I had a feeling you might have a strong opinion on this, given your passion for animal welfare shown on the Critter News blog.

I wonder if most countries around the world have some form of regulator for the horse racing industry. Or for that matter, in other industries where animals are used for entertainment. It’s an interesting question.

With regard to the racing industry, I would think that the majority of jockeys and trainers would take good care of their horses, not only because horses need to be kept in good condition if they are to win races, but also I think because most of the people involved in that line of work would have some form of liking for, or care for, horses. There might be a few who might enter the industry to try to win a quick buck, but the majority of trainers and jockeys would have a genuine liking for the horses.

Nevertheless, I do agree with your broader point about the need for effective protection of animal welfare in any industry where animals are involved or affected.

On a broader level, there are a variety of ethical issues about whether any animal should be used in sport whatsoever. To me, it really depends on the animals’ welfare and I do think that humans are capable of working with animals in a productive, healthy partnership. But there must be oversight. There is too much room for abuse when no one is looking. How many cases of elderly abuse and child abuse occur when no one is looking? And those are victims who can speak for themselves. And when such abuse of animals is detected, it must be severely punished.

The idea that animal welfare should be monitored and cruelty should be punished would seem a no-brainer. But it’s not because we get to the issue of the animal being property. If that animal is just a piece of property, like my coat and hat, why should you tell me what I can do with it? In addition, if you start actively monitoring and effectively punishing the abuse of horses, then what’s next? Farm animals? Laboratory animals? But detractors will say that costs money, creates “red tape” and is too much government involvement that prevents an industry from thriving and creating jobs. The animals are essentially raw material, not living things, in this viewpoint.

It’s a viewpoint that needs to fundamentally shift at some point for any real, effective protection of animals to occur in any industry, including sports.

These are very thoughtful questions.

Unfortunately, it is difficult to know exactly how horses feel about the situation. On one hand, some trainers say that some horses ‘love jumping.’ Critics, on the other hand, say that ‘a horse has no choice but to jump when there is a three-foot obstacle in front of him.

I would probably say that most horses look to my untrained eye to be fairly healthy, at least when they are paraded in the mounting yard, and I would imagine that professional racehorses would be well looked after and that there relationship with jockeys/trainers would be pretty good in most cases.

But I have no idea as to the question of whether jumps racing (or horse racing in general) is a better or worse life than what the horses in question would have outside the racing world is a very good question.

However, I’m going to play devils advocate here a little. Is there any indication that the horse has a tormented life with the exception of the risk for injury? If the horse receives good care and is trained well, I wonder if there is a way to know if the horse enjoys or loves the sport itself. I would certainly put their quality of life ahead of that of cows, pigs or chickens raised factory style here in the U.S.

I guess I would ask the question whether the relationship between horse and rider or groomer is solid, whether the horse appears healthy and to what extent they may enjoy the race if that is even possible. It is certainly a different life than living in a pasture, but that is not going to be an option. Removing the race means horses that will never be raised or live at all.

In wild days horses would have been prone to hurt by predators and trips and starvation. Is this life that much different or more dangerous?

Glad I was able to clear this particular matter up for you.

That’s an interesting question – yes, I’m fairly sure that was Christopher Reeve’s fate by memory. Obviously, riders are usually injured when the horse falls unless they are extremely fortunate, and I have it does not seem unusual to hear stories about jockeys being crippled for life. But I’m not entirely sure whether or not the percentage of human injuries is much greater for jumps racing than for ordinary racing. I suppose it would be.

I guess the reason that calls for jumps racing focus around animal welfare is that for the jockey, participation in jumps racing is a choice. Riders know the risks and they choose to participate in this type of racing in spite of the risk. So whilst any human injury arising out of any form of horse racing – jumps or flat – is a tragedy, such injuries do arise out of a result of the choice of the individual riders concerned to participate.

Horses on the other hand (whilst not ranking with the same importance as humans), do not have a choice, and that I would think would be the main reason why ethical questions surrounding any form of the sport tend to focus around animal welfare, rather than the welfare of humans.