This weekend, millions of Brits will be betting on one of the world's most spectacular sporting events. The Grand National will be watched by about ten million viewers in this country alone - once a year punters will be placing a bet and people who don't normally watch horse racing will be watching the big race.
At the same time, a small minority of animal rights extremists will be using fake statistics, false figures and downright distortions in an attempt to denigrate a great British institution beloved of great swathes of people from every walk of life.
A tiny minority of extremists will be given disproportionate airtime and a media soapbox to denigrate the Grand National, to call it cruel and to call for it to be banned. Only last Sunday, the Observer presented a deeply skewed opinion piece as a news article where the views of Animal Aid, with its handful of members, were given absurd prominence.
They have absurdly made the claim that the Grand National is "on a par with bullfighting." The death of an animal is a deliberate part of a bullfight - the death of a horse is something that all those in horse racing go out of their way to make sure doesn't happen.
The views of Animal Aid are apparently more important than the views of the multi-million membership RSPCA - who are working with the course to help make the event safer. The views of a tiny minority are apparently more important than the general public, who will be expressing their support for the Grand National in the betting shops and living rooms of Britain.
The death of two horses in last year's race was deeply unfortunate. It was tragic for the connections of the horses involved. And it's part of a Faustian pact for everyone who loves the National and loves National Hunt racing as a whole.
But let's not let that tragedy obscure some very important facts about the Grand National. In the 27 runnings of the race between 1984 and 2011, there have been 22 equine fatalities. True, that's 22 too many, but it certainly doesn't suggest that the National is the equine bloodbath that Animal Aid seem to argue it is.
There have also been enormous efforts to make the Grand National safer in recent years. Fences have been lowered, landing sides of fences have been made safer and RSPCA inspectors will be at Aintree for all three days of the National meeting. Slightly drowned out by the noisy heckling of Animal Aid protestors, the Aintree authorities have taken significant steps to remodel the course and make it as safe as possible for the horses.
The Grand National is a great spectacle and a great thrill for horses and riders alike. Narrow minded protestors forget that horses were born to race and the care and attention given to the average racehorse is beyond comparison. Racehorses are thoroughly pampered and cared for in their stables.
A Grand National entered horse is likely to be the apple of the eye of their trainer or owner. Any idea that racing people, who adore horses, would put them through something that they believe to be cruel is clearly complete nonsense. And anybody who suggests that horses are "forced" to do something they don't enjoy has clearly never seen the reaction of a thoroughbred who doesn't want to do something.
The Grand National isn't cruel. The Grand National is a thrilling spectacle and one of the few defining events that really brings the nation together. The handful of animal rights extremists, who seem determined to wreck the pleasures of ordinary working people, should redirect their attention to real, rather than imagined, animal cruelty. They should leave the Grand National alone.
Follow David Skelton on Twitter: www.twitter.com/djskelton
Andrew Telling: Canine Love in Conflict...Protecting the Bonds of War
How to pick the right horse for you in the 2012 Grand National
Grand National app shows future of augmented reality betting
Racehorses are ‘born to run’ in the same way that collies are bred for their instincts to herd or retrievers and spaniels to fetch. Synchronised did not die at Beecher’s Brook. He got up and ran on, jumping a further 5 fences riderless, which was to be his undoing. If he had been terrified or hated jumping, he would not have done that.
Yes, the National must be made safer . The Czech Pardubice is a much tougher, longer race, which turned its safety record around in 1993 with practical improvements, most importantly, smaller fields (According to Pete was not killed by the fence, he was brought down); more and better run offs to entice loose horses off the course; better and clearer take off markers (the raised orange toe boards are not enough).
Please, don’t distract from a serious welfare issue by spouting emotive inaccuracies.
I feel confident that the size of your ego will bring you back here this evening to look for posters who agree with your analysis, so I have no concerns about addressing you by name. I rather suspect though that after todays race you will not be commenting personally .
I can respond to every single fatuous point you made regarding improved safety, fantastic off-course welfare, total absence of cruelty, love and affection from owners etc etc. with one phrase. Wait until its a jockey who gets killed. After all we can apply all your points to them as well as the horses can't we. Aren't they bred to race? Don't they have a wonderful life off-course? Are'nt they loved by their owners?
I really would like to see what you have to say after todays race, but more than that I want you to be around when the first jockey dies at the National.
[quote] The death of two horses last year was unfortunate... What a get out of jail free word unfortunate is, in that context world war two was "unfortunate".
[quote] Lets not let that tragedy obscure some very important facts about the Grand National... That's like saying b*gger those who perished on the Titanic look how pretty the ship was.
[quote] Horses were born to race. Horses are bred and forced to race for mans greed.
[quote] Racehorses are thoroughly pampered and cared for in thier stables... In other words the prisoner ate a hearty breakfast.
Just like the foxhunting fraternity, your trying to defend the indefencable. [I bet you vote Tory too]
H. {Chesterfield}
---------------------------------------------
Hold your horses pal! All you need to to do here is deal with the real statistics. No need to rant and rave at the outset.
Let's not give too much credit to the race organisers. The above could have been written somewhat differently, along the lines of “As a result of the enormous efforts of protesters including supporters of Animal Aid, the Grand National has been made safer by lowering fences etc.........”.
And I wouldn't describe the lowering of fences and making the landing sides and course safer to save the lives of horses as “enormous” efforts. I would call them the efforts that any reasonable human being should make following 22 deaths over 27 races, without having to be coerced.
Also, the reason why the race “will be watched by about ten million viewers in this country alone” is not solely the public's love of horses. It is also because it is the closest thing we have to Roman chariot races. You're more likely than not to witness a horse die in any one race. In any event, the fact that “ten million viewers” and the “multi-million membership RSPCA” watch the race has no bearing on its degree of cruelty and should not be used as an argument.
I love watching this race. But I don't delude myself that it is not cruel. 22 deaths out of 27 races is simply outrageous.