We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
AN ANIMAL WELFARE charity in the UK has called for safety reforms to the Grand National – as racing chiefs defended the event as “safer than it’s ever been” and one trainer blamed “ignorant” protesters for more fallen horses than usual this year.
The RSPCA is calling for the race to involve fewer horses and for jockeys to lose their whips after dozens of Animal Rising protesters stormed the field at the yearly race on Saturday.
Three horses – Hill Sixteen, Dark Raven and Envoye Special – died during the three-day Aintree Festival last week.
RSPCA policy director Emma Slawinski told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “One of the things we particularly see at the Grand National is a very big field, so lots of horses running together.
“That, of course, causes issues when horses fall and can get in the way of other horses and cause accidents in that way.
“The other thing that we think needs to change very urgently is to see an end of the use of the whip for encouragement – hitting the horses to make them run faster.
“We know that that actually causes more accidents, it makes accidents more likely, makes injuries more likely, so we’d like to see that reform happen as well.”
Nevin Truesdale, chief executive of The Jockey Club, which owns the Aintree racecourse in Merseyside, said measures including softer ground and smaller hurdles have been imposed in recent years.
He told Sky News: “We did have a very good three days’ racing at Britain’s second-biggest spectator sport.
“But we can’t ignore what happened in terms of the fatalities we saw and every fatality we’re seeing is one too many.
“To see three fatalities – and condolences to all connections across the event – obviously it’s something we will be analysing and reviewing.”
“The fact that 99.8% of horses across all of racing come back from races safely – that’s come down by a third over the past 10 years – the sport is safer, the Grand National is safer than it’s ever been.
“But that does not mean that we will stop in terms of our relentless drive to improve welfare standards.”
Truesdale admitted “you will never eliminate risk completely” in the sport but said horses are “born and bred to race” and the activity “drives breeding and sustainability of the breed itself”.
Meanwhile, Sandy Thomson, Hill Sixteen’s trainer, blamed the “ignorant” Animal Rising protesters for more fallen horses at this year’s event.
He told Today: “If we look at the last nine years since the course has been modified, there’s been an average of under two fallers at the first two fences and this year everybody got very uptight about it – horses, jockeys, starters – and there were eight fallers at those first two fences.
“This was all caused by these so-called animal lovers who actually are ignorant and have absolutely no idea about welfare of horses.”
Thomson said, though, that changes could still be made to make the sport safer, including “a shorter run to the first fence and a few less horses on the field”.
The League Against Cruel Sports said the death toll at the Aintree Festival now stands at 62 horses since 2000 – with 16 killed in the Grand National, including two last year.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Racehorses are unbelievably well cared for. Someone of these protestors should visit a racing yard sometime.
@Michael OKelly: and the horse which die every year? I also think your comment should note that whilst the large majority of racehorses are well cared for there is also a significant amount which are not.
@Tipper Irie: but same story goes for non race horses. Some cared for. Some not so much. I do think the vast majority have a great life but i also think the national fences could still be eased another bit.
@Michael OKelly: you may want to add some race horses are well cared for, plenty of cruelty goes on behind the scenes
@Michael OKelly: Yeah that’s right. Unbelievably. As in, I don’t believe you. Animal abusers always come out with those claims, whether horse racing or bullfights and it’s always a lie.
@Tipper Irie: you could say the exact same about any per owner.
@Rui Firmino: are you for real comparing horse racing with a bull fight? I’m not into horse racing personally, but my uncle has a stable for local / national race horses, mostly low grade horses. The care and attention and lifestyle these horses have is second to none. They have the best of everything. Why would they mistreat the health and wellbeing of a horse which they want in pristine condition? Im not saying that no race horse gets mistreated, but again, many non race horses also get mistreated like any other animal it’s down to the owner.
@Michael OKelly:
“The fact that 99.8% of horses across all of racing come back from races safely – that’s come down by a third over the past 10 years – the sport is safer, the Grand National is safer than it’s ever been.”
This is false information.
The 0.2% figure refers to the annual risk of a horses’ death during races run in the UK, not the Grand National specifically. This figure is from the British Horseracing Authority (I have doubts the figure is accurate, see end of this post). Also, race horses are run 7 times per year, this equates to a risk of 0.028% per race (c. 200 race horse deaths per year in the UK). The figure is given in this document:
“Injuries And Fatal Injuries To Racehorses” from the BHA.
However, risk of fatality in the Grand National was 1.3% in recent years i.e. 1.3% of horses that started the race were killed (it was 3.3% about 20 years ago before fences were lowered).
Thus, the Grand National is c. 46 times more dangerous than general horse racing using BHA’s figures.
“The fatality figure has naturally fallen to just 1.3 percent, with five deaths across the 10 editions of the iconic race – that figure was as high as 3.3 percent at the turn of the century.”
References:
Rosanowski, S.M., Chang, Y.M., Stirk, A.J. and Verheyen, K.L., 2018. Risk factors for race-day fatality in flat racing Thoroughbreds in Great Britain (2000 to 2013). PloS one, 13(3), https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0194299p.e0194299.
https://horseracingsense.com/how-often-do-racehorses-race/
Lastly: BHA’s figures do not make sense to me. I know for a fact that c. 200 race horses are killed per year during races, and there are 14,000 race horses registered with the BHA. This means 1.4% of race horses are die racing per year, I really don’t understand how they calculate this 0.2% figure. It seems to occur because BHA document divides deaths / runners, not deaths / horses (recall a horse is run 7 times a year) so 200 deaths / 14,000 horses = 1.4%.
I notice the 1.4% figure is close to the Grand National Fatality rate.
@Michael OKelly: Horses are pumped full of antibiotics, steroids and a vast array of chemical substance. Heard that from a breeder this is why he would never eat horse meat.
@Michael OKelly: Yes, the BHA are sneaky. They are dividing deaths / runners, but horses are run multiple times per year (7 on average). The true risk of death is closer to 1.4% per year per horse (and similar to the Grand Nation i.e. I suspect attention to the Grand National allows is to see the true figure).
Also, a race horses’ career is 2 to 3 years, this means 2.8 – 4.2% of horses die racing over their short career. This also excludes deaths in training.
Of course this does not include other issues with the industry. The fact that 4,000-5,000 horses retire each year of which about 1,300 are slaughtered, though new rules since Jan 2022 excludes race horses slaughtered in the UK from pet food (this effectively bans human consumption too). I suspect these figures and rules exclude race horses exported to slaughter. Remember the Belgian horse meat scandal, when genetic testing discovered horse meat mixed in with beef:
https://www.brusselstimes.com/242983/horse-meat-scandal-belgian-national-on-trial-in-france
“As of January 2022, the slaughter of retired racing horses for human consumption is no longer permitted. Between 2019 and 2021, 4,000 retired racing horses were slaughtered in the UK for human consumption.”
Also, what happens to race horses that are too slow? It was revealed in 2019 that 90% of the 6,000 greyhounds bread per year were put down in Ireland, because they were too slow. Like greyhounds, are they producing too many foals?
@Andrew Lavelle: how many of those are massively funded by the state and promoted as a leading component of Irish economy and national TV? Then again, we are not talking about pet owners are we, so whatabout all you like.
@Michael OKelly: No doubt they are really well cared for but beating them during the race is cruel. That should be banned. The reduction in the number of times the jockey can hit a horse is a cop out. It is till a level field if no beating is allowed.
@Barry Lehane: And all is good while the stable fees are paid by the syndicate owners. what happens they can’t afford those fees when a recession hits like in 2004, I’ll tell you what happens they are picked up from the stable and dumped in a bog. I’ve know many a chap get involved with a horse owners syndicate only for it to back fire and the poor horse ends up suffering. Gambling and animal welfare do not go hand in hand, it’s simple not possible.
@Jason Walsh: I’ll say it again.. it’s the same for every animal / pet etc. It’s down to the owner. Many a dog and cat are left on the side of the road as a result of financial issues. It’s no different for race horses. People are fixated on the racing aspect rather than the bigger picture.
@Tipper Irie: Jockies die every year, it is what it is, without the sport many more horses would die but not so many jockies
@Anne Busher Collins: That’s why a lot of horse fatalities aren’t from broken legs; they are from heart attacks
@Tipper Irie: it’s not whatabout though is it? Plenty pet owners mistreat their animals so let’s not pretend that it’s just horse racing.
Any comments from them about the allegation that the disruptive protests directly contributed to the death of a horse in the Grand National
40 horses is what killed Hill 16.
Far too many, horses are unsighted at the jump, basically don’t see it.
Ireland does not care about animal abuse
@david comerford: Think Monaghan will beat Derry next day out.
@david comerford: this shocking poll proves it. Who cares about animal welfare when you have pundits, massive windfalls, a grand day out, trashy women’s outfits of mini dresses, 7 inch heels, bad tans and hair fascinators, and getting pissed on champagne. Pretentious and cruel indifference.
“The fact that 99.8% of horses across all of racing come back from races safely – that’s come down by a third over the past 10 years – the sport is safer, the Grand National is safer than it’s ever been.”
This is false information.
The 0.2% figure refers to the annual risk of a horses’ death during races run in the UK, not the Grand National specifically. This figure is from the British Horseracing Authority (I have doubts the figure is accurate, see end of this post). Also, race horses are run 7 times per year, this equates to a risk of 0.028% per race (c. 200 race horse deaths per year in the UK). The figure is given in this document:
“Injuries And Fatal Injuries To Racehorses” from the BHA.
However, risk of fatality in the Grand National was 1.3% in recent years i.e. 1.3% of horses that started the race were killed (it was 3.3% about 20 years ago before fences were lowered).
Thus, the Grand National is c. 46 times more dangerous than general horse racing using BHA’s figures.
“The fatality figure has naturally fallen to just 1.3 percent, with five deaths across the 10 editions of the iconic race – that figure was as high as 3.3 percent at the turn of the century.”
References:
Rosanowski, S.M., Chang, Y.M., Stirk, A.J. and Verheyen, K.L., 2018. Risk factors for race-day fatality in flat racing Thoroughbreds in Great Britain (2000 to 2013). PloS one, 13(3), https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0194299p.e0194299.
https://horseracingsense.com/how-often-do-racehorses-race/
Lastly: BHA’s figures do not make sense to me. I know for a fact that c. 200 race horses are killed per year during races, and there are 14,000 race horses registered with the BHA. This means 1.4% of race horses are die racing per year, I really don’t understand how they calculate this 0.2% figure. It seems to occur because BHA document divides deaths / runners, not deaths / horses (recall a horse is run 7 times a year) so 200 deaths / 14,000 horses = 1.4%.
I notice the 1.4% figure is close to the Grand National Fatality rate.
@David Jordan: Thanks for the information,would you have a figure for Ireland, hope you don’t mind me asking.
@Daniel Roche: I really have to go digging, 19 dead so far, c. 50 – 60 deaths per year. We have 10,000 race horses in training / running. This appears to infer a fatality rate of 0.5% per year (1.4% in the UK), but it’s likely not much lower than the UK in reality as many of Irish bred race horses are sent to the UK to race i.e. the number of race horses running here is much lower than the UK.
https://irishhorsedeathwatch.com/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/710764/race-horses-in-training-ireland/
@David Jordan: Thanks, appreciate it.
The vast majority of horse trainers on these Isles come from a farming background. Let’s say these protestors get their way and horse racing is banned. These trainers will just turn back to farming and instead of training horses and giving them a fantastic life, the trainers then farmers will be rearing calves for slaughter. Would that make these protestors happier ? Is the life of a cow worth less than that of a horse?
@Michael OKelly: Yes. Much tastier.
Aw ful sha meful sport, like greyhound coursing, greyhound racing, hunting, shooting, fox hunts, deer culling, dog euthanasia, pig cattle and sheep killi ng for food, non return fishing, exotic pet ownership, dog fighting, etc and all of these activities have one common denominator…
@Monty Carlow: So you support not eating meat.
@Monty Carlow: How do compare horse racing to hunting, shooting and animal slaughter??? Nearly all thoroughbreds are given a really good life and they enjoy racing! That’s where you disconnect. Trainers, owners and workers care more about these horses than some of their own family! You have no idea here.
@Josepi: difference is, they don’t try to make a profit from their own family, and don’t send them on a one way trip to the glue factory if they aren’t quite profitable enough.
@Pauline Gallagher: You have a seriously narrow mind on this topic. Does some of that happen? Yes unfortunately but that’s life. A huge proportion of horses have a really good happy life. They love running! Most owners lose 80% of what they put into racing. There is little money for most people that invest in it.
@david Jordan why have you got Fionnan Sheahan as your avatar ?
I heard one really posh type try to defend horse racing by asserting that horses love to run ,it’s their thing he said to just run around the paddock when they are let out in the morning .I thought I know a few humans like that but not with a wght on their backs and over fences .
No sign of these animal welfare activists to be seen at Ayr, Chepstow, Fairyhouse or Uttoxeter for their Grand Nationals, why, because they have no interest in animal welfare but are more interested in disruption and disorder. A case of rent a mob at a high profile meeting. Cheltenham sees almost as many fatalities but no they’ll go to Aintree because it has a worldwide audience.
@Mark Sheehan: Well they admitted to picking Aintree for the worldwide attention it gets , and I for one applaud them .The hypocrasy of these horse owners is nauseating .They cant resist the lure of the vast rewards , love their horses to death they do .The National is animal cruelty on a large scale , far too many horses ,fallers obstructing the rest ,v high fences etc
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say