Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Susan from VA — Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:42:12 GMT

To all posters that believe that permitting AI would enable breeding to deceased stallions or that frozen semen could be banked for whatever reason, I want to point out that not all stallions freeze well. In fact, with some stallions, the semen seems to thaw well and result in large numbers of forwardly-motile sperm, yet this semen is totally incapable of getting any mare pregnant. This would probably result in most AI being performed with fresh chilled semen, because frozen semen would be a waste of money in many cases.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Kathy Kranz — Mon, 29 Nov 2010 00:35:35 GMT

Please, please, keep something natural and pure! Flush the dollar signs. I hope TJC never gives permission for AI. If a stallion can no longer mount the mare, pension him. If the mare can no longer support the stallion, pension her. She probably has no business going through another 11-month gestation and delivery, anyway! Let the young, i.e., untried, stallions and mares begin to make their own marks in the breed.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

predict — Sun, 28 Nov 2010 04:06:07 GMT

I for one believe that AI has its good points and bad. It would of course be changing a long tradition in the industry, and the most difficult thing to overcome is an industry built on tradition. I don't believe the current rules are without fault, or else we wouldn't see the continuing decline of the thoroughbred's quality that we see in the breed's sturdiness today. This is not to say that AI would help or possibly hinder this result, but we really wouldn't know until a couple of decades past using AI. It would be amazing to actually see what the allowing of AI would bring about in the breed and also in the industry.

In this world we live in today I could envision an AI system that might work something like Netflix's in the movie industry. One could simply become a member and have any request for semen desired shipped to them "overnight". Doesn't sound so great to some I'm sure, but this probably sounds great to others.

Other changes might be in the willingness of owners to let the horses race longer, instead of rushing them off to the breeder shed at that first big win the horse achieves, especially if that horse now has to compete with a history's worth of good stallions available in the "semen in storage catalog".

It's too bad no one asks the horse what they want.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Four Card — Fri, 26 Nov 2010 23:30:35 GMT

The article talks about horse and handler safety. That is important. Racing and breeding should be about the horse.

Perhaps a stallion owner(s) could put a disciplined limit AI breedings. If supply/demand is a concern. At least make AI an option.

As for breeding stallions that are shy or less fertile - why not if they have other redeeming characteristics? Should Kantharos not be bred since he broke down after two starts? Would AI help his sire Lion Heart with gargantuan breeding efforts? A current top KY stallion is a ridgling should he not be bred?Another stallion was retired this year because vertabra issues made it difficult to breed. With AI could be made useful, maybe.

I would not be critical of Standardbred horses because we are all in the same industry. If you look at the soundness and race time progress that Standardbreds have made that is an awesome achievement. They use AI technique...

If we went back to smaller books that would promote genetic diversity and safety. however what would happen to the $50M stallion? A very few top prospects would probably be worth less. Is that what our industry is about - protecting the wealthy few?

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Lisa Schwartz — Fri, 26 Nov 2010 23:27:18 GMT

If the contention is “safety first” there should be very little argument against AI. Every handler of a mare or stallion knows the risks of the live cover breeding shed. The control of every aspect is heightened by the use of AI. It seems that many of the posts to this article assume that AI and semen transport are the same issue and I would contend that they are not.

The framing of the rules for the use of AI by The Jockey Club and the consideration of the economic implications must go hand in hand. It’s a many faceted issue that if cut carefully and with great precision can be a shining gem for the industry. To provide a safer breeding shed, with practices that enhance the health and well being of our blood stock and the handlers is without a doubt a benefit to all that TJC should consider fully.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

AngelaFromAbilene — Fri, 26 Nov 2010 12:12:59 GMT

I am so tired of hearing about how much money AI would save mare owners! If you are worried about the cost of shipping a mare to be bred, perhaps you do not need to be in the business. Breeding a mare and raising a colt is a costly endeavor and perhaps not for everyone.

I am absolutely, 100% against AI and ET. I have watched what has happened with the AQHA and it is disgusting. If an animal cannot stand for live-cover, it does not need to reproduce itself, be it mare or stallion. Survival of the fittest. Preserving the integrity of the breed and producing a better animal should be at the forefront of every breeders mind...not the almighty dollar.

(I maintain these thoughts as I try and find a QH stallion with the right characteristics to LIVE COVER 2 mares in February/March. Frustrating indeed!)

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

sherpa — Fri, 26 Nov 2010 01:19:47 GMT

pNewmarket - I know very little about the AI debate and so didn't have an informed "opinion" (although my default position is always "when in doubt, go with Nature"). However, the plain fact, as you stated, that American TBs conceived via AI wouldn't be accepted as 'legitimate' by the rest of the world, would make any pro-AI argument, moot. Irrelevant.

Thanks, too, for the Arrowfield/AUS article link. As the study came from a breeder who would seem to have much to gain from the practice of AI, yet with findings clearly in opposition to it, I would hope that it will be taken very seriously.

Beyond that, I love finding new websites with interesting links ... and say, what about that Duforth!? a seriously gorgeous fellow with an amazing pedigree! :-)

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Donut Jimmy — Thu, 25 Nov 2010 06:21:04 GMT

Oops, pacers not much better 475 nominees by 33 stallions, and the most by one horse was 51 nominees.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Donut Jimmy — Thu, 25 Nov 2010 05:52:04 GMT

Standardbreds have the Breeders Crown. If you are interested in the likely effects of allowing AI in Thoroughbreds, look at what AI has done for Standardbreds.

The 2010 Triple Crown had 366 nominees. They were sired by 154 different stallions. 85 stallions had a single nominee. The top two stallions had ten each.

There were 400 nominees for the two year old trotting divisions of the 2010 Breeders Crown. They were sired by 34 different stallions. Seven stallions were represented by a single nominee. The top stallion alone, had 50 nominated offspring. Ten stallions were responsible for 283 or over 70% of all nominees.

(There was a bit more diversity amongst the pacers.)

How many people think this is a good idea?

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Convene — Thu, 25 Nov 2010 01:36:51 GMT

I can see pros and cons for AI. One thing that does bother me is that, with the serious problem of "unwanted horses" (how I hate that idea - that any horse could be unwanted!), without the limitations nature provides for a stallion's reasonable productive covers, we could find even larger foal crops - not all of which would be "wanted" throughout life. Perhaps a ceiling would have to be imposed on the number of foals who could be registered to discourage that possibility. For good stallions whose physical performance in the breeding shed is poor, AI would help ensure our quality bloodlines continue and flourish. Otherwise I'm not sure it would be a good idea.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

will — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 18:02:55 GMT

AI being appoved by the royal families that run the Jockey Club you must be joking. They have more important things to do, like making plans to attend the royal wedding.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

JT — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 17:52:03 GMT

The ONLY way AI should be allowed is with a limit to the number of mares the stallion is allowed to breed to... I PROMISE to anyone of you who think otherwise..this will be a Death Nail to the industry if there isn't a strict limit.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Paul — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 17:06:45 GMT

Like any big change this is not as black and white as it seems. There are many pros and cons on both sides.

But, this would change even the minute staticstics we all study as breed students. Leading sires could be around for many decades after their deaths.

Basically, I see more positives than negatives although I would like to see a limit on foals per sire per year regardless of live mounting or AI.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

AliciaMcQ — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 17:02:28 GMT

Just to clear one thing up....there wouldn't be much siring from the grave, so-to-speak. Frozen semen is even more hit-or-miss than live cover. In order for it to take, a mare has to be ultrasounded every few hours, around the clock, and receive semen within a small window around the estimated time of ovulation.

And no, AI is not difficult to learn, but if you want to do it well, and any breeder that wants a good reputation will....you need training. And more than just a day's workshop. Plus there is the whole issue of sanitizing and prepping equipment correctly. Because of the fact that semen is so sensitive to every environmental change (temp, light, air, etc) prepping it for shipping takes the most training. I've done it quite a few times and I still worry about getting it wrong.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

DRFAGER01 — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 16:13:02 GMT

If this practice ever becomes the law of the land, and is governed fairly to all parties involved. preserving the likes of man o war, secretariats ,bold ruler, seattle slew, or ap indy would not only be a gain for the thoroughbred world. It would be a gain of Exta ordinary strides for an Industry that seem to only accept the Fashionably bred Stallions of the day. I am more for preservation of the Greats. This would Eventully lead to better research on soundness and performance Issues. The sound of having a Mr p at the sale in 2010 or a Seattle Slew in 2011 only sounds taboo now until it becomes the norm. the message from this is fair. lets preserve our Sport with better Management of the Issues. lets open our minds to try things beyond the old and Traditional Bible that the World of Thoroughbred racing seem to Breathe by.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Golden Gate — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 16:02:27 GMT

It will be intersting just for curosity sake to run a poll to see what percentage of Blood Horse online readers support or don't support the use of a.i.

As one person said their stallion is sound but had a major physical injury (not genetics related)that makes him not able to mount well.

I understand the one commenter's readers logic stating that a stallion hurt through accident (not genetic)should be allowed use of a.i. but as another reader wrote this opens up lawsuits if the JC trys to limit the amount of mares serviced through a.i.

I think the live cover rule should be left in place. We do not need the "flavor of the year stallion" to have 100,00's of offspring and others not to have very few if any. All of these offspring hitting the market at one time would cause the sales to drop as supply would exceed demand. With the way it is now only a certain number are available from any one stallion and at the sales the best of these are vied for.

Genetic diversity needs to be maintained. Also using a.i. would really effect the state bred stallion prospects. As it is now each state tries to improve their own stallions to keep mares coming to them. If everything were easy to obtain I believ any of the state stallions would be less utilized and the incentive to maintain and upgrade quality stallions would be reduced except in those cases where they already had the great stallions.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

pNewmarket — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 16:02:20 GMT

Your article has failed to mention that the issue of AI is NOT for the US Jockey Club to decide.

AI is banned by the INTERNATIONAL Stud Book Committee and any one country that breaks this rule will be thrown out of the organisation.

This would mean, for example, that US bred horses would not be allowed to race outside of the US (as they would not be recognised as true Thoroughbreds) and therefore the sales market would collapse.

No one from outside the US would want to buy US bred horses and no international horses would be sent to race in the US as the races would be of no value.

As has already been mentioned by a previous poster, the outbreak of CEM that you cite was actually spread by the use of AI!

A study was carried out into the use of AI by Arrowfield Stud in Australia, it makes for very interesting reading: www.stallions.com.au/.../arrowfield-study-dispels-ai-benefits

AI cannot/will not be allowed until every major racing nation in the world agrees to its use.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Pedigree Ann — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:22:52 GMT

If the US unilaterally adopted AI for Thoroughbreds, our export market would dry up. Why? Because no other racing country permits AI products to be registered as TBs. Correction. Russia tried it and found their AI horses rejected by other authorities. Every stud book in the world would have to agree to allow AI or none can, as it would be cutting the throat of its home country's breeding industry. Coolmore and the sheiks aren't going to pay big bucks for animals they can't stand or breed from in Ireland or Britain as TBs.

You want AI in the US? Start working on Wetherbys, the French Jockey Club, etc.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Larry Ensor — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 15:20:35 GMT

This argument has come up many,many times over the years. Same reasons for and the same reasons against.

More safe for the stallion and the mare. On face value yes. But I have seen very few safety issues even with the toughest stallion or reluctant mares when managed by an experienced professional team.

Not having to stress out the mare and foal by being shipped. I am sure there is a bit of stress the first time but by in large they could care less. And it is a good schooling lesson for the foal. I find it more stressful for the owner/shipper then the horses.

Rules and regs set by the Jockey Club would eliminate all concerns of over breeding to one stallion, breeding to dead stallions, etc..

IMO the main reasons A.I. will not be embraced in the near future are the same now as in the past. Money and jobs as was pointed out by another poster. There is a lot of money invested in farms around the Lexington area along with a lot of jobs not to mention vets. Most of which would no longer be necessary. Something that would not be over looked by KY politicians. But it would be a tremendous savings for mare owners. Lower vet costs, shipping, no outside board fees for those of us who own a farm etc.. Lower or eliminate repeat covers, late foals and missed years. It is a win win for mare owners but not for Kentucky stallion and farm owners.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Diane — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 13:15:55 GMT

We have too much supply now. at least, under the current rules, you have to make logistical choices. this is nuts

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Wonder? — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 13:15:00 GMT

I think articicial insemination could be a positive step in eliminating the slaughter of stallions in some countries, when they no longer cover the number of mares desired!!!!! We have at least two in one country possibly awaiting their demise because of this.........

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Daryl Tuttle — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 12:33:10 GMT

I think that AI would be great. I have been breeding for 6 years and have to ship to and from KY and FL and it is expensive the first go round, but if the mare slips, then she usually doens't get a second chance that year due to our limits.

Also, on stallion soundness, yes there are plenty of times when a great stallion gets injured and it is naive for the people to say that that horse should not be genetically perpetuated.

I am going to stand Smart Guy this year who showed a lot of class on the track and got injured. He comes from a lineage known for soundness and I will breed him BUT he is hurt from a racing injury and I will worry everytime I breed him. If you have ever handled breeding stallions, you learn quickly to be concerned about the mare's actions. They kick and try to jump out of the way, and one wrong move could permanently debilitate your stallion. I would love to see a day with AI approved.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Terry — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 05:43:13 GMT

"Take cases where semen from less-fertile stallions could be improved and then utilized." Bad idea. This increases the risk of reduced fertility in the next generation.

"There are famous “shy” breeding stallions and AI could help promote their genetics." Again, bad idea. This can be passed on as well.

In both cases, you are promoting bad genetics, not just the good genes.

There are good reasons for using AI, but these aren't among them!

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Donut Jimmy — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 04:37:41 GMT

If AI is permitted, stallions books will be unlimited. It is an absolute point of law that to place any arbitrary restriction on book size would constitute RESTRAINT OF TRADE and is absolutely, without question, illegal.

The AQHA used to restrict the number of foals registerable to any mare in a given year to one. You could do as many embryo transfers as you liked, but they would only register a single foal from those produced. They were sued and lost based on the principle of restraint of trade. Every other horse registry in the country immediately dropped any restrictions they may have had on numbers of ET foals, because the precedent insured they would be sued and would lose. Limiting number of foals produced by AI would suffer the same fate if challenged in court.

However, it is my opinion, that the farms have gotten so good at maximizing book size with natural cover, that allowing AI would not have as big an impact on this as some suppose.

Keep in mind there are several issues involved.

1) Artificial insemination as an option.

2) Transportation of semen off premises as an option. (When Standarbreds originally allowed AI it was restricted to on premise use only, both mare and stallion had to be on the farm at the same time. They later dropped this restriction.)

3) Use of frozen semen as an option.

4) Use of stored frozen semen as an option.

There are many good and bad consequences of the use of AI. It is important to distinguish what the options really are.

re: Mounting Issues - By Steve Montemarano

Lorri S — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 03:19:11 GMT

AI is open to abuse by the illegal fraternity that seem to be attached to any sport where money is to be made from gambling. Do we really want to have Danehill, Secretariat etc, siring from the grave? Here we have Blame, exceptionally well bred and a probable winner of HOY going to stud for a mere $3500. He wouldn't get a look in if the real champs were still breeding via frozen sperm.

Would we also have an over abundance of foals. Who would be in charge of regulating this. The horse racing hierarchy that's in place now have trouble handling anything now. Don't give them that responsibility to stuff up also.

In a perfect world AI would be the best way to go. Best for the horses, for owners and so ultimately for the fans. But in case you haven't noticed, this is far from a perfect world.