Right now we are hearing all the hoopla about the break downs in young horses & the Triple Crown trail starts too young. Well Secretariat, Slew, Man o'War & all the others ahead ran as 3 yr olds & won. I'm sure there was a large number of break downs then as well. While all break downs are sad to see & hear of, what's the excuse when it's an older horse this happens to, such as a 4+ horse. Can't blame the stress of the Crown trail there. The majority of these animals have better medical care than most people. To me it's the equal to having a teenager play sports eventually a career ending accident will happen

In my opinion, I'm not sure that we can respond. All we can try to do is prevent. If this happens again when the spotlight is on, others might respond for us, to the detriment of our sport's best interests. I think Barbaro and Eight Belles were the first two strikes in the public psyche. Let’s hope the third won’t come anytime soon.  

If trainers were pro golfers they would all say they shot 5 under par!  They need to be suspended without pay give up there horses and pay a fine.  There is too much well this guy does it why can't I.

Important topic, Scot. Better late than never... As you say, a necessary component is "education". But, before attempting to educate the public, we should first educate ourselves.

Racing is something we do not want to lose.  Without racing we would not have these beautiful thoroughbreds.  However they should not be medicated.  If they need meds to race, they should not race.  Crops should be used to guide the horse.

TO SCOT: Great, much needed article. You wrote, "If it's not already perfectly clear, let me spell it out:  Thoroughbred horse racing can no longer hide the dirty little secrets that have been part of our history."

Amen. Thank you for being so blunt. It's long past time to face the sport/industry's problems head on. I don't want to highlight a B-H competitor, but have to say the photos and videos of Paragallo's horses I've seen elsewhere are beyond sickening. I can only shake my head wondering how much of this kind of horror happens in the industry. Honest, ethical horsemen everywhere should be outraged, and should be forcing change in their own industry. After all, the livelihoods of honest, ethical horsemen are just as threatened as those of the human pond scum like Paragallo and the people who worked on that nightmare of a farm.

You wrote, "But the issue that concerns me right now is whether racing can survive another high-profile on-track injury. Or another expose on ex-racers rescued from a slaughter auction. Or another trainer caught doping his runners."

The answer is no. (I'm going to post more here later.)

honest  racingand not when the price is right  this is not monty hall show  i have seen things happen on track  good horses get beat that should never gotten beatthese jockeys are crooked the sport is gone it has got so bad impossible to clesn up now

Scot, I agree with every single word you've written, especially about not hiding the dirty little secrets. I've spent the last couple of days afraid this would not be addressed on this web site, so thank you. I was a big fan of horse racing when I was younger and have just gotten back in it the last couple of years. I love seeing the horses run, learning about pedigrees and the owner's and horse's stories. This is a sport that could keep me fascinated the rest of my life, to the point that I'm working my finances so that I can buy a retired racehorse and give it a place and a purpose. BUT, there have been aspects of this game that turn me right off, such as the overuse of medications, horses being run down the ranks of the claiming races and then too many ending up at a kill auction, training methods that produce fragile horses, and over-production with the consequences of too many unwanted horses.

If owners, breeders, trainers and fans don't want groups like PETA getting their noses too far into their business, then there needs to be in-house maintenance and cleaning up. Mr. Paragallo is a prime example. From what has been reported, there have been complaints about him for years from trainers getting bad treatment from him, suppliers not getting paid and neighbors turning him in for neglecting his horses. But it took 177 horses living in conditions like a concentration camp to get something major done. Look him up on Google and see the pictures taken at his farm. It's horrible. I know that he is an extreme example, the vast majority of owners are not like him, but how many others like him are out there & they just haven't been caught yet?

When a trainer says he doesn't know what a medication does, but he gives it to a horse anyway, that's a problem. Jeff Mullins isn't the only one who has said that. Either they're lying or they're fools doing it because everyone else is. We also have trainers who've won Eclipse awards the same year they were cited for violations. Jack VanBerg has caught flak for his candidness on medication use. Whenever you have a sport that involves a lot of money, there will be pressure to get an edge. This has been a problem in horse racing since before Man O'War. That's about one hundred years. So what's the answer to that? Ignore it & hope it's not an issue? That hasn't worked so far. There have been changes in rules for the better in the last year, but there needs to be a change in acceptance and enforced penalties for it to really make a difference. If that doesn't happen, then horse racing has no right to complain if PETA, the U.S. Congress and others rake them over the coals.

There was a post in your previous blog asking what does an owner do if he can't afford to keep his horses. That's a very valid question. There does need to be a way to handle horses that have nowhere to go. Realistically, placing an unwanted horse is a lot tougher than a dog or cat. I can't keep a horse in my backyard, I have to find a stable and then pay for it and the vet bills and the food. It's a lot more expensive than a dog or cat. I'm very glad we got rid of slaughterhouses. But that still leaves the question of what do you do with them? I think humane euthanasia may be an answer. What costs more - having an animal euthanized humanely or trying to repair the damage caused by neglect or the damage to the sport that the sight of skin-damaged, hairless, starving horses standing in mud will cause? I know that's not an answer that would be supported by animal rights groups, but until there are enough places for unwanted animals to go, what else is there? I did think the poster's suggestion of an auction made up of just these horses was an attractive option, like a last chance auction, but aren't those where kill buyers go now?

Mr. Paragallo has stated in the news media that he is giving money to the humane society to support his horses, but the president of the humane society has said they haven't received anything from him, the he hasn't paid his own staff for 2 weeks and that the hay dealer has also been stiffed. I think it would be great if the humane society could report that we are taking care of our own. Here's their address if you'd like to help, I have: http://www.cghs.org/

As far as your comments about the whip, when I see a horse who reacts badly when whipped that tells me one of two things about that horse: either it's a very strong-willed animal that doesn't want anyone telling it what to do or it's had a bad experience being over-whipped. The whip policies at some of the two year old in training sales have been changed and that is a positive step.

Nice post! Seems righ on target. We dodge another bullet (A-bomb) yesterday at Oaklawn.  In successive years:

Barbaro

Rags to Riches

War Pass

8 Belles

Old Fashioned

Next? Friesan Fire entered in the Derby off an unprecedented 7 week layoff.

And there will be a next until somebody gets serious (per this post) that horses CAN BE ENTERED in these high profile races only under specified conditions, that once they are entered they will be warmed up properly (scientifically), and that none have a pre-existing injury to the extent science can determine.

And, just to clarify, Rags cracked a hind in the Belmont, War Pass fractured sesamoids as he crossed the line in the Wood, and Old Fashion can be seen bobbing just before he leaves the back stretch.  Anybody who looked at the races and handling of Barbara realized that an injury was coming.  The common thread--highly questionable handling and training, and lack of pre-race diagnosis.

The owners,breeders and trainers treat the horse as if it were a machine, if it breaks get rid of it and get a new one. Most have no consideration for the horse. The horse didn't ask to be put on this earth to go through what he does in racing, treat him with respect as an animal first. The interest of the horse should be first as he's the one that's going to get your money back for you if he is well taken care of.

I do not think Thoroughbred racing can survive.  I, for one, am sick of seeing and hearing about gallant old geldings like Sky Diamond breaking down and being euthanized on the track when they should have been retired long ago.  I am sick of reading about owners like Ernie Paragallo who has as much feeling for the horses he races and breeds as yesterday's garbage.  I am canceling my subscriptions to The Blood Horse and Thoroughbredtimes and will stay away from the racetracks for good.  I did this once before when Ruffian died.  I came back because of Barbaro and I see now that was a big mistake.  I see just cruelity, brutality and heartbreak and empty promises to "fix things". I will continue to help with rescue groups but that is it. I hope the rest of the American public feels the same way.

I do not think that racing "hides its dirty little secrets".  As you state yourself, racing gets beat up daily by the media and outside interest groups.  What is hidden (ie. not reported) is all of the wonderful things in this sport and all of the fine people in it.  The horses are extremely well cared for by the vast majority of owners/trainers.  And the vast majority of people working in the sport spend long hours at low-paying jobs because they like horses and like racing.  But the media likes to focus on the bad apples and the tragedies in horse racing (just like they do in almost every other walk of life).  Education is very important.  And addressing problems is very important.  But so is reminding people why we love this sport and that most people involved in it are good people with good hearts.

 I absolutley agree with you on the whip regulations.  I recently bought part ownership in a racehorse and told all my co-workers about it and how excited i was.  It was split about half and half between people who thought that was "great" and people who said something like: "I think it's cruel to race horses".  Explaining that they were bred to run, and that most love to run doesn't seem to help, whips really turn people off from watching racing.  They think it's a form of beating the horse, not guiding it and making sure it runs a straight path.  

I absolutely agree with Brambles. I grew up on horseracing, and loved loved loved the Black Stallion books. Breeder's Cup 1990 was my wake-up call, when I realized that the romanticized notions of horseracing did not match the reality. That day was a bloodbath, Mr. Nickerson and Shaker Knit in the sprint, and a few races later the horror of Go for Wand. I was away for horseracing for many years, and I came back the year Smarty Jones ran in the Derby. Sadly though, I see the sport through adult eyes now and my childish love of the sport can't compete with the darkside of racing.

   Let me enumerate these:

1.I read Bloodhorse to keep up with the horses, but sadly I can't actually watch races anymore because I am so scared that I will see another horrific breakdown.

2. Overbreeding. There are too many horses and this is the thoroughbred industry's problem. Sadly, what I often see are outsiders trying to save thoroughbreds rather than people who are in the biz. I thought we were making progress with zero tolerance policies, but Suffolk downs has reinstated trainers who "unknowingly" gave horses up to the slaughterhouse. A policy does no good unless it is enforced.

3. Mares who are bred until they die. 20 year old mares should not be bred. Period. This is just owners trying to get the last little bit out of these mares and killing them in the process. It makes me ill when I see all these 20-21 year old mares who are killed by "foaling complications." Many of these mares proved their worth on the track and as broodmares but it was not enough. They could not enjoy a nice retirement with full support from their owners. Better to breed them until they die. I don't need to name them, but I will name a bare few, Relaxing, Lady's Secret, Urban Sea, Weekend Surprise, Wings of Grace (who was 25 when she had her last foal)and the list goes on. There is no reason to breed old mares and there is no reason to breed mares every year. Complications will happen but when mares have a foal every year it increases the odds.

4. Whenever a mare dies, the foal is placed on a nurse mare. Gee I wonder what happens to the foals of those mares?

Of course there are other issues such as medication et but these have already been mentioned by other people.

Let me conclude by saying, I can't endorse horseracing anymore. I am an animal lover and I am ashamed of the sport. When I was young, i wanted to own racehorses more than anything in the world, and now I can't be party to the sport.

I have loved this sport for over 15 years, and even I am starting to get tired about the things going on in the sport.

A lot of experts say things need to change, and list all the changes that need to be made, but I don't see any of those changes being made.

Changes need to be made NOW. There needs to be less talk and more action. The longer it takes to make these changes, the more time groups like PETA have to gain loyal activists and lose it's long time fans.

Sure, there have been some tiny changes since Barbaro & Eight Belle's deaths, but there hasn't been enough large, major changes to really make a difference in the eyes of the mainstream public.

Ok Scot you have our attention what's the answer???  We know something needs to change how do we get there???

Racing needs to downsize to the point where the handle is concentrated on a few regional tracks.  Once that happens we can think about lowering the take 5% to 10% across the board.  Once that happens the offshore money comes back..  It's simple right?

I think the industry has to come down really hard on the cheats.

They need to have state vets watching the horses training in the morning and give the vets the power to put lame horses (in the morning) on the vet's list. Unsound horses should not be racing or training, whether they are a cheap claimer or a top stakes horse.  I would like to see sanctions against a trainer who sends a sore horse out in the morning.

I would like to see all medical records go with the horse when he changes ownership.

I would like to see the HBPA protect the owner's investments in the sport rather than protecting the interests of the unscrupulous trainers.  Trainers take out of the industry and put NOTHING back in.

Lastly, I am proud of our industry for going after Ernie Paragallo so strongly.  

I'm sorry to say that Horse Racing will "Never" return to it's glory days !!!  

I do however believe it will still be here in the future, albeit getting smaller and smaller each decade.

Most of the problems that I see or read about all seem to be caused by the "Wealthy" people of this industry.

It was 2 Doctors who's problems were associated with Curlin.

It was 2 other Doctors who bred a 2-Yr. Old Filly.   Which is just flat out "Unethical".

It's Paragallo and his millions.

It's Stronach and his Billions.

And it's the Billion dollar Farms that are creating the overbreeding issues...Not the Little Guy !!!

"None" of these problem children were any of the "Little Guys" in this industry.

So..."IF" things are ever going to change for the better, then it's going to have to happen at the Top of this Industry first.

Whatever happened to the notion of "Leading By Example" ???

Apparently the people at the Top only feed that bull to the ones at the bottom !!!

I assure you there are a lot of "Kathy"s (see post) and "Four Cats" (see post) out there; probably the majority who inhabit  this racing/breeding game. They are the reason things have always been this way, and I doubt it will change substantially without brute force from the outside. I've been in this for a long time and can assure you that most choose to rationalize their selfish needs and desires (Paragallo, case in point).      

In view of all the above rhetoric I guess I have to have my say. Most will say Secretariat was the greatest but I keep thinking steroids when I remember the fertility problems - just an example.

Other than huge profits there is no sense in breeding a stallion to 100+ mares per season. A limit of 50 would suit me fine.

Disposing of race horses at the end of their careers would be much simpler if greed wasn't involved. They make wonderful saddle and trail horses. Ranch- 4-H- families-the show ring - the list goes on and on.

I sure hope the industry figures it out. By the way - another second career is chuckwagon racing. Sure there are a few accidents but there are pasture accidents too. And folks - please don't give up on "our" sport. Work at making it better.

In regards to the issue of the "Whip".   Maybe it's time to redesign it ???  

To the average public the whip itself can look hurtful.   And if you've ever been hit by one then you know how true it is.   So why not make it look more educational or at least less offensive to them ???   Even if it has to look somewhat frilly or feminine like.

In regards to the Medication issue...Why not limit it to Bute and Lasix "Only" ???

No Winstrol, No Legend, No nothing else...period !!!

And "IF" Any Any Any other chemical is found in a horses system then it goes straight to Disqualification, Immeadiate Fines and Suspensions.

I agree with some of the European countries who don't allow Any Medications at all.   And maybe some day we might end up doing the same ???

I mean...Why are we supporting the Pharmaceutical Companies ???   I don't see any of them helping to Fund our Industry, so why help fund theirs ???

In the meantime we could look at using only Bute and Lasix as a Transitional, Downsizing phase untill the days on None at all.

I think that with the inhumane treatment of many of the horses, their over-breeding, and public breakdowns, racing will not survive because people are not near the life and death of farms as they once were, nor is the language of racing common knowledge anymore.  Scot remarked on the need for education, and even BloodHorse is unwilling to have a webpage of terms to help newcomers enter the sport.  

But the bigger problems are the misuse of the horse, the over-breeding (by the top farms as was pointed out), illegal medications, and throw-away horses to slaughter.  I see no real activism on these pages.  It is left to rescue operators, the real horse whisperers, to pick up the pieces and beg for crumbs to keep these horses alive as they try to find forever homes for them, while some horses are so needy that they must stay with the rescuers.

Something is very wrong when a granddaughter of Seattle Slew is claimed, later bound for slaughter, rescued by Habitat for Horses (HfH) and then found by her grieving first owner 11 years later.  To top it off that owner is afraid of publicity because of PETA.

Activism and money need to be shelled out to help the problem racing created.  I don't see where BH Mag. or TBTimes tell us where to sign petitions against horse slaughter.(animalrescuesite.org or habitatforhorses.org)

Or that HfH is up for a $100,000 prize via animalrescuesite.org, Click "Vote Every Day!"  on the Shelter Challenge and select Habitat For Horses!

Or that angelacreshorsehavenrescue.com is up for a $1 MILLION dollar shelter makeover via zootoo.com.  

These people who pick up the racing mess need your votes to get that money, because it ain't coming from the tracks or breeders.  Voting by clicking doesn't even cost money, just a few seconds of your time.  Better yet email these addresses to your friends and ask them to vote, make it go viral.

So BloodHorse, if you are really interested in helping to solve this problem, then find out what is going on in the selfless world of rescue.  Become selfless too with a small banner to notify people how they can help with their clicks that can make all the difference to the shelters above. A page of links to shelters for the horse on this website would be helpful too.

And this is not even getting into the Paragallo atrocity and the poor Columbia-Green Humane Society having to deal with all those starving horses (plus their cats and dogs).  The needs are stupefying and we all know where it starts - with too many horses.

• Scot's reply:  Thanks, Merrywriter.  I will ask you to recognize that Blood-Horse and the Thoroughbred Times are industry NEWS sources. To maintain journalistic integrity, a news publication must avoid taking a stance on such issues as slaughter. Anything less is irresponsible and unfair to our readers. As a news source, we can REPORT on the issues -- from all sides -- to ensure that our readers are informed and can form their own opinions.  I'd urge you to take note of such resources as the Blood-Horse Thoroughbred Retirement Directory and the myriad news articles, features, and guides available at our sister site, TheHorse.com.  ... Finally, you're right about the need for a guide to the jargon of the Thoroughbred industry.  I'll see what I can find out about making it happen.

Lucky for Larry Jones and company, Old Fashioned didn't go on to the Derby and breakdown....imagine that....same owner, same trainer, same sire...humm....coincidence?  There is obviously a problem with Unbridled's Song's progeny.  They show too much ability, too early for their own good.  Instead of the owners and trainers admitting their is inherent weakness in the bloodline and give the animal time to develop, they exploit the early ability....much to their own detriment.  So it looks like the Derby has dodged a "bullet"...but thats just for now.... Gosh..I wonder how DUNKIRK vets?  Hope Todd Pletcher's asking the same question!

This article was well timed.  The events involving Mr. Paragallo really shook me as a racing fan.  In a lot of these comments I see "vast majority of" type commentary;  like,  a vast majority of owners do the right thing,  and/or a vast majority of horses are well cared for.  Well,  Mr. Paragallo's operation was successful enough and large enough that,  in my mind,  he and his horses SHOULD have been one of those "vast majorities".  He has campaigned champions and was a fairly consistent presence at a large,  well monitored (supposedly),  "big time" New York circuit.  To read and see what his operation has really done was shocking to me.  If an operation of that stature is doing that sort of thing;  A)How can we assume the other bigger operations aren't doing the same,  and B)What would that say about the smaller time operations and the care they provide their horses?  I think those are honest questions,  and ones the general public would ask.

The vast majority of horses are not graded stakes winners that go on to 5 and 6 figure stud careers,  or give birth to million dollar yearling purchases every year.  They are the claimers that do work there way down the ranks,  all too often racing well beyond the time they should have been asked to.  Are the vast majority of these claiming types receiving the same care that the names we all know from reading the Bloodhorse receive?  I doubt it,  as they are not the same kind of investment.(Is anyone going to send that low level claimer to a hyperbaric chamber?)

The owners are the ones responsible for much of this.  They are the ones as buyers and breeders who have demanded speed and brilliance over stamina and soundness.  They are the ones who continue to use trainers who have run afoul of the rules.  If they truly want change then demand it in what you pay for,  and to whom you give the horse to train.  No one is making them use the Dutrow's,  Biancone's or Mullin's of the world,  they CHOOSE to use these consistent rule breakers either in spite of their record or because of it,  depending on which record you're talking about (cheating or winning).  I also find it hard to swallow the "unwanted" label.  The last buyer "wanted" that animal and should have been well aware of the costs before doing so.  You don't go buy a car you can't make the payments on a year down the road,  so why should that be an excuse for the care of an animal? If you screw up your credit,  you can't get credit,  so owners that screw up their responsible ownership of these animals should not be able to own any others or get to race them.

The solution is national industry wide rule making and actual enforcement for most of these issues.  Rules governing whip use and medication administration need to be devised and enforced,  NATIONALLY.  Punished trainers need to lose the ability to just put their stables in an assistant's name and take a vacation (again,  the owners SHOULD step in here as well).  The question is WHO is going to make and enforce these rules,  and WHEN the heck are they going to step up and be proactive?  

Breakdowns,  though tragic, are not something that will ever be eliminated.  Even extensive testing wouldn't eliminate them,  although I would say that anything that could be done be way of preventing them should also be required.

I do KNOW that there are good people in the business.  It's time for THEM to show the outrage that the rest of us have and do something about it.  It's time for the national organizations like the NTRA,  TOBA, and HBPA to get together and make national policies that are industry wide and enforced.  I think we all agree that the horse should be put first,  that their should be rules on drugs, that these animals should not be abused,  etc.  Other than voicing my opinion and withholding my betting dollar I don't know what else a fan can do (I'm considering rescue type work as reaction rather than pro-action here!).  If the industry wants to survive,  then those involved in it need to take the initiative.  

Suffolk Downs  really has NO zero tolerance horse slaughter policy.  This is evident by their reinstatement of those trainers.  I encourage everyone, who believes this is wrong, to write Suffolk Downs and share their views.

I'd like to see racing history.. I mean literally - history.

With little accountability, no transparency and a small few who know what ethics actually mean...the industry, like the economy is going down the toilet.

Who will pay the price? The horses.. who else. Haven't they always paid with their lives. If not dying on the track, it's at the slaughterhouse.

I'm glad some tracks have taken the stand and implemented a no-slaughter policy.. but every single one should have been made to do this. Or they shouldn't open their doors

to racing. Too little, too late.

The sport of kings is a joke. Like a puppymill.. it has a stench about it and it isn't horse poop.

I think it's too late to clean up this act. For far too long, people have made their fortunes, on the backs of dead horses.

Time to get real day jobs guys.

As someone mentioned already, learning the depth of drug use in this sport takes the polish off heroes of the past, BUT if the industry is diligent and sincere about removing them from future horses, we might see talent and training show where the real power exists.

Having a public database of off track TB would be good for the game too. They need to decide "who" is responsible for each one born-- breeder or owner(s)--or collect dollars from all of them over the horse's career to support him/her later. Sort of SSI for TB.

I don't understand breeding a mare after she is 18 years old either. Her eggs and system are older and if she's like other mammals, that impacts her off-spring. How many successful racehorses are born from aged dams? Real question--I don't know. Is dam age a factor in vitality and endurance of the off-spring? Or not?

Hi. I have to say that I am a race fan only since seeing the movie, Seabiscuit " years ago.... I had no idea that the Thoroughbred was so fantastic ! I then learned all about the slaughter issue & was appaulled & surprised that we would/could treat any animal with such dis-respect. Dogs & cats get better treatment. & to he guy that wants to help out & adopt a OTTB, just do it !!! I did & I have no money either. I am a stay @ home mom, highly educated & do without for my horse, King of Spain. I even started a horse treat business to help as much as I could. The likes of Paraneck are too many & it WILL KILL this sport. People will NOT tolerate the abuse to these magnificent animals. peace

If you'd told me in the days of Slew and Bold Forbes that the only national television coverage of the Wood Memorial would be a seconds long stretch run clip, or that the Blue Grass at our most beautiful track would not be seen by a national audience...well.  As racing becomes a sport prempted by lacrosse, and relegated to grainy computer images, I'm losing interest.  Although, I must admit,I am ready to fast look away during backstretch, and stretch runs, expecting a breakdown.  The fact is, the greed we see on the nightly news permeated the sport of racing with the mega-syndication deals of the 70's-80's.  It stopped being about sports, or breeding for the breed, but evolved into breeding for the sales ring, for the buck.

I too lost interest for 25 years after Ruffian died . Now I'm back as an owner and am horrified at the lawlessness in this sport . I'll do the best I can for my horse throughout but more real changes need to be made . Paragallo raced almost 5,000 horses since 1996 . How many of them are still alive ?

1.  The whip – This has already been redesigned.  We hear or read nothing about its acceptance by jockeys, trainers, etc.  A whip does not need to touch the horse except in emergency, and defined rules must be established regarding its use.

2.  Jockey training and critique – There have been many instances in which a sudden move by the jockey (standing to cheer one’s win while the horse is still traveling at 30 to 35 mph, e.g.) has possibly caused an injury.  Schools and/or training in this difficult and dangerous art form must be made available and mandatory, together with professional critique of performance when advisable.

3.  Breeding out known weaknesses -This simple step could potentially eliminate the majority of U.S. current stock from a corrective breeding program.  Breeding needs numbers controls anyway, and this is a place to start.  We know where the hoof, ankle, leg problems have been produced, and the permitted practice of inbreeding is out of control.

4.  Drugs – Known performance enhancing drugs, in particular those that mask the pain of a horse’s infirmity, must be regulated on a national level.  This is not a state issue or an individual track issue; it is far too important an issue to be haphazard.  The very possibility that a cough drop would receive more attention from the industry than cobra venom is nightmarish.

5.  Claiming Races - The gates of hell.  Once a final claim is registered by Equibase race results, the horse is lost.  There is no way of knowing if that horse has been privately sold, given to a good home or sold as food.  There absolutely MUST be a central registry to keep full track of every horse used in the business.  Far too many horses have earned up to over a million dollars for one or more owners who have abandoned them to this unknown fate in gratitude for their loyal service.  Start right here!!

6.  Licensing - A Dog Kennel license is granted subject to annual (or more) pop State inspections in order that care for the canine occupants reaches a certain level of acceptability.  Why is this not done in the horse industries?  A Paragallo event would be more unlikely with such inspection.  Also, is there daily veterinary inspection of all horses entered in a race?  Is this available at all tracks

You are to be applauded for the intended value of this blog and for your brave and forthright attempt to create the betterment of an industry you love.  Good on you, Scot!

And thank you.

TO NANCYB: You wrote, "Most will say Secretariat was the greatest but I keep thinking steroids when I remember the fertility problems - just an example."

What the heck are you talking about? Secretariat never had any fertility problems. Also, Secretariat never had drugs of any kind used on him. You don't need to take my word for it. Here's a link (www.usnews.com/.../comments) to a short blog by Jim Gaffney, who was Red's excercise rider. Scroll down to the middle of the page and look for Jim's post.

He said, "Secretariat did not have any drugs of any kind during his racing career. I never in the thirteen months that I was galloping him did I ever have to hit him with the whip. Secretariat was a true champion and ran from his heart."

In that 6/28/08 blog post, Jim also called for banning all enhancement drugs, and especially steroids, from racing.

On the 25th anniversary of Red's Triple Crown, I had the great privilege of spending a day at the races with his trainer, Lucien Laurin. He was old school, having first been a jockey in the 1930's. Beginning in 1942, he trained for giants of the sport such as Reginald Webster, A. B. Hancock Jr. of Claiborne Farm, and Christopher Chenery of Meadow Farm. I can tell you first hand from long converstaions with him that Lucien never used steroids on his horses, period.

All contact sports have major injuries,Football,Baseball,Basketball,Ice Hockey etc,but no one ever talks about the death of those sports.Many in their igorance have talked about the death of Thoroughbred racing,Thoroughbred racing was never dead and is in fact undying.

Hay, Oats, and Water

I agree with Brambles and BHA,

I too have had simular experiences, lived it and breathed it from a distance, even painted the famous ones. I am a horse owner and make my living in the backyard horse world. I'm all grown up now too and see life without my rose-colored glasses.

May I add remembrances' to all the broodmares that have perished when "turned out to pasture", to all the foal mare foals left to perish in some filthy pen, and to all the broodmares and their foals sent to slaughter for elite foreign human consumption.

Being a certified farrier of 25 years work, the worst crippling injuries I've seen have been on OTTB's, many young horses ruined, could have had long productive lives, many bad bows, and blow-out joints. Arabians aren't raced  until they're four, less injuries, makes sense. So many little things and big things the TB racing world could do but will they, and if the racing commissions don't enforce rules they're  cheating the only enity that truly matters in their world, the horse.  

I don't know how popular this will be but I'm going to say it anyway.

When I heard, yesterday that another Unbridled Song (Unbridled) offspring had broken down under the rigors of racing I winced.

Not only because of the memory of Eight Belles but also because Old Fashioned is likely to be mended and sent to breeding shed where he will likely pass on the structural flaws that have lead to many of the current breakdowns in that line.

Back up to Ruffian, brilliant speed yes but her sire Reviewer was practically made of glass, his career on the race track ended through structural breakdown.  He survived and bred on and I believe not many of his offspring survived forward.

We talk about the older horses, the Man o' Wars, Seabiscuits and others and how they held up under a racing schedule that has not changed.  As unpleasant as this is to think about, the genetic pool behind them was weeded to strength due to the very lack of modern medical miracles we have today.  Horses in their past (not their lineage but say peers of their ancestors) who broke down on the track only had one option and thus, did not breed forward.

I'd say that not only has the practice of medication *on* the track hurt today's racehorse but the very advances that will allow veterinary science to save Old Fashion are on the flip side, allowing genetic flaws to breed forward.  Thus we're in a vicious cycle.

There isn't an easy solution to any of this because it starts in the breeding shed and goes all the way forward to runners who can no longer race.  The 'breeding' animals are propped up on medical advances and pass on those potential weaknesses and the 'gelded/unlucky' sorts end up in the kill pens.

It seems to be an almost no win situation.

I have been betting the races for 30 years. In light of the breakdowns,neglect, and drug addled horses I would support banning horseracing.Its time has come and gone.

I was a huge horse racing fan from 1986 to 1993. I traveled all around to see races. I remember seeing ESPN and Chris Lincoln covering the Jim Beam, and what about Pete Axthelm pick of Granacus in the Blue Grass.

Great Times. But then I was at Belmont for Go for Wand and Prairie Bayou. I was there at GP for Mr. Brooks.

Now I'm only an ocassional better and haven't been to a live race in years.

Three years ago I started a new job and my work profile said I was an avid horse racing fan. Then came Barbaro. Now I hide the fact that I follow horse racing.

Firstly, to For Big Red- with a moniker like that one would presume you're a Secretariat (or Man O War) fan. I'll assume it's Secretariat and, with your stated experience, I'm surprised you remember so little about his initial retirement to stud. Secretariat and Riva Ridge-both L. Laurin trainees- did experience fertility issues when they first went to stud. I don't know for a fact if Laurin used steroids, etc. on them or not (Equipoise was widely used at that time), but I'm sure not accepting your hearsay recollections to the contrary... To John T:- your analogies to other sports, i.e. football, baseball, basketball, etc. are all wet. a) their participants freely choose to engage in their respective sports b) Most importantly- had the fatalities in those sports been even 10% what they are in horseracing (for the horses) those sports would be banned. You see, there's a big difference between injuries and catastrophic injuries. As I posted earlier, many wish to rationalize their wants and desires-they choose their focus, and blind themselves to what is reality.      

To those who feel the breed today is inherently weaker (more unsound) than in times past; that this is among our major problems and needs swift change-I'd say don't be so quick to jump to conclusions; do some research. It can be harmful to focus on what may be potentially wrong (incorrect) issues. Horses of the past may appear to have been sounder, but I doubt there has been much digression in this area. Some of the greatest influences on the breed had relatively few starts. Just as example- a slow horse that runs 50 races may be inherently more unsound than a fast one that is injured/retired after 10 starts. In the less distant past consider Raise A Native and Danzig for example. Yes, Raise A Native broke down within 4 starts-because he was simply too fast (and with his size) to run at 2. Was the composition of his skeletal structure any "weaker" than the vast majority of those deemed to be "sound"? I doubt it. So you would weed out a Raise A Native from the gene pool? Don't be so fast. What about Alibhai? He never raced (bowed in a track record workout). Never heard (or read) any criticism of his gets' soundness. I'm not suggesting that some aren't inherently less sound-but they are harder to identify than one might think...There are more "known"/obvious problems in this sport that need swift attention. I'd suggest we leave the more esoteric for another day.      

"Thoroughbred racing and breeding are getting beat up almost daily by the media and by outside interest groups"

No they're not. The thoroughbred racing and breeding industry is beating itself up.

When you have the trainer of the top contender for the most important equine event in America blissfully walking into a secure area on a major race day and attempt to jam a foreign substance down the throat of one of his horses, the industry doesn't need " the media and by outside interest groups" to beat them up.

They're doing a pretty darn good job of it all by themselves.

Nancyb sez

"Most will say Secretariat was the greatest but I keep thinking steroids when I remember the fertility problems - just an example."

There are two problems with that theory.

1... Secretariat was powered by a HUGE heart. If that was drug induced, then it would not have been unique to him.

2... Secretariat's bloodlines  have actually done pretty well. He has produced a number of important stakes winners, including the great filly, winner of the Arc, and European Horse of the Year for 2008, Zarkava.

ONE MORE TIME...the stewarts OF OUR NATIONAL TREASURE HAVE BEEN ASLEEP @ THE WHEEL... EXPOSE...EDUCATE...PROMOTE...GET A REEL PROMOTOR(V8)...A MOUTH???...BELLWETHER PRODUCTIONS IS THE REAL THING...WAKE UP...LONG LIVE THE KING!!!...

Scot, I thank you for bringing up this issue and giving us the opportunity to voice our opinions and hopefully, some ideas to aid in the solution of this problem. I am sick to death about the state of the racing industry but I want changes that will ensure the longetivy of the sport. Real changes.

1. Breeders must take into account the life of the offspring by contributing to a retirement fund. that retirement fund must benefit all, equally. (social security, case in point)

2. Purse distribution for the horse, as in the percentage for the trainer and the jockey. (ss fund)

3. Mandatory participation or no license. Owner, Breeder, Trainer,etc

4. Non-Profit Overseers of the retirement funds. State and/or Federally regulated guidelines.

5. Licensed, regulated and montored retirement farms for placement of horses with special needs.

6. Licensed, regulated and monitored way stations for re-training facilities and adoption services.

7. State by state, Regulators to investigate all retirement facilities in a timely manner, bi-monthly or quarterly

8. Existing facillities in good standing and proven track records to be given 1st preference and automatic licensing privileges.

9. Adopt the European drug policy and enforce the regulation by automatic license suspensions with heavy fines. Second offence, 2 year ban from any racing activity or related industry. Third offense, lifetime ban.

10. Racing commissioner. i.e.baseball,football,etc

Drugs, breakdowns, unwanted horses, slaughter pens, unscrupulous owners, trainers, breeders, jockeys. Fix them and maybe there's life in the racing industrys' future.

I was watching a race on Tvg a couple of weeks ago and counted 12 times the jockey hit his horse in the final strides and he was winning the race by 5 or 6 lenghts. I started to email the race track in question and then I said what's the use, this happens all the time. I haven't watched Tvg since and I don't intend too. I get all the race results from the bloodhorse and carefully select what I'm going to watch.

I hope I can get to Keenland shortly, maybe Churchill Downs later on but definitely Hollywood Park for Zenyattas' 2009 debut.

I want racing to remain forever. Just not in it's present form.

CRob87 recommends that drugs be limited to Bute and Lasix.

Bute is an anti inflammatory--it will reduce pain and swelling of an injury.  Why would you want to allow a drug that will mask pain and injury on race day?????

You also mention banning Legend, which is Hyuralic Acid.  HA is found naturally in synovial (joint) fluid.  When a joint is diseased (starting to cause problems), the joint fluid starts to thin so that it doesn't lubricate as well as it should.  It is a bit of a chicken or egg thing.  Which comes first, the thinning or the joint injury?  Did the thinning cause the injury or did the injury cause the thinning and make the injury worse?  Legend fixes the viscosity of the joint fluid and puts it back to its healthy state.  It is not a drug in the way that Bute is.  It doesn't mask pain--it fixes a problem.

Winstrol, an anabolic steroid, is not allowed and is being tested for.

Let's face it, race horses are bred strictly for speed, so temperament and suitability for other disciplines has zero priority which makes it harder to find venues for many of these guys if they don't make it on the track...add to that, most of them have to be "let down" and retrained for quite a while ($$$) simply to become pleasure riding horses for an "experienced" rider (yes, there are exceptions to the rule) plus they eat a lot compared to most pleasure breeds... you have to have a real big place in your heart for this breed to make this your "one and only" horse.

I Can't believe you say a Trainer Doping horses>> You're the DOPE it was a All Natural Product>>>

In all these posts, with all their references to current 'horrors' in racing, not one mentioned The Pamplemousse, not one.  Thank God for the track vet who spotted 'heat in his tendon.'  Does no one else wonder just what his well paid trainer was doing that morning?  We do know, he sent the horse to the track anyway.  How fortunate are we that he didn't run and break down on the track.  These are the kinds of things that need to change.  And if the good guys, the little partners leave the game, there will be no game.  Those who care just have to stick around and help to make a difference.

Dona, I like every one of your suggestions, especially the social security for the horses and the retirement issues. That would be a huge plus in the eyes of the public to know that racing is caring for their own. That's the right thing to do and what you've proposed is a reasonable way to do it. And there does need to be a national commissioner. I think that's only a matter of time and if the industry doesn't change and accept that it will happen, they will find it forced on them by the government.

To John B: ephedra is an all natural product that was in many weight loss and energy formulas sold in health food stores. It's also one step away from meth and was banned after it killed some people.

In a single word : GREED

I don't believe TB racing can or should survive unless drastic changes are made.

1) While I am not completely against whips I find it very disturbing to watch a horse being hit repeatedly coming down the stretch while in last place by 15 lengths and losing more ground with every stride.

2) Stop all medications including bute and Lasix. Racing doesn't seem to about which horse is the best but rather which drug cocktail makes a horse run better or faster.

3) Increase the severity of  penalties with regard to medication violations. Instead of a slap on the wrist to the trainer, ban the horse (or the entire stable) from training/racing for 30 days.

4) Race day vet exams must be required at all tracks. Make the vet reports public.

5) Publish the horses medical histories including injuries, medications and surgeries. I am sick of seeing horses break down and later learning that the horse had suffered similar fractures in the past.

6) Immediately ban ALL horses that have been nerved. Allowing these horses to run puts everyone on the track at high risk. There is absolutely no excuse for Refinery to still be on the track except of course for greed. Furthermore, every time this horse runs, the betting pool is that much more contaminated.

7)Implement an industry wide ban with regard to slaughter. No more 'temporary' suspensions, only lifetime bans. Do not allow known kill buyers to have trainer's licenses (Jaron Gold - Pinnacle).

8) Create a lucrative race series for 4 year olds and up while significantly dropping the purses for 2 year old races. I would rather see an end to running 2 year olds, but I doubt this will happen in anyones lifetime.

9) Build a better racehorse.

Why not let these horses keep their hip numbers instead of naming them?  The racing industry wants it's fans to fall in love with these horses, to follow their careers, and once the horse disappears from the radar--don't ask where they've gone.  Giving them names gives the fans more of a reason to connect with these animals, and adds to the heartache when breakdowns or slaughter occurs.  Don't name the horses--call them numbers--which is all they are in this "business".  The racing industry is full of violence and neglect, and they should not ask anyone to love the horses that fall victim to this sport.

Horses have been running a winning the trible crown as three year old for a long time and the belmont was always two weeks away not three weeks.  I don't believe that the horses are running too fast causing them to breakdown.  Secretariat ran faster than they have in 30 yrs. Look how Lucen Lauren train him.  He trained him hard so when the Triple Crown came he was ready.  These horses don't have enough training.  No one put quality time in.

TO SCEPTRE: In your 13 Apr 2009 12:30 AM post you wrote, "Secretariat and Riva Ridge-both L. Laurin trainees- did experience fertility issues when they first went to stud."

Education is your friend. Please go to Google and search on this "young stallion fertility" (without the quotes). You'll find many pages of information related to the topic.

And if you're shy about taking my word for anything, please go to this 4/14/03 article (www.logans.com.au/news-articles.php) from Logans, Australia's leading horse insurance firm. The article, written by Logans' founder, says:

"Bloodstock insurance began when the owners of expensive horses sought insurance cover for transporting their horses from the U.K to the U.S.A. It developed from a marine transit cover to the highly specialised and technical cover it is today. The first bloodstock policies were written to cover only mortality. However, with the syndication of expensive stallions the cover was extended to include fertility. The first such policy was arranged for the great Thoroughbred racehorse Secretariat. The cover was negotiated by London broker Roger Barklam who cleverly arranged with Lloyds underwriters for a policy which would include not only the death of the stallion but also a cover to provide indemnity if the stallion was infertile or became infertile. There was an immediate scare when veterinary tests indicated that the stallion was infertile. However veterinary tests and the actual impregnation of mares are two different events and Secretariat proved to be a very fertile stallion, impregnating a very high percentage of his mares. Veterinary tests for fertility have never been a requirement for fertility cover since."

Of course, if your knowledge is greater than that of genuine experts in the field of equine medicine, insurance and fertility, please do let us know. In the meantime, you'll forgive me for being disgusted by attempts to smear a great trainer who isn't alive to defend himself. This sport has enough current problems without reaching back over 35 years in lame attempts to tarnish historical figures.

TO TBPARTNERPERSON43: Thank you for mentioning the situation with The Pamplemousse. For what it's worth, I've posted a similar opinion several times in these various B-H blogs. I don't think many people want to touch the subject due to the implications, but I, for one, am convinced you are right.

A word on racing injuries. Ever since Barbaro's breakdown, I have been studying breakdowns trying to find a common denominator between them. I believe that I have found the root of the problem. So many things are genetic its scary and unsoundness is no exception. If you don't think unsoundness can be passed on through horses look at Eight Belles for a seccond. Everyone knows about her breakdown,but has anyone heard about the CARREER ENDING INJURY her sire had. Old Fasioned was just added to the list because their sire is the same. I am sure in most breakdowns you can trace the unsoundness back through their lines to  Native Dancer where approximately 70% of thoroughbred horses have Native Dancer in their lines. He had chronic foot problems that ended in his retirement (Kind of like another horse I know named BIG BROWN). The main thing I'm seeing now in the breeding world is to find horses with no Native Dancer, Raise A Native, Mr Prospector etc. and cross them with horses that have these lines. Pretty soon there will be none of these other horses left. I know it has been commented that durring the days of Man O War there was just as many breakdowns, but I challenge you, find one(and I'm talking high profile serious, career ending, life threatening injuries). This is a major problem that needs to be fixed at the simplest level. Stop breeding horses that have been retired because of, or have sustained in their career a life or career threatening injury.

To-For Big Red-

I wouldn't categorize Logan's founder, an insurance man, as an expert in the field of fertility. I stand by my statements. Both Secretariat and Riva Ridge did experience "fertility issues" when they first went to stud. Secretariat, initially, had a low sperm count, and Riva Ridge experienced difficulties as well. A very low sperm count is a fertility issue, even though he (Secretariat) did eventually impregnate 2 of the 3 test mares bred to him. I never stated that Laurin did (or did not use "drugs") nor did I state that drug use caused these initial fertility "issues". It is not uncommon, however, for new stallions to experience fertility issues, and often this is due to prior drug (usually steroid) use. The fact that they initially, or later, prove to be quite fertile is not, in itself, suggestive that they were not previously exposed to drugs (or steroids). As said, I have no first hand knowledge if Laurin used drugs (particularly steroids) or not. I submit that you also have no first hand knowledge of this. I have heard, second hand, that he did-which is no great surprise, as most trainers in those days did administer "drugs", including steroids...As far as education being one's friend, I'd suggest you take your own advice. Talk (write) less, and read (and learn) more.  

TO SOPHIE 15: My opinion won't even buy you a cup of coffee, but for what it's worth, I agree with you. I've been urging in these blogs that the "powers that be" in the industry fund a study to map the Thoroughbred genome with the goal of identifying genetic diseases and defects. Like you, I have no doubt that at least some of the current high level of Thoroughbred fragility has a genetic component.

Although Ruffian is widely considered the best filly ever, few in the general public are aware that her sire, Reviewer, was an extremely fragile horse. He suffered three separate cannon bone fractures during his racing career, retiring after the third. Sent to stud anyway, he was euthanized at the young age of 11 after suffering a fractured leg in a paddock accident. He had surgery, but thrashed coming out of anathesia, re-injuring the leg. Ruffian died the same way, thrashing coming out of surgery, re-injuring her leg, leading to her being euthanized.

Answers are out there, if only people with the responsibility, resources and authority will work together to find and implement them.

Sophie 15, you're correct. I'm an old crazy woman, been in horses all my life, daddy was a breeder, great-uncle who just died started working the back side in the 1940s, and I can tell you that back in the day, horses did NOT break down as they do today.  Period.  I know.  Mon oncle et mon papa et moi, we were there.  Inbreeding is nothing new.  It's the breeding of unsound horses for early speed that's new.  So... Here's an idea I want to put out there: when I was a girl, yearlings were treated VERY differently than most are now.  I went to Keeneland and other sales from the early 1960s up thru the early 1970s.  Yearlings looked like yearlings, slicked up for sure, but they didn't look like beefmaster cattle fattened for the slaughter.  Or like show horses, either.  They looked like yearings.  I used to ride my bicycle out to various farms in Lousiana and Lexington where I grew up; pastures full of mobs of well-bred yearlings, bucking, kicking, playing and running like mad fools.  Developing the bone density they needed to stay sound.  Unsound colts never made it to the sale ring.  And the colts, fillies in the sale ring, no growth hormone, no steroids during "sales prep."  No one can convince me that this isn't part of the problem.  BTW, y'all know that Unbridled's Song's co-owner Ernie Paragallo has been charged with 22 counts of animal cruelty in New York, right?  Je dit qu'il est un grand canaille, moi.  

1. Stop breeding "pretty horses"

2. Accept responsibility as a stud owner that not every mare is a good fit.

TO SCEPTRE: You wrote, "I never stated that Laurin did (or did not use 'drugs') nor did I state that drug use caused these initial fertility 'issues'."

That is exactly what you are implying. Apparently no amount of factual information to the contrary will dissuade you otherwise. Hey, the person and horses you're smearing are long gone, so they can't be hurt anymore.

In the meantime, this blog asks a forward-looking question, "Can Horse Racing Solve Its Problems In Time to Survive?" When I look at the photos in this New York Daily News article (www.nydailynews.com/.../2009-04-12_spca_releases_images_of_neglected_animals_at_center_brook_farm.html), my answer is no.

Brambles, your post resonated with me and inspired me to write this.  You mentioned Sky Diamond was your turning-point, well, Wanderin Boy was mine.  I'll never look at this sport the same way again, but I'm not yet ready to turn my back.  If things get any worse (as many predict they will) then I will leave.  We have dodged some major bullets recently with The Pamp and Old Fashioned.  My question to you Scot is this:  do you believe there is a desire within the industry to make changes?  Because I don't believe there is.  People are very happy with the current setup, being allowed to rake in the money off the sweat of the horse and then throw away that very horse when it becomes a liability... and, interestingly, the fans are supposed to give our money to rescue these poor creatures.  I see it as a reflection of our current economic troubles in general... greedy people getting all they can and to heck with the long-term ramifications.  The perfect illustration of the current evils of horseracing is the fact that breeders will continue to send mares to Paragallo, enriching this unhumane person who is devoid of morals even further, while perpetuating the unsoundness of the thoroughbred by producing more unsound Unbridled's Song offspring.  To me that says it all!  Sadly, I don't think anything is going to change for the better, so I will "enjoy" racing while it still exists.

• Scot's reply:  Do I believe that there's a desire to make changes?  Absolutely.  For some, it's a sincere realization that things MUST change to save the sport.  For many, maybe more of a wishy-washy woudn't-that-be-nice-in-the-perfect-world type of desire.  And for most, there's a general feeling of "I can see some problems that need to be addressed -- but they're not MY problems...".  But I believe that we're not too far away from some breaking points for the industry.  Congressional meddling. Loss of casino revenue. Increased "animal rights" interference. Track closings. Continued downhill spiral of racing's reputation and visibility. Farms going out of business. As those events break, we're going to be left with a core group that will either make the necessary adjustments or eulogize the sport. 

So where is a good place to start if people want to get involved in making sure change for the better happens? As evidenced by this website, I have a computer and I know how to use it. :-)

• Scot's reply:  Karen, that's the perfect attitude!  Later this week I will be posting a follow-up piece about taking steps to actually solve some of these problems.  I'm hoping we hear back from a lot of folks with a lot of different perspectives.  There's no great single answer to every problem, but there are lots of small solutions to parts of the problems we're facing.

I agree big changes need to be made. The problems begin at conception.Big Brown went straight to the highest bidder. He will most certainly pass on his quarter cracks. Unfortunately it is all about greed. This industry is no different than corporate America. It is all around us and every where we look. The difference is the horses are paying the price.

Most on this blog share similar goals-We are concerned for the horses' well-being, wish to better protect them and, if this can't be accomplished in reasonably short order, then to, perhaps, abolish the sport. These are also my views, so it is with some discomfort that I feel the need occasionally to debate or argue with some among you. Should the posters on this blog be indeed a respresentative sample of those who "care" in the thoroughbred community I'm concerned that our message is too fragmented and could be too easily dismissed due to our misconceptions and/or lack of sufficient knowledge. Yes, our basic position is quite valid, but we need to support it with accurate evidence. To do otherwise would severely weaken our case...An example in point was the observation that "high-profile breakdowns" are something new. Quite simply, if you don't have the perspective to know this, don't put forward such a statement. Off the top of my head I can well recall the on-track catastrophic breakdowns of Lamb Chop (musculoskeletal), La Prevoyante (cardiac), Black Hills (with Arcaro in the Belmont), certainly read about the tragedy of the great Sky Larking, etc., etc. Those of the past are more difficult to remember for the very reason that it was the past-many before your time. Has the frequency increased; anecdotes don't offer the answer, only thorough research which would prove rather difficult...Ponting much of the blame (and potential solution) in the direction of the breeders may also prove counterproductive. As I mentioned in earlier posts, it is rather difficult to identify the true sources of unsoundness. What is more easily remedied, however, is the care given these horses-first and foremost our present ability to afford them greater oversight (regular, thorough screenings-taking it out of just the hands of trainers and owners; abolishment of most drugs; scientifically devised surfaces; abolishment of 2 yr. old racing; emphasizing distance over sprint racing; routine inspections of boarding and training facilities; and I'm sure much more).      

It is like Paragallo that gives the racing scene a VERY bad rep. The man should be tared and feathered but will probably get a slap on the wrist.  That is the way it seems to go all the time, got a lot of money off the swet of the horse, he wears his $2000 suits and shoes and look what the horse got, starvation and death, really makes a lot of sense to me. The rich get richer and can end up doing what he pleases but in the end the industry as a whole is going to suffer and they wonder why people are getting turned off from racing.

sceptre:  I must respectfully disagree with you on two points.  First, I do believe the major problem starts with breeding.  We need to get horses like I Want Revenge into the breeding shed to impart some new genes into the pool, sturdy South American genes.  I wish Magnum wasn't gelded... put him in the breeding shed darn it.  We have to get away from overdosing on the Native Dancer line, and, instead, infuse soundness and hardiness.  Secondly, the breakdowns do not have to be "high profile" to be devastating to people.  Witness Bramble who referenced a horse I have never heard of named Sky Diamond.  That horse's breakdown touched that person and will stay in the memory.  Sceptre, I might have agreed with you on your point that high-profile breakdowns are not something new, that they may have occurred just as frequently in the past.  BUT, something Steve Haskin wrote in one of his blogs OPENED MY EYES.  Haskin said that he doesn't view as much live racing as he used to because of the breakdowns, and that when he first started in horseracing back in the 60's breakdowns were never even a concept in his mind.  How can you argue with that?  

Sceptre: You are correct that high profile breakdowns have been happening for years. People have mentioned Ruffian on this blog many times. The difference is that most of the extreme activists didn't have the power they have now. Media coverage was also tuned down. I for one believe that the sheer number of X-rays these colts legs go through weaken the bone structure considerably. You also hit on some key areas that are very important although I beg to differ with the scientifically designed surfaces. In my opinion a well maintained dirt track will suffice. Maybe ditch the toe grabs. Definately abolish the 2 yr old racing and then move on to breeding issues. Why breed a known unsound horse? Horses have been passing down their imperfections for years. Do I believe it is to far gone to make a difference in the breeding shed? probably. After a while it gets tough to track when the problems are being thrown from generation to generation. All I know is the breakdown of Barbaro and Eightbelles inspired a lot of what seemed like some great steps forward in the protection of these athletes. It is important to realize no matter what the industry does, it will never breakdown proof this sport. Football players wear pads and helmets and they suffer career ending injuries all the time. I believe these horses are truly bred to run. They run because they want to. I had two of them in my pasture and they were always running.... just to run... what a beautiful sight.

Here's my take

1. No drugs. None.

2. Severe penalties. Is there any way to defend not ruling off forever someone found with cobra venom? Yank someone's owner's license then allow him to transfer the horses to his daughters but still list him in your PR materials as the owner of the stable. Wink, wink, nod, nod.

3. Stop breeding for the sales ring and what I call breeding to get a breeder. Look at the roll call of horses who couldn't race at 4: Point Given, Smarty Jones, Afleet Alex, Sky Mesa, Big Brown, Monarchos, FuPeg, Charismatic, Grindstone. Most of them didn't make it through their 3-year-old season. Start breeding for race horses. I like one of the idea above: offer more money for older stakes races. Extend the distances.

Remember when thoroughbreds were tall, rangy things? Now they're quarterhorses propped up on thoroughbred ankles.

4. No synthetics. Like drugs, they're masking inherent weaknesses and encouraging people to continue breeding unsound lines. Close any dirt track with a dangerous surface. No racing until they fix it.

5. Stop breeding mares past age 17. It's disgusting. Stop breeding stallions, particularly unproven ones, to books of 150 or more. Really, do we need more than 100 a year from a stallion? I'd prefer a cap of 80.

6. Love the idea expressed above of a vet watching morning works and any unsound horse goes on the list. If you stop with the masking drugs, the list will be huge.

That's it for now. I hope my disgust does not outstrip my love for the game.

John B sez

"I Can't believe you say a Trainer Doping horses>> You're the DOPE it was a All Natural Product>>>"

As are some of the most potent and dangerous substances out there.

Back at ya EasyGoer....

 #3.  Amen.  It has made me sick for a long time.  Just breed 'em till they die.  The owner/breeders always respond with total suprise...."every thing was going well with the 22 year old mare...."  

And that's just the aftermath of episodes like Lucas running Lady's Secret long past her wanting to run. She blew the first turn...a class act like her blowing the turn...anyone else remember that day at Saratoga?  then he still wouldn't quit and took her down to the Molly Pitcher just be beat a monies earned record.  What a guy.

Give these sweethearts a break.  If I were ever to buy a racehorse, it would be totally from the bottom side, how long they raced and races won.

thank you, glad I got that off my chest.

Nancy

If you go to Google Books, and search for The Horse God Built by Lawrence Scanlon, page 174--there is a reference to the start of Secretariat's stallion career. It says there was a concern and the test mating settled one Appaloosa mare whose baby was big, marked like his sire and named First Secretary. It goes on to say S was fertile and an easy keeper. "Poetry in motion"

This may work or not http://tinyurl.com/cqluqz

Also,just for old times sake go watch his last race in Canada www.youtube.com/watch

The Scanlon book says the horse loved to run. He ran because it was all him to do so. It is pretty moving to read and watch him again, and surely a testament to strength and vigor and --good genes.

I can't be 100%  sure but is this the first time TWO promising horses listed on Haskins derby dozen are out due to career ending injuries long before the first Saturday in May? That is downright scary.

Scot, Thank you for highlighting what has to be the most important question facing the industry: Can racing survive?

In its current state of disarray, the answer would have to be a resounding 'no.'

Some of the posters (Tiznowbaby among them) hit the right notes, but they are preaching to the choir, in my case. The problem is there is no one on high who can bring change about in a strict, uniform manner across 38 racing platforms. The Jockey Club, Breeders' Cup, the NTRA, the RCI etc. are either impotent, clueless or lack the regulatory muscle or cohesion with other portions of the industry to get much done. As much as I hate to say this the only way I can see this industry surviving is if a powerful central authority imposes its will and that, alas, will mean that the Feds will have to get involved. Kentucky Rep. Whitfield is quoted in another publication on this very topic  and, I reluctantly agree with him. The industry has shown itself incapable of regulating itself and, for its own survival, power has to be exerted over it from outside. My first wish would be that the various racing leaders would sublimate their own egos and get together a la NASCAR, MLB, or NLF et al and form a 'league office' which is what I thought the NTRA was supposed to become, but that memo apparently did not reach the desks of those who run the Jockey Club, the RCI, the Breeders Cup etc. No one wants to cede power, thus we are at an impasse that can only be resolved by force from outside. Rep. Whitfield says he will use the law which empowers race betting across State lines to establish Federal control. I hope he does, but he better do it soon and with enough Dems on his side so that we can elevate this industry into all it should be.

Thank you Karen-in-Indiana,  appreciate your acknowledgement. I don't know about anywhere else but here in California, ephedra products are behind the counter and they keep track of all purchases. You are correct, ephedra is an essential ingredient of meth.

I must say, I was really taken back about the humane euthanizing comment you made earlier.

That is something we cannot condone or allow to become common place even though it may seem humane at the moment given todays headlines about mistreatment and starvation. There are greedy, heartless indivudals in the game now, can you imagine what it would be like if euthanasia was an accepted alternative. I'm all for relieving an animals suffering the humane way but to say it's okay to breed and race an animal until it can no longer make money is at the least obscene and immoral. I know you were not advocating such a drastic alternative but I have read other blogs where people offered it up as a remedy for PETA like it was a bonafide option. If that was the case, I would fight tooth and nail to abolish racing even if it took every dime I have.

Horse racing and dog racing have a great deal in common. Unwanted ex-racers, questionable breeding practices, and a great deal of money being made. A viable solution for both industries lies in the scrutiny of that money.  

I can see educating the well-meaning public should be added to my list above.

The general public seems to be against 2-year old racing, yet studies have shown that horses that race as 2-year olds earn more money and race longer.  Why isn't that study more available to the public?  I would love to have a link to add to this post.

The general public feels that a horse left to grow in a pasture until 4 years will be a sounder racehorse.  Nothing could be further from the truth!

A racehorse NEEDS training at racing speed in order to develop the bone structure to withstand the stresses of racing.  Without early speed training, they are MORE fragile.  It goes against what some would consider common sense, but that doesn't make it any less true.

It is also not common knowledge that 2-year olds are the LEAST likely group of horses to suffer catastrophic injuries.  The corollary of that is if you want to reduce catastrophic injuries, only allow 2-year old racing.  That is the what the science is telling us, but the research is diametrically opposed to the beliefs of the general public.

That discrepancy between what the science is telling us and what the well-meaning public believes needs to be addressed, and it should be addressed aggressively before PETA gets a hold within our industry.

PETA is an ugly organization to deal with and they have bottomless pockets.  Beware of PETA.  They are not animal lovers.

• Scot's reply:  JAJ, you asked for a link... here's how I responded in a previous post when someone else brought up the physical benefits of 2-year-old racing:  "Dr. Larry Bramlage of Rood & Riddle Equine Hospital is perhaps the world's most renowned Thoroughbred racehorse veterinarian.  His research supports what you say -- training and concussion in the 2-year-old Thoroughbred actually aids its development.  Here's a great article by him:  The Racing of Two-Year-Olds."  ...  All that said, however, I will warn you to avoid over-generalization.  These studies say that 2-year-olds that race are more likely than the general Thoroughbred population to earn more and race more years.  But comparing "2-year-olds that race" to "all Thoroughbreds" is a misleading study.  For a true comparison, we'd have to look at the performance of "racehorses that were trained to start as 2-year-olds" versus "racehorses that were trained to start as older horses."  And frankly the data available now is incomplete and inconclusive (that's a separate problem and one that The Jockey Club needs to do something about).  ...  Keep in mind that many many foals are trained to race as 2-year-olds, but not all do (mental immaturity, physical issues, etc.).  When they then start as 3-year-olds, it's going to skew the statistics in favor of 2-year-old racing.  ...  Here's a scenario to illustrate:  a trainer has 10 foals that he's prepping for a 2-year-old racing season.  Five are physically and mentally ready, and they race. Yay for the juveniles!  The other five are deemed "not ready" after a few weeks or months of training, and they're laid up for a while to mature.  When these five come back as 3-year-olds, there's a lot of possibilities:  they could be mentally fried from the early training, they could suffer physical repercussions from being pushed as 2-year-olds, or it could be discovered that they are pretty much talentless. So when you look at these two groups side-by-side, you're not comparing apples to apples.  You're comparing a group that thrived on early training to a group that were either unfit for racing to begin with or that would have benefitted from additional maturing time before the first round of training. 

in response to Karen's earlier comment about Jeff Mullins using medication without knowing what it does to a horse.  This one shocks me a bit, how can anyone give a horse anything not knowing how it works.  That certainly is not horsemanship.  But owners with top horses do not seem to worry about this and send these superb animals to trainers like Mullins anyway.  Could it be that its about the dollar in the end?

I just read this whole thing.  It is a depressing and miserable read.  I want to feel excited about racing, I love watching these magnificent creatures doing what they love to do.  But, as it is with everything man touches, it has an ugly side.  Desperate to find something hopeful in all these comments, I can only say that at least it is evidence that some people really care.  What is that old quote "evil happens when good people do nothing".  

Scot,

Thank you for that article.

You questioned using generalizations, of comparing 2-year olds that raced against the general Thoroughbred population.  I agree--that is like comparing apples to oranges.

However, the study you sent the link to compared horses who started as a 2-year old to horses who did in fact start but not as a 2-year old.

That is comparing apples to apples.  It proves that a racehorse who starts at 2 has more starts, earns more money, wins more stakes races than a racehorse who doesn't start until 3 or more.  Both groups in the study had raced, so it was NOT a comparison of 2-year old starters against the general population.

• Scot's reply:  To be fair, the Bramlage-cited data was comparing horses by when they STARTED, not by when they were TRAINED.  At best, that's a Granny Smith-to-Red Delicious comparison, if not apples to oranges. I'll stick with my argument that it makes a huge difference (and skews the numbers to bias 2-year-old racing) when you look only at the age of first starts.  Lots of those horses in the study that are listed as first starting at ages 3 or older actually went through the same training regimen as the 2-year-old starters.  My contention is those that failed or broke down should be grouped with the 2-year-old trainees rather than with older trainees.  Otherwise what you're saying is "the horses that succeed at 2 are more likely to have successful careers than horses that fail at 2."  That does tell you many things, but it does NOT prove that "horses that are trained at 2 are more likely to have successful careers than horses that are trained at 3 or older."  Don't get me wrong, I don't discount the possibility that 2-year-old training might be proven to be superior... I just won't buy into that idea until there are unbiased data to back it up.  (And as I mentioned, that data does not exist now -- anywhere.  I believe it is the responsibility of The Jockey Club to either start maintaining that data or to step aside to let another group do so.)

Dona, it's not really that I support humane euthanasia. It's more that, given the way things are today, when an owner asks 'What do I do with animals I can't take care of and can't find a place for?', what options are there? That's why I loved your post. It gives a picture of the ideal and if people work for the ideal, even if that's not reached, at least whatever does come of it will be better than what's out there now. I go to Old Friends website and read the stories and how those horses are being taken care of and it's great that it's there, but there are not enough places like that for claimers or horses who have been injured and can't be retrained or even ridden. So they end up in kill pens or starving to death and the worst part is, they are intelligent enough to loose hope. That breaks my heart. I think we're on the same page, I'm just a little more cynical about people, especially when money is involved.

I believe that not allowing any drugging would solve at lot of the problems.  If these horses can't be raced they won't be bred in the first place.  

Thank you TIZNOWBABY.  That was just a wonderful, concise summary of solutions.  All are doable.  Hope everyone scrolls back and reads your post.  As an aside, on a positive note, thanks to Bloodhorse for highlighting the excellent job Mark Miller did in training General Quarters.  We need lots of good stories to offset the bad.  

Great   article,  

Horses need to be put first...  what happend to horsmanship?  they are not machines, that should get forced to run that hard... or shot up  drugs to keep them going for the mighty $$     and if they break down, just get rid of them an go get a new one... and then when they are too old to race, or can't race anymore, they are put up for slaughter.. This industry really needs some tough laws , clamp down on over  breeding  and  "  find places for those horses that can't anymore... this industry  needs to get cleaned up get rid of the greed   !!  Diane

Very good article. I do not know anything about horses except that they're beautiful and I love watching them run. But I have been so traumatized watching horse racing that sometimes I just don't know why I keep watching the races. My first trauma was Ruffian whose picture I still have hanging in my office. I gave it up for a long time then came back with Barbaro - I could have sworn we had a Triple Crown winner - I was so excited. We know what happened there. God I loved that horse and suffered with him for 8 months until his passing. Then Gorgeous George Washington. Then Eight Belles. And Shakis, Wandering Boy, Indyanne, Dear Lord how much can an animal lover take. You love these animals then you lose them in the blink of an eye. Right now, I'm so upset over The Pamplemouse and Old Fashioned - after all the attention and love I've given these beautiful creature, now I won't see them race again (I'm almost sure of this). So, now what? I fall in love with some other race horse that I'm going to lose to death or injury. Why put yourself out for this kind of pain? So yes there are alot of issue - drugs, abuse, etc.  But I think this sport can attract more fans like me if we can sit back and enjoy seeing these beautiful animals do what they love doing - run - without having this nagging thought in the back of your head that disaster is about to happen.

Great article and many more like it are needed.  To answer your questions "But the issue that concerns me right now is whether racing can survive another high-profile on-track injury. Or another expose on ex-racers rescued from a slaughter auction. Or another trainer caught doping his runners."  The answeres are No, No and No!  My money used to go to support racing, now it goes to support rescues to save these beautiful animals from slaughter, abuse and drugs.  Racing is a beautfiful sport and one everyone could enjoy but no longer can I encourage recommending racing as a family sport knowing that the very animal cheered on by children may end up at the slaughterhouse if he doesn't win or did not run fast enough.  Please, let's work together and fix the ills and then we can celebrate this beautful sport together and to the horse we can say, we treated you well when you gave your all for us and we will treat you will and protect you when it is time for you to rest.

TO TIZNOWBABY: Re your point #3, "Stop breeding for the sales ring and what I call breeding to get a breeder." Of all the items on the long list of the sport/industry's problems, commercial breeding is the toughest nut of all to crack.

Forgive me for stating the obvious here, but it may be useful to note that, legally, horses are livestock; property with which the owner can do as he or she pleases WITHIN THE LAW (emphasized due to the Paragallo case). Horse sales have been around probably since the species was first domesticated, so eliminating commercial breeding is not feasible. However, I believe breeding practices can be improved with the aid of 21st century tools such as genetics research, centralized databases, statistical studies, etc.

I think the main difference between most of the top breeders of yesteryear and today's commercial breeders is twofold: First, breeders of the past usually produced horses primarily to race for their own stables. Even though they might sell a percentage of their foal crop each year, the market then was for sturdy horses who could run fast over a distance of ground carrying weight.

For the most part, a commercial breeder's perspective isn't long term. Like any farmer or rancher, they're focused on selling the next crop -- and they are selling to a far different market than in the past. Today's Thoroughbreds are bred to win as early as possible, to run fast over short distances, and to carry the least amount of weight possible.

Fifty years ago come September 4th, the great Kelso made his racing debut. Bred and owned throughout his life by Mrs. Allaire DuPont's Bohemia Stable, Kelso raced eight years, winning 39 of 63 starts. He carried 130 pounds or more in 24 races. As they used to say back then, Kelso didn't need to "carry his track around with him." He raced on 14 different tracks, on dirt and turf. He won the Jockey Club Gold Cup five consecutive years when its distance was two miles.

Kelso was gelded early and raced three times as a two-year-old, winning only his maiden race. Not rushed into the Triple Crown, Kelso made his three-year-old debut mid-year in an allowance race, then finished out 1960 winning the Choice Stakes, Jerome Handicap, Discovery Handicap, Lawrence Realization Stakes (equalling Man o' War's record), Hawthorne Gold Cup and Jockey Club Gold Cup. He was named three-year-old champion and Horse of the Year, the first of his five HOTY titles.

After he was retired, Mrs. DuPont had Kelso retrained as her personal show jumper and saddle horse. He lived at her Woodstock Farm in Maryland for the remainder of his 26 years, and is buried there.

I think we can all agree that racing and breeding have changed dramatically in 50 years, for the most part, not for the better.

In my opinion, it would benefit the breed tremendously if owners and the general public would rediscover the thrill of watching great horses running two miles while carrying true handicap weights. But that will never happen unless buyers drive changes in the sales market and owners are willing to be patient with their young stock.

Amen. I love racing, grew up in the business, am sickened by what's happened in the last 20 years. Something nobody talks much about in addition to the issues raised in this excellent article is WHAT ABOUT THE WAY YEARLINGS & 2YOs ARE NOW BEING RAISED AND PREPPED FOR THE SALES?  They surely don't look nowadays like the yearlings I saw 30 years ago; now they look like show ponies crossed with fatted calves. Qu'est-ce qu'on va faire ???

For Big Red, I completely agree that, as you say, the commercial breeding would be the toughest nut to crack. I like to think that if you eliminated drugs, that would help the situation. We're masking too much unsoundness with drugs and synthetic tracks.

"groups set out to destroy the sport". (from the original post).

I'll agree that racing needs to "educate", which includes taking a stand against all the stupid agendas and have baked opinions that populate these boards.

my view is that the sky is not falling, that we have a sport made for the internet once we wake up to that, we have a gambling monopoly, better horses are being bred, therapeutic drugs need to be defended, most people on the back stretch are honest instead of crooks, human slaughter for unwanted horses is understood by 95% of horse owners, breeders and trainers, and racing needs to get a back bone, and as the original poster stated commence to "educate". And btw those abused animals at IAMS will thank PETA as their only advocate for the idiot that posted that PETA hates animals.

I don't share the opinion that synthetic tracks mask unsoundness.  Success on synthetic surfaces requires stamina, whereas success on dirt requires only speed.  And I thought we were in agreement that we need to promote stamina over speed to increase soundness in the thoroughbred.  

Easy Goer, bless you for discussing the topic of breeding mares into the ground, that is an ugly secret that seems to never see the light of day.  You can add Kentucky Derby winner Winning Colors to your list of broodmares who died from foaling complications (at the age of 23).  

Lastly, one main reason why the BC 2008 went off without a single horse being hauled off the track, is that a team of state vets not only examined the horses the morning of the races, they examined the horses all week long.  And, of course, The Pamplemousse was spared by a pre-race exam.  That level of commitment to safety should be displayed at all tracks.  Thank you Scot for this opportunity to express our honest opinions.

The Ernie Paragallo stories are truly nauseating and disgusting, but, unfortunately, not unusual.  I have been involved with horses for almost 50 years, and currently own 5, including 2 thoroughbreds.  It is lots of fun to watch the Derby horses blaze across the finish line, but what goes on behind the scenes is truly criminal. I know for a fact that horses race with significant injuries, including slab fractures, at tracks throughout the country.  When the horse can no longer put money in the owner's wallet, they are often "discarded", because they have "limited" value.  It is then up to the true animal lovers to clean up the "mess" that has been created by the Ernie P's of the world.  Eight Belles and George Washington were two of the lucky ones. Their death was quick and humane, much unlike the horses that are neglected, abused and not cared for over many months.  Then you have the horses that are put on the slaughter trucks and shipped to Mexico and Canada.  At a low level track where I have volunteered, the kill buyer is always there masking his activity as "thoroughbred trainer".  He once told me with a smile that, if he depended on winning purses at Beulah, he would be "out of business" because there is no money in horse racing in the state of Ohio.  His main occupation is horse trader and he buys horses for a few dollars and then they are often sent to Sugarcreek or to the killer who ships to Canada. I sincerely applaud the precipitous decline of the racing industry. I hope and pray that over the next few years the racing industry files financial bankruptcy because it is already emotionally bankrupt.

By the way, Ernie P should be heavily fined and do extended jail time.  I am truly insulted that Ernie P would deny abusing the animals under his care and expect the rest of us to donate money to save these pathetic creatures.  He is the one who is truly pathetic!

Re-the two-year-old racing issue:

Scot's comments are right on the mark...I've devoted much attention to this issue and can say that the intended inference (relative safety of 2 yr. old racing) drawn from Dr. Bramledge's remarks is not supported by the literature. There have been no studies that compare injury in those receiving consistent speed work/racing at two to those withheld (deliberately) from such until a later age (3,4,5). Dr. Bramledge has posited that speed work during the horse's accelerated growth phase contributes positively to long-term soundness in the racehorse. I have discussed this with other prominent equine veterinarians who deny knowledge of any such study. They contend that the jury is still out pending the necessary studies on this larger issue. There is, however, a consensus "given", i.e. the horse does not reach full maturity until approx. 5 yrs. age. Until more is known (if ever) common sense should dictate that we error on the side of maturity and, at least, abolish 2 yr. old racing. It is important that young horses-foals, yearlings, etc. receive constant exercise-repeated concussion-thus stimulating proper bone growth/density. Needless to say, Dr. Bramledge is a renowned, skilled surgeon, but his public persona appears rather dedicated to the protection of the sport.  

MLJ:

Your post was beautifully written and very informative. Hope all read it.

Thank you.

MLJ:

Being an Ohioan myself I'll agree with you on most of your points about Beulah Park.

But, I do want to point out what I think is the 1 bright spot about Racing in Ohio.   And that is the "Ohio Bred Program".

Not that there have ever been a lot of "Good" Ohio bred horses.   Harlans Holiday was probably the most famous in recent years, but the program itself, I believe, is worth taking a look at.

This year there are 33 Ohio Bred Stake races and all with a "Minimum" purse of $50,000...Minimum that is !!!

And with a projected foal crop of 2009/2010 of being less than 200 foals..."To Me"...that's a market that someone with the means should be tapping into.

200 foals really isn't that much competition when compared to the 1000's that are born each year in other states with restricted programs.

I just thought that this was worth noting as a "Bright Spot" since most of us on here seem to despise the state of racing in general these days.

I want to add to my list of early retirements. Old Fashioned, according to Rick Porter, is done. So, now he can make little babies with that fashionable pedigree of his. Will they make it to the Derby or crap out early?

First off the age should be raised to 5 (not 4), when the horse is completely done growing and plates are fused, this is realy when their peak is reached. second off breeding and over breeding needs to be adressed, La Ville Rouge, to name a well known horse, has now popped out 3 full bothers to Barbaro in as many years, and although the jacksons are amazing people and very good owners, most are not, how many horses end up at the meat man on a daily basis??? Third Off I think the government should stick their nose in it, give the trainers and owners a little scare, maybe to straighten up their act. At Suffolk Downs you have a trainer/owner who was convicted of animal abuse still allowed to race horses, you have got to be kidding me??? There will never be justice for all the horses thrown away on a daily basis but the owners/trainers in the spotlight have a duty to bring awareness to the plight of retired racehorses and to stop contributing to the over breeding that is out of controll...sigh.....

Karen, We are on the same page and I'm glad you understand why I advocate a retirement fund for the horse from the proceeds they generate. Storm Cat alone could support his entire prodigy with his breeding fees, and look at the money they in turn earned. There's a book out about how Mr Prospector sired a billion dollar industry. Where's his offspring's share for their upkeep? Establishing a fund to care for these horses could create a whole new cottage industry, create jobs,and generate more interest about the sport because states would have a greater piece of the pie being distributed throughout. Imagine more places created to house them, additional medical personnel to aid in the rehab and post racing training, medical supplies and related products, tourism it could generate, ala the Kentucky horse park where Cigar is housed. The possibilities are endless but nothing will happen unless racing has their back to the wall during desperate hours or Congress mandates it.

Maybe the question should be more like "What is racing going to do in order to survive"? In other words, what are they going to do and when are they going to do it?.

Donna, Karen (etc.) your hearts are in the right place, but I doubt your methods for funding the displaced horses is very viable. What hasn't been expressed enough in this blog are the raw economics of this game. For openers, approx. $2B are expended yearly on costs associated with training, but only approx. $1B are returned in earnings. Those figures don't take into account the costs of purchase, or breeding and rearing, etc. The owners feel they are already behind the 8-ball, so most would be disinclined to lose even more. It is these negative economics which are in part contributory to the overall problem. Racing simply doesn't support itself. Yes, some very high profile stallions turn a nice profit, but most don't. I'll now contradict myself by suggesting that if a small % of the purse were deducted and, perhaps, a small % of the revenues from all stud fees, perhaps this might be "swallowed", thus helping relieve some of the overwhelming costs associated with homing all these horses.    

To the poster above who said that 95% of horsemen support the idea of humane slaughter, that's exactly the problem. The evidence that slaughter was terribly inhumane even when done in the US is unimpeachable. We're talking massive bodies of evidence, collected by the Federal Government about the transport and the slaughter house that, by comparison, makes Paragallo's farm look like it was run by Dr. Doolittle instead of Dr. Moreau.

Slaughter was never humane, and pretending that it can be doesn't make it so. Examine the Freeedom of Information evidence released by the USDA last November. Slaughter needs to be banned, period.

Listen, it's the notion that horses are disposable commodities without the intelligence to know they are being betrayed that is at the root of this. If the sport does not have the financial means - or will - to do right by the horses during and after their careers, that's a real problem. There are a lot of folks who truly love the horses they own and train and treat them well. This doesn't change the fact that - according to recent vet studies out of Canada -  babies come off the farm with the precursors to the equine version of osteoporosis. It's an uncoupling of the healthy osteoblast-osteoclast bone regeneration process that is a precurser to bigger injury. Newer science is leading us to the realization that breakdowns may be more than just taking a bad step out of the blue.  

Right now, many in the sport have a bunker mentality. They blame PETA for their own transgressions, and, like Nixon, the press for his downfall. While all this brouhaha is going on, there is an immediate need to come up with intelligent solutions within the industry so the humane community doesn't have to keep picking up the slack.

Factoring in the long term costs of producing any asset is sound  business management. If there is too little demand for the end product of racing, off track TBs, the intelligent, non greedy response would be to reduce production. So stallions would go back to sensible books and have a longer life expectancy. Win-win.

For the Thoroughbred bred to run, one of the most glorious animals on the planet,  

intelligent, practical, compassionate solutions are a matter of life and death.

Interesting article, here are my comments.

I think the sport is in need of a "commissioner's office". This multi-purpose office does what it does in other sports, self regulates the industry. It enforces certain rules and standards agreed upon by race track owners. But can provide other functions as well. If you want to keep the feds and states off your back, self regulate.

First, I feel that horse owners with multi-state licenses should submit to the commissioner's office a "business plan" for horses under their care for the retirement of racing horses, humanely. The commissioner's office can have a representative at each track or group of tracks to insure compliance by single state owners. Managing partners of syndicates could be the responsible party avoiding small investors from that problem.

Trainers who use illegal medications should be penalized more severely. Temporary suspension of licenses does not deter trainers from illegaling medicating, especially the trainers with large barns in multiple states where the day to day training is done by an assistant trainer anyway. However, with more severe penalities to both the trainer of record and the assistant trainer, perhaps these people will think twice about what they are doing.

Let's say for example, that if caught using an illegal substance, the trainer and the location's assistant trainer lose their license for 6 mos, the second time, one year. Finally, the third time there is a lifetime ban.

As to promoting the sport, advertisers may be more willing to sponsor the sport if they were sponsoring more than one race. For example, Yum Brands sponsors the Kentucky Derby. How about if the funds sponsored several races at different tracks. Many tracks have smaller unsponsored stakes, use those. A multi track ownership organization could easily do this. Wouldn't the sponsor get a bigger bang for his buck on that basis and more funds flow into racing?

Finally, have all tracks have small entry fees for all races, let's say $100. per horse. Divide these funds, let's say 20% retained by the track, 20% for horse retirement facilities, 20% for equine medical research, 20% for testing facilities for illegal substance testing, 20% to fund the commissioner's office and national marketing.

My thoughts

When my horses compete in shows, I do not expect others to pay for their surgeries to repair their injuries, their ongoing injury-related veterinary care, their medications, plus basic care of immunizations, deworming, farrier and board or feed bills. The horses were owned by me, competed by me and are MY financial responsibility to care for them myself and if I cannot, then I should not have my horses in competition or shows.  It is NOT okay for me to dump them with a kill buyer or take them to an auction OR expect someone in the racing industry to pay for my show horses.  Why is the reverse true for racing?

How many breeders, stallion owners or racing owners do you know that truly take responsibility for their horses?  This includes -- BEFORE donating the horse to a rescue -- paying for any surgeries required because THEIR horse suffered an injury while trying to make THEM money.  They could even make these surgery cost donations to the rescue and have a tax donation.  NO, that does not happen. The injured, if they are lucky, find their way to a rescue that bears the costs of caring for the horses, including surgery for repair of fractures, by begging for money from the non-race public and then the donors of the injured horses are all too happy to take a bow for their magnanimous donation of an injured horse!   If racing breeders or owners are unable to personally retire the horses they bred or owned or pay rescues to do so for them, then they should take them back to their farms and peacefully euthanize them.  (See John Hettinger's quote below).   However, people in the racing industry prefer to shirk their responsibility and let a 40 billion dollar industry's disposable horses become the financial concern of someone else, who never brought them into this world nor ever raced them but for some reason, they think their slow or injured horses and unwanted broodmares and aged or infertile stallions are not THEIR responsibility.

For those who financially cannot care for a horse they have bred or raced, then they should not be racing or breeding.  It's that simple. For those in racing that think this is just fine that people living in their trucks should be allowed to breed and/or race horses, then they should bear the burden of supporting those unfortunate horses or they should chase those "paupers" from the "sport of kings."  

In addition to breeder, stallion owner, and horse owner responsibilities:   Where are the donations from the racetracks that made money off of the wagers on these horses when they were in the industry or trying to race but suffered training injuries before they could even start? Sure, the tracks are crying that they are financially in trouble but I bet that general manager and staff still take their full salaries earned off the backs and broken legs of the horses that race at their track.  The registration fees paid to the Jockey Club and all the income earned from equineline.com -- why is there no donation per registered horse from the Jockey Club?    Where are donations from each and every veterinarian at the tracks and Thoroughbred farms who cared for them and profited from them?  The farriers? The exercise riders? The jockeys?  The states that receive tax dollars because they raced there and suffered injuries while earning money for those states? The pharmaceutical companies that profit from the sale of lasix, bute, steroids (both anabolic and catabolic) and other most commonly used drugs in the industry?    In a 40 billion dollar industry, it is not hard to figure out where the funding for its OWN horses should come from and it certainly should not continue to remain the responsibility of the non-race public. The racing industry needs to face reality.

Those in racing that cannot afford to take care of their horses humanely or repair a horse’s injury before donating it to a rescue and continue to support the rescue that takes their horse in, need to leave the "sport of kings".  To quote the late, great John Hettinger:

At the end of his life he should be retired, adopted, or humanely euthanized if no better solution can be found. Anything else makes a mockery of the words which for centuries have been used to describe our game ... Sport of Kings. -John Hettinger, Trustee, New York Racing Association

Realize that most are no longer reading this specific blog. Still, Facing Reality's (and some others) post warrants some comment-

Granted, there are no easy solutions for the numbers of "unwanted" horses. I beg that we eliminate euthanasia as one of the viable alternatives. Many see this as practical/logical (perhaps even "clean"), and certainly preferable to suffering (even this is less than certain). If our message is that euthanasia can be acceptable, it will be seen by others as the path of least resistance-the easiest way out of this mess. It will tend to inhibit more creative solutions, and allow those (states, tracks, owners, etc.) to rationalize away any efforts they may have otherwise undertaken. We don't advocate euthanasia for the homeless, wretched, elderly, etc. and we shouldn't for the horse. The fact that we "permit" this for dogs, cats, etc. (another wrong) should not be of solace to us... This specific issue needs a thorough airing.  

WFG:

Your basic concept about funding at the end is something already done.  Let me clarify for those still on this board:

Only certain races have entry fees. Allowance races and claiming races do not which are where most of the horses run. I do support a mandatory (not owner's choice)fee per horse entered as is currently done at Fingerlakes in NY and that amount is then MATCHED by the racetrack itself. However, the amount should be much higher than required at Fingerlakes.  Fingerlakes (loud applause!!) also is the only track in the country that has set aside land for their onsite rescue. The total of these two amounts could be set aside for donation to whatever rescue that particular track has a contract or agreement with but it is not fair for only the owners to bear the cost of this entry fee -- the track is making money because their horse is racing and risking its life and limbs on their racetrack.

Currently, through legislation, racing does fund the various things you mentioned (plus some you did not) by percentages from the total wagered.  You can probably find each state's racing legislation through a search that will show you what the amounts are for any particular racing state.  To make any change in that distribution would require amending each state's racing legislation which would probably be met with great resistance but that is PRECISELY the best way to generate the main source of funds for the horses.   Currently, just as an example, this is what usually happens to the total amount wagered in a state:  The states and local governmental units are the first to step in and take a percent for taxes. Out of this they fund the things you mentioned such as racing commissions, regulatory veterinarians, collection and testing of samples, enforcement and oversight of the welfare of the horses and integrity of racing (and it could be most reasonably argued tht many states fail miserably at this). The tracks get a percent for their costs and profit, a percent is set aside for PURSES, for state breeding programs, and in most states a percent is set aside for operating costs of the authorized Horsemen's organization (whether that be the state's HBPA or other similar horsemen's organization.) There maybe a percent set aside for the Department of Agriculture or even for the state's general fund to pay for other things --some of them totally unrelated to horseracing.  CA legislation sets aside a percent for charities but the legislation does NOT state that this amount is to go to the retiring horses and in the past these sums have been donated to any number of human charities and they do not PUT THE HORSE FIRST. Rescues receive less than other charities or even none in some years. To reopen this legislation in each state and get all of the above to agree to take a lesser percentage to fund racing's injured horses would be a monumental task!  

As far as EUTHANASIA as an option: Someone who has personally viewed  horses at the track with fractures, blown tendons or suspensories limping onto the kill buyer trucks, has attended the auctions where rescuers are ignored by the auctioneer over the kill buyer, has a barn full of horses who have had surgery but are still only sound for walk/trot and now must refuse horses and know they are going to slaughter because they are full, completely understands what John Hettinger stated so eloquently -- if nothing else is available, then chemical euthanasia is an option over turning horses away so these once prized investments can be slaughtered.   If you do some number crunching adding the horses sent to slaughter per year (see Patricia Hogan, DVM's response to the AAEP white paper) and add to that the horses that are taken in by formal rescues and by individuals each year, understanding that these horses have another 20 years to live, then euthanasia must be considered or racing will be unable to support their discarded horses. There are simply too many of them each year.  It’s a heartbreaking but grim reality.