The role of racing surfaces in horse welfare - Current trends and future challenges

Words - Virginia Lisco

Every thunderous stride of a racehorse is a delicate balance between power and vulnerability, and the surface beneath their hooves can make all the difference. Whether it’s turf, dirt, or synthetic tracks, these surfaces aren’t just where races are run, they play a critical role in protecting the health and welfare of the horses. The composition, maintenance, and resilience of these surfaces directly impact the likelihood of injuries, affecting everything from joint strain to catastrophic breakdowns.

In an era where the welfare of horses is more scrutinised than ever, the choice and upkeep of racing surfaces have become critical. Turf requires precise irrigation and aeration to remain safe and consistent; dirt demands meticulous grading and moisture control to prevent compaction; and synthetic tracks, though engineered for uniformity, must be closely monitored for temperature sensitivity and degradation over time.

But the challenges don’t stop there. With climate change rewriting the rules of weather patterns, bringing heavier rains, harsher droughts, and rising temperatures, the very nature of these tracks is being put to the test. Maintaining consistent conditions under these shifting extremes will require innovation and a commitment to sustainability, as the racing industry navigates the intersection of performance, safety, and environmental responsibility.

Traditionally, turf tracks dominate the European horse racing scene, serving as the primary surface in most racecourses due to their ability to provide optimal conditions for racing, particularly during the milder months. 

However, in recent years, there has been a growing interest in synthetic surfaces, across Europe, where these tracks are gaining traction for their ability to withstand the challenges posed by winter weather. Major racecourses across the continent utilise synthetic surfaces like Polytrack and Tapeta to ensure safe and consistent racing even under adverse weather conditions. Synthetic tracks are particularly valued for their superior drainage, stability in cases of frost and heavy rain, and different maintenance requirements compared to turf, offering a practical and modern solution to tackle climate challenges while maintaining a continuous racing calendar.

Dirt tracks are now almost entirely absent in Europe, with rare exceptions at a few minor racecourses where the quality of racing is generally low. This is because dirt surfaces neither provide the technical advantages of synthetics nor carry the prestige and tradition associated with turf. The shift toward synthetic surfaces, particularly noticeable in regions with harsher winters, is gradually establishing itself as a key trend for the future of European racing, while the dominance of turf remains unchallenged for the most prestigious events.

The ongoing shift in surface preferences reflects a broader focus on equine welfare, a priority that has spurred significant research and collaboration among leading organisations in the racing industry. The adoption of synthetic tracks, driven in part by studies highlighting their safety benefits, is a direct response to growing concerns about horse injuries and fatalities. A key driver behind this shift is the safety record of synthetic tracks compared to other surfaces. 

Data from studies, such as those conducted by The US Jockey Club's Equine Injury Database (EID), provide critical insights into this trend. According to the EID, synthetic tracks report significantly lower rates of catastrophic injuries, approximately 1.2 incidents per 1,000 starts, compared to dirt tracks, which average 2.1 incidents per 1,000 starts, and slightly lower than turf tracks, which average 1.6 incidents per 1,000 starts. These findings underscore the uniformity and predictability of synthetic surfaces, which minimise variability in footing and reduce the risk of uneven impact during high-speed gallops. Additionally, synthetic tracks are less susceptible to environmental factors, such as extreme wet or dry conditions, which can compromise the performance and safety of both turf and dirt surfaces.

Several prominent organisations have dedicated substantial resources to studying the relationship between track surfaces and equine health. For instance, The US Jockey Club, through the EID, has compiled data since 2008 that consistently demonstrates the superior safety profile of synthetic surfaces, providing a foundation for their increasing adoption, particularly in regions with demanding climates or high year-round racing schedules. 

Similarly, the British Horseracing Authority (BHA) conducts comprehensive reviews of racecourse safety, ensuring that maintenance protocols and track designs align with welfare goals. 

In France, France Galop has implemented robust injury monitoring systems, using the insights to refine track conditions and better match surface types to their environmental contexts. These efforts underline the growing recognition that track surfaces play a pivotal role in reducing injury risks, particularly in the high-impact phases of a horse's stride, as detailed in research such as the Equestrian Surfaces Guide. Despite the demonstrated safety advantages of synthetic surfaces, debates remain regarding their long-term impact on equine health. Critics suggest that synthetic tracks may contribute to soft tissue stress injuries due to their firmer composition compared to well-maintained turf. 

Building on the findings of the Equestrian Surfaces Guide, it becomes evident that the biomechanical interaction between the horse and the track surface is a critical determinant of safety and performance. Each phase of the stride: landing, support, and rollover, introduces distinct biomechanical stresses that vary based on the surface’s composition, maintenance, and environmental conditions. 

This research, further supported by Dr Mick Peterson’s, Racing Surfaces White Paper, highlights the importance of not only selecting appropriate surface types but also ensuring consistent maintenance to reduce injury risks.

Peterson’s study provides a detailed analysis of how surface properties, such as firmness, cushioning, and grip, directly influence the forces acting on a horse’s legs during high-speed galloping. The white paper emphasises that well-engineered synthetic tracks excel in delivering predictable and uniform performance, mitigating the variability often associated with dirt and turf surfaces. For example, in the landing phase, when shockwaves and braking forces are transmitted through the leg, synthetic tracks are designed to provide a controlled level of slide, dissipating some of the impact forces and reducing stress on the hoof and distal limb. In contrast, surfaces with excessive grip, such as poorly maintained dirt, amplify these forces, increasing the risk of injuries.

During the support phase, when the hoof absorbs up to 2.5 times the horse's body weight, surface uniformity becomes critical. Peterson’s research underscores that uneven surfaces, like waterlogged or overly compacted turf, can lead to uneven load distribution, raising the likelihood of strain injuries to tendons, ligaments, and joints. 

Synthetic tracks, with their engineered shock-absorbing properties, excel in maintaining stability during this phase, effectively minimising these risks. The rollover phase, where propulsion forces peak, also places significant demands on grip and shear strength. Synthetic surfaces are particularly effective here, offering consistent traction to prevent slips while avoiding the overstress on tendons and ligaments caused by overly hard or high-grip surfaces.

In addition to biomechanical insights, Peterson's white paper emphasises the importance of consistent surface maintenance. Even the best-engineered tracks can lose their safety advantages without proper upkeep. The study highlights the need for regular monitoring of moisture levels, compaction, and grip, alongside the use of advanced tools like surface testing equipment and ground-penetrating radar to proactively identify and address hazards. By maintaining these standards, synthetic surfaces can sustain their intended performance and safety benefits over time, reducing injury risks for both horses and riders.

These findings align closely with real-world injury data, such as that collected through the EID, which shows significantly lower rates of injuries and fatalities on synthetic tracks compared to dirt and turf. Peterson’s work further supports this data by demonstrating how the controlled grip, shock absorption, and uniformity of synthetic surfaces mitigate the extreme forces associated with high-speed galloping. 

As racing organisations increasingly prioritise equine welfare, integrating these biomechanical insights and maintenance best practices into surface design is becoming essential. This evolution not only addresses safety concerns but also ensures that performance standards are upheld across diverse environmental conditions and year-round racing schedules.

Another pressing challenge tied to track surfaces and horse welfare is the impact of climate change, which is increasingly complicating the maintenance and safety of racing tracks. Extreme weather events, such as heavy rainfall, prolonged droughts, and unexpected temperature fluctuations, threaten the integrity of turf, dirt, and even synthetic surfaces. Maintaining tracks in optimal condition under these conditions is not only a logistical challenge but also critical to equine welfare and the continuity of racing schedules.

Turf tracks, which dominate the European racing landscape, are particularly vulnerable to these climate pressures. Heavy rainfall can waterlog turf, reducing its ability to provide a stable and uniform footing. Prolonged droughts pose a different but equally severe threat. 

In 2022, during an exceptionally dry summer, several racecourses in the UK, including Newmarket, faced challenges in maintaining adequate irrigation. The lack of rainfall led to concerns about the firmness of the ground, which can increase the risk of injuries to horses. To address this, racecourses have had to rely heavily on irrigation systems, though these solutions come with significant costs and raise concerns about water sustainability in drought-prone regions. 

Dirt tracks, though rare in Europe, face their own set of challenges under extreme weather conditions. Unlike synthetic tracks, dirt surfaces are highly susceptible to changes in moisture levels. Heavy rains can turn dirt tracks into dangerously muddy and slippery courses, increasing the risk of falls and injuries. Even synthetic tracks, while more resilient to climatic variability, are not immune. Extreme heat can affect the surface properties, potentially leading to inconsistent footing. This highlights the need for ongoing innovation in synthetic surface technology to enhance resilience under extreme temperature conditions.

As climate change intensifies, the industry faces an urgent need to adapt its infrastructure and maintenance practices. Investment in weather-resistant technologies, such as hybrid turf systems that combine natural grass with synthetic reinforcement, is one promising avenue. Additionally, many racecourses are exploring more sustainable water use strategies and heat-resistant materials to future-proof their tracks. While these measures require significant financial and operational resources, they are crucial to maintaining the safety and sustainability of horse racing in an increasingly unpredictable climate.

At its core, the quality and maintenance of racing surfaces are fundamental to ensuring the safety and performance of both horses and jockeys. The interaction between a horse’s stride and the track is critical, with every phase: landing, support, and rollover, subjecting the horse’s legs to significant forces that vary depending on the surface type. This makes the choice and upkeep of racing surfaces a cornerstone of the sport. 

While turf continues to dominate prestigious events for its tradition, aesthetic appeal, and performance characteristics, synthetic tracks are increasingly recognised for their ability to minimise injury risks, maintain consistency across diverse weather conditions, and meet the demands of year-round racing. 

Insights from organisations like The US Jockey Club and BHA, combined with research such as Peterson’s Racing Surfaces White Paper, underline the importance of balancing innovation and tradition in surface design and maintenance. Synthetic surfaces, with their engineered properties, offer uniformity and controlled shock absorption, mitigating the biomechanical stresses that lead to injuries. 

However, turf’s natural cushioning and long-standing association with the heritage of the sport ensure its continued dominance at elite racing events. Maintaining this delicate balance is essential to enabling horses and jockeys to perform at their peak while prioritising safety and welfare. As the industry adapts to modern challenges, including climate variability and evolving performance demands, racing surfaces will remain central to ensuring the sport’s longevity and sustainability for future generations.

What is racing's "Social Licence" and what does this mean?

Paull Khan expands upon a presentation he gave at the 

European Parliament to the MEP’s Horse Group on November 30th

As World Horse Welfare recently pointed out in its excellent review of the subject—while social licence or the ongoing acceptance or approval of society may be ‘intangible, implicit and somewhat fluid’—an industry or activity loses this precious conferment at its peril. Examples, all too close to home, can be seen in greyhound racing in Australia and America or jumps racing in Australia.

What is clear is that our industry is acutely aware of the issue – as are our sister disciplines. The forthcoming Asian Racing Conference in Melbourne in February will feature a session examining what is being done to ‘ensure that (our) a sport is meeting society’s rapidly evolving expectations around welfare and integrity’. And back in November, the Federation Equestre Internationale (FEI) held a General Assembly whose ‘overriding theme’ was ‘that of social licence, and the importance for all stakeholders to understand the pressing needs for our sport to adapt and monitor the opinions of those around us’.

Considered at that meeting were results of a survey, which indicated that two-thirds of the public do not believe horses enjoy being used in sport and have concerns about their use. Those concerns mainly revolve around the welfare and safety of the horses. Intriguingly, a parallel survey of those with an active involvement in equestrian sport revealed that as many as half of this group even did not believe horses enjoyed their sport; and an even higher proportion than the general public—three-quarters—had concerns about their use.

While it is likely true, to an extent at least, that the public tends not to distinguish between equestrian sports, the specific concerns about horse racing are certainly different from those about Olympic equestrian disciplines, which centre on such matters as bits, bridles, spurs and nosebands. 

Upon what, then, does our social licence in European horse racing critically depend? What are the major issues about which the public has opinions or worries, and on which the continuance of our social licence may hang? It should be said at the outset that what follows is not based upon scientific evidence (and the research should certainly be undertaken) but merely reflects the belief of the author. But it is suggested with some confidence that the following (in no particular order) are the three issues uppermost in public consciousness. They are:

• Use of the whip

• Racecourse injuries/fatalities

• Aftercare – the fate of retired racehorses

There are, of course, other matters – the misuse of drugs and medications, gambling harms, etc., but the three topics above seem to account for a large proportion of the public’s anxieties about racing. There are likely to be subtle differences in the views of the public between one European country and another. Certainly, it is true that the volume of public disquiet varies very considerably between nations. In Scandinavia and Great Britain, for example, horse welfare and animal welfare more generally are very much front of mind and near the centre of public discourse. It is far less evident in several other countries. 

But it is illuminating to look at what racing has been doing in recent years in the three areas listed above, and what the future looks like. A survey was conducted among member countries of the European and Mediterranean Horseracing Federation (EMHF); and it is clear that, while there is much still to be done, there has been significant and sustained progress and good reason to believe that this is likely to continue – and in fact accelerate – over the next few years. 

Use of the whip

Let us consider whip use first. At the most recent World Horse Welfare Annual Conference in London in November, straplined ‘When Does Use Become Abuse’, one speaker was called upon to give strategic advice as to how to counter negative perceptions of equestrianism. 

What he decided to major on was striking. With the whole breadth of the equine sector from which to draw, he chose to hone in on horseracing and—more specifically yet—on the issue of whip use. It was a salutary further example of how, while the whip may be a tiresome distraction to many, it is front and centre in the minds of many of the public.

Is there any more emotive or divisive issue within racing than the whip? Admittedly, most racing professionals hold that it really is very difficult to hurt a horse with the mandated padded crops, even if one wanted to. And, with veterinary supervision at all tracks, it is impossible to get away with, even if one did. In brief, they don’t consider this a welfare issue, but rather one of public perception. 

But it is then that the divisions set in. Some conclude that all that is necessary to do has been done, and that any further restriction on the whip’s use would constitute pandering to an ignorant public. Others argue that, even if it is just a matter of public perception and the horses are not being hurt or abused, the sight of an animal being struck by a human is now anathema to increasingly broad swathes of society—in a similar way to the sight of a child being struck by an adult: a commonplace 50 years ago, but rare today. Therefore, the sport must act to be ahead of the curve of public sentiment in order to preserve its social licence.

How is this argument playing out? Let us look at a key element of the Rules of Racing in 18 European racing nations—the maximum number of strikes allowed in a race is a blunt measure, indeed, and one that takes no account of other variables such as the penalty regime for transgressions, but one that, nonetheless, paints a telling picture.

The first map shows how things stood 20 years ago. The majority of the countries are shown in black, denoting that there was no specified limit to the number of strikes. Just one appears in white – Norway banned the use of the whip as long ago as 1986.

The second paints the picture as it was 10 years ago. Eleven of the 18 countries had, in the intervening decade, changed their rules and applied a lower maximum number of strikes, and are shown in a lighter colour as a result.

Today’s situation is shown in the third map. All but one of the countries (excluding Norway) have tightened up their whip use rules still further over the past decade. None now allows unlimited use, and countries now banning the use of the whip for encouragement, number four.

It can be concluded that all countries across Europe are moving towards more restricted use of the whip. At different speeds and from different starting points, the direction of travel is common.

What will the situation be in another 10 years? Many administrators within EMHF countries, when asked to speculate on this, gave the view that there would be no whip tolerance within ten years and that the Scandinavian approach will have been adopted.  

On the other hand, Britain has recently concluded that the biggest public consultation on the subject and the new rules that are being introduced do not include a reduction in the number of strikes, but rather a series of other measures, including the possible disqualification of the horse and importantly, the requirement only to use the whip in the less visually offensive backhand position. 

Whether or not we will see a total ban within the next decade, it must be long odds-on that restrictions on whip use, across the continent, will be stricter again than they are today.

Aftercare

Twenty years ago, little thought was given to the subject of aftercare. There were some honourable exceptions: in Greece, the Jockey Club required its owners to declare if they could no longer provide for their horse, in which case it was placed in the care of an Animal Welfare organisation. Portugal had a similar reference in its Code. Most tellingly, in Britain a trail-blazing charity, Retraining of Racehorses (RoR), had been launched, following a review by the former British Horseracing Board.

Ten years ago, RoR had nearly 10,000 horses registered, had developed a national programme of competitions and events in other equestrian disciplines, and was holding parades at race-meeting to showcase the abilities of former racehorses to enter new careers. 

Di Arbuthnot, RoR’s chief executive, explains, “In the UK, a programme of activities for thoroughbreds had started to encourage more owner/riders to take on former racehorses.  This was supported by regional volunteers arranging educational help with workshops, clinics and camps to help the retraining process. Other countries were looking at this to see if similar ideas would work in Europe and beyond.

“Racing’s regulators had begun to think that this was an area they should be looking to help; retraining operators and charities that specialised in thoroughbreds were becoming recognised and supported; and classes at equestrian events began in some countries.  Owner/riders were looking to take on a thoroughbred in place of other breeds to compete or as a pleasure horse; the popularity of the thoroughbred was growing, not just by professional riders to use in equestrian disciplines, but also by amateurs to take on, care for and enjoy the many attributes of former racehorses.

“The aftercare of the thoroughbred was on the move.”

But not a great deal else was different in the European aftercare landscape.

Since then, however, there has been little short of an explosion of aftercare initiatives. In 2016, the International Forum for the Aftercare of Racehorses (IFAR) was born, “to advocate for the lifetime care of retired racehorses, to increase awareness within the international racing community of this important responsibility.” In this endeavour, IFAR is not in any way facing resistance from Racing Authorities – far from it. It is pushing against an open door. 

The International Federation of Horseracing Authorities has, as one of its twelve objectives, the promotion of aftercare standards. And the chair of its Welfare Committee, Jamie Stier, said some years ago that there is ‘now a better understanding and greater recognition that our shared responsibility for the welfare of racehorses extends beyond their career on the racetrack’. 

This direction from the top has been picked up and is increasingly being put into active practice. Also in 2016, France launched its own official charity Au Dela des Pistes, (‘beyond the racetrack’),  in 2020 Ireland followed suit with Treo Eile (‘another direction’). By 2019, in Britain, remarkably, many more thoroughbreds were taking part in dressage than running in steeplechases! 

So now the three main thoroughbred racing nations in Europe all have active and established aftercare programmes; and many other smaller racing nations are moving in that direction. It is not just a matter of repurposing in other equestrian pursuits – many of those horses retiring from racing that are not suited to competitive second careers are simply re-homed in retirement and others find profitable work in areas such as Equine Assisted Therapy. 

Arbuthnot (also chair of IFAR) adds: “For racing to continue as we know it, we must assure the general public, those that enjoy racing, that thoroughbreds are not discarded when their racing days are over and that they are looked after and have the chance of a second career.  It is up to all of us around the world to show that we care what happens to these horses wherever their racing days end and show respect to the thoroughbred that has given us enjoyment during their racing career, whether successful or not on the racecourse. If we do this, we help ensure that horse racing continues in our lifetime and beyond.”

It is important to publicise and promote the aftercare agenda, and the EMHF gives IFAR a standing platform at its General Assembly meetings. EMHF members have translated the IFAR ‘Tool Kit’—for Racing Authorities keen to adopt best practice—into several different European languages.

Time Down Under and Justine Armstrong-Small: Time Down Under failed to beat a single horse in three starts but following his retirement from racing, he has reinvented himself, including winning the prestigious showing title of Tattersalls Elite Champion at Hickstead in June 2022. Images courtesy of Hannah Cole Photography.

British racing recently established an independently chaired Horse Welfare Board. In 2020, the Board published its strategy ‘A Life Well Lived’, whose recommendations included collective lifetime responsibility for the horse, incorporating traceability across the lifetimes of horses bred for racing. 

Traceability will be key to future progress, and initiatives such as the electronic equine passport, which has been deployed among all thoroughbreds in Ireland and Britain, will play a vital part. Thoroughbred Stud Book birth records are impeccable, and we know the exact number of foals registered throughout this continent and beyond. The aim must be to establish the systems that enable us to ascertain, and then quantify the fate of each, at the least until their first port of call after retirement from racing.

Racecourse injuries

There can be nothing more distressing – for racing professionals and casual observers alike – than to see a horse break down. The importance of minimising racecourse injuries—and, worse still, fatalities—is something everyone agrees upon. What is changing, though, it would appear, is the potential for scientific advances to have a significant beneficial effect.

Of course, accidents can and do befall horses anywhere and they can never be eliminated entirely from sport. But doing what we can to mitigate risk is our ethical duty, and effectively publicising what we have done and continue to do may be a requirement for our continued social licence.   

There is much that can be said. It is possible to point to a large number of measures that have been taken over recent years, with these amongst them:

• Better watering and abandonment of jump racing if ground is hard 

• Cessation of jump racing on all-weather tracks 

• Cessation of jump racing on the snow 

• Safer design, construction and siting of obstacles

• By-passing of obstacles in low sunlight

• Colouring of obstacles in line with equine sight (orange to white)

• Heightened scrutiny of inappropriate use of analgesics

• Increased prevalence of pre-race veterinary examinations, with withdrawal of horses if necessary

• The outlawing of pin-firing, chemical castration, blistering and blood-letting

• Abandonment of racing in extreme hot weather

Many of the above relate to jump racing, and Britain has witnessed a reduction of 20% in jump fatality rates over the past 20 years. But there is more that must be done, and a lot of work is indeed being done in this space around the world. 

One of the most exciting recent developments is the design and deployment of ground-breaking fracture support kits which were distributed early in 2022 to every racecourse in Britain. 

Compression boots suitable for all forelimb fractures

By common consent, they represent a big step forward – they are foam-lined and made of a rigid glass reinforced plastic shell; they’re easily and securely applied, adjustable for varying sizes of hoof, etc. They reduce pain and anxiety, restrict movement which could do further damage, and allow the horse to be transported by horse ambulance to veterinary facilities. 

X-rays can then be taken through these boots, allowing diagnosis and appropriate treatment. These kits have proved their worth already: they were used on 14 occasions between April and December last year, and it would appear that no fewer than four of these horses have not only recovered but are in fine shape to continue their careers. It is easy to envisage these or similar aids being ubiquitous across European racetracks in the near future.

Modular splints suitable for slab fractures of carpal bones

Perhaps of greatest interest and promise are those developments which are predictive in nature, and which seek to identify the propensity for future problems in horses. 

Around the world, there are advances in diagnostic testing available to racecourse vets. PET scanners, bone scanners, MRI scanners and CT scanners are available at several tracks In America, genetic testing for sudden death is taking place, as is work to detect horses likely to develop arrhythmias of the heart.

Then there are systems that are minutely examining the stride patterns of horses while galloping to detect abnormalities or deviations from the norm. In America, a great deal of money and time is being spent developing a camera-based system and, in parallel, an Australian-US partnership is using the biometric signal analysis that is widely used in other sports. 

The company – StrideSAFE – is a partnership between Australian company StrideMASTER and US company Equine Analysis. They make the point that, while pre-race examinations that involve a vet trotting a horse up and down and looking for signs of lameness, can play a useful role, many issues only become apparent at the gallop. 

There are, in any case, limitations to what is discernible to the naked eye, which works at only 60 hertz. StrideMASTER’s  three-ounce movement sensors, which fit into the saddlecloth, work at 2,400 hertz, measuring movements in three dimensions – forward and backward, up and down and side to side, and building up a picture of each horse’s ‘stride fingerprint’.

In a blind trial, involving thousands of horses, 27 of which had suffered an injury, this system had generated a warning ‘red-flag’ for no fewer than 25 of them. The green lines in the centre of this diagram are this horse’s normal stride fingerprint; the red line was the deviant pattern that would have flagged up the potential problem, and the grey line was where the horse then sadly injured itself.

The ‘stride fingerprint’ of a racehorse

While the false-positive rate is impressive for such screening tools, another enemy of all predictive technologies is the false positive, and ways need to be found to take action on the findings without imposing potentially unnecessary restrictions on horses’ participation. At present, the StrideMASTER system is typically throwing up three or four red flags for runners at an Australian meeting—more in America. 

A study in the spring by the Kentucky Equine Drug Research Council, centering on Churchill Downs, will seek to hone in on true red flags and to develop a protocol for subsequent action.  David Hawke, StrideMaster managing director, expands, “Protocols will likely vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, depending on the imaging modalities available. At Churchill Downs, they will have a PET scan, and we will be going straight from red-flag to PET scan.” 

There will be other approaches available to regulators involving, for example, discussion with the trainer, a requirement for a clean vet’s certificate, or perhaps for a normal ‘fingerprint’, before racing next.          

CONCLUSIONS

There is a need for continued investment and resource allocation by Racing Authorities. But the will would seem to be there. In Britain, €7M from betting will, over the next three years, fund an extensive array of no fewer than 26 horse welfare projects, covering such matters as education and support for re-homers, analysis of medication data and clinical records, fatalities occurring off the track, ground/going research and obstacle improvement and development. That is a serious statement of intent and an illustration of just how high in importance the welfare of racehorses has now become.

Of course, not all racing nations have the resources to conduct such research. It will be vital, therefore, that the lessons learnt are shared throughout the racing world. In Europe, this is where the EMHF will play a vital role. The federation has always had, as primary aims, education and the adoption of best practice across its membership.

The hope must be that, through all these measures and many others in combination, we can assuage the concerns of the public sufficiently to retain our social licence. But let our ambitions not rest there. We must also strive to shift the debate, to move onto the front foot and invite a focus on the many positive aspects of racing, as an example of the partnership between man and horse that brings rich benefit to both parties. 

Elsewhere in this issue, there is a feature on racing in Turkey, and it was the founding father of that country, Kemal Ataturk, who famously said:

“Horseracing is a social need for modern societies.” 

We should reinforce at every opportunity the fact that racing provides colour, excitement, entertainment, tax revenues, rural employment, a sense of historical and cultural identity and much more to the human participants. It is also the very purpose of a thoroughbred’s life and rewards it with ‘a life well lived.’

We have a lot more to do, but let’s hope we can turn the tide of public opinion such that people increasingly look at life as did Ataturk.