Good Read
fbwinners
Senior Member
PETA's way off track on this one
Article Launched: 05/08/2008 10:55:02 PM PDT
It must be spring if the misinformed folks with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals are spouting off about something they know absolutely nothing about.
PETA pays attention to horse racing four times a year - during the three Triple Crown races and Breeders' Cup day, or just long enough to make crazy, absurd accusations against a 20-year-old jockey that only serve to discredit their cause.
Yes, it was a tragedy that Eight Belles had to be euthanized after breaking both front ankles while jockey Gabriel Saez galloped her out following a brilliant runner-up effort to Big Brown in last Saturday's Derby. No, Saez did nothing wrong and does not deserve to be suspended for abusing the filly, as PETA ridiculously claimed following the race.
If PETA would stick to arguments that have some merit, like seeking a ban on whipping, limits on races and the age of racehorses, and a move to artificial surfaces - talking points the organization included in a letter to the Kentucky Horse Racing Authority on Sunday - the animal-rights group could be taken more seriously.
But while they're at it, they might want to also seek a ban on steroids and other drugs, and if they are so concerned about the welfare of the horses, why not ask for more information on these synthetic tracks they covet so much that have caused such a firestorm in the industry?
It's gotten to the point where we are now inundated with numbers and statistics that only serve to back the arguments of one side or the other.
"I call it creative accounting, like when you're doing your taxes for the IRS," trainer John Shirreffs said.
Now comes the formation of a seven-member Thoroughbred Safety Committee, announced Thursday by Ogden Mills Phipps, chairman of The Jockey Club, in the wake of Eight Belles' breakdown. Phipps said the committee, which will include John Barr, a horse owner and member of the Oak Tree Racing Association's board of directors, will review every facet of equine health, including breeding practices, medication, the rules of racing and track surfaces. They will recommend actions to be taken by the industry to improve the health and safety of thoroughbreds, and Phipps says they will do it in a timely manner.
Sounds good, but on the subject of synthetic tracks, the committee needs to formulate an independent study covering all aspects of the surfaces, including potential health risks not only to the horses, but to the jockeys, track workers and fans alike.
Even Frank Stronach, chairman of Santa Anita's parent company, Magna Entertainment Corp., admitted to health concerns regarding his track's surface during an exclusive interview on Magna's own Horse Racing TV on April 20.
Trainer Melvin Stute sits in Clockers' Corner in the mornings now and wonders what's happened to all the Blackbirds that once inhabited the area. Some have their suspicions, but it's all just conjecture now and needs to be addressed and studied.
Shirreffs, a harsh critic of the synthetic surfaces, claims the reduction in catastrophic breakdowns during the afternoons is more than offset by the casualties during morning workouts.
"And the horses that get hurt in the morning are the promising young horses," he said.
Said Stute: "I've had nine horses put down in 40 years, and five of them have been since the synthetics."
It's really quite simple. If each track's racing office would keep an official, unbiased record on the number of morning breakdowns and compare it to the pre-synthetic days, we'd have something to go by. As it is now, it's all speculative.
Trainer Brian Koriner says he's never had so many horses with foot problems.
"I'm not sold on them," he said of synthetic tracks. "I haven't talked to a trainer who is completely sold on them. They are very inconsistent."
Yet there are just as many trainers who like artificial tracks, such knowledgeable horsemen as Mike Mitchell, Doug O'Neill, Richard Mandella, Dan Hendricks and David Hofmans.
Who's right? Are artificial surfaces good or bad for the sport?
Until we get more data from independent sources, we won't know for quite a while.
For every argument supporting synthetic surfaces, there are just as many against.
For instance, they originally were supposed to be maintenance free and save the tracks all sorts of money. That's proven to be wrong.
"I like synthetics, but I think they wear out," trainer Clifford Sise said.
Synthetic tracks will have been a California staple for two years by the end of 2008. It's not time to toss them aside, like critics claim, nor would it be proper to embrace them as a cure-all for the safety of the horses and riders.
This industry needs to start pulling on the same end of the rope, or the concerns and arguments that exist today will still be around in 2010. The clock ticks, and we all wait to see what's next.
Article Launched: 05/08/2008 10:55:02 PM PDT
It must be spring if the misinformed folks with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals are spouting off about something they know absolutely nothing about.
PETA pays attention to horse racing four times a year - during the three Triple Crown races and Breeders' Cup day, or just long enough to make crazy, absurd accusations against a 20-year-old jockey that only serve to discredit their cause.
Yes, it was a tragedy that Eight Belles had to be euthanized after breaking both front ankles while jockey Gabriel Saez galloped her out following a brilliant runner-up effort to Big Brown in last Saturday's Derby. No, Saez did nothing wrong and does not deserve to be suspended for abusing the filly, as PETA ridiculously claimed following the race.
If PETA would stick to arguments that have some merit, like seeking a ban on whipping, limits on races and the age of racehorses, and a move to artificial surfaces - talking points the organization included in a letter to the Kentucky Horse Racing Authority on Sunday - the animal-rights group could be taken more seriously.
But while they're at it, they might want to also seek a ban on steroids and other drugs, and if they are so concerned about the welfare of the horses, why not ask for more information on these synthetic tracks they covet so much that have caused such a firestorm in the industry?
It's gotten to the point where we are now inundated with numbers and statistics that only serve to back the arguments of one side or the other.
"I call it creative accounting, like when you're doing your taxes for the IRS," trainer John Shirreffs said.
Now comes the formation of a seven-member Thoroughbred Safety Committee, announced Thursday by Ogden Mills Phipps, chairman of The Jockey Club, in the wake of Eight Belles' breakdown. Phipps said the committee, which will include John Barr, a horse owner and member of the Oak Tree Racing Association's board of directors, will review every facet of equine health, including breeding practices, medication, the rules of racing and track surfaces. They will recommend actions to be taken by the industry to improve the health and safety of thoroughbreds, and Phipps says they will do it in a timely manner.
Sounds good, but on the subject of synthetic tracks, the committee needs to formulate an independent study covering all aspects of the surfaces, including potential health risks not only to the horses, but to the jockeys, track workers and fans alike.
Even Frank Stronach, chairman of Santa Anita's parent company, Magna Entertainment Corp., admitted to health concerns regarding his track's surface during an exclusive interview on Magna's own Horse Racing TV on April 20.
Trainer Melvin Stute sits in Clockers' Corner in the mornings now and wonders what's happened to all the Blackbirds that once inhabited the area. Some have their suspicions, but it's all just conjecture now and needs to be addressed and studied.
Shirreffs, a harsh critic of the synthetic surfaces, claims the reduction in catastrophic breakdowns during the afternoons is more than offset by the casualties during morning workouts.
"And the horses that get hurt in the morning are the promising young horses," he said.
Said Stute: "I've had nine horses put down in 40 years, and five of them have been since the synthetics."
It's really quite simple. If each track's racing office would keep an official, unbiased record on the number of morning breakdowns and compare it to the pre-synthetic days, we'd have something to go by. As it is now, it's all speculative.
Trainer Brian Koriner says he's never had so many horses with foot problems.
"I'm not sold on them," he said of synthetic tracks. "I haven't talked to a trainer who is completely sold on them. They are very inconsistent."
Yet there are just as many trainers who like artificial tracks, such knowledgeable horsemen as Mike Mitchell, Doug O'Neill, Richard Mandella, Dan Hendricks and David Hofmans.
Who's right? Are artificial surfaces good or bad for the sport?
Until we get more data from independent sources, we won't know for quite a while.
For every argument supporting synthetic surfaces, there are just as many against.
For instance, they originally were supposed to be maintenance free and save the tracks all sorts of money. That's proven to be wrong.
"I like synthetics, but I think they wear out," trainer Clifford Sise said.
Synthetic tracks will have been a California staple for two years by the end of 2008. It's not time to toss them aside, like critics claim, nor would it be proper to embrace them as a cure-all for the safety of the horses and riders.
This industry needs to start pulling on the same end of the rope, or the concerns and arguments that exist today will still be around in 2010. The clock ticks, and we all wait to see what's next.