Cargando…

A Critical Analysis of the British Horseracing Authority’s Review of the Use of the Whip in Horseracing

SIMPLE SUMMARY: This is a critique of the British Horseracing Authority’s 2011 report, A Review of the Use of the Whip in Horseracing. It analyses the way the report uses science and public opinion research to reach conclusions on the animal welfare impact of whip use. Our analysis suggests that som...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jones, Bidda, Goodfellow, Jed, Yeates, James, McGreevy, Paul D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494335/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26479143
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani5010138
_version_ 1782380072320106496
author Jones, Bidda
Goodfellow, Jed
Yeates, James
McGreevy, Paul D.
author_facet Jones, Bidda
Goodfellow, Jed
Yeates, James
McGreevy, Paul D.
author_sort Jones, Bidda
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: This is a critique of the British Horseracing Authority’s 2011 report, A Review of the Use of the Whip in Horseracing. It analyses the way the report uses science and public opinion research to reach conclusions on the animal welfare impact of whip use. Our analysis suggests that some of the report’s findings are insufficiently defended by the report and that further independent scientific review is needed to reach definitive conclusions about whip use on racehorse welfare. ABSTRACT: There is increasing controversy about the use of the whip as a performance aid in Thoroughbred horseracing and its impact on horse welfare. This paper offers a critical analysis of the British Horseracing Authority’s (BHA) 2011 Report Responsible Regulation: A Review of the Use of the Whip in Horseracing. It examines the BHA’s process of consultation and use of science and public opinion research through the application of current scientific literature and legal analysis. This analysis suggests that the BHA’s findings on the welfare impact and justification for whip use are insufficiently defended by the report. These findings indicate that the report is an inadequate basis from which to draw any definitive conclusions on the impact of whips on racehorse welfare. Further review is needed, undertaken by an independent scientific body, to advance this debate.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4494335
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44943352015-09-30 A Critical Analysis of the British Horseracing Authority’s Review of the Use of the Whip in Horseracing Jones, Bidda Goodfellow, Jed Yeates, James McGreevy, Paul D. Animals (Basel) Review SIMPLE SUMMARY: This is a critique of the British Horseracing Authority’s 2011 report, A Review of the Use of the Whip in Horseracing. It analyses the way the report uses science and public opinion research to reach conclusions on the animal welfare impact of whip use. Our analysis suggests that some of the report’s findings are insufficiently defended by the report and that further independent scientific review is needed to reach definitive conclusions about whip use on racehorse welfare. ABSTRACT: There is increasing controversy about the use of the whip as a performance aid in Thoroughbred horseracing and its impact on horse welfare. This paper offers a critical analysis of the British Horseracing Authority’s (BHA) 2011 Report Responsible Regulation: A Review of the Use of the Whip in Horseracing. It examines the BHA’s process of consultation and use of science and public opinion research through the application of current scientific literature and legal analysis. This analysis suggests that the BHA’s findings on the welfare impact and justification for whip use are insufficiently defended by the report. These findings indicate that the report is an inadequate basis from which to draw any definitive conclusions on the impact of whips on racehorse welfare. Further review is needed, undertaken by an independent scientific body, to advance this debate. MDPI 2015-03-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4494335/ /pubmed/26479143 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani5010138 Text en © 2015 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Jones, Bidda
Goodfellow, Jed
Yeates, James
McGreevy, Paul D.
A Critical Analysis of the British Horseracing Authority’s Review of the Use of the Whip in Horseracing
title A Critical Analysis of the British Horseracing Authority’s Review of the Use of the Whip in Horseracing
title_full A Critical Analysis of the British Horseracing Authority’s Review of the Use of the Whip in Horseracing
title_fullStr A Critical Analysis of the British Horseracing Authority’s Review of the Use of the Whip in Horseracing
title_full_unstemmed A Critical Analysis of the British Horseracing Authority’s Review of the Use of the Whip in Horseracing
title_short A Critical Analysis of the British Horseracing Authority’s Review of the Use of the Whip in Horseracing
title_sort critical analysis of the british horseracing authority’s review of the use of the whip in horseracing
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494335/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26479143
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani5010138
work_keys_str_mv AT jonesbidda acriticalanalysisofthebritishhorseracingauthoritysreviewoftheuseofthewhipinhorseracing
AT goodfellowjed acriticalanalysisofthebritishhorseracingauthoritysreviewoftheuseofthewhipinhorseracing
AT yeatesjames acriticalanalysisofthebritishhorseracingauthoritysreviewoftheuseofthewhipinhorseracing
AT mcgreevypauld acriticalanalysisofthebritishhorseracingauthoritysreviewoftheuseofthewhipinhorseracing
AT jonesbidda criticalanalysisofthebritishhorseracingauthoritysreviewoftheuseofthewhipinhorseracing
AT goodfellowjed criticalanalysisofthebritishhorseracingauthoritysreviewoftheuseofthewhipinhorseracing
AT yeatesjames criticalanalysisofthebritishhorseracingauthoritysreviewoftheuseofthewhipinhorseracing
AT mcgreevypauld criticalanalysisofthebritishhorseracingauthoritysreviewoftheuseofthewhipinhorseracing