IHRB appears to be repositioning its role within the industry Are you aware of "global challenges like antimicrobial drug resistance and anthelmintic resistance?" I didn't think so. Well this is an example of some of the wording you need to wade through in order to respond to the Irish Horseracing Regulatory Board's (IHRB) Public Consultation Survey. This extensive survey is seeking feedback not only from industry professionals, but also from random members of the public in relation to new Thoroughbred Welfare Standards that the IHRB are introducing in order to define the minimum level of care expected from those working in the industry. Many of these welfare standards relate to basic common sense, such things as ensuring that horses have access to clean water and are fed a nutritious diet. Not a million miles from the sort of stuff you might explain to a seven-year-old when they get a pet rabbit. Questioning the IHRB's Focus The main issue I have with these Thoroughbred Welfare Standards and the whole consultation process that the IHRB has undertaken, is that I don't believe it represents the best use of IHRB resources and it looks to me as if the IHRB is straying from its core remit. To my mind it is the equivalent of An Garda Siochana producing a Parenting Guide, telling us exactly how we should act at each stage of a child's development. I would much prefer if the Regulator spent our tax payers' money solving cases that damage the reputation and integrity of the sport, rather than producing fluffy, vague and aspirational welfare standards that on the whole are already adhered to by the vast majority, if not all, of those working with thoroughbreds. Tell me who drugged Viking Hoard in Tramore. Tell me who gave anabolic steroids to Luke Comer's horses. Don't tell me that "Stabling conditions must be such that a horse can enjoy a calm, restful and secure space with fresh, clean air and acceptable noise and lighting levels." I'm not even sure I have that myself. Article highlights: The IHRB is introducing new Thoroughbred Welfare Standards that outline minimum care levels for racehorses Many standards are basic common sense already practiced by industry professionals The author believes the IHRB should focus on solving integrity cases rather than creating vague welfare guidelines Concerns exist about the standards' enforceability and the IHRB's responsibility after a horse's racing career Potential Undermining of Public Confidence The IHRB tells us that these nine Thoroughbred Welfare Standards are to be "designed to reflect best practice, protect public confidence in the sport, and provide assurance to all stakeholders, including owners, government, and the wider public, that Irish racing meets the highest expectations." I think there is a danger that this whole process may inadvertently undermine public confidence. By publishing a completely new set of guidelines for racehorse trainers, who are already licensed by the IHRB, leaves it open to an obvious interpretation that these welfare standards are now needed because many within the sport have not been following basic principles of animal husbandry. Vague Wording and Retirement Concerns A "Retirement Planning Strategy" for racehorses is the one area of these Thoroughbred Welfare Standards that is certainly needed for the sport, but the proposed wording is vague and rather meaningless. "Trainers must ensure that when a horse leaves their care, they take reasonable steps to safeguard its immediate welfare and be satisfied as to the suitability of its next destination, and that its departure is documented" "Take reasonable steps to safeguard its immediate welfare," that phrase could be interpreted in many different ways and would be a nightmare to enforce. It could literally mean walking the horse on to the box that is removing it from the yard. One trainer's satisfaction "as to the suitability of a horse's next destination" may not mirror that of society as a whole. This wording falls a long way short of what I would consider a retirement planning strategy. Overall I'm not convinced IHRB is the right body to be involved in a Retirement Planning Strategy in the first place as it considers its own role to end the moment a horse's racing career finishes. Questions of Responsibility and Enforcement When there was a national outcry last year following the airing of the RTE's Prime Time investigation into the Straffan abattoir, the IHRB stayed silent and never made a statement. Despite witnessing the shocking abuses to horses that had been under their care during their racing careers, the IHRB considered this to have nothing to do with them as the animals were no longer involved within the sport. The word "must" is used repeatedly in the proposed Thoroughbred Welfare Standards, which infers that there will be sanctions for those that don't adhere to them, but associated penalties have not been specified. Will a trainer be fined if the bedding in their stables is not considered "comfortable" by IHRB inspectors? Will future IHRB stable inspections involve detailed scrutiny of all nine Welfare Standards as well as testing for prohibited substances and up to date medicines records? If so, will the IHRB require additional resources and staff to carry this out? Public Consultation Concerns One of the final questions in the survey is: "Do you believe these standards strike the right balance between horse welfare and practical operation realities in training yards?" I wonder how the IHRB expects members of the public, with no intimate knowledge of any training yard, to answer this question? Even for those working within the industry it is a difficult question to answer. Training yards in Ireland are extremely diverse, everything from small family run operations with only a couple of horses all the way up to the world-leading facilities in yards like Ballydoyle. One set of standards won't necessarily fit all. On the flip side, it can be considered that this public consultation process marks a positive shift for the IHRB, an organisation born out of the secretive Turf Club. Openness and transparency from the sport's regulator is something to be welcomed, but I'm not sure this particular set of Welfare Standards is the correct place to start.
