Will The Jockey Club ever stop requiring live cover?

[Poll_Alias]

Allowing AI will no more affect the policing of birthdates than is currently happening.

My one and only suggestion to police AI and protect regional programs and boarding businesses is to require mares to be located within x number of miles of the stallion. This would protect regional stallions, keep mares and stallions safer, protect the foals from the stress of being separated from the dam for breeding and the boarding farms will still fill their stalls.

[skydy]

@snaffle1987

Any animal industry that uses AI knows that one of the biggest obstacles with it is policing birthdates of the resulting offspring. If you could have a yearling born in November but sold with a January birthdate, it is going to be not much older than its counterparts but be ahead of the curve in terms of growth and ability by just enough to give it an edge. Especially in an industry that has such a massive influence by public sales; whether that be right or wrong. The reason for the JC requiring live cover is about control of the entire process, not just DNA. If you don’t think it will happen then you are looking at it with blinders on. The industry already doesn’t use AI but they have mares with light blinders on in March and housing them under lights in small paddocks to get them to cycle as soon as possible to have January foals because the earlier the foals are born the more they can capitalize on their birth year and be ahead of their counterparts born later. It’s already happening just within the measurable control of the well-documented cover dates that are recorded, video taped, certified, etc.

The KY farms for sure wouldn’t lose their boarding business in its entirety, it is a horse-capital. The sales are focused around KY, there is plenty of business there. But those farms not 100% invested in the sales business would likely need some readjustment. Yes, the land is currently there but look at the affect of urban sprawl in Lexington in the past 10-15 years. Then look at Lexington area30-40 years ago. It’s already happening especially with smaller and smaller amounts of mares bred as the years tick on.

In regards to Into Mischeif and Tapit; sure their stud fees limit who can use them. But when their book is full, their book is full. Not everyone can use the same 10 stallions. I do think AI if it is ever permitted, will have an effect on stud fees if they allow more than the current book of mares. It will be interesting to see how that plays out and how certain farms would manage it. It could make the expensive stallions slightly more affordable but triple the profits if they could breed more mares. Or the farms could keep their books small and charge the same stud fee to keep them highly desirable.

And no, I don’t make this stuff up. It’s called looking at the big picture. The TB industry is like any other animal industry. Driven by massive amounts of money and extremely wealthy people. It’s not human nature for people to play by the rules when there is money and notoriety to pay; it’s the reason why the JC has such strict rules to control it.

This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to me.

@snaffle1987

I do think if the industry went to AI, you might see more use of regional stallions. There are a few that have caught my eye in recent years but are far too far away to make it justifiable to use them.

You are breeding Thoroughbreds? That’s very hard to believe.

[snaffle1987]

I am not here to impress you

[LaurieB]

@smoofox

I once worked with a dark bay Trakehner stallion who hated grey mares. He was a complete gentleman and easy to handle - but grey mares were disgusting to him.

I believe Seattle Slew also would have nothing to do with gray mares.

[MHM]

That’s so funny. You can lead a horse to water…

[Aussie_2020]

A friend of mine had to breed early to get the stallion she wanted. She felt pretty comfortable with it because that particular mare was always late. You guessed it, not that year. She foaled Dec 30th.

But my friends a good egg and took it in stride. She named him Prancer , she didn’t register him and I got him from her as an unbroken 6yo. She sent a brand new custom halter and lead with him. It was red and green braid with his name embroidered. (It was ugly! I sold it on ebay)

[LaurieB]

@snaffle1987

Any animal industry that uses AI knows that one of the biggest obstacles with it is policing birthdates of the resulting offspring. If you could have a yearling born in November but sold with a January birthdate, it is going to be not much older than its counterparts but be ahead of the curve in terms of growth and ability by just enough to give it an edge. Especially in an industry that has such a massive influence by public sales; whether that be right or wrong. The reason for the JC requiring live cover is about control of the entire process, not just DNA. If you don’t think it will happen then you are looking at it with blinders on. The industry already doesn’t use AI but they have mares with light blinders on in March and housing them under lights in small paddocks to get them to cycle as soon as possible to have January foals because the earlier the foals are born the more they can capitalize on their birth year and be ahead of their counterparts born later. It’s already happening just within the measurable control of the well-documented cover dates that are recorded, video taped, certified, etc.

Nobody is disputing the fact that TB breeders like early foals.

It’s your assertion that AI would cause breeders to lie about birthdates that makes no sense. Why would they be more likely to do that with AI than they are now with live cover? The Jockey Club doesn’t control anything about the process of live cover–contrary to what you said above–they are simply a breed registry. Anyone can produce a TB by AI, you just can’t register it with the JC.

For anyone who’s interested:
About 20 years ago, the JC became aware that some breeders might be fudging birthdates and decided to look into it. For quite a while (they may still be doing this, I’m not sure) they had inspectors making surprise visits to Kentucky farms during the last week of December. The inspectors had lists of all the pregnant mares on the farms* and they asked to see each of those mares to verify that they were still pregnant.

• The KBIF (KY Breeders Incentive Fund) requires mares to live in KY to be eligible and mare owners report at which farm their mares reside.

So if indeed AI is somehow going to cause lying to become rampant among TB breeders, problem solved.

[EventerAJ]

I’ve spoken with others who have worked at farms with a day or two early “oops” foals. It was understood that they were just kept in the barn until January 2nd before foaling announcements were made.

Honestly I don’t see the harm in that. Two or three days before Jan 1 will not make any difference whatsoever in a September yearling or mature racehorse. If you’re deliberately breeding for early/mid December? That’s wrong. But considering the sheds open Feb 14, if you get a Dec 30 foal who cares. Call it Jan 1 and most people will understand. In the cases where those foals are legitimately under 320 days gestation, they might have developmental difficulties anyway and are not at a chronological advantage to their peers.

[Arzny]

I’ve always wondered how people get away with not registering them (I.e., not paying the stud fee). In my experience the farms start sending bills to you for a fee at 320 days and don’t stop until you get them the money or a death cert.

[Arzny]

KBIF still comes to inspect mares, as does Indiana. KY at least makes an appointment, but it’s my understanding it’s more for the state bred programs than to confirm DOB.

[MHM]

@LaurieB

The inspectors had lists of all the pregnant mares on the farms* and they asked to see each of those mares to verify that they were still pregnant.

That’s interesting. I wonder if they checked the tattoo or now the microchip to make sure the farm was showing them the right still-pregnant mare.

[LaurieB]

@Arzny

KBIF still comes to inspect mares, as does Indiana. KY at least makes an appointment, but it’s my understanding it’s more for the state bred programs than to confirm DOB.

Sorry if I wasn’t clear: the Jockey Club was the one doing the inspections–it was their information about which mares resided where that came from the KBIF.

[Arzny]

Ah gotcha. They never came to our place, only KBIF in November. And the KBIF inspection was very…low key.

We were pretty by the book though - doesn’t mean they weren’t at other farms.

[Aussie_2020]

Oh no, I know she would have paid, my friend is the ultimate straight arrow. She only had one tb mare left at that time. She had about 15 Standardbred mares and raced or sold the offspring in northern CA. I think it just didn’t matter to her that he was too early. She wasn’t going to race him, he would have gone down to the sales with the other yearlings.

[Janet]

There was a Dick Francis novel (or maybe it was one of the ones written by his son) in which the plot centeres on a TB stallion, successful on the track and as a breeding sire, who was born before Christmas, but registered as having been born in January.

[skydy]

@LaurieB

@smoofox

I once worked with a dark bay Trakehner stallion who hated grey mares. He was a complete gentleman and easy to handle - but grey mares were disgusting to him.

I believe Seattle Slew also would have nothing to do with gray mares.

Interesting.

I knew a lady whose Arabian stallion wouldn’t breed gray mares and it was a real issue. At that time there were a lot of gray Arabian mares (I don’t know if they are as common now as they were then.) They tried everything, but he was adamant, it was a no go. He was a beautiful bay horse with a great show record and desirable bloodlines and he got lovely foals, but not from gray mares.

I’ve know stallions to take exception to some mares, it happens, they just don’t like that particular mare for whatever reason, but when they object to a coat color it always seems to be gray.

[Texarkana]

Growing up, the farm where I worked stood a gray arabian stallion who would only cover other grays.

Horses, man.

[skydy]

I guess everyone, horse or human, has a “type”.

I remember reading (I think it was here on the forums) about a horse that wouldn’t cover paint/pinto mares, but I don’t have any IRL experience with that.

[skydy]

@snaffle1987

The industry already doesn’t use AI but they have mares with light blinders on in March and housing them under lights in small paddocks to get them to cycle as soon as possible to have January foals because the earlier the foals are born the more they can capitalize on their birth year and be ahead of their counterparts born later.

??? Breeders (of many different breeds) put mares under lights (not usually beginning in March) and do so for reasons having nothing to do with January foaling, but for other considerations.

Geography is one. There are many areas in the U.S. where breeders avoid having a foal born either in the heat of the summer, or in the dead of winter, depending on where they are located.

@snaffle1987

I am not here to impress you

Most people here aren’t to try to “impress” anyone. We have discussions. You seem to have a disparaging view of thoroughbred racing and breeding, but little actual knowledge, and it’s puzzling.

If you are interested in TB racing, breeding, or sales, why not take advantage of the experience of people here, who aren’t trying to impress anyone, but are straight forward when asked a question and who, it is clear, know what they’re talking about? I have some experience with TB breeding, but little IRL experience with racing, and I’ve learned quite a lot from the people here who do.

[Willesdon]

I recall a good TB stallion who would only cover mares outside, never inside the barn.

It must have been a good stallion man to work out that behaviour, one who thoroughly understood the horse he was looking after.