Jack Anderson: For Ireland's greyhound industry, no publicity is good publicity
Derby, Elliott Credit Mandatory 23/11/2024 Park, View 2024 Greyhound A Action General Boylesports Irish Shelbourne The Of ©inpho/nick Dublin
2024 was not a good year for the sport of greyhound racing. At the beginning of the year, there were six countries where commercial greyhound racing remained legal and active – Mexico, US, UK, New Zealand, Australia, and Ireland. That number fell when the sole, remaining track in Mexico closed in July. In the surviving five, the sport is facing significant challenges.
First up, the US: to say that greyhound racing exists in the States, is a bit of a geographical exaggeration. There are just two remaining tracks, both in West Viriginia and both heavily subsidised by adjacent casinos and state lottery funding. In 2017, only the exercise of veto powers by the then Governor (now US Senator) Jim Justice – he of Babydog fame – saved the sport in that state. At the federal level, an amendment to animal welfare laws was introduced in the US Congress in 2023. If passed it would have seen the sport proscribed nationwide but, despite some initial momentum, the Bill subsequently fell away as the US entered another election cycle.
Second, the UK: at its peak, just after World War II, Britain had 77 dog tracks. It is now down to 20, and, at best, only 2 can be described as being within the Greater London area. There is one track in Wales and one in Scotland.
The Scottish track is not even affiliated to the sport’s governing body, the Greyhound Board of Great Britain. This year, a bill to ban the sport, sponsored by the Greens in the Scottish parliament, attracted cross-party support.
In 2023, the Welsh government announced a public consultation process on whether the sport should be phased out. A government response is expected early in 2025. In both Scotland and Wales, the end of the sport is nigh.
In the US and the UK, the sport has declined for several reasons. Political support, even from the right wing (respectively, the Republican and Conservative parties) fell away as community expectations towards the use of animals in competitive sports changed. This remains a key issue. The standards society generally expects of the greyhound racing in terms of how it treats its athletes – often called the sport’s social licence – has evolved and elevated rapidly.
It is not just that community expectation in respect of the treatment and welfare of animals has increased in recent years; there has also been an increase in the number of people who would simply prefer animals not to be used at all in competitive sport.
While traditionally, the sport, both in the US and UK, could reasonably argue that it was a significant employer and contributor to the economy, especially in rural areas; in recent years, the sport’s decline has been such that this argument, once its greatest political lobbying tool, has now turned against it. The moment greyhound racing was seen by state politicians in the US as a sport that could be let go with little social, economic or political cost, its fate was sealed.
Neither did the sport help itself in the US. Poor regulatory structures, which varied from state to state (and even from track to track) and a lassitude to anti-doping control were seen as key weaknesses. Off the track, the sport offered little in terms of commercial or entertainment innovation as its core demographic (and its facilities) withered and aged. Greyhound racing in the US, as elsewhere, failed to stay relevant in a very competitive sports environment and paid the price.
Moreover, and again off track, the industry practice of a dog’s retirement lasting only as long or as soon as they could be taken to a knackery, was seen as callous and calculating. The industry, critics shouted, valued its animals only for as long as they retained their commercial value.
Greyhound racing in the US might have survived in states other than West Virginia, if it had kept its share of the sports gambling pie but a decision by the US Supreme Court to, in effect, legalise gambling nationwide and on all sports, saw wagering on greyhound racing collapse and migrate to major league sports. The nearest most American punters get to greyhound racing today is virtual dog racing on monitors in casino halls built on former tracks.
There is a similar trend in UK sport where the sport has largely given up on getting people to attend in person and has bet its future commercial viability on the wider availability of punter-friendly starting times and streaming services.
The reasons for the decline and fall of the sport in the US (and UK) contains lessons for the sport’s survival in its other retaining jurisdictions, including Ireland.
Greyhound racing, as a commercial sport, is not unique in its struggle to compete and remain relevant against mainstream, popular codes but what distinguishes its struggles from other minority sports is, simply, the issue of animal welfare.
Greyhound racing in New Zealand is tightly regulated. It is subject to close government oversight. A report in 2017 had recommended, on pain of prohibition, much greater emphasis on the welfare and re-homing on dogs. The industry had responded, though it remained, in effect, on a warning. Commercially, though not a huge industry and comprising of about 1,000 people in full time employment, greyhound racing in NZ was until recently seen as viable with a relatively robust wagering turnover. Moreover, the current NZ government, seen as one of the more conservative in recent times, consisted of parties historically friendly to a NZ racing industry that spans three codes – thoroughbreds, harness racing and the dogs.
And yet, earlier this month that very same government announced the end of the sport, to be seen no more in by 2026. The reason was singular and simple – animal welfare. Despite the fact that the rate of injuries to and fatalities of greyhounds compared favourably to other jurisdictions internationally, the NZ government was of the opinion, shared across parliament, that such injuries and fatalities remained stubbornly and unacceptably high.
In Australia, the industry fears a domino effect. In the past year alone, reports in Tasmania and South Australia have not portrayed it in a good light. In July, the CEO of the Greyhound Racing NSW resigned in light of a scathing report on animal welfare practices in the sport.
As for the industry in Ireland, the main focus seems to be on funding. In Budget 2025, horse racing received a total of €79.3 million in support, while greyhounds got €19.8 million, which is typically compared to the €30 million allocated to the 58 national sport governing bodies and 29 local sports partnerships.
But the whataboutery nature of the debate on funding for greyhound racing masks a deeper issue for the sport in Ireland. In the budget debate, a government representative justified the funding on the basis that greyhound racing is an integral part of the social fabric of Ireland. That might once have been the case and, in certain parts of Ireland, it no doubt remains the case but, if global trends tell us anything, that fabric is wearing thin.
Finally, the various recent reports in Australia, NZ and elsewhere on greyhound racing have in common an underlying irony, and one that if I was in an executive position in the sport in Ireland, I would be pointing out forcefully to participants. The lessons from abroad for Ireland is that the momentum to restrict or ban greyhound racing gets its greatest momentum, not so much from public lobby groups but, ironically, from within the sport itself and by participants who very publicly let it down by disregarding the sport’s rules and protocols on welfare, anti-doping and re-homing. As far as greyhound racing industry in Ireland is concerned, no publicity is good publicity.