Grand National Fatalities - World Horse Welfare comment

[Sixteen Hands]

World Horse Welfare responds to the news that horses Synchronised and According to Pete had to be put down on compassionate grounds after suffering injuries during the Grand National.

World Horse Welfare chief executive Roly Owers said:

“The deaths of Synchronised and According to Pete are a terrible tragedy and our thoughts go out to everyone connected with these horses who will clearly be devastated. Over the coming days it will be important to establish the facts. There is no doubt that questions need to be asked and that is exactly what we’ll be doing. We won’t know what if any changes will need to be made until we know the exact circumstances of their falls. It’s hugely important to us that everything possible is being done to protect the safety of the horses and riders.

“No race, especially the Grand National, can be without risks but there is a balance between acceptable and unacceptable risk and we need to strive to get that balance right.”

 

[LadyRascasse]

Very balanced and well thought out statement!! Well done WHW now if the RSPCA could follow suit then we would be getting somewhere

 

[Kokopelli]

Toally agree LadyR.

Hopefully people will begin to realise the RSPCA are a dreadful organisation and start turning to better places like WHW.

 

[Dobiegirl]

A well considered statement very much like the one put out by the BHA.

 

[MerrySherryRider]

WHW sitting on the fence. Lets hope they come out with a more constructive statement after the investigation.

 

[1life]

Toally agree LadyR.

Hopefully people will begin to realise the RSPCA are a dreadful organisation and start turning to better places like WHW.

Sweeping staements that don't help anyone....

WHW have given a very pc reply but I feel they are right - there has a to be a balance to all sports between risk and outcome. Many friends of mine that have no horse knowlegde were very upset by the news of the 2 horses having to be put down. It has made them consider the risks involved for a relatively short sporting episode.

 

[Kokopelli]

Sweeping staements that don't help anyone....

WHW have given a very pc reply but I feel they are right - there has a to be a balance to all sports between risk and outcome. Many friends of mine that have no horse knowlegde were very upset by the news of the 2 horses having to be put down. It has made them consider the risks involved for a relatively short sporting episode.

It's my opinion and I'm stating it. My experiences of the RSPCA have been dire, as are many other people I have talked to.

WHW from my experiences are a much better organisation. I believe it's because they are focused on equines so when it comes to dealing with horses they are more experienced.

ETA- I was also very upset by the two deaths and I'm glad the risks are being reviewed and hope the GN will become a much safer race without loosing it's essence.

 

[Rowreach]

I don't think WHW are sitting on the fence - I think it is a very grown up statement which shows they are waiting the outcome of an investigation and will have further to say at that time.

I am a staunch supporter of NH racing but I watched that race on Saturday and I think the GN has had it's day.

 

[MiJodsR2BlinkinTite]

I don't think WHW are sitting on the fence - I think it is a very grown up statement which shows they are waiting the outcome of an investigation and will have further to say at that time.

I am a staunch supporter of NH racing but I watched that race on Saturday and I think the GN has had it's day.

Agree with this; whilst I've never had the heart to put a bet on the GN I've never actually been "anti" it, but the past few years' casualties have begun to change my mind a bit.

Naturally, any of us that have been around horses a while will unfortunately have had to be around and/or deal with a horse having to be PTS, but I just wonder whether some of the problem is the type of horses that are being asked to run the GN, and what sort of prior experience they've had???? And perhaps there's a tendency to breed chasers which (for speed) are lighter than their forebears, and therefore won't be able to stand the course the same?? Plus maybe a lot of runners and the problem of loose horses doesn't help either.

 

[AmyMay]

They were on tv this morning. Very balanced response, without the knee jerk reaction we commonly see from some organisations.

 

[jaquelin]

The review will be interesting as in spite of various safety-driven changes the fatalities continue. I looked at old footage (1925) of the GN - a very different race - horses spread out both length-wise and across the course; very different type of horse, and an incredibly sedate start! Now it has become a sort of flat race with jumps, so has changed in character a lot. Of the two fatalities, there seems to be a consensus that Synchronised was not fit to run (physically or mentally) and that when he took off at the start he should have not been run after.
With According to Pete, I was looking at his stats and it took him 50 starts (inc GN) to make around £200K. The winner took 35 starts to make over £750K ( not including GN). These two stats would suggest to me that According to Pete has been run beyond his ability. But then again his fall, being knocked down by another horse was a result of the "hurdle turned into a flat race" point I make above. Times do change so perhaps the GN has had its day.

 

[Rowreach]

Jaquelin you are right - a very different race today from what it was, and the "old fashioned chaser" is now a thing of the past. The "safety" improvements have, to my mind, been anything but. I'm big into racing, I would love to have the money to own a good NH horse, but if I did he would never run in the GN in a million years.

 

[Dobiegirl]

Paul NIcholls was on our local news last night as they paraded Neptune Collonge through Ditcheat and he said we live in changing times and the GN will have to change as well.

Alistair Down writing in the Racing Post said" the GN was at a cathartic crossroads and we need to learn lessons if it is to survive". This was meant to be the safest GN after improvements but has the opposite affect and this was working with the RSPCA whose recommendations were implemented.

Decisions about further improvements will not be made quickly as there are so many people to consult and they have to get it right if they want the GN to continue.

 

[TBB]

.
With According to Pete, I was looking at his stats and it took him 50 starts (inc GN) to make around £200K. The winner took 35 starts to make over £750K ( not including GN). These two stats would suggest to me that According to Pete has been run beyond his ability. But then again his fall, being knocked down by another horse was a result of the "hurdle turned into a flat race" point I make above. Times do change so perhaps the GN has had its day.

I don't think you can say ATP was being run beyond his ability just because he hadn't won as much prize money as the winner. He had jumped for fun and was going well when a horse fell in his path as he landed giving him no chance to avoid it, before that he had completed all his chase starts and the winner had fallen twice over fences and been brought down in a Newbury chase but survived it. It was unfortunate accidents that claimed both the horses this time but if they keep modifying the track by lowering the fences there will be more casualties as the speed will increase. My condolences to the connections of both horses who were owner bred.

 

[Dobiegirl]

In my opinion NC was the class horse in the field excluding Synchronised and was a grade 1 horse in his youth, he probabley would have one a gold cup or 2 if it hadnt been for the likes of Kauto Star and Denman.

According to Pete was a classy racehorse but did not run in grade 1 races unlike NC and that is where the prize money is the highest.

 

[Maesfen]

Alistair Down writing in the Racing Post said" the GN was at a cathartic crossroads and we need to learn lessons if it is to survive". This was meant to be the safest GN after improvements but has the opposite affect and this was working with the RSPCA whose recommendations were implemented.

Precisely; the RSPCA recommendations. Not exactly the result they wanted but is it any wonder? They're not experienced enough in racehorses (or even any horse for that matter though they might investigate woodworm in a rocking horse) and that course to actually pass any opinions. Everyone in the know would not have made those particular changes. With the exception of the new qualifications needed and some of the vetting procedures plus the new horse area for after the race, they would have done well to stay out of it as they don't know enough to pass comment let alone insist on their proposals and changes to the course.

Incidentally, decent reply from the WHW, not a knee jerk reaction like some.

 

[MyBoyChe]

Im with you Rowreach. I have followed NH racing since I was a kid in the 70s (remember the old ITV 7 with John Laurence, before he became Lord Oaksey) and absolutely love it. I dont think the changes have helped, they have changed the character of the race not necessarily for the better, sadly. I would also love to be able to own a half decent racehorse (I actually own an incredibly badly failed racehorse, but I love him), but if I did I could never let it run in the GN, I just think the risk factor is too high. I know there is risk attached to everything but I prefer to try and keep the odds in my favour. My OH asked me if I had any tips for the race, my reply, "yes, dont bother, too much of a lottery" . I do get irritated by some of the stupid and totally irrelevant comments made by people who never watch racing, except on GN day. In a way it is its own worst enemy, it attracts huge audiences,many of whom never watch another race and really dont understand horses or the people who work with them and, for the most part, love them. Lets just hope, for the sake of our sport, that the powers that be manage to sort themselves out and come up with a solution that works.

 

[sidesaddlelady1]

Toally agree LadyR.

Hopefully people will begin to realise the RSPCA are a dreadful organisation and start turning to better places like WHW.

Whilst I despise the RSPCA I thought their man interviewed on Radio 4 on Sunday morning spoke a lot of good sense

 

[viewfromahill]

I don't think WHW are sitting on the fence - I think it is a very grown up statement which shows they are waiting the outcome of an investigation and will have further to say at that time.

I am a staunch supporter of NH racing but I watched that race on Saturday and I think the GN has had it's day.

Couldnt agree more!!! We are a "very" horsey family who are not against NH racing in any shape or form BUT........thought it horrendous on Saturday, actually quite disturbed that these horses are no more through a race for "pleasure"?? with in our opinion way to many starters, and yes would now support any action to get this race banned and before anyone jumps on with "they are dealt with quickly - dont disagree - but if they werent in this race in the first place then they would likely still be alive and yes accidents in the field etc do happen that is life but sending out 40 odd horses hurtling towards a fence is no accident

 

[viewfromahill]

Couldnt agree more!!! We are a "very" horsey family who are not against NH racing in any shape or form BUT........thought it horrendous on Saturday, actually quite disturbed that these horses are no more through a race for "pleasure"?? with in our opinion way to many starters, and yes would now support any action to get this race banned and before anyone jumps on with "they are dealt with quickly - dont disagree - but if they werent in this race in the first place then they would likely still be alive and yes accidents in the field etc do happen that is life but sending out 40 odd horses hurtling towards a fence is no accident

And just a thought, its almost a certainty that some racehorses WILL be pts in the GN if this were Horse of the Year and it was the same odds would it go ahead?

 

[Rowreach]

And just a thought, its almost a certainty that some racehorses WILL be pts in the GN if this were Horse of the Year and it was the same odds would it go ahead?

I was out on the yard Saturday morning, riding mine and watching my son ride his, and wondering which of the 40 GN runners would be dead by teatime There is no other single race or competition where this thought would be in my head beforehand, as a given.

 

[sidsmum]

I was out on the yard Saturday morning, riding mine and watching my son ride his, and wondering which of the 40 GN runners would be dead by teatime There is no other single race or competition where this thought would be in my head beforehand, as a given.

And that to me says it all. :-/

 

[Over2You]

I was out on the yard Saturday morning, riding mine and watching my son ride his, and wondering which of the 40 GN runners would be dead by teatime There is no other single race or competition where this thought would be in my head beforehand, as a given.

That very thought goes through my head every time there is a jumps race!! However, I can confidently watch show jumping knowing the risks to the horses are minimal. In fact, out of the 20+ years I have spent watching SJ, I can count on one hand the number of horses I have seen suffer fatal injuries. Trust me, I have watched THOUSANDS of hours of the sport on TV and as a spectator. I can also relax watching Eventing as I know the sport has been made a lot safer. Dressage is always a pleasure to watch as I have NEVER seen, or heard of a horse dying during a test. Whereas with racing, DOZENS of horses die every year. Since the beginning of March (this year), TWENTY SEVEN horses have died on British racecourses!! Just how is that justifiable??

The racing fraternity consists of people who (despite saying otherwise) see horses as disposable commodities. No genuine animal lover would ever want to see horses put under as much stress, or put into situations where they could very easily lose their lives. If the owners of According to Pete cared for the horse as much as they say they did, there is no way they would have put him into one of the most dangerous races in the world. They even called him a "pet". That would be like a "devoted" dog owner gambling with their pet's life by deliberately throwing a toy onto a frozen lake, then seeing if their dog will come back with the toy, or drown in ice cold water. Or a dedicated cat owner allowing their pet to wander freely on a busy motorway.

Racing has always (and will continue) to kill vast numbers of horses, just so the owners, trainers, and jockeys can get their thrills. So that punters (who care nothing of horse welfare) can continue to make bets. Don't even try to say otherwise as it's the truth!!

Sickening!!

 

[KautoStar1]

Over2You - I would like to see you put your views to JP McManus or Peter Nelson and suggest they don’t care about their horses. Your comparisons are ridiculous and hysterical (& I don’t mean in a funny way either). People like JP and Trevor Hemmings, for instance, have fantastic breeding and retirement facilities for their horses and they want for nothing. Peter Nelson and Malcolm Jefferson didn’t send According to Pete out to run without careful consideration. They sent him out with the belief he could win and that he’d been trained specifically with the National in mind. Don’t you dare say they didn’t care.

And please remember the millions of pounds racing ploughs into welfare and scientific developments. Without racing, we, the ordinary horse owner and the owners of top dressage, show jumpers and event horses, would not have access to the marvellous treatments that are now available – the life-saving operations, tendon repair, lameness diagnostics etc etc,

As someone who has taken a horse to the races and come back without it, I can assure you, whether it’s a 90 rated seller or a 180 rated Gold Cup horse, the loss is felt by everyone involved.

 

[Over2You]

Over2You - I would like to see you put your views to JP McManus or Peter Nelson and suggest they don’t care about their horses. Your comparisons are ridiculous and hysterical (& I don’t mean in a funny way either). People like JP and Trevor Hemmings, for instance, have fantastic breeding and retirement facilities for their horses and they want for nothing. Peter Nelson and Malcolm Jefferson didn’t send According to Pete out to run without careful consideration. They sent him out with the belief he could win and that he’d been trained specifically with the National in mind. Don’t you dare say they didn’t care.

And please remember the millions of pounds racing ploughs into welfare and scientific developments. Without racing, we, the ordinary horse owner and the owners of top dressage, show jumpers and event horses, would not have access to the marvellous treatments that are now available – the life-saving operations, tendon repair, lameness diagnostics etc etc,

As someone who has taken a horse to the races and come back without it, I can assure you, whether it’s a 90 rated seller or a 180 rated Gold Cup horse, the loss is felt by everyone involved.

I am sorry, but it still defies belief how much of a risk that owners, trainers, etc, are willing to put their horses under.

As for the research that racing funds. If you think that performing all kinds of horrific tests (including vivisection) on animals is okay, then I feel sorry for you.

Please also try to justify the twenty-seven deaths since the start of March. I wonder what excuses you pro-racers will come up with!!

 

[Dobiegirl]

I am sorry, but it still defies belief how much of a risk that owners, trainers, etc, are willing to put their horses under.

As for the research that racing funds. If you think that performing all kinds of horrific tests (including vivisection) on animals is okay, then I feel sorry for you.

Please also try to justify the twenty-seven deaths since the start of March. I wonder what excuses you pro-racers will come up with!!

Where do you get your info from, vivisection oh my giddy aunt, after your suggestion on the other thread about lassoing loose horses you are clutching at straws, you really are losing the plot.

 

[amandat]

The racing fraternity consists of people who (despite saying otherwise) see horses as disposable commodities. No genuine animal lover would ever want to see horses put under as much stress, or put into situations where they could very easily lose their lives. If the owners of According to Pete cared for the horse as much as they say they did, there is no way they would have put him into one of the most dangerous races in the world. They even called him a "pet". That would be like a "devoted" dog owner gambling with their pet's life by deliberately throwing a toy onto a frozen lake, then seeing if their dog will come back with the toy, or drown in ice cold water. Or a dedicated cat owner allowing their pet to wander freely on a busy motorway.

Sickening!!

I agree 1000% with KautoStar1 & find the above a sickening comment !!

 

[Aces_High]

The racing fraternity consists of people who (despite saying otherwise) see horses as disposable commodities. No genuine animal lover would ever want to see horses put under as much stress, or put into situations where they could very easily lose their lives. If the owners of According to Pete cared for the horse as much as they say they did, there is no way they would have put him into one of the most dangerous races in the world. They even called him a "pet". That would be like a "devoted" dog owner gambling with their pet's life by deliberately throwing a toy onto a frozen lake, then seeing if their dog will come back with the toy, or drown in ice cold water. Or a dedicated cat owner allowing their pet to wander freely on a busy motorway.

Racing has always (and will continue) to kill vast numbers of horses, just so the owners, trainers, and jockeys can get their thrills. So that punters (who care nothing of horse welfare) can continue to make bets. Don't even try to say otherwise as it's the truth!!

Sickening!!

I am shocked at your very uneducated attempt of posting a comment with a complete lack of any knowledge of what is involved within the industry. I do not expect everyone to enjoy racing but I certainly do not expect to hear narrow minded insensitive comments such as the above. Disgusting.

 

[Maesfen]

Sadly it's what's to be expected from OTY but that doesn't excuse their behaviour at all.

 

[Over2You]

Here we go again. Anybody who is anti-racing must be un-knowledgeable. Please enlighten me as to why you think it is okay to put into horses into such dangerous situations? Where are the justifications in killing twenty-seven horses over the course of just a month-and-a-half?

As for racing funding extremely cruel experimentation programmes (including vivisection). Take a look at this. If it were untrue, then Animal Aid would have been legally obliged to remove all mention of it. However, the information has been on the site for years!

What's disgusting is that you racing lot think your "sport" is wonderful. Despite it being glaringly obvious that about the only thing it's good for is killing animals!!

There was nothing "sickening" about my comments whatsoever. My analogies were spot on. Any animal owner who genuinely loves their charges would NEVER put them in such perilous situations!! You are the ones who are losing the plot if you think your "sport" should still have its place in the 21st century. It continues to kill an alarmingly high number of horses, but all you can do is defend it. You should be ashamed - very ashamed!!