated from their litter mates, and they roam free outside.  It can be hard to adjust to adoptive homes. And if they return to her,she spoils them. Like Ruffles.
“Whatever she wants, she gets,” Elliot says.

She takes stock of her farm, surrounded by the speedy hounds she has lovingly bred and raised. She has a litter that’s not yet six months old. She’s particularly proud of one of the puppies. His name is Chilly, a brindle who is a bit smaller than his brothers and sisters. He is the runt of the litter; she wasn’t sure he could make it.

But he had the heart,” she says, smiling as he leaps up at the fence. He might be Elliot’s best dog yet.



The National Greyhound Association is deeply disappointed at the result of the Amendment 13 vote. Florida voters have been misled into supporting a measure that not only will cost thousands of jobs in the state, but one that opens the door for future campaigns to force the radical animal rights agenda on the people of Florida through the Constitutional Reform process. Individual family businesses that will be shut down as a result of this Amendment may choose to pursue legal remedies against the state; that is their right under the law.
Meanwhile, we will begin the sad process of working with the kennels, greyhound owners, Greyhound Pets of America, and all of our adoption partners, to ensure that all the greyhounds dislocated by the passage of Amendment 13 are properly accounted for and cared for as they transition to other tracks, into adoption programs, or back to their owners over the next two years. Unfortunately, the future is not as clear for the 13,000 Florida families who rely, directly and indirectly, on greyhound racing for their livelihood.


Florida TaxWatch, an independent, nonpartisan taxpayer research institute and government watchdog, is urging Florida voters to reject Question 13 because the fate of greyhound racing should not be a Constitutional question. Here’s their position:

The constitution loses much of its significance as the foundational instrument of government when the process of constitutional amendment or revision is used as a substitute for legislation. Incorporating what is essentially a legislative matter into the constitution undercuts the legislative process and limits the areaof legislative responsibility and discretion. Once incorporated, it is extremely difficult to remove what is essentially a statutory provision from the constitution.

The contents of the Florida Constitution should be limited to matters that are essential or fundamental. Matters that are ordinarily handled through the legislative process, such as the banning of greyhound racing, should be excluded from the Constitution.

For these reasons, Florida TaxWatch recommends a NO vote on Amendment 13.”



St. Petersburg Times correspondent and greyhound adopter Danielle Hauser says that Floridians should vote NO on Question 13 because it is based on misconceptions about how greyhounds are treated.

In her September 28 commentary, Hauser noted that she knew very little about racing greyhounds before she adopted one, so she bought into some of the misconceptions about them and their treatment. “Like most people, I was wrong,” she said.

Hauser pointed out that several local greyhound adoption groups, including Bay Area Greyhound Adoptions and Greyhound Pets of America-Tampa Bay, have joined a group of 83 adoption organizations statewide that have gone on record in opposition to Question 13.

“These are non-profit, volunteer-based groups that work lovingly and diligently to foster and find retired greyhounds their forever homes. These groups also aim to educate the public about the lives of greyhounds on and off the track,” she wrote.

Greyhounds are the professional athletes of the canine world, Hauser said, so kennel owners and trainers ensure that their dogs are well taken care of. “They are fed high quality food, have plenty of play time, exercise and human interaction,” she said. “They also are under constant medical supervision.”

In her commentary, Hauser also expressed concern that Question 13 fails to provide funding for re-homing of more than 8,000 greyhounds that would be displaced from Florida greyhound tracks if the measure passes.

She concluded by urging voters to go visit a greyhound at a “Meet and Greet” event or take a greyhound kennel tour. “See for yourself what greyhounds are really like,” she said. “Dogs don’t lie.”




Citing the “politicized” Constitution Revision Commission (CRC) and the “partisan underpinning” of its “disappointing results,” editors of the Tampa Bay Times are urging Floridians to vote NO on Question 13, the amendment to ban greyhound racing.

And they didn’t stop there. In a scathing indictment of the CRC’s work, the September 28 editorial called on voters to reject all but one of the 12 ballot questions, including Amendments 6-12, the half-dozen questions the CRC added to the ballot.

“The CRC squandered an opportunity that occurs only once every 20 years to propose meaningful reforms to the Constitution,” editors wrote. “Its amendments are a muddle of unrelated issues.”

The publication’s writers noted the lack of sound reasoning on why any of the proposals should be added to the Constitution. On greyhound racing, they were particularly blunt. “Whatever your view on dog racing, its disposition doesn’t belong in the Constitution. On Amendment 13, the Tampa Bay Times recommends voting NO.”




In the wake of the Florida Supreme Court’s September 7 decision to put Question 13, a constitutional amendment to ban greyhound racing, back on the November general election ballot, the National Greyhound Association (NGA) has launched a campaign to defeat the measure.

The NGA has enlisted the services of Strategic Digital Services (SDS) to assist in the campaign to defeat Question 13 in Florida.

The company, based in Tallahassee, was formed by Joe Clements and Matt Farrar, both of whom have extensive experience in Florida politics and campaigns as well as digital media marketing and advertising.

“After looking at several proposals and performing our due diligence, we selected SDS,” said NGA President Julia Ward. “We feel they are very well qualified and have the capabilities to accomplish the task at hand.”

Working together, the NGA and SDS will mount an aggressive and informative campaign of digital and media communications.

Wealthy out-of-state animal rights groups drove the effort to put Question 13, the greyhound racing measure, on the ballot. Under Florida law, passage of any constitutional amendment requires a 60 percent majority of votes cast.

“We won’t have the enormous budget of these huge animal rights groups,” said NGA Executive Director Jim Gartland, “but we are confident that our messages will reach and resonate with Florida voters.”

Gartland noted that Question 13, if passed, will cost as many as 13,000 jobs in Florida. Those displaced will include track and kennel workers, as well as hundreds of employees at the local companies who supply greyhound racing with goods and services.

“Putting thousands of Floridians out of work just to satisfy some extreme activist agenda doesn’t make much sense,” Gartland concluded.


The familiar “circus train” animal cracker box

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA) is hyping the success of its recent effort to persuade Nabisco, the maker of Barnum’s Animal Crackers, to redesign the snack’s package by removing the circus cages that formerly appeared on the box. The radical animal rights group, famous for its pointless publicity stunts, hasn’t explained how the new package design will enhance the lives of elephants, lions or giraffes in the wild.

An August 21 story in the New York Post reported that Nabisco agreed to redesign the box “to keep this brand modern and contemporary.” PeTA’s pitch to Nabisco highlighted the “egregious cruelty” inherent in caging animals.

If anybody understands egregious cruelty, it’s PeTA. For the past several years, the organization’s gratuitous euthanasia of “rescued” cats and dogs has been a national scandal. Since 1998, PeTA has killed more than 36,000 pets that supposedly were being taken to PeTA-operated shelters for placement in adoptive homes. Instead, most of the animals were euthanized within 24 hours of being seized by PeTA employees.

The website “” reports one highly publicized incident in 2014, when PeTA staffers actually seized a pet chihuahua from a family’s backyard. The family  protested, only to learn that the dog already had been euthanized. The family sued PeTA, and the PeTA employees were charged with larceny.

It’s ironic that Nabisco would buy the “egregious cruelty” argument from an organization that has killed more animals over the past 20 years than any zoo or circus in existence. Somebody at Nabisco failed to do their homework. We wouldn’t be surprised if a few people quit buying Barnum’s Animal Crackers just to make that point.

The new “cage-free” box