The 'Grand' National?

[tess1]

I think *LOVE* might be the wrong word, I would prefer the words *respect and understand*. I have asked you last night and you have not answered my question, what would you like to happen? Would you like racing to be banned? Would you feel happy then? Or would you prefer to renew your subscription to Animal Aid and PETA?

Surprisingly I have no subs to either Animal Aid or PETA, or indeed any other 'animal rights' group.

As I explained last night, what I would like is for the people who make a living, or gain enjoyment from race horses, one way or another, to simply take responsibility for them when their racing days are over. I acknowledge that accidents happen and horses get killed or so severely injured that they need to be destroyed on the race course, or afterwards. That doesn't mean I like it, but I see it as a fact of life - nothing is going to change that. What is not acceptable (to me - clearly it is to many others) is that after these horses have risked their lives time and again on a race course, worked hard, and lived a restricted lifestyle for much of their racing careers, they are then left facing uncertain futures - either with 'numpties' - to coin a phrase - or left to rot in some field, or sent to slaughter. The racing industry is worth billions. If the people genuinely cared about the horses the way it is touted time and time again anyone dares express concern about the welfare of racehorses, then foremost in everyone's minds would be the long-term well-being of the animals the whole industry is founded upon. Until that happens, everything is lip service and rings very hollow.

 

[tess1]

Well for a start, I just can't think of a way it could be regulated. Where would the money go? How would this fund be transferred from owner to owner? What would the money be spent on? Who would keep track of where and who all this money was going to?

well, if they can regulate the 25 million they dish out for vet research I am sure it can't be beyond the wit of man to come up with a way to ensure that bona fide charities apply for and get funding for taking, rehab-ing and re-homing, or retiring horses as appropriate. Where there's a will, there's a way. But don't worry SpringArising ... there's no will for this to happen, so we don't need to worry about the gritty details at this stage ...

 

[teapot]

Surprisingly I have no subs to either Animal Aid or PETA, or indeed any other 'animal rights' group.

As I explained last night, what I would like is for the people who make a living, or gain enjoyment from race horses, one way or another, to simply take responsibility for them when their racing days are over. I acknowledge that accidents happen and horses get killed or so severely injured that they need to be destroyed on the race course, or afterwards. That doesn't mean I like it, but I see it as a fact of life - nothing is going to change that. What is not acceptable (to me - clearly it is to many others) is that after these horses have risked their lives time and again on a race course, worked hard, and lived a restricted lifestyle for much of their racing careers, they are then left facing uncertain futures - either with 'numpties' - to coin a phrase - or left to rot in some field, or sent to slaughter. The racing industry is worth billions. If the people genuinely cared about the horses the way it is touted time and time again anyone dares express concern about the welfare of racehorses, then foremost in everyone's minds would be the long-term well-being of the animals the whole industry is founded upon. Until that happens, everything is lip service and rings very hollow.

I see your point and understand the merit of it but not everyone in racing disposes of their horses for meat money the moment it can't race anymore. Take Judi Dench for example, yes the Judi Dench. Her racehorse wasn't a donkey, but not a massive winner either. He's now based at an RDA yard, being retrained in the hope that he'll become suitable for the more able RDA riders to use as a dressage ride.

It's also something that if you take issue with in racing, you MUST take issue with in polo and riding schools. Polo's possibly even more monied than racing yet has far more of a 'disposal' attitude and riding schools, well, hammered around a poor quality school until they can't be used aka make money, and most likely for the older ones, just disposed of. Moreover, I'm sure there are horses in this country who are hammered three days a week out hunting and got rid of the moment they're not good enough. That is no different to me and where lies my issue with the 'anti racing' brigade. By all means knock the industry, be critical of it, but do not for one minute make it sound like racing is the devil incarnate and 'oh isn't is terrible' without looking at the wider equine industry, which in one way or another we all support and are involved in.

I stood up for a riding school pony's welfare the other week, who in my eyes, was not fit for his job and was not getting the care he needed on that day. When I see a racehorse in the same condition going out to be raced, maybe I'll be a bit more critical.

 

[AdorableAlice]

The welfare of riding school horses is governed by the licensing authority any concerns should be brought to the licensing officers attention.

 

[tess1]

I see your point and understand the merit of it but not everyone in racing disposes of their horses for meat money the moment it can't race anymore. Take Judi Dench for example, yes the Judi Dench. Her racehorse wasn't a donkey, but not a massive winner either. He's now based at an RDA yard, being retrained in the hope that he'll become suitable for the more able RDA riders to use as a dressage ride.

It's also something that if you take issue with in racing, you MUST take issue with in polo and riding schools. Polo's possibly even more monied than racing yet has far more of a 'disposal' attitude and riding schools, well, hammered around a poor quality school until they can't be used aka make money, and most likely for the older ones, just disposed of. Moreover, I'm sure there are horses in this country who are hammered three days a week out hunting and got rid of the moment they're not good enough. That is no different to me and where lies my issue with the 'anti racing' brigade. By all means knock the industry, be critical of it, but do not for one minute make it sound like racing is the devil incarnate and 'oh isn't is terrible' without looking at the wider equine industry, which in one way or another we all support and are involved in.

I stood up for a riding school pony's welfare the other week, who in my eyes, was not fit for his job and was not getting the care he needed on that day. When I see a racehorse in the same condition going out to be raced, maybe I'll be a bit more critical.

I TOTALLY take issue with all the things outlined above ... and many more besides ... dressage, showjumping, endurance, PMU barns, on and on ... yes, I absolutely agree with you. However, this thread is about horse racing, and probably about ten pages back we had the whole discussion about why it isn't really valid to say yes, this is bad, but that's just as bad, and until you fix all those other bad things you have no right to discuss what is wrong here.

 

[teapot]

The welfare of riding school horses is governed by the licensing authority any concerns should be brought to the licensing officers attention.

Thankfully I believe he's since been retired and enjoying the spring sunshine. That said, I'm not sure how effective the council licensing is given they only turn up once a year and you know when they're coming too. Very easy to make things look 'correct' for the day they turn up.

 

[teapot]

I TOTALLY take issue with all the things outlined above ... and many more besides ... dressage, showjumping, endurance, PMU barns, on and on ... yes, I absolutely agree with you. However, this thread is about horse racing, and probably about ten pages back we had the whole discussion about why it isn't really valid to say yes, this is bad, but that's just as bad, and until you fix all those other bad things you have no right to discuss what is wrong here.

To be able to discuss the issues in racing, especially of welfare, you have to do a compare and contrast with other parts of the equine industry, otherwise you have nothing to back opinions up with. Like saying 'racehorses live a hard life' - compared to who else exactly? You cannot just pluck a statement like that out of thin air.

 

[Moomin1]

I see your point and understand the merit of it but not everyone in racing disposes of their horses for meat money the moment it can't race anymore. Take Judi Dench for example, yes the Judi Dench. Her racehorse wasn't a donkey, but not a massive winner either. He's now based at an RDA yard, being retrained in the hope that he'll become suitable for the more able RDA riders to use as a dressage ride.

It's also something that if you take issue with in racing, you MUST take issue with in polo and riding schools. Polo's possibly even more monied than racing yet has far more of a 'disposal' attitude and riding schools, well, hammered around a poor quality school until they can't be used aka make money, and most likely for the older ones, just disposed of. Moreover, I'm sure there are horses in this country who are hammered three days a week out hunting and got rid of the moment they're not good enough. That is no different to me and where lies my issue with the 'anti racing' brigade. By all means knock the industry, be critical of it, but do not for one minute make it sound like racing is the devil incarnate and 'oh isn't is terrible' without looking at the wider equine industry, which in one way or another we all support and are involved in.

I stood up for a riding school pony's welfare the other week, who in my eyes, was not fit for his job and was not getting the care he needed on that day. When I see a racehorse in the same condition going out to be raced, maybe I'll be a bit more critical.

How do you know that the 'anti racing' brigade do not look at other industries and say the same?

 

[tess1]

To be able to discuss the issues in racing, especially of welfare, you have to do a compare and contrast with other parts of the equine industry, otherwise you have nothing to back opinions up with. Like saying 'racehorses live a hard life' - compared to who else exactly? You cannot just pluck a statement like that out of thin air.

no, you don't have to do comparisons with the rest of the equine industry ... I'll let this article expand on that (second point) http://epona.tv/blog/2014/october/arguing-without-arguments

By 'hard life' for race horses I mean the breeding practices, the abrupt weaning, the (disgustingly) early backing of flat horses, who are often on the scrap heap by the time they are two or three ... the restricted lifestyles that don't meet horses ethological (behavioural) needs, including lack of turnout and social contact with other horses, the high incidence of ulcers and stereotypies suggesting environmental and dietry short-falls, the risk of injury and death on race courses, the risk of ending up with unscruplous owners/trainers who are prepared to use drugs, or whose husbandry practices are not what they should be, the regular transportation, whip use, stressful training ... yes, some of them do find it stressful ... and that's before we've even started on what happens when they aren't wanted any more. It's a myth to imagine that because the horse is gleaming, plaited, rugged and fed to within an inch of his life he is, in fact, 'fulfilled' in terms of his behavioural and physiological requirements. He may look stunning, and be very fit, but ultimately he is a horse, and anyone who has studied feral equine behaviour will appreciate how far removed race horses are from what they instinctively need. And yes, that is the same as with all other sports.

 

[teapot]

How do you know that the 'anti racing' brigade do not look at other industries and say the same?

Well going by this thread alone, it seems to bit a bit blinkered in its attitude and approach. A number of us have mentioned the same thing happening to eventers that happened to Many Clouds, without even a nod of acknowledgement. Just the whole attitude to racing, both on here, and the public eye is how bad/cruel/devil like it is gets my goat when other industries have exactly the same issues, and DO NOT receive the money that racing does.

I'm just not a fan of people plucking attitudes to support their narrow viewpoint, without considering the bigger picture. Yes, it's a racing based thread, but I'll say it again and say that you cannot talk about racing in isolation.

By 'hard life' for race horses I mean the breeding practices, the abrupt weaning, the (disgustingly) early backing of flat horses, who are often on the scrap heap by the time they are two or three ... the restricted lifestyles that don't meet horses ethological (behavioural) needs, including lack of turnout and social contact with other horses, the high incidence of ulcers and stereotypies suggesting environmental and dietry short-falls, the risk of injury and death on race courses, the risk of ending up with unscruplous owners/trainers who are prepared to use drugs, or whose husbandry practices are not what they should be, the regular transportation, whip use, stressful training ... yes, some of them do find it stressful ... and that's before we've even started on what happens when they aren't wanted any more. It's a myth to imagine that because the horse is gleaming, plaited, rugged and fed to within an inch of his life he is, in fact, 'fulfilled' in terms of his behavioural and physiological requirements. He may look stunning, and be very fit, but ultimately he is a horse, and anyone who has studied feral equine behaviour will appreciate how far removed race horses are from what they instinctively need. And yes, that is the same as with all other sports.

Now flat racing I do have issues with regarding age of backing and the damage it does, NH less so.

Every issue you mention, aside from the flat racing backing age and increased risk of death, could be true of any equine sport. So some race horses don't live any harder a life than a dressage horse, eventer, polo pony or eventer; thus racing is not a one off and cannot be treated as such imho. The assumption about no turnout always makes me smile though, did anyone see that feature on, think it was Rebecca Curtis' yard where they were all out in a massive herd every day? They were being more 'horse' like than some dressage yards allow in the UK and in Europe.

The background industry (yards, owners, facilities, turn out etc) is no different to any other equine industry. It is the sport/racing itself that makes it different and I can't work out whether people take issue with the background industry, or the actual sport?

 

[tess1]

Well going by this thread alone, it seems to bit a bit blinkered in its attitude and approach. A number of us have mentioned the same thing happening to eventers that happened to Many Clouds, without even a nod of acknowledgement. Just the whole attitude to racing, both on here, and the public eye is how bad/cruel/devil like it is gets my goat when other industries have exactly the same issues, and DO NOT receive the money that racing does.

I'm just not a fan of people plucking attitudes to support their narrow viewpoint, without considering the bigger picture. Yes, it's a racing based thread, but I'll say it again and say that you cannot talk about racing in isolation.

Yes, the same thing can happen to eventers. But no equine sport - any sport - has the fatalities that horse racing does. That does make it stand out somewhat in terms of questionable welfare.

 

[Dobiegirl]

Yes, the same thing can happen to eventers. But no equine sport - any sport - has the fatalities that horse racing does. That does make it stand out somewhat in terms of questionable welfare.

There are race meetings everyday of the week, virtually 52 weeks a year, eventers do not have events anywhere near that, hence the difference in numbers so your argument doesn't stand up.

 

[ycbm]

There are race meetings everyday of the week, virtually 52 weeks a year, eventers do not have events anywhere near that, hence the difference in numbers so your argument doesn't stand up.

Racing deaths for jump racing are one in 250 starters according to the last stats I saw published by the authorities. That would equate to at least one death for every weekend of eventing, more often two. If you check the schedule there will be several weekends of eventing each week between now and the end of October. But there will probably be no deaths, or at most one or two.

 

[MurphysMinder]

There was a team of , I believe, 11 vets at Aintree. A vet was one of those throwing water at MC as he walked back, and she was also shown using the sweat scraper on him in the cooling area. The veterinary attention these horses receive is absolutely second to none. Compare that with a post I saw on fb this morning, someone asking for ideas to treat sarcoids "as they couldn't afford a vet", that is where all this angst should be aimed, at those who have horses but aren't prepared to care for them.

 

[Smurf's Gran]

Tess just to give you more facts as you do not seem to have researched this properly. At least two owners donated around £5m between them for retired racehorses. When Dubai Millennium died his owner donated £1m odd towards grass sickness research and he also raised the profile of this awful disease. As someone who lives in the epicentre of this disease and knows many people who have lost horses to it that info sticks with me. I am sure you can find more info if you research but it might not suit your agenda.

Firm I don't think it is enough though. All credit to the owners that did donate (and One Million is loose change to Sheik Mohammed !) but it needs consistent support from all owners rather than expecting charities (funded by ordinary people) to just pick up the slack / wastage from racing.

I do like racing and support the GN, but if all owners / trainers etc love their horses so much, maybe supporting appropriate charities would be a good way to show it.

 

[LittleRooketRider]

Just to add to what was said about MC's owner... the Queen also ensure a home for all of her horses successful or otherwise whenever their careeer on the track ends.

Edited to add: You seem to assume that owners don't take care of their horses on the basis that you don't knowwhat happens to horses after their racing days are over

 

[Smurf's Gran]

Thankfully I believe he's since been retired and enjoying the spring sunshine. That said, I'm not sure how effective the council licensing is given they only turn up once a year and you know when they're coming too. Very easy to make things look 'correct' for the day they turn up.

Agree a "reputable" riding school near us used to ship out certain horses to a field they had near by so they were not part of the inspection

 

[Smurf's Gran]

There was a team of , I believe, 11 vets at Aintree. A vet was one of those throwing water at MC as he walked back, and she was also shown using the sweat scraper on him in the cooling area. The veterinary attention these horses receive is absolutely second to none. Compare that with a post I saw on fb this morning, someone asking for ideas to treat sarcoids "as they couldn't afford a vet", that is where all this angst should be aimed, at those who have horses but aren't prepared to care for them.

No the arguments are completely different.

There is not a sliding scale of awfulness, where one behaviour or treatment is tolerated because another is worse. Just because some owners do not care for their "ordinary" horses properly, does not take anything away from the argument of those who either support or are against racing.

 

[Maesfen]

There were more than 11 MM (so I was told) many of them taken from our local practices; I know Hampton, Fyrnwy, Nantwich were all well represented plus experienced horse people at every fence and turn, anywhere a horse could (or shouldn't) go ready for any eventuality.
The vet scraping him off comes to me sometimes, she's top class and a really hands on person, he wouldn't have been in better hands.

 

[Smurf's Gran]

There was a team of , I believe, 11 vets at Aintree. A vet was one of those throwing water at MC as he walked back, and she was also shown using the sweat scraper on him in the cooling area. The veterinary attention these horses receive is absolutely second to none. Compare that with a post I saw on fb this morning, someone asking for ideas to treat sarcoids "as they couldn't afford a vet", that is where all this angst should be aimed, at those who have horses but aren't prepared to care for them.

double post

 

[Smurf's Gran]

Just to add to what was said about MC's owner... the Queen also ensure a home for all of her horses successful or otherwise whenever their careeer on the track ends.

Edited to add: You seem to assume that owners don't take care of their horses on the basis that you don't knowwhat happens to horses after their racing days are over

Interesting point LRR, what to you think happens to the majority of racehorses once their racing days are over, they are injured, or unsuitable to race?

 

[tess1]

There are race meetings everyday of the week, virtually 52 weeks a year, eventers do not have events anywhere near that, hence the difference in numbers so your argument doesn't stand up.

I am talking about the TOTAL number of equine fatalities caused directly as a result of participation in a race on tracks in the UK. Not percentage/proportion of deaths by numbers of equines competing. Not that I am defending eventing in any way, shape or form; if you have figures that suggest more horses die eventing then racing (even proportionally) then it would be good to share them. However, even if that was found to be the case, it does not make racing any "better" - racing is what it is, irrespective of what may be occurring in other spheres of equestrian activity.

You are all discussing the vet care post-race as if it was some sort of minor miracle, and people went out of their way to help the horse. Are you telling me that anything less than that could possibly have been expected? Did you think Aintree was going to pull in few guys from the council to slosh buckets over the horse who had just won, and no one was going to remember to bring a sweat scraper? I would expect post-race care to be absolutely top-notch ... anything else would be a joke. And even then, with all that care, it made for extremely uncomfortable viewing. The management of the horse in those critical minutes WAS lacking ... media demands for the interview prioritised over welfare - I hope the whole walk in process is reviewed for next year.

 

[LittleRooketRider]

Interesting point LRR, what to you think happens to the majority of racehorses once their racing days are over, they are injured, or unsuitable to race?

I won't claim to know the fate of every horse, but to assume that it was something horrific because I don't is quite frankly ridiculous.

I am familiar with and know of many owners who have ensured their future, be it living out their days at grass, retrained for competition eg. eventing or dressage, or just a quiet life as a happy hacker, a family pet or pts (which tbh there are much worse). These are all not big names in racing some only had one ortwo, a couple bred racehorses and had a fair number, but not at the top-end of racing.

 

[Smurf's Gran]

I won't claim to know the fate of every horse, but to assume that it was something horrific because I don't is quite frankly ridiculous.

I am familiar with and know of many owners who have ensured their future, be it living out their days at grass, retrained for competition eg. eventing or dressage, or just a quiet life as a happy hacker, a family pet or pts (which tbh there are much worse). These are all not big names in racing some only had one ortwo, a couple bred racehorses and had a fair number, but not at the top-end of racing.

Thanks for your views. Its good to know that some are doing okay, and this is what I would expect. Though it would be good to have some idea of what happens to the majority though. I suppose a relevant charity might be more appropriate to consult for this info, as all anyone will have on here is personal anecdotes ( unless of course they work for a charity).

 

[ester]

I do think that the industry should do more for its exracers, not the ones of big owners with the facilities to retire them, or the really successful ones - the rest who face such an uncertain future often at a very young age. It's great that there are good owners/trainers who care about what happens to them after but there are so many that don't.

 

[ester]

Racing deaths for jump racing are one in 250 starters according to the last stats I saw published by the authorities. That would equate to at least one death for every weekend of eventing, more often two. If you check the schedule there will be several weekends of eventing each week between now and the end of October. But there will probably be no deaths, or at most one or two.

See I would agree with this, assuming we are counting all levels of each I don't see how 1/250 die throughout the eventing season.

 

[tess1]

I won't claim to know the fate of every horse, but to assume that it was something horrific because I don't is quite frankly ridiculous.

I am familiar with and know of many owners who have ensured their future, be it living out their days at grass, retrained for competition eg. eventing or dressage, or just a quiet life as a happy hacker, a family pet or pts (which tbh there are much worse). These are all not big names in racing some only had one ortwo, a couple bred racehorses and had a fair number, but not at the top-end of racing.

I won't claim to know the fate of every horse, but to assume that it was something wonderful because I don't know is quite frankly ridiculous.

Yes, I know of a few who kept their horses as well ... and plenty who didn't. Keeping and caring for the horses into a long and happy retirement is the exception rather than the norm. It is virtually unheard of in flat racing, where horses are on the scrap heap at such a young age.

I think the existence of several charities dedicated to rescuing ex-race horses ... not to mention the ones that end up in non-specialised charities ... gives a bit of a clue as to what might be going on.

Old, and somewhat sensationalist, but I think one can get the bare bones of the argument ... The British Horseracing Authority (BHA) says it conducted an audit of thoroughbreds last year - horses can be 'tracked' thanks to micro-chipping and the introduction of 'horse passports' - and it found that about 1,200 had been killed in abattoirs. A further unspecified number were killed in Irish slaughterhouses.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-food-French-dinner-plates.html#ixzz3XH7E8Kms
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The slaughtering of healthy horses is not viewed as a welfare issue. Clearly it's not viewed as an ethical one either ... a beautiful illustration of how the racing industry treats horses as a disposable commodity, allowing people to get rid of their no longer wanted horses with a clear conscience.

 

[siennamum]

I am enjoying the reasoned debate on here but wish people would stop assuming that if you criticise racing in any way you must be a rabid Peta supporter.

I enjoy watching the racing but think that there are many ways it could be improved from a welfare perspective. (as I do with many equestrian and canine sports/pastimes)

I can't find the poster who seems to be claiming that eventing is as bad or worse. If a horse was repeatedly near collapse at the finish of XC there would be an outcry. Frankly no ride would want to sit on it for fear of it collapsing on the course. Riders slapping a horse to sharpen it up prior to a fence is one thing (and I know there is whip abuse in eventing) it is not permissible though to repeatedly hit the horse between the last fence and the finish line - it may not be a race but time is of the essence. The only reason horses are hit on the run up at the GN is to make them go faster, even if they are exhausted. I for one don't like it.

 

[MotherOfChickens]

I am enjoying the reasoned debate on here but wish people would stop assuming that if you criticise racing in any way you must be a rabid Peta supporter.

Quite. Some of us even worked in racing for a few years and are so not completely ignorant- another criticism aimed at people who don't agree with it all.

 

[LittleRooketRider]

I won't claim to know the fate of every horse, but to assume that it was something wonderful because I don't know is quite frankly ridiculous.

Thats not what I meant, but it does swing both ways.

TBH although I woud love all healthy horses to live out their life and I personally couldn't/wouldn't send a horse to abattoir I don't thibk this is a problem as generally (despite the sensationalism of press over a few disreputabe abattoirs) the animals are dealt with humanely.

I am not denying there are issues in either the racing industry or abattoirs, but I will not agree that it is inherently cruel.