DEFRA Response to Cruel Greyhound Exports
Date; 21.09.21
We sent the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) our evidence of 4 British based greyhound exporters who were heavily involved with greyhound racing, hunting and breeding in Pakistan.
We selected these 4 exporters from the many recognised by us, as were able to substantiate the movement of their dogs from England to several Pakistan breeding and hunting kennels.
Exporter 1 (former GBGB licensed greyhound trainer) 16 dogs
Exporter 2 - 19 dogs
Exporter 3 - (convicted heroin dealer) 28 dogs
Exporter 4 - 41 dogs
This totalled 104 dogs sent to greyhound breeding/hunting kennels in Pakistan.
Why we object to commercial greyhound exports
Greyhounds do not deserve to be shipped around the world for racing, breeding and hunting.
80% of British greyhounds are bred in Ireland. Once dogs retire from licensed racing in Ireland and Britain, they should not continue to be used as a commodity and especially in any country that has no up to date animal welfare laws or homing programme.
Evidence
We provided Defra with information using Pakistan customs and trade data. The shipping data was made available by several companies based overseas, and was accessible for a fee. It showed the movements of dogs from British ports to their destination at Pakistan greyhound breeding and hunting kennels.
We also provided copies of the actual customs data specifically showing the shipments of the 104 dogs made by the 4 exporters.
This data showed imports to Pakistan from Britain. Defra had asked us for the details of the exports and we delivered evidence to them, which was made legally available to us by a foreign company. (This data is no longer accessible; Names of exporters/importers and kennels were coincidentally removed 2 days after a publication in a national newspaper, highlighting the cruel exports of British greyhounds to Pakistan)
We asked Defra to consider banning all commercial exports of dogs, generally 'in guise as pet dogs', to countries where there are no animal welfare laws to protect greyhounds.
Greyhounds generate a substantial profit for the greyhound racing industry 'with an estimated turnover of 2.6 billion per year' yet they remain to have no protection under the AWA2006 to prevent them from being exported to any countries where they can be tortured or killed.
"The board says the British greyhound industry has an estimated turnover of £2.6billion and employs more than 7,000 people across the country"
Ref; Express - 26.03.22
Finally, we asked Defra to provide us with answers to the following questions so that we could share them with the public.
Question
As plans move forward for greyhound racing to be primarily led by the bookmakers/media giants, Entain and Arc, shouldn't this major move within the industry warrant a new parliamentary review to ensure that the welfare of greyhounds is fully accounted for prior the launch/takeover of contracts in 2024?
Answer
Parliamentary reviews are a matter for Parliament rather than Government. Given this would appear to be more about broadcast rights, etc, it would be an issue to address to DDCMS in the first instance and maybe the Commons DCMS Select Committee.
Question
Clarity - GBGB Annual Retirement Data and Retirement Form;
We understand that greyhounds who are labelled 'retired' from racing; can be legally sold on for further use as a commodity; i.e. exported for commercial purpose 'breeding and racing' in guise as a pet' or raced at an unregulated track in the UK. They are usually put at risk when not homed by a reputable rescue centre.
The breakdown on the 2020 GBGB annual retirement data now rightfully identifies that a number of dogs (Approximately 23% from their 2020 retirement data ) were either; retained by trainers/owner - homed by owner/trainer -or passed onto the unregulated tracks; As aforementioned, we have received contact from some owners, trainers and independent rescuers, claiming that the GBGB do not chase up their dogs whereabouts following the retirement forms being submitted.
Please could you advise us as to why there is not an addition to the Greyhound Retirement Form, such as a Change of Ownership form for dogs that are not confirmed as 100% retired via a homing centre? and why these particular dogs should remain to come under the category of 'Retired' on the annual data?
Reply
The details of GBGB’s Greyhound Retirement Form are a matter for GBGB not Defra. We’ve always understood ‘retired’ to mean ‘retired from GBGB racing’. Whether that be retired to stud, to race elsewhere (although we’re aware there are now only a handful of independent amateur tracks still operating in GB) or rehomed to a rescue or new owner, the greyhound will no longer have a professional racing career running on GBGB tracks.
With regard to owners and trainers not being contacted where a greyhound has been rehomed, I understand that where a greyhound goes into a rehoming centre, GBGB will check with that centre in order to release the £400 bond. In relation to other non-bonded greyhounds, GBGB will follow up any reported suspicions regarding the location of a retired greyhound. And I understand that all new owners are written to asking them to confirm that the dog is homed by them.
However, GBGB admit the response rate from new owners is approximately 40% and GBGB themselves regard this is a weakness in the system. However, it looks likely that GBGB will look to address this very issue as part of the their new National Welfare Strategy announced last month, so I suggest we keep an eye on that piece of work to see what solutions are proposed.
The reality is that many so-called retired dogs are being found on social media advertising websites, or living in squalid conditions not suitable to house rats, both here and worse overseas 'where there are little to no animal welfare laws', yet the British public are led to believe that ALL greyhounds that come under the label of 'retired' are moved onto the safety of a rescue centre, or adopted as a pet in a caring home.
We’ve seen no evidence as to what the public believes to happen to greyhounds. However, the figures GBGB publish each year state what number of greyhounds are rehomed by a charity, as opposed to retained or rehomed by the owner or trainer, or retired to stud or to the independent circuit. In this regard, GBGB are being transparent, as the Government asked them to be.
UK anti-discriminatory laws
We should make very clear that we do NOT object to dogs being 'legitimately' exported as pets to ANY country, but at present there are no efforts made by the UK government to ensure that greyhounds will NOT be used as a commodity for 'racing or breeding' overseas.
Given it is not illegal to breed or race greyhounds in this country, it would be difficult for us to justify a ban on greyhounds being exported to other countries where they would be used similarly.
We believe that Greyhounds should only be exported (where 100% verified as pets by using strict measures) to countries where there are up to date animal protection laws' to protect them from extensive suffering i.e. dismembered and killed during hunts, used for dog fighting or skinned/boiled alive, and eaten.
I can only repeat what I’ve said previously, the Government cannot support the suggestion that just because an animal is exported to a certain country it will automatically suffer by going to that country. Also, the Government believes it is important to work with Governments around the world to gain agreement on animal welfare standards and seek to phase out cruel and inhumane practices.
Our opinion regarding the exports of greyhounds similarly reflects those underlined by RSPCA Australia. Please see their statement below, which can be found on their website, under the RSPCA Knowledgebase;
Why does the RSPCA oppose the export of racing greyhounds?
"RSPCA Australia opposes the export of Australian racing greyhounds because it puts racing greyhounds at significant risk of poor animal welfare outcomes. These risks include stress and injuries associated with long-distance transport, lack of animal welfare legal protection in importing countries, and the potential to enter the dog meat trade. The lack of a formal tracking system for dogs exported to other countries means that the fate of Australian greyhounds is currently unknown. There are also serious concerns about the apparent lack of formal rehoming/adoption programs in destination countries"
Question
If Defra does not believe it is possible to prevent greyhound exports due to the possibility of shipments via intermediary countries, and that a ban on greyhound exports may go against UK anti-discriminatory laws; then will they accept that the only other feasible solution to end the unnecessary cruelty, is to ban greyhound racing in the UK?
Reply
Again, I can only repeat the Government’s position here. We have no plans to ban greyhound racing. While we are aware of the concerns that surround the industry, it does appear that these concerns are being addressed. As we have said, the numbers of greyhounds being exported to Pakistan appears to us to be low, and the scale of the problem would not justify a proposal to ban an entire industry. A proposal to address a problem which is not proportionate to that problem would be very unlikely to survive any sort of challenge.
We sent the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) our evidence of 4 British based greyhound exporters who were heavily involved with greyhound racing, hunting and breeding in Pakistan.
We selected these 4 exporters from the many recognised by us, as were able to substantiate the movement of their dogs from England to several Pakistan breeding and hunting kennels.
Exporter 1 (former GBGB licensed greyhound trainer) 16 dogs
Exporter 2 - 19 dogs
Exporter 3 - (convicted heroin dealer) 28 dogs
Exporter 4 - 41 dogs
This totalled 104 dogs sent to greyhound breeding/hunting kennels in Pakistan.
Why we object to commercial greyhound exports
Greyhounds do not deserve to be shipped around the world for racing, breeding and hunting.
80% of British greyhounds are bred in Ireland. Once dogs retire from licensed racing in Ireland and Britain, they should not continue to be used as a commodity and especially in any country that has no up to date animal welfare laws or homing programme.
Evidence
We provided Defra with information using Pakistan customs and trade data. The shipping data was made available by several companies based overseas, and was accessible for a fee. It showed the movements of dogs from British ports to their destination at Pakistan greyhound breeding and hunting kennels.
We also provided copies of the actual customs data specifically showing the shipments of the 104 dogs made by the 4 exporters.
This data showed imports to Pakistan from Britain. Defra had asked us for the details of the exports and we delivered evidence to them, which was made legally available to us by a foreign company. (This data is no longer accessible; Names of exporters/importers and kennels were coincidentally removed 2 days after a publication in a national newspaper, highlighting the cruel exports of British greyhounds to Pakistan)
We asked Defra to consider banning all commercial exports of dogs, generally 'in guise as pet dogs', to countries where there are no animal welfare laws to protect greyhounds.
Greyhounds generate a substantial profit for the greyhound racing industry 'with an estimated turnover of 2.6 billion per year' yet they remain to have no protection under the AWA2006 to prevent them from being exported to any countries where they can be tortured or killed.
"The board says the British greyhound industry has an estimated turnover of £2.6billion and employs more than 7,000 people across the country"
Ref; Express - 26.03.22
Finally, we asked Defra to provide us with answers to the following questions so that we could share them with the public.
Question
As plans move forward for greyhound racing to be primarily led by the bookmakers/media giants, Entain and Arc, shouldn't this major move within the industry warrant a new parliamentary review to ensure that the welfare of greyhounds is fully accounted for prior the launch/takeover of contracts in 2024?
Answer
Parliamentary reviews are a matter for Parliament rather than Government. Given this would appear to be more about broadcast rights, etc, it would be an issue to address to DDCMS in the first instance and maybe the Commons DCMS Select Committee.
Question
Clarity - GBGB Annual Retirement Data and Retirement Form;
We understand that greyhounds who are labelled 'retired' from racing; can be legally sold on for further use as a commodity; i.e. exported for commercial purpose 'breeding and racing' in guise as a pet' or raced at an unregulated track in the UK. They are usually put at risk when not homed by a reputable rescue centre.
The breakdown on the 2020 GBGB annual retirement data now rightfully identifies that a number of dogs (Approximately 23% from their 2020 retirement data ) were either; retained by trainers/owner - homed by owner/trainer -or passed onto the unregulated tracks; As aforementioned, we have received contact from some owners, trainers and independent rescuers, claiming that the GBGB do not chase up their dogs whereabouts following the retirement forms being submitted.
Please could you advise us as to why there is not an addition to the Greyhound Retirement Form, such as a Change of Ownership form for dogs that are not confirmed as 100% retired via a homing centre? and why these particular dogs should remain to come under the category of 'Retired' on the annual data?
Reply
The details of GBGB’s Greyhound Retirement Form are a matter for GBGB not Defra. We’ve always understood ‘retired’ to mean ‘retired from GBGB racing’. Whether that be retired to stud, to race elsewhere (although we’re aware there are now only a handful of independent amateur tracks still operating in GB) or rehomed to a rescue or new owner, the greyhound will no longer have a professional racing career running on GBGB tracks.
With regard to owners and trainers not being contacted where a greyhound has been rehomed, I understand that where a greyhound goes into a rehoming centre, GBGB will check with that centre in order to release the £400 bond. In relation to other non-bonded greyhounds, GBGB will follow up any reported suspicions regarding the location of a retired greyhound. And I understand that all new owners are written to asking them to confirm that the dog is homed by them.
However, GBGB admit the response rate from new owners is approximately 40% and GBGB themselves regard this is a weakness in the system. However, it looks likely that GBGB will look to address this very issue as part of the their new National Welfare Strategy announced last month, so I suggest we keep an eye on that piece of work to see what solutions are proposed.
The reality is that many so-called retired dogs are being found on social media advertising websites, or living in squalid conditions not suitable to house rats, both here and worse overseas 'where there are little to no animal welfare laws', yet the British public are led to believe that ALL greyhounds that come under the label of 'retired' are moved onto the safety of a rescue centre, or adopted as a pet in a caring home.
We’ve seen no evidence as to what the public believes to happen to greyhounds. However, the figures GBGB publish each year state what number of greyhounds are rehomed by a charity, as opposed to retained or rehomed by the owner or trainer, or retired to stud or to the independent circuit. In this regard, GBGB are being transparent, as the Government asked them to be.
UK anti-discriminatory laws
We should make very clear that we do NOT object to dogs being 'legitimately' exported as pets to ANY country, but at present there are no efforts made by the UK government to ensure that greyhounds will NOT be used as a commodity for 'racing or breeding' overseas.
Given it is not illegal to breed or race greyhounds in this country, it would be difficult for us to justify a ban on greyhounds being exported to other countries where they would be used similarly.
We believe that Greyhounds should only be exported (where 100% verified as pets by using strict measures) to countries where there are up to date animal protection laws' to protect them from extensive suffering i.e. dismembered and killed during hunts, used for dog fighting or skinned/boiled alive, and eaten.
I can only repeat what I’ve said previously, the Government cannot support the suggestion that just because an animal is exported to a certain country it will automatically suffer by going to that country. Also, the Government believes it is important to work with Governments around the world to gain agreement on animal welfare standards and seek to phase out cruel and inhumane practices.
Our opinion regarding the exports of greyhounds similarly reflects those underlined by RSPCA Australia. Please see their statement below, which can be found on their website, under the RSPCA Knowledgebase;
Why does the RSPCA oppose the export of racing greyhounds?
"RSPCA Australia opposes the export of Australian racing greyhounds because it puts racing greyhounds at significant risk of poor animal welfare outcomes. These risks include stress and injuries associated with long-distance transport, lack of animal welfare legal protection in importing countries, and the potential to enter the dog meat trade. The lack of a formal tracking system for dogs exported to other countries means that the fate of Australian greyhounds is currently unknown. There are also serious concerns about the apparent lack of formal rehoming/adoption programs in destination countries"
Question
If Defra does not believe it is possible to prevent greyhound exports due to the possibility of shipments via intermediary countries, and that a ban on greyhound exports may go against UK anti-discriminatory laws; then will they accept that the only other feasible solution to end the unnecessary cruelty, is to ban greyhound racing in the UK?
Reply
Again, I can only repeat the Government’s position here. We have no plans to ban greyhound racing. While we are aware of the concerns that surround the industry, it does appear that these concerns are being addressed. As we have said, the numbers of greyhounds being exported to Pakistan appears to us to be low, and the scale of the problem would not justify a proposal to ban an entire industry. A proposal to address a problem which is not proportionate to that problem would be very unlikely to survive any sort of challenge.
