Select Committee on Jumps Racing

PP 291

FINAL REPORT

of the SELECT COMMITTEE ON JUMPS RACING

November 2016

Tabled in the House of Assembly and published pursuant to Standing Order 346 30 November 2016

Second Session, Fifty-Third Parliament

Contents 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...... 3 2. INTRODUCTION BY THE CHAIR ...... 5 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ...... 7 3.1 Appointment of the Committee...... 7 3.2 Membership ...... 7 3.3 Terms of Reference...... 7 3.4 Disclosure of Evidence...... 8 3.5 Conduct of Inquiry...... 8 4. SUMMARY LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 10 4.1 RECOMMENDATIONS – OVERVIEW...... 11 4.1.1 Future Direction ...... 11 4.1.2 Research and Data Collection...... 11 4.1.3 Safety Planning and Risk Mitigation ...... 12 4.1.4 Safeguarding Animal Welfare...... 13 4.1.5 Wastage and Overbreeding in the Thoroughbred Racing Industry...... 14 5. RECOMMENDATIONS AND RATIONALE ...... 15 5.1 Public Submissions ...... 48 APPENDICES...... 75 APPENDIX 1 - Abbreviations and Acronyms ...... 75 APPENDIX 2 – Written Submissions ...... 76 APPENDIX 3 – Form Variation Submissions ...... 95 APPENDIX 4 – Witnesses ...... 118 APPENDIX 5 – Papers Received...... 119 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The House of Assembly passed a resolution on 23 September 2015, on the motion of the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, Forests, Tourism, Recreation and Sport, and Racing, the Hon. L.W. Bignell M.P., for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into and report on jumps racing in South Australia and in particular:

(a) whether or not it should be banned; and (b) any related matters.

The findings of this report are presented in two sections, recommendations & rationale and public submissions, which draw on and summarise the key arguments presented to the Committee through submissions, hearings and research studies. The Committee has considered and used evidence from these sources to produce 28 recommendations, which are grouped under five main headings and reflect critical areas of concern that must be addressed for jumps racing in South Australia (S.A.) to continue.

The Committee found that jumps racing in S.A. should not be banned but that its continuation should be conditional on the industry meeting the broad areas for improvement outlined in the recommendations, over the next three years. It is clear to the Committee that jumps racing presents a greater risk of injury or fatality to horses and jockeys than flat racing, with steeplechase races presenting the greatest risk. It is, however, also evident that the implementation of several measures since 2010 has made the sport safer, as evidenced by a reduction in horse fatalities in our State in recent seasons.

The recommendations on the future direction of jumps racing, and the conditions upon which it may continue, aim to address gaps in research and data collection, matters concerning transparency and accountability in industry practices, the need for safety planning and risk mitigation to direct continuous improvement objectives, and for additional duty of care measures to safeguard animal welfare.

The recommendation on the terms of reference concerning any related matters addresses wastage and overbreeding in the thoroughbred racing industry. The discarding of horses no longer considered useful to the industry is an area of considerable concern to the Committee. The industry must do more to determine the proportion of racehorses that go to slaughter, the reasons for this and the contribution of breeding practices to their fate.

The intent of the Committee’s recommendations is to see the industry achieve best practice in all aspects of its endeavours, with a focus on ensuring continuous improvement in the safety of the sport for both horses and riders.

The public submissions reflect the multifaceted arguments advanced by opponents and supporters of jumps racing. They establish the contextual basis of the concerns raised and outline developments that have contributed to the current environment in which the industry operates. This includes an overview of the key reviews and inquiries on the safety performance of jumps racing that have resulted in improvements to safety standards and practices.

3 While there is considerable disagreement and contestation of arguments posed by those who support and oppose a ban on jumps racing, the Committee is satisfied that it is in the interests of all to gain the industry’s co-operation in striving to achieve the best possible safety and animal welfare outcomes in this sport and in the racing industry more broadly.

The Committee site visit to Mount Gambier

(Committee Members L to R: Mr Bell, Dr McFetridge and the Hon. Michael Atkinson)

4 2. INTRODUCTION BY THE CHAIR

During the course of this Inquiry, the Committee has welcomed contributions from more than one thousand interested individuals and organisations, who have represented a broad spectrum of views through their submissions and evidence at hearings.

The Committee has taken the time to gain a thorough understanding of the evidence available from research and arguments advanced in favour of or opposing a ban on jumps racing and other related matters. The information we have received has been supplemented by first-hand knowledge of the industry and its practices, gained from site visits to rural and regional racing clubs in South Australia and Victoria.

We have carefully considered the impact a ban would have on the many individuals, businesses and communities that would be most affected, the welfare of the horses and ethical concerns that underpin the position of those who oppose this activity.

The Committee acknowledges that jumps racing has been a unique part of South Australian history since 1876. Generations of South Australians have grown up with the tradition of attending the picnic races at the Oakbank Easter Carnival, which is now regarded as the largest meeting of its kind in the world. The Great Eastern and Von Doussa steeplechase races have gained iconic status, attracting visitors from across Australia and overseas.

The Committee is satisfied that jumps racing at Oakbank, and in other rural communities in which it takes place in South Australia, provides a financial boost to regional tourism and local businesses. This industry supports and sustains a small but dedicated group of owners and trainers, and in turn, jockeys, strappers, farriers, veterinarians, equipment and feed suppliers and many others who count on this industry to make a living.

We have heard from those with family connections to jumps racing that go back more than a century and others who have spent their entire working lives in this industry. From these encounters, we have formed the view that the jumps racing community loves its sport and the horses upon which it relies.

There is, however, no question that jumps racing carries greater risk of injury and fatality to horses than flat racing. This is well documented. The majority of the submissions we received legitimately expressed concerns for the safety and welfare of horses participating in jumps races. It is clear from these submissions that there is a widespread public sentiment for a greater duty of care to animals, particularly those involved in sports.

Among the submissions were passionate pleas from members of the public who saw no place in our society for cruelty to animals and those who find jumps racing abhorrent, leading only to death and suffering. Others argued that a hallmark of a progressive society is how we treat our animals. As a society we do not and must not tolerate cruelty to animals. To guard against this, needless or explicit cruelty is illegal and enforceable under the Animal Welfare Act 1985.

We must acknowledge changing community attitudes and values that require the industry to implement further protections and show greater transparency and accountability. If the traditions of the past are to continue into the 21st century, we need to ensure that adequate protections and appropriate whole -of – life animal - welfare and safety standards are in place.

5 Research indicates that the implementation of safety measures since 2010 have made a significant impact, with a reduction in fatalities in recent years. There is, however, much room for improvement. Furthermore, the Committee has found that research and data on various facets of jumps racing and either limited or non-existent. A strong evidence base is vital not only for informed public debate but also for progressive social change.

The industry must satisfy the public that it has a continuing commitment to mitigating risk and achieving world best practice in all aspects of this sport. The Committee is confident that the recommendations we have made in this report call the industry to account and can enhance the safety of this sport in South Australia.

I thank all who took time to provide submissions and present evidence to the Committee. This has greatly informed our discussions and contributed to what we believe to be a balanced response to a complex issue.

I also thank my fellow Committee members for their time and diligence; this Committee was an extraordinarily cohesive one and I am grateful to each committee member – the Hon. Michael Atkinson, Mr Troy Bell, Mr Eddie Hughes and Dr Duncan McFetridge – for their willingness to work so well and so thoroughly together.

Thank you also to the very hardworking support staff - Ms Rachel Stone, Mr Shannon Riggs and Ms Veronika Petroff - for their commitment to the Inquiry and their support of committee members; it is greatly appreciated and their professionalism is to be commended.

Katrine Hildyard MP

Chair

30 November 2016

6 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMITTEE

3.1 Appointment of the Committee

On 23 September 2015 the House of Assembly passed a resolution, on the motion of the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, the Hon. L.W. Bignell M.P., for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into and report on jumps racing South Australian, and, in particular –

3.2 Membership

The Membership of the Select Committee prescribed by the resolution of the House of Assembly was –

Ms Katrine Hildyard M.P. Member for Reynell Chair

The Hon. Michael Atkinson M.P. Member for Croydon

Mr Troy Bell M.P. Member for Mount Gambier

Mr Eddie Hughes M.P. Member for Giles

Dr Duncan McFetridge M.P. Member for Morphett

Ms Hildyard was elected Chair of the Select Committee. Ms Rachel Stone (Parliamentary Officer) was assigned as Secretary. Mr Shannon Riggs (Parliamentary Assistant) also assisted the Committee as A/Secretary. A Research Officer, Ms Veronika Petroff, was appointed by the Committee on 25 May 2016.

3.3 Terms of Reference

The Select Committee’s terms of reference, as agreed by the House of Assembly, were:

That this House establish a Select Committee to inquire into and report on jumps racing South Australian, and in particular –

(e) whether or not it should be banned; and (f) any related matters.

The motion called on the Select Committee to report on 30 June 2016, which was later extended to 30 November 2016.

7 3.4 Disclosure of Evidence

Pursuant to Standing Order 339 the House ordered that the Select Committee have power to authorise the disclosure or publication, as it sees fit, of any evidence presented to the committee before such evidence being reported to the House.

3.5 Conduct of Inquiry

The committee received 1811 submissions in a range of forms, from individuals and organisations (some submitted twice). These included online petitions; letters based on online petitions supplemented with personal observations; and lengthier submissions, presenting arguments founded on available independent, academic and industry research. For administrative purposes, 972 of these submissions were categorised as ‘form letters’, or variations of form letters as shown in Appendix 4. A list of organisations and individuals providing written submissions is attached as Appendix 3.

Submissions were received from a wide range of individuals and organisations, including veterinarians, animal welfare organisations, Members of Parliament, regional racing clubs, owners, breeders and trainers of racehorses and jumps race horses, representative bodies, such as Thoroughbred Racing South Australia (T.R.S.A.), Australian Jumping Racing Association (AJRA), Country Racing Victoria (C.R.V.), former jockeys, business owners associated with the thoroughbred racing industry and individuals who have had a long association with horses through equestrian sports.

Oral evidence was heard from 22 witnesses and some of these witnesses appeared more than once. A list of those who appeared before the Committee to give evidence is attached as Appendix 4.

On 13 October 2015 the committee resolved that all evidence received by the committee be published on the internet and made public, providing that witnesses had had an opportunity to correct the Hansard record of their evidence. Transcripts and submissions can be found at www.parliament.sa.gov.au (under the “Committees” menu and then “Select Committees” “Jumps Racing”.)

The committee has met on 18 occasions to receive oral evidence, to consider written submissions and to deliberate on the committee’s findings. The procedural meetings and hearings were held in Adelaide, at Parliament House.

At the commencement of its inquiry, the committee determined that is was essential to attend various jumps racing meets throughout the racing season to meet with various stakeholders and gather evidence to contribute to investigation.

8 The committee attended these jumps meets –

 Oakbank Easter Monday - 28 March 2016, Oakbank, Adelaide Hills, South Australia  TAB Warrnambool May Racing Carnival – 4 May 2016, Warrnambool, Victoria  Mount Gambier Race Day – 13 May 2016 – Mount Gambier, South Australia

The Committee site visit to Oakbank Easter Monday

(L-R: The Hon. Michael Atkinson, Mr Bell, Ms Hildyard, Dr McFetridge, Mr Mark Angus (Oakbank Committee Member) and Mr Bill Williams (former jockey and trainer)

9 4. SUMMARY LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Under its Terms of Reference, the Select Committee was established to inquire into and report on jumps racing in South Australian, and in particular –

(a) whether or not it should be banned and (b) any related matters.

After careful consideration of the submissions and evidence before it, the Select Committee has unanimously resolved to recommend that jumps racing in South Australia (S.A.) should not be banned.

It was evident to the Committee that significant changes implemented in recent years to make jumps racing safer have improved the safety of this sport. Victoria, the only other jurisdiction in Australia to hold jumps races, has led the way in introducing safety measures and standards, after many reviews and inquiries into the safety performance of jumps racing in that State. Many of these measures have been implemented in S.A., and, the Committee notes, Victoria continues to set the standard for best practice.

Having examined the conduct of the jumps racing industry in S.A. and Victoria, the Committee believes that given the interrelationship of the jumps racing industry, more could be done to ensure that safety measures and protocols are consistently applied. All efforts should be made by the industry in S.A. to demonstrate its continuing commitment to implementing best-practice safety measures.

The Committee has found that public debate on this issue is characterised by competing claims by opponents and supporters. Available data is highly fragmented, dispersed and contested, raising questions about its reliability. Gaps in the data collected also exist. The Committee believes a clearer and more comprehensive understanding of this complicated topic could be gained by broadening the scope of the data that is collected, recorded and made publicly available. The Committee puts forward several recommendations relating to data collection and further research, to ensure that any decision about the future of jumps racing in S.A. is informed by current, comprehensive and reliable data. This would also assist in addressing existing gaps in available data and research and provide a more complete understanding of the risks, for both horses and riders participating in hurdle and steeplechase racing, compared with flat racing.

The Committee is strongly of the view that jumps racing should only continue under particular circumstances. The recommendations relating to safety and risk mitigation proposed by the Committee identify broad areas for improvement within the industry, with an emphasis on increasing transparency and accountability and on further enhancing the safety of horses and jockeys in S.A.

It is a key recommendation of the Committee that the matter of whether to ban jumps racing in S.A. should not be revisited by Parliament for the next three years, to allow the industry to undertake further improvements against the Committee’s proposed recommendations.

On the Term of Reference about any related matters, the Committee has identified the need for measures to be implemented by the thoroughbred racing industry to address the issue of

10 wastage and its relationship to overbreeding more broadly. The Committee believes that the recommendations put forward must be addressed to establish the extent of the problem and to identify the reasons for horses leaving the industry, particularly in light of the animal welfare concerns that this raises. It is in the interests of the industry to demonstrate greater transparency, accountability and conduct of best practice in all aspects of its endeavours.

Recommendations on Term of Reference (a) whether or not it should be banned are listed under four main headings:

 Future Direction  Research and Data Collection  Safety Planning and Risk Mitigation  Safeguarding of Animal Welfare.

Recommendations on Term of Reference (b) any related matters are addressed under the heading:

 Wastage and Overbreeding in the Thoroughbred Racing Industry.

4.1 RECOMMENDATIONS – OVERVIEW

4.1.1 Future Direction

Recommendation 1: The Committee recommends that jumps racing in South Australia should not be banned and that the matter of whether to ban jumps racing should not be revisited by Parliament for the next three years, to allow the industry time to undertake further improvements against the Committee’s proposed recommendations.

4.1.2 Research and Data Collection

Broadening the Scope of the Data that is Collected, Recorded and Made Publicly Available

Falls, Fatalities and Injuries resulting in Deaths

Recommendation 2: The Committee recommends that data on fatalities and falls and injuries resulting in deaths in training, trials and races be collected and made publicly available.

Recommendation 3: The Committee recommends that T.R.S.A. make stewards reports and reports issued by Jumps Review Panels publicly available by regularly publishing these reports online.

Recommendation 4: The Committee recommends that data on fatalities and falls and injuries resulting in deaths in training, trials and races be published annually in a publicly available form, such as the T.R.S.A.’s Annual Report.

11 Non-Fatal Injuries

Recommendation 5: The Committee recommends that the industry document and report on the nature and outcome of non-fatal injuries to horses arising from collisions with other horses and obstacles, falls, jumping or landing awkwardly or both during jump races.

Recommendation 6: The Committee recommends that, in addition to race-day vet assessments of horses that have experienced an awkward jumping or landing, the industry in South Australia and Victoria consider how they might conduct follow-up vet assessments to detect injuries that may not have been detected immediately after the race.

Recommendation 7: The Committee recommends that T.R.S.A. make publicly available detailed information on horse performance from Jumps Review Panel reports.

Factors Contributing to Horses being withdrawn from Races

Recommendation 8: The Committee recommends that the industry investigate and compile data on factors that may contribute to horses not finishing races.

Recommendation 9: The Committee recommends that the industry consider the relationship between non-completion and high attrition rates (retirement of horses from jumps racing) resulting from non-fatal injuries.

Facilitating Data Analysis

Recommendation 10: The committee recommends that racing authorities consider forms of collecting, recording and archiving data that are more amenable to analysis of industry-wide and long-term trends and that the industry demonstrate transparency, accountability and its commitment to continuous improvement of the safety of horses and riders, by making this data publicly available.

4.1.3 Safety Planning and Risk Mitigation

Developing and Implementing a Safety Action Plan

Recommendation 11: The Committee recommends that the industry develop and implement a Safety Action Plan, with continuous improvement objectives to increase the safety of jumps racing for horses and jockeys, particularly for steeplechase races.

Recommendation 12: The Committee recommends that the industry provide full reporting annually on the outcomes of measures implemented under its Safety Action Plan and that this information be published online and in a hard-copy format, such as an annual report, in the interests of greater transparency and accountability.

Creating Consistency in Safety Measures across Jurisdictions

Recommendation 13: The Committee recommends that the industry in S.A. consider bringing its local Rules of Racing on jumps racing in line with Victorian standards in areas in which there are currently inconsistencies.

12 4.1.4 Safeguarding Animal Welfare

Protection under Legislation

Recommendation 14: The Committee recommends that the Animal Welfare Act 1985 continue to be used as the basis of determining ill treatment of horses involved in jumps racing and that all breaches be reported and prosecuted accordingly.

Addressing Inadequacies in Current Processes

 Greater scrutiny of under-performing horses

Recommendation 15: The Committee recommends that there be greater scrutiny by stewards of the performance of jump race horses where there is evidence of a history of lameness, injury, falls, collisions with other horses or obstacles or both, jumping obstacles awkwardly or poorly or both, to prevent avoidable suffering and address high attrition rates.

Recommendation 16: The Committee recommends that stewards reports provide more detailed descriptions of the nature of the fall and the impact on the horse to contribute to epidemiological data and to review factors that may lead to, and be associated with, poor performance.

Withdrawing horses rule

Recommendation 17: The Committee recommends that consideration be given to imposing greater penalties for not withdrawing horses that show signs of fatigue or other signs of impaired performance.

 Transparency in Whole of Life Reporting

Recommendation 18: The Committee recommends that the industry make public all relevant information for each individual horse during its lifetime, including all injuries and deaths in training, trials, races and, at any time, and full details of the fate of horses, including detailed reporting on proposed use, such as slaughter, recreational riding and retirement to pasture.

Duty of Care Measures

 Retirement Planning

Recommendation 19: The Committee recommends that the horseracing industry develop, fund and implement a retirement plan for thoroughbred race horses to address wastage.

 Identifying and Supporting Alternative Pathways Out of Jumps Racing

Recommendation 20: The Committee recommends that the industry consider measures for extending the life of ex-racehorses to lessen the likelihood of their being slaughtered.

Recommendation 21: The Committee recommends that programs for re-training of jumps racing horses for other equestrian pursuits such as show jumping, cross-country, three-day eventing and high-weight flat racing be supported by the industry in S.A.

13 Recommendation 22: The Committee recommends that, with proper regard to the type of injury, cost and other relevant factors, greater consideration be given to the role of rehabilitation in extending racehorse lives.

 Equine Rescue/Rehoming of unwanted horses

Recommendation 23: The Committee recommends that industry funding be provided to establish an equine rescue and rehoming program for unwanted horses, including jumps race horses that cannot be transitioned into other equine pursuits.

4.1.5 Wastage and Overbreeding in the Thoroughbred Racing Industry

Fate of Horses Leaving the Thoroughbred Racing Industry

Recommendation 24: The Committee recommends that, in the absence of recent published studies quantifying the demographics of horses entering slaughterhouses in Australia, S.A. data be collected, collated and published to enable research to be undertaken to determine the proportion of horses that are registered to race that go to slaughter and the reasons for this.

Recommendation 25: The Committee recommends that the industry consider implementing a register or index of jumps horses to enable detailed statistical data to be collected on their fate and to determine the proportion of horses that are registered to race that go to slaughter. In the interests of achieving greater transparency and accountability, the Committee recommends that the industry make this data publicly available.

Recommendation 26: The Committee recommends that the industry collect and make publicly available data on the number of horses leaving the racing industry annually to provide an understanding of racehorse attrition rates, owing to overbreeding and other factors, to enable measures to be implemented to address this problem.

Issues regarding Breeding

Recommendation 27: The Committee recommends that consideration be given to developing a nation-wide industry plan with measurable outcomes to mitigate wastage through overbreeding.

Recommendation 28: The Committee recommends that the industry enter into partnerships to support research into current breeding practices with a view to establishing more sustainable numbers.

14 5. RECOMMENDATIONS AND RATIONALE

Future Direction

Recommendation 1: The Committee recommends that jumps racing in S.A. should not be banned and that the matter of whether to ban jumps racing should not be revisited by Parliament for the next three years, to allow the industry time to undertake further improvements against the Committee’s proposed recommendations.

Research and Data Collection

Broadening the Scope of the Data that is Collected, Recorded and Made Publicly Available

Falls, Fatalities and Injuries resulting in Deaths

Recommendation 2: The Committee recommends that data on fatalities and falls and injuries resulting in deaths in training, trials and races be collected and made publicly available.

Recommendation 3: The Committee recommends that T.R.S.A. make stewards reports and reports issued by Jumps Review Panels publicly available by regularly publishing these reports online.

The current debate about jumps racing is characterised by the competing claims of supporters and opponents, drawing on a range of data sources.

The basis of concerns relating to the welfare of horses participating in jump races is that there is a significant possibility that horses will suffer serious injury or death. The arguments made by opponents of jumps racing reference two independent published studies by Boden et al (2006)1 and Ruse et al (2015)2, supplemented by data gathered through direct observation and compiled from publicly available racing industry sources.

The study conducted by Boden et al. at the University of Melbourne covered a 15-year period from 1989 to 2004 and measured the risk of racehorse fatality in jump and flat starts on racecourses in Victoria to determine proportional mortality rates for specific causes of death.

1 Boden, L A., Anderson, G A., Charles, J A., Morgan, K L., Morton, J M., Parkin, T D H., Slocombe, R F., Clarke, A F., 2006, ‘Risk of fatality and causes of death of Thoroughbred horses associated with racing in Victoria, Australia: 1989-2004’, Equine Veterinary Journal, Volume 38, Issue 4, p.p.312-318, at: http.://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2746/042516406777749182/abstract Accessed 5/9/16

2 Ruse, K., Davidson, A., Bridle, K., 2015, ‘Jump. Horse Safety: Reconciling Public Debate and Australian Thoroughbred Jump. Racing Data, 2012-2014’, Animals 2015, 5, pp.1072-1091

15 The researchers found that over this period there were a total of 514 fatalities, 316 in flat races and 198 in jumps races. There was one horse death for every 115 horses that started in a jump race, compared with 1 horse death for every 2150 horses that started in a flat race. The risk of fatality was 0.44 per 1000 flat starts and 8.3 per 1000 jump starts or almost 19 times (18.9) greater than a horse competing in a flats race. 3

The study also found that catastrophic limb injuries were 18 times greater for jumps races than flat races and cranial (head) or vertebral (back and neck) injuries were 120 times more likely in jumps races than in flat races, with the incidence of sudden death to horses 3.5 times greater.4

Since this study was conducted, significant safety changes were introduced by Racing Victoria Limited (R.V.L.) in 2010 and some of these measures were also adopted in S.A.

In a more recent study by Ruse et al., comprehensive data was compiled and published on jumps horse safety in Victoria and S.A. during the 2012 to 2014 jumps race seasons. The researchers found that the introduction of safety initiatives has had some success in reducing fatalities. These safety initiatives included improving the placement of obstacles, schooling and trialling facilities, and assessing the suitability of venues to conduct steeplechase races. In particular, their data showed that a new rule introduced in 2010, allowing jockeys to retire a horse during a race if fatigued and out of contention, was invoked for about 10% of starts. They surmised that fatigued horses are more likely to pose a risk to themselves, their rider, or other horses, and that frequent application of this rule is likely to have been a significant contributor to improved horse and human safety in the study period.5

This study found that the overall fatality rate was 5.1 per 1000 starts or 0.51%; the overall fall rate was 33 per 1000 starts or 3.3%; and around 10% of all starters were retired before the race finished, falling into the failed to finish category, which included withdrawing horses owing to fatigue or being uncompetitive. Overall 85% of horses starting a jumps race completed the race. 6

The study also found there was a considerable difference in risk between hurdles and steeplechase races during the study period, with one fatality in 1328 hurdle starts compared to nine fatalities in 642 steeplechases starts. The fatality rate for steeplechases was 14.0 per 1000 starts compared with 0.75 per 1000 starts for hurdles.7

3 Boden et al. cited in R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission p. 5; Ruse et al, pp.1074-1075

4 Animals Australia Submission p.3; Ruse et al, p.1075

5 Ruse et al, p. 1082

6 Ibid, p.1080

7 Ruse et al, p.1080

16 There were 29 falls per 1000 starts, compared with 40 per 1000 starts in steeplechases. The proportion of falls that result in fatalities in steeplechases (35%) was greater than for hurdles (2.6%), with over one-third of steeplechase falls proving fatal. 8

The authors note that although this data shows that industry responses to concern about horse welfare in jumps racing have reduced risks between 2012 and 2014, considering hurdle and steeplechase races separately reveals that steeplechase races were riskier for horses than hurdle races. The study found that there were 0.75 fatalities per 1000 starts for hurdle races and no horses died while jumping hurdles during the study period, despite there being 39 falls during this category of race. By comparison, there were 14.0 fatalities per 1000 starts (1.40%) in steeplechase races in the study period. The authors point out that this is comparable to the findings of a study conducted in 1998 by Bailey et al.,9 that considered risk factors for musculoskeletal injury in flat, hurdle and steeple racing and higher than that documented by Bourke1011.

Although this study provides more recent data for Victoria and S.A., it did not report on the flat racing fatality rate. The study by Boden et al. continues to be cited to provide this comparison. A key conclusion of the study by Ruse et al. was that:

Current public debate about Australian jumps racing is taking place in the absence of comprehensive and reliable data…12

Neither study considered fatalities, falls and injuries that occurred in training, as this data is not collected. Comprehensive data across the full spectrum of activities associated with jumps racing would provide a greater understanding of just how high the intrinsic risk of accidents and fatalities for both horses and riders is compared to flat racing.

Non-fatal Injuries

Recommendation 6: The Committee recommends that, in addition to race-day vet assessments of horses that have experienced an awkward jumping or landing, the industry in

8 Ruse et al, p.108

9 Bailey, C.J.; Hodgson, D.R.; Bourke, J.M., 1998, ‘Flat, hurdle and steeple racing; Risk factors for musculoskeletal injury’, Equine Veterinary Journal, Volume 30, p.p.498-503

10 Bourke, J.M., 1995, ‘Fatalities on racecourses in Victoria. A seven year study’, In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of Racing Analysts and Veterinarians; R & W Publications: Elina, NY, USA, p.p.. 265- 268.

11 Ruse et al., p.1083

12 Ibid., p.1082

17 South Australia and Victoria consider how they might conduct follow-up vet assessments to detect injuries that may not have been detected immediately after the race.

Recommendation 7: The Committee recommends that T.R.S.A. make publicly available detailed information on horse performance from Jumps Review Panel reports.

Evidence indicates that collisions with other horses or obstacles, jumping or landing awkwardly, or falls are not uncommon in jumps races. In its submission and evidence to the Committee, the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. contends that incidents such as these restrict a prey animal’s ability to flee, and are likely to cause anxiety and adverse effects on horses as prey animals. 13

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. argues that in addition to causing distress, landing awkwardly is likely to result in musculoskeletal damage. 14 Research on non-fatal injuries is limited in Australia, with no references found relating to jumps racing. Research by Pinchbeck et al. (2004)15 into horse injuries and racing practices in National Hunt16 races in the U.K. has identified tendon/ligament damage and laceration/wounds as common injuries. The study noted that these injuries are commonly associated with falls.17

Although Ruse et al. do not provide a description of type or prevalence of injuries, they identify an overall fall rate of 33 per 1000 starts or 3.3% for jumps races conducted in Victoria and S.A. between 2012 and 2014. Considering hurdle and steeplechase races separately, they found that the rate of falls was 29 per 1000 starts for hurdles compared with 40 per 1000 starts for steeplechases. 18

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. argues that a fall rate of 3.3% must result in many horses being injured. An examination of J.R.P. reports demonstrates there are high incidences of horses that experience an awkward landing, resulting in distress and damage. Injuries may have occurred but may not be obvious or detected by veterinary examinations conducted immediately after a race and are therefore not noted in stewards’ reports.19

In addition to race day vet assessments of horses that have experienced an awkward jumping or landing or both, follow up veterinary assessments may play an important role in detecting

13 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, pp.8-9

14 Ibid., p.9 15 Pinchbeck, G.L., Clegg, P.D., Proudman, C.J., Stirk, A., Morgan, K.L. and French, N.P.., 2004, 'Horse injuries and racing practices in National Hunt race horses in the UK: the results of a prospective cohort study,' The Veterinary Journal 167 p.p..45-52

16 Jumps racing is officially known as National Hunt racing in Great Britain and Ireland (The rise and fall of jumps racing, 2010, Lynch, M, Sydney Morning Herald, at: http.://www.smh.com.au/sp.ort/horseracing/the-rise-and-fall- of-jump.s-racing-20100131-n6bv.html Accessed 19/10/16)

17 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission p.7

18 Ruse et al. p. 1081

19 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission p.9

18 injury that may not be immediately apparent. The Committee believes that stewards and J.R.P. reports could be used to identify horses most at risk of injury after such incidents.

The Committee understands that although publicly available information on horse performance is available in Victoria from stewards and J.R.P. reports, such reports are not publicly available in S.A. Publicly releasing information on horse performance would bring S.A. in line with Victorian best practice measures, resulting in greater transparency and accountability in our industry. Monitoring the effects and outcomes of non-fatal injuries would also add to epidemiological20 data and assist in understanding the impact of jumps racing on animal welfare. 21

Factors contributing to horses being withdrawn from races

Recommendation 8: The Committee recommends that the industry investigate and compile data on factors that may contribute to horses not finishing races.

The importance of maintaining comprehensive and accurate industry records cannot be underestimated. After an R.V.L. commissioned inquiry in 2008, His Honour David Jones concluded in his report that:

…it is critical that comprehensive and accurate records are maintained in relation to every jumps racing incident and examination, to horse and to jockey (and to anyone else involved). How this is done is a matter for R.V.L, and should perhaps be discussed with the I.T. department to ensure that data is able to be interrogated and cross referenced among databases in the most efficient way possible.

I consider that the implementation of this recommendation is essential to achieving an acceptable level of risk in jumps racing.22

20 Veterinary epidemiology is concerned with investigating diseases, productivity and animal welfare in animal populations. The collection of data is one of its essential foundations, which must then be analysed using qualitative or quantitative approaches to formulate causal hypotheses.

Veterinary epidemiology is used to describe frequency of occurrence and how disease, productivity and welfare are affected by the interaction of different factors or determinants. This information is used to manipulate such determinants to reduce the frequency of disease or treatment of animals that may impact their welfare.

Pfeiffer, DU., 2002, Veterinary Epidemiology – An Introduction, University of London at: http.://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwjOrdvkwuDP.AhWJqlQ KHZP.KDyIQFggjMAE&url=http.%3A%2F%2Fwww.p.anaftosa.org.br%2FComp.%2FMAP.A%2F431857.p.df&us g=AFQjCNEldXJsdXCc76JBcmdCkp.YE5Ggnsw&bvm=bv.135974163,d.cGw Accessed 17/10/16

21 Ibid. 22 Jones, D., 2008, Review of Jumps Racing in Victoria, p. 196

19 Recent studies have also identified the need for industry data that is “more amenable to analysis of industry wide and long term trends.” 23

Clear and reliable data can play an important role in helping us to understand factors that may contribute to horses not finishing races. The Committee understands there may be many reasons that horses do not finish races. The C.P.R. presented statistics it believes demonstrate that 16.5% of horses will not finish a jumps race owing to a death, fall, lost rider or under the failed-to-finish category, accounting for horses that are withdrawn.24

Submissions and evidence presented to the Committee raise the strong causal link between horses not finishing races and high attrition rates in jump races. The C.P.R. contends that, combined with fatality and fall rates, the attrition rate of horses in jumps racing is the true measure of danger in the sport. The C.P.R. argues that the inherent risk involved in jumps racing results in many horses sustaining:

“…non-lethal, albeit career-ending injuries which see them exit the racing industry in large numbers just one year after participating in a jumps race.” 25

These injuries can include bowed tendons, muscle tears and other musculoskeletal injuries. The C.P.R. contends that although many of these injuries are minor in nature, they lead to many horses being discarded to slaughterhouses or knackeries, where their fate becomes untraceable. 26

Race data on the numbers of horses participating in jumps racing sourced by the C.P.R. from Victorian and South Australian stewards reports suggest that there was an attrition rate of 51.8% between the 2014 and 2015 seasons. 27

This contention is supported by recent research. An examination of the number of starts per horse conducted by Ruse et al. from 2012 to 2014 found that more than half of horses (55%) competed three or fewer times, with almost one quarter (22%) competing in only one race. Another quarter raced between four and 10 times. Less than 10% of horses competed more than 10 times, with one horse racing 32 times.28

Ruse et al. analysed annual turnover in the jumps horse cohort by identifying individual horses that ran in two of the three race seasons in the study period, either in successive seasons, the 2012 and 2014 seasons, or in all three seasons. The authors found that:

23 Ruse et al, p.1086

24 C.P.R. Submission p.5; Ruse et al., p.1080

25 C.P.R. Submission p.7

26 Ibid.

27 C.P.R. Submission pp. 6-7

28 Ruse et al. p.1078 & p.1085

20 Of the 2012 jump horse cohort, 37% raced in 2013 and 21% raced in 2014. Only 7% of the 2012 cohort raced in 2014 but not in 2013, and only 14% raced in all three seasons. Of the 2013 cohort, 29% raced in 2014. 29

This suggests:

…that any career extension enabled by Australian jump racing is short lived for the majority of horses.

It is also clear that Australian jumps racing is sustained by high levels of new horse entries each season. This high rate of turnover raises questions about horse pathways in and out of Australian jumps racing. These questions are relevant to public debate about the drivers of horse breeding in Australian racing.30

Facilitating Data Analysis

Various issues have been raised in research, submissions and evidence concerning the way that data on jumps racing is collected, recorded and made publicly available.

Ruse et al. have noted that when data is publicly available, it is highly fragmented and dispersed, requiring considerable effort to assemble and integrate.31

Submissions from opponents of jumps racing claim that, unlike Victoria, stewards and jumps review panel reports of races in S.A. are not publicly available. Information about jumps race trials held in S.A. is also not placed on the public record. 32

The Committee has been presented with diverse sources of data in submissions and in evidence at hearings, from opponents and supporters of jumps races.

Animal welfare organisations, such as R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Banjumpsracing.com and C.P.R., collect and compile their own data from attendances at trials and races and other publicly available sources.

29 Ruse et al., p. 1078

30 Ibid, p.1085

31 Ruse et al, p.1086

32 Banjumpsracing.com Submission p. 14

21 Statistics relating to fatalities of horses competing in jumps races and trials in S.A. for the past 10 years was made available to the Committee by T.R.S.A.33 A comparison between flat and jump race starts for the 2015 season was submitted by the A.J.R.A. 34

The Committee was also provided with a recent fact sheet published by Racing Victoria comparing the 2009 Victorian season, the last season conducted under old jumps and policies, with the 2015 and 2016 seasons, in which new jumps and polices were implemented. This data included fatalities in trials and a comparison with flat racing fatalities.35

The Committee has found that the available S.A. data is not publicly accessible or easily amenable to analysis. It is difficult to determine long-term trends, or make comparisons with flat racing. The Committee notes that independent research and data presented in submissions generally combines S.A. and Victorian data. Deaths are measured per 1000 starts and as a ratio to the number of individual runners, as it is argued, there is only a limited pool of horses that can be entered in jumps races. 36

The Committee has observed that some data on the economic impact of the sport relates to thoroughbred racing generally, rather than jumps racing specifically. Furthermore, there are issues within the industry about how jumps racing statistics are compiled and used to support the arguments made. Evidence was presented to the Committee about advice provided to South Australian Jumps Racing (S.A.J.R.) by the Chairman of the South Australian Jockey Club, regarding the use of Irish challenge day figures, indicating that it can no longer be included in S.A.J.R. statistics, as it is no longer considered a jumping day.37

Unsubstantiated claims were frequently made in submissions and evidence presented by both supporters and opponents of jumps racing, with sources, particularly for statistics, not being provided. Consequently the Committee is unable to ascertain the veracity of claims concerning the safety of jumps racing. Such claims include the status of Australian jumps racing as the safest jurisdiction in the world or that the fatality rate in thoroughbred racing in Victoria is among the lowest in the world.

The Committee appreciates that with the corporatisation of racing in 2000, the State Government is no longer privy to industry data. The Committee welcomes the provision of data currently collected and compiled by the industry in our State and encourages T.R.S.A. to extend its efforts in more comprehensively compiling and publicly releasing data.

The Committee believes that if the industry were to consider how it could collect, record and make publicly available forms of data that are more amenable to analysis, particularly of long-

33 T.R.S.A. Submission p.3 34 AJRA Submission, p.7

35 Hon. Martin Pakula M.P., Minister for Racing, Victoria, correspondence, Racing Victoria Jumps Racing Fact Sheet, 10 June 2016, pp. 2-3

36 C.P.R. Submission, p.5; T.R.S.A. Submission, p.3

37 J Cannizzaro, Chairperson, S.A.J.R, Hansard, 8 Aug 2016 p.64

22 term trends and comparisons with flat racing, significant steps forward could be made toward better informing public debate.

Developing and Implementing a Safety Action Plan

Recommendation 11: The Committee recommends that the industry develop and implement a Safety Action Plan with continuous improvement objectives to increase the safety of jumps racing for horses and jockeys, particularly for steeplechase races.

Having considered the submissions and evidence before it, the Committee is of the view that the T.R.S.A., as the governing body responsible for jumps racing in S.A., must show evidence that the sport can be conducted safely, taking into consideration both the welfare of horses and riders.

The continuation of jumps racing should be conditional on it meeting agreed - upon safety standards and addressing issues relating to the welfare of horses and riders, particularly for steeplechase races.

According to the Director of Equine Science and Welfare at the British Horse Racing Authority, Professor Tim Morris:

…it is essential that jumps racing in the UK continues to understand that it has to "earn the right to operate”.

It's a risky sport, and we don't shy away from that, but we try to do all we can to minimise that risk. We give the RSPCA credentials to come to meetings and talk to animal rights and welfare groups. People who keep animals know that accidents can happen in any environment and that they have to be looked after. They are a bit different to animal rights activists, who are against the use of animals in sport and leisure.

The animal welfare people do give us a hard time on occasions, but they understand about risk and it's a constructive critical relationship and that is reflected in the political arena. You have to realise that you need to keep your licence to operate, be aware of the environmental, political and cultural climate. We work very hard to ensure that what we do is compatible with the culture.38

In evidence presented to the Committee, R.V.L.’s Workforce Development Officer, Ms Lisa Coffey, outlined a range of initiatives that are being implemented in Victoria as part of its commitment to maintaining what it believes to be world’s best practice on the safety of horses

38 Lynch, M, 2010, ‘The rise and fall of jumps racing’, Sydney Morning Herald at: http.://www.smh.com.au/sp.ort/horseracing/the-rise-and-fall-of-jump.s-racing-20100131-n6bv.html Accessed 19/10/16

23 and jockeys in thoroughbred racing. These initiatives include education programs for horses, riders and trainers.39 The Committee heard that:

The horses need to be trained properly and schooled properly so that when they do race at speed and jump at speed they actually have the technique, balance and surefootedness to do it.

…and they have to have practiced doing it…It is not a case of them showing up to a jumps trial and being forced to jump the fences at speed. 40

The Committee was advised that all jumps trainers in Victoria and S.A. undertake accreditation in Victoria with the R.V.L.’s Workforce Development Officer. They are required to complete a nationally-recognised, government-approved qualification, RGRPSH432A Train Horses for Jumping Races. Jumps racing trainers are not required to renew their jumps accreditation annually. They would, however, be required to complete another course, should the techniques in training horses to jump at speed change.41

Ms Coffey advised the Committee that jockeys are put through a rigorous assessment in schooling horses and trainers are assessed to ensure that every jumps trainer has the same accreditation. Annual jumps safety and welfare forums are also held to assist in educating jumps riders and trainers. 42 It is compulsory for all new trainers and all jumps jockeys to attend these forums. 43

R.V.L. Board member, Mr Pearse Morgan, confirmed that it is a requirement that all trainers and jumps jockeys attend these discussions on safety in jumps racing. 44

As a result of safety performance reviews conducted in Victoria since 1994, investments in jumps racing have been jointly made by the industry and Government in that State. These include new jumps and irrigated schooling facilities. The Committee was informed that, in addition to reforms that have already been undertaken, there was a need for a strategic approach in reforms towards strengthening and making the industry safer.

Safety and welfare is one of seven strategic goals in Racing Victoria’s 2013-2016 Strategic Plan. R.V.L. aims to:

…promote a racing industry culture in which the safety and welfare of the thoroughbred racehorse is paramount.

39 L Coffey, Workforce Development Officer, R.V.L., Hansard 19 Sep.t 2016 p.96

40 L Coffey, Workforce Development Officer, R.V.L., Hansard 19 Sep.t 2016 p.96 41 L Coffey, Correspondence to banjump.sracing.com, Banjump.sracing.com Secondary Submission, 10 Oct 2016

42 L Coffey Hansard 19 Sep.t 2016 p.96; R.V.L., Jumps Racing Fact Sheet, 10 June 2016, p.2

43 L. Coffey Correspondence to banjump.sracing.com, Banjump.sracing.com 10 Oct 2016

44 P. Morgan, Board member, R.V.L., Hansard 8 Aug 2016 p.71

24 In its Strategic Plan, R.V.L. outlines its commitment to ensuring that the safety record in Victorian jumps racing meets world’s best practice and that the welfare of all participants is central to the management of the sport. 45

Although T.R.S.A. does not address the issue of safety and welfare directly in its Strategic Plan 2013-2016, it seeks to:

Maintain high levels of integrity and lead the industry to ensure the long term viability of the thoroughbred racing industry.46

To achieve this objective, T.R.S.A. aim to provide an “appropriate level of people, skills and resources, to ensure the highest levels of integrity are maintained in racing and in out - of - competition testing” and develop “education courses, opportunities and qualifications, for those entering the racing industry.” 47 T.R.S.A.’s current Strategic Plan also makes provision for improvements to:

…infrastructure and facilities supporting the industry, consistent with industry and community standards whilst maintaining the over-riding objective of the long term financial sustainability of the industry. 48

In the contextual statement relating to this Objective T.R.S.A. states that:

The standard of racing infrastructure supporting the industry in South Australia is in some areas below participant expectations and industry standards. The standard of facilities for patrons in some areas are below community expectations, exacerbated by the opening of competing sporting and entertainment venues with modern facilities.49

The Committee notes that several strategies and measures of success have been proposed to achieve this objective. The Committee also understands that T.R.S.A. uses its resources to support initiatives that improve the safety of horses and jockeys, and that these include improved schooling programs for horses, trainers and jockeys; improved schooling qualification facilities; and upgrades of jumps racecourse tracks and obstacles, particularly in regional S.A., to ensure continuous improvement.50

45 R.V.L. Jumps Racing Fact Sheet, 10 June 2016

46 T.R.S.A. Strategic Plan 2013-2016, p. 6

47 T.R.S.A. Strategic Plan 2013-2016, p. 6 48 T.R.S.A. website - Strategic Plan 2013-2016, p. 6 at: http.://www.theracessa.com.au/thoroughbred_racing_sa/governance/strategic_p.lan Accessed 21/9/16)

49 ibid., p.11

50 T.R.S.A. website - Annual Report, 2015 at: http.://www.theracessa.com.au/thoroughbred_racing_sa/governance/annual_rep.ort Accessed 26/9/16

25 As jumps racing is considered an important component of T.R.S.A.’s racing program, the Committee believes every effort should be made by the industry in S.A. to demonstrate that it is addressing public concerns about the safety of jumps racing.

The opportunity exists for T.R.S.A. to develop a Safety Action Plan as part of its strategic planning for the next three-year period. The plan and the outcomes of its objectives, including safety measures implemented, should ideally be published annually in T.R.S.A.’s Annual Report, to achieve greater industry transparency and accountability.

Creating Consistency in Safety Measures across Jurisdictions

Submissions and evidence presented to the Committee have identified differences in the way jumps racing is conducted in Victoria and South Australia.

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. argues that although R.V.L. adopted many of the key recommendations of the Jones Report to improve the safety of horses and jockeys, T.R.S.A. has not, leading to inconsistencies in the rules of racing between Victoria and S.A. 51

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. submission contains a summary of what it believes to be the key differences in practices between the two states, based on information available in R.V.L. Rules of Racing and T.R.S.A. local Rules of Racing. It proposes that changes be made about track condition, qualification requirements to race, annual re-qualification requirements, the powers of the J.R.P, public access to J.R.P. reports and the rule of remounting. 52

It contends that, unlike Victoria, where jumps races must not be held if tracks are rated better than Dead 4 or equivalent, S.A. has no stated limit. This means horses could race on harder tracks, despite the understanding that softer tracks have a lower impact on trauma and concussion, minimising the risk of lameness.

The Committee heard that the measure of the softness of the track has been changed over recent years from what was known as Dead 4 to Good 4. In evidence presented by Ms Margaret Lucas, Chairman of the Warrnambool Racing Club (W.R.C) and past Chairman of the Australian Jumps Racing Association (A.J.R.A), she explained to the Committee that despite the different terms used:

…it is the same softness…that’s as firm as it can be, it can be softer.53

To qualify to race in Victoria, two trials are required, unlike S.A., where only one trial is required. A minimum of 10 obstacles in a trial or race is required in Victoria. No minimum number of obstacles is stated in S.A. The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. considers trial assessment of horses

51 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.13

52 Ibid., p.14 53 M Lucas, Chairman, Warrnambool Racing Club, Hansard 8 August 2016, p.67

26 for fitness and capability a key factor to reduce risks of injury or deaths. In light of this, it sees no justification for why S.A. horses should complete only one trial.

Annual re-qualification is a requirement in Victoria but is not required in S.A. As the jumps race season is only six months long, the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. believe annual re-qualification is an appropriate measure to ensure horses are fit and capable.

In its Rules of Racing, R.V.L. provides a clear description of the roles, responsibilities and jurisdiction of the J.R.P., investing it with strong powers, unlike S.A., where there is no reference to the powers of the S.A. J.R.P. in the local Rules of Racing.

Victorian J.R.P. race and trial reports are published online, however, no S.A. J.R.P. reports are published. The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. maintain that publication would ensure greater transparency and accountability, given the public interest in jumps racing.

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. also raises concerns about a rule of racing in S.A. of remounting horses to finish a race, on the condition that no jump has been evaded. This is not permitted in Victoria and it believes that the circumstances leading to a jockey being dislodged need to be considered, as this may be owing to a fall or other incident. It believes it is unacceptable for a horse to be ridden further without first undergoing a veterinary examination. Inconsistencies also exist with mandatory reporting of deaths in training and trials in Victoria, with R.V.L. announcing the introduction of this measure under its Rules of Racing 2015. 54

The Committee understands that differences in local rules between racing jurisdictions are not uncommon. As Victoria and S.A. are the only Australian States to continue jumps racing, given the high level of participation of horses and jockeys across state borders, the Committee is of the view that greater safety standards, accountability and transparency would be achieved by bringing S.A. in line with Victoria where this is currently not so.

Safeguarding Animal Welfare

Protection under Legislation

Addressing Inadequacies in Current Processes

Greater scrutiny of under-performing horses

Recommendation 15: The Committee recommends that there be greater scrutiny by stewards of the performance of jumps race horses where there is evidence of a history of lameness, injury, falls, collisions with other horses or obstacles or both, jumping obstacles awkwardly or poorly or both, to prevent avoidable suffering and address high attrition rates.

Recommendation 16: The Committee recommends that stewards reports provide more detailed descriptions of the nature of the fall and the impact on the horse to contribute to

54 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.14

27 epidemiological data and to review factors that may lead to, and be associated with, poor performance.

In submissions received by the Committee, several case studies outlined instances of animal suffering 55 caused by falls and injuries and poor horse performance in races leading to fatalities. It is argued that these could have been prevented if available data was reviewed and action taken to stop these horses from racing. 56

Case studies presented by the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. document a series of incidents that it believes should have raised serious concerns about the horse’s ability to participate in jumps races. Of these case studies, a recent local example documents the performance of a 10-year-old gelding, Trenchtown, in the five weeks leading to his death at Morphettville on 25 July 2015. Incidents over this time included lameness, jumping awkwardly and falling, knuckling, hitting obstacles, stumbling and sustaining injuries that required the horse to be euthanased. These incidents also resulted in the rider becoming unbalanced and being dislodged. 57

The Committee heard that, according to the Australian Racing Fact Book, S.A. had 14 active jumps horses in 2015. In evidence presented, Banjumpsracing.com claims that statistics it has compiled show that of these horses, only nine were still active at the time of its submission to the inquiry. Its view is that:

The horses are leaving the sport due to suspension from poor performance, injury and, of course, death.58

In tracking jumps horses from season to season, Banjumpsracing.com concludes that:

…the average attrition rate is 50 per cent per season. So, 50 per cent of all horses that race in a jumps race in one season will not race again the next season.59

Data collected by the C.P.R. supports this statistic and the view that horses disappear from one season to the next. They concede there will be exceptions, with a few horses making a comeback to racing but argue that horses “that may have a minor muscle tear or a bowed tendon…are simply discarded when nobody is looking.” 60

The Committee believes that closer scrutiny of horse performance could play an important role in preventing career ending injuries and fatalities, leading to a reduction in the high attrition rate of horses competing in jumps races. The provision of more detailed descriptions of the

55 C.P.R. Submission, pp.7-8; A.A. Submission p.4 56 RSPCA Submission, p.p.15-18

57 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.17

58 M Bryant, Member, Banjumpsracing.com, Hansard, 6 June 2016 p.23

59 Ibid., p.23

60 W Young, Communications Manager, C.P.R., Hansard 19 September 2016 p.90

28 nature of falls and their impact on horses in stewards reports could also assist in reviewing factors that may lead to and be associated with poor performance.

Withdrawing Horses Rule

Recommendation 17: The Committee recommends that consideration be given to imposing greater penalties for not withdrawing horses that show signs of fatigue or other signs of impaired performance.

Fatigue is a recognised risk factor contributing to a higher incidence of falls, injury and fatalities in jumps racing. The Committee heard that horses are more likely to make mistakes in jumping obstacles when fatigued, with evidence pointing to a link between falls and fatigue. 61

The association between falls and fatigue has been acknowledged in the industry, resulting in the introduction of new rules of racing requiring jockeys to withdraw a horse showing signs of fatigue from competition. The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. argue that this acknowledges the extreme exertion that some horses endure during a jumps race. 62 It contends that:

Horses who are behind the field and subsequently eased out of the race due to fatigue and exhaustion are likely to be experiencing both reduced physical capacity and mental distress. 63

At its extreme, horses can experience epistaxis, bleeding from the nostrils, that generally arises from exercise induced pulmonary haemorrhage (E.I.P.H.), which is the manifestation of ruptured capillaries in the lungs at peak exertion. The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. advised the Committee that racing bans and forced retirement penalties are imposed on horses that show signs of epistaxis, indicating the seriousness of this condition. It points to studies indicating that the risk of epistaxis is greater for jumps horses compared with flat horses and higher in horses that compete in steeplechase races compared with hurdles. 64

The C.P.R. support the introduction of the industry ruling requiring the withdrawing of fatigued horses, arguing that it is the only safety measure that has been effective in reducing fatalities. 65

In evidence presented by Mr Joe Cannizzaro, Chairman of the S.A.J.R.A and member of the A.J.R.A., concurs. He informed the Committee that:

61 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.9

62 Ibid

63 Ibid., p.10

64 Ibid., p.11

65 C.P.R. Submission p.4

29 …one of the simplest and most important changes that has really helped our sport immensely is…allowing riders to retire their horses when they believe they are uncompetitive on the day. It has been a marvellous initiative.66

Given the importance placed by both the industry and opponents of jumps racing on this rule, the Committee is of the view that it must be stringently enforced, as it is a critical measure for safeguarding animal welfare. To enforce this ruling, the industry could consider imposing greater penalties for non-compliance.

Transparency in Whole of Life Reporting

Further to evidence presented by the Oakbank Racing Club on 25 July 2016 on whole-of-life reporting requirements for thoroughbred racehorses, the Committee sought clarification from T.R.S.A. on current practices that provide such a record for jumps racehorses. In its response the C.E., T.R.S.A., Mr Jim Watters, explained that two new rules had been introduced by the Racing Australia Board relating to requirements for the notification of the retirement of a racehorse and registration of foals within 30 days of birth, enabling the industry to track horses from birth to exit from the industry. The Committee was informed by T.R.S.A. that:

The Racing Australia Board approved a new rule in relation to the notification of the retirement of a racehorse, which came into effect on 1 July 2014. The managing owner of each race horse is responsible for advising the reason for the horse’s retirement, and the plans for the horse beyond its racing career. They must indicate, at no charge to them or their trainer, whether their race horse was retired due to illness, injury, for breeding purposes, or at their request. They need to advise whether the horse will be re-homed as an equestrian or pleasure horse, enter an official retirement program, or be sent to a livestock sale. It is an offence not to lodge such form with Racing Australia.

In total nearly 9 out of 10 retired racehorses either entered the equestrian industry or the breeding industry.

In an effort to check the veracity of the information, each state undertakes a random audit of a sample of the forms lodged from their state and initial reports indicate a high degree of compliance.

As of 1 August 2016, foals will be required to be registered within 30 days of birth, and ownership details must be lodged. Any change in ownership must be notified, as to the location of the horse, and any changes to location. Failure to lodge such returns will mean that that foal cannot be registered to race.

66 J Cannizzaro, Hansard 8 August 2016 p. 62

30 This will effectively enable Racing Australia to track horses from birth to exit from the industry.67

The Committee was further advised that the new Australian Rules of Racing and policies apply to all thoroughbred racehorses and that:

There is no variance as such as to whether the horse is a two year old, flat horse or jumper…All are legitimate forms of racing and the same rules/policies apply.68

The Committee did not receive any data on the number of jumps horses that have entered either the equestrian or the breeding industries on retirement.

In its submission and evidence to the Committee, the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. raised concerns about the lack of public access to industry records to enable horses to be tracked. In evidence presented, the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. elaborated on its concerns about the adequacy of current reporting requirements and lack of transparency in providing data related to the fate of jumps horses leaving the industry.69 It noted that to determine the true fate of horses, more detailed information is required and considers the current use of descriptors such as retired as unacceptable and meaningless.

In consideration of this evidence, Committee member, Dr Duncan McFetridge M.P., a qualified veterinarian, expressed concerns about the adequacy of terms such as ‘sent to a livestock sale’, which could suggest that horses were sent to auction, where they could be bought for slaughter. Dr McFetridge advised the Committee that under the National Livestock Identification Scheme (N.L.I.S.), cattle can be tracked through a scanning system and that a similar system could be used to track horses that go to an abattoir.

Although it was acknowledged that current industry practices require all thoroughbreds to be microchipped to enable identification and tracking from birth to death, the Committee understands that this information is not publicly available.

In its evidence to the Committee, the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. referred to research which suggests that 40% of horses that are slaughtered are derived from the thoroughbred racing industry. This research cites poor performance and the existence of injuries, which affect performance, as the underlying reasons. 70 The findings of this research were not supported by evidence presented to the Committee by Ms Christine Duggan, General Manager, Samex Peterborough Pty Ltd., and Mr Jim Oakley, a horse buyer for Metro Velda. Ms Duggan advised that the Samex abattoir received about 96 horses a week, 95% of which were brumbies.71 Mr Oakley advised that he delivers on average around 10 horses a week to Peterborough, a third of which are thoroughbreds.72

67 J Watters, CE, T.R.S.A., Email to S.C.J.R 3 August 2016

68 ibid 69 Dr D Evans, Animal Welfare Advocate, R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Hansard 15 April 2016, p.3

70 Ibid., p.4 71 C Duggan, Hansard 31 October 2016, p.108 72 J Oakley, Hansard 17 October 2015, p.102

31 The Committee heard that the sources of horses are largely unknown and statistics on the proportion of horses that are registered to race that go to slaughter do not exist as they are not collected and collated. 73 According to the R.S.P.C.A.S.A.:

…trainers and owners dispose of their horses as they see fit and there is no record of what the destination is…74

The absence of data identifying where horses that go to slaughter come from is of concern to the Committee. The publication of full and detailed reports for every horse in the thoroughbred racing industry during its lifetime is critical to informing any discussion of wastage. Such reporting would also enable further research to be conducted. 75

The mechanisms currently in place to track horses in the racing and breeding industries will be discussed further in discussions of recommendations relating to wastage and overbreeding in the thoroughbred racing industry.

Duty of Care Measures

Retirement Planning

Recommendation 19: The Committee recommends that the horseracing industry develop, fund and implement a retirement plan for thoroughbred racehorses to address wastage.

Submissions received have identified wastage in the racing industry as a key concern. Wastage refers to the number of animals leaving the racing industry from overbreeding and when they are no longer considered useful by the industry. 76

The Committee has noted that the introduction of retirement planning for racehorses is favoured by several animal welfare groups.

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. believe that, given the high revenues generated from gambling and other sources, the racing industry should invest:

…a decent amount of that back into the welfare of the animals that they make their money from…77

They call for known and published industry plans that indicate:

This is what we are intending to do. This is how much money we are wanting to invest over this period of time to endeavour to achieve these outcomes for the horses that are either failed racers, former racers or whatever they may be, so they get a good outcome.78

73 Dr D Evans, Hansard 15 April 2016, p.5 74 ibid 75 Dr D Evans, Hansard 15 April 2016, p.5

76 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.11

77 T Vasudeva, CEO, R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Hansard 15 April 2016, p.10

78 ibid

32 A key assertion of supporters of jumps racing is that this activity extends a horse’s racing career, prolonging the life of a horse that might otherwise go to slaughter. Opponents argue that this is not the case and that jumps racing:

…will merely defer the one way trip to the abattoir, and only as long as that horse is competitive. 79

Animal Liberation S.A (A.L.S.A.) argues that generally there is a lack of retirement planning and that this is indicative of the worth the industry places on horses that are no longer considered profitable. It contends that:

There is no peaceful paddock for the majority of jumps racers, only death.80

In evidence presented by Ms Molly Salt, Campaign Co-ordinator, A.L.S.A., the Committee heard that it is a requirement in the United States that when a racehorse is bought and registered to race, owners must put aside funds for a retirement plan. 81 The Committee sought further information from A.L.S.A. about where this occurs and how many States have introduced this requirement, however, it did not receive a response.

In evidence to the Committee, the C.P.R. advised that it:

…has successfully lobbied the wider racing industry over the years to bring about some positive reforms for racehorses.82

These reforms include a mandatory retirement program for racehorses, run by the racing industry. Such a program, it argues, would ensure that:

…we know for certain that these horses are not going to the knackery, they are not going to the abattoir.83

The Committee was informed that on 6 September 2016, Racing N.S.W. announced it will contribute $2 million annually to fund the retirement of racehorses, and has provided a commitment to “funding a home for every racehorse, whether they reach the racetrack or not”.84 The initiative will be funded by a 1% levy on a newly introduced prizemoney package.

It has been reported that:

79 A.L.S.A. Submission, p.6

80 ibid 81 M Salt, Campaign Co-ordinator, A.L.S.A., Hansard 15 April 2016 p.17

82 W Young, C.P.R. Hansard p.87

83 ibid., p.90

84 W Young, C.P.R., Hansard 19 September 2016, p.87; Sydney Morning Herald, ‘Racing NSW launches horse welfare fund as part of prizemoney package’, at: http.://www.smh.com.au/sp.ort/horseracing/racing-nsw- launches-horse-welfare-fund-as-p.art-of-p.rizemoney-p.ackage-20160906-gra0qm.html?deviceTyp.e=text Accessed 19/9/16

33 Racing N.S.W. will form a new department, including vets and staff, to retrain racehorses and place them within the horse community beyond their time on the track. Its role will be to establish partnerships with riding schools, pony clubs and other equestrian organisations to promote re-homing of thoroughbreds.85

The Committee notes that aspects of this initiative are similar to R.V.L.’s Off the Track Program.

The C.P.R. raised concerns about whether the amount announced by Racing N.S.W. is sufficient to achieve its objective. It advised the Committee that, although it welcomed the recent announcement, it will continue to discuss this matter with Racing N.S.W. 86

Research by Ruse et al. has found that the average age of horses in the time frame of their study was 6.4 years. They note that it is a regulatory requirement in Australia that horses are at least three years old before they begin jumps training and racing. They found that a low percentage (2%) were aged three years in their first jumps racing season. 87 They note:

Given the requirements to qualify a horse to jump, it is likely that the majority of Australian jump horses will be at least four years old before racing over obstacles. Our data show the median age of jump horses is six years, with a range of three to 13 years and almost one quarter aged eight and above…88

These findings indicate that:

…Australian jump racing may well significantly extend the tenure of some horses in the racing industry. Given that jump racing accounted for only 1.5% of all thoroughbred racing in Victoria and South Australia [in] the study period, this career option will be offered only to a small minority of race horses.89

The authors point out that the study’s age - profile data needs to be understood in the context of a high annual turnover of jumps horses.

Despite the investment in training and qualifying a jumps horse, 55% of horses started in three or fewer races across the 2012, 2013 and 2014 seasons, with 22% starting in only one race.

…This suggests that any career extension enabled by jumps racing is short lived for the majority of horses.

85 Sydney Morning Herald, ‘Racing NSW launches horse welfare fund as part of prizemoney package’, at: http.://www.smh.com.au/sp.ort/horseracing/racing-nsw-launches-horse-welfare-fund-as-p.art-of-p.rizemoney- p.ackage-20160906-gra0qm.html?deviceTyp.e=text Accessed 19/9/16

86 Mr W Young, C.P.R., Hansard 19 Sep.t 2016 p.88

87 Ruse et al, p.1079

88 Ibid., p.1084 89 Ibid.

34 …It is also clear that Australian jump racing is sustained by high levels of new horse entries each season.90

The Committee heard that wastage not only occurs at the end of a racehorse’s career but is created from the beginning through overbreeding, in a push to create champions. 91

The Committee believes there are clearly implications from overbreeding and this will be examined further in the discussion on wastage and overbreeding in the thoroughbred racing industry.

The Committee understands that thoroughbred horses have a life span of between 25 to 30 years and that all retire from racing well before the term of their natural life. Effective retirement plans and provisions go some way toward ensuring a responsible industry response to resolving the issue of wastage.

Identifying and Supporting Alternative Pathways

Recommendation 20: The Committee recommends that the industry consider measures for extending the life of ex-racehorses to lessen the likelihood of their being discarded and slaughtered.

Recommendation 22: The Committee recommends that, with proper regard to the type of injury, cost and other relevant factors, greater consideration be given to the role of rehabilitation in extending racehorse lives.

The Committee was informed that industry - supported initiatives have been introduced in Victoria under the Off the Track program to transition retired racehorses into other disciplines and pursuits.92 R.V.L.’s Workforce Development Officer, Ms Lisa Coffey, advised that the major premise of the Off the Track program is to promote the use, agility and versatility of retired racehorses. 93

This program was introduced by Racing Victoria in 2012 and comprises a network of re- trainers and sponsorship of events for retired racehorses.

R.V.L. promotes and supports a network of accredited thoroughbred re-trainers across Victoria to assist with the successful transition of racehorses into other pursuits. Re-trainers

90 Ruse et al pp,1084-5

91 Dr D Evans, R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Hansard 15 April 2016 p.10

92 R.V.L. website, Horse Welfare - The Facts at: bttp://rv.racing.com/welfate Accessed 19/9/16

93 L Coffey, Hansard 19 Sept 2016, p.97

35 re-educate retired racehorses as performance and pleasure horses and can assist racing trainers and owners with the placement of their horses into a second career.94

The Committee heard that there are 22 accredited re-trainers in Victoria. Ms Coffey advised that re-trainers:

…make their own agreements with the owners as to what they do with the horse. Some will take them and they will be paid to retrain them and the owners might take them back for themselves, they might want to ride them themselves or they might want to sell them themselves, or else some of the re-trainers take the retired racehorses and they work on them for free…and they are able to sell them themselves.95

The Off the Track program drives demand for retired thoroughbred racehorses as pleasure and performance horses through event sponsorship. Racing Victoria has formed partnerships with equestrian bodies such as Equestrian Victoria, Pony Club Association of Victoria, the Horse Riding Clubs Association of Victoria, to ensure suitable incentives exist for re-educating and riding retired racehorses.96

Ms Coffey advised that,

…retired jumps horses are more sought after than flat horses because…they already know how to jump. 97

The Committee was informed that through the program, a new retired racehorse showing category has been created at agricultural shows, and sponsorship is provided for the best performing retired racehorse in pony club and eventing competitions. 98

R.V.L. board member Mr Pearse Morgan presented evidence to the Committee about the importance of ensuring alternative uses for retired jumps horses. Mr Morgan informed the Committee that:

…the field of equestrian eventing is one in particular where for the equestrian eventing fraternity the horses of choice are the thoroughbred jumps horses, because from their viewpoint they have been educated.

…there is a clear preference among the participants in the equestrian fraternity for retired jumps horses.99

According to Mr Morgan:

94 R.V.L. website, Off the Track at: https://rv.racing.com/the-horse/off-the-track/about Accessed 19/10/16

95 L Coffey, Hansard 19 September 2016, p.97

96 R.V.L. website, Off the Track Program at: https://rv.racing.com/the-horse/off-the-track/about Accessed 19/10/16

97 L Coffey, Hansard 19 September, 2016, p.97

98 ibid 99 P. Morgan, Hansard 8 August 2016, pp.72-3

36 …rather than jumps racing having a negative impact on horse welfare, we believe that, with the education jumps horses get, jumps racing is actually having a positive effect on animal welfare by the opportunity it gives those horses to move on to a new life.100

It is not evident from the available data how many retired jumps horses are successfully transitioned into other equestrian pursuits, however, R.V.L. contends that over the past year, more than 90% of horses leaving the racing industry generally have been re-homed directly into the equestrian, pleasure or breeding industries. R.V.L. also cite an unnamed 2013 University of Melbourne study indicating that thoroughbreds with a link to racing are the most represented breed among the 600,000 pleasure horses in Victoria. 101

Similar data for S.A. was not made available to the Committee. Consequently, the Committee was unable to determine what initiatives are in place in S.A., or to gauge the local industry’s success in transitioning jumps horses into second careers in equestrian disciplines and pursuits.

On other career-extending options, the Committee heard that high-weight racing could provide an alternative pursuit to jumps racing for horses and jockeys. The C.P.R. advised the Committee that high-weight flat racing is a sound alternative to jumps racing that would retain jobs for jumps jockeys and trainers. 102 The C.P.R. argues that this “most obvious alternative for jumps racing” would allow jockeys of a higher weight class than flats jockeys to continue to race with “no impact at all” and that:

This would ensure that they have another avenue of flat racing which is much kinder to the horses, less risky for the jockeys.103

The C.P.R. submit that high-weight racing is currently being conducted, with 15 races scheduled for the 2016 jumps racing season. 104

R.V.L. board member Mr Pearse Morgan informed the Committee that:

From a Racing Victoria viewpoint, we recognise the importance of the jumps riders. There are approximately 30 qualified jumps jockeys in Victoria, and they ride on average between 20 to 30 horses per day at trackwork. The contribution they make from a trackwork viewpoint and a training viewpoint is very, very significant. In order to support their existence and retaining them in the industry, Racing Victoria introduced a concept called ‘high weight races’. The purpose of the high weight races is that they give the jumps jockeys the opportunity to earn riding fees on the flat.105

100 P. Morgan, Hansard 8 August 2016, pp.72-3

101 R.V.L. website, Horse Welfare - The Facts at: bttp://rv.racing.com/welfate Accessed 19/9/16

102 C.P. R. Submission p.12 103 W Young, Hansard 19 September 2016, p.90

104 C.P.R. Submission, p.12

105 P. Morgan, Hansard 8 August 2016 p.77

37 The Committee also heard that although rehoming is an important element in extending the life of ex-racehorses, rehabilitation can play a critical role. 106 The C.P.R. contend that underlying symptoms that have not been addressed can cause behavioural problems. Horses that endure constant pain from stomach ulcers, for example, can demonstrate what appear to be dangerous behaviours, preventing them from being rehomed. In evidence presented, Mr Ward Young from the C.P.R. explained that:

Some of the damage that is done to these horses during racing are problems that can be easily fixed but can appear to be serious problems at the outset.

Too many horses are discarded on a whim because it’s easy and that is why the fate of jumps horses is so bleak.107

The Committee was informed that horses with chronic injuries require time to recover. In evidence presented by Banjumpsracing.com, Ms Michelle Bryant informed the Committee that she and Ms Kerri Bryant are “very active in the rehoming of jumps horses.” They operate an animal rescue service that concentrates on rehoming off - the - track thoroughbreds. Ms Bryant advised the Committee that:

…we have taken quite a number of injured jumps horses and rehabilitated and rehomed them just as companions.108

Ms Bryant noted that:

A lot of them, unfortunately, leave the industry because of injury…

After 12 to 18 months, depending on how bad the injury is, we can get them fit enough that they are comfortable and won’t need ongoing care, but you could never put that horse back under pressure.109

Although the Committee understands that there may be cases where rehabilitation is not possible, evidence presented by Mr John Glatz, then Chairman of the Oakbank Racing Club, suggests that there are also cases where successful results can be achieved. Describing a horse diagnosed with a fractured pastern after undergoing an X-ray, Mr Glatz reported that:

I took him home and had him in a stable for six months with a plaster cast on him…Took the cast off and six months later he ran second in the Great Eastern and won Warrnambool, and then went on and hunted, show-jumped and died when he was about 27, just of old age.110

The Committee believes that, in light of this evidence, retraining, rehoming and rehabilitation should be considered as viable options for extending the life of ex-jumps horses, to reduce the likelihood of their being unnecessarily euthanased or going to slaughter.

106 Mr W Young, Hansard 19 September 2016, p.91 107 ibid

108 M Bryant, Hansard 6 June p.24

109 Ibid., p.25 110 J Glatz, Hansard, 25 July 2016, pp.49-50

38 Equine Rescue and Rehoming of Unwanted Horses

The Committee has heard that one of the factors that may lead to injured horses being euthanased or slaughtered is the cost of treatment. Treatment for injuries can be expensive and the cost of rehoming can be prohibitive for many. Ms Michelle Bryant noted that jumps horses:

…are very difficult to rehome because they are an expensive pet, and if they can’t be utilised for show jumping, eventing, those kinds of things, people don’t want them.

On average, I would say that a thoroughbred would cost somebody $150 a week to care for, and there are just not the homes out there for people willing to spend that money on a paddock ornament…111

Injuries incurred will also impact on whether horses can be rehomed. The Committee heard that:

The reality is that, due to the physical stress and injuries that these jumps horses often have, even just through a very short career, it makes them a lot less attractive to people who are looking to take an off-the-track thoroughbred into another equine pursuit or another equine sport. Horses that have had that kind of stress on their bones and have often had tendon injuries tend to be overlooked. They are certainly harder to rehome than a normal thoroughbred.112

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. informed the Committee that:

The likelihood of an injured jumps horse receiving surgery to treat a fracture or tendon/ligament injury is believed to be low due to the older average age of these horses and the high risk of further injury or breakdown.113

Research has shown that there is a high rate of annual turnover in jumps racing, which typically has a six - month season, and that the median age of a jumps horse is six years of age. 114

This raises concerns about the lack of provision by the industry for the large number of unwanted horses at the end of their racing careers, given that the life span of a thoroughbred racehorses is typically 25-30 years.

111 M Bryant, Hansard, 6 June 2016, p.26

112 M Bryant, Hansard, 6 June 2016, p.24

113 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, pp.6-7

114 Ruse et al p.1084

39 The Committee believes that, in addition to the issue of retirement planning, rehoming is a matter that the industry must address and that this is may best be undertaken at the national level.

Wastage and Overbreeding in the Thoroughbred Racing Industry

Fate of Horses Leaving the Thoroughbred Racing Industry

Recommendation 24: The Committee recommends that in the absence of recent published studies quantifying the demographics of horses entering slaughterhouses in Australia, S.A. data be collected, collated and published to enable research to be undertaken to determine the proportion of horses that are registered to race that go to slaughter and the reasons for this.

Among the criticisms levelled at the jumps racing industry by opponents of jumps racing is the ethics of wastage that occurs in the racing industry generally from overbreeding, use and the discarding of injured or uncompetitive horses that are no longer considered useful by the industry. 115

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. advised the Committee of a study conducted at the University of Queensland indicating that forty percent of the horses that are slaughtered are derived from the thoroughbred racing industry. 116

The study by Doughty, conducted in 2008 117 investigated horses processed at an Australian export abattoir over a four - month period. The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. argue this is a significant proportion of horses from one sector.

115 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p. 11

116 Dr D Evans, R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Hansard 15 April 2016, p.p.4-5

117 Doughty, A, 2008, ‘Epidemiological survey of dentition and foot condition of slaughtered horses in Australia’, Master of Animal Studies Thesis, University of Queensland, cited in R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission p.11

40 A further Australian study by Hayek et al. in 2005118 collected data for the 2002-2003 season and estimated that the total wastage rate was 38.6%. The authors found that the main reason for wastage was poor or slow performance accounting for 36.5% of horses, with illness and injury accounting for 31.0%.

On the basis of this study, the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. conclude that:

…it is either a slow horse or an injured horse that would end up being slaughtered.119

Hayek et al. also found that 9.4% of horses went into breeding, and that factors such as unsuitable temperament and behaviour accounted for 6.4% of the wastage rate. A total of 16.6% of horses went to auction or a new owner and it is understood that this suggests these horses would be acquired by meat buyers, and 6.3% went to slaughter. 120

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. raised further concerns about the fate of jumps horses leaving the industry in light of the findings of the Ruse et al, study that shows a high turnover or attrition rate in the industry. Only seven per cent of jumps horses racing in Victoria and South Australia in 2012 were still racing in 2014 and the jumps racing careers of the majority of horses comprised no more than three races in one season. These findings raise questions that require further investigation to identify the underlying reasons for the short-lived careers of thoroughbred jumps race horses, given the significantly greater investment in time required to train and qualify a jumps horse in Australia. 121

The Committee heard that the proportion of retired jumps racing horses sent to slaughter is, however, largely unknown as it is not measured at either abattoirs or knackeries.

It is the Committee’s understanding that abattoirs process horse meat for human consumption exclusively for export, as distinct from knackeries, that dispose of sick, injured and dead horses, among other livestock, for pet food, fertiliser and other by-products.

A study conducted by Hayek in 2004, noted that many animal welfare groups have hypothesised a link between the ex-racehorse and the horsemeat industry. 122 In South Australia, horses are slaughtered at Peterborough abattoir, the only abattoir in the State to process horse meat for human consumption. 123

The General Manager of Samex Peterborough, Ms Christine Duggan, advised the Committee that horses are processed on behalf of Velda N.V., a Belgium owned company, previously

118 Hayek A.R., Jones B., Evans, D.L., Thomson, P.C., McGreevy, P.D., 2005, 'Epidemiology of horses leaving the Thoroughbred and Standardbred racing industries,’ In Proceedings of the 1st International Equitation Science Symposium, Melbourne, Australia, cited in R.S.P..C.A.S.A. Submission p.11

119 Dr D Evans, R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Hansard 15 April 2016, p.4

120 Hayek et al cited in R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.11

121 Ruse et al p.p.1085-6

122 Hayek, A., 2004, Epidemiology of horses leaving the racing and breeding industries, University of Sydney, p.16

123 Dr D Evans, R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Hansard 15 April 2016 p.5

41 known as Metro Velda. Ms Duggan informed the Committee that the abattoir carries out “service kills” for Velda N.V. and that horses are supplied by buyers who liaise directly with the Managing Director/owner of the company in Belgium. 124

Under the service kill arrangement, Samex is notified by Velda N.V. when a service kill is required and bill the company for the use of the facility. 125

…We do not have any involvement in the supply nor do we have any knowledge of the breed or history of stock supplied to us by …Velda. All stock come with a N.V.D. (National Vendor Declaration) form, that is as much information as we are given. Samex Peterborough does not accept any sick or injured stock for slaughter along the guidelines of animal welfare.126

A specific Horse Vendor Declaration (H.V.D) and Waybill or Transported Stock Statement must be provided by owners, who are required to have owned the horse for six months or more. 127 The H.V.D requires owners to provide their full name and postal address, full address and name of the horse’s property of origin, full and accurate details of the horses supplied including colour, description, sex and microchip identification. Disclosure of any treatment with drugs, chemicals, hormone growth promotants or beta-agonists must also be supplied. 128

Further to the evidence presented at its hearing on Friday 15 April, the Committee requested the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. to provide further information on where and how horses in S.A are slaughtered. It reported that Peterborough is one of only two abattoirs in Australia that process horses for human consumption, the other being in Caboolture in Queensland. The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. understands that the Peterborough abattoir mainly processes feral horses, some ex-racehorses and recreational horses, as well as feral camels. It advised that:

Limited details are available but information from 2013 indicated that at that time they slaughtered on average about 250 horses per month.

A captive bolt is used to stun the horse followed by exsanguination by cutting the major blood vessels in the neck. A veterinarian is required to be onsite at meat export premises, whose responsibilities include animal welfare. Authorisation and licencing is overseen by the Commonwealth Department of Agriculture...

General welfare provisions for slaughter are included under the Model Code of Practice for the Welfare of Animals at Slaughtering Establishments (2001). There are no specific standards for horse slaughter.129

124 C Duggan, Hansard 31 October 2016, pp.108-9

125 C Duggan, Hansard 31 October 2016, p.110

126 Correspondence from C Duggan, GM, Samex Peterborough Pty Ltd, 10/10/16

127 C Duggan, Hansard 31 October 2016, p. 111 128 Correspondence from C Duggan, GM, Samex Peterborough Pty Ltd, 10/10/16

129 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Response to questions arising from Hearing 15 April 2016 p.1

42 The Chief Executive Officer of the R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Mr Tim Vasudeva informed the Committee that:

Different facilities will do different things…part of the process, in terms of them being compliant, would be to ensure that you minimise the extent to which animals that are going to slaughter are aware of that being their impending fate.130

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. understands that all abattoirs are designed to ensure that animals awaiting slaughter cannot see animals being slaughtered, owing to the potential stress this may cause. It advised that regular inspections of slaughtering facilities and abattoirs are conducted by the R.S.P.C.A.S.A., to ensure compliance with relevant codes. The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. is required to provide two days advance notice when conducting inspections. 131

Ms Duggan advised the Committee that the Samex abattoir received about 96 horses a week from all over Australia but mainly from the north of South Australia and the Northern Territory. Of these “probably 95 per cent are brumbies” with the remaining five per cent domestic.

I wouldn’t be able to tell you whether they are from racing, jumping or whatever they did prior to coming to our abattoir.

…Most of the domestics we get are old…132

Confirming evidence presented by the R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Ms Duggan explained that all horses are humanely slaughtered and Commonwealth Department of Agriculture appointed veterinarians must be in attendance during slaughter.133

Commonwealth Government meat inspectors are also on hand to ensure the horse meat products are fit for human consumption. In line with European Union regulations, samples are taken, and tests for banned substances conducted, to enable all products to be traced back to the point of slaughter. 134

When groups of brumbies arrive at the abattoir they are kept in groups, as it is understood that they are pack animals. Domestic horses are placed in separate pens and, if they are not due to be slaughtered for a few days, are fed and watered. All horses “are permanently on water as soon as they arrive.” Confirming the procedures outlined by the R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Ms Duggan explained that horses are then placed in “knocking boxes” where trained slaughtermen apply a captive bolt that instantly kills the horses, which are then bled and processed, “exactly the same as beef.” 135

130 T Vasudeva, R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Hansard 15 April 2016, p5

131 Ibid 132 C Duggan, Hansard 31 October 2016, p108

133 Ibid., pp.109-10

134 C Duggan, Hansard 31 October 2016, p.111

135 Ibid., p.110

43 The Committee has noted that horses that have been euthanased by injection cannot be processed for human consumption or as pet food. Mr John Glatz, Chairman of the Oakbank Racing Club (O.R.C.) advised the Committee that:

There are various ways of euthanasing horses. They can give them an injection, but that means they can’t be used for anything.136

Mr Glatz explained that although some horses are still euthanased with a bullet:

…normally a vet would just euthanasia them with an injection. It is just like an overdose of anaesthetic and you just sort of go to sleep but you don’t wake up again.137

The Committee heard from Mr Jim Oakley, a former knackery operator, who currently works as a buyer for Metro Velda. Mr Oakley advised that he is currently:

…a beef and horse buyer, mainly for the meat trade. I buy horses from all over S.A. and cart them to the Peterborough abattoir for slaughter.138

He closed his pet food knackery at Mount Compass “two or three years ago”.

Our main thing was beef and injured cows, but most of the dairies have gone now so it wasn’t worth keeping going. Those days I did all the injured horses in the district and a few from the track, but nowadays…I don’t handle any injured stock because they can’t go to Peterborough. They are all under inspection up there by AQIS. 139 and the injured horses can’t go up there.140

Mr Oakley receives one or two horses a week directly from the stables of trainers, with most coming from secondary sources, that is:

…the people who get them from the stables, take them home and find out that they’re not suitable or get hurt from them.141

The Committee was advised that he is one of two buyers working for Velda NV in S.A. He delivers on average around 10 horses a week to Peterborough, of which about:

…one-third [are] thoroughbreds, one-third pacers and one-third ordinary hacks…that people are finished with or are of old age or, for various reasons, are unsuitable or dangerous. 142

136 J Glatz, Chairman, O.R.C., Hansard 25 July 2016, p.50

137 Ibid., p.51 138 J Oakley, Hansard 17 October 2016, pp.102-3

139 Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service

140 J Oakley, Hansard 17 October 2016, pp.102-3

141 J Oakley, Hansard 17 October 2016, p.102

142 Ibid., pp.103-4

44 Occasionally sick, injured and dead horses are disposed of at a Murray Bridge facility, where they are made into fertiliser. 143 The Committee notes that there are two businesses providing horse disposal services listed on the Adelaide Plains Equine Clinic’s directory of Horse Owner Services and Supplies.144

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. maintains that sending spent racehorses to slaughter is a contentious issue that is gaining greater public attention and there remains a lack of transparency in the industry, which hinders access to such data. They have called on the South Australian racing industry to collate and publish all relevant data for each individual jumps race horse, given the high risks involved and level of public concern.

Australian jumps racing is sustained by high levels of new horse entries each season.145 The Committee believes it is appropriate to seek answers to questions about the drivers of horse breeding in Australian racing to further inform public debate. Reliable statistics that provide a strong evidence base must be at the heart of such as debate.

The Committee has been informed of industry measures for tracking thoroughbred racehorses from birth to retirement. It understands that all thoroughbred foals born in Australia from 2003 are required to be microchipped and a Foal Identification Card is provided at the time horse parentage is verified. This card is relinquished to the Registrar of Racehorses146 (R.O.R.) at the time an application for naming is submitted. Upon naming, a new Thoroughbred Identification Card is issued by the R.O.R.147

During the registration process, horses are officially named and the details of all owners are recorded. The Thoroughbred Identification Card, issued upon registration, records the horse’s breeding, markings, age, sex, colour, brands and microchip number. The R.O.R. stipulates that this document must remain with the horse if sold and at all other times.148

A fee is required for each registration, 20% of which is paid to the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation 149(R.I.R.D.C.), a government statutory body.150

In evidence presented by the R.S.P.C.A.S.A., the Committee heard that although this data is collected, it is not available on a public registry. It contends that available information on

143 J Oakley, Hansard 17 October 2016, pp.104

144 Adelaide Plains Equine Clinic at: http://www.adelaideplainsequine.com/horse-owner-services-suppliers/ Accessed 14/11/16

145 Ruse et al., p.1085 146 R.O.R. is a division of Racing Information Services Australia Pty Ltd (R.I.S.A.). R.I.S.A. is the official thoroughbred racing industry organisation responsible for the compilation of race fields and form and maintenance of race results across Australia. It is responsible for the registration and naming of thoroughbred racehorses nationally. A horse must be registered with the R.O.R. before it can commence a racing or breeding career.

147 Australian Stud Book website at: https://www.studbook.org.au/RulesAndServices.aspx Accessed 31/10/16 148 Registrar of Racehorses website at: http://www.racingaustralia.horse/RoR/AboutROR.aspx Accessed 31/10/16

149 The RIRDC Horse Research and Development program assists in the developing the Australian horse industry and enhancing its export potential. 150 Registrar of Racehorses website: http://www.racingaustralia.horse/RoR/AboutROR.aspx Accessed 31/10/16

45 individual horses that race is difficult to collate and broad and ambiguous descriptors such as active, retired, deceased are used.151

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. raised further concerns that although all thoroughbreds are allocated a microchip number, not all horses are taken off the microchip register when they end their racing careers.152

In a further submission provided by Banjumpsracing.com, the Committee was informed that several terms are used by the industry to report the status of a horse. These are active, retired, transferred, exported and dead. It claims the reporting relies solely on the honesty of the trainer and that the statuses are marked by ambiguity. 153

Banjumpsracing.com argues that although a horse may be classified as in active training, it may not have raced in months or years. Owners may claim that a horse has been retired from racing but that there is no way of knowing whether it has been sent to a paddock, a new owner or to sales where it can be bought for slaughter. This is not recorded or qualified by R.I.S.A. Horses transferred out of a trainer’s stable might not have been immediately taken by another trainer, raising concerns about their whereabouts.

There are numerous horses whose status is “transferred”. They could be anywhere. Transferred simply means “no longer trained by Trainer A”…154

Horses sent overseas for racing fall under the exported category and their fate can also be difficult to determine. 155

The Committee is of the view that the industry must collect comprehensive statistical data on the fate of jumps race horses, within the broader scope of the racing industry. It has an obligation to demonstrate greater transparency and accountability to facilitate a better understanding of this issue and how best to address the concerns it has raised.

Issues regarding Breeding

Recommendation 27: The Committee recommends that consideration be given to developing a nation-wide industry plan with measurable outcomes to mitigate wastage through overbreeding.

Recommendation 28: The Committee recommends that the industry enter into partnerships to support research into current breeding practices with the view to establishing more sustainable numbers.

The Committee notes the lack of publicly available data and recent studies on the issue of wastage through overbreeding in the thoroughbred racing industry.

151 T Vasudeva & Dr D Evans, R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Hansard 15 April 2016, pp.10-11

152 Dr D Evans, R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Hansard, 15 April 2016, p.11

153 Banjumpsracing.com Secondary Submission, 10 October 2016, pp.14-15

154 ibid. 155 ibid.

46 Opponents of jumps racing, such as Animal Liberation S.A. (A.L.S.A.), claim that the racing sector is responsible for breeding more unwanted horses than any other industry.156

Racing Victoria claims that, over the past 10 years, the number of foals born nationally has dropped by more than 27%, and the number of horses competing has remained relatively constant. 157

The Committee understands that records are maintained by the Australian Stud Book (A.S.B.), however, only subscribers are able to gain access to breeding statistics. The A.S.B. operates to ensure the integrity of thoroughbred breeding in Australia and to provide industry population, breeding statistics and trends for national and international use. The A.S.B. records three official identification numbers: the contact breeder number, the life number and microchip number of the horse. The life-number is an 11 digit number applied to all horses born during the 1997 foaling season and beyond. Each thoroughbred, regardless of where it is born, carries a unique life number, making it possible to trace if it races overseas, interstate and if it changes names.158

All horses born in Australia since 2003 are microchipped and can be identified through their microchip number. The microchip must be implanted to A.S.B. specifications by an A.S.B.- approved vet and remains the sole and absolute property of the A.S.B. at all times. Micro- chipping and the recording of D.N.A. type is one of the four components of the identification process. Other components are: certificate of paternity; description of a horse’s natural features; and freeze branding. All horses can be checked against these benchmarks throughout their lives to verify their identity. Under existing practices, it is a requirement that the A.S.B. is notified of all named and un-named thoroughbreds that die.159

A literature review conducted in 2004 for a Bachelor of Science (Veterinary Science) thesis by Ariella Hayek established that:

No published study has described the wastage rates of Thoroughbred and Standardbred breeding mares and stallions in Australia.160

The Hayek study, the first investigation into the fate of horses leaving the racing and breeding industries in Australia, found that:

The way in which the race industry is structured means that information regarding the movements of individual horses is difficult to acquire. 161

The study identified several reasons for horses leaving racing and breeding, including poor or slow performance, illness or injury and unsuitable temperament or behaviour. The author

156 A.L.S.A. Submission, p.6

157 RVL website at: https://rv.racing.com/welfare Accessed 19/9/16

158 ASB website at: https://www.studbook.org.au/RulesAndServices.aspx Accessed 31/10/16 159 Ibid.

160 Hayek, A., 2004, Epidemiology of horses leaving the racing and breeding industries, University of Sydney

161 ibid

47 concluded that further research is needed to identify risk factors for horses leaving owing to these reasons.162

The need to identify possible training or breeding practices that address or prevent these problems is acute. This is because the large number of horses available to racing stables and studs may mean that it is currently more expedient and financially feasible for trainers and stud masters to acquire new horses rather than to use present practices to remedy problems in existing horses. This may account for the large number of horses described in this study moving between different enterprises. In addition to the serious welfare concerns for the horses involved, this practice is not of benefit to the race industry. Owner dissatisfaction due to the short careers of horses has been shown to have resulted in these important stakeholders leaving the industry (Bourke 1995). The current media attention to horse wastage, and the various campaigns focusing on this that have been launched by animal welfare groups, may also result in decreased public participation in the industry in the future. Consequently, horse wastage is an issue that has serious ramifications that may affect the continued viability of the industry. 163

The Committee notes the absence of recent studies into breeding practices within the thoroughbred racing industry. There is a clear pathway of thoroughbred horses moving into jumps racing from flat racing and an inter-relationship between these two aspects of the racing industry. Breeding undeniably affects wastage and further research is required to assess and improve current practices.

5.1 Public Submissions The submissions received and evidence presented to the committee reflect strong divisions in public sentiment on the question of whether to ban jumps racing. Public debate on this controversial issue is highly emotive and, it has been observed, occurs largely in the absence of current, comprehensive and reliable research. A recent research study into the dynamics of Australian thoroughbred jumps racing concluded that:

Conflicting perceptions of acceptable risk, and the diverse value-judgements on which these may be based, are at the heart of the debate about Australian jumps racing. 164

The arguments of opponents and supporters of jumps racing are multifaceted. A contextual basis for understanding the positions advanced is provided and the key concerns and themes that have emerged from the submissions and evidence are outlined below.

Context for Understanding Jumps Racing in South Australia

Jumps Racing defined - What is jumps racing?

Jumps racing in Australia is conducted as part of the thoroughbred horse racing industry and comprises hurdle and steeplechase races. South Australia and Victoria are the only states that continue to conduct jumps races. Although jump races are mostly conducted in Victoria, the industry in these two states is closely aligned.

162 ibid.

163 Hayek, A., 2004, Epidemiology of horses leaving the racing and breeding industries, University of Sydney.

164 Ruse et al, p. 1084

48 Jumps racing is conducted under state-based local Rules of Racing, which results in differences between the two states. 165 In S.A., Thoroughbred Racing South Australia (T.R.S.A.) considers jumps racing an important component of its annual program. T.R.S.A. is the Principal Racing Authority (P.R.A.) in S.A., as recognised under the Australian Rules of Racing. As the governing body and umbrella organisation for thoroughbred racing, the T.R.S.A. is responsible for all sectors of the racing industry in S.A., including jumps racing.166

Hurdle racing is the dominant form of Australian jumps racing. 167 Hurdle races usually involve fewer jumps over shorter distances than steeplechase races. 168 The minimum distance of a hurdle race in SA is 2800m (and 3200m in Victoria). 169 In both states, hurdles are a maximum of one metre high, with horses carrying a minimum weight of 64kg, which includes the jockey and saddle, and handicap weight.170

Steeplechases are normally longer races run over 3,450 to 5,500 metres, over 1.15m fences. Horses are typically required to jump between 15 to 20 and as many as 33 obstacles. 171

Where does jumps racing occur? The Australian Context

Research has shown that although jumps racing in Australia is mostly conducted in regional areas, it also occurs in metropolitan areas. Jumps racing in S.A. is conducted at one metropolitan track, Morphettville, and four regional tracks at Oakbank, Gawler, Murray Bridge and Mt Gambier. 172 Jumps races are typically held during autumn and winter when tracks are softer, with an average of 22 races programmed between March and August each year. 173 The majority of jumps races in Australia are held in rural, western Victorian country racing clubs. 174

Why aren’t jumps races held in other States and Territories?

Banned in N.S.W.

Jumps racing has been banned in New South Wales (N.S.W.) since 1998 and it remains the only state in Australia to expressly prohibit jumps racing.

The amendment was introduced by the Hon. R. S. L. Jones in the N.S.W. Legislative Council and assented to by the Legislative Assembly on 16 September 1997.175 The amendment to

165 ibid., p.1073 166 T.R.S.A. Submission pp.1-2

167 Ruse et al p.1083 168 ibid., p1074 169 ibid, p1073 170 ibid, p1074

171 Animals Australia. Submission p.2

172 T.R.S.A. JR Program cited in R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission p.2 173 Ruse et al., p.1073 174 ibid, p.1077

175 L.S.S.A. Submission, p.4

49 Section 21C of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979 (N.S.W.) commenced operation on 1 February 1998. 176

Under Section 21C of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979 (N.S.W.) steeplechasing and hurdle racing are prohibited. The Act provides:

26.1 A person who organises or participates in a steeplechase or hurdle race is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty: 250 penalty units in the case of a corporation or 50 penalty units or imprisonment for 6 months, or both, in the case of an individual.177

An exemption is provided by N.S.W. Regulations for persons who organise or participate in show - jumping events. The Regulations provide:

29.1 A person who organises or participates in a steeplechase or hurdle race is exempt from the operation of section 21C of the Act if the race is organised in such a way that no horse in the race can approach or attempt to jump a particular obstacle or hurdle at the same time as any other horse in the race. 178

Status of Jumps Racing in other States and Territories

Jumps racing is not expressly prohibited in any other Australia State or Territory. A submission presented by the Law Society of South Australia (L.S.S.A.) notes that there is no legislative ban on jumps racing in Victoria, Tasmania, Queensland, Northern Territory, Australian Capital Territory and Western Australia. With the exception of Victoria, jumps racing in these jurisdictions is understood to have ceased.

The L.S.S.A. advised that jumps racing ceased in Tasmania on or about 28 April 2007. This decision was made by the Tasmanian Thoroughbred Racing Council owing to the declining popularity of jumps races and a declaration that it was not economically viable.

Queensland was one of the first states to cease jumps racing. In the 1890s, the combination of an economic downturn and the effects of a serious flood harmed the racing industry in this State. Jumps racing is believed by some to have briefly re-appeared in the 1980s with an annual exhibition hurdle. Others suggest the last such event occurred in 1903. Jumps racing was seen as uneconomical, as the necessary equipment, jockeys and horses came from Victoria.

Research conducted by the L.S.S.A. suggests that the Northern Territory has never held jumps races and it was therefore never the subject of a "ban".

176 L.S.S.A. Submission, p.4; A.LS.A. Submission, p.5

177 Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979 - 15 January 2016 - Part 2 Section 21C - 21C Steeplechasing and hurdle racing prohibited at: http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/#/view/act/1979/200/part2/sec21c Accessed 22 August 2016 178 Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979 - Current version for 15 January 2016 to date - Part 2 Section 21C - 21C Steeplechasing and hurdle racing prohibited at: http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/#/view/act/1979/200/part2/sec21c Accessed 22 August 2016: L.S.S.A. Submission p.5; ALSA Submission p.5; Sentient Submission p.3

50 An annual hurdle race was held in the Australian Capital Territory in the 1980s, however, owing to a race scandal over the event, interest waned and jumps racing ceased in 1989.

A steeplechase was held in Perth in 1877 and hurdle racing appeared on a regular basis in Western Australia in the 1890s. During the 1930s, however, jumps racing slowly declined. The last jumps race was held in that State in 1941. 179

The position of the Australian Jumps Racing Association (A.J.R.A.) is that jumps racing could not be sustained in Queensland, Tasmania and Western Australia owing to economic downturns in racing. 180

A recent independent research study contends that the viability of jumps racing in S.A. is highly dependent upon participation from the Victorian racing industry.181

International Context

Jumps racing is conducted in 18 countries across four continents. 182 The A.J.R.A. maintains that jumps racing is viewed as an important component of the equine racing industry in England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, France, Germany, Czechoslovakia, Austria, Belgium, Italy, Sweden, Japan, America and New Zealand. 183

The Committee heard that jumps racing is the predominant form of racing in England and Ireland, with more jumps race meetings held that flat meetings. 184 Within the U.K., 65 per cent of races are jumps races. 185

The Committee noted that although there is also opposition to jumps racing overseas from animal welfare advocates, jumps racing remains popular and shows no signs of declining.

Defining animal welfare

It is argued that considerations of animal welfare need to be grounded in a generally accepted definition. The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. base its understanding of animal welfare on U.K. animal welfare scientist Professor Donald Broom’s definition, which refers to “the ability of an animal to cope with its environment”, including physical and mental aspects. The welfare of an individual animal “can be said to be good if it is experiencing positive physiological and psychological outcomes”. 186

179 LSSA Submission, pp.5-7

180 A.J.R.A. Submission p.2

181 Ruse et al.,pp.1085-6

182 ibid., p.1073 183 A.J.R.A. Submission, p.2

184 S.A.J.R. Submission p.1 185 P Morgan, R.V.L., Hansard 8 August 2016, p.75

186 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.3

51 In its submission, the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. note that the understanding of animal welfare has been broadened in recent years to take into account developments in the growing field of animal welfare science, such as an understanding that mammalian species have emotional intelligence and sentience, or the ability to be aware of sensations and emotions and the capacity to feel pain and suffering, as well as experiencing a state of well-being. The definition of animal welfare favoured by the R.S.P.C.A. encompasses the need to provide positive experiences for animals, not just to prevent negative experiences. This definition is aligned with the University of Cambridge’s Declaration of Consciousness, which was publicly proclaimed by international scientists in 2012. The Declaration reflects a view that a society has a duty of care to consider the physical and psychological impacts on animals and to act accordingly to afford animals positive experiences and minimise harm and suffering wherever possible. 187

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. advised the committee that although there is continuing debate in the scientific community regarding effective measures to assess animal welfare, there is agreement that both physiological and psychological impacts must be considered. Behaviour can be a good indicator of the status of these measures in particular circumstances. Within this debate it is acknowledged that to contribute to overall good welfare, animals need to live as close to a “natural life” as possible. 188

The R.S.P.C.A. uses a framework of Five Freedoms, based on a U.K. enquiry on Animal Welfare, to consider factors that contribute to animal welfare. These are freedom from hunger and thirst, pain, injury and disease, fear and distress, discomfort, and freedom to express normal behaviour. In applying this framework, they believe that jumps horses are denied the ability to express normal behaviour, and are subjected to pain and injury and fear and distress. 189

Position of Opponents of Jumps Racing

Those opposed to jumps racing base their arguments on several key concerns. These concerns predominantly relate to animal welfare and whether it can be conducted safely.

Safety and Animal Welfare

Opponents argue that there is an unacceptably high rate of fatalities, falls and injuries in jumps training, trials and races. They consider the sport to be cruel, causing suffering and distress, and inherently more dangerous than flat racing. 190

The Committee heard that it is the contention of opponents to jumps racing that owing to what they consider to be insurmountable welfare risks, jumps racing cannot be conducted safely and should be banned. 191 Although some opponents concede that, as research has shown,

187 Ibid. 188 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.3

189 ibid., p.4 190 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.8

191 ibid., p.2

52 the fatality rate appears to have decreased in hurdle races, they argue that there is no indication that it can be reduced to an acceptable level, particularly in steeplechase races. 192

The introduction of a Rule of Racing requiring horses not in contention to be withdrawn from races has been commended by Coalition for the Protection of Racehorses (C.P.R.) and the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. for the role it has played in reducing fatalities. 193 Despite the introduction of wide - ranging safety measures, many opponents believe that when jumping and racing are combined it is not possible to reduce the danger to horses and jockeys that is inherent in the sport. 194 This sentiment is summed up in evidence presented to the committee by the C.P.R.:

I think that you can race a horse relatively safely. I think you can jump a horse relatively safely. But, the fundamental concern in jumps racing is that you have to do both, and I don't believe you can safely do so. 195

Opponents point to a number of factors that contribute to an increased risk of injury and death. They cite research, such as the Boden et al. study (2006), which identified longer distances, heavier weights and clearing obstacles as among these factors and research by Bailey et al., which identified the placement of obstacles in the path of racing horses as an obvious risk factor:

...The presence of barriers is the most obvious factor placing horses in jumping races at greater risk and the finding that the majority of jumping fatalities were associated with a fall supports this. ...It is possible that because jumping races are run over longer distances and horses carry a greater weight than flat racing horses, the jumps may pose an even greater obstacle for fatigued horses.196

A key aspect of the discussion on welfare risks is the question of whether horses “love to jump”. Opponents acknowledge that there is limited research available to assist in answering this question, however, they cite a Polish study by Gorecka-Bruzda et al, 197that compared the behaviour toward negotiating heights between leisure horses and equestrian competition horses with similar breeding. The results showed that under “riderless” conditions, even though the competition horses showed some preference to jump over rather than go around an obstacle compared to the leisure horses, there was an apparent reluctance by all horses to continue jumping as the obstacle height increased from 20 cm to 50 cm. This finding has implications for jump races as obstacles in both hurdle and steeplechases are at least one metre in height. The authors of this study concluded that excess demands could be placed on

192 A.L.I. Submission, p.4; Ruse et al., p.1083

193 C.P.R. Submission, p.4 194 A.L.S.A. Submission, pp.17-18 195 W Young, C.P.R., Hansard 19 September 2016 p.89

196 C.P.R. Submission, p.4

197 Gorecka-Bruzda, A., Jastrzebska, E., Muszyiska, A., Jedrzejewska, E., Jaworski, Z., Jezierski, J. and Murphy, J., 2013, 'To jump or not to jump? Strategies employed by leisure and sport horses.' Journal of Veterinary Behaviour 8 pp.253-260

53 horses in sports involving jumping and that the issue requires further monitoring for welfare purposes. 198

Opponents also advance concerns about the risks jumps racing poses to the safety of jockeys and the lack of accountability and transparency in the industry in S.A., which raise questions about the integrity of an industry that operates within a self-regulatory environment. 199

Furthermore, opponents question the significance of the jumps racing in S.A., which they argue has seen diminishing attendances at race meets and declining participation in jumps racing over recent years, and fewer trainers, starters and jockeys. They also point to waning support from within the industry and the Minister for Racing for jumps racing in S.A.

Although it is acknowledged that jumps racing has existed in Australia for more than 150 years and is considered a long standing tradition, it is argued that it is a small part of the total horse racing industry, constituting less than 1.5% of the industry in Victoria and S.A. 200 Opponents argue that the number of jumps races and horses involved in both States has decreased over past years and continues to decrease significantly, indicting an industry in decline. 201

In its submission, the Animal Law Institute (A.L.I.) claims that about 10% of the annual total of jumps races are held in S.A. 202 Animal Liberation S.A. (A.L.S.A.) cite research by Ruse et al. that found:

…the majority of Australian jump racing is regional, based in Victoria, and involves a small group of experienced trainers and jockeys.203

Sentient - the Veterinary Institute for Animal Ethics, contends that, based on media reports and Oakbank Racing Club annual reports, attendances at the Oakbank Easter Carnival have dropped by about 50% over the past six years from about 100,000 in 2010, to less than 50,000 in 2015, with gate income reported to be $100,000 less than for the previous year.204 Data available from Racing Information Services Australia suggests that of the $400,000 prize money offered at the Oakbank Easter Carnival, S.A. horses, competing in jumps races averaged only about 7% of winnings in recent years. 205

Banjumpsracing.com presented the Committee with data collated from all jumps racing results available from racingaustralia.horse on horses that have started in a race. It proposes that the average jumps racing field size in 2016 was 5.7 starters per S.A. jumps race. This represents a 20% decrease in starters from Victoria and S.A. racing in S.A. jumps races between 2014

198 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, pp.7-8

199 C.P.R. Submission p.13; R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.18

200 Ruse et al cited in C.P.R. Submission, p.2 201 A.A. Submission, p.9

202 A.L.I. Submission, p.9 203 Ruse et al., p.1072 cited in A.L.S.A. Submission, p.3

204 Sentient Submission, pp.4-5 205 ibid., p.5

54 and 2016. They also note that field sizes of fewer than eight starters do not pay a third dividend and are consequently unattractive to punters. 206

Opponents have noted the considerable overlap in the industry across these states, arguing that S.A. jumps race meetings are dependent on horses, trainers and jockeys from interstate and in some cases overseas, citing Ruse et al, in support of their claims. Opponents propose that the overlap in the industry leads to “double counting” on the number of people and horses actually involved, with actual numbers smaller than stated by the industry. 207

Banjumpsracing.com argue that although the T.R.S.A. website lists a total of 67 S.A. trainers with a jumps racing permit, only 11 raced a total of 19 jumps horses in S.A. during the 2016 season. Of these trainers, three (27%) had a single jumps racing start and a further six (55%) raced only one jumps horse, indicating the predominance of hobby trainers.208 They contend that there are no full time jumps trainers in S.A. 209

In its submission, Sentient refers to the findings of Ruse et al., which show that between 2012- 14 S.A. trainers accounted for fewer than 30% of all starts at S.A. racetracks. 210

Banjumpsracing.com notes that there has been an increase in the number of S.A. horses, with the same number of trainers as in 2015 racing more horses over obstacles. An analysis of race starts and the current status of horses based on racingaustralia.horse data shows that of the 19 horses that raced this season, 50% are either lame, suspended or retired. They also show that three of the four reported falls this season, or one in six S.A. horses, sustained falls during a S.A. jumps race. S.A. trained horses accounted for only 19 of the 556 racing starts in Victorian jumps racing in 2015.211

The Economic Contribution of Jumps Racing

Opponents of jumps racing question the extent of the financial contribution made by jumps racing to the State’s economy and the success of S.A. horses in winning prize money. The future and viability of the State’s premier jumps racing event, the O.R.C.’s Oakbank Easter Carnival, is also considered.

Research has shown that the Oakbank Easter Carnival is reputably worth $13 million to the local economy, drawing crowds of around 70,000 over two days of jumps racing. 212 Opponents argue that attendance numbers at this event continue to decline and that major sponsors have withdrawn in recent years, owing to continuing horse fatalities. 213

206 Banjumpsracing.com Further Submission, 10 October 2016, p.4 207 A.A. Submission, p.9

208 Banjumpsracing.com Further Submission, 10 October 2016, p.5 209 Banjumpsracing.com Submission, p.7 210 Sentient Submission, p.4

211 Banjumpsracing.com Submission, p.7

212 Ruse et al.,p.1086 213 A.L.S.A. Submission p.2; R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.22

55 Citing figures from the 2014 Oakbank Annual Report, the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. propose that the low level of sponsorship income, which does not cover the jumps racing prize money, creates an unsustainable situation for the O.R.C. They believe the proportion of the prize money won by S.A. trained horses is small, with the average prize money won by S.A horses accounting for less than 7% for the past three years. 214

It is argued that S.A. horses took only 10% of the prize money on offer during the 2012 season. Jumps horses racing at the Oakbank Easter Carnival took just 5.5% of the prize money in 2013, 6.7% in 2014 and 5.7% in 2015. By comparison, flat racing at this event returned almost 88% to S.A. horses. 215

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. support the view that the proportion of the prize money won by S.A. trained horses is small, arguing that the average prize money won by S.A. horses accounts for less than 7% for the past three years. 216 A.L.S.A. advances the view that banning jumps racing from Oakbank may have beneficial implications, leading to an increase in numbers and revitalisation of the event. 217

Community attitudes

Opponents believe there is a lack of widespread support for jumps racing 218 and that this is driven by changing community standards and expectations about animal welfare and activities involving animals. Rather than representing the views of a minority, opponents refer to petitions and surveys that suggest community attitudes support an end to jumps racing. 219

Petitions were presented by the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. as part of its submission. An online petition conducted in 2014, calling for the O.R.C. to withdraw jumps racing, generated 9,000 signatures in support of a ban, with 6,500 of these signatures from South Australians. 220

Banjumpsracing.com believe the public have indicated their support for an end to jumps racing at Oakbank through a recent on-course poll carried out by The Advertiser. This poll found that 80% of carnival attendees would still attend Oakbank if jumps races were no longer held. 221

214 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.22

215 Banjumpsracing.com Submission, pp.18-19

216 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.22 217 S Sutton, A.L.S.A., Hansard 15 April 2016, p.19

218 A.LI. Submission, pp.10-11 219 A.L.S.A ,Hansard15 April 2016, p.19

220 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.24

221 Banjumpsracing.com Submission, p.18

56 These findings are consistent with the findings of other surveys and polls conducted by The Advertiser, which suggest that the majority of those who attend the Carnival would return if jumps races were banned and only flat races were held. 222

Ethical and welfare concerns also emerge regarding wastage in the thoroughbred racing industry, particularly owing to a perceived lack of transparency and accountability in the way the industry collects statistics on the fate of ex-racehorses and does not make these publicly available. 223

Opponents argue that there is a high attrition rate in the jumps racing industry, where a high percentage of horses do not continue competing beyond a small number of races in a single racing season, contributing to wastage in the industry. This results in high levels of new horse entries each season and a high rate of turnover in the jumps racing industry. 224 Wastage is a key concern, as is the fate of horses, once they leave the racing industry. Opponents point to the industry’s lack of investment in the retirement, rehoming and retraining of jump horses. 225

Waning industry support for jumps racing in SA

Opponents consistently cited the lack of support for jumps racing expressed by the S.A. Minister for Racing and the S.AJ.C.’s stance against the continuation of jumps racing at Morphettville. They argue that the S.A. racing industry is divided on jumps racing, with the S.A.J.C. and T.R.S.A. expressing differing views on whether jumps races should be held at Morphettville. It is the S.AJ.C.’s preference for jumps racing at Morphettville to cease, a position it has consistently promoted from 2011 to the present. 226 This is at odds with T.R.S.A., which is responsible for programming all races, including jumps races, in S.A. Banjumpsracing.com advised the Committee that after lengthy negotiations with T.R.S.A. at the end of the 2014 season, Chief Executive Officer, S.A.J.C., Mr Brenton Wilkinson, agreed to six races being held over four race meets, a reduction from nine races, on the proviso that a further reduction in scheduled races be negotiated in the future. 227

The S.A.J.C. advised the Committee that it agreed to accept a programme of six jumps races held over four days in the 2015 and 2016 racing seasons and that this represented a significant reduction in the number of jumps races and a reduction in the number of days on which jumps races have been programmed, since this matter was first raised. 228

222 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.23

223 M Salt, A.L.S.A. Hansard 15 April 2016, p.17

224 Ruse et al., p.1085 225 M Salt, ALSA, Hansard 15 April 2016, p.17; R.S.P.C.A. Submission p.11; Banjumpsracing.com Secondary Submission pp.14-15; C.P.R. Submission, p.10

226 S.A.J.C. Submission, Letter 11 July 2016 227 Banjumpsracing.com Submission, p.19

228 S.A.J.C. Submission, Letter 11 July 2016

57 Opponents argue that the S.A.J.C. position arose from what it perceived to be negative perceptions associated with the sport and for the racecourse. 229 The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. note former S.A.J.C. Chairman David Peacock’s view “that jumps racing at Morphettville was not profitable and tarnished the industry’s image.” 230

Opponents propose that there has also been a decline in interest among regional racing clubs in hosting jump races. The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. claim that, in 2015, two jumps races on the program were cancelled at Gawler and Murray Bridge racing clubs owing to a lack of nominations.231

Banjumpsracing.com contend that in 2014, the Gawler Jockey Club’s chairperson, Judith Jones, expressed concerns about the low numbers of horses in jumps racing, its effect on racing turnover and the negative publicity generated by the presence of protesters at jumps meetings. Banjumpsracing.com note that a total of four races at two jumps meets were scheduled for 2016. 232

The Murray Bridge racing club has indicated that although it would be interested in hosting more jumps races, this would be conditional on T.R.S.A. providing financial support, as “jumps events cost a lot more to staff.” 233

Organisations calling for a ban on jumps racing claim that they had no intention of campaigning to ban flat racing or equestrian sports that involve jumping, such as show jumping and cross- country jumping. Ms Molly Salt and Ms Sally Sutton from A.L.S.A told the Committee that it does not have a policy on banning flat racing. Although they indicated A.L.S.A. would in principle like to ban it, they do not have statistics on which to base a campaign and acknowledge it has no prospect of success. A.L.S.A. informed the Committee that the issues surrounding jumps racing that it objects to do not exist in equestrian events and show jumping.234

…showjumpers are bred to show jump; it is low impact and there is hardly any speed in comparison with jumps racing.235

The C.P.R. contends that there are several key differences between jumps racing and other horse sports that involve jumping. Show jumping and cross country focus on techniques and accuracy in executing a jump and that jumping does not occur in a group. It points out that the focus of jumps racing is on getting over the finish line first. It notes the many years of preparation required to school horses for show jumping and cross-country sports, to enable

229 A.L.S.A. Submission, p.3 230 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.19

231 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.19

232 Banjumpsracing.com Submission, pp.19-20

233 Ibid.,p.20

234 M Salt & S Sutton, A.L.S.A. Hansard 15 April 2016, pp.16-17 235 M Salt, A.L.S.A., Hansard 15 April 2016, p.16

58 them to perform at the highest levels, contrasting this with what they believe to be minimal training of only a few weeks before jumps horses can be entered into jumps trials. 236

Position of Supporters of Jumps Racing

Those who support the continuation of jumps racing contest the arguments posed by opponents. Supporters believe that much of the criticism of the sport is inaccurate and emotionally driven. They argue that jumps racing in Victoria has a huge following, is conducted in many countries overseas, and that there are more jumps race meetings in England and Ireland than flat meetings. 237

Safety of the Sport

Supporters claim that Australia is the safest jumps racing jurisdiction in the world. 238 They maintain that jumps racing is not cruel, pointing to the findings of many reviews, and that jumps people love their horses. They argue that owners invest substantial sums of money to make sure their horses get to the races in the best possible physical condition. 239

Advocates for jumps racing argue that horses love to race and jump, that jumps racing extends a horse’s career and that many of these animals would be slaughtered if not for jumps racing.240 They contend that jumps horses are much more likely than any other horse type to have long-term career possibilities 241 and that having a career path for horses to move from flat to jumps racing helps support the breeding industry, particularly staying-bred horses that can cover longer distances. 242 They contend that without jumps racing, there would not be a staying industry in Australia, as “the two are intimately linked.” 243

Supporters also point to initiatives in Victoria that have been implemented to assist horses in transitioning into a life after racing, such as R.V.L.’s Off the Track program and the rehoming of horses for equestrian pursuits and pleasure and into the breeding industries. 244

On the issue of the safety of the sport and numbers of fatalities in races and trials, T.R.S.A. argue that in the past 10 years, of the 2515 starters in 435 jumps races and trials held in S.A., 20 horses have died or were euthanased due to injuries sustained, representing 0.79% of

236 C.P.R. Submission, pp.9-10

237 S.A.J.R. Submission, p.1

238 M Lucas, W.R.C., Hansard 19 September 2016, p.99 239 S McGregor, Chairman, A.J.R.A., Hansard 19 September 2016, pp.94-5

240 Ruse et al., p.1075 241 S McGregor, Hansard 19 September 2016 p.95 242 A.J.R.A. Submission. p.2 243 S McGregor, Hansard 19 September 2016 p.94

244 A.J.R.A. Submission, p.2

59 starters. They contend that not all injuries to horses in these races were jumps - related and excluding non-jumps related incidents would reduce this percentage. 245

They point to a number of interventions that have been implemented over the years to ensure greater safety for horses and riders. These measures include tougher qualifying conditions, new processes for the accreditation of trainers and qualification of horses, the introduction of an expert Jumps Review Panel, new obstacles incorporating new plastic wings, improved riding policies and better education of jockeys and pre-race veterinary inspections. 246 Tracks must now be prepared to a Good 4 rating or softer to lessen limb concussion 247 and a new requirement has been introduced under the Rules of Racing for jockeys to ease horses that are showing signs of fatigue or are uncompetitive, out of races. 248 Annual safety forums have also been introduced to assist in educating jumps riders and trainers. 249

Minimising risks

It has been observed that the inherent risk involved in jumps racing may be integral to the attraction this activity holds for those who view it as “the thrill of the chase” and an entertainment comprised of “courageous horses, hardened trainers, fearless riders, and controlled danger…” 250 Those in the industry contend that fatalities and incidents happen even in flat racing. They acknowledge that jumps racing is riskier than flat racing and that this risk must be managed. 251

Advocates for jumps racing argue that comprehensive statistical reports of falls and casualties from each race meeting are compiled and used to identify preventable risk factors. 252 The Committee was advised by T.R.S.A. that the S.A. J.R.P. reviews:

…each jumps race and trial, viewing the performance of each individual horse and rider, as well as the fences and race course.253

An Industry in Decline?

Many advocates point to the vital role of jumps racing in the Australian racing industry and within specific regional economies and cultural identities. 254 They question the statistics used by opponents about field sizes, prize money won by S.A. trained horses and attendance

245 T.R.S.A. Submission, p.3

246 A.J.R.A. Submission, p.3; p.6; T.R.S.A. Submission, p.2 247 A.J.R.A. Submission, p.4 248 Ibid., p.6 249 R.V. Jumps Racing Fact Sheet 10 June 2016 – Correspondence from Hon. Martin Pakula M.P.

250 Ruse et at., p.1084

251 P Morgan, R.V.L., Hansard 8 August 2016 p.72

252 T.R.S.A. Submission, p.6 253 Ibid., p.2

254 Ruse et al., p.1085

60 figures for race days with jumps racing, which suggest that jumps racing is struggling as a sport. 255

T.R.S.A. contends that the level of local involvement in jumps racing has been adversely affected by an environment of uncertainty about its continuation. It points out that a considerable investment in time and effort is required in preparing a horse for jumps racing and there has been a reluctance by some S.A. horse owners to make the commitment due to this uncertainty. 256

Figures provided by T.R.S.A. indicate that there has been an average of 7.9 starters in jumps races over the past five seasons. Of the 28 races held at metropolitan races meetings in the 2014-15 racing season with a field size of six or less, only three were jumping events. One of the 12 races with five starters was a jumps race and two of 10 races with six starters were jumping events. Prize money won by S.A. trained horses in jumping races, as a percentage of the total prize money in jumps races, has increased from 10% in 2012 to 16.21% in 2013, to 22.2% in 2014. 257

Statistics were provided to the Committee hearing on 19 September 2016 by Mr Joe Cannizzaro, board member of A.J.R.A., showing that during the 2016 season, S.A. horses won or placed in 60% of all jumps races. Of the 33 wins and placings, 11 S.A. horses won their races, compared with eight Victorian horses. A further 12 S.A. horses placed second, compared with seven Victorian horses and 10 placed third, compared with 9 from Victoria.258

T.R.S.A.’s average attendance figures at Morphettville since 2013, for the period of the year when jumps races are scheduled show that of the top five days in terms of attendance, three had jumps races on the programme. Of the top 10 days, six had jumps racing on the programme and Irish Day, which has two jumps races, recorded the S.A.J.C.’s fourth highest attendance levels for the season. 259

Supporters argue that although there has been very little difference between the total levels of on and off course wagering, when comparing days with jumping races to those without in this period, the average wagering turnover on course was greater on days with jumps races. The average totaliser wagering turnover for this period for Saturday meetings with a jumps race as part of the program was $744.5K compared with $743.K for meetings without jumps races. 260

Jumps racing is considered an important component of the S.A. racing program and, it is argued, race meets with jumps races, including the Oakbank Easter Carnival, are among the best attended. 261 Those who support the continuation of jumps racing point to its long history

255 T.R.S.A. Submission, pp.4-5

256 T.R.S.A. Submission, p.3

257 Ibid., p.4 258 J Cannizzaro, Hansard, 19 September 2016 p.94

259 T.R.S.A. Submission, p.4

260 Ibid. 261 T.R.S.A. Submission, p.5

61 and tradition in S.A. The Oakbank Racing Club has, since its formation in 1875, been synonymous with S.A. jumps racing. The Great Eastern and Von Doussa steeplechase races, first run in 1876 and 1877, continue this tradition to the present day. 262

The O.R.C. argues that the Oakbank Easter Carnival is the best attended race meeting in the State, attracting local visitors as well as those from across the country and overseas. 263 It provides a significant economic benefit to the Adelaide Hills, employs many South Australians and is a vital part of the social fabric of many communities throughout the State, particularly in the south-east. 264 These arguments are supported by research undertaken in 2011 and 2012 by consultants I.E.R. into the economic benefit to the Adelaide Hills and to the South Australian economy. 265

The industry believes a ban on jumps racing at Oakbank would see a significant reduction in economic benefits to the Adelaide Hills owing to fewer intrastate, interstate and international visitors attending and a loss of jobs. Furthermore, a reduction in attendees from the loss of jumps races at Oakbank would have “a major detrimental impact on the O.R.C.”. 266

Areas of Concern

Opponents of jumps racing:

…argue that horses have evolved to avoid rather than jump obstacles, that the heightened prospect of injury or death to jump horses is an unacceptable focus of human entertainment, and that the risk of being injured or killed in jumps racing is not an acceptable alternative to the slaughterhouse.267

Thoroughbred jumps racing is controversial primarily because its opponents believe it involves a higher risk of accident or fatality to both horse and rider, compared to flat racing. 268

As an animal welfare organisation, the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. has long advocated for the end of jumps racing “primarily due to the inherent and unacceptable risks of injury, distress and death of horses.”269

262 O.R.C. Submission, p.1

263 Ibid. 264 T.R.S.A. Submission, p.1 265 O.R.C. Submission - IER Economic Impact Evaluation 2011 & 2012;T.R.S.A. Submission, p.5

266 T.R.S.A. Submission, p.6

267 Ruse et al., p.1075

268 Ibid., p.1073

269 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.2

62 This sentiment is expressed in the majority of submissions that the Committee received from individuals and groups opposed to jumps racing.

The large number of horse deaths in jump races is repeatedly cited by animal welfare and activist groups as being central to their arguments for banning this activity. The Committee noted that

Falls and fatalities…are widely reported in the media and result in negative public opinion and criticism of racing and the racing industry’s approach to equine welfare. 270

This in turn has led to changing community expectations about animal welfare and calls for greater accountability of both government and industry. 271

Welfare concerns are not limited to deaths in jump races. In its submission to this Inquiry, Sentient, the Veterinary Institute for Animal Ethics, argues that:

Death is considered to be a crude measure in terms of assessing animal welfare but it is the only statistic the industry provides. Horses suffer non-fatal injuries as well as the likelihood of mental distress. 272

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. has raised concerns about fatalities that occur in training and trials, non- fatal injuries, including those that may result in euthanasia, the psychological impact experienced by horses in jump races, and the impact of falls, collisions with other horses and obstacles, or of horses jumping and landing awkwardly. In addition to the suffering that occurs from the time of injury to euthanasia, it argues that these not uncommon occurrences may cause physiological and psychological suffering and distress. Suffering occurs through catastrophic limb injuries and musculoskeletal damage, pain associated with acute injury such as ligament/tendon damage and lameness, laceration and wounds, psychological impacts such as stress, anxiety, mental distress and fatigue, and in extreme cases epistaxis.273274 The use of whips further harms the welfare of jumps horses.275

Identifying and Analysing Risk Factors

The Committee considers that it is in the interest of the industry to investigate and closely monitor factors that may contribute to falls, injury and death in jumps racing, as this can inform

270 Ruse et al., p.1073

271 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission p.2

272 Sentient Submission, p.1 273 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, pp.5-8 274 Epistaxis is bleeding from the nostrils and generally arises from exercise induced pulmonary haemorrhage, which is the manifestation of ruptured capillaries in the lungs at peak exertion. R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.11

275 Ibid., p.10

63 the development of intervention measures to minimise these incidences and allows the industry to assess their impact and effectiveness. 276

In their submission, the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. refer to a scientific report cited in the Jones Review in Victoria conducted by Dr Tim Parkin that found that most jumps falls occur in the second half of the race and that 95% of falls occur after contact with the obstacle. The review noted that horses are more likely to make mistakes in jumping obstacles when fatigued, with evidence pointing to a link between falls and fatigue. 277

The association between falls and fatigue has been acknowledged in the industry, resulting in the introduction in 2009 of new rules of racing requiring jockeys to withdraw a horse showing signs of fatigue. The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. argue that this acknowledges the extreme exertion that some horses endure during a jump race. 278 They contend that:

Horses who are behind the field and subsequently eased out of the race due to fatigue and exhaustion are likely to be experiencing both reduced physical capacity and mental distress. 279

The Committee heard that of the recommendations handed down in the Jones Review, improvements in jump design could be considered the most important. In evidence presented, Mr Pearse Morgan, board member, R.V.L., proposed that the Jones Review highlighted and addressed the number and high percentage of falls that occurred coming up to the final two or three jumps, by recommending that new jumps be introduced. He believes the introduction of the current design of jumps have made “a material difference in the number of falls over the final two or three jumps.” 280

Opponents of jumps racing, such as the C.P.R., claim that only one safety measure has been effective in reducing fatalities, that is, withdrawing horses that are out of contention from races. Research has found that 10% of horses in jumps races retired before the race finished. 281 This data is supported by an unpublished review by the R.S.P.C.A.S.A. of S.A. steward reports in 2015. The review found that of the 128 starters, 13 failed to finish races, equating to 10.1%.282

Speed is considered a contributing risk factor for falls. During the Inquiry, the Committee sought information comparing the speed of jumps and flat races and whether jumps racing has become faster or slower with the introduction of safety measures. 283 The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. contend that speed is one of several factors that contribute to a higher risk of falling but that limiting speed is unlikely to counter the overall risk of falling. It argues that an in-depth review

276 Ibid., p.9

277 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.9

278 Ibid. 279 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.10

280 P Morgan, RVL, Hansard 8 Aug 2016, p.70

281 Ruse et al., 2015, p.1080 282 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.10 283 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Response to questions from hearing on 15 April 2016, p.1

64 of jumps racing would need to be undertaken to determine if the speed at which jumps races are run has changed and notes that efforts have been made within the industry to help ensure that horses do not run too fast, such as the use of heavier minimum weights of 64kg for jumps horses compared with 54kg for flats horses. 284

Racing in a pack is also seen to increase the risk of collision and can influence a horse to jump too early, owing to horses in front launching or the jump being obscured, thereby influencing a horse’s ability to judge distance. The close proximity of other horses may also distract horses from focusing on the impending jump. 285

The study by Boden et al. 286summarised that determining the risk of fatality is essential to assessing the impact of intervention measures to minimise such fatalities. Studies such as this can provide important benchmarks for the racing industry to monitor fatalities and evaluate intervention strategies.

Safety of Jockeys

Opponents also raise concerns regarding the significant risks jumps racing poses to jockeys.287 Studies have shown that jumps jockeys are more likely to fall and suffer fractures than flat jockeys. 288

The first epidemiological study of risk factors for falls to jumps jockeys employed in thoroughbred racing in Australia, found that;

…thoroughbred jumps racing jockeys have a fall rate 12.5 times greater than that of their flat racing counterparts. On average, a licenced jockey…can expect to have a fall every 19 rides in jumps racing representing a fall in 5.3% of rides, with 9.7% of these falls resulting in injury. 289

The study by Hitchens et al., (2010) investigated falls in jumps races conducted between 1 August 2002 and 31 July 2009. 290 The authors found that jockeys riding in steeplechase races have a higher fall rate than jockeys riding in hurdle races.291:

284 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Response to questions from hearing on 15 April 2016, p.1

285 Ibid, p.2 286 Boden, L A., Anderson, G A., Charles, J A., Morgan, K L., Morton, J M., Parkin, T D H., Slocombe, R F., Clarke, A F., 2006, ‘Risk of fatality and causes of death of Thoroughbred horses associated with racing in Victoria, Australia: 1989-2004’, Equine Veterinary Journal, Volume 38, Issue 4, pp312-318 at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2746/042516406777749182/abstract Accessed 5/9/16

287 Sentient Submission, p.4 288 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.19

289 Hitchens, P, Blizzard, L, Jones, G, Day, L, Fell, J, 2010, Predictors of race-day jockey falls in jumps racing in Australia, Accident Analysis and Prevention 43, p.840

290 Ibid. 291 Hitchens et al., 2009 as cited in Hitchens, et al.,2010 Predictors of race-day jockey falls in jumps racing in Australia, pp.840-847, at: http://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?cites=9438701773592025236&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en Accessed 5/9/16

65 The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. informed the Committee that studies have shown that jumps jockeys have a 41% higher risk of fractures compared with flats jockeys. 292

Jockey injuries are well documented. According to Banjumpsracing.com there were 26 Victorian jumps jockeys who raced in either Victoria or S.A. in the 2015 season. Of these, four or 15% suffered injuries that required hospital treatment. 293 It argues that only two jumps jockeys reside in S.A., Irishman Donal Macauley and S.A. - born Amy Herrmann.294 The Committee notes the serious fall taken by Ms Herrmann during a jumps trail at Morphettville in June 2015 295 and was informed she has yet to return to racing. 296

Data on jumps jockeys who have died in a jumps races was not available to the Committee, so it was unable to determine numbers. A search of online media was conducted to establish recent jockey deaths, however, no reports of jumps jockey deaths were found.

Hitchens et al., note that after reviews of jumps racing in 1991, 1994, 1998, 2002, 2005, 2008 and 2009, interventions were made to improve thesafety of races, among them, changes to hurdles and steeplechase fences. The results of the study:

…point to the need for better preparation of horses to compete in high pressure racing and races over longer distances, and better training and conditioning of jockeys with specific focus on skills required when riding inexperienced or less accomplished horses.297

The authors note that studies conducted by Pinchbeck et al., between 2002 and 2004 in the U.K., have found additional factors associated with horse falls on which they did not have information. These included whether or not the horse was participating in its first hurdle race, the position of the jump in the race, the speed of the race, the number of jumps, distance between jumps, incline of the track in the vicinity of the jump, horses commencing a jumping career at an older age, travel time to races, use of visors on horses and use of the whip.298 They conclude that their findings could form the basis for targeted strategies to improve occupational health and safety standards in thoroughbred jumps racing in Australia. 299 T.R.S.A. advised the Committee that wide-ranging measures have been implemented since 2010 to ensure the safest possible environment for both horse and rider. As in Victoria, T.R.S.A. has introduced a Jumps Review Panel, comprising industry veterinarian Dr Peter Horridge, senior T.R.S.A. steward Andrew Hayles, Registrar of the South Australian Racing Appeals Tribunal, Chair of Horse S.A. and committee member of the Adelaide International Three Day Event, Denis Edmonds, and retired jumps jockey and former deputy steward,

292 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Hansard 15 April 2016, p.4

293 Banjumpsracing.com Submission, p.14 294 Ibid., p.9 295 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.18 296 Banjumpsracing.com Submission, p.9

297 Hitchens, P, Blizzard, L, Jones, G, Day, L, Fell, J, 2010, Predictors of race-day jockey falls in jumps racing in Australia, Accident Analysis and Prevention 43 (2011) p.847

298 Ibid., p.847 299 Hitchens, P, Blizzard, L, Jones, G, Day, L, Fell, J, 2010, Predictors of race-day jockey falls in jumps racing in Australia, Accident Analysis and Prevention 43 (2011) p.840

66 Richard Best. The panel closely monitors the performance of each individual horse and rider. 300

Safety enhancements that have been implemented since 2009 to improve the safety record of Victorian jumps racing have included better education programs and improved riding policies through initiatives such as a Jumps Rider Skills Panel and safety forums. Jumps Rider Skills Panels, comprising former leading jumps riders and R.V. stewards, have been introduced to educate and mentor jumps riders who are disciplined or referred by the Jumps Review Panel for further coaching. Annual safety forums also assist in educating jumps riders and trainers to ensure that horses are ridden in accordance with expectations and are fit and appropriately educated for competition.301

Following a Committee request for information about Government policies on jumps racing, the Victorian Minister for Racing, the Hon. Martin Pakula M.P., advised that under the Labor Government’s Plan to Keep Victorian Racing Strong, support through the Victorian Racing Industry Fund (V.R.I.F.) is provided for initiatives to support jockeys.302

Government - approved professional development training programs conducted through TAFE are also available in Victoria. R.V.L’s Workforce Development Officer, Ms Lisa Coffey, advised the Committee that her role includes upskilling and helping develop the skills of jockeys. According to Ms Coffey:

We have designed assessment…and training materials. Some are online and the rest are practical. Every jumps jockey in Victoria and S.A. comes to Victoria to have assessments with myself and another jumps jockey...303

In the event of injury or fatality while riding, the Victorian Government contributes to the National Jockeys Trust and supports a Jockeys Industry Transition Scheme. 304

Further assistance is provided through the National Jockey Trust, which assists injured jockeys and the families of those who are killed while riding. $200,000 in funding is provided for this initiative from the V.R.I.F. and comes entirely from unclaimed dividends and on course wagering taxes.305

In May 2016, the Victorian Government announced $260,000 in funding to support a two year pilot program aimed at transitioning jockeys to other employment when their riding career ends. The Post Riding Career Employment Transition Program aims to support at least 20 jockeys each year by providing essential skills, training and opportunities to make a successful

300 T.R.S.A. Submission, p.2 301 R.V.L. Jumps Racing Fact Sheet, 10 June 2016, Correspondence from Victorian Minister for Racing, 14 July 2016 p.1

302 Ibid. 303 L Coffey, Hansard 19 September 2016, p.96

304 Labor’s Plan to Keep Victorian Racing Strong, Correspondence from Minister for Racing 14 July 2016 p.1

305 ibid

67 career transition. The program is seen to complement the continuing jockey assistance program and Apprentice Jockey Training Program.306

The Committee heard that R.V.L.’s Workforce Development Officer also provides assistance to jockeys coming to the end of their careers and that a new licencing category for jockeys who want to transition to become trainers has also been introduced. 307

It is evident to the Committee that gaining a better understanding of the risks involved in jumps racing for jockeys could, as Hitchens et al. suggest, assist in the development of strategies to improve safety standards. The Committee believes continuing training is a critical step toward lowering the risks jumps racing poses to jockeys, by providing skill development opportunities. As in Victoria, support also needs to be provided by the industry to jockeys following injury or at the end of their riding careers.

Can Jumps Racing be Made Safe?

Those opposed to jumps racing maintain that there is no acceptable level of risk for the safety and welfare of horses. They point out that whereas jockeys can make a conscious decision about whether or not to participate, having regard to the risks, horses cannot.

They argue that jumps racing is fundamentally not safe for horses and that the combination of racing horses and jumping is inherently dangerous. Some opponents take the position that it is simply not natural for horses to participate in such an activity. 308

Despite the introduction of safety improvements over recent years, they believe that an unacceptable fatality level is an inevitable consequence of jumps racing 309 and that the sport can never be made safe. 310

Acceptable Level of Risk?

Is there an acceptable level of risk at which jumps racing can be conducted? Those who support the continuation of jumps racing concede that, like most sporting events, there are risks to participants but with appropriate safeguards those risks can be kept to an acceptable level for riders and horses. 311 When considering the question of what constitutes acceptable risk, His Honour David Jones found that:

306 “Program to Help Jockeys with Career Options”, 5 May 2016, R.V.L website at: https://rv.racing.com/news/2016-05-05/jockeys-trust Accessed 19/9/16

307 L Coffey, Hansard 19 September 2016, p.96

308 Jones, 2008, p.145

309 A.L.I. Submission, p.9 310 C.P.R. Submission, p.1

311 Jones, 2008, p.146

68 …an acceptable level of risk for horses can be considered to be the minimum level of risk to horses at which it is reasonably practicable to conduct jumps racing.312

The Jones Report noted evidence presented by Dr J.M. Burke from the Australian Veterinary Association, that other equine athletic activities, including equestrian events such as eventing, also contain risk and that:

…injury, sometimes with a fatal outcome, is inescapable in any form of rigorous equine athletic activity. 313

A submission from Equine Veterinarians Australia (E.V.A.) presented to that review argued that:

…properly regulated use of horses in jumps racing is a legitimate use of equine athletic ability.314

The E.V.A. recognised that:

…training and racing of horses is inevitably associated with some risk of injury and that the minimisation of these risks through attention to training methods, schedules and facilities is an important responsibility of all participants in the industry.315

The Committee has given careful consideration to submissions that have strongly argued that jumps racing cannot be made safe. We are of the view that although jumps racing does involve risk of injury to rider and horse, continuous systemic change and improvement is necessary to enable jumps racing to operate within an acceptable level of risk.

On this matter, the Committee agrees with the finding of the Jones Review, that with appropriate changes, it is practicable for jumps racing to operate within an acceptable level of risk. 316

The Committee notes that significant changes, as recommended in the Jones Report, have been made since it was handed down. In its submission, the Animal Law Institute (A.L.I.) advised the Committee that a subsequent review in 2009, while initially recommending that jumps racing be phased out within two years, was replaced by a series of new standards aimed at ensuring higher standards of safety. Toward this end, in 2010, Key Performance Indicator (K.P.I.) targets for racing fatalities were introduced in Victoria. A target of not more than 6.5 deaths per 1000 starts (0.65%) was set and additional changes introduced before the 2011 racing season. A maximum fall rate of 3% was also proposed. 317

312 Ibid., p.147

313 Burke, cited in Jones, 2008, p.146

314 Jones, 2008, p146

315 Ibid. 316 Ibid., p.147 317 A.A. Submission, p.8

69 The K.P.I. threshold was discontinued the following year on confirmation from R.V.L. that jumps racing would be monitored continually and that future reviews would be conducted if required. 318

In assessing the extent to which new measures have succeeded in making jumps racing safer, changes must be viewed in light of statistics on falls and fatalities. Considering the study undertaken by Ruse et al., the A.L.I. argues that while:

The overall fatality rate of 0.51% falls just below the previous KPI of 0.65%...the steeplechase fatality rate of 1.4% exceeds this figure… 319

Animals Australia (A.A.) argues that since the K.P.I. benchmark was first proposed in 2010, the maximum falls and deaths ratio limits have been exceeded in both Victoria in two of the five years since and in three of the past five years in S.A. 320 It notes that the K.P.I. measure of 0.65% is some 10 times the flat horse death rate in Victoria and about 20 times the flat horse race death in S.A. over the past two years. 321 It bases these findings on data they have compiled from R.V.L. and its predecessor, S.A. official stewards reports and information available from the Australian Racing Fact Book.

In the absence of a current benchmark, K.P.I. targets that have previously been introduced will continue to act as benchmarks against which risk is assessed. The Committee believes it would benefit the industry to determine a standard against which improvements can be measured.

Use of Whips

The use of whips in jumps racing is a contentious issue. It raises animal welfare concerns about inhumane treatment through the pain whipping inflicts and questions about the ethics of whipping fatigued horses, particularly in jumps races that are longer and more arduous than flat races. 322

Opponents of jumps racing refer to a U.K. study by Pinchbeck et al., that show horses competing in hurdle and steeplechase races that are whipped and progressing through a race are seven times more likely to fall compared to horses that are not whipped. The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. note that a similar study has not been conducted in Australia and that these results strongly suggest that whipping is a major factor relating to the risk of falls.323

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. point out that:

Whips are permitted to be used in jumps racing as for flat racing in Australia, with rules restricting their use prior to the 100 metre mark with advice that a jockey can use the whip at their discretion in the last 100 metres of the race. This appears to be a strangely Australian

318 ALI Submission, pp.4-5

319 Ibid., p.6 320 A.A. Submission, p.8 321 Ibid., p.9 322 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.10

323 R.S.P.C.A.S.A., Response to questions from hearing on 15 April 2016, p.3

70 approach to racehorse welfare. All other jurisdictions accept that whip use in the final 100 metres should be subject to particular scrutiny if they are to hope to claim horse welfare is to be assured.324

The Committee was informed that local racing bodies can set their own rules on whip use in jumps races, following the introduction of a new Racing Australia rule. Under the current rule, jockeys can only whip their mount a maximum of five times before to the 100m mark and not on consecutive strides. On 27 April 2016 R.V.L. increased the allowable strikes before to the 100m mark from 5 to 10. Given the close alignment of the jumps racing jurisdictions, the increase has raised concerns that this will give rise to an increase in breaches in S.A.. 325

The R.S.P.C.A.S.A. contend that a review of 2016 T.R.S.A. stewards reports shows that:

…from 11 races held to date, 5 races have involved jockeys breaching the whip rule by striking more than 5 times prior to the 100m mark with a fine of $100 stated for three of these breaches. This is a very small financial penalty and is unlikely to act as a deterrent.326

The scope of this Inquiry did not allow for extensive comparisons with overseas jurisdictions to be conducted. The Committee is of the view that the findings of U.K. studies, which constitute one of the strongest jumps racing jurisdictions, can, however, inform the discussion about risk factors leading to falls.

Research by Boden et al. suggests that the combination of longer distances, heavier weights and clearing obstacles in jumps races poses a higher risk of injury and death and that one of the main contributors to this risk is fatigue. This is supported by the Jones Review finding that horses are more likely to make mistakes in jumping obstacles when they are fatigued.327

The introduction of a rule requiring jockeys to withdraw horses owing to fatigue would appear to acknowledge the extreme exertion that horses endure in jumps racing. It has been noted that practices have been adopted by other jurisdictions, that accept that whip use in the final 100 metres should be subject to particular scrutiny, to assure horse welfare and assist the industry to achieve world’s best practice. Opponents argue that consideration of better policing of whip use breeches and measures that may pose a greater deterrent than current penalties for breaches would also contribute to greater safety standards.

Key Reviews/Inquiries

324 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.10

325 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Response to questions from hearing on 15 April 2016, p.3

326 Ibid., p.4 327 R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission, p.9

71 Reviews of jumps racing have been conducted in Australia between 1991 and 2010. These occurred in 1991, 1994, 1998, 2002, 2005, 2008 and 2009. 328

Senate Select Committee on Animal Welfare 1991

Opponents of jumps racing consistently refer to the findings of a Senate Select Committee on Animal Welfare. In November 1983, the Senate established a Committee to inquire into and report on the question of animal welfare in Australia, with particular reference to interstate and overseas commerce in animals; wildlife protection and harvesting; animal experimentation; codes of practice of animal husbandry for all species; and the use of animals in sport.

In May 1988, having published 10 reports in accordance with the terms of reference, the Committee began an inquiry into the animal welfare aspects of the racing industry. The Committee was comprised of these members: Senator Bryant Burns (Qld), Chairman (from May 1990), Senator David Brownhill (New South Wales) Deputy Chairman (from July 1985), Senator Robert Bell (Tasmania) (from May 1990), Senator Paul Calvert (Tasmania) (from September 1987), Senator Barney Cooney (Victoria) (from July 1985), and Senator Nick Sherry (Tasmania) (from August 1990).

In August 1991 the committee published its report, entitled "Aspects of Animal Welfare in the Racing Industry". The report contained six chapters, covering the use of the whip, racing two year old horses, jumps racing, drugs, other animal welfare concerns, and improving welfare in the racing industry.

Based on evidence received during the inquiry, the Committee expressed serious concerns about the welfare of horses participating in jumps races. These concerns were based on the significant probability of a horse suffering serious injury or even death as a result of participating in these events and, in particular, steeplechasing. This concern was exacerbated by evidence suggesting that, even with improvements to the height and placing of jumps, training and education, the fatality rate would remain constant. The majority of the Committee therefore concluded that there was an inherent conflict between jumps racing and animal welfare, and was of the view that relevant State governments should phase out jumps racing over the next three years. However, although Senators Brownhill, Calvert and Cooney, however, shared the Committee's concern about fatalities in jumps racing, they considered that improvements to jumps racing facilities and practices would alleviate many of the animal welfare problems. They made recommendations including bandaging of legs; improvements to jump height, placement and the material used in jumps; and better training and preparation of horses and jockeys. 329

The view of the rest of the Committee to phase out jumps races over the following three years was not pursued by State governments involved and the position did not change until the

328 Hitchens et al., p.346

329 Jones, 2008, pp.17-18

72 cessation in New South Wales in 1997, followed by cessation in Tasmania in 2007, leaving Victoria and South Australia as the only states conducting jumps racing. 330

Victorian Reviews

Since the Senate Select Committee report, jumps racing has been reviewed on seven occasions in Victoria, in response to high rates of injuries and fatalities. These reviews were initiated by the Victorian Racing Club in 1994 and 1998, and subsequently by Racing Victoria Limited (R.V.L.) in 2002, 2005, 2009 and 2010. In addition, R.V.L. commissioned the His Honour David Jones to report on jumps racing in 2008. The Jones Report reviewed the safety performance of Victorian jumps racing and included economic factors and implications. 331

The Victorian racing industry has addressed the safety of jumps racing regularly over a long period and taken steps to improve safety. In 1994 a review was conducted by Mr L.D. Benton, the then Racing Manager of the Victorian Racing Club, and a further review in 1998 by the Victoria Racing Club resulted in the Victorian Jumps Racing Report. In 2002 and 2005 reviews were done by panels appointed by R.V.L. Recommendations followed these reviews and action was taken.

The 1994, 1998, 2002 and 2005 reviews were carried out by panels comprising industry representatives. In 2008, however, the R.V.L. Board went outside of the industry when it commissioned an independent review by retired County Court Judge, His Honour David Jones, bringing a legal and judicial background to his investigation of the industry. As a consequence, it is regarded as a fundamentally different review from those conducted previously.

Despite the implementation of the majority of the recommendations from the Jones Review, there was an increase in fatalities in 2009. This led to a plan to phase out jumps racing entirely in Victoria within two years. This was subsequently replaced by a series of new standards aimed at ensuring higher levels of safety. 332

In 2010 K.P.I. targets of not more than 6.5 racing fatalities per 1000 starts (0.65%) and additional changes were introduced before to the commencement of the 2011 racing season. These changes included improving sight lines on obstacles and reviewing the placement of wings; improving schooling and trialling facilities at training venues; reviewing the racing program; and assessing the suitability of venues to conduct steeplechase races. The K.P.I. threshold was discontinued the nextyear on confirmation from R.V.L. that jumps racing would

330 Jones, 2008, pp.17-18

331 C.P.R. Submission, pp. 7-8

332 A.L.I. Submission, pp. 4-5

73 be monitored on an contininuing basis and that future reviews would be conducted if required. 333

333 A.L.I. Submission, p.5

74 APPENDICES

Appendix 1 – Abbreviations and Acronyms

Appendix 2 – Written Submissions

Appendix 3 – Form Variations Submissions

Appendix 4 – Witnesses

Appendix 5 – Papers Received

APPENDIX 1 - Abbreviations and Acronyms A.A. – Animals Australia

A.L.I. – The Animal Law Institute

A.L.S.A.– Animal Liberation Inc SA

A.J.R.A. – Australian Jumps Racing Association Inc

BanJumpsRacing.com

C.P.R. – Coalition for the Protection of Racehorses

C.R.C. – Casterton Racing Club Inc.

J.R.P. – Jumps Review Panel

L.S.S.A. – The Law Society of South Australia

N.V.D. – National Vendor Declaration

O.R.C. – Oakbank Racing Club Inc.

P.R.A. - Principal Racing Authority

R.I.S.A. – Racing Information Services Australia Pty Ltd.

R.O.R. - Registrar of Racehorses

R.S.P.C.A.S.A. – The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals South Australia Inc.

R.V.L. – Racing Victoria Limited

S.A.J.C. – South Australian Jockey Club Inc.

S.A.J.R. – South Australian Jumps Racing

Sentient – The Veterinary Institute for Animal Ethics

75 T.R.S.A. – Thoroughbred Racing South Australia Ltd

V.R.I.F. - Victorian Racing Industry Fund

APPENDIX 2 – Written Submissions

This is a list of written submissions received by the Select Committee.

Submission No. 1 Animal Liberation Inc SA Submission No. 2 Molly Salt, Animal Liberation Inc SA Submission No. 3 Glenys Oogjes, Executive Director, Animals Australia Submission No. 4 Maragret Lucas, Chairman, A Australian Jumping Submission No. 5 Jane Nicolle, Banjumpsracing.com Submission No. 6 Trevor Jellie, Belvedere Stud Ward Young, Communications Manager, Coalition for the Submission No. 7 Protection of Racehorses Steven Mills, CFO - Country Racing Victoria, Country Racing Submission No. 8 Victoria Submission No. 9 Kathryn Durden, Durden Racing Submission No. 10 Eric Musgrove, E V Musgrove Racing Submission No. 11 Nick O’Connor, Managing Director, Eureka Personnel Submission No. 12 Will Burrell, Director, Furzefield Submission No. 13 Alister Haigh, Chief Executive, Haigh's Chocolates Submission No. 14 John Donnelly, Racing Operations Officer, Hamilton Racing Club Submission No. 15 Nicholas Rule, Managing Director, Hammonds Paints Submission No. 16 Jaimie Stichel, Image Floats Submission No. 17 John MacMillan, MacMillan Racing Submission No. 18 Kim & Gayle Mayberry, Mayberry Racing Submission No. 19 Chris Biggs, Secretary, Oakbank Racing Club Inc Submission No. 20 Nikki, Racing Management Services Submission No. 21 John Rowley, Manager, Rowley's Polo Farm Submission No. 22 Tim Vasudeva, Chief Executive Officer, R.S.P.C.A.S.A. Submission No. 23 Rosemary Elliott, President, Sentient, Veterinary Submission No. 24 Joe Cannizzaro, Chairman, South Australian Jumps Racing Luke Koumi, President, South Australian Racehorse Owners Submission No. 25 Association Chris Biggs, Executive Officer, South Australian Racing Club's Submission No. 26 Council Submission No. 27 Emilia Michael, Director of Policy, The Animal Law Institute Submission No. 28 David Caruso, President, The Law Society of South Australia Submission No. 29 Frances Nelson, Chair, Thoroughbred Racing SA Inc Submission No. 30 Des Roberts, Chairman, Warrnambool Racing Club Inc Peter Downs, Chief Executive Officer, Warrnambool Racing Submission No. 31 Club Inc Submission No. 32 Rob Wilkinson, Wilkinson Racing Stables

76 Submission No. 33 Trevor Little, Windiknowie Submission No. 34 DanTehan MP, Member for Wannon Submission No. 35 James Purcell MLC, Member for Western Victoria Submission No. 36 Dr Melanie Latter Submission No. 37 Michelle Leidig Submission No. 38 Josephine Velte Submission No. 39 Jo McPherson Submission No. 40 Lena Bodin Submission No. 41 Traudy Glasencnik Submission No. 42 Marion Ferguson Submission No. 43 Callyn McKeen Submission No. 44 Ruth Gault Submission No. 45 Suzi Drake Submission No. 46 Kate Hawker Submission No. 47 Rord Kerkhoven Submission No. 48 Niki McComb Submission No. 49 Adam Roustoby Submission No. 50 Miriam Yip Submission No. 51 George Manos Submission No. 52 Alex Hodges Submission No. 53 Renee Geelen Submission No. 54 Jenny Barnes Submission No. 55 Dr Gwyn Jolley Submission No. 56 Linda Fleiter Submission No. 57 Angus McCarl Submission No. 58 Gail Freeman Submission No. 59 Graham Reynolds Submission No. 60 Sheree Sellick Submission No. 61 Rebecca Greco Submission No. 62 Wendy Parsons Submission No. 63 Michael Alexander Submission No. 64 Terry Matthews Submission No. 65 Janine Clipstone Submission No. 66 Christine Peirson Submission No. 67 Peter Couzens Submission No. 68 Nichola Brambleby Submission No. 69 Alice Shore Submission No. 70 Aura Valli Submission No. 71 David Leghorn Submission No. 72 Perry Gunner Submission No. 73 Suzanne Bamford Submission No. 74 Fay Atkins Submission No. 75 Keith Smith Submission No. 76 Dr Caroline Winter Submission No. 77 Trevor Richardson Submission No. 78 Tash

77 Submission No. 79 Carolyn Trimboli Submission No. 80 Paige Waden-Flod Submission No. 81 Guillermina Perelmuter Submission No. 82 Barbara McMahon Submission No. 83 Heather Gibb Submission No. 84 Jacqueline Bird Submission No. 85 Tessa Hodge Submission No. 86 Tanya Reid Submission No. 87 Taryn Allen Submission No. 88 Emma Elix Submission No. 89 Linda Dudine Submission No. 90 Maxine Fraser Submission No. 91 Monica Saunders Submission No. 92 Stella Liley Submission No. 93 Lois Pavy Submission No. 94 Stephanie Andreula Submission No. 95 Victoria ApSimon Submission No. 96 Rob Levai Submission No. 97 Mick Kluske Submission No. 98 R Williams Submission No. 99 Anna Jurs Submission No. 100 Dianne Berriman Submission No. 101 Sue Gredley Submission No. 102 Julie Britza Submission No. 103 Sue Bamford Submission No. 104 Bernadette Chodkiewicz Submission No. 105 Emma Teague Submission No. 106 Vivien Edson-Clarke Submission No. 107 Lily de Leo Submission No. 108 Jennifer Martin Submission No. 109 Iwona Hetherington Submission No. 110 Eileen Marsland Submission No. 111 Emily Submission No. 112 Des Mutton Submission No. 113 Lorrae Submission No. 114 Pammy Frangipani Submission No. 115 Rod Neeson Submission No. 116 Helena Holland Submission No. 117 Sandra Potts Submission No. 118 Melinda Morre Submission No. 119 Margaret Oliver Submission No. 120 David Holland Submission No. 121 Glenys King Submission No. 122 Glenda Couch-Keen Submission No. 123 Anne Clothier Submission No. 124 Libby King

78 Submission No. 125 Kate Neil Submission No. 126 Val Nairn Submission No. 127 Alexandra Eberhardt Submission No. 128 Philip Hood Submission No. 129 Rhonda Avard Submission No. 130 Teru Mcdade Submission No. 131 Louise Pike Submission No. 132 Craig Smith Submission No. 133 Janice Jurgens Submission No. 134 Dionne McRostie Submission No. 135 Helen Parham Submission No. 136 Bev Rayner Submission No. 137 Elizabeth Close Submission No. 138 Bengamin Roberts Submission No. 139 Tim Walker Submission No. 140 Jodie McLatchie Submission No. 141 Leanne Hassen Submission No. 142 Victoria Megyesi Submission No. 143 Jacqui Wilson Submission No. 144 Bindi King Submission No. 145 Philip Cook Submission No. 146 Anna Manley Submission No. 147 Amanda Pringle Submission No. 148 Nadia Kalderovskis Submission No. 149 Claire Kelly Submission No. 150 Laura Shandra Submission No. 151 Elvira Pipinias Submission No. 152 Miriam McGrego Submission No. 153 Roy Phung Submission No. 154 Sandra Paterson Submission No. 155 Catherine Pennington Submission No. 156 Kendall Crabtree Submission No. 157 Eva Miller Submission No. 158 Anna Williams Submission No. 159 Penelope Keen Submission No. 160 Dr Trudy Seidel Submission No. 161 Sue Stathoris Submission No. 162 Robyn Dawe Submission No. 163 Michelle Holden Submission No. 164 Charlotte Nitschke Submission No. 165 Hilary Bruer Submission No. 166 Sharon Hutchings Submission No. 167 Kevin Bleus Submission No. 168 Paul Cameron Submission No. 169 Pauline Roesler Submission No. 170 Leslie Roesler

79 Submission No. 171 Matt Spouse Submission No. 172 Jane Brister Submission No. 173 Judy Price Submission No. 174 Zoe Love Submission No. 175 Geoffrey McKnight Submission No. 176 Ginger Neimo Submission No. 177 Jenny Hancock Submission No. 178 Kieth Cochrane Submission No. 179 Kerry Parker Submission No. 180 Vanessa Hearnden Submission No. 181 Lesley Patrick Submission No. 182 Sharon Submission No. 183 Di Evans Submission No. 184 Heather Coulls Submission No. 185 Rina Cohen Submission No. 186 Philippa Gann Submission No. 187 Julie Hood Submission No. 188 Joanne Submission No. 189 Lenis Wells Submission No. 190 Julie Bruno Submission No. 191 Dr Richard Seglenieks Submission No. 192 Sarah Cullinann Submission No. 193 Annie Burns Submission No. 194 Diane Southwell Submission No. 195 Frances Radnor Submission No. 196 Leean Eagle Submission No. 197 Elouise Giardina Submission No. 198 Justine Rock Submission No. 199 Kathleen Marsh Submission No. 200 Leesa Lewis Submission No. 201 Graham Lettice Submission No. 202 Songul Modra Submission No. 203 Cheryl Taggesell Submission No. 204 Daisy Ferris Submission No. 205 Caroline Bunce Submission No. 206 Jane Luke Submission No. 207 Natalie Morris Submission No. 208 Michael Liddle Submission No. 209 Ebonie Ragless Submission No. 210 Niamh Tynan Submission No. 211 Zoe Reed Submission No. 212 Chris Adlard Submission No. 213 Pauline Bevan Submission No. 214 Amanda Taylor Submission No. 215 Dr Nicol Moulding Submission No. 216 Angela Butler

80 Submission No. 217 Suzanne Stevens Submission No. 218 Susan Hagley Submission No. 219 Jenny Brennan Submission No. 220 Teresa Birt Submission No. 221 Beverley Wilson Submission No. 222 Dr Angella Duvnjak Submission No. 223 Molly Moate Submission No. 224 Karen Johnson Submission No. 225 Moira Grant Submission No. 226 Jody Moate Submission No. 227 Susan Hockley Submission No. 228 Elaine Hunt Submission No. 229 Shelley Evans Submission No. 230 Sue Jaensch Submission No. 231 Michelle Bryant Submission No. 232 Jessie Saj Submission No. 233 Philippa Ahern Submission No. 234 Elise Leslie-Allen Submission No. 235 T Gore Submission No. 236 Louise Taylor Submission No. 237 Lyndy Scott Submission No. 238 Catherine Sheridan Submission No. 239 Camille Booth Submission No. 240 Alan Goldsmith Submission No. 241 Brenton Cox Submission No. 242 Sally Perkin Submission No. 243 Mark McNamara Submission No. 244 Apoorva Madan Submission No. 245 Suzie Hawthorne Submission No. 246 Matthew Leek Submission No. 247 Patricia Woudwyk Submission No. 248 Meaghan Ashton Submission No. 249 Michael Coe Submission No. 250 Josh Hornly Submission No. 251 Nancy MacLachlan Submission No. 252 Kate He Submission No. 253 Betty Oldfield Submission No. 254 DJ Goldner Submission No. 255 Colin Oldfield Submission No. 256 Annie Chan Submission No. 257 Annie K Submission No. 258 Kenneth Toh Submission No. 259 Amy Chan Submission No. 260 Sonia Stoneman Submission No. 261 Anna Birch Submission No. 262 Dale Galliford

81 Submission No. 263 Zarina Greenberg Submission No. 264 KayButler Submission No. 265 Jennifer Crawford Submission No. 266 Andrew Hall Submission No. 267 Deb Oliver Submission No. 268 Lisa Hurcombe Submission No. 269 Robyn O”Sullivan Submission No. 270 Brian Searle Submission No. 271 Hans Amstel Submission No. 272 Elaine Jeffery Submission No. 273 Jake Stephens Submission No. 274 Katy Osborne Submission No. 275 Marika Turci Submission No. 276 Kerry Halliday Submission No. 277 Leanne Hall Submission No. 278 Anonymous Submission No. 279 Submission No. 280 Tony Wirth Submission No. 281 Georgia Kelly-Bakker Submission No. 282 Liz Williams Submission No. 283 Katherine O’Grady Submission No. 284 Garry Wedlock Submission No. 285 Tracey Katsoura Submission No. 286 Deanna Millane Submission No. 287 Kelly de Leeuw Submission No. 288 Grace Ray Submission No. 289 Lauren Christensen Submission No. 290 Patrick Thomas Submission No. 291 Edmund Highcock Submission No. 292 Amber Highcock Submission No. 293 Luke Groom Submission No. 294 Jenny Crawford Submission No. 295 Shirley Keeffee Submission No. 296 Keith & Margaret Baldwin Submission No. 297 Robyn Pine Submission No. 298 Kathleen Hills Submission No. 299 Alexandra Garland Submission No. 300 Carol Haley Submission No. 301 Sandra Jorgensen Submission No. 302 Lucy Fox Submission No. 303 Jeremey Kelly-Bakker Submission No. 304 Rebekah Eyers Submission No. 305 Geoffrey Norrish Submission No. 306 Clint Marshall Submission No. 307 Robert Charley Submission No. 308 Deb Horley

82 Submission No. 309 Melaine Neck Submission No. 310 Bill Fisher Submission No. 311 Jacky Hann Submission No. 312 Paul & Cath Hambling Submission No. 313 Shantelle Burden Submission No. 314 Marlene Hunter Submission No. 315 Hannah Ryles Submission No. 316 Troy Munro Submission No. 317 Courtney Dittmar Submission No. 318 Sarah Tea Submission No. 319 Stephen Platt Submission No. 320 Jenni Scarborough Submission No. 321 Carolyn Meade Submission No. 322 Tina Campbell Submission No. 323 Susan Buckland Submission No. 324 Bonnie Henderson Submission No. 325 Sean Corrigan Submission No. 326 Georgia Amos Submission No. 327 Kelly Barry Submission No. 328 Leah Howard Submission No. 329 Bianca Strahan Submission No. 330 Mikalya Luxton Submission No. 331 Ariel Bright Submission No. 332 Akasha Thring Submission No. 333 Lisa Durbridge Submission No. 334 Doug Oliver Submission No. 335 Chanelle Bekesi Submission No. 336 Brooke Stone Submission No. 337 Janette Rogers Submission No. 338 Joanne Sutton Submission No. 339 Andra Cordell Submission No. 340 Beau Wellington Submission No. 341 Bianca Grant Submission No. 342 Andrea Mitchell Submission No. 343 Michelle Schuh Submission No. 344 Rosemary Clark Submission No. 345 Carmel Johnson Submission No. 346 Dorsa Maher Submission No. 347 Sarah Rankine Submission No. 348 Sarah Redshaw Submission No. 349 Bruna Wilhelm Submission No. 350 Kosta Giannopoulos Submission No. 351 Maire Sutrin Submission No. 352 Nina Zeleny Submission No. 353 Tara Kustrin Submission No. 354 Malissa Handley

83 Submission No. 355 Maddie Caines Submission No. 356 Renee De Wet Submission No. 357 Astrid Myers Submission No. 358 Tabitha Eades Submission No. 359 Pamel Kinnane Submission No. 360 Elizabeth Beltrame Submission No. 361 Belinda Emanuele Submission No. 362 Clare Drever Submission No. 363 Adele Wotzke Submission No. 364 Rachael Kirkham Submission No. 365 Emma Cox Submission No. 366 Janaya Ashby Submission No. 367 Lynette Kohl Submission No. 368 Jade Ryles Submission No. 369 Michelle Payne Submission No. 370 Sharma MacDonald Submission No. 371 Fiona Daws Submission No. 372 Deborah Rogers Submission No. 373 Megan Evans Submission No. 374 Silvia Brunialti Submission No. 375 Sofia Polisena Submission No. 376 Lindy Carter Submission No. 377 Suzi Sexton Submission No. 378 Linda McMahon Submission No. 379 Georgia Blomberg Submission No. 380 Isabella Loxton Submission No. 381 Jesika Callaghan Submission No. 382 Emma Adams Submission No. 383 Judith Nickels Submission No. 384 Lauren Thomas Submission No. 385 Ebony Montgomery Submission No. 386 Kylie Magoch Submission No. 387 Wayne Orr Submission No. 388 Emma Sanders Submission No. 389 Danielle Witham Submission No. 390 Suse Stonecrop Submission No. 391 Russell Bryant Submission No. 392 Tina Levi Submission No. 393 Leigh Taylor Submission No. 394 Heidi Frundt Submission No. 395 Rachel Bageas Submission No. 396 Belinda Lock Submission No. 397 Gillian Flitcroft Submission No. 398 Merry Wickes Submission No. 399 Kati Monopolk Submission No. 400 Pauline Mulberry

84 Submission No. 401 David Pagano Submission No. 402 Alisa Marie Submission No. 403 Michelle Markow Submission No. 404 Brett Dawes Submission No. 405 Deanne Albrecht Submission No. 406 Belinda Budich Submission No. 407 Corrine Fiebiger Submission No. 408 Traude Kolb Submission No. 409 Shirley Adnris Submission No. 410 Monnica Lee Submission No. 411 Pam Altschwager Submission No. 412 Hannah Illingworth Submission No. 413 Caitlin Alvaro Submission No. 414 Morgan Stacey Submission No. 415 Dana Markovic Submission No. 416 Annie Noona Submission No. 417 Michelle Pallant Submission No. 418 Kate Suisted Submission No. 419 Diane Turbil Submission No. 420 Laura Harte Submission No. 421 Susanna Grilli Submission No. 422 Janne Harris Submission No. 423 L Zaknich Submission No. 424 Chanelle A Submission No. 425 Allan Rosenblum Submission No. 426 Gaynor Growden Submission No. 427 Lucy Markiewicz Submission No. 428 Jane Beard Submission No. 429 Jennifer Webb Submission No. 430 Yassmin Abdo Submission No. 431 Kristy Blair Submission No. 432 Bianca Werner Submission No. 433 Ashelee Hermsen Submission No. 434 Alex Crosbie Submission No. 435 Tiandra Promnitz Submission No. 436 Darryl Atkins Submission No. 437 Nicole Neos Submission No. 438 Lisa Evans Submission No. 439 Samantha McPherson Submission No. 440 Chelsea Quintero Submission No. 441 Kelly Demicoli Submission No. 442 Ros Stiles Submission No. 443 Mary-Ann Carver Submission No. 444 Benjamin Roberts Submission No. 445 Robyn Begg Submission No. 446 Elise Kalderovskis

85 Submission No. 447 Arlee Sharp Submission No. 448 Tanya Pass Submission No. 449 Abbie Collinson Submission No. 450 Serena Ladhams Submission No. 451 Adele Boylan Submission No. 452 Moira Ferres Submission No. 453 Ann-Marie Submission No. 454 Stephanie O’Brien Submission No. 455 Rebecca Smith Submission No. 456 Kimberley Eime Submission No. 457 Janette McMaster Submission No. 458 Caroline Bunce Submission No. 459 Paige Maxwell Submission No. 460 Karen Hough Submission No. 461 Lynette Pattina Submission No. 462 Keryn Tutty Submission No. 463 Natasha Nicol Submission No. 464 Brooke Elisabeth Submission No. 465 Kylie Hensen Submission No. 466 Jan Hawes Submission No. 467 Kane Swensson Submission No. 468 Danielle Hiscock Submission No. 469 Fiona Hetherington Submission No. 470 Leah Wade Submission No. 471 Corinne Davidson Submission No. 472 Andrea Borrett Submission No. 473 Liam Fitzpatrick Submission No. 474 Chloe Ruse Submission No. 475 Jackie Hatfield Submission No. 476 Tom Knott Submission No. 477 Jo Oliver Submission No. 478 Melanie Muxlow Submission No. 479 Ingrid Rosemeyer Submission No. 480 Becky Modra Submission No. 481 Vrushali Moghe Submission No. 482 Claire Campbell Submission No. 483 Joy Danielson Submission No. 484 Tania Wooley Submission No. 485 Chris Hepper Submission No. 486 Kerri Hudson Submission No. 487 Sheryl Rickard Submission No. 488 Lee Cataldi Submission No. 489 Josephine Gray Submission No. 490 Phil Philanderer Submission No. 491 Prayag Modi Submission No. 492 Sean Mullarkey

86 Submission No. 493 Katrina Long Submission No. 494 Margaret Submission No. 495 Michael Cater Submission No. 496 Sophie Haselgrove Submission No. 497 Jon O’Connor Submission No. 498 Barry Brook Submission No. 499 Marie Bagnell Submission No. 500 Michelle Chumley Submission No. 501 Andrew Gray Submission No. 502 Linda Hammond Submission No. 503 Lexie McDonnell Submission No. 504 Georgia Weston Submission No. 505 Kirsten Mooney Submission No. 506 Ryan Davidson Submission No. 507 Brad Carletti Submission No. 508 Tanya Morgan Submission No. 509 Thamsin Dunn Submission No. 510 Lyndall Scott Submission No. 511 Laraine Webb Submission No. 512 Ana Costa Submission No. 513 Linda Knights Submission No. 514 Gillian Searle Submission No. 515 Abraham Fletcher Submission No. 516 Tamara Nicolle Submission No. 517 Samantha Cohen Submission No. 518 Chelsea Stevens Submission No. 519 Donna Glynn Submission No. 520 Sandy Lambert Submission No. 521 Sarah Marinkovic Submission No. 522 Margret Gilchrist Submission No. 523 Paula Taplin Submission No. 524 Eliza Seward Submission No. 525 Monica O’Leary Submission No. 526 Carole Morris Submission No. 527 Geraldine Reid Submission No. 528 Dominc Porcelli Submission No. 529 Steven Field Submission No. 530 Kylie Videon Submission No. 531 Anthony Cosgriff Submission No. 532 Prue Serafini Submission No. 533 Jurg Meier Submission No. 534 Katie Hannan Submission No. 535 Mark Pearce Submission No. 536 Roslyn Tonkin Submission No. 537 Stephanie McBeath Submission No. 538 Emma Mehuys

87 Submission No. 539 Quianna Stewarts Submission No. 540 Aileen Dolheguy Submission No. 541 Elise Kalderovskis Submission No. 542 Nikki Lowe Submission No. 543 Catherine Edmends Submission No. 544 Kathy O’Donnell Submission No. 545 Dr R Stobart Submission No. 546 Sandra Carpenter Submission No. 547 Lynette Stringer Submission No. 548 Susan Stewen Submission No. 549 Kathleen John-Forbes Submission No. 550 Cassandra Crothers Submission No. 551 Samara Mitchell Submission No. 552 Philippe Bredin Submission No. 553 Vilia Nine Submission No. 554 Kathrine Ferres Submission No. 555 Christine Lowery Submission No. 556 Keisha Rowe Submission No. 557 Sophie Corso Submission No. 558 Ruth Quick Submission No. 559 Cherise Madigan Submission No. 560 Gigi McClements Submission No. 561 Karen O’Reielly Submission No. 562 Ken Goodchild Submission No. 563 Garrett Cooper Submission No. 564 Valerie Huxley Submission No. 565 Marion Lacey Submission No. 566 Maureen Ryan Submission No. 567 Felicity Latty Submission No. 568 Pesa Lenga Submission No. 569 Callyn Mckeen Submission No. 570 Ashlee Eyles Submission No. 571 Janet Gallehawk Submission No. 572 Mitch John-Forbes Submission No. 573 Angie Fuss Submission No. 574 Maria Rivera Submission No. 575 Karina Donhardt Submission No. 576 Phil Cornelius Submission No. 577 Penney Hughes Submission No. 578 Lisa Roberts Submission No. 579 Dr Lisa Ackerman Submission No. 580 Allison Sadler Submission No. 581 Frankie Stockdale Submission No. 582 Marta Parkitny Submission No. 583 Ashely Sutherland Submission No. 584 Caitlin Bahr

88 Submission No. 585 Trish Geidel Submission No. 586 Philip Tilbrook Submission No. 587 Caitlin Bryant Submission No. 588 Natalya Giffney Submission No. 589 Julie Starkey Submission No. 590 Sandra Starkey Submission No. 591 Tracey Standley Submission No. 592 Janet Allan Submission No. 593 Wendy Butler Submission No. 594 Alex Nemeth Submission No. 595 Kim Sutterby Submission No. 596 Chrissy Andrusiak Submission No. 597 Gillian Davey Submission No. 598 Hazel Douglas Submission No. 599 Vivienne Williams Submission No. 600 Tanya Woods Submission No. 601 Andrea Goudie Submission No. 602 Mel Gladstone Submission No. 603 Meghan Jackson Submission No. 604 Courtney Dolman Submission No. 605 Libby Austin Submission No. 606 Nicholas Longford Submission No. 607 Debra Church Submission No. 608 Louise Woodward Submission No. 609 Lloyd Powella Submission No. 610 Debra Richards Submission No. 611 Elizabeth Janiszewski Submission No. 612 Alierah Foley Submission No. 613 Frances Reid Submission No. 614 Stephanie Roberts Submission No. 615 Darryl Easther Submission No. 616 Mark Clendon Submission No. 617 Michele Bain Submission No. 618 Jaz Blazey Submission No. 619 Lynette Beacham Submission No. 620 Helen Sands Submission No. 621 Zab Manatakis Submission No. 622 Vikii Warner Submission No. 623 Kerryn Suthern Submission No. 624 Bianca Staker Submission No. 625 Ines Raimondo Submission No. 626 Nathaneal Scherer Submission No. 627 Melainie Jamieson Submission No. 628 Alison Kennedy Submission No. 629 Carolyn McDonald Submission No. 630 Helen Marshall

89 Submission No. 631 Jane MacArthur Submission No. 632 John Wood Submission No. 633 Deanne Reinders Submission No. 634 Neil Roberts Submission No. 635 Vivienne Clayton Submission No. 636 Simone Hunter Submission No. 637 Sally Lawrance Submission No. 638 Fay Atkins Submission No. 639 Lia Michael Submission No. 640 Jane Long Submission No. 641 Christine Donovan Submission No. 642 Chloe Pepper Submission No. 643 Anthony Clayton Submission No. 644 Susanne Bamford Submission No. 645 Tania Boylan Submission No. 646 Briony Pearce Submission No. 647 Janine Clipstone Submission No. 648 Sharon O’Loughlin Submission No. 649 Susan Brockschmidt Submission No. 650 Vanessa Genrich Submission No. 651 Corie Walters Submission No. 652 Seng Lim Submission No. 653 Avalon Sperring Submission No. 654 Rod Kerkhoven Submission No. 655 Kate Starrs Submission No. 656 Miriam Cooper Submission No. 657 Sue Lang Submission No. 658 Hayley Slater Submission No. 659 Daniela Stepcich Submission No. 660 Anne Sanders Submission No. 661 Cathryn Wyers Submission No. 662 Kerri Bryant Submission No. 663 Frances Hanna Submission No. 664 Robyn Lucas Submission No. 665 Richard Tee Submission No. 666 Anna Nowak Submission No. 667 Christine Empson Submission No. 668 Conni Franks Submission No. 669 Sharon Mason Submission No. 670 Wendy Davey Submission No. 671 Gillian Hunter Submission No. 672 Christine Lowery Submission No. 673 Lorwai Tan Submission No. 674 Risemarie Grgelec Submission No. 675 Peter Lock Submission No. 676 Sarah Eley

90 Submission No. 677 Shana Parkinson Submission No. 678 Cindy Tucker Submission No. 679 Rosalie Steward Submission No. 680 Elizabeth Waston Submission No. 681 Raffaela Lubiana Submission No. 682 Felicity Pasquill Submission No. 683 Cristy Sanderson Submission No. 684 Brenda Aspey Submission No. 685 Emma Holt Submission No. 686 Lisa Hinder Submission No. 687 Lisa Murray Submission No. 688 Suzanne Parker Submission No. 689 Julie Raeck Submission No. 690 Barbara Willow Submission No. 691 Raquel Gunman Submission No. 692 Sandra Dekker Submission No. 693 Sue Burrow Submission No. 694 Jeremey Johnson Submission No. 695 Marisa Paolone Submission No. 696 Rodney Patching Submission No. 697 Libby Austin Submission No. 698 Malcolm Myers Submission No. 699 Jussey Verco Submission No. 700 Veronique Smith Submission No. 701 Loretta Orsini Submission No. 702 Emma Breagan Submission No. 703 Roger O’Donahoo Submission No. 704 Norma Graves Submission No. 705 Jennifer-Maree Gamble Submission No. 706 Carmen Redfern Submission No. 707 Sally Collyer Submission No. 708 Jill Fraser Submission No. 709 Meagan Lamming Submission No. 710 Elizabeth Bennett Submission No. 711 Mick Kitschke Submission No. 712 Chris Barker Submission No. 713 Rosanna Kassis Submission No. 714 Kate Sieber Submission No. 715 Michelle Irvine Submission No. 716 Carol Perusic Submission No. 717 Nathaniel Sage Submission No. 718 Amanda Allen Submission No. 719 Alison Ashdown Submission No. 720 Sue Storl Submission No. 721 Kirsty Seipolt Submission No. 722 Robin Dunn

91 Submission No. 723 Jacqui Rowe Submission No. 724 Tracey Taylor Submission No. 725 Rob Michael Submission No. 726 Nichola Thompson Submission No. 727 Dianne Lamming Submission No. 728 Jill Edmonds Submission No. 729 Janet Gallehawk Submission No. 730 Elizabeth Milner Submission No. 731 Marlene Bentino Submission No. 732 Carolyn Bennett Submission No. 733 Janice Hutchison Submission No. 734 Debra Foreman Submission No. 735 Evelyn Carroll Submission No. 736 Priya Alexander Submission No. 737 Berrie Submission No. 738 Glenda Clifford Submission No. 739 Kristine Cole Submission No. 740 Suellen Marshall Submission No. 741 Giulia Tog Submission No. 742 Anita Masson Submission No. 743 Eril Riely Submission No. 744 Timoth Garde Submission No. 745 Sarah Browne Submission No. 746 Samantha Pearce Submission No. 747 Margaret Scown Submission No. 748 Anne Wilson Submission No. 749 Judi Storer Submission No. 750 Patrica Honey Submission No. 751 Jasemin Rose Submission No. 752 Diana Bogers Submission No. 753 Maria Moore Submission No. 754 Xavier Gates Submission No. 755 Ruth Duffy Submission No. 756 Marg Pedler Submission No. 757 Alana Bacon Submission No. 758 Aura Valli Submission No. 759 Jade Perry Submission No. 760 Elizabeth Sweetman Submission No. 761 Michael Sterrs Submission No. 762 Peter Lange Submission No. 763 Tanya Bryant Submission No. 764 Jessica Mineff Submission No. 765 Mel Shepherd Submission No. 766 Marie Hogg Submission No. 767 Robyn Henriksen Submission No. 768 Roger Lucas

92 Submission No. 769 Nicole Lucas Submission No. 770 Kyle Penick Submission No. 771 Barbara Devine Submission No. 772 Bodil Schou-Hansen Submission No. 773 Avalon Llewellyn Submission No. 774 Kady Singer Submission No. 775 Frances Radnor Submission No. 776 Don Cole Submission No. 777 Warwick Burns Submission No. 778 Ashleigh Thomson Submission No. 779 Ian Killip Submission No. 780 Sue Schofield Submission No. 781 Eleanor Hefferan Submission No. 782 Grace Pavone Submission No. 783 Liane Hensell Submission No. 784 Vanja Veale Submission No. 785 Helen O’Brien Submission No. 786 Morgana Gwilym Submission No. 787 Kara Killick Submission No. 788 Ally Duffy Submission No. 789 Jacqui Lamont Submission No. 790 Pascal Moulton Submission No. 791 Kerri Tilbrook Submission No. 792 Karmin Kenny Submission No. 793 Dr Llywela Williams Submission No. 794 Elizabeth Brown Submission No. 795 Sarah Hardwick Submission No. 796 Cara Plum Submission No. 797 Shana Coles Submission No. 798 Lynette Board Submission No. 799 Samantha Johns Submission No. 800 Narada Edgar Submission No. 801 Emily Jans Submission No. 802 Sophie Neubauer Submission No. 803 Vicki Benson Submission No. 804 Michaela Newell Submission No. 805 Marilyn Sterrett Submission No. 806 Rebecca Franklin Submission No. 807 Stephanie Singleton Submission No. 808 Myria Doak Submission No. 809 Richard Clough Submission No. 810 Kelly-Anne Horne Submission No. 811 Lia Savron Submission No. 812 Honoria Wallace Submission No. 813 Catherine Myors Submission No. 814 Russell Dunn

93 Submission No. 815 Helen Ryan Submission No. 816 Alex Agostini Submission No. 817 Sara Bruce Submission No. 818 Ron Wood Submission No. 819 Rebecca Ho Submission No. 820 Robyn Lucas Submission No. 821 Sally Vindedzis Submission No. 822 Deb Milson Submission No. 823 Ann Sch Submission No. 824 Jenny Overton Submission No. 825 Julia Seaborn Submission No. 826 Stella Robinson Submission No. 827 Hamish Lydbrook Submission No. 828 Alison Ashdown Submission No. 829 Dorian Hill Submission No. 830 Milinda Douangbupa Submission No. 831 Lulu Parke Submission No. 832 Emily Summers Submission No. 833 Nathan Sinnott Submission No. 834 Samara Steen Submission No. 835 Jan Kendall Submission No. 836 John O’Connor

94 APPENDIX 3 – Form Variation Submissions

The following are lists of the four form variation submissions as received by the Select Committee.

Form Variation 1

I am writing in support of banning jumps racing in South Australia.

With 16 horses dying in the sport since 2009 in this state alone, and a University of Melbourne study showing a horse is nearly 19 times more likely to die in a jumps events compared to a flat race, this illogical ‘sport’ must not be allowed to continue.

With a Senate Select Committee on Animal Welfare recommending a phase out of jumps racing 24 years ago, the time has well and truly come for jumps racing to end.

New South Wales banned jumps racing nearly 20 years ago, and it is well overdue for South Australia to do likewise.

I thank you for the opportunity to make a submission.

Form Variation 1 No. 1 Rebecca Greenslade Form Variation 1 No. 2 Catherine Kelly Form Variation 1 No. 3 Ann Ginever Form Variation 1 No. 4 Margaret Scown Form Variation 1 No. 5 Dale Nauman Form Variation 1 No. 6 Lyn Thomas Form Variation 1 No. 7 James Franklin Form Variation 1 No. 8 Robyn Willis Form Variation 1 No. 9 Jo Turner Form Variation 1 No. 10 Abby Thomas Form Variation 1 No. 11 Amelie Bottrill Form Variation 1 No. 12 Vivian Nunez Form Variation 1 No. 13 Sera Lucchesi Form Variation 1 No. 14 George Leventeris Form Variation 1 No. 15 Bridgette Zander Form Variation 1 No. 16 Heidi Frundt Form Variation 1 No. 17 Sue Cronin Form Variation 1 No. 18 Jacob Lowes Form Variation 1 No. 19 Liz Oswald Form Variation 1 No. 20 Tongton Wang Form Variation 1 No. 21 Wendy Evans Form Variation 1 No. 22 Hayley Neubauer Form Variation 1 No. 23 Alex Rogers Form Variation 1 No. 24 Nathalie Rickett Form Variation 1 No. 25 Elena Gonzalez

95 Form Variation 1 No. 26 Stephen Bogdanowicz Form Variation 1 No. 27 Deb Kelly Form Variation 1 No. 28 Jacquilyn Korcz Form Variation 1 No. 29 Naomi Andrews Form Variation 1 No. 30 Linda Sherlock Form Variation 1 No. 31 Caroline Ward Form Variation 1 No. 32 Jennifer Ross Form Variation 1 No. 33 Mick Abberley Form Variation 1 No. 34 Lily Liang Form Variation 1 No. 35 Terri Thomas Form Variation 1 No. 36 Janine Baker Form Variation 1 No. 37 Mary Fisher Form Variation 1 No. 38 Claire Schofield Peter & Form Variation 1 No. 39 Dilys Lord Form Variation 1 No. 40 Danielle Zubrinich Form Variation 1 No. 41 Marie Edwards Form Variation 1 No. 42 Sarah Lindsay Form Variation 1 No. 43 Tracy Wake Form Variation 1 No. 44 Lyn Freeman Form Variation 1 No. 45 Paige Spriggs Form Variation 1 No. 46 Mia Faletti Form Variation 1 No. 47 Carol Alessio Form Variation 1 No. 48 Kylie Finlay Form Variation 1 No. 49 Alicia Fox Form Variation 1 No. 50 Jim Douglas Form Variation 1 No. 51 Ann Knibbs Form Variation 1 No. 52 Dianne Jeffries Form Variation 1 No. 53 Ruth Eckhard Form Variation 1 No. 54 Leah Eitzen Form Variation 1 No. 55 Dorthy Hope Form Variation 1 No. 56 Barb Semmens Form Variation 1 No. 57 Uday Mitra Form Variation 1 No. 58 Fiona Bartlett Form Variation 1 No. 59 Jayne Cirillo Form Variation 1 No. 60 Michelle Mayer Form Variation 1 No. 61 Allen Agnew Form Variation 1 No. 62 Lesley Baligod Form Variation 1 No. 63 Ingrid Shaw Form Variation 1 No. 64 Belinda Jackett Form Variation 1 No. 65 Sean Bartram Form Variation 1 No. 66 Benjamin Abercrombie Form Variation 1 No. 67 Colin Lock Form Variation 1 No. 68 Barbara Wahlstrom Form Variation 1 No. 69 Patricia Yarham Form Variation 1 No. 70 Joshua Boscani

96 Form Variation 1 No. 71 Amanda Irving Form Variation 1 No. 72 Chloe Irving Form Variation 1 No. 73 Mladen Franetovic Form Variation 1 No. 74 Bozena Buczkowska Form Variation 1 No. 75 Jo-Anne Seater Form Variation 1 No. 76 Pauline Springett Form Variation 1 No. 77 Brenda Bowers Form Variation 1 No. 78 David Williams Form Variation 1 No. 79 Grace Nelligan Form Variation 1 No. 80 Gen Shearer-McBride Form Variation 1 No. 81 Catherine Linford-Klose Form Variation 1 No. 82 Prue Bartels Form Variation 1 No. 83 Samantha Green Form Variation 1 No. 84 Rhoda Godiwala Form Variation 1 No. 85 Mari Thiele Form Variation 1 No. 86 Jane Wallace Form Variation 1 No. 87 Deanne Smith-Jones Form Variation 1 No. 88 Sue Redman Form Variation 1 No. 89 Sasha Stewart Form Variation 1 No. 90 Edward Goodfellow Form Variation 1 No. 91 Olive Pritchard Form Variation 1 No. 92 Maria Kroon Form Variation 1 No. 93 Dawn Broome Form Variation 1 No. 94 Joan Sohl Form Variation 1 No. 95 Sharon Hobbs Form Variation 1 No. 96 Teresa Cunningham Form Variation 1 No. 97 Paul Murphy Form Variation 1 No. 98 Mark Clendon Form Variation 1 No. 99 Kylie Johns Form Variation 1 No. 100 Janelle Brown Form Variation 1 No. 101 Russell Gardiner Form Variation 1 No. 102 Simon Ostler Form Variation 1 No. 103 Bernice Wuttke Form Variation 1 No. 104 Tina Easterbrook Form Variation 1 No. 105 Amanda Osborn Form Variation 1 No. 106 Rebecca Henry Form Variation 1 No. 107 Sara Eisner Form Variation 1 No. 108 Jennifer Shiels Antenucci Form Variation 1 No. 109 Antonietta Sofia Form Variation 1 No. 110 Julie Woodroffe Form Variation 1 No. 111 Jennifer Keogh Form Variation 1 No. 112 Jeziel Villarruz Tapp Form Variation 1 No. 113 Anne Bishop Form Variation 1 No. 114 Lyn Hector Form Variation 1 No. 115 Tracey Gleeson Form Variation 1 No. 116 Sue Hallam

97 Form Variation 1 No. 117 Jacqueline Bird Form Variation 1 No. 118 Kelly Angus Form Variation 1 No. 119 Dasyton Thomas Form Variation 1 No. 120 Alison Pope Form Variation 1 No. 121 Marie Howarth Form Variation 1 No. 122 Ursula Dorocki Form Variation 1 No. 123 Margaret Weir Form Variation 1 No. 124 Harry Hodgen Form Variation 1 No. 125 Lois Pavy Form Variation 1 No. 126 Camille Bailey Form Variation 1 No. 127 Maxine Hanson Form Variation 1 No. 128 Deborah Fuller Form Variation 1 No. 129 Sonja Newton Form Variation 1 No. 130 Noelle Chivell Form Variation 1 No. 131 Vivien Thomas Form Variation 1 No. 132 Annette Tolley Form Variation 1 No. 133 Elizabeth Barron Form Variation 1 No. 134 Laura Tufo Form Variation 1 No. 135 John Nicholas Form Variation 1 No. 136 Denis Mills Form Variation 1 No. 137 Gracie Carbone Form Variation 1 No. 138 Jacky Spencer Form Variation 1 No. 139 Fiona McCallum Form Variation 1 No. 140 Christy Markiewicz Form Variation 1 No. 141 Julie Merrifield Form Variation 1 No. 142 Linda Pyne Form Variation 1 No. 143 Gaye Mietzke Form Variation 1 No. 144 Marie Mills Form Variation 1 No. 145 Maria Laing Form Variation 1 No. 146 Jasmine Szczurko Form Variation 1 No. 147 Leah Gentner Form Variation 1 No. 148 Susan Dyer Form Variation 1 No. 149 Ros Mann Form Variation 1 No. 150 Lyndall Dooley Form Variation 1 No. 151 Andrew Baillie Form Variation 1 No. 152 Andy Applebee Form Variation 1 No. 153 Alicia Garcia-Rojas Form Variation 1 No. 154 Julie Langton Form Variation 1 No. 155 Ruth Trimboli Form Variation 1 No. 156 Lee Carter Form Variation 1 No. 157 Kevin Parham Form Variation 1 No. 158 Helen Starr Form Variation 1 No. 159 J Mitchell Form Variation 1 No. 160 Dee Gullidge Form Variation 1 No. 161 Lisa Bleasdale Form Variation 1 No. 162 Andrea Zidlicky

98 Form Variation 1 No. 163 Hazel Austin Form Variation 1 No. 164 Kathy O'Donnell Form Variation 1 No. 165 Julie Glynn Form Variation 1 No. 166 Sharyn Taylor Form Variation 1 No. 167 Brian Smith Form Variation 1 No. 168 Hajisa Teague Form Variation 1 No. 169 Sue Baxter Form Variation 1 No. 170 Amanda Allen Form Variation 1 No. 171 Helen Hall Form Variation 1 No. 172 Victoria Marcelis Form Variation 1 No. 173 Annette Haridan Form Variation 1 No. 174 Marnie Parker Form Variation 1 No. 175 Tom Olthoff Form Variation 1 No. 176 Jeanette Bartle Form Variation 1 No. 177 Pam Wallis Form Variation 1 No. 178 Marina Thomas Form Variation 1 No. 179 Vanessa Doyle Form Variation 1 No. 180 Denise Mitchell Form Variation 1 No. 181 Sally Selwood Form Variation 1 No. 182 Carole Burden Form Variation 1 No. 183 Josephine Sutton Form Variation 1 No. 184 Elizabeth Freeman Form Variation 1 No. 185 Jon Othitis Form Variation 1 No. 186 Mark Parker Form Variation 1 No. 187 Philip Payne Form Variation 1 No. 188 Chyon Booth Form Variation 1 No. 189 Colin Crook Form Variation 1 No. 190 Jonathan de Meyrick Form Variation 1 No. 191 Fiona Whitefood Form Variation 1 No. 192 Leisa Moore Form Variation 1 No. 193 Anna Young Form Variation 1 No. 194 Marcus Dewar Form Variation 1 No. 195 Jane Nunan Form Variation 1 No. 196 Anna Caruana Form Variation 1 No. 197 Corinne Karbhari Form Variation 1 No. 198 Sharon McEvoy Form Variation 1 No. 199 Christine Palmer Form Variation 1 No. 200 Nadia Pivato Form Variation 1 No. 201 Suzanne Parker Form Variation 1 No. 202 Linda T Form Variation 1 No. 203 Angela Swan Form Variation 1 No. 204 Ashlee Trimmer Form Variation 1 No. 205 Corie Walters Form Variation 1 No. 206 Stella Bartlett Form Variation 1 No. 207 Dawn Morris Form Variation 1 No. 208 Marion Ferguson

99 Form Variation 1 No. 209 Trish Bassett Form Variation 1 No. 210 James Franklin Form Variation 1 No. 211 Natalie Hughes Form Variation 1 No. 212 Jenny D'Arcy Form Variation 1 No. 213 Helen Molloghan Form Variation 1 No. 214 Constance Rugen Form Variation 1 No. 215 Sandra Dekker Form Variation 1 No. 216 Trudi White Form Variation 1 No. 217 Traude Kolb Form Variation 1 No. 218 Sue Burrows Form Variation 1 No. 219 Peter Lock Form Variation 1 No. 220 Terri Ellis Form Variation 1 No. 221 Penelope Morrison Form Variation 1 No. 222 Belinda Lock Form Variation 1 No. 223 Elke Echard Form Variation 1 No. 224 Christine Pierson Form Variation 1 No. 225 Richard Tee Form Variation 1 No. 226 Melissa Sergi Form Variation 1 No. 227 Anna Sykes Form Variation 1 No. 228 Brita Robyn Form Variation 1 No. 229 Phoebe Erickson Form Variation 1 No. 230 Susan Norbury Form Variation 1 No. 231 Frank Ferdinand Form Variation 1 No. 232 Kim Harvey Form Variation 1 No. 233 Penelope Pronin Form Variation 1 No. 234 Marion Blyth Form Variation 1 No. 235 Cathy Lindford-Klose Form Variation 1 No. 236 Eril Riley Form Variation 1 No. 237 Toni Wood Form Variation 1 No. 238 Sherlene Turner Form Variation 1 No. 239 Julie Elmes Marie- Form Variation 1 No. 240 Anne Phillips Form Variation 1 No. 241 Christelle Michon Form Variation 1 No. 242 Kylie Morgan Form Variation 1 No. 243 Lety Leigh Form Variation 1 No. 244 Amanda Neville Form Variation 1 No. 245 Jane Gray Form Variation 1 No. 246 Emma Bryan Form Variation 1 No. 247 Sharnie Rudd Form Variation 1 No. 248 Kath Becker Form Variation 1 No. 249 Miranda Fiori Form Variation 1 No. 250 Alisha Lopes Form Variation 1 No. 251 David Belmonte Form Variation 1 No. 252 Beverly Murray Form Variation 1 No. 253 Ashleigh Bunton

100 Form Variation 1 No. 254 Linda Glass Form Variation 1 No. 255 Kyanne Hill Form Variation 1 No. 256 Katrina Muir Form Variation 1 No. 257 Daniela Nonkovic Form Variation 1 No. 258 Jeanette Wilde Form Variation 1 No. 259 Susan Taylor Form Variation 1 No. 260 Sharon Rubenstein Form Variation 1 No. 261 Daniela Stepcich Form Variation 1 No. 262 Briony Pearce Form Variation 1 No. 263 Amber Hoang Form Variation 1 No. 264 Garry Harris Form Variation 1 No. 265 Emma Rugari

Form Variation 2

To the Secretary, Select Committee on Jumps Racing

Jumps racing is a dangerous sport which continues to kill horses and create negative publicity for horse racing in South Australia.

I urge the Select Committee on Jumps Racing to recommend that the South Australian Government end jumps racing and make it illegal as it is in NSW.

Form Variation 2 No.1 Ewen Kloas Form Variation 2 No.2 Pamela Fioretti Form Variation 2 No.3 Kristie Burley Form Variation 2 No.4 Davina Dolman Form Variation 2 No.5 Morgan Rayner Form Variation 2 No.6 Sarah Palmer Form Variation 2 No.7 Rebecca Tofsted Form Variation 2 No.8 Rose Slaviero Form Variation 2 No.9 Steph Hampson Form Variation 2 No.10 Carol Warner Form Variation 2 No.11 Isiah Nunerley Form Variation 2 No.12 Sarah Broadbent Form Variation 2 No.13 Sarah Keneally Form Variation 2 No.14 Michele Broom Form Variation 2 No.15 Raffaela Lubiana Form Variation 2 No.16 Natalia Lukaszewicz Form Variation 2 No.17 Jacqueline Haslem Form Variation 2 No.18 Felicity Mills Form Variation 2 No.19 Liz Maclaren Form Variation 2 No.20 Kathy Durant Form Variation 2 No.21 Linda Stratford Form Variation 2 No.22 Gillian Cunneen Form Variation 2 No.23 Fiona Daws Form Variation 2 No.24 Jenny Ilasi

101 Form Variation 2 No.25 Vanessa Williams Form Variation 2 No.26 Candice Walsh Form Variation 2 No.27 Judith Stahl Form Variation 2 No.28 Marie Bagnell Form Variation 2 No.29 Kelly Wilson Form Variation 2 No.30 Kim Sellers Form Variation 2 No.31 Julie Reed Form Variation 2 No.32 Aimee Williams Form Variation 2 No.33 Ann Wilson Form Variation 2 No.34 Kerry Moriarty Form Variation 2 No.35 Peta Hill Form Variation 2 No.36 Astara Lak'ech Form Variation 2 No.37 Ann Brown Form Variation 2 No.38 Ani Kazantsev Form Variation 2 No.39 Alex Milam Form Variation 2 No.40 Anna Rogers Form Variation 2 No.41 Gabriel Hattingh Form Variation 2 No.42 Kellie Wheeler Form Variation 2 No.43 Adele Boylan Form Variation 2 No.44 Stephan Bogdanowicz Form Variation 2 No.45 Rosemary Biggins Form Variation 2 No.46 Debra Tranter Form Variation 2 No.47 Laura Golding Form Variation 2 No.48 Michelle Remin Form Variation 2 No.49 Steph Ewen Form Variation 2 No.50 Anne Black Form Variation 2 No.51 Ali Jordan Form Variation 2 No.52 Rachel Dickson Form Variation 2 No.53 Joanne Sutton Form Variation 2 No.54 Andy Tyler Form Variation 2 No.55 Nicole Wilson Form Variation 2 No.56 Diana Bennet Form Variation 2 No.57 Monique Guevorts Form Variation 2 No.58 donalea Patman Form Variation 2 No.59 John Salter Form Variation 2 No.60 Tammy Stephean Form Variation 2 No.61 Lindy Van Houweninge Form Variation 2 No.62 Katherine Ferres Form Variation 2 No.63 Rosa Baeza

102 Form Variation 3

To the Secretary, Select Committee on Jumps Racing

In the 21st century, the barbaric sport of jumps racing cannot be allowed to continue. It simply is too dangerous, and is no longer popular with the public.

I urge the Select Committee on Jumps Racing to recommend that the South Australian Government end jumps racing and make it illegal as it is in NSW.

Form Variation 3 No. 1 Olivia Turnball Form Variation 3 No. 2 Alyssa Vowles Form Variation 3 No. 3 Paula Phillips Form Variation 3 No. 4 Ashlyn Burdett Form Variation 3 No. 5 Sarah Jones Form Variation 3 No. 6 Victoria Austin Form Variation 3 No. 7 Helen Drousas Form Variation 3 No. 8 Andrea Gerhardt Form Variation 3 No. 9 Alex Kwong Form Variation 3 No. 10 Stephanie Clark Form Variation 3 No. 11 Lorna Mackenzie Form Variation 3 No. 12 Jessica Tilbrook Form Variation 3 No. 13 Sherree Dodson Form Variation 3 No. 14 Kerry Wragg Form Variation 3 No. 15 Shane Ward Form Variation 3 No. 16 Geoff Kluke Form Variation 3 No. 17 Nadia Seger Form Variation 3 No. 18 Stellar Woods Form Variation 3 No. 19 Anna Petynka Form Variation 3 No. 20 Jessica Harrington Form Variation 3 No. 21 Briannagh O'Loughlin Form Variation 3 No. 22 Nan Borsht Form Variation 3 No. 23 Roxanne Reuben Form Variation 3 No. 24 Rebecca Golding Form Variation 3 No. 25 Kathleen Woolford Form Variation 3 No. 26 Chamindri Samarakoon Form Variation 3 No. 27 Samantha Harston Form Variation 3 No. 28 Priya Fernandes Form Variation 3 No. 29 Marilyn Galloway Form Variation 3 No. 30 Charlottee Sharpe Form Variation 3 No. 31 Lyndal Gallaway Form Variation 3 No. 32 Joanne Gura Form Variation 3 No. 33 Vivian Poignet Form Variation 3 No. 34 Alexi Lilford Form Variation 3 No. 35 Alexandra Adcock Form Variation 3 No. 36 Julie Cooper Form Variation 3 No. 37 Laura Pember Form Variation 3 No. 38 Sascha Klave

103 Form Variation 3 No. 39 Aliza Carr Form Variation 3 No. 40 Judy Bell Form Variation 3 No. 41 Collette Murdoch Form Variation 3 No. 42 Brenda Chapman Form Variation 3 No. 43 Kim Easterbrook Form Variation 3 No. 44 Despina Handolias Form Variation 3 No. 45 Kathy Chadwell Form Variation 3 No. 46 Jennifer Connor Form Variation 3 No. 47 Fay Done Form Variation 3 No. 48 Jennifer Johansson Form Variation 3 No. 49 Alexander Stein Form Variation 3 No. 50 Stella Bowers Form Variation 3 No. 51 Emma Breagan Form Variation 3 No. 52 Ana Novic Form Variation 3 No. 53 Jennifer Burns Form Variation 3 No. 54 Hedwig Crews Form Variation 3 No. 55 David Ogilvie Form Variation 3 No. 56 Judy De Groot Form Variation 3 No. 57 Nicola McDonnell Form Variation 3 No. 58 Kelly Nelder Form Variation 3 No. 59 Rachel Armstrong Form Variation 3 No. 60 Kristy Attard Form Variation 3 No. 61 Michelle Barnard Form Variation 3 No. 62 Natahlia Cameron Form Variation 3 No. 63 Deanne Haydon Form Variation 3 No. 64 David Knight Form Variation 3 No. 65 Jackie Reed Form Variation 3 No. 66 Andrea Sreiber Form Variation 3 No. 67 Robin Johnson Form Variation 3 No. 68 Rosanne Newton Form Variation 3 No. 69 Kathleen Lavelle Form Variation 3 No. 70 Janine Lum Form Variation 3 No. 71 Kelvin Stingel Form Variation 3 No. 72 Bonnie Holmes Form Variation 3 No. 73 Simona Bevilacqua Form Variation 3 No. 74 Keryn Walshe Form Variation 3 No. 75 Rachel Lowe Form Variation 3 No. 76 Elizabeth Bellette Form Variation 3 No. 77 Emma Schumann Form Variation 3 No. 78 Janine Stoward Form Variation 3 No. 79 Theresa Vanderwyk Form Variation 3 No. 80 Elyse Miniken Form Variation 3 No. 81 Beth Maplestone Form Variation 3 No. 82 Andy Applebee Form Variation 3 No. 83 Sharyn Nash Form Variation 3 No. 84 Edward Wechner

104 Form Variation 3 No. 85 Eleisha Mullane Form Variation 3 No. 86 Peter Snaith Form Variation 3 No. 87 Anette Johannessen Form Variation 3 No. 88 Kate Csortan Form Variation 3 No. 89 Aimee Bergemann Form Variation 3 No. 90 Margaret Knott Form Variation 3 No. 91 Elizabeth Duggan Form Variation 3 No. 92 Beverley Moss Form Variation 3 No. 93 Dilys Clarke Form Variation 3 No. 94 Debbie Lord Form Variation 3 No. 95 Jillian Ryan Form Variation 3 No. 96 Rosalie Disney Form Variation 3 No. 97 Marzena Walkiewicz Form Variation 3 No. 98 Amy Johannsohn Form Variation 3 No. 99 Phoebe Wilson Form Variation 3 No. 100 Dee A Form Variation 3 No. 101 Ivan Snajdar Form Variation 3 No. 102 Ruth Overy Form Variation 3 No. 103 Tracey Healand Form Variation 3 No. 104 Laura Antonakakis Form Variation 3 No. 105 Michelle Jordan Form Variation 3 No. 106 Robyn Spencer Form Variation 3 No. 107 Biance Price Form Variation 3 No. 108 Christine Roberts Form Variation 3 No. 109 Joanie Roberts Form Variation 3 No. 110 Caroline Langer Form Variation 3 No. 111 Lee Seminara Form Variation 3 No. 112 Alyssa Moore Form Variation 3 No. 113 Reg Taylor Form Variation 3 No. 114 Troy Sullivan Form Variation 3 No. 115 Barbara Rudnick Form Variation 3 No. 116 Jodi Moyle Form Variation 3 No. 117 Jillian Fiedor Form Variation 3 No. 118 Deborah Clarke Form Variation 3 No. 119 Roslyn Clayton Form Variation 3 No. 120 Leonie Mason Form Variation 3 No. 121 Robyn Hockley Form Variation 3 No. 122 Natalie Van Leewijck Form Variation 3 No. 123 Mei Wong Form Variation 3 No. 124 Lyndal McEvoy Form Variation 3 No. 125 Terri Kimmendale Form Variation 3 No. 126 Aleisha Treloar Form Variation 3 No. 127 Susan Clarke Form Variation 3 No. 128 Kelly Rooney Form Variation 3 No. 129 Jeanette Wilde Form Variation 3 No. 130 Michael Eastham

105 Form Variation 3 No. 131 Leonie Duehlmeyer Form Variation 3 No. 132 Pauline Saidi Form Variation 3 No. 133 Melinda Carstens Form Variation 3 No. 134 Katie McGregor Form Variation 3 No. 135 Sally Bruni Form Variation 3 No. 136 Tanya Bask Form Variation 3 No. 137 Jess McKenzie Form Variation 3 No. 138 Tam Stephean Form Variation 3 No. 139 Margaret Sincoe Form Variation 3 No. 140 Katie Walacavage Form Variation 3 No. 141 Kayla Dean Form Variation 3 No. 142 Naomi Vanderweg Form Variation 3 No. 143 Jessica Fisher Form Variation 3 No. 144 Geraldine Meldrum Form Variation 3 No. 145 Cat Selth Form Variation 3 No. 146 Tracey Baker Form Variation 3 No. 147 Michelle Riddock Form Variation 3 No. 148 Karen Kelly Form Variation 3 No. 149 Maria McLaverty Form Variation 3 No. 150 Robyn Wylie Form Variation 3 No. 151 Maragret Gawart Charlie- Form Variation 3 No. 152 Elizabeth Wright Form Variation 3 No. 153 Margaret Davies Form Variation 3 No. 154 Esther Harris Form Variation 3 No. 155 Krshna Sonjeli Form Variation 3 No. 156 Alexander Yantselovskiy Form Variation 3 No. 157 Lefki Pavlidis Form Variation 3 No. 158 Richard Hallin Form Variation 3 No. 159 Jasmina Cuk Form Variation 3 No. 160 Lise Vandal Form Variation 3 No. 161 Leigh Saunders Form Variation 3 No. 162 Nikki Van der Velde Form Variation 3 No. 163 Valerie Hildebrand Form Variation 3 No. 164 Salome Argyropoulos Form Variation 3 No. 165 John Delfgou Form Variation 3 No. 166 Luan Sage Form Variation 3 No. 167 Ali Mikota Form Variation 3 No. 168 Angela Thornton Form Variation 3 No. 169 Vicki Kirss Form Variation 3 No. 170 Natalie Bate Form Variation 3 No. 171 Lisa B Form Variation 3 No. 172 Marian Boyd Form Variation 3 No. 173 Peter Brennan Form Variation 3 No. 174 Marie Mills Form Variation 3 No. 175 Jeremy Vallence

106 Form Variation 3 No. 176 Catherine Vallence Form Variation 3 No. 177 Nalini Scarfe Form Variation 3 No. 178 Dawn Carmichael Form Variation 3 No. 179 Serena White Form Variation 3 No. 180 Ginger Neimo Form Variation 3 No. 181 Nicole Weber Form Variation 3 No. 182 Mia Neale Form Variation 3 No. 183 Donna Picton Form Variation 3 No. 184 Rowan Mullett Trelor Form Variation 3 No. 185 Gavin Brown Form Variation 3 No. 186 Peter Maresh Form Variation 3 No. 187 Dorien Mergan Form Variation 3 No. 188 Leanne Hayes Form Variation 3 No. 189 Janelle Taylor Form Variation 3 No. 190 Pia Demarchi Form Variation 3 No. 191 Leonie Sim Form Variation 3 No. 192 Dakshinee Kodituwakku Form Variation 3 No. 193 Rebecca Yuncken Form Variation 3 No. 194 Sureen Tiwana Form Variation 3 No. 195 Eleonara Gullone Form Variation 3 No. 196 Malkit Singh Form Variation 3 No. 197 Shane Green Form Variation 3 No. 198 Nicole Wright Form Variation 3 No. 199 Marguerite Cordell Form Variation 3 No. 200 Denis Fowler Form Variation 3 No. 201 Marianne Locke Form Variation 3 No. 202 Raelene Govett Form Variation 3 No. 203 John Simmons Form Variation 3 No. 204 Graham Carter Form Variation 3 No. 205 Shesh Panneerselvam Form Variation 3 No. 206 Jillian Seckolds Form Variation 3 No. 207 Amy Read Form Variation 3 No. 208 Rebekka Wildenauer Form Variation 3 No. 209 Amanda Allen Form Variation 3 No. 210 Ellie Pankhurst Form Variation 3 No. 211 Lucille Bruyand Form Variation 3 No. 212 Nicholas Marriott Form Variation 3 No. 213 Judy Nish Form Variation 3 No. 214 Lynda Purser Form Variation 3 No. 215 S Weber Form Variation 3 No. 216 Renee Liprino Form Variation 3 No. 217 Jocelyn Parton Form Variation 3 No. 218 Sandra Brake Form Variation 3 No. 219 Noeleen Wright Form Variation 3 No. 220 Lyndsay Harris Form Variation 3 No. 221 Ros Stiles

107 Form Variation 3 No. 222 Lynda Plummer Form Variation 3 No. 223 Tamasin Cox Form Variation 3 No. 224 Matt Townsend Form Variation 3 No. 225 Florence Fleming Form Variation 3 No. 226 Risto Siljanoski Form Variation 3 No. 227 Susan Kulka Form Variation 3 No. 228 Hayley Matthews Form Variation 3 No. 229 Brigitta Vant Hoofty Form Variation 3 No. 230 Jo-Anne Seater Form Variation 3 No. 231 Beverley Woodburn Form Variation 3 No. 232 Dilys Harbourd Form Variation 3 No. 233 Kerry Hauser Form Variation 3 No. 234 Sue Fellows Form Variation 3 No. 235 Marion Ferguson Form Variation 3 No. 236 Edie Rens Form Variation 3 No. 237 Jean Robertson Form Variation 3 No. 238 Neil Ryding Form Variation 3 No. 239 Jessica Gilbey Form Variation 3 No. 240 Debra Cotter Form Variation 3 No. 241 Tanya Bare Form Variation 3 No. 242 Linda McSweeney Form Variation 3 No. 243 Beverly Beasley Form Variation 3 No. 244 Yeni Ballon Form Variation 3 No. 245 Helena Mills Form Variation 3 No. 246 Richard Woolley Form Variation 3 No. 247 Marilyn Mills Form Variation 3 No. 248 Michele McKenzie Form Variation 3 No. 249 Clydie Matruglio Form Variation 3 No. 250 Helen Schaper Form Variation 3 No. 251 Tess Brinums Form Variation 3 No. 252 Alanna Clifton Form Variation 3 No. 253 Tim Lee Form Variation 3 No. 254 Victoria Wilson Form Variation 3 No. 255 Bianca Francis Form Variation 3 No. 256 E Dwyer Form Variation 3 No. 257 Claudia Correia Form Variation 3 No. 258 Leanne Schaak Form Variation 3 No. 259 Anna Franklin Form Variation 3 No. 260 Madeleine Milam Form Variation 3 No. 261 Lesley Antoniadou Form Variation 3 No. 262 Leonie Green Form Variation 3 No. 263 Serena Wilson Form Variation 3 No. 264 Louise Binney Form Variation 3 No. 265 Chloe Kambouridis Form Variation 3 No. 266 Joanne Dobbin Form Variation 3 No. 267 Dianne Aitken

108 Form Variation 3 No. 268 Debby Myers Form Variation 3 No. 269 Mich Coughlin Form Variation 3 No. 270 Tania Smith Form Variation 3 No. 271 Renata Coleman Form Variation 3 No. 272 Serena Stuart Form Variation 3 No. 273 Tori Peart Form Variation 3 No. 274 Anni Haque Form Variation 3 No. 275 Michelle Payne Form Variation 3 No. 276 Alex Hon Form Variation 3 No. 277 Kellie Barry Form Variation 3 No. 278 Nathalie Quesnel Form Variation 3 No. 279 Annastasia Leonedas Form Variation 3 No. 280 Izak Coombe Form Variation 3 No. 281 Joanne Russell Form Variation 3 No. 282 Candice Scott Form Variation 3 No. 283 Jacqueline McCracken Form Variation 3 No. 284 Isabella Mamo Form Variation 3 No. 285 Cianah Harris Form Variation 3 No. 286 Janine Harron Form Variation 3 No. 287 Anastasia Papadopoulos Form Variation 3 No. 288 Christine Frew Form Variation 3 No. 289 Chris Murphy Form Variation 3 No. 290 Louise O'Rouke Form Variation 3 No. 291 Tammy Master Form Variation 3 No. 292 Ann Poole Form Variation 3 No. 293 Tegan Palin Form Variation 3 No. 294 Sheida Badiee Form Variation 3 No. 295 Claudine Dickson Form Variation 3 No. 296 Tracy Wooding Form Variation 3 No. 297 Ysolda Eckhardt Form Variation 3 No. 298 Emma Styles Form Variation 3 No. 299 Xander Ralph Form Variation 3 No. 300 Stella Butler Form Variation 3 No. 301 Debra Giles Form Variation 3 No. 302 Nicola Haywood Form Variation 3 No. 303 Aude Schmitt Form Variation 3 No. 304 Zoe Neilson Form Variation 3 No. 305 Lisa Ingham Form Variation 3 No. 306 Kelly Court Form Variation 3 No. 307 Shelley Davis Form Variation 3 No. 308 Derrin Craig Form Variation 3 No. 309 Michelle Smith Form Variation 3 No. 310 Elisa Lay Form Variation 3 No. 311 Natalia Milner Form Variation 3 No. 312 Claire Gregory Form Variation 3 No. 313 Fallon Voroshine

109 Form Variation 3 No. 314 Maike Schmitz Form Variation 3 No. 315 Lauren Robins Form Variation 3 No. 316 Catherine Jones Form Variation 3 No. 317 Peter Smith Form Variation 3 No. 318 Samantha Gibbs Form Variation 3 No. 319 Donna Perkins Form Variation 3 No. 320 Mary Stott Form Variation 3 No. 321 Lachlan Stewart Form Variation 3 No. 322 Ruby Jones Form Variation 3 No. 323 Kellie Stuart Form Variation 3 No. 324 Glenda Manning Form Variation 3 No. 325 Jess Urquhart Form Variation 3 No. 326 Catherine Chamberlain Form Variation 3 No. 327 Collette Hodgson Form Variation 3 No. 328 Sophie Masters Form Variation 3 No. 329 Ian Thomas Form Variation 3 No. 330 Sheree Dee Form Variation 3 No. 331 Linda Mayer Form Variation 3 No. 332 Callie Burke Form Variation 3 No. 333 Rebecca Woodward Form Variation 3 No. 334 Natalie Wall Form Variation 3 No. 335 R Rover Form Variation 3 No. 336 Nicole Loyson Form Variation 3 No. 337 Heather Delvendiep Form Variation 3 No. 338 Sarah Nelson Form Variation 3 No. 339 Isabel McMillan Form Variation 3 No. 340 Ian Anderson Form Variation 3 No. 341 Rebecca Zuesse Form Variation 3 No. 342 Gordon Johnson Form Variation 3 No. 343 Sally Green Form Variation 3 No. 344 Emma Craig Form Variation 3 No. 345 Elizabeth Eyre Form Variation 3 No. 346 Viv Coombes Form Variation 3 No. 347 Lorraine Stern Form Variation 3 No. 348 Cassie Hudson Form Variation 3 No. 349 Bridget Gasson Form Variation 3 No. 350 Laura Chapman Form Variation 3 No. 351 Laura Vella Form Variation 3 No. 352 Sue Stewart Form Variation 3 No. 353 Talia Wicks Form Variation 3 No. 354 Mark Pearce Form Variation 3 No. 355 Bernadette Shingles Form Variation 3 No. 356 Christine Collins Form Variation 3 No. 357 Caroline Hurr Form Variation 3 No. 358 Dave Dunning Form Variation 3 No. 359 Caroline Moore

110 Form Variation 3 No. 360 Matt Peake Form Variation 3 No. 361 Renai Dwyer Form Variation 3 No. 362 Alison Moore Form Variation 3 No. 363 Lina Jones Form Variation 3 No. 364 Neville Dennard Form Variation 3 No. 365 Anne S Form Variation 3 No. 366 Bill King Form Variation 3 No. 367 Gabby Grasso Form Variation 3 No. 368 Leanne Higgins Form Variation 3 No. 369 Magda Wozny Form Variation 3 No. 370 Michaela Sutton Form Variation 3 No. 371 Alex Fredrickson Form Variation 3 No. 372 Tina Stanton Form Variation 3 No. 373 Shona Fisher Form Variation 3 No. 374 Susan Michelmore Form Variation 3 No. 375 Sharon Bull Form Variation 3 No. 376 Jayne Roodhouse Form Variation 3 No. 377 Melegueta Mattay Form Variation 3 No. 378 Ava Redman Form Variation 3 No. 379 Katie Milton Form Variation 3 No. 380 Caitlin Buchanan Form Variation 3 No. 381 Miranda Rezzani Form Variation 3 No. 382 Nicola Willis Form Variation 3 No. 383 SArah Hunt Form Variation 3 No. 384 Andrea Crestani Form Variation 3 No. 385 Georgia Rasera Form Variation 3 No. 386 Katharine Babatzanis Form Variation 3 No. 387 Jennifer Mclachlan Form Variation 3 No. 388 Vanessa Sainty Form Variation 3 No. 389 Madeleine Cranmer Form Variation 3 No. 390 Sandra Dekker Form Variation 3 No. 391 Phyllis Hurr Form Variation 3 No. 392 Terri Ellis Form Variation 3 No. 393 KAtie Wells Form Variation 3 No. 394 S Sharma Form Variation 3 No. 395 Denise Hunter Form Variation 3 No. 396 Debra Eyles Form Variation 3 No. 397 Nichole Ives Form Variation 3 No. 398 Violet Renard Form Variation 3 No. 399 Alex Gawly Form Variation 3 No. 400 Remi K Form Variation 3 No. 401 Yvette Laurel Form Variation 3 No. 402 Courtney Millett Form Variation 3 No. 403 Debra Kerr Form Variation 3 No. 404 Margaret Norton Form Variation 3 No. 405 Terina Kocbek

111 Form Variation 3 No. 406 Samantha Fradd Form Variation 3 No. 407 Ashleigh Rundle Form Variation 3 No. 408 Sue Lewis Form Variation 3 No. 409 Susanne Helps Form Variation 3 No. 410 Margaret Nonas Form Variation 3 No. 411 Anna Charlton Form Variation 3 No. 412 Helen Round Form Variation 3 No. 413 Marie Hatten Form Variation 3 No. 414 Katrina Mullen Form Variation 3 No. 415 Michele Winter Form Variation 3 No. 416 Belinda Sweeney Form Variation 3 No. 417 Marcos Garcia Form Variation 3 No. 418 Margaret Hincks Form Variation 3 No. 419 Karen Brewer Form Variation 3 No. 420 Jacqueline Allen Form Variation 3 No. 421 Lisa Holt Form Variation 3 No. 422 Caroline Fraser Form Variation 3 No. 423 Elke Seaborn Form Variation 3 No. 424 Jillian Wheatland Form Variation 3 No. 425 Leanne Donahay Form Variation 3 No. 426 Robyn Maloney Form Variation 3 No. 427 Philippa MAson Form Variation 3 No. 428 Cathryn Levvey Form Variation 3 No. 429 Jade Woodlock Form Variation 3 No. 430 Elise Mitchell Form Variation 3 No. 431 Priscilla Javni Form Variation 3 No. 432 Eric Winter Form Variation 3 No. 433 Winnie Lisowski Form Variation 3 No. 434 Glenice Lohde Form Variation 3 No. 435 Sylvia Mikula Form Variation 3 No. 436 Emma Rilstone Form Variation 3 No. 437 Alex Fillmore Form Variation 3 No. 438 Caitlin Findley Form Variation 3 No. 439 Cathy Glass Form Variation 3 No. 440 Anne Bowerman Form Variation 3 No. 441 Nicole Burke Form Variation 3 No. 442 Yvonne Albrecht Form Variation 3 No. 443 Margaret Butcher Form Variation 3 No. 444 Abby Gilmore Form Variation 3 No. 445 Michelle Koros Form Variation 3 No. 446 F Davies Form Variation 3 No. 447 Sally Carnes Form Variation 3 No. 448 Katrina Morrison Form Variation 3 No. 449 Giselle Tonee Form Variation 3 No. 450 Dianne Idda Form Variation 3 No. 451 Deb Barnes

112 Form Variation 3 No. 452 Irene Cooper Form Variation 3 No. 453 Louvis Moeung Form Variation 3 No. 454 Larissa Cumming Form Variation 3 No. 455 Jordan Rogers Form Variation 3 No. 456 Mindi Bakopanos Form Variation 3 No. 457 Kristy Mason Form Variation 3 No. 458 Nuwan Alahakoon Form Variation 3 No. 459 Bianca Burian Form Variation 3 No. 460 Tania Hossack Form Variation 3 No. 461 Robert Bilson Form Variation 3 No. 462 Louise Parke Form Variation 3 No. 463 Sonia Grace Form Variation 3 No. 464 Tamsyn Hardgraves Form Variation 3 No. 465 Lauren Hadolt Form Variation 3 No. 466 Brenda May Form Variation 3 No. 467 Harry Freiverts Form Variation 3 No. 468 Louise Crimmins Form Variation 3 No. 469 Michelle Mason Form Variation 3 No. 470 Leah Folloni Form Variation 3 No. 471 Megan Pretorius Form Variation 3 No. 472 Kerry Sutherland Form Variation 3 No. 473 Shane Osmond Form Variation 3 No. 474 Jennifer Cahalan Form Variation 3 No. 475 Alyson Ryan Form Variation 3 No. 476 Reece Jongenelis Form Variation 3 No. 477 Jennifer Connor Form Variation 3 No. 478 Lucy Damant Form Variation 3 No. 479 Josh Groot Form Variation 3 No. 480 Kelly Lane Form Variation 3 No. 481 Noni Sampson Form Variation 3 No. 482 Karyn Lidgard Form Variation 3 No. 483 Maryanne McRostie Form Variation 3 No. 484 Meghan O'Rouke Form Variation 3 No. 485 Fay Diamantkis Form Variation 3 No. 486 Chris Cashel Form Variation 3 No. 487 Colette Piels Form Variation 3 No. 488 Jamie McCarthy Form Variation 3 No. 489 Emily Richardson Form Variation 3 No. 490 Kathy Scanlon Form Variation 3 No. 491 Sandy Makins Form Variation 3 No. 492 Tanya Cox Form Variation 3 No. 493 Jeanette Gangl Form Variation 3 No. 494 Robwyn Langmead Form Variation 3 No. 495 Kim Rettig Form Variation 3 No. 496 Claire Crewe Form Variation 3 No. 497 Connie Becker

113 Form Variation 3 No. 498 Jackie Monteith Form Variation 3 No. 499 Debra Carvajal Form Variation 3 No. 500 Lucy Wilson Form Variation 3 No. 501 Ashley Spican Form Variation 3 No. 502 Karen Munro Form Variation 3 No. 503 Adair Denshire Form Variation 3 No. 504 Lesley Pearse Form Variation 3 No. 505 Sarah Nightingal Form Variation 3 No. 506 Julie Copping Form Variation 3 No. 507 Emalene Mcknight Form Variation 3 No. 508 Jennifer King Form Variation 3 No. 509 Tracey Herbert Form Variation 3 No. 510 Imogen Sach Form Variation 3 No. 511 Louisa Sheridan Form Variation 3 No. 512 Abbey Slater Form Variation 3 No. 513 Emily Gotdon Form Variation 3 No. 514 Amanda Duscher Form Variation 3 No. 515 Theresa Thomas Form Variation 3 No. 516 Megan Crowley Form Variation 3 No. 517 Kylie Blyth Form Variation 3 No. 518 Maria Negyesi Form Variation 3 No. 519 Stephanie Champion Form Variation 3 No. 520 Leah Bell Form Variation 3 No. 521 David Topp Form Variation 3 No. 522 Rowena Sheppard Form Variation 3 No. 523 Gemma Curtis Form Variation 3 No. 524 Shona Truscott Form Variation 3 No. 525 Jasmin Johnson Form Variation 3 No. 526 Leanne Walton Form Variation 3 No. 527 Helen Parham Form Variation 3 No. 528 Shane Mccann Form Variation 3 No. 529 Nicole Hladni Form Variation 3 No. 530 Cathy Audley Form Variation 3 No. 531 Lei Gryffydd Form Variation 3 No. 532 Lesley Goodge Form Variation 3 No. 533 Vicky Mackenzie Form Variation 3 No. 534 Janni Kluke Form Variation 3 No. 535 Linda Ward Form Variation 3 No. 536 Rikki-Lee Watson Form Variation 3 No. 537 Brittany Edwards Form Variation 3 No. 538 Oana Lazarescu Form Variation 3 No. 539 Kim Pepi Form Variation 3 No. 540 Leisa Rogers Form Variation 3 No. 541 Deej Foster Form Variation 3 No. 542 Rachelle Batch Form Variation 3 No. 543 Jasmin Rowe

114 Form Variation 3 No. 544 Jessica Foy Form Variation 3 No. 545 Judith Viti Form Variation 3 No. 546 Greer Barmby Form Variation 3 No. 547 Yvette Whitcombe Form Variation 3 No. 548 Bianca Forrest Form Variation 3 No. 549 Steph Pham Form Variation 3 No. 550 Anne Burgess Form Variation 3 No. 551 Michelle Kerrison Form Variation 3 No. 552 Stephen Heselwood Form Variation 3 No. 553 Leanne Jenkins Form Variation 3 No. 554 Andrew Dickin Form Variation 3 No. 555 Michele Howard Form Variation 3 No. 556 Margot Capuano Form Variation 3 No. 557 Kate Elliott Form Variation 3 No. 558 Bev Wride Form Variation 3 No. 559 Beth Christensen Form Variation 3 No. 560 Brooke Seddon Form Variation 3 No. 561 Helen Drousas Form Variation 3 No. 562 Rolf Sorensen Form Variation 3 No. 563 Vanessa Lowe Form Variation 3 No. 564 Rykie Yates Form Variation 3 No. 565 Leena Maguire Form Variation 3 No. 566 Amy Martin Form Variation 3 No. 567 Matthew Buss Form Variation 3 No. 568 Natasha Nicol Form Variation 3 No. 569 Allen Sluggett Form Variation 3 No. 570 Carmel Pezzanite Form Variation 3 No. 571 Miranda Smith Form Variation 3 No. 572 Sheila Owen Form Variation 3 No. 573 Chris Critchell Form Variation 3 No. 574 DeArne Lands Form Variation 3 No. 575 Tracey Quinn Form Variation 3 No. 576 Cheryl Moore Form Variation 3 No. 577 Patricia Manning Form Variation 3 No. 578 Shona Lawson Form Variation 3 No. 579 Mel Holmes Form Variation 3 No. 580 Ana Luz-Raymond Form Variation 3 No. 581 Rosemary Lavin Form Variation 3 No. 582 Bridgette Moyle Form Variation 3 No. 583 Catherine Burk Form Variation 3 No. 584 Alex Garson Form Variation 3 No. 585 Michael Davidson Form Variation 3 No. 586 Michelle Renahan Form Variation 3 No. 587 Nyree Walshe Form Variation 3 No. 588 Stu Hopkins Form Variation 3 No. 589 Kerry McGrath

115 Form Variation 3 No. 590 Krys Graves Form Variation 3 No. 591 Judith Hazelton Form Variation 3 No. 592 Geoff Boan Form Variation 3 No. 593 Karen Rowell Form Variation 3 No. 594 Diana Palmer Form Variation 3 No. 595 Cristiane Pimentel Form Variation 3 No. 596 Vicki P Form Variation 3 No. 597 Illira Sweeney Form Variation 3 No. 598 Marianne Maslamoney Form Variation 3 No. 599 Melissa Kluge Form Variation 3 No. 600 Fran Chambers Form Variation 3 No. 601 AF Form Variation 3 No. 602 Deb Edwards Form Variation 3 No. 603 Elizabeth Jacobs Form Variation 3 No. 604 Aran Mylvaganam Form Variation 3 No. 605 Linda Sutton

Form Variation 4

To the Secretary, Select Committee on Jumps Racing

Jumps racing continues to kill and injure horses at a rate much greater than flat racing.

A 1991 Senate Select Committee report into animal welfare recommended that jumps racing should end in all states of Australia. Yet more than twenty years later the cruelty continues.

I urge the Select Committee on Jumps Racing to recommend that the South Australian Government end jumps racing and make it illegal as it is in NSW.

Form Variation 4 No. 1 Molly Sanders Form Variation 4 No. 2 Emily Williams Form Variation 4 No. 3 Zalan Glen Form Variation 4 No. 4 Leanne Bennett Form Variation 4 No. 5 Eloise Hoile Form Variation 4 No. 6 Skye Brown Form Variation 4 No. 7 Teresa Nelson Form Variation 4 No. 8 Sharon Patterson Form Variation 4 No. 9 Chantal Buslot Form Variation 4 No. 10 Cheryl Ferguson Form Variation 4 No. 11 Marion Harrison Form Variation 4 No. 12 Irina Ashmyan Form Variation 4 No. 13 Amber Day Form Variation 4 No. 14 Penny Russell Form Variation 4 No. 15 Claire Harvey Form Variation 4 No. 16 Janet Devlin Form Variation 4 No. 17 Debra Taylor Form Variation 4 No. 18 Justine Curatolo

116 Form Variation 4 No. 19 Nicole Tomazic Form Variation 4 No. 20 Paula Moore-Ward Form Variation 4 No. 21 Katrina Lukaszewicz Form Variation 4 No. 22 Ingrid Shaw Form Variation 4 No. 23 Sarah Dalgleish Form Variation 4 No. 24 Nicole Butterfield Form Variation 4 No. 25 Sue Saliba Form Variation 4 No. 26 Shannon Driscoll Form Variation 4 No. 27 Emma Rugari Form Variation 4 No. 28 Debbie Nettleingham Form Variation 4 No. 29 Jen Miles Form Variation 4 No. 30 Sue Ilett Form Variation 4 No. 31 Debbie Sanders Form Variation 4 No. 32 Camille Jonas Form Variation 4 No. 33 Linda Dal Castello Form Variation 4 No. 34 Daniel Potter Form Variation 4 No. 35 Georgina Hook Form Variation 4 No. 36 Genevieve Jones Form Variation 4 No. 37 Pamela Hook Form Variation 4 No. 38 Laurie Hook Form Variation 4 No. 39 Joe Menzies

117 APPENDIX 4 – Witnesses

These witnesses were called by the Select Committee to hearings between April 15 2016 and October 31 2016.

Witness No.1 Dr Tim Vasudeva, Chief Executive Officer, R.S.P.C.A. South Australia Witness No.2 Dr Di Evans, Animal Welfare Advocate, R.S.P.C.A. South Australia Witness No. 3 Ms Molly Salt, Campaign Co-ordinator, Animal Liberation S.A. Witness No. 4 Ms Sally Sutton, Member, Animal Liberation S.A. Witness No. 5 Ms Kerri Byrant, Banjumpsracing.com Witness No. 6 Ms Michelle Bryant, Banjumpsracing.com Witness No. 7 Mr Alistair Cornell, Banjumpsracing.com Witness No. 8 Ms Jane Nicolle, Banjumpsracing.com Witness No. 9 Mr John Glatz, Chairman, Oakbank Racing Club Witness No. 10 Mr Mark Angus, Committee Member, Oakbank Racing Club Witness No. 11 Mr Barney Gask, Committee Member, Oakbank Racing Club Witness No. 12 Mr Joe Cannizzaro, Chairperson, South Australian Jumps Racing Association, Member, Australian Jumps Racing Association Witness No. 13 Mr Paul Hamblin, professional jumps jockey Witness No. 14 Mr Pearse Morgan, Board Member, Racing Victoria Limited Witness No. 15 Mr Eric Musgrove, professional jumps trainer Witness No. 16 Mr Nick O’Connor, hobbyist owner Witness No. 17 Ms Lisa Coffey, Board Member, Australian Jumps Racing Association Witness No. 18 Ms Margaret Lucas, Board Member, Australian Jumps Racing Association Witness No. 19 Mr Sandy McGregor, Chairman, Australian Jumps Racing Association Witness No 20 Mr Ward Young, Communications Manager, Coalition for the Protection of Racehorses Witness No. 21 Mr Jim Oakley, beef and horse buyer Witness No. 22 Ms Christine Duggan, General Manager, Samex Peterborough

The full Hansard transcripts of the hearings can be found at the Committee’s web page on the Parliament of South Australia website: https://www.parliament.sa.gov.au

118 APPENDIX 5 – Papers Received

This is a list of papers received by the Select Committee, either as part of formal presentations to the committee or in response to questions put by the committee.

 Additional information provided by Oakbank Racing Club – o Key Facts Oakbank Easter Racing Carnival 2016 o Additional Submission by Oakbank Racing Club to Jumps Racing Select Committee o 2016 Oakbank Survey on Jumps Racing o Petition in Support of Jumps Racing Collected at Easter Racing Carnival 2015 o S.A.J.R. Petition in Support of Jumps Racing collected at Easter Racing Carnival 2015 o J.M. Williams, D.M Marlin, N. Langley, T.D. Parkin and H. Randle (2013), “The Grand National; a review of factors associated with non-completion and horse-falls, 1990 to 2012”.  R.S.P.C.A. - o Committee Hearing Presentation o Response to questions from the Committee and other relevant information. o Response to Oakbank Racing Club evidence provided to the Committee  The Hon. Martin Pakula M.P., Minister for Racing – Letter providing additional information  Additional information provided by Australian Jumps Racing Association – o Statistics of Starters, Falls and Fatalities o TAB Turnover and Attendance – 2011/2015 o Summary of 2016 Season of all Winners and Place Horses o Photographs of various race meets  Additional information provided by Banjumpsracing.com – o Black Moon media article o Grand Annual steeplechase media article o A. Green, 2014, “Jumps Racing: What vote compass tells us about Victorian’s views”. o Statistics of Horses from Oakbank Racing Carnvial o A document detailing the deaths of 40 jumps horses since Racing Victoria overturned a ban on jumps racing at the beginning of 2010. o A photo of an injury suffered by a horse Sirrocean Storm during the 2010 jumps carnival at Warrnambool. o A link to a video produced for viewing by the Committee. o Secondary submission o S.A. Breakdown of Jumps Data  SAMEX Peterborough – Correspondence.

119 120