Racing Welfare: The Horse Comes First

[Exploding Chestnuts]

Hmmm, i don't think it's that easy though Alec. I personally take responsibility but, as discussed on here multiple times, you can never guarantee a horses future once it has been sold on. If the trainer were to advise the horse gets re-homed, there's nothing to say that the home is suitable, or that the horse will stay with that home.
On the front of humanely destroying those that are not suitable to be re-homed, how will this be viewed by Joe Public? given the racing industry already receives a large amount of negative publicity/perception, I can't imagine this will help at all - whether it's the right thing to do or not. it would have to be managed very sensitively, if it were to become common practice.
i'm not saying I don't agree by the way - I'm just offering a perspective as an owner that it's not that easy from what I've seen

You are quite right, its not clear cut, and if the owner was to say "I will buy it and if it does not make the grade I will cull it. The owner would be immediately castigated.
This is a hobby for most owners, they don't assume responsibility for the horse from birth to death, and you have to realise that most horse owners do not this either.
We can look at greyhound racing and say ...... they breed in the hope of a winner and the rest will be shot, to some members of the public there will be no difference.

 

[Alec Swan]

……..
This is a hobby for most owners, they don't assume rseponsibility for the horse from birth to death, and you have to realise that most horse owners do not so this either.

Really? When I take on a horse, I assume a responsibility. It's a moral obligation, and one of the very few 'one rule fits all' arguments that can be applied. There remain too many, far too many who set their responsibilities on one side, when it suits them. And then, many have the front to shed tears!

The general public, and their thoughts? Really? Our responsibilities take precedence over public opinion.

Alec.

 

[Optimissteeq]

Really? When I take on a horse, I assume a responsibility. It's a moral obligation, and one of the very few 'one rule fits all' arguments that can be applied. There remain too many, far too many who set their responsibilities on one side, when it suits them. And then, many have the front to shed tears!

The general public, and their thoughts? Really? Our responsibilities take precedence over public opinion.

Alec.

Not arguing about our responsibilities BUT public opinion does matter and does influence the racing industry - we've seen many changes come about due to public opinion. I really don't think it's as clear cut as you imply.
Should the public get the feeling that racehorses are being culled because they are not any good then I feel the backlash would be great and would add more weight to a call for banning it.

 

[Exploding Chestnuts]

Most horses are bought and sold at some stage in their life, I don't think owners are necessarily evading their responsibilities. There is no moral obligation to keep an animal forever, in many cases it would not be desirable for either the animal or the owner.

 

[Dobiegirl]

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Ed-Dunlop-Racing/400426843304961



I thought you may be interested in seeing this, scroll down for Red Cadeaux having a bit of down time.

 

[Exploding Chestnuts]

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Ed-Dunlop-Racing/400426843304961



I thought you may be interested in seeing this, scroll down for Red Cadeaux having a bit of down time.

Its a bit small! I would rather see them out on an acre of grass where they can have a proper leg stretch. We had all our horses out all day in decent weather, as long as they are used to it they don't go berserk.
We had a sand paddock the size of this to let them roll after work.

 

[Dobiegirl]

Yes it is a bit small I agree, but we are talking a fit racehorse here and a very valuable one at that, a lot of these horses are entire as well which brings fresh challenges.