“We don't use Clenbuterol. Period,” Englehart said.

So is there more to this story? Dig a little deeper and you might conclude that there is. To Englehart, it's not about the fact that the horse tested positive. He doesn't dispute that finding. But when was the horse given Clenbuterol and by whom? He hopes the answers to those questions will clear his name and lead to HIWU dropping the case against him.

The horse that tested positive for Clenbuterol was an unnamed 2-year-old by Classic Empire out of Fast Heart. Englehart bought the horse on behalf of owner Marcello Rosa for $14,000 at the OBS auction June 15. The horse broke down while training and had to be euthanized at Finger Lakes Nov. 21.

Englehart's problems were just beginning.

HIWU performed a battery of tests on the deceased horse, including blood, urine and hair. The blood and urine tests were negative. According to Rick Arthur, former equine medical director for the California Horse Racing Board, a standard dose of Clenbuterol will typically be detectable in the blood for about three to four days after administration. For urine, the detection window would typically be between 10 to 17 days after administration.

But HIWU also performed a hair test, which revealed the presence of Clenbuterol. Englehart claims that hair tests can show the presence of the substance for up to a year after it was given to a horse. According to Arthur, Clenbuterol can be found in hair samples for at least six months after the drug was administered.

Dr. Rick Arthur | Horsephotos

“We've certainly seen Clenbuterol in hair up to six months,” said Arthur. “It could probably stay longer, we just haven't tried to look at it. We did a lot of hair testing for Clenbuterol in Quarter Horses at Los Alamitos. Trainers have contended that horses past six months have tested positive.”

After learning about how long after administration Clenbuterol can be found in a hair sample, Englehart started to do the math. The horse broke down exactly five months and six days after the purchase at OBS. That means, Englehart contends, that it is entirely possible that someone gave the horse the drug before he purchased it and that he could be suspended for something someone else did.

“(HIWU) say it's in the horse's system, so you are guilty,” said Englehart, who is still training while awaiting he results of the split sample test done on the Classic Empire colt. “It doesn't matter to them that it can stay in the system for up to a year and I only had the horse for less than six months. That's completely unfair. They are trying to upend my life.”

The unraced colt was sold for $4,000 at the Fasig-Tipton Kentucky October Yearling Sale Oct. 26, 2022. The consignor was Vinery Sales and the purchaser was Juan Centeno. The latter, who sells under the name of All Dreams Equine, turned around and put the horse in OBS June. It was one of five horses who successfully went through the ring, including a horse named She She's Shadow (Bucchero), who was also purchased by Englehart.

When asked if She She's Shadow was tested and what the results were, Alexa Ravit, the director of communications & outreach for HIWU, said in an email response to the TDN: “HIWU cannot comment on what horses have been sampled or their subsequent test results beyond what is published on our website in accordance with the ADMC Program's public disclosure requirements.”

Englehart's theory is that Centeno gave the Clenbuterol to the horse in hopes that it would help the colt have a fast pre-sale workout. The horse put in a two-furlong breeze in :22.

“I don't know the gentleman from All Dreams Equine,” Englehart said. “I just know it had to be him because I know it wasn't me.”

Centeno did not respond to emails, text messages and phone calls from the TDN requesting a comment.

Englehart alleged that Clenbuterol use is “rampant” at the 2-year-old sales.

“This horse was probably training on (Clenbuterol) right up to day he sold,” Englehart said. “It's very well known that Clenbuterol use is rampant at sales. Every trainer knows that. I think if they did a hair test on every horse 70 to 80 percent would be positive for Clenbuterol.”

Under OBS's conditions of sale, no medication may be administered within 24 hours of a horse's under-tack performance. Several specific medications may not be administered on the sales grounds or present in a test sample, including Clenbuterol. OBS tests around 10-15% of the horses who are going to sell, but does not do hair-sample tests, just blood and urine. This colt was not one of those randomly tested in June, the sales company said.

Tom Ventura | Patty Wolfe

When asked to elaborate on the sales company's rules regarding Clenbuterol, OBS President Tom Ventura said every step possible is taken to make sure that no horse in the sale has been given that particular drug.

“With our policy for bronchodilators, including Clenbuterol, we were ahead of the racing curve, because the sales companies have the ability within the conditions of sale to put policies in place maybe a little quicker than jumping through the regulatory hoops that are required at the racetracks,” Ventura said. “OBS, in October of 2019, prohibited bronchodilators. Period. In any animal at any level, in any type of sale.

“Since the very beginning of the tests, I think we had two early on who tested positive and didn't go through the ring, so two positives that we have had for Clenbuterol in four years. I know there weren't any in the last year. We test them as they're coming off the racetrack, and then the buyers have the right to test when they sign the sales ticket. We haven't had any returns for Clenbuterol from those tests.”

In limbo while awaiting the results of the split sample, Englehart has continued his own investigation. He believes the answer to his problems may lie in what is called a segmented drug test, which can provide a time line so far as when a drug was used.

According to the website cellmark.co.uk, by segmenting head hair samples into monthly one-centimeter sections, a month-by-month historic profile of drug use can be obtained. That goes for humans and horses.

If the segmented test shows that the Clenbuterol was administered prior to the day when Englehart bought the horse, it would seem to prove his point that someone else must have given the drug to the horse and lead, he believes, to him being exonerated.

Englehart has sent a hair sample off to the lab at Texas A&M and asked it to do a segmented test.

“I'm just hoping they look at the science and I don't have to do the suspension,” he said.

The problem is that he doesn't know if HIWU will also do a segmented test. Will they? Have they? HIWU won't say.

“HIWU cannot publicly comment on the specific facts of pending cases, including whether segmented analysis was conducted on samples taken from specific horses,” Ravit said in another email.

Finger Lakes | Sarah Andrew

That's not reassuring to Englehart, who points out that the problem extends beyond sales. Horses often change hands, whether being bought at auction, being claimed or being privately purchased, and if they test positive for Clenbuterol through hair tests it would be unfair to automatically penalize the person who had the horse at the time it tested positive.

“The average horseman who bought a horse or has a horse in their possession for only a short period of time, they can't be dropping the hammer on them when something can still show up in these tests after a year,” Englehart said. “You have to know when the horse was given the Clenbuterol.”

We posed this question to HIWU: “Could a horse be given Clenbuterol by someone prior to being transferred to a new trainer and test positive? That would mean the current trainer would be getting penalized for something someone else did. Is this a plausible scenario?”

Ravit's response did not answer that question.

“HIWU cannot comment on the specific questions regarding Englehart's pending case, including the samples collected and type of testing conducted on Fast Heart 2021, the expected timeline to receive the B Sample results, and the plausibility of his defense,” she wrote. “Additionally, HIWU cannot speculate on the adjudication of the hypothetical case you described, for the outcome would depend on the specific facts of the case.”

Englehart is worried that he is running short on time. Once the results of split sample are in and as long as it also shows the presence of Clenbuterol, he will be facing what could be an immediate suspension that can last as long as two years.

“I'm just hoping that the tests comes back and vindicates me,” he said. “I will fight this as hard as you can and take this as far as necessary. I'm ready to take it to the courts. Meanwhile, this has been a nightmare for me.”

Dan Ross contributed to this story.

The post Facing A Two-Year Suspension For Clenbuterol, Trainer Jeffrey Englehart Says They’ve Got The Wrong Guy appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

More than four years ago in response to the death of GI-placed Bobby Abu Dhabi (Macho Uno)–what was initially suspected a sudden cardiac-related event–the TDN took a lengthy dive into the issue.

In a nutshell, sudden cardiac deaths oftentimes leave no discernable physical sign for pathologists to piece together a clear diagnostic picture–no major lesions, faulty valves, ruptured arteries or damaged heart tissue for them to point to with authority and say this or that caused the heart to stop.

In a well-considered study published in 2011 looking at post-mortem findings from 268 Thoroughbred racehorses that suffered exercise-related sudden deaths, pathologists made a definite diagnosis in only 53% of cases, a presumptive diagnosis in 25% cases, while 22% of cases were left unexplained. In humans, coincidentally, about one-third of sudden deaths are presumed to be cardiovascular-related but don't actually have any concrete diagnosis.

Veterinary experts remain after all these years largely circumspect when pressed as to exactly what causes these events in racehorses, with fingers pointed towards electrical abnormalities like arrhythmias, genetic predispositions, drug use and faulty valves of the heart.

“We're asking better questions and we're asking more questions,” said Dionne Benson, chief veterinary officer for 1/ST Racing, when asked why progress has been slow in better understanding sudden death cases in racehorses. “But we've just started to ask those questions the last few years.”

Causes
Part of the reason is the infrequency with which these events occur. This paper pinned the number at roughly one sudden death per 10,000 individual starts.

Last Friday, the TDN asked the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA)–mandated to record and report all equine fatalities at participating jurisdictions–how many sudden deaths have occurred since the law went into effect on July 1 last year. HISA did not provide an answer.

This study from last year found that sudden equine deaths were more likely during training than during racing, and horses with fewer lifetime starts were at higher risk.

“Exercise intensity appears not to be critically important in precipitating sudden cardiac death in horses,” the researchers summarized, before adding that typically, “sudden cardiac death occurred early in the careers of affected horses.”

A pivotal area of research surrounds so-called “electrical irregularities,” like arrhythmias (an irregular heartbeat), and heart murmurs (the presence of irregular heartbeat sounds).

Indeed, some 50% of racehorses experience cardiac arrhythmias when put under some kind of physical duress. That is one main reasons researchers out of the University of Minnesota are in the middle of a study of some 1,200 Thoroughbreds and Standardbreds with normal heart function at rest, but who develop arrhythmia during exercise.

“It's really hard to know for sure because when a horse dies, the electrical conductivity of the heart stops,” said Molly McCue, a professor and the associate dean for research at the University of Minnesota College of Veterinary Medicine, explaining why there still remains no concrete scientific proof that electrical irregularities cause sudden cardiac death, even though most experts agree that these issues are key to getting to the root of the problem.

In this regard, many veterinary experts bemoan the fact that in this scientific arena, horse racing is in some regards the medieval cousin of human athletics, which has already been closely monitoring and studying the heart's electrical capabilities for many decades, meaning so much of the dynamic possibility of a racehorse's heart remains shrouded in mystery.

Back in early 2015, in a study encompassing 30 racehorses in California, none of the horses suffered arrhythmias, but the authors noted a post-exercise increase in what is called valvular regurgitation, which is when heart valves don't close properly, allowing blood to flow backwards in the heart.

About 20% of healthy Thoroughbreds have some degree of valvular regurgitation when examined–but again, any clinical significance is currently unknown.

Despite the vast body of cardiac research in human athletes, the National Institutes of Health has its eye on the Grayson-Jockey Club funded arrhythmia study “as an interesting model for what happens in young human athletes,” McCue said, with the occurrence of sudden death in horses far higher than in humans.

“The frequency in horses, it's about 10 times more common than it is in people,” McCue said.

Another fast-evolving area of interest concerns genetics. Human science has found a genetic connection to a higher risk of heart disease. In racehorses, any potential genetic correlation with a higher likelihood of sudden death is still largely at lift-off.

McCue and her fellow researchers are taking DNA samples from the same 1200 horses in the arrhythmia study to see if any genetic pattern emerges. McCue calls these two studies “a two-pronged effort” to identify early horses at higher risk of experiencing sudden death.

“One is the genetics, figuring out who is high-risk and who we need to screen and look at really critically. And then two, developing tools that can identify the horses this is most likely to happen in,” said McCue.

“Our hope is that if we can develop computer models that can predict if a horse is more likely to experience severe arrhythmias today, we can then pull that horse from racing,” McCue added.

Some heart problems among horses that suffer sudden death are much easier to diagnose–but structural abnormalities are rare. A 2011 paper found that about 1% of horses who die suddenly suffer a ruptured aorta, which is the largest artery in the body.

Which brings the story around to the presumed connection between drugs and sudden cardiac death–the touchpaper of any high-profile sudden death in racing.

Drugs
“Here's the problem,” said Rick Arthur, former CHRB equine medical director. “People watch CSI and they see them taking a fingernail clipping and they can tell you what you had for lunch three days ago. Life doesn't work that way.”

In other words: Unlike an episode of CSI: NY, which typically wraps with a neat conviction, investigations into sudden racehorse death rarely conclude as tidily, even when a link emerges with a suspected substance.

Just take the case of a Standardbred that died suddenly at Cal Expo in early 2014. The horse, Arthur said, was subsequently found to have abnormally high levels of cobalt (a naturally occurring element) in its system.

The trainer faced no punitive actions because the death occurred before the CHRB passed rules instituting cobalt thresholds in test samples, said Arthur, who equivocated on whether the horse's death could have been definitively linked to an administration of cobalt.

“The cobalt was so high that it could have been associated with it,” Arthur said. “But again, that's when we were suspicious of cobalt–we might have over-interpreted it. But it certainly was very high.”

A recent limited study on six Standardbreds found a possible connection between cardiac arrhythmias (including atrial fibrillation) and levothyroxine–a thyroid supplement linked to the sudden deaths of seven Bob Baffert trained horses between 2011 and 2013.

A subsequent CHRB report noted that the horses had been administered thyroxine, and that use of thyroxine is “concerning in horses with suspected cardiac failure.” However, the report also noted that, because the drug had been administered to all horses in Baffert's care, the use of thyroxine “does not explain why all the fatalities occurred.”

Arthur co-authored a paper finding a “very strong” connection between anticoagulant rodenticide exposure and an increased risk of sudden death during exercise from unusual hemorrhaging. Strong suspicions surround the bronchodilator clenbuterol, which has been proven to increase heart muscle. Iodine–commonly found in seaweed-based supplements—has also been linked to arrhythmia.

“Certainly there are other things. Horses can build up levels of selenium [a naturally occurring mineral] which can cause sudden death,” Benson said. “You can also have things in the feed like monensin [a polyether antibiotic toxic to horses].”

In human sports the rise of erythropoietin [EPO]–a synthetic form of a natural metabolic product that thickens the blood–was linked to the deaths of multiple young professional cyclists and other athletes. Has illicit EPO use in horseracing ever been linked to any sudden equine deaths?

“No–at least not in California,” said Arthur, who said that EPO would have the same effect in horses' blood by thickening it though increased blood cell count, a process called polycythemia.

But a diagnostic complication in this issue, Arthur added, is how horses are “natural blood-dopers because of their huge spleens.”

Virus
 Springtime, of course, is equine virus hunting season. And viral infections are known to cause myocarditis, inflammation of the heart muscle.

“It's always a possibility,” said Francisco Uzal, coordinator of the California Animal Health and Food Safety Laboratory post-mortem program for the CHRB, when asked if a viral infection could explain the two recent Joseph-trained sudden deaths.

Uzal added, however, that while he has never seen during any sudden death necropsy instances of severe myocarditis–which would show up under the under the microscope as large lesions–“we've found in a number of sudden-death horses really, really mild and minor myocarditis.”

More tellingly, said Uzal, is how the same minor heart lesions appeared in horses that didn't suffer sudden death events. “You see it in normal horses, too. So, what does it mean? Probably nothing,” he said.

“This is so frustrating for us,” Uzal added. “We go home empty-handed most of the time.”

Which leads to the finer points of the actual necropsy process. Even if a substance suspected of increasing the likelihood of sudden equine death shows up at what are presumed elevated levels during the necropsy process, it doesn't necessarily indicate a smoking gun.

Take thyroxine, an endogenous substance, meaning it's produced naturally inside the body and therefore harder to evaluate than a medication with its own specific pharmacological signature.

“When you do a test, you compare what you find with the normal values in a normal animal in a living horse. There are no normal values for dead horses,” said Uzal, highlighting how difficult it is to determine baseline levels for endogenous substances like thyroxine.

“But having said that, we have compared the thyroxine found in postmortem blood in sudden death horses with the same in normal horses, and we found no difference,” he said.

Helpful to better understanding the underlying causes of sudden cardiac death in racehorses would be if all necropsies were made equal.

Uzal co-authored a 2017 paper highlighting how “autopsy technique” varies depending on personnel and “institutional preferences.”

As Uzal puts it, “pathology is a science as well as an art. You talk to 10 different pathologists, you hear 10 different stories. We have tried very hard to standardize, and we are still fighting for it.” In this regard, could federal intervention be on its way?

HISA's racetrack safety rules require all horses that die or are euthanized on licensed grounds at all participating jurisdictions undergo a necropsy. But the rules appear broad and fail to mandate more specific uniform rules on necropsy protocols.

HISA did not respond to a series of questions on the issue of necropsies. This includes whether every horse that has died during racing and training at jurisdictions under HISA's oversight have undergone necropsy examinations, and whether HISA has indeed instituted uniform protocols or guidelines for the actual necropsy process.

Future
In a bid to fill in some of the glaring blanks surrounding sudden death, UC Davis has begun storing necropsy samples taken from sudden death horses in a large freezer to be retrieved and re-tested in the advent of more sophisticated analytical technologies.

“The other thing we do from each horse, we have multiple different containers. So, the idea is we can provide it to different people,” said Uzal.

More contemporaneously, Uzal and his team are poised to begin studying the training records of horses that suffer sudden cardiac deaths for any possible explanatory patterns.

“We want to see if there's something in the training that could give us a clue of what's happening,” said Uzal. “We want to see if it's possible–and I don't know if that's the right expression–but see if it's possible that some horses are trained to the point of exhaustion.

“I don't know the answer–it's pure speculation,” Uzal added. “It could be nothing, or it could be something.”

The post Sudden Equine Deaths: “This is so frustrating for us” appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

The most high-profile of the track veterinarians facing action against their veterinary license is California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) equine medical director Dr. Jeff Blea, whose license was suspended at an emergency hearing by the board on Christmas Eve. Blea is accused of failing to perform adequate examinations of horses prior to prescribing drugs to them, as well as lacking in record-keeping and other areas of the state's veterinary practice law. He has since been placed on administrative leave as the case plays out. Blea isn't the only one facing charges – Drs. Vince Baker, Sarah Graybill Jones, Kim Lewis Kuhlmann, Steven Lee Boyer, and Kenneth Carl Allison also had accusation documents filed against them in 2021 with similar charges. Only Blea's case has resulted in an emergency hearing.

Many in the racing industry have, publicly and privately, questioned the motivation of the veterinary medical board in its pursuit of charges against Blea, as well as its public presentation of the charges as being relevant to Blea's work in overseeing the death of Medina Spirit at Santa Anita in December. (We ran this letter to the editor from trainer Richard Mandella earlier this week testifying to the conditioner's relationship with Blea before he retired from racetrack practice.)

Speakers during the public comment period of the veterinary medical board meeting Jan. 19 did not get into the specifics of Blea's case or mention him by name, but most suggested that the regulations under which the board filed an accusation document against him were outdated and ill-suited to equine practice.

“Not every veterinary practice in this state is conducted on small animals in four-walled hospitals,” said Dr. Rick Arthur, retired racetrack practitioner and former equine medical director for CHRB. “The California Veterinary Medical Board regulations do not reflect the standard of practice, the high standard of practice in ambulatory practice in California, which makes it easy for this board to play 'Gotcha.' That has to change.”

“The scope and tone of the charges on your website are extreme, and they don't' appear to be based on any knowledge of the standards of equine practice in this state,” said Dr. Michael Manno, racetrack veterinarian with San Dieguito Equine Group. “I can tell you that if you can suspend a license based on these accusations and complaints, most of the veterinarians that practice equine medicine in this state might as well hand in their licenses right now.”

Dan Baxter, executive director of the California Veterinary Medical Association, voiced the organization's concern about whether the regulations are in touch with business practices.

“On the heels of recent enforcement action taken by the veterinary medical board, the CVMA has received emails and phone calls from numerous members practicing within the California equine community concerning the board's interpretations of minimum practice standards and enforcement of those standards,” he said. “We fear that there may be a significant disconnect between the reasonable, sound practice standards observed by equine practitioners in the field and the standards to which those same practitioners are being held by the board.

“Without a meeting of the minds between this board, the body interpreting and enforcing the legal standards of practice, and the equine practitioners subject to that enforcement, the CVMA is deeply concerned that equine veterinary practice within the state of California, already a profession in which the supply of qualified clinicians is limited, may be further gutted due to the departure of practitioners unwilling to subject their licenses or livelihoods to the vagaries of a framework that does not reflect the standard of practice observed by the equine veterinary community in this state.”

Dr. Russ Sakai, surgeon at Petaluma Equine, agreed and also expressed concern about what these types of regulatory actions may mean for veterinary students.

“There is a lack of veterinarians graduating and coming into equine practice,” said Sakai. “I think it's difficult to recruit veterinarians at the student level, especially when they see equine veterinarians being subjected to this sort of what appears to be unfair treatment, or being treated with a double standard by a group of members that seem to have not a very thorough understanding of equine practice.”

After hearing the feedback, veterinary board vice president asked the California Veterinary Medical Association to submit a presentation to the board outlining their concerns about the state's Veterinary Practice Act as applied to equine medicine and any regulatory proposals they had to remedy those issues.

There were no specific cases set to be discussed by board members during the public portion of the meeting on Jan. 19 or during a follow-up meeting scheduled for Jan. 20.

The post ‘A Significant Disconnect’: Equine Veterinarians Speak Out At California Veterinary Medical Board Meeting appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

NYRA has charged Baffert with engaging in conduct detrimental to the best interests of racing and has sought to temporarily ban the trainer from its tracks. A hearing on the matter is scheduled to begin Jan. 24.

Dr. Rick Arthur, who was the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) equine medical director at the time of the 2019 violations, told TDN Monday that barn inspections are “routine” after a post-race medication positive, and that there is no regulatory requirement for drug cabinets to be locked, even though the board strongly encourages medications to be securely stored.

Arthur also explained that the proper labeling of medications is primarily the veterinarian's responsibility, and that a crucial question is: What were the mislabeled drugs?

“If it's Gastrogard tubes out of the box,” said Arthur Monday, pointing to a commonly used ulcer medication, “it's a technical violation, and not a serious one at all. If it was serious, an official warning or complaint would have been filed against either the trainer or the dispensing veterinarian.”

The investigation reports for the barn inspections–obtained through a California Public Records Act (CPRA) request–shed some light on the nature of NYRA's amended complaint but fail to answer the issue of what the mislabeled drugs actually were.

No subsequent warnings or complaints were filed against either Baffert or the attending veterinarian, Dr. Vince Baker, however.

The Del Mar barn inspection identified by the NYRA press release pertains to the one conducted Aug. 16, after the Baffert-trained Eclair (Bernardini) tested positive for bute after finishing 4th at Del Mar Aug. 3. Baffert was fined $1,500. Eclair tested positive with 2.88 micrograms per milliliter (ug/mL) of bute in her system.

According to the report, the investigator found “25 different kinds of medications that are not properly labeled and expired. There is no lock on the medication cabinet however the tack room door has lock capabilities. Dr. Vince Baker advised he would be taking care of the situation.”

According to the report, Baker told the investigator he did not know how Eclair tested positive for bute. “Baffert stated he thinks someone is intentionally giving bute to his horses and mentioned that he would be offering a reward to help solve the case,” the report added.

According to the report, Baker told the investigator he had treated Eclair no later than 10:30 am two days before the race.

Baker also told the investigator that he treated other Baffert runners with bute the following day, but that he “does not believe he inadvertently treated 'Eclair' by mistake,” according to the report.

The CHRB conducted a separate inspection of Baffert's Del Mar barn Aug. 10, after Cruel Intention (Smiling Tiger) tested positive for bute after finishing 3rd at Del Mar July 27 in the Real Good Deal S.

Baffert was fined $500. Cruel Intention tested positive with 0.51 ug/mL of bute in his system.

In light of the Santa Anita welfare crisis the spring of 2019, the CHRB reduced just months earlier the permissible level of race-day bute from 2 ug/mL to a level of non-detect.

Six days prior to the second barn inspection, the CHRB investigator found “expired medications and those that were up to date were properly labeled. There is no lock on the medication cabinet however the door has lock capabilities,” according to the inspection report.

According to the report, Baker told the investigator he treated three of Baffert's horses at the same time with bute, “and does not know why only one horse [Cruel Intention] tested positive for it.”

The two inspection reports can be read here and here.

The post CHRB Investigative Reports Add Details to NYRA’s Amended Charges Against Baffert appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

When speaking to the TDN, Arthur maintained that the investigation — and others into high scopolamine tests which also resulted in no sanctions — was by handled as suggested by staff counsel. He also said he thought the legal team for Mick Ruis, who filed a lawsuit over the handling of the Justify case, was behind the Post's story, with help from CHRB commissioner Oscar Gonzales.

“I don't know if Oscar was the one, but Oscar has certainly been the proponent of keeping the Justify issue alive. Actually, I filed a whistleblower complaint against Commissioner Gonzales for basically arguing the Justify case as if he was representing Ruis with talking points that were clearly provided by Darrell Vienna,” Arthur said. “I'm sure Commissioner Gonzales knows that I filed a whistleblower complaint. I think I haven't hidden my disdain for Commissioner Gonzales for a long time.

“There certainly have been attorneys that have tried to play commissioners over the years. And I think that we have an ambitious petty politician that wants to make a name for himself that allowed himself to be played. The Justify case was dismissed in accordance to state law, and it was not dismissed by Rick Arthur. It was not dismissed by [former CHRB executive director] Rick Baedeker. It was dismissed by the board, which is required by law. And that was done properly in accordance to law.”

Beyond his response to the Post story, Arthur told the TDN he believes California has made significant progress in the areas of equine welfare and safety in the 15 years he has been involved. Some regulations might be a little extreme, he admitted, but he thinks the state will find the balance with time.

Read more at Thoroughbred Daily News

The post Arthur: Post Story Questioning Justify Case Was A Plant From Ruis Legal Team appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

The day after Arthur officially stepped down, he conducted a Q&A with the TDN, the first part of which can be seen here. In it, he discussed his tenure as California racing's chief veterinarian, the impending implementation of the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA), and the recent controversy stirred up by a Washington Post report into his investigation into a series of sudden deaths among Bob Baffert trainees between 2011 and 2013.

The following is the concluding half of the interview. It has been edited only very lightly for grammatical and clarification purposes.

TDN: Another Washington Post story from earlier this week details a 23-page California deputy attorney general analysis of the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB)'s handling of the Justify case in which it states, “The court could find the CHRB abused its discretion and acted in a manner that was arbitrary, capricious, or entirely lacking in evidentiary fact.” Now, you've repeatedly said that the only part of the CHRB's handling of the case that concerned you was the secrecy aspect. If you could go back and redo that whole case, would you do anything differently?

RA: First of all, the case was handled at the recommendation of staff counsel in Sacramento, after consulting with attorneys in the business consumer services and housing agency which oversees the CHRB and with the attorney general's office. That is what was proposed. I certainly agreed with that, in accordance with California law. The dismissal of those cases was done entirely in accordance with regulations and California law.

There is no question that the only person who questions it is obviously Darrell Vienna [attorney representing plaintiff Mick Ruis], who planted the story with the Washington Post. I told the reporter he was being played. But anyway, that's a different issue. The only issue as far as I was concerned was that it was unfair to disqualify this horse when we were going through a process simply because of bureaucratic inefficiency by the California Horse Racing Board. I won't get into the details about why that was the case, but if you go back and look at the regulatory structure or the regulatory processes in California or of the CHRB at that time, I think it's pretty easy to see.

Since then, just to be clear, there have been five scopolamine positives in California. Not one trainer was sanctioned. Not one horse was disqualified. That doesn't include almost a dozen other horses that had scopolamine in their samples below the international screen limit that we use in the laboratory. So, I really have no regrets over it. I have no apologies.

You're talking about information that was provided, most likely, by [CHRB] commissioner Oscar Gonzales, who used to work for Darrell Vienna, to Darrell Vienna to promote this story because it just lost in a court case in superior court. So, where this is going to go, I don't know. But we had a reporter that was played by a plaintiff's attorney as far as I'm concerned.

TDN: Are you saying that Commissioner Gonzales was the one who leaked the document?

RA: I don't know if Oscar was the one, but Oscar has certainly been the proponent of keeping the Justify issue alive. Actually, I filed a whistleblower complaint against Commissioner Gonzales for basically arguing the Justify case as if he was representing Ruis with talking points that were clearly provided by Darrell Vienna.

TDN: When did you file that?

RA: Over a year ago.

Horsephotos

TDN: Has anything happened?

RA: No, I haven't heard back and the state auditor's office told me not to expect to hear back. I'm sure Commissioner Gonzales knows that I filed a whistleblower complaint. I think I haven't hidden my disdain for Commissioner Gonzales for a long time.

There certainly have been attorneys that have tried to play commissioners over the years. And I think that we have an ambitious petty politician that wants to make a name for himself that allowed himself to be played. The Justify case was dismissed in accordance to state law, and it was not dismissed by Rick Arthur. It was not dismissed by [former CHRB executive director] Rick Baedeker. It was dismissed by the board, which is required by law. And that was done properly in accordance to law.

It is a done deal as far as I'm concerned, as much as people would like to keep it alive.

TDN: Now, you brought up the equine safety improvements that have occurred in California. We've made large demonstrable strides forward in that regard. But economically, the sport faces any number of serious challenges. What do you think it needs to do to ensure its longevity and sustainability?

RA: It's a real challenge to maintain the economic health of horse racing and make sure that we're doing everything right by the horse. They don't always go in the same direction. For example, we've raced almost 50% of our starts on the turf course here on a meet that is almost six months long. That really puts a lot of stress on the turf course. But that's where people like to run their horses. You have to have full fields.

We'd obviously like to have breaks so that the turf course could be in better condition. Maybe we need an additional turf course. I don't know exactly what it would be. But we do have to make it more economically viable for the owners, otherwise they're not going to [be able to afford] the PET or MRI [scans], all the other diagnostic techniques and examinations that we now require. So, somehow we have to improve the economics. But the key to sustainability is to make sure that we are taking care of the horse.

Sarah Andrew

TDN: Do you think any of these safety measures are overkill?

RA: I don't know if they're overkill. They're maybe a little bit further than we need to go. But I think we'll sort those out over time.

TDN: Which ones?

RA: For example, a 30-day stand down for fetlock injections with corticosteroids. Not unreasonable, but probably more than needs to be required.

[Note: Arthur subsequently clarified his remarks that his frustration is with what can be the “inability” to regulate in a “meaningful way,” and pointed out that most international racing authorities use at most a 14-day corticosteroid injection stand down.]

TDN: Do you think racing in California is in better shape now than when you first took your position?

RA: I think in terms of the regulations, I think we're in better shape now. I do think that we have lost some public support for horse racing that is going to be very hard to get back. I think we're always going to be under the gun. The animal rights activists are never going to be satisfied with horse racing, just like they aren't satisfied with any other animal use.

California's an odd state that way–most people don't know anything about horses. They don't know a lot about animals. There's not that rural background. Not very many people were raised on farms or around animals. So, there's really kind of a disconnect about how animals should be used in society, and that may not be sustainable for a long period of time.

I think the horse racing structure is in very good shape to go forward. But whether it will satisfy the public in California, I think is going to be hard to predict. I mean we've decreased fatalities, like I said, by 75%. Is that good enough? We will never have racing when there's zero fatalities, just like there will never be flying with zero crashes. I mean, that's just the reality of it.

Horsephotos

TDN: How real an existential threat do you think that is to California racing?

RA: I think it's a real existential threat to racing in California. The Santa Anita fiasco really exposed horse racing to people who weren't paying attention. The racing press understood that horses were injured in racing. The non-racing press really had no idea.

The type of questions that I had from reporters who had never covered racing before, never covered sport, were pretty astounding. I think a lot of people didn't realize that there are fatalities in horse racing. I think it came as a big surprise. And when you look at the numbers, it can be pretty frightening. I'm talking about nationally–there's a lot of horses in training.

TDN: How successful has the sport been thus far in challenging that narrative and what do we need to do better?

RA: I think we pride ourselves on the care we give our horses. There are certainly risks associated with it, just like there is with a lot of different production agriculture. But, I mean, [compare that] to the wild horses out in the fields, which have a life expectancy of about a third of what the horses that are managed have. I think sometimes people don't understand how well we take care of horses, and I think we have to present that message.

It used to be that people came around to the barns, look at the horses and pet them. A lot of people have never touched a horse, and I think if they get that interaction with the horse, that's something that we can sell.

To me, racing is a sport. Horses are athletes. I'm not involved in the gambling aspect of it myself. Gambling pays for the sport for the rest of us. Obviously it's a business. Gambling is key to it and getting horses and getting full field sizes or having the more races, the better the business model. But really to me, I think we have to sell the sport more than we do.

Horsephotos

TDN: What advice would you like to give to your successor, Dr. [Jeff] Blea?

RA: Well, I think Dr. Blea is well suited for this position. He's been in national leadership positions. He certainly is aware of controversy, which comes with this job. You can't avoid it if you're going to do the job right. I think the real issue is to do what you think is right and stand up for what you think is right.

TDN: And what's next for you?

RA: I'm still going to stay involved. I'm still involved in national and international organizations. I'll continue to do that. I've certainly had some opportunities that I'm mulling over in the future. But how hard I want to work? I really don't know.

I have some research projects that [are] still in the works. I'm involved with the Grayson-Jockey Club Research Foundation, RMTC [Racing Medication and Testing Consortium]–those sorts of things that I'm going to continue to do. And the Oak Creek Charitable Foundation as well. So, I'll keep involved in those.

The post Dr. Rick Arthur Q&A: Part Two appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

A long-time vocal champion, both in his home state and at the international level, of tightened welfare practices in the sport, Arthur has spearheaded a slew of precedent-setting medication and equine safety reforms in California.

During those 15 years, Arthur has been at the helm of the industry's veterinary ship while California has navigated a series of tumultuous storms, including a benighted venture to switch from dirt to synthetic racetrack surfaces during the first few years of his tenure, as well as the Santa Anita welfare crisis that erupted near the beginning of 2019. Known on occasion to be pugnacious and forthright, Arthur has also endured his fair share of criticism as California racing's chief equine veterinarian, most recently concerning the case surrounding Justify's scopolamine positive subsequent to the horse's GI Santa Anita Derby victory of 2018.

Bearer of many hats, Arthur is a former private veterinarian, Thoroughbred owner and breeder, and a member of The Jockey Club. He was also a past-president of the American Association of Equine Practitioners (AAEP) and was honored with the organization's President's Award in 2014. Dr. Jeff Blea, a SoCal-based private veterinarian with 28 years of experience and another former AAEP president, has filled Arthur's vacant seat.

The following is the opening half of a conversation Arthur conducted with the TDN on his first day off the job. It has been edited only very lightly for grammatical and clarification purposes.

TDN: After 15 years as California's equine medical director, what is your main takeaway from that period?

RA: My main takeaway is that horse racing has to pay attention to the horse and develop policies and programs and regulations that put the horse first.

TDN: And looking at the totality of what's happened during those 15 years, has California been successful at doing that?

RA: If you look at the numbers objectively, we've decreased fatalities almost 75% over that period. Some of it is [due to] decreased racing, but far and away, the majority is [due to] the policies and the regulations we put in place and [by] encouraging the culture change to put the horse first.

TDN: How would you characterize that “culture change” during your tenure?

RA: Up until the Santa Anita situation in 2019, I don't think a lot of horsemen really understood that society has changed and that it's necessary to make changes that put the horse first. And there certainly was a lot of push-back when you look at things like the fatality review program, when you look at voided claims, to the continuing education program, to put more science into the art of training. All those things we had tremendous push-back on really until the Santa Anita fiasco.

Horsephotos

TDN: You bring that up. So, the last two years has arguably been the most transformative period in California in terms of medication and safety reforms, many of which you'd been trying to push through prior. You've talked a lot about the cumbersome administrative law process, but why do you think it took something like the Santa Anita welfare crisis to bring about those modifications?

RA: It is very easy to stop regulations in the way that the California Horse Racing Board [CHRB] operated previously. And if you go back and look at all those initiatives that we started–continuing education for trainers, voiding claims, third party Lasix, post-mortem review programs, restricting intraarticular injections, even banning anabolic steroids back when I first started–there was always somebody who was opposing those changes. Even lowering toe grabs that were demonstrated to be associated with increased injury. There was always push-back at every step.

As I said, it's very easy to stop a regulation. Even though everybody thinks that it's easy to add regulations, it's actually just the opposite.

TDN: Immediately after the Santa Anita crisis, these changes arrived very suddenly, a mixture of in-house rules that dictated state policy and sweeping regulations that came thick and fast. Looking back, do you think it was done in a manner that was, in its entirety, fair to the horsemen and their livelihoods, and would you have done things differently given a second chance?

RA: Well remember that many of those were initiated by The Stronach Group.

TDN: That's what I meant by in-house rules…

RA: Some of them were a major change to trainers. In reality, I think some of them were a little bit stricter than they needed to be and done a little bit precipitously. But the fact is, it did open the door for many changes that have been shown to be quite effective.

TDN: Multi-factorial is the key term in any catastrophic injury and in the case of what happened at Santa Anita, official reports point to a variety of precipitating factors. What do you see is the main factor which made that particular Santa Anita winter/spring meet so deadly?

RA: Racing on a bad racetrack.

TDN: Can you elaborate on that?

RA: Look at the weather in the first two months of 2019–the previous year, 90% of the starts were on a fast track. In 2019 for the first two months, 60% of the race starts were on a fast track. We had so much rain during that period of time, there was really not an opportunity to refurbish the racetrack.

In early March, when they stopped racing, we had a dry period. They were able to bring in their previous track superintendent to rework the racetrack. And after that period of time, we really had a relatively safe racetrack. So, the real issue was continuing to race on a compromised racetrack. And it's not just the racetrack that's responsible for that, but horsemen that actually entered their horses and trained their horses on tracks that were not ideal.

TDN: Many see The Stronach Group's ban of Jerry Hollendorfer as an act of scapegoating. Do you think they [TSG] were right to ban him?

RA: I was not involved in that decision.

[Note: Arthur explained that he's involved in ongoing litigation between Hollendorfer and several entities in California, and was therefore unable to comment further]

Horsephotos

TDN: Now, the changes have been extensive over the last two years but we've a lot more on the horizon. In exactly a year's time, the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act is expected to be implemented. How do you see it fitting into California's existing regulatory and safety and welfare infrastructure?

RA: It will be very, very difficult for the [HISA] safety program to come up with a program as extensive as California's and send it around the rest of the country. That suggests to me that California will still continue to have a stricter, or let's say a more robust, safety program than HISA is going to be able to develop.

How will that actually work? In my reading of the regulation, it's hard to understand because the funds for that safety program will no longer be available to the CHRB–those are some of the nebulous aspects of the HISA law as to exactly how those funds will be developed and how they'll be distributed.

For example, in California we have monitoring veterinarians as a matter of law. As of right now, those are provided by the track associations. That [would conceivably] be something the regulatory agency would oversee. But those individuals are supervised by law and by regulation and by the CHRB official veterinarians. So, how that all mixes together I think is going to be a real challenge for HISA to sort out.

TDN: Ultimately, do you see it as a plus or a minus to California racing?

RA: I suspect it's going to be a step back. I think eventually, long-term for national racing, I certainly understand the need for HISA. I think the national state-by-state regulation of racing and organizations like the ARCI have found themselves incapable of developing a national sport. NTRA was supposed to have a legal office that never came to be either. So, having one entity with control over all of racing, I certainly understand the need for it. And I think it's really, probably, the only way racing is going to survive long term.

TDN: Arguably, the biggest problem in drug testing in the future concerns the detection of genetically engineered products like EPO that mimic the body's own hormones and proteins. If USADA is HISA's drug enforcement agency, do you think they'll do a better job of policing these substances than the sport already does?

RA: It really depends. I certainly know that USADA and WADA [World Anti-Doping Agency] have capabilities in looking at gene doping. The IFHA [International Federation of Horseracing Authorities] has gene doping committees as well. In fact, there's liaison between WADA and the IFHA that I'm involved with. I do think that genetic testing, particularly gene doping, is going to be a real challenge, very expensive. So, I do think having a central entity is going to be critical to addressing that threat.

I don't think you could do it state by state, even though the best school, UC Davis, has some very, very talented people that understand genetics very well. But it's going to take it an international effort to address the risk of gene doping and gene manipulation.

TDN: So, what you're saying is USADA brings…

RA: …They bring international cooperation. It looks as if, even though USADA is different than WADA–certainly internationally–the racing industry is teaming with the FEI [The International Federation for Equestrian Sports], IFHA and WADA to try to pool our resources and understand the risks of how detection of gene doping and gene manipulation could affect horse racing going forward, and how to test for it.

Breeders' Cup/Eclipse Sportswire

TDN: Knowing what you know, how prolific is gene doping and gene manipulation in the sport?

RA: Right now, there is no evidence that it is being used. However, this is an area that has made leaps and bounds in advancement since we started the IFHA gene doping subcommittee five, six years ago. It's an entirely different environment today.

I do think there are potential risks in terms of getting genes or administering genes to horses. The real problem with gene doping is it's easy to get a gene in a horse, but it's not easy to get it to do what you want it to do. Well, that's true of even gene therapy and other uses of gene manipulation.

Having said that, I do think it's a bigger risk today than it was five years ago. And there is a lot of advancement in this area that caused us concern. But as of right now, I know of no instance internationally of gene doping being used in horse racing. That doesn't mean it hasn't happened. That doesn't mean it's not going on. We're looking for it.

TDN: In the last month, The Washington Post has come out with a couple of reports, in one of which it's alleged that trainer Bob Baffert used political coercion against you to influence the outcome of your investigation into the series of sudden deaths among his trainees between 2011 and 2013. In the final report, you concluded that although the blanket prescribing of thyroxine to all Baffert horses does appear unusual, “The fatalities remain unexplained and there is no evidence whatsoever CHRB rules or regulations have been violated or illicit activity played a part.”

You told the Post the two things–the political pressure and the report's findings–were unrelated. If you were to conduct the investigation today, would the findings and the outcome be any different?

RA: No. If you look in the necropsy reports that are up on the CHRB website, you'll see that there's all different sorts of explanations that are associated with some of the sudden deaths.

One of them was an anticoagulant rodenticide. We had a number of cases in California over the following years that were associated with anticoagulant rodenticide poisoning, including ponies, so it's not as if somebody was trying to drug a pony with rat poison. So, the real issue is that there were no violations of CHRB rules.

That does not mean that you condone the blanket administration of thyroxine. And certainly, if you look at my comments, either during the presentation at the CHRB meeting or in the report, Bob Baffert trains his horses hard. They were all on thyroxine. A number of them were on clenbuterol at the same time. And all of that, even though there's no violation of rules, really reflects on Bob Baffert's management of his stable.

If you look, there's actually a statistical analysis that shows this was not a random event, that there's something that was associated with those horses–whether it was Hollywood Park, whether it was Bob Baffert, whether it's the way the horses were managed, thyroxine, the entire program–there was something associated with those horses that put them at greater risk than the average horse. We just didn't know what it was.

TDN: Given the ethical framework that you abide by, how would you characterize the way Baffert managed his barn?

RA: The way the barn was managed was to win races–win big races with very expensive horses.

Horsephotos

TDN: Ethically–by your ethical framework.

RA: How would I best answer that question. It's not the way I like to see horses managed.

TDN: Since then, has the way in which he manages his barn improved?

RA: He actually quit using thyroxine before the report, after consulting with his own veterinarians about some of the things that were going on. I do think that they did change some management practices in the barn, but if you watch the way that Bob trains horses, he trains them very aggressively.

In fact, probably, and I've said this before, Bob Baffert really changed the way that horses are trained here. They're trained much harder than they were back 30 or 40 years ago when I started practicing. He works his horses very fast, very hard. And unfortunately, other trainers who try to emulate him don't have those million-dollar yearlings that can work 58 and change.

I think it used to be, everybody tried to emulate Charlie Whittingham, the way he trained, which was a more considered approach to training horses as compared to the Bob Baffert Quarter Horse style of training.

TDN: Do you think that change ultimately has been for the better or to the detriment of the Thoroughbred racehorse in California?

RA: I'm a big fan of Charlie Whittingham, Ron McAnally, Dick [Richard] Mandella. Those types of trainers.

Stay tuned for part two of this Q&A with Dr. Arthur.

The post Dr. Rick Arthur Q&A: Part One appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

It's well known now in racing circles that the CHRB held a closed-door meeting in which the regulatory agency opted not to pursue any action against Justify's trainer, Bob Baffert, and declined to disqualify the horse from his victory in the Santa Anita Derby. That meeting took place in the summer after the colt had won the Triple Crown. Justify got into the Kentucky Derby field with qualifying points earned in the Santa Anita Derby.

Records obtained by the Washington Post reveal that Dr. Rick Arthur, equine medical director for the CHRB, assured Baffert in late April that the investigation would not likely impact Justify's impending run in the Triple Crown series. Baffert was notified of the positive ahead of the Kentucky Derby. In an April 26 email, Arthur told the CHRB he had spoken with Baffert and “told him there would be nothing from CHRB before the KY Derby, unlikely before the Preakness and possibly not until after the Belmont. I told him I thought there was a good indication that these were feed contamination.”

CHRB investigators proceeded with their fact-finding mission after the Kentucky Derby and went in search of hay samples to see if they could find jimsonweed, which was blamed by the CHRB and Baffert for the scopolamine overage. They also opted to DNA test the post-race blood samples from Justify and others with detectable levels of scopolamine. Records show Arthur said that testing request would be “a big deal” and asked if it could wait until after the Preakness, which was still a week and a half away.

Test results on hay samples came back after the Preakness and revealed the leafy plant investigators had pulled was milkweed, not jimsonweed. Then, Larry Bell, the owner of the Citrus Feed Company that sold hay to Baffert, showed up at the CHRB office with plant samples he said he had picked up off the ground in the parking lot a month earlier. Those contained jimsonweed, although Bell said he couldn't tell whether the samples had fallen off a truck delivering a shipment to Baffert. Bell, according to the Post, had previously testified on Baffert's behalf, although it wasn't clear in what circumstances.

Read more at the Washington Post

The post Records Reveal New Details About CHRB Investigation Of Justify Case appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

In addition to advising the Board on matters pertaining to equine health and welfare, Dr. Blea will help oversee the CHRB's drug testing program, work with investigators on medication violations, liaise with those peers directing programs at the University of California, Davis, including the Postmortem Program, and work with Official Veterinarians in their oversight of practicing veterinarians.

Dr. Blea is perfectly positioned to assume this vital role. He was a practicing veterinarian on the Southern California thoroughbred circuit for 28 years, and during that time he demonstrated an interest in improving horse racing, focusing primarily on equine health and welfare, as evidenced by his leadership nationally with the American Association of Equine Practitioners and regionally with the Southern California Equine Foundation. He served as a director of the Dolly Green Research Foundation from 1999 to 2015. The list of the organizations and programs he has served is long and admirable.

Originally Dr. Blea hoped to be a jockey, but an accident cut short that career, which led him into veterinary medicine.

“As it turned out, I consider myself a better vet than I would have been a rider,” he said pragmatically. “I studied at Colorado State University. While there, I met people who were interested in organized veterinary medicine. I was mentored by some incredible people who were progressive, not only in what veterinary medicine should, be but also in what horse racing should be.

“When I came to California, I met Dr. Arthur and it really opened my eyes relative to the horse racing industry and the role of veterinary medicine. This led to a greater understanding of what the racing industry was and what it should be…where it needed to be. I realized I could take my practical background and blend it with my scientific knowledge to make a greater impact on improving care of the horse in particular and improving horse racing in general.

“When Rick announced his pending retirement a few years ago, he urged me to apply,” Dr. Blea continued. “Others did as well. Initially I resisted. I was quite happy practicing veterinary medicine. Mostly out of curiosity I applied. During the long interview process, I began to realize that the role of EMD was much more than I had appreciated. This led to a greater understanding of the significance of the EMD, and so by the end of the process I realized this job was something I wanted to do if offered the opportunity.”

Dr. Blea was chosen from a strong field of well-qualified applicants. The EMD position they all sought is significantly different than the one Dr. Arthur found when he accepted the job 15 years ago. Dr. Arthur directed more centralized oversight in a number of areas under the general responsibility of the EMD.

CHRB Chairman Greg Ferraro said during the June meeting, ““During the last 15 years, Dr. Arthur has brought our medical program and our health and safety program light-years ahead of where it was when he started. We truly appreciate what you've done.”

Dr. Arthur expressed full confidence in his replacement. “I know Dr. Blea very well,” said Dr. Arthur. “He understands the challenges going forward and has the background, knowledge, and tenacity to do the job.”

The post Dr. Jeff Blea Takes Over As California Horse Racing Board’s Equine Medical Director appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

While Dr. Blea has been committed to his thriving veterinary practice on the Southern California thoroughbred circuit, he recently decided he could be a more valuable resource to the equine veterinary profession and provide greater assistance in the advancement of the racing industry.

Dr. Gregory Ferraro, chairman of CHRB and a former equine veterinarian himself on the southern circuit, described Dr. Blea as: “a nationally known and widely respected equine veterinarian. He is recognized for his clear thinking and fairness in his decision making.”

Under contract arrangements between the CHRB and the School of Veterinary Medicine (SVM) at the University of California, Davis, the EMD serves as a member of its faculty. CHRB Executive Director Scott Chaney said the CHRB worked closely with UC Davis during the process, which was prolonged by the pandemic. A joint panel from UC Davis and the CHRB interviewed candidates and selected Dr. Blea.

“We value this partnership,” added Chaney. “We were fortunate to consider several well-qualified candidates. I am very pleased with the process and the choice. I look forward to working closely with Dr. Blea to make racing safer at this critical time.”

Dr. John Pascoe, SVM executive associate dean, commented: 'We very much look forward to Dr. Blea serving as the next Equine Medical Director and continuing the vision of late Senator Ken Maddy for a robust partnership between the University of California-Davis, the CHRB, and the racing industry to improve the health and welfare of racing horses. Jeff brings a wealth of expertise to the EMD position. His extensive knowledge of racing, equine and racetrack practice, his national leadership in equine and racing organizations, and his commitment to research that improves horse racing assure that California will continue to lead the nation in our collective efforts to ensure safe racing.'

Dr. Blea brings 28 years of veterinary experience with him, and before that he rode briefly as a jockey. He always has been interested in improving horse racing, focusing primarily on equine health and welfare, as evidenced by his leadership nationally with the American Association of Equine Practitioners and regionally with the Southern California Equine Foundation. He served as a director of the Dolly Green Research Foundation from 1999 to 2015. The list of the organizations and programs he has served is long and admirable.

Dr. Blea always has been forthcoming, expressing common sense and fairness, regardless of which side he favored on any given issue.

“As Equine Medical Director,” he said, “I look forward to working with industry stakeholders in further advancing the progressive transformation of horse racing in California with the emphasis on horse safety, welfare, and integrity.”

Dr. Arthur added, “Dr. Blea is an excellent choice to become EMD. He has a broad background in horse racing and is well respected by his colleagues here in California and nationally.”

The post Dr. Jeff Blea Named California’s New Equine Medical Director appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post