Earlier this year a 12 week public consultation was held on proposals drafted by Defra for new regulations under section 13 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to promote the welfare of racing greyhounds in England. Amendments are to follow but essentially the proposals as they currently stand will come into force in 2010 (intended date: 6 April).
Whilst all welfare groups including the Dogs Trust have been highly critical of the proposals for not covering many areas of concern, the new regulations will provide minimum welfare standards across all tracks in England and largely bring the independent (flapping) tracks in line with those tracks licensed under the Greyhound Board of Great Britain.
New legislation will include the requirement for a vet to be present at all race/trail meetings and the provision of suitable veterinary facilities, greyhounds to be examined by a vet prior to each race/trial (and withdrawn if judged not fit to run) and injuries sustained to be recorded.
Incredibly, the majority of flapping tracks fall short of the above basic welfare measures. Following the recent and very welcome closure of Swansea’s flapping tack there remains only one independent track in Wales. In Scotland, however, there are five (Armadale, Ayr, Corbiewood, Halcrow and Thornton) and to put this into context, seven such tracks still hold races in England.
The new regulations are therefore very relevant to Scotland and yet the Scottish Government have no interest in adopting the regulations, stating that racing dogs are fully protected under the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 (similar legislation in England does not protect such dogs).
Perhaps it is simply convenient to cite the above Act, either that or the Animal Health and Welfare Division are very naive.
Scottish policy is important not least because of the frequency and nature of injuries greyhounds sustain in trails and races. Injuries sustained annually across all tracks in Britain total 5 figures, and about 1,000 greyhounds are put-to-sleep every year following injury. Greyhound racing in this respect cannot be compared with any other activity, whether a sport, working or otherwise.
A vet with links to a Scottish flapping track (he will on occasion attend the track in a professional capacity but is not in attendance during trials and races) states many greyhounds competing on the circuit suffer serious injury - commonly fractures - and are transported to a veterinary practice to obtain treatment urgently needed.
The Scottish Governments (now former) Animal Welfare Policy Analyst, Scott McDowell, would not be drawn on whether he thought a vet should be present at trial and race meetings but is apparently not aware of any welfare problems at the tracks. He further ads in a letter dated 9 September 2009 that no welfare complaints in relation to any tracks have been received by the Scottish SPCA in several years.
I am not clear what precisely McDowell thinks should be a matter for the SSPCA but rest assured, if anyone sees an animal being ill treated at a flapping track it will not be brought to the attention of any welfare organisation for fear of reprisal.
Whilst new legislation is essentially track focused it will impact little on the scale of injuries greyhounds sustain. That said it is a significant step forward in protecting dogs running on flapping tracks, a significant step forward that is for dogs running on flapping tracks in England. The Scottish Government should hang their heads in shame.
Sunday, 29 November 2009
Thursday, 8 October 2009
Ruby for sale due to new stock arriving
In a one page fanciful article (courtesy of Our Dogs, 15 August 2008), Greyhound Star editor Floyd Amphlett, conjured up a romantic image of greyhound racing that had little in common with reality. “You build a kennel” writes Amphlett, “buy a greyhound, pay for its registrations, inoculations and the rest, apply for a licence and then race at your closest track. It is a hobby not so different to those of you readers of Our Dogs who enjoy agility training, fly-ball, or other assorted fun activities with dogs.”
Amphlett’s very evident fertile imagination is surely wasted as editor of a minority ‘news’ paper. The survival of racing is increasingly dependent on professional trainers such as Michael Peterson and indeed survival for the trainer is dependent on running a large number of dogs. Peterson’s kennel strength stood recently at 96 and he was to remark: “You need that many to pay the bills.”
Peterson - attached to Oxford - freely admits the ‘sport’ of greyhound racing is in turmoil, and in a series of forthright conversations gives an insight into the hard economics of being a trainer and the dog’s welfare.
It was dialogue instigated through yet another report of a greyhound found abandoned; a greyhound on this occasion that was raced and retired under Peterson. The white and black male called Chapelane Tom was picked up in the Croydon area mid July and taken to a dog pound. Luckily he was found a foster home and now has a secure future but who last owned Chapelane Tom had yet to be established.
The industries regulatory body should receive a completed form detailing the fate of all greyhounds retired but no such form for Chapelane Tom was ever received. Not to worry, Peterson keeps a record of his dogs. Unfortunately the book in question (for greyhounds retired in 2006) could not be found. The trainer, however, believed Chapelane Tom was adopted through the Watford branch of the National Animal Welfare Trust and had no doubt the dog was not homed independently.
Just four greyhounds have been adopted through the above branch in recent years and Chapelane Tom was not one of them. The search, however, for the 2006 book would continue or so the person making the inquiry was told.
Peterson has been training greyhounds for the last 7 years and took over from his father who has 45 years experience as a trainer. He is a major player at Oxford and a serious contender in this year’s Trainers Championship that is based on the number of winners.
It might seem a glamorous life but Peterson is running a business and the retirement of greyhounds is an additional drain on resources: “It’s hard to home racing greyhounds. The finances in this sport are piss poor. A lot of trainers are basically just covering their cost which to be honest with you I am. I am not making bundles of money, I’ve got a young family and I have eight to nine dogs here that need homing.”
Practical and ultimately financial considerations have seen an ever increasing number of trainers off-loading greyhounds independently. Peterson works with a number of rescues but keeps his options open: “I’m not being funny, anywhere possible to home a racing greyhound, ye know, anywhere.”
The trainer speaks favourably about Greyhounds 4 U (G4U) - a rescue that interestingly does not agree with yearly vaccinations, conventional wormer or flea treatment. Peterson’s dogs available for adoption through G4U are on occasion still running. Tragically that was the case for Aintsheapeach. The beautiful blue brindle female had been seeking a home through the rescue since May 2009 but was never to enjoy retirement. On 4 September 2009 Aintsheapeach was put-to-sleep after breaking her right hock in a BAGS meeting at Oxford.
Asked how many dogs he has lost at the track this year Peterson replied: “This year, probably four.” It was a question put to him in September and so whatever the actually figure might be, expect it to be higher come the end of December.
Aintsheapeach is one of a staggering 129 dogs to run on licensed tracks under Peterson during 2008. 69 greyhounds ceased running under Peterson during the same year of which 31 are not subsequently recorded racing (under a different trainer). Only 6 greyhounds from the latter figure are listed on greyhound-data.com either available for adoption or adopted.
Above figures highlight a movement of greyhounds that may surprise many outside the business of racing. Murtz Keano ran in Ireland before running on licensed British tracks under trainers S A Cahill, E Hall and M Daniels. The greyhound subsequently ran just 4 races under Peterson at Oxford and is now running in Denmark.
A new race owner is now sought for black female Reisk Ruby. The Peterson dog, born July 2007, is offered for sale “due to new stock arriving.” The terminology he uses is of course highly appropriate for a ‘sport’ in which the greyhound is just a commodity - essentially a betting medium - that official’s record in ‘units’. Ruby commands the relatively modest sum of £800 o.n.o.
The financial difficulties facing trainers are further compounded by the ‘elusive’ owner, as Peterson explains: “Say an owner gets himself into debt for some reason or can’t afford his kennel bill no more, suddenly you can’t get hold of the owner and then you’ve got 3 or 4 dogs lumbered with you. And to be honest with you 90 per cent of the time that’s what happens.”
It is a problem that has left Peterson significantly out of pocket: “I’ve got one owner that has moved up to near Newcastle and I can’t get hold of him. He basically owes me nearly 3½ thousand pounds which in this sport is a hell of a lot of money… He’s got one dog here, she’s four years old, OK, so… she’s probably got about 3 - 6 months left in her racing career tops and then basically I am lumbered with the bitch. I am lumbered with the bitch now because I can’t get hold of him.”
Peterson’s finances are further stretched this year after he was found in breach of rules 174 (i)(b) and 217 at a Disciplinary Committee Hearing on 14 April 2009 and fined £600. The judgement was made in relation to a urine sample that was taken from greyhound Arco Grace and found to contain procaine - a drug that can affect a dog’s performance and/or well being.
Arco Grace was available for adoption through G4U but is now with Oxford Retired Greyhound Trust who collected the dog from Petersons kennels on 6 October. A person speaking on behalf of the branch said of the greyhound: “It’s the worst bitch (health wise) we’ve ever picked up from any stadium and in actual fact he (Peterson) should be reported to the RSPCA.”
It’s all a far cry from the romantic image conjured up by Amphlett. Peterson describes the business of racing as a “very tough place, especially at the moment with the current financial climate.” And ads: “The sport itself is in turmoil, absolute turmoil.”
Since 1926 a total of 111 tracks were licensed under the now obsolete National Greyhound Racing Club. Under the newly formed Greyhound Board of Great Britain there remain only 27. The industry is crumbling and Peterson earmarks four tracks whose future would seem precarious: “Tracks like Coventry; how they survive I just do not know. There’s been a question mark over Hove for the last couple of years. Portsmouth, I think they’ve got probably a year maximum left on their lease… Wimbledon’s another one. (There has been) a question mark over Wimbledon for the last few years.”
From a welfare point of view and looking essentially long term, the closure of any track is of course good news. It is true the industry is responding to the outrage felt by an ever increasing number of people regarding the treatment of greyhounds but it would be naïve to think that any welfare initiatives are driven primarily for any reason other than wanting to protect the business of racing.
Many readers might have issue with Peterson. Many might have concern for the number of greyhounds the trainer has lost through injury or the 25 dogs not listed on Greyhound Data either available for adoption or adopted. Of greater concern, however, should be the fact that in the world of greyhound racing Peterson is one the good guys.
Put very simply the humane treatment of greyhounds and commercial greyhound racing are incompatible and that will never change. And in case you are wondering, Peterson never did find his 2006 book.
Amphlett’s very evident fertile imagination is surely wasted as editor of a minority ‘news’ paper. The survival of racing is increasingly dependent on professional trainers such as Michael Peterson and indeed survival for the trainer is dependent on running a large number of dogs. Peterson’s kennel strength stood recently at 96 and he was to remark: “You need that many to pay the bills.”
Peterson - attached to Oxford - freely admits the ‘sport’ of greyhound racing is in turmoil, and in a series of forthright conversations gives an insight into the hard economics of being a trainer and the dog’s welfare.
It was dialogue instigated through yet another report of a greyhound found abandoned; a greyhound on this occasion that was raced and retired under Peterson. The white and black male called Chapelane Tom was picked up in the Croydon area mid July and taken to a dog pound. Luckily he was found a foster home and now has a secure future but who last owned Chapelane Tom had yet to be established.
The industries regulatory body should receive a completed form detailing the fate of all greyhounds retired but no such form for Chapelane Tom was ever received. Not to worry, Peterson keeps a record of his dogs. Unfortunately the book in question (for greyhounds retired in 2006) could not be found. The trainer, however, believed Chapelane Tom was adopted through the Watford branch of the National Animal Welfare Trust and had no doubt the dog was not homed independently.
Just four greyhounds have been adopted through the above branch in recent years and Chapelane Tom was not one of them. The search, however, for the 2006 book would continue or so the person making the inquiry was told.
Peterson has been training greyhounds for the last 7 years and took over from his father who has 45 years experience as a trainer. He is a major player at Oxford and a serious contender in this year’s Trainers Championship that is based on the number of winners.
It might seem a glamorous life but Peterson is running a business and the retirement of greyhounds is an additional drain on resources: “It’s hard to home racing greyhounds. The finances in this sport are piss poor. A lot of trainers are basically just covering their cost which to be honest with you I am. I am not making bundles of money, I’ve got a young family and I have eight to nine dogs here that need homing.”
Practical and ultimately financial considerations have seen an ever increasing number of trainers off-loading greyhounds independently. Peterson works with a number of rescues but keeps his options open: “I’m not being funny, anywhere possible to home a racing greyhound, ye know, anywhere.”
The trainer speaks favourably about Greyhounds 4 U (G4U) - a rescue that interestingly does not agree with yearly vaccinations, conventional wormer or flea treatment. Peterson’s dogs available for adoption through G4U are on occasion still running. Tragically that was the case for Aintsheapeach. The beautiful blue brindle female had been seeking a home through the rescue since May 2009 but was never to enjoy retirement. On 4 September 2009 Aintsheapeach was put-to-sleep after breaking her right hock in a BAGS meeting at Oxford.
Asked how many dogs he has lost at the track this year Peterson replied: “This year, probably four.” It was a question put to him in September and so whatever the actually figure might be, expect it to be higher come the end of December.
Aintsheapeach is one of a staggering 129 dogs to run on licensed tracks under Peterson during 2008. 69 greyhounds ceased running under Peterson during the same year of which 31 are not subsequently recorded racing (under a different trainer). Only 6 greyhounds from the latter figure are listed on greyhound-data.com either available for adoption or adopted.
Above figures highlight a movement of greyhounds that may surprise many outside the business of racing. Murtz Keano ran in Ireland before running on licensed British tracks under trainers S A Cahill, E Hall and M Daniels. The greyhound subsequently ran just 4 races under Peterson at Oxford and is now running in Denmark.
A new race owner is now sought for black female Reisk Ruby. The Peterson dog, born July 2007, is offered for sale “due to new stock arriving.” The terminology he uses is of course highly appropriate for a ‘sport’ in which the greyhound is just a commodity - essentially a betting medium - that official’s record in ‘units’. Ruby commands the relatively modest sum of £800 o.n.o.
The financial difficulties facing trainers are further compounded by the ‘elusive’ owner, as Peterson explains: “Say an owner gets himself into debt for some reason or can’t afford his kennel bill no more, suddenly you can’t get hold of the owner and then you’ve got 3 or 4 dogs lumbered with you. And to be honest with you 90 per cent of the time that’s what happens.”
It is a problem that has left Peterson significantly out of pocket: “I’ve got one owner that has moved up to near Newcastle and I can’t get hold of him. He basically owes me nearly 3½ thousand pounds which in this sport is a hell of a lot of money… He’s got one dog here, she’s four years old, OK, so… she’s probably got about 3 - 6 months left in her racing career tops and then basically I am lumbered with the bitch. I am lumbered with the bitch now because I can’t get hold of him.”
Peterson’s finances are further stretched this year after he was found in breach of rules 174 (i)(b) and 217 at a Disciplinary Committee Hearing on 14 April 2009 and fined £600. The judgement was made in relation to a urine sample that was taken from greyhound Arco Grace and found to contain procaine - a drug that can affect a dog’s performance and/or well being.
Arco Grace was available for adoption through G4U but is now with Oxford Retired Greyhound Trust who collected the dog from Petersons kennels on 6 October. A person speaking on behalf of the branch said of the greyhound: “It’s the worst bitch (health wise) we’ve ever picked up from any stadium and in actual fact he (Peterson) should be reported to the RSPCA.”
It’s all a far cry from the romantic image conjured up by Amphlett. Peterson describes the business of racing as a “very tough place, especially at the moment with the current financial climate.” And ads: “The sport itself is in turmoil, absolute turmoil.”
Since 1926 a total of 111 tracks were licensed under the now obsolete National Greyhound Racing Club. Under the newly formed Greyhound Board of Great Britain there remain only 27. The industry is crumbling and Peterson earmarks four tracks whose future would seem precarious: “Tracks like Coventry; how they survive I just do not know. There’s been a question mark over Hove for the last couple of years. Portsmouth, I think they’ve got probably a year maximum left on their lease… Wimbledon’s another one. (There has been) a question mark over Wimbledon for the last few years.”
From a welfare point of view and looking essentially long term, the closure of any track is of course good news. It is true the industry is responding to the outrage felt by an ever increasing number of people regarding the treatment of greyhounds but it would be naïve to think that any welfare initiatives are driven primarily for any reason other than wanting to protect the business of racing.
Many readers might have issue with Peterson. Many might have concern for the number of greyhounds the trainer has lost through injury or the 25 dogs not listed on Greyhound Data either available for adoption or adopted. Of greater concern, however, should be the fact that in the world of greyhound racing Peterson is one the good guys.
Put very simply the humane treatment of greyhounds and commercial greyhound racing are incompatible and that will never change. And in case you are wondering, Peterson never did find his 2006 book.
Sunday, 26 April 2009
Thousands of greyhound pups unaccounted for
The breeding of greyhounds for the purpose of racing is a hit and miss affair at the best of times. Illness aside, both injury and temperament frequently dictate the fate of such dogs. Factor in the understandable desire for only the highest performing animal, and the ‘wastage’ figure rises enormously.
Even the Greyhound Board of Great Britain (GBGB) who govern racing on Britain’s 28 major tracks concede that a greyhound may never contend a race because the dog “is too slow …, because he or she is disinterested in chasing the artificial hare or because he or she simply interferes or plays with other greyhounds whilst running on the track.” Interfering with another dog commonly refers to fighting.
The GBGB admission is backed up in a Greyhound Watch survey that is the largest of its kind ever undertaken. And the disparity between figures for greyhounds bred and pups to subsequently contend a race is alarming to say the least.
The survey covered all Greyhound Stud Book litter entries received between 1 June 2005 and 31 May 2006 (Vol. 125), and showed that only 2,267 of 4,332 pups born are recorded racing. In other words, just 52% made the grade.
And with the figure of 2,267 accounting for just 23% of greyhounds to be registered for racing in Britain over a twelve month period (comparison made against the registration total for 2007 (9,751)), above statistics only hint at the scale of unwanted pups.
Looking solely at the number of greyhounds bred as a result of racing in Britain, the findings indicate that over a one year period about 8,882 pups are judged not fit for purpose.
We have in Britain, however, still meetings held on flapping (independent) tracks for which no figures exist. Such tracks are though minor players and attract both dogs that have previously been recorded racing as well as pups new to the track. Flapping tracks will, therefore, not impact greatly on numbers.
Members of the racing fraternity would also be right to point out that the best bitch in a litter will, on occasion, be retired directly for mating. In other words, used as a breeding machine and spending the rest of her life in a kennel.
Most bitches used for mating have though competed on the track, if only in a few races. Any Chewing Gum is recorded contending 6 ‘opens’ and one feature race and subsequently had a litter in October 2000, August 2001, June 2002, March 2003, December 2003, August 2004, April 2005, February 2006 and March 2007.
The survey also collated data relating to specific breeders and the findings make for interesting reading.
Litter entries received for Charles Pickering over the same period (June 2005 – May 2006) total 39 (38 identified in the index), and out of 198 pups born, just 90 reached the naming stage and only 46 (23%) are recorded racing (figures in the survey relating to ‘naming stage’ are based on information in Vol. 125 and all subsequent volumes of the Greyhound Stud Book that have been published).
All pups from 9 litter entries for Pickering that include a mating between Goahead Atlantic and El Premier - El Premier being the sire of the brood bitch, appear to have vanished. Pickering was the subject of an article in The Sunday Times (11 May, 2008) in which he was reported offering slow dogs to be killed for research.
Litter entries for breeder and trainer Ann McCarroll (attached to Newcastle) total 11, and out of 62 pups born, just 35 were named and 23 (37%) are recorded racing. One of the brood bitches - Agile Milly - was, along with other greyhounds, later rescued after the animals were booked-in at Marske Vets Ltd to be euthanased.
And just 9 (16%) of 55 pups from 11 litter entries for Ian Taylor are recorded racing. Pups named total 34 of which 18, curiously, are recorded under Pickering.
So what happens to the thousands of pups bred every year that never contend a race?
Interestingly, the GBGB ask the same question under ‘FAQ’s’ on the governing bodies website (without, not surprisingly, giving even a suggestion of numbers). Read further down and you will see the GBGB fail to provide an answer and use clever wording to imply such dogs are homed.
Homing figures for 2007 given within the Greyhound Forum, June 2008 report for all greyhounds are as follows: 4,479 homed through the Retired Greyhound Trust (RGT) and an “estimated” 3,500 homed by owners, trainers and other welfare charities.
How credible the above figures are, is, however, in question. RGT Director, Ivor Stocker, was recently to say: “There was certainly instances in the last two or three years were dogs have been counted on more than one occasion because the trainer put in a form and we (RGT) put in a form.”
And through the media, the governing body invariably compare similar figures solely against the number of greyhounds that retire from racing annually (about 10,000) and so, at the very least, imply all greyhounds homed are ex-racers (it looks good and negates the subject of non-graders).
The public are being misled. Most, but not all greyhounds homed, are ex-racers. The RGT have estimated that about 30% of greyhounds homed through their branches were not registered for racing.
If that percentage is applied across all greyhounds homed and if we assume no greyhounds were counted on more than one occasion (for sake of argument) that is 2,394 non-graders accounted for in 2007.
Homing figures for 2007 are up slightly on 2006, but have risen little subsequently. No matter how you look at it, it isn’t possible to account for the vast majority of greyhounds that are not recorded racing.
Eight breeders with litters recorded in the survey showing high ‘wastage’ were asked about the fate of the pups. Only one breeder responded, and the response did not address the specific issue of the animal’s fortune.
In a one page fanciful article (courtesy of Our Dogs, 15 August 2008), Greyhound Star Editor, Floyd Amphlett, was to state: “Greyhound breeders do not dispose of young pups through colouring or genetic issues.” Amphlett, on that point, was correct. What, however, he conveniently forgot to mention is pups are killed and killed in their thousands because they are simply judged not suitable for racing.
Update:
This subject is now covered in Behind the Lights, the Tote and the Non-starters, where additional information is provided.
Even the Greyhound Board of Great Britain (GBGB) who govern racing on Britain’s 28 major tracks concede that a greyhound may never contend a race because the dog “is too slow …, because he or she is disinterested in chasing the artificial hare or because he or she simply interferes or plays with other greyhounds whilst running on the track.” Interfering with another dog commonly refers to fighting.
The GBGB admission is backed up in a Greyhound Watch survey that is the largest of its kind ever undertaken. And the disparity between figures for greyhounds bred and pups to subsequently contend a race is alarming to say the least.
The survey covered all Greyhound Stud Book litter entries received between 1 June 2005 and 31 May 2006 (Vol. 125), and showed that only 2,267 of 4,332 pups born are recorded racing. In other words, just 52% made the grade.
And with the figure of 2,267 accounting for just 23% of greyhounds to be registered for racing in Britain over a twelve month period (comparison made against the registration total for 2007 (9,751)), above statistics only hint at the scale of unwanted pups.
Looking solely at the number of greyhounds bred as a result of racing in Britain, the findings indicate that over a one year period about 8,882 pups are judged not fit for purpose.
We have in Britain, however, still meetings held on flapping (independent) tracks for which no figures exist. Such tracks are though minor players and attract both dogs that have previously been recorded racing as well as pups new to the track. Flapping tracks will, therefore, not impact greatly on numbers.
Members of the racing fraternity would also be right to point out that the best bitch in a litter will, on occasion, be retired directly for mating. In other words, used as a breeding machine and spending the rest of her life in a kennel.
Most bitches used for mating have though competed on the track, if only in a few races. Any Chewing Gum is recorded contending 6 ‘opens’ and one feature race and subsequently had a litter in October 2000, August 2001, June 2002, March 2003, December 2003, August 2004, April 2005, February 2006 and March 2007.
The survey also collated data relating to specific breeders and the findings make for interesting reading.
Litter entries received for Charles Pickering over the same period (June 2005 – May 2006) total 39 (38 identified in the index), and out of 198 pups born, just 90 reached the naming stage and only 46 (23%) are recorded racing (figures in the survey relating to ‘naming stage’ are based on information in Vol. 125 and all subsequent volumes of the Greyhound Stud Book that have been published).
All pups from 9 litter entries for Pickering that include a mating between Goahead Atlantic and El Premier - El Premier being the sire of the brood bitch, appear to have vanished. Pickering was the subject of an article in The Sunday Times (11 May, 2008) in which he was reported offering slow dogs to be killed for research.
Litter entries for breeder and trainer Ann McCarroll (attached to Newcastle) total 11, and out of 62 pups born, just 35 were named and 23 (37%) are recorded racing. One of the brood bitches - Agile Milly - was, along with other greyhounds, later rescued after the animals were booked-in at Marske Vets Ltd to be euthanased.
And just 9 (16%) of 55 pups from 11 litter entries for Ian Taylor are recorded racing. Pups named total 34 of which 18, curiously, are recorded under Pickering.
So what happens to the thousands of pups bred every year that never contend a race?
Interestingly, the GBGB ask the same question under ‘FAQ’s’ on the governing bodies website (without, not surprisingly, giving even a suggestion of numbers). Read further down and you will see the GBGB fail to provide an answer and use clever wording to imply such dogs are homed.
Homing figures for 2007 given within the Greyhound Forum, June 2008 report for all greyhounds are as follows: 4,479 homed through the Retired Greyhound Trust (RGT) and an “estimated” 3,500 homed by owners, trainers and other welfare charities.
How credible the above figures are, is, however, in question. RGT Director, Ivor Stocker, was recently to say: “There was certainly instances in the last two or three years were dogs have been counted on more than one occasion because the trainer put in a form and we (RGT) put in a form.”
And through the media, the governing body invariably compare similar figures solely against the number of greyhounds that retire from racing annually (about 10,000) and so, at the very least, imply all greyhounds homed are ex-racers (it looks good and negates the subject of non-graders).
The public are being misled. Most, but not all greyhounds homed, are ex-racers. The RGT have estimated that about 30% of greyhounds homed through their branches were not registered for racing.
If that percentage is applied across all greyhounds homed and if we assume no greyhounds were counted on more than one occasion (for sake of argument) that is 2,394 non-graders accounted for in 2007.
Homing figures for 2007 are up slightly on 2006, but have risen little subsequently. No matter how you look at it, it isn’t possible to account for the vast majority of greyhounds that are not recorded racing.
Eight breeders with litters recorded in the survey showing high ‘wastage’ were asked about the fate of the pups. Only one breeder responded, and the response did not address the specific issue of the animal’s fortune.
In a one page fanciful article (courtesy of Our Dogs, 15 August 2008), Greyhound Star Editor, Floyd Amphlett, was to state: “Greyhound breeders do not dispose of young pups through colouring or genetic issues.” Amphlett, on that point, was correct. What, however, he conveniently forgot to mention is pups are killed and killed in their thousands because they are simply judged not suitable for racing.
Update:
This subject is now covered in Behind the Lights, the Tote and the Non-starters, where additional information is provided.
Sunday, 21 December 2008
Greyhounds in kennel hell denied loving homes
Kennels belonging to Eve Blanchard, a professional greyhound trainer attached to Poole stadium, have shocked greyhound protection groups because of the squalid conditions.
Ms Blanchard, now 74, charges £4.00 per day to anyone wishing to run a dog through her kennels that when filmed did not even have lighting. Of further concern is the lack of heating. Ms Blanchard, however, believes the little heat generated by a group of dogs living within a confined area and sound proofing installed about 20 years ago helps keep the animals warm during the colder winter months.
National Greyhound Racing Club Area Steward, Colin Betteridge, is aware of problems and Ms Blanchard was recently served with an Improvement Notice that covers issues including a leaking roof. Mr Betteridge will be visiting the kennels again in the near future to see if improvements judged necessary have been carried out.
Ms Blanchard had at one time about 70 dogs but said she now has only 30 and “most of those aren’t running because their side-lined and lame.” Until recently, the dogs included Corrig Cinders - a beautiful white and blue female - that was put-to-sleep at Poole track after sustaining a broken shoulder in a horrific incident whilst contending only her 17th race.
And the ‘lucky’ greyhounds that survive a career on the track are likely to spend the remainder of their life - perhaps another 7 years - in Ms Blanchard’s kennels.
Tracey Seymour, who runs the Devon and South-West branch of the Retired Greyhound Trust, said Ms Blanchard “doesn’t home her dogs with anyone. She lets them rot and die in her kennel… She’s the world’s worst nightmare. She’s one of these trainers that believe a greyhound should spend the rest of its life in a kennel rotting until it dies and then she gets people to go round there and dig holes and bury them rather than give them the chance of a home.”
Ms Seymour spoke with the trainer when first linking-up with Poole stadium, in the hope some of the dogs could be found loving homes but said Ms Blanchard “wouldn’t budge, she wouldn’t give her dogs over to a homing scheme at all.”
And whilst most people would find the conditions the animals are living in totally unacceptable Mr Betteridge said there is “no serious issue” and “nothing to be alarmed at.”
Information and quotes given above are taken from recorded conversations held on 18th and 19th December 2008.
Ms Blanchard, now 74, charges £4.00 per day to anyone wishing to run a dog through her kennels that when filmed did not even have lighting. Of further concern is the lack of heating. Ms Blanchard, however, believes the little heat generated by a group of dogs living within a confined area and sound proofing installed about 20 years ago helps keep the animals warm during the colder winter months.
National Greyhound Racing Club Area Steward, Colin Betteridge, is aware of problems and Ms Blanchard was recently served with an Improvement Notice that covers issues including a leaking roof. Mr Betteridge will be visiting the kennels again in the near future to see if improvements judged necessary have been carried out.
Ms Blanchard had at one time about 70 dogs but said she now has only 30 and “most of those aren’t running because their side-lined and lame.” Until recently, the dogs included Corrig Cinders - a beautiful white and blue female - that was put-to-sleep at Poole track after sustaining a broken shoulder in a horrific incident whilst contending only her 17th race.
And the ‘lucky’ greyhounds that survive a career on the track are likely to spend the remainder of their life - perhaps another 7 years - in Ms Blanchard’s kennels.
Tracey Seymour, who runs the Devon and South-West branch of the Retired Greyhound Trust, said Ms Blanchard “doesn’t home her dogs with anyone. She lets them rot and die in her kennel… She’s the world’s worst nightmare. She’s one of these trainers that believe a greyhound should spend the rest of its life in a kennel rotting until it dies and then she gets people to go round there and dig holes and bury them rather than give them the chance of a home.”
Ms Seymour spoke with the trainer when first linking-up with Poole stadium, in the hope some of the dogs could be found loving homes but said Ms Blanchard “wouldn’t budge, she wouldn’t give her dogs over to a homing scheme at all.”
And whilst most people would find the conditions the animals are living in totally unacceptable Mr Betteridge said there is “no serious issue” and “nothing to be alarmed at.”
Information and quotes given above are taken from recorded conversations held on 18th and 19th December 2008.
Tuesday, 18 November 2008
A ‘sport’ in conflict with the Animal Welfare Act?
Under section (9) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 it states: “A person commits an offence if he does not take such steps as are reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure that the needs of an animal for which he is responsible are met to the extent required by good practice.” And subsection (2, e) covers specifically the need for an animal “to be protected from pain, suffering (and) injury.”
Similar legislation applies in Scotland under the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006, section (24), subsection (3, e).
The above begs the following question: Are trainers of racing greyhounds in breach of the relevant Act when running dogs on Britain’s tracks?
Safety at Yarmouth stadium has been a contentious issue for many years with trainers describing the track as both “diabolical” and an “absolute tip.” An inconsistent surface - said to be due to grading and drainage - and the inside rail are given as reasons for a very high number of injuries and fatalities.
Recent victims include Bluestone Lane and Daves Dasher. The former - a blue male - suffered a severe hind leg fracture on Wednesday 22nd October and was put-to-sleep by the track vet. He was just 30 months old and the third greyhound joint owner Ms Cossey has lost through injury. The following Monday, 27th October, Daves Dasher - a dark brindle male aged only 26 months - sustained a serious fracture of the right foreleg and was PTS also.
Commenting on the most recent fatality, Assistant Racing Manager Marcus Westgate was typically pragmatic: “It was just one of those really unfortunate things that happen in this game.” When pushed to give a figure for greyhound’s put-down due to injury each month he replied: “Maybe a couple, something like that.” Feedback from trainers, however, would indicate the true figure is higher.
On Saturday 18th October, spectators at Peterborough stadium were horrified to witness two greyhounds fatally injured. Glandore Queen - a fawn and white female - was recorded ‘brokedown’ after sustaining a hind leg fracture in the first race of the evening meeting, and Hanoi Son - a black male - sustained a broken hock when brought down in the fifth race.
The term ‘brokedown’ is occasionally used by race stewards to identify when a greyhound has suffered a potentially serious injury and, as a result, was unable to finish the race. Both Glandore Queen and Hanoi Son were PTS by the track vet out of view of customers watching from the restaurant and bars.
Sadly, fatalities such as the examples given are common across all tracks. It is thought as many as 1,500 greyhounds are PTS annually following injury. This, however, represents only the tip of the iceberg when looking at the scale of injuries sustained.
Last year stewards at Owlerton stadium (Sheffield) recorded greyhounds either lame or ‘brokedown’ 309 times; a figure covering a total of 272 dogs. For 141 of the greyhounds it was to be their last race.
Racing at the above track is regulated by the National Greyhound Racing Club (NGRC) and the figure of 309 translates to about 6,900 injuries sustained nationally when looking at the ratio between the total figures for races contended at Owlerton and all NGRC tracks combined.
Not all injuries, however, were identified in the stewards comments and above figures do not take into account the many trials that are held. In addition Owlerton has, according to Dave Houfton (husband of trainer Jane Houfton (a major player at the stadium who can supply you a racing dog for as little as £200)), a good record on safety: “Out of all the tracks in the country it’s probably… one of the safest and one that statistically would have a lot fewer injuries.”
Take the above factors into account and it’s likely to be a five figure total for injuries sustained nationally not including stats for the flapping (independent and unregulated) tracks.
Unfortunately, we cannot be any more precise than that. The Racecourse Promoters Association (RCPA) are compiling a database on injuries for NGRC tracks but have turned down all requests for information.
Editor of Greyhound Star, Floyd Amphlett was recently to imply that greyhound racing is little different to “agility training, fly-ball or other assorted fun activities with dogs.” Mr Amphlett has written much about greyhound racing but nothing quite so farfetched. No other activity, whether a sport, working or otherwise results in thousands of dogs getting ‘smashed-up’ every year.
Richard Newell - a breeder, trainer and owner of racing dogs - is a little more candid in his observation of BAGS (Bookmakers Afternoon Greyhound Service): “Don't tell me that the majority of BAGS trainers see their inmates as anything other than livestock? I doubt the majority of BAGS dogs get a daily gallop out in a field…, more like 10 minutes emptying out twice a day and a trip to the local track once a week running lame for £15 to line the pocket of a caring Bookmaker.”
Owlerton hold two BAGS meetings per week and the injury rate last year, as a percentage of total races held, was 10.3. In contrast, the figure is 7.8 when making the same calculation (based on the steward’s race comments) for meetings held on Saturday evening.
Risk of injury, however, whether a BAGS meeting or otherwise is evidently very high, as all who are involved in racing are only too aware. Mr Houfton speaks favourably about Owlerton but was also to add: “I’m afraid with greyhound racing a dog’s next race can be its last one.”
In considering a breach of the Animal Welfare Act a court of law may look at the issue of “good practice” but this would be missing the point. A track should be properly maintained and in good order, dogs have to be muzzled and passed fit to race (though it is widely acknowledged many do run when injured) but “good practice” at best only makes racing safer, it does not make racing safe.
The camber (or lack of it), drainage (where applicable) and rail have an impact on safety but it is the character of greyhound tracks - with fast straights leading into tight bends - that creates so many incidents and results in so many injuries and fatalities. And six greyhounds competing together multiply the risk with many incidents occurring as the dogs hurtle into turn one.
A trainer of 30 years, who, by the way, was fined £600 by the NGRC for refusing to run his greyhounds when he judged a track to be unsafe, believes the injury rate could only ever be significantly reduced if dogs competed on a straight course.
The RSPCA Senior Enquiries Administrator is adamant though, that greyhound racing as it currently stands is not in breach of the Animal Welfare Act, but was unable to provide any credible explanation to support her and, presumably, the charities view. Needless to say the RSPCA/SSPCA do not have the resources to take action against all 1240+ trainers running dogs on NGRC tracks alone.
Defra, who drew up the legislation, would not dispute a breach of the sections detailed but an independent legal expert thought no Judge would side against a trainer because of the political ramifications.
Similar legislation applies in Scotland under the Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006, section (24), subsection (3, e).
The above begs the following question: Are trainers of racing greyhounds in breach of the relevant Act when running dogs on Britain’s tracks?
Safety at Yarmouth stadium has been a contentious issue for many years with trainers describing the track as both “diabolical” and an “absolute tip.” An inconsistent surface - said to be due to grading and drainage - and the inside rail are given as reasons for a very high number of injuries and fatalities.
Recent victims include Bluestone Lane and Daves Dasher. The former - a blue male - suffered a severe hind leg fracture on Wednesday 22nd October and was put-to-sleep by the track vet. He was just 30 months old and the third greyhound joint owner Ms Cossey has lost through injury. The following Monday, 27th October, Daves Dasher - a dark brindle male aged only 26 months - sustained a serious fracture of the right foreleg and was PTS also.
Commenting on the most recent fatality, Assistant Racing Manager Marcus Westgate was typically pragmatic: “It was just one of those really unfortunate things that happen in this game.” When pushed to give a figure for greyhound’s put-down due to injury each month he replied: “Maybe a couple, something like that.” Feedback from trainers, however, would indicate the true figure is higher.
On Saturday 18th October, spectators at Peterborough stadium were horrified to witness two greyhounds fatally injured. Glandore Queen - a fawn and white female - was recorded ‘brokedown’ after sustaining a hind leg fracture in the first race of the evening meeting, and Hanoi Son - a black male - sustained a broken hock when brought down in the fifth race.
The term ‘brokedown’ is occasionally used by race stewards to identify when a greyhound has suffered a potentially serious injury and, as a result, was unable to finish the race. Both Glandore Queen and Hanoi Son were PTS by the track vet out of view of customers watching from the restaurant and bars.
Sadly, fatalities such as the examples given are common across all tracks. It is thought as many as 1,500 greyhounds are PTS annually following injury. This, however, represents only the tip of the iceberg when looking at the scale of injuries sustained.
Last year stewards at Owlerton stadium (Sheffield) recorded greyhounds either lame or ‘brokedown’ 309 times; a figure covering a total of 272 dogs. For 141 of the greyhounds it was to be their last race.
Racing at the above track is regulated by the National Greyhound Racing Club (NGRC) and the figure of 309 translates to about 6,900 injuries sustained nationally when looking at the ratio between the total figures for races contended at Owlerton and all NGRC tracks combined.
Not all injuries, however, were identified in the stewards comments and above figures do not take into account the many trials that are held. In addition Owlerton has, according to Dave Houfton (husband of trainer Jane Houfton (a major player at the stadium who can supply you a racing dog for as little as £200)), a good record on safety: “Out of all the tracks in the country it’s probably… one of the safest and one that statistically would have a lot fewer injuries.”
Take the above factors into account and it’s likely to be a five figure total for injuries sustained nationally not including stats for the flapping (independent and unregulated) tracks.
Unfortunately, we cannot be any more precise than that. The Racecourse Promoters Association (RCPA) are compiling a database on injuries for NGRC tracks but have turned down all requests for information.
Editor of Greyhound Star, Floyd Amphlett was recently to imply that greyhound racing is little different to “agility training, fly-ball or other assorted fun activities with dogs.” Mr Amphlett has written much about greyhound racing but nothing quite so farfetched. No other activity, whether a sport, working or otherwise results in thousands of dogs getting ‘smashed-up’ every year.
Richard Newell - a breeder, trainer and owner of racing dogs - is a little more candid in his observation of BAGS (Bookmakers Afternoon Greyhound Service): “Don't tell me that the majority of BAGS trainers see their inmates as anything other than livestock? I doubt the majority of BAGS dogs get a daily gallop out in a field…, more like 10 minutes emptying out twice a day and a trip to the local track once a week running lame for £15 to line the pocket of a caring Bookmaker.”
Owlerton hold two BAGS meetings per week and the injury rate last year, as a percentage of total races held, was 10.3. In contrast, the figure is 7.8 when making the same calculation (based on the steward’s race comments) for meetings held on Saturday evening.
Risk of injury, however, whether a BAGS meeting or otherwise is evidently very high, as all who are involved in racing are only too aware. Mr Houfton speaks favourably about Owlerton but was also to add: “I’m afraid with greyhound racing a dog’s next race can be its last one.”
In considering a breach of the Animal Welfare Act a court of law may look at the issue of “good practice” but this would be missing the point. A track should be properly maintained and in good order, dogs have to be muzzled and passed fit to race (though it is widely acknowledged many do run when injured) but “good practice” at best only makes racing safer, it does not make racing safe.
The camber (or lack of it), drainage (where applicable) and rail have an impact on safety but it is the character of greyhound tracks - with fast straights leading into tight bends - that creates so many incidents and results in so many injuries and fatalities. And six greyhounds competing together multiply the risk with many incidents occurring as the dogs hurtle into turn one.
A trainer of 30 years, who, by the way, was fined £600 by the NGRC for refusing to run his greyhounds when he judged a track to be unsafe, believes the injury rate could only ever be significantly reduced if dogs competed on a straight course.
The RSPCA Senior Enquiries Administrator is adamant though, that greyhound racing as it currently stands is not in breach of the Animal Welfare Act, but was unable to provide any credible explanation to support her and, presumably, the charities view. Needless to say the RSPCA/SSPCA do not have the resources to take action against all 1240+ trainers running dogs on NGRC tracks alone.
Defra, who drew up the legislation, would not dispute a breach of the sections detailed but an independent legal expert thought no Judge would side against a trainer because of the political ramifications.
Saturday, 1 March 2008
Cover-up following killing of Harry
A beautiful blue greyhound - racing name Harrys Junction - was to endure weeks of neglect and suffering before his life was ended in the back of an RSPCA van, and yet the owners are facing no charges.
As far as the RSPCA are concerned the matter is now closed and the couple in question are not prevented from owning another pet.
This tragic story concerns yet another greyhound disposed of by the racing industry but this dog was not abandoned or homed independently by the trainer as is often the case.
Harrys Junction was put up for adoption with the Retired Greyhound Trust (RGT) with responsibility for homing of the animal given to Barbara Townsend who represents ReHome a Greyhound, Marshland St James.
On 27th September 2007 a couple in Wisbech took possession of the greyhound and soon afterwards neighbours became very worried about the animals treatment and welfare.
An RSPCA inspector visited the property in November and advised the owners to have the greyhound examined by a vet. Both the health of the dog and suitability of the home were of concern.
The same inspector again visited the property on 07th January 2008 when the greyhound was surrendered by the couple and later euthanased by the RSPCA following a brief examination of the dog at Amical Veterinary Centre.
Townsend, a trainer attached to Peterborough Stadium, states having checked on the greyhound several times including shortly before Christmas when she believed the animal was fine, and so it would appear her perception differs greatly to that of the inspector.
RGT Director Ivor Stocker has tried defending Townsend by stating "circumstances in the home can change" but this is not believed to be the case.
The male occupant admits that the greyhounds head was stood on causing a loss of sight in one eye and there was an attempt to stitch a leg wound themselves. No wonder local residents could hear the animal yelping out in agony.
That said, the couple are shocked to hear of the animals fate. It is their view the greyhound was not suffering any injury or illness that could in anyway be considered fatal and so why was the animal destroyed by the RSPCA?
The charity refuse to answer any questions, using the Data Protection Act as an excuse (information specific to the greyhound is not covered by the act), and Amical Veterinary Centre have been instructed to make no comment.
It appears the greyhound was conveniently disposed off and what we are now seeing is a cover-up.
For every dog that enters racing another will not make the grade and is likely killed. It is the same fate for many greyhounds that have competed on the track and not all are humanely put-to-sleep by a vet.
Harrys Junction, however, was given the chance of a secure future when placed with the RGT but suffered a premature death also due to failures on the part of all concerned. He was just 5 years old.
As far as the RSPCA are concerned the matter is now closed and the couple in question are not prevented from owning another pet.
This tragic story concerns yet another greyhound disposed of by the racing industry but this dog was not abandoned or homed independently by the trainer as is often the case.
Harrys Junction was put up for adoption with the Retired Greyhound Trust (RGT) with responsibility for homing of the animal given to Barbara Townsend who represents ReHome a Greyhound, Marshland St James.
On 27th September 2007 a couple in Wisbech took possession of the greyhound and soon afterwards neighbours became very worried about the animals treatment and welfare.
An RSPCA inspector visited the property in November and advised the owners to have the greyhound examined by a vet. Both the health of the dog and suitability of the home were of concern.
The same inspector again visited the property on 07th January 2008 when the greyhound was surrendered by the couple and later euthanased by the RSPCA following a brief examination of the dog at Amical Veterinary Centre.
Townsend, a trainer attached to Peterborough Stadium, states having checked on the greyhound several times including shortly before Christmas when she believed the animal was fine, and so it would appear her perception differs greatly to that of the inspector.
RGT Director Ivor Stocker has tried defending Townsend by stating "circumstances in the home can change" but this is not believed to be the case.
The male occupant admits that the greyhounds head was stood on causing a loss of sight in one eye and there was an attempt to stitch a leg wound themselves. No wonder local residents could hear the animal yelping out in agony.
That said, the couple are shocked to hear of the animals fate. It is their view the greyhound was not suffering any injury or illness that could in anyway be considered fatal and so why was the animal destroyed by the RSPCA?
The charity refuse to answer any questions, using the Data Protection Act as an excuse (information specific to the greyhound is not covered by the act), and Amical Veterinary Centre have been instructed to make no comment.
It appears the greyhound was conveniently disposed off and what we are now seeing is a cover-up.
For every dog that enters racing another will not make the grade and is likely killed. It is the same fate for many greyhounds that have competed on the track and not all are humanely put-to-sleep by a vet.
Harrys Junction, however, was given the chance of a secure future when placed with the RGT but suffered a premature death also due to failures on the part of all concerned. He was just 5 years old.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)