Naturalness and the Legitimacy of Thoroughbred Racing: A Photo-Elicitation Study with Industry and Animal Advocacy Informants

Comparison of Reported Fatalities, Falls and Injuries in Thoroughbred Horse Jumps and Flat Races in the 2022 and 2023 Jumps Race Seasons in Victoria, Australia

Jumps racing is a form of Thoroughbred horse racing that involves hurdles and steeples and typically longer distances, and heavier weights compared with flat racing, which does not incorporate obstacles. In Australia, jumps racing is carried out only in Victoria, one of eight states and territories. The continuation of jumps racing is contentious due to the higher risk of fatalities, falls and injuries for horses, compared with flat racing. While measures have been introduced by the industry to improve the safety of riders and horses, the rates of fatalities, falls and injuries in horses participating in jumps races have not been collectively reported in Australia since the 2012 to 2014 race seasons. Although information on individual horse fatalities, falls and injuries is published by Racing Victoria in Stewards' Reports, the data are not aggregated, and so cannot readily be used to assess trends or evaluate the efficacy of safety measures introduced by the industry. The aim of this study was to determine the fatality, fall and injury rates for horses participating in hurdle and steeplechase races in Victoria in the 2022 and 2023 Thoroughbred horse jumps racing seasons compared with horses participating in flat races at the same race meets. Data on horse fatalities, falls and injuries were extracted from the published Racing Victoria race results and Stewards' Reports for the jumps races (n = 150) and corresponding flat races (n = 157) held at the 38 jumps race meets in Victoria in 2022 and 2023. Overall, horse fatalities, falls and injuries occurred at higher rates in jumps races compared with flat races during the study period. The rate of horse fatalities in jumps races was 3.3 per 1000 starts, with no fatalities in flat races. The rate of horse falls in hurdle races was 24 per 1000 starts and 41.6 per 1000 starts in steeplechase races, comparable with rates previously reported in the 2012 to 2014 seasons. There were no falls in flat races. Horse injuries occurred at a rate of 68.9 per 1000 starts in jumps races compared with 18.8 per 1000 starts in flat races. In hurdle and steeplechase races, veterinary clearance being required following horse injury was 5.4 times (OR 5.4, 95% CI 2.8-10.2) and 7.2 times (OR 7.2, 95% CI 3.3-15.6) more likely, respectively, compared with flat races. The risk of trauma was 4 times more likely in hurdle and steeplechase races (OR 4.8, 95% CI 1.7-13.3 and OR 4.1, 95% CI 1.2-13.4, respectively) and the risk of lameness was increased by 2.5 times in hurdles (OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.2-5.2) and 5.1 times in steeplechase races (OR 5.1, 95% CI 2.3-11.5), compared with flat races. These findings support concerns about the welfare of horses involved in jumps racing and of the need for further safety measures to reduce these risks.

Testing and Refining the Ethical Framework for the Use of Horses in Sport

In 2021, in response to an acknowledged need for universal, consistent ethics to guide decision making in the horse sport sector, Campbell published a theoretical ethical framework for the use of horses in competitive sport. The research reported here tested the applied usefulness of that theoretical ethical framework through stakeholder engagement in a three-round modified Delphi study and refined it to develop a practical decision-making tool which can be applied consistently across multiple equestrian disciplines. Stakeholders from a broad range of equestrian competitive disciplines participated in the research. Participants were required to apply the ethical framework to a pre-determined ethical dilemma, individually (Rounds 1 and 2) and within a group (Round 3), and at the end of each round to complete a questionnaire designed to gauge opinion and user experience. At the completion of each round of testing, the theoretical framework was refined based on stakeholder feedback. Results showed that participants perceived useability and application of the framework to generally increase with each round. Qualitative content analysis identified key concepts, including cognition (e.g., broadens/deepens thinking) and application (e.g., considers multiple angles from a variety of information sources, needs to be a short/simple process). Results suggested that the refined framework is beneficial for group decision making across a wide variety of ethical issues and equestrian competitive disciplines. The framework thus has the potential to improve equine welfare through facilitating consistent ethical decision making in which the interests of the horse are prioritized.

Social Licence to Operate: What Can Equestrian Sports Learn from Other Industries?

Simple Summary

Most societies regulate human activities using laws that state clearly what is, and is not, legally permissible. However, there is a second layer of permission that is granted—or revoked—by the public. This second layer is known as a ‘social licence to operate’ (SLO), and it represents an intangible, implicit agreement between the public and an industry or group. The public may approve of an activity, in which case it can proceed with minimal formalised restrictions, or it may disapprove, and this may herald legal restrictions, or even an outright ban. This review discusses the concept of SLO in relation to equestrianism. Experience from other industries suggests that, to maintain its SLO, equestrianism should take an ethics-based, proactive, progressive, and holistic approach to the protection of equine welfare, and should establish the trust of all stakeholders, including the public. Trust will only ensue if society is confident that equestrianism operates transparently, that its leaders and practitioners are credible, legitimate, and competent, and that its practice reflects society’s values. Earning and maintaining this status will undoubtedly require substantial effort and funding—inputs that should be regarded as an investment in the future of the sport.

Abstract

The concept of ‘social licence to operate’ (SLO) is relevant to all animal-use activities. An SLO is an intangible, implicit agreement between the public and an industry/group. Its existence allows that industry/group to pursue its activities with minimal formalised restrictions because such activities have widespread societal approval. In contrast, the imposition of legal restrictions—or even an outright ban—reflect qualified or lack of public support for an activity. This review discusses current threats to equestrianism’s SLO and suggests actions that those across the equine sector need to take to justify the continuation of the SLO. The most important of these is earning the trust of all stakeholders, including the public. Trust requires transparency of operations, establishment and communication of shared values, and demonstration of competence. These attributes can only be gained by taking an ethics-based, proactive, progressive, and holistic approach to the protection of equine welfare. Animal-use activities that have faced challenges to their SLO have achieved variable success in re-establishing the approval of society, and equestrianism can learn from the experience of these groups as it maps its future. The associated effort and cost should be regarded as an investment in the future of the sport.

Swedish Trotting Horse Trainers’ Perceptions of Animal Welfare Inspections from Public and Private Actors

Simple Summary

Harness racing is the most common form of horse racing in Sweden. As public awareness of animal welfare is increasing, the welfare of these horses must be ensured. Trotting horse trainers in Sweden undergo an official animal welfare inspection by the County Administrative Board (CAB) and a private inspection by their own association, the Swedish Trotting Association (STA). This study investigated trainers’ perceptions of these different inspections using a digital questionnaire sent out during spring 2021. Of the 396 responding trainers, a majority reported quite positive experiences of both CAB and STA inspections. However, most perceived the STA inspections to be more valuable and the STA inspectors to be more competent than the CAB inspectors. Overall, the competence and manner of the inspector had a stronger association with trainers’ perceptions of an inspection than the results of the inspection. While trainers were generally satisfied with the control system, they would like better coordination between the different inspections.

Abstract

In Sweden, the County Administrative Board (CAB) and Swedish Trotting Association (STA) both perform animal welfare inspections of the premises of trotting horse trainers. The CAB inspection checks for compliance with the legislation, and the STA inspection checks for compliance with the private ‘Trotter Health Standard’, which mainly sets the same requirements as the legislation. This study investigated the views of trainers on these inspections both as separate events and in relation to each other. A digital questionnaire was sent out to trotting horse trainers in Sweden during spring 2021, and 396 trainers responded. Descriptive and statistical analyses were used to evaluate the responses. In general, the trainers reported positive experiences of both the CAB and STA inspections, but they had consistently more positive views about the private STA inspections than the official CAB inspections. The outcome of the inspections, i.e., non-compliance or not, did not affect trainers’ perceptions of the inspections, but inspectors’ knowledge, manner, and responsiveness had a strong effect. The trainers were generally satisfied with the current control system but would like better coordination between the different inspections.

A new approach to horse welfare based on systems thinking

Globally, calls for change in the horse industry to prioritise the health and well-being of domestic horses (Equus caballus) are reaching a critical threshold. Horse behaviour deemed undesirable or inconvenient by owners (henceforth referred to as undesirable behaviour) is reported across all aspects of a horse's life and may indicate a welfare issue. This study proposes a reconceptualisation of undesirable horse behaviour as a complex challenge based on systems thinking. Emerging from the natural sciences, systems thinking is an interdisciplinary approach to complex challenges (such as undesirable behaviour) as dynamic, highly interconnected networks of components and feedback relationships. This critical literature review examined the undesirable behaviours studied, the disciplines conducting research and their underpinning assumptions to identify opportunities for approaching research differently. Four themes emerged from the literature: undesirable behaviour is typically studied with unarticulated assumptions and in individual disciplines; behaviours are typically studied in isolation with the complexity of horse-human interactions generally not considered; management of behaviour typically has an anthropocentric linear 'cause and effect' focus; and solutions to undesirable behaviour are often short-term 'fixes' resulting in poor horse outcomes. From these, we outline the opportunities that each provide the next generation of horse research in terms of interdisciplinarity, systems thinking and management. Undesirable horse behaviour in a horse-human system is conceptually mapped in terms of factors associated with the behaviour (eg housing, stress, diet), and the relationships between them. Systems thinking offers a way to integrate multiple disciplines and identify and navigate new solutions to promote horse welfare.