The consequences for horses of a racing ban
SIR – Iain Green (Letters, July 18) argues that horses are “beaten” – “whipped” for entertainment.
Is he aware that a jockey’s whip is made of foam, with the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals having been involved in its design? Horses feel it, but are not left with a visible mark.
Jockeys are limited to seven uses in flat races and eight in jumps. Sometimes they use it for steering purposes to avoid interference with other horses. They must also give time for a horse to respond to a whip’s use before using it again. Excessive use results in bans for jockeys.
In nearly all competitive sports played by humans, injuries, sometimes serious, occur. By Mr Green’s logic, all such sports should be banned because they are largely played for entertainment.
He mentions that many horses experience blood in their lungs. The membrane protecting a horse’s lungs is very thin and practically whenever a horse runs, competitively or not, blood leaks into its lungs. If blood leaks from its nostrils that is more serious, but it is rare.
He is right about a trend towards breeding horses for speed rather than strength (on the flat). The British racing programme is very balanced when it comes to distance, however. The premier race is still the Epsom Derby, run over one mile, four furlongs.
I’ve always assumed that’ if racing is banned, thousands of horses would be put down unless there is taxpayer compensation paid to owners to keep them alive. Many would probably choose not to support their horses if costs weren’t met, so a straightforward ban on racing without extensive compensation is likely to have a huge detrimental effect on horse welfare.
Trevor Pitman
Beckenham, Kent