Breeders and trainers will exclaim that they care deeply for their dogs, have not seen instances of abject callousness and ill treatment in their experience, and even when it does occur, it's the result of "bad apples." They take this anecdotal approach to defending their industry because isolating and disconnecting individual acts from the value system of the organization as a whole enables them to avoid confronting what can euphemistically be called negative outcomes that the institutionally mandated commodification of a living creature requires.
Scholars who study the the structure and operation of institutions have found that even in organizations designed to do great harm there will be individuals who appear to act in ways that go against the system. Thus, there were individual guards who gave food or cigarettes to inmates of Nazi death camps, or certain slave owners who were generous with their slaves. Yet they still participated in an endeavor that resulted in wholesale suffering and death across entire races of people.
George Washington and Thomas Jefferson both owned slaves, and by all accounts treated them well, but that didn't stop them from understanding that the institution of slavery was at best problematic. Washington wrote, "I can only say that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of slavery." Jefferson echoed those thoughts when he wrote, "The abolition of domestic slavery is the great object of desire in those colonies where it was unhappily introduced in their infant state." Yet his uneasiness with the institution of which he was a part didn't stop Jefferson from treating slaves as objects as the case of Sally Hemming illustrates.
Breeders will say that they care very much for the dogs they breed and trainers will say that they care very much for the dogs they race, and that may very well be true, but it's more like the care that causes a person to wash and wax the car on a sunny weekend and get the oil changed regularly than the care you and I feel for the bony ball of fur curled up on the couch.
Breeders care about producing the most profitable product so they put effort and time into doing that, but when the sale comes, even though they may feel a slight twinge of regret, the transaction is completed because that was the institutional reason for bringing the dog into this world in the first place. Trainers care about producing the fastest most profitable dog and put time and effort into doing that, but when that dog no longer finishes in the money, they may do everything in their power to connect it with a reputable adoption group, but the dog must go because it no longer has an institutional purpose.
Dogs who are injured and killed in this system become collateral damage, unfortunate, but an acceptable cost of doing business. Certainly trainers feel sadness when a promising dog suffers a career ending injury or is killed while racing, but it is not the same kind of devastation you or I feel at the loss of a beloved family member. It can't be, or they wouldn't be able to fill that now empty cage with another dog.
As long as the institution of greyhound racing exists the needless deaths, injury and general misuse of greyhounds will continue because that is what the industry requires, and while those within racing may feel regret, or even sadness because of it, their continued participation will guarantee that it goes on, much as the institution of slavery outlived Washington and Jefferson, despite their personal opinions.
