Non Raceday Inquiry – Written Decision dated 18 November 2024 – Leslie Anderton

The Respondent, Mr Leslie Howard Anderton, is charged under r 141 of the NZGRA Rules.

Information A16939 reads: “On the 9th of September 2024 at Addington Raceway, Leslie Howard Anderton, the Licensed Trainer of SAPPORO BALE, failed to present the greyhound to compete in Race 2 at the Christchurch GRC meeting, free of the Prohibited Substance Arsenic at a level of >1600ng/mL, being over the threshold of 800ng/mL, and being an offence under the provisions of r 141(1)(a) and (4) and subject to penalty pursuant to r 174 of the NZGRA Rules.

The Respondent has admitted the breach of r 141(1)(a) and has accepted the Summary of Facts.

Both parties agree that the matter can be determined on the papers.

Rule 141 provides:

(1) The trainer or other person in charge of a greyhound:

(a) nominated to compete in an event; must present the greyhound free of any prohibited substance.

(3)  The trainer or person in charge of a greyhound presented contrary to subrule (1) of this rule shall be guilty of an offence.

(4) A greyhound presented for an event in circumstances where subrule (1) of this rule has been breached must be disqualified from the relevant event and from receiving any benefit derived from the relevant trial, test or examination.

The penalty provision is r 174:

(1) An Adjudicative Committee may as it thinks fit penalise a person found guilty of an offence under the Rules by any one or a combination of the following penalties:

(a) a reprimand (sometimes known as a warning or caution);

(b) a fine not exceeding $10,000.00 for any one offence except a luring and baiting offence under r 159.

(c) suspension.

(d) disqualification.

(e) cancellation of a registration or a licence, or in the case of a Club, its affiliation to GRNZ; or

(f) warning off.

(3) Any part or portion of a penalty imposed may be suspended for a time and pursuant to conditions that an Adjudicative Committee thinks fit

Per the GRNZ Categories of Prohibited Substances, Arsenic is included in Category 4 – All other substances that have the ability to improve or impact the performance of a greyhound which lists a penalty starting point of 6 months disqualification and/or a fine of $5,000.

Summary of Facts

1.  The respondent Leslie Howard Anderton is the holder of an Owner / Trainer Licence issued by New Zealand Greyhound Racing (GRNZ).

2.  GRNZ introduced new Prohibited Substance Rules, including Arsenic (800ng/mL) and Cobalt thresholds, on 1 October 2021. The changes were published by way of an advisory to participants on the GRNZ website and in the August 2021 ‘On Track’ magazine.

Circumstances

3.  On 9 September 2024 the greyhound SAPPORO BALE won Race 2 – the Happy Birthday Jo Chapman Sprint PBD – at the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club meeting at Addington Raceway.

4.  At the time of the race SAPPORO BALE was a 4yo old dog, owned by the Second Chance Syndicate and trained by Mr Anderton. The greyhound won a stake of $1380.

5.  SAPPORO BALE was post-race swabbed (#107566) and on 27 September the Eurofins ELS Limited laboratory issued an Analytical Report detailing the sample had screened with an Arsenic level of 3000 micrograms per litre of urine (ug/L).

6.  The sample and control were sent by NZ Racing Laboratory Services to Racing Analytical Services Ltd (RASL) in Melbourne, Australia for the purpose of confirmatory analysis.

7.  Arsenic is a naturally occurring trace element that is normally present in greyhounds at very low levels as a result of a normal dietary intake. Testing undertaken in NZ since 2021 has revealed that the average level of Arsenic in greyhounds is approximately 60ng/mL. An excessive amount of Arsenic has been shown to influence the cardiovascular system (GAR 1) and therefore is a prohibited substance per the GRNZ Prohibited Substance Regulations when present in a sample at concentrations above 800ng/mL.

8.  On 5 October investigators visited Mr Anderton’s kennels near Kirwee and advised him of the ELS screening result. Upon inspecting SAPPORO BALE’s outdoor kennel, it was evident by the chew marks on the tanalised fencing timber of the yard and the housing that there had been significant chewing.

9.  Treated pine timber is known by investigators to contain Copper Chrome Arsenate (CCA), a wood preservative used to protect against rot and pests. CCA contains Arsenic as its main insecticidal component. Treated timber exposed to moisture can leach and becomes softer to chew.

10.  A comparative urine sample was obtained from SAPPORO BALE which later returned a level of 184ng/mL.

11.  On 17 October RASL issued a confirmatory Certificate of Analysis detailing the Arsenic at a level of (greater than) >1600 ng/mL, being the upper limit of the calibration range used.

12.  While SAPPORO BALE had not previously been tested for Arsenic, other Anderton trained greyhounds have been tested on 17 occasions since the introduction of the threshold, with levels between 20 – 681 ug/L. Mr Anderton was advised in March or April 2023 regarding high readings (367 – 681) returned by his greyhound HARLEY JOHN.

13.  Recent positive cases in greyhounds prompted GRNZ to post an advisory to all trainers via their website on 1 May 2024:

Caution re Arsenic. Over the past year, there have been instances where greyhounds have been found to have high urinary arsenic levels in their systems, with the probable cause attributed to treated timber, which the greyhounds have been constantly licking or chewing. These cases highlight the fact that kennels made of treated timber could, through greyhounds chewing or licking them, cause elevated urinary arsenic levels. Trainers are advised to be cautious about this, especially if they have greyhounds who are more prone to chewing or licking.

Conclusion

14.  It is highly probable that the level of Arsenic detected in SAPPORO BALE is due to the dog chewing treated timber in its kennel.

15.  Mr Anderton is liable under r 141(1)(a) of the Rules of GRNZ, of failing to ensure the greyhound raced free from a prohibited substance.

16.  The RIB seeks disqualification of SAPPORO BALE from the race concerned pursuant to r 141(1), (4).

17.  Mr Anderton has no previous breaches of the prohibited substance rule in his many years as a Licensed Trainer.

Decision

The charge has been admitted; it is found proved.

Informant’s Penalty Submissions

The Informant stated the Respondent was a Licensed Owner Trainer under the Rules of GRNZ and had held an Owner Trainer licence since 2008.

Comparable Cases were identified:

RIB v Lane (30 July 2024)

Trainer charged with a breach of the threshold (>1600ng/mL). The probable cause was also from the greyhound chewing CCA treated timber. Lane was fined $1000, all of which was suspended for 12 months per r 174(3).

RIB v Johnson (23 May 2024)

Trainer charged with a breach of the threshold (>1600ng/mL). The source of the high level was also believed to be from the greyhound chewing treated timber. Johnson was fined $1000, with the penalty wholly suspended for 12 months.

An aggravating feature was that in April 2023 Mr Anderton was advised that another of his dogs HARLEY JOHN had returned elevated Arsenic levels.

Mitigating features were that Mr Anderton had admitted the charge at the earliest opportunity and had been cooperative and respectful with RIB staff throughout the process.

Upon being advised of the screening result, although SAPPORO BALE had since been retired, Mr Anderton had relocated the dog to a different kennel to ensure that the risk of exposure to further Arsenic was negated, supplemented the dog with an antioxidant, and had undertaken preventive measures with his kennels to minimise CCA exposure to other greyhounds.

Mr Anderton has had no prior NRI charges in his lengthy training career.

The RIB concluded their submissions by stating that it was completely explainable that the source of the threshold breach was from the CCA treated timber located in the kennel in which SAPPORO BALE was housed.

The RIB submitted that as in the two cases they cited in their submission, a $1000 fine was appropriate, with the penalty being wholly suspended for a period of 12 months. If a second relevant offence against r 141(1) was to occur during the 12-month period, the $1000 fine would be activated.

SAPPORO BALE was required to be disqualified from his win at Addington on 9 September pursuant to r 141(4).

No RIB costs were sought.

Respondent’s Penalty Submissions

The Respondent made a written penalty submission, in which he confirmed that he admitted the charge and accepted the Summary of Facts.

Mr Anderton said he had held an Owner/Trainer Licence since the days of QE2 in the 1990s. When the kennel first received SAPPORO BALE from Trainer Craig Roberts, he was a very stressed out dog and did show minor chewing tendencies, but once he settled into a larger kennel area, these seemed to disappear. While the Addington track was closed, SAPPORO BALE did not travel to Southland, as the distance 390m was too far for him to race.

When Addington reopened, SAPPORO BALE’s workload was increased in an effort to lower his weight, as he had put on over 2kg with not racing for 2 months. During that time, he became slightly stressed out with not being allowed to travel to races with the other dogs and, unbeknown to Mr Anderton, he had started chewing the wooden post by his gate. There had been a lot of rain during this time, so the post was wet and easier to chew, which in time elevated his Arsenic levels.

The post in his kennel and other kennels, as evidenced in the photos that the Respondent provided, had had metal bands added to stop the wood being chewed in the future. The Anderton kennel had also treated with an antioxidant (milk thistle), any dogs that showed signs of any chewing which would detoxify the dog’s system and clear any toxins such as Arsenic.

Decision as to Penalty

It is clear that the reason for the positive result to Arsenic from an analysis of the post-race sample, was as a consequence of SAPPORO BALE chewing CCA treated wood in the kennel. As the Summary of Facts states, it was “evident by the chew marks on the tanalised fencing timber of the yard and the housing that there had been significant chewing.”

Although Mr Anderton was aware that SAPPORO BALE showed chewing tendencies, once the dog had settled into a larger kennel area, these tendencies appeared to disappear. He believed the chewing recommenced due to the dog not travelling south to Invercargill to race, with the distance of the races at that venue not being suitable for him. Mr Anderton was of the opinion at the time, that SAPPORO BALE was slightly stressed out with not being allowed to travel with the other dogs and, unbeknown to him, the dog had started chewing the wooden post by his gate.

An aggravating factor is that SAPPORO BALE’s propensity for chewing was known to Mr Anderton, and he should, as an experienced Trainer, have been aware that other racing dogs had returned Arsenic positives. In addition, he had previously been warned that another of his dogs, HARLEY JOHN, had returned an elevated Arsenic level. Mr Anderton  should have been sufficiently concerned to take the preventive action that the Adjudicative Committee is pleased to see he has subsequently adopted.

The Summary of Facts does not indicate whether Mr Anderton was aware of the 1 May 2024 advisory on the GRNZ website concerning the possibility of Arsenic positives due to greyhounds chewing treated wood, but again as an experienced Licensed Trainer, he should have read it. This case, as with the previous positives, is a salutary warning to all Industry participants of the need to keep abreast of such matters.

Mitigating factors are the Respondent’s early admission of the breach, his clear record, and his co-operation with the RIB investigation. It is accepted that the likelihood of Mr Anderton reoffending in similar manner is very low. His adding metal bands to the posts to stop the wood being chewed in the future will no doubt assist in this regard.

In addition to the starting point in the Categories of Prohibited Substances, the decisions in Lane and Johnson are helpful guides in deciding penalty in this case. A further relevant case is RIB v Clark (19 December 2023) — two breaches of the threshold from the same greyhound, with levels of 908ng/mL and >1600ng/mL. The probable cause was also that the greyhound had been chewing CCA treated timber.

The facts of the cases are similar. In Clark, the Adjudicative Committee assessed the offending to be low-level and determined that a suspended fine of $800 was appropriate. In Johnson and Lane, the suspended fines were $1,000.

Since the introduction of the new Rules as from 1 February 2023, an Adjudicative Committee has the power to suspend any part or portion of a penalty for a time and pursuant to conditions that it thinks fit. The Adjudicative Committees in each of these cases saw fit to avail themselves of this provision, finding that the breach did not require a punitive penalty. The Adjudicative Committee in Johnson approved the comment Clark that “there is more to be gained by adopting a prevention / educative approach, which is a more pragmatic way of resolution using the penalties available within the Rules.”

The Racecourse Inspector, Mr Irving, has submitted that a similar approach be followed in this case, and that a fine of $1,000, suspended for 12 months is appropriate.

The Adjudicative Committee in Lane, considered whether the time for an educative approach had passed, as it was apparent that the message from GRNZ was not being heeded. The Adjudicative Committee questioned whether a full suspension of the fine was acting as the necessary deterrent.

This notwithstanding, the Informant has sought full suspension in this case, and, with the same hesitation as was expressed in Lane, the Adjudicative Committee has determined that a fully suspended fine of $1,000 is appropriate for Mr Anderton. More particularly, this fine will be suspended for a period of 12 months from the date of this Decision, pursuant to r 174(3), on the condition that the Respondent does not commit any further breach of the Rules of GRNZ within that period, other than a minor Raceday incident dealt with under the Minor Infringement Scheme, in which case the fine will immediately become payable.

Disqualification

SAPPORO BALE is disqualified from his 1st placing in Race 2 – the Happy Birthday Jo Chapman Sprint PBD C1 295m – at the Christchurch Greyhound Racing Club’s meeting at Addington Raceway on 9 September 2024, pursuant to r 141(4).

The amended result of the race is as follows:

1ST    ALPHA ROWDY

2ND   HOMEBUSH LEANA

3RD   CLAWS IN MAXIMUS

4TH   HOMEBUSH PICKLE

Stakes are to be paid accordingly. If the winning stake has been paid to the connections of SAPPORO BALE, it is to be repaid to GRNZ.

Costs

The RIB did not seek costs and as the matter was heard on the papers, there are no adjudicative costs.