Six horses die at the Cheltenham Festival - Should Horseracing be banned?

Any chance of a poll please mods?

A link to the full article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/horse-racing/43438392

Big things are...

• Four horses put down on the final day.
• One suffered a leg injury during the County Hurdle, three more during the Grand Annual Chase.
• The British Horseracing Authority will be carrying out a review by looking at what led to the fatalities, and also looking at things like whip misuse.

Y'see, I'd be okay with horse racing if it were the jockeys that risked their lives. You might think that's wrong, but at least the jockeys would be able to choose to do it, right? The horse ain't given much choice. It's bred from birth to be hit with a whip & then put down when it becomes cost inefficient... That's my opinion, anyway. I've no idea how anyone can derive enjoyment from such a barbaric sport.

PS, I checked the Other Sports/General/Current Events sub-forums & couldn't find a discussion on this, but sorry if I've managed to miss it.

Why put a horse down?
Can't injuries heal?

Apparently horses legs don't heal too well from breaks.

It's difficult for a horse's leg to heal due to a combination of factors. Their legs must absorb considerable shock as their powerful bodies gallop at high speeds. Horses engage in a lot of physical activity, and the consequences of this behavior can eventually lead to deteriorated leg bones and increased opportunities to fall. Another thing to consider is how many leg bones horses have. Out of the 205 bones that make up a horse's entire body, 80 of them are located in its legs. The complex system of joints, bones, ligaments, tendons, cartilage, lubricant, laminate and hooves that contribute to a horse's amazing speed can also be the cause of its downfall. What's more, between 60 to 65 percent of a horse's weight rests on its front legs -- that's why most of its injuries occur here.

https://animals.howstuffworks.com/mammals/broken-leg-horse.htm​

It is as clear as animal abuse can get.

Sometimes, but when they can, there's often seen to be little point. There's no chance an injured race horse will race again, so what's the point in spending the money on vet fees?

Also, from this article, which is definitely worth a read: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2011/sep/23/claims-five-broken-leg-horse

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."

Then should be banned.
You can't put a horse in a high risk situation, when injury almost means certain death.

Ban it.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/oct/01/horseracing.sport

Article is 10 years old but I suspect there's no change

All those against say neeigghh

Should it? Yes

Will it? No because it’s making a lot of rich folks like the Queen and co money. It’s making gambling companies money by people who bet on it.

So there’s very little chance with all the wealth behind it that it gets banned.

As a kid I was brought up in and around the industry, the horses in general are extremely well cared for, well fed, clean stables, turned out regularly to be with their pals in the fields, well groomed, yes all to be raced, but this is what they are born for, and what comes natural to them, life is not without risk, but if I was to come back as animal I'd like it to be a racehorse, most have a fantastic life. If you ban it they simply won't be born.

The Queen has feck all to do with it

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/24/queens-horses-win-7million-prize-money/

Injury does not mean certain death, a snapped leg does sadly, but many horses recover from injuries picked up on the racecourse.

Yes we know all that.

It would be an Act of Parliament that would outlaw horse racing not the opinion of the Queen

Erm and you know the so called act of parliament will be swayed by the opinions of rich people. The Queen is one of them.

Nice to see points from the other side of the debate, but I can't really agree.

Sure, life is not without risk, but who are we to decide what risks others take? It doesn't really matter if their animals or not to me, because the crux of it is we're breeding these animals with the intent to risk their lives for our benefit... Not sure I'll ever be able to agree with that, even if the alternative is nonexistence. Better to not exist than to be born to risk your life for entertainment without any say in the matter.

Like I said before, I'd be fine if it were the jockeys whose lives were on the line, as they'd be able to make the choice themselves... But this? Just feels wrong.

But yeah, it is important to note that the overwhelming majority of horses that have raced in recent years do live good lives & aren't put down unless there's no alternative (but some are put down for financial reasons, which again is something I can't really agree with).

Having read they are being bred for lighter, faster and therefore weaker legs, you have to ban it

Erm and you know then that these "rich people" of whom the Queen is one couldn't prevent the Hunting Act of 2004 a "so called" Act of Parliament that was fiercely resisted by those in favour of hunting foxes et al?

Erm and you know Fox hunting doesn’t make these folks rich. It just fed their egos. Just like those people who go on safari hunts to shoot Lions.

Banning horse racing will be hitting a lot of big pockets who will oppose it. It will also be hitting the governments pocket too.

Thing is there is so much animal abuse/cruelty goes on that to call horse racing some barbaric sport is just wrong (I'm not saying you said this), reality is we as humans are in general a dreadful selfish species for a lot of animals, but racehorses have a good chance to be treated right, and live a full life, it's really not so bad.

If we are going to go down the lines of it been better for an animal to have never been born than live a life for 'our benefit', then we'd all have to be vegetarian.

The point stands. Rich folks don't necessarily get to torpedo Acts of Parliament they don't like.

Horse racing won't be banned not because of the preferences of some rich people but because of the ramifications of shutting down an industry that benefits the economy to the tune of over £3bn

Also public opinion was very much against fox hunting, which made it harder for the small (yet powerful) minority to defend it. Public opinion isn't really against horse racing at all, so it's not really going to change.

Oh I agree, there's definitely bigger offenders than horse racing, especially in the not-so-legal side of things.

How many of the horse injuries occur when race is over hurdles?

No it shouldn't be banned. If the death toll was extremely high then fair enough but it isn't.

As a percentage it's something like 0.2% over the last twenty years.

You are quite right, they couldn't stop the law being passed. They just ignore it now it has been. The police do nothing to enforce it because the chief constables don't want sir henrington arse twat on the phone bollocking them on Monday morning
We are still as pathetic a country as we always were, the rich and titled get to do what the feck they like and because of who they are nothing gets done.

I think the issue is inequality. We should put down Ruby Walsh as a show of good faith.

Oh yeh you'll find me elsewhere banging on about class war but I'd suggest we've made progress since the days of Medieval feudalism.

My initial response was to this idea that just because the Queen makes money out of something it doesn't necessarily mean it will be allowed to continue. Horse racing, as its stands will go on as long as people invest money in it and only stop when that does. I wonder what the appetite is with the general public for a ban? The vast majority of people have feck all to do with it.

I saw at least 3 dead animals on the road this week.

Should we ban cars?

I think it should be banned, and I could see it getting banned eventually. Certainly if they don't manage to make it a whole lot safer.

6 horses dying is a horrible statistic. That must be a pretty big outlier though?

Not really if it’s a broken leg and who would waste the money for the horse to be no use anyway? Kinder to put them out of their misery as harsh as that sounds.

How much do you think the Queen makes from horse racing then, I'd love to know? Just a rough breakdown of prize money won compared to purchase cost, land cost, stabling and facilities, wages, training, vets, entry and transport.

I

At Cheltenham festival:

2018 - 6
2017 - 4
2016 - 7
2015 - 2
2014 - 5
2013 - 1
2012 - 5
2011 - 1
2010 - 4
2009 - 1
2008 - 1
2007 - 2

At least according to a website with a dramatic black background called HORSEDEATHWATCH.com

https://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/25/sport/queen-elizabeth-horse-racing-prize-money/index.html

land is an asset, one she has plenty of from her inheritance, and its value doesn't depreciate but inflates above average rates

https://www.sandringhamestate.co.uk/sandringham-estate/stud/

yeah, she inherited the stables

Jockeys and horses share the credit in victory, so it's only fair the opposite is true.

And by that I mean when a horse has to be put down after an injury the jockey that rode him should suffer the same fate. Fair's fair.

But does a jockey get to live out his life as a stud?

The ones that make it will become studs under this new system.

No, just no. You could start waving the ban hammer at everything and anything

Boxing/ Wrestling, Scott Westgarth died shortly after his fight, why not ban them as they are dangerous
Football/ Rugby, Players have collapsed and died/ never been able to play again.
Motorsports, F1 and MotoGP have had deaths in resent years, deaths most years in the Isle of Man TT why not ban them.
Transport, people die everyday in car crashes or jump in front of trains/ Trams. Why not ban it

It’s unfortunate that horses die but that’s the risk of the sport, may look into lowering the size of some jumps like in The Grand National. It would also put a load of people out of a job

The difference in all your examples being that humans take their own risks out of choice.

In all those cases the humans making the decision to compete are the ones at risk. They're not forcing animals into it as well.