# petition to make the Grand National safer



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

I've set up a petition in the aim to get lots of support and hopefully take it to the BRS and get them to just consider that the course perhaps needs some of it's safety aspects reconsider. 

I'm not suggesting we ban the race, but if we can reduce the number of horses on the course, perhaps lower the fences and even reduce the length they have to run, you can still enjoy the race, and it will hopefully reduce the number of fatalities. 

We do see it in eventing, however not as often, because safety is considered, obviously we can't prevent accidents entirely, but I believe we can reduce the risk. 

In the past 11 years, 21 horses have been killed on GN, lets try and reduce that number. We're all horse lovers here! So let's just do the right thing 


http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/grandnationalsafety/
Thanks for your support. I don't want to cause a fight, I just want to raise awareness 

xx


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

I will not be signing sorry as I believe in making the jumps smaller and the course shorter the horses will go faster therefore causing more falls which is likely to result in more fatalities.


----------



## Lollii (11 April 2011)

I won't be signing either, I want it to stay just as it is thank you.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Fair enough, what about just reducing the number of horses on the course then at least?


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

Reduce the length and reduce the size = horses go faster. Ever watched a 2m hurdle? If you're campaigning about that, you'll have to campaign about all racing - the GN is not the only race where horses are killed, and there are normal, everday races where 2 horses can die.

Safety is considered in racing too, believe it or not.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

I have signed.


----------



## ForeverBroke_ (11 April 2011)

Just for those interested, they are debating this all morning on 'This Morning.'


----------



## abina (11 April 2011)

I believe the Jockey club and the racing authorities have the welfare and the safety of all - riders, horses, spectators and staff very well considered at ALL RACES not just the GN  and do a fairly good job in a sport that is very high risk. 

At every sport things can and do go wrong .... think of how many riders and horses have died through falls in eventing, team chasing, and point to pointing. Nobody wants their horse fatally injured and nobody wants to witness it either - and I'm sure the GN has a risk assesement that equals the bible in pages !


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Not necessarily. 
A friend of mine watches the Scottish National, and there are far less horses on the track, a shorter track, and smaller fences. 

Far less, if any, fatalities...


----------



## RuthnMeg (11 April 2011)

Not for me either, fed up of 'cotton wool' attitude for almost everything these days. There is a risk in everything, those who take part, know the risks. 
Keep The Grand National as it is, it doesn't need to be modified any more.


----------



## Chavhorse (11 April 2011)

Very interesting article today in the DM by Ginger Mcain (who I think knows what he is talking about) saying that reducing the drops to the fences has inadvertently made the course faster and it is the speed that kills. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-safety-row-jockey-lies-coma-horses-die.html


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Fleabite said:



			Just for those interested, they are debating this all morning on 'This Morning.'
		
Click to expand...

Thanks. Seems there is more of a movement now to making it safer. I hope so. I can't understand the ice queen attiutudes of some.


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

So you are basically proposing another Gold Cup? Fatalities can occur in ANY race - in the first year of your 'new Grand National' over normal chase fences over 3m, there could be 2 fatalities...


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Thanks for the responses and that link, interesting. 

Well, personally I believe they should at least reduce the number of horses running...


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Thanks. Seems there is more of a movement now to making it safer. I hope so. I can't understand the ice queen attiutudes of some.
		
Click to expand...

And I can't stand the fluffy bunny attitudes of others, then being called a cow for 'not caring' - I keep saying, fatalities can occur in ANY RACE! 2 deaths can occur in ANY RACE, the Grand national is not the only race that horses die in, and they don't get killed every year!


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Well, then perhaps we shouldn't just let them gallop so fast? 

If this was an XC course, which okay understandably has more safety design, or if you saw people bombing at jumps aimlessly at a flat out gallop, I think many of us would be feeling perhaps a little uneasy, with striding etc. It must be a struggle to be running at those speeds and then try and collect yourself for a jump like that.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			And I can't stand the fluffy bunny attitudes of others, then being called a cow for 'not caring' - I keep saying, fatalities can occur in ANY RACE! 2 deaths can occur in ANY RACE, the Grand national is not the only race that horses die in, and they don't get killed every year!
		
Click to expand...

21 horses in 11 years. Perhaps I'm really bad at maths, but that would average out at least one horse a year. 
No, but we hear most about the deaths of GN. I've not insulted your beliefs, I don't want an argument, all I'm saying is that perhaps we should consider the safety of it more. I'm not slamming people, I could easily post my real views on racing on here, but I'm not. I'm trying to reason and trying to compromise, I know it will never get banned, and I know that many horses would be out of work, and many would end up slaughtered... 

Perhaps if we didn't wear them out at such a young age, then we wouldn't have so many ex-racers in rescue homes, or needing homes, and then the REAL rescue cases can be taken in and given the correct attention they need. Instead of taking a backseat with the influx of all these racers?


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Chavhorse said:



			Very interesting article today in the DM by Ginger Mcain (who I think knows what he is talking about) saying that reducing the drops to the fences has inadvertently made the course faster and it is the speed that kills. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-safety-row-jockey-lies-coma-horses-die.html

Click to expand...

I have to say that whenever the ground is hard I expect more fatalities. It's a combination of speed with no give in the ground. When conditions are muddy and slower, however, there are often more fallers but they slide and so the impact is not so great. So it's swings and roundabouts. But it is absolute rubbish to say that jumping smaller fences is more dangerous than jumping huge fences with drops. How could reducing the drops make the horses go faster? They don't know there's a drop until they are in the air! 

And are there fewer fallers in eventing when the fences are smaller? I think not.

People will say anything to twist things the way that suits them.


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Well, then perhaps we shouldn't just let them gallop so fast? 

If this was an XC course, which okay understandably has more safety design, or if you saw people bombing at jumps aimlessly at a flat out gallop, I think many of us would be feeling perhaps a little uneasy, with striding etc. It must be a struggle to be running at those speeds and then try and collect yourself for a jump like that.
		
Click to expand...

Jockeys are not stupid. They look for strides just like anyone jumping - you will see them taking a pull or pushing a horse a few strides out because they have seen a stride. They aren't just galloping straight at the fences and praying. Sam Waley-Cohen and a few others have spent a lot of time working with Yogi Breisner to improve their jumping and enable them to look for strides etc better, because jumping is the name of the game. 

Eventers go slower, but their jumps are more varied - it would be completely crazy to gallop flat out at some of the drop fences I have seen, but you don't get them in racing, plus eventers have to navigate water/doubles/steps etc, so it's very different.

They are racehorses. Races are run at a gallop. They don't go flat out the whole way round because it is 4m, but the smaller you make the fences, the faster they will go. Same with making the course shorter.


----------



## Aidey (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



*Well, then perhaps we shouldn't just let them gallop so fast? *

If this was an XC course, which okay understandably has more safety design, or if you saw people bombing at jumps aimlessly at a flat out gallop, I think many of us would be feeling perhaps a little uneasy, with striding etc. It must be a struggle to be running at those speeds and then try and collect yourself for a jump like that.
		
Click to expand...

Its a race, the fastest to get to the finish line wins? How would jockeys know how fast they were going? And then think I'm going too fast I've got to slow down? The Grand National is what it is, don't like it? Don't watch.


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

Maybe we should just ban racing all together, after all 2 horses were killed in flat races over the weekend


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			In the past 11 years, 21 horses have been killed on GN, lets try and reduce that number. We're all horse lovers here! So let's just do the right thing 

Click to expand...

Are you trying to make yourself a laughing stock, Lassisuca??

If you want to use statistics to set up a petition, do your homework. I cannot believe that you read something in a newspaper as inaccurate as the Mail, or a website as twisted as AA, and base a petition on their distortions. 

From an earlier post - 

*National deaths last 12 years

2011 - 2 from heavy falls - attributed, IMO due to fast ground.
2010 - no deaths
2009 - 1 death - not from a fall, but 'I hear the Echo' collapsed and died on the run in.
2008 - 1 death - McKelvey got injured running loose after unseating
2007 - no deaths
2006 - 1 death - Tyneandtyneagain - fall
2005 - no deaths
2004 - no deaths
2003 - no deaths
2002 - 2 deaths - The Last Fling and Manx Magic - both falls on good ground
2001 - no deaths
2000 - no deaths

I can't be bothered going further back, but 480 horses ran over the last twelve years and there have been 5 deaths from falls. More significantly the ground was good on both the days 2 horses were lost. So I guess it's to do with the speed not the fences. But how could they have forseen this weather? Also, it is dangerous to water late to change the going as false ground can be very treacherous.*

I am speechless at the utter stupidity of starting a petition based on hearsay........


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

3Beasties said:



			Maybe we should just ban racing all together, after all 2 horses were killed in flat races over the weekend 

Click to expand...

Ah yes, but they don't seem to count...

I actually don't think I can argue about racing anymore. I never thought that day would come, but it's going round and round in circles, with people saying the same thing in more and more threads *head explodes*


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			Are you trying to make yourself a laughing stock, Lassisuca??

If you want to use statistics to set up a petition, do your homework. I cannot believe that you read something in a newspaper as inaccurate as the Mail, or a website as twisted as AA, and base a petition on their distortions. 

From an earlier post - 

*National deaths last 12 years

2011 - 2 from heavy falls - attributed, IMO due to fast ground.
2010 - no deaths
2009 - 1 death - not from a fall, but 'I hear the Echo' collapsed and died on the run in.
2008 - 1 death - McKelvey got injured running loose after unseating
2007 - no deaths
2006 - 1 death - Tyneandtyneagain - fall
2005 - no deaths
2004 - no deaths
2003 - no deaths
2002 - 2 deaths - The Last Fling and Manx Magic - both falls on good ground
2001 - no deaths
2000 - no deaths

I can't be bothered going further back, but 480 horses ran over the last twelve years and there have been 5 deaths from falls. More significantly the ground was good on both the days 2 horses were lost. So I guess it's to do with the speed not the fences. But how could they have forseen this weather? Also, it is dangerous to water late to change the going as false ground can be very treacherous.*

I am speechless at the utter stupidity of starting a petition based on hearsay........
		
Click to expand...

Finally someone who is posting the FACTS!


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			Are you trying to make yourself a laughing stock, Lassisuca??

If you want to use statistics to set up a petition, do your homework. I cannot believe that you read something in a newspaper as inaccurate as the Mail, or a website as twisted as AA, and base a petition on their distortions. 

From an earlier post - 

*National deaths last 12 years

2011 - 2 from heavy falls - attributed, IMO due to fast ground.
2010 - no deaths
2009 - 1 death - not from a fall, but 'I hear the Echo' collapsed and died on the run in.
2008 - 1 death - McKelvey got injured running loose after unseating
2007 - no deaths
2006 - 1 death - Tyneandtyneagain - fall
2005 - no deaths
2004 - no deaths
2003 - no deaths
2002 - 2 deaths - The Last Fling and Manx Magic - both falls on good ground
2001 - no deaths
2000 - no deaths

I can't be bothered going further back, but 480 horses ran over the last twelve years and there have been 5 deaths from falls. More significantly the ground was good on both the days 2 horses were lost. So I guess it's to do with the speed not the fences. But how could they have forseen this weather? Also, it is dangerous to water late to change the going as false ground can be very treacherous.*

I am speechless at the utter stupidity of starting a petition based on hearsay........
		
Click to expand...

That's fine. I don't care if I make a 'laughing' stock. Sorry I care  I mean honestly


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			And I can't stand the fluffy bunny attitudes of others, then being called a cow for 'not caring' - I keep saying, fatalities can occur in ANY RACE! 2 deaths can occur in ANY RACE, the Grand national is not the only race that horses die in, and they don't get killed every year!
		
Click to expand...

If being called a fluffy bunny means having normal human emotions and being a generally caring and sympathetic person, then I'm fine with that. 

Yes, of course, the fatalities can occur in any race, but how many other races lose horses EVERY time they are run, except for very rare years? You know when the national starts that usually at least one horse will be running to its death. That's a fact. It does not occur in any other british race with such regularity. Accidents will happen all the time with horses, even (and especially in) the field. But where we can address specifics, then it would be cruel not to.


----------



## Aidey (11 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			Ah yes, but they don't seem to count...

I actually don't think I can argue about racing anymore. I never thought that day would come, but it's going round and round in circles, with people saying the same thing in more and more threads *head explodes*
		
Click to expand...

I agree!


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			If being called a fluffy bunny means having normal human emotions and being a generally caring and sympathetic person, then I'm fine with that. 

Yes, of course, the fatalities can occur in any race, but how many other races lose horses EVERY time they are run, except for very rare years? You know when the national starts that usually at least one horse will be running to its death. That's a fact. It does not occur in any other british race with such regularity. Accidents will happen all the time with horses, even (and especially in) the field. But where we can address specifics, then it would be cruel not to.
		
Click to expand...

So, you deduce from this that I do not have normal human emotions, am not caring or sympathetic? This is where, no offence, you begin to sound silly. Everyone involved with racehorses loves them and cares about them deeply.

And it doesn't lose horses every time. Have a look at the posts above, Do you want to ban the Cheltenham Festival too? Good luck with that.. Horses dies team chasing every year. Maybe you also want to ban hacking on the roads, it seems to produce a lot of grizzly deaths.


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

Whilst I agree that there needs to be some radical changes in the GN - petitions of this sort will not help achieve that.

The racing authorities need to be petitioned to have a long hard look at the race, with more welfare reforms in mind.

I'm afraid petitions like yours are simply knee jerk reactions to issues that need to be addressed in the wider arena.


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			That's fine. I don't care if I make a 'laughing' stock. Sorry I care  I mean honestly
		
Click to expand...

How mind-numbingly ridiculous are you being - READ the post - you want to stop something based on figures which are WRONG.

You 'care' about something which doesn't happen, so you start a petition to prevent something which isn't happening anyway?

Really, have a think about what you're doing.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			Are you trying to make yourself a laughing stock, Lassisuca??

If you want to use statistics to set up a petition, do your homework. I cannot believe that you read something in a newspaper as inaccurate as the Mail, or a website as twisted as AA, and base a petition on their distortions. 

From an earlier post - 

*National deaths last 12 years

2011 - 2 from heavy falls - attributed, IMO due to fast ground.
2010 - no deaths
2009 - 1 death - not from a fall, but 'I hear the Echo' collapsed and died on the run in.
2008 - 1 death - McKelvey got injured running loose after unseating
2007 - no deaths
2006 - 1 death - Tyneandtyneagain - fall
2005 - no deaths
2004 - no deaths
2003 - no deaths
2002 - 2 deaths - The Last Fling and Manx Magic - both falls on good ground
2001 - no deaths
2000 - no deaths

I can't be bothered going further back, but 480 horses ran over the last twelve years and there have been 5 deaths from falls. More significantly the ground was good on both the days 2 horses were lost. So I guess it's to do with the speed not the fences. But how could they have forseen this weather? Also, it is dangerous to water late to change the going as false ground can be very treacherous.*

I am speechless at the utter stupidity of starting a petition based on hearsay........
		
Click to expand...

Just said on ITV that there have been 33 deaths since 2000. May have heard that wrong?


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

Chavhorse said:



			Very interesting article today in the DM by Ginger Mcain (who I think knows what he is talking about) saying that reducing the drops to the fences has inadvertently made the course faster and it is the speed that kills. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-safety-row-jockey-lies-coma-horses-die.html

Click to expand...

That makes no sense whatsoever.......


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			How mind-numbingly ridiculous are you being - READ the post - you want to stop something based on figures which are WRONG.

You 'care' about something which doesn't happen, so you start a petition to prevent something which isn't happening anyway?

Really, have a think about what you're doing.
		
Click to expand...

Deaths are still happening, are they not? 
As you've already stated. Horses are being put into early retirement, are they not? Horses are unable to work and then sold on and then we end up with lots of ex-racers/rescues, do we not? 

I respect that racing means a lot to you, but am I telling you it should be banned? Am I telling you you are a heartless what not? Am I telling you that you're cruel? 

No, I am not


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Just said on ITV that there have been 33 deaths since 2000. May have heard that wrong?
		
Click to expand...

That's journalism (in the weakest possible sense) jumping on the bandwagon. 

Go onto the Racing Post site - check out EVERY National for the last 12 years, as I did. That's where my figures have come from. And they are the accurate ones.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			So, you deduce from this that I do not have normal human emotions, am not caring or sympathetic? This is where, no offence, you begin to sound silly. Everyone involved with racehorses loves them and cares about them deeply.

And it doesn't lose horses every time. Have a look at the posts above, Do you want to ban the Cheltenham Festival too? Good luck with that.. Horses dies team chasing every year. Maybe you also want to ban hacking on the roads, it seems to produce a lot of grizzly deaths.
		
Click to expand...

No, read my post again. I am referring to the term 'fluffy bunny'. For some reason there appears to be a small faction on here that likes to bandy the term about as though it is some insult. I am simply saying that I am fine with it.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			That's journalism (in the weakest possible sense) jumping on the bandwagon. 

Go onto the Racing Post site - check out EVERY National for the last 12 years, as I did. That's where my figures have come from. And they are the accurate ones.
		
Click to expand...

I remember a national around 10 years ago where four horses died.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

We know that journalism is notorious for manipulating things, but perhaps the figures from the RP, are slightly biased, perhaps they're talking about horses that died directly on the course, or moments after.

I'm sure, if we do some scanning, that we could find horses that have died as a result of the fall, later on that is. 

I'm sure that other horses have had to be pts as a consequence of their injuries sustained, perhaps they've forgotten those figures.


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			That makes no sense whatsoever.......
		
Click to expand...

Of course it does. This winter horses have been running on dreadful soft ground, so bad that a load of meetings were cancelled. Suddenly, the weather dries up and the ground changes like lightning to quick. They travel much faster on good ground, so the falls are harder. 

With the smaller fences, the race is run quicker - jumping the majority of these fences is no different to jumping bullfinches.


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Horses are being put into early retirement, are they not? Horses are unable to work and then sold on and then we end up with lots of ex-racers/rescues, do we not?
		
Click to expand...

They are retired from Racing, not retired from work! Would you rather they go on racing into their late teens?!


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Perhaps if we didn't wear them out at such a young age, then we wouldn't have so many ex-racers in rescue homes, or needing homes, and then the REAL rescue cases can be taken in and given the correct attention they need. Instead of taking a backseat with the influx of all these racers?
		
Click to expand...

Where is your information comming from?

No. 1 A lot of race horses (flat) retire in relative youth - often to go on to do worthwile and valuable jobs elsewhere.  Colt's and Fillies who are proven retire to stud very young - and enjoy some quite wonderful years.

No. 2 Horses running over hurdles usually run for longer - and providing they stay sound can be competing well in to their 12th year.

No. 3 'All' competition / sports horses need a home after they have retired from their 'job'.  Racing is no unique in this respect.  

No. 4 Are there really so many ex-racers in Rescue Soceity's - or are you confusing this with Rehabilitation Society's.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			That's journalism (in the weakest possible sense) jumping on the bandwagon. 

Go onto the Racing Post site - check out EVERY National for the last 12 years, as I did. That's where my figures have come from. And they are the accurate ones.
		
Click to expand...

Those figures are wrong, I'm afraid. That horse died on the run up last year. We all remember it. Yet your figures show none. So that completely blows any credibility for the racing post figures.


----------



## sprite1978 (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Deaths are still happening, are they not? 
As you've already stated. Horses are being put into early retirement, are they not? Horses are unable to work and then sold on and then we end up with lots of ex-racers/rescues, do we not? 

I respect that racing means a lot to you, but am I telling you it should be banned? Am I telling you you are a heartless what not? Am I telling you that you're cruel? 

No, I am not
		
Click to expand...

Dont take offence, when somebody points out incorrect details. 

I dont agree with your aims, but in the long run if your petition is based on real facts, you will have more credibility, and therefore more likely to get the result you want.

Stop being stroppy and petulant - just accept the correction with good grace, and say thank you!


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			That's fine. I don't care if I make a 'laughing' stock. Sorry I care  I mean honestly
		
Click to expand...

You need to be clear on what you care about though, and I'm not sure you are....


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			Where is your information comming from?

No. 1 A lot of race horses (flat) retire in relative youth - often to go on to do worthwile and valuable jobs elsewhere.  Colt's and Fillies who are proven retire to stud very young - and enjoy some quite wonderful years.

No. 2 Horses running over hurdles usually run for longer - and providing they stay sound can be competing well in to their 12th year.

No. 3 'All' competition / sports horses need a home after they have retired from their 'job'.  Racing is no unique in this respect.  

No. 4 Are there really so many ex-racers in Rescue Soceity's - or are you confusing this with Rehabilitation Society's.
		
Click to expand...

My information is coming from horses I meet in everyday life. 

At my yard, we have three ex-racers, who are 5, 6 and 9. 

The 5 year old was taken off the track because he was backed very young, and at the age of five has developed kissing spines, arthritis and cannot be ridden because he's in such a poor state. 

The 6 year old was going to be slaughtered, however because his owner took him on, he's being bought on slowly, however is freaked by the smallest thing. 

The 9 year old was also retired, because he's been passed from home to home since the age of 5. He was sadly PTS the other month, because injuries sustained from racing several years ago, meant that he struggled to walk properly, he was in a lot of pain, but box rest wasn't for him. Bute etc didn't help him.

At my old yard, were two ex-racers, one of whom had to spend months trying to get him near a mounting block because he would just bolt and the other who at the age of 7 was retired from severe arthritis. 

That's my source, okay only a small fraction, but I could go on for a while with all the cases I've heard.


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Deaths are still happening, are they not? 
As you've already stated. Horses are being put into early retirement, are they not? Horses are unable to work and then sold on and then we end up with lots of ex-racers/rescues, do we not? 

I respect that racing means a lot to you, but am I telling you it should be banned? Am I telling you you are a heartless what not? Am I telling you that you're cruel? 

No, I am not
		
Click to expand...




lassiesuca said:



			We know that journalism is notorious for manipulating things, but perhaps the figures from the RP, are slightly biased, perhaps they're talking about horses that died directly on the course, or moments after.

I'm sure, if we do some scanning, that we could find horses that have died as a result of the fall, later on that is. 

I'm sure that other horses have had to be pts as a consequence of their injuries sustained, perhaps they've forgotten those figures.
		
Click to expand...

Your petition is supposedly to alter the National, yet here you are attacking racing in general now. Either back up your statistics or admit you are wrong. 

The RP page has the annual results, it's not a article laid out with a spin on it. EVERY single race is recorded on there, and it's available for anyone to view. It's a factual results sheet. 
If you look through the form of horses that run in it, you'll see that the majority go on to race elsewhere. There is one horse, Graphic Approach, who was PTS a month later -that is a rarity, but you can be sure it was reported because the press know this sells papers. 

Go and check the facts, don't just take me at my word. It's all out there.


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Those figures are wrong, I'm afraid. That horse died on the run up last year. We all remember it. Yet your figures show none. So that completely blows any credibility for the racing post figures.
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps you can't read, Wagtail? Look at the list I made - I mention I Hear The Echo in it. However, he didn't die as a result of a fall, which is what the sensationalism is about. He could have died in the field, his heart gave out. There is no way that can be attributed solely the fact he'd run in the National.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			Your petition is supposedly to alter the National, yet here you are attacking racing in general now. Either back up your statistics or admit you are wrong. 

The RP page has the annual results, it's not a article laid out with a spin on it. EVERY single race is recorded on there, and it's available for anyone to view. It's a factual results sheet. 
If you look through the form of horses that run in it, you'll see that the majority go on to race elsewhere. There is one horse, Graphic Approach, who was PTS a month later -that is a rarity, but you can be sure it was reported because the press know this sells papers. 

Go and check the facts, don't just take me at my word. It's all out there.
		
Click to expand...

But your figures are wrong. I have just given you an example of why. You need to look somewhere else.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

sprite1978 said:



			Dont take offence, when somebody points out incorrect details. 

I dont agree with your aims, but in the long run if your petition is based on real facts, you will have more credibility, and therefore more likely to get the result you want.

Stop being stroppy and petulant - just accept the correction with good grace, and say thank you!
		
Click to expand...

Without playing tit for tat, although now I am, I'm not the only one throwing my rattle out of the pram. I'm actually remaining pretty calm, although a little niffed that my facts are wrong, naturally. But now I'm confused because I'm hearing different figures from everywhere. 


Just to state, caledonia, the RP is also a paper, which, journalists write for. Are journalists, as you've already stated, biased any way?


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			Perhaps you can't read, Wagtail? Look at the list I made - I mention I Hear The Echo in it. However, he didn't die as a result of a fall, which is what the sensationalism is about. He could have died in the field, his heart gave out. There is no way that can be attributed solely the fact he'd run in the National.
		
Click to expand...

Part of the petition is to shorten the course. If this had been done he wouldn't have died. You are concentrating only on the fences part of the petition. You need to do what you keep advising others to do and _read_.


----------



## HashRouge (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			That's journalism (in the weakest possible sense) jumping on the bandwagon. 

Go onto the Racing Post site - check out EVERY National for the last 12 years, as I did. That's where my figures have come from. And they are the accurate ones.
		
Click to expand...

Actually your figures aren't 100% correct. 
You stated no deaths in 2003, but Goguenard was PTS after the race. In 2007, Graphic Approach was PTS one month after the race due to injuries sustained at Becher's.

I do agree that using The Daily Mail's statistics is ridiculous though, because they make it appear that far more horses were killed during the race. Surely if someone is going to petition to make the National safer they should be petitioning to make racing in general safer?!

1998 is the worst National I remember. I think 3 horses were PTS after falling in the race: Pashto, Do Rightly and Griffin's Bar. Only 6 finished that year!! I wonder what the ground was like?


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			My information is coming from horses I meet in everyday life. 

At my yard, we have three ex-racers, who are 5, 6 and 9. 

The 5 year old was taken off the track because he was backed very young, and at the age of five has developed kissing spines, arthritis and cannot be ridden because he's in such a poor state. 

The 6 year old was going to be slaughtered, however because his owner took him on, he's being bought on slowly, however is freaked by the smallest thing. 

The 9 year old was also retired, because he's been passed from home to home since the age of 5. He was sadly PTS the other month, because injuries sustained from racing several years ago, meant that he struggled to walk properly, he was in a lot of pain, but box rest wasn't for him. Bute etc didn't help him.

At my old yard, were two ex-racers, one of whom had to spend months trying to get him near a mounting block because he would just bolt and the other who at the age of 7 was retired from severe arthritis. 

That's my source, okay only a small fraction, but I could go on for a while with all the cases I've heard.
		
Click to expand...

So your opinions are based on 3 cases, and few you've heard of.  

Three rejects from one industry of equine sport.  One has a conformation issue, one has behavioural issues, and one has a medical issue.  Show me the proof that any of those came from racing......


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

If you have never looked at the Racing Post site, take a look.

It has the results from every race in Britain from, well, forever. Along with comments on how the horses ran (not written by journalists but by the Timeform analysts) and it also states which horses died. It is a factual list - the results section is not altered in any way at all by journalists. It's like the BSJA site or BE sites.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Without playing tit for tat, although now I am, I'm not the only one throwing my rattle out of the pram. I'm actually remaining pretty calm, although a little niffed that my facts are wrong, naturally. But now I'm confused because I'm hearing different figures from everywhere. 


Just to state, caledonia, the RP is also a paper, which, journalists write for. Are journalists, as you've already stated, biased any way?
		
Click to expand...

It is notoriously difficult to get correct figures about mortalities for the national. Your figures are as accurate as Caledonias.  The most common figure quoted for fatalities since 200 is 30 horses.


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			I remember a national around 10 years ago where four horses died.
		
Click to expand...

Really? Please point me to it - it certainly hasn't happened in the last 12 years. 

Oh, and I care enough about racing and the horses that run in it to have the courtesy to know the names of the ones that died - to you they are just numbers to back up some misplaced sense of wrongdoing. 

But then, it's easy to potshot on a forum, rather than go and do something constructive about real welfare issues.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			So your opinions are based on 3 cases, and few you've heard of.  

Three rejects from one industry of equine sport.  One has a conformation issue, one has behavioural issues, and one has a medical issue.  Show me the proof that any of those came from racing......
		
Click to expand...

Were you not suggesting the race needs to be looked at and the course made safer by reducing runners, in the other thread?


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			It is notoriously difficult to get correct figures about mortalities for the national. Your figures are as accurate as Caledonias.  The most common figure quoted for fatalities since 200 is 30 horses.
		
Click to expand...

Go and look at the *RESULTS* - they are NOT manipulated, they are records. It clearly states the horses that died under their names in the finishing order. 

Or are you too lazy, preferring to believe sensationalism shoved in your face over facts that don't suit your case?


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Were you not suggesting the race needs to be looked at and the course made safer by reducing runners, in the other thread? 

Click to expand...

Yes I was.  And I firmly believe that the GN does need to be looked at and reviewed.  Less horses, no handicaps and better qualifications for horse and rider.

However, I am not anti racing, anti GN or anti basing my facts on good solid information and research.


----------



## HashRouge (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			It is notoriously difficult to get correct figures about mortalities for the national. Your figures are as accurate as Caledonias.  The most common figure quoted for fatalities since 200 is 30 horses.
		
Click to expand...

No I'm sorry but that's not true. The 33 stated by the Mail refers to the National meeting, not the Grand National itself. Her figures are not as accurate as Caledonia's although, as I pointed out, Caledonia's figures aren't 100% accurate either.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			So your opinions are based on 3 cases, and few you've heard of.  

Three rejects from one industry of equine sport.  One has a conformation issue, one has behavioural issues, and one has a medical issue.  Show me the proof that any of those came from racing......
		
Click to expand...

5 which I've actively helped in from pretty much day 1. 

I know they're all from racing. 

The medically affected TB, sustained his injuries on a race track, I can't tell you which one, because I honestly don't know. So yes, all types of race DOES cause accident, fair enough. 

Do I need to produce their papers or something?


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Part of the petition is to shorten the course. If this had been done he wouldn't have died.
		
Click to expand...

And you base that on WHAT? Did you see the autopsy? If a horse is going to have a heart attack, it will - a piece of work could have triggered that as easily as the race did.


----------



## QUICKFIRE (11 April 2011)

Wonders, has there ever been any fatalities in the Shetland Grand National??? should all TBs be culled ? and be replaced with short legged hardy ponies :-0


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Part of the petition is to shorten the course. If this had been done he wouldn't have died.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry but that is laughable.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

3Beasties said:



			Sorry but that is laughable.
		
Click to expand...

You have a strange sense of humour.


----------



## rosie fronfelen (11 April 2011)

The nanny state again- dear oh dear-


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

HashRouge said:



			No I'm sorry but that's not true. The 33 stated by the Mail refers to the National meeting, not the Grand National itself. Her figures are not as accurate as Caledonia's although, as I pointed out, Caledonia's figures aren't 100% accurate either.
		
Click to expand...

I missed Goguenard - apologies. And I have mentioned Graphic Approach, however, he didn't die on the course, or injure himself directly from the fall. He was running loose, and I 'think' it was infection that got him in the end.

Here you go - 

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/news/397/121407.html


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			Go and look at the *RESULTS* - they are NOT manipulated, they are records. It clearly states the horses that died under their names in the finishing order. 

Or are you too lazy, preferring to believe sensationalism shoved in your face over facts that don't suit your case?

Click to expand...

*puts in earplugs*  They do not include those that have died as a result of the race but not on the course. And yes, I am quite lazy, actually. For example, I should be mucking out right now instead of having a lively debate.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Caledonia- so this is what you said earlier...
*National deaths last 12 years

2011 - 2 from heavy falls - attributed, IMO due to fast ground.
2010 - no deaths
2009 - 1 death - not from a fall, but 'I hear the Echo' collapsed and died on the run in.
2008 - 1 death - McKelvey got injured running loose after unseating
2007 - no deaths
2006 - 1 death - Tyneandtyneagain - fall
2005 - no deaths
2004 - no deaths
2003 - no deaths
2002 - 2 deaths - The Last Fling and Manx Magic - both falls on good ground
2001 - no deaths
2000 - no deaths
*


So 2010, no fatalities? 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/apr/09/deaths-grand-national-aintree


http://www.horseracing.co.uk/news/2010/04/plaisir-destruval--22nd-march-2003-to-9th-april-2010/ 

http://www.horseracing.co.uk/news/2010/04/prudent-honour--8th-may-2002-to-9th-april-2010/




(Just to confirm the 'hear say') 

So before you condemn ME on hearsay, perhaps consider your own facts, too


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			*puts in earplugs*
		
Click to expand...

Says it all, really.


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

rosiefronfelen said:



			The nanny state again- dear oh dear-
		
Click to expand...

Actually to be fair, I don't think that this is about being a nanny state.  It is about a person's legitimate concerns over animal welfare (however confused).  In essence I support some of the concerns, and see nothing wrong in highlighting them.

The OP is a little confused about what exactly they are concerned about.  However, animal welfare should never be seen as part of the nanny state.  And I think that all of us would probably agree about that.


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Caledonia- so this is what you said earlier...
*National deaths last 12 years

2011 - 2 from heavy falls - attributed, IMO due to fast ground.
2010 - no deaths
2009 - 1 death - not from a fall, but 'I hear the Echo' collapsed and died on the run in.
2008 - 1 death - McKelvey got injured running loose after unseating
2007 - no deaths
2006 - 1 death - Tyneandtyneagain - fall
2005 - no deaths
2004 - no deaths
2003 - no deaths
2002 - 2 deaths - The Last Fling and Manx Magic - both falls on good ground
2001 - no deaths
2000 - no deaths
*


So 2010, no fatalities? 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/apr/09/deaths-grand-national-aintree


http://www.horseracing.co.uk/news/2010/04/plaisir-destruval--22nd-march-2003-to-9th-april-2010/ 

http://www.horseracing.co.uk/news/2010/04/prudent-honour--8th-may-2002-to-9th-april-2010/




(Just to confirm the 'hear say') 

So before you condemn ME on hearsay, perhaps consider your own facts, too 

Click to expand...

They didn't die in the National ......... get your facts straight.........


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			Yes I was.  And I firmly believe that the GN does need to be looked at and reviewed.  Less horses, no handicaps and better qualifications for horse and rider.

However, I am not anti racing, anti GN or anti basing my facts on good solid information and research.
		
Click to expand...

Nor am I against racing. I stopped watching the Grand National a couple of years ago when I realised I was just watching in hope to see them all round safely. I would like to enjoy it again.


----------



## RuthnMeg (11 April 2011)

If the owners, trainers and jockeys want to be a part of the National, who are you to deside otherwise? 
Whatever you do won't effect the future running of the race, so give up and save your breath. 

The owner of Ornais has said, although sad he has lost his horse, he is sadder for the critics complaining about the 'cruel race'. It was run on perfect ground, and falling early on the first circuit had nothing to do with lack of stamina at the end of what is a long race, just very unlucky.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			They didn't die in the National ......... get your facts straight.........
		
Click to expand...


Is Grand National not held at Aintree, which is the same course as the GN anyway...


----------



## Double_choc_lab (11 April 2011)

The figure of 33 horses which I also heard quoted on the TV this morning was said to be for the whole Grand National Meeting over the last x number of years.  This is a whole three day meeting - not just one race.  I think you'll find that there will be more carnage during the "Foxhunters" rather than the GN itself.  

IMO you can't make the fences smaller, course less, it will encourage more speed and it won't be the Grand National.  Whoever said about the Scottish national not losing any horses - this is far less of a race than the GN.

Yes it was incredibly sad and viewers were much more aware than previous years because of the camera angles and the fact that we could see there were fallers - in previous years this hasn't happened and so the great majority of people could adopt an "out of sight out of mind" attitude.

Someone on a previous thread sleighted the girl who won £1900 on a tricast bet - well on the racecourse you are usually unaware of horses who have died unless you watch to see what happens  its not generally announced so this girl could have been in blissful ignorance.

Deaths happen in every aspect of equestrianism and I'm sure owners don't enter their horses lightly into this race but don't lets lose another great tradition and start the decline of racing.

Will not be signing petition I'm afraid.

Sorry kept quiet up until now but just had to vent my thoughts!


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			And you base that on WHAT? Did you see the autopsy? If a horse is going to have a heart attack, it will - a piece of work could have triggered that as easily as the race did.
		
Click to expand...

Lol. You do have a strange way of looking at things. Yes a pootle round the school is just as hard as running the National. I see where you are coming from now.


----------



## Chavhorse (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Caledonia- so this is what you said earlier...
*National deaths last 12 years

2011 - 2 from heavy falls - attributed, IMO due to fast ground.
2010 - no deaths
2009 - 1 death - not from a fall, but 'I hear the Echo' collapsed and died on the run in.
2008 - 1 death - McKelvey got injured running loose after unseating
2007 - no deaths
2006 - 1 death - Tyneandtyneagain - fall
2005 - no deaths
2004 - no deaths
2003 - no deaths
2002 - 2 deaths - The Last Fling and Manx Magic - both falls on good ground
2001 - no deaths
2000 - no deaths
*


So 2010, no fatalities? 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/apr/09/deaths-grand-national-aintree


http://www.horseracing.co.uk/news/2010/04/plaisir-destruval--22nd-march-2003-to-9th-april-2010/ 

http://www.horseracing.co.uk/news/2010/04/prudent-honour--8th-may-2002-to-9th-april-2010/




(Just to confirm the 'hear say') 

So before you condemn ME on hearsay, perhaps consider your own facts, too 

Click to expand...

Ummmm none of these deaths were at the Grand National, they happened at the Topham Chase.

I thought your petition was about the National or have I got it wrong and it is about Aintree in general?


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Is Grand National not held at Aintree, which is the same course as the GN anyway...
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure which race these horses died in, however you have raised another point:

The Topham chase is run over the national course, but with fewer runners and at a shorter distance. Horses still die. And as those articles show, horses die in all sorts of different races...not just over the National course. So what do you want to do, ban racing?


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Is Grand National not held at Aintree, which is the same course as the GN anyway...
		
Click to expand...

Your petition states that all these horses died in the GN. They didn't. Your petition is about changing the GN based on inaccurate hearsay. 

Don't move the goalposts. If you genuinely cared, you would have done your research throughly so that you could put your case.


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Lol. You do have a strange way of looking at things. Yes a pootle round the school is just as hard as running the National. I see where you are coming from now. 

Click to expand...

Do you understand the term 'a piece of work' in relation to race horses..........


----------



## Lucinda_x (11 April 2011)

Not going to sign for all the reasons pointed out by previous posters. I love my racing but everyone involves understands the risks involved with it - as with any other disciplines involved with horses.


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Caledonia- so this is what you said earlier...
*National deaths last 12 years

2011 - 2 from heavy falls - attributed, IMO due to fast ground.
2010 - no deaths
2009 - 1 death - not from a fall, but 'I hear the Echo' collapsed and died on the run in.
2008 - 1 death - McKelvey got injured running loose after unseating
2007 - no deaths
2006 - 1 death - Tyneandtyneagain - fall
2005 - no deaths
2004 - no deaths
2003 - no deaths
2002 - 2 deaths - The Last Fling and Manx Magic - both falls on good ground
2001 - no deaths
2000 - no deaths
*


So 2010, no fatalities? 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/apr/09/deaths-grand-national-aintree


http://www.horseracing.co.uk/news/2010/04/plaisir-destruval--22nd-march-2003-to-9th-april-2010/ 

http://www.horseracing.co.uk/news/2010/04/prudent-honour--8th-may-2002-to-9th-april-2010/




(Just to confirm the 'hear say') 

So before you condemn ME on hearsay, perhaps consider your own facts, too 

Click to expand...

Sorry but I think that proves the point that you really have no idea about racing!

The National meeting is run over 3 days, the above horses died in other races they DIDN'T die in the Grand National!


----------



## RuthnMeg (11 April 2011)

Double_choc_lab said:



			IMO you can't make the fences smaller, course less, it will encourage more speed and it won't be the Grand National.  Whoever said about the Scottish national not losing any horses - this is far less of a race than the GN.

Yes it was incredibly sad and viewers were much more aware than previous years because of the camera angles and the fact that we could see there were fallers - in previous years this hasn't happened and so the great majority of people could adopt an "out of sight out of mind" attitude.



Deaths happen in every aspect of equestrianism and I'm sure owners don't enter their horses lightly into this race but don't lets lose another great tradition and start the decline of racing.

Will not be signing petition I'm afraid.

Sorry kept quiet up until now but just had to vent my thoughts!
		
Click to expand...

Agree re camera angles. I think the race made the one big mistake of by passing those 2 fences. In previous years this was not possible, the fallen horses were quickly removed to the side to allow the jump to be jumpable.


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Is Grand National not held at Aintree, which is the same course as the GN anyway...
		
Click to expand...

No, not all the races during the National meeting are run over the National fence, in fact, very few of them are


----------



## ischa (11 April 2011)

Im another who won't be signing , i have read through many posts this morning regards to the safety of the grand national 
I have to say i have watched
It for years , and it seems there is less accidents I'n grand national This year then there was , 4-5 years ago 
To me this is possibly down to the fact they did review the safety side of it , And again are reviewing it again this year due to the 2 that died on Saturday 
I have worked I'n the breeding side of racehorses , and also i have a friend who just brought a racehorse that has just come off the track , not for the fact she too slow (she had come I'n first and seconds ), or didn't want to run , they had to lay her off because she was to over fusiasic about running (so much for racehorses don't like there job ) 
As to the safety side of racing over cross country 
There is accidents I'n all equestrian sports whether it racing , cross
country , jumping etc 
There is still a risk
How do we now it not the sAme % of deaths I'n cross-country then there is I'n racing 
There might be the same amount but not all reconised
As to the safety Side of cross country 
Only yesterday i was reading I'n horse and hound about the corcerns
Of safety over the  unfixed jumps 
These are the 3 deaths that have accured over safety on the cross-country jumps 
(1) is a pony member jade south of 15
Was killed I'n 2008 whose horse somersaulted over a unfixed cross country rally 
(2) Russian rider elena Timonina
,15 was killed I'n may 2010 from a unfixed trailer type fence 
(3) French competitor Maia butanes ,29 who died when horse did a rotational Fall from an unpinned jump
So much for safety on the cross country course


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			Do you understand the term 'a piece of work' in relation to race horses..........
		
Click to expand...

Yes, on the gallops. My friend has around twenty race horses. I source and retrain failed race horses for clients. But to me, a piece of work is in the school.

It is silly to equate running the national with training at home. Caledonia used the term 'just as easily'. That is ridiculous.


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Is Grand National not held at Aintree, which is the same course as the GN anyway...
		
Click to expand...

*THUD* - do your homework..........


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

This is the problem. The GN is very public. And now people with good intentions are jumping to poorly researched, read in the Daily Mail conclusions, or listening to the views of celebrities (I believe that girl from Strictly Come Dancing wants it banned - er, sorry love, what do you know?!) and making a fuss. Unless you have looked at the facts from both sides of the arguement - you should keep quiet. 

Nobody seems to be realising that racehorses die in any kind of race. The GN is NOT A ONE OFF!


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

RuthnMeg said:



			In previous years this was not possible, the fallen horses were quickly removed to the side to allow the jump to be jumpable.
		
Click to expand...

In previous years this was more than possible, and happend quite commonly if a horse or rider was prone (for any reason).


----------



## RuthnMeg (11 April 2011)

The Foxhunters on the thursday, The Topham on the friday and The National on the saturday. Those are the 3 races run over the birch fences 'aintree type'. In November there is a 3m (approx) race over the aintree fences too.


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

RuthnMeg said:



			Agree re camera angles. I think the race made the one big mistake of by passing those 2 fences. In previous years this was not possible, the fallen horses were quickly removed to the side to allow the jump to be jumpable.
		
Click to expand...

I think the new safety measures that have been added to the course recently means that a jump can now be by-passed where as before they couldn't so any injured/dead horses where removed very quickly from the track so the race could continue, I guess now that doesn't have to be done so much.

They have also added Slip lanes (not sure what the official name for them is!) for the loose horses to go down so they can't cause any further accidents, I must admit I thought these worked very well.


----------



## The Virgin Dubble (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Is Grand National not held at Aintree, which is the same course as the GN anyway...
		
Click to expand...

No, incorrect again. The main GN course is a far cry from the course the majority of races are run on at Aintree.

I can understand that you are genuinely concerned, but if you're going to make a petition, do lots of research, so that you can present factual information for people to take on board.

I love the GN, and wouldn't sign your petition as it stands, but I do agree with you that the number of runners should be lowered.


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			It is silly to equate running the national with training at home. Caledonia used the term 'just as easily'. That is ridiculous.
		
Click to expand...


So why equate what Caledonia said regarding a piece of work to pootling around in a school.  You are being deliberately obtuse.

And if you have racing connections - you will fully understand just how hard they can work during their 'work' and what strain is put on heart and lungs.


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

caledonia said:



			*thud* - do your homework..........

Click to expand...


----------



## RuthnMeg (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			In previous years this was more than possible, and happend quite commonly if a horse or rider was prone (for any reason).
		
Click to expand...

In previous years, before the course was modified there was no way around the jumps, so fallen horses had to be moved to the side. Often out of camera view angles. The jump was therefore jumpable!


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Lol. You do have a strange way of looking at things. Yes a pootle round the school is just as hard as running the National. I see where you are coming from now. 

Click to expand...

I look at things like equine heart attacks from a basis of experience of horses having a great life and doing work they love - galloping, hunting, racing etc. 

I don't think it's much of a life for any horse if their 'work' is only *a pootle round the school*


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			So why equate what Caledonia said regarding a piece of work to pootling around in a school.  You are being deliberately obtuse.

And if you have racing connections - you will fully understand just how hard they can work during their 'work' and what strain is put on heart and lungs.
		
Click to expand...

Are you trying to say that a work out on the gallops puts as much strain on the horse as the GN? So you are supporting the comment by Caledonia that the horse was 'just as likely' to have collapsed and died as he was running the GN? No where near, I would say.


----------



## MissMincePie&Brandy (11 April 2011)

Obviously it's sad. However I don't believe the GN course is too dangerous, or cruel. Those horses lived fantastic lives, and would have died almost instantly, with the best veterinary help imediately at the scene. 

The only issue I have with the racing industry is what happens to the TBs after their careers are over. A certain percentage are successfully rehomed (I have one), but a larger percentage are not - perhaps if the plights of some of those unfortunate ex-race horses unable to find good homes were on live television ..................


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

To be fair it doesn't sound like you really know what you are talking about!  Neither do I, so don't feel it is my place to interfere.

21 horses that were fit and well kept before they died, in the huge the scale of animal cruelty and welfare, is certainly not a big issue in my eyes.  Maybe your time and effort would be better spent elsewhere?


----------



## Zebedee (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Is Grand National not held at Aintree, which is the same course as the GN anyway...
		
Click to expand...

PMSL !

I think before you try & start a campaign of this nature it may be better if you make sure you are fully informed as to what you are talking about !


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			I look at things like equine heart attacks from a basis of experience of horses having a great life and doing work they love - galloping, hunting, racing etc. 

I don't think it's much of a life for any horse if their 'work' is only *a pootle round the school*

Click to expand...

 Please show where I have stated that the horses do not enjoy galloping, hunting and racing. Also, please show where I have said that my horses only ever pootle around the school. I am not sure what point you are trying to make here.

To recap, we were arguing about whether a horse was less likely to have dropped dead if the GN was shorter. I said that he wouldn't have. You said he was 'just as likely' to. My logic is that he collapsed and died on the run up. Had the course been half a mile shorter logic would have it that he would not have collapsed and died.

We were not arguing about whether horses enjoy galloping. I am with you there. Of course they do!


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Are you trying to say that a work out on the gallops puts as much strain on the horse as the GN? So you are supporting the comment by Caledonia that the horse was 'just as likely' to have collapsed and died as he was running the GN? No where near, I would say.
		
Click to expand...

READ what I wrote. A horse with a heart condition, could go at ANY time when the heart rate is raised. If they have the physiology predisposed to heart failure, unknown to the trainer, then it's a case of when, not if. 

The GN being the GN itself had nothing to with that. It could have been ANY race, or a piece of work. Healthy people die suddenly of heart attacks, so do horses.


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Are you trying to say that a work out on the gallops puts as much strain on the horse as the GN? So you are supporting the comment by Caledonia that the horse was 'just as likely' to have collapsed and died as he was running the GN? No where near, I would say.
		
Click to expand...

Once heart and lung function reach a certain capacity - they can physically work no harder.  The heart and lungs will be put under just as much strain during 'work' as in racing - however, the _duration_ will be longer.

So yes, I am of the opinion that if a horse dies on the track - it is just as likely to die during it's work - it's natural biology I supose, because the horse with a weakness is allready predisposed.......

But I suppose if you are only used to horses pootling around a school - then yes, the stresses would be significantly reduced.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Zebedee said:



			PMSL !

I think before you try & start a campaign of this nature it may be better if you make sure you are fully informed as to what you are talking about !
		
Click to expand...

Just how many hyenas does it take to...oh never mind


----------



## The Virgin Dubble (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			READ what I wrote. A horse with a heart condition, could go at ANY time when the heart rate is raised. If they have the physiology predisposed to heart failure, unknown to the trainer, then it's a case of when, not if. 

The GN being the GN itself had nothing to with that. It could have been ANY race, or a piece of work. Healthy people die suddenly of heart attacks, so do horses.
		
Click to expand...

Best Mate.


----------



## Zebedee (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Are you trying to say that a work out on the gallops puts as much strain on the horse as the GN? So you are supporting the comment by Caledonia that the horse was 'just as likely' to have collapsed and died as he was running the GN? No where near, I would say.
		
Click to expand...

A TRAINERS job is to TRAIN the horses so that they arrive at the racecoure as fit & prepared as they can be to do the job in hand.
If it makes it any easier for you, think of how marathon runners prepare for those races. They don't ever run the full distance in TRAINING. They do shorter runs (still measured in miles) and do other fittening work to ensure they are as fit & prepared as possible for the race itself.
Is that easier for you to understand?


----------



## Zebedee (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Just how many hyenas does it take to...oh never mind 

Click to expand...

A fair few judging by the lack of coherent thought being exhibited by some of the posters on this thread


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Caledonia and Amymay. I have a horse here for training right now who after winning numerous races started to fail as a racer. Lovely mare, but when I got her vetted, the vet said 'well I know why she's not a very good racer'. She had grade four heart murmurs audible in all four chambers of the heart. She had arrived with me only 3 days after coming last in her final race and as fit as stunning as you could ever want. That horse was able to cope with her one and a half mile flat races and progressed to hurdles with some success (a couple of places) and she coped with any any amount of training without dropping dead. But do you think she'd have survived the National?


----------



## VoR (11 April 2011)

Equine sport is dangerous for both horses and riders, accidents can happen whether eventing, jumping, racing, hunting, even hacking out, which lead to death of either, whilst I was incredibly saddened to see the tarpaulin and screens at F20 and Bechers on Saturday, that wouldn't make me sign a petition to ban/try to make safer the GN for all the reasons already stated about speed, etc. 
Experts said on analysis of the race that the pace was too fast from the off, that is what probably caused the deaths rather than fence height/distance etc, it's a massive race, adrenelin is flowing, blood is up and there is little, once the tape goes up that can stop that.
On another point, in 2001, animal aid reported that 1 in 31 National Hunt horses 'failed to survive the season' being killed on or off the course.....it is unclear how many of these were attributable to racing and how many to other injuries or illness, a good example of how statistics can be made to say what you want them to...if these were down JUST to racing then over the last 12 years the GN has lost 1 in 96 horses, which would suggest that it is not as dangerous as we might think and that what we have here is a knee-jerk reaction to the oh so sad, but 'unavoidable' (unless racing is banned altogether) loss of two fine animals.


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Caledonia and Amymay. I have a horse here for training right now who after winning numerous races started to fail as a racer. Lovely mare, but when I got her vetted, the vet said 'well I know why she's not a very good racer'. She had grade four heart murmurs audible in all four chambers of the heart. She had arrived with me only 3 days after coming last in her final race and as fit as stunning as you could ever want. That horse was able to cope with her one and a half mile flat races and progressed to hurdles with some success (a couple of places) and she coped with any any amount of training without dropping dead. But do you think she'd have survived the National?
		
Click to expand...

But she would have been trained differently if she were to enter the National, so she may not have survived the training. That is not the fault of the race.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Zebedee said:



			A TRAINERS job is to TRAIN the horses so that they arrive at the racecoure as fit & prepared as they can be to do the job in hand.
If it makes it any easier for you, think of how marathon runners prepare for those races. They don't ever run the full distance in TRAINING. They do shorter runs (still measured in miles) and do other fittening work to ensure they are as fit & prepared as possible for the race itself.
Is that easier for you to understand?
		
Click to expand...

 You lot do get so hot under the collar. I understood that very well before you attempted to patronise me. But thanks, anyway.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

3Beasties said:



			But she would have been trained differently if she were to enter the National, so she may not have survived the training. That is not the fault of the race.
		
Click to expand...

But Hear the Echo survived the training. That was the point I was making.


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			But do you think she'd have survived the National?
		
Click to expand...

Who knows?  That is the problem with heart problems.  And of course, we don't know what kind of distance she was used to running.....

I guess what we can say with certainty is that she'd probably have come last


----------



## The Virgin Dubble (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Caledonia and Amymay. I have a horse here for training right now who after winning numerous races started to fail as a racer. Lovely mare, but when I got her vetted, the vet said 'well I know why she's not a very good racer'. She had grade four heart murmurs audible in all four chambers of the heart. She had arrived with me only 3 days after coming last in her final race and as fit as stunning as you could ever want. That horse was able to cope with her one and a half mile flat races and progressed to hurdles with some success (a couple of places) and she coped with any any amount of training without dropping dead. But do you think she'd have survived the National?
		
Click to expand...

She wouldn't have even qualified... 

They don't race any old crap TB in the GN. They are highly trained athletes - the best of the best.
It's like saying I wouldn't manage the London Marathon. Of course I wouldn't.


----------



## Zebedee (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



 You lot do get so hot under the collar. I understood that very well before you attempted to patronise me. But thanks, anyway. 

Click to expand...

Apologies. The content of your posts led me to believe that your understanding of how racehorses were prepared to do the job they have been bred for was somewhat limited.

There was no attempt to patronise. Had that been my aim I would have suceeded


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Anyway. I MUST muck out my seven stables now Thanks for all the lively debate.


----------



## ladyt25 (11 April 2011)

I haven't read all the posts but interestingly they have done a poll on This Morning and 74% of people think the GN should be banned! That shocks me actually but I am thinking that is just a knee jerk reaction to the weekend's race and the 2 horse deaths that were very obvious for all those watching to see.

Now, I know not every year horses die but quite often they do but often they have fallen, got up and had to be destroyed but this is away from the fences and, although it will be mentioned at the end about fatalities, people don't see it so don't seem to have such strong reactions to it.

I think it would be sad to see the GN go and I don't think you could ban it. If you did then, in reality you'd have to ban ALL racing and what on earth would happne to all the horses in training? It is a huge industry, you can't just go about banning things that thousands of people enjoy every day.

Maybe they should be showing people images of the horses killed on the roads daily, or show farm animals being slaughtered - would people then say we should all become vegetarian and ban farming? People are shocked by what they see and, as said they have a knee-jerk reaction and say "ban it".

Remember the year i think 7 horses died at the Cheltemham festval? That was in the papers and the same debates went on. Nothing changed. Sadly sometimes these things happen - no it should not be seen as necessarily acceptable but unfortunately if a horse makes a mistake at a fence it can fall. Maybe more training should go in to improving their jumping ability? I know Yogi Breisner works with a few of the racehorse trainers ti improve the horses jumping technique - I believe he trained the Cheltenham GC winner? Surely things like this are improving the sport in general - they are making a concerted effort to lessen the chance of a horse making an error?

I would like to see the GN stay the only change I think they maybe should make is to reduce the numbers in it. I am not sure whether it would stop the odd fatality - sometimes it's just blooming bad luck -some horses have horrendous falls and bounce back up and are none the worse. Others have what seems to be a bit of a stumble and sustain a fatal injury. Mine could do the same in the field.


----------



## LEC (11 April 2011)

One of the issues the GN has is that its a handicap - this for me presents several issues as its the largest handicap anywhere in the world over fences. We do not see better quality horses in it because its just that a handicap and so they would be hugely penalised for top weight especially over that distance. Also several trainers approach the race with a degree of caution and will spend their time protecting the horses handicap rather than testing the horses out to see if they are up to the job. The whole handicap system has its negatives and positives but ultimately we do not see the superb horses who win all the other grade 1s throughout the season but you do get to see horses like Mon Mome bolt up at odds of 100-1. Anyway for me the problem was the ground - the national is always horrible to watch on good ground.

In CR there is a post about what happened to certain eventers that have never been seen again and guess what injury or death are high on the lists. These eventers like the racers will have been trained, protected and looked after yet still the attrition of the sport will affect them. Spring Along died at Gatcombe from heart failure yet there are no petitions on here about it. Dressage has a huge attrition rate but you never see it on TV! Ok so they might not die on TV but for every GP horse there are probably 40 who have not made it and out of those I would guess half would be due to injury. 

I think some of you are terribly blinkered in your views and need to look at the bigger picture. These snap decisions from watching one race are not healthy for any sport. I bet there are more problems in the UK from obese or poorly looked after horses and bad riding than the whole of the racing industry can create.


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

ladyt25 said:



			I haven't read all the posts but interestingly they have done a poll on This Morning and 74% of people think the GN should be banned! That shocks me actually but I am thinking that is just a knee jerk reaction to the weekend's race and the 2 horse deaths that were very obvious for all those watching to see.
		
Click to expand...

But how many of those 74% are horsey people that actually understand and follow racing? Not many I bet  

The National has sparked this reaction because so many where watching, where as the two horses that were killed in flat races haven't been mentioned! I think a better argument/poll would be to ask if racing should be banned all together (which I would still say No, definitely not!), I don't think it is fair to single the National out when horses die everyday on the race track, sad, but that is how it is!


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Caledonia and Amymay. I have a horse here for training right now who after winning numerous races started to fail as a racer. Lovely mare, but when I got her vetted, the vet said 'well I know why she's not a very good racer'. She had grade four heart murmurs audible in all four chambers of the heart. She had arrived with me only 3 days after coming last in her final race and as fit as stunning as you could ever want. That horse was able to cope with her one and a half mile flat races and progressed to hurdles with some success (a couple of places) and she coped with any any amount of training without dropping dead. But do you think she'd have survived the National?
		
Click to expand...


That's the whole point you can't tell, it's a lottery.

I doubt a winning middle distance flat mare would have coped with the National - nothing to do with her heart (which incidentally could easily have materialised AFTER her last race) - but the fact she's not bred or trained that way.

Trainer I knew retired a horse with a fibrillating heart. Went to a hunting home, and about 5 years later died underneath the owner when they were stood still on point. Another trainer I know had her homebred 5yo out to qualify it.He whinnied and dropped dead underneath her. Heart attack.
I could go on - there is no rhyme or reason to it.


----------



## Sandstone1 (11 April 2011)

RuthnMeg said:



			Not for me either, fed up of 'cotton wool' attitude for almost everything these days. There is a risk in everything, those who take part, know the risks. 
Keep The Grand National as it is, it doesn't need to be modified any more.
		
Click to expand...

The horses dont know the risk or have any choice in if they take part or not. Its time something more was done to make it safer in racing in general.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Well obviously I need to do some more research, I've obviously gotten a lot wrong etc, so my apologies.

However, my intentions were there, as I know some people believe that I 'honestly don't care'. Obviously I do? 

If you don't like my petition then fine, but perhaps a little more constructive feed back, instead of nitpicking? 

So how can I improve my petition? p.s. if you're not signing it because you don't agree, then take a step back and leave the thread, but those who believe changes need to be made but not sure about my facts, please could you point me in the direction of legit stuff?


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

LEC said:



			I think some of you are terribly blinkered in your views and need to look at the bigger picture. These snap decisions from watching one race are not healthy for any sport. I bet there are more problems in the UK from obese or poorly looked after horses and bad riding than the whole of the racing industry can create.
		
Click to expand...

Well said!


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			But Hear the Echo survived the training. That was the point I was making.
		
Click to expand...

That's down to chance.


----------



## sprite1978 (11 April 2011)

I support the GN, and I do so knowing that it is an extremely dangerous spectacle where horses/riders maybe injured and die. I think the way the horses and tarps were so visable can only act as a good reminder of this fact. 

However, the very visable loss of these animals will stir up a knee jerk reaction, and unsupported claims of cruelty. The hauds of drunk racegoers who are completely dissmissive and ignorant of the consequences bother me more. It may give them a true appreciation of the effort and athleticism of the horses and riders.

As i have said, I support the grand national - but I do so with my eyes wide open. Long may it continue.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Could I just add though, that it is unfair to say that everyone who is not fond of the GN 'doesn't know what they're talking about'. 

A well known trainer, friend and saddle fitter I know, her late husband was a racehorse trainer, he worked in the racing industry and she used to follow a lot of the work he did and supported him. However, she's not fond of the GN either. Despite, being raised in a family which is very pro-racing.


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Well obviously I need to do some more research, I've obviously gotten a lot wrong etc, so my apologies.

However, my intentions were there, as I know some people believe that I 'honestly don't care'. Obviously I do? 

If you don't like my petition then fine, but perhaps a little more constructive feed back, instead of nitpicking? 

So how can I improve my petition? p.s. if you're not signing it because you don't agree, then take a step back and leave the thread, but those who believe changes need to be made but not sure about my facts, please could you point me in the direction of legit stuff?
		
Click to expand...

You've only been given facts. However, you have chosen to interpret it as nipicking.....


----------



## LEC (11 April 2011)

1 child dies every 20 seconds due to lack of clean drinking water. Maybe looking at combating issues such as this will make your petition a valid one and useful one rather than making a snap judgement on something you seem to know very little about?


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Could I just add though, that it is unfair to say that everyone who is not fond of the GN 'doesn't know what they're talking about'.
		
Click to expand...

But that has not been the assertion in this thread.


----------



## The_snoopster (11 April 2011)

I love watching the GN I bet every year and lose every year but still enjoy the whole televised run up to it. However the one point I would like to put is, several of the horses were not really up to the GN, I got this veiw from the commentators, pundits, and jockeys whilst being interviewed. 2 jockeys were quoted has saying their horses stood very little chance of getting around, one commentor said one horse had never ran a race over two miles ?. Another time a commentor said that a certain horse jumping ability was not really up to the GN fences, sorry I cannot remember names.
So and please feel free to explain it to me why on earth were those particular horses there, surely these horses were either likely to fall and potentially bring another horse down with it. It does appear to me that at least 10 horses should not have been even in the starting line due to either their jumping, or stamina not being up to it. Maybe if lower graded horses were refused entry there would be less injuries.
But then I suppose even these horses have ran races all year with the owners and trainers hoping for their horse to be chosen has a runner for the GN, so who am I to moan. I suppose the reason there is this big hoohar because we all saw the covered bodies on the track where as usually they have been removed before the runners get back to that fence. I will not sign the petition but would be happier if a more stricter ruling on which horses are actually chosen to run in the GN.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

LEC said:



			1 child dies every 20 seconds due to lack of clean drinking water. Maybe looking at combating issues such as this will make your petition a valid one and useful one rather than making a snap judgement on something you seem to know very little about?
		
Click to expand...

Because there are already lots of them about, lots of charities etc which by the way, I support. 

I've already stated that I'm wrong, so no need to continue on that I'm wrong.


----------



## ladyt25 (11 April 2011)

3Beasties said:



			But how many of those 74% are horsey people that actually understand and follow racing? Not many I bet  

The National has sparked this reaction because so many where watching, where as the two horses that were killed in flat races haven't been mentioned! I think a better argument/poll would be to ask if racing should be banned all together (which I would still say No, definitely not!), I don't think it is fair to single the National out when horses die everyday on the race track, sad, but that is how it is!
		
Click to expand...

I do wonder that too - I doubt many were horse people, they are just shocked as they SAW quite obviously that two horses were dead. Normally you don't see it so i guess maybe it doesn't hit home as much. I think one viewer's comments they did read out was horsey though and they were in support of the GN.

I saw the horse accident at Thirsk where the horse died (shown on CH4earlier in the day) - horrible fall and noone could have forseen it. I did not see the other horse sustain the fatal injury at the same meeting. However, these have not been mentioned as you say - does that mean these horses were not as important as the ones in the GN??  I think more people need to know the reality of racing really or maybe the reality of the competitive horse world in general cos you can bet every week horses died racing, eventing, team chasing, hunting etc etc. I think the only answer is to ban riding altogether??! 

People are always going to disagree on certain equine sports. racing gets the biggest coverage though but personally i do not like the dangerous riding I have seen hunting and the lack of thought for the horse's welfare sometimes then. I am not a fan of dressage and how the horses don't often get to be horse. I actually think in general, racehorses (certainly NH horses) live a pretty decent life on the whole but sadly there are accidents but I don't think ANY race's intention is to cause injury to anyone, horse or rider.


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			So how can I improve my petition? p.s. if you're not signing it because you don't agree, then take a step back and leave the thread, but those who believe changes need to be made but not sure about my facts, please could you point me in the direction of legit stuff?
		
Click to expand...

So you only want people to reply who agree with you, basically?


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

No, I just want constructive feed back, even if they don't agree with me, that's fine and they've clearly stated that. 

It's like a pack of animals on here.

How do I delete threads/get it locked? I didn't want an argument to start, can we not discuss are opposing views without such petty conflict? I know this is a passionate subject to many on here, and like I've said I RESPECT that, I've not attacked your beloved sport totally, I could give my full views, on that I'd rather it be banned altogether, but I've not? I've remained pretty reasonable I think. 

Is this how all adults treat children?


----------



## Scranny_Ann (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			I've set up a petition in the aim to get lots of support and hopefully take it to the BRS and get them to just consider that the course perhaps needs some of it's safety aspects reconsider. 

I'm not suggesting we ban the race, but if we can reduce the number of horses on the course, perhaps lower the fences and even reduce the length they have to run, you can still enjoy the race, and it will hopefully reduce the number of fatalities. 

We do see it in eventing, however not as often, because safety is considered, obviously we can't prevent accidents entirely, but I believe we can reduce the risk. 

In the past 11 years, 21 horses have been killed on GN, lets try and reduce that number. We're all horse lovers here! So let's just do the right thing 


http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/grandnationalsafety/
Thanks for your support. I don't want to cause a fight, I just want to raise awareness 

xx
		
Click to expand...

After reading this WHOLE thread, i am iterally stumped for words!

Another tradition attracting bad press from 'fluffy bunnies' who feel that can 'make a difference'   No, not a sarcastic comment to attract an argument, a true account of my thoughts! (We are all allowed think say what we think?  I presume?!)

It's like the Hunt Ban all over again ....

Anyway, on a brighter note.  I think the National is great!  And ... i came in second (must collect winings actually thinking about it )


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

How many people on here are against bull fighting, may I ask? 

The Spanish see it as a traditional fight, the bulls are well cared for up until the fight, as are the horses. Bulls are killed and horses are sometimes killed. 

Is that 'just the risk'?  I mean, it could just happen. It'll be interesting as I know many of us on here are anti-bull fighting, just wondering what your views on that are. 


Just a question?

p.s. it's a subject I'm well aquainted with, so up for a debate on that (I'm anti-bullfighting, by the way).


----------



## HashRouge (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			I missed Goguenard - apologies. And I have mentioned Graphic Approach, however, he didn't die on the course, or injure himself directly from the fall. He was running loose, and I 'think' it was infection that got him in the end.

Here you go - 

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/news/397/121407.html

Click to expand...

No need to apologize, and thanks for the info on Graphic Approach. Very sad, but tbh could have happened during any race


----------



## Scranny_Ann (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			How many people on here are against bull fighting, may I ask? 

The Spanish see it as a traditional fight, the bulls are well cared for up until the fight, as are the horses. Bulls are killed and horses are killed.

Is that 'just the risk'? 

Just a question?
		
Click to expand...

 Seriously?  The Term "grasping as straws'" springs to mind here! 

Not everyone agrees with your petition, those who do have signed - what more do you aim to achieve?  To change everyones view point on racing to that of yours?  

You couldn't be more mistaken.


----------



## glitterbug (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			How many people on here are against bull fighting, may I ask? 

The Spanish see it as a traditional fight, the bulls are well cared for up until the fight, as are the horses. Bulls are killed and horses are killed.

Is that 'just the risk'? 

Just a question?
		
Click to expand...

now that is a bit of asilly comparison because no one puts a horse in a race with the intention of killing it, however the bull is in the ring to be maimed or killed period


----------



## stacey_lou (11 April 2011)

I will sign as I believe decreasing the number of horses per race will help


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			No, I just want constructive feed back, even if they don't agree with me, that's fine and they've clearly stated that. 

It's like a pack of animals on here.

How do I delete threads/get it locked? I didn't want an argument to start, can we not discuss are opposing views without such petty conflict? I know this is a passionate subject to many on here, and like I've said I RESPECT that, I've not attacked your beloved sport totally, I could give my full views, on that I'd rather it be banned altogether, but I've not? I've remained pretty reasonable I think. 

Is this how all adults treat children?
		
Click to expand...

If you want constructive feedback, then I'd say lose the petition. 

Then go and research statistics from ALL horse sports about fatalities, injuries, medical interventions etc and then present a balanced view of what needs addressing in the horse world. 

You could also start a petition about restricting breeding from unproven animals. 

Or ensure stallions are licensed and registered and APPROVED before they cover mares, with the penalty being confiscation of the entire, and all foals. 

Or a petition to ensure every horse imported and exported across the channel is legitimate - campaign for 24 hour checks on every port.

Racing is an easy target because the facts are out there, unlike any other equine sport. Maybe petition for more publicly available information elsewhere?

Racing is the only industry with horses that self-regulates to a degree. It's the only horse sport where yards need to be approved, trainers are spot checked, and the horses viewed by vets before they run. It's downfall is partially because every race is televised, but also because of it's transparency. 

There's an awful lot more wrong with the horse world than racing.


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			How many people on here are against bull fighting, may I ask? 

The Spanish see it as a traditional fight, the bulls are well cared for up until the fight, as are the horses. Bulls are killed and horses are sometimes killed. 

Is that 'just the risk'?  I mean, it could just happen. It'll be interesting as I know many of us on here are anti-bull fighting, just wondering what your views on that are. 


Just a question?

p.s. it's a subject I'm well aquainted with, so up for a debate on that (I'm anti-bullfighting, by the way).
		
Click to expand...

There is no comparison between horse racing and bull fighting - so it has no bearing on this debate.

A bull is put in to the arena to be killed.  The horse is put on the race track to win.


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			How many people on here are against bull fighting, may I ask? 

The Spanish see it as a traditional fight, the bulls are well cared for up until the fight, as are the horses. Bulls are killed and horses are sometimes killed. 

Is that 'just the risk'?  I mean, it could just happen. It'll be interesting as I know many of us on here are anti-bull fighting, just wondering what your views on that are. 


Just a question?

p.s. it's a subject I'm well aquainted with, so up for a debate on that (I'm anti-bullfighting, by the way).
		
Click to expand...

Dunno why I bothered to write out a sensible reply earlier........ bulls are bred to be killed in the ring. That's the definite outcome. There is no comparison with racing. Stop moving the goalposts to try and save face.


----------



## Mynstrel (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			Colt's and Fillies who are proven retire to stud very young - and enjoy some quite wonderful years.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I agree with that, they may be well looked after but I'm not sure churning a foal out every 12 months for 15 or so years would match my idea of quite wonderful.


----------



## helloamys (11 April 2011)

I love watching racing, esp the National, so will not be signing but you will get more support if you use well sourced facts and stats from a variety to sources, not from a news report.


And you cannot compare racing to bull fighting! 
I've never been to a bullfight, I don't agree with purposely killing animals for sport, so I'm not speaking from experience. But the intention of a bullfight is to kill the bull from the start, whereas fatalities during the GN were accidents and could have happened in any race.


Spent abit too long typing and its already been brought up


----------



## mcnaughty (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Caledonia and Amymay. I have a horse here for training right now who after winning numerous races started to fail as a racer. Lovely mare, but when I got her vetted, the vet said 'well I know why she's not a very good racer'. She had grade four heart murmurs audible in all four chambers of the heart. She had arrived with me only 3 days after coming last in her final race and as fit as stunning as you could ever want. That horse was able to cope with her one and a half mile flat races and progressed to hurdles with some success (a couple of places) and she coped with any any amount of training without dropping dead. But do you think she'd have survived the National?
		
Click to expand...

No, she probably would not have survived the GN but she didn't run in the GN did she, she didn't die running in it so what are you trying to say?  Go and have a go at the trainer for not having a decent vet.  You cannot blame a race for a horse's condition before it starts that is just bloody stupid.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			There is no comparison between horse racing and bull fighting - so it has no bearing on this debate.

A bull is put in to the arena to be killed.  The horse is put on the race track to win.
		
Click to expand...

Hmm but is it? I mean, I'm talking about the horses that are used in bullfighting, what are your views on that.

Obviously they're not exactly the same, but there IS a comparison. 

Horse enters ring, with a risk of being impaired by the bull, because it's doing something which has risks. 

Horse enters track to gallop alongside 40 other horses which usually ends in serious injury for some horses, or death, but that's the risk we take? 


We're entering our horses for something which potentially has the ability to kill them, but these are more high risk sports. But I know so many people have an issue with that, who are pro-GN


----------



## HashRouge (11 April 2011)

I do believe reducing numbers would be a good move in the National, as 40 is still far too many, but I think you have to get your facts completely straight before you start a petition. Do you want racing in general to be safer or just the National? Are you complaining about the industry or just the racing itself? I would advise double checking all your facts and figures as claiming that 33 horses have been killed in the National alone since 2000 makes it seem like butchery, when really that figure is a distortion of the facts. I'm not anti-racing, but I believe there is a lot that could be done to improve the industry as a whole and to make the races safer. I don't think the Grand National is the only issue.

As for bull fighting - that is a whole different kettle of fish. The purpose of bull fighting is actually to kill the bull, whereas the purpose of racing is to win the race, not kill the horse. Bull fighting is hugely contentious even in Spain and a lot of Spaniards don't agree with it. It was recently made illegal in Cataluña and it is becoming less and less popular. It really doesn't have anything to do with the horse racing argument, IMHO. The use of horses by the picadors is also something I strongly disagree with, given that it is expected that they will be charged and struck by the bull.


----------



## mcnaughty (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Well, then perhaps we shouldn't just let them gallop so fast? 

.
		
Click to expand...

LOL - if you have ever bothered to watch the GN you would have heard the starter warning them every time something along the lines of DON'T GO TO FAST TO THE FIRST - they say it every year and it makes not a jot of difference.

Anyway, it is a R A C E the FASTEST wins!  Stupid comment.


----------



## pip6 (11 April 2011)

I am not interested in the debate or petition, to pick on anyone, I have my views & they sit very confortably with me. The bull fighting analogy is rediculous. Those animals are only certain of painful death when they go in the ring. For heavens sake they get swords stabbed in their backs. It is in no way comprable & I agree with the 'grasping at straws statement'. If you want a debate on bull fighting, start another thread where the issues specific to it can be aired.

The one thing I would like to come from the non-horse owning publics view of the fataly injured horses, is how fragile these animals can be. I would be lovely if this could translate into greater understanding in situation where they come across them, such as on roads. If they care that much about them, let's see proof & drop their speed, treat them with understanding & not get angry when they encounter them & have to wait.


----------



## olop (11 April 2011)

Not sure if anyone here watched the foxhunters on the previous day - those jockeys should be applauded the way they all rode around those fences & as far as I know nobody got hurt.

I am all for reducing the numbers of the horses in the race - there doesnt need to be 40 odd runners in this race but reducing the length & making the fences shorter is not necessary.  The race is prestige for a reason & altering it like that will take that from the race (I also dont think it will impact on the safety either)

I also think the horses in the race should not be handicapped & they should also be proven over testing conditions & the further distances.  

I think there were several horses in that race that had never been over 3 & half miles before & I think the horses should have all at least have run in races over the distance in various conditions before being entered into this race.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

People, I'm talking about using HORSES in bullfighting. Of course killing bulls in bull fighting is a whole different thing. 

Mind you, isn't death nearly inevitable at the GN?


----------



## mcnaughty (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Is Grand National not held at Aintree, which is the same course as the GN anyway...
		
Click to expand...

Please, if you care that much - do your homework - go and study the thing you hate the most.

There are loads of different types of race - types of jump, length of race, age of horse, sex of horse, handicap weights etc etc.  Yes, the GN is run at Aintree - and all the races are over jumps - that is what happens at this time of year - but the jumps differ tremendously from race to race.

The GN is unique in the type of jumps and the length of course.  The other "nationals" are nothing in comparison - they just bear part of the same name.


----------



## Mynstrel (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Lol. You do have a strange way of looking at things. Yes a pootle round the school is just as hard as running the National. I see where you are coming from now. 

Click to expand...

Ive known it happen during a pootle round a school; halfway through a beginners lesson at a riding school I used to go to a young, fit, well looked after pony just keeled over with a heart attack with a 5yo kid riding him.  

Ive also known a horse break a leg in a stable overnight, god only knows how, & another that did the same tied on the yard when it tried to scratch an ear with a back leg & over balanced.  The bottom line is they're fragile creatures & there's always a risk no matter what they're doing.

I dont like horses dying at the national or anywhere else when they go before their time but Im sure if I was one Id rather go quickly like they did with a vet on hand within seconds than like the one Ive mentioned where the poor thing had to stand on the yard on 3 legs for an hour waiting for the vet or one that colics overnight & isn't found until morning.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

glitterbug said:



			now that is a bit of asilly comparison because no one puts a horse in a race with the intention of killing it, however the bull is in the ring to be maimed or killed period
		
Click to expand...

No, not at all. Just like hunting where the intention is killing a fox, bull fighting is viewed as a traditional sport. I think the OP was asking why can't people have views against certain sports just because they are traditional. Part of the thrill of the Grand National is its danger. We are knowingly putting some of the horses to their deaths, even though this is not the _goal_ of the race. This danger could be reduced, but many of you do not want this.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

mcnaughty said:



			Please, if you care that much - do your homework - go and study the thing you hate the most.

There are loads of different types of race - types of jump, length of race, age of horse, sex of horse, handicap weights etc etc.  Yes, the GN is run at Aintree - and all the races are over jumps - that is what happens at this time of year - but the jumps differ tremendously from race to race.

The GN is unique in the type of jumps and the length of course.  The other "nationals" are nothing in comparison - they just bear part of the same name.
		
Click to expand...

Yawn. And another...

Poor OP.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			No, not at all. Just like hunting where the intention is killing a fox, bull fighting is viewed as a traditional sport. I think the OP was asking why can't people have views against certain sports just because they are traditional. Part of the thrill of the Grand National is its danger. We are knowingly putting some of the horses to their deaths, even though this is not the _goal_ of the race. This danger could be reduced, but many of you do not want this.
		
Click to expand...

That's a good point, Wagtail, many people on here are pro-fox hunting, and a fox is inevitable going to be killed ( or was, I'm so glad it was banned!) 

But obviously, being ripped to shreds by dogs is okay. It's tradition, and so it makes it fine!


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Hmm but is it? I mean, I'm talking about the horses that are used in bullfighting, what are your views on that.

Obviously they're not exactly the same, but there IS a comparison. 

Horse enters ring, with a risk of being impaired by the bull, because it's doing something which has risks.
		
Click to expand...

So is your concern here that the bull will _definately _be killed, or that the horse _may _be injured??


----------



## MurphysMinder (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Caledonia and Amymay. I have a horse here for training right now who after winning numerous races started to fail as a racer. Lovely mare, but when I got her vetted, the vet said 'well I know why she's not a very good racer'. She had grade four heart murmurs audible in all four chambers of the heart. She had arrived with me only 3 days after coming last in her final race and as fit as stunning as you could ever want. That horse was able to cope with her one and a half mile flat races and progressed to hurdles with some success (a couple of places) and she coped with any any amount of training without dropping dead. But do you think she'd have survived the National?
		
Click to expand...

I would think it highly likely that the trainer's vet thoroughly checked out this mare when she stopped winning, and discovered the heart murmurs, which is why she was passed on to you.  Although heart murmurs can be congenital, they can also develop in later life, so she was quite likely fully fit in her earlier successful career.


----------



## mcnaughty (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Yawn. And another...

Poor OP. 

Click to expand...

Yes Poor OP for being so far off the mark in everything she says she needs putting straight - do you believe you are helping her?


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Yawn. And another...

Poor OP. 

Click to expand...

lol, don't worry, nothing we can't handle! 

Us fluffy bunny huggers have to stick together


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			People, I'm talking about using HORSES in bullfighting. Of course killing bulls in bull fighting is a whole different thing. 

Mind you, isn't death nearly inevitable at the GN? 

Click to expand...

Which brings us full circle..................


----------



## mcnaughty (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			Which brings us full circle.................. 

Click to expand...

And this brings us back to.... doe a deer a female deer....


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Yes, I don't think we are going to get anywhere with this one.


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			That's a good point, Wagtail, many people on here are pro-fox hunting, and a fox is inevitable going to be killed ( or was, I'm so glad it was banned!) 

But obviously, being ripped to shreds by dogs is okay. It's tradition, and so it makes it fine!
		
Click to expand...

OMG!  You silly girl!  How the heck can you come on Horse&Hound forum, of all forums, go on about how cruel racing AND fox hunting is and not expect people to have something to say about it??  I'd go on a different forum if I were you!


----------



## Magicmillbrook (11 April 2011)

sprite1978 said:



			I support the GN, and I do so knowing that it is an extremely dangerous spectacle where horses/riders maybe injured and die. I think the way the horses and tarps were so visable can only act as a good reminder of this fact. 

However, the very visable loss of these animals will stir up a knee jerk reaction, and unsupported claims of cruelty. The hauds of drunk racegoers who are completely dissmissive and ignorant of the consequences bother me more. It may give them a true appreciation of the effort and athleticism of the horses and riders.

As i have said, I support the grand national - but I do so with my eyes wide open. Long may it continue.
		
Click to expand...

Very good point


----------



## mcnaughty (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Yes, I don't think we are going to get anywhere with this one.
		
Click to expand...

No - because it is totally pointless when the OP cannot make up her mind on what she actually wants to ban, all her facts and figures are incorrect and she knows nothing about the race nor industry that she wants to attack.


----------



## Flame_ (11 April 2011)

And would bull fighting be acceptable if the bull might get away after a fight? I doubt it.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			So is your conern here that the bull will _definately _be killed, or that the horse _may _be injured??
		
Click to expand...

Both. 

I hate bullfighting, but I'm using the use of horses in bull fighting as my analogy. My example doesn't MEAN I'm condoning it. I'm just trying to find out where people's views and beliefs lie. 


The Luso's and Andalusian's trained for bull-fighting are all very skilled athletes, they move well and they've been trained to their prime. They are well cared for and bull fighting is part of Iberian tradition, although Catalonia has banned it, but it is still prominent around Spain. 

They enter the ring on horse back, and begin half passing at canter around the arena, it's very high risk, and so many people on here, I know are, like me, against it. 

I'm not suggesting we ignore the bull being killed, but I'm using an analogy which has more relevance. So, please answer my question. Is using horses in bull fighting acceptable? Because of the risk? I mean, is it fair to play a horse in front of a 600 pound bull with horns, being tormented? Is it fair to place a horse on a course which, let's face, is pretty much all over the place?


----------



## martlin (11 April 2011)

Phew, that was quite a read! Loads of arguments going...
Now me, I won't be signing your petition, my view might be biased as I grew up with this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DmqIEsE3Yc
as my annual racing fix, so there's no wonder I believe the Grand National is quite allright, actually


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Starbucks said:



			OMG!  You silly girl!  How the heck can you come on Horse&Hound forum, of all forums, go on about how cruel racing AND fox hunting is and not expect people to have something to say about it??  I'd go on a different forum if I were you! 

Click to expand...

Hehe, just trying to find out where all your beliefs lie. 

So, what are your views on bull fighting; Starbucks?


----------



## mcnaughty (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Both. 

I hate bullfighting, but I'm using the use of horses in bull fighting as my analogy. My example doesn't MEAN I'm condoning it. I'm just trying to find out where people's views and beliefs lie. 


The Luso's and Andalusian's trained for bull-fighting are all very skilled athletes, they move well and they've been trained to their prime. They are well cared for and bull fighting is part of Iberian tradition, although Catalonia has banned it, but it is still prominent around Spain. 

They enter the ring on horse back, and begin half passing at canter around the arena, it's very high risk, and so many people on here, I know are, like me, against it. 

I'm not suggesting we ignore the bull being killed, but I'm using an analogy which has more relevance. So, please answer my question. Is using horses in bull fighting acceptable? Because of the risk? I mean, is it fair to play a horse in front of a 600 pound bull with horns, being tormented? Is it fair to place a horse on a course which, let's face, is pretty much all over the place?
		
Click to expand...

Please stick to the title of your thread or start another thread - if you cannot finish your original arguement there is no point starting another one.


----------



## Scranny_Ann (11 April 2011)

Starbucks said:



			OMG!  You silly girl!  How the heck can you come on Horse&Hound forum, of all forums, go on about how cruel racing AND fox hunting is and not expect people to have something to say about it??  I'd go on a different forum if I were you! 

Click to expand...


^^^ This ^^^^ made me


----------



## The Virgin Dubble (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Yawn. And another...

Poor OP. 

Click to expand...

You really aren't helping the OP at all - in fact, just the opposite. You are stirring things up with that attitude. 

Mcnaughty offered CONSTRUCTIVE polite advice, without any hint of rudeness. 

OP, as I said earlier, you do need to research more thoroughly before you present a petition, otherwise it is pointless and doomed to fail.

I don't doubt your heart is in the right place though.


----------



## TBB (11 April 2011)

Haven't read all the posts on here, but would just like to make a couple of comments. The GN was the third race over the course during the meeting and to my knowledge no horse was killed in the other races, so the height of the fences is not a problem. One of the other races was the foxhunters race, so the standard of horse and jockey is not to blame, the quality of horses running in the race nowadays are better than before as the more highly rated horses run in it now since the fences were altered and the riders in the foxhunters are amateurs ( really good ones mind you). The other two races were over a shorter distance but the fatalities in the GN were on the first circuit so the distance had not come in to play. As for the winners exhaustion at the end it was hot and the other placed horses were fine, I saw race at Newcastle earlier in the season in heavy ground where the horses were legless at the end of it but no one said a thing about it. Saturday was unfortunate and no one likes to see fatalities but there are no debates about banning hurdles when there are fatalities and when the GN is run with no problems no one bothers. The GN is a victim of its own success as its watched by people who never watch another NH race all year and when anything happens its hijacked by certain groups (much like the hunting debate) and sensationalised by the media. Before anyone asks, no I dont hunt and I've had a horse in training that was killed ( in a fall in the yard on its way to the horse walker). I just think that people should think a bit more about the young lad in a coma after one of the other races rather than just jumping on the bandwagon. Sorry if I've repeated what others have already said!!!


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Hehe, just trying to find out where all your beliefs lie. 

So, what are your views on bull fighting; Starbucks? 

Click to expand...

I don't really know that much about it TBH, isn't anything I've ever seen or been involved with so I'll withhold judgement.  I find it's best not to talk about things I know nothing about.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U86UfRjdYg&feature=related

Is this acceptable?


----------



## feisty_filly (11 April 2011)

Ok this thread is a bit pointless, we have all been round in circles since the race on Saturday (on many different threads) and people are just repeating what's already been said. Why keep going? 
Personaly I enjoy the GN and having a wee flutter on the horses. Alot of people seem to confuse race horses with pet horses.


----------



## Magicmillbrook (11 April 2011)

OP - Sorry people are being rude to you, everyone is entitled to an opinion, but you realy should get your facts straight before starting a petition.  I gather from your comment about adults attacking children that you are a more youthfull member - perhaps you might get a kinder response in the common room?

Its realy sad that horses died in the GN, but horses die in many many races, and at RC events, hunts and last year one dropped dead at a local sponsored ride.  We had this discussion at work this morning when the sweep stake money was handed out - I would rather a horse died on the hoof, galloping freely being a horse than fading away with failing teeth and limbs ...just my opinon


----------



## KautoStar1 (11 April 2011)

I'm sure the viewers of This Morning will sort it all out and in the future the national will be run with everyone wearing pink with flowers in their hair


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Dubs said:



			You really aren't helping the OP at all - in fact, just the opposite. You are stirring things up with that attitude. 

Mcnaughty offered CONSTRUCTIVE polite advice, without any hint of rudeness. 

OP, as I said earlier, you do need to research more thoroughly before you present a petition, otherwise it is pointless and doomed to fail.

I don't doubt your heart is in the right place though. 

Click to expand...

Apologies to McNaughty, it was not aimed specifically at her (or him). I was referring to the fact that this is about the fifteenth post saying exactly the same thing. The OP had already apologised twice for getting it wrong. I really hate the pack mentality that sometimes arises on fourms such as this. People don't know when to let a point drop and fail to realise when they are straying into bully territory. I'm sure it wasn't intentional.


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U86UfRjdYg&feature=related

Is this acceptable?
		
Click to expand...

With all due respect OP - horses in racing very rarely attack each other - so your example here fails to make any point at all.

As for whether I am for or against bull fighting - for the record I'm against it.  It has nothing to do with whether a horse is used in the performance or not.

However, this has nothing to do with your original post - and I fail to see what analogy you are drawing from comparing the two......


----------



## HashRouge (11 April 2011)

This is the most common use of a horse in bullfighting. The picador's job is basically to tire out the bull before the torero (who in Spain, at least, tends to fight on foot) enters the ring. As you can see, the horse is charged by the bull and, although it wears protection, is at risk of being gored and must be down right terrified. The picador's generally use cheap, poorly bred horses that no-one really cares about. The bull starts to go for the horse about half a minute in:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwY5mi2KaVw

This is what the OP is talking about, I think. This type of bullfighting happens occasionally in Spain but really isn't that common. It is much more common in Portugal and in Latin America (I think this horse is from Mexico but I could be wrong). I can't agree with this either because I don't agree with bullfighting, but as far as I'm aware, this sort of horse is far less likely to be injured by the bull because it is extremely well trained and also very valuable. If the horse was "probably" going to die every time it entered the ring the sport would simply not be viable. Much like with the torero who fights on foot, accidents can happen, but bullfighting tends only to be fatal to the bull. I disagree less with this use of the horse in bullfights than with the former, if that makes sense, although I'm completely opposed to bullfighting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgG_Gwy7Ysg


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U86UfRjdYg&feature=related

Is this acceptable?
		
Click to expand...

I'm a bit confused why you are posting about bull fighting when the thread is supposed to be about the Grand National?

As I said before I know nothing about bull fighting so don't feel like I should comment.


----------



## mcnaughty (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U86UfRjdYg&feature=related

Is this acceptable?
		
Click to expand...

The horse is leaning into the attack!  FFS this is not cruel to the horse - it is not distressed nor injured!


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			With all due respect OP - horses in racing very rarely attack each other - so your example here fails to make any point at all.

As for whether I am for or against bull fighting - for the record I'm against it.  It has nothing to do with whether a horse is used in the performance or not.

However, this has nothing to do with your original post - and I fail to see what analogy you are drawing from comparing the two......

Click to expand...

See, now I've thrown in an example, it's being disregarded. 

The analogy I'm drawing, for the 100th time, is one that is suggesting we throw horses into a sport which has high risk, but it's deemed acceptable because that's the risk we take. 

I'm not comparing the fighting- I'm comparing the RISK. 

Not all horses get attacked in a bull fight. Not all horses fall down in a race. But the point is that some still do. The point is that it is the risk we all 'take' with horses in these kind of sports. I know horses in racing aren't be chased by bulls, but they have 30 odd horses behind them, all galloping, one horse falls, and if they don't break their neck, the likeliness of having 600 pounds of TB horse land on them is high. So the risks are pretty similar.

It's interesting that you're apposed to that.


----------



## HashRouge (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U86UfRjdYg&feature=related

Is this acceptable?
		
Click to expand...

OP, see my post. That is not a bullfighter's horse, it is a picador's horse. It will not be the well-trained athlete you mentioned earlier and the reason it wears padding, which bullfighters' horses tend not to, is because the bull is allowed to charge the horse. It's part of the way they tire the bull out before the torero enters the ring.


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

OP, do you oppose eventing? Or team chasing? Or hacking on the roads?


----------



## The Virgin Dubble (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Apologies to McNaughty, it was not aimed specifically at her (or him). I was referring to the fact that this is about the fifteenth post saying exactly the same thing. The OP had already apologised twice for getting it wrong. I really hate the pack mentality that sometimes arises on fourms such as this. People don't know when to let a point drop and fail to realise when they are straying into bully territory. I'm sure it wasn't intentional.
		
Click to expand...

It may seem like a pack mentality to you, but it's a very emotive subject, particularly atm, and fans of the GN are feeling quite defensive after all the hysteria whipped up by the media.

The OP, unfortunately, has got caught up in the crossfire because she based her petition on media propaganda rather than her own detailed research.

I'm sure no offence is intended.


----------



## pip6 (11 April 2011)

Someone mentioned in a post earlier about how hard it was to get an ex-racer to stand next to a mounting block. This isn't a fault, it's the way they are mounted in racing, never standing still & never using a mounting black, always leg-ups on the move. This isn't a fault, it's just years of training. As it stemmed from the horses early formative years, I have no doubt that it will take time & much patience to persuade him to stand by a mounting block for you.

On the speed v fences argument, I would add that I do endurance. After graduating through the grades to advanced, where you can enter endurance rides. Everyone starts togther, & first past the post & passed by the vet wins. Thing is, minimum distance is 80km (50 miles), going up to 160km (100 miles). One horse, one rider, all terrains, all weathers (including in deserts if you go abroad). The reason they no longer do ER's under 80km is speed. The faster you go, the higher the chance of injury. On the fast desert courses, they can do the 160miles, including 5 vet checks for horse welfare at which they must meet strict soundness/dehydration/metabiloic parameters during the preparation for which the clock does not stop ticking, in just over 7 hours (averaging well over 20km+ per hour for the length of the race). Dehydration / cooling are all done effectively, & these animals are kept well hydrated (unlike racehorses). Most will come in off that pace & present to the vet (pulse under 64bpm) in under a minute, including the time it takes to remove the tack (must be stripped for presentation). Even at the end they have to be deemed by the vet to be fit & well, & meet the same strict parameters. I do think there are some out moded ideas in racing, with regard to hydration & rapid cooling, which could be improved. At least these days they are giving them more water at the end (you wont find an endurance horse refused water, even in the middle of a race). I would prefer to see improved welfare with regard to dehydration & cooling as a focus to improvement.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

It puzzles me why the OP is being subjected to such an onslaught. She has got a few facts wrong for which she apologises, and is only asking for a review of the GN not a ban. I posted a poll a couple of days ago in which 60% of people who responded would like to see some changes, even those who loved the race. http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=448128
This thread is not a ban racing thread. If it were, then I could understand the vitriol. I for one, love going to the races, but I just want to see it made as safe as we can.


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			See, now I've thrown in an example, it's being disregarded. 

The analogy I'm drawing, for the 100th time, is one that is suggesting we throw horses into a sport which has high risk, but it's deemed acceptable because that's the risk we take. 

I'm not comparing the fighting- I'm comparing the RISK. 

Not all horses get attacked in a bull fight. Not all horses fall down in a race. But the point is that some still do. The point is that it is the risk we all 'take' with horses in these kind of sports. I know horses in racing aren't be chased by bulls, but they have 30 odd horses behind them, all galloping, one horse falls, and if they don't break their neck, the likeliness of having 600 pounds of TB horse land on them is high. So the risks are pretty similar.

It's interesting that you're apposed to that. 

Click to expand...

I'm not disregarding your example - just wondering what it has to do with banning the GN.

However, if your analogy is about risk - then you're going to need to expand the remint of your original petition by banning all equine sport.  Because every single one of them carries significant risk.

And that goes for the riding that you do too - OP.  Competative or not.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

mcnaughty said:



			The horse is leaning into the attack!  FFS this is not cruel to the horse - it is not distressed nor injured!
		
Click to expand...

Wow. 

Anyway, so is this horse alright? I mean, totally safe and all that  ... 

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1709177330443&set=o.156996780994152&theater



Teagreen, if I'm honest, no I don't enjoy eventing either, hacking on the roads has a huge risk, but then I try to avoid road riding and am fortunate to keep my horse in the middle of the country park and near woods. I don't deny that it is risky, but then so is everything in life. However, some things pose MORE of a thread than others. Naturally.


----------



## mcnaughty (11 April 2011)

Horse riding IS a high risk sport - ALL horse riding!  You cannot take the risk out of it - it is impossible!

Actually most top eventers - if you ask them which part of eventing they love the most it is the XC that is because of the adrenalin rush!


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			See, now I've thrown in an example, it's being disregarded. 

The analogy I'm drawing, for the 100th time, is one that is suggesting we throw horses into a sport which has high risk, but it's deemed acceptable because that's the risk we take. 

I'm not comparing the fighting- I'm comparing the RISK. 

Not all horses get attacked in a bull fight. Not all horses fall down in a race. But the point is that some still do. The point is that it is the risk we all 'take' with horses in these kind of sports. I know horses in racing aren't be chased by bulls, but they have 30 odd horses behind them, all galloping, one horse falls, and if they don't break their neck, the likeliness of having 600 pounds of TB horse land on them is high. So the risks are pretty similar.

It's interesting that you're apposed to that. 

Click to expand...

I think people are opposed to bull fighting because of the Bull, not the horse.

The way I see it is that millions of animals are killed for us to eat and the majority of them don't even get a good quality of life either.  Just think of all the animals in this country that are abused and neglected, and the thousands of domestic animals abroad that are neglected/starving because no one can provide them with their basic needs.  There are so many horses suffering in the world, but all you can think about is 1 or 2 that might die in the national and another few that might get a poke in the ribs from a blummin bull!  Horses that despite these accidents have top notch care and are happy and larry.

Why do you focus so much on these high publicity cases I wonder?  Do you think YOUR view is in perspective?


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			It puzzles me why the OP is being subjected to such an onslaught.
		
Click to expand...


Because she does not make a valid argument, and seems unable to post relevant or correct information.....


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Hmm starbucks, last image is DEFINITELY just a poke in the ribs  

I agree that animals everywhere suffer abuse, neglect, mistreatment. 

However; this is always the argument of those I argue with against rollkur (I even had a petition for that, but don't worry, that's a subject I'm familiar with ), that there were more important issues at stake.

Yes, I agree entirely, and I support all those things too; however, we can't just push these things to the side? We can't just turn a blind eye because there is worse suffering in the world. 

You could critisize the NSPCC, I mean, there are starving children out in Africa who are dying from Malaria, HIV, starvation and frequently becoming orphans, but then helping children who are abused by their parents or pushed around a bit? Should we critique care homes because their time is being wasted on those who perhaps don't need as much aid as others? I mean seriously?


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			Because she does not make a valid argument, and seems unable to post relevant or correct information.....
		
Click to expand...

Ah, but I am not the only one posting incorrect sources? 

I think we're all getting incorrect figures.


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

I vividly remember a horse who was around at the time I was most actively involved in racing called Son of Snurge. He was pretty hopeless. He had a loving trainer and loving owners, but he ran at tiny tracks in tiny races and was generally pretty rubbish.

Son of Snurge died in a low grade race at Hexham. Another horse died in the same race. Did ANYONE have anything to say about it? No. His groom cried and his trainer was upset and his owners mourned. But the press never said a thing, Animal Aid probably noted his death and said no more and that was that. It wasn't on tv, it went largely unnoticed. Like so many other races where 2 or more horses die.

Animal Aid have latched onto this because of how public it was. Ill-informed townie public watch This Morning and assume horses only die in the GN and that's awful. But if you want the GN banned (not saying, OP, that you do, I'm just ranting in general!) then you also want all racing banned, because the risk is the same. Doesn't matter if it's the GN where 'famous', relatively well known horses run in millions of living rooms around the world, or piddly chases with a £1000 prize money pot at Hexham on a rainy afternoon.


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Hmm starbucks, last image is DEFINITELY just a poke in the ribs  

I agree that animals everywhere suffer abuse, neglect, mistreatment. 

However; this is always the argument of those I argue with against rollkur (I even had a petition for that, but don't worry, that's a subject I'm familiar with ), that there were more important issues at stake.

Yes, I agree entirely, and I support all those things too; however, we can't just push these things to the side? We can't just turn a blind eye because there is worse suffering in the world. 

You could critisize the NSPCC, I mean, there are starving children out in Africa who are dying from Malaria, HIV, starvation and frequently becoming orphans, but then helping children who are abused by their parents or pushed around a bit? Should we critique care homes because their time is being wasted on those who perhaps don't need as much aid as others? I mean seriously?
		
Click to expand...

No that's not what I'm saying at all.  The point is that race horses are not being abused by running in the GN!! My horse broke his leg after being hit by a car, would make pretty horrendous pictures like the one you posted of the horse bull fighting. Does that mean people should not ride on the road?  Accidents happen, but it's not the same as abuse.


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Ah, but I am not the only one posting incorrect sources? 

I think we're all getting incorrect figures.
		
Click to expand...

But _you_ started this thread.  And it was incumbant on you to ensure your facts before you set up your petition.  It's inaccuracies like yours that make so many other petitions worthless.  They are set up by people based on little, no, or inaccurate information - which can have the affect of making other petitions valueless.

As for others getting their figures incorrect.  One poster left something out - which was an error, rather than ignorance.....


----------



## tallyho! (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Wow. 

Anyway, so is this horse alright? I mean, totally safe and all that  ... 

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1709177330443&set=o.156996780994152&theater



Teagreen, if I'm honest, no I don't enjoy eventing either, hacking on the roads has a huge risk, but then I try to avoid road riding and am fortunate to keep my horse in the middle of the country park and near woods. I don't deny that it is risky, but then so is everything in life. However, some things pose MORE of a thread than others. Naturally.
		
Click to expand...

Aaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh!!! You've mentally scarred me for life!


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			But _you_ started this thread.  And it was incumbant on you to ensure your facts before you set up your petition.  It's inaccuracies like yours that make so many other petitions worthless.  They are set up by people based on little, no, or inaccurate information - which can have the affect of making other petitions valueless.

As for others getting their figures incorrect.  One poster left something out - which was an error, rather than ignorance.....
		
Click to expand...

However I stated that I cocked up, twice, yet still getting shot at? 

Yes I've picked up a new 'subject' but most topics are inevitable going to go on a tangent and head somewhere else. 

I will edit my figures, however my petition isn't totally incorrect. I've now got a sponsor, Heather Moffett, who like I stated earlier, husband was part of the racing industry, who can hopefully amend where I went wrong.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			However I stated that I cocked up, twice, yet still getting shot at? 

Yes I've picked up a new 'subject' but most topics are inevitable going to go on a tangent and head somewhere else. 

I will edit my figures, however my petition isn't totally incorrect. I've now got a sponsor, Heather Moffett, who like I stated earlier, husband was part of the racing industry, who can hopefully amend where I went wrong.
		
Click to expand...

And you have stood up well to the pack.  It seems strange to me that even people like Amy who agree with some of what you are wanting (ie to make the GN safer), are pedantically hanging on to some incorrect figures despite your acknowledgement of your error. Obviously, I am missing something here.


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			And you have stood up well to the pack.  It seems strange to me that even people like Amy who agree with some of what you are wanting (ie to make the GN safer), are pedantically hanging on to some incorrect figures despite your acknowledgement of your error. Obviously, I am missing something here.
		
Click to expand...

I've not quoted any figures.......


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			But _you_ started this thread.  And it was incumbant on you to ensure your facts before you set up your petition.  It's inaccuracies like yours that make so many other petitions worthless.  They are set up by people based on little, no, or inaccurate information - which can have the affect of making other petitions valueless.

As for others getting their figures incorrect.  One poster left something out - which was an error, rather than ignorance.....
		
Click to expand...

You have been here a long time. Maybe you are aware of some rule that I am not, that means anyone who makes a mistake in their OP can expect to be ripped to shreads by the mob even if they apologise for said errors. And that anyone else who also makes a mistake (so long as you like them) can be excused as it is only an error.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			I've not quoted any figures.......
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was referring to you hanging onto the mistakes by the OP and going on about them.


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

Oh, and following on from my Son of Snurge post, there was the 2 flat horses that died on Grand National day. But people are forgetting about them too. Doesn't that make flat racing just as unsafe as the Grand National...2 horses died in the GN.....2 horses died in Son of Snurge's low grade chase....2 horses died on the flat....

But then I bet if you count the number of horses who died in field accidents/illnesses today, it'd be 2 or more. 

Moral is...horses are risky. Racing is risky. If you want to eliminate the risk, ban racing. But then you'd have to ban so many other things...

Actually, I want to apologise to old Snurgy for getting where he died wrong in my original post about it....I think it was Sedgefield we were at that day, not Hexham. That was another death...in another low grade race...that no one got hyped up about...


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			You have been here a long time. Maybe you are aware of some rule that I am not, that means anyone who makes a mistake in their OP can expect to be ripped to shreads by the mob even if they apologise for said errors. And that anyone else who also makes a mistake (so long as you like them) can be excused as it is only an error. 

Click to expand...

 

Thanks for sticking up for me, wagtail  

It's okay, have you ever been involved with the pro-rollkur or Parelli enthusiasts? They can be even nastier. Without my letting my head expand, I've debated with Linda Parelli, HHO is no match  

I know this forum has quite a reputation, but I didn't think it was as bad as it was made out. I respect though, that I've provoked this and that they are defending what they believe in. So that's fine


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			You have been here a long time. Maybe you are aware of some rule that I am not, that means anyone who makes a mistake in their OP can expect to be ripped to sgreads by the mob even if they apologise for said errors. And that anyone else who also makes a mistake (so long as you like them) can be excused as it is only an error. 

Click to expand...

Actually Wagail - I don't think that this poster has been ripped to threads.  Ok, the odd post has been a bit over the top, but mostly she's been corrected.

When you are asking people to support something with a view to making changes in an organisation or policy within a government then it is your responsibility to research your proposal for the facts surrounding your cause, before putting together a petition.  

The OP has, for the most part, merely been countered, corrected or intelligently argued with.  

We can all make mistakes and frequently do.  But when people insist on taking the higher moral ground it would be useful of them to know exactly what ground it is they are standing on.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			Oh, and following on from my Son of Snurge post, there was the 2 flat horses that died on Grand National day. But people are forgetting about them too. Doesn't that make flat racing just as unsafe as the Grand National...2 horses died in the GN.....2 horses died in Son of Snurge's low grade chase....2 horses died on the flat....

But then I bet if you count the number of horses who died in field accidents/illnesses today, it'd be 2 or more. 

Moral is...horses are risky. Racing is risky. If you want to eliminate the risk, ban racing. But then you'd have to ban so many other things...
		
Click to expand...

I totally see where you're coming from with field incidents of course. However, whilst obviously even being in a field poses a risk, you just don't expect a course, like GN, to have quite a high proportion of deaths. 

I suppose because it's quite a publicised thing, and also it's in quite a small 'area', you do tend to note the death rates a lot more. 

*Again, I'm not suggesting we ban the GN. *

I'll bold face it this time, as obviously not been heard lol


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			Oh, and following on from my Son of Snurge post, there was the 2 flat horses that died on Grand National day. But people are forgetting about them too. Doesn't that make flat racing just as unsafe as the Grand National...2 horses died in the GN.....2 horses died in Son of Snurge's low grade chase....2 horses died on the flat....

But then I bet if you count the number of horses who died in field accidents/illnesses today, it'd be 2 or more. 

Moral is...horses are risky. Racing is risky. If you want to eliminate the risk, ban racing. But then you'd have to ban so many other things...
		
Click to expand...

Of course horses are risky. I have lost two over the years in paddock accidents. But surely we should do our bests to reduce the risks? For example, if I see a rabbit hole in the field, I fill it in. I don't wait until a horse breaks its leg or think 'oh well, horses will be horses.' If it's too muddy or slippery, I put them in the all weather turnout. We know that the number of horses that run in the national, compounds the danger. IMO it is both sensible and ethical to remove or reduce that danger. Quoting deaths in flat races etc is meaningless because there was no consistent element that caused the deaths. In the GN there are several that we _know_ do. I do think there are probably other courses that need looking at too though.


----------



## tallyho! (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			I've set up a petition in the aim to get lots of support and hopefully take it to the BRS and get them to just consider that the course perhaps needs some of it's safety aspects reconsider. 

I'm not suggesting we ban the race, but if we can reduce the number of horses on the course, perhaps lower the fences and even reduce the length they have to run, you can still enjoy the race, and it will hopefully reduce the number of fatalities. 

We do see it in eventing, however not as often, because safety is considered, obviously we can't prevent accidents entirely, but I believe we can reduce the risk. 

In the past 11 years, 21 horses have been killed on GN, lets try and reduce that number. We're all horse lovers here! So let's just do the right thing 


http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/grandnationalsafety/
Thanks for your support. I don't want to cause a fight, I just want to raise awareness 

xx
		
Click to expand...

Haven't read the umpteen pages of replies but I do agree in making this race safer... signed.

One step at a time.. maybe after Badminton we can tackle eventing!!!


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

I was out in my numbers by ONE horse - the OP didn't even know that the horses she was counting hadn't even run in the National. 

6 horses died on track in the GN out of 480 total runners over 12 races. That's accurate.

33 or whatever is being claimed is not. 

 At least 4 of those 6 were when the ground was quick. Watering would help that greatly. 

However, as unseasonal weather causes road deaths, unfortunately it caused these deaths. I'm sure the track will try what they can, but I've no doubt you'd all be up in arms if he'd overwatered, it had rained, and we'd been subjected to the grisly spectacle such as this year's Eider.

You want to help horses? Go and look for the ones that need it, not well cared for animals like these were.


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			I totally see where you're coming from with field incidents of course. However, whilst obviously even being in a field poses a risk, you just don't expect a course, like GN, to have quite a high proportion of deaths. 

I suppose because it's quite a publicised thing, and also it's in quite a small 'area', you do tend to note the death rates a lot more. 

*Again, I'm not suggesting we ban the GN. *

I'll bold face it this time, as obviously not been heard lol
		
Click to expand...

I did actually say over the page in my first post about Snurgy that I knew you didnt want to ban the National - so I did hear you.


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Of course horses are risky. I have lost two over the years in paddock accidents.
		
Click to expand...

I haven't....... maybe you need to stop keeping horses?


----------



## jenbleep (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			You want to help horses? Go and look for the ones that need it, not well cared for animals like these were.
		
Click to expand...

I totally agree with this


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Caledonia, you know you pointed out to me about researching my points before I make them....

well the discussion has evolved since then 
In the time you've been away, I've admitted I was wrong, amended it on my petition, removed the bit about the course length and various other things. 

I wish I hadn't got this started, my school work is calling me, but this is far more engaging!


----------



## Flame_ (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



*Again, I'm not suggesting we ban the GN. *

I'll bold face it this time, as obviously not been heard lol
		
Click to expand...

But how can The Grand National still be the Grand National if you make it significantly different? 

Shorten it? Reduce the field? Lower the fences? Do away with the handicap? There will already be other races of that distance, maximum field size, fence heights and no handicap, they are just called something else, and horses die in them sometimes too. Do people not think the horses' trainers enter in the National are horses that they think will best suit this race with this distance, fence height, etc?


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Caledonia, you know you pointed out to me about researching my points before I make them....

well the discussion has evolved since then 
In the time you've been away, I've admitted I was wrong, amended it on my petition, removed the bit about the course length and various other things.
		
Click to expand...

So why don't you do something more beneficial to horses in general? The ones that aren't glamorous, or high profile because they're not racehorses? THEY are the ones that need your help.........


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

Flame_ said:



			But how can The Grand National still be the Grand National if you make it significantly different? 

Shorten it? Reduce the field? Lower the fences? Do away with the handicap? There will already be other races of that distance, maximum field size, fence heights and no handicap, they are just called something else, and horses die in them sometimes too. Do people not think the horses trainers enter in the National are horses that they think will best suit this race with this distance, fence height, etc?
		
Click to expand...

Exactly.

I was having this conversation with someone in the shop earlier on.

"Shorten it and reduce the number of runners" they said. Well, that makes the Topham then. Horses still get killed in that.

"Ok then, make the fences smaller, or different" they said. Well, they did that. It just makes them go faster. Say they replace them with ordinary fences. That just makes it like any other chase. Horses die on those too.

"Make the fences tiny?" they suggested. So like hurdles then? Horses die in hurdle races too.

"The ground was too fast" they said. Now, I would rather have seen it run on softer ground. However, the ground was by no means unsafe, it just meant they went faster. If it was heavy, horses would be more tired, which creates its own outcry. 

"Well, maybe we should just make it a flat race then!" they finally said. Well, horses die in that too. So basically, unless we ban racing, you can't remove the risk.

I think they'll reduce the field size for next year.


----------



## levantosh (11 April 2011)

I think the national will always be a welfare issue. The fences have all ready been made easier than in the olden days. The smaller fences make the horses take more of a risk. 
There is also one point which I would like to make. The horses are not running the national loose, the jockeys are in charge of the horses as soon as they get on the course. Its up to the riders to slow down not the horses. I am a point to point jockey and all well and be it I am nowhere in the same league as these guys but when the horse I was riding gets tiered or is making silly errors in its jumping through fatigue then it gets pulled up and saved for another day. Going flat out is always a recipe for disaster. 
Would people like the national run in the mud like when Red Marauder won his national!
People will always be divided but I for one enjoy the national.
People were complaining and trying to change the Eider chase at Newcastle because it was like a bog and only 2 horses finished. Not being funny but if it were up to some people racing would be completely banned!
Mary King lost a horse at express eventing, should that venue be cancelled?


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			So why don't you do something more beneficial to horses in general? The ones that aren't glamorous, or high profile because they're not racehorses? THEY are the ones that need your help.........
		
Click to expand...

But I do  

I have a 3 year old rescue from the meat market, I had a horse (who okay, admittedly was a little too much for me, I am 5ft and he was a 17hh ID x) who was a rescue case, came to me with rain scald, thrush, severely underweight and had been tethered, with stale water to drink pretty much. My friend and I work together, her current project, who we discovered last year, is a 15hh Arab, who is covered in scars, was shut in a mangy box all day and severely underweight, over grown feet so he could barely walk and a 12hh Welsh Sec A who we sold to a friend, that was riddled with ring worm, lice, and kept in a garden shed for three years. 

I support the WSPA, Bransby Home of Rest for horses, the Brooke  etc. 

So yes, I do also help horses in more dire need. Thank you very much


----------



## Flame_ (11 April 2011)

levantosh said:



			Mary King lost a horse at express eventing, should that venue be cancelled?
		
Click to expand...

 Big can of worms.


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			But I do  

I have a 3 year old rescue from the meat market, I had a horse (who okay, admittedly was a little too much for me, I am 5ft and he was a 17hh ID x) who was a rescue case, came to me with rain scald, thrush, severely underweight and had been tethered, with stale water to drink pretty much. My friend and I work together, her current project, who we discovered last year, is a 15hh Arab, who is covered in scars, was shut in a mangy box all day and severely underweight, over grown feet so he could barely walk and a 12hh Welsh Sec A who we sold to a friend, that was riddled with ring worm, lice, and kept in a garden shed for three years. 

I support the WSPA, Bransby Home of Rest for horses, the Brooke  etc. 

So yes, I do also help horses in more dire need. Thank you very much 

Click to expand...

That's commendable, but an individual basis. I meant with your petition.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			That's commendable, but an individual basis. I meant with your petition.
		
Click to expand...

Shall I find my links to my 'anti-fur farms' petition? 
I support all sorts of causes. Bunny hugger? I hope not, but I just think animals in general are not really respected enough. 

Apologies to anyone I've offended in this thread, I totally respect this is your sport, your passion and to many of you, a way of living. I also respect that the racing industry provides homes for horses that would end up in the slaughter house


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

I wonder how many of the 74% of the those who voted in This Mornings poll had ever been racing or watched a race other than the Grand National. I bet 74% also read the Daily Mail. I also wonder how many voted..

I'm sure the 223,748 people who attended the Cheltenham Festival and the 156,392 approx who attended Aintree will beg to differ..


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Shall I find my links to my 'anti-fur farms' petition? 
I support all sorts of causes. Bunny hugger? I hope not, but I just think animals in general are not really respected enough. 

Apologies to anyone I've offended in this thread, I totally respect this is your sport, your passion and to many of you, a way of living. I also respect that the racing industry provides homes for horses that would end up in the slaughter house
		
Click to expand...

I don't support fur farms either, but horses are my passion, so I concentrate on them. 

Get involved with the transport to slaughter petitions, they are trying to make a difference. So much suffering in the horse world would be eased if there were restrictions on those.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			I don't support fur farms either, but horses are my passion, so I concentrate on them. 

Get involved with the transport to slaughter petitions, they are trying to make a difference. So much suffering in the horse world would be eased if there were restrictions on those.
		
Click to expand...

Oh I forgot that, I donated to the WHW 'Make a Noise' campaign against transporting too! My parents always ponder on where my Christmas money goes...


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

I do believe your heart's in the right place, just needs a bit of a shove in the right direction.


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Oh I forgot that, I donated to the WHW 'Make a Noise' campaign against transporting too! My parents always ponder on where my Christmas money goes... 

Click to expand...

I think it's nice that you obviously want to make a difference to horse suffering. Campaigns like that really do make a difference, I'm sure. It's also nice that you held your hands up to the mistakes you made and listened to those who pointed out the truth. But at the end of the day, there are a lot more things to make a noise about than horse racing.


----------



## Appymadness (11 April 2011)

This is a tricky one. I personally Hate the Grand National! Because of the amount of horses running is just too much, its a Stampead not a race!
I just can't watch it anymore, if I see a horse fall I get upset,even if it gets up afterwards.
Horse riding/racing is a dangerous sport for both horse & rider. It is true that because the jumps have been changed & made smaller drops, the race is a lot faster which causes more falls. There was another fatalality at Aintree on the Thursday before where a horse fell at a jump & broke its leg & had to be destroyed. 
I remember going to Badminton one year & the rain just pelted down for the whole weekend, there were about 5 horses killed that weekend because of the slippey ground & falling.
I think the number of horses should be reduced slightly, even if just removing 6 will make a difference & making the jumps standard brush fences & removing all drops.
The race will never be banned, its a massive money spinner & at the end of the day that's what its all about plus the massive pressure & hype of who is the greatest race horse.
Its a marmite race. People love it & people hate. Me, I hate it & wish it would be banned but that is just my opinion. I just hate seeing animals suffer, if it were down to me I'd ban shooting, fox hunting, jump races would be made very easy, infact the grand National would just be another steeple chase called the Small National! lol!
The Jury will just have to stay out on this one. But reducing the number of horses & reducing the distance & making the jumps would be nice, but like others have said, it would be just another Steeplechase!


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

Appymadness said:



			but like others have said, it would be just another Steeplechase!
		
Click to expand...

And steeplechases kill horses. So really, it wouldn't be any different.


----------



## happyhaffie (11 April 2011)

Firstly well done for standing up to something you believe in, if alot more people did just that alot of suffering of any animal would be reduced, but mainly well done for listening to other peoples views and amending yours, you may not have had the correct information but it does seem like your trying.
The grand national scares the living day light out of me and for the first time in 10 years I attempted to watch it, saw what happend at the second fence and done a runner to the farm (i am ridiculously soft when it comes to seeing animals or humans hurt them selves).  But I would not want to see it banned, I do think that improvements can be made as with any sport their is always room for improvement, no sport is risk free but that does not mean that the risks can be ignored, changes have been made over the years and hopefully they will keep on making the changes to all grounds so the risk to rider and horse can be as minimal as possible.
I would probably say I am pro Grand National as long as they keep on improving the sport, I dont know what would make the race safer thats not my area but im quite sure there are professionals who do just that, I do not think it is fair for the general public to demonise the race, if a pro turned around and said this race is too much too dangerous then I would be more likely to listen to the out cry and I do wonder how many of them have had a flutter and perhaps lost :0


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			I haven't....... maybe you need to stop keeping horses?
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps you have not been keeping horses so long as I have or owned and cared for as many. Some of your posts do come over as rather immature.


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Perhaps you have not been keeping horses so long as I have or owned and cared for as many. Some of your posts do come over as rather immature.
		
Click to expand...

Hmmmm ........ that was obviously too subtle for you. 

I'm commenting (tongue in cheek) on what you should or shouldn't do from a statistic you gave me - I'm simply turning your argument back on you. You might have had 2,000 horses, you might have had only 2, who knows? But you've had 2 die. Depending on the ratio, it is or is not acceptable.

My point was to demonstrate that a statistic taken out of context can be unfairly damning. Sorry if it went over your head.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			Hmmmm ........ that was obviously too subtle for you. 

I'm commenting (tongue in cheek) on what you should or shouldn't do from a statistic you gave me - I'm simply turning your argument back on you. You might have had 2,000 horses, you might have had only 2, who knows? But you've had 2 die. Depending on the ratio, it is or is not acceptable.

My point was to demonstrate that a statistic taken out of context can be unfairly damning. Sorry if it went over your head. 


Click to expand...

 I see! Very good. Yes, I'm afraid after some of your rather harsh and sarcastic responses to the OP I was expecting something along a similar vein. Well I like!


----------



## LizzyandToddy (11 April 2011)

Fatalities can happen at any time, the changes you propose are just going to encourage the horses to go faster and at least with fences of a decent size the horse has to bring itself back. The fences themselves aren't dangerous, a horse could clamber through it if it tried, its just over jumping and pecking on landing at speed which can cause them to fall on their necks which is fatal.

No one likes to see accidents, but accidents happen everywhere in any race, or out on the hunting field, even in the field at home. Moments like this are only brought to everyone's attention when it becomes heavily televised such as the GN. 

And for what it's worth, I think that both incidents that did occur were delt with very well.


----------



## DJ (11 April 2011)

People are proud of this ? A "great British Tradition" to be enjoyed ? ? ?  

Look at the photo`s on Yahoo.co.uk 

Quite frankly i`m ashamed !!!!!!!


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



 I see! Very good. Yes, I'm afraid after some of your rather harsh and sarcastic responses to the OP I was expecting something along a similar vein. Well I like! 

Click to expand...

From your replies on this thread, I felt it was how you warranted responding to. 

ETA, Daisy, you'll need copyright for these?


----------



## Echo Bravo (11 April 2011)

Lets face it, this will go away again till next year and we will have the same arguments. No I don't think the GN is cruel or any other riding activity that has speed. Jeez does that mean I cann't canter my horse incase he may break a leg. Please some of you grow up death comes in different ways, at lest these two horses knew nothing or felt any pain. If you really care about animal suffering look on the SPANA website, about the poor bloody donkeys and horses made to carry way beyound their own weight, now to me that is human abuse and cruelty.


----------



## DJ (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			ETA, Daisy, you'll need copyright for these?
		
Click to expand...

Why ? They`re on Yahoo`s main news page for all to see  

I will happily take them off .... but if people wish to see them, go look at Yahoo.co.uk ....


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

Cos you can't just copy photos willy nilly.


----------



## DJ (11 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			Cos you can't just copy photos willy nilly.

Click to expand...

Willy nilly ..... lmao ... haven`t heard that saying in yeeeeeears


----------



## Golf Girl (11 April 2011)

In my opinion, this horrendous and gruesome spectacle should be banned. The welfare of the horses should come first in any sport. If people want to take part in dangerous sports that's their choice, but the horses don't have a choice. It's exploitation of animals for financial gain. Shocking and shameful.


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

daisysp8 said:



			Willy nilly ..... lmao ... haven`t heard that saying in yeeeeeears 

Click to expand...

It just popped into my head.........


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

Golf Girl said:



			In my opinion, this horrendous and gruesome spectacle should be banned. The welfare of the horses should come first in any sport. If people want to take part in dangerous sports that's their choice, but the horses don't have a choice. It's exploitation of animals for financial gain. Shocking and shameful.
		
Click to expand...

Eventing, dressage, showjumping, team chasing, polo, showing...are they shocking and shameful too? They may not have so many 'on the surface' deaths, but you wouldn't believe what goes on behind closed doors in these sports.


----------



## only_me (11 April 2011)

Golf Girl said:



			In my opinion, this horrendous and gruesome spectacle should be banned. The welfare of the horses should come first in any sport. If people want to take part in dangerous sports that's their choice, but the horses don't have a choice. It's exploitation of animals for financial gain. Shocking and shameful.
		
Click to expand...

Like normal racing? Or just national hunt in general?

The welfare of the horse does come first in all sports - and btw, eventing is also considered a dangerous sport. heck all horse riding is a dangerous sport, how do you feel about that?


----------



## lannerch (11 April 2011)

amymay said:



			Yes I was.  And I firmly believe that the GN does need to be looked at and reviewed.  Less horses, no handicaps and better qualifications for horse and rider.

However, I am not anti racing, anti GN or anti basing my facts on good solid information and research.
		
Click to expand...

Here here

 and that in a nutshell is why I too would not consider signing the petition as it currently stands.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			Blimey, how many more times in one thread can an OP move the Goalposts? 

Click to expand...

I can do it more if you really want


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

Did anyone just see the National 'debate' on The One Show?! Brough Scott wasn't allowed to say anything because of David Cassidy - but I have no idea what on earth Cassidy was rattling on about! Something about American racehorses and drugs and mares and stallions...

BHA have realeased a statement - I quote some of the key paragraphs:




			Including this year, in 12 runnings of the Grand National since 2000, 479 horses have raced in the Grand National. 8 horses have been fatally injured, and we openly report this, as do the media including the BBC. Put another way, 471 horses went home after the race. In addition, in the seven years previous to this years running of the race, just three horses had lost their lives competing in the race  Hear The Echo, McKelvey and Tyneandthyneagain. McKelvey and Tyneandthyneagain were both injured when running riderless.
		
Click to expand...





			All those involved in racing do care for their horses. At the race itself there are more than 150 specialist staff who are completely focused on making the race as safe as possible, so there is no shortage of effort or expense in this respect. [see Notes for Editors 2 for detail]. This care and concern is why Horseracing has for many years also worked closely with legitimate animal welfare charities, such as the RSPCA and World Horse Welfare. The role of both these organisations is to be critical and raise concerns with us and, if they are not happy with the action we take, there is no doubt they would be very public about it, as anyone would expect from a legitimate animal welfare organisation. 

Beyond this proper concern for horse welfare, much of the prompting on this issue to the media has been driven by Animal Aid. Animal Aid are not an animal welfare group, as many newspapers and news channels have been misinformed. They are an animal rights organisation against the use of animals for sport and leisure. As such their clearly stated agenda is to ban racing. [see Notes for Editors 3].
		
Click to expand...





			The Grand National is a difficult race and was run this year on an unseasonably warm day. Because of that, all the jockeys had been instructed prior to the race to dismount from their horses as soon as the race was over in order to allow the team of handlers and vets to get water to the horses so as to prevent over-heating (which is a main cause of collapse), as it is when people run and race over long distances. This preventative action happened to all the horses, not just the winner, and shows welfare improvements in action. No horse collapsed.

The introduction of the run-outs, which were used for the first time this year, were introduced in 2009, the year after the horse McKelvey died. They were introduced after much discussion, which included the RSPCA, as a welfare measure to allow loose horses to be able to go round the obstacles, and not, as has been reported, to prevent the race from being voided. Again this is welfare in action.

The winning jockey, Jason Maguire has been banned for exceeding the strict limits which we place on the use of the whip. The horse was carefully examined after the race and there is no evidence of an abuse. Such abuses are dealt with very seriously and, as we do at the end of every season, we will certainly be reviewing our Rules to ensure that we have the balance right between appropriate use of the whip and controlling inappropriate, unacceptable use.
		
Click to expand...

Full thing can be read here: http://www.britishhorseracing.com/grand-national/


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			Don't bother on my account
I've read enough tripe for one evening.
		
Click to expand...

You don't have to read it though


----------



## V1NN (11 April 2011)

Signed. I also dont want to see the race banned and i do believe significant improvements have been made in recent yrs but i would be delighted if they could reduce the number of horses running in the grand national to 30 as a maximum. I believe that would just help so much in making it safer for the horses sake, i hate to think of the massive fear that poor horse who broke his back at beechers brook must have felt when he was lying their unable to move due to excruciating pain and then having other horses land on him..just makes me so sad, call me fluffy bunny if you like but i just love horses very much and hate to think of them suffering for the sake of ultimately entertainment.


----------



## Echo Bravo (11 April 2011)

But Frube if you read several medical reports on back injuries in humans they dont feel pain at all, just cann't move and I would say the horse was put down straight away when the vets realised what was wrong. Please stop putting human emontions onto animals. If you want to feel sorry for horses or donkeys go onto Spana website, now there is animal suffering and I always send money to them when I can afford it.


----------



## Hannah123 (11 April 2011)

If it had been the same amount of humans that died as did horses the race would have been banned along time ago. I dont think its fair for horses to be killed or seriosly injured unneccessarily although i cant deny that they dont enjoy racing i think it should definatly be made safer. xxx


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

Hannah123 said:



			If it had been the same amount of humans that died as did horses the race would have been banned along time ago. I dont think its fair for horses to be killed or seriosly injured unneccessarily although i cant deny that they dont enjoy racing i think it should definatly be made safer. xxx
		
Click to expand...

Again, horses are killed doing all sorts of things. Riding is a risk sport, keeping horses is a risky acitvity. As someone post on another thread, tends of thousands people died in cycling accidents last year, yet that hasn't been banned.


----------



## V1NN (11 April 2011)

I'm sorry i'm just saying how i personally feel and giving my opinion. I'm not against racing and i completely understand why people love the grand national and other big races. There are a few folk at my work who just love it and i understand that and i understand its a big part of british history etc. I only would like to see less horses in the race just to make it that bit safer or the jockeys sake as well as the horses. I know i'm guilty of putting human emotions onto horses and i know many others who also do it, its only because we love our horses so much and couldnt stand to see them come to any harm or feel terrible pain. I know accidents happen everyday in the world of horses, horses will be horses after all. My own horse broke his jaw in jan no idea how it happened. However i just like to minimise risk as much as possible.

Of course i feel sadness for horses in 3rd world countries , horses who were victims to the awful natural disasters that have happened lately , horses who have suffered terrible abuse and neglect and yes i have donated to many animal welfare organisations, but thats not what this particular dicussion is about thats a whole other thread.

Thankyou..


----------



## Flame_ (11 April 2011)

Do Jockeys want the field reducing?


----------



## Amymay (11 April 2011)

Flame_ said:



			Do Jockeys want the field reducing?
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it matters terribly if they do.


----------



## Yosemite (11 April 2011)

3Beasties said:



			I will not be signing sorry as I believe in making the jumps smaller and the course shorter the horses will go faster therefore causing more falls which is likely to result in more fatalities.
		
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more and I won't be signing the petition.
However, I think there is something to be said for reducing the number of runners so that, apart from anything else, there is less congestion at the narrower fences such as Becher's.


----------



## Apricot (11 April 2011)

Signed it. The whole racing industry really needs a rethink. God knows why they banned fox hunting and not even put restrictions on racing and the breeding/destruction of racehorses! (I'm not exactly pro fox hunting - I only support hunting things you eat - but I bet there are many times more equine deaths through the racing industry than there are vulpine through hunting)

Also, although the loss of horses in the National is very upsetting, I feel that the number of failed/lame racehorses culled each year is the real issue of the moment. If the government refuses to moniter breeding then they should really fund some sort of retraining programme, although I know that there are not many people willing to take on an ex racer.


----------



## V1NN (11 April 2011)

They probably dont, its just that it made me feel sick when i seen the photos of one jockey who looked to be almost crushed.


----------



## Holly Hocks (11 April 2011)

I can't believe that the GN threads are still going.  Some agree with it and some don't and some can't quite decide.   I'm more concerned with what happens to all racehorses after their racing career is over.  This was discussed on the JV show on radio 2 today and they read a poem by Philip Larkin called "At Grass" about retired racehorses.  Here it is:

At Grass by Philip Larkin

The eye can hardly pick them out
From the cold shade they shelter in,
Till wind distresses tail and main;
Then one crops grass, and moves about
- The other seeming to look on -
And stands anonymous again

Yet fifteen years ago, perhaps
Two dozen distances surficed
To fable them: faint afternoons
Of Cups and Stakes and Handicaps,
Whereby their names were artificed
To inlay faded, classic Junes -

Silks at the start: against the sky
Numbers and parasols: outside,
Squadrons of empty cars, and heat,
And littered grass : then the long cry
Hanging unhushed till it subside
To stop-press columns on the street.

Do memories plague their ears like flies?
They shake their heads. Dusk brims the shadows.
Summer by summer all stole away,
The starting-gates, the crowd and cries -
All but the unmolesting meadows.
Almanacked, their names live; they

Have slipped their names, and stand at ease,
Or gallop for what must be joy,
And not a fieldglass sees them home,
Or curious stop-watch prophesies:
Only the grooms, and the grooms boy,
With bridles in the evening come.


----------



## Sussexbythesea (11 April 2011)

Echo Bravo said:



			But Frube if you read several medical reports on back injuries in humans they dont feel pain at all, just cann't move and I would say the horse was put down straight away when the vets realised what was wrong. Please stop putting human emontions onto animals. If you want to feel sorry for horses or donkeys go onto Spana website, now there is animal suffering and I always send money to them when I can afford it.
		
Click to expand...

Animals don't feel fear?  

Only intelligent beings feel fear - do you feel fear?


----------



## MagicMelon (11 April 2011)

Signed.  Those who say that reducing the fence size will cause more problems is absolute rubbish.  They are galloping over 5ft fences, they're already going as fast as they can - they wont go any faster over smaller fences.  I personally find it a horrific and sickening race which I refuse to watch. Its only gotten so big due to non-horsey folk who dont realise how many horses die.


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

MagicMelon said:



			Signed.  Those who say that reducing the fence size will cause more problems is absolute rubbish.  They are galloping over 5ft fences, they're already going as fast as they can - they wont go any faster over smaller fences.  I personally find it a horrific and sickening race which I refuse to watch. Its only gotten so big due to non-horsey folk who dont realise how many horses die.
		
Click to expand...

No, they're not, they go much faster over hurdles. They don't have to steady up for hurdles, they jump them low and flat, they do have to steady up for the National fences. 

Horses die on the flat, over hurdles, over chase fences and over National fences - do you want everything banned?


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Can I thank everyone who did sign  

We are not suggesting a ban on GN, as another thread has misinterpreted, I think that some people are just behaving really immaturely now. I don't think I've disrespected your views, nor anyone else on this thread who disagrees. But I just think that we've been singled out as 'bunny huggers who know nothing'. That's a really unfair label to give some of us. Because that's not fair, I've noticed my errors, I've stated I've noted it, I've corrected it, yet still some people are dragging on and on. 

Thank you, Caledonia and teagreen though, for your polite response  
x


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

MagicMelon said:



			Signed.  Those who say that reducing the fence size will cause more problems is absolute rubbish.  They are galloping over 5ft fences, they're already going as fast as they can - they wont go any faster over smaller fences.
		
Click to expand...

Have you actually watched the race?

So many of you seem to think the horses go at a flat out gallop and the jockeys have no control over them, if you actually watch you will see that the jockeys look for a stride and try and set the horses up for the jump. They are not going fast and don't kick on until the closing stages of the race.


----------



## Tinkerbee (11 April 2011)

Tbh, a horse is a horse. Replaceable. 

My thoughts and concerns are with the JOCKEY (a human...) Peter Toole  and he wasn't even in the GN...


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Tinkerbee said:



			Tbh, a horse is a horse. Replaceable. 

My thoughts and concerns are with the JOCKEY (a human...) Peter Toole  and he wasn't even in the GN...
		
Click to expand...

You are joking right, about the horse thing? So are humans, naturally. One dies, another one is born?


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			You are joking right, about the horse thing? So are humans, naturally. One dies, another one is born? 

Click to expand...

Nope. I feel the same way. You can replace a horse. Very sad when it dies, but it can be replaced. You cannot replace a son, a husband, a member of your family. Human lives cannot be replaced.


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			You are joking right, about the horse thing? So are humans, naturally. One dies, another one is born? 

Click to expand...

I actually can't believe you just typed that!  

An animals life should NEVER, EVER be compared to that of a humans.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

3Beasties said:



			I actually can't believe you just typed that!  

An animals life should NEVER, EVER be compared to that of a humans.
		
Click to expand...

I obviously don't think that about humans, but to me, my horse is a major part of my life. He is my best friend, he makes me smile, he's there to cheer me up, he's not just a thing which I would replace? If I lost him, I'd be devastated, nothing would EVER replace my horse. Another horse wouldn't be him, just like losing your husband and finding a new partner, it's never the same.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

3 beasties et al Humans are only important to humans. You are looking at it from a human perspective so of course humans are more important to you or to me. But actually, taken from a perspective outside of any beings, humans are NOT more important. Humans cannot be replaced, but nor can any specific animal. If humans have souls, then so do animals.


----------



## Caledonia (11 April 2011)

MagicMelon said:



			Signed.  Those who say that reducing the fence size will cause more problems is absolute rubbish.  They are galloping over 5ft fences, they're already going as fast as they can - they wont go any faster over smaller fences.  I personally find it a horrific and sickening race which I refuse to watch. Its only gotten so big due to non-horsey folk who dont realise how many horses die.
		
Click to expand...

I can't believe you consider yourself a rider yet don't understand the basic concept of how lowering fences increases speed?


----------



## Mrs B (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			I obviously don't think that about humans, but to me, my horse is a major part of my life. He is my best friend, he makes me smile, he's there to cheer me up, he's not just a thing which I would replace? If I lost him, I'd be devastated, nothing would EVER replace my horse. Another horse wouldn't be him, just like losing your husband and finding a new partner, it's never the same.
		
Click to expand...

May I suggest you NEVER, EVER again equate losing a horse to losing a husband or partner. When you are older (and hopefully a little wiser) you will realise why.


----------



## kickonchaps (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			I obviously don't think that about humans, but to me, my horse is a major part of my life. He is my best friend, he makes me smile, he's there to cheer me up, he's not just a thing which I would replace? If I lost him, I'd be devastated, nothing would EVER replace my horse. Another horse wouldn't be him, just like losing your husband and finding a new partner, it's never the same.
		
Click to expand...

You've mentioned a couple of times you're a minor, which means you're probably only a few years younger than me. I've loved a person, and a horse, and broken up with the person and the horse has died, and both have been equally horrific.

But I won't even try and compare the love I felt for my first boyfriend with the love I imagine I would feel for the man who fathered my children and who I had shared decades of life with. Both of us are way too young to comprehend what it would be like to have that, because as someone mentioned on a different thread somewhere on here, the stakes get higher as you get older. I think it's insulting to people who've lost husbands and children to say it's the same as losing a horse, and that does not mean I love my horse less than you love yours.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Why can't I love my horse as much as I would a sibling? Why can't I be upset if he died? Why should I feel obliged to replace him? I mean seriously? 

If a stranger off the street died, obviously I'd be sad for his family etc, but I wouldn't be as upset as I would if I lost my horse? If Peter Toole died (and god forbid he doesn't), then I wouldn't be as upset as I would be if my horse passed away? 

Is that so wrong to love my horse and value him. I like him far more than most people! Animals (which we are aswell, just far more egotistical than other animals), are to me, just as valid. If I value my horse as much as I would a human being, then sorry, but I'd be more upset if he died than some random person?


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			I obviously don't think that about humans, but to me, my horse is a major part of my life. He is my best friend, he makes me smile, he's there to cheer me up, he's not just a thing which I would replace? If I lost him, I'd be devastated, nothing would EVER replace my horse. Another horse wouldn't be him, just like losing your husband and finding a new partner, it's never the same.
		
Click to expand...


My horse is my life, he is my shoulder to cry on and my reason to get up in the morning, I will be devastated when he goes (hopefully when he is a ripe old age and has lived a full and happy life), absolutely devastated! But it won't come anywhere close to the pain I feel about loosing my best friend at the age of 17, 6 years later I struggle every single day so I can't begin imagine the pain her family got through!

Loosing an animal cannot be compare to loosing somebody that you love.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

How is that insulting to those who've lost husbands and children and wives etc? Can you account for all their feelings? Of course you can't. It's not insulting, because some of us value our horses than more than just a replaceable thing which you can get another one. They are individuals like us, and just because they don't speak, doesn't make them any less valuable.


----------



## kickonchaps (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Why can't I love my horse as much as I would a sibling? Why can't I be upset if he died? Why should I feel obliged to replace him? I mean seriously? 

If a stranger off the street died, obviously I'd be sad for his family etc, but I wouldn't be as upset as I would if I lost my horse? If Peter Toole died (and god forbid he doesn't), then I wouldn't be as upset as I would be if my horse passed away? 

Is that so wrong to love my horse and value him. I like him far more than most people! Animals (which we are aswell, just far more egotistical than other animals), are to me, just as valid. If I value my horse as much as I would a human being, then sorry, but I'd be more upset if he died than some random person?
		
Click to expand...

Words actually fail me. I hope no one from his family visits HHO.


----------



## Golf Girl (11 April 2011)

Tinkerbee said:



			Tbh, a horse is a horse. Replaceable.
		
Click to expand...

Are you serious?? Unbelievable


----------



## Mrs B (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			How is that insulting to those who've lost husbands and children and wives etc? Can you account for all their feelings? Of course you can't. It's not insulting, because some of us value our horses than more than just a replaceable thing which you can get another one. They are individuals like us, and just because they don't speak, doesn't make them any less valuable.
		
Click to expand...

Because you are equating the grief you would feel at losing your horse to, say, that of 3Beasties when losing her best friend, when there would be no possible comparison - and that is what is insulting to both 3Beasties and her friend's memory. I hope it is a long time before you have to find that out the hard way.


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

Golf Girl said:



			Are you serious?? Unbelievable 

Click to expand...

Can you replace humans? I value human life over animal life anyday. Doesnt mean I dont care, I just know how much it HURTS forever to lose someone you are close to.


----------



## Mrs B (11 April 2011)

Golf Girl said:



			Are you serious?? Unbelievable 

Click to expand...

On the contrary - she's quite correct. She is not denying it is sad or that she would not grieve. Much as we love them, if we lose a horse, chances are we get another. Therefore they are able to be replaced.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

3Beasties said:



			My horse is my life, he is my shoulder to cry on and my reason to get up in the morning, I will be devastated when he goes (hopefully when he is a ripe old age and has lived a full and happy life), absolutely devastated! But it won't come anywhere close to the pain I feel about loosing my best friend at the age of 17, 6 years later I struggle every single day so I can't begin imagine the pain her family got through!

Loosing an animal cannot be compare to loosing somebody that you love.
		
Click to expand...

I love my animals, they are something I love. 

I lost my dog, who I've grown up with since I was a baby, he was the same age as me and passed at the age of 15. I was really upset when he went, back in January, and still am.  Everyday I still have a good cry about it. 

I think we all deal with things differently, so can't really account for how one person feels.  I'm not implyign you love your horse any less than me, but we perhaps deal with death totally differently. 

I get really emotional when I lose an animal, and perhaps it's something I need to combat, but it aches. When I lost my great Grandma, I was really upset, but I'm okay now, it hurt like I did losing my dog, although perhaps this sounds really callous and bizarre, but I think that it hurt more when I lost my dog, but that was because I didn't see my Grandma that much. 

A friend of mine died back in January, too (wasn't a good month to say the least), she was pregnant and lost her baby too. I was really upset by it, as were all my friends, again, it hurt a lot, but it hurt just the same losing my dog. 

I think we all deal with it differently.

I'm sorry for your losses


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			Can you replace humans? I value human life over animal life anyday. Doesnt mean I dont care, I just know how much it HURTS forever to lose someone you are close to.
		
Click to expand...

Ditto


----------



## Tinkerbee (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			You are joking right, about the horse thing? So are humans, naturally. One dies, another one is born? 

Click to expand...

How sad.


----------



## B_2_B (11 April 2011)

Jesus christ...


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

Yep, I think the thread has just about hit rock bottom....


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

pastie2 said:



			I think that you, young lady have some very serious issues. You have clearly never lost a human being that you have been close too. Or even more frightening that you lack the milk of human kindness, I would describe you as an acid drop.
		
Click to expand...

This is ridiculous? 

I love how everyone is empathetic towards humans, but view animals so differently? It saddens me, but then you will never ever change my love for my horse, and don't know me, nor what goes in my life, so . 

I've lost loved ones, I've also lost several animals, and it doesn't get easier. When my cat passed, I refused to get a new one, because he wasn't replaceable. My dog is never going to be replaced with a new one, because I'm still grieving over my loss of him. 

I find it almost 'cold hearted' that some people view their animals as just replaceable things? They give you so much joy, happiness and love- how can you replace that? Just like a human, who gives you joy, happiness and love- so could another, but it's never the same.


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			I find it almost 'cold hearted' that some people view their animals as just replaceable things? They give you so much joy, happiness and love- how can you replace that? Just like a human, who gives you joy, happiness and love- so could another, but it's never the same.
		
Click to expand...

Seriously, when you are in a hole stop digging!!


----------



## Munchkin (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			A friend of mine died back in January, too (wasn't a good month to say the least), she was pregnant and lost her baby too. I was really upset by it, as were all my friends, again, it hurt a lot, but it hurt just the same losing my dog.
		
Click to expand...

I've managed to keep quiet for hours and hours, and this, ladies and gents, is why this individual is best not replied to.  She actually, genuinely, needs help. The delusions were quite amusing a few pages back (races with speed limits?!), not so much when you're comparing losing a pregnant friend to losing a dog.


----------



## ridefast (11 April 2011)

Well I agree with Lassiesuca. I have had close family die and I was sad, but much more sad when my pet rabbit died. Maybe I just have a different relationship with animals and humans than others, but my pets have always been my life. I can't go a day without seeing my horse I feel physically ill. I have been given no reason to see why a human life is any more valuable than an animals life. Our pets live in a man made world, none of it is natural to them yet they will give us their lives, without understanding it. Those horses in the grand national gave their lives for our "sport". They had no understanding of it, nobody told them that this is the longest race over huge hedges and they could die. They placed their trust in humans and paid for it with their lives. Humans have the choice, the horses didnt


----------



## Potato! (11 April 2011)

To get this back on topic. 

Im sorry that you feel that way but these are working horses and not pets. Therefore they have a purpose. To be honest i think that it would be very sad indeed if the Grand national was banned but that wont happen because of the money involved. I was talking to many non horsey people at work and all bar one of them said that yes they were upset that horses died but that's racing and if we banned that then everything else would have to be banned too. 

I have had to deal with 2 horses recently who died in the field one of a hart attack and the other with a broken leg.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Munchkin said:



			I've managed to keep quiet for hours and hours, and this, ladies and gents, is why this individual is best not replied to.  She actually, genuinely, needs help. The delusions were quite amusing a few pages back (races with speed limits?!), not so much when you're comparing losing a pregnant friend to losing a dog.
		
Click to expand...

I'd known my friend for two years. I'd grown up with my dog for 15 years? How can you tell me how I SHOULD feel? 

That's really hurt me now, and I'm sorry if I've hurt others because I love my animals so? Like seriously, I don't need help. 

I don't like many people, for reasons which are none of your business. Particularly my family, people aren't very nice in this world. People stab you in the back, people piss on you because a better offer has come along, people get pleasure out of torturing other people, animals etc. People laugh at one another and gang together to mock you. 

Animals don't do this. Animals don't mock you, they don't laugh at you, they don't stab you in the back and are there waiting in the field for you when you need reassurance, they are there when you need a hug and you can return the favour. 

I don't need help, I just value my animals a lot. 

How dare you tell me how I should and shouldn't feel? That's really, really hurtful. My friend meant a lot to me, as did my dog. My dog was part of MY family. My childhood. It hurt like hell when he died, as it did when my friend died. I still am upset over her, but I am still upset over my dog. 

That's really unfair to say


----------



## Appymadness (11 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			And steeplechases kill horses. So really, it wouldn't be any different.
		
Click to expand...

Yep! Pretty much! Steeplechase races are a dangerous sport, not just GN. Did you know that Dooneys Gate the horse that broke its neck at this years GN. This was his first Grand National at the age of 10 and the Jockey was a little over weight for the horse & race. His first Grand National & last ever race. Ballabriggs was close to collapse from dehydration, probably from being scared shitlass after whip abuse - Which Jason Maguire has been given a 5 day ban on, for excessive use of the whip
Ginger McCain has said "Don't improve it by making it easier or you will finish up with a bog standard four-and-a-half-mile steeplechase that basically any horse can jump."
Does he mean to say he wants to see horses struggle over big & difficult fences??? and see them fall & die????
To me that would be the best idea, making a course easy to jump, the fastest & boldest horse would still win instead of falling into a crumpled heap at the first fence because they are too big & difficult. 

But hey, I'm not a Steeple chase fan. Flat racing is ok. But I just feel that Standards are slipping it preparation for the horses to run the GN. Are they REALLY ready & fit for the race???? 
Are half of them fit for the race & the other half not fit for race, how often does the outsider win & beat the system??
is the whole race a sham & a conspiracy therory going on behind it all????


----------



## Munchkin (11 April 2011)

AppyMadness - please elaborate on any possible conspiracy theory? I'm intrigued?

lassiesuca - if you honestly cannot understand why what you've just said is sick, I give up


----------



## Vixstar (11 April 2011)

ridefast said:



			Well I agree with Lassiesuca. I have had close family die and I was sad, but much more sad when my pet rabbit died. Maybe I just have a different relationship with animals and humans than others, but my pets have always been my life. I can't go a day without seeing my horse I feel physically ill. I have been given no reason to see why a human life is any more valuable than an animals life. Our pets live in a man made world, none of it is natural to them yet they will give us their lives, without understanding it. Those horses in the grand national gave their lives for our "sport". They had no understanding of it, nobody told them that this is the longest race over huge hedges and they could die. They placed their trust in humans and paid for it with their lives. Humans have the choice, the horses didnt
		
Click to expand...

Are you serious????  What an horrible thing to say!  A bl*ody rabbit over a close family member??

Lassiesuca - I understand that you love your animals, I love all of mine however I understand that it is a COMPLETELY different love to that I have for my friends and family.  They are not replaceable.  I think what other ppl were trying to get at is that - you can go out and buy another horse/dog/_rabbit_ but you *cannot* go and buy friends and family, once they are gone, they are gone.    And the two should not be compared.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Why should they not be compared? 

Is it illegal to value an animal equally or perhaps to some, more than the loss of a human? 
It's not sick, twisted or callous. It's called emotion, it's called loving something you care deeply about, a family member. There is no harm in doing so. 

I love my friends, family and of course, all my animals. When one of them passes, I am deeply upset. Don't tell my the pain I should feel. Don't tell me the pain I shouldn't feel. Don't tell me how I need help and don't judge me before you even know me.


----------



## Golf Girl (11 April 2011)

3Beasties said:



			Loosing an animal cannot be compare to loosing somebody that you love.
		
Click to expand...

What utter tosh! It depends on who you are, but to most people losing a beloved pet is every bit as heartbreaking as losing a human that they love.


----------



## ridefast (11 April 2011)

Excuse me why am I horrible? Who am I being horrible to? this is how I feel, me, not you. Everyone on here seems to be having a dig at lassiesuca, I am supporting her because I can understand how she feels. It was my rabbit and to me she will never be replacable. There is no need to be rude, we are all entitled to our own opinions and emotions. Why should I value human life more because you do? That's you not me. I have seen a lot more of the bad side of humans. My pets do not have "sides" They are what they are and accept me for who I am. I haven't met many humans that do that. So excuse me if I place my pets life on the same level as humans


----------



## Golf Girl (11 April 2011)

Mrs B said:



			Because you are equating the grief you would feel at losing your horse to, say, that of 3Beasties when losing her best friend, when there would be no possible comparison - and that is what is insulting to both 3Beasties and her friend's memory. I hope it is a long time before you have to find that out the hard way.
		
Click to expand...

Er, grief is grief. There isn't a sliding scale of 'grief score' that is appropriate depending on who or what a person has lost!


----------



## HuntingPink (11 April 2011)

I've watched this thread and wasn't going to join in but I'm disgusted at the attitudes towards animals by some on here. Why can't we love humans and animals equally? We're all animals at the end of the day. To say that an animal is replaceable is as ridiculous as saying that a human is replaceable. All life is precious, we are not better than animals, in fact in some cases I would say that we are much worse.

Someone mentioned that the OP is a minor, other older members of this forum should be disgusted at your comments to her/him. You've behaved worse than the animals that you value so little. Talk about pack mentality.

I like racing and enjoy hunting but I was horrified at the Grand National. It's really made me think about the ethics of it.  I might not agree 100% with the OP but they raise some interesting points. It's just a shame that some of you have to get abusive instead of discussing it even if you do disagree.


----------



## Mrs B (11 April 2011)

Golf Girl said:



			What utter tosh! It depends on who you are, but to most people losing a beloved pet is every bit as heartbreaking as losing a human that they love.
		
Click to expand...

That statement and those made by lassiesuca make me just so incredibly angry. I adored all my animals and wept when they died (not 'passed' they're not bloody urine!) both when the decision was made by me and when it was taken out of my hands.

But let me tell you, the utter, excruciating pain of getting a phone call to say my Mum had been killed was almost unbearable and I can't begin to describe it to you. I heard screaming and had no idea it came from me. I ran into a wall in my distress. 

I will be charitable and guess that you are both as young and clueless as each other to have said such things And I'll edit that to include HuntingPink and ridefast.


----------



## Vixstar (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Why should they not be compared? 

Is it illegal to value an animal equally or perhaps to some, more than the loss of a human? 
It's not sick, twisted or callous. It's called emotion, it's called loving something you care deeply about, a family member. There is no harm in doing so. 

I love my friends, family and of course, all my animals. When one of them passes, I am deeply upset. Don't tell my the pain I should feel. Don't tell me the pain I shouldn't feel. Don't tell me how I need help and don't judge me before you even know me.
		
Click to expand...

Who said it's breaking the law?  Looking at the BIG picture all life should be valued equally - everything/one has a right on this earth.  (And I'm no bunny hugger!)

Without being patronising, I think you being so young I don't think you have experienced deep loss of someone you really love/care about.  When I was in my teens I couldn't think of anything worse than losing a pet and would be really upset for a long time.  Then I grew up, matured and learned a lot.

There is *nothing* wrong with feeling emotional when losing an animal - I think everyone will agree that when/if someone loses their horse they are deeply upset and are for a long time after.  But the point everyone is trying to make is that they are totally different - and I don't think you will understand that until it has happened to you.

I think people are finding it insulting and hurtful, and maybe should end the thread there.


----------



## teagreen (11 April 2011)

And I cannot believe some of the attitudes towards human life. Some of you seriously need to get some perspective.

I knew people who lost a daughter in a riding accident. Her mother is now depressed and their grief is palpable - and I will never forget her mother sobbing "I wish it was that bl**dy horse instead". 

Imagine your mother/father/son/daughter rides and, god forbid, has an accident. Who would you rather lose? 

I also know a family who own a few Point to Pointers, and they lost one a few weeks ago. It was ridden by their son, a horror fall. They loved the horse dearly - but the first thing his mother said to me was "Thank goodness it was the horse and not him."

Of course animals are individuals, but my god - you cannot replace a human life, imagine what it must be like for the parents of that poor boy. Comparing losing a dog or a rabbit or a horse to losing a family member is absolutely ridiculous. You may think losing your dog is the worst thing in the world, but you can buy another and that grief can be dampened just a little bit - you can't buy another mother, that is someone you miss every single day and I cannot even BEGIN to describe how it feels to lose someone like that. Let me tell you, it is a million times worse than you losing your pets.


----------



## Golf Girl (11 April 2011)

Mrs B said:



			That statement and those made by lassiesuca make me just so incredibly angry. I adored all my animals and wept when they died (not 'passed' they're not bloody urine!) both when the decision was made by me and when it was taken out of my hands.

But let me tell you, the utter, excruciating pain of getting a phone call to say my Mum had been killed was almost unbearable and I can't begin to describe it to you. I heard screaming and had no idea it came from me. I ran into a wall in my distress. 

I will be charitable and guess that you are both as young and clueless as each other to have said such things.
		
Click to expand...

OK Mrs B now don't you go starting on me! I have suffered all sorts of personal tragedies in my long life but that is frankly neither here nor there. How dare you assume that I am young and clueless!


----------



## Vizslak (11 April 2011)

martlin said:



			Phew, that was quite a read! Loads of arguments going...
Now me, I won't be signing your petition, my view might be biased as I grew up with this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DmqIEsE3Yc
as my annual racing fix, so there's no wonder I believe the Grand National is quite allright, actually
		
Click to expand...

   Thats immense!  I love the GN but have no desire to ever want to ride round it but THAT race...I wanna do it! Mental!! Thanks for sharing!


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			And I cannot believe some of the attitudes towards human life. Some of you seriously need to get some perspective.

I knew people who lost a daughter in a riding accident. Her mother is now depressed and their grief is palpable - and I will never forget her mother sobbing "I wish it was that bl**dy horse instead". 

Imagine your mother/father/son/daughter rides and, god forbid, has an accident. Who would you rather lose? 

I also know a family who own a few Point to Pointers, and they lost one a few weeks ago. It was ridden by their son, a horror fall. They loved the horse dearly - but the first thing his mother said to me was "Thank goodness it was the horse and not him."

Of course animals are individuals, but my god - you cannot replace a human life, imagine what it must be like for the parents of that poor boy. Comparing losing a dog or a rabbit or a horse to losing a family member is absolutely ridiculous. You may think losing your dog is the worst thing in the world, but you can buy another and that grief can be dampened just a little bit - you can't buy another mother, that is someone you miss every single day and I cannot even BEGIN to describe how it feels to lose someone like that. Let me tell you, it is a million times worse than you losing your pets.
		
Click to expand...

'Like'


----------



## sakura (11 April 2011)

I've lost two people who were both very close to me, one was family who died from an illness, the other man was a very dear friend who was killed by someone else. I still miss both every single day and I still cry about loosing them - to me, that grief was on a scale above what I can humanely measure. I've also lost many animals, all of which have been considered family to me. To be honest, I actually can't measure grief at all, loosing anyone I love to me is incomprehensible and no life is "replaceable" at all, imo.

however, I appreciate that everyone views things different. Everyone is different, that's the beauty of the world. Lassiesuca's views are not 'wrong' and they're not 'deluded' .... they're just different to yours. 

Back on topic, I actually think it's great the passion she has behind what she feels is wrong, I wish more people had that fight. I'm not anti-racing at all, but I would very much support lowering the starters

I agree, perhaps ending this thread would probably be a good idea


----------



## jenbleep (11 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			And I cannot believe some of the attitudes towards human life. Some of you seriously need to get some perspective.

I knew people who lost a daughter in a riding accident. Her mother is now depressed and their grief is palpable - and I will never forget her mother sobbing "I wish it was that bl**dy horse instead". 

Imagine your mother/father/son/daughter rides and, god forbid, has an accident. Who would you rather lose? 

I also know a family who own a few Point to Pointers, and they lost one a few weeks ago. It was ridden by their son, a horror fall. They loved the horse dearly - but the first thing his mother said to me was "Thank goodness it was the horse and not him."

Of course animals are individuals, but my god - you cannot replace a human life, imagine what it must be like for the parents of that poor boy. Comparing losing a dog or a rabbit or a horse to losing a family member is absolutely ridiculous. You may think losing your dog is the worst thing in the world, but you can buy another and that grief can be dampened just a little bit - you can't buy another mother, that is someone you miss every single day and I cannot even BEGIN to describe how it feels to lose someone like that. Let me tell you, it is a million times worse than you losing your pets.
		
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. Seriously some people on this thread need to get a grip, it's actually quite frightening some of the warped views expressed in this thread


----------



## Munchkin (11 April 2011)

Golf Girl said:



			OK Mrs B now don't you go starting on me! I have suffered all sorts of personal tragedies in my long life but that is frankly neither here nor there. How dare you assume that I am young and clueless!
		
Click to expand...

I think most people on this forum assume you're just clueless, going by your entire post history. Young is too much of an assumption


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Tinkerbee said:



			Tbh, a horse is a horse. Replaceable. 

My thoughts and concerns are with the JOCKEY (a human...) Peter Toole  and he wasn't even in the GN...
		
Click to expand...

Sounds like he's going to be okay. Let's hope so.

As for the replaceable comment, well that sounds very callous. Not an animal lover then? I can honestly say that although I have had many many animals (dogs and horses) there are some that can never be replaced. My mare is one of those. When she goes, my passion for horses will never be the same. Just because you have not loved an animal like that, does not mean that it is wrong. Of course, I love my family even more, but there are some people who have no one at all and their animals are their lives. Do not belittle them and disrespect their feelings. We are all different.


----------



## 3Beasties (11 April 2011)

Vizslak said:



   Thats immense!  I love the GN but have no desire to ever want to ride round it but THAT race...I wanna do it! Mental!! Thanks for sharing! 

Click to expand...

Me too, it looks amazing!!


----------



## Mrs B (11 April 2011)

Golf Girl said:



			OK Mrs B now don't you go starting on me! I have suffered all sorts of personal tragedies in my long life but that is frankly neither here nor there. How dare you assume that I am young and clueless!
		
Click to expand...

Because that's exactly how you come across by posting such insulting crassness!


----------



## ridefast (11 April 2011)

Thankyou Mrs B, you have no idea who I am, how old I am, what or who I have lost in my life, in fact, you know NOTHING about me. But you are happy to make false assumptions about me, well, thankyou. It's strange how the people being the most personal and insulting and patronizing on here are among the older generation. Very mature


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

I'm sorry, but anyone who says that they were as upset when their rabbit died to "a close family member", just has to be a bunny hugger!!  I've been lucky enough not to lose a close family member, well elderly grand parents but that's a bit different.

My dogs and my horse are like my babies and I don't know what I'll do when I lose them, but I would never even think of comparing that to a losing a parent, partner, sibling or child.

Maybe the people making those comparisons don't have real "loved ones" like the rest of us do.  It's a horrible comment to make for YOUR family to those who said that!!

I can understand why people get sentimental over animals but we live in a world where in fact their life is not treated as importantly as humans.  That's why we aren't all vegans and do what the f we want basically.  Like it or hate it it's the truth, and the GN is the least of our worries.


----------



## GrumpyHero (11 April 2011)

this is the most ridiculous thread i've read in a while.
all i can say is i will not be signing.


----------



## BroadfordQueen (11 April 2011)

:O I can't believe this thread!!!
How on earth can anyone say that losing their mum, dad, brother, sister..isn't as bad as losing their bloody pet is beyond me!
I'm not saying you cant love your pets, I love all of my pets dearly, they are part of my family. But to put them at a par with your human family..its just stupid. What have your pets ever done for you? They rely on you for food and shelter, and the occasional cuddle. They don't care about you half as much as much as your family do. So why should you care more about them than your family?!


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

kickonchaps said:



			Words actually fail me. I hope no one from his family visits HHO.
		
Click to expand...

Oh come on! At least she is being honest. If you asked half the country if they would feel grief at the passing of the stranger or would personally feel more grief if their beloved dog were run over, I know what the honest ones would say. They do not know the stranger. He has no effect on their lives, and so how can they feel personal loss? Sad, yes, and very sorry for all his relatives, but to say it actually affected their own lives and made them feel grief, then they would be lying. If however, they were a fan of his, things would probably be very different. And again if he was not a stranger but a brother or a father, then they would be far more devastated than if it were their dog.


----------



## martlin (11 April 2011)

Vizslak said:



   Thats immense!  I love the GN but have no desire to ever want to ride round it but THAT race...I wanna do it! Mental!! Thanks for sharing! 

Click to expand...

there you go, especially for you a program in English about it from 2008, it has been made ''safer'', but still
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hjr2FIrLcjI
the race itself starts at 9min

oranica, or in English the ploughed ground is their favourite bit


----------



## BroadfordQueen (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			And again if he was not a stranger but a brother or a father, then they would be far more devastated than if it were their dog.
		
Click to expand...

But the OP is saying she was more upset when her rabbit died than when her friend died. Thats the point.


----------



## ridefast (11 April 2011)

"I'm sorry, but anyone who says that they were as upset when their rabbit died to "a close family member", just has to be a bunny hugger!!"

Yes so what's your point? Why can't I love my rabbit as much as I love my horse? Is it the size? Are smaller animals not worthy of the same amount of love, and grief when they die? Why is it so hard for people to comprehend that I loved her fiercely, was devastated when she died and still get upset and miss her many years later? I feel sorry for people that clearly can't love that much. Just imagine how much love I have for the humans in my life that I DO care about.


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Oh come on! At least she is being honest. If you asked half the country if they would feel grief at the passing of the stranger or would personally feel more grief if their beloved dog were run over, I know what the honest ones would say. They do not know the stranger. He has no effect on their lives, and so how can they feel personal loss? Sad, yes, and very sorry for all his relatives, but to say it actually affected their own lives and made them feel grief, then they would be lying. If however, they were a fan of his, things would probably be very different. And again if he was not a stranger but a brother or a father, then they would be far more devastated than if it were their dog.
		
Click to expand...

Oh god yes I'd be more bothered if my dog died than a passing stranger, but your own family and friends?


----------



## ridefast (11 April 2011)

No BroadfordQueen, the op said she was more upset when her dog died than her friend. I am saying I was as upset when my rabbit died as when family members have died. Come on get it right


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

ridefast said:



			"I'm sorry, but anyone who says that they were as upset when their rabbit died to "a close family member", just has to be a bunny hugger!!"

Yes so what's your point? Why can't I love my rabbit as much as I love my horse? Is it the size? Are smaller animals not worthy of the same amount of love, and grief when they die? Why is it so hard for people to comprehend that I loved her fiercely, was devastated when she died and still get upset and miss her many years later? I feel sorry for people that clearly can't love that much. Just imagine how much love I have for the humans in my life that I DO care about.
		
Click to expand...

So you DIDN'T care about the close family member(s) you lost?  That would kind of make sense if it's a distant Uncle you mean, or someone you disliked for whatever reason.  But the humans in your life that YOU DO care about, surely they come above the rabbit?

I'm not judging based on size of pet, I'm sure you loved your rabbit just as much as I love my horse, but to compare that to an actual close family member (as in some one you love and care about) is a bit far fetched IMO.


----------



## lannerch (11 April 2011)

I must confess I have in life cared more in life for an animal than I have for many people, I feel guilty for that can't help it its how it was. 
And when she died I really greaved, still fell sorrow but thats life. granted I would greave a lot more for most of my respective family but not all.
I would however never put an animal life above a human if it was choice between animal and human human would have to win.

I do come across death regularly at work so maybe that insensitises me to it a bit.

I do question those posters though refusing to accept other peoples point of view just because it is differnt to their own. 
It is not fair to mock someone just because they feel something you cannot relate to we are all different that is what makes the world go round!


----------



## kickonchaps (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Oh come on! At least she is being honest. If you asked half the country if they would feel grief at the passing of the stranger or would personally feel more grief if their beloved dog were run over, I know what the honest ones would say. They do not know the stranger. He has no effect on their lives, and so how can they feel personal loss? Sad, yes, and very sorry for all his relatives, but to say it actually affected their own lives and made them feel grief, then they would be lying. If however, they were a fan of his, things would probably be very different. And again if he was not a stranger but a brother or a father, then they would be far more devastated than if it were their dog.
		
Click to expand...

Yeah, we'd all be sadder about losing our pets than someone we don't know, but I think it's hugely insulting and insensitive to go round actually naming names, bearing in mind that the horse world is a small place and you're bound to have someone on here who knows someone else etc... Let's not let this degenerate into a messed up ranking system of 'rather my horse than my cat, but rather my neighbour than my horse, although the other neighbour is a friend so rather my horse than them'. I think the vast majority of the population, given a gun and told someone's gotta go, the horse or the sibling/partner/parent/child, would pick the horse every time, and for those who didn't have the choice, hearing other people pick the horse is pretty upsetting

Edited to add... hearing other people NOT pick the horse


----------



## Appymadness (11 April 2011)

HuntingPink said:



			I've watched this thread and wasn't going to join in but I'm disgusted at the attitudes towards animals by some on here. Why can't we love humans and animals equally? We're all animals at the end of the day. To say that an animal is replaceable is as ridiculous as saying that a human is replaceable. All life is precious, we are not better than animals, in fact in some cases I would say that we are much worse.

Someone mentioned that the OP is a minor, other older members of this forum should be disgusted at your comments to her/him. You've behaved worse than the animals that you value so little. Talk about pack mentality.

I like racing and enjoy hunting but I was horrified at the Grand National. It's really made me think about the ethics of it.  I might not agree 100% with the OP but they raise some interesting points. It's just a shame that some of you have to get abusive instead of discussing it even if you do disagree.
		
Click to expand...

Here! Here! 
I was thinking the same. Its a discussion Forum not a bully playground! People are entitled to their opinion, regardless if people agree with it or not. There should be an attitude of diplomacy, matureness & if anything open mindedness. We are not all the same or feel the same BUT we all do Feel. Bullying is NOT the answer.  I don't agree with a lot of what has been said on this link as thought it was all rather immature & Nasty. Ive taken on board peoples opinions & that's that!
Be nice people!!!! Listen to what they say & be more respectful & thoughtful with your answers.


----------



## firm (11 April 2011)

Ridefast I guess it is because rabbits generally do not live as long as horses.   But also grief over the loss of a rabbit will be very personal to one individual as compared with grief over the loss of a person. Even if you feel grief for a rabbit more than a close family member, surely seeing the pain and grief that other friends, family, children are suffering makes it that much worse and harder. The death of a rabbit will never create the ripple effects of grief like the loss of a person.   I can't believe I even have to write that.  
Having lost friends/family members as well as pets I know which loss is harder. I don't think "older" members are being hard, I think they just hope that some of the statements written are youthful lack of experience of death.


----------



## ridefast (11 April 2011)

You never knew her so you will never understand how special she was to me. She died on my nans funeral, my nan was ready to go and she wasnt. I never miss my nan, but I miss her a lot. My animals are a huge part of my life, whereas only a few humans are. However I cannot control how much I love each animal, I cannot MAKE myself love people more. It may sound harsh but the truth is there are not many humans that I would want to see every day, I will always choose to spend my time with my pets. I value them a lot more than I value a lot of my family. But I have had a lot of trouble with my family, so if not wanting to see them makes me a bad person, well then I'm a horrible person


----------



## Golf Girl (11 April 2011)

lannerch said:



			I do question those posters though refusing to accept other peoples point of view just because it is differnt to their own. 
It is not fair to mock someone just because they feel something you cannot relate to we are all different that is what makes the world go round!
		
Click to expand...

You'll find that happens a lot in this forum ....


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

I don't know where the bullying has occurred on this thread.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

lannerch said:



			I must confess I have in life cared more in life for an animal than I have for many people, I feel guilty for that can't help it its how it was. 
And when she died I really greaved, still fell sorrow but thats life. granted I would greave a lot more for most of my respective family but not all.
I would however never put an animal life above a human if it was choice between animal and human human would have to win.

I do come across death regularly at work so maybe that insensitises me to it a bit.

I do question those posters though refusing to accept other peoples point of view just because it is differnt to their own. 
It is not fair to mock someone just because they feel something you cannot relate to we are all different that is what makes the world go round!
		
Click to expand...

Agree with this. Everyone is different. Some people are not lucky enough to have EVER had a person in their lives that loves them or that they can feel close enough to. They may have been abused, gone through the care sytsem, abandoned, or just old and alone. Animals can be all they have or all they trust. We do not know the backgrounds to people on here so to start shouting and making judgements just because they are not the same as us is sickening and bullying. We should have respect for people's emotions and feelings as these cannot be helped. They just _are_. Feelings should not be up for attack.


----------



## Vizslak (11 April 2011)

martlin said:



			there you go, especially for you a program in English about it from 2008, it has been made ''safer'', but still
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hjr2FIrLcjI
the race itself starts at 9min

oranica, or in English the ploughed ground is their favourite bit 

Click to expand...

Ta!  I think I like it because its like hunting but in a race! I really really want to do it! Perhaps I should set up my own one around the farm!


----------



## Munchkin (11 April 2011)

ridefast - are you a windup? You gotta be!

P.S. We established earlier in this thread that 'riding fast' is in fact dangerous, cruel and barbaric among many other things and that it'd be safer for all [horses] if speed limits were imposed in racing.





Can't believe I just had the opportunity to type that.


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Starbucks said:



			I don't know where the bullying has occurred on this thread.
		
Click to expand...

Oh come on! It's like feeding time at the zoo.


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

ridefast said:



			You never knew her so you will never understand how special she was to me. She died on my nans funeral, my nan was ready to go and she wasnt. I never miss my nan, but I miss her a lot. My animals are a huge part of my life, whereas only a few humans are. However I cannot control how much I love each animal, I cannot MAKE myself love people more. It may sound harsh but the truth is there are not many humans that I would want to see every day, I will always choose to spend my time with my pets. I value them a lot more than I value a lot of my family. But I have had a lot of trouble with my family, so if not wanting to see them makes me a bad person, well then I'm a horrible person
		
Click to expand...

Sounds like you have your own personal issues.  Ones that have nothing to do with a GN debate though.


----------



## Golf Girl (11 April 2011)

Starbucks said:



			I don't know where the bullying has occurred on this thread.
		
Click to expand...

If that's true, then it's very sad, and I do feel sorry for you.


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

Munchkin said:



			ridefast - are you a windup? You gotta be!

P.S. We established earlier in this thread that 'riding fast' is in fact dangerous, cruel and barbaric among many other things and that it'd be safer for all [horses] if speed limits were imposed in racing.

Can't believe I just had the opportunity to type that.
		
Click to expand...

OMG what a brilliant plan!  They should limit it to a working trot maybe, they should only go round once (so they don't get tired), and get rid of the jumps altogether!  Perfect!


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

Golf Girl said:



			If that's true, then it's very sad, and I do feel sorry for you.
		
Click to expand...

Admit I haven't read the whole thing so maybe I've missed something?

Otherwise, if you'd been around a bit longer maybe you'd know, but people get a lot more stick for a lot less!


----------



## ridefast (11 April 2011)

Munchkin - I knew a ram called munchkin, is it really you?? I never knew you had internet! How are your ears? Do you still like to charge strangers? hope you're happy  hugs and love xxx


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Oh come on! It's like feeding time at the zoo. 

Click to expand...

It's not bullying.  Come on a pro racing forum (H&H is a pro racing, pro hunting publication) and bang on about how cruel everything is and how much you love your bunnies - what do you expect people to say?  "Oh that's nice dear, good for you, we like to see horses die it's us who are the evil ones - all praise you!"

I don't think so!


----------



## Appymadness (11 April 2011)

Munchkin said:



			AppyMadness - please elaborate on any possible conspiracy theory? I'm intrigued?

lassiesuca - if you honestly cannot understand why what you've just said is sick, I give up 

Click to expand...

oooooh! Not sure I should say!!! I might get myself into trouble!!!! lol
Does make you wonder if some of the horses are 'specifically chosen' to enter the race as not really ready for the race, altho perceived to be fit & ready so to give Certain other horses a better chance in winning. So to make the more 'powerful people' win loads of money! An outsider came very close to winning the Grand National - Was that suppose to happen??
Maybe ive just watched LOck Stock and Snatch too much!!!! lol!

Ive always thought there are alternative theories behind the racing world. who really Knows???? lol!


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

Appymadness said:



			oooooh! Not sure I should say!!! I might get myself into trouble!!!! lol
Does make you wonder if some of the horses are 'specifically chosen' to enter the race as not really ready for the race, altho perceived to be fit & ready so to give Certain other horses a better chance in winning. So to make the more 'powerful people' win loads of money! An outsider came very close to winning the Grand National - Was that suppose to happen??
Maybe ive just watched LOck Stock and Snatch too much!!!! lol!

Ive always thought there are alternative theories behind the racing world. who really Knows???? lol!
		
Click to expand...

FFS, I'm giving up!


----------



## Wagtail (11 April 2011)

Starbucks said:



			It's not bullying.  Come on a pro racing forum (H&H is a pro racing, pro hunting publication) and bang on about how cruel everything is and how much you love your bunnies - what do you expect people to say?  "Oh that's nice dear, good for you, we like to see horses die it's us who are the evil ones - all praise you!"

I don't think so!
		
Click to expand...

Actually, a large proportion of this forum are what you love to term as bunny huggers. In my recent poll regarding field ornaments 80% of people said they would keep a horse that had become too old or injured to ride rather than PTS and half of them would do it even if it meant they couldn't afford another horse to ride. http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=447453
In my other poll, 60% of people would like to see changes to the GN to make it safer or ban it all together. Only 40% wanted to see it stay the same. 

And yes there is bullying on this thread and others.


----------



## Appymadness (11 April 2011)

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! I think this thread has sent everyone, including myself Bonkers!!!!
I'm just being silly now! Trying to make light of it all.


----------



## Munchkin (11 April 2011)

Appymadness said:



			oooooh! Not sure I should say!!! I might get myself into trouble!!!! lol
Does make you wonder if some of the horses are 'specifically chosen' to enter the race as not really ready for the race, altho perceived to be fit & ready so to give Certain other horses a better chance in winning. So to make the more 'powerful people' win loads of money! An outsider came very close to winning the Grand National - Was that suppose to happen??
Maybe ive just watched LOck Stock and Snatch too much!!!! lol!

Ive always thought there are alternative theories behind the racing world. who really Knows???? lol!
		
Click to expand...

Well it seems to have failed then as I happily won a few hundred squid when Mon Mome romped home at 100-1


----------



## Appymadness (11 April 2011)

Munchkin said:



			Well it seems to have failed then as I happily won a few hundred squid when Mon Mome romped home at 100-1
		
Click to expand...


Nice!!! Don't let it change you!!! lol!


----------



## Golf Girl (11 April 2011)

Munchkin said:



			I think most people on this forum assume you're just clueless, going by your entire post history. Young is too much of an assumption 

Click to expand...

Would you care to elaborate Munchkin?


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Thanks for some of the replies.

It's weird, I've just watched a thing on t.v. about animal testing and rights, and some really interesting questions were raised which I'm now thinking about. 

I think I'd like to clarify a few points though, which I feel people have misinterpreted; 

1) Obviously I'd save my Mum over my horse, or any of my immediate/close family and friends. 

2) I wouldn't be ''more'' upset if I lost my horse than my Mum/Dad etc. 

The point I was making is that I'd be just as upset if I lost my beloved pony as I would a close friend. I can't account for family, because close family- it's never happened. But I don't think anyone is in the place to tell me how I should of felt when my friend died? You don't realise how much that hurt me, saying that? Because you don't know how upsetting it was to lose both of them at a similar time. However, it still hurts a lot with my dog, because every morning, I have to go downstairs and see the spot where his bed was, empty. No more walks in the orchard, when I was a young kid, we used to fall asleep in the boot of my Mum's old car, in the summer when it was really hot with the boot open, my other dog who passed two years ago, was just as upsetting. I watched her litter of puppies being born at the age of 6, I got to help ''look after'' her children. Her pups. 



Another poster said ''what do animals do for us?''

When I've had a crap day, feeling down in the dumps or even when I'm already in a good mood, lightens my mood.

When I need to relax, I can sit in the field or walk up to the woods and detox. 

I can't describe what they do for my soul, they just make me feel happy  

Equally I have friends and family who do this too. But then my horse is part of my family therefore he is just a valuable part. I don't feel I need to justify that or feel ashamed because of that  and nor should anyone else. If you don't value your animals like that- that is absolutely fine. 

But for me, my animals are irreplacable, they are ''replaceable'' but they are never the same. Ever.


----------



## Golf Girl (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Actually, a large proportion of this forum are what you love to term as bunny huggers. In my recent poll regarding field ornaments 80% of people said they would keep a horse that had become too old or injured to ride rather than PTS and half of them would do it even if it meant they couldn't afford another horse to ride. http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=447453
In my other poll, 60% of people would like to see changes to the GN to make it safer or ban it all together. Only 40% wanted to see it stay the same. 

And yes there is bullying on this thread and others.
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps a poll on how to rid this forum of the (minority) rude, arrogant, narcissistic bullying element would be a good idea?


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Actually, a large proportion of this forum are what you love to term as bunny huggers. In my recent poll regarding field ornaments 80% of people said they would keep a horse that had become too old or injured to ride rather than PTS and half of them would do it even if it meant they couldn't afford another horse to ride. http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=447453
In my other poll, 60% of people would like to see changes to the GN to make it safer or ban it all together. Only 40% wanted to see it stay the same. 

And yes there is bullying on this thread and others.
		
Click to expand...

Good for you then!  Obviously, if my horse went lame tomorrow I'd have him shot immediately, and would never want for GN to be made more safe for horses, that would just be crazy, where's the fun in that?

Why would I sign a petition, generated by someone who does not know what they are talking about?  If it were one that was well thought out, by someone who was involved in the racing industry and knew what they were on about I would, but some kid on a forum, who thinks all races at Aintree are round the grand national fences?  No thanks.  Just makes it seem like a farse.

Then when people join in talking about their actual bunnies and how they love them more than family members???  Come on???!!


----------



## Munchkin (11 April 2011)

Oh I can be arsed. One word: Parelli. Folk stopped taking you seriously a long time ago... but let's not go there again, hey? 

G'night all. Hugs and kisses  xx


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Golf Girl said:



			Perhaps a poll on how to rid this forum of the (minority) rude, arrogant, narcissistic bullying element would be a good idea?
		
Click to expand...

I doubt it . 

If some of us get too sentimental about things, we're deemed as bunny huggers who need to 'toughen up'. 

Never be ashamed to be who you are or stand for what you believe in. And that goes for everyone, but we can do it without totally condemning people or their beliefs. 

I've not called some of you callous, heartless, vile bitches? I've not said you don't love your animals less than I, I've not said that, nor has anyone else? I don't get why everyone has to resort to name calling ''delusional'' and ''need help'' and ''bunny huggers'' 

It's sort of back to the stereotypical ''don't call me that'' thing. 

If you like dressage ''you're a cruel cow who does rollkur''
If you like western ''you are a bitch who loves rodeo'' 
If you, like me, are interested in Portuguese/Spanish riding ''Must support bullfighting'' 
If you like racing ''you must be a heartless idiot'' 

It's just the same, just because someone stands for something, or perhaps disagrees and takes a more ''enlightened'' view on something, we're called a bunny hugger? 

Is this what we're lowering ourselves to? Perhaps I need a name for some of you guys


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

Golf Girl said:



			Perhaps a poll on how to rid this forum of the (minority) rude, arrogant, narcissistic bullying element would be a good idea?
		
Click to expand...

Have you joined just for this thread Golf Girl?


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			I doubt it . 

If some of us get too sentimental about things, we're deemed as bunny huggers who need to 'toughen up'. 

Never be ashamed to be who you are or stand for what you believe in. And that goes for everyone, but we can do it without totally condemning people or their beliefs. 

I've not called some of you callous, heartless, vile bitches? I've not said you don't love your animals less than I, I've not said that, nor has anyone else? I don't get why everyone has to resort to name calling ''delusional'' and ''need help'' and ''bunny huggers'' 

It's sort of back to the stereotypical ''don't call me that'' thing. 

If you like dressage ''you're a cruel cow who does rollkur''
If you like western ''you are a bitch who loves rodeo'' 
If you, like me, are interested in Portuguese/Spanish riding ''Must support bullfighting'' 
If you like racing ''you must be a heartless idiot'' 

It's just the same, just because someone stands for something, or perhaps disagrees and takes a more ''enlightened'' view on something, we're called a bunny hugger? 

Is this what we're lowering ourselves to? Perhaps I need a name for some of you guys 

Click to expand...

Go for it!  I go fox hunting and love NH racing!   What ever name you come up with I'm sure will be quite fitting.

Not really that sure what you're talking about with the rest of it.  Think I'd take you more seriously though, if you'd done a bit more research as you say you have with rollkur and bull fighting.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Starbucks said:



			Go for it!  I go fox hunting and love NH racing!   What ever name you come up with I'm sure will be quite fitting.

Not really that sure what you're talking about with the rest of it.  Think I'd take you more seriously though, if you'd done a bit more research as you say you have with rollkur and bull fighting.
		
Click to expand...

Well I've already stated that I've seen errors in my petition. Are we still on that one  I thought the topic had ''matured''


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Well I've already stated that I've seen errors in my petition. Are we still on that one  I thought the topic had ''matured'' 

Click to expand...

I want a name!

The point is, I can't understand how people can make such a quick judgement on something they know relatively little about.  Not just you but all the random journalists/TV celebs who have felt the need to stick there ore in. 

Do your research, then make a thread like this.  You are not going to learn what will make the GN safer in a matter of hours/days.


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Starbucks said:



			I want a name!

The point is, I can't understand how people can make such a quick judgement on something they know relatively little about.  Not just you but all the random journalists/TV celebs who have felt the need to stick there ore in. 

Do your research, then make a thread like this.  You are not going to learn what will make the GN safer in a matter of hours/days.
		
Click to expand...


I'm not lowering myself to that, starbucks  

I think you've hit it on the head though, why are we judging people we don't know? Why are we telling people how they should feel? 

Anyway, I'm bored of this now, I hate how debates on here always sprial out of control, from both sides. I don't want to get caught in this anymore

Anyway of getting this thread locked? Mods?


----------



## Tormenta (11 April 2011)

3Beasties said:



			I actually can't believe you just typed that!  

An animals life should NEVER, EVER be compared to that of a humans.
		
Click to expand...

Why not? I would rather have with me one of my horses than some of the evil people who walk this planet. And although I am no fluffy bunny hugger whatever they are called, I also believe that animals ARE individual beings, they do not come out of a cloned packet.

And for whoever stated about putting human emotions onto animals. Animals feel fear and pain just as humans do. Just to clarify, anthromorphism annoys me, "Oh I bet she didn't want to go out of her stable in the rain today because she was cold" is anthromorphism. Lying with a broken back and presuming that horse felt no fear or pain is another different issue entirely.

And no I am not against racing but some comments on here are ridiculous!!


----------



## lassiesuca (11 April 2011)

Tormenta said:



			Why not? I would rather have with me one of my horses than some of the evil people who walk this planet. And although I am no fluffy bunny hugger whatever they are called, I also believe that animals ARE individual beings, they do not come out of a cloned packet.

And for whoever stated about putting human emotions onto animals. Animals feel fear and pain just as humans do. Just to clarify, anthromorphism annoys me, "Oh I bet she didn't want to go out of her stable in the rain today because she was cold" is anthromorphism. Lying with a broken back and presuming that horse felt no fear or pain is another different issue entirely.

And no I am not against racing but some comments on here are ridiculous!!
		
Click to expand...

Just a quicker- but amen to that!


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			I'm not lowering myself to that, starbucks  

I think you've hit it on the head though, why are we judging people we don't know? Why are we telling people how they should feel? 

Anyway, I'm bored of this now, I hate how debates on here always sprial out of control, from both sides. I don't want to get caught in this anymore

Anyway of getting this thread locked? Mods?
		
Click to expand...

So you don't like it when the tables are turned, it's ok for you to judge people (i.e. those who run their horses in the National) but not for people to judge you?

I think it's pretty much exhausted TBH.  Contact Admin, not sure how you do that - they are called thefatcontroller or something along those lines.


----------



## Starbucks (11 April 2011)

OR you can click on the little road sign thing at left of comments you don't like and admin will delete if he/she thinks there is anything out of line.


----------



## lassiesuca (12 April 2011)

Starbucks said:



			So you don't like it when the tables are turned, it's ok for you to judge people (i.e. those who run their horses in the National) but not for people to judge you?

I think it's pretty much exhausted TBH.  Contact Admin, not sure how you do that - they are called thefatcontroller or something along those lines.
		
Click to expand...

But I've not judged the Grand National in the sense that I've slammed it. I've not proposed we ban it? I've not said you're all cruel. 

We're entitled to disagree of course, and I think we're entitled to hold an opinion on things, even if wer'e not ''experienced'' in that field. I've not slammed your beloved industry, I've not gotten all my friends (not saying you have by the way) to help me ''fight'' this never ending battle, I've remained pretty mellow (sometimes I can get really fired up ) and respected nearly everyone's views. 

I think some people have been particular mean though but I shan't regurgitate stuff I've already said. 

Ah, I'll get admin to sort it out.


----------



## Starbucks (12 April 2011)

Well I've got to admit, you have spirit!


----------



## Amymay (12 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			And I cannot believe some of the attitudes towards human life. Some of you seriously need to get some perspective..
		
Click to expand...

But clearly the people who are comparing loosing a pet with a relative etc are very young and have no life experience - let alone personal experience of loosing someone close to them.

Unitl you have, I don't think you can even begin to understand the grief and sense of loss involved.  So if you have nothing to compare it with, it's natural at such a young age to equate it with loosing a pet.

Also, who are we to judge how people feel about loss - whether it be a pet or a person??


----------



## teagreen (12 April 2011)

amymay said:



			But clearly the people who are comparing loosing a pet with a relative etc are very young and have no life experience - let alone personal experience of loosing someone close to them.

Unitl you have, I don't think you can even begin to understand the grief and sense of loss involved.  So if you have nothing to compare it with, it's natural at such a young age to equate it with loosing a pet.

Also, who are we to judge how people feel about loss - whether it be a pet or a person??
		
Click to expand...

Yes, you're right. It is unfair of us to tell them 'this is how you will feel, and no, you shouldn't have been sad about that loss.' It is just difficult when you have lost a close family member not to get rather upset and personal, but I guess we do have to take a step back and remember that there were very happy times in our lives when we hadn't had to endure such losses and that losing a dog was the saddest thing that had happened. 

People weren't saying that you should be upset because Peter Toole was ill. I don't know him. However, I have taken a step back and said to myself 'It is very sad about the horses that died. However, if I put myself in his parents shoes, it is even sadder that he is injured.' You have to look at it from the perspective of them and how they must be feeling. 

Everyone is sad when they lose a pet, but surely you have to look at it from the perspective of, say, the Phillips family. If given the choice between who they lost that tragic day - Polly or Coral Cove - I am certain who they'd choose. Riding is a risky sport for both horse and rider. But anyone who has lost a family member in tragic circumstances will, I'm sure, tell you the same thing.


----------



## DJ (12 April 2011)

Youth is an amazing thing, the passion to truly believe we can change the world for the better. I applaud OP for the fact she actually is spirited enough to stand up for what she believes in, years ago before life made us bitter i`m sure we had the same fighting spirit !!


Some of the comments on here from the so called "mature" individuals have been downright rude, and confirm to me once more why i love my animals the way i do, they don`t judge or critise and their capacity to forgive is endless. 


I`m not going into the ins and outs of my life, which has not been fun and games i can assure you. I`ve lost loved ones in tragic circumstances, and i`ve lost animals too. I lost my beloved horse in January, and have just buried my grandad last week. Every life that has been lost to me has hurt as much as the other. My husband sobbed at loosing our horse, i`ve never seen him cry like that, but at family funerals he hasn`t shed a tear ... so is he "acid" ? is he "cold hearted" ? No .. he`s not, he is the most wonderful, most gentle man i`ve ever met. Grief for *ANY* soul that touches our lives cannot be measured in right or wrongs levels of who should be missed the most.


----------



## Amymay (12 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			It is just difficult when you have lost a close family member not to get rather upset and personal, but I guess we do have to take a step back and remember that there were very happy times in our lives when we hadn't had to endure such losses and that losing a dog was the saddest thing that had happened.
		
Click to expand...

At some point we will all have lost someone close to us. But to take personally someones comments about that loss being comparable to loosing a pet is over sensative, I think, and certainly not something to get upset about.


----------



## aylad (12 April 2011)

can I just say that I think this forum is the nastiest place ever you are all so far up your own backsides that you refuse to see others points of view and only agree with your own views and beliefs! 
firstly you all go on about how accidents happen horses die in racing and how the horse is bred to do this job Erm well correct me if im wrong but I don't know of one horse that has gone up to its owner / trainer and said oh I lie racing can't wait till the big one this weekend! seriously these horses have no say in the matter no choice at all, I bet if we could speak to them and said do you want to race but you might die they wouldn't want to do it! we force them onto such a position for our own entertainment values is sick and wrong!!

secondly the whole a family members death means more than animals dying Erm you are completely wrong there you judge the OP saying she is young she wouldnt understand never known such loss well I have two of my grand parents have died and even worse I have suffered the worst possible thing to happen to a woman I lost my baby and that hurt like hell and still does the only thing that got me through it was my horse and I can tell you now that when my horse dies my grief will be the same as losing my baby as I love them both as much I've had my horse since he was 4 months old he's now 11 yrs old and is my best friend and my baby so when he goes it's gonna hurt like hell!! why do humans think they are so much more superior to animals! we are quite possibly the nastiest sickest animals on this planet! some humans disgust me!

rant over.


----------



## feisty_filly (12 April 2011)

aylad said:



			can I just say that I think this forum is the nastiest place ever you are all so far up your own backsides that you refuse to see others points of view and only agree with your own views and beliefs! 
firstly you all go on about how accidents happen horses die in racing and how the horse is bred to do this job Erm well correct me if im wrong but I don't know of one horse that has gone up to its owner / trainer and said oh I lie racing can't wait till the big one this weekend! seriously these horses have no say in the matter no choice at all, I bet if we could speak to them and said do you want to race but you might die they wouldn't want to do it! we force them onto such a position for our own entertainment values is sick and wrong!!

secondly the whole a family members death means more than animals dying Erm you are completely wrong there you judge the OP saying she is young she wouldnt understand never known such loss well I have two of my grand parents have died and even worse I have suffered the worst possible thing to happen to a woman I lost my baby and that hurt like hell and still does the only thing that got me through it was my horse and I can tell you now that when my horse dies my grief will be the same as losing my baby as I love them both as much I've had my horse since he was 4 months old he's now 11 yrs old and is my best friend and my baby so when he goes it's gonna hurt like hell!! why do humans think they are so much more superior to animals! we are quite possibly the nastiest sickest animals on this planet! some humans disgust me!

rant over.
		
Click to expand...

im very sorry for your loss.
i too have lost a child, i had a missed misscarrage at 15 weeks. my horse most deffinatly helped me through. unfortunatly that horse had to be PTS in december and i was devistated, but i would NEVER compair loseing him to loseing my baby. Dont get me wrong i loved freddy soo much, he was my horse of a lifetime but that pregnancy was my REAL baby, my child that was growing inside me. i saw my husband ripped appart by greif, we struggled alot. this is why i personaly take offence at OPs suggestion that a horses life is equal to an equine. just my personal oppinion.


----------



## ester (12 April 2011)

I think that is all very personal. 

I am certainly no fluffy bunny but actually don't really like the human condition that values human life over any other, and think that some people are entitled to be more attached to their animals than their family.


----------



## Amymay (12 April 2011)

Ooo can I jump on the 'my terrible story is worse than yours' bandwaggon????


----------



## feisty_filly (12 April 2011)

amymay said:



			Ooo can I jump on the 'my terrible story is worse than yours' bandwaggon????
		
Click to expand...

sure


----------



## lassiesuca (12 April 2011)

I think that we all need to remember that we can't account for another persons feelings. It shouldn't be insulting, because it's not a personal or slanderous attack, but if it is insulting to you then that is fine. However we shouldn't be condemned because one values their animals life equally or even over another human beings. Why do we take the view that we are far more worthy than ''our fellow animal minions''.

Let's just respect, that like our animals, we are all individuals and we all experience different emotions, different feelings and have different values.


----------



## Wagtail (12 April 2011)

Humans are not more important than animals. But they usually are to other humans. Just like horses are more important than humans to other horses. It is a very arrogant view to think of human life as more valuable than an animal's. On the contrary, the planet would be a lot better off if there were far fewer of us. However, of course, losing a human loved one is going to be far more painful than losing an animal. It is only natural. But, it is not always the case. I have known people grieve just as much (sometimes suffering depression for years) after losing an animal. Animals often give us far more comfort and (apparent) love than annoying humans who cause us so much pain and grief. And it is not always the young. Personally, I feel it is disgusting to say things such as 'animals can be replaced'. I don't think they can any more than a human can. It is just that most of the time their deaths do not affect us as much. We just get a new horse or dog or cat. But once in a while, if we are lucky, we come across one that is special. Not everyone will know that feeling.


----------



## GemmaLee (12 April 2011)

hasn't this gone completey off topic !? to be frank I am disgusted with some of the attitudes on here !! what does it matter whom or what someone grieves for , we all have DIFFERENT personal experiences and relationships with the people AND animals in our lives. It is appalling that some of you are claiming that people who value their animals in a way that may be different to yours as delusional etc. What gives anyone the right to make others feel as if their emotions are wrong ? who made you god over night ? 
  How would you react if someone turned around and blungeoned you for grieving over a lost family member , telling you that you are mental and delusional ? &*!% would hit the fan judgeing by the reactions you have all given on here already.
  WE ARE ALL DIFFERENT . Noone on here has said you are wrong for feeling the losses you have in your life , and I wouldn't wish it upon anyone ! its a terrible thing to happen and I am incrediably sorry!. BUT an animal may have been the same to someone else , when someone is terribly depressed it can be the shining light that pulls them out of the dark and gives them something to live for , who are you to say thats wrong? Horses are used in therapy to help with people who have confidence issues , depression , bi polar , anxiety etc . and people are the ones who often knock them so far down they want to kill themselves . how do you think their family would feel ? what if the horses prevented that outcome , surely then they could be considered worthy maybe because they prevented the loss of a human life ?
 judging by your comments on not wishing for your children to attend the same school as the OP also , I assume some of you are parents. Take a look at yourselves !! publicly slandereing and belittleing a minor , how would you feel if a supposedly responsible ADULT slandered your children through the internet. 
 everyone on here has differet opnions , accept that and move on , don't insult and belittle someone because they think differently . This is a terribly sensitive subject but you have not lived anyone elses life , only yours , the world is a big place , and your one life experience does not account to alot in the bigger picture of things , there is billions of people with different lives , families etc , all with a completely different story so do not assume you have the answers to what is right in this world .
 Let people grieve for whomever and whatever they want , wether it be human or animal. I'm sorry about this but i just couldn't sit back and watch fuly grown women bully a minor for loving animals , its a bit sad really . 
 If you feel animals have no place to be equal to humans then thats fine !! noone will take that away from you , but if someone values animals on the same level thats fine too !!! why can't you accept that . I'm sorry through the hurt any of you have gone through losses of loved ones , but you should use their memories to do good and remember them by not argue and use as a weapon against one another and pubic forum about horses for goodness sake.


----------



## feisty_filly (12 April 2011)

i just gave my personal view of the OPs oppinions. every one is intitled to feel as they do, i mean no one can help the way they feel. 

it was the way OPs oppinions came accross that i (and i think a few others) might have found insulting.


----------



## Wagtail (12 April 2011)

Very well said GemmaLee.


----------



## GemmaLee (12 April 2011)

of course everyone is entitled to their own opnions  but there is no need to personally attack someone for the way they feel , I don't agree on alot of things but I accept them , but being nasty to someone for feeling something  is uncalled for , its not as if she is slandereing the memory of a lost one or saying it is not valid . It is a sensitive subject and reading her posts she doesn't seem to be attempting to intentionally insult anyone , when it comes to sensitive issues like this it is sometimes better to bite our tongues . nobody is in the wrong for feeling how they feel , and nobody is saying their pain is greater than anyone elses ,as we are not them and therefore shal never know


----------



## lassiesuca (12 April 2011)

feisty_filly said:



			i just gave my personal view of the OPs oppinions. every one is intitled to feel as they do, i mean no one can help the way they feel. 

it was the way OPs oppinions came accross that i (and i think a few others) might have found insulting.
		
Click to expand...

How have I been insulting? I've not disrespected your opinions.

I've found you all to be really arrogant and bully like in the way you've assumed things about me and dictated to me my feelings. I've not forced my view down your throat, shame it can't be said for some of you. I've remained really calm, bu you've really really been quite hurtful. I've apolgoised if I've hurt anyone unintentionally and I've been polite after you've all ripped at me and some others too.


Thanks Gemma xx


----------



## Amymay (12 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Very well said GemmaLee.
		
Click to expand...

What - you could read all that???

And for the record, the OP has not been inuslting at all in any of her posts. (not aimed at Wagtail, obviously).


----------



## Starbucks (12 April 2011)

Guess the OP didn't manage to get this deleted then!


----------



## Amymay (12 April 2011)

Starbucks said:



			Guess the OP didn't manage to get this deleted then!
		
Click to expand...

There's nothing to delete.  Just a lively and intersting thread.


----------



## GemmaLee (12 April 2011)

so instead reacting like an adult , you return with sarcasm *claps* proven my point exactly . enough said


----------



## lassiesuca (12 April 2011)

Starbucks said:



			Guess the OP didn't manage to get this deleted then!
		
Click to expand...

If I'm quite candid, the moderating on here is pretty poor, however this thread isn't that bad. I think last night I was feeling a bit sensitive!


----------



## DragonSlayer (12 April 2011)

aylad said:



			can I just say that I think this forum is the nastiest place ever you are all so far up your own backsides that you refuse to see others points of view and only agree with your own views and beliefs! 
firstly you all go on about how accidents happen horses die in racing and how the horse is bred to do this job Erm well correct me if im wrong but I don't know of one horse that has gone up to its owner / trainer and said oh I lie racing can't wait till the big one this weekend! seriously these horses have no say in the matter no choice at all, I bet if we could speak to them and said do you want to race but you might die they wouldn't want to do it! we force them onto such a position for our own entertainment values is sick and wrong!!

secondly the whole a family members death means more than animals dying Erm you are completely wrong there you judge the OP saying she is young she wouldnt understand never known such loss well I have two of my grand parents have died and even worse I have suffered the worst possible thing to happen to a woman I lost my baby and that hurt like hell and still does the only thing that got me through it was my horse and I can tell you now that when my horse dies my grief will be the same as losing my baby as I love them both as much I've had my horse since he was 4 months old he's now 11 yrs old and is my best friend and my baby so when he goes it's gonna hurt like hell!! why do humans think they are so much more superior to animals! we are quite possibly the nastiest sickest animals on this planet! some humans disgust me!

rant over.
		
Click to expand...

I think you need to take off your rose-tinted glasses if you think this forum is the nastiest place you have ever been! I've been watching but not contributing much at all, the main thing here, is that some people give an opinion but cannot accept another. It's been a very interesting read.

If you just joined to post this then....pfffffft!


----------



## feisty_filly (12 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			How have I been insulting? I've not disrespected your opinions.

I've found you all to be really arrogant and bully like in the way you've assumed things about me and dictated to me my feelings. I've not forced my view down your throat, shame it can't be said for some of you. I've remained really calm, bu you've really really been quite hurtful. I've apolgoised if I've hurt anyone unintentionally and I've been polite after you've all ripped at me and some others too.


Thanks Gemma xx
		
Click to expand...

i do hope the second half of your post wasnt aimed at me as iv only posted on this thread twice! though reading back i agree that alot of members on this forum have been less than nice to you and you should not have been made feel bullied at all and im sorry you have been treated this way. 
i usualy find this forum a very supportive kind and fun place to be but when it comes to controversial (sp?) issues people get  bit heated. 

i was upset by the reaction that some one could value there horse as much as a child or family member to be honest, its just my view though same as you have yours.


----------



## lassiesuca (12 April 2011)

feisty_filly said:



			i do hope the second half of your post wasnt aimed at me as iv only posted on this thread twice! though reading back i agree that alot of members on this forum have been less than nice to you and you should not have been made feel bullied at all and im sorry you have been treated this way. 
i usualy find this forum a very supportive kind and fun place to be but when it comes to controversial (sp?) issues people get  bit heated. 

i was upset by the reaction that some one could value there horse as much as a child or family member to be honest, its just my view though same as you have yours. 

Click to expand...

No it wasn't aimed at you, sorry for that misunderstanding, more of the general vibe which some members have given off (i.e. the ones who've been active in this discussion and then condemned myself and several others for their belief) 

I don't think I've condemned anyone on this thread for not valuing their animal equally or more than a human, nor do I think that, what I've been hurt by is that people think I'm delusional because of it, if that makes sense? 

I'm very sorry for your loss, and I don't doubt that the pain you felt was unbearable. 

x


----------



## benson21 (12 April 2011)

so....back to the Grand national......


----------



## Fellewell (12 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			I'd known my friend for two years. I'd grown up with my dog for 15 years? How can you tell me how I SHOULD feel? 

That's really hurt me now, and I'm sorry if I've hurt others because I love my animals so? Like seriously, I don't need help. 

I don't like many people, for reasons which are none of your business. Particularly my family, people aren't very nice in this world. People stab you in the back, people piss on you because a better offer has come along, people get pleasure out of torturing other people, animals etc. People laugh at one another and gang together to mock you. 

Animals don't do this. Animals don't mock you, they don't laugh at you, they don't stab you in the back and are there waiting in the field for you when you need reassurance, they are there when you need a hug and you can return the favour. 

I don't need help, I just value my animals a lot. 

How dare you tell me how I should and shouldn't feel? That's really, really hurtful. My friend meant a lot to me, as did my dog. My dog was part of MY family. My childhood. It hurt like hell when he died, as it did when my friend died. I still am upset over her, but I am still upset over my dog. 

That's really unfair to say
		
Click to expand...

Is this the post where the op felt that people were accusing her of being delusional?


----------



## feisty_filly (12 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			No it wasn't aimed at you, sorry for that misunderstanding, more of the general vibe which some members have given off (i.e. the ones who've been active in this discussion and then condemned myself and several others for their belief) 

I don't think I've condemned anyone on this thread for not valuing their animal equally or more than a human, nor do I think that, what I've been hurt by is that people think I'm delusional because of it, if that makes sense? 

I'm very sorry for your loss, and I don't doubt that the pain you felt was unbearable. 

x
		
Click to expand...

yes that makes sence hun. that is the problem in posting on a public forum, some people that dissagree with you may well think that, its not nice but it comes back to peoples oppinions. truth is no one knows your life experience so no one should condem your choices


----------



## lassiesuca (12 April 2011)

Fellewell said:



			Is this the post where the op felt that people were accusing her of being delusional?
		
Click to expand...

Yes


----------



## Wagtail (12 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			If I'm quite candid, the moderating on here is pretty poor, however this thread isn't that bad. I think last night I was feeling a bit sensitive!
		
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised you were! However, you remain far calmer and more mature than those who were attacking you, who should be old enough to know better. Sadly, bullying is not confined to school playgrounds. It is a sad fact of life no matter how old you get. But it is especially bad when a load of older women bully a minor on the internet.


----------



## Wagtail (12 April 2011)

amymay said:



			What - you could read all that???
		
Click to expand...


Haha, yes, it did boggle the eyes a little but then when I got into it, I found it rather well put.


----------



## lassiesuca (12 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			I'm not surprised you were! However, you remain far calmer and more mature than those who were attacking you, who should be old enough to know better. Sadly, bullying is not confined to school playgrounds. It is a sad fact of life no matter how old you get. But it is especially bad when a load of older women bully a minor on the internet. 

Click to expand...

I agree, I was actually quite shocked! I know several other adult friends who have followed this thread (but for good reasons, opted to stay well away from!) were disgusted at the attitude of people in general, not so much because I'm a minor, but more so because some value human life so sacredly, yet fail to treat other humans with respect. Odd, isn't it?


----------



## Wagtail (12 April 2011)

Yes, ironic.


----------



## mcnaughty (12 April 2011)

MagicMelon said:



			Signed.  Those who say that reducing the fence size will cause more problems is absolute rubbish.  They are galloping over 5ft fences, they're already going as fast as they can - they wont go any faster over smaller fences.  I personally find it a horrific and sickening race which I refuse to watch. Its only gotten so big due to non-horsey folk who dont realise how many horses die.
		
Click to expand...

Erm, wrong - if you actually take the time to watch some racing you will see they go much faster over the hurdles over a shorter distance.  You can see the horses back off when they approach the GN fences and by the sheer laws of physics and chemistry I'd like to see you run as fast over 100m as 1,500!


----------



## firm (12 April 2011)

"more so because some value human life so sacredly, yet fail to treat other humans with respect. Odd, isn't it? "

It is not odd - it is the paradox of the world we live in & you see every day. If people valued human life (or any life)  a bit better and put it before many things like religion, profits etc then the world might be a much better place.   Sorry way off topic LOL


----------



## teagreen (12 April 2011)

Alastair Down has written a fabulous piece in the Racing Post today:




			IT IS simple to attack jump racing, infinitely more complex and challenging to defend it.

Saturdays Grand National has provoked a veritable storm of protest. Some of the outrage has been from the usual suspects marching under the banner of animal rights  whatever they may be. But a large chunk of the disgust has come from the everyday man and woman in the street, and their legitimate concerns have to be taken seriously by the racing industry, because in the final analysis we continue to ply our trade with the consent and tolerance of the general public.

And it is no use jump racing holding its nose and ducking the stark realities. Since 1988the Grand National has killed 20 horses and the spectacle of two of them quite literally laid out for eight million people to see on Saturday has stuck broadside in the craw of many people, not least certain newspaper editors or TV and radio stations hungry for controversy.

Every single argument about the legitimacy and morality of jump racing can be boiled down to one extremely uncomfortable, even disturbing, question and that is: Are you prepared to accept the death of horses as part of your sport?

We will take as read all the usual caveats and qualifications about constantly doing our damnedest to prevent horses being killed, and please lets dispense with our customary refuge in expressions such as casualties or horses paying the ultimate
price.

I can play with fancy words better than most but this is not the time  on Saturday some people were revolted by the sight of dead horses and they are levelling the potentially fatal charge that the Grand National in particular and, therefore, jump racing in general is cruel past the point of acceptability.

Nor is it any use to rail against the cheap sensationalism of the coverage or the twisted logic of critics for whom regard for the truth is an easily avoided inconvenience. There is no point trying to have a sane debate with someone who compares jump racing with bullfighting except to make the small point that on the racecourse everything humanly possible is done to avoid death whereas in the bullring it is fully intended to bring it about.

So we must address the burning question. If your answer is, No, I am not prepared toaccept the death of horses as part of my sport, then jump racing is not for you because it is a high-risk, physically dangerous activity in which fatalities are inevitable.

A lot of the problemis that jump racings deaths are extremely high profile. As a society we hide death away. We kill hundreds of millions of animals every year and I could show you certain modern farming methods, or the most scrupulously run abattoir, and have you puking in revulsion within minutes.

But such horrors are all hidden from view with the result that someone apparently outraged by Aintree would make no connection with their own contribution to animal carnage on a colossal scale whensitting down later with a chicken sandwich or a juicy steak.

And of course I am as upset as the next man by confronting death. A stricken animal up close is a terrible sight to behold and I couldnt put my hand on my heart and say that if I had to face it time and again there might not come a tipping point when I could take it no more.

But I am prepared to accept the death of horses as part of my sport. The worst part for sure and the one that serves up jumpings vilest moments. And is my conscience clear?
Yes. Is it untroubled? Most assuredly not.

Everybody loathes the death of a horse. But fatalities are just a fraction of what jump racing is about and I would behonest enough to argue that, in an increasingly sanitised, risk-denuded society, the omnipresence of danger lies at the very kernel of its appeal.

I have no argument with those who disapprove of jump racing. But with those who seek toemasculate it beyond recognition or ban it entirely I am implacably at odds.

Those who love jump racing hail from every geographical corner and inhabit all social strata of these islands. They are Everyman and they are legion.

When they make their way to Cheltenham or to Aintree it is not without trepidation of what they may see. But, taken in the round, they find something about the sight, sound and spectacle of jump racing that is spiritually uplifting and nourishing to the soul in a way that no other sport comes close to providing.

And, of course, a little learning is a dangerous thing. How many of those currently howling at jumpings gate have ever set foot ona racecourse or tried even to begin to understand it before condemning it? There is no tyranny as great as ignorance.

I know many folk, the young in particular, who despite not being ardent racing fans try never to miss the festival because as a feast of very human joy they have found no other occasion in their year to match it.

And that joy is nurtured, raised and rammed tumultuously home into the human breast by an almost primal passion for the jumps horse in full cry. And when one is killed, is it merely marked by some flitting note of regret, or an uncaring shoulder shrug?

Not a bit of it, it is the stuff of genuine remorse, yet still a price worth the paying. The truth is that jump racing gives ordinary people avenues into zones of emotional experience that are increasingly hard to replicate elsewhere. That may render it unfashionable and sometimes uncomfortable, but it doesnt erode my conviction that it is utterly defensible andalmost wholly admirable.
		
Click to expand...

I see they are to look at watering and cutting the field size. I'm all for doing everything to reduce the risk - but with jump racing, you will never eradicate the risk completely. They have run the GN on all sorts of ground, there are fatalities on them all. The Topham doesn't have 40 runners, yet horses still get killed. But if it makes people happy for a little while, fine.


----------



## Double_choc_lab (12 April 2011)

According to the "i" newspaper the Sports Minister is urged to intervene into the GN debate.  If there is such a debate then please can Alaistair Downe be involved.  Such a brilliant article and such a man with words.


----------



## horsegirl (12 April 2011)

Flame_ said:



			But how can The Grand National still be the Grand National if you make it significantly different? 

Shorten it? Reduce the field? Lower the fences? Do away with the handicap? There will already be other races of that distance, maximum field size, fence heights and no handicap, they are just called something else, and horses die in them sometimes too. Do people not think the horses' trainers enter in the National are horses that they think will best suit this race with this distance, fence height, etc?
		
Click to expand...

How about instead of racing them they are just made to look pretty.  Plaits, matching boots to jockey silk etc and then parade them round and open the phone lines x factor stylee.  The one with most votes wins and we all bet on the outcome. No risk


----------



## ester (12 April 2011)

so long as the parade ring hasn't become live HG I think that is an excellent idea.


----------



## KautoStar1 (12 April 2011)

A brilliant piece in todays Racing Post by Alastair Down, a man who knows what he is talking about



By Alastair Down 11:05AM 12 APR 2011 

IT IS simple to attack jump racing, infinitely more complex and challenging to defend it.

Saturdays Grand National has provoked a veritable storm of protest. Some of the outrage has been from the usual suspects marching under the banner of animal rights  whatever they may be. But a large chunk of the disgust has come from the everyday man and woman in the street, and their legitimate concerns have to be taken seriously by the racing industry, because in the final analysis we continue to ply our trade with the consent and tolerance of the general public.

And it is no use jump racing holding its nose and ducking the stark realities. Since 1988the Grand National has killed 20 horses and the spectacle of two of them quite literally laid out for eight million people to see on Saturday has stuck broadside in the craw of many people, not least certain newspaper editors or TV and radio stations hungry for controversy.

Every single argument about the legitimacy and morality of jump racing can be boiled down to one extremely uncomfortable, even disturbing, question and that is: Are you prepared to accept the death of horses as part of your sport?

We will take as read all the usual caveats and qualifications about constantly doing our damnedest to prevent horses being killed, and please lets dispense with our customary refuge in expressions such as casualties or horses paying the ultimate
price.

I can play with fancy words better than most but this is not the time  on Saturday some people were revolted by the sight of dead horses and they are levelling the potentially fatal charge that the Grand National in particular and, therefore, jump racing in general is cruel past the point of acceptability.

Nor is it any use to rail against the cheap sensationalism of the coverage or the twisted logic of critics for whom regard for the truth is an easily avoided inconvenience. There is no point trying to have a sane debate with someone who compares jump racing with bullfighting except to make the small point that on the racecourse everything humanly possible is done to avoid death whereas in the bullring it is fully intended to bring it about.

So we must address the burning question. If your answer is, No, I am not prepared toaccept the death of horses as part of my sport, then jump racing is not for you because it is a high-risk, physically dangerous activity in which fatalities are inevitable.

A lot of the problemis that jump racings deaths are extremely high profile. As a society we hide death away. We kill hundreds of millions of animals every year and I could show you certain modern farming methods, or the most scrupulously run abattoir, and have you puking in revulsion within minutes.

But such horrors are all hidden from view with the result that someone apparently outraged by Aintree would make no connection with their own contribution to animal carnage on a colossal scale whensitting down later with a chicken sandwich or a juicy steak.

And of course I am as upset as the next man by confronting death. A stricken animal up close is a terrible sight to behold and I couldnt put my hand on my heart and say that if I had to face it time and again there might not come a tipping point when I could take it no more.

But I am prepared to accept the death of horses as part of my sport. The worst part for sure and the one that serves up jumpings vilest moments. And is my conscience clear?
Yes. Is it untroubled? Most assuredly not.

Everybody loathes the death of a horse. But fatalities are just a fraction of what jump racing is about and I would behonest enough to argue that, in an increasingly sanitised, risk-denuded society, the omnipresence of danger lies at the very kernel of its appeal.

I have no argument with those who disapprove of jump racing. But with those who seek toemasculate it beyond recognition or ban it entirely I am implacably at odds.

Those who love jump racing hail from every geographical corner and inhabit all social strata of these islands. They are Everyman and they are legion.

When they make their way to Cheltenham or to Aintree it is not without trepidation of what they may see. But, taken in the round, they find something about the sight, sound and spectacle of jump racing that is spiritually uplifting and nourishing to the soul in a way that no other sport comes close to providing.

And, of course, a little learning is a dangerous thing. How many of those currently howling at jumpings gate have ever set foot ona racecourse or tried even to begin to understand it before condemning it? There is no tyranny as great as ignorance.

I know many folk, the young in particular, who despite not being ardent racing fans try never to miss the festival because as a feast of very human joy they have found no other occasion in their year to match it.

And that joy is nurtured, raised and rammed tumultuously home into the human breast by an almost primal passion for the jumps horse in full cry. And when one is killed, is it merely marked by some flitting note of regret, or an uncaring shoulder shrug?

Not a bit of it, it is the stuff of genuine remorse, yet still a price worth the paying. The truth is that jump racing gives ordinary people avenues into zones of emotional experience that are increasingly hard to replicate elsewhere. That may render it unfashionable and sometimes uncomfortable, but it doesnt erode my conviction that it is utterly defensible andalmost wholly admirable.


----------



## mcnaughty (12 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			I'm not surprised you were! However, you remain far calmer and more mature than those who were attacking you, who should be old enough to know better. Sadly, bullying is not confined to school playgrounds. It is a sad fact of life no matter how old you get. But it is especially bad when a load of older women bully a minor on the internet. 

Click to expand...

Wagtai, I believe you may be absolutely right - that is if you can read bullying into what was said last night - I actually did not believe anyone was bullied - if they had this post would have been pulled by now by TFC.

Also, if OP is a minor then she should not be allowed to start a petition of any kind - that is in the same way as she is not allowed to vote.

OP has tried to twist and turn in every direction to try to get some kind of point across - I am actually unsure of what the point is but believe it has something to do with not using animals in any activity that involves risk of any kind.  

I hope for her own peace of mind that she does not ever hack out on the public highway because she will be breaking every rule in her own imaginary "book"!

Oh, and someone said way back there about a comparison between the GN and endurance racing and the horses being dehydrated - are they supposed to stop half way round for a drink....  I'd like to see the authorities try to enforce that one as we all know you can take a horse to water but...


----------



## fburton (12 April 2011)

Starbucks said:



			Oh god yes I'd be more bothered if my dog died than a passing stranger, but your own family and friends?
		
Click to expand...

I don't know if it's "normal" or not (and frankly I'm not going to lose any sleep over it), but I was more deeply affected emotionally when a horse that had been a major part of my life for 27 years died than when any of the three grandparents I knew died - as dearly as I loved them and value their influence on my life. Four years after this horse died, I am still grieving the loss to an extent. I think I "got over" the loss of my grandparents faster than that. If that makes me a monster, so be it! 

That's not to say that I would put any animal's life above that of any human - of course, I wouldn't.

As emotionally deficient as _I_ may be, some of the replies directed at OP have shown a startling lack of sensitivity and maturity.


----------



## ridefast (12 April 2011)

Since being mature clearly doesnt work I shall sink to immaturity - You're a big bunch of meany bullies! The op was upset by someones comment that a horse is replacable, her point was that SHE values animal life as much as humans. And the reaction by the majority of people on this discussion was simply bullying - perhaps in a sneaky way, but it was still bullying. You ought to feel ashamed. All I can say is good for you lassiesuca, you stick to what you believe is right. I value animal life just as much (and in some cases more) as human life. 

On a mature note I am not trying to belittle or insult anyone who has suffered a painful human loss, I understand there is nothing to compare and noone can measure or dictate how much pain you feel or how much you will grieve.

But I will say the same, I will not be made to feel stupid or ridiculed by the amount I grieve for a beloved pet, and noone will make me feel stupid even if, horror of horrors, I dare to grieve more for a rabbit (yes, a RABBIT) than a family member. Grow up you meanies


----------



## Wagtail (12 April 2011)

H&H only pull threads where there are complaints and obvious abuse. This was far more subtle as it was not specific posts but the sheer fact that so many people ganged up on one other and bombarded her with insults from 'silly girl', to 'you really need help!' The fact that you cannot see what happened as bullying really highlights how bad the problem is. It happens on every forum though. Not just here. It is one of the ugly sides of human nature. But it is also one of my pet hates. I will stick up for anyone I see being bullied whether I agree with their views or not.


----------



## teagreen (12 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			H&H only pull threads where there are complaints and obvious abuse. This was far more subtle as it was not specific posts but the sheer fact that so many people ganged up on one other and bombarded her with insults from 'silly girl', to 'you really need help!' The fact that you cannot see what happened as bullying really highlights how bad the problem is. It happens on every forum though. Not just here. It is one of the ugly sides of human nature. But it is also one of my pet hates. I will stick up for anyone I see being bullied whether I agree with their views or not.
		
Click to expand...

It is one of the ugly sides, and the risks, of the internet. You can say what you like (so people think, anyway) because you are behind a computer screen. If we'd all been sat in a room discussing this, half the things that have been said wouldn't have been said. Some people feel stronger, more powerful, 'better' simply because they are sat behind a computer. I don't say anything on here that I wouldn't to someones face - and that includes using smilies, because it's amazing the offence someone can take if you put  at the end of it.

However, you also have to prepared to take what happens on here with a pinch of salt. At the end of the day, these people are not your friends, you don't know them, you'll never meet them. They are fictional characters behind a screen. If I am offended by something I tend to think "Yeah, well I bet you wouldn't have said that to my face", switch the computer off and rest easy knowing that that person doesn't know where I live and I don't have to speak to them again. I don't think forums are for people who get deeply hurt and offended by words, because if you post something, you are going to get a whole mix of comments back. Just close the computer down and forget about it. 

I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying it's a forum. So some people called her silly. If she's clever she'll shrug the comments of some internet unknown username off.


----------



## MissMincePie&Brandy (12 April 2011)

Thank you for copying this in KautoStar1. Superbly written.



KautoStar1 said:



			A brilliant piece in todays Racing Post by Alastair Down, a man who knows what he is talking about



By Alastair Down 11:05AM 12 APR 2011 

IT IS simple to attack jump racing, infinitely more complex and challenging to defend it.

Saturdays Grand National has provoked a veritable storm of protest. Some of the outrage has been from the usual suspects marching under the banner of animal rights  whatever they may be. But a large chunk of the disgust has come from the everyday man and woman in the street, and their legitimate concerns have to be taken seriously by the racing industry, because in the final analysis we continue to ply our trade with the consent and tolerance of the general public.

And it is no use jump racing holding its nose and ducking the stark realities. Since 1988the Grand National has killed 20 horses and the spectacle of two of them quite literally laid out for eight million people to see on Saturday has stuck broadside in the craw of many people, not least certain newspaper editors or TV and radio stations hungry for controversy.

Every single argument about the legitimacy and morality of jump racing can be boiled down to one extremely uncomfortable, even disturbing, question and that is: Are you prepared to accept the death of horses as part of your sport?

We will take as read all the usual caveats and qualifications about constantly doing our damnedest to prevent horses being killed, and please lets dispense with our customary refuge in expressions such as casualties or horses paying the ultimate
price.

I can play with fancy words better than most but this is not the time  on Saturday some people were revolted by the sight of dead horses and they are levelling the potentially fatal charge that the Grand National in particular and, therefore, jump racing in general is cruel past the point of acceptability.

Nor is it any use to rail against the cheap sensationalism of the coverage or the twisted logic of critics for whom regard for the truth is an easily avoided inconvenience. There is no point trying to have a sane debate with someone who compares jump racing with bullfighting except to make the small point that on the racecourse everything humanly possible is done to avoid death whereas in the bullring it is fully intended to bring it about.

So we must address the burning question. If your answer is, No, I am not prepared toaccept the death of horses as part of my sport, then jump racing is not for you because it is a high-risk, physically dangerous activity in which fatalities are inevitable.

A lot of the problemis that jump racings deaths are extremely high profile. As a society we hide death away. We kill hundreds of millions of animals every year and I could show you certain modern farming methods, or the most scrupulously run abattoir, and have you puking in revulsion within minutes.

But such horrors are all hidden from view with the result that someone apparently outraged by Aintree would make no connection with their own contribution to animal carnage on a colossal scale whensitting down later with a chicken sandwich or a juicy steak.

And of course I am as upset as the next man by confronting death. A stricken animal up close is a terrible sight to behold and I couldnt put my hand on my heart and say that if I had to face it time and again there might not come a tipping point when I could take it no more.

But I am prepared to accept the death of horses as part of my sport. The worst part for sure and the one that serves up jumpings vilest moments. And is my conscience clear?
Yes. Is it untroubled? Most assuredly not.

Everybody loathes the death of a horse. But fatalities are just a fraction of what jump racing is about and I would behonest enough to argue that, in an increasingly sanitised, risk-denuded society, the omnipresence of danger lies at the very kernel of its appeal.

I have no argument with those who disapprove of jump racing. But with those who seek toemasculate it beyond recognition or ban it entirely I am implacably at odds.

Those who love jump racing hail from every geographical corner and inhabit all social strata of these islands. They are Everyman and they are legion.

When they make their way to Cheltenham or to Aintree it is not without trepidation of what they may see. But, taken in the round, they find something about the sight, sound and spectacle of jump racing that is spiritually uplifting and nourishing to the soul in a way that no other sport comes close to providing.

And, of course, a little learning is a dangerous thing. How many of those currently howling at jumpings gate have ever set foot ona racecourse or tried even to begin to understand it before condemning it? There is no tyranny as great as ignorance.

I know many folk, the young in particular, who despite not being ardent racing fans try never to miss the festival because as a feast of very human joy they have found no other occasion in their year to match it.

And that joy is nurtured, raised and rammed tumultuously home into the human breast by an almost primal passion for the jumps horse in full cry. And when one is killed, is it merely marked by some flitting note of regret, or an uncaring shoulder shrug?

Not a bit of it, it is the stuff of genuine remorse, yet still a price worth the paying. The truth is that jump racing gives ordinary people avenues into zones of emotional experience that are increasingly hard to replicate elsewhere. That may render it unfashionable and sometimes uncomfortable, but it doesnt erode my conviction that it is utterly defensible andalmost wholly admirable.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Wagtail (12 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			It is one of the ugly sides, and the risks, of the internet. You can say what you like (so people think, anyway) because you are behind a computer screen. If we'd all been sat in a room discussing this, half the things that have been said wouldn't have been said. Some people feel stronger, more powerful, 'better' simply because they are sat behind a computer. I don't say anything on here that I wouldn't to someones face - and that includes using smilies, because it's amazing the offence someone can take if you put  at the end of it.

However, you also have to prepared to take what happens on here with a pinch of salt. At the end of the day, these people are not your friends, you don't know them, you'll never meet them. They are fictional characters behind a screen. If I am offended by something I tend to think "Yeah, well I bet you wouldn't have said that to my face", switch the computer off and rest easy knowing that that person doesn't know where I live and I don't have to speak to them again. I don't think forums are for people who get deeply hurt and offended by words, because if you post something, you are going to get a whole mix of comments back. Just close the computer down and forget about it. 

I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying it's a forum. So some people called her silly. If she's clever she'll shrug the comments of some internet unknown username off.
		
Click to expand...

The problem is internet bullying is real. You or I may be able to shrug it off and not let it bother us, but many people can't. This is especially true of the young. Young people have been driven to suicide because of internet bullies. Yes, really. So do not just shrug it off. We all have a duty to ensure we are not participating in this kind of behaviour. Okay, so this ismild compared to some instances I have seen, but it was bullying none the less, without doubt.


----------



## Chrissy Gal (12 April 2011)

I have signed the petition from the point of reducing the number of runners. I am concerned that falls which do not result in death or destruction of the horse appear to be largely disregarded. Being 4 legged horses are relatively stable creatures and become distressed with adversely affected confidence even by relatively minor falls never mind pain and discomfort caused by superficial injury/bruising. Having worked with horses over may years (showjumping, breaking and schooling) I believe each fall is significant even if the horse survives. In any event one would hope that the popularity of the event will be diminished following this years effort if nothing is seen to be done about "the problem".


----------



## teagreen (12 April 2011)

Chrissy Gal said:



			I have signed the petition from the point of reducing the number of runners. I am concerned that falls which do not result in death or destruction of the horse appear to be largely disregarded. Being 4 legged horses are relatively stable creatures and become distressed with adversely affected confidence even by relatively minor falls never mind pain and discomfort caused by superficial injury/bruising. Having worked with horses over may years (showjumping, breaking and schooling) I believe each fall is significant even if the horse survives. In any event one would hope that the popularity of the event will be diminished following this years effort if nothing is seen to be done about "the problem".
		
Click to expand...

So do you want all jump racing banned?


----------



## VoR (12 April 2011)

I think that this thread has surely run it's course hasn't it? (s'cuse the pun!)As usual there is no conclusion because there are strong feelings on both sides of the argument and it seems no acceptance of these differences. It so reminds me of the hunting debate, going nowhere, so, can we leave it to the racing authorities who will I am sure, under public pressure, review the safety of the GN.

As I have said before, ALL equestrian sport has it's risks to both horse and rider, there are even plenty of hacking related accidents detailed on these forums. To make the GN totally safe would be impossible as it is for any equestrian 'event', it could be banned, but that might be the thin end of the wedge, as, like it did with LACS from hunting with hounds to even angling, attention would then turn to something else, eventing maybe?

To eradicate the risk is to ban all equestrian sport, not a decision anyone on here would care to see I'm sure.


----------



## Chrissy Gal (12 April 2011)

I would certainly not wish for all or any jump racing to be banned, this would have a much greater detrimental effect on equine welfare. The point is that more can and needs to be done to make some races safer which is why I advocate reduction in the number of starters to reduce the inceased risk caused by horses jumping and falling eas it appears to me that horses jumping and/or falling directly in the paths of others.


----------



## DragonSlayer (12 April 2011)

We could introduce snail racing to the larger populace......


----------



## fburton (12 April 2011)

DragonSlayer said:



			We could introduce snail racing to the larger populace......
		
Click to expand...

I suspect even that would lead to a slugfest...


----------



## Chrissy Gal (12 April 2011)

That is not worthy of comment on a serious issue.


----------



## Appymadness (12 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			I've set up a petition in the aim to get lots of support and hopefully take it to the BRS and get them to just consider that the course perhaps needs some of it's safety aspects reconsider. 

I'm not suggesting we ban the race, but if we can reduce the number of horses on the course, perhaps lower the fences and even reduce the length they have to run, you can still enjoy the race, and it will hopefully reduce the number of fatalities. 

We do see it in eventing, however not as often, because safety is considered, obviously we can't prevent accidents entirely, but I believe we can reduce the risk. 

In the past 11 years, 21 horses have been killed on GN, lets try and reduce that number. We're all horse lovers here! So let's just do the right thing 


http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/grandnationalsafety/
Thanks for your support. I don't want to cause a fight, I just want to raise awareness 

xx
		
Click to expand...

Approximately 18,000 foals are born into the closely-related British and Irish racing industries each year, yet only around 40% go on to become racers. Those horses who do not make the grade may be slaughtered for meat or repeatedly change hands in a downward spiral of neglect. Of those horses who do go on to race, around 420 are raced to death every year.

This is the best petition to sign.
http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/f/ACTIVE/petition/?id=10&campaign=horse


----------



## teagreen (12 April 2011)

Appymadness said:



			Approximately 18,000 foals are born into the closely-related British and Irish racing industries each year, yet only around 40% go on to become racers. Those horses who do not make the grade may be slaughtered for meat or repeatedly change hands in a downward spiral of neglect. Of those horses who do go on to race, around 420 are raced to death every year.

This is the best petition to sign.
http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/f/ACTIVE/petition/?id=10&campaign=horse

Click to expand...

What about the New Forest and Welsh pony foals who suffer the same fate as these each year? I have a friend on FB who was at some sale today and ponies of all types, exmoors I think it might mainly have been but I could be wrong, were fetching about £40 a head. 

Also, I hope that as a supporter of Animal Aid, you do not keep pets, especially do not use your horses in sport or for recreational purposes, I hope you are vegan, do not eat meat, milk, honey, sit on a leather sofa or saddle...

Animal Aid want racing banned. Yeah, GREAT idea.


----------



## Echo Bravo (12 April 2011)

Teagreen. what a sensible answer, but these people really don't want to know they just want to ruin everyones enjoyment with horses. They really don't care about animal welfare as you have said youngsters going for meat money, like on Dartmore, never mind NF. They want you to be just as miserable minded as they are. But Snail Racing, would they get eaten at the end???


----------



## DragonSlayer (12 April 2011)

Chrissy Gal said:



			That is not worthy of comment on a serious issue.
		
Click to expand...

Some of the mud-slinging on here makes me think otherwise....


----------



## chessy (12 April 2011)

Can't believe some of the replies in this thread, the OP makes a non-confrontational post and loads of so-called "adults" respond with personal insults and bile. Some of you really need to get off your high horses!!


----------



## The Virgin Dubble (12 April 2011)

BRITISH HORSERACING AUTHORITYS DIRECTOR OF EQUINE SCIENCE AND WELFARE STATEMENT ON THE GRAND NATIONAL

Professor Tim Morris, Director of Equine Science and Welfare, said:

The Grand National was attended by over 70,000 people and watched by tens of millions, many of whom would have had a bet, or taken part in a sweepstake. Any one of those millions of people would undoubtedly have been very saddened by the accidents, seen clearly on television, which led to the death of Ornais and Dooneys Gate during the race.

Racing is a sport with risk, and the Grand National is the most testing race in Great Britain; that is why it has captured the imagination of so many for over a century. Racing works hard to reduce the risk. Some risk to horses is inherent in the sport, as it is to differing degrees in the life of a horse in any environment. Racing is open and transparent about these risks, publishes information about equine fatalities on the Authoritys website, and works to further reduce these risks [see Notes for Editors 1 and 4]

All those involved in racing do care for their horses. At the race itself there are more than 150 specialist staff who are completely focused on making the race as safe as possible, so there is no shortage of effort or expense in this respect. [see Notes for Editors 2 for detail]. This care and concern is why Horseracing has for many years also worked closely with legitimate animal welfare charities, such as the RSPCA and World Horse Welfare. The role of both these organisations is to be critical and raise concerns with us and, if they are not happy with the action we take, there is no doubt they would be very public about it, as anyone would expect from a legitimate animal welfare organisation.

Beyond this proper concern for horse welfare, much of the prompting on this issue to the media has been driven by Animal Aid. Animal Aid are not an animal welfare group, as many newspapers and news channels have been misinformed. They are an animal rights organisation against the use of animals for sport and leisure. As such their clearly stated agenda is to ban racing. [see Notes for Editors 3].

If racing then didnt exist, this would have a huge impact on tens of thousands of thoroughbreds across the UK; it would effectively mean that owners and trainers wouldnt be able to look after their horses and the breed would disappear; as would a large part of British life.

Such Animal Rights campaigners are entitled to their views, but the overwhelming majority of the British public take an animal welfare viewpoint as to how they deal responsibly with their obligations to animals kept as pets, raised for food and used in sport and leisure. They do not want to stop eating meat, keeping pets, riding horses or watching racing, but do want risks to animals be reduced to the minimum.

So it is clear there are two quite distinct issues here. The first issue is how we can realistically reduce the risk in the Grand National further, and that is the job of the BHA, Animal Welfare groups and Aintree Racecourse. We do listen to those concerns that have been raised and will continue to strive to reduce risk, whether that is in specific relation to the Grand National or in any other race. The second issue is the wider ethical debate of whether it is right for humans to use animals in leisure, sport and for food. Neither of these issues is served by the emotive language and misleading information from Animal Rights campaigners.

The BHA would also like to clarify the following points:

The Grand National is a difficult race and was run this year on an unseasonably warm day. Because of that, all the jockeys had been instructed prior to the race to dismount from their horses as soon as the race was over in order to allow the team of handlers and vets to get water to the horses so as to prevent over-heating (which is a main cause of collapse), as it is when people run and race over long distances. This preventative action happened to all the horses, not just the winner, and shows welfare improvements in action. No horse collapsed.

The introduction of the run-outs, which were used for the first time this year, were introduced in 2009, the year after the horse McKelvey died. They were introduced after much discussion, which included the RSPCA, as a welfare measure to allow loose horses to be able to go round the obstacles, and not, as has been reported, to prevent the race from being voided. Again this is welfare in action.

The winning jockey, Jason Maguire has been banned for exceeding the strict limits which we place on the use of the whip. The horse was carefully examined after the race and there is no evidence of an abuse. Such abuses are dealt with very seriously and, as we do at the end of every season, we will certainly be reviewing our Rules to ensure that we have the balance right between appropriate use of the whip and controlling inappropriate, unacceptable use.

Notes to Editors:

(1) Including this year, in 12 runnings of the Grand National since 2000, 479 horses have raced in the Grand National. 8 horses have been fatally injured, and we openly report this, as do the media including the BBC. Put another way, 471 horses went home after the race. In addition, in the seven years previous to this years running of the race, just three horses had lost their lives competing in the race  Hear The Echo, McKelvey and Tyneandthyneagain. McKelvey and Tyneandthyneagain were both injured when running riderless.

(2) 20 horse catchers; at least two fence attendants at each of the Nationals 16 fences; four stewards to inspect the course; two British Horseracing Authority Course Inspectors; 10 vets; 50 ground staff; and 35 ground repair staff

(3) In an interview with Nicky Campbell three years ago in advance of the Grand National, Andrew Tyler, the head of Animal Aid, was put on the spot by Nicky Campbell and he admitted that he wanted racing banned. He did the same last year ahead of the Grand National in an interview with BBC Scotland.

(4) For more information on Equine Welfare, including injuries and fatalities, please see:

http://www.britishhorseracing.com/resources/equine-science-and-welfare/horsewelfare.asp

http://www.britishhorseracing.com/resources/equine-science-and-welfare/injuries-fatalities.asp


----------



## Munchkin (12 April 2011)

There is no point trying to have a sane debate with someone who compares jump racing with bullfighting except to make the small point that on the racecourse everything humanly possible is done to avoid death whereas in the bullring it is fully intended to bring it about.
		
Click to expand...

Alastair Down read this thread, then. And came to the same conclusion as me - sane debate not possible with some people.


----------



## Echo Bravo (12 April 2011)

Congrats Dubs, some sanity at last.


----------



## Appymadness (12 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			What about the New Forest and Welsh pony foals who suffer the same fate as these each year? I have a friend on FB who was at some sale today and ponies of all types, exmoors I think it might mainly have been but I could be wrong, were fetching about £40 a head. 

Also, I hope that as a supporter of Animal Aid, you do not keep pets, especially do not use your horses in sport or for recreational purposes, I hope you are vegan, do not eat meat, milk, honey, sit on a leather sofa or saddle...

Animal Aid want racing banned. Yeah, GREAT idea.
		
Click to expand...

I do keep pets, all of mine are rescue cases including New Forest & Exmoors, foals from fat horse meat farms. Dogs & cats from rescue, all now happy & loved & I don't do or have any of the above! ie are vegan, do not eat meat, milk, honey, sit on a leather sofa or saddle...


----------



## teagreen (12 April 2011)

Appymadness said:



			I do keep pets, all of mine are rescue cases including New Forest & Exmoors, foals from fat horse meat farms. Dogs & cats from rescue, all now happy & loved & I don't do or have any of the above! ie are vegan, do not eat meat, milk, honey, sit on a leather sofa or saddle...

Click to expand...

So do you support the banning of racing?


----------



## fburton (12 April 2011)

KautoStar1 said:



			Every single argument about the legitimacy and morality of jump racing can be boiled down to one extremely uncomfortable, even disturbing, question and that is: Are you prepared to accept the death of horses as part of your sport?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, it is a well-written article - thoughtful and thought-provoking.

I do think the author, Alastair Down, may be guilty of creating a false dichotomy by arguing that people must choose between either accepting no deaths or accepting the status quo.

My personal belief is that there's a real difference between freak deaths which cannot possibly be anticipated (and hence mitigated by changing conditions) and deaths having a high enough probability to be expected to occur at a certain rate over the years. I consider the former acceptable - just as any other sport in which there are fatalities - and the latter unacceptable, or at least grounds for seeking changes.


----------



## The Virgin Dubble (12 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			Animal Aid want racing banned. Yeah, GREAT idea.
		
Click to expand...

I think Animal Aid want most things banned tbh...

Great idea for horse riders to support them. If they had their way, all forms of horse riding would be banned...


----------



## The Virgin Dubble (12 April 2011)

Echo Bravo said:



			Congrats Dubs, some sanity at last.

Click to expand...

Which, judging by the way this thread has progressed, will no doubt be ignored...


----------



## tallyho! (12 April 2011)

*waves*

You all still arguing?


----------



## Appymadness (12 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			i've seen things at markets that would make anyone's toes curl...

and i bet if they could talk, they'd swap their miserable lives for that of a pampered TB in a heartbeat.

and please, don't say "rescue"..you bought a pony at a market, its really just that.
		
Click to expand...

Never bought a pony from Market in my life, handed to me by RSPCA or it would've had a bullet in the head. So yep RESCUED!!!!!


----------



## DragonSlayer (12 April 2011)

Appymadness said:



			Never bought a pony from Market in my life, handed to me by RSPCA or it would've had a bullet in the head. So yep RESCUED!!!!!
		
Click to expand...

So they just.....handed it over to you? That was it?


----------



## Amymay (13 April 2011)

Appymadness said:



			Never bought a pony from Market in my life, handed to me by RSPCA or it would've had a bullet in the head. So yep RESCUED!!!!!
		
Click to expand...

The RSPCA don't just hand horses (or any animal for that matter) over....


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

fburton said:



			Yes, it is a well-written article - thoughtful and thought-provoking.

I do think the author, Alastair Down, may be guilty of creating a false dichotomy by arguing that people must choose between either accepting no deaths or accepting the status quo.

My personal belief is that there's a real difference between freak deaths which cannot possibly be anticipated (and hence mitigated by changing conditions) and deaths having a high enough probability to be expected to occur at a certain rate over the years. I consider the former acceptable - just as any other sport in which there are fatalities - and the latter unacceptable, or at least grounds for seeking changes.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly. I think the arguments stating that horses die all the time, no matter what they are doing, is not a legitimate one to support keeping a race like the GN as it currently is. It's like saying you don't think it a good idea to do extra checks on a certain type of aircraft just because it crashes more often than another, because all types of aircraft crash.


----------



## Munchkin (13 April 2011)

But there ARE always changes being made in NH racing to make it safer for horse and jockey - a number of these have been listed numerous times in this thread.  You just seem to be determined to ignore this fact.  Ironically, one of the changes made for this year was the option to bypass a fence - meaning bodies didn't need to be moved so quickly from the track and that the public saw them on camera... causing this kneejerk reaction...


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

Another point which you anti GN people seem to be significantly missing -If the changes introduced in 2009 of bypassing the fences, and introducing a chute for loose horses  had been implemented earlier, then three horses would not have been killed in the previous ten years, as they were all injured running loose.

The stats would then have been comparable to normal steeplechasing. Do you want to ban that? Changes have been made, and proved effective.

I genuinely think Ornais went wrong beforehand. I watched the rerun several times. His death was not GN specific, I think it would have happened on any course.

Dooney's gate was so unlucky, it was the way he got landed on. Horses get brought down in 'normal' racing as well, it's not relative to the field size, it happens in 12 runner fields. 

I'm curious what you adamant anti - GN people do with your horses?


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

I am not anti Grand National at all. I just think there are even more things that should be done to make it safer. 

I run a livery yard and also retrain ex racers for clients. I train them in dressage and show jumping. And I do occasionally take them on the gallops, but most of their retraining is done in an all weather arena and out hacking.


----------



## Double_choc_lab (13 April 2011)

Doesn't the thread with the most replies get quoted in H&H each week.  Look at the title of this thread - it will look as though the great majority are in favour of a petition which I'm sure is not the case.  Somewhat ironic.


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			I am not anti Grand National at all. I just think there are even more things that should be done to make it safer. 

I run a livery yard and also retrain ex racers for clients. I train them in dressage and show jumping. And I do occasionally take them on the gallops, but most of their retraining is done in an all weather arena and out hacking.
		
Click to expand...

So where do you get the ex-racers from - the yards? Are they flat or NH?

But you are being anti GN. 

I think the ground was too quick, and they need to address that if it ever happens in future. The difficulty is the inconsistent UK weather. There would have been an equal outcry if the ground had been similar to when Red Marauder won. Ground conditions can change so fast, and sometimes it has to be accepted that there are limits to what can feasibly done without seeing into the future.

So - what would you have done/change to prevent Ornais fall, specifically? The trip, ground, field numbers had nothing to do with his demise. 

What would you have done to prevent Dooney's Gate fall? Given you cannot avoid where a horse gets up once it has fallen.


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			So where do you get the ex-racers from - the yards? Are they flat or NH?

But you are being anti GN. 

I think the ground was too quick, and they need to address that if it ever happens in future. The difficulty is the inconsistent UK weather. There would have been an equal outcry if the ground had been similar to when Red Marauder won. Ground conditions can change so fast, and sometimes it has to be accepted that there are limits to what can feasibly done without seeing into the future.

So - what would you have done/change to prevent Ornais fall, specifically? The trip, ground, field numbers had nothing to do with his demise. 

What would you have done to prevent Dooney's Gate fall? Given you cannot avoid where a horse gets up once it has fallen.
		
Click to expand...

I knew there would be fatalities because of the ground and actually voiced this concern on here before the race. I have to question whether the ground did not have a part to play in Ornais's demise. There was no give on landing. It's amazing how much difference this makes. Horses tend to slide on landing when ground is wetter. I've been digging ragwort today and the ground is like concrete.

I always source my TBs via a friend of mine who owns race horses. She usually has some that are ready to go to the sales or failing that, her trainer has a few at his yard that he wants to let go. I get a very honest assessment of the horses temperament that way. I am not bothered about performance.

edit: I have read that Ornais was dead before reaching the ground. If so, how did he break his neck? I do not want to study the footage. Unless I was doing it in order to make the race safer, I don't think it is a healthy thing to do.


----------



## Wishful (13 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			Dooney's gate was so unlucky, it was the way he got landed on. Horses get brought down in 'normal' racing as well, it's not relative to the field size, it happens in 12 runner fields. 

I'm curious what you adamant anti - GN people do with your horses?
		
Click to expand...

I saw something similar happen (with same eventual result) in an 7 runner race.  The max allowed number of runners would have been 18 for that race, so it wasn't a crowding issue, it was pure bad luck.

As for watering more, thinking about it, we might have had a lot more exhausted horses if the race had been run on soft ground in the temperature on Saturday.  It was unusually hot for the time of year.


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

Wishful said:



			I saw something similar happen (with same eventual result) in an 7 runner race.  The max allowed number of runners would have been 18 for that race, so it wasn't a crowding issue, it was pure bad luck.

As for watering more, thinking about it, we might have had a lot more exhausted horses if the race had been run on soft ground in the temperature on Saturday.  It was unusually hot for the time of year.
		
Click to expand...

But that is the thing with racing. Sometimes it IS just bad luck. However, the more runners there are, the greater the odds of being killed. That is just common logic. Just because sometimes people get killed in car crashes with perfectly road worthy cars, does not justify not improving safety standards.


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			I knew there would be fatalities because of the ground and actually voiced this concern on here before the race. I have to question whether the ground did not have a part to play in Ornais's demise. There was no give on landing. It's amazing how much difference this makes. Horses tend to slide on landing when ground is wetter. I've been digging ragwort today and the ground is like concrete.

I always source my TBs via a friend of mine who owns race horses. She usually has some that are ready to go to the sales or failing that, her trainer has a few at his yard that he wants to let go. I get a very honest assessment of the horses temperament that way. I am not bothered about performance.
		
Click to expand...

Ah - you probably get the slow ones then, those that don't have the leadership/competitive instinct, that's why you don't understand it exists. 

Your field is not on a par to the racecourse. 

Aintree watered on the run up to the race, but forecast rain failed to materialise, so they were left with quickish ground. You can't put a lot of water on the dry course immediately before horses run, that way you create false ground, which is infinitely more dangerous as it causes horses to break down, or slip up. 

Ground would have made no difference to Ornais - he was gone before he fell, IMO. Even if you don't believe that, the way he fell was because he didn't take off at the fence, and landed on his head. The ground would have made no difference to that, it's purely chance.

But what would you do to prevent Dooney's Gate's demise in future?


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

Wishful said:



			As for watering more, thinking about it, we might have had a lot more exhausted horses if the race had been run on soft ground in the temperature on Saturday.  It was unusually hot for the time of year.
		
Click to expand...

Good point, Wishful. That was the case the year at Burghley when Caroline Pratt was killed. It was incredibly hot but with boggy ground underfoot. The riders wanted the course shortened, and the GJ didn't agree. It wasn't a pretty sight watching a few of those horses come home. Or not.


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			Ah - you probably get the slow ones then, those that don't have the leadership/competitive instinct, that's why you don't understand it exists. 

Your field is not on a par to the racecourse. 

Aintree watered on the run up to the race, but forecast rain failed to materialise, so they were left with quickish ground. You can't put a lot of water on the dry course immediately before horses run, that way you create false ground, which is infinitely more dangerous as it causes horses to break down, or slip up. 

Ground would have made no difference to Ornais - he was gone before he fell, IMO. Even if you don't believe that, the way he fell was because he didn't take off at the fence, and landed on his head. The ground would have made no difference to that, it's purely chance.

But what would you do to prevent Dooney's Gate's demise in future?
		
Click to expand...

Please note I edited re Ornais before your response. Dooney's Gate would have had half the chance of being landed on if there were half the horses in the race. Simple. You cannot make racing 100% safe, obviously, but I believe we have a duty to make it as safe as we can.


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			But that is the thing with racing. Sometimes it IS just bad luck. However, the more runners there are, the greater the odds of being killed. That is just common logic. Just because sometimes people get killed in car crashes with perfectly road worthy cars, does not justify not improving safety standards.
		
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight, you are saying that it is simply statistically because there are more runners, more are likely to die, NOT because of overcrowding or too many on the field? 

If so, that's the same as saying that the annual numbers of runners and races in the UK should be reduced to prevent as many fatalities. 

You either think the deaths were due to overcrowding, which I'd like to see justified as it patently had no effect on Ornais, and little or none on Dooney's Gate. He was unlucky he fell in the lead. If he'd been at the back of the field we wouldn't be having this debate.

You can cater for disaster up to a certain degree, but after that it is simply and sadly chance. 

You haven't given a valid response as to how you would have prevented these two deaths.


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Please note I edited re Ornais before your response. Dooney's Gate would have had half the chance of being landed on if there were half the horses in the race. Simple. You cannot make racing 100% safe, obviously, but I believe we have a duty to make it as safe as we can.
		
Click to expand...

I didn't see the edit, what I've quoted is the same as you have written there?

Again - what do you propose is done to make the GN safer????

Halving the field would not have altered what happened to Dooney's Gate. They were spread out across Bechers. He got up underneath a landing horse, you cannot factor for that.


----------



## lannerch (13 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			I didn't see the edit, what I've quoted is the same as you have written there?

Again - what do you propose is done to make the GN safer????

Halving the field would not have altered what happened to Dooney's Gate. They were spread out across Bechers. He got up underneath a landing horse, you cannot factor for that.
		
Click to expand...

Disagree halving the field could well have made a difference to dooneys gate, it would have reduced the chance of the horse actually landing on him by 50%,  obviously if the field was reduced there would be less congestion. 
Simple probablility!


----------



## lannerch (13 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Please note I edited re Ornais before your response. Dooney's Gate would have had half the chance of being landed on if there were half the horses in the race. Simple. You cannot make racing 100% safe, obviously, but I believe we have a duty to make it as safe as we can.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly!

And to reduce the field imo would be an acceptable change that would in no way deflect the excitement and challenge of the race, infact I prefer watching it the 2nd time round because by then only the pure jumpers are left and you can see who is who. When they all start off all you see is a mass of horses you cannot follow who is who, and you watch with your breathe held waiting for the fallers, who then trip up the mass behind them!
Tighten the qualification, lesson the field as well as reducing risk you would make the race far easier to follow and far more enjoyable.


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

lannerch said:



			Disagree halfing the field could well have made a difference to dooneys gate, it would have reduced the chance of the horse actually landing on him by 50% obviously if the field was reduced there would be less congestion. Simple probablility!
		
Click to expand...

But it wouldn't, in races horses run in a pack, some being held up behind other horses, they NEVER run spread out across a whole fence, except coming to the finish of a race. If there were 30 runners the same would have happened because he was in front. They don't leave gaps between runners in racing.


----------



## lannerch (13 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			But it wouldn't, in races horses run in a pack, some being held up behind other horses, they NEVER run spread out across a whole fence, except coming to the finish of a race. If there were 30 runners the same would have happened because he was in front. They don't leave gaps between runners in racing.
		
Click to expand...

They would not need to spread out if there were fewer runners, it may still have happened however it would be less likely sorry but your fighting a loosing battle on that one!


----------



## teagreen (13 April 2011)

This post isn't aimed at anyone in particular, just general musings.

I think the most striking line from Down's article is that *there is no tyrany greater than ignorance.*

I've read a good number of forums over the past few days and the things people come out with are just astonishing. 
"The horses are whipped to death"
"I have heard that they blindfold racehorses in their stables so that they run faster when they come out"
"They are force fed high energy feed like turkeys and given no hay"
"I have never heard of a racehorse being turned out"
"The jockeys don't care. They get paid a fortune for doing it. They do it for the money"
"I can't believe they race horses over jump aged 2, that's terrible."

These people should go to the Lambourn open day on 22nd April and have a look around some yards for themselves. All open to the public - then you'll see the truth with your own eyes.


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

lannerch said:



			They would not need to spread out if there were fewer runners, it may still have happened however it would be less likely sorry but your fighting a loosing battle on that one!
		
Click to expand...

Show me any race where horses in front don't have runners behind them. Is it only the GN where horses get brought down? Even in 4 runner races horses run behind the front ones. I've seen plenty horses brought down in 10 runner races if a front runner falls. 

I watch racing every day, I know what happens in racing and how horses run. I'm not basing this opinion on one or two races.


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			I think the most striking line from Down's article is that *there is no tyrany greater than ignorance.*

Click to expand...

Agree wholeheartedly, sadly that seems to sum up the whole fluffy syndrome.


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			But it wouldn't, in races horses run in a pack, some being held up behind other horses, they NEVER run spread out across a whole fence, except coming to the finish of a race. If there were 30 runners the same would have happened because he was in front. They don't leave gaps between runners in racing.
		
Click to expand...

You are making no sense. There would have been half the number of horses to land on him therefore half the chance, Anyone can see that. If you are following on behind a horse and there is plenty of space then it makes sense not to jump the same spot especially as the fence is so wide. But with overcrowding you have no choice. Also, overcrowding could well have been a factor with Ornais. You said yourself, he did not take off. Why was that? Maybe he couldn't see to judge the fence.


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			Agree wholeheartedly, sadly that seems to sum up the whole fluffy syndrome.
		
Click to expand...

What is a fluffy syndrome?  People who care about animals? Are you saying they are ignorant? Why is it that you always resort to personal insults? So far, those who have disagreed with you have been called badly educated, ignorant, clowns... This always seems to happen when you are starting to lose the argument.


----------



## Chavhorse (13 April 2011)

Double_choc_lab said:



			Doesn't the thread with the most replies get quoted in H&H each week.  Look at the title of this thread - it will look as though the great majority are in favour of a petition which I'm sure is not the case.  Somewhat ironic.
		
Click to expand...

Very ironic.

It is interesting to see how other horse forums have reacted to the OP posting the initial post and petition.  

One well known forum who does not have as much traffic as this one has had 150 views and only 12 responses 10 from people saying "have signed" and 2 from the OP saying thank you for signing.  I can only assume that the other 138 read the post raised their eyes and clicked onto something else.

Interestingly no one has said "you are joking" or pointed out that OP's initial facts were a little bit off so the thread is no languishing near the bottom of page 2 of their forum.

Is this a lesson to be learned?  maybe if we had simply read and ignored this would now be on about page 6  Naturally I love interesting debate but some of the posts on this thread ranging from wrong info to bull fighting then off on the wonderful tangent of Rabbits v human life (still needing brain bleach for that one) have not even followed the original arguments.  

Kudos to those of you obviously involved in NH racing who have kept your cool and given factual responses.

Good to see that on page 1 of their Forum they have a lovely post wishing Peter Toole a quick recovery , this thread has a lot of traffic and lots of lovely replies, with the exception of the OP of this thread who has chosen to post "Hope he is all right, but there is a moral in this story" nice! 

I know for sure that as a HHO member I would far rather that a post wishing Peter Toole all the best was the one to be quoted in H&H this week.


----------



## Potato! (13 April 2011)

Ornasis had a Rotational Fall the same as many Event horses. Are you saying that they cant see the fence to take off because of overcrowding as well


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

Chavhorse said:



			Very ironic.

It is interesting to see how other horse forums have reacted to the OP posting the initial post and petition.  

One well known forum who does not have as much traffic as this one has had 150 views and only 12 responses 10 from people saying "have signed" and 2 from the OP saying thank you for signing.  I can only assume that the other 138 read the post raised their eyes and clicked onto something else.

Interestingly no one has said "you are joking" or pointed out that OP's initial facts were a little bit off so the thread is no languishing near the bottom of page 2 of their forum.

Is this a lesson to be learned?  maybe if we had simply read and ignored this would now be on about page 6  Naturally I love interesting debate but some of the posts on this thread ranging from wrong info to bull fighting then off on the wonderful tangent of Rabbits v human life (still needing brain bleach for that one) have not even followed the original arguments.  

Kudos to those of you obviously involved in NH racing who have kept your cool and given factual responses.

Good to see that on page 1 of their Forum they have a lovely post wishing Peter Toole a quick recovery , this thread has a lot of traffic and lots of lovely replies, with the exception of the OP of this thread who has chosen to post "Hope he is all right, but there is a moral in this story" nice! 

I know for sure that as a HHO member I would far rather that a post wishing Peter Toole all the best was the one to be quoted in H&H this week.
		
Click to expand...


ah but before you twist what I said entirely, on page 2 of that thread, I said it wasn't a personal attack on him. It was more of a general statement about the Grand National and how dangerous I believe it can be. Although as I stated on here, I'd be more upset if my horse died than him, for reasons which I needn't repeat. 

Also with regards to the rabbit comment, that's a bit unnecessary, again, as we've established, you are not in a place to dictate how one should feel. After all, whether it's rabbits, dogs, horses or cats or humans, we are all mammals, we share 90-99.9% of our DNA with them and we form relationships with them. It's not silly, nor is it laughable. 

I think some people need to establish that this isn't a personal attack on the racing industry, my thoughts on it are my own and I don't need a bunch of hormonal and frustrated women or men to condemn those of us who have a softened approach to things or perhaps, believed that we could possibly help make it a safer course. We don't need to be labelled these stupid 'fluffy bunny' hugger names or delusional because we value our pets over some humans?

Obviously we are all entitled to our opinions but now it's verging on spiteful behaviour and from some posters it's already past that. We all make cock ups and we all get mislead sometimes (unless you're all perfect and this has never happened to you), but jesus, some of you guys are so nasty, particularly to wagtail, who I think has taken a lot of the abuse pretty well.

Thank you to those who have signed or those who have been polite in not signing.


----------



## Mrs B (13 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			ah but before you twist what I said entirely, on page 2 of that thread, I said it wasn't a personal attack on him. It was more of a general statement about the Grand National and how dangerous I believe it can be. Although as I stated on here, I'd be more upset if my horse died than him, for reasons which I needn't repeat. 

Also with regards to the rabbit comment, that's a bit unnecessary, again, as we've established, you are not in a place to dictate how one should feel. After all, whether it's rabbits, dogs, horses or cats or humans, we are all mammals, we share 90-99.9% of our DNA with them and we form relationships with them. It's not silly, nor is it laughable. 

I think some people need to establish that this isn't a personal attack on the racing industry, my thoughts on it are my own and I don't need a bunch of hormonal and frustrated women or men to condemn those of us who have a softened approach to things or perhaps, believed that we could possibly help make it a safer course. We don't need to be labelled these stupid 'fluffy bunny' hugger names or delusional because we value our pets over some humans?

Obviously we are all entitled to our opinions but now it's verging on spiteful behaviour and from some posters it's already past that. We all make cock ups and we all get mislead sometimes (unless you're all perfect and this has never happened to you), but jesus, some of you guys are so nasty, particularly to wagtail, who I think has taken a lot of the abuse pretty well.

Thank you to those who have signed or those who have been polite in not signing.
		
Click to expand...

Well, you see you really don't help yourself much, do you? You complain that other posters have been rude, and then you not only (in a previous post) refer to your approach (and that of those who agree with you) as 'enlightened' which rather suggests that you feel you take the moral high ground and the rest of us live in the dark ages and then you call those who don't take your view as 'hormonal and frustrated' which you have to admit is not exactly polite in itself.


----------



## Chavhorse (13 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			ah but before you twist what I said entirely, on page 2 of that thread, I said it wasn't a personal attack on him. It was more of a general statement about the Grand National and how dangerous I believe it can be. Although as I stated on here, I'd be more upset if my horse died than him, for reasons which I needn't repeat.
		
Click to expand...

Not Twisting your words at all I have cut and pasted them from the other Forum)))

You Said "Hope he's alright... but there's a moral in that story..."

It was only when someone picked you up on it and said 

"I'm afraid I find your comment difficult to stomach. I appreciate emotions are running high but he's a 22 year old kid who happened to be riding on the same day as the GN. I just hope he makes a good recovery"

That you then said "Oh I didn't aim it at him personally sorry! I meant that the moral of the story is that this race course is deadly!"

I am assuming that had you not been picked up your original comment would have stood.

As I said before Nice!


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

Mrs B said:



			Well, you see you really don't help yourself much, do you? You complain that other posters have been rude, and then you not only (in a previous post) refer to your approach (and that of those who agree with you) as 'enlightened' which rather suggests that you feel you take the moral high ground and the rest of us live in the dark ages and then you call those who don't take your view as 'hormonal and frustrated' which you have to admit is not exactly polite in itself.
		
Click to expand...

I called some of you hormonal and frustrated because that is the vibe given off and after a lot of spiteful comments, I'm retaliating, and think I am allowed to be slightly mean back.

What makes you think that I think I'm above everyone because I jokingly said about my debate with Linda Parelli? It was a joke that I could handle this, but that's very hard to read over a computer screen just as I'm sure some of the comments at me were aimed. I believe many posters on here think that they are above everyone, dictating how one should feel about certain things


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

Chavhorse said:



			Not Twisting your words at all I have cut and pasted them from the other Forum)))

You Said "Hope he's alright... but there's a moral in that story..."

It was only when someone picked you up on it and said 

"I'm afraid I find your comment difficult to stomach. I appreciate emotions are running high but he's a 22 year old kid who happened to be riding on the same day as the GN. I just hope he makes a good recovery"

That you then said "Oh I didn't aim it at him personally sorry! I meant that the moral of the story is that this race course is deadly!"

I am assuming that had you not been picked up your original comment would have stood.

As I said before Nice!
		
Click to expand...

 Yes, because my post got misinterpreted, just because someone picked me up on it doesn't mean I changed my view on things?

I said I hope he was alright, but again, he's not really my concern, if I'm honest, it's no more blunt than some of the posts aimed at the death of an animal and laughing that someone got more upset over their rabbit dying than a human?


----------



## Mrs B (13 April 2011)

It was nothing to do with Linda P. It was the following:

_"It's just the same, just because someone stands for something, or perhaps disagrees and takes a more ''enlightened'' view on something, we're called a bunny hugger"_


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

Mrs B said:



			It was nothing to do with Linda P. It was the following:

_"It's just the same, just because someone stands for something, or perhaps disagrees and takes a more ''enlightened'' view on something, we're called a bunny hugger"_

Click to expand...

Note, the '' '', I struggled to find the right words. Also you stated I was above myself before that comment. Apologies if that came across very pig headed, but I feel that is no worse than some of the other comments, which were aimed at myself and others, but because you agreed with them, naturally they weren't pig headed. 

Think we're going nowhere with this.


----------



## padarco (13 April 2011)

Riders, trainers know the risks they take - sadly the horses have no choice!!!


----------



## Mrs B (13 April 2011)

Lassiesuca, absolutely agree with the last bit


----------



## Flame_ (13 April 2011)

I'd just like to congratulate the members of HHO for managing a 17 page (the way my thingy's set up) pointless, going round in circles, highly etertaining, ding-dong/discussion without finding or making up some petty excuse to get it deleted.


----------



## kickonchaps (13 April 2011)

49 pages on my computer!!!


----------



## lannerch (13 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			So where do you get the ex-racers from - the yards? Are they flat or NH?

But you are being anti GN. 

I think the ground was too quick, and they need to address that if it ever happens in future. The difficulty is the inconsistent UK weather. There would have been an equal outcry if the ground had been similar to when Red Marauder won. Ground conditions can change so fast, and sometimes it has to be accepted that there are limits to what can feasibly done without seeing into the future.

So - what would you have done/change to prevent Ornais fall, specifically? The trip, ground, field numbers had nothing to do with his demise. 

What would you have done to prevent Dooney's Gate fall? Given you cannot avoid where a horse gets up once it has fallen.
		
Click to expand...

I can answer that if qualification was tightened up and numbers reduced neither dooneys gate or ormais would have made the field as going by the starting odds which are ususually related to recent form and experinace both were high odd outsiders!
I also question whether handicapping is necessary in the national, surely the best horse should win!

I do not think most on here are pro the petitition in its current form, I certainly am not and certainly as it stands would not sign!
Now if it was just for the above then that would be a different matter.


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)




----------



## DJ (13 April 2011)

Wow ... this ones still going !!!! ??

Tea and biscuits anyone ? ? ? ....


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

Double_choc_lab said:



			Doesn't the thread with the most replies get quoted in H&H each week.  Look at the title of this thread - it will look as though the great majority are in favour of a petition which I'm sure is not the case.  Somewhat ironic.
		
Click to expand...

On the contrary. I conducted a poll a few days ago which showed that 60% of respondants on here think the GN should either be made safer or banned. I have spoken to many horsey friends including my racehorse owning friend, and they would like to see at least a reduction of runners and some assurance that those running are at least capable of getting round. At the start of the race a couple of the jockeys said they did not expect their mounts to get round. Horses entered for the race should at the very least be more than capable of completing the race baring misfortune. One horse, I believe had not run over two miles before? There are a lot of things that need addressing.


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

burness_21 said:



			Ornasis had a Rotational Fall the same as many Event horses. Are you saying that they cant see the fence to take off because of overcrowding as well
		
Click to expand...

Completely different fences. There is nothing on a NH fence to cause a rotational fall. These types of falls are almost always caused by getting a leg caught in the solid jump. The only thing Ornasis could have got his leg caught on was another horse. He would have had to get a leg very far into the fence to cause such a fall. Again the most likely cause of this would be obstruction from another horse.


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Completely different fences. There is nothing on a NH fence to cause a rotational fall. These types of falls are almost always caused by getting a leg caught in the solid jump. The only thing Ornasis could have got his leg caught on was another horse. He would have had to get a leg very far into the fence to cause such a fall. Again the most likely cause of this would be obstruction from another horse.
		
Click to expand...

Absolute nonsense. It is nothing to do with getting a 'leg caught ' that causes a rotational. 

And he did virtually have a rotational fall, because, he chested it because something had happened to him on the approach, I believe.


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			Absolute nonsense. It is nothing to do with getting a 'leg caught ' that causes a rotational. 

And he did virtually have a rotational fall, because, he chested it because something had happened to him on the approach, I believe.
		
Click to expand...

I've had a couple of rotational falls myself in the past. One was caused by leaving a leg behind, the other by not making the ditch. If something happened to him on the approach, then it seems to me likely it was due to overcrowding.


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			I've had a couple of rotational falls myself in the past. One was caused by leaving a leg behind, the other by not making the ditch. If something happened to him on the approach, then it seems to me likely it was due to overcrowding.
		
Click to expand...

You seem to have no idea what a rotational fall is. It would be impossible to have one from a ditch.


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

http://equineink.com/2008/07/18/what-is-a-rotational-fall-and-how-can-they-be-prevented/


Just out of interest re. the rotational falls; 




*Rotational falls occur when a horse hits an upright, solid fence between his knees and his chest. Horses that hit below the knees typically were able to scramble over the fence, but when a horse moving at speed hit a jump with his chest the rotational fall was inevitable.*

Click to expand...


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			You seem to have no idea what a rotational fall is. It would be impossible to have one from a ditch.
		
Click to expand...

Oh would it now? Stange that I had one then. Horse took off. Was short on landing (landed front leg still inside ditch) and flipped over. Full rotation. And that was my first hand experience. I was lucky she didn't land on top of me. And I'm not talking the usual taking a ditch like you do out hacking orhunting. This was a cross country course and the ditch was taken at a right angle two strides from a bear trap. Now I KNOW you are full of hot air. Absolutely no point in arguing with you.


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



http://equineink.com/2008/07/18/what-is-a-rotational-fall-and-how-can-they-be-prevented/


Just out of interest re. the rotational falls;
		
Click to expand...

I knew two riders who have died in them so I am fully aware what one is, and people pretending they've had one in a pathetic attempt to point score is disgusting.


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Oh would it now? Stange that I had one then. Horse took off. Was short on landing (landed front leg still inside ditch) and flipped over. Full rotation. And that was my first hand experience. I was lucky she didn't land on top of me. And I'm not talking the usual taking a ditch like you do out hacking orhunting. This was a cross country course and the ditch was taken at a right angle two strides from a bear trap. Now I KNOW you are full of hot air. Absolutely no point in arguing with you. 

Click to expand...

A rotational occurs over an obstacle, with height. You fell on the lip of a ditch.


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			I knew two riders who have died in them so I am fully aware what one is, and people pretending they've had one is a pathetic attempt to point score is disgusting.
		
Click to expand...

OMG, you really are sinking low now. That's it. You have lost all credibility for me. What a piece of work. Shame.


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			I knew two riders who have died in them so I am fully aware what one is, and people pretending they've had one in a pathetic attempt to point score is disgusting.
		
Click to expand...

Huh? I didn't say I had one?


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

Caledonia said:



			A rotational occurs over an obstacle, with height. You fell on the lip of a ditch.
		
Click to expand...

As I said. You have lost credibility. Enjoy debating with others.


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

Oh... I doubt Wagtail would lie about something like that; Caledonia, I don't think you can judge without being their first hand whether or not she had a rotational fall...


----------



## Munchkin (13 April 2011)

Wagtail - I'm not sure it's Caledonia who has lost credibility here!

You can clearly see Ornais on the video replay - there was no horse in his way. He didn't 'jump' for some reason and as he went over he was rigid. It certainly looked like something was wrong before he hit the ground. I'm not sure what could have been done to avoid that.


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Huh? I didn't say I had one? 

Click to expand...

Using friend's deaths to try to score points and calling others liars as well as other insults. I won't waste any more time on such an idiot.


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

Wagtail said:



			Using friend's deaths to try to score points and calling others liars as well as other insults. I won't waste any more time on such an idiot.
		
Click to expand...

, you don't need to justify yourself to anyone! x


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

Munchkin said:



			Wagtail - I'm not sure it's Caledonia who has lost credibility here!

You can clearly see Ornais on the video replay - there was no horse in his way. He didn't 'jump' for some reason and as he went over he was rigid. It certainly looked like something was wrong before he hit the ground. I'm not sure what could have been done to avoid that.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks, Munchkin. I won't watch the video. I have no interest in watching horses die. I am relying on others telling me, and thanks for clarifying. All that could be found on google was that he broke his neck in the fall.


----------



## Wagtail (13 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



, you don't need to justify yourself to anyone! x
		
Click to expand...

No, but I like people to know the reason that I stop responding to them.


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (13 April 2011)

Pointless petition and by my computer 53 pages of pointless posts


----------



## DragonSlayer (13 April 2011)

EKW said:



			Pointless petition and by my computer 53 pages of pointless posts 

Click to expand...

I changed my settings ages ago, and only have 13 pages!



Don't ask me though, how I did it....forgotten!


----------



## teagreen (13 April 2011)

Interestingly, anyone watching the 7.15 at Southwell just now will have seen a horse go tearing down towards the first hurdle in the middle of the pack, only to jam the breaks on and send his jockey flying over his head, then stand looking at him as if to say "Nah, you go first"

Wonder why he did that


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (13 April 2011)

teagreen said:



			Interestingly, anyone watching the 7.15 at Southwell just now will have seen a horse go tearing down towards the first hurdle in the middle of the pack, only to jam the breaks on and send his jockey flying over his head, then stand looking at him as if to say "Nah, you go first"

Wonder why he did that 

Click to expand...

I love it when horses make total fools out of you! It just proves that if they don't want to do it they won't! Good on the wee beastie I say!


----------



## teagreen (13 April 2011)

EKW said:



			I love it when horses make total fools out of you! It just proves that if they don't want to do it they won't! Good on the wee beastie I say! 

Click to expand...

I can't remember exactly what his form is, but I'm sure Matt Chapman said he'd refused more than once before. Perhaps some of the people on this thread should do a study on him!


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (13 April 2011)

Just looked her up - she is called Granny Kanzi - great name! She had only raced in 5 point to points before that with the form reading PPR-PR. Me's thinks she isn't the keenest horse on the planet for racing!


----------



## nuttynugget (13 April 2011)

Wow!!!!

I think this thread has gotten out of hand? lol

Back to the question in hand, I have signed the petition. I was asked by a friend which horse I put money on which I replied none, I was then asked "why? I thought you liked horses??" which I replied "yes- thats why I don't support the grand national or racing"

In fact I would be happier if this petition was to ban racing.. poor horses!!!


----------



## teagreen (13 April 2011)

nuttynugget said:



			Wow!!!!

I think this thread has gotten out of hand? lol

Back to the question in hand, I have signed the petition. I was asked by a friend which horse I put money on which I replied none, I was then asked "why? I thought you liked horses??" which I replied "yes- thats why I don't support the grand national or racing"

In fact I would be happier if this petition was to ban racing.. poor horses!!!
		
Click to expand...

So if racing was banned, what would you do with all the horses?


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (13 April 2011)

Well if your going to ban racing then you had better ban eventing, show jumping, endurance, showing, dressage, polo, hacking, turning your horse out in the field, walking it out in hand.

In fact just put it in a padded cell where it can merrily bounce off the walls all day doing itself no damage what so ever!

Every single thing that you do with your horse has a degree of danger to it. How many times recently have we seen reports on horses killed whilst out hacking by being hit by cars? How many horses have slipped in the field and broke a leg? You can never make anything totally and utterly safe, all you can do is minimilise the risks.


----------



## teagreen (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			It wouldn't be her decision.

They would all be shot...end of...and 1000's of folk would be made redundant..no, 10's of 1000's
		
Click to expand...

I know it wouldn't be her decision, but I'm asking what she thinks would happen with them. Does she have any good ideas? Because you're right - they would be shot. People who want racing banned seem to gloss over this fact.

Can you imagine the pictures in the Daily Mail then?


----------



## Caledonia (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			TBH, I am so glad i'm going into the latter half of my life, becuase i truely do not want to see WTF the Horse World will be like in 50 years time if some of the half-wits on here are the future.....it makes me really, really sad.

Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more with this.


----------



## nuttynugget (13 April 2011)

LOL!!!!!!!! you lot were quick..

If racing was banned then there would be no need to breed as many TBs right? How many TBs born each year do you think are put down before they reach 5? and how many more are surplus to requirement once theyve been retired from racing?


----------



## MrsMozart (13 April 2011)

Good gawd, is this still going?!

Don't you lot get bored?

Or is it just me that's bored tonight...


----------



## teagreen (13 April 2011)

nuttynugget said:



			LOL!!!!!!!! you lot were quick..

If racing was banned then there would be no need to breed as many TBs right? How many TBs born each year do you think are put down before they reach 5? and how many more are surplus to requirement once theyve been retired from racing?
		
Click to expand...

How many do you think are currently on the go? From foals to broodmares. You'd be ok with them all being shot if racing was banned tomorrow? A handful would find homes, a welfare issue would ensue with many of them placed inappropriately.


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

nuttynugget said:



			LOL!!!!!!!! you lot were quick..

If racing was banned then there would be no need to breed as many TBs right? How many TBs born each year do you think are put down before they reach 5? and how many more are surplus to requirement once theyve been retired from racing?
		
Click to expand...

I agree with you; however I think to a certain extent it's one of those cyclical things, I mean, a lot of us are slightly opposed to racing as it kills horses; however if we ban it; more horses will get shot, considering the debt our country is in. So it's a tough one to call! 

I think some of the responses has made me think on that.


----------



## nuttynugget (13 April 2011)

Unfortunately when it comes to horse welfare our countries debt means nothing to me.. 

I'm not just opposed to racing because it kills horses I think it is a cruel sport. If any of you had the opportunity would you race your own horse? I definitely wouldn't risk it.

Why are people fore racing? I don't understand


----------



## teagreen (13 April 2011)

nuttynugget said:



			Unfortunately when it comes to horse welfare our countries debt means nothing to me.. 

I'm not just opposed to racing because it kills horses I think it is a cruel sport. If any of you had the opportunity would you race your own horse? I definitely wouldn't risk it.

Why are people fore racing? I don't understand
		
Click to expand...

If I could be a horse, I'd be a racehorse. They live wonderful lives compared to so many equines in Britain.

You didn't answer my question - what do you suggest we do with all the horses who'd not have a job if racing was banned tomorrow? Would you be happy with tens of thousands of horses being shot?


----------



## dominobrown (13 April 2011)

I race my own horse. 
Do you hack your hors? Do you ride your horse? Why would risk it?? 
Its not a cruel sport
YAWN


----------



## Queenbee87 (13 April 2011)

nuttynugget said:



			Unfortunately when it comes to horse welfare our countries debt means nothing to me.. 

I'm not just opposed to racing because it kills horses I think it is a cruel sport. If any of you had the opportunity would you race your own horse? I definitely wouldn't risk it.

Why are people fore racing? I don't understand
		
Click to expand...

I was discussing this in college today (re: ethical theories). Yours is a very dogmatic view. You need to consider the bigger picture and be more pragmatic. If racing was banned there would be thousands of horses shot and some would just be abandoned leaving rescue centres unable to cope which would be detrimental to the welfare of the horses affected. There would also be loss of jobs, not just directly within the racing industry (jockeys, trainers, grooms, racecourse staff) but within the hospitality industry in areas near racecourses. I am sure there were other repercussions we discussed but I have a cold and want to go to bed!

If racing is banned, it sets a precedent and how long would it be until XC is banned....then SJ and even Dressage!?

I don't like racing and think it's awful that horses die (as they do in other diciplines too) but I do think that banning it would also cause its fair share of problems!


----------



## lannerch (13 April 2011)

nuttynugget said:



			Unfortunately when it comes to horse welfare our countries debt means nothing to me.. 

I'm not just opposed to racing because it kills horses I think it is a cruel sport. If any of you had the opportunity would you race your own horse? I definitely wouldn't risk it.

Why are people fore racing? I don't understand
		
Click to expand...








Horses die out hacking prehaps we should ban that too 

Now this thread is really going downhill!


----------



## nuttynugget (13 April 2011)

YAWN back at you.

I hack my horse yes and obviously I ride my horse but I wouldn't want him galloping on hard ground.

In answer to your question if horse racing was banned then the problem would decrease over the years as the horses won't be in demand. Maybe a good solution is to fizzle out horse racing over a number of years.. We already have a surplus to requirement in TBs, how many do you think are shot unnecessarily at the moment?


----------



## lannerch (13 April 2011)

If racing was banned all our horses would suffer all horse sports would suffer why?

Racing is where the money is , racing is where all the research is, racing is what keeps the majority of our vets going, racing is what keeps a lot of our own farriers busy racing is what puts money into the equine industry of which all horses can benefit.


----------



## dominobrown (13 April 2011)

I hope racing is never banned. Galloping on hard ground? Where did that come from? My horse likes good or good to soft ground so thats what he race on. 
TheTB is a fantastic breed and if racing was banned it would be lost which would be a sad day. 
Your solution is the worst I ever heard. To say all 'suplus' TB's which are shot is utter rubbish, infact a lot go on to do other things, say Miner's Frolic. Fantastic horse bred for racing.


----------



## lannerch (13 April 2011)

My horse gallops himself on hard ground as he does muddy ground he is always hooling around his field prehaps we should ban turn out too!


----------



## Echo Bravo (13 April 2011)

Nuttynugget. Please grow up, horses die all the time and I take yours never will in your mind because you wrap it up in cotton wool and don't go beyond a walk. these racehorse are treated so well, that I could never reach the standard they are kept at, but my lot are happy and yes we have a canter on Yiuk!! hard ground now and then. In a months time this will all forgotten till next April, just think about the poor little buggers that will be born in the next 2-3 months that will go to the abbiattor before they a 1 year old. And Pastie2 keep going girl as you always make sense on these sort of posts


----------



## nuttynugget (13 April 2011)

Echo Brave, I dont know who the hell you think you are. You do not know anything about me or my horse.

Yes, the racehorses are treated well until they break their legs and get shot. Or don't make the mark and get shot.

No-one seems to be giving a good reason why horse racing is a positive except for the money.


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

Pastie2, 

My piebald cob; how could you send him to the potters


----------



## nuttynugget (13 April 2011)

Why am I a troll? because I don't agree with you?

Get in the real world mate


----------



## kickonchaps (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			we have a surplus of useless, ugly gypsy cobs.

TBH they could do with being got rid of as well.
		
Click to expand...

Lol!! Kind of true though. As much as some may hate the racing/dressage/eventing/whatever industries, they take breeding VERY seriously and they're not afraid to get rid of horses that don't cut the mustard, can't perform at the required level, can't stay sound etc. Can't be said for everyone


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			if he was knackered and weighed in correctly i would.
cobs are 2 a penny.
		
Click to expand...

lol, I believe he'd beg to differ!  Was that tongue in cheek, Pastie2's comment? I hope so


----------



## nuttynugget (13 April 2011)

I think its unfair to call someone a troll because they disagree with you.

Apologies if I offended you: get in the real world.


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			After looking at the pic you have posted....yep, he's 2 a penny..nothing special there i'm afraid.
is he your's?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, he's mine. 

Ah he's very special to me! Which is all that counts!


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			And so are a lot of racehorses to their owners
		
Click to expand...

I didn't say they wasn't


----------



## Echo Bravo (13 April 2011)

Alligator40. you have taken the words out of my mouth and far better saidMany thanks.


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			are you not?

racing owners, as far as i'm aware, dont give 2 figs to what you get up to with your 2 a penny bumbling cob...so my point is...what right have you, as a bumbling cob owner, to raise a petition about what they do with their horses?
		
Click to expand...

The first time I read that, I felt it quite offensive, because it's not all about money. I hate the way the associate between cobs is ''bimbling'' that's really prejudice against a certain breed of horse. 

I started a petition to try and improve the standards of the course; we can all do so much as owners, I'm not implying they don't care, although many of the owners aren't really involved with the horse- it's the grooms and trainers, isn't it? (Please correct me if I'm wrong), I know a man who owns a racehorse, however he doesn't really get involved unless there is money or a race, he doesn't really know much about horses either, it's down to the grooms. 

I think that there is no need to discriminate against my horse  you can discriminate against me, but not my horse  . 

That's so petty, how old are you?


----------



## GemmaLee (13 April 2011)

Oh my you're all still going on ? What happened to this being a simple thread about a petition that you may or may not want to sign . So now it is taking the route of culling certain breeds of horses .... and can I add there is nothing wrong with cobs , I'm sure at some point in your life you have ridden one when learning to ride , but clearly they aren't good enough now you have your lovely well bred horses. Seeming as this a forum for people interested in horses , its a bit sad that you have come to the point of mocking certain breeds of horses  Just because some of you may view cobs as inferior because they don't compete in high level competition doesn't mean they should be shot .... I'm sorry but whats not to say a human being who can't physically work or has learning disabilities should be shot aswell then.... The whole wanting to kill useless breeds thing is a bit ridiculous reaay considering people often slate how useless arabs are , even though without them you wouldn't have the modern day thoroughbred . rip me apart for this because its likely that you will , I don't care but people do have quite narrow minded views on here sometimes , just because a horse is useless to you doesn't deem it that


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			are you not?

racing owners, as far as i'm aware, dont give 2 figs to what you get up to with your 2 a penny bumbling cob...so my point is...what right have you, as a bumbling cob owner, to raise a petition about what they do with their horses?
		
Click to expand...

Also, if they don't give two figs, then why are you bothering with this? You've stated your views on this, yet still continue to get annoyed and angry and then resort to petty slating? If they aren't bothered, then what are you defending really? Considering my petition is probably going not have any effect, as you've established, it's not going to have many sigs as you've established? 

Yet you're still harping on about it? Get over yourself


----------



## teagreen (13 April 2011)

Well, this thread has now lost all credibility.

Sorry guys, but take a right good look at yourselves and your fighting. An interesting thread has gone down the pan with the introduction of quite frankly ridiculous personal insults.


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			Older than you....and you need to seriously get into the real world and grow up sweetie.

Discriminate against your horse? OMW...  FPMSL..he is NOTHING special AT ALL....NOTHING.

trot off back to college..i'm sure you will feel far more comfortable there.
		
Click to expand...

Older... but definitely not wiser or maturer! 

So what? So if someone was laughing at a child with a disability or facial defect saying they weren't anything special, would you think that's acceptable? I'm sure my horse doesn't care anyway. So never mind  I'll get over it. Just think it's sad that you're bitching about horses. Each and every horse is special, hence why each and every life is valuable  

I don't go to college. I go to school. Gawwwwdd...get it right


----------



## Chavhorse (13 April 2011)

GemmaLee said:



			Oh my you're all still going on ? What happened to this being a simple thread about a petition that you may or may not want to sign . So now it is taking the route of culling certain breeds of horses .... and can I add there is nothing wrong with cobs , I'm sure at some point in your life you have ridden one when learning to ride , but clearly they aren't good enough now you have your lovely well bred horses. Seeming as this a forum for people interested in horses , its a bit sad that you have come to the point of mocking certain breeds of horses  Just because some of you may view cobs as inferior because they don't compete in high level competition doesn't mean they should be shot .... I'm sorry but whats not to say a human being who can't physically work or has learning disabilities should be shot aswell then.... The whole wanting to kill useless breeds thing is a bit ridiculous reaay considering people often slate how useless arabs are , even though without them you wouldn't have the modern day thoroughbred . rip me apart for this because its likely that you will , I don't care but people do have quite narrow minded views on here sometimes , just because a horse is useless to you doesn't deem it that 

Click to expand...

Unfortunately yes it is still going on "The Simple thread about a petition people may or may not have wanted to sign" went arse up on about page 3 when people with knowledge of the racing industry rather than "Wot I have read in the papers" started challenging the OP.

Since then we have been subjected to heavens knows what kind of complete twaddle and goal post moving.

Roll on the end of the Easter holidays


----------



## Echo Bravo (13 April 2011)

I think you will find most racehorse owners are kept upto date on their horses good or bad and some owners if I'm right have given their moneymakers as you see them, several years off if something has gone wrong with them and still forked out lots off money to keep them well,not had them put down and when they retire look after them well as does my next door neighbour, as her ex racer which she has owned from 2 years old he is now 21, when he was injured racing (flat)he came home and lives like a king (equine). So people like you make me disgusted as you seem to lump all racehorse owners and the rest in one issue. The Grand National Race which I should inmage you know very little about.


----------



## narkymare (13 April 2011)

I never ever tghought i would do this - but i have read lots of this post and am sticking up for lassieluca
Waht sort of horse lover slates a breed of horse????
Bloody disgusting - ok lassie can vbe hotheaded, get her facts wrong - believe me me and her have BIG fallouts - but to be so so nasty - slating her horse????
Im disgusted - shame on you
And yes - lets hear it now for the rosie and pastie shwo again - seemingly now joined by alligator - disgusting.
If you dont agree with her ignore her, but to slate her horse, to slate any horse because of its breed  - just wrong  - you are not horse lovers


----------



## narkymare (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			So, after 60 odd pages exactly what is your gripe?

TBH i, and a fair few others on here, haven't a scooby what you and...basically just wagtail are harping on about..
you have moved the goalposts so many times and wagtail is a nutjob...
i'm of an age that gets confused 

Click to expand...



your of an age that should just bloody ignore instead of beign so rude - disgusting  - do you have children????


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

Alligator, thing is- you've been actively joining in this discussion, continuing the thread equally, you've been commenting on the goal posts that are being moved. You've actively played a part in this discussion. 

If I'm honest, I didn't start all the goal post moving, someone said about a horse being replaceable and it went from that. I used the horses in bull fighting as an anecdote to try and support my argument.


----------



## lassiesuca (13 April 2011)

Wow- thank you Debbie! I didn't expect that... but nevertheless, thank you  and I agree with you entirely!


----------



## Flame_ (13 April 2011)

We used to own a coloured cob. We sold him and he went and won HOYS. How cool is that? Would have been better if we'd kept him actually.


----------



## abbieandfiona (13 April 2011)

narkymare said:



			your of an age that should just bloody ignore instead of beign so rude - disgusting  - do you have children????
		
Click to expand...

100% agree why the hell is a adult picking on a child for having a view point no wonder kids are so brainwashed in society not to think if they cant even come on a forum and say what they think. End of day these kids are our future so we need to respect what they say and encourage independent thinking!!!!


----------



## Echo Bravo (13 April 2011)

I'm sorry Narkymare, but haven't you been reading all the posts. Nobody has been going on about other breeds as I see it, just that the fluffy buunies say it's dangerous for TBH to race over jumps and should be stopped and somebody said and I agree what about the poor little buggers that are bred and go for meat, what ever breed? Yes this thread did start about the GN, but has got sidetracked somewhat and I agreee this thread should end


----------



## narkymare (13 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Wow- thank you Debbie! I didn't expect that... but nevertheless, thank you  and I agree with you entirely!
		
Click to expand...

np - me and you have had our spats but its been in the heat of the moment - not carried on over days
 - i dont agree with all your opinions (as you know lol)  but i do know your heart is in the right place and i just think some comments to you from "responsible" adults who should by now have calmed down and got over it are disgusting


----------



## abbieandfiona (13 April 2011)

pastie2 said:



			Breath NM when you are typing as your words are getting mixed up. Rosie has not been on this thread. Have you been on the pop again dear?
		
Click to expand...

As a teacher even i can tell that perhaps this person could have a form of learning disorder such as dyslexia, so as well as picking on a child you now are picking on someone who may not be able to help themselves. Nice to be a bully?


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (13 April 2011)

Woah! I go away for a couple of hours to feed my loony bin and everyone is having a jolly good argument in my absense!

Where was my invite?!?


----------



## narkymare (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			She's always on the pop bless her pickled little liver.
		
Click to expand...

See -  plain bloody rude - no i,ve not been on the "pop" - i just think you are one obnoxious,totally horrible rude and nasty person - or does saying that make me pissed?


Shall i send you a picture of my horse so you can degrade him too - you poor excuse for humanity - god and we wonder why this country is in the state its in with retrobates like you around


----------



## narkymare (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			Who cares?

life goes on...there are far too many "victims" in society today.

some people need to grow a pair
		
Click to expand...



Lol typical bully quote -


----------



## abbieandfiona (13 April 2011)

That a nice kind thing to say so whats wrong with being a victim people are victims when things happen to them thank god the police force dont have you with them.


----------



## Zebedee (13 April 2011)

OP.
To be honest I think a lot of what you have posted is total rubbish,& that as you grow in age & wisdom the memory of this thread will occassionally wake you during the night & bring you out in a cold sweat ! However as you have (repeatedly) told us you are young, & the young are allowed to make mistakes. It's called learning.
I liked the photo of you with your cob, & I'm glad that you think he is special & that you love him. I think all mine are special too, including the cob & the reject mini shetlands ! 
Beauty is without doubt always in the eye of the beholder. Continue to love & enjoy him.


----------



## Echo Bravo (13 April 2011)

Narkymare you are really should look at your self, calling someone for being rude and your answers come back even worse, where are you manners. And I agree this thread is getting abusive and towards Alligater40. As someone said on other threads get over yourself.


----------



## narkymare (13 April 2011)

lassiesuca said:



			Alligator, thing is- you've been actively joining in this discussion, continuing the thread equally, you've been commenting on the goal posts that are being moved. You've actively played a part in this discussion. 

If I'm honest, I didn't start all the goal post moving, someone said about a horse being replaceable and it went from that. I used the horses in bull fighting as an anecdote to try and support my argument.
		
Click to expand...

this is what gets my goat - you have annoyed me lassie in the past but after our initial arguing i ignored you
why would a sane adult carry it on - alligator grow a pair and ignore if you dont like it!!!! 
This post is ridiculous - if you dont like the comments  and think its silly why feed it????
Be the adult and  just ignore!!!


----------



## narkymare (13 April 2011)

Echo Bravo said:



			Narkymare you are really should look at your self, calling someone for being rude and your answers come back even worse, where are you manners. And I agree this thread is getting abusive and towards Alligater40. As someone said on other threads get over yourself.
		
Click to expand...



hes just horrible !!!! Havwe you read his replies????? Horrible nasty person!!!


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (13 April 2011)

Am I allowed to add in my tuppence worth? 'cos I'll do it any way 

Why don't you all just wheesht for 5 minutes 'cos my sides are in agony from laughing at the bickering on here!


----------



## Zebedee (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			How kind...

as always.


Click to expand...

I'd quite like that as an epitaph


----------



## Starbucks (13 April 2011)

narkymare said:



			you poor excuse for humanity - god and we wonder why this country is in the state its in with retrobates like you around 

Click to expand...

Nice to see that NM is taking the high road and not getting personal or nasty then! 

I don't really get what the big deal is myself, it's all about quality of life for me.  If I was a horse I'd probably most like to be a hunter, then maybe an eventer or racehorse... would least like to be a dressage horse or a SJer!  I suppose being a happy hack would not be too bad.

2 horses died this weekend which is rubbish, but they will have had a fab life up until then and ended up with at the very most a couple of minutes of pain, in which their adrenalin would have been running so high they would probably not have felt it half as bad as it looked.  Is that really so bad?? Maybe I've lost the plot, or don't see things in the way some of you "animal lovers" do (is that better than bunny hugger?).

People are getting angry because it's annoying when people who don't know what they are talking about attack something you love!


----------



## dominobrown (13 April 2011)

Starbucks said:



			People are getting angry because it's annoying when people who don't know what they are talking about attack something you love!
		
Click to expand...

Thats a good epitaph to me! (love the word!)


----------



## Echo Bravo (13 April 2011)

EKW could you take over as I think myself and Alligator40 have banged our heads on a brickwall long enough


----------



## abbieandfiona (13 April 2011)

So not picking on me then for standing up for them both due to the fact that i can spell or am educated to a high degree?? Oh dear


----------



## narkymare (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			sadly, EB posters of a certain age have a  "know my rights" attitude.

they can give out but, if it reciprocated, it is viewed as "bullying"..which is the word of the moment.
when i was in my teens, what i said i stood by, i researched, i asked, i made sure i was talking sense..Bullying?..total bollox i stood by what i said, because i knew i was right...
i detest people who "pull cards", they are cowards
		
Click to expand...

I bet im older than you!!!


----------



## Starbucks (13 April 2011)

abigail621 said:



			So not picking on me then for standing up for them both due to the fact that i can spell or am educated to a high degree?? Oh dear
		
Click to expand...

Congratulations!


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (13 April 2011)

No no! On you go! I am having a rare old time laughing at everyone! It's brightening up an other wise droll evening!


----------



## narkymare (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			he?

PMSL

Dweeb
		
Click to expand...



omg your actually a woman?????
even worse - you should be ashamed of yourself


----------



## narkymare (13 April 2011)

Jes im actually shocked alligator is a woman  - god help us


----------



## Flame_ (13 April 2011)

OP, has any of this thread made you re-think running a petition to alter the Grand National, especially considering you weren't really sure how or why you wanted it altering? Has it got you to understand why if you are going to kick off about something, it is best to gather as much information about what it is you have a problem with, *before publicly kicking off about it*? That's a lesson that wouldn't do a lot of us any harm, I suppose. 

BTW I also like your cone eating cob!


----------



## dominobrown (13 April 2011)

So when will Godwin's Law apply to this thread??


----------



## Elf On A Shelf (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			Oh go on then, tell me why....i am on the edge of my seat waiting for your reason why i should be ashamed of myself....
		
Click to expand...

Because you like hiding under water in Australia, snap at things and have incredibly large, sharp, pointy teeth?!?


----------



## narkymare (13 April 2011)

alligator40 said:



			Oh go on then, tell me why....i am on the edge of my seat waiting for your reason why i should be ashamed of myself....
		
Click to expand...



lol - do you really want to know - i dont like offending people needlessly


----------

