❓ This parliamentary question scrutinizes Racing and Wagering WA's (RWWA) reporting on post-racing outcomes for thoroughbred and standardbred horses, particularly focusing on euthanasia, rehoming pathways, and traceability gaps. The Minister's responses reveal significant limitations in oversight and data collection beyond initial retirement pathways.
AnsweredQoN 1475Legislative Council
Asked
14 April 2026
Member
Portfolio
Emergency Services; Corrective Services; Defence Industries; Veterans; Racing and Gaming
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to a written response provided by Racing and Wagering WA (RWWA) on 10 February 2026, in response to questions regarding post-racing outcomes for thoroughbred and standardbred horses in Western Australia during the financial year 2025 (FY2025).RWWA's response provided the following reported retirement pathway data for FY2025:Thoroughbreds: 28 (3%) killed as unsuitable for rehoming; 845 (87%) retired or rehomed, comprising 148 to breeding, 402 to equestrian pursuit, 205 to non-equestrian pursuit, 12 to OTTWA Estate, and 78 through auction or private sale.Standardbreds: 18 (5%) killed as unsuitable for rehoming; 273 (76%) retired or rehomed, comprising 83 to breeding, 119 to equestrian pursuit, 61 to non-equestrian pursuit, 10 to OTTWA Estate, and 0 through auction or private sale.RWWA's response records that 28 thoroughbreds and 18 standardbreds were killed upon retirement, described as unsuitable for rehoming due to "behavioural and/or medical" reasons. RWWA's response further states that post-retirement traceability extends to "first retirement pathway" only, with ongoing traceability dependent on voluntary uptake of the OTTWA Passport.The reported figures for horses killed (3% of thoroughbreds, 5% of standardbreds) and horses retired or rehomed (87% of thoroughbreds, 76% of standardbreds) total 90% and 81% respectively, leaving the retirement outcomes of the remaining 10% of thoroughbreds and 19% of standardbreds unreported in RWWA's response.RWWA's response directed any further questions to the Racing and Gaming Minister's office, and I ask:(a) Has the Minister sought or received advice from RWWA regarding the 28 thoroughbreds and 18 standardbreds recorded as killed upon retirement in FY2025 as unsuitable for rehoming? If so, what advice has the Minister received? In particular:(i) how many of those
horses were killed due to behavioural problems, and how many due to medical
conditions;(ii) for those horses
killed due to behavioural problems, were those problems assessed and documented
by a qualified veterinarian prior to the decision to kill; and(iii) what specific medical
conditions were recorded for those horses killed due to medical conditions;(b) RWWA's FY2025
response records 205 thoroughbreds and 61 standardbreds as retired or rehomed
to "non-equestrian pursuit." What oversight role does the Minister
have in ensuring that disaggregated outcome data is collected and retained for
this cohort? In particular:(i) how many of those
horses were rehomed specifically as paddock or companion horses; and(ii) how many of those
horses were placed into equine assisted therapy programs;(c) RWWA's FY2025
response records 148 thoroughbreds and 83 standardbreds as retiring to breeding
purposes. What oversight role does the Minister have in ensuring that
post-breeding retirement outcomes for those horses are recorded? In particular:(i) how many
thoroughbreds and standardbreds that subsequently retired from breeding during
FY2025 were confirmed as rehomed; and(ii) what is the total
number of thoroughbreds and standardbreds that retired from breeding purposes
during FY2025, regardless of known rehoming status;(d) RWWA's FY2025
response records that 3% of thoroughbreds and 5% of standardbreds were killed
upon retirement, and that 87% of thoroughbreds and 76% of standardbreds were
retired or rehomed. These figures total 90% and 81% respectively. Will the
Minister confirm whether the retirement outcomes of the remaining 10% of
thoroughbreds and 19% of standardbreds are recorded by RWWA? If not, why not;(e) RWWA's FY2025
response describes support through the OTTWA Programs as available to horses
"considered medically and behaviourally suitable for a post-racing
career." What structured programs does the Minister oversee or fund
specifically for horses who are not considered suitable for a post-racing
career and who can only be rehomed as companion or paddock horses;(f) RWWA's FY2025
response states that post-retirement traceability extends to "first
retirement pathway" only, with ongoing traceability dependent on voluntary
uptake of the OTTWA Passport. What oversight role does the Minister have in
ensuring that first retirement pathway data is independently verified and that
welfare outcomes beyond first placement are monitored; and(g) If the Minister does
not intend to take further action to address the reporting gaps identified in
RWWA's FY2025 response, what criteria must be met before the Minister would
require RWWA to report disaggregated and independently verified retirement outcome
data?
I refer to a written response provided by Racing and Wagering WA (RWWA) on 10 February 2026, in response to questions regarding post-racing outcomes for thoroughbred and standardbred horses in Western Australia during the financial year 2025 (FY2025).RWWA's response provided the following reported retirement pathway data for FY2025:Thoroughbreds: 28 (3%) killed as unsuitable for rehoming; 845 (87%) retired or rehomed, comprising 148 to breeding, 402 to equestrian pursuit, 205 to non-equestrian pursuit, 12 to OTTWA Estate, and 78 through auction or private sale.Standardbreds: 18 (5%) killed as unsuitable for rehoming; 273 (76%) retired or rehomed, comprising 83 to breeding, 119 to equestrian pursuit, 61 to non-equestrian pursuit, 10 to OTTWA Estate, and 0 through auction or private sale.RWWA's response records that 28 thoroughbreds and 18 standardbreds were killed upon retirement, described as unsuitable for rehoming due to "behavioural and/or medical" reasons. RWWA's response further states that post-retirement traceability extends to "first retirement pathway" only, with ongoing traceability dependent on voluntary uptake of the OTTWA Passport.The reported figures for horses killed (3% of thoroughbreds, 5% of standardbreds) and horses retired or rehomed (87% of thoroughbreds, 76% of standardbreds) total 90% and 81% respectively, leaving the retirement outcomes of the remaining 10% of thoroughbreds and 19% of standardbreds unreported in RWWA's response.RWWA's response directed any further questions to the Racing and Gaming Minister's office, and I ask:
(a) Has the Minister sought or received advice from RWWA regarding the 28 thoroughbreds and 18 standardbreds recorded as killed upon retirement in FY2025 as unsuitable for rehoming? If so, what advice has the Minister received? In particular:
(i) how many of those
horses were killed due to behavioural problems, and how many due to medical
conditions;
(ii) for those horses
killed due to behavioural problems, were those problems assessed and documented
by a qualified veterinarian prior to the decision to kill; and
(iii) what specific medical
conditions were recorded for those horses killed due to medical conditions;
(b) RWWA's FY2025
response records 205 thoroughbreds and 61 standardbreds as retired or rehomed
to "non-equestrian pursuit." What oversight role does the Minister
have in ensuring that disaggregated outcome data is collected and retained for
this cohort? In particular:
(i) how many of those
horses were rehomed specifically as paddock or companion horses; and
(ii) how many of those
horses were placed into equine assisted therapy programs;
(c) RWWA's FY2025
response records 148 thoroughbreds and 83 standardbreds as retiring to breeding
purposes. What oversight role does the Minister have in ensuring that
post-breeding retirement outcomes for those horses are recorded? In particular:
(i) how many
thoroughbreds and standardbreds that subsequently retired from breeding during
FY2025 were confirmed as rehomed; and
(ii) what is the total
number of thoroughbreds and standardbreds that retired from breeding purposes
during FY2025, regardless of known rehoming status;
(d) RWWA's FY2025
response records that 3% of thoroughbreds and 5% of standardbreds were killed
upon retirement, and that 87% of thoroughbreds and 76% of standardbreds were
retired or rehomed. These figures total 90% and 81% respectively. Will the
Minister confirm whether the retirement outcomes of the remaining 10% of
thoroughbreds and 19% of standardbreds are recorded by RWWA? If not, why not;
(e) RWWA's FY2025
response describes support through the OTTWA Programs as available to horses
"considered medically and behaviourally suitable for a post-racing
career." What structured programs does the Minister oversee or fund
specifically for horses who are not considered suitable for a post-racing
career and who can only be rehomed as companion or paddock horses;
(f) RWWA's FY2025
response states that post-retirement traceability extends to "first
retirement pathway" only, with ongoing traceability dependent on voluntary
uptake of the OTTWA Passport. What oversight role does the Minister have in
ensuring that first retirement pathway data is independently verified and that
welfare outcomes beyond first placement are monitored; and
(g) If the Minister does
not intend to take further action to address the reporting gaps identified in
RWWA's FY2025 response, what criteria must be met before the Minister would
require RWWA to report disaggregated and independently verified retirement outcome
data?
horses were killed due to behavioural problems, and how many due to medical
conditions;(ii) for those horses
killed due to behavioural problems, were those problems assessed and documented
by a qualified veterinarian prior to the decision to kill; and(iii) what specific medical
conditions were recorded for those horses killed due to medical conditions;(b) RWWA's FY2025
response records 205 thoroughbreds and 61 standardbreds as retired or rehomed
to "non-equestrian pursuit." What oversight role does the Minister
have in ensuring that disaggregated outcome data is collected and retained for
this cohort? In particular:(i) how many of those
horses were rehomed specifically as paddock or companion horses; and(ii) how many of those
horses were placed into equine assisted therapy programs;(c) RWWA's FY2025
response records 148 thoroughbreds and 83 standardbreds as retiring to breeding
purposes. What oversight role does the Minister have in ensuring that
post-breeding retirement outcomes for those horses are recorded? In particular:(i) how many
thoroughbreds and standardbreds that subsequently retired from breeding during
FY2025 were confirmed as rehomed; and(ii) what is the total
number of thoroughbreds and standardbreds that retired from breeding purposes
during FY2025, regardless of known rehoming status;(d) RWWA's FY2025
response records that 3% of thoroughbreds and 5% of standardbreds were killed
upon retirement, and that 87% of thoroughbreds and 76% of standardbreds were
retired or rehomed. These figures total 90% and 81% respectively. Will the
Minister confirm whether the retirement outcomes of the remaining 10% of
thoroughbreds and 19% of standardbreds are recorded by RWWA? If not, why not;(e) RWWA's FY2025
response describes support through the OTTWA Programs as available to horses
"considered medically and behaviourally suitable for a post-racing
career." What structured programs does the Minister oversee or fund
specifically for horses who are not considered suitable for a post-racing
career and who can only be rehomed as companion or paddock horses;(f) RWWA's FY2025
response states that post-retirement traceability extends to "first
retirement pathway" only, with ongoing traceability dependent on voluntary
uptake of the OTTWA Passport. What oversight role does the Minister have in
ensuring that first retirement pathway data is independently verified and that
welfare outcomes beyond first placement are monitored; and(g) If the Minister does
not intend to take further action to address the reporting gaps identified in
RWWA's FY2025 response, what criteria must be met before the Minister would
require RWWA to report disaggregated and independently verified retirement outcome
data?
I refer to a written response provided by Racing and Wagering WA (RWWA) on 10 February 2026, in response to questions regarding post-racing outcomes for thoroughbred and standardbred horses in Western Australia during the financial year 2025 (FY2025).RWWA's response provided the following reported retirement pathway data for FY2025:Thoroughbreds: 28 (3%) killed as unsuitable for rehoming; 845 (87%) retired or rehomed, comprising 148 to breeding, 402 to equestrian pursuit, 205 to non-equestrian pursuit, 12 to OTTWA Estate, and 78 through auction or private sale.Standardbreds: 18 (5%) killed as unsuitable for rehoming; 273 (76%) retired or rehomed, comprising 83 to breeding, 119 to equestrian pursuit, 61 to non-equestrian pursuit, 10 to OTTWA Estate, and 0 through auction or private sale.RWWA's response records that 28 thoroughbreds and 18 standardbreds were killed upon retirement, described as unsuitable for rehoming due to "behavioural and/or medical" reasons. RWWA's response further states that post-retirement traceability extends to "first retirement pathway" only, with ongoing traceability dependent on voluntary uptake of the OTTWA Passport.The reported figures for horses killed (3% of thoroughbreds, 5% of standardbreds) and horses retired or rehomed (87% of thoroughbreds, 76% of standardbreds) total 90% and 81% respectively, leaving the retirement outcomes of the remaining 10% of thoroughbreds and 19% of standardbreds unreported in RWWA's response.RWWA's response directed any further questions to the Racing and Gaming Minister's office, and I ask:
(a) Has the Minister sought or received advice from RWWA regarding the 28 thoroughbreds and 18 standardbreds recorded as killed upon retirement in FY2025 as unsuitable for rehoming? If so, what advice has the Minister received? In particular:
(i) how many of those
horses were killed due to behavioural problems, and how many due to medical
conditions;
(ii) for those horses
killed due to behavioural problems, were those problems assessed and documented
by a qualified veterinarian prior to the decision to kill; and
(iii) what specific medical
conditions were recorded for those horses killed due to medical conditions;
(b) RWWA's FY2025
response records 205 thoroughbreds and 61 standardbreds as retired or rehomed
to "non-equestrian pursuit." What oversight role does the Minister
have in ensuring that disaggregated outcome data is collected and retained for
this cohort? In particular:
(i) how many of those
horses were rehomed specifically as paddock or companion horses; and
(ii) how many of those
horses were placed into equine assisted therapy programs;
(c) RWWA's FY2025
response records 148 thoroughbreds and 83 standardbreds as retiring to breeding
purposes. What oversight role does the Minister have in ensuring that
post-breeding retirement outcomes for those horses are recorded? In particular:
(i) how many
thoroughbreds and standardbreds that subsequently retired from breeding during
FY2025 were confirmed as rehomed; and
(ii) what is the total
number of thoroughbreds and standardbreds that retired from breeding purposes
during FY2025, regardless of known rehoming status;
(d) RWWA's FY2025
response records that 3% of thoroughbreds and 5% of standardbreds were killed
upon retirement, and that 87% of thoroughbreds and 76% of standardbreds were
retired or rehomed. These figures total 90% and 81% respectively. Will the
Minister confirm whether the retirement outcomes of the remaining 10% of
thoroughbreds and 19% of standardbreds are recorded by RWWA? If not, why not;
(e) RWWA's FY2025
response describes support through the OTTWA Programs as available to horses
"considered medically and behaviourally suitable for a post-racing
career." What structured programs does the Minister oversee or fund
specifically for horses who are not considered suitable for a post-racing
career and who can only be rehomed as companion or paddock horses;
(f) RWWA's FY2025
response states that post-retirement traceability extends to "first
retirement pathway" only, with ongoing traceability dependent on voluntary
uptake of the OTTWA Passport. What oversight role does the Minister have in
ensuring that first retirement pathway data is independently verified and that
welfare outcomes beyond first placement are monitored; and
(g) If the Minister does
not intend to take further action to address the reporting gaps identified in
RWWA's FY2025 response, what criteria must be met before the Minister would
require RWWA to report disaggregated and independently verified retirement outcome
data?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
9 June 2026
Responded by
Minister for the Environment representing the Minister for Emergency Services; Corrective Services; Defence Industries; Veterans; Racing and Gaming
Response time
7 days
(a)
(i - iii) No
(b)
(i-ii) The Minister has no oversight role in ensuring data is collected and retained for horses retired or rehomed to non-equestrian pursuit. The national peak racing bodies, Racing Australia (RA) and Harness Racing Australia (HRA), are the custodians of horse status data but they do not require the specific details of the non-equestrian pursuit to be provided with status updates.
RWWA runs the Off The Track WA Passport program which is a voluntary traceability initiative and is designed to assist RWWA in monitoring ownership and post-racing pathways of retired thoroughbred and standardbred racehorses in Western Australia. This applies to horses that have left the traceability regulation of RWWA and the national peak bodies. The program supports lifecycle accountability by enabling ongoing ownership updates and provides a mechanism to independently verify retirement pathways once horses leave racing.
(c)(i-ii)
The Minister has no oversight role in ensuring post-breeding retirement outcomes for horses retired to breeding purposes.
Breeding activity including status updates sit within the regulations of the Australian Stud Book (Thoroughbred) and Australian Trotting Stud Book (Standardbred). Reporting and monitoring of breeding horse activity is therefore managed by the relevant Stud Books, rather than RWWA as regulator of Western Australia’s three racing codes.
(d)
Post-racing outcomes are published each year in RWWA’s Annual Report.
The response provided by RWWA included the number and percentage of horses euthanised due to being unsuitable for rehoming (3% of Thoroughbreds and 5% of Standardbreds), which represents a subcategory of horses reported in the “euthanised” column of the 2025 Annual Report.
The remaining horses not specified in the response (10% of Thoroughbreds and 19% of Standardbreds) include all horses reported as deceased or euthanised during the reporting period that were not at the point of retirement (i.e. became ill or were injured during training or racing).
(e)
The RWWA Off The Track WA Passport program is a free resource available for all retired racehorses, including horses retired to non-equestrian pursuits.
Owners of retired racehorses with an OTTWA Passport have access to the OTTWA Herd Heroes initiative, which provides passport holders with discounts to equine products and services from participating local and national businesses. Participating businesses include bodywork, dental and veterinary services, stockfeed, riding schools, and retail stores.
Retired racehorses who are not successful in transitioning to equestrian pursuits are generally rehomed as therapy horses, or as paddock companions, depending on their individual characters and suitability. In some cases, these horses are donated to reputable organisations such as HorsePower Australia, Claremont Therapeutic Riding Centre, and Riding for the Disabled Australia (RDA).
(f)
The Minister has no oversight role in ensuring that first retirement pathway data is independently verified and welfare outcomes beyond the first placement are monitored.
RWWA uses information submitted under the Off The Track WA Passport program to independently verify the location and first retirement pathway of horses once they leave the industry, as reported by the racing participants. It also enables further ownership updates when the passport issued is passed along with the horse at any subsequent change of ownership. Whilst passport uptake is voluntary, there are now over 5,500 passports issued to horses retired in WA and when passports are utilised to redeem benefits from OTTTWA initiatives (education clinics, events, Herd Heroes) a check-in on horse ownership and status is acquired.
In addition, RWWA has a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in place with Southdale Services (WA’s recognised horse knackery) to ensure welfare standards are upheld and to assist traceability and transparency. Under the MoU, Southdale submits monthly documentation to RWWA confirming the identity of all Thoroughbred and Standardbred horses delivered to Southdale for euthanasia. This enables RWWA to compare and independently verify notifications submitted by racing participants.
(g)
RWWA’s response was tailored to the questions asked regarding retirement pathways only. Additional information is accounted for in the full post-racing traceability table published in the Annual Report.
Aggregation of data for reporting is necessary to summarise information into a digestible format which reveals high-level trends, facilitates useful comparison, and enables informed decision-making based on evidence.
(i - iii) No
(b)
(i-ii) The Minister has no oversight role in ensuring data is collected and retained for horses retired or rehomed to non-equestrian pursuit. The national peak racing bodies, Racing Australia (RA) and Harness Racing Australia (HRA), are the custodians of horse status data but they do not require the specific details of the non-equestrian pursuit to be provided with status updates.
RWWA runs the Off The Track WA Passport program which is a voluntary traceability initiative and is designed to assist RWWA in monitoring ownership and post-racing pathways of retired thoroughbred and standardbred racehorses in Western Australia. This applies to horses that have left the traceability regulation of RWWA and the national peak bodies. The program supports lifecycle accountability by enabling ongoing ownership updates and provides a mechanism to independently verify retirement pathways once horses leave racing.
(c)(i-ii)
The Minister has no oversight role in ensuring post-breeding retirement outcomes for horses retired to breeding purposes.
Breeding activity including status updates sit within the regulations of the Australian Stud Book (Thoroughbred) and Australian Trotting Stud Book (Standardbred). Reporting and monitoring of breeding horse activity is therefore managed by the relevant Stud Books, rather than RWWA as regulator of Western Australia’s three racing codes.
(d)
Post-racing outcomes are published each year in RWWA’s Annual Report.
The response provided by RWWA included the number and percentage of horses euthanised due to being unsuitable for rehoming (3% of Thoroughbreds and 5% of Standardbreds), which represents a subcategory of horses reported in the “euthanised” column of the 2025 Annual Report.
The remaining horses not specified in the response (10% of Thoroughbreds and 19% of Standardbreds) include all horses reported as deceased or euthanised during the reporting period that were not at the point of retirement (i.e. became ill or were injured during training or racing).
(e)
The RWWA Off The Track WA Passport program is a free resource available for all retired racehorses, including horses retired to non-equestrian pursuits.
Owners of retired racehorses with an OTTWA Passport have access to the OTTWA Herd Heroes initiative, which provides passport holders with discounts to equine products and services from participating local and national businesses. Participating businesses include bodywork, dental and veterinary services, stockfeed, riding schools, and retail stores.
Retired racehorses who are not successful in transitioning to equestrian pursuits are generally rehomed as therapy horses, or as paddock companions, depending on their individual characters and suitability. In some cases, these horses are donated to reputable organisations such as HorsePower Australia, Claremont Therapeutic Riding Centre, and Riding for the Disabled Australia (RDA).
(f)
The Minister has no oversight role in ensuring that first retirement pathway data is independently verified and welfare outcomes beyond the first placement are monitored.
RWWA uses information submitted under the Off The Track WA Passport program to independently verify the location and first retirement pathway of horses once they leave the industry, as reported by the racing participants. It also enables further ownership updates when the passport issued is passed along with the horse at any subsequent change of ownership. Whilst passport uptake is voluntary, there are now over 5,500 passports issued to horses retired in WA and when passports are utilised to redeem benefits from OTTTWA initiatives (education clinics, events, Herd Heroes) a check-in on horse ownership and status is acquired.
In addition, RWWA has a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) in place with Southdale Services (WA’s recognised horse knackery) to ensure welfare standards are upheld and to assist traceability and transparency. Under the MoU, Southdale submits monthly documentation to RWWA confirming the identity of all Thoroughbred and Standardbred horses delivered to Southdale for euthanasia. This enables RWWA to compare and independently verify notifications submitted by racing participants.
(g)
RWWA’s response was tailored to the questions asked regarding retirement pathways only. Additional information is accounted for in the full post-racing traceability table published in the Annual Report.
Aggregation of data for reporting is necessary to summarise information into a digestible format which reveals high-level trends, facilitates useful comparison, and enables informed decision-making based on evidence.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.