BHA must expect a backlash in bid to save racing
Horse-welfare move will cause a commotion when the first big-race favourite is denied a run, says Marcus Armytage
The next generation need to be reassured that everything is being done to make it safer
On Wednesday, the British Horseracing Authority did something completely out of character – it finally grasped a nettle, got on the front foot and gave its sport a lead on an issue which has the potential to one day block out the sun, certainly as far as jump racing is concerned.
Animal welfare is an issue which is not going to go away, for farming, for circuses, for zoos, for the individual who keeps a dog or pet mouse or, indeed, for racing. Hunting has already pretty much gone and, over in Europe, bullfighting continues but with its back against the wall.
It may not yet have quite gone the same way in Ireland, where the population’s connection with the land and horses is still so strong, but you do not have to be an Old Testament prophet to realise it will come there, too, one day.
No longer can racing get away with telling the next generation of racegoers old truths, such as “where there’s livestock, there’s deadstock” or that horses are “outside the backdoor”. Nor can you bang on about most racehorses living in the equivalent of five-star hotels, or that were it not for racing they would not be there.
Society is changing. Rightly or wrongly, people are more easily offended, and veganism is a growing trend. The next generation are not bothered about jockeys, who are there of their own volition, but they need to be reassured that everything that can be done to make it safer is being done for racehorses, who might not be there of their own volition – that when it comes to welfare, no expense is spared.
The sport has to be seen to be proactive on this, going above and beyond.
Outwardly, like a lot of governing bodies, the BHA appears to stumble along, often in a backwards direction, shooting itself in the foot.
But on the back of a review into six racehorse fatalities at last season’s Cheltenham Festival, it has announced 17 recommendations to make jump racing safer for the horses, not just at the Festival, but across the sport as a whole.
And, at last, I get the feeling that, on this subject at least, the BHA has grabbed the steering wheel before the car has veered off the road. For once, I was impressed with its chief executive, Nick Rust, and his passion on the subject.
Apart from reducing the field sizes in two-mile chases at Cheltenham, I felt the most significant change was the veterinary screening of every runner at next year’s Festival to make sure it has not arrived there with a problem. It will also have to arrive with a record of recent therapeutic medications.
The “trot up” has been a feature of three-day eventing for years. One takes place before the start of the competition and another takes place the morning after the most strenuous phase, the cross-country, before the show jumping.
If a horse is not immediately passed, it goes to a holding box for further veterinary inspection and it is often at that stage that the horse is withdrawn by the rider. Very few top riders do not have a story of how a potential victory might have been denied them by the vets, but it is an accepted part of their sport.
There will, of course, be a commotion the first time a favourite for a big race is denied a run, with the trainer saying it has always been a crotchety mover at the trot, and a vet arguing it is lame. But for the long-term good of racing, that is something with which trainers and the sport will have to come to terms.