FOI 305/25
Freedom of Information Request 305/25
REQUEST
The NPCC has revealed that between 'February and September 2024, policing has seized over 4,586 suspected S1 dogs throughout England and Wales.'
- Please provide the number of suspected S1 dogs you seized between February and September 2024.
- Please provide the number of dogs you kennelled in each month between February 2024 to September 2024.
The NPCC has also revealed that it can cost up to £1,000 per month to kennel a dog.
- Please provide the total amount you spent kennelling dogs in each month between February 2024 and September 2024.
- Please provide the total amounts you spent on (i) food and (ii) care in respect of kennelled dogs in each month between February 2024 and September 2024.
- Please provide the names of all businesses/organisations you used to kennel dogs between February 2024 and September 2024.
RESPONSE
Question 1
A search has been conducted on Centrik for all S1 dogs seized between the 01/02/2024 and 30/09/2024. This search yielded 78 records.
Question 2
|
Month |
Total |
|
Feb |
30 |
|
Mar |
15 |
|
Apr |
32 |
|
May |
20 |
|
Jun |
12 |
|
Jul |
15 |
|
Aug |
12 |
|
Sep |
11 |
|
Grand Total |
147 |
For the remainder of your request, we consulted with our Specialist Operations Department who have provided the following information.
Question 3
|
Feb 24 44,088.58 |
|
March 24 32,956.78 |
|
April 24 34,919.24 |
|
May 24 50,484.42 |
|
June 24 63,528.29 |
|
July 24 45,165.86 |
|
August 24 50,323.52 |
|
Sept 24 51,685.52 |
Question 4
South Wales Police do not hold this information as the budget is not broken down to the level of detail requested. Under the Freedom of Information Act (2000) we are not obliged to create information in order to comply with a request. We are only able to provide recorded information. Please see below:
‘’Information is defined in section 84 of the Act as 'information recorded in any form'. The Act therefore only extends to requests for recorded information. It does not require public authorities to answer questions generally; only if they already hold the answers in recorded form. The Act does not extend to requests for information about policies or their implementation, or the merits or demerits of any proposal or action - unless, of course, the answer to any such request is already held in recorded form."
Question 5
Your request to provide the names of all businesses/organisations you used to kennel dogs has been considered and I am not obliged to supply you with this information.
The following exemptions apply:
Section 31(1)(a)(b) – Law Enforcement
Section 38 (1)(a)(b) – Health & Safety
Both Sections 31 & 38 are qualified and prejudice-based exemptions, and the legislators accept that there may be harm if released. The authority is therefore required to articulate the harm that may be caused and consider the public interest arguments for and against the disclosure of the information.
Evidence of Harm
Disclosing the contracted kennelling providers would provide sufficient information for individuals with malicious intent to target the kennels. For example, owners could arrive at the kennels to demand the return of their dog(s), or could attempt to break into the premises in order to secure the return of their animal, before any court proceedings could be
taken which would prejudice law enforcement. Any such activity, in turn, would endanger the safety of staff and other individuals using the premises, and the public at large if dangerous dogs were released back into the community because of any such action.
Our kennelling provision for seized dogs is kept confidential for reasons of safety and security; this is to ensure the safety and security of the staff and kennels, but also to ensure that seized animals are cared for in a secure, safe environment.
Factors favouring disclosure Section 31
By disclosing the requested information, this would provide openness and transparency and better awareness to the public.
Factors favouring non-disclosure Section 31
If we were to provide the contracted kennelling providers, this would be a valuable asset to individuals and/or organisations wishing to target our kennelling provision. Disclosure would place South Wales Police at a tactical disadvantage as if a location were made public, and targeted, officers would need to be deployed to respond to security issues, and any animals held at that site would need to be moved to alternative kennels causing unnecessary stress to animals, and extra expense to the public purse.
It cannot be in the public interest to disclose information which would undermine our ability to protect the public and bring offenders to justice, or which could result in additional expenditure in both resources, transportation and kennelling.
The security of the public is of paramount importance and the Police Service will not divulge information if to do so could compromise law enforcement.
Factors favouring disclosure Section 38
There is a public interest in public authorities operating in as transparent a manner as possible, as this should ensure they operate effectively and efficiently.
Factors favouring non-disclosure Section 38
The safety of the staff and persons at the kennels would be compromised if the kennelling providers were made known to the public.
Having considered the arguments for and against release, the public interest test favours non-release of material which directly impacts on any on-going or future investigations. The greater public interest is served in maintaining the integrity of the justice process, and this in turn favours maintaining the exemption in relation to the withheld material. South Wales Police will not disclose information that could compromise the future law enforcement role of the force.
Also due to the potential harm that could be caused to our operational effectiveness as outlined above; to ensure the safety of staff, and individuals attending kennels, and the public at large; and to ensure that animals are cared for in a safe and secure environment the balance lies in favour of non-disclosure.
In accordance with the Act, this letter acts as a refusal notice for this part of your request.