Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

The grand national is cruel to horses

999 replies

McHappyPants2012 · 12/04/2012 15:20

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

OP posts:
NigellasGuest · 15/04/2012 20:15

sorry =- not read the whole thread so someone may already have pointed this out but boingie apparently if the jumps were made smaller, then the horses would just go faster, and it would be just as dangerous.

Flightty · 15/04/2012 20:22

Is a broken leg really classed as catastrophic and non survivable? Could they not sedate the horse/give it some serious pain relief and then consult the owners? It seems they didn't even tell them the horse was down till after the race.

catgirl1976 · 15/04/2012 20:24

They won't prolong its distress - they will act in its best interests

MightyNice · 15/04/2012 20:29

it depends on lots of things flightty, where the break is, how bad it is and more besides - think it has been explained much further up the thread how difficult it is to treat these kinds of injuries

I hope next year's race is safer, feel myself changing sides a bit the more I think about it

carabos · 15/04/2012 20:30

ATP broke a hind leg - that's a no-brainer for euthanasia I'm afraid. Any vet or police constable can authorise the destruction of an animal in the absence of the owner to relieve suffering.

McHappyPants2012 · 15/04/2012 20:33

I am shocked by the amount of replies and have read every one of the replys and learnt alot more.

OP posts:
catgirl1976 · 15/04/2012 20:37

I really think it's time they significantly reduced the number of riders. Lets hope the do.

catgirl1976 · 15/04/2012 20:38

*they

Backinthebox · 15/04/2012 20:39

Where to start with all of this? I've only just read the thread, having been busy watching the race yesterday and then taking my daughter out this morning to take part in her first ever gymkhana race lesson. To give an idea of my experience, I have worked in the racing industry, ridden in a race and have owned a racehorse myself in the past, but am more of a participant in cross country and hunting these days. I spent the evening before the Grand National at the Lambourn Injured Jockey's Centre, in the company of racing people, discussing racing. (And hunting! The 2 are very closely linked, hence the name National Hunt Racing.) The weekend before my current horse was on the course (although not in a race) at Ascot Races. I spent 2 National meetings working in security at Aintree (the year before and the year after the 'race that never was,') - for those who disbelieve the statements made by an earlier poster about animal rights activists and their thoughts, I can tell you I was asked to search bags for some very specific and very unpleasant items - the tip off being aggressive action by animal rights saboteurs.

I would say there are a lot of very eloquent people giving a very good account of their opinions on both sides of the argument here, and a lot of absolute rubbish being spouted too. I am going to put my hand up and say I enjoy watching racing. I'm not going to justify it. I feel sad when injuries and deaths occur, both to horse and to rider, although I always feel sadder for human deaths and injuries. But something primitive in my brain means I continue to enjoy it. I think many people will also experience the same thrill and not be able to explain it away, the thrill of speed, of danger, of risk. Beyond that, I am not going to defend racing here.

I've decided to post as there are a few things that haven't been mentioned here, or if they have, they haven't been elaborated on fully. Firstly, racehorses are enormously complicated animals to look after once they have left racing. In particular geldings are not worth much, and a mare with a poor record is also fairly worthless. They are often past the point where they are easy to train, their muscles have been developed differently to how a riding horse would be developed, they are looked after in large yards, often to a strict regime (although strict should not be interpreted as cruel,) and they need enormous amounts of physical and mental readjustment and retraining in order to make them useful as riding horses. You can buy ex-racehorses for peanuts, and many people are naive and do not realise the amount of effort they will have to put in just to make it a 'normal' horse.

The racing industry has recognised this and has in recent years put into place ex-racehorse competitions, covering showing, jumping and dressage, in order to showcase exactly how well a racehorse can be retrained. These classes are now very fashionable and contested to a very high standard, showing that ex-racehorses for the most part are perfectly capable of becoming extremely useful animals in a second career. They are an attempt to encourage ex-racer owners to strive for high standards and to become knowledgable about the horse they have brought. Sadly many people buy 'a cheap horse' and are unaware of how to maintain it, and this is where the neglect creeps in. These owners are generally well-meaning but relatively ignorant. (I say relatively, as this kind of owner assumes that their non-racehorse knowledge will cover racehorses too.)

For anyone who is interested, here is the Retraining of Racehorses official site. A friend of mine takes on some very poor cases and has had a lot of success too.

The next issue that has been touched on but not gone into in depth is that the National HAS had lots of changes made in the name of safety. Yet it really doesn't seem to have made much difference to the number of horses falling. Even so, most of the fastest speeds have been recorded in recent years, suggesting that the safety improvements on the course are actually leading to faster speeds and higher risk. A similar thing happened in eventing. After 5 riders died in as many months in 1999, British Eventing brought in safety measures which have led to suggestions that people are now competing beyond their ability, lulled into a false sense of security by safety measures that don't actually compensate for the increased risks taken by the participants.

As for the wealth involved in racing, I would argue that a day at the races is much more financially possible than a day at a football match for most people. I would agree that there are a lot of very, VERY rich people in racing, but there are a lot of very ordinary people involved too. I think it is a much more accessible spectator sport than many other sports out there.

There is nothing I will be able to say, or even want to be able to say, to people who do not like the National that will encourage them to look on it favourably. I am happy with the idea that different people have different views on things and a sensible approach is to allow people their views. I just wanted to shed a bit of light on things that have been skimmed over or missed out from the story of racehorses. I'm sure I could waffle on for hours on the subject, but I think I've typed enough for now!

PS I just want to say to Montysma1 - let me know when you are out and about so I can live up to your expectations. I consider myself a reasonable human being, but if you believe everyone who has ever had anything to do with a horse to be a fuckwit, I would hate to disappoint you!

Backinthebox · 15/04/2012 20:45

Carabos, excellent reference, Barbaro! A story of what happens when sentiment causes significantly more suffering to a horse than the quick alternative. An attempt to heal a broken leg in a horse that sickened even the hardest hearted of the horse world.

difficultpickle · 15/04/2012 20:45

I definitely think that halving the field from 40 to 20 would be a very good idea. From what I've read ATP was fatally injured because he was brought down by another horse. I know that could happen in any race but I would imagine there is a greater probability in the GN because of the number of horses.

Fireandashes · 15/04/2012 20:52

Backinthebox, I applaud you. Excellent post.

LineRunner · 15/04/2012 20:56

The next issue that has been touched on but not gone into in depth is that the National HAS had lots of changes made in the name of safety. Yet it really doesn't seem to have made much difference to the number of horses falling.

I touched on this. Pages ago.

fortyplus · 15/04/2012 20:59

Excellent post Backinthebox.

With regard to equine leg fractures - when my horse suffered her broken pstern it was explanied to me (at the Royal Veterinary College) that the reasons that a successful outcome is often unlikely are as follows:

Horses' bones do not knit back together quickly and cleanly as human bones do. If you or I break a bone then when it's set the bone cells are growing back together within 24 hours and the bond will show little extra growth around the break. A horse's broken bone will take 2-3 weeks to start to knit back together following resetting. When it does the bone cells tend to form a 'mass' around the break site. This is particularly problematic in cases where the bearing surface of a joint has been broken.

For these reasons (and because the physiology of a horse means that the bone will be subject to huge forces) surgery to pin the bone is usually necessary if there is any hope of a successful outcome.

This surgery is complicated and therefore lengthy. My own horse was under general anaesthetic for 4.5 hours. Pneumonia is a likely outcome if the horse is under GA for more than 4 hours.

When the horse recovers from the GA it will sometimes go berserk and thrash the broken leg to pieces in an effort to remove the cast.

The subsequent healing process is unpredictable and the horse has to be x-rayed every few weeks. If the bone is not knitting cleanly the animal has to be destroyed.

Finally when the cast is removed the healed area will sometimes not stand up to the forces imposed on it and breaks again leading to the destruction of the horse.

Often when a horse breaks a leg the soft tissue damage is so extensive that this alone precludes a successful outcome.

And finally if the horse survives all this it will probably never be ridden again. A racehorse that is unrideable can't be kept as a pet. A mare or stallion may possibly be useful for breeding. A gelding would have no future.

Codandchops · 15/04/2012 21:03

Thank you Backinthebox for your excellnt post. I have learned so much about racehorses since yesterday Grin

I really do feel for ATP's owner Sad

minxthemanx · 15/04/2012 21:08

The original question was whether the Grand National is cruel. Despite the pages of highly informed and interesting information about horse physiology, I still don't understand how whipping exhausted animals, injury and death does not equal cruel. Forgive me if I've missed something that explains how this is ok.

MilitaryWag · 15/04/2012 21:12

The GN is losing support year on year. It is nothing but a circus with no real purpose. It was born during a time when animal welfare issues were almost unheard of but because it has been going on for so long it is now part of tradition with people viewing it in an almost romantic way. The fact remains out of 40 runners, 25 didnt even make it past the winning post. It is a hideous spectacle of horse pitched against horse in a frenzy of excitement and near hysteria to see who will survive the 'greatest race on earth' (in other words who will get round and actually finish) I would hope that anyone with an ounce of compassion in their bodies would see this race for what it really is..... an archaic and quite frankly hideous event which should no place in a civilised sociey.
Backinthebox you made some very valid comments.

ilovesooty · 15/04/2012 21:19

Great post, Backinthebox

The next issue that has been touched on but not gone into in depth is that the National HAS had lots of changes made in the name of safety. Yet it really doesn't seem to have made much difference to the number of horses falling. Even so, most of the fastest speeds have been recorded in recent years, suggesting that the safety improvements on the course are actually leading to faster speeds and higher risk

Yes, a point made first by Linerunner and then by me. I think it's significant that there was only one fatality in the 60s, and that was in Foinavon's year. Years ago when the fences were stiffer they simply didn't go as fast.

minxthemanx · 15/04/2012 21:27

Military, I quite agree. In a modern, supposedly civilised society I am baffled by people's needs to use animals in this way. Archaic and cruel - I'm afraid I have read nothing on these many posts that justifies whipping animals and subjecting them to a fair chance of injury or death, just to entertain people. Tho I have learned a lot about the complicated nature of horses' legs. Wink

difficultpickle · 15/04/2012 21:44

Cornelius Lycett (Radio 5 racing commentator) said yesterday something along the lines of he wondered how long the GN would continue.

montysma1 · 15/04/2012 22:15

PS I just want to say to Montysma1 - let me know when you are out and about so I can live up to your expectations. I consider myself a reasonable human being, but if you believe everyone who has ever had anything to do with a horse to be a fuckwit, I would hate to disappoint you!>>>>>>>

Oh its not at all hard not to disapoint me. Just dont place animals is known dangerous situations, whilst declaring your love for them. Really not difficult at all.

Having been around horses all my life and indeed horsey people. I did not indeed state that anyone who had anything to do with horses is a fuckwit. I
stated that people attempting to defend needless death and cruelty, who support a horrible sport and a horrible industry, and who express their sadness at deaths THEY HAVE CAUSED, are indeed fuckwits.

careergirl · 15/04/2012 22:16

Grand National, National Hunt racing will continue

careergirl · 15/04/2012 22:19

re synchronised napping when being shown first jump this was because he was wanting to be with the rest of the field at the starting tape

Flightty · 16/04/2012 07:23

I'm glad if Lysaght said that, Bisjo. I read that John McCririck was very fed up about the race this year.

Apparently he has been campaigning for years for horses who unseat or pull up before the race not to be allowed to run.

So someone out there agrees with me on that at least. Not that I haven't only formed this judgment in the last couple of days.

Flightty · 16/04/2012 07:33

'As the horse and rider were filmed facing the first fence, Miss Balding commented on air: ?I don?t think he fancies it much, you know.? She added afterwards: ?I know that?s a silly thing to say.? Yesterday Miss Balding, an experienced horsewoman, wrote on Twitter: ?It is wrong to wake up the morning after an event still upset about it.?

She also wrote messages saying there are too many horses in the Grand National, meaning they do not have enough room to jump and land safely.
McCririck commented: ?Racing must review whether horses should be allowed to take part if they get loose and run free.

?For years, along with others, I?ve campaigned for horses to be withdrawn if they unnaturally exert themselves at such a crucial moment. The industry must act to cut down this kind of avoidable risk.?

From the Daily Mail

Swipe left for the next trending thread