Assessment - Horses

Wait a minute, how can any of this be fault of the horses? I mean they just run. It is really more their human connections, but
there are some issues surrounding the horses themselves. The biggest issue is the continuation of breeding horses that have
soundness issues, and it is an issue that the industry has avoided like the plague.

There are really two issues in here:

1. Breeding unsound horses makes breakdowns more likely, giving the animal rights folks more ammunition to make their
case against us. With the recent dog racing ban in Massachusetts we should be doing everything in our power to keep
breakdowns to the absolute minimum.

2. The economics of horse racing states that the more you can run your horse, the more money you can make. A top level
horse can get away with running 3 or 4 times a year and still make money – but the rest? This is a place that I really like
Barry Abrams philosophy, "why not run them rather than work them?" If your horses are sound, then you stand to make a lot
more money as an owner. The Unusual Heat's have been exceptionally solid, mainly because of the breeding to distinctly
different blood lines (like the NZ mare Penpont). Unusual Heat himself is out of Rossard, a dam whose pedigree would be
unidentifiable to almost all with nothing but Euro runners. The only UH breakdown I am aware of was Runforthemoneybaby
who broke down in a morning work, although Shem Tov came close the other day after bleeding and collapsing on the track.

So how do we identify bloodlines that are prone to injury? A national morbidity and mortality database that contains specific
information on any injury or illness that removes a horse from training for two weeks or more. This idea is now out there
floating around and is being fought, hard! Why? Because it would put the light of day on certain sires and bloodlines which
would reduce their stud value significantly – and leave them open to the public asking why the industry continues to breed to
horses with genetic weaknesses. Ruffian was an accident waiting to happen with her sire (Reviewer) and dam (Shenanigans),
both of which were put down after breaking legs. There are serious questions about the Unbridled and Unbridled's Song lines,
Boundary with his history of foot problems, and a lot more problems that many in the industry are aware of. Maybe it is a
misperception, but the Euro's seem to have a lower injury and breakdown rate.

There is a significant downside to a national database of morbidity and mortality – it puts the statistics out to the public and
gives the loonies ammunition to attack the sport. The state with mandatory reporting of injuries? That would be
Massachusetts which mandated a public reporting system for greyhound injuries and fatalities. Here is the lead in for a
pre-vote article on the measure to ban greyhound racing:

"Touting grainy footage of leg-breaking greyhound racing accidents and a three-inch stack of racetrack-related injury reports,
the Committee to Protect Dogs hopes it has what it needs to sink the sport in the state. In a crusade to ban greyhound
racing through a ballot initiative - the second attempt in eight years - those two pieces of media constitute the group's trump
card, evidence that the sport is cruel and inhumane."

So greyhound racing is inherently dangerous to the animals? Not really, the injury rate it is about the same as
thoroughbreds, 2.66 injuries per 1,000 starts, with almost all of the injuries treatable.

A national registry of injuries and fatalities would give us invaluable information on which genetic lines, tracks, and trainers
have above normal injury/fatality rates over an extended period of time. But what if a genetic line is vetted out as unsound and
they continue to breed to them? That pretty much tells the general public "we know he's not sound, but tough sh*t, we are
going to breed him anyway because he is fast". Another possible outcome is if it is determined that synthetics DON'T reduce
injuries and fatalities (which we really should know).

Even though there is inherent risk in publishing accurate national statistics, it is a critical necessity if the sport wants to
clean up its act.

The other issue that we need to look at is drugs. Everyone knows that horse racing has become a giant chemistry
experiment, and that there are more examples of "dirty" trainers than you could fit in a large book. Steroids were easily
banned because of the public's knowledge of steroids and human athletes, but the other 500 ways to cheat are just as bad or
worse. I think the only way out is to ban everything, including Lasix, Butazolidin, and Clenbuterol. Horse racing needs to be
"organic" – we need to be able to say that horses run on hay, oats and water. This would take the wind out of the animal
rights organizations sails. There is a new weapon in the drug testing arsenal, analysis of hair, which will give you a specific
timeline of what drugs and when for any sample. Don't think it is a big deal? Look at PVal who shaved off every inch of body
hair when he was notified that he would be tested by hair analysis in the future (any bets on how many of Biancone horses
would be shaved down?). So you can't hide drugs that are administered off track or on layoffs.

We are better off fighting this today when we still hold an advantage in the court of public opinion than to be forced to reactive
action in the face of another high profile breakdown, which WILL occur at some point. Our fanaticism with breeding for speed
has gotten us to this point, as has the predominance of the Northern Dancer, Native Dancer, Raise a Native bloodlines. How
many mile and a quarter races are there today versus ten years ago? Our new "classic" distance is a mile and an eighth, yet
Australia's premier race is two miles (won by a horse that ran a mile and a half days before). Maybe it is time to shuffle the
deck like Europe did in the 1960's (bringing in Northern Dancer blood) by bringing in more bloodstock from Australia, New
Zealand and South America or injecting Arabian blood.

Whatever we do to shore up the soundness of horses is in our best interest, today and in the future. There will be a period of
risk as we ramp this up, but another Eight Belles will roll the public to the negative perception end of the spectrum, and that
is a guarantee. That means we need to make safety the top expense in the sport – starting by killing the drugs TODAY. We
should be able to cite the huge number of ongoing safety initiatives and to heavily publicize the efforts. There should be a
plan we follow to the "T" and publicize all of our efforts.