As racehorses sprint towards the finish line at Sha Tin Racecourse, winning the applause of the crowd, their peak moments as professional athletes garner much attention. However, for these animal athletes that bring significant economic benefits and cultural symbolism to Hong Kong, public interest rarely extends to a critical issue: after leaving the spotlight and the racetrack, will they receive the security and dignity that match their contributions?

In 2015, the Hong Kong Jockey Club, as the largest animal user locally, serves as a critical reflection point for examining Hong Kong’s “working animal” welfare policies, particularly regarding its arrangements for the retirement of racehorses. Currently, discussions on animal welfare in society tend to focus on companion animals and strays, systematically overlooking the “working animal” groups that serve and create value in specific industries. Establishing a set of mandatory, transparent lifetime welfare standards and retirement safeguards for racehorses not only concerns the well-being of thousands of horses but is also a significant step towards advancing Hong Kong’s animal welfare policy into a more comprehensive and mature framework.

• Racehorses as Working Animals: Welfare Risks and Institutional Dependency Beneath the Spotlight
  
  Racehorses are highly specialized working animals. Their lives can generally be divided into three stages: training and racing, late career, and retirement. Each stage presents unique welfare challenges, and the current arrangements heavily rely on the internal policies and resources of a single institution (the Hong Kong Jockey Club).
  
  During the training and racing phase, racehorses face intense training, competition pressure, risks of injury, and frequent transport. While the Jockey Club boasts world-class veterinary and training facilities, the operational standards, injury management guidelines, and, importantly, the “mandatory retirement medical criteria” (i.e., the conditions under which they must stop racing) are not legally mandated public standards but are within the realm of self-regulation by the organization.
  
  The real welfare gap emerges during the retirement phase. The reasons a racehorse retires vary: age, injury, or failure to meet racing requirements. The subsequent pathways include being chosen as breeding stock, sold for other equestrian uses locally or overseas, adopted through the Jockey Club’s retired horse program, or, in very rare cases, being humanely euthanized. The core issue lies in the transition from “Jockey Club assets” to “ordinary animals,” which lacks public oversight and institutional safeguards. The fate of horses hinges on market value, owners’ willingness, and the capacity of Jockey Club programs, rather than a statutory assurance rooted in animal welfare that does not fluctuate with economic value.
  
• Current Limitations: Goodwill of Self-Regulation and Institutional Gaps
  
  It must be acknowledged that the “Retired Racehorses Program” established by the Hong Kong Jockey Club is one of the more comprehensive among similar institutions globally, providing new homes for hundreds of retired racehorses through veterinary assessments, matchmaking, adoption follow-up, and more. This reflects the organization’s social responsibility and goodwill.
  
  However, from a public policy perspective, the reliance on a single institution’s voluntary, resource-dependent plan has fundamental flaws:
  
  • Insufficient Coverage and Compulsory Nature: The program does not guarantee the welfare of all retired racehorses, particularly those sold or disposed of at the owner’s discretion. Their welfare entirely depends on the goodwill of buyers or recipients, presenting significant uncertainty and potential risks (e.g., being resold to slaughter chains).
  • Limited Transparency and Public Oversight: Overall data on retired horses (such as annual retirement totals, proportions of various pathways, and long-term follow-up after adoption) lacks a statutory requirement for public disclosure, making it difficult for the public to assess the program’s overall effectiveness and shortcomings.
  • Lack of Independent Auditing and Minimum Standards: The operational standards of the program, the criteria for vetting adoptive families, and requirements for the living conditions of horses are all set by the organization itself, without being reviewed or certified by an independent third party or the government based on animal welfare science.

This exposes a significant legislative gap in animal welfare in Hong Kong: our laws can regulate the size of hamster cages in pet shops but do not provide any mandatory legal framework for ensuring the quality of life for racehorses that have served a multi-million-dollar industry.

• Policy Recommendations: Moving from Industry Self-Regulation to Legal Safeguards
  
  Therefore, we advocate initiating from racehorses to promote the establishment of a legal welfare system applicable to specific working animal groups. This approach does not deny existing efforts but seeks to elevate them to a more robust and equitable level.
  
  First, legislate a Code of Practice for Working Animal Welfare and establish mandatory registration and traceability systems.
  
  The government should refer to international animal welfare scientific opinions to create specialized welfare codes for working animals such as racehorses, guide dogs, and police dogs. For racehorses, the code should cover their entire lifetime, including:
  
  • While Active: Clearly define training intensity, transport conditions, injury management, and welfare-based mandatory retirement medical guidelines.
  • Transition Period: Require owners or organizations to submit a “retirement welfare plan” to the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department when deciding to retire a horse, detailing its specific destination and subsequent welfare arrangements, and establish a traceable lifetime record for each horse.
  • Retirement Period: Regardless of whether the horse is adopted, repurposed, or exported, the receiving party must comply with legally defined standards for maintenance environments and care capabilities, and be subject to random inspections.
    
• Second, establish a Working Animal Retirement Welfare Fund to promote shared responsibility.
  
  Borrowing from the “polluter pays” principle, we suggest levying a specific tax or fee from relevant industries (starting with the horse racing industry) to establish an independently managed trust fund. This fund would be used to finance:
  
  • Eligible facilities for retired animal care, medical treatment, and support.
  • Partial subsidies for adopters’ maintenance costs to encourage adoption.
  • Research on relevant welfare, public education, and operational expenditures. This will ensure that welfare resources do not fluctuate due to individual organizations’ policies or economic cycles.
    
• Finally, create an interdepartmental regulatory and public education platform.
  
  The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department should be responsible for supervising the welfare conditions of working animals and periodically publish statistical reports. Simultaneously, public outreach should educate the community about the contributions and welfare needs of working animals, partially transforming public enthusiasm for horse racing into ongoing concern and support for the lifelong welfare of racehorses.

Conclusion: Another Yardstick for Measuring Social Civilization

The welfare protections for the later lives of working animals serve as an implicit measure of the depth of civilization and the warmth of a society’s system. The Hong Kong Jockey Club’s outstanding position in the global horse racing community should not only be reflected in the level of races and betting amounts but also in the leading standards of welfare protection for animal partners.

We call upon the Hong Kong SAR Government, the Legislative Council, the Hong Kong Jockey Club, and all citizens concerned about animal welfare to jointly support and advance this system construction. Starting with legislation for racehorses, gradually expanding protections to all working animal groups. This is not only a deserved return for these voiceless contributors but also a step towards building a more complete and advanced animal welfare safety net in Hong Kong, establishing our city’s image as one that truly respects life in the international community. The long road beyond the finish line should be a dignified path of safeguarding.