 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So, 6 horses killed at the Cheltenham festival so far this week.
Part of a wonderful tradition or no better than bull fighting?
As bad as dog racing. Ban the lot.
If I wanted to see some colourfully dressed midgets and dumb animals being whipped for the amusement of the watching masses i'd go to the circus.
Even I can see there's a bit more to it than that, the horses need training just like athletes, the jockeys need the skills to get the best race out of them, and there's the added jeopardy of the horse might just not do what you want it to and refuse to start, or jump.If I wanted to see some colourfully dressed midgets and dumb animals being whipped for the amusement of the watching masses i'd go to the circus.
But I agree that something should be done to minimise the number of deaths, it's daft. It'd be no less a spectacle if the hedges were half the size, or dome other features were added to slow the horses down, river crossings, chicanes, whatever. Might even improve it.
I am increasingly finding this a bizarre "sport" where the slightest of injury get's you killed. Micheal O'leary (RyanScare) had "his" horse put down yesterday after it suffered ligament damage. He Said "it's not as if you can ask the horse sit on the sofa with it's leg in the air for 6 weeks". Michael Owen wouldn't have made it 21 if that was the case in footie.
In a sane and sensible world it should be banned...
...or made safer like Formula 1 motor racing was in the 1970's. If 6 people had died there would be uproar but because it's ONLY horses we don't seem to care.
People make me very angry sometimes 👿
I am increasingly finding this a bizarre "sport" where the slightest of injury get's you killed. Micheal O'leary (RyanScare) had "his" horse put down yesterday after it suffered ligament damage. He Said "it's not as if you can ask the horse sit on the sofa with it's leg in the air for 6 weeks". Michael Owen wouldn't have made it 21 if that was the case in footie.
He's right though, how do you get an animal that sleeps standing up to rest a broken leg or torn ligament?
Or looking at it another way, we kill hundreds of perfectly healthy cows, pigs, chickens, lambs (only babies!) every day and it doesn't raise an eyebrow. Would it be less of an issue if the euthinasia was done by Findus?
surroundedbyhills - Member
I am increasingly finding this a bizarre "sport" where the slightest of injury get's you killed. Micheal O'leary (RyanScare) had "his" horse put down yesterday after it suffered ligament damage. He Said "it's not as if you can ask the horse sit on the sofa with it's leg in the air for 6 weeks". Michael Owen wouldn't have made it 21 if that was the case in footie.
Horse leg bones are internally very intricate and when ligaments or bone are damaged, they tend to shatter the bone, damaging much of the surrounding area. The bone will never properly heal and the pain caused by both the injury and regrowth is excruciating for the horse and the results are almost always infection and death with little chance of recovery. (From my wife's Veterinary friend)
As said above. Horses aren't designed to stand on 3 legs for a prolonged period and certainly can't sit around.
But I agree that something should be done to minimise the number of deaths, it's daft. It'd be no less a spectacle if the hedges were half the size, or dome other features were added to slow the horses down, river crossings, chicanes, whatever. Might even improve it.
...or maximise the entertainment value out of the existing number of deaths. Introduce some hungry lions and tigers into the races. At least then the jockeys would be more able to participate in the "excitement"
It's an indicator of a very poorly run sport that rely's on betting to make it's bills balance.
Terrible situation, run by Thugs, monitored by syndicates and signed off by Vets who are almost held to ransom.
I used to ride Point to Point, did 3 years at it and loved it. Once saw horse hit a fence and break its front leg and carry on running across the field with it flapping in the air.
It made me throw up and quit that part of the sport there and then.
When I did it (back in the mid 90's) we used to have Vets planted at every segment, it your horse wasn't fit enough to carry on, you were out. Yet even I could see some horses looking ragged yet get passed through.
Turns out it's very common to shoot race horses once they have even the smallest of injuries, with the outcome that the horse would make no more money after the injury.
I can't stand horse racing, it's just brutal.
Don't know much about it but do remember a documentary recently that was all about the number of horse deaths due to the sport...I.e. Many many horses are put down due to racing related injuries, but it's kept very hidden (for the sake of the image of the sport)..
Does't it seem strange to put down a previously winning horse due to injury, surely if it were possible to heal/keep them, you'd put them out to Stud, no? There's tremendous profit in that...
Would it be less of an issue if the euthinasia was done by Findus?
I laughed.
...or maximise the entertainment value out of the existing number of deaths. Introduce some hungry lions and tigers into the races.
I'm loving this idea. We know ~4 horses will die every Cheltenham, we know ~4 riders will die every IOM TT. Can't we ban those sports and utilize the entertainment value of those deaths in a far more exciting way. Jousting to the death with lasers?
I'm sure a horsey ex told me that 2yo failed race horses are put down, so those deaths have to be added to the mix. But then if you ban horse racing they'd all get put down anyway but their kids wouldn't 'cos they wouldn't live to have kids...
I'm having lamb tonight. I don't need to eat lamb to survive so that lamb died for my enjoyment, not for my survival. If horses die for someone else's enjoyment is that any different? Especially since competing race horses live a fantastic life. I'd have thought any wild animal of your choice scratching a living in nature suffer far more.
Also, you think it's bad in the UK?
Think about the Arab World and all the racing that goes on out there, on sand.
all the racing that goes on out there, on sand.
I guess that will make them run a bit faster...
whip the jockeys as well the midget ba5tards that they are.. Disappointed Pendleton is doing it now too. Most (all) things that involve the suffering of animals for sport should be consigned to history.
Wrg to the comments about yearly death rates with HR and IOM, at least the IOM chaps are only killing themselves and a bit of machinery..
...or made safer like Formula 1 motor racing was in the 1970's. If 6 people had died there would be uproar but because it's ONLY horses we don't seem to care.
so we need downforce for horses?
I think the jockey should be buried with the horse if the horse is dead ... 😡
Round all the jockeys in a field and let the artist formerly known as prince to hunt them down.
Had a nice couple of winners over the last few days. I didn't back anything that died fortunately.
I think the jockey should be buried with the horse if the horse is dead ...
Yeah, I'm with you on this. Well, assuming that the Jockey has negligently placed the animal in foreseeable or unreasonable danger.
You can sling a horse for big injuries but the welfare of the animal is a big factor. Not normally done.
Ours has just been on box rest for 5 months after an incident with a barbed wire fence. After two weeks of walking in hand, and 20 minutes supervised time in a very small field, she is starting to resemble a horse rather than an unexploded bomb of excitement and energy. (she is not a racehorse, she is a low level eventer/pet so not pushed hard like they are in racing)
If anyone ever see's a repeat of Channel 4's 'Inside Nature's Giants', watch the racehorse one. They load up the ligament in one of the legs, and then simulate what happens when the horses back foot oversteps slightly and kicks the back of the front leg, by lightly touching the ligament with a knife. The power released as it lets go is huge...and that's why its normally game over. (and thats why most horses have protective boots on their legs)
Out of genuine interest, is this because racehorses have been bred for centuries for speed? I doubt wild horses would have survived long if their legs kept exploding.
And I can't see the Mongolian hordes getting very far if their horses kept breaking every time they jumped over something.
Yes. Horses have been domesticated for thousands of years. The thoroughbred is a few hundred years old, crossbred from Arabs etc. They're much bigger stronger horses than an Arab but the lower legs and hooves are still small which makes them so fast but fragile.
All the wild horse breeds (I think the Przewalski is the only undomesticated horse still around) are much smaller, lighter and sturdier animals.
If there was no racing there'd be no racehorses. Would it be better to kill off the entire breed than have some (far too many) die in races?
Yes - kill off the entire bred. Or rather don't keep breeding them for sport and let then die out slowly. Cannot see why this is legal as a sport - it makes no sense at all. I'd ban it.
Why does it make no sense? Have you ever been to a racing event?
Yes - kill off the entire bred. Or rather don't keep breeding them for sport and let then die out slowly.
How does that work, tax payer funded race horse retirement farms?
And once you accept racehorse aren't happy enough to live do you wipe out all animals less happy than race horses? That's pretty much every wild animal and a vast number of pets.
Animal genocide because you don't think they have a good enough quality of life?
A lot of wishy washy anthropomorphication going on in this thread. I'm not particularly fond of watching beautiful animals occasionally self destruct because of an activity staged solely for the enjoyment of humans, but actually, I don't see a massive moral difference between this and the meat industry. There's MORE than enough nutrients available to allow a human to thrive in a good vegetarian/vegan diet; the reason we eat meat is because we like to. It's pleasurable to chow down on a tasty steak. It's pleasurable to watch/bet on horses galloping around a track.
I suppose the main difference is that a) ALL the animals get killed in the meat industry (and their welfare beforehand is a LOT more questionable), and b) the nasty end of the meat industry is kept hidden away from public view. If such a thing as the 'factory farm and abattoir channel' was available on freeview, there would be a lot more vegetarians in the population...
I'm not a vegetarian and nor do I particularly like horse racing, FWIW.
Don't enjoy racing myselfn but to hold racehorses up as good examples of mistreated animals is barking. They are the healthiest, best treated animals out. How much care goes into the diet and excersize of a family dog FFS.
Is it reasonable to say that bred racing horses actually enjoy the activity?
Exactly. In many ways a race horse is a FAR more fortunate animal than most farm animals; great welfare, well loved and exercised, the highest quality food stuffs. And a reasonable chance of living to a ripe old age, rather than off to the slaughterhouse at 2 years old or so. This, in exchange for the risk (I have no idea of figures, but I would imagine that the majority of horse DON'T die on the track) of sustaining an injury that will quickly result in a quick, clean death. I know which I'd rather be.Don't enjoy racing myselfn but to hold racehorses up as good examples of mistreated animals is barking. They are the healthiest, best treated animals out. How much care goes into the diet and excersize of a family dog FFS.
A consistent position would be either the acceptance of human exploitation of animals (being pro animal welfare would be consistent with this viewpoint), or alternatively being against the exploitation of animals. It is inconsistent to be against the exploitation of some animals because they ar photogenic etc
Cannot see why this is legal as a sport - it makes no sense at all. I'd ban it.
Let's ban everything you disagree with shall we. Perhaps we should just ban you.
Why do Internet arses feel its right to ban everything that they dislike or don't agree with.
People are killed cycling, let's ban that, in car accidents, let's ban cars, property, aircraft, trains, in their homes. Where do we stop?
Hear about something some don't like, but you didn't see, ban it.
Banning something that causes needless cruelty for entertainment isn't a particularly radical position, is it? Foxhunting was banned. There's a big outcry over Crufts.
Hmmm. There's a gulf of difference between chasing wild animals with dogs who tear them up for human pleasure, and racing horses for human pleasure who sometimes injure themselves and are subsequently humanely despatched.
Are you advocating the banning of steak? Leather shoes? Nice car interiors? Animals have doubtless suffered so we may enjoy these things, and none of which are strictly necessary in today's society. But they are nice and enjoyable...
Is it reasonable to say that bred racing horses actually enjoy the activity?
In my personal experience, horses love to gallop and love to race each other. It's an evolutionary necessity for the species, because if they didn't do it for fun and thus get good at it, when a predator leaps out on them they wouldn't be fast enough to survive.
This is why there's such a problem when horses break legs - they're very hard to keep safe during the recovery and in the unlikely event you get through that period, will it heal strong enough to cope with their first celebratory gallop when you turn it out into its field?
Now this could be a more morally consistent angle. Crufts has been criticised because of the 'breed standards' leading to dogs being bred with effectively what amount to genetic deformity which reduce the quality of life for the animals in question. Maybe there should be a campaign for breed standards that put health and welfare before aesthetics (in dogs) and outright speed (in horses). Simple in practice, very difficult to enforce though, I suppose.There's a big outcry over Crufts.
Banning something that causes needless cruelty for entertainment isn't a particularly radical position, is it?
In the UK it is. We eat meat for enjoyment, we kill all kinds of animals for convenience and build on their habitats.
How many Bulls from milking breeds make it to adult life? Male chickens? They're almost all slaughtered.
To single out the absolutely best treated animals of all as worthy of mass execution for their own good is barking.
Disappointed that none of those calling for the banning of horse racing due to the frequent deaths of horses have not popped back on the thread to explain how eating meat is consistent with their views. Or maybe they're all vegetarian...
I was dissapointed to not be at the Midlands national today. If some of the nay sayers actually went and saw what fine animals they are and how well looked after they are they may actually know what the **** they were on about. No trainer owner or jockey wants to lose a horse out in the course...
Or maybe they're all vegetarian...
Well, I am. But to say that, because we can't ban all animal cruelty, we shouldn't ban any is ridiculous.
A false dichotomy.
Earlier I mentioned our unexploded bomb of a horse... First time in the field with her mate after 5 months this morning...and this was her winding down after bucking and standing vertically...
Well, I have no real issue with your position then. My gripe is with people who would castigate racing, yet are happy to support the meat industry. I'm not massively comfortable with the perceived animal welfare of either industry, but I accept that i have no room to criticise one whilst ignoring the other. I do enjoy eating meat, and I like my shoes to be leather. Therefore I have no moral imperative to criticise those who enjoy horse racing; I would not seek to ban something on the flimsy justification of animal cruelty whilst I facilitate animal cruelty on my part due to my fondness of sausages and bacon and steak. My enjoyment is no more or less valid than anyone else's.Well, I am. But to say that, because we can't ban all animal cruelty, we shouldn't ban any is ridiculous.
Not at all. Moral consistency and the avoidance of hypocrisy.false dichotomy
One very happy horse you have there spooky. Lovely to see.
Not at all. Moral consistency and the avoidance of hypocrisy.
There is no need to say that we should not make any changes because some people eat some meat.
Changes to legislation surrounding horse racing are not impossible for that reason. There is no binary choice between not caring for any animals, and, completely protecting all animals from harm for, or by, a human for entertainment or consumption.
Therefore it is a false dichotomy.
Yes, that was my point too - I'm a vegetarian but I occasionally eat fish and have leather shoes. It's not an all-or-none thing, and especially when it's only for entertainment then the cruelty is hard to defend.
If it's not an all or none thing, why don't you give up the things you do that are needlessly cruel rather than point at other people?
That would be neither all or none.
I do 😀
Did I point?
Maybe they could sell the horses for meat and then at least they wouldn't go to waste? Seems a bit of a shame.
Possibly quite tough though with all the exercise?
My point is, why if the the horse loves running with a midget on its back, does it need said midget to whip it mercilessly to get it to run? If the animal does not want to make progress using humane methods, then it shouldn't be doing what it does. Yes I like meat as well.
The dead horses have already contributed to human enjoyment, no need to overdo it... (and I believe glue factories/dogfood manufactureers have first dibs anyway.Maybe they could sell the horses for meat and then at least they wouldn't go to waste? Seems a bit of a shame.
I never suggested that one could not change horse racing [i]because[/i] the meat industry exists. I merely pointed out the hypocrisy inherent in a viewpoint that criticises racing whilst supporting the MUCH CRUELLER meat industry by continuing to eat meat and wear leather shoes. At least a lot of race horses actually survive and are relatively well looked after, and when they do injure themselves they are dispatched humanely and quickly. (I've had the misfortune to witness this first hand). I've also been in an abatoir; If I had to come back as a racehorse or a cow, It wouldn't be a tough choice.false dichotomy
Because horses like running [i]with their mates[/i]; they need encouragement to put their head forward. I'm no racing fan, but 'whipping mercilessly' is somewhat inflamatory language. I'm fairly sure that there's rules against that sort of thing. I think that the racing industry would argue that a jockey's whip is a 'humane' method, and more effective than a carrot on a stick out front, a la loony tunes...why if the the horse loves running with a midget on its back, does it need said midget to whip it mercilessly to get it to run?
http://www.thepja.co.uk/members-info/regulatory/useofwhip/
While I'm not a massive fan of jump racing I do ride and there is more to the use of a whip than simply making your horse run faster. It is one of your aids but is normally used after legs, reigns and seat. I've no idea if Jockeys talk to their horses but I guess it is too noisy?
I never suggested that one could not change horse racing because the meat industry exists. I merely pointed out the hypocrisy inherent in a viewpoint that criticises racing whilst supporting the MUCH CRUELLER meat industry by continuing to eat meat and wear leather shoes. At least a lot of race horses actually survive and are relatively well looked after, and when they do injure themselves they are dispatched humanely and quickly. (I've had the misfortune to witness this first hand). I've also been in an abatoir; If I had to come back as a racehorse or a cow, It wouldn't be a tough choice.
This.
Of course the racing industry would say it's alright.... I'm lucky/unfortunate to live right in the middle of horse racing mecca and you see plenty of animals with marks to their hides/ribs, it's not on.
It's not even a sport, more an excuse for folk to bet money, wear cheap suits, look like they've slept in a bath full of wotsits, drink champagne and then head into town for a night out.
Load of pish.
Can't say I disagree with that. That's a bit different from the 'ban it all' calls from some posters though.it's not on.
I'm not a "ban it all" person, but it's surely not beyond the wit of man to create a horseracing event where the participants don't regularly die. Perhaps better regulation of jumps and course, stricter standards about whips, maybe even longer term to breed tougher but slower horses.
create a horseracing event where the participants don't regularly die
It's called flat racing, and it's (even more) dull than national hunt or steeplechases. And seeing as these animals exist to entertain, I can't see it happening. Horses still die on the flat though; I've seen a horse shatter its front leg galloping up a slight rise. As for breeding tougher horses; fine idea in principle; but seriously, could you imagine any way that would actually work? I suggested it earlier in the thread as an intelectual exercise, and I can't.
You could have Cob racing. But some would still break legs and you're back to the old problem of needing to kill all the existing horses which rely on racing for their survival.
back in the mid 90's I did a lot of work with Bristol University Veterinarian School, in particular the Horse treatment people. IIRC their take on it was for most animals it's possible to treat. The problem is not with ^ frisky horse post op as you can immobilize the limb. The big problem is dealing with a confused heavy disorientated horse as it comes round from the anesthetic. Bristol had a padded "cell" where the floor was a roll in roll out operating table. The next problem is the long rehabilitation period. All in all it's the prohibitive cost of the specialized treatment coupled with the fact a non racing race horse isn't much use/resale value as they can bloody big and quite temperamental.