Criticising or questioning charities is about as socially acceptable as drowning a blind child’s kitten.

Personally, I don’t haven’t trusted charities since learning years ago that a donkey sanctuary was proving so successful that they were having to breed their own animals to keep all the paddocks full on their seven farms.

Or that the RSPCA recently spent over £1m of donations on the upkeep of a dozens of horses for a court case in which the offender received a six month suspended prison sentence.

This is the same RSPCA that destroyed 53,000 animals last year, of which half were reckoned to be healthy, but they couldn’t justify spending more of their £130m annual income on new homes.

So I was interested to read the Dogs Trust report on their secret undercover investigation into greyhound kennels – The Greyhound Industry – Don’t Bet on Fair Treatment.

I read the report and the first thing that struck me was in introductory pages. “The regulations have failed to deliver the improvements required to protect racing greyhounds from cradle to grave”

A bit misleading isn’t it? Or maybe a hint at Dogs Trust’s long term ambitions? Do they want to travel to Ireland and supervise the whelping, and then monitor the activities of a ten year old hound in some old lady’s semi-detached home in Surbiton?

So – no, it will never be about ‘cradle to grave’.

Greyhounds are racers during a particular part of their lives and there is no reason why a four month old greyhound pup should be regulated differently to a four month old Dalmatian. A six year old mongrel should be treated the same as a six year old ex-Wimbledon grader. As acknowledged by the Home Office – much to the disgust of Dogs Trust and others – when the Animal Welfare Act was drafted.

Moving on – this is what they found

Potential Breaches included;

WELFARE CONCERNS AT GREYHOUND KENNELS

  • Kennels which were in filthy conditions that were soaked in urine and excreta that appeared not to have been cleared for days.
  • No signs of disinfectant or cleaning materials on the premises and no evidence of kennels being cleaned and disinfected for a considerable time due to thick layers of dust and cobwebs.
  • Kennels showing signs of neglect with dangerous sharp pieces of metal and wood that could cause injuries to dogs.
  • Significant rot and water damage to roofs – some had collapsed posing a real danger to dogs.
  • Kennels were dark and dank with inadequate light.
  • Food preparation areas that were extremely dirty and chemicals directly above food containers.
  • No firefighting equipment on the premises.

OTHER WELFARE CONCERNS FOR GREYHOUNDS

  • Many trainers reported numerous injuries to Greyhounds within the kennels.
  • Some trainers admitted to significantly minimising the use of veterinarians and self medicating their Greyhounds.
  • Some trainers reported poor transport conditions for Greyhounds travelling from Ireland to be sold in the UK.
  • Some trainers only fed animals once a day due to their Greyhounds running in Bookmakers Afternoon Greyhound Races (BAGS). Trainers were also under pressure to buy low graded dogs from Ireland to supply the demand for BAGS races.
  • Several trainers did not appear to have adequate heating facilities.

 

My first response is – nobody can justify the maltreatment of animals – but then this isn’t about maltreatment. It’s about kennels.

Show me an underfed unhappy greyhound and I’ll kick-off – show me flaked paint or rusty chainlink and I don’t give a damn.

The level of allegations also had a scattergun approach. Its one thing saying that the kennels hadn’t been cleaned out and a health hazard to dogs and staff, its quite another saying they were dusty.

At one level there is a complaint that there is no sign of disinfectant, but the next, the presence of chemicals in the vicinity of food. Were they cleaning chemicals? A touch of alchemy?

There were lame dogs in the kennels? Well **** me Sherlock, fancy finding injured greyhounds in a racing kennel!

Trainers were actually treating dogs for injuries (whatever next!) and didn’t feel the need to pay a vet £200 for turning out and in many cases doing an inferior job. Or possibly they were referring to the type of first aid that most vets would leave to a veterinary nurse.

Many kennels are deliberately dark, because most dogs prefer them that way. They don’t want too much activity outside their doors – and in a decent kennel at least, the dogs are out at least five times a day.

Nor do many kennels go big on heating – the old fashioned way for the winter was a nice deep bed of straw (or now paper) and coat the dogs up on the really cold evenings. No central heating!

Signs of damage – quite possibly caused by greyhounds – and not yet fixed. There will be some in all kennels.

These are working kennels folks, Not the pastel theme, artistically pleasing show premises that the Dogs Trust can afford to run.

But then money isn’t a problem for the Dogs Trust. In 2013 – I don’t have figures for last year – their income was £73m. Yes, seven, three, and six effin noughts.

Do you know that his leviathan pays FOUR people more than £100,000 per year and one, in excess of £140,000! Their assets are £128m – more than enough to buy the entire greyhound industry many times over.

On average, the RGT needs £1,022 for every greyhound it homes. The figure for the Dogs Trust is over £6,200.

Greyhound racing is aware of its limitations, and it is entirely capable of policing itself if it is given adequate resources.

If Dogs Trust actually wanted to improve matters it could use its significant political clout to back greyhound racing on its pursuit of a fair deal with the off-course betting industry.

Greyhound racing is already doing its best. Every month, trainers are given grants to improve their kennels. I understand that seven of the top ten trainers have had grants.

The problem is – resources are limited. A £13m BGRF is now £6.5m. And that’s for everything, including ‘integrity’.

Dogs Trust could even insist on preconditions – if we help you get the money, we want a time limited program to bring all up to kennels up to a mutually agreed standard.

But they will still be working kennels – and we know best how to run them.

In the meantime, since Dogs Trust are so concerned, do you think they might sub us a few quid?