A greyhound that tested positive for methamphetamine after winning its race has left its owner and racing investigators scratching their heads about how the dog could have been contaminated.
Trainer Craig Anderson, 68, was shocked by the result, vehemently expressing he had never touched the drug and had no idea how his dog came into contact with it.
When investigators from the Racing Integrity Board turned up at his property for a drug screening of his six greyhounds, they found that one of the dogs, Hilton Hustler, tested positive for the Class A substance.
Forensic samples were taken of Anderson and his wife, the dogs’ kennel area, and Anderson’s vehicle, which was used to transport the dogs, and all returned a negative result.
Hilton Hustler’s test one week earlier, and another two weeks after, were also clear.
In the last year, Anderson was involved in hundreds of races with his greyhounds being tested 22 times collectively, and 18 times the previous year.
He has had no prohibited substance breaches since he began racing dogs in 2017.
Anderson told investigators that other than his dog having the usual interactions with kennel staff and other handlers while at the races, no other humans had been in contact with the dog in the two to three days before the positive drug test.
Despite the racing investigators being unable to trace the source of the drug, a charge was laid against Anderson before the Racing Integrity Board.
However, at a hearing held in December at Addington Raceway, no penalty was sought for Anderson due to there not being any evidence of his being connected to the drug.
Investigators said the level found in Hilton Hustler’s system was very low at just 0.7ng/mL of methamphetamine and 3ng/mL of amphetamine.
For comparison, the international standard for positive drug test cut-off concentration applied in human drug testing is 300ng/mL.
Because a source could not be found, the board opted not to penalise Anderson for the positive drug test.
"The Adjudicative Committee is satisfied that neither Mr nor Mrs Anderson was in any way responsible for the Prohibited Substances that were found in the out-of-competition urine sample that was taken from their greyhound…"
The board noted the low levels of meth found in the dog’s system and Anderson’s unblemished racing record.
"Presenting a greyhound with a prohibited substance in its system is an offence of strict liability – that is to say, an offence is committed even when, as in the present case, no negligence is found," the board said.
"However, where no negligence is found, that finding can lead to a reduced penalty or a very small, or no, fine."
