- This topic has 85 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Being a fully paid up member of the RSPB,I like to think my connections in the RSPCA inform me well and I can assure you
Steeplechasing
dear boy that as far as their interest goes in Horseracing its virtually nil,Horse welfare yes but again compared to their domestic interests,farming interests and wildlife interests it doesn’t even measure on a scale as believe it or not 99% of all horse owners treat their animals well,compared to Cats and Dogs and poor little Bunnies,Horses are not a cause for concern! I have noticed you almost have an obsession with the bloody RSPCA,for someone who calls himself a Racing fan I wonder if you are some sort of activist planted here by a minority anti-horseracing Group?
Some of you need to leave the insular world of racing and look at the real world from a layman’s viewpoint.
The only way the RSPCA can come out of racing is if they believe elements of the sport to be cruel. If that becomes the case, their remit is to do all they can to bring prosecutions against those involved in cruelty.
They won’t just chuck toys out of prams and wander off grumbling. They will start to pursue prosecutions against jockeys, trainers, racecourse groups, venues etc – that is their job.
As Miss Woodford highlights, a small group in the USA (who wouldn’t even register on the radar in comparison to the profile of the RSPCA in the UK) has managed to get more than half the dog tracks there closed.
Racing has no chance whatsoever of surviving a slew of prosecutions in a coordinated RSPCA campaign. As I seem to repeat ad nauseam on this subject, sponsors, broadcasters, high profile supporters, racegoers etc would desert racing quicker than it takes Frankel to run 6 furlongs.
The BHA would be incapable of mounting any credible defence and would be reduced to panic measures like banning the whip completely, utterly neutering the Grand National and who knows what else. Even that would probably be too late.
Still think racing can put up two fingers to the RSPCA and boldly stand alone?
Geezus! Only just noticed this post! This pile of tosh only confirms what I’ve stated above! Come clean Joe,whats your hidden agenda?
it would fail because only 1 case was ever brought, where the jockey had already been found guilty of deliberately hitting his horse repeatedly in order to get banned, and that failed to even make it to court.
That case – Eddie Ahern – was not brought by the RSPCA, but by Animal Aid and, according to Josh Apiafi, Chief Exec of the PJA at the time, the police took some persuading not to prosecute: here’s what he said . . .
“The BHA did a lot of work to stop the Nottingham police taking action in the Eddie Ahern case and basically got told to address the situation, and fast, because of the increase in whip offences,”
It would also fail because the implications for all livestock related industries – and don’t forget we’re talking about working livestock here not pets – would be disastrous for the economic wellbeing of the nation.
Apart from the dubious moral case you propose here, the RSPCA have no ‘livestock’ category. They classify animals in 8 types – they do have a ‘farm animals’ category but racehorses would come under ‘Equine’ in their table.
In 2010, in that 8 category table, equine offences were third, a whisker behind cats and well behind dogs.
It would fail because the RSPCA knows all this already and wouldn’t dream of throwing it’s reputation under a truck by trying it. If enough of the lunatics have made it to the top of the asylum for the RSPCA to try it, it will be the end of them as a respectable organisation and their rank and file know that.
Their fast and very fiery response to the latest whip rules changes and their consistent view – well known and openly published on their website (see footnote for extracts) offers no evidence, to my mind, that if they believe a prosecution is merited, they will shrink from bringing it.
In 2010 they had a 97.5% success rate with prosecutions.
Racing is not bloody illegal dog fighting or bear baiting. It’s a massive world class industry with an almost entirely blemish free welfare record and I wish to God some people would stand up for it on that basis. Anyone who thinks it’s anything less has no business being any part of it.
I have never compared it to dog-fighting or bear-baiting. Racing’s blemish-free welfare record owes an awful lot to the influence of the RSPCA. The BHA have always been keen enough to hang their welfare hat on the ‘partnership’ with the RSPCA despite showing no inclination whatever to consult them on the latest changes. If the RSPCA decide at some point it is ‘anything less’ as you put it, then perhaps they will indeed no longer be part of it.
As some of the responses to my posts on this subject are getting personal, let me state my position once again:
I am open-minded on the use of the whip. Setting a numerical limit with no allowance for the manner of use (force index) was foolish and short-sighted. The latest changes will not solve the problem as, with discretion comes inconsistency.
I am no apologist for the RSPCA, nor do I have any partisan attachment to them or to their behaviour. I thought some of the content of their initial press release was well over the top.
I believe the RSPCA do a fine job within racing, especially in trying to balance their own remit with the interests of the sport. But if I needed only a cold pragmatic reason for my argument, some of you will be old enough to recall Lyndon B Johnson’s reasoning on keeping FBI director J Edgar Hoover sweet, "It’s better to have him inside the tent p1ssing out than outside the tent p1ssing in."
FOOTNOTE: (my bold.italics) extracts from RSPCA website:
While using a whip is not specifically illegal, the Animal Welfare Act 2006 includes a duty to prevent unnecessary suffering, and this law applies to jockeys, racehorse owners and racecourse managers.
The British Horseracing Authority has both a legal and moral duty to minimise whip use to avoid any unnecessary suffering,
and to take reasonable steps to ensure the needs of racehorses to avoid pain and suffering.
We hope that the BHA and jockeys will respond to the challenge and make substantial changes to the use of the whip in horse racing. Otherwise, the British Horseracing Authority’s position in law could be questioned,
and the future of British horseracing could be threatened.
Inappropriate or excessive use of the whip can cause pain and is a welfare issue. The Animal Welfare Act 2006 sets out clear obligations for all those responsible, including on a temporary basis, for protected animals to ensure the welfare needs of their animal are met. This includes ensuring that it is protected from pain, suffering, injury and disease.
There is no ‘opt out’ for horseracing.
The whip is used primarily for safety, correction and encouragement purposes. The RSPCA does not believe that a ban would be safe or practical as there will be instances where its use is required for genuine safety purposes
but the present situation is untenable, particularly its excessive use in racing under the guise of encouragement.
The final para, was, I believe, published in September, prior to the implementation of the ‘new’ (now old) whip rules.
- Total Posts 102
As ive pointed out many times, its the publicity about the National that causes most of the problems. Why did the BHA say "We nearly lost the RSPCA" over this years National.
The RSPCA had imo to react after the sundays went to town after Aprils race and lets face it, overheads and the Run bys DRAW ATTENTION to casualties, all the revamping hasnt lead to less horses dyng in the bleedin event and our sport is judged almost entirely upon it.
id think seriously about changing the whole thing, or else we have to sit and cross our fingers every year as its just become damage limitation
And yes id rather lose the race than the sport, make it along a x country event, rebrand it the new national and make it a 25 max field
Steeplechasing, none of my observations was meant to be personal, I enjoy your contributions to this discussion. They’re clearly well considered.
I’d suggest that maybe it would be helpful to think less about how the RSPCA (& it’s fewer than 40k members) sees, and categorises, things and more about how the layman, the outside world and, most importantly, the law sees things. As I say, there has been one attempted prosecution of a jockey which didn’t even make it to court.
I would be -genuinely – amazed if the RSPCA went after racing on the basis of cruelty in terms of stick use. It would be massively expensive, would split their membership and could destroy their reputation if they failed.
More importantly such a crusade on whip use grounds would, in my view, be wrong and should be countered on the basis of beingwrong
not on the basis of whether or not the argument might be won or lost. Attempts to conduct politics by focus group is what got the BHA into this shambles.
Sean, I didn’t take any of your comments as personal but too many responses from some others, on this and other similar threads are bordering on offensive in my view.
I’m no shrinking violet but always make a point of being respectful to individuals no matter how much I disagree with them and, naively perhaps, expect the same in return.
Anyway, I’ve said as much as I usefully can on this now and, as the Dragons say, will declare myself out.
What type of "prosecution" are we talking about here? Is it marking (cutting) the horse? Hitting it in the wrong place? Excessive frequency? Force? Or exhaustion? What type of prosecution do you believe the RSPCA could win a "cruelty" case Joe.
Value Is EverythingI’m no shrinking violet but always make a point of being respectful to individuals no matter how much I disagree with them and, naively perhaps, expect the same in return.
Anyway, I’ve said as much as I usefully can on this now and, as the Dragons say, will declare myself out.
Joe,The title to this thread has no bearing on what the RSPCA do or dont do regarding Horseracing but as usual you have to mention them…Constantly for some strange reason! The RSPCA have as much influence on Horseracing and as much interest actually as The Salvation Army have on the War in Afghanistan! None! So stop harping on like a bloody merchant of doom when in REALity there’s absolutely no cause for concern from them!
My position has always been based on the premise that racing cannot afford to lose the RSPCA.
Another absolute Pearler! This thread is littered with little snippets from an extremist who thinks he can Brainwash us into thinking the RSPCA somehow have a hold over our great sport! The RSPCA will make their once a year pilgrimage to Aintree show their faces through Animal rights campaigners who wouldn’t know why they are their demonstrating….’Oh its about the whip is it’?
‘Nah i think its about that Canal turn’ ‘What they jump over a canal’? Then when the dead horses are removed from sight they will jump on the press bandwagon,some of whom are supposed to be racing journalists themselves and we’ll have a couple of days dispute and it will be all forgotten about for another year!
That just about sums up the RSPCA and Horseracing! I’ll take it a step further……the drama queens who cant watch ‘Ballabriggs’ take 17 slaps to ensure an historic victory dont have a problem with both ‘Ornais’ and ‘Dooneys Gate’ lying there fatally injured.What a strange attitude they have! Its a bit like a criminal being shot dead by the Police but the powers that be suggest using their baton to control them, 7 strikes is the max! the drama queens think its wrong to use the baton but say nothing about shoot to kill! Hypocrites or what?KF – can you moderate your tone please. You can make your points without disrespecting other posters who are merely putting forward their viewpoint.
As ive pointed out many times, its the publicity about the National that causes most of the problems. Why did the BHA say "We nearly lost the RSPCA" over this years National.
The RSPCA had imo to react after the sundays went to town after Aprils race and lets face it, overheads and the Run bys DRAW ATTENTION to casualties, all the revamping hasnt lead to less horses dyng in the bleedin event and our sport is judged almost entirely upon it.
id think seriously about changing the whole thing, or else we have to sit and cross our fingers every year as its just become damage limitation
And yes id rather lose the race than the sport, make it along a x country event, rebrand it the new national and make it a 25 max field
Running the event some 2 weeks later than it was regularly in the 1970s increases the chances of firmer ground and with it, a far greater risk of fatalities. Let it not be said that racing doesn’t know how to shoot itself in the foot.
KF , you may have a point, but here’s the way I see it
When the whip rules were introduced by Roy and Stiers , our good friend Joe was on telling us how much we should fear the wrath of the Rspca, then he want away
Amendments came , surprise more Rspca posts from Joe
Now we have some more changes , and hey presto he’s back …more of the same old stuff
see a pattern here , I think so
For the record its a load of nonsense (imo ) however well meaning Joe is , and I have no doubt that is the case , its really pathetic Racing will decide what is good for racing not some extremist group or the RSPCA , whose latest utterance is not so user friendly (imo )
The whip rule changes may not suit everyone , in fact I feel there are more to come and perhaps centralised stewarding , may be born as a result, and about time as well !!
Lets enjoy it again
Ricky
So when a jockey gets a ban for excessive use by going over the guide limit because he can offer no reasonable excuse, you will still be enjoying racing then Ricky?
get over it Eclipse , the rules have been changed, and more to come , eventually all will be good again
cheers
Ricky
More tripe from the usual suspects
One even manages to bring the St John’s Ambulance into the equation
What evidence have you that what the RSPCA do would have any effect at all on the SJA?I always thought that you should never give in to blackmail, Steeplechasing appears to believe you should get into bed with them and give them a good massage.
More tripe from the usual suspects
One even manages to bring the St John’s Ambulance into the equation
What evidence have you that what the RSPCA do would have any effect at all on the SJA?I always thought that you should never give in to blackmail, Steeplechasing appears to believe you should get into bed with them and give them a good massage.
More abuse from the "usual suspects" too Yeats.
Don’t see why you have to call an opinion "tripe" Yeats. It’s just a different opinion to yours. I far from agree with all that Joe has said, but there is no need for some of the comments on here.If the RSPCA start campaigning against racing, then whether you or I like it or not Yeats and whether their opinion is nonsense (which both you and I believe it is) it is probably going to effect
public opinion
.
IF
public opinion
reaches a stage where racing is seen as
"cruel"
by a majority or significant minority, then the SJA as a whole may well pull out, or individual volunteers might not want to turn out.
In the same way: If it affects public opinion to such a degree that sponsers are seen by a significant minority as supporting a "cruel sport", it will mean that particular significant minority of the public are actively
put off
a company who sponser racing. So sponsering becomes a waste of money and racing loses revenue.
As I’ve said on other threads Yeats (even started one myself) the time may well come when racing does have to stand up to what seems like RSPCA blackmail. Indeed, had they not rescinded their original press release on the newest rules a few days ago, I was pretty sure the time
HAD
come. But we can’t be blind to what taking on the RSPCA
might
potentially mean to "Racing". We should think carefully of all possible outcomes, even if it sounds like "scaremongering" to some.
Value Is Everything
Then when the dead horses are removed from sight they will jump on the press bandwagon,some of whom are supposed to be racing journalists themselves and we’ll have a couple of days dispute and it will be all forgotten about for another year!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.