9th January 2009 - WELFARE - Brough Scott
(Racing Post)

As recession bites, rumours grow. At the Moorcroft Racehorse Welfare Centre in Sussex half a dozen of us sat around bemoaning the state of the racing nation. “Have you heard,” someone said, “about the unsold foals at Tattersalls December Sales which were left abandoned with headcollars off so that no one could identify them?” We nodded sadly and someone added, “but I heard it was much worse at Goffs, Ireland is in a terrible mess.”

What happened next may have been our society in microcosm but was none the less regrettable for it. We began to pour fuel on the flames. We talked of the economic collapse, of the huge impending and probably now unwanted foal crop, of the yearlings that may not find buyers, of the owners who can’t pay bills, of trainers who might take short cuts, of the increasing number of horses returned to Moorcroft and other welfare centres, and of authorities who won’t take action. In short we had a good old bleat and blamed everyone else.

Meanwhile that initial story had settled neatly in the brain. I had heard it before so assumed there must be some truth in it. I began to be ashamed of the game that has been my abiding interest since the old king died. Then I began to be ashamed of myself. For while the challenges of the recession for horse welfare are screamingly obvious – some people can no longer afford their commitments – the specific and general allegations which I had so sagely accepted were actually unproven. Aren’t journalists supposed to check?

The Tattersalls and Goffs stories turned out to be complete cobblers. Not only is it categorically, on the bible, denied that any such foal abandonment took place, even if it had done the animals would be easily identifiable as they have to be microchipped to be accepted for sale. Why didn’t any of us in the room know that on Monday? Because it is easier to be ignorant and complain.

On to the wider question – how bad are the problems? Who is giving a lead? At the Thoroughbred Breeders Conference that same Monday morning, Kirsten Rausing’s presidential address had mostly foresworn welfare worry for wishful positivism. The first instinct was to berate her for not setting out some sort of emergency task force to chase round looking for trouble. But in an activity, which like the whole rest of the racing game depends at the root on optimism, is it her job, any more than those representing trainers, owners, jockeys or the great tribe of punters beneath, to talk down the pleasures of taking part ?

Maybe not, but there has to be a very large proviso. Optimism is fine provided it is not heedless, provided all parties stick to the rules that already exist. For, and here’s the answer to our second allegation, the idea that there are not firm welfare limitation laid down, or help and advice available, is as far from the mark as those original canards flapping around Goffs and Tattersalls.

A year and a week ago Professor Tim Morris joined the British Horse Racing Authority with the impressive title of “Director of Equine Science and Welfare.” In the wider horse world Britain was in shock from the truly disgusting case of cruelty against some 100 skeletal horses discovered at Spindles Farm in Amersham. No one is suggesting that the 25,000 thoroughbreds in Britain are currently exposed to anything like that, but the collective organizational reaction to the case does have relevance for racing. For the initial and horror confusion stung Princess Anne above all others to insist on putting together a coalition of interests to better handle any future disaster, General Richard Gordon (whose last job was the slightly more globally challenging United Nations Mission in Eritrea and Ethiopia) was drafted in, and all major horse bodies were signed up to something called “The National Equine Welfare Protocol.”

The Professor may not need to call up the General but he has already linked with other organizations like World Horse Welfare to ensure that emergency systems could be put in place if needed. Most of all he is keen that people in racing should be aware how closely every horse is monitored and of what is available across the board;from the Retraining of Racehorses work headed up by Di Arbuthnot, the four approved rehabilitation centres (who on their own can hardly place 100 ex racers a year), right through to the breeders and veterinary organizations that serve the game.

“We have to realise,” says Tim Morris calmly, “that we are all in this together. From the outside we are all held responsible if anything goes wrong. And the BHA must not be precious in stepping up to the plate in a humble way to be a conduit to solve any problems that people might have right down to the practicalities of euthanasia where necessary.”

As he spoke the headlines screamed about Woolworth going under and job cuts at Marks and Spencer. Racing is lucky in many ways because it is at the top of the equine chain. Horses who do not measure up can find a place in other countries and other disciplines, many breeding stock can wait in the field until circumstances change. But there are going to be unwanted stock and those involved with them will need to act in a responsible way. If culling is needed, and with the dramatic change in circumstances it’s a likely outcome, that has to be done responsibly too. Like all those before him, I will hold his head and pat his neck while the dead is done. Proper welfare demands dignity in death as well.

The thoroughbred is the most monitored of all species of horse but, inevitability, some will get into poor or panicky hands. If they do, and if their situation becomes a liability, their fate, however much we might wish otherwise, reflects upon us all. “There are is a lot of help out there,” says Tim Morris, “and people should not be ask for support. But there is no simple answer, no cavalry that can come riding over the hill.”

Not quite the cavalry perhaps but across the plains from Kansas let me give you the redoubtable, walrus- moustached, ten gallon hated figure of Dr Tom Lenz. You have never heard of him? I think you should.

Tom Lenz is a considerable horseman, a former president of the American Association of Equine Practicioners and amongst his many qualifications is a diploma in the lexicon busting science of Theriogenology (animal reproduction – no I didn’t know it either). But forget the quips, Tom’s relevance to this discussion is that for the last three years he has been chair of the self explanatory Unwanted Horse Coalition (UHC) and frankly admits that the situation could become “real serious.”

But what you won’t get from him is any anthropomorphic (it means treating animals as humans), emotive ringing of hands or feuding factionalism. If you listen to him or go onto the UHC’s excellent website what you get is calm, united commitment. “Our problem originally stemmed from the closure of slaughter plants across the US and people just abandoning unwanted horses rather than asking for help or the final solution having them shipped to Mexico or Canada. When we started different parts of the horse industry wanted to fight each other. The right thing to do is to unite in the cause of Welfare and to be proactive rather than reactive about the problems.”

It was cold in Kansas on Wednesday but there was warmth and hope in Dr Tom’s prescription. “It won’t be easy,” he said, “but my advice to you over there is to get ahead of the issue and to make sure that everyone works together.” Sounds like a prescription we should take.