Equestrian

The Coalition for the Protection of Racehorses just released its annual Deathwatch report – giving punters plenty to think about as they gear up for a day of festivities at the Melbourne Cup next week.

According to the report, at least 174 thoroughbred racehorses died at the track or as a result of injuries sustained while racing or training in the past 12 months – the highest number recorded by animal rights activists since they began tracking 10 years ago.

The findings are startling – and sure to arrest the attention of lawmakers and regulators –especially today, where equine welfare is increasingly fragile against the ubiquity of corporate interest.

The Report

Released on Tuesday, Deathwatch Report 2025 is the 12^th annual report summarising deaths of racehorses around Australia over the preceding twelve months.

As the only source of comprehensive and aggregated details of annual numbers and causes of death, the report fills a valuable lacuna in data– helping to bring transparency to the racing industry and raise public awareness around its clandestine and often-unscrupulous operation.

The report’s key finding – regarding the death toll in the 2024-2025 racing years – means that on average, at least one horse died every 2 days.

It also means that since CPR began maintaining records, the number of racing-related horse deaths continues to increase, despite claims from the industry that animal welfare standards are improving.

In 2014, there were 125 deaths compared to 174 in 2025 – an increase of almost 40%.

The data itself is sourced from the Principal Racing Authority’s official Steward’s Reports for each state, and various media outlets. However, the true number of racehorses who are euthanised/ killed as a direct result of racing is far in excess of that which can be determined from information available to the public.

For example, CPR was able to identify and confirm 50 racehorse deaths in NSW/ACT that were directly related to their use in racing. Yet when CPR received the names of all thoroughbred horses that had died in NSW during the 2023/24 racing year from Racing NSW, through an application under the GIPA Act, the list of names provided was almost three times as many as CPR had been able to identify via Stewards Reports, industry information and media articles.

Similarly, in Victoria, 45% of the Victorian deaths could not be found via Stewards’ reports or other publicly available industry records, and were only identified via scrutiny by CPR, media articles and information provided by industry informants.

Another pertinent concern arising from the report is that owners are routinely disregarding safety standards in order to get a potential return of investment as quickly as possible. Of the 174 horses that died in the last racing year, 37% started racing as two-year-olds despite the fact that horses don’t reach skeletal maturity until they are about 6 years old.

This is particularly concerning given the recent allegations against Racing Victoria made by its general manager of veterinary services, Dr Grace Forbes. According to a report by the Herald Sun, Forbes alleged she was told by Racing Victoria to be more “flexible”, which she interpreted as a request to be more flexible in her application of the veterinary safety protocols when deciding whether to clear a horse to race.

Regulatory Landscape

In light of the report’s findings and the public pressure it will inevitably induce, multiple vectors for reform are elucidated. But before these are accurately mapped out, it is important to contextualise the management of equine welfare within the current regulatory landscape.

At the moment, there are no national guidelines or a statutory regime encompassing all horse breeds, including thoroughbreds. Consequently, horse racing is regulated at the state level, with each jurisdiction having its own racing authority that sets rules for trainers, jockeys, veterinary inspection, steward reporting and so on.

For example, Racing NSW is the principal authority overseeing thoroughbred racing in NSW. Racing NSW operates under a unique statutory governance model in that it is both the commercial body for and the regulator of the industry. Established under the Thoroughbred Racing Act 1996, Racing NSW’s functions include, among others:

1. controlling, supervising, and regulating thoroughbred racing in NSW (s.13(1)
2. promoting the business, economic and strategic development of the NSW thoroughbred racing industry (s.13(1)(b1)), and
3. initiating, developing and implementing policies that support the promotion, strategic development and welfare of the industry while protecting the public interest (s.13(1)(c)).

In the context of animal welfare, the TR Act works together with other frameworks to ensure Racing NSW has oversight within the industry. However, the TR Act does not contain any objectives or specific provisions pertaining to animal welfare. Instead, Racing NSW must comply with broader state and national regulatory frameworks when exercising its functions.

Since the Constitution does not include a ‘head of power’ for animal welfare, national legislation is significantly restricted in scope in Australia. For the most part, animal welfare protection is a residual power within the domains of the state and territories, all of which take different approaches to legislating the issue. In each of the states and territories, the legal framework is constituted by a primary statute and subordinate legislation in the form of regulations and codes of practice. For example, in NSW, the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979 is the primary statutory authority, setting minimum legal standards for how animals are to be treated.

The issues currently facing the racing industry, including those elucidated by the 2025 Deathwatch report, can largely be traced back to this state-based approach to regulation. According to legal experts, the lack of a unified framework creates a ‘fragmented, complex, contradictory, inconsistent system of regulatory management’ on the basis that it causes public confusion, makes national data collection almost impossible, and does not advance a united agenda promoting animal welfare.

Paths for Reform

For this reason, the most prescient trajectory for reform is a uniform approach to animal welfare protection, through a nationally consistent statutory regime. Implementing this, however, necessitates significant time and resources.

In the meantime, there are several opportunities for reform that can be implemented on a state level. For example, after a string of high-profile fatalities (notably international entrants in the Melbourne Cup), some jurisdictions have instituted mandatory CT/MRI screening of international horses. The next step in the view of CPR is to extend these protocols so that they are applied year-round and to all horses, not just internationals.

There have also been calls for mandatory death-reporting and increased transparency. This is especially pertinent, given the findings in the Deathwatch report that the true number of horse-racing fatalities does not align with the publicly reported figures.

Given the additional findings from the report on over-breeding and ‘wastage’, future reforms may also target retirement-funding traceability registers, or mandatory post-racing welfare audits.

Looking Ahead

Equine welfare is no longer a fringe concern but a prescient ethical issue carrying immense political and commercial risk. As societal expectations around the safety and protection of horses continue to evolve, so should the law, especially to prevent further unnecessary deaths.