NO WAY !!! I do not want to see AI used in Thoroughbred breeding !!I'm not really into the dual hemisphere breeding either!!

Let's face facts: A.I. has been in use for decades in spite of the Jockey Club's prohibition against it.  But when was the last time the Jockey Club imposed sanctions against the perpetrator? It's much like the racing commissions which claim they are opposed to drug abuse by trainers but make little effort to find the culprits.

The Jockey Club should either legalize A.I. or enforce it's own rule which prohibits it.

This all boils down to responsible horse breeding.

You can argue for the possibility of limited genetics, devalued stud fees and lowered sales yearlings/2yo-I/T all you like, but the FACT is that argument is an illogical smokescreen.  Just because it might be allowed (and I will guarantee we see AI in my lifetime when the old guard finally dies off) does not mean a stallion owner has to use it.

Exactly what is the difference between the Ashford foal factory pumping out 400+ foals from a shuttle stallion and a stallion owner allowing 400 AI foals a year?

There isn't and it's incredibly disingenuous (not to mention just a little hypocritical) to suggest there is.

It is also pretty damn stupid to suggest that a stud fee would be impacted because of AI.  They aren't connected, no matter how much the anti-AI crowd tells us.

Despite what the propaganda would have people believe, AI would not lower stud fees to deserving stallions, provided the stallion managers show some restraint.  Again, there is no difference between 400 AI foals and 400 shuttle foals.  If you are afraid of lowering the value of a stallion because of a flood of yearlings -- here's a novel concept, DON'T BREED HIM TO EVERY MARE WHOSE OWNER PRESENTS A CHECK.

It is within the power of the stallion owners/managers to make AI work and the first step is voluntarily limiting stallion books.  Just because 300 mare applications are presented doesn't mean you have to breed to all 300.

There's a great word stallion owner/manager would have to learn and use when AI is approved and that word is "NO."

No, just because you have a check and mare doesn't mean I will breed my stallion.

No, there are already 150 mares in foal to my stallion this year, I won't be breeding him anymore. (150-250 foals/year from a top class sire is not an unreasonable number globally... it is nationally).

No, your mare doesn't meet the required pedigree/race/produce record so her application isn't approved.

Again, just because it is available, doesn't mean you have to use it.  If you as a stallion owner don't want to, then don't.  If you have a high class enough stallion, the mares will be there.

It also won't flood the market with AP Indys.  It MIGHT just get rid of the cheap $500 regional stallions who probably should be gelded anyway.  Personally, I don't see anything wrong with that.  And I don't want to hear about some champion by someone's backyard stallion.  That is the exception, not the rule.

Not only do I not want to see AI used in Thoroughbred breeding. I would like to see the stallion bookings brought under a 100 mares and the dual hemisphere stopped. Horses are animals not expendable machines.

Here's an interesting angle on this debate:  As an accountant, one of my clients is a warm blood breeder.  For a relatively small amount of money (< $10,000), she can obtain and use the frozen semen of a warm blood stallion that has been dead over a decade to sire a foal with her mare.  This was a revelation to me... I am not sure I want stallions to be siring foals for 40 or 50 years.  That could seriously (adversely) affect the genetic diversity of the breed even more...

There is one reason, and one reason only that the Jockey Club doesn't allow AI. It would destroy the "stud farms" of KY. Once AI is allowed, cooled & shipped semen would follow. Then a stallion could stand anywhere, not just at a "stud farm" in KY. Those people put lots of money in the game to hold their monopoly. There is no legitimate reason not to allow AI.

The Jockey Club does right by prohibiting A.I.  It would encourgage breeders who already book their stallions with more mares than appropriate to still more mares, since one mounting can produce several matings when using A.I.  I fear that should A.I. become used in Thoroughbred breeding, it would lead to many more horses being bred each year.  With so many unwanted horses in this country already, I would really hate to see that happen.

I agree that the problem is "400 foals", if a stallions book was limited to 100-150 mares, I see no problem.

I really do not like the practice in QH world where they harvest the fertilized egg of a top mare and transplant that embryo into a surrogate mare...that way she can keep on showing and racing...

The argument for AI is interesting - safety of the mares & studs through the reduction in infective disease such as occurred earlier this year on a couple of the quarter horse farms and the fear that once again it may spread to our thoroughbred farms, the actual physical injury's risk that could be potentially suffered by both mares & studs during the actual breeding process, The injurys that many older stallions have suffered and ended thier lives as well as thier abillity to reproduce, reproductive careers ended because of secondary issues like laminitus etc.? Could we not still require mares to be shipped & bred on site at the facility where the stud stands? Further could a registration mandate also be issued limiting a stud book to say 75 breedings? I'm not sure I know enough about AI to take a stand one way or the other but it seems that it may warrant a look at both the pro's & cons of the subject. One thing I do know is that I am totally against dual hemisphere breeding that is nothing more than the breeders way of getting around the naturally limited book through seasonal avoidance they might as well be using AI with an uncontrolled book number!    

The original uses the term artificial insemination (AI) and expresses concern about the numbers of mares that might be inseminated, and possibly reducing the genetic diversity in TBs. I believe some TB stallions can cover up to 2-300 mares per year, maybe more if they shuttle. I doubt you will find more than 3-5 Quarter Horses who sire that many foals in one year (I know the performance/show industry more than the racing QH, but the most popular sires are probably only siring 1-200 foals a year.

Lastly most of the original premises, and following comments are using the term AI as if it was the same as shipped semen; either cooled or frozen.

It is very possible to use AI with the mare on the premises, and use the full dose in one mare and have exactly the same effect as live cover. AI would protect both mares and possibly studs from savaging or incidental injuries and change not one iota of breeding statistics. The discussion should be about shipped semen not AI!

The question really should be about shipped semen, not articial insemination.

I think it's archaic to not use A.I., it's not going to impact the amount of breedings anymore than the current stud farms like Ashford shuttling stallions all over the world to the detriment of their health both mentally and physically. I have used A.I. for years with my Arabians, the pros far exceed the cons, it isn't a cheap solution so it's not like everyone will all of the sudden breed crap to AP Indy, plus if the fear is overbreeing than simply limit books, which should be done in the first place. I LOVE the fact my precious and delicate newborn foals and their dams stay home in the safety and security of their own farm instead of being transported and stressed at such a younf age, opening up the greater risk of illness etc.. it's a no-brainer to me.

I show Paint horses and because of AI, I was able to breed my mare (in Michigan) to a stallion in Texas without the expense of hauling her there and leaving her for months, not knowing if she were being properly cared for or what. Then I would have had to bring her back to Michigan, and the long haul plus the climate change wouldn't have been healthy for her or her foal. I wanted his combined sire and dam bloodlines, and it was an easy arrangement to have the vet ready and waiting. If TJC would approve AI, mares in California could access NY bloodlines and keep the genetic diversity of the breed.

There's always Pro's and Con's with any change.   But, IMO...AI should at least be allowed to happen.  

Leave the decision up to the Owner/Manager of each Stallion if you want, but at least allow it for those who choose it.

I mean...how cool could it have been if the technology were available decades ago and we were allowed to...to still be able to have a newborn direct foal from Bold Ruler, War Admiral, Man O' War and such ???

To me...that should be reason enough.

Or even if they chose to put a freeze on a particular Stallions availability and then Re-Introduce him again 20-30 years later.

There's several way cool options, but none can exist untill it's allowed.

Very important topic...I am strongly in favor of permitting A.I.-and this comes from one who is a regional stallion owner. A.I. would improve the safety, health, and well-being of the stallion, broodmare and, in some instances, newborn foal. Yes, some of Scot's and others' concerns have validity, but I believe they can be satisfactorally dealt with. The largest issue would concern the need to limit "book" size-this may have legal ramifications. I tend not to be too concerned about the frozen semen issue, as it would impact most on the unproven stallions (i.e. some of the elite deceased stallions would compete with them for mares). Those unproven, for example, and others as well, must then stand at a relatively reduced rate in order to economically compete. Perhaps, as it should be.... Scot: you mention that A.I. has proven to be deleterious to other breeds (specifically The American Quarter Horse and Stanardbred breeds). Would appreciate a bit more detail.      

• Scot's reply:  Hey Sceptre!  Well, my friends in the Quarter Horse and Standardbred industries tell me -- yes, this is second-hand knowledge -- that the average mating nowadays is done without the mare owner ever having even seen the stallion. They're relying on paper pedigrees and at best a Photoshopped stallion picture to determine their mating plans because the stud is 1,000 miles away but it only costs $40 to get the semen shipped!  ... More institutionally, though, the practice of AI (which the breed registries supported) quickly led to embryo transfer and in vitro fertilization (which the registries apparently didn't embrace as whole-heartedly, based on some lawsuits) -- and the next step now is legal challenges to allow cloned foals (which the various breed stud books are fighting tooth and nail but all agree they're doomed to fail).  Here's an example that supports the "slippery slope" argument:  read about how the AQHA lost its a lawsuit about its original rule allowing only one embryo transfer registration per mare per year. As for Standardbreds, in the years following AI approval, stallion diversity has plummeted and inbreeding has skyrocketed.  (We're not talking selective inbreeding, which you know I support -- rather, it's wholesale, close-up, deleterious mating practices that are almost guaranteed to weaken the breed.)

I applaud the Jockey Club for not allowing AI.  I am not involved in Throughbred breeding, but I do have Quarter Horses and think that AI, along with registration of more than one foal per mare per year, will lead to a smaller gene pool over time.  I also think it opens the door for perhaps someday allowing registration of other things such as cloned animals.  There are plenty of stallions and mares out there already and we do not need to concentrate the gene pool anymore than it already is.

Everyone stop and think about things for just a minute.

How does AI benefit the breed?

It would allow mares or stallions with physical and fertility issues to possibly reproduce.

However, do you really want stallions that have physical or fertility issues to still be passing on those genes? Do you want a habitually "dirty" mare into the gene pool?

AI would allow a stallion or mare to be anywhere.

Reference was made to the "rich" stud farms.  But, what you are forgetting is the one hundred thousand plus people who are making their living off the breeding industry.  vets, farriers, feed suppliers, grooms, maintainance people, security, fencing companies, tack stores,Van companies, vet techs, and so many more.  All of those people spend money to live, to eat, buy clothing and cars.  In short, the entire economy of Lexington is build on the horse.  It is not just the "rich" stud farms who would go under.  It would devistate the entire city and surrounding areas.

The last point to consider is this: Once AI starts, NOTHING will be able stop any form of reproduction in any number.  All you need to do is look at the AQHA lawsuits.  There will be NO limits on stallion books (stallion owner will sue JC and WIN), no limits on AI, no limits on ET (embryo transfer) for mares.  No limits on ANYTHING.

be careful what you wish for.

I have been involved with American Quarter Horses for 40 years including part ownership in a stallion that bred as many as 185 mares a year.  It would be a TRAGIC MISTAKE for the Jockey Club to allow A.I.  All of the reasons stated above are right on target.  

Additionally, with the dominance of shipped semen, people breed to stallions that they have never seen.  I see ads with retouched photos being used to market stallions.  Mare owners can get some some big surprises when their foals arrive.  

The first cloned horses will train this year show this year in the NCHA Futurity.  Cloning is just around the corner at AQHA despite their efforts to resist it.  

I have watched AQHA take this path and I firmly believe that it has done irreversible damage to a wonderful breed. I hope Jockey Club NEVER goes down this path.  

To: Reality Check - I think you are wrong on about every count.  Our stallion was a commercial operation.  We could ship enough semen to breed 15 mares a day and would have bred 300 if we could have. It was about the money.  In a business as commercially driven as the Thoroughbred industry is, how many operations would willingly limit their income?

The Quarter Horse industry has seen a proliferation of cheap stallions since the advent of A.I.  I can't figure this one out but the breeding statistics bear it out.  In 2003, AQHA received stallion reports for more than 35,000 stallions that produced 164,000 registered foals.

This is a genie that can't be put back into the bottle.  And once the first step is taken, the rest will surely follow.  Shipped semen, frozen semen, embryo transfer and possibly cloning.  

Not letting thoroughbreds be bred by AI is archaic and silly. I have been in the standardbred business as well as owned thoroughbreds. It is a blessing that when you retire a mare she never has to leave the farm. No moving trauma to her and her foal. No expense of vanning multiple times to meet a stud. The danger of the actual breeding to humans and horses is cut to almost nothing. The mare can be bred on the day and time to have the best chance of conception. It is so much more economical.

Much easier to ship semen than the whole horse.

Overbreeding is the responsibility of the stallion manager and it seems that nowadays some of them do not take their responsibity very serious except to get all the stud fees possible and to heck with anything else.

Standardbreds do not allow breeding to stallions who are deceased. When he dies it is over.

The American Quarter Horse Association has been doing AI for years. Just think of all the past great horses of the 70's and 80's that the thoroughbred industry could stii benifit from if The Jockey Club allowed AI. The Iron Horse would not be lost just kept frozen for future use. Secretariat, Seattle Slew,Alydar, Affirmed, Alysheba, and other great sires that contribute to the thorouhgbred.

AI has done more harm than good for the AQHA and Standardbreds.  Venereal diseases spread farther and quicker, as the recent CEM & EVA outbreaks have shown.

The most popular stallions will be even more overbred.  I'm less concerned about the value of the offspring at sales than the contraction of the gene pool.

In addition, mares which otherwise would be culled from broodmare bands would be kept breeding sub-par horses with AI available.  The reduced costs of shipping, and the elimination of medical screening demands by the stud farms would encourage these poor quality mares to pump out even worse offspring.

As for economics, all one has to do is compare the stud fee for Storm Cat his last year at live cover to that he's offering AQHA mares for AI.   He stood for $300k his last year, and now is $20k live foal.

• Scot's reply:  Thanks for the great comments and for the opportunity to link to a previous discussion about Storm Cat covering Quarter Horse mares.

I agree with all the reasons given for not allowing AI. There is a lot to be said about tradition, to even give a millimeter would be starting down a slippery slope legally, and there are enough people with live cover using the 'fashionable' sires of the moment and ignoring perfectly good ones to not allow a practice that would make that trend worse. As for economics, I don't know about it impacting stud fees that much, but someone else wrote about all of the people whose jobs depend on stud farm operations and that would be affected. Someone else wrote about the overproduction now and how that would be increased. There would not be as many organizations and it wouldn't be such an issue if there were only a few 'unwanted' or throwaway horses, but there are enough that the government in Montana is braving any backlash they may receive to not only approve, but protect, slaughter houses in their state. Having said all of that, there have been geldings that have done very well whose genetics stopped with them. And then there is Cigar. AI would do nothing for him, but cloning would. But then you come right back to the argument that if you allow cloning in 'special' circumstances, where do you stop?

AI should never be allowed in TB breeding. AI can produce 1000-5000 foals a year. You would also be able to clone Northern Dancer and use AI to foal 1000's.It is a no brainer people. Storm Cat is now an AI stud for Q horses and at 20,000  instead of 500,000.  

For those of you making the attempt to compare Storm Cat's stud fee as a PROVEN sire of thoroughbreds to his stud fee as an UNPROVEN sire of quarter horses need to actually investigate what the top QH sires actually get.

I think you're going to find he's at the top on both lists.  If he weren't the thoroughbred sire he was, there is no way in hell he'd be getting $20k for quarter horses.

Beyond that, all of this sky-is-falling nonsense is ridiculous.  As previously stated, the only reason AI isn't approved in Thoroughbreds is because of the damage it would do to Kentucky's economy.

It's as stupid as the fear-mongering behind statements like "we'll have 1000 Storm Cats every year!!!"  No we won't.  There are only so many people who can actually afford to breed to 6 figure stallions and only so many mares that are actually worth breeding at that price.

AI will drive out the cheap $500 regional stallions who should be gelded anyway and increase the books of the middle range stallions.  It would have little impact on any of the big stallions.

Again, it comes down to responsible breeding.  That means STALLION MANAGERS need to voluntarily limit their books (again, 250 foals globally isn't that unreasonable) and if they won't then the damn mare owners should.

If you're worried that your Smart Strike foal won't be worth the stud fee you spent because there's 200 out there in his foal crop, maybe you shouldn't breed to him.

It's pretty damn stupid to complain about your foal being devalued when you're the one that caused it by contributing to the 'glut' of foals by his sire out there.

I think the Jockey Club is right. No AI for Thoroughbreds. Just look at what AI has done to the QH breed. Two genetic diseases, HYPP and HERDA, were spread far and wide throughout the breed with AI. And I would like to remind you all that due to the overabundance of QHs, they are sent to slaughter in huge numbers. It is estimated that 70-80% of slaughter horses are QHs.

I know of several TB stallions(hunter and event sires) who do AI for other breeds. One of the owners refuses to breed to QHs because of the slaughter numbers. He doesn't want any of his stallion's foals ending up in that situation. I don't blame him.

I do think books of the stallions should be limited, and I don't approve of shuttling, either. Shuttle stallions don't live as long as stallions that stay home. It's not natural for a horse to breed year round, his system is set up for seasonal breeding, not year round. That takes a big toll on a horse.

As for the argument that mares don't do well when shipped to breeders and back, many mares stay at the breeder farm and foal, or they ship home to foal in their own stalls. I had two mares bred in Maryland right before we moved to Florida, the van bringing the other horses stopped at the breeding farm and picked them up and they came on down. Both in foal. They shipped fine and the foals arrived on time and healthy.

If you can't afford the shipping, you probably shouldn't be breeding. Horses are expensive, and trying to do it on the cheap does them no favors. AI would allow people who shouldn't be breeding due to their economic circumstances. It wouldn't be fair to the horses.

Lmaris:

I'm not sure that I agree with you about your point regarding Storm Cat.

I believe that his fee is only $20K simply because he hasn't "Proven" himself in their world yet.

When he started as a Stallion in Thoroughbreds his fee was only about $30K.   Then it dropped to $20K because he wasn't producing anything great yet.   But, then over the next 15 years or so he did "Prove" himself to be worthy of $500K.

I actually applaud his owners for even trying him in the QH world.   If more Thoroughbred Stallion owners did the same it might help the future AI approval in Thoroughbreds.

Appreciate the link, Scot, and yes, reading it did give me pause.

It appears that your (and many others) concerns mainly center around the potential inability to restrict book size, and the slippery slope dynamic. It's a given that breeders can't be trusted to do the "right thing", and  economics probably won't maintain a near status quo should A.I. be permitted. So, for A.I. to be feasible would require that the courts uphold what would be new Jockey Club guidlines for A. I. use (limited book size, etc.) I am far from convinced that the courts wouldn't (and I did read carefully your link, and a few other sources). The Jockey Club is simply not motivated to embark on a thorough exploration of the legal issues (one can envision numerous facts and analogies to support such "new rules" should they have a mind to posit them). I now am not yet suggesting that they (J.C.)permit A.I. , but feel they should make a conscientious effort to examine the legal ramifications on the restrictions they would impose if A.I. were permitted. There are obvious benefits to A.I. It is worth much effort to perhaps enable us to have our cake and eat it too.      

Sorry, forgot to mention, and it's a relatively small matter:

Several have expressed concerns over the fact that far fewer breeders would inspect/have access to the chosen stallion. Please trust me on this- at present, relatively few breeders visit the chosen mate for their mare prior to cover. I know this may be difficult to believe, but it's true. This doesn't only apply to the regional markets, it's equally true for Kentucky. Ask any stallion manager.      

I applaud the JC's decision not to allow AI. Just because we can, does not mean we should. Convenience is a paltry excuse for messing with mother nature's perfect system of natural selection.

JASON: My little old opinion isn't worth anything, but I agree with you 100%. The Jockey Club has it right. I hope they never allow AI in Thoroughbred breeding.

I understand and respect the position of TJC regarding AI, albeit, there are safeguards that can be applied if the TJC decides to adopt it; such as establishing one or two US-sactioned facilities to perform it. But I think that the adoption of more rigid positions on equally substancial and patent topics, such as accepting "palominos" but not so its genetic counterpart, the "buckskins", or convoying "grays" with "roans" (when actually there is proof of genuine "roan" Thoroughbreds in Australia and New Zealand) make many people consider by analogy that the TJC is extremely rigid and unreasonable on this other  equally fundamental topic (AI).

Argghh,

This whole discussion is driving me crazy!!

AI is not the same as shipped semen...AI is not the same as shipped semen...again and again.

AI just means that the mare is not bred by live cover. All the same restrictions of mare being present at the same farm as the stud (I think the biggest money issue for TB stud owners) can apply for AI.

The real issue implied in this discussion is shipped semen not AI. For those who think that AI created the HYPP and HERDA issues in QH....HYPP came from Impressive who was a breeding stallion when AQHA DID NOT allow shipped semen---HERDA I believe is traced back to King/ Poco Bueno lines from the 40s--again long before shipped semen.

To Tim, or professional auction poster, I do believe AQHA will end up allowing clones because of legal precedent established with embryo transfers. The one positive I see in allowing clones of geldings  for breeding purposes only is that you could geld many more colts and if the geldings turn out to be GREAT individuals you can recapture the genes from those geldings for the breeding pool.

• Scot's reply:  Goodwhit, I think it's fair to say that "shipped semen" is a subset of artificial insemination. By disallowing AI, The Jockey Club necessarily prohibits its use whether or not it has been shipped.  I understand your frustration with the semantics, but it's kind of like generically discussing "Thoroughbred racehorses" and assuming people will understand you're referring to flat runners.  Steeplechase and endurance Thoroughbreds do exist, but in context and unless otherwise qualified, it's an understandable shorthand to use"Thoroughbred racehorse" or even just "racehorse" when speaking of Thoroughbred flat racers. 

ONE THING THAT HAS BEEN HIT ON,BUT NOT FULLY ADDRESSED,IS WHO IS GOING TO BUY THESE BABIES,AND WHO IS GOING TO BREED.  LOOK AT ALL THE WESTERN MAGAZINES ABOUT QH'S AND HOW MARES ARE RUNNING DRY, NO BREEDING THIS YEAR.  MANY AVERAGE PEOPLE LIKE ME ARE SICK OF SEEING STARVED HORSES, ABANDONED HORSES, AND IT IS US, WHO ARE LEFT TO PICK UP THE PIECES.  YET WE ARE DEMONIZED FOR WANTING BREEDING RESTRICTIONS, FOR LESS FOALS PER YEAR.  HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE SEEN THE OTHER BLOOD HORSE PAGES WITH THE  STORY OF SKIPINGO, SKIP AWAYS, BROTHER, OR HOW SOMEONE JUST FOUND SECRETARIATS BROTHER AND RESCUED HIM.  I AM SO TIRED OF PEOPLE WHO WANT BREEDING TO BE CONVIENT FOR THEM. YET WHEN THEY SELL THE FOAL, EXPECT US TO PICK UP THE TAB, BY EVENTUALLY GIVING THE HORSE A LOVING AND FOREVER HOME.  I RESPONED TO THE WESTERN HORSEMAN ARTICLE WITH THE SAME THOUGHT. WHY DO NOT FARM MANAGERS JUST BUILD A BIG FEEDLOT FOR ALL THE BABIES THEY PRODUCE, FEED THEM OUT, THEN SLAUGHTER THEM. WITHOUT GETTING THE REST OF US INVOLVED. IF FOR ONE SECOND ANY BREEDER ON THIS FORUM THINKS NONE OF THEIR BABIES HAVE BEEN SLAUGHTERED,THEN YOU NEED THE REALITY CHECK.

Several years ago a study was conducted by a leading veterinarian school in K.Y. concerning the benefits of A.I. to the TB breed. I personally talked to one of the Vets involved and was told the study found that A.I. improved almost every concern in breeding except one.

1) Safety and health of Mares and foals. Given the fact that mares and foals can stay in their normal inviroment, the reduction of stress related illness and accidents caused by shipping of mares and foals from one state to another will greatly be reduced. S.T.D's are virtually eliminated which protectect the health of our horses which retain theri values.

2) Safety and health of Stallions - Collection of semen techniques midigate injuries to valuable stallion assets caused by stressed out and maiden mares.

3) Safety and health Humans - A stallion breeding shed is one of the most dangerous work enviroments in the world and is reflected by having the highest workmans comp rates of any industry due to human injury and death rates. Humans are rarely injured by stallions in the breeding shed. Most injuries and deaths by humans in the breeding sheds are caused by visting mares who are seperated from their new foals or maiden mares who have never been bred before. less human injuries will have a great economic impact to financially struggling farms through reduced Workmans comp rates.

2)Increased conception rates - This increases a mare owners return on investment potential in such a high expense venture of breeding which will keep people in our industry. The over empahsized "over production" theory of AI detractors need only to look at the list of TB stallions in the past 5 years who covered 100 or more mares per year. The commercial market corrects when their is over supply like it is currently. Capitalism 101. For thoses who prefer regulation over market forces, simply limit the amount of mares a stallion can cover (not recomended).

As I stated, AI improves all aspects of our industry except  one. That one is the boarding farms in our largest producing areas ie...KY, Fla, Ca,ect. Think those folks have any influence in the Jockey Club policy decision process? Overall AI is better for our entire industry than current live cover requirements.

Amen, Amy Rooney! How about a rule that limits the amount of foals born (wasn't Man'O'War's crop only about 5,000 foals? gimmme a break about arguing that there wouldn't be anymore great ones)? The Jockey Club could have a panel that could approve or disapprove any potential matings. it IS time to address the issue of the unwanted, "throw-away", used up runner, and maintaining better breeding practices is a HUGE piece of the puzzle.

SCOT: My apologies for absent-mindedly typing "Jason" instead of your actual name in my 06 May 2009 11:48 PM post. It was very late and it had been a long, tiring day. Name mixup aside, I do agree with you 100% that The Jockey Club has it right about AI. Someone, somewhere has got to preserve what integrity this industry has left.

• Scot's reply:  *grin*  Noticed but figured it out... my fellow blogger Jason Shandler is a great guy so the mistake was no insult!

TO AMY ROONEY: Love the passion in your 07 May 2009 8:39 AM post, and thank you very much for it. :)

       Scot, The other day you had e-mailed me with some information ,Unfortunately I'm having trouble retrieving my E-mails :( Is there any other way to recieve the information at this time ?? I'd truly appriciate it!

• Scot's reply:  What a technological world we inhabit!  :-)   My phone number is listed in the "About" section -- give me a call sometime and we'll discuss.

I think AI should be allowed with a restriction on the number of mares per stallion. That number should be at about the maximum number a stallion covers now. Say 200 tops. Some breeding farms are already working in a gray area by collecting a stallion after he covers a mare and then she is infused post-breeding. Who's to say they don't breed a second mare with part of that collection? Also, most mares are not "bred" by a stallion, they are "raped". Sometimes quite violently. AI would eliminate that trauma as well as the trauma that is incurred when she and her foal are separated. It would be safer for all humans involved as well. Also, conception rates would be much higher because the mare can be bred at the optimal time, not when she can get into the breeding shed, which is often times not ideal. That can result in doubling, which clogs up the schedule even more, or she misses all together resulting in lost time and a later foal next year. None of the above arguments have convinced me AI is a bad idea.

Just like in ALL business $$$$MONEY$$$$ is GOD. Rules are to be followed by most but not all.Embyro Transplants do happen, AI does happen get REAL.Having worked in the TB industry all my working life believe me if enough money is involved it will get done, just like embyro tranplants were done in the Alydar Era., I know that for a FACT!! While working at the Irish National Stud as many many TB farm Managers attended. We regularly took sperm from one covering and assisted another mare who had been breed days before, normal practice. If the Thoroughbred Industry continues to say one thing and do another it will lose all it fans, the few that are left.  

Oh, come on.  All the Jockey Club has to do is to refuse to register over a certain number of foals per year stallion.  It isn't illegal to do AI now, the foal just can't be registered with Jockey Club.  AI is much safer for both handlers and horses and can aid stallions with fertility issues.

I think AI should be allowed in thoroughbreds, with a couple of rules 1.  No more than 200 mares bred each year  2.  Mare must be on site with the stallion.  Shipping companies would still be happy, the kentucky farms would still be happy.  The benefits would be, optimum breeding for the mare, better conception rates, less wear and tear on the stallion.  No long lines waiting for you stallions turn and the big farms, just drive up unload your mare, put her in some stocks and you are good to go.  Yes, we need to be doing things this way.  It would be much better for everyone concerned.

Murray, glad to see someone else has seen what I have seen.

As a breeder for many years and one who has TB, Arabian, QH & APHA mares & stallions, I would be very happy if the JC allowed AI and cooled shipped semen.  Horses still have to be boarded somewhere - the large stud farms could collect and AI on-site. Stallions still have to be collected and shipped from somewhere - this would keep the large stud farms in business. Stud fees could remain the same.  I think that we would see more quality horses produced if someone was not limited by location and the stallions around them.  The answers to not overbreeding are correct record management, DNA typing, and a cap on how many mares could be booked per season.  The safety of mares, handlers and stallions to me is a huge plus.  While Collection is still a dangerous job, it's not as dangerous as live-cover.  We collect and ship many stallions in a season and also AI mares with cooled shipped semen from stallions across the country. There is a lot of $$ in shipped semen with handling charges, etc.  The stud farms would still make a lot of money. I know that a lot of people will disagree with me here but in my humble opinion, I hope that someday we will see AI and cooled shipped semen allowed.  

If AI is allowed you can start to call Lexington the former horse capitol of the world. There will be no need to keep mares here or anywhere else in KY. I guess the good news is that we could all move to Pennsylvania, have PA breds by whatever stallion in the world and not worry about a bunch of bible thumpers worrying about slot machines at Keeneland. Because there won't be no Keeneland when everyone leaves. And if you are stupid enough to believe that it won't happen, try it, the Standardbred business is still a major force in Lexington right? No? Gee, what could have happened?  

I have read every comment posted here and I believe I have a unique idea.  I would be for A.I. on very, very limited basis.  For example...it can only be used with stallions who have sired over 75 stakes winners and on mares who have already produced top level allowance winners or stakes winners.  Who in their right mind would not have liked to have seen more foals out of Genuine Risk.  A.P.Indy is a genetic gold mine and he is improving the breed while some stallions are not.  The stallion must be a proven sire and the mare a proven producer for it to be used.  If not, then forget about it.  A.I. has not harmed any breed.  MAN does the harm by breeding anything and everything that walks.  The people who responded about Storm Cat standing for $20,000.00.  Is this REALLY a big deal??  He is not standing at stud any longer for T-breds and can no longer contribute to the downfall of the breed.....YES DOWNFALL !!!  If the owners have people knocking on their door wanting to use dismount samples or stored samples....let them.  The sooner he runs out the better!!  A.I. and the Thoroughbred don't mix.  Limiting a stallions genetic impact on the breed does have advantages.....and that even applies to one of my favorite stallions.....A.P.Indy.  

        Thanks Scot ! I'll be in touch soon :)

What total nonsense.  Live cover is inherently more dangerous and just lines the pockets of farms that demand that you leave your mare there for x number of months.  If you are worried about genetic diversity, limit the number of foals allowed for one stallion.  Do you really believe that when a farm reports that a satllion bred 180 mares that they were all live cover!  Let's get real here and get in the 21st century.  Why should regional breeders be restricted?  Why shouldn't someone in New York be able to breed to a stallion in California without risking his/her mare and foal in a cross country journey.  Frankly there are no rationale reasons not to allow AI.

I am sure people involved in horse breeds other than Thoroughbreds are delighted, and I am sure people involved in Thoroughbreds are not thrilled to read “……The Jockey Club is a conservative organization that is wary of change…..”.

And I am absolutely positive people involved in horse breeds other than Thoroughbreds, Lexington, KY area real estate brokers, politicians and horse vanning companies, to name a handful of interested parties, are delighted The Jockey Club does not permit the registration of foals conceived as a result of the artificial insemination of Thoroughbred stallion semen.

I also question the author's credibility to type on the subject of equine artificial semen and seriously doubt the author's knowledge respecting animal breeding /genetics when the author types ".........practices that are not only theoretically harmful, but in fact have proven to be deleterious to other breeds (specifically..... and the Standardbred breeds).

To whit:

1/ Artificial insemination of stallion semen, in and of itself, is not related to animal breeding /genetics. The author infers artificial insemination of stallion semen will automatically trigger an increase in the size of popular stallion books decreasing the available number of alleles at each locus within the Thoroughbred breed – two absolutely not true insinuations.

2/ The two Standardbred breed regulators in North America (The United States Trotting Association – USTA, and Standardbred Canada – SC) have allowed the registration of foals conceived by artificially inseminated semen since the technique was perfected with Standardbreds in and around the American state of Ohio in the 1950’s – back 50 years – at least seven equine generations.

To date I am not aware of any peer reviewed and published study dealing with “deleterious” genetic issues in any Standardbred population in North America.  

3/ Given most commercial Standardbred stallions standing in North America artificially inseminate their book of mares, only a relative hand full of  Standardbred stallions standing in North America service more than 150 mares per year while in North America – possibly no more than a dozen Standardbred stallions bred more than 150 mares while standing in North America in 2008.

Mares bred data is available from the USTA and SC. Comparison of said data with The Jockey Club mares bred numbers will reveal several Lexington, KY based Thoroughbred stallions breed more mares in one North American season than the overwhelming majority of Standardbred stallions standing in North America breed in one season.

4/ My facts may not be exactly correct on this point, however, basically, beginning in the 2009 breeding season the USTA is limiting the number of mares a stallion’s semen may inseminate in a calendar year in North America to approximately 140. The new rules apply only to sires foaled after 2004 and limits are different for trotters and pacers. In Canada, SC has no stallion book limits.

The USTA board passed the abovementioned stallion book limit rules several years ago for two reasons (a) one non-peer reviewed and non-published study authored by a Veterinarian that implied a lack of diversification within the Standardbred gene pool in North America and (b) hard lobbying from commercial breeders hoping the supply/demand market legend will act in their favor in ensuing years.

Of course, like and most horse breeding authorities and the 100 or so members of The Jockey Club, the majority of USTA board members (then and now), could probably not explain in “Mendelian” terms how a horse gets its chestnut coat.  

David Stuart

Glencoe, Ontario, Canada

davestuartguelph@yahoo.com

At a glance, for pedigree students, Artificial Insemination in thoroughbreds sounds exciting as we will have the opportunity to design and materialize any imaginable mating just because we won’t have geographical restrictions anymore. Once you have your mare’s pedigree analyzed, you may put all your creativity, boldness, or intuition into play and have the opportunity to test it with breeding her to any stallion in the whole world (providing AI is permitted globally). It would be a “genetic globalization” revolution.  

Under the assumption that most of the world successful sires are of American origin we could expect oversaturation of very few lines (e.g. Mr. Prospector, Seattle Slew, Northern Dancer, Storm Cat). However, there will be room for experimentation as well as we may choose “outcrosses” with stallions from countries like Argentine, Australia, Brazil, UK, Germany, France, New Zealand, Ireland, etc. Who knows … it might yield some nice surprises.

However, I would be expectantly distrustful about the quality of the product.  As the great Federico Tesio stated, the “nervous impulse”   infused by natural mating could be a determining factor for the quality or running ability of the offspring.

The experience with QHs should be fully scrutinized in order to weigh in the benefit not only on the commercial domain but also on the genetic strength and diversity and abilities of the “artificial” horses. Then the pros and cons could be put in the balance so that any solid conclusion could be extrapolated to TB.

Artificial Insemination might be a good thing only if a strong and healthy regulation could be enforced.

If I were confronted with the task of deciding on this matter I would design a “pilot experiment” with a selected group of thoroughbreds for at least a decade and then collect all data pertinent to economics, horse health, HSE, running ability, genetic vigor, breeding operation and management, regulations and guidelines effectiveness and appropriateness. Once all the aspects of the application and the implications of this technology is well understood, then and only then,  I will come  up with “the wisest decision” on this delicate matter.

Perhaps, after modernizing  the breeding industry with more degree of freedom (by AI supposedly ),  the handicappers will have another parameter to analyze as the past performances will pinpoint “Naturally Bred” and “Artificially Bred” horses. A new entry for our vast and valuable databases and statistics…!

There should be an exception for foreign stallions.  I thought it would be good to allow AI for them with a restriction of only ~ 10 foals per year.  This way those rare bloodlines you talk of and only accessible to foreign breeders, can be brought here.

• Scot's reply:  Porfi, you're hitting me where it hurts!  :-)  The one part of AI that I would embrace is the easy ability to bring hard-to-find bloodlines into a breeding program.  I'm afraid I'd be 100% against any exceptions, however, because of that slippery slope reality.

To Liz:  Your comment about leaving your mare at the farm for months.  Not really a requirment.  I just shipped my mare up from Florida on a monday night/tuesday morning.  She was covered, sent to my friends farm for an overnight stay.  Then she was back on the truck to Florida.  I am please to say she is in foal!

To VMT:  mares are not "raped" as you say.  Don't put human qualities on animals.  The mares are protected and the stallions are handled by professionals.  There is no "raping" going on.  In the breeding shed it is quite calm compared to in the wild.  In the wild, Mares kick the crap out of stallions who don't act like they have a brain.  I appreciate that it is your opinion, but please refrain from stating your opinion as "fact" when it is how you feel and not based on facts. I have been in the Horse business for over 30 years and NOT ONE TIME have I seen a mare "raped"!!

To Murray Johnson:  If this is Murray who trained Perfect Drift....if you "saw" A.I. going on and embryo transfers taking place and did nothing about it, shame on you.  ALl you did was enable law breakers to get away with it.  We are a society of rules and laws for a reason. Following them is a good thing.

To Scot:  Man you have had two kick butt topics lately.  KEEP THEM COMING !!!

The Jockey Club, while not incorrect is in many ways more conservative than the mostconservative person you can think of. There are some good reasons for AI (safety, and health and injury concerns among them.  I have always personally believed that the Japanese would have probably opened up their horse industry to outsiders for the ability to do something about War Emblem for instance, and if Barbaro had survived everything and gone to stud, it would have been safer all the way around to have been able to collect from him.

Injuries and health problems happen in live cover, and there probably is a way to cover the legal and other problems raised in article. Try the AQHA and Standard bred registries, as both have used AI for years. I more than half expect if anyone tries to clone and register a horse, it will be the AQHA, (they've talked about regulation of it)

A good ways down that slippery slope one can envision the storage of enough sperm which might then permit the stallion to become essentially retired. They could then, perhaps, be castrated, enabling them to live a more "normal" existence as a horse...Yes, change doesn't come without risk. Human beings are unable to predict perfectly future consequence. On the other hand, horseracing doesn't exist in a vacuum-there is change occurring all around it. Change can also bring positive progress-consider what science has afforded us in many areas-often at the expense of many jobs-not reason at all for stifling positive change.    

I've recently been seeing info going around that many times expensive mares foals are separated and turned over to nurse mares, so that the TB mare, because of the live cover requirement, can be shipped and rebred that year without a potentially valuable foal at side.  Is this excessive propagana or true? How common is it that mares are immediately rebred?  If it is, wouldn't AI prevent the stress of foal separation as well as save the need for nurse mares and the "disposable" foals they produce?  Are there really a bunch of champion tb's out there that weren't nursed by their own mother?  Please enlighten me.

• Scot's reply:  My experience has been that this type of practice is uncommon.  I'll open the floor to others' observations. 

You know, I can see pros and cons from all the great comments by you all.

Here would have been my one wish: that when the Great Ruffian was put down, that they harvested a few of her eggs and so there would have been a foal that technically have called her its dam.  What a shame they couldn't do that. I know its kinda off topic, but just think about it.

We have used AI in dogs for years and every point you have made is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!  It has been of great use in helping to stamp out numerous genetic problems.  It also makes available a safer breeding for both the male and female.  I'm sure the quality overall would improve simply because of larger playing field we could choose from.  There are plent of good mares out here whoes owners can't or won't ship.  I say get out of the dark ages and get on with it....

Theresa:

From my experience, Scot's reply is correct. Foals are generally not separated (permanently) from their dams merely to expedite re-breeding, or for concerns of foal safety, etc. It is, however, quite common for mares to be re-bred on foal heat, and certainly on first normal cycle following foaling... Placing foals on nurse mares is not without some risk or potential negative effect on the foal (ex.- the experience gained by the foal from its dam can have positive impact). You are quite correct in your concern about the re-breeding process, and one often too minimized. Thus far there haven't been any fool-proof solutions and, at minimum, these foals are (unduly?) stressed (even when a stallion resides at the mare's place of boarding). For me this is reason enough to entertain the possibility of A.I...Some of the positions taken on this A.I. debate are not unlike other racing related issues.- There are those who place the racing industry and its traditions first, while others focus more on the safety and well-being of the horse.              

To Robert, Do you call the police everytime you see someone speeding??? What world do you live in??? This is America, when cheats are caught they get  a ticket and go right back to Cheating.Look at our TOP trainers now days. How about 3 strikes and your OUT!!!

     There are too many stallions around that do not deserve to be stallions! There are enough unwanted horses that end up in horrible circumstances !!! I think AI would just make it worse !!!

Yorkknls are you living in the real world?????  Dogs today have dysplazias and blindness and osteochondrosis and diabetes and skin allergies that they never or almost never had before A. I. was performed. Breeding two dogs without matching there conformation is just as bad as doing with horses. I would hate to see you're dogs health records.

Scott frankly I don't give a dam about the Jockey's Club and there traditions but I do agree with you that the live cover rule makes it better for keeping diversity in blood lines. This was a great topic thank you for bringing it up I know that you probly got some flack from other people in the industry!

To Dynaformer Lives, actually the opposit is true. A person is able to track a dogs/horses record over a long period of time and see if any serious conditions have followed the stud in question.  The conditions you list exhisted long before AI.  As with a live cover you would do your research first, hopefully.  The difference is if you find the correct stallion your mare is not traveling thousands of miles to get there.  By the way thanks to lots of research, I was lucky enough to have healthy long lived animals.  We were able to do abreeding last year with seman that was frozen for twenty years.  The breeding was done because our stud was free from all of the conditions you list plus some "new" lethal ones.  Please look at the whole picture. If we really care for our horses we should be looking out for what is best for them and their health.

Hi Murray,

All well and good, but have you an opinion on A.I.'s "legalization" for thoroughbreds?

Incidently, we met years ago while you were training "Joyous Day". Did eventually acquire her from Mrs. A.

Of course, it's just wishful thinking on my part, but what the ol' TB needs is to open the books back up to some Arabian sires--that'd get you some diversity, stamina and soundness back . . .

Wow!! what interesting insights we are reading in this blog... truly a hit!

This topic is so important as a game changer that, I insist, we should examine all the facts thoroughly before maturing the idea. Extrapolating AI experience from the dairy and dog industry may prove not very valuable because the attributes sought in these businesses are different.

For those who may want to search sources of information, the following link shows some bullet points regarding pros and cons of AI in horses:

www.newrider.com/.../insemination.html.

Technical issues aside, the implementation of AI in TB will open a whole new dimension to the business. For instance, Curlin (or any sound young champion on stud duty) could come back to race again while his sperms are traveling all over the country ... Curlin will not have to be present at any farm to peform his stud duties, hence, he could very well be training! ... and eventually he will be competing against some of his sons if they are able to climb to his grade 1 level. Whishful thinking ... maybe! but the upcoming AI legislation would dictate this ocurrences.

This new dimension would imply that many more Surgeon Veterinaries as well as special technical personnel should be employed to carry out AI.

At last, everything will come down to answering the question: will AI improve the quality of Thoroughbreds?,  and would it be sustainable?

Only time and trials will give the answer.

• Scot's reply:  Some interesting points, Native Dancer!  I like the idea of watching great runners extending their time on the track -- but I'll cynically point out that one of the reasons owners yank their colts out of racing so early is not just to gain an extra year in the breeding shed, it's to avoid having the horse go out and flop in a big race. Sadly, the commercial market rewards an entering sire that ran 8 times with 6 or 7 victories and penalizes those that ran 40 or 50 or 60 times with top-level success but also a couple of "off" outings. I'm not sure that would change just by implementing AI.   ......  On another note:  here's a whole online library of additional reading about Artificial Insemination practices as published in the veterinarian-reviewed publication THE HORSE, which is vet-quality information written for the average owner to understand.  (<-- If you can't tell, this is one of my favorite equine resources, and not just because I worked there!)

Well I am a breeder of show dogs and well accomplished I must say also am a breeder of thoroughbreds.  I don't think you can compare the two.  Dogs can be tightly linebred where as you wouldn't do it, or I wouldn't so much in horses. The closer the breeding the more genetic disasters you risk.  

On the case of AI in thoroughbreds, why can't they just

limit the studs like they do with live covers.  100 mares is 100 mares whether they have a live cover or an AI.  I think there is pros and cons to both, but think the stallion and mare would have less risk of injury.  By collecting you can inseminate a multitude of mares off one collection.  

I don't think the JC will change its course and I don't have a problem with it because I entered this game only knowing one way to do this and that was to ship and breed.

TO THERESA: At 07 May 2009 9:55 PM you wrote, "...it's just wishful thinking on my part, but what the ol' TB needs is to open the books back up to some Arabian sires."

I've occasionally daydreamed about this idea, too. It will never happen, of course, but the idea does have merit IMHO. Thing is, I don't think there are any breeders around these days who take a long view, like breeders of yore did. Today, everything seems to be about getting the earliest possible return on investment.

Scot, that'a good point about protecting the race record. A good example of what you've said is Cetewayo. He raced until he was 8, Ribot is only 2 back in his pedigree, his record is 37-11-5-4, at least 10 of those are in graded stakes. Now I don't know if there are issues with fertility or anything, but with all the people talking about lack of durability in the breed and with his race record, why is he only standing for $2,500 & Unbridled's Song, who seems to pass on his fragility, standing for $125,000?

All this A.I./frozen semen discussion raises some rather thought provoking, near-nth degree conjecture. Since it could permit deceased lives to continue to procreate it increases more the "conflict" between selective breeding and the "forces" of evolution.  

To Murray:  No I don't call the police everytime.  You got me there.  But I DO report EVERY violator I know that breaks the rules when it comes to a business.  I have lived in America a long time and I don't turn a blind eye to those who break the rules.  Yes speeding kills, but lets compare apples to apples.  Our society says speeding is not that serious, which is why we get tickets and not jail, unless you kill someone.  Our laws say we get a ticket.  The Jockey Club laws say, breed a horse using A.I. and get caught, that foal will not be registered and none of its offspring will be either.  My point is this this Murray.  You are a notible figure in our sport.  You seem to represent most of us who are trying to make it big, or bigger in the sport.  If we see one of our own not playing by the rules or at least not caring that others are doing what they should, then that person needs to find another line of work.  I know underhanded things go on in the business.  When you see things going on that are wrong, be a stand up guy and do something about it.  Don't just walk away or turn away.  Just saying I don't care and then saying out sport is dirty, means nothing.  This sport we all love will not survive if the public believes, or starts to doubt our integrity or our word.  I have seen enough of that to last 10 lifetimes.  Best of Luck to you in the future.  I hope to see you in the winners cirle again.  Thanks.

If the Jockey club has it right, It would do whats best for the entire industry. Live cover is far from doing whats best for the horses safety and health and for the health and safety of the humans who participate in It. you refer to the AQHA as being a damaged because of AI. First of all the American Quarter horse as a breed has only been around since the 1930's? How much genetic diversity can you have in 80 years to begin with. That argument is not accurate at best.

Live cover is the only way to be breeding horses of any breed period. AI opens itself up to a whole lot of legal issues and having followed the Quarterhorse industry I have seen some problems arise with AI. As for the safety concerns, let's not forget that they are horses and have been breeding in the wild for centuries and we have pampered them far beyond what we really need to. My friend Dr. Larson a DVM pasture breeds his Thoroughbreds, he gets a far better conception rate he says. And I trust him on that count.

To Julie L. (and all others who share your position):

When we began this topic it had occurred that someone might offer this (your) argument. I had hoped it would be avoided. Since it hasn't, it should be addressed, but I'll attempt to do so only briefly. A complete response doesn't lend itself to this forum-

Thoroughbreds, not unlike domesticated

dogs, cats, etc. are selectively bred creatures, quite different from wild horses, wolves, lions, tigers, etc. They are less able than their forebears to fend for themselves, and, perhaps, less "robust" in many other areas...Also, wild horses are not confined to paddocks or stalls, are not removed from their herd and often transported to be bred, don't have their newborn offspring taken from them during mating, etc. etc. So, in some instances, rather than being "pampered" domesticated horses endure greater stresses than their "wild" relatives. I dare say that "safety" would be of even greater concern for wild horses should they be subjugated to the breeding practices imposed upon our thoroughbreds...Wild horse mares breed to the stallion at hand, generally thoroughbreds do not...Perhaps more importantly, we would not accept the wastage that may occur in the wild ,with wild horses, for our thoroughbreds. Our manner of selective breeding does not, for the most part, encompass survival of the fittest. In general, thoroughbreds, as do dogs, cats, etc. require much more care (pampering if you will) than their wild cousins for their proper survival and well-being. This needed to be said, not just to address Julie L's specific point, but for all those farm managers who like to employ her basic argument in rationalizing the negligent care given to their horses. As said, there is far more that can be offered on this subject. I'll close by posing this question: Where is it written that "nature's way" is the given "good"? We certainly haven't adhered to that model.        

I've read the comments (70-some-odd) and nowhere does anyone say what is actually the important thing about live cover over artificial insemenation. The most viable sperm breeds the mare with live cover! That's it. If sperm is diluted up to 10 times, only the best of what is in each tube will breed the mares.....NOT the best of what that stallions ejaculate produced. So is that what a mare owner wants? Just the best of the ordinary? I don't think so. AI is definitely safer for both animals and man. It also prevents disease and transfer of these from horse to horse. Cooled shipped semen is much easier on the mare and foal, rather than shipping to a strange place and being boarded at some un-Godly price. There's no question about that part of it. We bred our mares every other year so we didn't have to take a mare with a foal on a long trip, plus keeping both of them somewhere besides home. Foals need a lot of things when they are little...most of them, hands on, and no one is going to care for your foal like you are. There are good and bad to each of your arguments...but the main thing to remember is that you get the best a stallion has to offer with live cover!

Peggy:

Perhaps no one has mentioned what you call "the important thing". because rather than it being important, it is sheer nonsense, with no basis in science or mathematics. I suggest you research the subject.    

I am against AI for the reasons that are stated at the top of this page (A thru D). It makes perfect sense to me that AI should not be allowed.

Instead of focusing energy on making horses even more of a "commodity" to be used up and discarded, why not put more focus on how terrible slaughter is and how horses deserve a better fate?

This is only coming from a fan, not an expert who is in the horse business. If nothing else, the live cover has it's own infatuating mystique. In an age ever-advancing technology and defiance of Mother Nature, it's refreshing to see something done the way she intended (sort of!)

Your arguments are laughable.  For one thing the JC could simply RESTRICT the number of mares bred by a particular stallion.  

Second the REAL reason AI is prohibited is due to the fear that it would obliterate the boarding/breeding farms HERE IN KY.  Just imagine all the breeders around the country and the world that wouldn't be FORCED to keep their mares here to be bred!!!  THAT IS THE ONE AND ONLY REASON IT ISN'T ALLOWED.

• Scot's reply:  Glad to give you something to laugh at, LCM, although that was not the intent and I hope not how everyone responded.  Sadly, many people don't think through the long-term effects of any changes in policy and regulation. The "live cover" rule is enforceable only because it is not a new limitation.  Any attempt by TJC to institute a rule limiting book size for a stallion would last probably about a day -- and certainly no longer than the time it would take for a dozen lawsuits to be filed. ... As for the argument that Kentucky boarding farms are collaborating for purely financial reasons, I'd ask: what do the farms in England or Ireland or New Zealand or Argentina -- where farms are much less concentrated than in Kentucky -- gain from this rule that makes it worth supporting in their respective registries?

With some matings, you hope for a colt, with others a filly. But what affects foal gender -- and can Thoroughbred breeders influence the process?

I am not sure I should have read any of this ... I think the breed itself is already so fragile that any talk of this is crazy ! I am also tired of hearing about back yard breeding and how your horses are better because he won some races . Well there are great horses every where that do just as amazing things and don't get the credit . We breed Quarters and it is all live cover but we only push out a handful of foals a year ...I guess this could be considered back yard breeding cause we are not some huge facility but I believe it keeps our bloodline strong and in demand , I also don't believe in breeding older horses regardless how many times a vet says its okay I think this also is detrementle to quality of the foal . Back to AI , I think the more it is used the more we will start seeing our beloved race horses breaking down on tracks . I do believe though the racing industry is built on the love of money verse the love of their animal though and having that said when it comes to money they will do what ever the hell they want to get it even if it means killing hundreds of horses to get there . That to me is not equine love !!!

They do it with people.  What's the big deal?