Kentucky Derby

[em1126]

I am not a follower of horseracing, but I did watch the Derby today and just as I got done saying, "I'm just glad none of the horses got hurt," they started talking about how Eight Belles was laying on the ground. I'm really sad for her. :( The race was really exciting, but that part just sucked.

[PinkMartini]

We didn't watch it but heard about it on the news... Poor filly had to be euthanized on the track :(

[em1126]

Really? No one but me and PinkMartini is talking about the Derby and euthanizing Eight Belles? Maybe there's just not much to say. :( Does anyone think they should change horseracing rules? What about PETA's claim that the jockey should be suspended?

[ambula704]

I wasnt able to watch (although I heard it wasnt even really covered on TV) but it broke my heart to hear the news. Today they had something on NBC's Today Show, and the trainer was saying this is fairly common and isnt really any more dangerous than any other sport. They also said the track conditions werent that bad so it was probably just a freak accident.

[imagirliegirl]

I love animals and I thought what happened was SO sad. I actually teared up and thought about it for the rest of the night. I'm pretty sure I drove my husband nuts talking about it.

As for PETA, I think PETA should shut the hell up. What happened was NOT the jockey's fault. Anyone watching the video of that horse finishing the race cannot say the jockey did anything wrong. If she was too injured to run she would have collapsed. Instead, she ran her little heart out.

I really believe that the owners and trainers really love these animals.


Does anyone think they should change horseracing rules?

I don't know what they can do, honestly. I mean, I read that some people attribute the problem to inbreeding because they want the horses to be faster. That's not completely far-fetched but that seems to be a problem with breeders, not the sport itself. They were also talking about making the tracks out of different material to make them safer. Maybe that will help?

[jesvet]

I think the owners love the money more than the animals themselves. :(

[fuzzy]

This is C&P'ed from my LJ. (to give context, I'm a horse owner, but don't own thoroughbreds.)

****

Not that you wanted to hear my opinion on the matter...but here it is.

I really can not stand to listen to all this talk about the Derby and Eight Belles and the questioning of what really happened?

First, I'll say I don't have a problem that some people make money off of animals, provided the animals are well-cared for and treated humanely. Factory-farmed meat = bad but [insert husband's name] shooting a deer in our backyard = acceptable; circus = evil but Lipizzaner stallions show = ok; puppymills = awful but reputable breeders = ok.

So, while I have issues with greyhound racing, I don't have the same issues with horse racing...although I do think the industry as a whole needs to take a really hard look at itself. I think the horses are extremely well-cared for and very much loved. I think the industry does an OK job with finding horses who don't have the talent for racing new homes or new careers (unwanted horses are indeed a problem and there could be room for improvement, but ALL of us in the horse world contribute to the problem, so I don't think one can point the finger soley at the racing community).

I don't believe changing the track to an artificial surface would have saved Eight Belles or Barbaro. It may have helped...but ultimately, I think they both would have suffered catastrophic injuries. Horses in nature race across dirt all the time.

I don't think they should limit fillies from racing against colts (gak I really dislike PETA). Fillies race against colts in nature all the time.

I don't think the jockey or the trainers knew there was some underlying injury before the race (did I mention I dislike PETA?). These horses get top-notch medical care.

I do think they need to carefully look at the possibility that over-breeding for speed at the expense of bone mass or overall durability may be a problem they need to address.

Mostly, though, I wish someone -- while this is in the national spotlight for a few moments -- would acknowledge that these horses are babies whose bodies aren't meant to tolerate the stress of a hard racing career. This, for the most part, is my beef with racing. We don't ever lightly saddle-break our horses out until they are three and that's only after they have been fully examined by the vet and x-rayed to make sure their growth plates are closed or are nearly closed (although I'll admit that quarter horses are different than thoroughbreds). At the very, very most, a two year old might be ridden once a week for no more than 20 minutes at a time, because we respect their physical limitations and wait for their bodies to shore up. The racing horses are in demanding training programs at the age of two. And, the jockey club uses a birth day of January 1 for all horse born that year, so those horses who were born later in the year are even younger and more fragile.

I like racing. I think it is fun to watch and, more importantly, I think the horses have fun. But I also think if they waited year and raced as four -- or even better -- five year olds, we might have slower times, but we'd have much, much more healthier horses.

****


I think the owners love the money more than the animals themselves.

Another very serious problem that I didn't touch on is that while many of the "old" owners do love their horses more than themselves, there's been an influx of "new" owners who don't have the same respect for the animals. They pressure trainers into producing $$ ASAP and don't listen to the experience of the trainers/staff.

[Chile]

*****

[em1126]

Wow, it's really interesting to me to hear all that information from people who know horses. I know very little, but I've been learning a lot over the past few days. Thanks for sharing that info!

[jajacobsen]

I do think they need to carefully look at the possibility that over-breeding for speed at the expense of bone mass or overall durability may be a problem they need to address.

Mostly, though, I wish someone -- while this is in the national spotlight for a few moments -- would acknowledge that these horses are babies whose bodies aren't meant to tolerate the stress of a hard racing career. This, for the most part, is my beef with racing. We don't ever lightly saddle-break our horses out until they are three and that's only after they have been fully examined by the vet and x-rayed to make sure their growth plates are closed or are nearly closed (although I'll admit that quarter horses are different than thoroughbreds). At the very, very most, a two year old might be ridden once a week for no more than 20 minutes at a time, because we respect their physical limitations and wait for their bodies to shore up. The racing horses are in demanding training programs at the age of two. And, the jockey club uses a birth day of January 1 for all horse born that year, so those horses who were born later in the year are even younger and more fragile.

I like racing. I think it is fun to watch and, more importantly, I think the horses have fun. But I also think if they waited year and raced as four -- or even better -- five year olds, we might have slower times, but we'd have much, much more healthier horses.

****.

BINGO. But it would be very expensive to wait additional years and support the horses before determining which had the correct aptitude for racing. And time = money, so therein lies the problem.

I LOVE horses, but nowadays, don't like many organized forms of any horse competitions (same for most animal competitions). Many people involved in such are great people and great advocates of animals, but many are also cruel, bottom-line oriented with no real empathy for the animal as a sentient creature.

[Lucy Van Pelt]

I have been against horse racing since I saw Go For Wand break down in the Breeders Cup back in 1990. It was horrific. When Barbaro and Eight Belles broke down, you really didn't *see* anything. When Go For Wand broke down, she ran down the track with her leg only being held by a patch of skin. That turned me off of this *sport* forever.

In my opinion, and I'm not a vet or expert although I have owned and showed horses in the past, that they race these horses when they are way too young. Their legs are not strong enough to handle the pressure of racing. Most people only hear about or see horses breaking down in the major races of the year, but this happens ALL THE TIME. It's not only the horses that die either. Their jockeys are often seriously hurt, left paralyzed, or even killed in these accidents. It's disgusting.

[IrishEyes]

I am an admirer of thoroughbred racing (grew up near Saratoga race track) and it's very interesting to hear some of the information provided here by people with 'horse knowledge'. I'd be very interested in there being more of a push for moving racing until horses were older. It seems that there is a huge number of Grade I races for 3 year olds (after which many are retired to stud), but then there are also good races for older horses (see Cigar's career). Since horses can live pretty long and have plenty of good stud years, what's the problem with moving the racing period of their lives to 4-6 yrs? Won't that still provide enough profit for the new owners but hopefully decrease these problems we're seeing by running young horses?

[Chile]

*****

[fuzzy]

Since horses can live pretty long and have plenty of good stud years, what's the problem with moving the racing period of their lives to 4-6 yrs? Won't that still provide enough profit for the new owners but hopefully decrease these problems we're seeing by running young horses?


Money/cost.

As Chile said, these horses are very well cared for and the costs of maintaining them (aside from the trainer's salary, jockey costs, etc etc etc) are astronomical. Therefore, the owners want to know if the horses are going to produce $$ or not as soon as possible. If they wait a few more years, they could be investing in a horse that can't produce. That is, just because a horse is bred well or conformational sound doesn't mean it will make a great racer. They have to have it in their hearts and that's hard to breed.

ETA -- Whoops, was typing while Chile responded.

[Chile]

*****

[KellyM]

It's really interesting to read all these responses from people who seem to be in the business!

Can anything be done about changing the breeding? Horses from not so long ago just seemed more durable than the horses of today.

[Lucy Van Pelt]

Also, the breeders used to let the foals and yearlings play and rough each other up, but now they don't do that. They need/want the yearlings to look pretty and not all scratched up for the yearling sales.


Veteran Washington Post sportswriter Sally Jenkins wrote that thoroughbred horses had become too strong with bones too lightweight, "She ran with the heart of a locomotive, on champagne-glass ankles." Blaming the breeders and investors, Jenkins claimed, "thoroughbred racing is in a moral crisis, and everyone now knows it.

I couldn't agree more.

[Chile]

*****

[fuzzy]

Also, WRT breeding -- although I confess I'm not a TB person and don't know as much about lineage as I should -- it seems to me that it would be difficult. As far as I understand, you can't really isolate these breakdowns to one (or two or three) genetic lines. So it'd get really messy and hard to "police."

That's why I do believe a most realistic step would be to raise the ages of the horses raced.

Also, last summer my horse was hurt and we spent a great deal of time at three separate equine facilities. This was shortly after Barbaro's breakdown and it ended up being what we all made small talk about while my horse was being examed and/or treated. I went to one vet near my house -- he treats performance horses and harness race horses at some small tracks, one vet in New Jersey -- she treats all the horses for the US Equestrian team, and one vet in Saratoga -- he treats your TB race horses.

They all agreed that the vast majority of these break downs aren't spontaneous or "out of the blue." Rather, it is likely that most (not all, but most) are a result of mirco-fractures or stress-fractures the horses develop during training. These fractures are undetectable on radiographs but most ARE detectable on MRI scans.

MRI technology in the equine world has come along way in just the last four years (my horse had one last year, so I've rather familiar with the subject). Previously, if a horse needed a MRI, they had to be put under general anthesthia and then scanned from a lying down position. This was considered 1) expensive; 2) risky for the horse; and 3) not always an accurate representation of what is going on inside of the horse because you are veiwing the structures as the horse is laying down -- not as they are putting pressure on their bones, ligaments and tendons. Additionally, the horse generally had to be held out of work the day before the MRI so that s/he could have bloodwork and an EKG done and they were held out of work the following day as a "recovery" day.

In recent years, they have developed "standing" MRI facilities in which the horses are tranquilized (with a very safe traq that we all use in our barns on a regular basis) and are scanned in about 20 to 30 minutes. The scans are more accurate, the cost is much cheaper, and the horses are only out of work on day (the ady of the scan).

They -- my vets -- argued that if you are going to spend millions on a yearling, it didn't seem too much to ask them to spend about $2,000 on MRI scans of the front legs of their horses prior to racing to ensure there are no micro-fractures. Horses that do have those fractures could be pulled out of training, rested, and likely either re-homed to new careers or entered into breeding programs.

[imagirliegirl]

They -- my vets -- argued that if you are going to spend millions on a yearling, it didn't seem too much to ask them to spend about $2,000 on MRI scans of the front legs of their horses prior to racing to ensure there are no micro-fractures. Horses that do have those fractures could be pulled out of training, rested, and likely either re-homed to new careers or entered into breeding programs.

That's what I was wondering about. I think it should almost be required to scan them before a big race or a certain # of times a year. Had they done this with Eight Belles, maybe they could have found the problem and kept her out of the race. I know it would be disappointing, but I think a horse breaking it's legs and dying is much worse. :(