two horses die at scottish grand national

I prefered my idea of all of these farm animals and pets just simply having the gate left open so they could be free to do as they pleased! I'd quite like to have a moo cow dander along the street noseying in everyones gardens and having sheep play with the kids playpark equipment - they would as well! Sheep have a great sense of humour!

I'm sorry, I can't take this thread seriously anymore!
 
If you just 'used up' the remaining animals and bred no more, can you imagine what the place would look like. Imagine having no sheep, cows, pigs or chickens anymore...what an awful, fluffy (although there would be no fluff..no sheep...) world that'd be.

In a world where Animal Aid ruled, there would be no cattle, no sheep, no chickens, no pigs, a handful of horses (no TB's, and your vet treatment would suck)...you're economy would be wrecked. And you wouldn't be able to get a decent bar of chocolate or a milkshake or have honey on toast :(
 
teagreen said:
If you just 'used up' the remaining animals and bred no more, can you imagine what the place would look like. Imagine having no sheep, cows, pigs or chickens anymore...what an awful, fluffy (although there would be no fluff..no sheep...) world that'd be.

In a world where Animal Aid ruled, there would be no cattle, no sheep, no chickens, no pigs, a handful of horses (no TB's, and your vet treatment would suck)...you're economy would be wrecked. And you wouldn't be able to get a decent bar of chocolate or a milkshake or have honey on toast :(
Click to expand...

I never thought about the lack of chocolate! We most certainly can't have that now! Do you really want a world full of women that are grumpy because they can't have their chocolate fix! Deary me!
 
EKW said:
I never thought about the lack of chocolate! We most certainly can't have that now! Do you really want a world full of women that are grumpy because they can't have their chocolate fix! Deary me!
Click to expand...

AA do promote a vegan chocolate..but I'm not sure what's in it. Unless it tastes EXACTLY like Galaxy, I wouldn't be impressed. I can't think what they use instead of milk, but I've tried soya milk twice and both times it made me throw up. So it better not be that!
 
JanetGeorge said:
Mmm ... how many babies breast fed by omnivore mothers die of malnutrition?? See: http://naturalhygienesociety.org/diet-veganbaby.html




And what would happen to all the farm land that supports livestock - but is not suitable for crop growing. The countryside would be a very different place! And don't you think that crop growing causes pollution - excess nitrogenous fertilisers, herbicides, pesticides!! And without grass break crops (and farmyard manure) soil would quickly lose heart and structure - even more chemicals would be required!

And gee - you'd need to kill a LOT more animals. Rabbits, hares, badgers (who can afford to have expensive equipment going down a badger sett!)

You're living - like most AR supporters - in Cloud Cuckoo land! You will NEVER get what you want - and you make it far harder to gain improvements in animal WELFARE!
Click to expand...

I dont really see how this makes sense. But anyway, we are kinda worlds apart on our views so thats fine. I would rather live in cloud cuckoo land, than on this planet that people are gonna end up destroying anyway.
 
_MizElz_ said:
Very sad. You also have to question how fair the connections of Minella Four Star were to put him in for this - he's run four times in the last two months, having won the Midlands National three weeks ago. It's a big ask...

Not a good time for racing at the moment.
Click to expand...

Not going to get into the debate this time, but that is TERRIBLE!!! They really should feel ashamed of themselves.
 
EKW said:
I prefered my idea of all of these farm animals and pets just simply having the gate left open so they could be free to do as they pleased! I'd quite like to have a moo cow dander along the street noseying in everyones gardens and having sheep play with the kids playpark equipment - they would as well! Sheep have a great sense of humour!

I'm sorry, I can't take this thread seriously anymore!
Click to expand...

There is a sheep that uses one of our backroads as his/her own personal playground. Great fun when you come around the corner to find him in his own game of race the car up the middle of the road... He always seems to think he wins, at which point he turns to face said car and you can virtually see him blowing a raspberry face at you before he hops off into the closest ditch. Kind of amusing but certainly not something I'd want all the sheep in the field doing! :D

More to the point, I too find it hard to take these sorts of threads too seriously as there seems to be no middle ground. It's either "ban all racing" or "racing is the finest of humans work on earth". I tend to fall somewhere in the middle where I figure there are flaws in the current system and probably ways which it could be improved on to improve the current fatality rate, without banning it altogether and seeing the inevitable fallout in so many areas as have been pointed out already (unwanted horses, unemployment, reduced valuable input into research/medical advances etc).

Surely there is a happy medium where guidelines could be phased in such as a minimum time between races, or a scaling back of the length of certain races which are known to be of higher risk of fatigue and breakdown?? Or am I a bit idealistic too? Sure it might end up inconveniencing those who prefer to push a horse to the limits, but it would also mean the industry would be fair for both horse and those who stand to make money from it? Thoughts?
 
I guess for me the reall issue is that we just dont need to eat meat to survive. Vegans and veggies are just as healthy, if not more healthy than omnivores.
Click to expand...

I would take issue with that - at least that vegans are healthier.

It's all about balance in a diet. A bit of this, a bit of that etc. I would defend anyone's right to be a meat eater/vegan/veggie. However those following vegan diets tend to be lacking in many essential protiens and amino acids necessary for healthy living. And certainly raising a child as a vegan is near criminal in my mind.
 
popstar said:
Surely there is a happy medium where guidelines could be phased in such as a minimum time between races, or a scaling back of the length of certain races which are known to be of higher risk of fatigue and breakdown?? Or am I a bit idealistic too?
Click to expand...

Be assured that if trainers start racing horses at abnormally short intervals the stewards would notice (and if the stewards notice, things happen!) But interval between races is rarely 'an issue' in welfare terms.

Some horses need several races to reach peak fitness and get them racing properly - others will win first time out! (Knowing which horse does which is the divider between trainers who make money and those who go bust!) Some horses do better 'fresh' - particularly over short distances (we used to call them 'speedy squibs'!)

Stayers normally need more racing to get them fit and to get them to the point where you can place them in the field and nurse them until it's time for them to make the winning run!

A very long race can carry more risk of breakdown - if a horse is tiring badly he is more likely to do a tendon. But a shorter jumping race would mean everything going flat out in the early stages and a much higher risk of horses bringing themselves - and others down. When you have a long race, the jockeys are usually just trying to jump clean and just stay out of trouble for the first circuit.

The experts are CONSTANTLY looking at accidents - why they happened in that particular case - and whether they could have been prevented by a, b or c. Changes have been made to many races - and particularly the Grand National - to make them safer. Unfortunately, as Eventing people know, jumping at speed (whether 1 horse or a number of horses) carries risks!
 
One of the reasons I don't go to point to points very often is that I don't like to see horses falling and getting hurt - but I get fed up with the cries of protest after the Grand National, etc. It is a huge shame if a horse is hurt, but it is an accident, and a racehorse's job is to take part in races. They are well prepared to go out and win.

I don't think that a TB is ever safe and cannot be in a "safe environment." That is why owners of TBs have always to be three steps ahead of them and foresee any possible risks in handling, etc. Mr. Frisk (Grand National winner) broke his leg when out hacking on the road, an advanced eventer broke his back in the stable. A friend's brood mare broke her leg when galloping round the field with her foal, Murphy Himself and Charisma (retired champion eventers) broke legs in the field when playing.

As for being vegetarian, that is fine if that is your wish, I know lots of vegetarians. But one third of the farming area in the UK is grass, and a huge amount of that could never be used for growing crops, due to terrain, climate, soil depth, etc. currently it is used for grazing animals who eat grass (humans can't digest it) and then we eat the animals and have the benefit of the manure which is used as fertiliser.

You constanly hear that "meat eating leads to global warming." That refers to countries where the animals are fed large quantities of grain. In the UK the grass cover absorbs carbon and virtually all lamb and beef are produced on a grass grazing system, not fed large quantities of grain, so it is NOT adding to global warming. This has been well researched by scientists. (Not sure about the water consumption, but presumably it would take the same amount of water to grow and process crops as to graze and process animals.).

Just thought I would add my thoughts! Sorry.
 
amymay said:
I would take issue with that - at least that vegans are healthier.

It's all about balance in a diet. A bit of this, a bit of that etc. I would defend anyone's right to be a meat eater/vegan/veggie. However those following vegan diets tend to be lacking in many essential protiens and amino acids necessary for healthy living. And certainly raising a child as a vegan is near criminal in my mind.
Click to expand...

Saying that vegans lack essential proteins and amino acids is so untrue actually. there are so many fruit, veg and wholegrains and beans and pulses that provide ample proteins, its just knowing what to eat to get them all.
Except for B12, there is nothing in meat or dairy that i cant get from vegetable sources.
The reason i cant get enough B12 is because its all been depleted from our earth, because of how we treat the land. Animals tend to have some in there meat.
 
ORANGEHORSE said:
One of the reasons I don't go to point to points very often is that I don't like to see horses falling and getting hurt - but I get fed up with the cries of protest after the Grand National, etc. It is a huge shame if a horse is hurt, but it is an accident, and a racehorse's job is to take part in races. They are well prepared to go out and win.

I don't think that a TB is ever safe and cannot be in a "safe environment." That is why owners of TBs have always to be three steps ahead of them and foresee any possible risks in handling, etc. Mr. Frisk (Grand National winner) broke his leg when out hacking on the road, an advanced eventer broke his back in the stable. A friend's brood mare broke her leg when galloping round the field with her foal, Murphy Himself and Charisma (retired champion eventers) broke legs in the field when playing.

As for being vegetarian, that is fine if that is your wish, I know lots of vegetarians. But one third of the farming area in the UK is grass, and a huge amount of that could never be used for growing crops, due to terrain, climate, soil depth, etc. currently it is used for grazing animals who eat grass (humans can't digest it) and then we eat the animals and have the benefit of the manure which is used as fertiliser.

You constanly hear that "meat eating leads to global warming." That refers to countries where the animals are fed large quantities of grain. In the UK the grass cover absorbs carbon and virtually all lamb and beef are produced on a grass grazing system, not fed large quantities of grain, so it is NOT adding to global warming. This has been well researched by scientists. (Not sure about the water consumption, but presumably it would take the same amount of water to grow and process crops as to graze and process animals.).
Just thought I would add my thoughts! Sorry.
Click to expand...

http://www.chooseveg.com/conservation.asp
Im afraid not. It takes a lot more water to raise animals, per lb of meat, than it takes to grow crops.
 
Mrs B said:
Ah yes - Wikipedia. The truth, the whole truth and anything people feel they want to write at the time to suit their own arguments

Especially at the top of this particular one, where it says:
'The neutrality of this article is disputed...'
Click to expand...

No worries. There is plenty more info on it anyway.
plus a lot studies done in favor of farming, tends to be one sided too, normally carried out by someone who has something to gain in some way.
Its not always easy to find impartial studies.
 
We will never see eye to eye on this.

I know that the World as it stands is far from perfect when it comes to the treatment of not just animals but other humans (and I am much more an animal than a people person). We ARE at the top of the chain, whether you like it or not. If it's any consolation, I'm sure we won't remain there for long and the planet will continue to turn quite happily without us.

As the 'top dogs' we should always do what we can to improve the lot of the other species we control. And it's pointless to say we shouldn't control them, as that IS what happens when you are the dominant species. And denying it is like telling the sun not to rise.

But deciding whether or not some animals should exist at all, based on some naive idea of how nice the planet would be without survival of the fittest (or in your words, 'exploitation') is not, to my mind, realistic or the way forward.

Because that is what you (and Animal Aid) are suggesting. That from now on, we decide that anything that is not truly wild should not exist as Man exploits it. But Man (sadly) exploits virtually the entire planet and there are very few truly 'wild places' left.

Which (if you take it to your logical conclusion) would mean no cows, pigs, sheep. Few horses (unless on the Steppes!), no moggies and dogs, no chickens unless Jungle Fowl, no pet rabbits, no white mice, no landscapes which have developed over thousands of years to accommodate farmed animals, therefore no managed grazing areas to support rabbits, hare, owls, deer, foxes, pheasants... Just crops designed to feed billions of humans alone, destroying the last remaining areas of bio-diversity. Think of the palm oil plantations driving out the orang-utans and multiply that many times. And, I take it, for many humans to survive without their current modes of transport (ie cattle, donkeys, horses) you're happy for them to instead buy cheap cars or mopeds and guzzle more fuel and destroy the earth, its resources and remaining habitats further?

And what kind of soya eating, bland, ravaged, sterile World, entirely designed to sustain a bubble-wrapped human species would that leave us with? Far removed from the very animals you insist you love but which would now be as remote and uncared for as the stars?

Not a World I would ever like to live in, that's for sure.
 
Mrs B said:
We will never see eye to eye on this.

I know that the World as it stands is far from perfect when it comes to the treatment of not just animals but other humans (and I am much more an animal than a people person). We ARE at the top of the chain, whether you like it or not. If it's any consolation, I'm sure we won't remain there for long and the planet will continue to turn quite happily without us.

As the 'top dogs' we should always do what we can to improve the lot of the other species we control. And it's pointless to say we shouldn't control them, as that IS what happens when you are the dominant species. And denying it is like telling the sun not to rise.

But deciding whether or not some animals should exist at all, based on some naive idea of how nice the planet would be without survival of the fittest (or in your words, 'exploitation') is not, to my mind, realistic or the way forward.

Because that is what you (and Animal Aid) are suggesting. That from now on, we decide that anything that is not truly wild should not exist as Man exploits it. But Man (sadly) exploits virtually the entire planet and there are very few truly 'wild places' left.

Which (if you take it to your logical conclusion) would mean no cows, pigs, sheep. Few horses (unless on the Steppes!), no moggies and dogs, no chickens unless Jungle Fowl, no pet rabbits, no white mice, no landscapes which have developed over thousands of years to accommodate farmed animals, therefore no managed grazing areas to support rabbits, hare, owls, deer, foxes, pheasants... Just crops designed to feed billions of humans alone, destroying the last remaining areas of bio-diversity. Think of the palm oil plantations driving out the orang-utans and multiply that many times. And, I take it, for many humans to survive without their current modes of transport (ie cattle, donkeys, horses) you're happy for them to instead buy cheap cars or mopeds and guzzle more fuel and destroy the earth, its resources and remaining habitats further?

And what kind of soya eating, bland, ravaged, sterile World, entirely designed to sustain a bubble-wrapped human species would that leave us with? Far removed from the very animals you insist you love but which would now be as remote and uncared for as the stars?

Not a World I would ever like to live in, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

Thats certainly not a world i would like to live in either. I believe all animals have a place on earth, because ALL creatures are important. I certainly wouldnt like to see a world where there are no animals. I just dont think that we need to exploit these animals in order for them to have a purpose. But your right, we live worlds apart on our views of this, which is fine. Ive been vegan long enough to know that there are not a lot of people who have the same views as me.

I just wanted to share this video. Just so you know where I am coming from, and what i believe in. Its not to patronise or try to push my beliefs on anyone. You dont have to watch it so please dont try to tell me im forcing my views on anyone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6_hjA4cdjM

PS, ive just noticed what u have said about controlling animals. Im not really concerned with this, im more concerned with the fact that we breed animals for food. This is not controlling them. Im aware that the planet cannot be over run by carnivores, but we are not controlling our livestock by killing them.
 
so sad whenever a fatality occurs in any equestrian discipline be it from hacking to racing (which of course is the more publicised) but, it is the nature of riding and unfortunately accidents do happen.

Not read all the replies but over2you: I take it you will be petitioning at badminton horse trials this weekend then? The horses run over much the same distance, over far more difficult and complex fences than the, I quote 'horrid' NH fences with more jumping efforts to boot? ;)

to victimise racing and brand it purely as a greedy form of entertainment is shortsighted - have you ever seen the bookies at badminton? I know I have!
 
Humans, as predators, are naturally competitive. Horses, as prey, are not. Well, except for fighting over the odd blade of grass.

It's in our nature to want to be - or have - the fastest, most beautiful, the best. We're blessed that horses indulge us. But when we get to extreme equine competition of any sort, we are using horses to indulge our own egos.

The Grand National, Badminton, even high level "dressage" puts unnatural physical and mental stress on a creature that is generous to a fault.
 
Mrs B said:
We will never see eye to eye on this.

I know that the World as it stands is far from perfect when it comes to the treatment of not just animals but other humans (and I am much more an animal than a people person). We ARE at the top of the chain, whether you like it or not. If it's any consolation, I'm sure we won't remain there for long and the planet will continue to turn quite happily without us.

As the 'top dogs' we should always do what we can to improve the lot of the other species we control. And it's pointless to say we shouldn't control them, as that IS what happens when you are the dominant species. And denying it is like telling the sun not to rise.

But deciding whether or not some animals should exist at all, based on some naive idea of how nice the planet would be without survival of the fittest (or in your words, 'exploitation') is not, to my mind, realistic or the way forward.

Because that is what you (and Animal Aid) are suggesting. That from now on, we decide that anything that is not truly wild should not exist as Man exploits it. But Man (sadly) exploits virtually the entire planet and there are very few truly 'wild places' left.

Which (if you take it to your logical conclusion) would mean no cows, pigs, sheep. Few horses (unless on the Steppes!), no moggies and dogs, no chickens unless Jungle Fowl, no pet rabbits, no white mice, no landscapes which have developed over thousands of years to accommodate farmed animals, therefore no managed grazing areas to support rabbits, hare, owls, deer, foxes, pheasants... Just crops designed to feed billions of humans alone, destroying the last remaining areas of bio-diversity. Think of the palm oil plantations driving out the orang-utans and multiply that many times. And, I take it, for many humans to survive without their current modes of transport (ie cattle, donkeys, horses) you're happy for them to instead buy cheap cars or mopeds and guzzle more fuel and destroy the earth, its resources and remaining habitats further?

And what kind of soya eating, bland, ravaged, sterile World, entirely designed to sustain a bubble-wrapped human species would that leave us with? Far removed from the very animals you insist you love but which would now be as remote and uncared for as the stars?

Not a World I would ever like to live in, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

agree with alec swann, such a good sensible post.
 
EKW said:
↲↲Um what planet do you live on? Just a week ago i had 3 firetrucks chasing me and 2 others down the road. Full blues and twos and they most certainly werent slowing down! One we could have coped with but not 3! We ended up cantering, yes cantering! Down the road to dart into a field entrance as they ignored us asking them to slow down a fraction whilst we trotted out of their way. We were on racehorses at the time so 1. They were endangering 3 innocent creatures and 2. They endangered 3 racehorses going about their work.
Click to expand...

I was informed by a Policeman only 3wks ago that horses have right of way & even if they are on their way to an emergency they HAVE to SLOW down. It is also in the highway code that you pass a horse at 12mph.

On this subject, it is a fact that if 700+ jockeys were killed each year from racing/training then yes something would be done about it. I dont think it necessary to ban racing, just say in the case of the National cut back on the runners perhaps.
 
ORANGEHORSE said:
One of the reasons I don't go to point to points very often is that I don't like to see horses falling and getting hurt - but I get fed up with the cries of protest after the Grand National, etc. It is a huge shame if a horse is hurt, but it is an accident, and a racehorse's job is to take part in races. They are well prepared to go out and win.

I don't think that a TB is ever safe and cannot be in a "safe environment." That is why owners of TBs have always to be three steps ahead of them and foresee any possible risks in handling, etc. Mr. Frisk (Grand National winner) broke his leg when out hacking on the road, an advanced eventer broke his back in the stable. A friend's brood mare broke her leg when galloping round the field with her foal, Murphy Himself and Charisma (retired champion eventers) broke legs in the field when playing.

As for being vegetarian, that is fine if that is your wish, I know lots of vegetarians. But one third of the farming area in the UK is grass, and a huge amount of that could never be used for growing crops, due to terrain, climate, soil depth, etc. currently it is used for grazing animals who eat grass (humans can't digest it) and then we eat the animals and have the benefit of the manure which is used as fertiliser.

You constanly hear that "meat eating leads to global warming." That refers to countries where the animals are fed large quantities of grain. In the UK the grass cover absorbs carbon and virtually all lamb and beef are produced on a grass grazing system, not fed large quantities of grain, so it is NOT adding to global warming. This has been well researched by scientists. (Not sure about the water consumption, but presumably it would take the same amount of water to grow and process crops as to graze and process animals.).

Just thought I would add my thoughts! Sorry.
Click to expand...

I read some really interesting stuff about agriculture in the UK and water consumption along the lines of most horticulture being in the east and the west not being so suitable so if we grow more veg then actually we will have more water problems
 
Jennyharvey said:
Saying that vegans lack essential proteins and amino acids is so untrue actually. there are so many fruit, veg and wholegrains and beans and pulses that provide ample proteins, its just knowing what to eat to get them all.
Except for B12, there is nothing in meat or dairy that i cant get from vegetable sources.
The reason i cant get enough B12 is because its all been depleted from our earth, because of how we treat the land. Animals tend to have some in there meat.
Click to expand...

So why do Vegans always look so damn ill.
 
Jennyharvey said:
.......The reason i cant get enough B12 is because its all been depleted from our earth, because of how we treat the land. Animals tend to have some in there meat.
Click to expand...

Whilst I'm not doubting that you're right, if "it's all been depleted from our earth", then how is it sourced?

Alec.

Ets, as with many other threads, this has now wandered completely off topic!! a.
 
Last edited:
EKW said:
Just a quick point to all of you who disagree with racing - next time you horse needs medication or surgery just remember that the racing industry has paid for a vast majority of the research into these things. What stage would veterinary science be at without that funding?
Click to expand...

Thank you!! I never post on here but this post has got me so angry! Without the racing industry there would be very very little funding for veterinary research and progress. I don't think people realise how important racing is for not only those directly employed by it, but many surrounding industries and most importantly horse welfare.
Every morning I have my arms pulled out up the gallops, if something doesn't enjoy racing it more often than not doesn't make it to the track as it shows no interest in its work. I am more worried about a retired racehorses welfare if it were to get into the wrong hands than those in training! I understand that in the media glare racing looks ruthless, but I can guarantee that these horses are better cared for than hundreds piled on lorries for slaughter ever year or ponies kept on scrub year in year out infested with worms!
The yard I work for won the race that started this discussion, I looked after the horse everyday and am not afraid to admit I was glad to see him come home safe. He had packets of polos a week and a fair few more after winning the race. He has now gone out for his much deserved summer holidays!

Anyway I am now off to put me and my horse at great risk in the members at our point to point......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top