Should Horse Racing be banned?

[SOCCERROO FOX]

Let's give up guys no one will be able to convince Ozleicester or change his mind. He is set in his ways, christ he even said he wants to ban fishing!!!

[ozleicester]

Knackery? Are you in the 1920's?

Apologies, i was using the vernacular used by one of your supporters, in future ill use the more accurate terminology the "Slaughter house"

Do it, get a stable on a course, open the door and see what happens, I'll give you 90 seconds before it's leaping over a fence.

yup, then after a quick sprint it would stop eat some grass, pretty much do as it pleases. It will not be force fed an abnormal diet filled with all sorts of speed enhancing unatural foods.

In fact for horses who aren't capable chasers it could be even more dangerous as they would stray off the hurdling courses and onto the fences, break their leg and sit there for hours dying, what a wonderful way to treat them that would be.

Its ok those horses are sent to the slaughterhouse long before they can become a problem. 40% of thoroughbreds born in the UK and Ireland are do not make it as races horses...care to guess what happens to them?

Go to 1.26 in the video, have a guess what he wants to do after a drink, look not even a man and a stick.

I see a magnificent creature that has been broken and is now under the control of a human and is being made to perform for my entertainment, Quite honestly i can provide you with hundreds of youtubes that show the horror and appalling way these animals are treated, but perhaps have a look at this one, its not too offensive (although you might want to skip the last 30 seconds or so)

I still fail to see how it's animal abuse really, people involved in horse racing love the animals, understand them and their needs far more than you do

They only love them when they are winning, see what happens to them if they dont make the grade

You are an idiot. There are a lot of people in this country who enjoy Horse Racing. There is a minority of people in this country who support the EDL. So that part of your argument stands very well.

Why thank you, so because "a lot" of people think its a good idea...it therefore ..is? No the world doesnt work that way, "a lot" of people support the death penalty but it isnt right, "a lot" of people support bull fighting, dog fighting etc... but thats does not make it right.

As to evolution, well lets try and not go off topic but we eat meat. We have evolved to become the dominant species and society was built around hunting/farming etc. I shoot and I fish because I like to eat meat and fish. You are a vegetarian, and I am not. You cannot tell me what I can and can't eat.

Yes we are dominant, well done us, however what that domination should create is a responsibility to do right by the less evolved,

Now as many other people have noticed. Those who disagree with Horse Racing appear to have no knowledge of it (for example whips are made of FOAM and leave no mark on the horse, and jockeys cannot raise their arms above their shoulders when using the whip, and strict rules and regulations are in place to ensure whips are correctly used).

Problem is, they arent correctly used, they do leave marks and they are a danger to the horses health. I recommend reading this article. http://www.rspca.org.au/news/study-reveals-unacceptable-use-of-whips-in-racing.html

Let's give up guys no one will be able to convince Ozleicester or change his mind. He is set in his ways, christ he even said he wants to ban fishing!!!

Im far from set in my ways, a few years ago i was a meat eating, horse race enjoying, anti vegetarian, who felt the greenies, lefties, and assorted nutters should shut up and stop trying to spoil my life. But hey, then i realised that everythign on this planet has the same right to a decent life as i do and infact that as the most evolved on the planet it is my responsibility to help the less able, be that man woman dog cat fish insect.

[adam1]

Ozleicester:

On the subject of a lot. Yet again you are flawed. Dog fighting and bull fighting isn't liked by 'a lot' of people in the UK. Dog fighting is very rare and I would say that over 99% of the population are against it. As to the death penalty, well considering how quickly the calls for it to be reinstated disapperead last year, just goes to show that 'a lot' of people are against it.

I would also like to clarify that my original use of 'a lot' was to counter your suggestion that horse racing only exists for those who want to gamble. I stated that a lot of people at point to points just go to watch the racing.

So on doing right by the less evolved I shouldn't go and shoot deer? Venison is nice and I would be doing the local deer populaton a favour...

On the whip use, get your facts right. Especially as that article is about Australian and not UK racing.

“This further highlights the need for Australia’s use of whips in racing to align with international best practice."

That quote pretty much kills your point. Also:

“We found that more than 75% of the time the whip struck the horse in the abdomen (also known as the flank), which according to theInternational Agreement on Breeding, Racing and Wagering as well as the British Horseracing Authority is unacceptable."

[ozleicester]

Ozleicester:

On the subject of a lot. Yet again you are flawed. Dog fighting and bull fighting isn't liked by 'a lot' of people in the UK. Dog fighting is very rare and I would say that over 99% of the population are against it. As to the death penalty, well considering how quickly the calls for it to be reinstated disapperead last year, just goes to show that 'a lot' of people are against it.

To be honest the "alot" is just a distraction and pretty much irrelevant, dog fighting is cruelty, cock fighting, bull fighting and horse racing are cruel, whether a hundred or a million like it, it remains cruelty.

I would also like to clarify that my original use of 'a lot' was to counter your suggestion that horse racing only exists for those who want to gamble. I stated that a lot of people at point to points just go to watch the racing.

I dont think i said it only exists for those who want to gamble, i think i said, it exists for our "entertainment" and beating and killing an animal for entertainment is wrong and cruel.

So on doing right by the less evolved I shouldn't go and shoot deer? Venison is nice and I would be doing the local deer populaton a favour...

really, we are discussing this?...IMO no you shouldnt go and shoot deer, but if your penis doesnt work i guess youve got to do something.

On the whip use, get your facts right. Especially as that article is about Australian and not UK racing.

“This further highlights the need for Australia’s use of whips in racing to align with international best practice."

That quote pretty much kills your point. Also:

“We found that more than 75% of the time the whip struck the horse in the abdomen (also known as the flank), which according to theInternational Agreement on Breeding, Racing and Wagering as well as the British Horseracing Authority is unacceptable."

How does that quote "kill" my point, i shouldve thought the exact opposite... read the last word of it UNACCEPTABLE (can you guess why its unacceptable, clue..its cruel and these people who love their horses are beating them)

I accept that my views are extreme to many, and my hope of ending the cruelty is a distant hope....but what the hell there were those who believed the slaves deserved rights

[Guest MattP]

I accept that my views are extreme to many, and my hope of ending the cruelty is a distant hope....but what the hell there were those who believed the slaves deserved rights

oh ffs lol

I'm glad I left this thread.

[adam1]

Ozleicester

On the subject of a lot, yes one could consider it to be slightly irrelevant. But if society as a whole accepts it, then surely it is deemed to be morally acceptable?

Beating and killing an animal for entertainment? That's not horse racing.

My penis works fine. Its absolutely huge as well. Slightly irrelevant but hey I'm proud of it!!! With regards to what I said about shooting deer I was merely addressing your point, "however what that domination should create is a responsibility to do right by the less evolved." Shooting deer is a responsibility of ours. It does a right to the less evolved. Deer culling is neccessary to help them survive. As you do not want deer to be culled then you are contradicting the statement you made (which is above).

Now the article...

This thread is about UK horse racing in wake of the grand national. The article you refered to focuses on Australian racing. The first quote I used addresses this. It also refers to the fact that Australian rules are not in align with international standards. These standards are applied in the UK. The second quote, well that clearly states that using that whip in the manner is unacceptable and is deemed so by international standards and the British Horseracing Authority. As this thread is on UK racing, and that article focuses on conduct which is not allowed in the UK, the article is completely irrelevant.

And another thing. No one is actually calling for horse racing to be banned. They want regulation to limit risk. That article doesn't want racing to be banned, it wants the regulation to be tighter with regards to whip use.

[Teeno]

Article from the Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog...rse?CMP=twt_gu

Nothing undermines horse racing more than the fact that its heroes may suffer a fatal injury at any moment. It doesn't even need a hurdle or a steeplechase fence; one false step, one misplaced hoof may be all it takes for a bone to break in such a way that the horse cannot be saved.

Racehorses are incredibly tough animals, brave, hardy and durable. At the same time, in the wrong combination of circumstances, they may as well be made of glass.

Among the stoutest of staying chasers I've seen was Young Kenny, who won the Scottish National, the Midlands National and the Becher Chase. Then one day at Haydock, while galloping on flat turf between fences, he suddenly shattered a fetlock joint in one of his hind legs.

When racehorses die in action, accusing fingers are often pointed at the sport. But, although exertion and the possibility of falls increase the risk, the main reason for these thoroughly upsetting moments is that horses often cannot recover from injuries that would pose no threat to humans.

Horses do not just sustain injuries while racing. It can happen when they take part in any kind of sport or leisure activity, or even while they are messing around on their own in a field. However much they are loved and however much money their owner is happy to spend on them, there is no way back from the wrong kind of break.

Cynics assume that money is the issue, but regular followers of the sport know this cannot be true. Neither Barbaro, the hugely popular Kentucky Derby winner, nor Rewilding, who pipped So You Think in a thriller at Royal Ascot this summer, survived their broken legs. Both would have been worth millions if they could have been preserved for a quiet life at stud, but it could not be done.

Why not? In search of explanations, I pitched my naive questions to two well-respected vets at the British Horseracing Authority. Professor Tim Morris is their director of equine science and welfare while Jenny Hall is a vet based in Lambourn who will be veterinary services manager at the Olympics next year. I'm very grateful for their time and patience.

1) Most humans recover easily from broken legs. Why can't horses?

"The problem is, because their bones have become lighter," Hall told me. "They're very strong, to carry their weight, yet they're light, for them to be able to go fast. So, unfortunately, sometimes, when they break, they just shatter."

When that happens, it is not possible to repair the bone, and not just because it is now in lots of little pieces that won't heal together. Another issue is what Hall called "plastic deformation", meaning that the bone bends before it breaks and it is the bent shape that is preserved in the pieces. Even if it were possible to put the pieces back together, you would end up with a madly bent bone.

Hall continued: "When you look at their lower limbs, which is where a high incidence of these injuries are, there's very little soft tissue covering the bone. So unfortunately, often, if there's a fracture, it may well be that the bone penetrates the skin, which turns it into an open fracture.

"Even in people, that makes it a much harder situation to get good healing. So you can imagine, with a horse, no matter how quickly a jockey pulls it up, it's hard for the skin not to get damaged and also for the blood supply to get damaged."

"And living tissue needs blood," Morris added. "If there was a fracture there, there's all the tendons, the nerves and the blood vessels that a sharp edge of bone could cut. So, down the rest of the leg, there's no blood supply to it, so the tissue may die, let alone having enough blood supply to heal."

Even if there were a remote possibility that the bone might heal, it may not be a good idea to wait and see, because of the complication of laminitis.

2) Laminitis?

The horse's hoof is attached to its leg by interdigitating laminae, fibrous tissue. These are strong enough to support the horse's weight when that burden of 500kg or so is shared across four legs. But when a horse breaks one of those legs and tries to support itself constantly on the other three, the increased burden creates serious problems for the laminae at the base of those legs.

Morris: "Instead of the 500kg being distributed around four hooves and being able to take it, you are giving a third extra force to the remaining hooves and that comes under pressure. The problem is … you're within a hard outer box [the hoof], so [the laminae] get inflamed, which is incredibly painful."

Hall: "And it affects the blood supply. It's a pressure necrosis. Like a bed sore."

Morris says that laminitis can be treated with painkillers, along with other drugs to deal with "the failure of the bloody supply, because there's so much inflammation ... But the problem is, you can get a vicious circle of more pain, more inflammation, building on itself very, very quickly in a severe case."

So any owner considering whether their horse may recover from a broken leg has to consider the pain of laminitis that they may well have to go through. And then, as Hall points out, there is also the question of "the quality of life that they will have at the end of it.

"If you have a limb amputation, you're still going to have a good quality of life, aren't you? But how do you judge a horse's quality of life? Will it have the ability to be turned out at liberty in the paddock, will it need long-term pain medication? Because you or I can have a new hip or new knee if we need one. That's not possible [for horses].

"It isn't that some of these fractures couldn't be prepared. It's that, even if you do that and put the horse through all that, where's your end-point? You've got to be able to get him back to having four functional legs."

Hall refers to the euthanasia guidelines published by the American Association of Equine Practitioners, which include these "guidelines to assist in making humane decisions regarding euthanasia of horses":

• A horse should not have to endure continuous or unmanageable pain from a condition that is chronic and incurable.

• A horse should not have to endure a medical or surgical condition that has a hopeless chance of survival.

• A horse should not have to remain alive if it has an unmanageable medical condition that renders it a hazard to itself or its handlers.

• A horse should not have to receive continuous analgesic medication for the relief of pain for the rest of its life.

• A horse should not have to endure a lifetime of continuous individual box stall confinement for prevention or relief of unmanageable pain or suffering.

3) Can't we do more to help them? Support them with slings while the bone heals? Replace the bone artificially?

Even if the horse could be persuaded to lie still and let the bone recover, there are other problems. Its weight, in particular, works against it. "They get pressure sores if they're lying down all the time, things that are difficult to manage in people, let alone in a 500kg horse," says Hall.

Are pressure sores the reason we don't just knock them out and leave them on their side until they recover? "No," said Hall. "They'd get pneumonia for starters."

Morris: "You've probably heard quite often, particularly with elderly people going into hospital for a hip-bone fracture which keeps them in there and then they get secondary pneumonia because they're lying down. When you're lying in your wrong position, the fluids that accumulate in the lung don't get cleared so well and that's the point of infection."

Surely, I suggest, you could support the horse in a sling, sparing it the risk of laminitis while its leg heals. "In the old days, they used to try. And it used to go horribly wrong," Morris said.

"The horse version of bed sores is sling sores. They will be rubbing and also [the horse] won't be used to it. And you're talking weeks, not days, and that is one of the biggest welfare issues."

Hall: "Again, they're heavy. So, to take a meaningful amount of the horse's weight, you're then compressing its intestinal tract and everything. Temperamentally, as well, you can't explain to a horse what you're doing. You can't say, look, mate, stay there quietly, it'll all be fine, you're only going to be there for three weeks, don't worry about it."

What about replacing the bone with something synthetic? "Human hospitals store either synthetic packing materials or irradiated human bone to be a scaffold," Morris said. "Again, it's the problem that it's invariably weight-bearing in the horse. You might use it if you've got a simple fracture, to pack a gap, but they're not structural at all."

Hall: "And bone is a living tissue, it's forever turning over. You do need a biological structure, really, for the long term."

4) Horses are sometimes put down very quickly on the racecourse. Is it possible to make a proper assessment so quickly?

Hall: "Because of the way the emergency services are deployed on the racecourse, the first opinion, the first veterinary surgeon to attend the horse, will be there very quickly because he will have been following the race [in a vehicle on the inside of the course].

"His colleague, because there are always multiple veterinarians on duty to cover a race meeting, paid for by the racecourses, will be there very quickly. For the horse to have a full clinical assessment and second opinion can be done very quickly.

"The horses that have fatal injuries, they have very extreme injuries. There's no possible misunderstanding of those. The horse will not have a supporting limb. The limb that he's injured will no longer be able to take any weight."

Racecourses, Hall said, are very efficient at transporting any connections from the grandstand to the injured horse, "so everyone connected with that horse will have been able to assess the situation and understand the severity of the situation".

"If the horse can travel comfortably, safely, off the racecourse, then the horse will go back in the horse ambulance and be taken to the veterinary treatment area, where time can be taken to evaluate the horse further and decide whether he needs to go off to hospital. [Those present can] make a proper, informed decision as to what exactly the injury is and how realistic it is for the horse's long-term future and welfare, whether repair is a good option."

In contrast to the fear behind my question, that critical decisions are being made very quickly, Hall and Morris cited a recent case at Sandown where some of those in the crowd apparently expressed concern that it took a long time for the vet to put a horse down after it had broken a limb in front of the stands.

In fact, they pointed out, the vet had given the horse a painkilling injection as soon as he arrived on the scene, as is standard practice. The horse was in no pain and there was time to make a thorough examination and reach an unhurried decision.

5) Can we hope for fewer fatalities in future?

Morris refers to a graph on the BHA's website that shows the number of equine fatalities each year, expressed as a percentage of total runners. There are ups and downs but the graph shows a gradual downward trend over the past 15 years.

Morris attributes this decline, at least in part, to improved technology. "It's changed completely. Better anaesthetics, better pain relief, better technology to hoist horses, stronger implants, better understanding of bone biology and how it heals, better diagnosis. It's the whole package of knowledge and then people do more, then they get better at it and you're in a virtuous circle.

"We think we've done the easy things in terms of ground, obstacles, veterinary treatment. To get it down to the next jump down, what we're doing now is, what are the complex risk factors?

"Since 2000, in a systematic way, we've been collecting every single death or injury and details of it. That's about a million runners over 10 years, so that's big enough to do stats and we're looking at our entire racing database to see what causes and associations are.

"That's being done with the University of Glasgow, by the epidemiology research group. So we're doing a systematic review of the horse that has a fatality or an injury, what factors are different from the horse that doesn't? That's going to be finished, I think, in 2013."

Once the risk factors have been identified, Morris, Hall and their colleagues can consider possible interventions that could minimise those risks. Across the whole of British horse racing, no one is doing more worthwhile work.

[ozleicester]

Ozleicester

On the subject of a lot, yes one could consider it to be slightly irrelevant. But if society as a whole accepts it, then surely it is deemed to be morally acceptable?

No, thats my point, the fact that a majority feels it is right, does not make it so, There was a time when women were unable to vote, when children were forced to work in unsafe conditions, when people were allowed to whip other people. Alll of those things were accepted as being the norm and acceptable, but no-one in their right mind believes it now.

Beating and killing an animal for entertainment? That's not horse racing.

Depends on how you look at it, as you said, thousand of people go just to watch the racing, the racing involves beating and killing horses...so, yes it is racing

My penis works fine. Its absolutely huge as well. Slightly irrelevant but hey I'm proud of it!!! With regards to what I said about shooting deer I was merely addressing your point, "however what that domination should create is a responsibility to do right by the less evolved." Shooting deer is a responsibility of ours. It does a right to the less evolved. Deer culling is neccessary to help them survive. As you do not want deer to be culled then you are contradicting the statement you made (which is above).

The deer were not in need of culling prior to our decision to entertain ourselves by breeding and then killing them, as with almost all of nature they will find a natural balance if left alone.

Now the article...

This thread is about UK horse racing in wake of the grand national. The article you refered to focuses on Australian racing. The first quote I used addresses this. It also refers to the fact that Australian rules are not in align with international standards. These standards are applied in the UK. The second quote, well that clearly states that using that whip in the manner is unacceptable and is deemed so by international standards and the British Horseracing Authority. As this thread is on UK racing, and that article focuses on conduct which is not allowed in the UK, the article is completely irrelevant.

This thread and poll ask should horse racing be banned not just in the uk and, While the article i quoted relates to oz racing, i think it safe to say that simialr things are occurring in the rest of the world, even if there has been progress made, and still, the fact that there have been recent changes (that you seem to agree with) in regard to whipping etc, shows that even though the majority werent calling for change, it was acknowledged that there was cruelty occurring.

And another thing. No one is actually calling for horse racing to be banned. They want regulation to limit risk. That article doesn't want racing to be banned, it wants the regulation to be tighter with regards to whip use.

"Limit risk", what risk do you think there is?... could it be the risk of harm for your entertainment?

[ozleicester]

Article from the Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog...rse?CMP=twt_gu

Nothing undermines horse racing more than the fact that its heroes may suffer a fatal injury at any moment. It doesn't even need a hurdle or a steeplechase fence; one false step, one misplaced hoof may be all it takes for a bone to br--------------------------------------------

--------------been identified, Morris, Hall and their colleagues can consider possible interventions that could minimise those risks. Across the whole of British horse racing, no one is doing more worthwhile work.

interesting reading and i agree with what they say about those horses that break legs etc, the ability to recover from them is as near impossible and yes, the only real option in dealing with a horse that has been injured this way while racing is to put it down.

They also mention that horses can be injured as a normal part of life, and again i agree and as the more intelligent species it is up to us to try and alleviate or end their suffering as soon and a painlessly as possible. Of course, if the horses werent being forced to run in the race, it definitly wouldnt have happened in the race.

None of this does anything to prove that horse racing isnt cruel, animals with small brains are trained and forced to race, they have no choice.

By the way http://www.horsedeathwatch.com/ list of the dead horse here, too big to copy and paste

[Teeno]

interesting reading and i agree with what they say about those horses that break legs etc, the ability to recover from them is as near impossible and yes, the only real option in dealing with a horse that has been injured this way while racing is to put it down.

They also mention that horses can be injured as a normal part of life, and again i agree and as the more intelligent species it is up to us to try and alleviate or end their suffering as soon and a painlessly as possible. Of course, if the horses werent being forced to run in the race, it definitly wouldnt have happened in the race.

None of this does anything to prove that horse racing isnt cruel, animals with small brains are trained and forced to race, they have no choice.

If horses weren't being forced to run in the race'.... They'd probably be running around at their own will, with equal probabilities of sustaining the same injuries.

[ozleicester]

If horses weren't being forced to run in the race'.... They'd probably be running around at their own will, with equal probabilities of sustaining the same injuries.

I guess we will never know, as they are seither dead, or still being forced to run and jump for your entertainment.

If the horses didn’t like it, they wouldn’t carry on running after their jockeys fall off

Horses are herd animals. They feel safer when part of a group, especially in the noisy, often unfamiliar raceday environment.

The horses enjoy the challenge

They are not equal to the challenge. The modern industry concentrates on breeding lighter-boned, speedier animals for Flat racing. Less successful Flat racers, or those good at clearing fences, are consigned to jump racing. But, because they are fine-tuned for speed rather than skeletal strength, they risk fatal injury when they fall – a common occurrence at Aintree.

The horses are treated like kings

Evidence suggests that, every year, thousands of horses who don’t pay their way are slaughtered for meat or killed in their yards.

Horses in the wild die too – death is natural

There is nothing natural about whipping highly inbred horses to force them to run to their physical limit and jump a series of life-threatening obstacles.

[Charl91]

I'm really of mixed opinion on this matter. In an ideal world, I would love for horse racing to be banned. It's for human entertainment purposes only; It might not be the cruelest of sports by a long shot (fishing, hunting/foxhunting, etc.), but I still don't think it should be acceptable.

That being said, as a meat eater, it would be hypocritical for me to say it should be banned when I contribute to more animal deaths myself per year then the grand national does. I don't like killing animals in the slightest, and I couldn't kill an insect without feeling guilty; I also accept that eating meat is natural and part of the food chain, and I make an effort to buy free-range food, etc.. That being said, I eat more then my fair share of meat, and wear leather shoes, etc. It would be hypocritical for me condone one form of cruelty while participating in one which is worse. When battery hens, Cows, etc. are sorted out, then I will worry about things like Horse Racing.

I wish I could be a vegetarian

[The People's Hero]

After today's 8pm debacle, yes.

[Simmo86]

HORSE DIES IN A FIELD SHOCKER!

Classy Great Endeavour fatally injured in field

By David Carr 9:19AM 20 APR 2012

PADDY POWER Gold Cup winner Great Endeavour has been put down after suffering a fatal injury while out in the field, trainer David Pipe confirmed on Thursday.

RELATED LINKS

• Great Endeavour profile
  

David Johnson's eight-year-old was spending the summer with his jockey Timmy Murphy with a view to returning to action next season.

"He was out in the field with one other horse and Timmy found him with a broken leg this morning," Pipe said.

"It's awful news and everyone is very upset. David, Timmy, his lass and everyone here. He was a great character and very talented horse who won the Paddy Power and also won at the Cheltenham Festival. And there was still more to come.

David Pipe: "everyone is upset" PICTURE: Edward Whitaker

"It puts what happened in the Grand National into perspective. Injuries can happen anywhere - he wasn't going too fast, he wasn't being overcrowded and the most dangerous place for a horse is in the field."

Great Endeavour won the Byrne Group Plate in 2010 but his greatest success came when he routed his Paddy Gold Cup field by seven lengths last November.

He finished a gallant fourth to Carruthers in the Hennessy Gold Cup two weeks later, when he looked the likely winner two fences from home, and was last seen in action when finishing eighth in the Ryanair Chase won by Riverside Theatre at Cheltenham last month.

He won six of his 17 races under rules and earned nearly £200,000 in prizemoney.

Think we should ban horse being allowed unsupervised in fields now..........

[ozleicester]

I'm really of mixed opinion on this matter. In an ideal world, I would love for horse racing to be banned. It's for human entertainment purposes only; It might not be the cruelest of sports by a long shot (fishing, hunting/foxhunting, etc.), but I still don't think it should be acceptable.

That being said, as a meat eater, it would be hypocritical for me to say it should be banned when I contribute to more animal deaths myself per year then the grand national does. I don't like killing animals in the slightest, and I couldn't kill an insect without feeling guilty; I also accept that eating meat is natural and part of the food chain, and I make an effort to buy free-range food, etc.. That being said, I eat more then my fair share of meat, and wear leather shoes, etc. It would be hypocritical for me condone one form of cruelty while participating in one which is worse. When battery hens, Cows, etc. are sorted out, then I will worry about things like Horse Racing.

I wish I could be a vegetarian

Any effort to reduce the suffering of animal is a step forward, one life saved is worth it.

I was a "meatetairian" a few years ago mmm 5 meats pizza and i look at Vegans and am amazed how they do it... but in the end if one less creature suffers due to my choices then its a good day.

any

HORSE DIES IN A FIELD SHOCKER!

Classy Great Endeavour fatally injured in field

By David Carr 9:19AM 20 APR 2012

PADDY POWER Gold Cup winner Great Endeavour has been put down after suffering a fatal injury while out in the field, trainer David Pipe confirmed on Thursday.

RELATED LINKS

• Great Endeavour profile
  

David Johnson's eight-year-old was spending the summer with his jockey Timmy Murphy with a view to returning to action next season.

"He was out in the field with one other horse and Timmy found him with a broken leg this morning," Pipe said.

"It's awful news and everyone is very upset. David, Timmy, his lass and everyone here. He was a great character and very talented horse who won the Paddy Power and also won at the Cheltenham Festival. And there was still more to come.

David Pipe: "everyone is upset" PICTURE: Edward Whitaker

"It puts what happened in the Grand National into perspective. Injuries can happen anywhere - he wasn't going too fast, he wasn't being overcrowded and the most dangerous place for a horse is in the field."

Great Endeavour won the Byrne Group Plate in 2010 but his greatest success came when he routed his Paddy Gold Cup field by seven lengths last November.

He finished a gallant fourth to Carruthers in the Hennessy Gold Cup two weeks later, when he looked the likely winner two fences from home, and was last seen in action when finishing eighth in the Ryanair Chase won by Riverside Theatre at Cheltenham last month.

He won six of his 17 races under rules and earned nearly £200,000 in prizemoney.

Think we should ban horse being allowed unsupervised in fields now..........

This was an inbred thin and light boned race horse who has been trained to exceed its limits and it has broken its leg. No one denies that horses die in fields sad but true, but this horse would not have been in that field if it was not a toy of the wealthy and an entertaiment tool of the masses

[Bert]

I wonder how many people will be calling for it to be banned after the Scottish national today

[AoWW]

This was an inbred thin and light boned race horse who has been trained to exceed its limits and it has broken its leg. No one denies that horses die in fields sad but true, but this horse would not have been in that field if it was not a toy of the wealthy and an entertaiment tool of the masses

Ah, so what you're really saying is that all horses should be stocky cart-horses - let's just cull and slaughter all the thoroughbreds across the globe so no-more nasty "inbreeding" (WTF?!!!) can go on.

What an earth do you imagine this horse would have been doing other than being in a field (you do realise the vast majority of horses, no matter what their breeding or usage, go in fields, right?) had it not been a "toy of the wealthy and an entertainment tool of the masses"?

I'm sorry, but I honestly think you've lost the plot over all this.

[Charl91]

Ah, so what you're really saying is that all horses should be stocky cart-horses - let's just cull and slaughter all the thoroughbreds across the globe so no-more nasty "inbreeding" (WTF?!!!) can go on.

To be fair, I understand his point (although the field arguments a little silly). It's fairly irresponsible of people to deliberately breed horses to try and create the perfect race horse if it creates lots of health issues for the horses. I don't think anyone assumes that Horses don't break their legs anyway, but from what I gather from my very limited knowledge as well as more brittle/thinner bones, making them much more prone to injury, they are much more at risk to other health problems also.

I'd genuinally like to here the argument for this from the perspective of a horse-racing fan; from my perspective it seems an irresposible thing to do, but then again I may not know all the facts. As I'v said before, I'd be for it being abolished, but it's less cruel then most sports or most things that go on in the world, so I'm not particularly up in arms about it.

[ozleicester]

Ah, so what you're really saying is that all horses should be stocky cart-horses - let's just cull and slaughter all the thoroughbreds across the globe so no-more nasty "inbreeding" (WTF?!!!) can go on.

How ridiculous, do you seriously think im suggesting we slaughter the existing horses, I have suggested we END the inbreeding of these animals and that by banning racing we would bring that about. In case you dont understand the inbreeding heres a fairly balanced page http://www.globalanimal.org/2011/12/01/inbreed-horses-race-to-ruin/59966/

What an earth do you imagine this horse would have been doing other than being in a field (you do realise the vast majority of horses, no matter what their breeding or usage, go in fields, right?) had it not been a "toy of the wealthy and an entertainment tool of the masses"?

I think you need to read the rest of the topic as it refers to the fields, of course they are in a field, my suggestions is that... Had they not been inbred to have lighter thinner bones needed for horse racing, they may not have broken thier legs (all though of course it can happen at any time... it is increased if you have skinny bones).

I'm sorry, but I honestly think you've lost the plot over all this.

You are entitled to your opinion and if you cant see that these creatures are being bred and abused for nothing more than entertainment then im glad im following a different plot.

[AoWW]

Ooh, I do love it when somebody patronises me and talks in such a condescending tone.

I know plenty about the breeding of thoroughbreds, thank you, the question is, do you, other than what you've read on the internet? What do you imagine will happen to those horses who no longer race, and are no longer valuable from a breeding perspective if the 'inbreeding' was to end - do you really think their quality of life will be that rosy if they're not able to at least partly 'pay-for-their-keep'?

I have read all of the topic... yay, go me, I can read! (You do realise horses other than thoroughbreds break their legs in fields, don't you?)

I can see that thoroughbreds are bred for a number of equestrian sports (not just racing). Sometimes, as with all animals, through ignorance and negligence, they are abused - I'd much rather this didn't happen and I'm all for taking realistic and reasonable measures to reduce this and further educate those responsible.

Have you ever considered taking up a career in journalism... I'm amazed by your ability to sensationalise quite so dramatically ... I'm sure the Daily Mail would bite your hand off!

[Charl91]

I know plenty about the breeding of thoroughbreds, thank you, the question is, do you, other than what you've read on the internet? What do you imagine will happen to those horses who no longer race, and are no longer valuable from a breeding perspective if the 'inbreeding' was to end - do you really think their quality of life will be that rosy if they're not able to at least partly 'pay-for-their-keep'?

That argument always saddens me. Not because I don't believe it, but because it implies that horses don't really have any value other then what they are worth to humans. I can appreciate that some may not be able to afford to keep them, but I presume that most would be put down because they are no longer deemed useful.

On another note, the other much used argument I hate is the "well, they wouldn't exist if we didn't breed them - it's better then not living at all". By that logic, you can justify child labour.

[ozleicester]

The racing industry is cruel,! that is the point of most relevance here.

Almost everyone says they are concerned about animals and that they are treated well. If you consider yourself an animal lover, then logically you cannot support the racing industry...

The racing industry in the UK breeds approximately 5000 foals per year, of that 5000 the Equine Fertility Unit found that 66% of thoroughbred foals were never entered for a race, and more than 80% were no longer in training after four years. It is pretty obvious what happens to that 4000 innocent animals. They arent being treated like kings, they are dead...... Ban horse racing and you stop 4000 unneccessary and cruel deaths.

This topic mentions only horse racing, but any "sport" where we breed animals for our pleasure should be banned.

If you support horse racing, you are supporting animal cruelty. Yes some live well,. Yes anmals get injured and die in nature. But, 60+ percent of animals bred for horse racing are killed because they arent good enough.... and the responsibility for that falls on anyone who supports horse racing.

http://www.guardian....rseracing.sport

http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/n/CAMPAIGNS/horse/ALL/1350/

[AoWW]

The racing industry is cruel,! that is the point of most relevance here.

Almost everyone says they are concerned about animals and that they are treated well. If you consider yourself an animal lover, then logically you cannot support the racing industry...

The racing industry in the UK breeds approximately 5000 foals per year, of that 5000 the Equine Fertility Unit found that 66% of thoroughbred foals were never entered for a race, and more than 80% were no longer in training after four years. It is pretty obvious what happens to that 4000 innocent animals. They arent being treated like kings, they are dead...... Ban horse racing and you stop 4000 unneccessary and cruel deaths.

This topic mentions only horse racing, but any "sport" where we breed animals for our pleasure should be banned.

If you support horse racing, you are supporting animal cruelty. Yes some live well,. Yes anmals get injured and die in nature. But, 60+ percent of animals bred for horse racing are killed because they arent good enough.... and the responsibility for that falls on anyone who supports horse racing.

http://www.guardian....rseracing.sport

http://www.animalaid...horse/ALL/1350/

Those figures are absolute bollocks. Read your quoted articles more carefully... you might find it easier to see them if you climb down from your high horse to do so.

It's far from obvious what happens to those 4000 horse who are no longer in racing after 4 years, except in your narrow-minded, ill-informed mind. Many of those horses will go on to have successful careers in show-jumping, eventing, even dressage, and many more are simply used for non-competitive riding in your average one-or-two-horse-owning-families. 60% of horses bred for racing are NOT killed because they are not good enough.

From the article you quoted:

Potter admits he kills some 3,000 a year, but denies that most are racehorses. He claims he sees only 100 a year from racing and those are ones with 'sustained injuries or with mental problems that mean they can't race or be retrained'. He said: 'There are more than a million horses in Britain with only about 20,000 in racing. Each year thousands will become ill or get injured and need to be put down. We offer the horse's owner an extremely humane way of doing that. It is a valuable service and without people like us, the welfare of horses in Britain would be much worse.'

[purpleronnie]

Does anyone ever change their minds in these 'discussions'?

[ozleicester]

Those figures are absolute bollocks. Read your quoted articles more carefully... you might find it easier to see them if you climb down from your high horse to do so.

It's far from obvious what happens to those 4000 horse who are no longer in racing after 4 years, except in your narrow-minded, ill-informed mind. Many of those horses will go on to have successful careers in show-jumping, eventing, even dressage, and many more are simply used for non-competitive riding in your average one-or-two-horse-owning-families. 60% of horses bred for racing are NOT killed because they are not good enough.

From the article you quoted:

My figures were not based on those articles alone they were just some examples , but hey ho. If you enjoy supporting an industry that is responsible for the death of AT LEAST 3 horses in the past week you go with it.

since 2000... 35 horse have died just at Aintree

http://www.animalaid.org.uk/images/pdf/factfiles/GrandNational.pdf

It comes down to whether you are happy to have animals dieing for your entertainment