With respect, a great many of the conventions of racing, including the ages at which horses are started and at which the large purses are contested, were established as traditions in times long past; before we had things like X-ray evidence of exactly how late growth plates close, the frequency of microtears and stress fractures, and the routine ability to mask incipient problems with drugs. I will state categorically that very few 2 year olds, regardless of outward appearance, are physically “mature” enough by the objective biological measures to be asked for a maximum effort. Honest vets will be the first to tell you. The only thing preventing this change is the added expense of feeding these horses for an additional year or two. This tired argument is all about profit margin, not horsemanship.
Well, sad as it may seem to some, racing and TB breeding are businesses. And even if they weren’t expense is a limiting factor even for enthusiasts. That’s just life as we’ve designed it.
People frequently mention “bleeders.” Why is it that this seems to be mostly a modern problem? It doesn’t exist in the literature of the 19th and early 20th centuries. Was racing any less stressful in those days, or were the horses fundamentally stronger in wind? Less inbred? Do we know? What we DO know is that in those days, lacking the easy “chemical” solution, we employed a “management” one. I’m old enough to have personally witnessed this. There were damn few things in the chemical “tool box” prior to 1980 and most of them had stood the test of the old times when horses as “living machines” of the mainstream economy HAD to produce for their owners or lose their lives immediately.
I don’t know where you were before 1980, but there were plenty of chemicals in the arsenals of those who chose to use them. Many of them far more “creepy” than what’s out there today.
They were expendable to a degree we can scarcely bend our brains around today. Those old methods often worked, but we no longer use them; rest, turnout, and proper conditioning by “long, slow distance.” This applies to all disciplines across the board.
Another widely-acknowledged problem is that today we almost exclusively breed the “sprinter” somatype; the big-boned, husky distance TB’s that were built to last are seen only rarely even in “steeplechase country” today and those are of overseas origin. They used to be our “salt of the earth” show and field hunters after they retired from the track. Regrettably, there is little incentive to breed TB’s and QH’s for soundness today. The tax code says it all; they are listed as “3-year assets.” Read, “disposable.”
I’m sure you mean somatotype, but we don’t apply somatotypes to animals. Phenotype might be more along the lines of what you’re thinking.
Another underexposed secret is the Standardbred racing industry. An acquaintance of mine who worked for years as a foaling attendant in upstate NY, foaling out literally hundreds of mares per year, told me in no uncertain terms that with the exception of the top 5%, the rest of these horses on their luckiest day might end up pulling an Amish buggy; all the rest, sound or not, would be at the killers’ before their 5th birthday. These thousands of horses, most of whom are pacers undesirable for riding, are produced in the full knowledge that they have no other job once their racing days are over. Most serve as nothing more than a tax write-off.
I take issue with this b/c it’s just bull. Standardbreds make lovely riding horses and many, MANY people are aware of that fact. AND you ABSOLUTELY CAN TRAIN PACERS TO TROT with very little work and time involved. They easily switch to trotting under saddle. I know oodles of Standardbreds enjoying their post-racing lives as hunters, jumpers, pleasure mounts, schoolies, etc. Please don’t perpetuate the misinformation above.
I’ve got a few other solutions, that extend into all the far corners of the horse industry, not just racing:
(1) Don’t breed on speculation just because you can. Don’t ever breed horses of poor conformation or temperament. Don’t allow your breed association to promote the myth that backyard amateurs can “make money” breeding horses. Take responsibility for what you bring into the world.
(2) Anyone who cannot afford the vet and disposal fees for humane euthanasia, which run around $750 in my part of the world, has no business owning a horse. They are financially unqualified for ownership, let alone any kind of equestrian competition. I’m talking to anyone here who ever knowingly sent a horse “down the road.” Are you so mercenary you would consign your dog to be strung up and skinned alive for a lousy $200 too? I’m sorry, Vets, but do not lower yourselves to being the apologist for this dirt-bag practice when the humane alternative is literally in your hands.
(2) Somebody, possibly R.S. Surtees, once said that the only people who should be making a living with horses are those who love and respect them as living beings. Nobody HAS to make their living in this industry, so most of the “financial arguments” don’t hold water for me. Those who find themselves doing things they wouldn’t want to confess, should leave the industry NOW–and the rest of us should make sure they do by the simple means of peer pressure. Recently, in my county, some horsemen of conscience were able to stop an abuse and neglect situation that had been going on for over 40 years, just because they stepped up to the plate and said something.
Fortunately, neither you nor anyone else can enforce your idea of who should or should not own horses. There will always be people who do things differently than we do. Again, that’s just life.
Apply guilt. Hold your peers to a higher standard. Make it a better world for horses–starting with yours, starting tomorrow!
Swamp Yankee
