[Ben Bradshaw/ Defra]

 

He writes almost in defence of the industry quoting sums of money donated to the welfare of retired Greyhounds.

 

That is what disgusted me the most about this letter.

 

I know they make 70 million a year out of it so expecting them to be impartial is perhaps a bit naive of me, but I don't expect them to respond with the kind of fluff that would be plastered on a BGRB leaflet/website.

 

They should be listening to, and answering our concerns, not defending the racing industry.

 

The me the end paragraph reads as if they don't want the hassle of regulating it, (and they seem to be sucked into thinking that the flapping tracks are the problem).

[Ben Bradshaw/ Defra]

.

 

What do people think about it???

 

Any thoughts?

[Ben Bradshaw/ Defra]

It was Magic that got the reply.

 

She posted it HERE and I have pasted it below. Someone else has since received the same reply.

 

What do people think about it???

 

Thank you for your email of 18 July 2006 to Ben Bradshaw about greyhound racing. I have been asked to reply.

 

I can assure you that we share your concerns on the allegations in the press of the killing of a large number of retired racing greyhounds.

 

Government Ministers have called upon the National Greyhound Racing Club (NGRC) – the organisation which sets and administers welfare standards for those tracks and owners/trainers who race under NGRC rules - to investigate the allegations made in the press. The Associate Parliamentary Group for Animal Welfare (APGAW) - an all-party parliamentary group made up of MPs, Peers and associate animal welfare organisations – has also launched its own investigation into the allegations. We welcome this enquiry and will certainly wish to consider any recommendations APGAW makes.

 

Until such time as further evidence is produced, we are unable to comment on whether any offences have been committed in the case mentioned in the press.

 

On the issue of the number of greyhounds retiring from racing each year, there is very little reliable evidence on the fate of greyhounds on retirement. Although, of course, the welfare of greyhounds during and after their racing career is ultimately the responsibility of the owners and trainers themselves. However, welfare organisations and the racing industry have worked together in recent years in an effort to improve the number of retired greyhounds who are re-homed. The racing industry has increased considerably the financial support that it provides for the welfare of retired greyhounds. Funding for greyhound welfare is channelled through the British Greyhound Fund, which is funded by the industry, including the betting industry. In 2005 grants relating to welfare totalled £2.5m, including £1.3m to the Retired Greyhound Trust (RGT). In 2000, funding from the industry for the RGT was £240,000. There are now more than 60 RGT Branches from Jersey to the Isle of Skye.

 

The British Greyhound Racing Board is also working with other canine welfare organisations to examine what is happening to retired greyhounds and is committed to addressing any problems identified. All of its publicity material informs prospective greyhound owners that they are responsible for the proper provision of their greyhound in retirement.

 

A Welfare Executive employed by the NGRC works with the RGT by helping to enforce it welfare rules – especially by stressing to owners their primary responsibility in finding homes for their retired greyhounds. Under NGRC rules those dogs that cannot be re-homed have to be humanely destroyed by a veterinary surgeon.

 

It is already an offence under the Protection of Animals Act 1911 to destroy an animal in a manner that will cause it unnecessary suffering. In addition, the Animal Welfare Bill, currently before Parliament, will introduce an offence of failing to provide for the welfare needs of an animal. This will apply to owners and keepers of all animals, including racing, and retired, greyhounds.

 

The Bill also provides powers to introduce secondary legislation to regulate animal related activities. We are considering making specific regulations under the Animal Welfare Bill in relation to the welfare of racing greyhounds.

 

Defra has set up a working group to examine the issue of greyhound welfare. The group has been asked to offer advice to Ministers and officials in the drafting of regulations to improve greyhound welfare. Members of the group include representatives of welfare organisations, the racing industry, local authorities, the devolved administrations and Defra.

 

While this group has yet to make any recommendations - our preference is that whenever possible welfare standards should be regulated by the industry. Although we recognise that industry self-regulation may not be an option for those tracks that are not operating under the aegis of the NGRC, I can assure you that we would not recommend any system of self-regulation unless it can be commended to parliament as a system that is open and auditable, with the standards set and the effectiveness of the enforcers monitored by central Government. This is a key issue and clearly one which the working group will want to address in its recommendations. There will also be a full public consultation on our proposals before approval by parliament.

 

I hope this letter addresses your concerns.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Michael Akano

Customer Contact Unit

[Granada News]

Maybe there was never really going to be a second competition?

[Ben Bradshaw/ Defra]

I'm sure someone here had a reply a few days back and posted it - but I can't remember who it was now.

[Granada News]

Person who spoke to the reporter has now said that the original comp went ahead because it was too late to pull it, but they were planning on running another one and changed their minds about it.

 

So not quite the success we first thought.

[Ben Bradshaw/ Defra]

Has anyone had a reply from Ben Bradshaw/DEFRA?

 

I am aware of a couple of people who received replies. Have you had one? What do you think about the response?

 

[Rspca Greyhound Petition]

 

 

OK, so assuming the campaign takes off and the press contact the Stop the Slaughter organisers (the committee as I understand it) ... when the press asks how the organisers envisage the slaughter will be stopped, will it be a case of them saying that there are many groups and individuals taking part in the campaign/march, many of whom feel a ban on the "sport" is necessary, while others feel industry regulation would be adequate? So no one "solution" will be presented to the current situation, by the organisers?

 

Any press statements will have to be carefully thought out. There are people involved who have a wealth of experience in this particular area (but not my specialist subject I must admit ).

 

Perhaps if the industry is more regulated and welfare improved enough, the industry will do itself out of business because it wouldn't be profiting enough? I'm not saying that would happen, but wonder if that's the angle the RSPCA and others might be tackling this from .

 

Yes maybe. Raising welfare standards could force some people out of the sport, or as you say, if pushed high enough it may cause the industry to become unviable.

 

I personally think that it is worth asking for a ban in personal letters etc, as the heavier the changes that are made, the greater the benefit to the dogs, whether 'retired', racing or never made the grade in the first place.

[Rspca Greyhound Petition]

My understanding of the situation is:

 

Greyhound Action are marching for a ban because they believe that is the only way to solve the problem properly.

 

The stop the slaughter march isn't a march to ask specifically for regulation and it isn't a march to ask specifically for a ban either. It is a march to simply ask them to stop the slaughter.

 

The individuals marching will all have their own opinions about how best to sort the problem, (either regulation or ban) but having the one banner 'stop the slaughter' will enable them all to march together in one big group to show just how many people care about it and want it sorted out.

[Rspca Greyhound Petition]

But I thought the protest/campaign being organised at present was deliberately not calling for a ban? I thought that was why GA was not getting involved officially and is organising its own march?

 

I'm getting confused - it might be me, I may have misunderstood

I think you are confusing my own personal thoughts about the RSPCA petition with the purpose of the proposed march. The two are not connected in anyway

 

Personally I'd rather see a ban because I don't believe that welfare can ever truly come first when part of a commercial profit driven venture and I have always been very open about that.

 

The reason that I can attend and support the stop the slaughter march is that it does not specify between a ban or independent regulation.

 

I do seriously think that many many people really want a ban. Some find that their positions with rescues/organisations compromise their ability to publicly express this opinion. Other people don't ask for a ban simply because they don't believe it will ever happen. If everyone who really wanted it said so, in their own individual letters, then I believe it could make a real impact - it may not neccesarily result in a ban, but perhaps it could make the huge difference between self regulation being allowed to continue and independent regulation.

 

Someone posted a reply from DEFRA/MP earlier (I will try and find it). It seemed to say that NGRC registered tracks may continue to be self regulated, whilst independent 'flapping' tracks would be regulated. Are the flapping tracks to blame for the problems? No. Is that a good enough solution? IMHO no it isn't. By asking for the absolute maximum,as individuals and where possible, perhaps we will get more for the dogs.

[Rspca Greyhound Petition]

Is it possible to have 'regulation to protect the welfare of all racing greyhounds throughout their lives'?

 

If everyone who wanted a ban actually asked for one I think we would get alot more changes made as they will perhaps try and find some middle ground between the race industry and the 'antis'.

[Other Ways The Refuge Can Help With This?]

I think a website is already being put together.

 

We are not going to be able to put all info onto a public forum/site at the moment for a variety of reasons.

 

 

 

This isnt meant to sound as it probably will read, but im guessing the best way a dog forum can help is to not focus all the organising via a dog forum (if you see what im saying).

As the vast majority of British people wouldnt have heard of refuge or DP.

Even in rescue, most of my contacts and collegues havent even heard of the dog forums, or if they have, arent interested in them.

 

I understand what you mean Martin. Yes there are alot of people interested who don't use forums, or in some cases don't use the Internet at all.

[Killing Field Of The Dog Industry]

Also check out Letters to the editor

[Golden Lab Male]

This dog was not wearing a collar and tag ( ) but is apparently chipped.

 

He is not neutered. (Big, bouncy, randy lad )

 

Escaped from house at 4.30am today.

 

Have informed both police and dog warden.

 

Phone number to come - please feel free to PM in mean time.

 

Thanks

 

(hopefully he can be found before he impregnates any stray ladies )

[Mooncups ( feminine hygiene product )]

They send me all queasy just thinking about it. I couldn't do it Noooooooooo noooooooo

[Wish Tippy Lick]

That is great Tippy.

 

Mona has joined a demonstration team. I'm not sure what they are expecting her to demonstrate? Being spooked, walking on 2 legs, taking chunks out of her kennel mates, pizzing on carpets? Hope so else they will be disappointed.