Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 09-05-2018, 11:47 PM   #16
Mulerider
Registered User
 
Mulerider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: East Texas
Posts: 1,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post

In my view there should be a database of discarded horses along with the last owner's name. Any owner not taking financial responsibility should be forbidden from racing horses by the tracks. tracks that allow such owners to run should be boycotted. Anybody suggesting that horseplayers should pay the freight should be gelded.
I proposed a simple variation of the database solution to both Boyd Gaming and the Louisiana Racing Commission that would identify discarded horses and the last owner (usually a backstretch meat buyer). The proposal would essentially name and blacklist that last owner, and prohibit connections from selling (or giving) a horse to that person once identified. Neither seemed interested.

I welcome HANA's inclusion of this category, although I appreciate the difficulty of gathering the data necessary to assign a fair ranking. IMO, a good starting point would be to look at each track's written no-slaughter policy. If the language prohibits an owner from "directly or indirectly" selling a horse to slaughter, as Tampa Bay's does, that's a good indication that the track is serious about its policy and understands how the policy can be gamed. If a track's language merely says "directly," or "knowingly" (Boyd Gaming) that's a red flag. it creates a loophole big enough to drive a truck through, and sends a not-so-subtle message to connections: if you're going to dump a horse, do it through a third party.
Mulerider is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-06-2018, 01:43 PM   #17
MadVindication
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyC View Post
The tracks don't profit from a discarded horse. The one who profits is the deadbeat owner who relieves him/herself from supporting the horse.

In my view there should be a database of discarded horses along with the last owner's name. Any owner not taking financial responsibility should be forbidden from racing horses by the tracks. tracks that allow such owners to run should be boycotted. Anybody suggesting that horseplayers should pay the freight should be gelded.
I think there should be moves to make both tracks and owners responsible and not just the tracks, yes.

If tracks have no accountability then they essentially "house" the problem.
MadVindication is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-06-2018, 07:03 PM   #18
Fager Fan
Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulerider View Post
I proposed a simple variation of the database solution to both Boyd Gaming and the Louisiana Racing Commission that would identify discarded horses and the last owner (usually a backstretch meat buyer). The proposal would essentially name and blacklist that last owner, and prohibit connections from selling (or giving) a horse to that person once identified. Neither seemed interested.

I welcome HANA's inclusion of this category, although I appreciate the difficulty of gathering the data necessary to assign a fair ranking. IMO, a good starting point would be to look at each track's written no-slaughter policy. If the language prohibits an owner from "directly or indirectly" selling a horse to slaughter, as Tampa Bay's does, that's a good indication that the track is serious about its policy and understands how the policy can be gamed. If a track's language merely says "directly," or "knowingly" (Boyd Gaming) that's a red flag. it creates a loophole big enough to drive a truck through, and sends a not-so-subtle message to connections: if you're going to dump a horse, do it through a third party.
I disagree. How would you like your livelihood taken away for unknowingly doing something wrong?

You’ve been really quiet on Dina. I expected you’d have a lot to say as one of her supporters. What gives?

As to this HANA grade, I think it’s a good idea. Get input from people in rescue because I’ve found few understand the real issues. For example, having an official rescue, one that takes in or places horses, is far more impactful than handing over to the TAA $5/start.
Fager Fan is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-06-2018, 07:09 PM   #19
AndyC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadVindication View Post
I think there should be moves to make both tracks and owners responsible and not just the tracks, yes.

If tracks have no accountability then they essentially "house" the problem.
Attempts to make others responsible for the irresponsible acts of horse owners is ridiculous. This is not a complex issue.
AndyC is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-06-2018, 09:01 PM   #20
Mulerider
Registered User
 
Mulerider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: East Texas
Posts: 1,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fager Fan View Post
I disagree. How would you like your livelihood taken away for unknowingly doing something wrong?

You’ve been really quiet on Dina. I expected you’d have a lot to say as one of her supporters. What gives?

As to this HANA grade, I think it’s a good idea. Get input from people in rescue because I’ve found few understand the real issues. For example, having an official rescue, one that takes in or places horses, is far more impactful than handing over to the TAA $5/start.
My limited support for Alborano was not unconditional, and I believe I've told you that privately. My focus is, and always has been, to attack the slaughter issue in Louisiana at the root of the problem, which is the negligence of the LRC and Boyd in addressing the issue in a serious way. My work with Alborano's group (specifically, Anna Haber who was featured in the article) was aimed at lobbying the Commission to enforce one specific rule on its books, and to try to convince Boyd to strengthen the language of its no-slaughter policy.

And as I've told a few people here privately, including PA and CJ, I completely disassociated myself back in July. After hearing credible reports of a lack of maintenance funding, I personally advised Alborano to approach NTWO with a request to step in and acquire the horses. When that was summarily rejected, I said adios. As did Anna Haber.

As far as livelihoods go, my plan does not jeopardize anyone's livelihood for unknowingly selling to a meat buyer. It is designed to identify and blacklist the meat buyer, and remove the "unknowingly" excuse.
Mulerider is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-06-2018, 11:13 PM   #21
TonyK@HSH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 498
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulerider View Post
My limited support for Alborano was not unconditional, and I believe I've told you that privately. My focus is, and always has been, to attack the slaughter issue in Louisiana at the root of the problem, which is the negligence of the LRC and Boyd in addressing the issue in a serious way. My work with Alborano's group (specifically, Anna Haber who was featured in the article) was aimed at lobbying the Commission to enforce one specific rule on its books, and to try to convince Boyd to strengthen the language of its no-slaughter policy.

And as I've told a few people here privately, including PA and CJ, I completely disassociated myself back in July. After hearing credible reports of a lack of maintenance funding, I personally advised Alborano to approach NTWO with a request to step in and acquire the horses. When that was summarily rejected, I said adios. As did Anna Haber.

As far as livelihoods go, my plan does not jeopardize anyone's livelihood for unknowingly selling to a meat buyer. It is designed to identify and blacklist the meat buyer, and remove the "unknowingly" excuse.
Many tracks impose 'anti-slaughter' policies. If an owner knowingly violates this policy they are punished accordingly.

The scenario I see playing out more often is an owner retires and re-homes their horse. This could be through a horseman's retirement program. The new owner, at some point, finds this horse dos not meet his needs and sends the horse to a sale.

If rescuers attempt to save the horse from slaughter, they check the tattoo and identify the last owner in the racing records. They may contact the 'old' owner or the racetrack where they participates. The burden is on the 'old' owner to prove that they were not responsible for this horse ending up at the sale.


I'm not going to pretend that there are not owners that knowingly violate these policies but in my experience most retirements are handled appropriately.
TonyK@HSH is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-07-2018, 06:29 AM   #22
Mulerider
Registered User
 
Mulerider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: East Texas
Posts: 1,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyK@HSH View Post
Many tracks impose 'anti-slaughter' policies. If an owner knowingly violates this policy they are punished accordingly.

The scenario I see playing out more often is an owner retires and re-homes their horse. This could be through a horseman's retirement program. The new owner, at some point, finds this horse dos not meet his needs and sends the horse to a sale.

If rescuers attempt to save the horse from slaughter, they check the tattoo and identify the last owner in the racing records. They may contact the 'old' owner or the racetrack where they participates. The burden is on the 'old' owner to prove that they were not responsible for this horse ending up at the sale.


I'm not going to pretend that there are not owners that knowingly violate these policies but in my experience most retirements are handled appropriately.
Yes, this is probably true in most jurisdictions. I'm afraid Louisiana is...different. Like clockwork, dozens of horses begin showing up at kill lots as soon as the meets end at Delta and EVD. And unfortunately, it is not uncommon to find a horse pulled from Thompson's with a lip tattoo that has been burned or otherwise mutilated to avoid identification. And for the horses that are able to be identified, it seems that the names of certain trainers and owners keep appearing time and time again. Boyd Gaming knows this.
Mulerider is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-07-2018, 11:10 PM   #23
clicknow
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 3,641
How is HANNA going to grade tracks on aftercare unless we are all very clear about what exactly "aftercare" involves?

Anyone can disappear a horse off the backside and claim it went on to a 2nd career, a good adoption, etc. There is even paperwork (legit) that shows this happening.


Then, years later, horse is found behind a dumpster somewhere, or walking alongside a county road somewhere, skin and bones, etc.

Aftercare to me, implies AFTER CARE. That means for the life of the horse. Is money set aside to accomplish this, are arrangements made for horse's aftercare BEFORE track allows them to race, etc.?

THere's got to be a dependable way to "sign seal deliver" on such promises. If anyone cared, that is.

Should breeders have any liability ? Owners? Trainers?

Where are we going to put them all? Perhaps "aftercare" can also include the owner just opting for humane euthanization.......and pay for it, just like any other vet bill. They should have to make such a "deposit" before ever racing the horse.

Last edited by clicknow; 09-07-2018 at 11:17 PM.
clicknow is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.