Saturday at Aintree

[Bob notacob]

Back when I was a Kid , there was a trainer here in Epsom called John Sutcliffe (senior) .He took pride in presenting and running good National horses. He didn,t mess about . He even had National fences built on a circuit around his paddocks at woodruff. He had at least one winner .I remember we were all celebrating that night ! The thing was that he took the national as a race on its own and trained accordingly. To get around that course ,a horse needs to be smart or very lucky . The kind of smart you get out hunting and good training. Luck you cannot depend on. Softening the national has in my opinion ,lead some to push luck before training and ability. I hate to criticise from the back seat ,but if I had 3 loose horses around me early on in a race ,I would be going wide to let them pass. You cannot outrun a loose horse carrying 12 stone less than you. You have to get them on your inside. I have nearly been put through the rails by a loose horse and wound up beating the crap out of it to drive it out and give me some room. Loose horses are bad news .

 

[GSD Woman]

ith the staff shortages in racing at the moment come on down and hop up on a horse! Even one horse on one lot makes a huge difference to the yards day! You may think your being tongue in cheek but I'm being deadly serious if you can stay on top you'll be grand! The horses know their gallops, they know where to start and stop, you'll be fine

Haha Elf! Be what you wish for or you might find a 60 year old American who hasn't ridden in 35 years on your door step.

 

[EMSPony]

Some pretty graphic footage in the Daily Mail of RaP and Galvin crashing into a lady on Saturday. Think it's clear to see how RaP fractured his eye socket and hope Galvin had a lucky escape as his hind leg went through the metal railings for a moment. Just appalled that this horror show passes as a sporting event and a 'good day out'. The poor lady didn't fare very well either. Of course the protestors were blamed (not the police or course officials who told them to stay in the area), although interestingly the lady did say she thought the protestors had a point and was surprised how many horses died. What on earth would they have blamed this year's carnage on if it wasn't for the protestors?

Mother crushed at Grand National was stuck because of eco-protesters

Jo Nagra was at Aintree Racecourse celebrating her husband Harj's birthday with her children Adan and Aman when she was knocked unconscious during the horror crash.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I had an interesting experience a crafting workshop today, I overheard a group of middle age/older ladies who didn't look (or sound) like they knew very much about horses, voicing absolute disgust at the National. I think if the general public (not the betting fraturnity) really knew what was going on in horse racing and was not brainwashed by the propaganda of 'they live like kings' and 'he died doing what he loved' they would not support it.

 

[Crazy_cat_lady]

All incredibly lucky, Galvin could have been horrific from the way his leg went through that railing. The lady could have been killed too

It's getting annoying the "they live like kings" and the "died doing what they love" because they're going to be kept that was as people want them to perform at their best - all professional athletes want to be in peak shape so focus on this - look at all the facilities available to professional footballers for example

 

[Clodagh]

All incredibly lucky, Galvin could have been horrific from the way his leg went through that railing. The lady could have been killed too

It's getting annoying the "they live like kings" and the "died doing what they love" because they're going to be kept that was as people want them to perform at their best - all professional athletes want to be in peak shape so focus on this - look at all the facilities available to professional footballers for example

CCL, I agree with much of what you say. Yet you sound very anti and yet you bet and follow racing. How do you reconcile your views?

 

[teapot]

Some pretty graphic footage in the Daily Mail of RaP and Galvin crashing into a lady on Saturday. Think it's clear to see how RaP fractured his eye socket and hope Galvin had a lucky escape as his hind leg went through the metal railings for a moment. Just appalled that this horror show passes as a sporting event and a 'good day out'. The poor lady didn't fare very well either. Of course the protestors were blamed (not the police or course officials who told them to stay in the area), although interestingly the lady did say she thought the protestors had a point and was surprised how many horses died. What on earth would they have blamed this year's carnage on if it wasn't for the protestors?

Mother crushed at Grand National was stuck because of eco-protesters

Jo Nagra was at Aintree Racecourse celebrating her husband Harj's birthday with her children Adan and Aman when she was knocked unconscious during the horror crash.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I had an interesting experience a crafting workshop today, I overheard a group of middle age/older ladies who didn't look (or sound) like they knew very much about horses, voicing absolute disgust at the National. I think if the general public (not the betting fraturnity) really knew what was going on in horse racing and was not brainwashed by the propaganda of 'they live like kings' and 'he died doing what he loved' they would not support it.

Poor sods

Those concrete blocks must be part of the Aintree furniture as you can see them on google maps... so those horses could have ended up in that position for any race that crosses the Melling Road. That's not a GN issue, that's a how safe is the inside of the course for loose horses issue.

 

[Crazy_cat_lady]

CCL, I agree with much of what you say. Yet you sound very anti and yet you bet and follow racing. How do you reconcile your views?

I do watch and follow it, I guess it's because there is a part of me that does enjoy watching it, however my favourite part is when one retires and gets out in one piece, I love the group racehorses where are they now and seeing them in their new careers.

I definitely wouldn't say I bet. The most I did on the GN was £2 each way. So I wouldn't class myself as a bettor, because i don't do it any other time. The ones bank rolling it are putting bets in of thousands of pounds. I've never get more than £5 on something because I can't afford to throw money away. A lot of betting is obscene. The bets they report going on at Cheltenham are obscene.

I would never get involved with a syndicate, nor would I own a racehorse, because I wouldn't want such a strong risk of it being killed. How do you feel about being a syndicate and having no ultimate say over what races the horses go in, whether they are retired, what happens to them etc?

Maybe I watch because I can maintain an element of detachment as it's not my horse. If there were no fatalities and the wastage issues were addressed, I wouldn't come across as anti. I'm sure my single viewing figure isn't going to affect whether or not it's banned so it's not going to make a difference or not if it's banned!!

I don't like the statements they are trying to ram down our throats. It's like the fatalities are fine because they've "lived like a king". It feels very much like it was fine for them to die because of it. Almost like they are trying to justify what they have made them do. The "died doing what they loved" - my dislike of it isn't applied just to racing. I note it's trotted out a lot when there's an eventing fatality. Were those 2 loose horses "doing what they loved?" No I'd say they were bolting, given they almost went through that fence. Not saying when I had a horse he wouldn't have p'd off straight back home again!

I agree racing isn't the only horse sport with deep problems. Some of the clobber on sj horses is disgusting. Eventing it feels like the fatalities are ramping up. Dressage that ridiculous movement isn't going to help long term soundness.

I couldn't send out a horse I owned or trained to something that had a stronger possibility it may not come back. Knowing they aren't fixable if they suffer a serious injury - is it justifiable to put them through it? Maybe I can watch because there is an element that makes it exciting to watch, and perhaps because there is an element of detachment because I don't know the horse? As mentioned my viewing won't affect anything, it's not like I have any influence.

I hate the whip and want it banned bar from safety. And yes I did fill in that stakeholder thing BHA did.

I don't think the pentathlon was as bad as some of what must go on behind the scenes in SJ. Rapping, and the way some of them use their whips in public, what goes on behind closed doors.

 

[teapot]

I would never get involved with a syndicate, nor would I own a racehorse, because I wouldn't want such a strong risk of it being killed. How do you feel about being a syndicate and having no ultimate say over what races the horses go in, whether they are retired, what happens to them etc?

Can only speak from what I've seen of the horses retired from the syndicate company I'm involved in - horses are rehomed like any other racehorse. One of the ones I own an eyelash of is owned by syndicate with a named individual at the top and the horse will no doubt be retired to the named individual's home/family when the time comes.

 

[Elf On A Shelf]

Generally horses don't go through white railings so those horses being on the inside of the track isn't that common. It's clearly never happened before or recently anyway otherwise contingency plans would have been put in place. All of the run outs are on the outside of the track. If you tried to out some on in the inside of the track it would encourage horses to run out as there would be a gap in the railings.

The video footage is shocking however and I have no doubt Aintree will be looking into this and rectifying it for future meetings.

 

[Clodagh]

I do watch and follow it, I guess it's because there is a part of me that does enjoy watching it, however my favourite part is when one retires and gets out in one piece, I love the group racehorses where are they now and seeing them in their new careers.

I definitely wouldn't say I bet. The most I did on the GN was £2 each way. So I wouldn't class myself as a bettor, because i don't do it any other time. The ones bank rolling it are putting bets in of thousands of pounds. I've never get more than £5 on something because I can't afford to throw money away. A lot of betting is obscene. The bets they report going on at Cheltenham are obscene.

I would never get involved with a syndicate, nor would I own a racehorse, because I wouldn't want such a strong risk of it being killed. How do you feel about being a syndicate and having no ultimate say over what races the horses go in, whether they are retired, what happens to them etc?

Maybe I watch because I can maintain an element of detachment as it's not my horse. If there were no fatalities and the wastage issues were addressed, I wouldn't come across as anti. I'm sure my single viewing figure isn't going to affect whether or not it's banned so it's not going to make a difference or not if it's banned!!

I don't like the statements they are trying to ram down our throats. It's like the fatalities are fine because they've "lived like a king". It feels very much like it was fine for them to die because of it. Almost like they are trying to justify what they have made them do. The "died doing what they loved" - my dislike of it isn't applied just to racing. I note it's trotted out a lot when there's an eventing fatality. Were those 2 loose horses "doing what they loved?" No I'd say they were bolting, given they almost went through that fence. Not saying when I had a horse he wouldn't have p'd off straight back home again!

I agree racing isn't the only horse sport with deep problems. Some of the clobber on sj horses is disgusting. Eventing it feels like the fatalities are ramping up. Dressage that ridiculous movement isn't going to help long term soundness.

I couldn't send out a horse I owned or trained to something that had a stronger possibility it may not come back. Knowing they aren't fixable if they suffer a serious injury - is it justifiable to put them through it? Maybe I can watch because there is an element that makes it exciting to watch, and perhaps because there is an element of detachment because I don't know the horse? As mentioned my viewing won't affect anything, it's not like I have any influence.

I hate the whip and want it banned bar from safety. And yes I did fill in that stakeholder thing BHA did.

I don't think the pentathlon was as bad as some of what must go on behind the scenes in SJ. Rapping, and the way some of them use their whips in public, what goes on behind closed doors.

I’m honestly not having a go. I ‘own’ syndicate horses and tbh would hate them to be entered in any National. I don’t have a say, no, but I would give my opinion.
I love racing but I think things can be improved. I agree the commentators are out of touch/entitled/blinkered/missing the point.
But I couldn’t bet on any race if I felt as strongly about it as you do. Just MO.

 

[sakura]

I used to enjoy watching flat racing, Ascot was a particular highlight. I never had the stomach or heart for NH and have always found it distressing to watch. But I always knew the horses were working too hard, too young and were all too often disposable, and that turned the tide for me. I haven't had anything to do with racing since Frankel retired.

 

[palo1]

I have been wondering whether to and how to post my thoughts on this but here goes...I understand and sympathise with much of the animal welfare agenda and whilst I don't support disruption or illegality I do think that activism in a peaceful sense is absolutely vital in a democracy.

What I think is interesting in lots of these debates about animal welfare is the willingness of disrupters/protesters to deny the knowledge and experience of people working directly with animals or supporting, for example, the racing industry. We generally respect 'expertise' and I think most people on here listen to their vet and other professionals - usually with the intention of respecting their knowledge and experience and acting on that. Wholesale, the contemporary equestrian world appears, at least to me, to be wedded to 'experts'. We have bitting experts, saddling experts, physios, chiropractors, instruction, horsemanship veterinary, hoofcare experts literally everywhere. In fact I often think we relinquish a considerable amount of stuff we should take responsiblilty for ourselves, to the beloved 'professional'. On the other hand, we do live increasingly in a culture where 'expertise' and even facts are hugely questioned, disputed and disregarded. In some cases that is valid and new knowledge and viewpoints can come from places other than that of existing knowledge and practice. Many, many people have benefited from barefoot knowledge and the disruption of mainstream practices around shoeing for example though I would say that there were absolutely farriers and experts involved in that.

When people working with horses discuss the issue of racing there are multiple viewpoints and I watched one of the most respected vets in the country (Liam Kearns) discussing horse welfare at Cheltenham. There are legions of farriers, vets, chiros etc etc who work in racing as well as the incredibly experienced grooms, lads and lasses that look after racehorses every day. There are trainers, jockeys, officials etc. Almost every one of those people are involved because they admire horses and want a life of connection (and usually blooming hard work and poor pay) with horses. They all started out as children or young adults who looked to horses for fulfillment, excitement, inspiration and a way of life. I think that is because horses are honestly amazing and many of us see and feel that every day we are with them. So many of these folks are 'experts'. Like @Elf On A Shelf , there is a huge amount of experience available. That isn't confined to unremittingly positive or one dimensional views and experiences either; there are loads of voices in racing. So why are those 'experts' so often dismissed, disregarded and viewed as suspicious, inaccurate, ill informed or just plain 'biased'? I mean the vets that work with race horses, for example, are they all unable to walk away or is it possible that there are things to admire in terms of welfare, good practice etc ?

I suppose I am just boggled by how easy it is for protesters and disrupters to dismiss what we ordinarily turn to. Not sure if those thoughts are remotely well articulated; I find it hard to pinpoint exactly what I mean when I do understand and respect the position of protest. Sorry for rambling but I wonder if anyone else has had the same thoughts?

 

[stangs]

I suppose I am just boggled by how easy it is for protesters and disrupters to dismiss what we ordinarily turn to. Not sure if those thoughts are remotely well articulated; I find it hard to pinpoint exactly what I mean when I do understand and respect the position of protest. Sorry for rambling but I wonder if anyone else has had the same thoughts?

I can't blame them for not trusting the words of someone who's funded by the industry. Why would anyone who receives most of their income from racing want to publicly bring up the negatives of racing as well? I also really don't think that, just because someone works with horses, that means that their information is reliable (just look at that FB post that was linked earlier). People often see in horses what they want to see. And it has also been my experience that some vets and farriers are wedded to tradition or their own egos and, as a result, talk a lot of nonsense.

Having said that, much of these "antis"'s cynicism is uneducated. As a result, nuance dies, and everything the professional says is rejected, rather than being acknowledged but treated with a healthy scepticism. Distrust the professionals all you want, but at least know the science.

 

[palo1]

I can't blame them for not trusting the words of someone who's funded by the industry. Why would anyone who receives most of their income from racing want to publicly bring up the negatives of racing as well? I also really don't think that, just because someone works with horses, that means that their information is reliable (just look at that FB post that was linked earlier). People often see in horses what they want to see. And it has also been my experience that some vets and farriers are wedded to tradition or their own egos and, as a result, talk a lot of nonsense.

Having said that, much of these "antis"'s cynicism is uneducated. As a result, nuance dies, and everything the professional says is rejected, rather than being acknowledged but treated with a healthy scepticism. Distrust the professionals all you want, but at least know the science.

Yes, that is much better expressed than my thoughts!! I get the lack of trust in an industry that protesters see as cruel and I get the scepticism of the views of those whose livelihoods depend on racing. BUT, even then, surely there is room to listen and learn and perhaps even respect the views of those involved in the industry? After all, those people do have a load of knowledge about it. I think the lack of education, understanding and acceptance of some expertise and facts is what I find so difficult to engage with. Although I sympathise with the intention, I find the attitudes and soundbites so ignorant, so strident and somewhat 'self-obsessed' it is quite hard to feel genuinely supportive tbh. On the other side of the coin, racing commentators have sounded incredibly complacent about things and dismissive of what is clearly a sincere desire to see change for good reason (although I would not necessarily want the same sort of wholesale change personally, necessarily.)

 

[littleshetland]

I have been wondering whether to and how to post my thoughts on this but here goes...I understand and sympathise with much of the animal welfare agenda and whilst I don't support disruption or illegality I do think that activism in a peaceful sense is absolutely vital in a democracy.

What I think is interesting in lots of these debates about animal welfare is the willingness of disrupters/protesters to deny the knowledge and experience of people working directly with animals or supporting, for example, the racing industry. We generally respect 'expertise' and I think most people on here listen to their vet and other professionals - usually with the intention of respecting their knowledge and experience and acting on that. Wholesale, the contemporary equestrian world appears, at least to me, to be wedded to 'experts'. We have bitting experts, saddling experts, physios, chiropractors, instruction, horsemanship veterinary, hoofcare experts literally everywhere. In fact I often think we relinquish a considerable amount of stuff we should take responsiblilty for ourselves, to the beloved 'professional'. On the other hand, we do live increasingly in a culture where 'expertise' and even facts are hugely questioned, disputed and disregarded. In some cases that is valid and new knowledge and viewpoints can come from places other than that of existing knowledge and practice. Many, many people have benefited from barefoot knowledge and the disruption of mainstream practices around shoeing for example though I would say that there were absolutely farriers and experts involved in that.

When people working with horses discuss the issue of racing there are multiple viewpoints and I watched one of the most respected vets in the country (Liam Kearns) discussing horse welfare at Cheltenham. There are legions of farriers, vets, chiros etc etc who work in racing as well as the incredibly experienced grooms, lads and lasses that look after racehorses every day. There are trainers, jockeys, officials etc. Almost every one of those people are involved because they admire horses and want a life of connection (and usually blooming hard work and poor pay) with horses. They all started out as children or young adults who looked to horses for fulfillment, excitement, inspiration and a way of life. I think that is because horses are honestly amazing and many of us see and feel that every day we are with them. So many of these folks are 'experts'. Like @Elf On A Shelf , there is a huge amount of experience available. That isn't confined to unremittingly positive or one dimensional views and experiences either; there are loads of voices in racing. So why are those 'experts' so often dismissed, disregarded and viewed as suspicious, inaccurate, ill informed or just plain 'biased'? I mean the vets that work with race horses, for example, are they all unable to walk away or is it possible that there are things to admire in terms of welfare, good practice etc ?

I suppose I am just boggled by how easy it is for protesters and disrupters to dismiss what we ordinarily turn to. Not sure if those thoughts are remotely well articulated; I find it hard to pinpoint exactly what I mean when I do understand and respect the position of protest. Sorry for rambling but I wonder if anyone else has had the same thoughts?

The protesters and most of the general public who dislike racing just see horses being horribly injured and dying in front of a baying crowd, hungry for excitement and the thrill of backing a winner. The experts views are dismissed because it's very hard to see beyond animals dying on the track. So many trainers and lads and lasses that work in the industry trot out the exclamations...'they live like Kings!, We love them', etc etc ad nauseam. I think people quite simply ask themselves that if they loved them so much, why expose them to such harm in the first place? Their arguments for the continuation of racing are very juxtaposed with what the viewing public witness on racetracks. I think its as simple as that. People are not prepared to be told otherwise by those whose interest in racing is purely financial. I'm sure they're 'in love' with their sport/job and how they earn their living, but people view it as exploitation of animals. The racing industry is vast and involves multi millions, no one benefitting from this very lucrative industry is willingly going to publicly denigrate the very thing that provides them with a living, and the public know this, they are not entirely stupid. They just see that where there's, racing, horses will die. As for welfare, training methods and horse management practices...if 'living like a king' means being clapped up for 23 hours a day, denied freedom of movement and natural patterns of behaviour, animal wastage and the breaking and racing of 2 year olds, I'm glad none of my horses are kings....

 

[sakura]

I mean, yeah. The general public don’t care what the experts have to say, they just don’t want to see horses being mistreated and dying on tv. It’s not that deep for them. They see horses dying, and that is wrong to them.

The equestrian community can argue those finer points amongst themselves, and they are valid to discuss, but it won’t ultimately matter unless action is taken within these sports to clean up their image.

For what it’s worth, people may hold degrees and be considered experts, but I still know what I believe is ethically right and wrong.

 

[palo1]

The protesters and most of the general public who dislike racing just see horses being horribly injured and dying in front of a baying crowd, hungry for excitement and the thrill of backing a winner. The experts views are dismissed because it's very hard to see beyond animals dying on the track. So many trainers and lads and lasses that work in the industry trot out the exclamations...'they live like Kings!, We love them', etc etc ad nauseam. I think people quite simply ask themselves that if they loved them so much, why expose them to such harm in the first place? Their arguments for the continuation of racing are very juxtaposed with what the viewing public witness on racetracks. I think its as simple as that. People are not prepared to be told otherwise by those whose interest in racing is purely financial. I'm sure they're 'in love' with their sport/job and how they earn their living, but people view it as exploitation of animals. The racing industry is vast and involves multi millions, no one benefitting from this very lucrative industry is willingly going to publicly denigrate the very thing that provides them with a living, and the public know this, they are not entirely stupid. They just see that where there's, racing, horses will die. As for welfare, training methods and horse management practices...if 'living like a king' means being clapped up for 23 hours a day, denied freedom of movement and natural patterns of behaviour, animal wastage and the breaking and racing of 2 year olds, I'm glad none of my horses are kings....

Yes, I get all of that and I can't imagine anybody at all dismissing the deaths of horses on track; it is always shocking and deeply sad, though vast numbers of people clearly don't see it as the final arbiter of their behaviour and support for racing; the UK racing-betting scene is huge and in many, many places language is used about racing horses and betting that is approving. Phrases that are absolutely in common parlance include 'having a flutter', 'a day at the races', 'winning on the gee gees' etc. We have ladies days and family race days as well; it is widely viewed as 'fun'. I know a little about this behaviour and have seen it en masse and extensively in the course of one of my jobs. It is not a huge and lucrative industry without at least some level of approval. I guess perhaps many people don't think about the contradictions, don't care about the cognitive dissonance or an increasing awareness of what is fair to animals. I agree btw with this: .if 'living like a king' means being clapped up for 23 hours a day, denied freedom of movement and natural patterns of behaviour, animal wastage and the breaking and racing of 2 year olds, I'm glad none of my horses are kings.... Personally I think dying on a NH track is far from the worst thing that we do to racehorses. But not all racehorses are treated as you say - the vast majority, yes, but not all. I think the fact, as @sakura says, 'The general public don’t care what the experts have to say,..' is right too, and in many discussions. I guess, where does that leave 'expertise', experience etc in all this: do we just make decisions on what we 'feel'? I hate seeing horses die in sport, hate the hypocrasy around all of it but I also worry about knee jerk politics and emotion at the heart of really important decisions about the world; racing is quite small fry, ethically speaking, for me but the attitudes of activists also seems potentially dangerous when applied to bigger fish.

 

[palo1]

I mean, yeah. The general public don’t care what the experts have to say, they just don’t want to see horses being mistreated and dying on tv. It’s not that deep for them. They see horses dying, and that is wrong to them.

The equestrian community can argue those finer points amongst themselves, and they are valid to discuss, but it won’t ultimately matter unless action is taken within these sports to clean up their image.

For what it’s worth, people may hold degrees and be considered experts, but I still know what I believe is ethically right and wrong.

Yes, but what if experts have or reveal information that absolutely changes your ethical standpoint? This has happened numerous times over history and is one of the reasons for the Enlightenment and other science and evidence based systems.

 

[TGM]

Just to take vets as an example, I know of vets who refuse to watch the Grand National because they don't like what they would see. Obviously these are not vets that work directly in racing. But it is such a complex issue, that I doubt such professionals will actually go so far to speak out against it. Especially as has been pointed out previously, the racing industry funds a lot of equine veterinary research.

 

[palo1]

Just to take vets as an example, I know of vets who refuse to watch the Grand National because they don't like what they would see. Obviously these are not vets that work directly in racing. But it is such a complex issue, that I doubt such professionals will actually go so far to speak out against it. Especially as has been pointed out previously, the racing industry funds a lot of equine veterinary research.

Yes, exactly. All equine vets are somehow implicated in racing because of the money that funds equine veterinary research which can benefit all/any horse and any vet. It is far more complex than just being able to condemn all of it I think.

 

[Clodagh]

The protesters and most of the general public who dislike racing just see horses being horribly injured and dying in front of a baying crowd, hungry for excitement and the thrill of backing a winner. The experts views are dismissed because it's very hard to see beyond animals dying on the track. So many trainers and lads and lasses that work in the industry trot out the exclamations...'they live like Kings!, We love them', etc etc ad nauseam. I think people quite simply ask themselves that if they loved them so much, why expose them to such harm in the first place? Their arguments for the continuation of racing are very juxtaposed with what the viewing public witness on racetracks. I think its as simple as that. People are not prepared to be told otherwise by those whose interest in racing is purely financial. I'm sure they're 'in love' with their sport/job and how they earn their living, but people view it as exploitation of animals. The racing industry is vast and involves multi millions, no one benefitting from this very lucrative industry is willingly going to publicly denigrate the very thing that provides them with a living, and the public know this, they are not entirely stupid. They just see that where there's, racing, horses will die. As for welfare, training methods and horse management practices...if 'living like a king' means being clapped up for 23 hours a day, denied freedom of movement and natural patterns of behaviour, animal wastage and the breaking and racing of 2 year olds, I'm glad none of my horses are kings....


i think it’s very wrong to say no one in racing really loves their horses. Simplistic and inaccurate.

 

[tristar]

but racing is big money business.

and as for them funding research into veterinary interventions, well they certainly create lots of their 0wn patients to practice on, sadly.

 

[Clodagh]

but racing is big money business.

and as for them funding research into veterinary interventions, well they certainly create lots of their 0wn patients to practice on, sadly.

I doubt you’d meet many rich stable lads who were only there for the money, not the love.

 

[sakura]

Yes, but what if experts have or reveal information that absolutely changes your ethical standpoint? This has happened numerous times over history and is one of the reasons for the Enlightenment and other science and evidence based systems.

I’m open to that, hasn’t happened yet though (in racing).

 

[tristar]

I doubt you’d meet many rich stable lads who were only there for the money, not the love.

exploitation, same with a lot of the horses, they are not in for the money.

 

[Tiddlypom]

exploitation, same with a lot of the horses, they are not in for the money.

Indeed. Our experienced HHOer who was shown on the telly leading up a winner at Aintree the day before the GN gets not much over the minimum wage.

 

[littleshetland]

Yes, I get all of that and I can't imagine anybody at all dismissing the deaths of horses on track; it is always shocking and deeply sad, though vast numbers of people clearly don't see it as the final arbiter of their behaviour and support for racing; the UK racing-betting scene is huge and in many, many places language is used about racing horses and betting that is approving. Phrases that are absolutely in common parlance include 'having a flutter', 'a day at the races', 'winning on the gee gees' etc. We have ladies days and family race days as well; it is widely viewed as 'fun'. I know a little about this behaviour and have seen it en masse and extensively in the course of one of my jobs. It is not a huge and lucrative industry without at least some level of approval. I guess perhaps many people don't think about the contradictions, don't care about the cognitive dissonance or an increasing awareness of what is fair to animals. I agree btw with this: .if 'living like a king' means being clapped up for 23 hours a day, denied freedom of movement and natural patterns of behaviour, animal wastage and the breaking and racing of 2 year olds, I'm glad none of my horses are kings.... Personally I think dying on a NH track is far from the worst thing that we do to racehorses. But not all racehorses are treated as you say - the vast majority, yes, but not all. I think the fact, as @sakura says, 'The general public don’t care what the experts have to say,..' is right too, and in many discussions. I guess, where does that leave 'expertise', experience etc in all this: do we just make decisions on what we 'feel'? I hate seeing horses die in sport, hate the hypocrasy around all of it but I also worry about knee jerk politics and emotion at the heart of really important decisions about the world; racing is quite small fry, ethically speaking, for me but the attitudes of activists also seems potentially dangerous when applied to bigger fish.

I do think real change is something that evolves over time, and I totally get the folly of 'knee jerk' reactions, but human beings ARE emotional beings, like horses and most other animals - thats the horror of it all. Sadly, I think many more horses are going to die in the name of sport before anything changes, if ever.

 

[palo1]

I do think real change is something that evolves over time, and I totally get the folly of 'knee jerk' reactions, but human beings ARE emotional beings, like horses and most other animals - thats the horror of it all. Sadly, I think many more horses are going to die in the name of sport before anything changes, if ever.

Yes, I agree. I don't think that it is wrong to feel emotional about stuff either but that needs to be used alongside science, evidence and expertise in order for the best outcomes. There is a really interesting and difficult time ahead in this sense; emotionally we want the best welfare outcomes for animals yet we also need to make decisions that work environmentally; the two are not always aligned so how will we decide what to do? I know that doesn't reference racing of course but I do think it is helpful to have more formal frameworks for decision making. I mean if we took other issues which have had emotion at the centre of decision making,. they haven't always had the best outcomes.

 

[bonny]

I think some of you could maybe consider this debate happens every year at Grand National time, it’s all entirely predictable and then nothing else happens for a year. Most people will have already forgotten about the events last Saturday and will have moved on to other things. It’s really not a big debate, just a few headlines for a day. The National will probably be tweaked a bit more and everything else in racing will continue as ever.

 

[sakura]

That may be true, but it’s not gonna stop me from trying to make a positive change.