Author: Sandra Kyle
Using the Whip in Thoroughbred Racing – Frequently Asked Questions
In the 2019 Melbourne Cup held this week second placegetter New Zealand jockey Michael Walker ,(seen in featured photo), was fined $10,000 and given a riding ban for over-whipping his horse, Prince of Arran. Using the whip in thoroughbred horseracing has come under increasing criticism in the past few years. The general public see the jockey thrashing an animal and feel uncomfortable, but the Industry defends the whip, saying it is necessary to control the horse, and it ‘doesn’t hurt’.
Back in 2012 veterinarian and Professor Paul McGreevy at the University of Sydney led an observational study on whip use by jockeys in thoroughbred races by The Australian RSPCA. The findings of the Study were:
- The whip caused a visual indentation on the horse in 83% of impacts
- The unpadded section of the whip made contact on 64% of impacts
- At least 28 examples of apparent breaches of whip rules were found
- More than 75% of the time the whip struck the horse in the abdomen (or flank)
- The majority of jockeys observed used a backhand whip action, possibly to avoid being penalised as, at the time of the study, the Australian whip rules maintained a focus solely on forehand action.
The results of this study did not offer any support for the retention of whipping in horse racing, and the way it is used is contrary to the International Agreement on Breeding, Racing and Wagering to which the Racing Australia Board is a signatory.
FAQs – (Australian RSPCA)
What do the results of the 2012 study mean for the ongoing use of the whip in racing?
The outcome of this study shows that the improper use of whips is commonplace and that it is impossible for stewards, using the technology currently available to them, to effectively police the rules surrounding whip use in Thoroughbred racing. Only through high quality, high speed vision is it possible to see exactly what is happening and unfortunately stewards don’t currently have access to this footage.
What is the issue with backhand whip use?
This study reveals that backhand whip use is far more common than anticipated by Australian whip rules. It is possible that jockeys have been encouraged to use backhand rather than a forehand action to avoid penalisation. There is no evidence that backhand whippings are less painful. It is important to note that there are no restrictions in whip use with either forehand or backhand actions in the final 100m of races.
What is the issue with striking the abdomen with a whip?
Striking the horse in the abdomen, also referred to as the flank, is likely to be more painful to the horse than a strike on the hindquarters because there is little muscle in this area to absorb the impact of the whip. The flank also extends to the stifle joint and is extremely sensitive and vulnerable to injury. For this reason, strikes to the flank are prohibited under international racing rules.
Australia is signatory to the International Agreement on Breeding and Racing which lists specific prohibitions for whip use, including using the whip on the flank. The results of the current study indicate that Australian racing authorities are not meeting their obligations under this International Agreement.
The British Horseracing Authority does not allow whips to hit the abdomen, which means that less than 25% of whip strikes observed in this study would have been acceptable in the UK.
Surely jockeys wouldn’t be using whips if they don’t make horses run faster?
Perception is a powerful thing on the part of jockeys who may feel a change in the horse’s stride when it’s whipped and on the part of owners and punters who correlate whipping with getting the most out of a horse. There is no agreed line within the industry as to why whips are used at all – it’s cultural.
What is a padded whip?
So-called padded whips have a shock-absorbent layer between the inner spine and outer sleeve. This is intended to provide a cushioning layer between the horse’s body and the hard inner spine of the whip. The padding does not extend along the full shaft of the whip – only for about one-third of the whip’s length. The claim is that such a whip “will cause less pain and less damage to the body being struck” compared to a conventional whip, however there is no evidence to support this argument.
Padded whips don’t cause pain, so what’s the problem with using them?
So-called padded whips do cause pain – they may be less painful than traditional contact whips when applied in exactly the same manner. But jockeys wouldn’t use them if they didn’t inflict some pain on the horse. In fact, this study found that in 64% of impacts, the unpadded part of the whip came in contact with the horse. It may be that jockeys are using the so-called padded whip in a different way to overcome the possibility that it has less impact on the horse.
What does a horse feel when it is struck with a whip?
There is no evidence to suggest that whipping does not hurt. Whips can cause bruising and inflammation, however, horses do have resilient skin. That is not to say that their skin is insensitive. Indeed, a horse can easily feel a fly landing on its skin. Repeated striking with a whip (of any type) in the same area of the body has the potential to cause localised trauma and tissue damage, the extent of which will increase with the force of the strike and the number of repetitions.
Whips are essential for jockey safety, or to make the horse ‘pay attention’, aren’t they?
Jockeys aren’t whipping their horses in the last 100m of a race to increase safety or to remind their horse to pay attention. If jockeys didn’t need to use the whip before that point for safety reasons then why suddenly pull it out at the end?
Bringing safety into the argument is just an attempt to distract people from the real problem – that last 100m where whips can be used indiscriminately.
What are the Australian Racing Board whip rules?
At the time of this study there were no restrictions on backhand whip strikes at any stage of a race. Following changes made on 1 December 2015, the ARB whip rules now state that jockeys can use the whip in either a forehand or backhand manner only five times before the final 100m of a race, however these are not to be used in consecutive strides. During the last 100m of a race, whips can be used at a jockey’s discretion, which essentially means horses can be whipped most when they are at their most fatigued and least able to respond.
What does RSPCA want next?
The RSPCA wants reform of the whip rules and an end of the use of the whip as a performance aid altogether. The study also confirms that there is unacceptable use of the whip in Thoroughbred racing and that stewards are not properly resourced to police Australian whip rules.
‘Humane’ Torture – how pigs are stunned in slaughterhouses
Pigs have the intelligence of a three year old child. They are curious, insightful, non-aggressive, social, and form close bonds with other individuals. When raised for slaughter, they typically live in extremely cruel factory farm conditions. The abuse of these intelligent and aware animals defies belief. For example, just this week a story has come to light showing live pigs being used as crash test dummies in China.
The flesh of pigs is in high demand all over the world, and billions of pigs are killed every year for food.
One of the most common forms of stunning pigs is to use a C02 chamber, described as a ‘more humane’ method of stunning pigs prior to slaughter.
In CO2 stunning, pigs are herded into a steel cage called a gondola, which is then lowered into a gas chamber. The pigs are typically frightened and reluctant to enter the gondola, so electric prods are often used to shock the pigs. Undercover evidence has shown frustrated workers frequently abusing resistant animals by repeatedly jabbing them with burning prods, sometimes holding them down while the animals scream in agony.
Once inside the C02 chamber pigs respond with panic and pain as their nasal passages burn and they cannot breathe. They thrash around violently, jumping over each other in an attempt to escape before collapsing in convulsions. (Feature photograph shows a still from a video taken by Aussie Farms, in 2014).
It is time to stop the carnage. It is time to close slaughterhouses for good.
WATCH THIS SHORT VIDEO (GRAPHIC WARNING) taken from recent undercover footage at Skovde Slaughterhouse in Sweden.
Bear Bile Farming – The Worst Form of Animal Cruelty
Bear-bile farming as it is carried out in various parts of Asia is one of the worst torments of sentient beings imaginable.
Read about the ‘whys’ and ‘hows’ of bear-bile farming in this article and see how you can support the efforts of Animals Asia. Their aim is to close all bear-bile farms and release the victims to sanctuaries, where they can live out their lives free from pain and stress.
Read the article here
The Vegan Backlash – A Sure Sign We’re Winning
Gandhi once said: ‘First they ignore you, Then they laugh at you, Then they fight you, Then you win’. As the vegan movement continues its unstoppable march into the mainstream, it is predictable that the backlash will grow. This can be seen in more and more hateful comments from minor media personalities and self-publicists, and also online. The positive spin on this is it’s a sure measure of how far we have come. The vegan movement is no longer ‘fringe’, it cannot be ignored, and is no longer a laughing matter. The movement has arrived at Stage Three in Gandhi’s progression: ‘Then they fight you’. Next is: ‘Then You Win’.
In today’s featured article, End Animal Slaughter contributor LYNLEY TULLOCH addresses the comment by a Radio New Zealand breakfast television host that vegans should be locked up for ‘economic treason.’ As she shows, his comment completely misses the point. The vegan movement cannot be defined by tradition, economy, or a dietary choice. It is much more than all of these. Veganism is a social justice movement defined by ethics, compassion, truth and human decency.
Read the article here
Fishes and Fishing – Essential Talking Points
Fishes are sentient beings. They are intelligent and capable of complex emotions. Yet they are often the ‘forgotten victims on our plate’. Given the state of the oceans and the environment, including them in the conversation is more important than ever.
Today’s featured article from vegfund.org gives some facts and figures, summarises the main ideas, and gives some suggestions for advocacy.
Read the article here
SLAUGHTERHOUSE VIGIL, LAND MEATS WHANGANUI, NEW ZEALAND
End Animal Slaughter’s SANDRA KYLE does twice-weekly vigils near her home in Whanganui, New Zealand. These photographs are from her latest vigil.
The beautiful beings in my photos were among 150 or so cows waiting at a slaughterhouse to be killed. I photographed them at one of my twice weekly vigils in Whanganui, New Zealand.
The animals stood on concrete in their own urine and feces, their flesh pressed against iron bars. While some cows were tightly packed, there was room in other pens for the animals to take a few steps forward and back. As they jostled around nervously, some of them slipped in the muck. When the innocent and vulnerable find themselves in dire straits it just kills me.
Every face shows their sadness, their fear. They also reveal their innocence. Animals, unlike people, are free from defilements.
They had been hours without eating, with hours more of hunger to endure before they would be delivered of the misery visited on them by us. Slaughterhouses do not feed animals, even when they have many hours to wait. It’s a ‘waste of money’ and also ‘it makes too much of a mess when they’re being processed.’ The last thing they want is intestinal contents and feces everywhere, adding to the risk of contamination. So the girls and boys go hungry.
As usual, I spoke to the gentle earthlings, and sang to them. I hoped that, momentarily at least, their spirits might be lifted. But of course, I couldn’t save them.
I hoped the night would not be too long for them, and that they could get some sleep. I hoped that tomorrow when the men with the electric prods and stun guns and knives began their wicked work that society has normalised, that the slaying would be carried out with the minimum of pain and fear.
Please look at their beautiful faces, and bear witness to their lives. If you want to learn more about Animal Save movement go to thesavemovement.org
Dog and Pig: Speciesism explained
Why do we love one and eat another? In this short article End Animal Slaughter’s SANDRA KYLE outlines the meaning of the word ‘speciesism’.
Human relationships with non-human animals are not straightforward. They are contradictory, and differ according to cultures. We assign different moral values to individuals based solely on their species membership, and this is analogous to prejudice regarding race (racism) or gender (sexism). This type of behaviour is therefore called speciesism.
Speciesism manifests itself in the near-universal belief that humans are intrinsically more valuable than individuals of other species. Some common assumptions are (1) Animals are less cognitively able than humans so are therefore superior; (2) Animals, unlike humans, cannot have moral intention; and (3) Animals are less sentient, and don’t feel and experience suffering the same way we do.
In the past several decades scientific evidence has challenged these long-held assumptions, sometimes overwhelmingly. For example, the question whether animals can be moral agents is amassing a growing field of literature, and altruism has been documented in many species. In one example, from New Zealand in 2008, a bottle-nosed dolphin came to the rescue of a disoriented mother whale and her calf, and led them into safe waters. Without the dolphin’s guidance, the whales would most likely have died.
On the question of cognitive ability, there have been countless studies on vertebrates that have been going on for decades now, that show they can solve puzzles, and communicate with humans in remarkably sophisticated ways.
Washoe the female Chimp successfully learned more than 350 words using American Sign Language
Example: Dog and Pig
An example of speciesism in western societies is the comparative positions of the family dog, and the pig who is raised for consumption. The former is treasured while the latter is commonly kept in conditions of physical and psychological torture before being slaughtered so we (and our pets) can eat them. In western society dogs have a much higher status than pigs, despite the fact that both species have similar mental and emotional capabilities (Mendl, Held, & Byrne, 2010). What’s more, both have shown similar results on the ‘mirror test’, revealing a level of self awareness. We see, even within one culture, that attitudes towards animals are consistent. A dog and a pig may are cognitively comparable, and both are sentient, but we love one, and torture and eat the other.
Cultural differences
Cultural differences play a big part in how we perceive other animals. For example, we are incensed at Koreans eating dog, but tuck into our bacon sandwich without a morsel of regret. Whether an animal is ‘man’s best friend’ or ‘dirty beast’, is largely determined by the culture we live in.
Mechanisms by which we justify speciesism
To carry out such extreme and contradictory behaviours, we need to employ mechanisms to justify our position. These mechanisms may include moral justification, euphemistic language, displacement of responsibility, dehumanization, moral disengagement and cognitive dissonance.
Opposing speciesism
Opposing speciesism doesn’t mean treating all species the same in all situations. It merely means that we should not use an individual’s species as the basis for harming or protecting them. If you think it is wrong to kill a dog for food, then it is also wrong to kill a pig – or a sheep, a chicken, or any other animal.
Quite apart from their differing cognitive levels, or level of moral agency, both common sense and countless scientific studies tell us that all animals, including those who live in the sea, are alike in their capacity to suffer, and their desire to avoid fear and death.
Therefore, animal sentience – the ability to feel physical and emotional pain – should be the key factor guiding the way we treat other animals.
Pigs in Peril: Slaughterhouse deregulation in the US
Gail A. Eisnitz, author of ‘Slaughterhouse: The Shocking Story of Greed, Neglect, and Inhumane Treatment Inside the U.S. Meat Industry’, and 2004 winner of the Albert Schweitzer Medal, is the author of our featured article.
In December this year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture will implement its ‘modernization’ plan for the slaughter of pigs (hogs). Under the new rules, meat processing companies will be given the green light to operate without a ceiling cap, effectively a licence to kill as many pigs as they can, as fast as they can. The new laws also make key inspection duties within plants self-regulating, an inherent conflict of interest that will end up badly not only for workers, but potentially for public health and, of course, for the principal victims, the pig themselves.
As Eisnitz documented in her ground-breaking book, pigs in high-pressure, chaotic slaughterhouse environments were still conscious after being stunned, shackled, hoisted and stuck (throats slit). Others regained consciousness and ending up being thrown in the scalding tank, still alive, spending their last moments in unimaginable, excruciating agony. Employees at these high speed plants routinely resorted to brutality against the animals, to vent their frustrations as they attempted to cope with the physically and emotionally heavy demands on them.
If the legislation comes into effect this dire situation will only get worse. Unless there is grassroots action to urge lawmakers to stop the implementation of these ill-conceived and inhumane changes, the Trump government will be responsible for jeopardizing the physical and mental health of slaughterhouse staff; consumers will be more likely to contract disease; and even more intelligent, sentient beings will die in conditions of extreme terror and agony.
Read the article here
‘Every horse can’t be a winner. What can they do with these horses?’ Interview with a kill buyer.
The Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s expose this week on the abbatoir fate of ex racehorses has shocked the world. This article that first appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald shows that despite pleading ignorance about how many ex racehorses end up as horse meat, it is mainly trainers who sell their gallopers directly to kill buyers.
Read the article here
‘Violent, gory and agonising’ – the tragic fate of ex-racehorses
This week the Australian Broadcasting Corporation aired a programme about the fate of ex champion racehorses who, instead of being retired to live out their lives in peace and safety, ended up in abattoirs and knackeries. Shocking undercover footage taken in Australian saleyards and slaughterhouses shows them being cursed at, beaten and injured by workers before they were killed.
This is the fate of far too many racehorses all over the world. A recent film, Platinum Ticket’s Final Ride, looks at the process that led to US champion gelding Platinum Ticket’s tragic end in an abattoirAKL.
Read also the article shared from All-Creatures.org
Quote from the article:
“As with other species, slaughter occurs by the cutting of both carotid (neck) arteries which results in their bleeding to death. In some cases horses are hanged by the neck from chains until they suffocate; just one method of subduing the power of a large creature whose utter terror – even in a wounded and depleted state – makes their desperate fight for life dangerous to their killers and a financial risk to their plant and equipment. It is violent, gory and agonising. Like all our victims, their fear is simply off the scale.”
‘We All Need To Stop And Ask For Change’
Just days after animal justice group Animal Rebellion was banned from protesting in London this week, they stormed Newman’s Abattoir in Farnborough and u-locked and chained themselves to a slaughter truck. Eighteen arrests were made, and three activists have been charged as a result of the action.
Excerpts:
“It was our duty to come here and make these demands – that we must transition to a sustainable food system, and stop exploiting the millions of cows, pigs, sheep, and goats who pass through this slaughterhouse every year. Our activists arrested this morning are heroes and will be remembered for this courage in the face of harsh police tactics.”
“Animal Rebellion accepts the need to support meat industry workers to transition to the production of alternative products, and calls on the government to immediately implement policies to support this change towards a plant-based food system, and work, for example, with the Vegan Society’s Grow Green Campaign, that helps farmers transition from meat and dairy to veg production”.
Read the Sentient Media article here
