THE OPPOSITION ARE CIRCLING.

​At the next big get-together of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals a motion will be put-forward to extend the charity’s aims to seeking a ban on Angling and Horse Racing. To help succeed in this aim the radicals within the society wish to halve the number of people at the high table, thereby lessening opposition to their take-over of the charity.
It is not a given that the motion will have enough support to become R.S.P.C.A. policy. Though the idea that such a charitable organisation must debate the subject of banning one of the most popular pastimes in the country, perhaps the world, and one of the country’s leading sports, both legal and money-earners for the exchequer, is alarming enough to give any one of us nightmares.
Perhaps it is wishful thinking on my part, but there seems an element of self-destruction in proposing a ban on either angling or horse racing as both are popular with both the Royal Family and large sections of the social classes. I cannot believe the Queen, a major owner and breeder of racehorses, would allow the charity royal patronage if they begin to campaign to have her favourite pastime banned. The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was considered an oddity when first conceived and it was only with royal approval and the appendage of Royal in its title was it taken seriously. To attempt to lay siege to the Monarch’s great sporting joy will only harm the reputation of the R.S.P.C.A.
To wish to have angling outlawed seems also to be a quick and easy way to harm donations and lessen the good work carried out by the charity. Angling is a pastime for everyone; as with horse racing it is an activity that brings together all layers of society, even if in the main it can be described as a working-class activity. I am not an angler myself and I dare say there is, as there always will be no matter what the sport or pastime, people who bring it into disrepute. But from what I read and hear about anglers they are countryman at heart, with an abiding interest in keeping waterways clean and healthy for the fish to which they are home.
And of course, and here I must speak mainly of horse racing as that is where my experience lies, there is no inherent cruelty to concern the R.S.P.C.A. If there were any animal welfare issues the sport would be defending itself on almost a daily basis in the law courts. No animal is better cared for than the racehorse. If it were not for the thoroughbred industry veterinary care around the world would not be as advanced as it is.
We are, though, in a precarious position and cannot take this proposed threat lightly. The unfortunate and accidental deaths of horses whilst in training and on the racecourse cannot with the best will in the world be reduced below present levels. We all wish broken legs could be healed as they are with humans. We wish no horse would collapse as a result of heart failure. But these things do occur and always will do. We cannot escape the inescapable.
But we can improve the image of the sport by restricting, even more severely than the present rules allow, use of the whip, and when a jockey transgresses the rules, whether it be seven strokes, three strokes of none at all, the he/she and the horse should be disqualified. Everyone from the stable staff to the trainer, owner and jockey are part of one team. In a football match if a goal is scored by a player who has improved his position by fouling a defender or by handball the goal is disallowed and the whole team shares the punishment. It needs to be the same in horse racing. Personally, I believe there should be a trial period when ‘hands and heels’ races for professional riders should be tested, with a date in the near-future selected for racing in this country to become either no strokes at all or one stroke limit. The opposition is circling.
And though we may have differing views on Michael Gove, to my mind he is about to increase the maximum punishment for cruelty to animals from a ludicrous 6-months to 5-years imprisonment. Is there any real difference between hitting a dog, for instance, seven-times with a whip and hitting a horse a similar number? One day a Law Lord might decide there isn’t.
Do I think the danger is close at hand? No. Horse racing is a good little earner for the exchequer both from betting and in exports. It is an industry where we lead the world. It is why once we leave the E.U. the thoroughbred industry will be given dispensation to carry on as normal. Angling, too, is safe, at least for a good length of time. But we should be one step ahead of the mob. They got hunting banned, remember, and that’s not coming back any day soon. They were complacent. They believed once the Conservatives were in power life would resume as they had always known it. They were wrong
Hopefully the good men and women of the R.S.P.C.A. will recognise the jeopardy of siding with radicals and throw out the motion. But that will not make the threat disappear. The whip issue must be addressed and addressed in the very near future. It is the greatest weakness in our defence of horse welfare within the industry.