Stupid Whip Rule Has To Go!

[Tonkatime!]

9 minutes ago, Basil said:

What is true though is that harness whip use is not (yet) their number one priority.

Acting preemptively is a concept Brodie often has trouble with.?

Common sense would suggest that is the case. It’s actually very simple for Brodie to prove himself correct if he simply shares the article or outlet where he heard that animal rights had no problem with the way whip was being used in nz harness then we can all see for our selves that Brodie is on the money. 

[Tonkatime!]

6 minutes ago, hunterthepunter said:

basil well what is there number one priority????

Have a look at their website, that will give you a fairly good idea. 

[Brodie]

40 minutes ago, Basil said:

As somebody who has close links with SAFE, I can confirm that Brodie is indeed making this up. What is true though is that harness whip use is not (yet) their number one priority.

Acting preemptively is a concept Brodie often has trouble with.?

Basil, ok where is your information in writing that SAFE have their eyes on harness whip use???????

Thats right you have made it up.

They stated that the harness whip use was not on their radar, when the current rule came in!!!!

That is damn fact and you know It!!!

[Brodie]

28 minutes ago, Tonkatime! said:

Common sense would suggest that is the case. It’s actually very simple for Brodie to prove himself correct if he simply shares the article or outlet where he heard that animal rights had no problem with the way whip was being used in nz harness then we can all see for our selves that Brodie is on the money. 

Tonkatime, show me the facts that you say that Animal Rights had a problem with the whip use on harness horses! !!

[Tonkatime!]

20 minutes ago, Brodie said:

Tonkatime, show me the facts that you say that Animal Rights had a problem with the whip use on harness horses! !!

Prof. Andrew Knight, Director of Research and Education: Animal welfare science and ethics for SAFE, who believes the sport is fundementally exploitative. 

Professor Knight also believes whipping the horse is unethical.

"If we were to beat any other animal with a stick, it would be prosecuted under the law." 

He says claims that the whip is merely an 'encouragement' to the horse are false.

"They definitely feel the whip, beyond any doubt. It triggers the pain receptors, it wouldn't work if it had not aquired the characteristics of a punisher." 

 

 

[Tonkatime!]

That quote relates to gallops but I think you get the point. 

[Brodie]

55 minutes ago, Tonkatime! said:

Prof. Andrew Knight, Director of Research and Education: Animal welfare science and ethics for SAFE, who believes the sport is fundementally exploitative. 

Professor Knight also believes whipping the horse is unethical.

"If we were to beat any other animal with a stick, it would be prosecuted under the law." 

He says claims that the whip is merely an 'encouragement' to the horse are false.

"They definitely feel the whip, beyond any doubt. It triggers the pain receptors, it wouldn't work if it had not aquired the characteristics of a punisher." 

 

 

That is not what I asked for Tonkatime.

What I asked for was the information that says that they had a problem with the harness whip use!

Where does it say anything about the Animal Rights wanting the harness whip rules changed????

No where at all Tonkatime and I do know that it was in the media that stated that ANIMAL Rights did not have the harness use of the whip in their discussions whatsoever!! !!

Whoever states that Brodie is making it up is blatantly telling porkies and that includes Basil!

 

 

 

[Happy Sunrise]

Striking a horse with a padded racing whip is at least aversive, and at worst, painful [1-3]. As McLean and McGreevy [4] note, from a behavioural science perspective, for a whip to work, “…it must have acquired the properties of a punisher at some point in time.” An Australian study by McGreevy and colleagues [2] found 83% of whip strikes caused indentations of the skin, and a recent study in horses confirmed whipping was likely to trigger nerve endings in the skin that transmit pain signals [3]. Despite this, a detailed 2017 study [5] found that penalties for breaches of whipping rules were too low, and were insufficient to act as deterrents. The authors concluded that “… the whip rules, their surveillance and recording, and the penalties imposed warrant urgent and independent review.”

[Rangatira]

2 hours ago, Happy Sunrise said:

Striking a horse with a padded racing whip is at least aversive, and at worst, painful [1-3]. As McLean and McGreevy [4] note, from a behavioural science perspective, for a whip to work, “…it must have acquired the properties of a punisher at some point in time.” An Australian study by McGreevy and colleagues [2] found 83% of whip strikes caused indentations of the skin, and a recent study in horses confirmed whipping was likely to trigger nerve endings in the skin that transmit pain signals [3]. Despite this, a detailed 2017 study [5] found that penalties for breaches of whipping rules were too low, and were insufficient to act as deterrents. The authors concluded that “… the whip rules, their surveillance and recording, and the penalties imposed warrant urgent and independent review.”

further evidence hrnz are on the right track 

[Rangatira]

11 hours ago, Tonkatime! said:

Prof. Andrew Knight, Director of Research and Education: Animal welfare science and ethics for SAFE, who believes the sport is fundementally exploitative. 

Professor Knight also believes whipping the horse is unethical.

"If we were to beat any other animal with a stick, it would be prosecuted under the law." 

He says claims that the whip is merely an 'encouragement' to the horse are false.

"They definitely feel the whip, beyond any doubt. It triggers the pain receptors, it wouldn't work if it had not aquired the characteristics of a punisher." 

 

 

good work tonka

i am looking forward to brodies statement outlining the benefits he sees in whipping a horse

Edited August 21, 2018 by Rangatira

[Happy Sunrise]

11 hours ago, Brodie said:

What I asked for was the information that says that they had a problem with the harness whip use!

Where does it say anything about the Animal Rights wanting the harness whip rules changed????

 

The quote I posted is straight off the SAFE website about whips. They do have a problem with it.

Luckily, they have a problem with a lot of other things too so whip use is way down the ladder of importance it would seem.

HRNZ are being proactive for the sake of the sport.

Galloping bosses must be have seething with the jockey who hit that horse without reason recently.

As I have said before, Greyhounds and jumps racing are way ahead on the list of targets but it does not mean harness can sit back and be smug about because then when the time comes it will be too late.

[Brodie]

20 minutes ago, Happy Sunrise said:

The quote I posted is straight off the SAFE website about whips. They do have a problem with it.

Luckily, they have a problem with a lot of other things too so whip use is way down the ladder of importance it would seem.

HRNZ are being proactive for the sake of the sport.

Galloping bosses must be have seething with the jockey who hit that horse without reason recently.

As I have said before, Greyhounds and jumps racing are way ahead on the list of targets but it does not mean harness can sit back and be smug about because then when the time comes it will be too late.

Happy, that is exactly my point, and a lady from an Animal Rights outfit, whether it was SAFE or some other  Animal Rights outfit stated that the harness whip usage was not on their agenda.

I would bet my last betting voucher on that!!!!!!

I reiterate that I don’t agree with horses being flogged but there was absolutely no need to change the previous whip rule, as it was working just fine.

There are far more reinsman fined now that what there was previously so it clearly isn’t working!

They need to take the no. 10 out of it and fine or suspend drivers that go overboard.

[Rangatira]

12 hours ago, Tonkatime! said:

That quote relates to gallops but I think you get the point. 

think again tonka

[Rangatira]

21 minutes ago, Brodie said:

Happy, that is exactly my point, and a lady from an Animal Rights outfit, whether it was SAFE or some other  Animal Rights outfit stated that the harness whip usage was not on their agenda.

I would bet my last betting voucher on that!!!!!!

I reiterate that I don’t agree with horses being flogged but there was absolutely no need to change the previous whip rule, as it was working just fine.

There are far more reinsman fined now that what there was previously so it clearly isn’t working!

They need to take the no. 10 out of it and fine or suspend drivers that go overboard.

Are you a licensed race driver brodie

[Brodie]

16 minutes ago, Rangatira said:

Are you a licensed race driver brodie

Yes, from the stand!!

[Tonkatime!]

1 hour ago, Brodie said:

Happy, that is exactly my point, and a lady from an Animal Rights outfit, whether it was SAFE or some other  Animal Rights outfit stated that the harness whip usage was not on their agenda.

I would bet my last betting voucher on that!!!!!!

I reiterate that I don’t agree with horses being flogged but there was absolutely no need to change the previous whip rule, as it was working just fine.

There are far more reinsman fined now that what there was previously so it clearly isn’t working!

They need to take the no. 10 out of it and fine or suspend drivers that go overboard.

So when animals rights do start to attack racing (which they will) in terms of public perception you think it’s better for the industry to stand there and say we have done nothing to address the issues raised rather than to be able to say we have been proactive and taken these steps to address welfare issues?

[Brodie]

8 minutes ago, Tonkatime! said:

So when animals rights do start to attack racing (which they will) in terms of public perception you think it’s better for the industry to stand there and say we have done nothing to address the issues raised rather than to be able to say we have been proactive and taken these steps to address welfare issues?

Not at all.

What HRNZ has done has pointed out to the Animal Rights is that they think there is a problem with using the whip.

The fact that they brought in the new rule points to that and now the Animal Rights will want even more restrictions!!  

It was a very dumb move as nothing had been said to HRNZ and therefore you should not be bringing it to their attention.

if it did read  its ugly heard at some time then something could’ve been done then to satisfy them!

It was a change of rule that was railroaded through by HRNZ without any thought of the consequences and support of the parties mostly concerned.

You can defend it till the cows come home and some will, but it was a stupid move and is a stupid rule that needed more thought put into it!!!  

[Rangatira]

2 hours ago, Brodie said:

Yes, from the stand!!

probably says it all

[Tonkatime!]

3 hours ago, Brodie said:

Not at all.

What HRNZ has done has pointed out to the Animal Rights is that they think there is a problem with using the whip.

The fact that they brought in the new rule points to that and now the Animal Rights will want even more restrictions!!  

It was a very dumb move as nothing had been said to HRNZ and therefore you should not be bringing it to their attention.

if it did read  its ugly heard at some time then something could’ve been done then to satisfy them!

It was a change of rule that was railroaded through by HRNZ without any thought of the consequences and support of the parties mostly concerned.

You can defend it till the cows come home and some will, but it was a stupid move and is a stupid rule that needed more thought put into it!!!  

The let’s worry about it when the heat goes on approach is not one I agree with I think it’s much better to be proactive.

Your entitled to your opinion Brodie and good on you for defending that position. 

[Basil]

17 hours ago, Brodie said:

That is not what I asked for Tonkatime.

What I asked for was the information that says that they had a problem with the harness whip use!

Where does it say anything about the Animal Rights wanting the harness whip rules changed????

No where at all Tonkatime and I do know that it was in the media that stated that ANIMAL Rights did not have the harness use of the whip in their discussions whatsoever!! !!

Whoever states that Brodie is making it up is blatantly telling porkies and that includes Basil!

 

Brodie, stop digging. You made a claim that you couldn't back up, that I knew to be false, and that others have shown to be blatantly wrong. Unless the rules of the English language have changed in the last 24 hours, that is the very definition of "making it up".

Your recollection of what you now claim to have heard/read is faulty — what was actually said is that harness whip use is not currently high on SAFE's list of priorities. As I said in my previous post. And as Happy has subsequently confirmed from the SAFE website.

I have repeatedly explained to you that there is a simple solution to your concerns about the 10-hit rule — get rid of the whip altogether. For some reason known only to yourself, you refuse to consider this as an option.

[Brodie]

1 minute ago, Basil said:

Brodie, stop digging. You made a claim that you couldn't back up, that I knew to be false, and that others have shown to be blatantly wrong. Unless the rules of the English language have changed in the last 24 hours, that is the very definition of "making it up".

Your recollection of what you now claim to have heard/read is faulty — what was actually said is that harness whip use is not currently high on SAFE's list of priorities. As I said in my previous post. And as Happy has subsequently confirmed from the SAFE website.

I have repeatedly explained to you that there is a simple solution to your concerns about the 10-hit rule — get rid of the whip altogether. For some reason known only to yourself, you refuse to consider this as an option.

Basil, 

Exactly, you agree with Brodie once again!

What was said is”that harness whip,use is not currently high on SAFE’s list of priorities”

Exactly what I have been saying Basil, and yet HRNZ goes ahead and brings out a rule that had not been thought about too much.

Clearly there have been some sort of discussions as the the charge was excessive use of the whip and now is used the whip in excess of the permitted number!

It needs amendment Basil, as drivers are being fined when they are not using it excessively at all, they are trying to win a race and yet they get done which affects their livelihood.

 

 

[hunterthepunter]

I think the point brodie is getting at is just because a driver hits a horse one or two times over the ten strikes he should not get fined that is the differents to clubbing the hell out of a horse

[Brodie]

2 hours ago, hunterthepunter said:

I think the point brodie is getting at is just because a driver hits a horse one or two times over the ten strikes he should not get fined that is the differents to clubbing the hell out of a horse

You are another intelligent one Hunter.

Yes there have been many drivers who have been done for barely tapping the horse with the whip.

Nathan Williamson has been done a couple of times when he was barely touching the horse.

These Stipes are saying that drivers are getting done are cheating by breaking the rules, they are getting an advantage over the other other drivers and horses.

If this is the case then let them DISQUALIFY the horses no questions asked!!!!!

No they won’t do that because there will be too much of an outcry won’t there?

Truth is that if it is bad enough to stand a driver down so that it costs him a lesson because the Stipes thinks that they have cheated, then go the full hog and cost the owner and trainer of the horses that have been given an advantage by this stupid rule.

 

[hunterthepunter]

12 minutes ago, Brodie said:

You are another intelligent one Hunter.

Yes there have been many drivers who have been done for barely tapping the horse with the whip.

Nathan Williamson has been done a couple of times when he was barely touching the horse.

These Stipes are saying that drivers are getting done are cheating by breaking the rules, they are getting an advantage over the other other drivers and horses.

If this is the case then let them DISQUALIFY the horses no questions asked!!!!!

No they won’t do that because there will be too much of an outcry won’t there?

Truth is that if it is bad enough to stand a driver down so that it costs him a lesson because the Stipes thinks that they have cheated, then go the full hog and cost the owner and trainer of the horses that have been given an advantage by this stupid rule.

 

bloody stipes rules for sum and not others justs like team driving