Over the past two decades, and particularly the last ten years, horse welfare in equestrian sports has moved from a niche concern to a central issue. Pressure from scientific bodies, advocacy groups, social media, investigative journalism, and shifting equestrian and lay public expectations has prompted the establishment of numerous charters, commissions, and foundations. While tangible improvements are evident in rule changes, research, and policy, questions remain about the depth and consistency of change across the global industry. This article examines the calls for improvement, the structures created in response, and the measurable advancements achieved.
Calls for Improvement
The push for better horse welfare gained momentum through a combination of scientific evidence, high-profile incidents, public discourse, and powerful media exposés. The International Society for Equitation Science (ISES) has been instrumental, issuing position statements on topics like restrictive nosebands, aversive training methods, and the misuse of dominance theory. These statements emphasise evidence-based practices that respect horses’ natural behaviours, mental capacities, and emotional states. ISES principles advocate for training that prioritises safety, foraging time, social contact, and freedom of movement.
Investigative press and TV documentaries have dramatically amplified these concerns. Landmark programs, such as the BBC Panorama investigation “The Dark Side of Horse Racing” (2021), used undercover footage to expose the slaughter of thousands of ex-racehorses, often under poor conditions or while injured. Similar reports have highlighted drug use to mask lameness, transport welfare failures, and controversial training practices in various disciplines. Visual evidence in these documentaries reaches broad audiences beyond the equestrian community, fuelling public outrage and challenging the sport’s social license to operate. Viral clips from competitions, showing stressed horses or questionable techniques, often feed into mainstream TV segments and print coverage in outlets like The Guardian or specialist equestrian media.
Social media has further accelerated this dynamic, with platforms rapidly disseminating footage and sparking campaigns. Incidents in disciplines like dressage, eventing, and show jumping have drawn scrutiny over hyperflexion (rollkur), tight nosebands, whisker trimming, and performance-enhancing practices. Public opinion polls, such as those conducted in the UK, reveal growing unease among non-equestrians, with negative media coverage often eroding trust more than positive stories build it.
National and international bodies responded to this multifaceted pressure. In countries like Germany, Denmark, and Sweden, welfare charters and stricter regulations emerged, often influenced by animal welfare laws and public campaigns. The UK saw initiatives from groups highlighting issues in competitive riding, while global federations faced demands for transparency. Research, including Delphi studies and large-scale surveys, identified key welfare priorities: training management, competition schedules, young horse handling, health monitoring, and human-horse relationships.
Critics argue that competitive pressures can lead to shortcuts compromising welfare, from inadequate turnout to over-training. This scrutiny, intensified by media around major events like the Olympics, risks broader reputational damage to the sport.
Pressure has also come from more radical animal rights organisations such as PETA, Animal Aid, and the Netherlands’ Party for the Animals (Partij voor de Dieren). The Dutch party, which holds seats in parliament, has actively pushed for bans or severe restrictions on equestrian sports, including lobbying against events like jumping and dressage on welfare grounds. Through high-profile campaigns, undercover investigations, parliamentary motions, and provocative media releases, these groups have highlighted real and perceived abuses, sometimes using sensational tactics that generate widespread coverage but can polarize stakeholders. While their absolutist positions—often calling for the cessation of certain competitive disciplines or the end of horse use in sport—have been criticized by many in the equestrian community as unrealistic and damaging to the industry, they have undeniably contributed to heightened scrutiny, forced faster responses from governing bodies, and kept welfare issues prominently in the public and political eye.
Summary of Policies Against Horse Competition/Racing on Change.org
Change.org hosts hundreds of active and archived petitions calling for bans or severe restrictions on horse racing and equestrian sports, primarily driven by animal welfare and animal rights advocates. These petitions reflect a common set of core demands and arguments:
Key Recurring Policies and Demands
- Full National/Regional Bans on Horse Racing: Many petitions urge governments to ban horse racing entirely (e.g., “Ban horse racing in the UK and Ireland”, “Ban horse racing nationwide” in the US, or state-specific calls like ending it in California). They argue that the sport is inherently cruel due to high injury and fatality rates, overbreeding, drug use, and the “disposable” treatment of horses once their racing careers end.
- End to Specific High-Profile Events: Strong focus on banning or reforming races like the Grand National (UK), citing multiple horse deaths in recent years. Petitions often call for the event’s cancellation until welfare standards dramatically improve or for its permanent end.
- Broader Ban on Equestrian Sports: Some extend beyond racing to call for prohibitions on competitive disciplines involving jumping, dressage, eventing, or any ridden sport, arguing that they involve exploitation, physical/mental stress, and unnatural demands on horses.
Petitions Calling for Immediate Actions Short of Full Bans
- Strict limits on whipping, use of bits/nosebands, and certain training methods.
- Bans on race-day medication and performance-enhancing drugs.
- Mandatory retirement/re-homing programs with lifetime care guarantees funded by the industry.
- Ending betting/gambling on horse racing (seen as the economic driver of exploitation).
- Higher age limits for starting horses and caps on training intensity for young horses.
Common Arguments
- Horses suffer fatal injuries, breakdowns, and slaughter pipelines after their careers.
- The industry prioritizes profit over welfare.
- Alternatives like “horse watching” or non-competitive events are proposed.
- Petitions frequently reference high-profile deaths (e.g., Gold Dancer) and statistics on fatalities.
Scale and Impact: Individual petitions gather from a few thousand to tens of thousands of signatures. While few have led to outright bans, they contribute to ongoing public and political pressure, amplify media coverage, and support lobbying by various groups, which has used similar arguments in parliamentary debates to push anti-racing or anti-equestrian policies.
These petitions represent the more absolutist end of the welfare debate, contrasting with reform-focused efforts by mainstream equestrian bodies. They are frequently cited in broader campaigns and help sustain public scrutiny.
Actions, Groups, Policies, and Charters
The response has been multifaceted, with new organisations, advisory bodies, and policies proliferating in direct response to media and public pressure.
In the UK, the British Equestrian Federation (BEF) established the Equine Welfare and Ethics Advisory Group (EWEAG) in 2022–2023, collaborating with organisations like the RSPCA. This independent body provides guidance on wellbeing standards. The BEF also launched the Charter for the Horse, a unified pledge adopted across the industry. It covers six pillars: empathy, care, respect, consideration, ethics, and learning, and commits participants to prioritise horses’ mental, physical, and behavioural needs.
The UK National Equine Welfare Council (NEWC) and groups like the Suitably Mounted Group initiative address broader welfare and rider-horse matching. The Welfare Stewarding Group (UK) and BEF’s updated welfare action plans (including 2025–2026 revisions) strengthen governance, incident reporting, and rule enforcement.
Internationally, the Fédération Équestre Internationale (FEI) appointed the Equine Ethics and Wellbeing Commission (EEWBC) in 2022. Its 2023 report delivered 30 recommendations across six priority areas, leading to the FEI Equine Welfare Strategy and Action Plan. The FEI Equine Welfare Advisory Group (FEWAG) provides ongoing independent advice. National federations in Germany, Denmark, and Sweden implemented similar charters and regulations, often aligning with EU animal welfare standards.
Also, internationally, The Sporthorse Welfare Foundation (SWF), founded by leading researchers worldwide, including Prof. Jane Williams and Me, (Dr David Marlin) from the UK, focuses on data-driven improvements. It conducts studies on management practices, collects metadata on sport horses, and develops evidence-based recommendations for riders, trainers, and federations. The SWF emphasises education, outreach, and policy influence to optimise career longevity and prioritise welfare without opposing the use of horses in sport.
Other policies include mandatory education, welfare-focused rulebooks, and partnerships for research. These efforts aim to balance sport with ethical stewardship, promoting “guardianship” of horses, partly as a proactive response to sustained media scrutiny.
Tangible Improvements?
Assessing real change requires looking beyond policies to implemented practices, rule enforcement, and welfare outcomes, many of which were hastened by documentary-driven public and regulatory pressure.
One clear victory is the FEI ban on trimming sensory whiskers (vibrissae), effective from July 2021. This recognises whiskers’ role in a horse’s sensory perception and navigation. Violations result in disqualification, marking a shift from cosmetic standards to welfare priorities. Many national federations followed suit. The FEI has also introduced a standardised noseband measuring device (implemented from 2025), a 1.7 cm thick gauge designed to prevent overly tight nosebands. Stewards now use this tool at events to check and enforce minimum space under the noseband, addressing long-standing welfare concerns about restricted breathing, jaw movement, and facial pressure raised by ISES and campaigners.
Another notable advancement is the FEI’s long-term climate mitigation strategies for thermally challenging environments led by Dr David Marlin. Following lessons from the 1992 Barcelona Olympics, where heat and humidity posed serious risks, the FEI developed comprehensive protocols including scheduled adjustments to competition timing, shortened or modified phases (e.g., in eventing), aggressive cooling procedures, monitoring via the Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT) index, and heat acclimation guidelines. These measures have proven highly effective since they were implemented at the Atlanta 1996 Olympic Games; no cases of exertional heat illness (EHI or heatstroke) have been reported in horses at Olympic or World Equestrian Games competitions since.
FEI rule changes have been significant. Proposals and implementations address stable conditions (minimum sizes, ventilation, lighting), fitness-to-compete assessments (including behaviour and body condition scoring), abuse reporting, and restrictions on certain practices. For 2026, updates include biosecurity measures, hoof boot allowances with veterinary checks, and strengthened veterinary regulations. Eventing has seen frangible device requirements for jumps to reduce injury risk.
Research from the SWF and collaborators has identified “essential” factors for sport horse welfare: better training and competition management, young horse protocols, health monitoring, and positive human interactions. Studies demonstrate benefits of daily paddock turnout and free movement, even for performance horses, leading to reduced stereotypic behaviours and improved emotional states. Recommendations are being disseminated to practitioners.
In the UK, the Charter for the Horse and updated BEF action plans promote consistent standards. Stronger governance in the 2025 rulebook includes stricter welfare protections and incident reporting. Public studies, like those by World Horse Welfare, track attitudes and drivers of trust, often in the wake of media investigations.
Post-Panorama and similar exposés, racing authorities enhanced aftercare funding, traceability, and retirement programs. Broader advancements include increased focus on equine mental health, standardised welfare assessments at events, and educational campaigns via FEI Campus. Some disciplines report lower injury rates through better veterinary oversight and adjusted schedules, though comprehensive global data is still developing.
Challenges persist. Enforcement varies by region and discipline, cultural resistance exists in some areas, and high-profile controversies continue. Social media and documentaries keep pressure high, and not all improvements are uniformly adopted at grassroots levels. Metrics like reduced medication use or longer careers require ongoing longitudinal studies.
Conclusion: Measured Progress with Room to Grow
The past 20 years have seen a transformation in awareness and infrastructure for horse welfare in sport. Calls from ISES, advocacy groups, the public, and powerful press/TV investigations have driven the creation of dedicated bodies like the SWF, EWEAG, and FEI commissions, alongside charters in multiple countries. Tangible gains, including whisker bans, rule reforms, research-backed guidelines, welfare action plans, and improved aftercare, all demonstrate real shifts, many catalysed by media scrutiny.
However, improvement is incremental. Full realisation depends on consistent implementation, robust data collection, cultural change within the industry, and transparent communication to maintain public trust. The process should involve education, rules to protect horse welfare, rule enforcement and punishment and/or re-education as appropriate and depending on the nature of the transgression. For example, misunderstanding, misinterpretation or accidents where the horse is not harmed could be at the lower end of the scale, whereas intentional abuse, such as the use of electric spurs, should, in my humble opinion, carry a lifetime ban from all horse sport. As guardians of equine athletes, stakeholders must continue translating policies into everyday practice. The future of equestrian sport hinges on proving that welfare and high performance are not just compatible, but mutually reinforcing. With sustained effort and continued constructive media attention, the next decade could build on this foundation for even greater gains, or we may find we lose control of equestrian sport.
