|
|
 |
| |
|  |
Tim Morris's Blog
Welcome to my Blog. I am Director of Equine Science and Welfare at the British Horseracing Authority and will be using this area to tell you about how our team works and discuss some of the major welfare issues.
It’s all in the genes...or is it?
20th April 2010
There has been a long debate on nature versus nurture; do the characterises of a living thing stem from how it’s made or from the environment in which it exists? The discovery of the principles of how traits are passed to offspring (heredity), and then the actual mechanism (via genes) might have given the nature side of the argument the upper hand.
However, consider two identical twins separated at birth, one bought up on Dover and one in Calais and then reunited at an age of twenty. With different languages, culture, religion, nutrition, and sports involvement who would like to say they really are identical twins and that it is all down to their genes?
So what should we make of the 'discovery' of the 'speed gene' in racehorses? Let’s take a step back and explain some of the key concepts, how it is that we can study them, and why we should do.
Take a look at this leaflet that summarises a British Horseracing project to look at the association of genes and disease. It defines some key terms, explains how the mapping of all horse genes now allows us to see which are associated with disease, and then what diseases are being studied.
Unlike the Irish research into the association between genes and performance, the British, and other, research focuses on disease.
Why is this? The first is an understandable conservatism, a healthy concern for unforeseen consequences. There are examples of how excessive selection for a small number of traits can lead to considerable problems.
The second is a wider concern in thoroughbred breeding that a particular science or technology should not be concrecentrated in the hands of a few, whether by patent protection or financial clout; hardly the basis for a broad based and exciting crop of racehorses.
Finally there is the recognition that an unhealthy horse cannot be a fast horse, and that disease is also bad welfare.
The British Horseracing project to look at the association of genes and disease has now finished, and it is being reported and scientifically assessed this year under the auspices of the veterinary research function of the Horserace Betting Levy Board. So watch this space.
One big question that is now being faced by all the research into the association between genes and disease, or speed, or whatever, is whether it’s is likely to work? Will we find what genes cause speed or disease? At present, despite high initial hopes, there is a growing scepticism that it easily will. So far despite some massive funding into human disease, many traits are proving remarkably resistant to full genetic definition.
Does this means that genes are less relevant? No, but that what appears a simple code is actually far more complex, and prone to variations in expression, including those resulting from environmental interactions.
So the nature versus nurture debate is not dead, genes are important, but don’t (yet?) bet your savings on a horse’s genetic profile!
Paying through the nose: Should horse owners fund the control of animal disease?
12th October 2009
We all remember the devastation caused by foot and mouth earlier this decade; the loss of livelihoods, the animal health and welfare implications, and how the countryside was closed down.
This, and other animal disease outbreaks across Europe, led the European Commission and the UK Government to think long and hard on how such disease outbreaks are prevented and managed. Out of all this came the European Commission and UK Government proposals on Responsibility and Cost Sharing (RCS).
So why is RCS suggested in the UK? The ‘glass half full’ answer is to set up the status quo so that animal keepers do their bit (e.g. biosecurity) to prevent disease (the responsibility bit), and that taxpayers cannot be expected to give an open chequebook to farmers (the cost sharing bit).
The ‘glass half empty’ answer is that animal keepers have little control over exotic disease (the last foot and mouth outbreak originated from a leak from a government licenced lab) and that costs are simply being dumped out of government onto animal keepers. The truth, as it does in many things, probably lies between these extremes.
Does RCS affect horses? Yes, because in Europes horses are considered agricultural animals (although not in UK) and the horse sector, with strong leadership from racing, has been asking that horse diseases receive more attention from Defra. Let’s not forget that animal disease remains one of the greatest threats to horseracing. (Update on the Impact of African Horse Sickness on the Horse Sector)
What are the UK Government proposals? Defra has proposed plans to create a new public body, separate from Defra, charged with managing animal health in the UK and sharing the cost of preventing and dealing with outbreaks of animal disease by charging a levy per animal (its £10.50 per horse per year) to animal keepers.
Why the proposals are not the answer:
- It will cost £14.3 million to set up and millions more to run;
- Forces horse owners to contribute a 20% share of all these costs;
- Ignores the fact that whilst the livestock industry receives over £1 billion per year in public funding, the horse sector receives no comparable subsidy;
- Does not take into account the fact that the horseracing industry already contributes around £750,000 per year to via the HBLB levy central funding aimed at preventing and controlling infectious diseases;
- Hits small horse owners hardest – around 65% of all UK horse owners have just one horse, with a further 15% owning just two
- Forces a separation of Government policy on animal health and animal welfare – when equine veterinarians have been very clear that these two are inextricably linked.
So if you are a horse owner, trainer or breeder and you agree, write to your MP and sign a petition against these proposals; put bluntly spend 10 minutes now or pay £10/year.
And finally, let’s remember that horse owners and racing are not saying no to responsibility and cost sharing, as we already do it and could be said to be an example to others. RCS has to have some benefit for horses and their owners to be acceptable, and racing is at the centre of those discussions.
The horse sector has come up with proposals to extend the role of insurance and reduce administrative costs. It does want to take responsibility and share our costs, and it does want to be constructive in making this happen.
Visit www.rethinkthehorsetax.org for more information about the proposals and what you can do to combat them
|
|
|
