Questioning the need for a retirement regulator

Reading Floyd’s article about the Bond Scheme left me with mixed emotions. I do believe there is a need for more welfare initiatives within the industry, but I am not entirely convinced that this is the right one.
As a young, professional trainer and Greyhound Trust Lead Volunteer along with my partner Debbie, we realise the many factors that influence the future of our sport.

Welfare is the biggest and will remain the biggest, however we do need to address the continuing decline of ownership. Is it responsible to charge an extra £200 at registration? Could this be the final nail in the coffin for greyhound racing? We are fortunate enough to have no issues in paying this, but trainers who own a vast number of their own charges at less well-paid tracks may think otherwise. Some still remember the Towcester Retirement Pot, that was unfortunately ‘lost’ when it went into administration.
The Bond Scheme would generate £1.4 million per year on current registrations, this is the same amount that the industry donates to the Greyhound Trust each year. Why is so much needed? According to the most up to date GBGB figures, 936 dogs were homed by their owners/trainers to Independent Greyhound Homing Kennels, The bond would generate the independent sector £369,200. 878 dogs were retained/retired to their racing owners and 4,588 came through the doors of the Greyhound Trust. (Floyd the GT may have homed 3,300 hounds but, in addition have up to 1,000 Hounds in their care at any one time), these numbers equate to 6,767.

Therefore, why try to reinvent the wheel? Why do we need a co-ordinator to source another potential 7,500 homes when we are only 737 short. The infrastructure, communications and relationships are already in place between all stakeholders.
There is no evidence to suggest that greyhounds that end up in independent homing facilities with other breeds will be homed any quicker, in fact we believe the opposite! Not all our hounds are cat or small dog friendly; imagine the stress a dog like that will go through living next door to a jumping Jack Russell or vocal Staffordshire Bull Terrier.

Every time a potential adopter walks past the Hound would show all sorts of behaviour that may cause the shelter to consider the Hound’s homing suitability. We within the industry know our dogs and the Greyhound Trust know them and how to home them, so let them.

We would feel better if such monies where used for more Stipendiary Stewards so that the current ones workload is much more manageable and allows them to focus their time on important and sensitive issues of neglect like that which was highlighted in yesterday’s Calendar. There would be no need for Independent Inspectors who may or may not be legitimate, like we have heard of in recent weeks which may prejudice Kennel security.

The monies could be spent on GBGB ran holding kennels based across the UK at Animal Welfare Colleges, who are able to house hounds that need emergency placements and reduce waiting list times. We were one of the emergency placements who took dogs from the kennels that are mentioned in yesterdays calendar and are glad to say that ‘Blue Bunting’ has since left us at Greyhound Trust Dudley and lives a fantastic life with his new owners which, quite frankly may not have been the case if he had gone somewhere else.

The fact that 514 dogs in 2018 could have had an alternative ending according to GBGB figures is our real issue. If diagnostic tools such as x-ray and ultrasound were available at every track, operating theatres and placements that could deal with these emergencies, this would have been reduced significantly, bringing the overall figures from 12.1% to well below 5%. We recognise that the Track Injury Recovery Scheme and the PDSA Scheme that was piloted at Monmore Green between the GBGB and the Greyhound Trust has made an important impact on Hound’s lives and commend Mark Bird and everyone at the GBGB for this Initiative.

We would further like to add that, in our opinion ‘results-based reward’ is a very dangerous avenue to go down. Some charities and shelters have euthanasia policies which include the length of time the animal is there for. Is it fair to euthanise an animal because it’s the wrong colour, big, small, timid or confident? We know as a trainer, owner and breeder that we would be outraged if this was to happen to one of our retired greyhounds and, like many more would have to seriously consider our future within the sport. Therefore, we implore the GBGB to contemplate these factors before considering alternative homing facilities.

Craig Marston

 

It is refreshing to receive a well argued but constructive letter. I will make just three observations but think this opens up a valuable and bigger debate to which I would invite other readers to contribute.

1) In my opinion, the Greyhound Trust remains in need of reform. It costs the guts of £1,000 to re-home every greyhound. There have to be more practical solutions and many tracks get significantly greater bang for their buck using alternative home finding schemes. Some of the independent home finding schemes have been in situ for many years with solid records. Sure there is a potential to attract bad ones – hence the need for the co-ordinator to monitor and approve them.

2) I believe the strength of the Greyhound Trust is not its head office, but in its volunteers and I know of many who would break away from the organisation if they were able to do so. They are bound by money alone. Many have become so disenchanted that they have simply, and sadly, walked away anyway. A coordinator would have the opportunity to fund them independently.

3) I have no issue with the £200 registration cost. The way I see it, it simply ensures that owners pay at the beginning of the race careers. The good ones would be paying at the end anyway, and quite often more than £200. The bad ones – who usually abscond with unpaid kennel bills – have no place in this industry. If we cannot attract enough owners because the betting industry insists on greyhounds racing at unpopular times, or the rewards from the tracks are not adequate – then the bookmaking industry can foot as many of the £200 bills as is necessary.

Ed

Towcester issues

When Towcester was first built people in the know said ‘what a place!’ Rubbish! Greyhound racing is a spectator sport. Yet the track was so far away you needed to watch it on TV. The truck was so wide that any dogs running on the outside had to be two grades higher than the dog on the rails. And how stupid was it to let people in for nothing? People coming in pay someone’s wages. Let’s hope Kevin runs the track like he does Henlow.

Paul Sharp

I think Kevin Boothby will address a number of the issues with Towcester, though personally I don’t have a problem with the position of the track. (When it first opened, I thought I would). Spectators might not be close, but they can see the entire circuit. Anyway, when was the last time most of us watched a whole race ‘live’ without checking a screen?

The width of the track was to accommodate eight dog racing which has never caught on in the UK. I can understand why, though wish it had as it offers many more betting and jackpot options.

As for ‘running Towcester like Henlow’? I don’t think that is an option. Henlow is a ‘racing machine’ that pretty much operates for the benefit of the betting shops. Turn up for a morning meeting and you couldn’t even be sure whether it was a trial session. As a local though, I miss the Henlow Sunday lunch and afternoon open racing. Hopefully it will be back for the summer.

Towcester may stage some ‘shop’ meetings, but has the option to stage racing that will appeal to the purist and be the flagship stadium that the whole industry can benefit from.

Ed

Sloppy presentation

Why do the guy or girl with the flag look so sloppy when they start a race they look like they are not interested? Years ago the starter would hold  the corner of his flag like a horse race. People watching must think like me what a sloppy starter

Edward Chappell

I agree with you that the presentation at some tracks is very poor, though some are very sharp. When we come to comparing ourselves with the Americans or Aussies though, we come off a very poor third for overall presentation.

Ed