Quickly exit this site by pressing the Escape key Leave this site
We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO: FOI-744-2024
I write in connection with your request for information which was received on 19th August 2024 as follows:
I am contacting you to request the following information regarding stray dogs.
1) How many stray dogs entered police kennels for each year between 1st January 2019 and 31st December 2023, including by breed.
2) Broken down by year 2019,2020,2021,2022,2023 (calendar years)
2a) How many of these were reclaimed by their owners?
2b) How many were adopted from the pound?
2c) How many went to an animal rescue? Please provide a breakdown in numbers per year for each rescue used
2d)How many were euthanized?
2e) What happened to any remaining dogs that did not fall into above categories?
2f) How many dogs were chipped?
2g) How many were chipped with owners details up to date?
3a) For each year (2019-2023)could you please tell me the total number of w.t.e (whole time equivalent) police dog handlers you employ?
3b) please detail whether the kennel services are delivered in house or via a contract with an external provider could you please confirm the provider?
4) Please provide the first part of the postcode of the holding kennels ( the details are for geographical spatial mapping and so exact address is not required)
Please find the Warwickshire Police response set out below.
Q1, Q2a to Q2g response: Please be advised that Police no longer deal with stray dogs (unless exceptional circumstances apply) as the powers have been delegated to local authorities, who are required to provide a collection service. The business area has advised that where stray dogs are encountered by police and the authority cannot collect (for example overnight, out of hours), the dog will either be taken by police to the secure kennel of the relevant local authority or held temporarily in kennels on police property for the relevant local authority to pick up. In most cases, there will be no recorded information held regarding this. In exceptional cases, an incident log may be created, however, as there is no way of readily identifying which logs will contain details of stray dogs, it would be necessary to manually review each and every incident log with a marker or tag for ‘dog’, for the specified period. There are on average around 400 such incident logs recorded annually and; therefore, this element of the request would exceed the fees limit.
Q3a response: Please see below number of WTE Police Dog Handlers employed in each period from 2019-2023:
2019: 9 WTE Police Dog Handlers
2020: 9 WTE Police Dog Handlers
2021: 8 WTE Police Dog Handlers
2022: 10 WTE Police Dog Handlers
2023: 10 WTE Police Dog Handlers
Q3b & Q4 response: Warwickshire Police have a contract for the ‘Provision of Secure Boarding Services of Banned Breeds, dangerous, seized dogs and associated services’, details of which are in the public domain at the following link:
Once you have entered the website please select:
‘Warwickshire Police’ in the Organisation field
‘Provision of Secure Boarding’ in the contract title field
With regard to the supplier and the first part of the postcode of the kennels, section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, places two duties on public authorities. Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at section 1(1)(a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in a request is held. The second duty at section 1(1)(b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held.
When refusing to provide such information, because the information is exempt, Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires Warwickshire Police to provide you, the applicant, with a notice which:
(a) States that fact
(b) Specifies the exemption(s) in question and
(c) States (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption(s) applies.
I can confirm that the requested information is held, however, the information is exempt from disclosure by virtue of the following exemption:
Section 31(1)(a)(b) – Law Enforcement
Section 31 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 provides an exemption from disclosure if the release of information would, or would be likely to, prejudice the prevention or detection of crime, the apprehension or prosecution of offenders, or the administration of justice. It is a prejudice-based qualified exemption and as such, there is a requirement to evidence the harm disclosure would cause and to carry out a public interest test.
Harm
Requests under the Freedom of Information Act are ‘applicant blind’, which means that the motives of anyone requesting information are not questioned. Therefore, in providing a response to one person, we are expressing a willingness to provide the same response to everyone.
Disclosure of the requested information could be of value to a person or persons with criminal or malicious intent, and, along with other information already in the public domain, could equip such individuals with intelligence regarding location of seized dogs. Those who actively seek to disrupt police activity involving the seizure of dogs, could map resources, thereby targeting specific areas for criminal activity, as well as enabling such individuals to adapt and counteract law enforcement efforts. This in turn could compromise the effectiveness and success of ongoing or future law enforcement operations, hinder the prevention and detection of crime and place the community at increased unnecessary risk of harm.
Section 31 - Factors Favouring Disclosure
The principle of transparency and accountability supports the disclosure of information to ensure public scrutiny and oversight of law enforcement activities, as it can enhance public understanding and trust in police operations.
In certain circumstances, there may be a legitimate public interest in knowing how public funds are allocated and utilised. Disclosure can facilitate public debate and scrutiny regarding the expenditure of taxpayer money, and the effectiveness of law enforcement strategies.
Section 31 - Factors Against Disclosure
Disclosing the requested information could provide valuable intelligence to those intent on committing crime, by revealing resources used by the force, and leaving such resources vulnerable to being targeted. This in turn could undermine their operational effectiveness and impede the force’s ability to carry out its core duty to ensure that the prevention and detection of crime, apprehension or prosecution of offenders, and administration of justice is carried out appropriately and effectively.
Balance Test
The balancing act between transparency and accountability on one hand and the protection of operational effectiveness, law enforcement, and public safety on the other hand, must be carefully assessed. Each case should be evaluated based on its specific circumstances and the potential impact of disclosure or non-disclosure.
The value of accountability and the legitimate interest in the public being satisfied in how the force utilise public funds is recognised. However, it is not in the public interest to disclose information around law enforcement tactics and operational capability if that information could be of intelligence value to those intent on committing crime or leave resources vulnerable to being targeted by criminal organisations. The ability to deliver effective law enforcement is of paramount importance, and Warwickshire Police will not divulge information if to do so would have an adverse effect on the force’s ability to prevent and detect crime. In this case, to disclose the details would not only affect the force’s ability to do so, but would also impact upon its core responsibility of protecting the community it serves and its officers.
Therefore, on balance, it is considered that the public interest in providing the information is outweighed by the potential impact release would have on current and future law enforcement activities, and this represents a refusal notice for this part of the request.
Every effort has been made to ensure that the information provided is as accurate as possible.
Your attention is drawn to the below which details your right of complaint.
Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please write or email the Freedom of Information Unit quoting the reference number above.
Yours sincerely
Freedom of Information Officer
Freedom of Information Unit
Warwickshire Police
PO Box 4
Leek Wootton
Warwickshire
CV35 7QB