# two horses die at scottish grand national



## Jennyharvey (17 April 2011)

Shocking.  

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/horseracing/8456569/Two-horses-die-at-Scottish-Grand-National.html

Will it ever end?


----------



## millhouse (17 April 2011)

I watched the race.  Nothing was said on the television.  As you say - shocking!

Rest in peace dear horses.


----------



## _MizElz_ (17 April 2011)

Very sad. You also have to question how fair the connections of Minella Four Star were to put him in for this - he's run four times in the last two months, having won the Midlands National three weeks ago. It's a big ask...

Not a good time for racing at the moment.


----------



## teagreen (17 April 2011)

What do you suggest, ban racing?

Horses haven't died in the Scottish National since 2002.


----------



## _MizElz_ (17 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			What do you suggest, ban racing?

Horses haven't died in the Scottish National since 2002.
		
Click to expand...

No, I would never suggest that.

I'm a huge fan of racing - but not of seeing horses over-raced. That's not to say that was definitely the cause of MFS's death, and I very much doubt it had any part to play in the death of Dooney's Gate and Ornais. But it is one of my pet hates. I have to confess I felt a bit uncomfortable seeing Denman run at Aintree last week, too - he definitely wasn't on his usual form.

I don't have any answers; it's been on my mind a lot since last weekend, and I've read with interest the varied views of various media figures; the only article I've actually agreed with almost totally has been the one from The Guardian.

You cannot deny it is a bad time for racing at the moment, at least from a media perspective. What with Newbury, the National and the Scots National, the sport has definitely taken a battering, and it is hard to see how it will ever really recover, IMO.


----------



## teagreen (17 April 2011)

_MizElz_ said:



			No, I would never suggest that.

I'm a huge fan of racing - but not of seeing horses over-raced. That's not to say that was definitely the cause of MFS's death, and I very much doubt it had any part to play in the death of Dooney's Gate and Ornais. But it is one of my pet hates. I have to confess I felt a bit uncomfortable seeing Denman run at Aintree last week, too - he definitely wasn't on his usual form.

I don't have any answers; it's been on my mind a lot since last weekend, and I've read with interest the varied views of various media figures; the only article I've actually agreed with almost totally has been the one from The Guardian.

You cannot deny it is a bad time for racing at the moment, at least from a media perspective. What with Newbury, the National and the Scots National, the sport has definitely taken a battering, and it is hard to see how it will ever really recover, IMO.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, Mizelz, we cross posted and my comment wasn't aimed at your post. 

I don't like seeing them over-raced either, but it's hard to comment when you don't know what goes on in the yards. I know a few didn't get runs earlier in the season because of the bad weather, so they are giving them more now, and I suppose if they look fit and well at home and show their usual spark then why not let them race. Horses in the 60's/70's raced a lot more frequently than they do now, and I've read articles from people saying 'stop wrapping them in cotton wool, if they look well then run them'. 

Racing is growing in popularity all the time and I think, within the 'country sector' anyway, is going to keep going that way. All the local meetings and point to points I've been to have been absolutely packed, and Cheltenham saw some pretty healthy figures too this year, and I read on Kim Bailey's website that horses were reaching massive prices at the last sale he was at, I'm sure he quoted over £200,000 for one. 

It has been a bad spell for racing, but I'm still more concerned with how Peter Toole is doing than the horses that died, sad as it is. As I said, horses haven't died in the Scottish National since 2002, it was just unfortunate that 2 died this year.


----------



## Jennyharvey (17 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			What do you suggest, ban racing?

Horses haven't died in the Scottish National since 2002.
		
Click to expand...

I think most people now know where i stand on racing.  Its never gonna be banned, but i would be all for a ban never the less.  

Its a terrible time for racing atm, hopefully more people will see this side of it, and perhaps think twice about betting on these poor animals.


----------



## teagreen (17 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			I think most people now know where i stand on racing.  Its never gonna be banned, but i would be all for a ban never the less.  

Its a terrible time for racing atm, hopefully more people will see this side of it, and perhaps think twice about betting on these poor animals.
		
Click to expand...

They are a hell of a lot better off than a lot of horses I have seen.


----------



## Jennyharvey (17 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			They are a hell of a lot better off than a lot of horses I have seen.
		
Click to expand...

I would agree.  Its unbelievable the amount of cruelty that goes on in the horse world, and all animals.  I think that people who want to own an animal should be trained, and inspected, so that they actually know what they are doing.  It may not be an easy thing to do, to monitor all pets and horses, but i think that something has to be done.


----------



## 3Beasties (17 April 2011)

Really?! 

I watched the race, only one fell (I think) bringing another down with it, they both got up and galloped on, quite a few were pulled up but I didn't think it was due to injury!

*tootles of to open link*


Oh that is a shame, RIP beautiful boys


----------



## Mrs B (17 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			Shocking.  

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/horseracing/8456569/Two-horses-die-at-Scottish-Grand-National.html

Will it ever end?
		
Click to expand...

So just to clarify - do you support Animal Aid?

Edited to say - have just caught Countryfile's item where they shot 4 Dartmoors - poor scraggy, ill-bred, malnourished little beggars. They were 'free' but given the choice, I'd have rather been a racehorse. Who wouldn't?


----------



## teagreen (17 April 2011)

Having just watched 4 Dartmoor Hill ponies be shot on Countryfile because they have no job and are not up to standard (their words exactly), it just shows further that racing is NOT the only 'evil' in the equine world. Not saying that these ponies shouldn't have been shot (better that than spiral into neglect and die of starvation), but people go on about how awful racing is - take a look around.


----------



## Spot_the_Risk (17 April 2011)

Also having watched Countryfile, I wish I'd got to Chagford market earlier and bought the spotted mare that kicked the auctioneer!


----------



## Dobiegirl (17 April 2011)

Regal Heights died after crossing the line presumabley of a heart attack and Minella Four Star pulled up fatally injured.

I would still rather be a racehorse than a little miserable Dartmoor pony, did you see those four bodies under the tarp. not 2 bodies as in the Grand National  but four and thats the ones we know about. But Ive seen nothing about this from the supporters of Animal Aid.


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (17 April 2011)

Dobiegirl said:



			Regal Heights died after crossing the line presumabley of a heart attack and Minella Four Star pulled up fatally injured.

I would still rather be a racehorse than a little miserable Dartmoor pony, did you see those four bodies under the tarp. not 2 bodies as in the Grand National  but four and thats the ones we know about. But Ive seen nothing about this from the supporters of Animal Aid.
		
Click to expand...

Animal Aid don't want to help wild animals. They want to take everyones pets and working animals and set them free ... so they can end up like those dartmoor ponies.


----------



## Mrs B (17 April 2011)

EKW said:



			Animal Aid don't want to help wild animals. They want to take everyones pets and working animals and set them free ... so they can end up like those dartmoor ponies.
		
Click to expand...

My point exactly, EW


----------



## Over2You (17 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			Horses haven't died in the Scottish National since 2002.
		
Click to expand...

So, that makes their deaths acceptable, does it?


----------



## Over2You (17 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			It has been a bad spell for racing, but I'm still more concerned with how Peter Toole is doing than the horses that died, sad as it is.
		
Click to expand...

At least he had a choice and knew the risks. The poor horses do not. Never have, never will.


----------



## teagreen (17 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			So, that makes their deaths acceptable, does it?
		
Click to expand...

Of course it doesn't. It was very sad. But what I'm saying is that the Scottish National is not a death fest.

Over2You, what would you like to do with the racing industry?


----------



## 3Beasties (17 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			At least he had a choice and knew the risks. The poor horses do not. Never have, never will.
		
Click to expand...

So if a fireman was seriously injured/died doing his job would it be fine because 'he had a choice and knew the risks'?


----------



## Over2You (17 April 2011)

3Beasties said:



			So if a fireman was seriously injured/died doing his job would it be fine because 'he had a choice and knew the risks'?
		
Click to expand...

Bad example. A firefighter doing his or her job would *NOT* put the life of an innocent creature at stake in the line of duty!!


----------



## MurphysMinder (17 April 2011)

Dobiegirl said:



			Regal Heights died after crossing the line presumabley of a heart attack and Minella Four Star pulled up fatally injured.

I would still rather be a racehorse than a little miserable Dartmoor pony, did you see those four bodies under the tarp. not 2 bodies as in the Grand National  but four and thats the ones we know about. But Ive seen nothing about this from the supporters of Animal Aid.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly!


----------



## _MizElz_ (17 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			At least he had a choice and knew the risks. The poor horses do not. Never have, never will.
		
Click to expand...

Over2You - I've read a few of your posts on the subject of racing and have come to the conclusion that you are the kind of person who is so blinded by your own convictions, you fail to actually even contemplate the other side of the argument. The pro/anti-racing argument is similar to the pro/anti-hunting one, and I firmly believe there are pros and cons in both cases. I myself try to maintain a balanced and objective view - granted, it doesnt always work. But it angers me when people present a continuously biased, one-sided argument without ample facts to back up what they're saying. And you may well come back and say that racehorses are ill treated, that they run because they are forced, that they are treated as machines by their ignorant owners, and in some cases, I believe you would be right. But to apply this to the entire racing industry would be ludicrous; it's a huge, blanket statement to make, and one that I really dont think can be substantiated. 

It is clear that you care very much for animals, and I'm not for a second saying that should change, but I think you need to consider the bigger picture.


----------



## Over2You (17 April 2011)

3Beasties said:



			So if a fireman was seriously injured/died doing his job would it be fine because 'he had a choice and knew the risks'?
		
Click to expand...

Additionally, if the same number of jockeys were being killed, there would be a damned site more going into reviewing the place of racing in modern society. A 'sport' that kills as many animals each and every year should be *BANNED!!*


----------



## teagreen (17 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			Additionally, if the same number of jockeys were being killed, there would be a damned site more going into reviewing the place of racing in modern society. A 'sport' that kills as many animals each and every year should be *BANNED!!*

Click to expand...

For the millioneth time - what would you do with the horses if it was banned tomorrow, like you so wish?


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (17 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			Bad example. A firefighter doing his or her job would *NOT* put the life of an innocent creature at stake in the line of duty!!
		
Click to expand...

&#8626;&#8626;Um what planet do you live on? Just a week ago i had 3 firetrucks chasing me and 2 others down the road. Full blues and twos and they most certainly werent slowing down! One we could have coped with but not 3! We ended up cantering, yes cantering! Down the road to dart into a field entrance as they ignored us asking them to slow down a fraction whilst we trotted out of their way. We were on racehorses at the time so 1. They were endangering 3 innocent creatures and 2. They endangered 3 racehorses going about their work.


----------



## _MizElz_ (17 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			For the millioneth time - what would you do with the horses if it was banned tomorrow, like you so wish?
		
Click to expand...

This is such a key point for all anti-racing people to consider.

I'm a teacher, and the other day, I was having a big debate with my Year 10 students regarding the issue of foxhunting, and whether the ban should be enforced more stringently. Although we're a rural school, the majority of students are largely against hunting, so once I had listened to their initial arguments, I presented them with a few simple facts for consideration. The statistics that shocked them the most were the ones regarding the numbers of horses and hounds that would have to be destroyed if foxhunting were to be outlawed completely - they were stunned.

The figures for racing, were it to be banned, would be equally disturbing, I feel.


----------



## Alec Swan (17 April 2011)

_MizElz_ said:



			Over2You - I've read a few of your posts on the subject of racing and have come to the conclusion that you are the kind of person who is so blinded by your own convictions, you fail to actually even contemplate the other side of the argument. The pro/anti-racing argument is similar to the pro/anti-hunting one, and I firmly believe there are pros and cons in both cases. I myself try to maintain a balanced and objective view - granted, it doesnt always work. But it angers me when people present a continuously biased, one-sided argument without ample facts to back up what they're saying. And you may well come back and say that racehorses are ill treated, that they run because they are forced, that they are treated as machines by their ignorant owners, and in some cases, I believe you would be right. But to apply this to the entire racing industry would be ludicrous; it's a huge, blanket statement to make, and one that I really dont think can be substantiated. 

It is clear that you care very much for animals, and I'm not for a second saying that should change, but I think you need to consider the bigger picture.
		
Click to expand...

Common sense,  and correct.

Alec.


----------



## Mrs B (17 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			At least he had a choice and knew the risks. The poor horses do not. Never have, never will.
		
Click to expand...

There are far worse fates in life (for every being on the planet) than dying as a racehorse may.

IMO you can't (and shouldn't) bubblewrap every life-form on Earth. Or else, what's the point? It's called LIFE for a reason! You may as well dictate that everything comes into the world, lives an average lifespan in a hermetically sealed environment which is dictated by Man as to be the most suitable (and I do include Man himself here!) and then shuffles off at it's allotted biologically pre-destined moment.

Or is that what you wish for?


----------



## Over2You (17 April 2011)

_MizElz_ said:



			Over2You - I've read a few of your posts on the subject of racing and have come to the conclusion that you are the kind of person who is so blinded by your own convictions, you fail to actually even contemplate the other side of the argument. The pro/anti-racing argument is similar to the pro/anti-hunting one, and I firmly believe there are pros and cons in both cases. I myself try to maintain a balanced and objective view - granted, it doesnt always work. But it angers me when people present a continuously biased, one-sided argument without ample facts to back up what they're saying. And you may well come back and say that racehorses are ill treated, that they run because they are forced, that they are treated as machines by their ignorant owners, and in some cases, I believe you would be right. But to apply this to the entire racing industry would be ludicrous; it's a huge, blanket statement to make, and one that I really dont think can be substantiated. 

It is clear that you care very much for animals, and I'm not for a second saying that should change, but I think you need to consider the bigger picture.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you for not shooting me down. However, my opinion of racing will *NEVER* change. I cannot see anything from the side of people who find it acceptable to put animals at such high risk in the name of sport and entertainment. If racing were banned, I would have no sympathy for those who would be jobless. They earned their money out of the pain and suffering of animals. Instead, they could turn their facilities into sanctuaries/retirement homes for the horses and charge the public to go and see them. A lower income perhaps, but it would still be a much kinder way of getting money out of the horses. To put them under so much stress and making them jump those horrid fences is as cruel as it is barbaric. It is something that should be consigned to the history books.


----------



## teagreen (17 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			Thank you for not shooting me down. However, my opinion of racing will *NEVER* change. I cannot see anything from the side of people who find it acceptable to put animals at such high risk in the name of sport and entertainment. If racing were banned, I would have no sympathy for those who would be jobless. They earned their money out of the pain and suffering of animals. Instead, they could turn their facilities into sanctuaries/retirement homes for the horses and charge the public to go and see them. A lower income perhaps, but it would still be a much kinder way of getting money out of the horses. To put them under so much stress and making them jump those horrid fences is as cruel as it is barbaric. It is something that should be consigned to the history books.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, Over2You, but that idea is completely ridiculous.

The horses would be SHOT and you know it. Thouands of them, mares, foals, in training racers, stallions. A few may find homes, but many of those would end up entering a spiral of neglect and die a lonely, starving death in some forgotten about fields.

The public would not pay to go and see a bunch of old racehorses. Nor would it make enough to keep them. So they'd be shot. That'd be acceptable, would it.

What about farmers? Riding schools? Dressage riders? Show producers? Showjumpers? They make their money out of animals, and I have seen much worse suffering in these places. So you want all these banned too then?


----------



## Kadastorm (17 April 2011)

Teagreen is right. 
There is no way those horses would be able to be kept. People are giving their horses away already due to not being able to afford them, what makes you think all the race horses are going to live wonderful lives, grazing in fields? there would be a HUGE cull, some may be re homed but most shot. 
As it says in the H&H mag "what the race gives the horse population outweighs what it takes".
And i would also much rather be a race horse than a dartmoor pony.


----------



## Over2You (17 April 2011)

Mrs B said:



			There are far worse fates in life (for every being on the planet) than dying as a racehorse may.

IMO you can't (and shouldn't) bubblewrap every life-form on Earth. Or else, what's the point? It's called LIFE for a reason! You may as well dictate that everything comes into the world, lives an average lifespan in a hermetically sealed environment which is dictated by Man as to be the most suitable (and I do include Man himself here!) and then shuffles off at it's allotted biologically pre-destined moment.

Or is that what you wish for?
		
Click to expand...

I can accept horse deaths from natural causes and accidents. However, I will never accept the death of a horse if the cause was the result of racing. Racing is purely for human greed and glory. I am also for taking risks - just as long as I am only endangering myself. Not asking a horse to run his/herself to the point of collapsing or suffering a horrific fall.


----------



## _MizElz_ (17 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			Thank you for not shooting me down. However, my opinion of racing will *NEVER* change. I cannot see anything from the side of people who find it acceptable to put animals at such high risk in the name of sport and entertainment. If racing were banned, I would have no sympathy for those who would be jobless. They earned their money out of the pain and suffering of animals. Instead, they could turn their facilities into sanctuaries/retirement homes for the horses and charge the public to go and see them. A lower income perhaps, but it would still be a much kinder way of getting money out of the horses. To put them under so much stress and making them jump those horrid fences is as cruel as it is barbaric. It is something that should be consigned to the history books.
		
Click to expand...

It would be interesting for you to ring the likes of Greatwood or Heroes (or any of the other existing racehorse rehabilitation centres) to ask them how much money they actually earn from charging people to go and see the horses...

The reality, and I'm sure, deep down, you realise this, is that if racing WERE to be abolished, a few famous horses MIGHT just end up in lovely retirement sanctuaries. The vast majority, however, would be shipped off to the likes of Potters and Turners in their thousands.   

I really have to take issue with your statement about horses being 'made to jump those horrid fences.' If a horse doesn't want to jump, by and large, it will stop. There are occasional refusals in racing, and I actually feel heartened whenever I see this happen, as it seems to prove a point - if a horse doesnt want to jump, it won't. The same for horses refusing to start (not just racing, either - remember the famous eventing example of a year or so ago?) Look at King John's Castle in the National last year. Can't, shan't, won't - and he didn't.

Again, you'll probably come back and just tell me that horses are so conditioned they know no better - but what of the loose horses who continue to jump the fences with the rest of the field? Nobody is forcing them. Not in the true sense of the word 'force'.


----------



## Dobiegirl (17 April 2011)

Its impossible to have a proper debate with someone who feels all the racehorses could retire to a farm funded by the visiting general public.

So in your perfect world after banning racing and retiring them where would you next turn your attention eventing,polo, sj, dressage or perhaps plough horses.


----------



## Over2You (17 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			Sorry, Over2You, but that idea is completely ridiculous.

The horses would be SHOT and you know it. Thouands of them, mares, foals, in training racers, stallions. A few may find homes, but many of those would end up entering a spiral of neglect and die a lonely, starving death in some forgotten about fields.

The public would not pay to go and see a bunch of old racehorses. Nor would it make enough to keep them. So they'd be shot. That'd be acceptable, would it.

What about farmers? Riding schools? Dressage riders? Show producers? Showjumpers? They make their money out of animals, and I have seen much worse suffering in these places. So you want all these banned too then?
		
Click to expand...

So, the people you racing supporters say love their animals, and who apparently think the world of them, would have no qualms about having them shot. Are you now admitting that the horses are in fact seen as disposable commodities and are not actually loved that much after all? Please do not try to compare racing to other horse sports. None of them are as punishing, nor are any of them responsible for as many horrific deaths. If any of those sports killed as many animals, then yes, I would be all for having them banned too.


----------



## Mrs B (17 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			I can accept horse deaths from natural causes and accidents. However, I will never accept the death of a horse if the cause was the result of racing. Racing is purely for human greed and glory. I am also for taking risks - just as long as I am only endangering myself. Not asking a horse to run his/herself to the point of collapsing or suffering a horrific fall.
		
Click to expand...

I was right then - the 'bubble-wrap' effect.


----------



## Alec Swan (17 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			....... Instead, they could turn their facilities into sanctuaries/retirement homes for the horses and charge the public to go and see them. A lower income perhaps, but it would still be a much kinder way of getting money out of the horses.......
		
Click to expand...

O2Y,  whilst I genuinely have no intention of "shooting you down",  you cannot be further from the truth.  Perhaps a very small percentage of horses retire and enjoy that retirement.  The bulk of those poor creatures which end up incarcerated in rescue centres,  live lives of misery.  Charging the public to gawp at them,  should be an embarrassment.  

I accept,  without question,  that your thoughts are founded upon a caring approach.  The problem is that it if we are to put the well being,  of the animal,  before our own,  and we have to accept that,  to face our responsibilities,  then we don't just foist them off onto a free disposal system,  and in the main,  that's what rescue centres are.  I would that I was wrong,  sadly I don't think that I am.

Alec.


----------



## jump_racing (17 April 2011)

One of the horses who died was from our yard. I can assure you all that we are greatly saddened by it. He was a lovely horse who died of a heart attack, which could of happened during a piece of work. Thank god the jockey is ok, we have had enough bad injuries happen just lately, Pete Toole being one  who is still in a very bad way. I haven't read any other replys but it upsets me that the general opinion is that none of us in racing care, of course we do, but believe me there are worse things for the horses to be doing. As i have said in my other posts ' treated like kings' springs to mind
.


----------



## _MizElz_ (17 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			I am also for taking risks - just as long as I am only endangering myself. Not asking a horse to run his/herself to the point of collapsing or suffering a horrific fall.
		
Click to expand...


Are you against horse riding full stop?

Everytime you set foot in the stirrup, you are risking yourself AND your horse, simply by the very nature of being the one 'in control.' Cases in point:

Last year, I took my mare out for a gentle hack around the lanes. We were hit by a concrete lorry who had been going far too fast. I fell off; my horse was injured. Did I endanger her? Yes - had I chosen not to ride on the road that day, she would never have been hurt.

Seven years ago, my horse and I suffered a horrific rotational fall during a schooling session; she came down on top of me, and although she suffered no long lasting injuries, it must have been pretty horrible for her. Not at all pleasant for her, but a risk of the sport. Did I endanger her? Yes - because I asked her to jump in the first place. But that is what she was bred for, and that is one of the reasons I ride. 

Finally, a friend of mine took her beloved, peak-of-fitness 13 year old gelding out for a nice long hack one day, and he dropped dead beneath her as they galloped up a hill. Did she endanger him? Yes, because if he'd stayed in the stable, he would arguably have lived to see another day - although who knows for how long. Did she ask him to run himself to the point of collapse? Well no, because she didnt INTEND for him to drop dead, and he was fit, healthy and happy in himself. But ultimately, asking him to gallop led to his death, so....

Do you see what I'm saying? No person who agrees with horse riding in general could claim to be against racing purely because of the risk to the horse. We ALL risk our horses.


----------



## teagreen (17 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			So, the people you racing supporters say love their animals, and who apparently think the world of them, would have no qualms about having them shot. Are you now admitting that the horses are in fact seen as disposable commodities and are not actually loved that much after all? Please do not try to compare racing to other horse sports. None of them are as punishing, nor are any of them responsible for as many horrific deaths. If any of those sports killed as many animals, then yes, I would be all for having them banned too.
		
Click to expand...

Oh come on. Racing is a business. They are not pets. I have show horses, and if they couldn't be shown anymore and were simply eating up my money with no purpose, I couldn't keep them. I think you will find the same in all areas of equine business. Of course they are loved, but if they are not making money, do you really think people in this hard pushed climate could afford to keep them? My father is a farmer - he cares very much for his cows, but if they weren't making him money, he couldn't afford to keep them. It will be the same thing for all the show producers I know, the showjumpers, the dressage riders, the eventers, etc etc etc.

As Down said in the Racing Post - there is no tyrany as great as ignorance. Racings deaths are very public. Show horses and show jumpers and happy hackers deaths are not documented, so you can't see how many die of awful things. Why don't you go and protest about the dartmoor hill ponies we all saw being shot on Countryfile tonight? That's something you could make a difference about. Only people with little concern for animal welfare want racing banned, any professional will tell you that.


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (17 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			. If racing were banned, I would have no sympathy for those who would be jobless. They earned their money out of the pain and suffering of animals.

 To put them under so much stress and making them jump those horrid fences is as cruel as it is barbaric. It is something that should be consigned to the history books.
		
Click to expand...

So everyone that works in the racing industry are cruel, heartless barstewards? We earn our money by working our horses to the best of their ability so that when they do go out onto the track they perform at their best and stand the best chance of coming home, hopefully in front. We don't train them with pain and suffering. They say that a horses mood reflects it's riders - well considering that the people I work with a bunch of jolly muppets I would say that our horses are pretty darned happy and energetic too. They look forward to their work each day. They tow us up and down those gallops eyeing up their work partner and trying to out do them. They are competative, we are competative. We want our horses to do well but first and foremost we want them to come back in one piece so we give the best education you could possibly ask for. 

The pain and suffering in racing is on the part of the stable staff. I can assure you that there is nothing more heart wrenching and gutting than running down the track to your horse knowing that you are going to be bringing home an empty bridle. We don't treat our horses as just another machine, they are well loved and well looked after - as if they were our own. Nore often than not we have to remind ourselves that we don't actually own them and the owners can send them to whichever racemeeting they wish to run them at.

As for those horrid fences - Hurdles flatten to the floor without much pressure. Chase fences are actually only 1.5ft high of solid material. The top few feet is just stacked birch that you can go through to your hearts content.

At least racing is open about their deaths and injuries. I'm sure if you delved deep enough you find many fatalities in eventing and show jumping. You would find more stress in a dressage yard and far more cases of laminitus in showing yards.

Over 2 You you are actually offensive in your comments. I see you come from Central Scotland. Please take the time to visit one of the trainers from that neck of the woods, Nick Alexander, Susan Bradburne, Lucinda Russell, Lucy Normile or from Glasgow Jim Goldie. You may also wish to visit Perth Racecourse and see first hand how happy and well looked after the horses there are.


----------



## Over2You (17 April 2011)

_MizElz_ said:



			It would be interesting for you to ring the likes of Greatwood or Heroes (or any of the other existing racehorse rehabilitation centres) to ask them how much money they actually earn from charging people to go and see the horses...

The reality, and I'm sure, deep down, you realise this, is that if racing WERE to be abolished, a few famous horses MIGHT just end up in lovely retirement sanctuaries. The vast majority, however, would be shipped off to the likes of Potters and Turners in their thousands.   

I really have to take issue with your statement about horses being 'made to jump those horrid fences.' If a horse doesn't want to jump, by and large, it will stop. *There are occasional refusals in racing, and I actually feel heartened whenever I see this happen*, as it seems to prove a point - if a horse doesnt want to jump, it won't. The same for horses refusing to start (not just racing, either - remember the famous eventing example of a year or so ago?) Look at King John's Castle in the National last year. Can't, shan't, won't - and he didn't.

Again, you'll probably come back and just tell me that horses are so conditioned they know no better - but what of the loose horses who continue to jump the fences with the rest of the field? Nobody is forcing them. Not in the true sense of the word 'force'.
		
Click to expand...

I certainly did not feel "heartened" when I saw a horse slamming on the brakes, only to crash into a solid fence and snap his leg (if I can find that video again I will point you in its direction). Nor do I feel "heartened" when I know that the horse I just saw refusing will only be entered into another race.


----------



## Jennyharvey (17 April 2011)

Over2you, i agree wholeheartedly with you, i would love to see all animals free from exploitation.  Unfortunately it aint ever gonna happen.  

Ive said in other posts, that we are too deep in this ***** of using others, money, ego.  We cant go back now.  Its not possible anymore to undomesticate animals, and have them roam free.  I would love to live in a world where we dont feel the need to use others, people and animals, but in reality, its not possible.  

Maybe if man never thought about domesticating animals at the dawn of time, we would never be in this situation of animal abuse and neglect.  Not just in racing, but for all animals. But like i said, we really are in too deep to change things around now.  We just have to make the most of it now.  Helping animals, charities, shelters, and all others who need our help.


----------



## Mrs B (17 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			Over2you, i agree wholeheartedly with you, i would love to see all animals free from exploitation.  Unfortunately it aint ever gonna happen.  

Ive said in other posts, that we are too deep in this ***** of using others, money, ego.  We cant go back now.  Its not possible anymore to undomesticate animals, and have them roam free.  I would love to live in a world where we dont feel the need to use others, people and animals, but in reality, its not possible.  

Maybe if man never thought about domesticating animals at the dawn of time, we would never be in this situation of animal abuse and neglect.  Not just in racing, but for all animals. But like i said, we really are in too deep to change things around now.  We just have to make the most of it now.  Helping animals, charities, shelters, and all others who need our help.
		
Click to expand...

You haven't answered my question, JennyHarvey - but I take it as read that you support Animal Aid.

Are you 'aint ever gonna' answer honestly? And where exactly is this 'roam free' you talk of?

If you (and Over2You) wised up a bit, saw the world as it IS and tried to understand the way it works, you might be in a much better position to actually DO something for equines who are *really* in need (such as live exports or those abandoned in fields to their 'freedom') rather than belonging to Planet Fluffy and berating the areas of the horse world which are very well regulated already, but are easy targets for you because of their prominence in the media.


----------



## caitlineloise (17 April 2011)

I wouldn't normally like to get involved in a debate but the 'racing' subject really gets me, It's seems people get wind of the press and go into uproar, horses die in low profile racing all the time, you just don't hear of it.

These horses are bred for a purpose, they are not pets, and as I believe somebody else has said, I bet a lot of people take their horses XC or SJ, is there no risk in that then? Hacking, no risk in that? I bet if somebody did figures, there would be an equal amount of horses that died in all the work you think is acceptable for them, and the racing environment.

I'm not normally argumentative, but this really get's at me! Of course I'm upset when I see a horse go down and know it didn't get up again, but jesus, they died doing what they loved. They where bred for that, if they weren't going to go into that sport, they wouldn't of been born, A LOT of people would be out of work. All airy fairy people think everybody that works with racehorses are evil, racehorses are probably looked after more than your bog standard horse, they are doing what they love to do every day, not just the day they go to race. Do all your horses not like a good blast? I bet thats what they enjoy more than schooling and a nice steady hack..


----------



## Jennyharvey (17 April 2011)

Mrs B said:



			You haven't answered my question, JennyHarvey - but I take it as read that you support Animal Aid.

Are you 'aint ever gonna' answer honestly? And where exactly is this 'roam free' you talk of?

If you (and Over2You) wised up a bit, saw the world as it IS and tried to understand the way it works, you might be in a much better position to actually DO something for equines who are *really* in need (such as live exports or those abandoned in fields to their 'freedom') rather than belonging to Planet Fluffy and berating the areas of the horse world which are very well regulated already, but are easy targets for you because of their prominence in the media.
		
Click to expand...

Yes i do support animal aid, yes i do ride as well, yes im a hypocrite, which im fully aware off, i do have reasons in which i do still ride, so feel free to have a go at me if you wish.  Obviously you didnt read my post fully, otherwise you would understand that i dont disagree with what others are saying.  Will animals ever be free?  NO.   Will we ever stop exploiting animals?  NO.  I know that as well as any one else.  Do i agree that we need to exploit animals?  NO.  But like i said, it really doesnt matter if i think that.  Its never gonna change that.  So i will happily have my views on it, others will have there views on it.


----------



## Ignition (17 April 2011)

You should all read this blog about racehorses, it's very good. http://justhelens.blogspot.com/


----------



## Dobiegirl (17 April 2011)

Ignition a very good blog. Everyone who supports racing has said the same thing over and over again but it falls on a few deaf ears. There is none so blind as those that wont see and they have a different agenda to the rest of us.

Without racing horse welfare would be a lot poorer as racing has poured thousands of pounds into things like grass sickness & laminitis to name but a few.

Animal Aid would rather pour their money into highlighting the downside of racing as they see it and not in helping Dartmoor hill ponies who is the biggest hyprocrite?.


----------



## BSJAlove (17 April 2011)

O2Y get in the real world!


----------



## nonrunner (18 April 2011)

I have been signed up to this forum for quite a while but just lurk and dont post but as i work in racing(obvious by the name i guess hehe !) i have been paying
alot of attention to all the racing posts at the moment and the same points keep coming out from both sides the one about
them being forced to do this more so than others.
racehorses love what they do and when they dont,boy let me tell you they let you know about it and i fully understand
from another perspective when people say they the only reason they come across as loving what they do is because its
all they know which is also true to a point but what alot of the anti racing peole are not seem to be grasping are that
these animals are bred for this and this only.They are not bred a pets/field toys/happy hackers yet they are treated with the up-most
care,love,time and attention equal to or even more to all the family horse/pony out there but they are still a working animal 
at the end of the day not a pet.

sorry if this i a repeat of what others have previously said, im getting a bit muddled with all the national posts lately !


----------



## luckyoldme (18 April 2011)

this is the scariest forum on the net i reckon. I dont like racing and i will never watch the gn again . I am soft and sentimental and my horse will be with me for life... however i did many moons ago work with tbs at stud and we just have to realise that most competetive equestrian folk view their horses differently to us sentamental folk. My horse had a long working life and his owner passed him on when he could no longer do his job. i picked up the pieces and now he is enjoying his life as a happy hacker with me. the two worlds are completely different but can compliment each other. sometimes without being bitchy.


----------



## JanetGeorge (18 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			Shocking.  

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/horseracing/8456569/Two-horses-die-at-Scottish-Grand-National.html

Will it ever end?
		
Click to expand...

It's a shame that newspapers don't carry more headlines about the dozens/hundreds of horses who die each week from starvation, neglect - or just through being dumped at knacker yards because no-one wants them and they're worth nothing!  It would bring a bit of perspective to the subject!


----------



## JanetGeorge (18 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			Yes i do support animal aid, yes i do ride as well, yes im a hypocrite, which im fully aware off, i do have reasons in which i do still ride, so feel free to have a go at me if you wish.  Obviously you didnt read my post fully, otherwise you would understand that i dont disagree with what others are saying.  Will animals ever be free?  NO.   Will we ever stop exploiting animals?  NO.  I know that as well as any one else.  Do i agree that we need to exploit animals?  NO.  But like i said, it really doesnt matter if i think that.  Its never gonna change that.  So i will happily have my views on it, others will have there views on it.
		
Click to expand...

NO horse rider should support Animal Aid.  While it often comes across as a 'reasonable' animal welfare group it IS an extreme animal 'rights' group.  It is campaigning against animal experiments, factory farming, wildlife culls, and *the use of animals for sport and leisure*  That includes ANY form of horse riding!

That doesn't mean horse riders shouldn't be concerned about welfare aspects of racing or any other equestrian sport - but I'd be careful who you get into bed with!


----------



## Over2You (18 April 2011)

EKW said:



			So everyone that works in the racing industry are cruel, heartless barstewards? We earn our money by working our horses to the best of their ability so that when they do go out onto the track they perform at their best and stand the best chance of coming home, hopefully in front. We don't train them with pain and suffering. They say that a horses mood reflects it's riders - well considering that the people I work with a bunch of jolly muppets I would say that our horses are pretty darned happy and energetic too. They look forward to their work each day. They tow us up and down those gallops eyeing up their work partner and trying to out do them. They are competative, we are competative. We want our horses to do well but first and foremost we want them to come back in one piece so we give the best education you could possibly ask for. 

The pain and suffering in racing is on the part of the stable staff. I can assure you that there is nothing more heart wrenching and gutting than running down the track to your horse knowing that you are going to be bringing home an empty bridle. We don't treat our horses as just another machine, they are well loved and well looked after - as if they were our own. Nore often than not we have to remind ourselves that we don't actually own them and the owners can send them to whichever racemeeting they wish to run them at.

As for those horrid fences - Hurdles flatten to the floor without much pressure. Chase fences are actually only 1.5ft high of solid material. The top few feet is just stacked birch that you can go through to your hearts content.

At least racing is open about their deaths and injuries. I'm sure if you delved deep enough you find many fatalities in eventing and show jumping. You would find more stress in a dressage yard and far more cases of laminitus in showing yards.

Over 2 You you are actually offensive in your comments. I see you come from Central Scotland. Please take the time to visit one of the trainers from that neck of the woods, Nick Alexander, Susan Bradburne, Lucinda Russell, Lucy Normile or from Glasgow Jim Goldie. You may also wish to visit Perth Racecourse and see first hand how happy and well looked after the horses there are.
		
Click to expand...

If hurdles were as safe, then why do so many horses die from falls during hurdle racing? Why is that 69 horses died between the 13th of March 2007 and the 12th of March 2008? Why all those fatalities (which happened to be four more than chasing)? As for the 1.5ft of solid material.  Let me picture horses jumping over something rigid and solid of about the same starting height as a puissance wall. Now let me picture them doing so from a fast paced gallop. Now let me picture the inevitable carnage. Oh, wait, I have already seen that far too many times to count!! 

You say again about how much the people in racing love the horses (paragraph 2), but why involve yourself in a sport knowing fine well that retuning with an empty bridle is a strong possibility. On average, 1 out of every 35 NH horses starting the season will not see the end of it.

Please do not be offended if I do not take you up on visiting those trainers you named. Or Perth racecourse. I do not wish to see horses who could very easily end his or her life in the name of sport.

Please also tell me exactly what it is you love about racing. I was discussing this with a couple of friends and my Mother the other day, but we were all stumped to come up with a reason.


----------



## mon (18 April 2011)

As non runner stated these animals are bred for racing, just like farm animals bred for meat/mlik and without these uses for them they wouldnt be alive, they are treated well in everyday life and if humans didn,t breed them to use then how many would be around,


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (18 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			If hurdles were as safe, then why do so many horses die from falls during hurdle racing? Why is that 69 horses died between the 13th of March 2007 and the 12th of March 2008? Why all those fatalities (which happened to be four more than chasing)? As for the 1.5ft of solid material.  Let me picture horses jumping over something rigid and solid of about the same starting height as a puissance wall. Now let me picture them doing so from a fast paced gallop. Now let me picture the inevitable carnage. Oh, wait, I have already seen that far too many times to count!! 

*Why do so many eventer fall? A simple mistep or wrong stride is all it take to come down. You can't compare jump racing to jumping a puissance wall. Racehorse are taught - yes funnily enough we do teach them things - to jumpat speed which means that they take off further out and land further away than in show jumping. To get over some of those show jumps you need precision as you need to leave the poles up. You don't get 4 faults everytime you go through the birch or knock a hurdle down, you just get a very annoyed fenceman.*

You say again about how much the people in racing love the horses (paragraph 2), but why involve yourself in a sport knowing fine well that retuning with an empty bridle is a strong possibility. On average, 1 out of every 35 NH horses starting the season will not see the end of it.

*Your horse could die anywhere, out hacking, eventing, even just playing in the field. Yes we heighten the risk for them to die but we accept that. I would love for every single horse to come home safe and sound but realistically that will never happen. We are not heartless for accepting this fact just realistic. We never get used to it and by heck you would never want to get used to it. 

Also where are you getting these stats from? 1 in 35? No chance!*

Please do not be offended if I do not take you up on visiting those trainers you named. Or Perth racecourse. I do not wish to see horses who could very easily end his or her life in the name of sport.

Please also tell me exactly what it is you love about racing. I was discussing this with a couple of friends and my Mother the other day, but we were all stumped to come up with a reason.

*Do you never get a buzz from your horse working well? Does it then not make you proud when they go out and do well at your chosen discipline? We work our horses to the best of their ability at home and who would have goot fun galloping a game horse with a bunch of friends?*

Click to expand...

Sometimes you need to get a reailty check.


----------



## Mynstrel (18 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			Bad example. A firefighter doing his or her job would *NOT* put the life of an innocent creature at stake in the line of duty!!
		
Click to expand...


What about police dog handlers?  They will deliberately put their dogs in harms way if need be.  Or is that ok because they're not horses?


----------



## Tormenta (18 April 2011)

pastie2 said:



			No! it wont end, the last place I look for cruelty is on the racecourse, enough has been said about that already. I went to an auction yesterday, there was not one humane person there, be it vender or buyer, mares and foals, youngsters, the gelded and the entire were just moved around on the continuious(sp) spiral of a commodity. They were sold from dealer to dealer, low value animals nearly worthless. What chance will they have, none IMO. A lovely sec A mare, had laminitis and 13 yrs old, done all the PC jobs and sold for £150. I dont think that she will have an easy life from now on, she is a commodity. You Jennyharvey are a very silly and uninformed woman and I am getting very fed up with your anti-racing and animal aid posts. Please why dont you direct your anger about animal welfare away from racing, there is more a huge world out there of animal neglect.
		
Click to expand...

She didn't have laminitis at the auction? She has had it previously you mean? Poor girl, done her bit for kids no doubt.


----------



## _MizElz_ (18 April 2011)

Over2You - please answer my question regarding whether or not you are a horse rider yourself, and whether you do, indeed, agree with horseriding in general.

Because if you are, or if you do, then all of your pontificating claims about risk and endangerment reek of hypocrisy. 

And I'm afraid your reply to EKW shows you for what you are - completely closed minded and, sadly, quite ignorant. The only reason you refuse to visit a trainer's yard or a racecourse is because you are frightened it will actually prove you wrong; you're scared you may actually see some compassionate, caring horsemanship from the people you have enjoyed ignorantly despising.


----------



## teagreen (18 April 2011)

I just do not understand those who are so against the racing industry.

Animal Aid state on their website:



			Because Aintree and the industry as a whole make a concerted effort to conceal news of equine fatalities, Animal Aid is making that information public
		
Click to expand...

Racehorses die a public death, since the public go the racecourses. Racing Post publish the news of every faller in their race analysis. But why do Animal Aid not publish a tally of all the Dartmoor Hill ponies shot? Or of all the leisure horses who die in that time? I think you will find those figures overtake racing deaths. Just because you don't see them dying, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. And it's not the death I worry about, as many have said, there are much worse fates than death. There are countless horses standing in muddy fields that no one has looked at for years, and riding school ponies who have had the same job for the past 20 years and who are so sour they don't have any zest left - who would you rather be? Their suffering is lingering and ongoing.

Racing is picked on because it is so public and well regulated. I cannot understand why people with geuine concerns for animal welfare don't campaign for things they can make a difference in instead. Over2You, you are a very blind person if you cannot understand that more leisure horses will die of 'abuse', even if it is well meaning 'abuse' (over feeding, people buying horses they can't handle, even riding on the roads!) than racehorses - you just don't hear about the others.


----------



## JanetGeorge (18 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			There are countless horses standing in muddy fields that no one has looked at for years, and riding school ponies who have had the same job for the past 20 years and who are so sour they don't have any zest left - who would you rather be? Their suffering is lingering and ongoing.

Racing is picked on because it is so public and well regulated. I cannot understand why people with geuine concerns for animal welfare don't campaign for things they can make a difference in instead.
		
Click to expand...

Animal Aid is not concerned with animal welfare - it is concerned with animal 'rights'!  Racing is targeted because it is high profile, involves a lot of money, and makes the news!  For a WELFARE story to make the news it has to be FAR worse - lik Amersham!  One or two horses starving in a roadside field are not news - sadly!  Therefore they don't attract donations to Animal Aid!!  How often do you see Blue Cross, Equine Market Watch, and other genuine horse welfare charities making the news????  Yet who does more for horse welfare - day in and day out??


----------



## Amymay (18 April 2011)

_MizElz_ said:



			Very sad. You also have to question how fair the connections of Minella Four Star were to put him in for this - he's run four times in the last two months, having won the Midlands National three weeks ago. It's a big ask...
		
Click to expand...

Very good point.

Talk about taking a horse to the well once to often.......


----------



## teagreen (18 April 2011)

JanetGeorge said:



			Animal Aid is not concerned with animal welfare - it is concerned with animal 'rights'!  Racing is targeted because it is high profile, involves a lot of money, and makes the news!  For a WELFARE story to make the news it has to be FAR worse - lik Amersham!  One or two horses starving in a roadside field are not news - sadly!  Therefore they don't attract donations to Animal Aid!!  How often do you see Blue Cross, Equine Market Watch, and other genuine horse welfare charities making the news????  Yet who does more for horse welfare - day in and day out??
		
Click to expand...

That's what I'm saying - they are a bunch of hypcrites who no one should support.


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (18 April 2011)

Just a quick point to all of you who disagree with racing - next time you horse needs medication or surgery just remember that the racing industry has paid for a vast majority of the research into these things. What stage would veterinary science be at without that funding?


----------



## Luci07 (18 April 2011)

JanetGeorge said:



			Animal Aid is not concerned with animal welfare - it is concerned with animal 'rights'!  Racing is targeted because it is high profile, involves a lot of money, and makes the news!  For a WELFARE story to make the news it has to be FAR worse - lik Amersham!  One or two horses starving in a roadside field are not news - sadly!  Therefore they don't attract donations to Animal Aid!!  How often do you see Blue Cross, Equine Market Watch, and other genuine horse welfare charities making the news????  Yet who does more for horse welfare - day in and day out??
		
Click to expand...

someone talking sense...

I take a pragmatic view of racing. This discipline, like ALL the others will have its good and bad sides. It will have its good and bad owners/trainers etc. I am not a massive racing fan - because racing is not my "thing", not because I have a problem with how the horses are treated. I just don't get particularly excited watching horses race, whereas I will set transfixed watching a good XC round or high level dressage. I am one of the many people who has benefited from racings cast offs and had some fun ex racers to work with. 

The one fact I can absolutely take issue with is that of the horses being forced to run/jump and am fed up with hearing how horses are panicked into racing. If a horse does not want to jump or run, it won't. Ascot and other sales have a lot of horses who simply will not do it! and while there was an example of a horse breaking its leg - that could have happened at any time, not just racing.

Maybe there could be more focus on the excellent charities that look to retrain horses who no longer have a career in racing or as JG said, the likes of Blue Cross etc who don't get the same press...


----------



## Jennyharvey (18 April 2011)

JanetGeorge said:



			NO horse rider should support Animal Aid.  While it often comes across as a 'reasonable' animal welfare group it IS an extreme animal 'rights' group.  It is campaigning against animal experiments, factory farming, wildlife culls, and *the use of animals for sport and leisure*  That includes ANY form of horse riding!

That doesn't mean horse riders shouldn't be concerned about welfare aspects of racing or any other equestrian sport - but I'd be careful who you get into bed with! 

Click to expand...

Why shouldnt i support animal aid?  Yes they do a lot of campaining on animals in sport, vivisection, factory farming, but i wouldnt call it an 'extreme' group at all.  Its my choice what charities i support.  If you want extreme, look no farther than PETA. thats extreme, and i dont support them at all.  I agree with what they represent, but not how they go about there campaining.  Or maybe ANY animal rights group is too extreme for you, just because they believe in something different?


----------



## BSJAlove (18 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			Let me picture horses jumping over something rigid and solid of about the same starting height as a puissance wall. Now let me picture them doing so from a fast paced gallop. Now let me picture the inevitable carnage. Oh, wait, I have already seen that far too many times to count!! 

You say again about how much the people in racing love the horses (paragraph 2), but why involve yourself in a sport knowing fine well that retuning with an empty bridle is a strong possibility. On average, 1 out of every 35 NH horses starting the season will not see the end of it.

Please also tell me exactly what it is you love about racing. I was discussing this with a couple of friends and my Mother the other day, but we were all stumped to come up with a reason.
		
Click to expand...

what total uneducated cr*p!

firstly, the GN fences have been made safer. if you watch, most of the horses jump through the fence anyway. so compairing a 5ft (on average) fence to a 7ft 3 puissance wall is utter tosh. its a different sport. you get people racing hurdles, and you get people doing high jump.

why involve your self in horses if you dont want to run that risk! if you dont want to risk your horse O2Y, then turn it out safely in to your perfect field and leave it there. but obviously we cant garantee said horse wont gallop around and break a leg. i honestly cant be bothered to ellaborate on this point as your one of those idiots that do not back up any of your stupid points with facts. 

and lastly. why do i enjoy racing? for the same reason i enjoy hunting. its fast, its furious and its good fun for everyone.


----------



## Amymay (18 April 2011)

Let me picture horses jumping over something rigid and solid of about the same starting height as a puissance wall.
		
Click to expand...

Oh dear.  I see you are completely out of touch with reality. It's so much worse than any of us could imagine............................


----------



## imasmartie (18 April 2011)

well let me say something I have read posts on here So i will try to help put the record straight.
First i have worked in racing since I was 16 [long time ago] if you think racing people dont care please take a look at racing post site artical about Bible lord who ran intopham at liverpool the no caring racing people have seen fit to have the horse trested and not put down.
secondly horses in racing are not put down for the sake of it there is good reasons [without wishing to bore the less educated amoung us] often horse breaks leg gets put down because not good patient, or there body weight alone contrubiutes to horse not being able to surstain it self in a comfortable manor which is another reason they get put down.
welfare is usually second to none.
I meny years ago was a fully licenced greyhound trainer i came out of the sport for a lot of reasons one being the prize money two the amount of dogs that for one reason or another were put down, [all to easy then to put dogs down] however rules and welfare issues have took over [some for the better] but one sad thing the ANTIE-DOG RACING IDIOTS HAVE DONE, THEY HAVE REMOVED MOST OF THE RIGHTS OF THE DOG TO HAVE IT PUT DOWN, dogs get injured like horses however there not so lucky, if they break there back and are not killed out right, the vet now has to wait for owner/trainers permission to put the dog down IS THAT RIGHT OR WRONG!!!!!
[ HAVE TO SAY ATTEND  ASCOT SALE In OCTOBER SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE  SENDING HORSES THERE HAD NOT EVEN BOTHERED ABOUT TURNING THEM OUT TO ATRACT ANY SORT OF BUYER IN SOME CASES THAY SENT HORSES THERE KNOWING THEY WERE MEAT ANIMALS THEY SHOULD BE ASHAMED BEACUSE SOME WERE BROUGHT OUTSIDE  THE RING AND WENT TO BEASTON MARKET THE NEXT DAY TO BE SOLD FOR MEAT .GOT NO PROBLUM WITH THAT BUT FACE FACTS THERES NO NEED TO PUT THE HORSE THROUGH THAT IF THATS ALL ITS WORTH  BUT THESE PEOPLE GIVE Racing a bad name}HOWEVER i will tell you the following i brought a 16.2 gelding [HE NOW 17.2] from Asoct sales in november he was cheap i quickly found out the reason why he COULD BITE FOR ENGLAND AND I MEAN BITE, however thankfully for him i took the view that HIS PROBLUM was man made and not him,
he went onto a red traffic light as he was a danger to handle, [without boring you with the details]
i had the vet on a routine vist to look at all 7 of the ex racers here, we had his teeth done, [yes i hold my hands up it was a mistake should have been done first but as like everyone else what didnt help was when the weather turned to snow we were traped in stables for a month didnt help his temper] plus i was not spending money on a horse that could end up being shot[ he had mouth ulcers 4inch one side 3 inches on the other] i gurantee he would never have picked the bridle up!!!!!
that said he has now turned the corner and is looking forward to a bight future doing a different job.
IM A REALIST THINGS GO ON IN ALL SPORTS RACING INCLUDED BADLEY TRAINED STAFF BAD RIDERS ETC, ITS UP TO THE RACING STAFF TO REPORT IT!!!! AND TRAINERS NOT TO KEEP TURNING A BLIND EYE AND EXCEPTING SECOND BEST!!!!!


----------



## imasmartie (18 April 2011)

OH I FORGOT TO SAY IF YOU WANT T SEE ABUSE
then you should have a look at B S P A  AREA 4A AT RODBASTON COLLEGE SHOW THAT TOOK PLACE ON SUNDAY, I saw a woman bEATing the **** out of a pony that had been stabled over night night because it had done no good ALL THIS IN THE NAME OF SPORT I DONT THINK SO SO TO THOSE PEOPLE THAT MAY READ THIS FROM THAT SHOW YOU WILL AND HAVE BEEN REPORTED!!!!!!!


----------



## AMH (18 April 2011)

Don't get me started on showing - how obesity is not considered cruelty is beyond me. I was at the Devon County a few years ago and watched the Heavy Hunter class. None of those animals could have sustained an hour's hunting, let alone a day's. 

Racehorses are trained BY LICENCED PROFESSIONALS ONLY to go out and do their job. If a trainer has his or her licence revoked, he or she will no longer be able to train. This speaks for itself in terms of how seriously the racing fraternity takes the welfare of the animals and the integrity of its sport.


----------



## Amymay (18 April 2011)

imasmartie said:



			OH I FORGOT TO SAY IF YOU WANT T SEE ABUSE
then you should have a look at B S P A  AREA 4A AT RODBASTON COLLEGE SHOW THAT TOOK PLACE ON SUNDAY, I saw a woman bEATing the **** out of a pony that had been stabled over night night because it had done no good ALL THIS IN THE NAME OF SPORT I DONT THINK SO SO TO THOSE PEOPLE THAT MAY READ THIS FROM THAT SHOW YOU WILL AND HAVE BEEN REPORTED!!!!!!!
		
Click to expand...

It's good to hear that you were able to report the abuse to the stewards at the show, and that hopefully some action is being taken against the owner of the pony.


----------



## marble (18 April 2011)

pastie2 said:



			No! it wont end, the last place I look for cruelty is on the racecourse, enough has been said about that already. I went to an auction yesterday, there was not one humane person there, be it vender or buyer, mares and foals, youngsters, the gelded and the entire were just moved around on the continuious(sp) spiral of a commodity. They were sold from dealer to dealer, low value animals nearly worthless. What chance will they have, none IMO. A lovely sec A mare, had laminitis and 13 yrs old, done all the PC jobs and sold for £150. I dont think that she will have an easy life from now on, she is a commodity. You Jennyharvey are a very silly and uninformed woman and I am getting very fed up with your anti-racing and animal aid posts. Please why dont you direct your anger about animal welfare away from racing, there is more a huge world out there of animal neglect.
		
Click to expand...

I just want to say that I agree with you, I to have been at auctions and seen equines like the welsh section a you spoke about, sold to gods knows what, every time I think about her, I could cry, what did she do to deserve what is going to happen now.  Far better PTS either at home, or in the local horse abbatoir.  How could you justify sending her to auction just to get 150 pounds, oh and by the way, I am on pension credit and 150 pounds would pay my oil bill, but still would never think of doing  at thing like this. 
Leave the racehorses alone, and if you do still want to make a fuss, press for the no whip, or if the whip is overused take the race away from the winner, you would soon see a difference then. Big Bucks is the best example "think Cheltenham"....


----------



## JanetGeorge (18 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			Why shouldnt i support animal aid?  Yes they do a lot of campaining on animals in sport, vivisection, factory farming, but i wouldnt call it an 'extreme' group at all.  Its my choice what charities i support.  If you want extreme, look no farther than PETA. thats extreme, and i dont support them at all.
		
Click to expand...

Oh - feel free to be a hypocrite!  As far as Andrew Tyler - the director of Animal Aid is concerned - you are JUST as bad as the jumping trainers and NH jockeys because you force your horse to be your slave and carry you around!  Animal Aid is JUST as extreme in its philosophy and beliefs as PETA - but Tyler knows that - in the UK - being HONEST would shut the cheque books of lots of nice little ladies who love animals but who have daughters (or grand-daughters) in the Pony Club!

IF Tyler managed to get Jumps racing stopped in the UK (and while that seems unlikely, if you'd told me 10 years ago that jumps racing would be stopped in Victoria (Australia) I'd have laughed in your face!) then he would move on - probably to high level eventing and/or showjumping.  It would only take a couple of (equine) fatalities at Badminton or Burghley - or Hickstead - to kickstart it!

And - BTW - I DO know Tyler - and I know his views!


----------



## Jennyharvey (19 April 2011)

JanetGeorge said:



			Oh - feel free to be a hypocrite!  As far as Andrew Tyler - the director of Animal Aid is concerned - you are JUST as bad as the jumping trainers and NH jockeys because you force your horse to be your slave and carry you around!  Animal Aid is JUST as extreme in its philosophy and beliefs as PETA - but Tyler knows that - in the UK - being HONEST would shut the cheque books of lots of nice little ladies who love animals but who have daughters (or grand-daughters) in the Pony Club!

IF Tyler managed to get Jumps racing stopped in the UK (and while that seems unlikely, if you'd told me 10 years ago that jumps racing would be stopped in Victoria (Australia) I'd have laughed in your face!) then he would move on - probably to high level eventing and/or showjumping.  It would only take a couple of (equine) fatalities at Badminton or Burghley - or Hickstead - to kickstart it!

And - BTW - I DO know Tyler - and I know his views!
		
Click to expand...



You dont think i fully understand this?  Believe me, i do.  I guess i just dont have the same motivations as people who compete there horses.  I dont want glory, money, ego,status.  The reason i ride is to help domesticated horses be understood, and used KINDLY, instead of just a machine for money making or ego.  Or being abused or misunderstood because of human ignorance.  I feel that if i can get ONE person to understand there horse better, to use kind training and riding, or help the horse overcome its fears and problems, then i have done something to help.  
If i were to have nothing more to do with horses, it really would be pointless.  I dont think that horses will ever be free, so i might as well try to help them in there domestication, instead of having nothing to do with them.


----------



## Dobiegirl (19 April 2011)

Jenny the world you inhabit is not where the rest of us live the real world.

If you really want to make a difference cancel your subscription to Animal Aid and subscribe to one of the many horse charities out there.They are not full of hot air and do actually make a difference to horses lives. You could actually see where you money goes and I am sure that would give you greater satisfaction.


----------



## Jennyharvey (19 April 2011)

Dobiegirl said:



			Jenny the world you inhabit is not where the rest of us live the real world.

If you really want to make a difference cancel your subscription to Animal Aid and subscribe to one of the many horse charities out there.They are not full of hot air and do actually make a difference to horses lives. You could actually see where you money goes and I am sure that would give you greater satisfaction.[/QUOT

Im a member of animal aid because im vegan, i believe in the work of animal rights charities, not just for horses but for all animals used by humans for food and enertainment.  
But i do agree that there are other charities who offer more help to the overall horse population, and i have done my part in helping these charities too.  

Believe me, i do live in the real world, just like everyone else.  I know what exactly goes on, for animal and people alike.  Just because i want to believe in a better world for everyone, doesnt mean im not in touch with reality.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Over2You (19 April 2011)

Dobiegirl said:



			Jenny the world you inhabit is not where the rest of us live the real world.

If you really want to make a difference cancel your subscription to Animal Aid and subscribe to one of the many horse charities out there.They are not full of hot air and do actually make a difference to horses lives. You could actually see where you money goes and I am sure that would give you greater satisfaction.
		
Click to expand...

Both Jenny and I live in the real world!! That is why we hate it as much!!

Also: If Animal Aid were such a useless organization, then why is it that they were able to make the nation's biggest supermarkets, numerous councils and DEFRA pay attention to their campaigns? Why is it that they have been able to stop cities using horse drawn carriages and universities using primates for experiments? Or the FACT that many schools, colleges, etc, use their literature as part of their curriculum? Not to mention their successful campaign to get supermarkets to support the use of CCTV in slaughterhouses. Look at this and this.


----------



## teagreen (19 April 2011)

But look at the leaflet produced by AA that is for children, called 'Friend or Food?'-




			In the UK, most of us wouldn&#8217;t dream of eating a dog or a cat, but  have no qualmsabout tucking into the flesh (and other parts) of pigs, chickens, cows, sheep, turkeys and fish. And why is it acceptable to eat rabbits who have been produced for meat, but not those from a pet shop; or to eat farmed ducks, but not those who are thrown bits of bread on the river?
Animals bred to be eaten experience pain, fear and distress in the same way as the dog or cat who may share your home. But the meat industry markets their flesh in away designed to break the link with a living, feeling being.
		
Click to expand...





			If we got to know these individuals, we would find that they are just as friendly,serious, funny or shy as any dog or cat in our lives and each deserves just as much respect.
		
Click to expand...





			All animal farming, whether the process used is described as intensive, free-range or organic, involves treating sentient beings as mere commodities to be mass-produced and killed for food. Animal Aid&#8217;s undercover investigations have shown that slaughterhouses are places of fear and suffering. Killing another being for food can never be regarded as humane.
		
Click to expand...

What a load of one sided rubbish. We have a farm that produces meat and the animals are treated with the utmost respect. My father knows them all and their personalities, they live in large barns during the winter with plenty of fresh straw, silage and barley. They spend all summer out at grass. The ones in to be fattened spend their days lying in a straw filled shed in the sun and haven't a care or want in the world. One day a lorry comes and the experienced stockman loads them up and they are killed humanely within hours of leaving the farm. They are not crammed into dirty, stinking sheds with fear in their eyes and living in fear of the nasty farmer. And I personally don't know any farm where that goes on - there will be places where substandard care takes place, but the same can be said for absolutely everywhere that keeps animals - riding schools, kennels, houses filled with cats etc. 

They are also COWS. What the hell do Animal Aid WANT to do with them - let them all roam free? 

It's a nice though, an ideal world, where all the animals are free. But we don't live in one. It isn't going to happen. So why try to make the kids think "See that pig? He's exactly the same as your dog Rover. And if you stop eating ham on your sarnies, they'll let him run free, like Babe."

Also their racing stuff. Animal Aid want racing banned. No one who cares about horses wants racing banned. NO WHERE DO ANIMAL AID MENTION WHAT THEY WOULD DO WITH THE RACEHORSES IF RACING WAS BANNED. 

It's all a load of brainwashing cr*p, especially their stuff for children. Even the language used is maniuplative and straight from the Daily Mail School of Journalism. I do hope any teachers who use their stuff also shows children the good side of animal keeping. I'm all for excellent standards for horses and farm animals and pets etc etc. But I'm not for letting them roam free. AA want the most extreme of everything - stop farming, stop shooting, stop racing. But nowhere do they mention what would happen AFTER these things got banned. A rosy, cruelty free world? No way.

ETA:
I just looked at another leaflet on their youth section. It makes me angry:



			Huge, dark, stinking sheds are crammed full of miserable animals, who will never breathe fresh air or see natural daylight other
than during transport to a market or slaughterhouse. They can hardly stretch their wings or legs and will never be able to roam freely. They often have to stand, and lie down in, their own waste. Farmed animals are treated as though they are stupid and unfeeling, but they experience pain, discomfort, fear, loneliness and frustration in the same way as other animals do.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (19 April 2011)

Sorry TeaGreen I have just had the funniest image pop into my head! 

You could be sitting having a nice cup of tea in your nice little kitchen in your town house when a cow sticks it's head through the window and moo's at you whilst other cows wander aimlessly through the streets rooting through rubbish and chewing magnolia's!

If you set free all of these farmed and domesticated animals then all hell would break loose - literally! There would be fighting in the middle of every street - busted heads, broken bones, dead animals here there and everywhere. You would get those sassy little females that would be parading on street corners, flutering their eyelashes ready to add to the free and roaming population. And if you thought pigeon poop on your car was bad wait until all the chickens get loose! 

Mayhem! Pure and utter Mayhem!


----------



## Dobiegirl (19 April 2011)

Well done Teagreen nicely put and once all these animals are roaming free who will look after the countryside, Animalaid no I dont think so,

The RSPCA has lobbied for the installation of cctv in slaughterhouses for a long while trust Animalaid to take all the credit.

Also Jamie Oliver and Hugh Fernie Whittingstall have campaigned for the end of factory farming and it is ongoing. My local shop only sell organic free range eggs and Im pretty sure their customers will have never heard of Animalaid but are familiar with JO & HFW.

Looking at theAA site I see you are trying to stop the culling of grey squirrels or tree rats as I like to call them. Why would anyone want to do that, they spread squirrel pox t the reds and if this is what it takes to save the reds Im all for it. At the moment grey squirrels have taken up residence in one of our outhouses loft and are terrorizing our swallows all Im going to say is not for much longer.

I also believe AA is against the culling of magpies, one year we had all our songbirds nests in our garden raided by magpies but after they were culled the following year our songbirds reared all their broods.

I repeat you do not live in the real world but walk about with rose tinted spectacles.


----------



## teagreen (19 April 2011)

Animal Aid assume that ALL farmers are cruel, that EVERYONE who eats meat has no care for animals, that EVERYONE involved in racing is cruel and hates horses. And this is what they tell children. And it is lying.


----------



## teagreen (19 April 2011)

Dobiegirl said:



			Also Jamie Oliver and Hugh Fernie Whittingstall have campaigned for the end of factory farming and it is ongoing. My local shop only sell organic free range eggs and Im pretty sure their customers will have never heard of Animalaid but are familiar with JO & HFW.
		
Click to expand...

Organic and free range farming is cruel too, AA say. It is no better than factory farming. To them, ALL forms of farming and animal production is cruel and should be stopped.

What will happen if they install CCTV in all the slaughterhouses and there is no cruelty going on...what will AA complain about then. Rather than be happy that there is no cruelty, they'd MUCH prefer if CCTV in slaughterhouses exposed animals being mistreated. I'm sure they like it when horses die racing too, more to moan about.

Nooo EKW, that wouldn't happen, don't be silly! They'd run free on lush green hills and raise their young in peace, and a nice human might sometimes come and rub their head and pat them and they'd all live happily on the hills. With the racehorses, who would also frolic happily in the buttercups and nuzzle together like a scene from Spirit....duh


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (19 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			Nooo EKW, that wouldn't happen, don't be silly! They'd run free on lush green hills and raise their young in peace, and a nice human might sometimes come and rub their head and pat them and they'd all live happily on the hills. With the racehorses, who would also frolic happily in the buttercups and nuzzle together like a scene from Spirit....duh 

Click to expand...

Ah! Sorry! That's where I went wrong! I have never watched Spirit! Only Babe - Pig In The City!


----------



## Delicious (19 April 2011)

I do enjoy watching national hunt racing.  Yes I find it terribly sad when a horse is injured or worse PTS no one likes to see that but it happens with any horse sport not just racing. There are fatalities in show jumping and eventing but this doesn&#8217;t get the bad publicity that racing gets. Should they have banned the Hickstead Derby after a horse broke its leg coming down the bank a few years ago or what about Badminton when two horses died there one year!

 I&#8217;ve had many friends work in racing and they simply adore the horses they work with and they are looked after like kings. What those poor horses and ponies being shipped round markets on a regular basis would give to swap places with a racehorse!  Racing is completely natural for horses, my two often race each other round the field, I hate it as I worry they might injure themselves but horses will be horses and you can&#8217;t wrap them in cotton wool all of the time. 

My old TB started out racing, he then went intermediate evening and then became a hunter until I got him in his twilight years as a light hack. He broke his leg in the field and had to be PTS.


----------



## _MizElz_ (19 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			It's all a load of brainwashing cr*p, especially their stuff for children. Even the language used is maniuplative and straight from the Daily Mail School of Journalism. I do hope any teachers who use their stuff also shows children the good side of animal keeping.
		
Click to expand...


We do - well, at least some of us do! Some of my best debates in class involve looking at various aspects of animal welfare. Interestingly, even for those who are not animal-orientated, the literature available from the likes of PETA and Animal Aid often proves invaluable, because it offers one of the most graphic illustrations of bias ever seen...


----------



## Jennyharvey (19 April 2011)

I dont really know how we have gone from racing to animal rights and meat eating lol.  But anyway.  I guess for me the reall issue is that we just dont need to eat meat to survive.  Vegans and veggies are just as healthy, if not more healthy than omnivores.  There is a lot of scientific studies done that show the effects of these diets, and its pretty conclusive, at least to me, that we don not need to eat animals to servive. If however we did, then at least the suffering and slaughtering of farm animals would be justifiable.  But we just dont need to.  

Also, i dont think anyone would really think that we could release farm animals into the wild.  What would happen is we would just consume all the animals already alive.  This probably wouldnt take long, because people eat a LOT of meat.  Plus if we didnt have all these farm animal, there would be a lot less polution, a healthier planet and healthier people.  

Thats just my take on it anyway.  Not trying to tell anyone else what to believe.


----------



## _MizElz_ (19 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			I dont really know how we have gone from racing to animal rights and meat eating lol.  But anyway.  I guess for me the reall issue is that we just dont need to eat meat to survive.  Vegans and veggies are just as healthy, if not more healthy than omnivores.  There is a lot of scientific studies done that show the effects of these diets, and its pretty conclusive, at least to me, that we don not need to eat animals to servive. If however we did, then at least the suffering and slaughtering of farm animals would be justifiable.  But we just dont need to.  

Also, i dont think anyone would really think that we could release farm animals into the wild.  What would happen is we would just consume all the animals already alive.  This probably wouldnt take long, because people eat a LOT of meat.  Plus if we didnt have all these farm animal, there would be a lot less polution, a healthier planet and healthier people.  

Thats just my take on it anyway.  Not trying to tell anyone else what to believe.
		
Click to expand...

I understand your sentiment - I really do. When I was about 15/16, I flirted with the idea of becoming a vegetarian, because I couldn't bear the thought that the lovely little calf I had just helped my best friend to hand rear would one day end up on the family's plate. 

But the scenario you have described - where meat is effectively outlawed and we simply eat up the animals that are currently living, then go onto a pure vegetarian diet - what do you think would happen to the current 'edible' species? They would all become extinct. There would be no Aberdeen Angus, no Herefords, no Belgian Blues. You may still have Friesian cows for milk, although you'd argue that if meat were to be banned, the dairy industry would follow pronto. Nobody would breed sheep; wool, let's face it, is a by product of meat, and nobody would breed them just for their wool alone, not with all the synthetic alternatives that are available now. Nobody would ever breed pigs - for the same reasons. Leather would be replaced with a synthetic alternative. The farmyard would become a thing of the past - and I fail to see how anyone could truly want that. The pollution argument is, in my view, negligible; we humans need to look to ourselves and our gadgetised lifestyles before we start blaming animals for ruining the planet.

Now, as much as eating meat sometimes makes me feel uneasy (and I would be lying if I said it didn't), I would hate to see a world where cows, sheep and pigs became a thing of the past. Because that, essentially, is the scenario you are presenting.

I also understand that you (unlike some others on here) are actually not trying to pick a fight with anyone, and are simply expressing your own views - which is great, because at the end of the day, that's what makes a healthy debate


----------



## JanetGeorge (19 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			I dont really know how we have gone from racing to animal rights and meat eating lol.  But anyway.  I guess for me the reall issue is that we just dont need to eat meat to survive.  Vegans and veggies are just as healthy, if not more healthy than omnivores.
		
Click to expand...

Mmm ... how many babies breast fed by omnivore mothers die of malnutrition??  See: http://naturalhygienesociety.org/diet-veganbaby.html




			Plus if we didnt have all these farm animal, there would be a lot less polution, a healthier planet and healthier people.
		
Click to expand...


And what would happen to all the farm land that supports livestock - but is not suitable for crop growing.  The countryside would be a very different place!  And don't you think that crop growing causes pollution - excess nitrogenous fertilisers, herbicides, pesticides!!  And without grass break crops (and farmyard manure) soil would quickly lose heart and structure - even more chemicals would be required!

And gee - you'd need to kill a LOT more animals.  Rabbits, hares, badgers (who can afford to have expensive equipment going down a badger sett!)

You're living - like most AR supporters - in Cloud Cuckoo land!  You will NEVER get what you want - and you make it far harder to gain improvements in animal WELFARE!


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (19 April 2011)

I prefered my idea of all of these farm animals and pets just simply having the gate left open so they could be free to do as they pleased! I'd quite like to have a moo cow dander along the street noseying in everyones gardens and having sheep play with the kids playpark equipment - they would as well! Sheep have a great sense of humour!

I'm sorry, I can't take this thread seriously anymore!


----------



## teagreen (19 April 2011)

If you just 'used up' the remaining animals and bred no more, can you imagine what the place would look like. Imagine having no sheep, cows, pigs or chickens anymore...what an awful, fluffy (although there would be no fluff..no sheep...) world that'd be. 

In a world where Animal Aid ruled, there would be no cattle, no sheep, no chickens, no pigs, a handful of horses (no TB's, and your vet treatment would suck)...you're economy would be wrecked. And you wouldn't be able to get a decent bar of chocolate or a milkshake or have honey on toast


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (19 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			If you just 'used up' the remaining animals and bred no more, can you imagine what the place would look like. Imagine having no sheep, cows, pigs or chickens anymore...what an awful, fluffy (although there would be no fluff..no sheep...) world that'd be. 

In a world where Animal Aid ruled, there would be no cattle, no sheep, no chickens, no pigs, a handful of horses (no TB's, and your vet treatment would suck)...you're economy would be wrecked. And you wouldn't be able to get a decent bar of chocolate or a milkshake or have honey on toast 

Click to expand...

I never thought about the lack of chocolate! We most certainly can't have that now! Do you really want a world full of women that are grumpy because they can't have their chocolate fix! Deary me!


----------



## teagreen (19 April 2011)

EKW said:



			I never thought about the lack of chocolate! We most certainly can't have that now! Do you really want a world full of women that are grumpy because they can't have their chocolate fix! Deary me!
		
Click to expand...

AA do promote a vegan chocolate..but I'm not sure what's in it. Unless it tastes EXACTLY like Galaxy, I wouldn't be impressed. I can't think what they use instead of milk, but I've tried soya milk twice and both times it made me throw up. So it better not be that!


----------



## Jennyharvey (19 April 2011)

JanetGeorge said:



			Mmm ... how many babies breast fed by omnivore mothers die of malnutrition??  See: http://naturalhygienesociety.org/diet-veganbaby.html




And what would happen to all the farm land that supports livestock - but is not suitable for crop growing.  The countryside would be a very different place!  And don't you think that crop growing causes pollution - excess nitrogenous fertilisers, herbicides, pesticides!!  And without grass break crops (and farmyard manure) soil would quickly lose heart and structure - even more chemicals would be required!

And gee - you'd need to kill a LOT more animals.  Rabbits, hares, badgers (who can afford to have expensive equipment going down a badger sett!)

You're living - like most AR supporters - in Cloud Cuckoo land!  You will NEVER get what you want - and you make it far harder to gain improvements in animal WELFARE!
		
Click to expand...

I dont really see how this makes sense.  But anyway, we are kinda worlds apart on our views so thats fine.  I would rather live in cloud cuckoo land, than on this planet that people are gonna end up destroying anyway.


----------



## Starbucks (19 April 2011)

_MizElz_ said:



			Very sad. You also have to question how fair the connections of Minella Four Star were to put him in for this - he's run four times in the last two months, having won the Midlands National three weeks ago. It's a big ask...

Not a good time for racing at the moment.
		
Click to expand...

Not going to get into the debate this time, but that is TERRIBLE!!!  They really should feel ashamed of themselves.


----------



## popstar (20 April 2011)

EKW said:



			I prefered my idea of all of these farm animals and pets just simply having the gate left open so they could be free to do as they pleased! I'd quite like to have a moo cow dander along the street noseying in everyones gardens and having sheep play with the kids playpark equipment - they would as well! Sheep have a great sense of humour!

I'm sorry, I can't take this thread seriously anymore!
		
Click to expand...

There is a sheep that uses one of our backroads as his/her own personal playground. Great fun when you come around the corner to find him in his own game of race the car up the middle of the road... He always seems to think he wins, at which point he turns to face said car and you can virtually see him blowing a raspberry face at you before he hops off into the closest ditch. Kind of amusing but certainly not something I'd want all the sheep in the field doing! 

More to the point, I too find it hard to take these sorts of threads too seriously as there seems to be no middle ground. It's either "ban all racing" or "racing is the finest of humans work on earth". I tend to fall somewhere in the middle where I figure there are flaws in the current system and probably ways which it could be improved on to improve the current fatality rate, without banning it altogether and seeing the inevitable fallout in so many areas as have been pointed out already (unwanted horses, unemployment, reduced valuable input into research/medical advances etc). 

Surely there is a happy medium where guidelines could be phased in such as a minimum time between races, or a scaling back of the length of certain races which are known to be of higher risk of fatigue and breakdown?? Or am I a bit idealistic too?  Sure it might end up inconveniencing those who prefer to push a horse to the limits, but it would also mean the industry would be fair for both horse and those who stand to make money from it? Thoughts?


----------



## Amymay (20 April 2011)

I guess for me the reall issue is that we just dont need to eat meat to survive. Vegans and veggies are just as healthy, if not more healthy than omnivores.
		
Click to expand...

I would take issue with that - at least that vegans are healthier.

It's all about balance in a diet.  A bit of this, a bit of that etc.  I would defend anyone's right to be a meat eater/vegan/veggie.  However those following vegan diets tend to be lacking in many essential protiens and amino acids necessary for healthy living.  And certainly raising a child as a vegan is near criminal in my mind.


----------



## Amymay (20 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			AA do promote a vegan chocolate..but I'm not sure what's in it. Unless it tastes EXACTLY like Galaxy, I wouldn't be impressed.
		
Click to expand...

Mmmmm Galaxy!!!!  Yum, yum, yum!


----------



## JanetGeorge (20 April 2011)

popstar said:



			Surely there is a happy medium where guidelines could be phased in such as a minimum time between races, or a scaling back of the length of certain races which are known to be of higher risk of fatigue and breakdown?? Or am I a bit idealistic too?
		
Click to expand...

Be assured that if trainers start racing horses at abnormally short intervals the stewards would notice (and if the stewards notice, things happen!)  But interval between races is rarely 'an issue' in welfare terms.

Some horses need several races to reach peak fitness and get them racing properly - others will win first time out!  (Knowing which horse does which is the divider between trainers who make money and those who go bust!)  Some horses do better 'fresh' - particularly over short distances (we used to call them 'speedy squibs'!)

Stayers normally need more racing to get them fit and to get them to the point where you can place them in the field and nurse them until it's time for them to make the winning run!

A very long race can carry more risk of breakdown - if a horse is tiring badly he is more likely to do a tendon.  But a shorter jumping race would mean everything going flat out in the early stages and a much higher risk of horses bringing themselves - and others down.  When you have a long race, the jockeys are usually just trying to jump clean and just stay out of trouble for the first circuit.

The experts are CONSTANTLY looking at accidents - why they happened in that particular case - and whether they could have been prevented by a, b or c.  Changes have been made to many races - and particularly the Grand National - to make them safer.  Unfortunately, as Eventing people know, jumping at speed (whether 1 horse or a number of horses) carries risks!


----------



## Orangehorse (20 April 2011)

One of the reasons I don't go to point to points very often is that I don't like to see horses falling and getting hurt - but I get fed up with the cries of protest after the Grand National, etc.  It is a huge shame if a horse is hurt, but it is an accident, and a racehorse's job is to take part in races.  They are well prepared to go out and win.

I don't think that a TB is ever safe and cannot be in a "safe environment."  That is why owners of TBs have always to be three steps ahead of them and foresee any possible risks in handling, etc.   Mr. Frisk (Grand National winner) broke his leg when out hacking on the road, an advanced eventer broke his back in the stable.  A friend's brood mare broke her leg when galloping round the field with her foal, Murphy Himself and Charisma (retired champion eventers) broke legs in the field when playing.

As for being vegetarian, that is fine if that is your wish, I know lots of vegetarians.  But one third of the farming area in the UK is grass, and a huge amount of that could never be used for growing crops, due to terrain, climate, soil depth, etc. currently it is used for grazing animals who eat grass (humans can't digest it) and then we eat the animals and have the benefit of the manure which is used as fertiliser.

You constanly hear that "meat eating leads to global warming."  That refers to countries where the animals are fed large quantities of grain.  In the UK the grass cover absorbs carbon and virtually all lamb and beef are produced on a grass grazing system, not fed large quantities of grain, so it is NOT adding to global warming.  This has been well researched by scientists.  (Not sure about the water consumption, but presumably it would take the same amount of water to grow and process crops as to graze and process animals.).

Just thought I would add my thoughts!  Sorry.


----------



## Jennyharvey (20 April 2011)

amymay said:



			I would take issue with that - at least that vegans are healthier.

It's all about balance in a diet.  A bit of this, a bit of that etc.  I would defend anyone's right to be a meat eater/vegan/veggie.  However those following vegan diets tend to be lacking in many essential protiens and amino acids necessary for healthy living.  And certainly raising a child as a vegan is near criminal in my mind.
		
Click to expand...

Saying that vegans lack essential proteins and amino acids is so untrue actually.  there are so many fruit, veg and wholegrains and beans and pulses that provide ample proteins, its just knowing what to eat to get them all.  
Except for B12, there is nothing in meat or dairy that i cant get from vegetable sources.  
The reason i cant get enough B12 is because its all been depleted from our earth, because of how we treat the land.  Animals tend to have some in there meat.


----------



## Jennyharvey (20 April 2011)

ORANGEHORSE said:



			One of the reasons I don't go to point to points very often is that I don't like to see horses falling and getting hurt - but I get fed up with the cries of protest after the Grand National, etc.  It is a huge shame if a horse is hurt, but it is an accident, and a racehorse's job is to take part in races.  They are well prepared to go out and win.

I don't think that a TB is ever safe and cannot be in a "safe environment."  That is why owners of TBs have always to be three steps ahead of them and foresee any possible risks in handling, etc.   Mr. Frisk (Grand National winner) broke his leg when out hacking on the road, an advanced eventer broke his back in the stable.  A friend's brood mare broke her leg when galloping round the field with her foal, Murphy Himself and Charisma (retired champion eventers) broke legs in the field when playing.

As for being vegetarian, that is fine if that is your wish, I know lots of vegetarians.  But one third of the farming area in the UK is grass, and a huge amount of that could never be used for growing crops, due to terrain, climate, soil depth, etc. currently it is used for grazing animals who eat grass (humans can't digest it) and then we eat the animals and have the benefit of the manure which is used as fertiliser.

You constanly hear that "meat eating leads to global warming."  That refers to countries where the animals are fed large quantities of grain.  In the UK the grass cover absorbs carbon and virtually all lamb and beef are produced on a grass grazing system, not fed large quantities of grain, so it is NOT adding to global warming.  This has been well researched by scientists.  (Not sure about the water consumption, but presumably it would take the same amount of water to grow and process crops as to graze and process animals.).
Just thought I would add my thoughts!  Sorry.
		
Click to expand...

http://www.chooseveg.com/conservation.asp
Im afraid not.  It takes a lot more water to raise animals, per lb of meat, than it takes to grow crops.


----------



## Jennyharvey (20 April 2011)

Also found this interesting.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_meat_production


----------



## Mrs B (20 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			Also found this interesting.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_meat_production

Click to expand...

Ah yes - Wikipedia. The truth, the whole truth and anything people feel they want to write at the time to suit their own arguments

Especially at the top of this particular one, where it says:
'The neutrality of this article is disputed...'


----------



## Jennyharvey (20 April 2011)

Mrs B said:



			Ah yes - Wikipedia. The truth, the whole truth and anything people feel they want to write at the time to suit their own arguments

Especially at the top of this particular one, where it says:
'The neutrality of this article is disputed...'
		
Click to expand...

No worries.  There is plenty more info on it anyway.  
plus a lot studies done in favor of farming, tends to be one sided too, normally carried out by someone who has something to gain in some way.  
Its not always easy to find impartial studies.


----------



## Mrs B (20 April 2011)

We will never see eye to eye on this.

I know that the World as it stands is far from perfect when it comes to the treatment of not just animals but other humans (and I am much more an animal than a people person). We ARE  at the top of the chain, whether you like it or not. If it's any consolation, I'm sure we won't remain there for long and the planet will continue to turn quite happily without us.

As the 'top dogs' we should always do what we can to improve the lot of the other species we control. And it's pointless to say we shouldn't control them, as that IS what happens when you are the dominant species. And denying it is like telling the sun not to rise.

But deciding whether or not some animals should exist at all, based on some naive idea of how nice the planet would be without survival of the fittest (or in your words, 'exploitation') is not, to my mind, realistic or the way forward.

Because that is what you (and Animal Aid) are suggesting. That from now on, we decide that anything that is not truly wild should not exist as Man exploits it. But Man (sadly) exploits virtually the entire planet and there are very few truly 'wild places' left.

Which (if you take it to your logical conclusion) would mean no cows, pigs, sheep. Few horses (unless on the Steppes!), no moggies and dogs, no chickens unless Jungle Fowl, no pet rabbits, no white mice, no landscapes which have developed over thousands of years to accommodate farmed animals, therefore no managed grazing areas to support rabbits, hare, owls, deer, foxes, pheasants... Just crops designed to feed billions of humans alone, destroying the last remaining areas of bio-diversity. Think of the palm oil plantations driving out the orang-utans and multiply that many times. And, I take it, for many humans to survive without their current modes of transport (ie cattle, donkeys, horses) you're happy for them to instead buy cheap cars or mopeds and guzzle more fuel and destroy the earth, its resources and remaining habitats further?

And what kind of soya eating, bland, ravaged, sterile World, entirely designed to sustain a bubble-wrapped human species would that leave us with? Far removed from the very animals you insist you love but which would now be as remote and uncared for as the stars? 

Not a World I would ever like to live in, that's for sure.


----------



## Alec Swan (21 April 2011)

What a good post,  Mrs B.

Alec.


----------



## Jennyharvey (21 April 2011)

Mrs B said:



			We will never see eye to eye on this.

I know that the World as it stands is far from perfect when it comes to the treatment of not just animals but other humans (and I am much more an animal than a people person). We ARE  at the top of the chain, whether you like it or not. If it's any consolation, I'm sure we won't remain there for long and the planet will continue to turn quite happily without us.

As the 'top dogs' we should always do what we can to improve the lot of the other species we control. And it's pointless to say we shouldn't control them, as that IS what happens when you are the dominant species. And denying it is like telling the sun not to rise.

But deciding whether or not some animals should exist at all, based on some naive idea of how nice the planet would be without survival of the fittest (or in your words, 'exploitation') is not, to my mind, realistic or the way forward.

Because that is what you (and Animal Aid) are suggesting. That from now on, we decide that anything that is not truly wild should not exist as Man exploits it. But Man (sadly) exploits virtually the entire planet and there are very few truly 'wild places' left.

Which (if you take it to your logical conclusion) would mean no cows, pigs, sheep. Few horses (unless on the Steppes!), no moggies and dogs, no chickens unless Jungle Fowl, no pet rabbits, no white mice, no landscapes which have developed over thousands of years to accommodate farmed animals, therefore no managed grazing areas to support rabbits, hare, owls, deer, foxes, pheasants... Just crops designed to feed billions of humans alone, destroying the last remaining areas of bio-diversity. Think of the palm oil plantations driving out the orang-utans and multiply that many times. And, I take it, for many humans to survive without their current modes of transport (ie cattle, donkeys, horses) you're happy for them to instead buy cheap cars or mopeds and guzzle more fuel and destroy the earth, its resources and remaining habitats further?

And what kind of soya eating, bland, ravaged, sterile World, entirely designed to sustain a bubble-wrapped human species would that leave us with? Far removed from the very animals you insist you love but which would now be as remote and uncared for as the stars? 

Not a World I would ever like to live in, that's for sure.
		
Click to expand...

Thats certainly not a world i would like to live in either.  I believe all animals have a place on earth, because ALL creatures are important.  I certainly wouldnt like to see a world where there are no animals. I just dont think that we need to exploit these animals in order for them to have a purpose.  But your right, we live worlds apart on our views of this, which is fine.  Ive been vegan long enough to know that there are not a lot of people who have the same views as me.    

I just wanted to share this video.  Just so you know where I am coming from, and what i believe in.  Its not to patronise or try to push my beliefs on anyone.  You dont have to watch it so please dont try to tell me im forcing my views on anyone.  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6_hjA4cdjM

PS, ive just noticed what u have said about controlling animals.  Im not really concerned with this, im more concerned with the fact that we breed animals for food.  This is not controlling them.  Im aware that the planet cannot be over run by carnivores, but we are not controlling our livestock by killing them.


----------



## georgiegirl (21 April 2011)

so sad whenever a fatality occurs in any equestrian discipline be it from hacking to racing (which of course is the more publicised) but, it is the nature of riding and unfortunately accidents do happen.

Not read all the replies but over2you: I take it you will be petitioning at badminton horse trials this weekend then? The horses run over much the same distance, over far more difficult and complex fences than the, I quote 'horrid' NH fences with more jumping efforts to boot? 

to victimise racing and brand it purely as a greedy form of entertainment is shortsighted - have you ever seen the bookies at badminton? I know I have!


----------



## CaleruxShearer (21 April 2011)

Over2You said:



			Bad example. A firefighter doing his or her job would *NOT* put the life of an innocent creature at stake in the line of duty!!
		
Click to expand...

Sorryto drag up an earlier post, as georgiesgirl said I haven't read all the posts but does this make eventing just as cruel and awful then?


----------



## intouch (21 April 2011)

Humans, as predators, are naturally competitive.  Horses, as prey, are not.  Well, except for fighting over the odd blade of grass.  

It's in our nature to want to be - or have - the fastest, most beautiful, the best.  We're blessed that horses indulge us.  But when we get to extreme equine competition of any sort, we are using horses to indulge our own egos.  

The Grand National, Badminton, even high level "dressage" puts unnatural physical and mental stress on a creature that is generous to a fault.


----------



## marble (21 April 2011)

Mrs B said:



			We will never see eye to eye on this.

I know that the World as it stands is far from perfect when it comes to the treatment of not just animals but other humans (and I am much more an animal than a people person). We ARE  at the top of the chain, whether you like it or not. If it's any consolation, I'm sure we won't remain there for long and the planet will continue to turn quite happily without us.

As the 'top dogs' we should always do what we can to improve the lot of the other species we control. And it's pointless to say we shouldn't control them, as that IS what happens when you are the dominant species. And denying it is like telling the sun not to rise.

But deciding whether or not some animals should exist at all, based on some naive idea of how nice the planet would be without survival of the fittest (or in your words, 'exploitation') is not, to my mind, realistic or the way forward.

Because that is what you (and Animal Aid) are suggesting. That from now on, we decide that anything that is not truly wild should not exist as Man exploits it. But Man (sadly) exploits virtually the entire planet and there are very few truly 'wild places' left.

Which (if you take it to your logical conclusion) would mean no cows, pigs, sheep. Few horses (unless on the Steppes!), no moggies and dogs, no chickens unless Jungle Fowl, no pet rabbits, no white mice, no landscapes which have developed over thousands of years to accommodate farmed animals, therefore no managed grazing areas to support rabbits, hare, owls, deer, foxes, pheasants... Just crops designed to feed billions of humans alone, destroying the last remaining areas of bio-diversity. Think of the palm oil plantations driving out the orang-utans and multiply that many times. And, I take it, for many humans to survive without their current modes of transport (ie cattle, donkeys, horses) you're happy for them to instead buy cheap cars or mopeds and guzzle more fuel and destroy the earth, its resources and remaining habitats further?

And what kind of soya eating, bland, ravaged, sterile World, entirely designed to sustain a bubble-wrapped human species would that leave us with? Far removed from the very animals you insist you love but which would now be as remote and uncared for as the stars? 

Not a World I would ever like to live in, that's for sure.
		
Click to expand...

agree with alec swann, such a good sensible post.


----------



## magic104 (21 April 2011)

EKW said:



			&#8626;&#8626;Um what planet do you live on? Just a week ago i had 3 firetrucks chasing me and 2 others down the road. Full blues and twos and they most certainly werent slowing down! One we could have coped with but not 3! We ended up cantering, yes cantering! Down the road to dart into a field entrance as they ignored us asking them to slow down a fraction whilst we trotted out of their way. We were on racehorses at the time so 1. They were endangering 3 innocent creatures and 2. They endangered 3 racehorses going about their work.
		
Click to expand...

I was informed by a Policeman only 3wks ago that horses have right of way & even if they are on their way to an emergency they HAVE to SLOW down.  It is also in the highway code that you pass a horse at 12mph.

On this subject, it is a fact that if 700+ jockeys were killed each year from racing/training then yes something would be done about it.  I dont think it necessary to ban racing, just say in the case of the National cut back on the runners perhaps.


----------



## Giles (21 April 2011)

ORANGEHORSE said:



			One of the reasons I don't go to point to points very often is that I don't like to see horses falling and getting hurt - but I get fed up with the cries of protest after the Grand National, etc.  It is a huge shame if a horse is hurt, but it is an accident, and a racehorse's job is to take part in races.  They are well prepared to go out and win.

I don't think that a TB is ever safe and cannot be in a "safe environment."  That is why owners of TBs have always to be three steps ahead of them and foresee any possible risks in handling, etc.   Mr. Frisk (Grand National winner) broke his leg when out hacking on the road, an advanced eventer broke his back in the stable.  A friend's brood mare broke her leg when galloping round the field with her foal, Murphy Himself and Charisma (retired champion eventers) broke legs in the field when playing.

As for being vegetarian, that is fine if that is your wish, I know lots of vegetarians.  But one third of the farming area in the UK is grass, and a huge amount of that could never be used for growing crops, due to terrain, climate, soil depth, etc. currently it is used for grazing animals who eat grass (humans can't digest it) and then we eat the animals and have the benefit of the manure which is used as fertiliser.

You constanly hear that "meat eating leads to global warming."  That refers to countries where the animals are fed large quantities of grain.  In the UK the grass cover absorbs carbon and virtually all lamb and beef are produced on a grass grazing system, not fed large quantities of grain, so it is NOT adding to global warming.  This has been well researched by scientists.  (Not sure about the water consumption, but presumably it would take the same amount of water to grow and process crops as to graze and process animals.).

Just thought I would add my thoughts!  Sorry.
		
Click to expand...

I read some really interesting stuff about agriculture in the UK and water consumption along the lines of most horticulture being in the east and the west not being so suitable so if we grow more veg then actually we will have more water problems


----------



## Jennyharvey (22 April 2011)

Can you point me in that direction of that article, i would love to read it.  Ta


----------



## Mike007 (22 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			Saying that vegans lack essential proteins and amino acids is so untrue actually.  there are so many fruit, veg and wholegrains and beans and pulses that provide ample proteins, its just knowing what to eat to get them all.  
Except for B12, there is nothing in meat or dairy that i cant get from vegetable sources.  
The reason i cant get enough B12 is because its all been depleted from our earth, because of how we treat the land.  Animals tend to have some in there meat.
		
Click to expand...

So why do Vegans always look so damn ill.


----------



## Alec Swan (23 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			.......The reason i cant get enough B12 is because its all been depleted from our earth, because of how we treat the land.  Animals tend to have some in there meat.
		
Click to expand...

Whilst I'm not doubting that you're right,  if "it's all been depleted from our earth",  then how is it sourced?

Alec.

Ets,  as with many other threads,  this has now wandered completely off topic!! a.


----------



## rosie fronfelen (23 April 2011)

another load of off topic crap, so you blame the farmers now?you can buy b12 anywhere-


----------



## Laura_Grey (23 April 2011)

EKW said:



			Just a quick point to all of you who disagree with racing - next time you horse needs medication or surgery just remember that the racing industry has paid for a vast majority of the research into these things. What stage would veterinary science be at without that funding?
		
Click to expand...

Thank you!! I never post on here but this post has got me so angry! Without the racing industry there would be very very little funding for veterinary research and progress. I don't think people realise how important racing is for not only those directly employed by it, but many surrounding industries and most importantly *horse welfare*. 
Every morning I have my arms pulled out up the gallops, if something doesn't enjoy racing it more often than not doesn't make it to the track as it shows no interest in its work. I am more worried about a retired racehorses welfare if it were to get into the wrong hands than those in training! I understand that in the media glare racing looks ruthless, but I can guarantee that these horses are better cared for than hundreds piled on lorries for slaughter ever year or ponies kept on scrub year in year out infested with worms!
The yard I work for won the race that started this discussion, I looked after the horse everyday and am not afraid to admit I was glad to see him come home safe. He had packets of polos a week and a fair few more after winning the race. He has now gone out for his much deserved summer holidays!

Anyway I am now off to put me and my horse at great risk in the members at our point to point......


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (23 April 2011)

Laura_Grey said:



			Anyway I am now off to put me and my horse at great risk in the members at our point to point......
		
Click to expand...

First of a HUGE congratulations for your horses gutsy performance in the Scottish National!

Secondly - very good luck today and let us know how you get on!


----------



## Jennyharvey (23 April 2011)

Mike007 said:



			So why do Vegans always look so damn ill.
		
Click to expand...

 lol you obviously havnt met too many healthy vegans.  Im sure you are familiar with the type of work farriers and trimmers do.  Most of it is back breaking work, which takes a lot of strength and energy.  Im a trimmer, and believe me, if i was weak or ill, i couldnt do my job.  But i dont have a problem with the workload.  To say you need to eat meat to be strong is really laughable.  You can have unhealthy vegans, just as you can have unhealthy omnivores.  

But like someone else has pointed out, its gone ridiculously off topic lol.


----------



## Dobiegirl (23 April 2011)

So you are a trimmer why dosnt that surprise me.

Yes it has gone off topic because quite frankly its been done to death.

I noticed you and Overtoyou havnt commented on the sales thread in NL on unwanted horses and ponies being hawked round sales without food or water.

Thats what I call cruelty not the death of 2 very pampered racehorses doing a job they love.

What pampering do those little scraps at the sales experience.?


----------



## Jennyharvey (23 April 2011)

rosiefronfelen said:



			another load of off topic crap, so you blame the farmers now?you can buy b12 anywhere-
		
Click to expand...

No i wouldnt blame the farmers.  I dont like to put blame on anyone, but because of how the land has been treated, we have lost some of its nutritional value, especially B12.  Even omnivores are advised to add B12 supplements to there diet because animals cant get the same amount they use too.  

Just a snipet from wiki.  

Neither plants nor animals are independently capable of constructing vitamin B12.[4] Only bacteria have the enzymes required for its synthesis. The total synthesis of B12 was reported by Robert Burns Woodward[5] and Albert Eschenmoser in 1972,[6][7] and remains one of the classic feats of organic synthesis. Species from the following genera are known to synthesize B12: Acetobacterium, Aerobacter, Agrobacterium, Alcaligenes, Azotobacter, Bacillus, Clostridium, Corynebacterium, Flavobacterium, Micromonospora, Mycobacterium, Nocardia, Propionibacterium, Protaminobacter, Proteus, Pseudomonas, Rhizobium, Salmonella, Serratia, Streptomyces, Streptococcus and Xanthomonas.

Industrial production of B12 is through fermentation of selected microorganisms.[8] Streptomyces griseus, a bacterium once thought to be a yeast, was the commercial source of vitamin B12 for many years.[9][10] The species Pseudomonas denitrificans and Propionibacterium shermanii are more commonly used today.[11] These are frequently grown under special conditions to enhance yield, and at least one company, Rhône-Poulenc of France, which has merged into Sanofi-Aventis, used genetically engineered versions of one or both of these species.


----------



## Jennyharvey (23 April 2011)

Dobiegirl said:



So you are a trimmer why dosnt that surprise me.

Yes it has gone off topic because quite frankly its been done to death.

I noticed you and Overtoyou havnt commented on the sales thread in NL on unwanted horses and ponies being hawked round sales without food or water.

Thats what I call cruelty not the death of 2 very pampered racehorses doing a job they love.

What pampering do those little scraps at the sales experience.?
		
Click to expand...

So what are you implying?


----------



## Dobiegirl (23 April 2011)

How you can put trimmers and farriers in the same sentence is beyond me.

Farriers train 4/5 yrs trimmer trains how long?

Why no comment on the ponies at markets? do they not register on your radar.


----------



## Jennyharvey (23 April 2011)

Dobiegirl said:



			How you can put trimmers and farriers in the same sentence is beyond me.

Farriers train 4/5 yrs trimmer trains how long?

Why no comment on the ponies at markets? do they not register on your radar.
		
Click to expand...

I guess its your opnion that farriers know everything about feet and trimmers dont, thats fine by me.  

Obviously ur not a fan of trimmers so i aint gonna get into a debate about that too.  This thread has gone on long enough, and off topic enough, and we are never gonna agree on things so maybe we should leave it at that?


----------



## Over2You (23 April 2011)

Dobiegirl said:



			So you are a trimmer why dosnt that surprise me.

Yes it has gone off topic because quite frankly its been done to death.

I noticed you and Overtoyou havnt commented on the sales thread in NL on unwanted horses and ponies being hawked round sales without food or water.

Thats what I call cruelty not the death of 2 very pampered racehorses doing a job they love.

What pampering do those little scraps at the sales experience.?
		
Click to expand...


I shall address the issue of these horrendous sales. I have noticed that none of you have mentioned the root cause of why these "little scraps" have come to be that way in the first place. It is because of the sheer and utter arrogance/ignorance of the farmers and other people who own them. There was a thread many months ago regarding the mass culling of Dartmoor ponies. I was quite pleasantly surprised by how many posters agreed with my viewpoint.  These idiots should be penalised for over breeding. They were after all the ones responsible for the situation in the first place. To further my point of arrogance, there was a female farmer interviewed on Countryfile who refused to take the stallion out of her herd! In the meantime, the pony population continues to grow, and more ponies end-up at these horrid sales or being shot! To me, those responsible for the over breeding should be made to pay for what they have done. Authorities should also make breeding restrictions and castrations mandatory.The money from the fines could be used to help rescues care for the ponies instead of them being disposed of like clapped out bangers. However, I have to admit if the ponies are beyond help, then PTS is the only option.  Going back to Countryfile. I cannot get over it actually showing the knacker man segment. It wasn't necessary at all! It made me feel sick. Between that, the BBC ritualistically showing horses dying in racing, and that abomination that was its Horse People series. I have arrived at the conclusion that the BBC clearly does not care about upsetting horse lovers. But, this is going even more off-topic.

As for the plight of these poor ponies being more cruel than racing. I agree that the former is  an atrocity brought on by humans. However, the deaths of hundreds of racehorses every year is entirely preventable too. Breeders of racehorses should be penalised as well. They are responsible for the mass slaughter of foals and should be made to pay for all the lives they take so callously. Making two-year-olds race at break neck speeds, and sending horses as young as four over enormous fences from a gallop is just downright barbaric. As is the casual way in which these wonderful horse people dispose of those not up to the job. Perfectly healthy horses killed for no good reason. As I have said many times before, the 'sport' does nothing, but disgust me.


----------



## levantosh (23 April 2011)

Where there is live stock there is dead stock! Racing is a sport just like any other. People get hurt in sport and so do animals. I know a dog that broke a toe doing agility, is this sport cruel? a polo match last year a horse dropped dead, is this sport cruel? A horse cut an artery at badminton (can't remember which year) on the flag post, is this sport cruel?
Where do we stop. A sad story the other day about a person I know who's horse had a horrendous injury in it's field, is the field cruel????
People won't be happy until racing is banned completely, but when the horses bred for racing are pts there will be uproar. Where does it end.
And racing is the second largest income to Britain behind football!


----------



## Mike007 (23 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			I just wanted to share this video.  Just so you know where I am coming from, and what i believe in.  Its not to patronise or try to push my beliefs on anyone.  You dont have to watch it so please dont try to tell me im forcing my views on anyone.  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6_hjA4cdjM

.
		
Click to expand...

I watched your video with a certain amount of amusement. An awfull lot of half truths . and incidentaly the reason that there might be a shortage of B12 is due to crop production. Livestock production does not deplete the soil of Cobalt to a fraction of the extent that your much vaunted crop production does.


----------



## Double_choc_lab (23 April 2011)

magic104 said:



			I was informed by a Policeman only 3wks ago that horses have right of way & even if they are on their way to an emergency they HAVE to SLOW down.  It is also in the highway code that you pass a horse at 12mph.

Magic - Could you tell me where in the Highway Code it says you have to pass a horse at 12 mph.  I have a copy in front of me now and para 191 says "...Always pass wide and slow.   ....Treat all horses like a potential hazard and take great care"

Sorry this is totally off topic but then so is much of this thread.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## intouch (24 April 2011)

Mike007 said:



			I watched your video with a certain amount of amusement. An awfull lot of half truths . and incidentaly the reason that there might be a shortage of B12 is due to crop production. Livestock production does not deplete the soil of Cobalt to a fraction of the extent that your much vaunted crop production does.
		
Click to expand...

And most of those crops are used to feed....livestock!


----------



## jroz (24 April 2011)

RIP horses


----------



## Jennyharvey (24 April 2011)

Mike007 said:



			I watched your video with a certain amount of amusement. An awfull lot of half truths . and incidentaly the reason that there might be a shortage of B12 is due to crop production. Livestock production does not deplete the soil of Cobalt to a fraction of the extent that your much vaunted crop production does.
		
Click to expand...

The crops themselves dont deplete the soil, its what is used on it.  If we treated the soil right, ie organically,  without using pesticides and harmful fertilisers, we wouldnt have the same problem of depletion.


----------



## Alec Swan (24 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			The crops themselves dont deplete the soil, its what is used on it.  If we treated the soil right, ie organically,  without using pesticides and harmful fertilisers, we wouldnt have the same problem of depletion.
		
Click to expand...

Point 1.  Whilst you may be well able to pay twice over,  or more for your food,  there are those who aren't.

Point 2.  If we in Britain are to supply our own food,  then we have to compete in a global market.  Do you really want us to rely upon imported rubbish,  from God knows where,  where we have no control over food standards?

Point 3.  Wake up to reality.  I like it,  no more than you do,  but this sort of shallow argument leads us nowhere.  When the rest of the world will go organic,  then so will I.  We're in a world wide recession.  Those in the poorer countries need the market which we provide.  Do you really want to deny them the chance to feed themselves,  and their children?

Think again.

Alec.

Ets,  having whinged that this has gone way off topic,  here I am,  making matters worse.  I apologise,  but only for that!!  a.


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (24 April 2011)

Creep said:



			Didn't even know Scotland had a grand national.
		
Click to expand...

Yup and you get the Welsh National, Irish National, Midlands, Summer, Sussex, Northumberland, London and of course the Highland National. Though only the Aintree Grand National is over the big fences, all of the others are over regulation chase fences.


----------



## Mike007 (27 April 2011)

Jennyharvey said:



			The crops themselves dont deplete the soil, its what is used on it.  If we treated the soil right, ie organically,  without using pesticides and harmful fertilisers, we wouldnt have the same problem of depletion.
		
Click to expand...

Crops DO deplete soil. Fact...However feeding crops to livestock and putting the muck back on the fields depletes it an awfull lot slower.


----------

