Month: January 2023

Not too many people know, that the playing fields along Beehive Hill, once had a dwelling on the site, called Holly Cottage.  It was located at the top end of the field, where the football pitch is today, and got its name from the row of holly trees to the rear of the property.

The cottage dates back to the 1800s, and census records over the years differ as to the actual postal address, varying between: The Birmingham Road, The Camp and Fieldgate Lane. The name Holly Cottage was never always recorded by the enumerators of the cencus (more about the postal problems later). 

William Brown and Family

In 1861, William Brown was living at the cottage with his wife Emma and their four children plus two lodgers, he was a bricklayer by trade but also farmed 8 acres of land. He and his family had moved to Holly cottage from Pepper Alley a few years earlier. In 1871 the family were still in residence, they now had five children plus a lodger. A decade later in the 1881 census, William was then 61 years-old and he and his family now farmed 12 acres. He died in 1882 and Emma died the following year.

Sale of Holly Cottage – 1882

In August 1882, the Leamington Spa Courier reported that Holly Cottage and its land had been sold at auction for £450 at the Crown Hotel in Leamington. The purchaser being retired solicitor William Evans, of The Spring in Kenilworth. At the same auction, he also bought the adjacent property, Camp Farm and its land, which totalled more than 116 acres.

Brown Family Continue Living at Cottage

Following the death of her parents, and the sale of the property, Ellen Brown continued with the tenancy of the cottage and its land. The 1891 census confirms that she was still in residence, and was continuing in farming, just like her father. She was then aged 36, and living with her three siblings, brother Charles and two sisters, Martha and Emily. In the 1911 census, all four were still living at the cottage. Ellen eventually died in 1939, aged 84.

The Arrival Of The Skinners

Herbert Skinner, a WW1 veteran, had brought his family from Northamptonshire to Kenilworth around 1940 and took over the tenancy of the cottage.  He and his wife Hilda, would eventually have a total of 16 children together, ten boys and six girls!

Water Found On The Fields

The cottage had an outside brick built ‘WC’, which consisted of just a hole in the ground with a plank of wood with a hole in it, supported by bricks. For sanitation purposes the pit was limed. The cottage had no running water, and so had to rely on water from a well.

Because water had been found on the site (on the field where the allotment is now) the Kenilworth Urban District Council (KUDC) had an obligation under the 1936 Public Health Act, to extract the water for the town’s use.  So, in early 1939, a lease agreement was made between them, and owner Miss Gertrude Emily Evans, (daughter of the late William Evans), at an annual rent of £55.

But it wasn’t until 1947, that the KUDC took further action concerning water extraction. In March of that year, they decided to ask the Ministry of Health for a loan of £3,250, for the sinking of a trial borehole, on a five-year-term. They received a tender of £2,445-18s from a London Company, which they accepted. The borehole was eventually drilled to a depth of more than 500 feet, but the operation took a lot longer than originally antisipated. Some of the workers even lodged at the cottage. However, there were concerns at the KUDC that the yield of water would not be sufficient to justify the amount of money being spent on the project. Consequently work stopped for many years, and it wasn’t until 1959, that work recommenced.

Later on during the Skinners tenancy, a modernised flush toilet and sewer system was installed by Jack Riley of Castle Hill. He dug a trench (without any help, apparently) all the way along the hedgerow from the cottage to the main sewer pipe on Beehive Hill (then known as Birmingham Road).

Fields Purchased by KUDC – 1944

KUDC Refuse Memorial Hall Proposal – 1945

At a KUDC meeting on 18th December 1945, a discussion took place following a request by the Memorial Hall Fund Committee of St. Augustines Church, enquiring whether the council would be willing to sell or lease, a strip of land attached to Holly Cottage, for the purposes of erecting a Memorial Hall. After due consideration, in the course of which the Chairman of the Waterworks Committee, made reference to the proposals for the future development of the site, and having regard to the geoligists report, it was decided that the Memorial Hall Fund Committee, be informed that the KUDC regrets its inability to dispose of or to grant, any lease of the land. The reason being was the impending development, in connection with the waterworks that was being undertaken, was of great importance.

Mystery Of the Old Air Raid Shelter

By 1970, the shelter was becoming a hazard, and a ‘dump site’. Over the years, oil drums, corrugated iron sheets, rubble etc had been thrown inside. The KUDC, feared that children could enter the shelter and possibly injure themselves, and be unable to get out. They decided that demolition maybe an option. But with re-structuring of local government at the time, KUDC never followed through on it.

Several years went by, and it was still standing, and was still be used for ‘fly-tipping’. It was now the responsibility of the new authority, Warwick District Council (WDC). By 1976, it was being used as changing-rooms, apparently, by football teams. Inside were benches, hurricane lamps and an oil stove, with plenty of ready-to-burn wood. The originial bricked-up enterance, had now been replaced by a well constructed lockable door. But the WDC were baffled that no one had ever approached them or the previous council for permission to do this work.

On Monday 5th April 1976, the shelter caught fire and a nearby resident alerted the Fire Brigade. Fireman had to break open the door and use breathing apparatus to make sure no one was inside. There was a small fire the following day, but luckily, this didn’t amount to much. It was reported that someone had approached the shelter and two boys ran off.

The shelter was eventually demolised, and is now part of the allotment.

From Birmingham Road to Beehive Hill

For many years, the stretch of Birmingham Road, that ran alongside the fields had always been known locally as ‘Beehive Hill’, especially by the older folk. In August 1958, the KUDC, received a letter from a local resident requesting that this portion of road be officially named Beehive Hill.  The Council surveyor agreed in principle, but came to a compromise.  He stated that the street plates were on order and would read; Birmingham Road (Beehive Hill), which he hoped would satisfy the letter writer and other locals. However, over a decade later, at a KUDC Health & Highways meeting, in September 1969, the surveyor reported that there was confusion being caused by the naming of the road. In some cases Beehive Hill was used as a postal address, while others were using the old name of Birmingham Road. Currently, Birmingham Road (Beehive Hill) is shown on the street plates for that section of the road, from Fieldgate Lane to the junction at Clinton Lane. From Clinton Lane, northwards, is the Birmingham Road. It was agreed by the committee, that this section of road be solely named Beehive Hill, and the street plates altered accordingly.

Origins of the Beehive Name

The name originates from the ‘Beehive Inn’ that was once in operation over 160 years ago. The building still exists today, located on the brow-of-the-hill, now called ‘Oak Cottage’. In the census of 1861, Edward Bishop, a Kenilworth man, was in residence with his family, and he was described as being a ‘Beer House Keeper’. Ten years later in 1871, it had changed hands and was run by Richard Hughes, originally from Southam, who was recorded as being a ‘Licensed Virtualler’. But by August of that year, his license had been suspended.

At the Leamington Petty Sessions on 27th September, the magistrates heard the case for the renewal of his licence. But the police opposed it on the grounds in which the way the house was being conducted. Inspector Thomas, stated that on Licencing Day last year (1870), Hughes threatened to stab his wife, and only a few days later, he had to be ‘conveyed’ home by police. They had found him in a ‘utter state of intoxication’, he was also bleeding from a wound to his head. On another occasion, he had threatened to shoot both his wife and daughter, who then sought the security of the police. Constable Brown attended the house, and found Hughes behaving like a ‘madman’. He searched the house and found a shotgun and both barrels were loaded. While the constable was searching the cowshed, Hughes threatened to ‘run him through with a pitchfolk’. Hughes, clearly had mental health issues, and had spend some time at the Hatton Lunatic Ayslum. Constable Brown believes that drink was the main cause of his problems, but his wife said that since her husband’s brother had died, and had seen his ‘corpse’, his mind had been deeply affected. However, following his return from hospital, he has been fit and stable. The magistrates initially refused the renewal, but instead, suspended it for 21-days, in the hope that Mrs Hughes could sell the business to someone who the Bench would approve of.

It looks like the ‘Beehive’ closed after the problems with the licencing issue. By 1881, the family were still living at the property, Richard Hughes had now changed trades completely. He was now a full-time farmer of 20 acres, so it looks like he had got his life back together. From that year onwards, there is no reference to the ‘Beehive’. In the 1891 census, he was still farming but died three years later, aged 72. His widow Ann continued to live at the property, and by 1901 was living with her daughter Sarah, who was then 41 years-old and single. Ann was recorded as being a ‘cow keeper’, she died the following year, aged 72. At the time of her death the property was recorded as being named Oak Cottage.

About 1910, John Charles Arthur Beardmore, a carpenter by trade, moved into the property with wife Nellie. The cottage was still being lit by oil-lamps and water was drawn from a well. A large Yorkshire Range was being used for cooking, heating and hot water. Arthur (as he was known), died in December 1960, aged 91. Following Arthur’s death Nellie decided to vacate the property and moved to Thornby Ave to be closer to her beloved Kenilworth Methodist Church. Here, she had been a chorister since the age of twelve. She died in 1977, aged 95. In her will, she left £100 to the church.

By September 1961, solicitor Charles Penn and wife Beryl (nee Burgoyne), both from Berkswell, had moved into the cottage. But in 1966, they were on the move, and it was put on the market for £6,950 by George Loveitt & Sons, describing it as a ‘18th Century Detached Property of Character and Distinction’. In 1973, it was up for sale again, this time with Locke & England. But the asking price had more than tripled to £25,250.

Holly Cottage Gets Demolished – 1960

Later in 1958, the land was valued at £1850, and the decision was made to put a plan into action to demolish the cottage under the national ‘Slum Clearance Programme’, as the property was deemed; ‘Unfit for habitation and incapable of being made fit at a reasonable cost‘. Strangely though, planning consent had been given back in 1954 for a further two cottages to be built on the site but nothing ever materialised. Herbert Skinner and son Frank, were the last people to live at the cottage. They were asked to vacate the property by the KUDC, and were found accommodation at Howes Buildings at St Johns. However, by May 1960, the cottage was still standing, and a request was made to the Housing Committee for its demolition, as soon as possible. The council surveyor was asked to obtain tenders for the work and it was finally demolished later that year. After the cottage had finally gone, the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, gave their consent to: ‘Appropriate the two fields for recreation use to the general public’.

The headline; ‘Footer Field Likely’, appeared in the 29th December 1962 edition, of the Kenilworth Weekly News (KWN), stating that various sporting organisations within the town, were disappointed at the lack of provisions being made available for adult games on the Bates Memorial Ground. But were given some hope that the fields ‘Not far from the top of Beehive Hill and opposite the end of Malthouse Lane’ had been measured up by the council, and one half of the land was deemed big enough to accommodate a football pitch.  But the land was still under cultivation, so the necessary action to put a pitch down would be delayed until the tenancy was terminated. But there were issues with the tenancy.

Tenancy of Fields

The KUDC had first put Holly Cottage (and fields) out to tender in 1939 (18th April) when they accepted an offer from William Page of Redfern Manor, at £60 per annum. The council also stated that Holly Cottage would be made into a habitable state of repair forthwith. But Mr Page’s tenancy at the fields didn’t last long, as by 13th September of the same year, local farmer Phil Hubbard, had taken over.

But in 1963, three years after the demolition of Holly Cottage it was discovered that he hadn’t paid any rent for the last three years! So, an agreement was reached with him that rent of £8 per annum would be payable from the time of the cottage’s demolition, he was also given notice to vacate the fields. We can only assume he was getting rent from the Skinner’s (maybe on some kind of sub-let agreement), and now they had gone, he believed the rent was too high. But it looks like the KUDC and Mr Hubbard never discussed the matter. The rent reduction from £60 down to £8 would suggest he was getting rent from the Skinner’s or they may have been doing work for him in lieu of rent. But, who knows?

Ever since the fields were made available to the general public, goalposts have always been present, and football still remains the most popular game played there. The fields are also handy for dog walkers, and with numerous Horse Chestnut trees, conker hunters!

The Archers Arrive – 1964

Kenilworth Archery Club was formed by Dennis Jackman and Arthur Bromwich following a public meeting in March 1963 in which 38 people attended. The club quickly found a field to use, right next door to St John’s Church. It was a very short range but was a good start for the fledgling club. With momentum gathering, youngsters were invited to attended a junior only session on 4th June, Whit-Tuesday.

Another Range Needed

But, in reality the club needed another ground. Within a week of the junior event they were granted permission to use Kenilworth Rugby Club in Glasshouse Lane. Here, the range was much longer, over 50 yards. But their stay at the rugby club didn’t last long, because of the start of the rugby season in September. Even the club’s first annual shoot on Sunday 29th September, had to take place out of town, at Courtauld’s ground in Coventry. Ernest Pennington-West of Lime Grove, being the overall champion. So, they were homeless once again, but luckily, they were allowed back to St. John’s.

But in 1964, the playing fields were made available to them by the KUDC, at ‘peppercorn’ rent of £2 a year, and they were there for a number of years, meeting up to three times a week. The only restriction of this new venue was that it had a maximum range of 50 yards. But for most members this was an ideal ground, and far better than at St John’s. This is when the fields at Beehive Hill became known locally as the ‘Archery Fields’.  Unfortunately, the club eventually folded due to dwindling membership. So, the Archers of Kenilworth had gone forever.

County First School – Proposal – Refused by KUDC

A letter was received by the KUDC in November 1969, from the county architect, refering to the difficulty in finding a site for the proposed new, County First School, in the north of Kenilworth. He enquired if the council would give further consideration to the suggestion that the school be sited on the playing fields at Beehive Hill, and the school playing fields facilities be shared with the council. When this had previously been mentioned in 1967, the KUDC were concerned about the playing fields provisions in this part of Kenilworth, but with more recent feelings towards education, that the shared use of the playing fields was a possibility. The KUDC turned down the request in favour of keeping the whole site as playing fields. However, north Kenilworth did eventually get a school, Priors Field in Clinton Lane in 1976. It would have been a big mistake building a school on the Archery Fields of just three acres, Priors Field has twelve acres.

KUDC to Impose Speed Limits Along Beehive Hill

In 1970, the Health and Highways committee of the KUDC decided to impose a speed limit of 40 m.p.h. along part of Beehive Hill, that is presently un-restricted. This section of road runs from the junction of Birmingham Road and Clinton Lane to Malthouse Lane. There is already a 30 m.p.h. limit from the Malthouse Lane junction, running past St Austin’s School into Fieldgate Lane. The responsibility for this change would be the Warwickshire County Council (WCC).

Motor Cyclist’s Fatal Accident – 1921 – Pinned Beneath Machine

On the afternoon of Thurday 9th June 1921, an Inquest was held at the Warneford Hospital Leamington, by Mid-Warwickshire Coroner, Mr E. Hadow on Alfred Day, aged 34 of Tamworth. He had been involved in a fatal accident at the junction of Beehive Hill and Clinton lane, on Sunday last, whilst driving a motor cycle and sidecar.

Witness Mrs Day, the deceased’s wife, said that she and her husband had left Tamworth that day, and she was in the sidecar, her husband was driving. She said that her husband was an experienced and skilful driver. But when they approached Kenilworth, they were un-certain which road to take, when they suddenly saw a sign-post. Her husband turned sharply round to the left up Beehive Hill, but the machine rolled over. Witness, who was unhurt, found that her husband was pinned underneath the cycle. The sister of Mrs Day, who was travelling in another vehicle about 30 yards behind, corroborated her sister’s statement.

The coroner further asked Mrs Day: There is a ‘big hill’ were he turned, is there not? – I do not think so, came the reply from the witness. Mr Hadow added; I have known that place for 50 years and I know there is a ‘big hill’ there. It is peculiar that neither of the witnesses noticed it, he replied.

Medical evidence was given Dr Levin of Warneford Hospital. He stated that the deceased sustained broken ribs on his right-hand side. When he was admitted to hospital the case was not regarded as serious. Death was due to internal hemorrhage, probably caused by movement on part of the man after following his admission to hospital. A verdict of ‘Accidental Death‘ was returned.

The Arrival of The Allotment

In 2006, the idea was proposed to use the field adjacent to the football pitch for an allotment. There was mixed views from local residents but a questionnaire in the KWN in the following year prompted 140 replies in favour of the proposal, But a petition of 101 signatures opposed the scheme. However, the executive of WCC eventually approved a five-year lease for the site. It was agreed that Kenilworth Town Council, would sub-let the field to the Kenilworth Allotment Tenants Association, who already controlled two other sites in the town.  

However, there were delays due to the lease agreement, but in March 2009, Councillor John Whitehouse was allocated £958 from the Member’s Fund at WCC, for a water supply to be installed at the site.

Story to be continued. If you have any information that could be useful for this article, please contact us.

Why the Warwick Rural District Council got into a right ‘Flap’ about a few dogs

Although regarded as part of Kenilworth, Fernhill Farm was actually part of the administrative responsibilty of the Warwick Rural District Council (WRDC) not the Kenilworth Urban District Council (KUDC). The site of the track (about 4.5 acres) was on the opposite side of the road to the farmhouse that is now known as Fernwood Farm, which once was one of two farms called Fernhill Farm. The other Fernhill Farm still exists.

Permanent Track Refused

In November 1962, the WRDC rejected an application by Mr. James Henry Lloyd and Mr. Richard Charles Harris to install a permanent track on the farm. Their decision was based on four main issues:

1. It was in the green belt area.

2. The Ministry of Agriculture stated that the land was for argriculture use and nothing else.

3. The WRDC stated that a permanent track would be ‘detrimental to the amenities of the district’

4. An objection was lodged by the solicitors acting on behalf of the developers of the newly built Sunshine House Estate on the former site of Rouncil Towers.

The rejection was a setback for applicants, but they stated they would be appealling against the decision. 38 signatures had already been gathered supporting their application.

A shelter and toilets had already been built on the site. However, James Lloyd pointed out that the track was run on the lines of a private club, and was just a ‘Flapping Track’ and the usual national greyhound rules did not apply here. He added, the track is fairly primative and provided facilities for greyhound owners to keep their dogs in good condition. Attendances were no more than 150, attended mainly by owners, trainers and friends. The shelter and toilets were required to make it more comfortable for those attending, and was not intended to attract further spectators. Meetings had taken place intermitently at the farm over the last 12 months which prompted the planning application for a permanent track.

Mr. Lloyd had more than a passing interest in the gambling trade and was the proprietor of J. H. Lloyd Turf Accountants in Park Road (now a private residence), which had first been licenced in late 1961. Race secretary, Richard ‘Dick’ Harris had been involved in greyhound racing for many years and was an experienced greyhound grader. On 21st September 1962 (at around the time of their planning application) they also applied to Warwickshire County Council (WCC) to grant them a betting licence for the track. Their application was submitted by their solicitors, Cooksey, Spencer & Co. of Coventry.

Residents and Building Company Object to Appeallants

An inquiry took place on 28th May 1963 at the offices of the WRDC in Leamington, where residents and other groups had the opportunity to object to the possiblity of the greyhound track ever being allowed to happen. 32 residents had signed a petition objecting to the appeallants. The inquiry was reported in the 1st June edition of the Kenilworth Weekly News, under the headline of ‘Protests About People Going To The Dogs’.

At the meeting, Mr. A. W. Moore, who was representing the residents and Sunshine Houses Ltd, said that a greyhound track up Rouncil Lane would create noise and danger by encouraging increased traffic and impose ‘stigma’ on the residential areas in the neighbourhood. James Lloyd of Fernhill Farm and Richard Harris of Roseland Road, had been refused planning permission for the establishment because the proposed site is in the green belt and its use for dog racing would be an undesirable intrusion into a pleasant rural area, and detrimental to amenities. But it was never made clear at the inquiry which ‘amenties’ Mr. Moore was referring too.

For the appeallants, Mr. H. N. Spencer said that the application was “purely to ask permission to run a greyhound track in a field right out in the countryside”. He said it would not be like the large racing tracks which provide many facilities. “There will be no paraphernalia, no stands, no concreate car parks, no dining facilities and no catering. It would purely cater for an inoffensive sport which is popular with the not-so-wealthy class”. Mr. Harris stated; “I fully appreciate the desirability of maintaining the green belt. Our application will not, in my opinion, harmfully affect the green belt in any way whatsoever, the equipment on the track is unobjectionable and inoffensive to anyone passing by and it is not proposed that there should be any buildings other than wooden sheds”.

Mr. Harris added that he had been associated with the sport for several years and had run a track at Banbury. On the proposed track, he said that two meetings a week would be held between Easter and October. He added that the venture was more for the coursing of greyhounds rather than the racing of them in the popular accepted sense. A ring had been constructed and wooden sheds erected for spectators, the maximum number of which, he estimated would be about 250. At its nearest point, the track is just over two miles away from the nearest residential area of Kenilworth. He stated; ‘I consider that the running of greyhounds in a field in open country is an unobjectionable pastime and could be classed with hunter trials, point-to-point racing, archery and other country pursuits’. Regarding the objection from Sunshine Houses Ltd, “At most there may be 20 odd cars passing there on two occasions a week. It has to be noted that no objection was received from the company when the track was operating during 1961 and 1962”.

Eight meetings were held between September and October 1961, when about 100 people attended and no more than 25 cars. 22 meetings with an average of 200 people attended between April and September 1962 with about 50 cars. Mr. Harris said that a two shilling enterance fee would be charged. Mr. D. G. Fuller of the county planning authority, suggested that the whole essence of dog racing is betting and the presence of bookmakers would attract larger crowds. “I beg to differ”, retorted Mr. Harris; “You cannot call a two shilling entry fee as a bet”.

Appeal Conducted by Warwickshire County Council

Mr. Matthew Cropp, the senior county planning assistant stated that the application had been refused because Fernhill farm was within the green belt. If allowed, the development would be in conflict with the planning authorities intention of establishing a green belt around Coventry and was likely to encourage further developments in what was a ‘vunerable part of the green belt’. Mr. Cropp also stated that the local planning authority feared that this ‘un-sophisticated sport’ was becoming quite a commerical enterprise outside the provisions of the green belt and they did not want to see it grow beyond its present state. It was stated that the Minister would make his judgement in due coarse. Meanwhile, pending the appeal, meetings at Fernhill Farm were put on hold until further notice.

That judgement did not come until October of the following year, when a letter, dated 9th October 1963 was sent from the Ministry and Local Government to the clerk of WRDC. The letter was then put before the planning committee meeting on October 22nd. But to the surprise of the councillors, the verdict did not go the way they thought it would.

An Inspector Calls – And Good News

Following a site visit by Inspector Mr. C. Bartlett he made many positive observations but also had some reservations. His report found the site had been equipped with and used as a greyhound track and rudimentry structures had been erected. Equipment was not immediately apparent from the road and the existing structures were not really distinguisable from minor farm buildings. Spectators at the meetings had to date been 200 maximum with about 50 cars. The inspector accepted that the site differed greatly from the normally associated term of a Greyhound Racing Track. It appeared to him that the use was not inappropriate in the green belt. The present structures did not detract from the openess of the countryside but the removal of the largest would lessen what little impact there was now. Apart from a small judge’s box and possibly the public convenience buildings were not essential for this unsophisticated sport. The narrowness of Rouncil Lane in the vicinity of the site was an argument against permitting the use, but the county surveyor had expressed no objection on highway grounds.

The inspector did not regard the loss of grazing land as being significant. He concluded that the appeal should be allowed subject to certain conditions. The Minister noted that it was the intention only to operate the track on a modest scale and to provide only the minimum of spectator facilities. The inspector reached the conclusion that the use as hitherto conducted differed greatly from the Greyhound Racing as normally understood. In these circumstances the Minister noted that the appellants were prepared to dispense with the existing shelter and he thought this would be desirable. Accordingly, the Minister allowed the appeal and permits.

A) The use of land at Fernhill Farm, Rouncil Lane, Beausale, near Kenilworth as a greyhound racing track.

B) The retention of the works and appartus necessary to that use and the retention of the judge’s box subject to the two following conditions;

I) That the means of access to the land shall be as may be agreed with the local planning authority or in default of agreement as shall be determined by the Minister.

II) That vehicle parking space shall be provided as may be agreed with the local planning authority or in default of agreement as shall be determined by the Minister.

Track Goes Into Operation

Toilets Refused

In February 1967, just over three years after getting planning permission for the track, the owners were refused permission to erect a public convenience on the site. This was refused by the Ministry of Housing and Local Government, who had given them permission in the first place to operate the track. The owners tried to appeal against this judgement but were refused by WRDC, backed by WCC because the Ministry inspector stated the track was on the green belt and the toilet accomodation would have been sited in a prominent position.

The judgement seemed very harsh but was hardly surprising as the original planning permission required the owners to dismantle the toilets and ‘clubhouse’ buildings, which were in situ at the time of the application. Floodlights had also ‘appeared’ since the original inquiry, which no provisions had been agreed upon.

Flapping Tracks History

Flapping tracks are basicially un-licensed tracks and are generally run by the owners of dogs. These tracks had started back in the 1920s and were predomatory a working-class sport. Over the following 50 years these tracks became quite popular and were popping up all over the country. A flapping track was never far way from any town. These days, however, there are very few remaining, believed to be less than a handful. Licenced tracks, under the current regulators, the Greyhound Board of Great Britain (formerly the Greyhound Racing Association), have around 20 tracks in operation and only really exist for the betting industry. But these registered tracks have been in decline for many years and the once popular sport has an uncertain future.

Story to be continued…….. If you have anything of interest to add to this article please contact us.