Kinsley boss John Curran believes that the abolition of ‘economic euthanasia’ as a means of disposing of ex-racers is entirely deliverable following a ground breaking pilot study held at his track, writes Floyd Amphlett.
Curran’s concerns were first conceived several years ago when he was asked, by the Racecourse Promoters Association to deliver industry injury and euthanasia figures to EFRA, the Government’s environment, food and rural affairs department.
He said: “I was only able to present the figures from the ‘white forms’, which contained the data compiled by the track vets in relation to injuries that actually took place at the track.
“I was aware, that there was a significant gap in what would have been on the ‘green forms’ as compiled by GBGB, though their Chief Executive (Barry Faulkner) was never called before them to explain the difference.
“As promoters, we were never given those details, quite rightly, as they were subject to data protection.
“As a promoter though, I had a fair idea of the number of dogs who were not terminally injured at the track, but would have been put to sleep by the owners and trainers in the following days.
“I could entirely sympathise with many. They might have had 25 per cent of the kennels who were off lame with small injuries, and they simply didn’t have the resources to pay for the veterinary treatment and keep the dogs in the kennel until homes could be found.”
Curran was particularly concerned about re-homing options for dogs who had sustained significant injuries.
To be brutal about it – could the industry with finite resources, afford to spend four figures on an injured greyhound, knowing that it wasn’t even able to re-home all its uninjured dogs?
He said: “It was a perfectly valid view, though not one that I personally subscribed to.”
Over a period of time, Curran did his own calculations and determined that of all the dogs ‘put to sleep due to injury’ (or ‘economic grounds) only, roughly, 15% were destroyed for legitimate humane/veterinary reasons. The rest could have been saved ‘at a cost’.
The GBGB began studying their options a couple of years ago and determined that the cost of surgery for significant hock or long bone injuries averaged out at around £800 per greyhound.
They even entered dialogue with various charities, though they would not deal directly with the greyhound industry.
Curran said: “We know that they would have come under fire from the antis who want as many dead greyhounds as possible to enable them to raise donations. They certainly wouldn’t want to see them saved.”
The Retired Greyhound Trust (now Greyhound Trust) were considered as a conduit through which injured greyhounds could be channelled. However they determined that they did not have the after-care facilities to handle the animals in the critical period immediately after surgery.
In the end, Curran supported by business partner Keith Murrell, and in conjunction with GBGB, decided to set up their own three month pilot scheme.
They put aside £5,000, Curran wrote an eight page action plan, and they engaged in long discussions with vets and local trainers about the actual practicalities of operating the scheme.
The plan kicked-in when the track vet summoned the welfare officer (Curran) to the paddock on the event of any greyhound being injured whereby there was a possibility of it being euthanased.
Curran would ask for an injury assessment from the vet and would consult with the owner and/or trainer. If the vet’s prognosis was that the injury could be treated, Curran would offer to help by taking the greyhound into the scheme.
If the vet determined that, that in his/her opinion, euthanasia or amputation was the humane option, then the final decision would rest with the owner.
If the animal was in need of treatment, it would be given pain relief and taken to the track’s holding kennel overnight, to be assessed for surgery the following day.
The holding kennel is operated by two specialist staff with additional facilities to assist in the handling of incapacitated greyhounds.
Following surgery, carried out by one of three locally contracted veterinary practices, the greyhound would be returned to the holding kennel for the important first two-four weeks of convalescence, before being returned to the original kennel to enable any re-homing arrangements to be made.
It is fair to say, there were many lessons learned during the three month trial.
Nine greyhounds ended up being drafted into the scheme. Seven of the injuries were bone related, including broken hocks and long bones, plus two severe muscle injuries eg where muscles had pulled away from bone.
In eight of the nine cases, connections had indicated that euthanasia would have been a serious consideration.
Ironically, the ninth, was by far the worst injury; a very badly broken hock, to a point that broken bones had punctured the skin.
Curran said: “With the dog sedated the owner was called to the paddock as the vet made his prognosis. The owner was very distressed but I asked her to remain outside. She asked me to promise that nothing would happen to the dog. I assured her that we would comply with her wishes.
“The vet recommended euthanasia. I told the owner, who was in tears, but she insisted that she didn’t want to put the dog to sleep. I informed the vet that we would abide by the lady’s wishes.
“She was very emotional afterwards, worried that we wouldn’t do as she asked and so grateful that we had.”
The dog was given more pain relief and was transported under veterinary guidance and a transportation certificate to one of the appointed veterinary surgeries to be kept overnight.
X-rays were taken and a meeting was held whereby the vets concurred with the decision of the track vet that euthanasia was their recommended option.
Curran said: “I phoned the lady and told her but she was adamant that nothing would happen to the dog. So we decided to take a third opinion from one of the other practices.
“They also looked at the x-rays and conferred but offered to speak to a specialist surgeon at the veterinary college. Their expert agreed on the difficulties but offered to talk them through a long and complicated operation.
“The bottom line is, the dog was saved.”
The cost of the complex operation was in excess of £4,000 of which the stadium made a significant contribution.
To put a dog on the scheme, it costs the owner £125. So how many of the owners quibbled about the cost?
“None of them” said Curran. “They were all happy to pay it. In fact, as part of the cost of surgery – and bear in mind, the complexity of the injuries can vary including a number that are very straightforward – the vets will also spay or neuter the animal while it is still under sedation. That saves 30% on the normal operation charge.”
Such has been the success of the pilot scheme that the Kinsley exec have agreed to extend it until the end of the year.
Curran has produced a paper for GBGB laying out his observations about the pilot scheme and the best method of rolling it out across the country. In essence, he believes it needs to be locally led and controlled with some central funding.
So do the extra greyhounds, who might otherwise have been put to sleep, really add to the home-finding burden?
Curran said: “Not at all. We have had a tremendous year for home finding. Up until the end of this week, we have re-homed 231 greyhounds including seven of the nine on the scheme.
“Even wiping out December, we are confident of reaching our target for the year of 260.”
Given the results of the Kinsley experiment, combined with GBGB’s Greyhound Commitment, it must be obvious to any impartial welfarist that the only issue preventing the scrapping of the ‘non economic euthanasia’ policy is the continued and disgraceful failure of the betting industry to honour their moral (voluntary) commitment to the British Greyhound Racing Fund.
