Alec Swan
...
Best you go and have a word with the Met Police mounted division, and also ALL the mounted and London based regiments. The closest that any of their horses get to grass, is hay!
Alec.
National Day Is Upon Us
- Thread starter Elf On A Shelf
- Start date
Best you go and have a word with the Met Police mounted division, and also ALL the mounted and London based regiments. The closest that any of their horses get to grass, is hay!
Alec.
Elf On A Shelf
...
This is unproven. BUT I do happen to believe that we are breeding for speed and an earlier racecourse appearance these days. Proper old fashioned leg at each corner chasers wouldn't be seen on the track until they were 5 or 6 but would have had been broken at 3 or 4 and hunted/done other things until they were physically ready to race.
Having a horse 3x in, at least, with Northern Dancer is also not something I would be best pleased about.
I also think that the ages at which they are trained has something to do with it. As I have said before I do not agree with breaking yearlings. I wouldn't like to see 2yo races start before June. But that is not my call. Yes I think that early work.leads to early problems but equally I find that the later you start you encounter other problems.
alliwantforchristmas
Well-Known Member
no, I'm not a campaigner, i can promise you that. it's just that if I feel strongly about something I will state my point. and if I think my point is being stated as being clueless, i'll back up my point, because i may be many things, but I am not clueless. like i said above, i am not against stabled horses etc. i have my own horses, and I ride and my horses do spend time in stables/barns as well as turned out.
I also do have a caps button, two infact. one of them is a bit sticky, and I got fed up of back tracking to correct the typing when the caps didn't work, and now I have got used to ignoring the caps and accepting that sometimes they work and sometimes they don't. so half the time I don't even bother to hit caps, and if I do and it doesn't work I don't bother to go back and change it. hope that clarifies things for you.
I also do have a caps button, two infact. one of them is a bit sticky, and I got fed up of back tracking to correct the typing when the caps didn't work, and now I have got used to ignoring the caps and accepting that sometimes they work and sometimes they don't. so half the time I don't even bother to hit caps, and if I do and it doesn't work I don't bother to go back and change it. hope that clarifies things for you.
alliwantforchristmas
Well-Known Member
don't see your point. thread is about racing. See my previous comments, it is not necessary to address every problem in the entire equestrian world before racing can be discussed. If that were the case then nothing could ever be discused or criticised, as someone could always say there is something else worse.
teapot
Well-Known Member
alliwantforchristmas
Well-Known Member
I have addressed this above. It is not necessary to fix everything before we discuss racing. If that were the case we could never discuss anything, as someone could always say 'what about'. Horses face multiple welfare issues in all walks of life. it is just that this thread happens to be about racing.
there are many issues in racing, the management and lifestyle, what happens to horses on the course, the whip argument, what happens to horses when their racing days are over and so on. the death issue is different to the rest of it. that's why i said it shouldn't be horse died therefore ban racing vs race horses live like kings and there are no problems. Neither approach is accurate or realistic.
Alec Swan
...
Have you ever seen the Household Cavalry when they come to Norfolk for their summer break? The best that they get is a gallop on Holkham beach! They certainly don't get 'turn-out'!
Horses are kept in London, and many for years, and without being turned out. They settle to the regime and they are ridden out every day, and from what I remember of it, to no ill effect.
Alec.
teapot
Well-Known Member
I think you're missing my point - it's not about 'what about x, y, z' it's about the fact people seem to single out racing as the big bad nasty evil when it isn't the only one with welfare issues. Now if racing was the anomaly in the equestrian world then yes I'd agree welfare needs discussing alongside the sport itself, but it isnt. Banging on about welfare in raceyards, when the exact same happens at your average local livery yard or riding school weakens the argument somewhat.
Besides, you could have a racehorse out 24/7 in a massive herd, and it could still die on a racecourse.
alliwantforchristmas
Well-Known Member
Have you ever seen the Household Cavalry when they come to Norfolk for their summer break? The best that they get is a gallop on Holkham beach! They certainly don't get 'turn-out'!
Horses are kept in London, and many for years, and without being turned out. They settle to the regime and they are ridden out every day, and from what I remember of it, to no ill effect.
Alec.
I don't see what this has to do with racehorses, except that if these horses could live this lifestyle with no ill effect vs 90% or more of racehorses leaving training with ulcers, then there must be a lot more problems in racing than just turnout time.
teapot
Well-Known Member
Have you ever seen the Household Cavalry when they come to Norfolk for their summer break? The best that they get is a gallop on Holkham beach! They certainly don't get 'turn-out'!
Horses are kept in London, and many for years, and without being turned out. They settle to the regime and they are ridden out every day, and from what I remember of it, to no ill effect.
Alec.
No Alec I've not been to their summer camp, but they definitely get two months of winter turnout at Melton. It's a well documented issue of having to turn mud monsters back into cav blacks in time for the first state occasion of the year (photos on the HQ London facebook page if you're interested). Some also regularly leave London for weeks of hunting.
alliwantforchristmas
Well-Known Member
No, I think you are missing my point. I have already said that there are many welfare issues with horses in all walks of life. we could say this - I will criticise racing, but you say indiscriminate breeding is worse, so I shouldn't focus on racing. then someone else could say that dressage horses suffer more - so now we can't discuss indiscriminate breeding, or racing. Then someone else could say that show jumpers get the worst time, and someone else says that riding school ponies have it worse, so now we can't discuss racing, or indiscriminate breeding, or dressage horses, or showjumpers because none of that is as bad as being a riding school pony. And then the owner of a riding school will come along and say her ponies are all treated just fine, and we should look at what goes on in the showing world. And so it goes on. There is good and bad in everything, but saying 'you can't talk about x because y is worse' or 'well it happens in z as well so just leave x alone' is utterly pointless.
did you not get the point that the death issue is different to the lifestyle issue?
and just because it happens in livery yards doesn't make it ok - either in livery yards or racing yards. So the welfare aspect need to be addressed in both, not just not picking on the welfare aspect of one because it occurs somewhere else as well.
Last edited:
teapot
Well-Known Member
No, you CAN talk about them, together, as compare and contrast. I take issue with people singling out the welfare of racehorses in yards, when the same or worse is happening under everyone's nose, and making racing the nasty evil section of the equine world. Racing's nasty and evil, and those poor horses with no turnout/no tlc compared to what? You cannot accuse something/a sector/a sport of having issues without having a base line to place it against, and the beauty of the equestrian world is the huge number of differing sports and activities that make up the sector as a whole. Moreover given how intertwined the equestrian world is, trying to isolate one specific sport weakens any form of argument. It has to be put in perspective because racing is not alone or a one off, it is part of a wider industry which cannot be seperated imho.
Doesn't make it right wherever it's happening, but I get annoyed when there are so many horses owned privately who would potentially have a better lifestyle in a raceyard, yet everyone singles out racing (as the collective industry) as the bad guy. There are bigger issues in the equestrian world and it would be so nice if racing was put in perspective occasionally :smile3:
Last edited:
alliwantforchristmas
Well-Known Member
This is a thread about RACING. If you want to start other threads on other welfare issues, then go ahead. If you want to talk about other aspects of welfare in this thread, then go ahead. but the demands on racehorses vs riding school ponies, vs field ornaments, vs someone's happy hacker, vs a competitive show jumper, or dressage horse or polo pony or endurance horse are all different. and within each of those disciplines you will find horse who are happy and well treated, with enough of their needs sufficiently met that they do not develop ulcers or stereotypies or other behavioural problems, and others where the management is inadequate and/or the demands placed upon the horse too high and they will suffer as a result. but it depends upon individual circumstance, not a blanket description of the discipline. hence why posting pictures of free choice stabling is a good example in the racing world of how someone is trying to meet horses needs. so his yard may be higher in welfare standards than some others. hence why I asked how common they are and how are they actually used. that's the comparison that matters. what are poeple doing now to improve racing, and what more can be done. and what can be done at home for the horses vs what can be done for them on the track in terms of safety and whip use and the deciding factors that put them in a race, and jump design. and what else can be done about things like breeding, work load, when to start youngsters etc. but none of it will be discussed in any meaningful way if the people who support racing just say 'its all fine so pee off and go and pick on something else'. and it just makes people who are on the outside, or less supportive of racing, even more suspicious. i never even thought much about racing until the victoria pendleton thing at cheltenham, and then seven horses died, and there were whip rules broken but jockeys still kept the race, but the attitude on here and elsewhere was of people saying 'they died, s*** happens, move along, nothing to see here'. that gave me the impression that what people want out of racehorses is way more important than their welfare, and that anyone who questions the 'tradition' is just seen as a clueless pleb who should mind their own business. which doesn't look good when anyone with even a bit of knowledge of horses can tell that a lot of horses suffer for people to enjoy their racing.
Elf On A Shelf
...
You'd be surprised at just how many "normal" horses have undiagnosed ulcers.
Last summer we gastroscoped 40 horses. A random selection of those who looked like they were ulcery all the way along to those who you wouldn't expect to have ulcers in a million years.
Of those 40, 17 had ulcers worthy of treating. 5 of them were actually very bad. Of these 5 4 were very poor doers, dull coated and had a lack of sparkle. 1 was a fat heffalump who we always struggled to get the weight off of, looked superb in its coat and could gallop with the best of them.
Of the other 23, 12 had the beginnings of ulcers but not sufficient enough to warrant treatment anymore than a slight change of diet. Ie they got a bit more hay and extra Alpha throughout the day.
The rest showed no signs of ulcers what so ever. One of which was a very poor doer. He had every test imaginable done to him and there was no reason why he looked so naff he just did. Well he didn't look naff he just ran up very very light when racing. Still ate up etc. He just obviously gave you 150% every time he ran. Which I do find amusing as he is was one of the slowest, and I mean I could run faster than this horse slow! Horses I have ever ridden! He is now loving life as a happy hunter and the lifestyle is obviously suiting him as he is keeping his weight much better.
Last summer we gastroscoped 40 horses. A random selection of those who looked like they were ulcery all the way along to those who you wouldn't expect to have ulcers in a million years.
Of those 40, 17 had ulcers worthy of treating. 5 of them were actually very bad. Of these 5 4 were very poor doers, dull coated and had a lack of sparkle. 1 was a fat heffalump who we always struggled to get the weight off of, looked superb in its coat and could gallop with the best of them.
Of the other 23, 12 had the beginnings of ulcers but not sufficient enough to warrant treatment anymore than a slight change of diet. Ie they got a bit more hay and extra Alpha throughout the day.
The rest showed no signs of ulcers what so ever. One of which was a very poor doer. He had every test imaginable done to him and there was no reason why he looked so naff he just did. Well he didn't look naff he just ran up very very light when racing. Still ate up etc. He just obviously gave you 150% every time he ran. Which I do find amusing as he is was one of the slowest, and I mean I could run faster than this horse slow! Horses I have ever ridden! He is now loving life as a happy hunter and the lifestyle is obviously suiting him as he is keeping his weight much better.
alliwantforchristmas
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't be surprised tbh. Plenty of welfare issues across the board, as I have already said. And there are plenty of statistics out there on ulcers.
So out of 40 horses 29 with ulcers or the start of them, and one who had a lifestyle change. so just below 75% with ulcers - lower than the 90% + quoted for racehorses, so your yard must be doing a bit better than some others. point is, what is acceptable? And I think that will be different for different people. And of course what can be done to improve it? because surely 90% or even 75% cant be acceptable in a professional sporting environment?
So out of 40 horses 29 with ulcers or the start of them, and one who had a lifestyle change. so just below 75% with ulcers - lower than the 90% + quoted for racehorses, so your yard must be doing a bit better than some others. point is, what is acceptable? And I think that will be different for different people. And of course what can be done to improve it? because surely 90% or even 75% cant be acceptable in a professional sporting environment?
Elf On A Shelf
...
Ideally you would have 0% but in reality that is never going to happen.
With the way racing is changing, and mostly for the better, I can see the percentages dropping as the years go by. But it can't be done overnight. Nothing can be done over night.
I work in racing and I will hold my hands up and say that no I don't agree with breaking at a young age. No I don't agree with the whip rules. No I don't always agree with how things are done, how horses are looked after etc. BUT times are changing.
The whip rules have changed dramatically over the last couple of years. The jumps have been made 'safer'. More and.more trainers are seeing the value in turnout and varied lifestyles.
We are getting there and we are getting there quicker than many other disciplines.
Racing is paving the way for many other things. The pro's out weigh the cons. Veterinary science for one. It is the biggest benefactor for the horse world.
Take St Nichols Abbey. He broke a leg, badly. Normally that is a straight pts injury. But with the money and the science they tried to fix him to stand at stud. They remodelled pretty much half of his bone and what bits didn't fit the jigsaw puzzle they made with metal and plastic. (how the bone breaks under pressure is pretty amazing and until you understand how it does it you will never understand why it can't be fixed). They fixed St Nick. He could stand. His leg held. He could walk. He got lammi. He recovered. He colicked and got put down.
Now you may say that was a total waste of time and that they should never have tried to fix him but in reality by trying out all these new fangled ideas and methods and bits of technology they have a whole new understanding into what they can and can't do with bones now. Without dear old St Nick that bit of veterinary science wouldnt have come to light for a good few years, if ever.
And yes. That was all about money. But the long term benefits outweigh the short term goal.
With the way racing is changing, and mostly for the better, I can see the percentages dropping as the years go by. But it can't be done overnight. Nothing can be done over night.
I work in racing and I will hold my hands up and say that no I don't agree with breaking at a young age. No I don't agree with the whip rules. No I don't always agree with how things are done, how horses are looked after etc. BUT times are changing.
The whip rules have changed dramatically over the last couple of years. The jumps have been made 'safer'. More and.more trainers are seeing the value in turnout and varied lifestyles.
We are getting there and we are getting there quicker than many other disciplines.
Racing is paving the way for many other things. The pro's out weigh the cons. Veterinary science for one. It is the biggest benefactor for the horse world.
Take St Nichols Abbey. He broke a leg, badly. Normally that is a straight pts injury. But with the money and the science they tried to fix him to stand at stud. They remodelled pretty much half of his bone and what bits didn't fit the jigsaw puzzle they made with metal and plastic. (how the bone breaks under pressure is pretty amazing and until you understand how it does it you will never understand why it can't be fixed). They fixed St Nick. He could stand. His leg held. He could walk. He got lammi. He recovered. He colicked and got put down.
Now you may say that was a total waste of time and that they should never have tried to fix him but in reality by trying out all these new fangled ideas and methods and bits of technology they have a whole new understanding into what they can and can't do with bones now. Without dear old St Nick that bit of veterinary science wouldnt have come to light for a good few years, if ever.
And yes. That was all about money. But the long term benefits outweigh the short term goal.
alliwantforchristmas
Well-Known Member
Dear god ... poor b****y horse. how can it be justified to put any horse through that. no wonder he colicked. Now, I'm sorry but that really is suffering beyond. They only did it because they wanted him to stand at stud. some knowledge doesn't justify the price for the horse, and if it is used again it will only be for another one they can try to make a fortune from. No way can they justify putting a horse through that much pain. I know what you are saying about vet advancements, and some are very good, but that really is out of order imo.
as for the whip rules - when the bha tried to tighten things up the jockeys went on strike! It said in the facebook post and I looked it up. How can that be right?
it's good that you can see the problems as well as the benefits, and from the inside. I have much more respect for someone with that kind of view than someone who says 'you don't know what you are talking about, now go away and stop bothering us' or words to that effect.
as for the whip rules - when the bha tried to tighten things up the jockeys went on strike! It said in the facebook post and I looked it up. How can that be right?
it's good that you can see the problems as well as the benefits, and from the inside. I have much more respect for someone with that kind of view than someone who says 'you don't know what you are talking about, now go away and stop bothering us' or words to that effect.
Elf On A Shelf
...
Your right. St Nick was put through far too much. Time should have been called at the lammi stage. His long term life would have been very restricted. No doubt he would have had the best of everything but I doubt he would have done anything more than a controlled inhand walk. For this the horse suffered to an extent but he would have been so spaced drugs he wouldn't have noticed. The long term medical benefits - were they worth it? If it wasn't St Nick that was the guinnae pig then it would have been another - behind closed doors with everything hushed up if it didn't work. At least Coolmore were very open with every stage of the process to let people see how much they tried.
alliwantforchristmas
Well-Known Member
yes, too much. there has to be a line somewhere, drugs and pain killers or no. Esp if long term quality of life was questionable. I'm sure lots goes on we don't hear about.
Like some others have said, death is definitely not the worst thing that can happen to a horse. One of the things no one can argue with is the way horses are dealt with swiftly when things go wrong in the race.
teapot
Well-Known Member
If you think that's what my post implied then you've read it incorrectly, far from it in fact. Open comparative discussion is what the equestrian world needs, but so so so many threads, articles in the press or online put racing in a negative light and imho isn't always fair. EKW's original post on this thread got ignored by someone else because it didn't fit with their anti racing agenda.
From a personal perspective, I spectate at all levels of BE/FEI and I also watch a lot of polo. I've seen far worse falls, welfare issues etc at both of those, than I ever have with my own eyes racing. It would be utterly hypocritical of me to condone racing, but not the other two. Every sport has its issues, which is again why I think they should be compared to others, to learn from others and to improve like others.
The horse I'm riding at the moment has gone through its his own welfare issues recently where I've had to stand my ground so much it caused a lot of stress, tears and a fair few ruffled feathers, for his own benefit and sanity. I can assure you I am not a '**** happens' kinda girl, but I can certainly put racing in some form of perspective, especially when welfare related issues happen right under your nose.
Last edited:
alliwantforchristmas
Well-Known Member
Just to clarify, my comment you have quoted above was not directed at you.
You can definitely learn from what other sports are doing, but that is not the same thing as saying that the welfare problems in racing shouldn't be discussed, or racing is being painted as 'the bad guy' because we are discussing racing as opposed to something else. It is impossible to discuss everything in one go, but i think most people care about welfare across the board. sometimes it is hard to see the welfare concerns in your own sport, because you're a bit too close to it, and also there is a degree of cognitive dissonance involved in actually accepting your sport does have welfare concerns. there are not many people who can be truly objective about a thing they love - sport, person or animal! I am sure people would look at the way i care for my horses and some would disagree with some things i do. but i am only one person with a small herd of horses on my own land, not a multi-million pound industry that is responsible for the existence and welfare of thousands of horses.
Last edited: