PETE HARNDEN: TAKING A FRESH LOOK AT RETIREMENT

I have become increasingly concerned at the direction that the industry is going when it comes to retired greyhounds.

Don’t get me wrong, we’ve come a long way, and there is still a way to go. But I am talking about the general unimaginative approach.

In the coming weeks and months, I am expecting the burden of welfare to become even heavier on trainers in particular. I recently found out that there are more greyhounds now owned directly by their trainers than by owners.

It is all very well for trainers to be exposed for putting older dogs to sleep. But if the industry doesn’t start giving them more help, and won’t share the burden – when they end up with a third of a kennel, or more, not earning their keep –  the whole game will grind to a halt.

I know how much it costs me personally to subsidise my kennel. I am able to do. Many others aren’t.

The simple solution is to throw more money at it. The problem is that the betting industry aren’t honouring their moral obligations to the greyhounds by not paying into the fund on their internet betting. Most of them anyway.

So the money just isn’t there.

 

But even if we had that money, it is a tremendous burden to try to re-home so many dogs.

I read on this website that there should be around 7,600 dogs registered this year, slightly down on last year which was a bit of a blip.

Working to round figures, if 7,600 are coming in, then surely a similar number are being retired? No matter what the antis try to say, you can’t re-home more than you have.

My question is, can we operate with fewer dogs?

I suppose we may get the answer to that when this whole media rights business is sorted.

On any given morning, afternoon and evening there are at least four tracks running at the same time. I actually counted 20 meetings as a whole on Friday.

Sadly, it looks inevitable that when ARC and SIS stop fighting each other, we will lose a lot of tracks along with the surplus racing.

Nobody knows when that will be and when it does happen, I don’t want to imagine how many surplus greyhounds there will be.

But until then, the re-homing problem needs to be sorted.

 

I don’t know the length of the average racing career, but let’s say it is two years. If you could extend that by an average of just four months per dog, you would need roughly 1,200 fewer dogs each year.

That would be roughly double the number of dogs put to sleep each year ‘on economic grounds’.

Of course, these things are easier said than done, but here are a few ideas that would definitely help and they would require the support of all sections of the industry. This is a shared burden and responsibility.

 

1) More durable greyhounds

Everybody wants to breed faster dogs because that is where the money is, but what about breeding more robust greyhounds?

Should we be looking at producing more greyhounds capable of running 100 races or more?

I understand that in America, kennel owners are much more interested in stud dogs that had long careers ‘in the money’, than dogs who maybe broke down after 20 races.

I realise that the only way it works is if there are incentives for breeders. If there were cash incentives for dogs reaching certain landmarks, like 100 races, those dogs would become more valuable.

It would certainly be another consideration for breeders like me who would always want to produce an open racer, but might have one eye on longer earning potential and shorter retirements.

But there is another angle to this that most people probably haven’t thought about.

You don’t have to give up speed for durability.

In recent years the big bucks were at stud. As soon as a dog won the Derby, he was off to make money.

Now because of frozen semen, a dog can win the Derby, spend the winter in the breeding kennel, and then run another two or three years.

If you go back to the 1940s, the champions were often still running at five years old. Mick The Miller was five and a half when he went unbeaten through the St.Leger.

Although some owners would fear for a loss of reputation as the dog got older, if a five year old Dorotas Wildcat could only get as far as the Derby semis, would anybody really think any the worse of him?

Or would they be saying what a ‘classy, durable, honest dog he must be. Who wouldn’t want pups like the dad?’

Besides, once his pups are on the track, the sire’s racing reputation becomes irrelevant.

 

2) Respect the veterans

One of the main reasons for sound dogs being retired is out of some sense of ‘pride’. Or is it ego?

We’ve all heard it, ‘well he used to be an open racer but now he is being beaten by A2 dogs, we should retire him’

Some of my fellow trainers are just as bad. They will have a former open racer and tell the owner to retire it because he can’t win opens any more.

Think about it for a second!

You are saying the dog loves racing, but because of the owner’s ego, the dog has to give doing what he loves. And if you don’t believe he loves it, see how he reacts on race day.

Why not ease the conscience of those concerned owners by running veteran grades?

Suddenly, the open racer turned A2 dog, is now one of the best “V1” dogs at the track.

Sure, the day will eventually come when a series of niggling injuries take their toll, or he lacks his usual enthusiasm to go on the van.

THEN retire him, but not out of misplaced sympathy.

This is one area that the tracks and racing offices need to get their heads together. It would cost £0 to implement and could make a huge difference to kennel strengths.

 

3) Raising trainer expertise

Whenever we talk about injuries, nobody ever thinks further than blaming the running surface. Luckily at Nottingham, we have one of the best in the country and dedicated staff keep it that way.

But surely there is a lot more to this?

How often do we hear that a big race winner has been to see Ron Mills, or George Drake, Micky Lawlor, to name but three. They have detected some small niggle, before the final and then cured it?

Aren’t graders made of the same stuff as open racers and likely to pick up the same injuries?

How many careers would be extended if graded dogs received the same treatment?

Imagine if the top physios were subsidised to visit a kennel every day and not only treat a set number of dogs but asked to show some of the basics to kennelstaff?

Even if it meant they were trained to loosen up tight hamstrings or stretch the dogs properly.

Obviously, there aren’t enough trained people to go around, so offer young university graduates some incentives to get involved.

(This is particularly close to home for me. My youngest daughter earned a degree in animal physiotherapy and rehabilitation. She could have made a career with horses or greyhounds and considered both, but equine looked the safer career choice – Ed).

Why do some trainers seem to get a lot more injuries than others. We all get them, but not necessarily in the same numbers or with the same types of injuries

Also, some trainers have a knack of keeping dogs running for extended careers. Look what Mark Wallis did with the likes of Domino Storm, Adageo Bob and Rubys Rascal.

Mark also has a very good record with bringing dogs back from injuries. Look at Billys Bullet.

How many trainers are having injuries because they feeding badly?

I don’t know – but maybe we should.

 

I lost two of my old favourites this week. The lady who rehomed Salacres Arthur got in touch to say Salacres Arthur had died aged 12.

I also had to take our old open racer Salacres Chief (Commander Chief) to be put to sleep due to ill health. He had been living with my mother and she is terribly upset.

In truth, I wasn’t really sad. He was eleven and a half, and been loved and looked after until his last breath.

They all deserve that. Which leads me to my final point.

I understand a ‘pension type’ of bond scheme is soon to be launched and agree with it in principle.

However, trainers would still be asked to keep dogs for between six months and a year still waiting for homes. Should there not be a scheme whereby retired dogs kept in trainers kennels could be treated the same as RGT holding kennels – ie being paid £3.50/£5 per day?

At that point, economic euthanasias would simply disappear overnight.