As a racing fan for the last 30 plus years I can say we all desire both uniform rules and a disciplinary set- up that provides for fair due process but quick resolution of issues with proper penalties.  As a veterinarian and animal welfare advocate, I have fought for proper rules to ensure the welfare of these majestic equine athletes. As someone who has been involved in process of creating regulations on the state level for dog kennels in PA, I know all too well how hard it can be to reach consensus and have everyone agree on everything proposed. It is the nature of the process and human nature itself. However, I also have learned through all these areas that when something is not liked or desired, a counter plan or counter offer is usually made to provide an alternative to what is being objected to. The lack of any type of counterproposal or set of rules/regulations being set forth by the people in opposition certainly is puzzling.

All the key players that are claiming to be excluded in this process of creating uniform regs could easily have come together and formed a committee, group, or whatever you want to call it of their own and work on crafting a competing set of rules and how they are to be implemented throughout the country that would alleviate any constitutionality concerns. I have yet to see even an outline proposed from any of these opposition groups on what should be done instead. Continuing with the status quo is not one that will be accepted by anyone as it has shown to be woefully lacking in many areas.

The National HBPA Convention is happening soon. Will any kind of update be given then? Will a new committee be announced? Will we finally see this “better plan” that all opposed to HISA claim can be created? Or…will we merely see the same old statements of HISA being unconstitutional and it needs to be done away with?

It is always easy to be the party in opposition to something. It is much harder to be the ones to craft a plan that will work.

–Bryan Langlois, DVM, Racing Fan and Vice-President ThoroFan

The post Letter to the Editor: Opposing Is Easy appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

There perhaps has not been a more public vocal critic of the Racing Commission than myself over the last few years (a look back at my public comments at meetings will show this). However, I must say that the changes being announced, implemented, and backed up with action are extremely pleasing to see. The issues that have plagued the industry (and Pennsylvania has often been called the prime example of these issues by many) are not something that are going to be solved overnight. It is going to take time and effort to do this. What the Pennsylvania Racing Commission has finally done is taken a good, hard look in the mirror and identified specific areas that need to be addressed and changed. That started with the Committee on Equine Welfare and Safety that the Commission created. The Committee came out with 11 “action items” that were going to be implemented in various stages of time (anyone familiar with the process to get regulations passed in Pennsylvania knows of the length of time it takes) with the goal of improving the safety of the horses, the safety of the participants, and the integrity of the sport in the public's eye.

It is one thing to just come out and say you are going to do something. It is quite another to do it, and, so far, the Commission has backed up its words with action. At each monthly meeting Thoroughbred Bureau Director Tom Chuckas gives a detailed a report on where each of the action items sits in the implementation process as well as a review of any enforcement actions taken. It is evident from what is reported at the meetings, such as barn and vehicle searches turning up syringes and medications that should not be there, “jog up” inspections of horses in various barns (leading to a few being flagged for closer inspection and one being placed on the vet's list), and an increasing number of Out of Competition Tests being done each month, that the Commission and its investigative team are taking this task very seriously and letting the public know it.

I know there are those out there that will still say the tracks in Pennsylvania are a cesspool and the Commission has no idea who the real cheaters are and such. Well, for those that claim to have all this inside info on the cheaters and what they are doing, a special “integrity hotline” has been created that allows you to leave this information anonymously. The number for this hotline is (717) 787-1942. You must leave a detailed message, and someone will only contact you back if you specifically request it. Otherwise, the calls will be investigated based on the message left. So far, 20 calls have been placed to the hotline with eight being completely resolved and 12 still being investigated. Yes, we would all like to know all the details of these investigations and who was investigated (myself included), but we also must realize that information does have to remain private for these things to work properly. So as the old saying goes, “If you see something, say something.”

A person who makes poor lifestyle choices for decades of their life is not going to turn everything around and have the effects of those choices disappear after a month at the gym. The same is true of this sport. It has taken decades for this industry to get to where it is, and it is going to take more time than any of us would like to right the ship properly. Some agencies and tracks continue to turn a blind eye to things and hope it will all be OK or offer lip service about change with no evidence to back it up. Pennsylvania is finally taking the right steps to bring integrity and safety back to the sport, and Director Chuckas and the Commission are to be commended for their efforts so far. I look forward to the continuation of these positive developments.

The post Letter to the Editor: Positive Changes Coming Out of Pennsylvania, by Bryan Langlois, DVM appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The additional information, however, mostly “fine-tunes” what was included in the original accusation against Blea and doesn't change the “big picture,” said George Wallace, Blea's attorney.

According to various leading veterinary medical experts, that big picture is one largely of lax record keeping.

What the amended accusation does, however, is set the ball rolling on a rough time-table leading to a full hearing, giving Blea 15 days with which to file a notice of defense.

Once Blea's notice of defense has been filed, the formal hearing is required to be scheduled within 30 days, said Wallace. But due to the complicated nature of the case, it will likely take longer, he said.

“We expect to oppose and refute most everything here when the appropriate time comes. It remains the case that the allegations of the Accusation are disputed, and will be either refuted altogether or shown to be consistent with the professional and legal obligations of equine veterinarians generally, and particularly of equine veterinarians at California race tracks,” Wallace wrote in an email, regarding the amended accusation.

Blea was put on administrative leave from his position as California horse racing's head veterinarian by UC Davis in January. As per an administrative law judge ruling from earlier this month, Blea's veterinary license is also temporarily suspended pending a formal hearing.

In the interim, Blea might still seek injunctive relief in the California Superior Court to lift the temporary block on his veterinary license due to the fact the suspension has “serious problems in terms of a lack of an evidentiary basis,” Wallace said. A decision on such a move could arrive by next week, he said.

After the administrative law judge's ruling earlier in February, CHRB executive director, Scott Chaney, explained that the agency was contemplating similar legal intervention in the Superior Court on behalf of Blea.

According to a CHRB spokesperson Wednesday, no decision had yet been made on the agency's legal approach in the case.

The veterinary board accuses Blea of a number of offenses, including allegedly administering drugs to racehorses without a prior examination to form a diagnosis and determine medical necessity, failing to establish “any” veterinary-client-patient relationship, and of issuing drugs that are not FDA approved for equine administration.

A subsequent TDN investigation found a broad consensus among veterinary medical experts that the infractions are largely matters of poor record keeping which typically result in punitive actions less severe than a suspended license.

Veterinary experts also suggested that the medical board's investigation into Blea potentially failed to account for the unusual nature of veterinary practice on the backstretch, where veterinarians with multiple barns under their care can build the sort of relationship with their animals that is absent from traditional small animal practice.

In its original argument for an interim suspension, the veterinary board claimed that Blea presents a “danger to public health, safety and welfare,” due to his oversight as equine medical director of the high-profile investigation into the death of the Bob Baffert-trained Medina Spirit (Protonico), the GI Kentucky Derby winner who collapsed and died after a scheduled workout Dec. 6 at Santa Anita.

The final results of that necropsy were issued to the public last week, with Medina Spirit's cause of death ultimately “undetermined.”

According to UC Davis, Blea remains on administrative leave, despite completion of the necropsy.

“The conclusion of the Medina Spirit necropsy does not affect the status of the equine medical director position. Dr. Blea's administrative leave continues. In the meantime, school personnel continue to fulfill the duties of the equine medical director for the California Horse Racing Board,” wrote a UC Davis spokesperson, in an email.

The amended accusation includes details that weren't included in the original complaint.

It states, for example, that Blea's veterinarian confidential reports revealed “clusters of equine patients were administered identical medications and treatments, at the same time, at the request of their trainers without medical necessity.”

Listed in explanation are the following substances that are commonly found along the racetrack backstretch: Adequan, Gastrogard, Aspirin powder, Acepromazine pills, Uniprim, Otomax, Legend (a hyaluronic acid), and Tucoprim powder.

The amended accusation also adds additional substances to those that Blea reportedly possessed or used that have not been approved by the FDA.

But as Bryan Langlois, former president of the Pennsylvania Veterinary Medical Association, had previously told the TDN, just because certain drugs don't have FDA approval for use in horses doesn't mean veterinarians are prohibited from prescribing them.

“A lot of drugs that are out there, they're FDA approved but only in certain species or only in humans. The companies never did the trials to test them in animals to get the FDA certification. So, a lot of times, we prescribe these drugs as off-label use,” Langlois had told the TDN.

“Usually, what that means is that there is no FDA approved equivalent out there for that species. The research has been done and the drug dosage has been worked out so that it can be used safely in animals, you just have to make the owner aware of the fact that you're using it off-label,” he had said.

Among the punitive outcomes the veterinary medical board is seeking against Blea is full revocation or suspension of his license.

The TDN asked Langlois to review the amended accusation. In a text, he explained that the nature of the allegations still don't rise to the level requiring immediate license suspension.

The post Amended Accusations Set Ball Rolling Towards Blea Hearing appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

I completely agree with this sentiment, and I do think most racing publications do try to promote and showcase the good of the sport along with the bad. I know at ThoroFan we try to do that in our attempt to both bring in new fans and be a central voice for the fans in general in this great game.

However, to be able to “kill it with the negativity,” as Cox states, then it must be the industry and its members that provide us with that avenue to do so. It is very hard for anyone to really promote the positive in the game, when such a glaring an incident as the one that took place at Turf Paradise has been met with barely a whisper by the industry itself.

The fact that Creative Plan was even allowed to start in his last race at Turf Paradise shows us how broken, at times, this system really is in providing for the health and well-being of the horse above all else. In hearing about his story, there is plenty of blame to go around on all sides of this. The ultimate result is always the same, though, and that is a horse unnecessarily being forced to lose his life for this sport because of the sheer ineptitude of the very people that are supposed to be entrusted to protect them.

I have heard all about the difficulties in being able to hire people and vets out at Turf Paradise. I do not know all the particulars of this, but (and I hate to have to say this) the basic fact is if you cannot provide the necessary means to ensure the health and welfare of the horses at your facility YOU DO NOT RACE!!!!

Therefore, I would call on the Arizona State Racing Commission to immediately suspend the license of Turf Paradise to conduct racing until such a time as they can prove they have the staffing and infrastructure in place to safely do so.

To the horsemen's groups, both Arizona and National, that have apparently stayed completely silent on this whole issue. What is it going to take before you back up your words about improving the integrity of the sport with proper actions? When will you actually police your own to help ensure that this type of scenario never happens again? What is it going to take to finally put the horse above all else to continue to allow your members to enjoy and prosper ethically and responsibly in this sport???

I would love nothing more than to kill it with the negativity. All I, and so many others, are waiting for is for the industry and its members to kill it with the excuses as to why it can't be better.

Bryan Langlois, DVM
Past-President, PVMA
Chair, Board of Directors, Animal Care PA
Vice-Chair, Board of Directors, Thorofan
AVC 2005

The post Letter to the Editor: The Real Reason for the Negativity appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Certainly, the accusations leveled against Blea appear a damning indictment of his veterinary bona-fides.

According to the veterinary board, Blea presents a “danger to public health, safety and welfare,” due to his oversight of the investigation into the death of the Bob Baffert-trained Medina Spirit (Protonico), the Kentucky Derby winner who collapsed and died after a scheduled workout on Dec. 6 at Santa Anita.

“There exists a clear conflict of interest with Respondent Blea's continued involvement in the drug testing program and investigations,” wrote the board. “The requested interim suspension order will prevent the appearance of impropriety and any possible undue influence by Respondent Blea.”

The broader reasons the board gives for justifying the action includes Blea allegedly administering “dangerous drugs” to racehorses without a prior examination, without forming a diagnosis and without medical necessity.

But it has also raised questions as to whether the veterinary board's decision is one underpinned purely by ethical and medical reasoning, or if political winds fomented by Medina Spirit's tragic death–a highly contentious affair due to the horse's unique achievements and the checkered regulatory history of his connections–are a key driver of the action?

The TDN spoke with eight veterinary medical experts who describe the accusations largely as matters that rarely, if ever, rise to the level of a suspended license. Some point to how Blea had already undergone a rigorous screening to sit on the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act's Anti-Doping and Medication Control Committee.

“I have absolutely no doubt that Dr. Blea is capable of conducting an absolutely perfect investigation to the best of his ability into Medina Spirit's death,” says Scott Hay, the immediate past president of the American Association of Equine Practitioners (AAEP), and someone who has known Blea professionally and personally for years. “He doesn't play games.”

According to Julia Wilson, executive director of the Minnesota Veterinary Medical Board, the actions of their California equivalent sets a potentially “unusual precedent” in state law.

Says Wilson, “I'm hoping this ends well.”

Timeline of Events…

Racetrack practitioners in California have been in the direct cross-hairs of the veterinary board since at least September of 2017, when the board received a complaint from the CHRB against three veterinarians who practiced at Golden Gate Fields in Northern California, according to public veterinary board documents.

The CHRB complaint alleged that veterinarians Kim Kuhlmann, Steven Boyer and Kenneth Allison were guilty of several infractions, including prescribing and administering medications to equine patients “per the trainer's instructions, without an examination or medical necessity.”

According to George Wallace, an attorney representing the three veterinarians, the veterinary board's investigation resulted in monetary citations and abatement orders against his clients.

Subsequent informal conferences between representatives from the veterinary board and the three veterinarians themselves resulted in those citations being withdrawn, says Wallace.

“The board, at that point, is supposed to either affirm that it is going forward with the citations, modify the citations within the bounds of what it can do with the citations, or dismiss it,” says Wallace.

“What the board did here was, instead of dismissing, it issued a peculiar order saying, 'we're withdrawing the citations without prejudice,' which everybody interpreted on the face of it as a dismissal,” Wallace says.

However, on Feb. 10 last year, the veterinary board filed formal accusations against Kuhlmann, Allison and Boyer related to the original 2017 complaint but with additional alleged violations. Possible disciplinary actions include suspension or revocation of their licenses.

The veterinary board has yet to hold a formal hearing on these accusations, however a hearing is scheduled for this Thursday in Alameda County Superior Court as part of the defendants' attempts to have the accusations dismissed altogether.

The same month the revised accusations were submitted–February 2021–the veterinary medical board allegedly received an anonymous complaint concerning the “unsafe treatment of equine patients” by multiple Californian racetrack veterinarians. In its subsequent investigation, the board issued record request letters to at least 10 different veterinarians, says Wallace. No formal accusations were officially filed, however, until after Medina Spirit died of an apparent cardiac event on Dec. 6.

The nature of Medina Spirit's death conjured memories of a CHRB investigation into the sudden deaths between 2011 and 2013 of seven Baffert-trained horses during training or racing.

The CHRB's investigation report found Baffert-trained horses during that period were significantly more likely to die from sudden death than non-Baffert trained horses, calling the difference “dramatic.” The report noted how the horses had been administered thyroxine–a thyroid hormone typically used to treat hypothyroid conditions–and that use of thyroxine is “concerning in horses with suspected cardiac failure.”

Two days after Medina Spirit's death, the veterinary medical board issued formal accusations against veterinarian Sarah Graybill Jones for a variety of offenses, including negligence in the practice of veterinary medicine and dispensing drugs without medical necessity.

On Dec. 13, California Senator Dianne Feinstein issued a public letter to the CHRB urging the board to conduct a thorough and transparent investigation into Medina Spirit's death.

Four days after Feinstein's public missive, the veterinary board issued formal accusations against Blea and private veterinarian Vince Baker, one of Baffert's long-time veterinarians.

On Christmas Eve, an emergency hearing was held on the veterinary board's petition for an interim suspension of Blea's veterinary license.

Three days into 2022, the administrative law judge who heard the case formally sanctioned that interim suspension.

Nature of the Accusations…

The accusations levelled against Blea revolve around his treatment records for six unnamed horses in his care between January and March of last year.

Among the complaints listed in the petition for an interim suspension, Blea allegedly administered “dangerous drugs” to racehorses without a prior examination to form a diagnosis and determine medical necessity.

The “dangerous drugs” listed are acepromazine, Adequan, aspirin, dormosedan, glycopyrrolate, methocarbamol, phenylbutazone, thyro-L Thyroxine, torbugesic and trichlormethiazide/dexamethasone.

Several of these medications are in everyday use on the backstretch, especially acepromazine, otherwise known as “ace,” a tranquilizer routinely used to sedate excitable horses during training. The same applies to Lasix, the ubiquitous race-day anti-bleeder medication, and phenylbutazone, a painkiller referred usually as just “bute.”

These drugs are not necessarily dangerous definitionally, says Bryan Langlois, former president of the Pennsylvania Veterinary Medical Association and someone with no professional or personal relationship to Blea. Rather, the term is a regulatory classification, peculiar to California, meaning that they cannot be given without a prescription, he says.

“In theory, it's basically anything that needs to be given on the order of, or prescribed by, a veterinarian,” says Langlois, about the “dangerous drug” classification. “At the same time, there are tons of supplements out there that could be considered very dangerous, too, but which don't fall under that definition.”

According to Langlois, “when you look at some of the drugs they're talking about–aspirin or bute that are normally given–yes, you do have to have an understanding of what you're doing, but you're not talking about drugs that you have to be so, so careful of all the time. For some reason, they legally define it as that in the state practice act.”

In a similar fashion, Blea is accused of unprofessional conduct in using drugs that are not FDA approved for equine administration, like Thyro-L, Trichlormethiazide /Dexamethasone powder and aspirin powder.

However, just because these drugs don't have FDA approval for use in horses doesn't mean veterinarians are prohibited from prescribing them, says Langlois.

“A lot of drugs that are out there, they're FDA approved but only in certain species or only in humans. The companies never did the trials to test them in animals to get the FDA certification. So, a lot of times, we prescribe these drugs as off-label use,” says Langlois.

“Usually, what that means is that there is no FDA approved equivalent out there for that species. The research has been done and the drug dosage has been worked out so that it can be used safely in animals, you just have to make the owner aware of the fact that you're using it off-label,” he says.

The board accuses Blea of failing to establish “any” veterinary-client-patient relationship (VCPR), claiming that he had “administered, prescribed, dispensed and/or furnished drugs and treatments” to his six equine patients “without establishing the necessary VCPR.”

This particular accusation, says Langois, taps into an ongoing debate within the veterinary community–what is the correct vet-client-patient dynamic when that relationship isn't clearly defined?

A standard relationship is one between the veterinarian and the owner of the animal. In small animal practice, the owner is the one who typically brings a sick pet in for treatment, for example.

But within horse racing, the trainer often acts as a middle-person, making decisions about veterinary treatments on behalf of the owner.

“A lot of times an investigator will look at that and go, 'well, does the owner know you've been doing all of this?' And as you know on the backside, it's usually the trainer's calling the shots as an agent for the owner,” says Langlois.

Unsurprisingly given Medina Spirit and Baffert's history with sudden deaths, the veterinary board zeroes in on how Blea allegedly prescribed, dispensed and/or administered thyroxine to one of the horses in his care “without establishing a veterinarian-client-patient relationship, without performing an examination, without forming a diagnosis, and most importantly, without medical necessity.”

“I can tell you that Dr. Blea met all our criteria for that prescription,” says former CHRB equine medical director Rick Arthur, pointing to a 2014 CHRB advisory on thyroxine use that was in effect during the treatment period identified by the veterinary board.

Interestingly, in the November CHRB committee meeting some three months before the alleged anonymous source contacted the veterinary medical board, Arthur shared how from 256 prescriptions for thyroxine during the first nine months of 2020 in Southern California, over half were for two trainers and 80% prescribed by just three veterinarians.

Though Arthur declined to disclose who the three veterinarians were, he told the TDN that Blea was not one of them.

According to Langlois, the nature of the complaints leveled against Blea essentially amount to poor record keeping.

“There are some causes for concern,” says Langlois. “The one thing we don't know, and this probably won't come out until the actual hearing, is, so far they've only really identified the horses that were treated by their initials. We don't know if something detrimental happened to those horses after those treatments or not. It doesn't seem like it because the board did not say anything about that.”

However, “when it comes to rising to the level of needing an immediate suspension, in my opinion, I don't think it reaches that level,” says Langlois.

According to Wilson, “just about every” complaint the board follows up on results in findings of poor record keeping. In the small number of instances where the record keeping is especially lax, she says, the veterinarian must take a remedial record-keeping course and their records are monitored for a period of time.

And so, what are the sorts of offenses that typically warrant a suspended license? Someone who presents a “serious risk of imminent harm to the public,” says Wilson.

Last year, the California veterinary board revoked three licenses, and while record keeping issues were listed on two of them, they were attached to much more serious offenses like “negligence” and “incompetence” in one case, and “discharging patients in unstable condition” in another. The vast majority of record-keeping issues listed last year resulted in citations or fines.

Eric Peterson, former member the Kentucky Veterinary Medical Board, explained that had he been presented with the same set of accusations, he would have recommended issuing a fine of “at most” $100.

“I was on the Kentucky vet board for 10 years. This would be minimal,” says Peterson, who says has known Blea for some 25 years. “We might not even fine him for this.”

Nevertheless, state veterinary boards, says Peterson, are vulnerable to political coercion. To illustrate, he cited a case from a few years prior whereby several Kentucky-based veterinarians were charged with purposefully altering the radiograph dates on horses headed for auction.

“Politics got in the way and nobody was suspended,” says Peterson.

The veterinary board failed to respond to a request for comment before deadline.

The TDN also sent a series of questions to the California Department of Consumer Affairs, which works with the veterinary board.

In response, spokesperson Matt Woodcheke wrote that the veterinary board's highest priority is to “protect the public through the licensing and regulation of veterinary professionals,” and that the board is “performing its mandate under California law to protect consumers through administrative disciplinary action.”

Friction Between Vet Board and CHRB…

Indeed, Blea's continued licensure, argues the veterinary board, presents a danger to “public health, safety and welfare” through his oversight of the various programs conducted at UC Davis for the CHRB, including the university's necropsy program–a medical process that forms part of the CHRB's investigation into Medina Spirit's death.

“Because Respondent Blea is alleged to have administered dangerous and medically unnecessary drugs to numerous racehorses, it stands to reason that he approves of such practice by other veterinarians,” the board states.

While the role of the CHRB's equine medical director is not contingent upon having an active veterinary license, the CHRB responded to Blea's interim suspension by bringing in the executive associate dean of UC Davis's School of Veterinary Medicine to oversee the necropsy of Medina Spirit.

This, the CHRB stated, “satisfies the VMB's stated reason for filing the temporary suspension petition and therefore requires it to consider its withdrawal.” But will it?

According to Wallace, his office has been in “communications” with the California Department of Justice about the subject of “whether or not veterinary licensure is required to be equine medical director.” Wallace declined to elaborate upon further details of the communications.

More broadly, this episode appears to be the latest in an ongoing turf-war over regulatory jurisdiction of racetrack veterinarians between the CHRB and the veterinary board. Of the veterinary board's eight members, its three non-vet board members are active animal welfare advocates, reports the Blood-Horse.

“Equine veterinarians at the track are in a position of being regulated in their activities by at least two different agencies between the vet board and the racing board. Those two agencies, I think, don't see eye to eye on who should be doing what where,” says Wallace.

As such, the vet board is putting the “scope of its authority” to the test here, says Wallace. “It has strong opinions that it can do everything that it is trying to do. Not everyone agrees with those opinions. And that's what makes for lawsuits.”

Langlois says that from a purely public perception standpoint, “there probably is some merit” in the veterinary board's argument to remove Blea from overseeing the Medina Spirit investigation.

Otherwise, Langlois says, there appears no obvious conflicts of interest that might preclude him from the task. Blea wasn't Baffert's private veterinarian, for example. Nor did he treat Medina Spirit personally.

“I would think there would be more merit to their argument if he was the one physically doing the necropsy or physically running the drug tests, or physically collecting the samples from Medina Spirit after his death,” says Langlois. “But from what I understand, he isn't.”

The formal hearing for Blea's interim license suspension is scheduled for Jan. 21.

Wallace warns some of the other vets who have been issued record request letters should be braced for formal accusations against them.

Kathryn Papp is an East Coast-based veterinarian and vocal critic of the over-use of medication in horse racing, who nonetheless describes Blea's suspension as unjustified.

Papp says that if she were practicing in California, she would be “fearful” of having to second and triple guess “every diagnosis I made or procedure I performed.” She adds that if “our livelihoods and very right to work are going to be threatened and, or punished unfairly,” then “I could not understand why anyone would want to continue being an equine practitioner in California at all.”

The post Blea Suspension: Medical Necessity Or Political Theater appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Why it seems so hard for Commissions to do the right thing in banning these bad actors for life is something I will never understand. I am a veterinarian licensed in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. If a video surfaced of me committing those acts, I would not have my license suspended for months or even two years. It would be gone permanently in a heartbeat, and I likely would not have the ability to obtain one in any other state in this country.

What occurred in that video is blatant animal cruelty (something I have been involved in assisting the prosecution of for the last 15 years). It can be looked upon as nothing less and should be dealt with accordingly by both law enforcement and the Racing Commissions. Sadly, that did not happen in the case of the decision of the Delaware Racing Commission.

HISA, if and when it is finally in full effect, will hopefully put an end to this concern once and for all. In the meantime, just because an issue like this occurred in one state does not mean other states that she is licensed in cannot act on their own. Every state in which Ms. Cobb is licensed needs to start the process of immediate revocation of that license. I am fully aware of a person's due process rights and what can happen when racetracks or commissions take away those rights via their actions in some suspensions (the NYRA Bob Baffert case for example). I am also aware that anyone who is accused of or charged with a violation of any kind is entitled to their full due process. I urge the Commissions to due their proper investigation and due diligence on this case, and then render their decision quickly. To me, the only decision that it can be is immediate and permanent revocation of the license.

Another thing I have learned over the years is the true power that we as the public can have in matters before a racing commission. I learned this after the intense pressure put on the PA Racing Commission by so many to get the license of the trainer of a horse named “Silent Ruler” permanently revoked after the horse was found in a state of severe pain and neglect from a non-attended to sesamoid fracture. Therefore, I urge everyone who sees this letter to please write into or contact your State Racing Commission and politely but firmly urge them to not allow this cruelty to continue by revoking Ms. Cobb's license to train horses in that state if she holds one and to not consider granting her one if she does not.

We hear all the time how Commissions and those in the industry want to bring back integrity to the sport. The Delaware Racing Commission has failed miserably at this. It doesn't mean that others must follow that lead.

Bryan Langlois, Past President, PVMA, Board Member, ThoroFan

The post Letter to the Editor: Bryan Langlois DVM appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

“Ganas…all we need is Ganas.” –Jaime Escalante

Pretty simple words to say, but much harder to truly live by, and the racing industry is at the point now where it needs to truly not only say these words, but to live them.

Jerry Brown, in a letter to the editor recently published in the Thoroughbred Daily News, stated his belief that horses running in stakes races were not running true to form possibly because of not running on Lasix in those races. He pointed out that these horses may have been scoped post-race, but very often the fans, handicappers, and the public have no idea what the results of these scopes are. This issue is not related to just scoping a horse looking for bleeding, but in all facets of a horses medical care. Racing woefully fails this transparency test, a fact known for years.

One of the arguments (aside from the legal one of owners releasing records which is easily remedied with a change to an owner's license application) against providing full transparency of medical records and fatal injury data has always been that the public will not understand it, and the animal rights crowd will try to twist it to fit their narrative on things. That really is not an acceptable excuse. The industry can no longer rely on the old refrain of “you just don't understand the industry” when presented with any question or argument against racing. Take the time to explain what we all “don't understand,” but also explain it to the ones the industry has the most chance of making understand and converting to fans. It is something I have come to call the “10-80-10” rule.  Ten percent of people are always going to think racing is wrong, inhumane, and should be forever banned. They are never going to see it any differently. On the other end of the spectrum, there are 10% of people who think nothing needs to change in the racing industry at all. They will not agree to changing anything even if the data points to a need for it. Both extremes are not the area racing needs to solely focus on (even though both often shout the loudest). The focus should be on the 80% in the middle that are asking to be heard but are also willing to listen. Providing not only transparency but an explanation about that transparency in a manner that people can understand builds the trust needed to bring new blood into the game. It is not hard. It just takes “ganas.”

Finally, a constant refrain I am hearing all the time regarding the sport is, “Without the owners you have no sport,” or “Without the gamblers you have no sport.” This is all true. However, what must be remembered far more importantly is this: “Without the HORSE you have no sport”!!!

Without the HORSE you have no entity for owners to own.

Without the HORSE you have no entity for the gamblers to wager on.

Without the HORSE you have no entity for trainers to train.

Without the HORSE you have no entity for the jockeys to ride.

Without the HORSE you have no entity for vets to treat.

Without the HORSE you have no entity for the fans to root for.

As soon as we take the focus off the horse, we lose sight of what the most important thing in this sport is. The majestic animal we all fall in love with and root on to hold onto that lead or just get up at the wire is what the sport is all about. I am not trying to belittle the contributions of all the other stakeholders of this sport (and I know some will still be offended by my statement). However, NO ONE in this industry is in a position that is superior to the creature that makes it all possible. Keeping this in mind at all times is what will help re-invigorate fans and interest to the sport. Take care of the HORSE first and foremost, and the rest will follow and fall into place.

The time for just talking about change is over. We need meaningful actions to bring about that change. In some places it is happening. In others it is not. One thing remains a constant theme throughout, though. Want to bring this amazing sport to the next level and see it thrive? All it takes is “ganas.”

The post Letter to the Editor: Bryan Langlois, DVM appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post