Horse racing is a global sport steeped in centuries of tradition, elegance and spectacle. From the ancient chariot races to today’s modern thoroughbred racehorses, this global industry provides an exciting and challenging sport for both horse and rider. But it is also a very dangerous sport.
One of the most common types of horse races is a flat race, where horses run on a surface, such as a tarmac or turf track, over specified distances. There are also jump races, in which a horse competes over obstacles, and harness racing, where a harnessed horse trots or paces with a jockey riding behind in a sulky (also called a sulky race). In addition to flat, jump and harness racing, there are handicapped races in which a horse’s weight is assigned by the racing secretary based on its performance.
A horse race can be an exciting event for both spectators and participants, with the thrill of placing a bet and the heart-thumping action of horses galloping over the finish line. But it is also a dangerous event for both horse and rider, with many fatal accidents occurring each year. In the US alone, there are around 100 fatal horse races each year.
These fatalities are not only tragic for the families of those involved, but also for the entire equestrian community. For this reason, it is important to understand the nature of horse race and what impact it has on the safety of participants and on a thoroughbred’s welfare.
The concept of what is natural has particular relevance in the horse racing discourse, guiding breeding regulations; influencing how the thoroughbreds are perceived and their behaviour; and affecting husbandry, handling and training practices. To explore how key industry and animal advocacy informants conceptualise naturalness in these contexts, this research utilised semi-structured interviews and photo-elicitation with a total of 74 informants from the US, Australia and UK. The informants were asked to comment on four common images of thoroughbreds on race day and discuss how they related to the idea of what is natural.
The animal advocacy informants were more likely to identify a number of issues with the images, including a lack of naturalness. They were also more concerned with the holistic idea of naturalness, extending it to include a thoroughbred’s innate physiological; emotional and social needs; its telos, health and healing; and its relationship to humans. This more expansive idea of naturalness enabled them to recognise that a wide range of racing practices were not in the interest of the thoroughbreds’ welfare and that they denaturalised their life world, condition and treatment, compromising their nature, integrity and agency. In contrast, the industry informants tended to naturalise, normalise and downplay the impacts of these practices by focusing on what can be seen in the image rather than what is not visible. They often ignored the equipment and human handling that can be seen or downplayed, such as by avoiding descriptions of mental and behavioural expressions.