The grand national is cruel to horses

[McHappyPants2012]

Alot of the horses will be injured and whipped into going faster, it's also a long race course.

I can't believe people would bet on this event

Depends who you are selling to and what for, but yes of course they need re-training and of course selling to people who don't know what they are doing creates a welfare issue. (but thats always true - not just for ex-racehorses)

They are still worth more this way than they are to the knackers yard unless they are old, injured or cannot be re-trained

Fire , as I said in my post, although I may not have been clear, if you take the race at face value , as it currently is , without bringing into the discussion all the other wrongs that go on in the world or this industry , ignoring whether it should be banned or not , or the risk associated with riding a horse or actually breathing , ignore all of that , running the grand national when you know fatalities are likely to occur is cruel .

That was an excellent post ArcticRain - bringing this thread back to the original issue.
Going off topic myself, though - Catgirl, I've noticed your comments have changed from saying that racehorses are all looked after when they are retired to now admitting that a number of horses are destroyed if they cannot be re-trained . Would you be able to give an estimate of the actual number destroyed? Considering in the sheer number of horses in training and the fact that very few of them can be successful enough to be worth their owners' while to keep in training, there is obviously a huge number of animals that are "surplus to requirements" every year. Do you really expect people to believe that more than a tiny fraction of them are rehomed?
The first national winner, Lottery , ended his days pulling a cart. Hallo Dandy , the 1984 winner, was rescued from appalling neglect. Seagram , who won the race even more recently, was shot after a failed attempt to relaunch his racing career. If these national winners don't get to live out their retirement in the way they deserve, I can't see that a horse who comes last in a £2k claiming stakes will have much chance of being rehomed.

And as I stated upthread, that conclusion depends entirely on your definition of "cruelty".

I don't believe death is inherently cruel. It can be (and in this instance, is) very humane. I don't believe encouraging a horse to participate in an activity for which it has been bred, trained, fittened (and without which activity it would not exist in the first place) is inherently cruel. I don't believe that placing a horse in a situation where it has no concept of the future or of risk is inherently cruel - it means it is not suffering from fear, dread, panic or any other human constructs. I don't believe that keeping and using horses for public enjoyment is inherently cruel, so long as the horses are well cared for, prepared appropriately and the INTENTION is for the horses to return safe and sound afterwards, with every possible measure in place to try to facilitate that safe return.

I did also start my first post by saying I would advocate a reduction in field size numbers, so I am not blindly arguing in defence of the race "as is", merely refuting the emotional and subjective accusation of cruelty.

What I don't get is why a horse with a broken LEG has to be put down. I wonder if this is a relic of the past, when a stable just couldn't be bothered to feed or support a lame horse? (Imagine if we put human athletes down after a leg fracture!)

I understand that the problem may lie with the difficulty of long bone repair, but surely a nail or pin of the kind used for humans could make the horse viable as an animal even though it will never race or even move around independently? Perhaps one of the concerned people might think in terms of charities for animals deemed no longer 'useful'? I don't think we have any right to kill them, and assumptions that they are not 'happy' remind me of Hitler's euthanasia programmes.

I have never denied some horses are destroyed - of course they are. In fact the vast majority of horses will be destroyed at some point. My horses will likely be destroyed at some point. Lots of national winners live out lovely retirements. Sadly some don't but thats not an issue specific to racing, which cannot be expected to track every horse sold on for the rest of its life. Horses change hands. Sometimes they fall into the wrong hands. Thats not just in racing.

What I do deny is that the majority of raceshorses are sold for meat at the whim of cruel owners and trainer or that tens of thousands of otherwise fit or healthy horses are sold to the abbatoir rather than sold on for other careers.

Oh and I never said all racehorses are looked after when they retire.
Don't misquote me

sieglinde - its because you cannot easily immoblise a horse. It can't get around on 3 legs like a dog. If you lift it off the ground in a sling it will likely crush its own organs. Plus, immobilising a horse (assuming you could safely do it) is very very cruel

sieglinde A horse's anatomy means it cannot lie down for the length of time recovery would take and to immobilise it upright by eg cross-tying puts strain on the remaining limbs and feet. This often leads to an excruciatingly painful condition called laminitis, whereby the tissues inside the hoof swells and the pedal bone rotates and punctures down through the sole of the foot.

Also, coming round from the anaesthetic to pin or plate the leg is extremely tricky and risky - horses need all four legs to stand themselves up and the effort needed to rise puts additional pressure on the newly-repaired bone, often causing it to shatter in the attempt at standing.

Finally, to immobilise a flight animal is extremely stressful and can lead to stress-related colic (painful and often fatal stomach ache - horses can't vomit so they have no way of relieving this naturally).

Very occasionally a fracture of a non-load-bearing bone can be repaired, but they tend not to be the types of injuries most horses (not just racehorses) sustain.

What does

'pulled up lame'

Mean? Please

Being the species in control of another species , we have a duty and responsibility to ensure their safety . Letting a horse run this race for the sake of our entertainment knowing full well what the consequences may be is not fulfilling that responsibility . It is taking advantage . Breeding etc is a different discussion , as is whether the race should be banned.

Anyway , the same thing is being said over and over , so this discussion will go on and on , so I'm pulling out . Interesting points , and some facts I didn't know .

It means the horses was having difficulty running as one (or more) of its legs had a problem so the jockey decided to stop the horse and not complete the race

Kayano it means the jockey felt the horse take a false step or stumble, so took it out of the race before the finish in order for it to be looked at by the vet - "pulling up" in racing speak literally means "slowing down/stopping".

The horse would probably be brought back to the racecourse stables in the horse box that follows the runners round so it could be examined in peace.

And also 'breaking down' please cat girl is that the same?

I'm only asking because on that animal aid link at the start it says 'pulled up lame - destroyed' and I didn't understand the terminology

Breaking down is more serious, usually refers to a tendon strain which may or may not end the horse's career, depending on the severity.

If it says "pulled up lame - destroyed" it means that when they examined the horse, whatever the issue causing it to limp / stumble etc proved to be something it could not recover from so they put it down

Breaking down sound as if the horse is a car or some other inanimate object that's quite sad.

Why can't they just say seriously injured?

I wouldn't like to be described as having broken down when in actual fact I was just hurt

In extreme cases, the tendon can rupture completely and the horse unfortunately cannot be saved. One of my friend's horses sadly did this at a local show jumping event - he caught his front leg with his back hoof and severed the tendon.

Strictly speaking kayano, we only use the phrase to refer to cars because they took over from horses following mechanisation. Its reference to animate objects came earlier than to inanimate ones.

Have to say the three people i know who have bought ex-racehorses have never paid more than £500 for them , perhaps its because in this area we have alot of racing stables. I personally wouldnt have one , except as a paddock ornament but thats because i am an experienced novice rider , in that i have been riding for 30 years , but i am still not very good

I watch the GN every year , i sit there willing every last horse round the course safely , with my fingers crossed .

I agree that i think the field should be made smaller , especially as so many of the loose horses don't run out of the course but continue on . I also think that some of the fences , beachers being one of the main ones could be made safer still . I realise that horse racing is always going to carry risk , but i dont see how minimising the risks will make it any less exciting.

The whip they use is alot lighter ( like everything in racing) and much gentler than a standard riding crop , if you hit your palm with a standard crop it would leave a mark , it wouldnt with a racing crop due to the weight and padding .

DH refuses to watch it. Yesterday he had a friend on facebook, who was laughing at his mrs before the race as she was upset because she didn't like watching horses die and he thought she was pathetic.

DH has one less FB friend today.

From last year, but still a very interesting article.

careergirl and fireandashes Are you forgetting the moment when Sychronised was caught, walked up to the first 'jump' and he reared back? Visibly unwary. I don't care what any vet says that horse wasnt happy about that jump yet he was still raced.

Anyway goes round and round in circles this argument.

That article doesn't give any figures for racehorses either.

It shows that in a recession horse ownership becomes more difficult financially and more horses become unwanted and sent to the abbatoir. Not a surprise. Sadly, our local cattery has found the same things is happening with cats - its not just horses that suffer in a recession (although clearly they are far more expensive)

The article talks about horse ownership across the board and is not specific to racing (although the point about over breeding in "good" times is interesting but still not really racing specific)