No horse-drawn carriage before the Royal Wedding. Was this a concession to animal rights activists? – Telegraph Blogs

Thursday 13 March 2014 | Blog Feed | All feeds

Pete Wedderburn



Eight horses draw the Queen's coach at the Golden Jubilee (Photo: Heathcliff O'Malley)


Immediately before the royal wedding of Prince William to Kate Middleton, the usual horse-drawn Glass Coach for the trip to Westminster Abbey by the bride and groom has been replaced by a car. Is this a security issue, or could sensitivities about animal welfare have played a part in the decision?

It's an issue that has attracted attention elsewhere. Glee star Lea Michele has made a video with PETA, aiming to convince people to boycott horse-drawn carriages in New York City.

I’m sure that Lea Michele has a point. There are some aspects of the lives of the New York horses that are far from ideal. But if you scratch the surface, you’ll find that this is yet another example of two contrasting pro-animal stances being deliberately – and quite cynically – confused by PETA.

PETA supports the “animal rights” view, which is that humans should not be allowed to interfere at all with the free-living lives of animals. This is the real reason why PETA would like to ban the horse and carriage trade, but it’s a view that would only be supported by a tiny minority of the populace.

To draw more support for this campaign, as it does for its other campaigns,  PETA appeals to “animal welfare” supporters. These represent the large majority of people who’d see themselves as animal lovers; they believe that it’s acceptable to use animals for human benefit, as long as due attention is paid to their quality of life.

“Animal rights” activists want a complete ban of all horse and carriage rides; in the long term, they’d also like to ban all farm animals and pets.

“Animal welfare” activists, on the other hand, argue that the human-animal relationship is a valuable part of our society, and that as long as regulations ensure that animals are given “lives worth living”, there’s nothing wrong with humans keeping working horses, farm animals or pets.

The New York City carriage horses are subject to strict licensing controls, under laws, updated as recently as 2010, that are enforced by the ASPCA, New York City Police Department, the Health Department, the Consumer Affairs Department, and the Parks Department. If there are welfare problems, the way forward is for these bodies to address the issue by ensuring that the welfare regulations fulfil the task that they’ve been designed to do.

Banning the horses would simply raise the question: what to ban next? What about the horse-drawn carriages in the thousands of other cities around the world where they’re kept busy entertaining tourists?

Or to move out of our Western bubble for a moment, what about the 100 million working horses, mules and donkeys in the world that are integral to rural transport and food production, distribution and security in developing countries? Would PETA like to ban those too?

If you want to get involved with a worthwhile campaign, forget the celebrity-driven PETA animal rights extremist approach. Instead, give your support to the Brooke, which is the world’s biggest welfare charity for working equines. The Brooke reaches over 800,000 working horses, donkeys and mules a year, with mobile teams and clinics treating sick and injured animals as well as educating owners about aspects of animal welfare.

And if you’re a celebrity, I’m sure that the Brooke would be very happy to hear from you. Then again, the Brooke may not give you the air-brushed glossy image and international platform that PETA promises, so why would you bother?

comments powered by Disqus