NYRA latest to add anti-slaughter policy

[Kasept]

OZONE PARK, N.Y. – The New York Racing Association, Inc. (NYRA) has announced an anti-slaughter policy that introduces harsh penalties to offending horsemen while encouraging them to support horse rescue and adoption initiatives.

The newly created policy is as follows:

Any owner or trainer stabled at a New York Racing Association, Inc. (NYRA) track found to have directly or indirectly sold a horse for slaughter will have his or her stalls permanently revoked from all NYRA tracks. NYRA requires its horsemen to conduct due diligence on those buying horses and encourages them to support rescue and adoption efforts and to find humane ways of dealing with horses unable to continue racing.

“We are fully committed to protecting our sport’s equine athletes,” said NYRA President and CEO Charles Hayward. “This policy sends the message that horse slaughter will not be tolerated and that those participating in this practice, either knowingly or for lack of due diligence, will not be welcome at Aqueduct, Belmont Park, or Saratoga.”

In addition to its stance against horse slaughter, NYRA also supports numerous equine retirement, anti-slaughter, and research organizations, and has made donations to the following organizations within the past year:

• Thoroughbred Retirement Foundation – Mission to save thoroughbred horses no longer able to compete on the racetrack from possible neglect, abuse and slaughter.
• Columbia Green Humane Society - Dedicated to the protection, humane treatment and well being of all animals.
• Grayson Jockey Club Research Foundation – Committed to the advancement of research to enhance the health and soundness of horses of all breeds.
• Exceller Fund – Providing a future beyond the finish line, the Exceller Fund works to transition thoroughbred horses to a second career off the track.

[Travis Stone]

Good for NYRA...

[chucklestheclown]

Directly or indirectly? That is way too vague.

[reese]

Originally Posted by chucklestheclown

Directly or indirectly? That is way too vague.

Vague only to you

It is perfectly clear to anyone who can comprehend the written word.

[GBBob]

This is what a horse's retirement SHOULD look like and if Owners and Trainers can't make the financial commitment or spend the time to provide for or guarantee their well being, then they shouldn't be in the game.

Thnx to Ryan for posting in Dee Tee

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jnh4gg85hRs

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

Originally Posted by GBBob

This is what a horse's retirement SHOULD look like and if Owners and Trainers can't make the financial commitment or spend the time to provide for or guarantee their well being, then they shouldn't be in the game.

Thnx to Ryan for posting in Dee Tee

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jnh4gg85hRs

[freddymo]

Great news..

[richard]

Super.

[Linny]

Chuckles is right. If a trainer gives away or sells a horse very cheap to someone who they believe is going to retrain it and it ends up at a killer auction or feedlot, is he to blame?

Many small outfits do take horses for retraining but they are not rescues they are businesses hoping to sell for a profit. They are usually small farms and don't have the ability to provide a permanent home. If a sore horse doesn't come sound enough to go into work or a horse proves unfit for retraining, they have to get rid of them. They don't really want to send them "away" but most don't have the choice, they cannot care for them all.

Using terms like "undirectly" is very vaque when you announce a "zero tolerance" policy. How many degrees of separation is required before a trainer is absolved of responsibility?

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Linny

Chuckles is right. If a trainer gives away or sells a horse very cheap to someone who they believe is going to retrain it and it ends up at a killer auction or feedlot, is he to blame?

Many small outfits do take horses for retraining but they are not rescues they are businesses hoping to sell for a profit. They are usually small farms and don't have the ability to provide a permanent home. If a sore horse doesn't come sound enough to go into work or a horse proves unfit for retraining, they have to get rid of them. They don't really want to send them "away" but most don't have the choice, they cannot care for them all.

Using terms like "undirectly" is very vaque when you announce a "zero tolerance" policy. How many degrees of separation is required before a trainer is absolved of responsibility?

Leave your number and tell the people to call you to get the horse if things don't work out.. It's not so complicated to do the right thing

[Scav]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Leave your number and tell the people to call you to get the horse if things don't work out.. It's not so complicated to do the right thing

It can be part of the contract also, "If for any reason you are unable to meet your obligations in regards to said horse, you will return said horse at no cost"

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Scav

It can be part of the contract also, "If for any reason you are unable to meet your obligations in regards to said horse, you will return said horse at no cost"

I doubt NY is the problem but kudos to NYRA.. When horses are running for 3k purses the kill pen cant be to far away

[Linny]

I hope that the policy will mean that trainers will be wiling to take back a horse that doesn't pan as a retraining project.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by reese

[/b]

Vague only to you

It is perfectly clear to anyone who can comprehend the written word.

C'mon, he's talking about the guys who represent themselves to the trainer or friend of the trainer as having a kid who needs a backyard horse, etc., but are really bunchers for auction/killers. These guys know most don't want the horses to go to killers, they lie and know what to say if they need horses.

Good for NYRA.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Scav

It can be part of the contract also, "If for any reason you are unable to meet your obligations in regards to said horse, you will return said horse at no cost"

That's a good suggestion. It's a very common contract insert in many purebred dog sales contracts, and it's rarely followed, and expensive to try and enforce in a court of law.

I get around it with my dogs by saying instead that at any time in the animals life, they return it no questions asked, I will refund the entire original purchase price. I got one dog back at 5 years of age, and I'm darn glad he came home to me and not off into the ether somewhere.

I never put that in the bill of sale for any of my own horses. I did go back after 10 years and try and find the horse I sold when going into vet school, and couldn't trace the horse. Wish I had put something like that in there, for that horse.

I think the only way to really ensure you will ever get back an animal you have sold is to always be the highest bidder.

[Merlinsky]

Originally Posted by Riot

C'mon, he's talking about the guys who represent themselves to the trainer or friend of the trainer as having a kid who needs a backyard horse, etc., but are really bunchers for auction/killers. These guys know most don't want the horses to go to killers, they lie and know what to say if they need horses.

Good for NYRA.

You can have due diligence though and if someone goes to a certain point to lie to you, well there are repercussions. Just letting someone you haven't checked up one side and down the other leave with a horse is not something I'm comfortable with. Also maybe people will knock it off with the 'free to a good home' thing. As a kid I'd eat up the idea of going and getting a free horse. My parents of course knew better. If you can't afford to pay for a horse, you definitely can't afford to own them. What about that woman that hauled the 12yo mare planning to race her who started bawling in the paddock or whatever saying she couldn't afford to bring her and not run her...I don't see why the former owner let her have the horse when she'd just been laid off. How was she gonna pay the upkeep?

Kill buyers will only pay so much right? I get that some trainers almost feel like they're gonna have to pay someone to take the horse off their hands, but I'm sorry we owe'em a duty. Charge a little something and if you can do all the other work to get and race a horse, some research is in order to let one go to someone else.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Merlinsky

You can have due diligence though and if someone goes to a certain point to lie to you, well there are repercussions. Just letting someone you haven't checked up one side and down the other leave with a horse is not something I'm comfortable with.

I completely agree.

[Left Bank]

Originally Posted by Riot

C'mon, he's talking about the guys who represent themselves to the trainer or friend of the trainer as having a kid who needs a backyard horse, etc., but are really bunchers for auction/killers. These guys know most don't want the horses to go to killers, they lie and know what to say if they need horses.

Good for NYRA.

What's a "buncher"

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Left Bank

What's a "buncher"

A middleman. He goes auction to auction, place to place, collecting ("bunching") horses in a group to send in a trailer to slaughter.

This is the guy that won't pay over $400-$500 per head, and never for a skinny horse, at local Amish - county livestock auctions. He'll buy obviously lame horses, horses with sores, etc.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Riot

A middleman. He goes auction to auction, place to place, collecting ("bunching") horses in a group to send in a trailer to slaughter.

This is the guy that won't pay over $400-$500 per head, and never for a skinny horse, at local Amish - county livestock auctions. He'll buy obviously lame horses, horses with sores, etc.

How much does it cost to put a horse down?