Thanks NY Times For Making My Point!
Remember two days ago when I said this:
If I had a holiday wish this season, it would be to see the industry support it’s own more often and particularly in the high profile circumstances where non-racing related charities tend to get the most support by our industry. Not only would it help raise awareness for the racing related charities, it would probably be some inherent “positive” marketing by showcasing an industry that’s concerned and supportive of it’s equine and human athletes.
An editorial entitled “Out of the Gate” in today’s New York Times is a prime example of why I said it.
When the Kentucky Derby rolls around each year, few ordinary fans are aware of the grisly waste of horseflesh that underpins the self-proclaimed Sport of Kings. One of the unacknowledged traditions of racing has been wholesale neglect of glorious thoroughbreds once their competitive days are done. Notions of happily ever- aftering in the bluegrass are largely myth.
While the editorial makes some fair points it hung a lot of sweeping generalizations on one (horrifying) case (Paraneck Stables). Is there a problem? Yes. Should the industry being doing more to address it? Hell yes. Are there places in the industry already taking measures to address the issues? Yes, and one is cited in the editorial but not without taking a shot:
The crackdown is welcome but late in coming to a multibillion-dollar industry that can make a humane show of ministering to its celebrity champions while gracelessly relegating thousands more to destruction at the bidding of “kill buyers” who work the sport’s fringe.
To make matters more annoying, a friend recently pointed out to me that a non-racing charity that is frequently supported by racing on it’s biggest days, Susan G. Koman “Race for the Cure”, has some corruption issues of it’s own!
But back to racing:
As the upstate scandal spread across the Internet, equine care charities and ordinary people have been helping the victimized horses to sweet resurrection as ranch retirees and recreational companions.
They are shepherded by pioneer protective groups like the Columbia-Greene Humane Society/Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the Thoroughbred Retirement Foundation. The foundation has been saving thoroughbreds since 1984, when it began buying horses for rural prisons, to be cared for by minimum-security inmates. “The little guy just wants to run free,” one inmate said of his horse. “And I don’t blame him.”
What I find so galling about the Times editorial is that they fail to give direct mention to places like Another Chance 4 Horses, which actually “broke” the Paragallo story by posting it on their site (from there Paulick picked it up). Yet they cite the (deserving of praise) Columbia-Greene Human Society by name as if they were the only ones involved. As often as the industry fails to support it’s own, the Times minimizes groups within the industry working on the problems, or so it seems to me.
So c’mon owners, tracks and industry organizations, let’s support our own not only big race days but always! Next time you send out a press release check and see if the charities you’re supporting support those within the industry trying to address it’s issues… and perhaps then the New York Times will be forced to editorialize about it!
Update: Upon seeing this tweeted reaction to the NYT editorial and googling, I was pleased to find this passage about some of the excellent things a few tracks are doing to address “aftercare” (as it seems it’s called):
In the area of caring for horses after their careers, Turfway Park has a “surrender stall,” where horsemen can leave horses, “no questions asked.” The track supplies food and hay until the Kentucky Equine Humane Center retrieves the Thoroughbred. Also cited in this area were Woodbine, which commits a percentage of purses to aftercare; the jockeys at Monmouth Park, who commit a percentage of their mount fees; as well as the New York Racing Association tracks and California.
Great stuff, let’s see more of it!
Additional Update: Finely makes a similar point by citing what happened to dog racing in Massachusetts.
It is a cautionary tale for every other animal-related sport that doesn’t do nearly enough to protect its competitors while racing and guarantee them safe, dignified retirements after their careers are over. Sadly, horse racing falls into that category.
Posted by dana on Dec 27 2009
Filed Under: Industry, 2009, Media, Rescue, Retirement, Racing
(2 votes, average: 5 out of 5)
Loading ...
Loading ...
Hi-
Long time reader, first time I’ve commented.
I do agree that the industry needs to do much, much more. It does make the NYT article case harder to make when the system is actively and *loudly* supporting TB retirement/aftercare charities.
But I do wonder if the good that is being done–ones you mentioned above along with many others–is just destined to be lost in the doom and gloom articles we seem to see all the time, especially in places like the NYT.
I volunteer with CANTER and see both the negative and positive side of the issue, and have been around racing and owned OTTBs for a large chunk of my life. I’m glad there’s a spotlight on retirement, and the pieces that highlight the lack of aftercare have certainly raised awareness and launched people in to action.
It’s easy to sensationalize (to borrow from the Twitter convo: “no horses died in the Derby”), but I would love to see a piece about the horses away from the spotlight who don’t have the talent of our stars, but who try just as hard in the claiming ranks. And how their trainers and owners are finding options available to them that were not even available a year ago in some places. End it by saying that the industry has taken small steps, but it needs to do more to make the jobs of all the charities a bit easier.
After all, it’s all about perception. If all you can hear is the negative then there’s no room for the tiny positive voice to break through and get louder.
Thanks for finally commenting, and great points! The sensationalism at the Times really denigrates the fact they’re legitimately trying to prompt the industry to do something. I’d love to see some reporting like what you’re suggesting.
Thanks for the welcome! I have always enjoyed reading; figured it was time to finally jump into the fray. :)
Thank you! I’m always grateful for any publicity this issue gets. And I’d like to mention Philadelphia Park’s Turning for Home program. Sponsored by the PTHA and working in conjunction with the South Jersey Thoroughbred Rescue and Adoption, TFH is funded in part by contributions from PHA horsemen ($10 per race entry) and jockeys ($10 per win; $5 per place) and also charitable contributions. Since its inception in May 2008 nearly 300 horses have been in TFH’s program. These are not the stars of the sport; these are the horses that run in the other races that make it possible for the stars to exist. You can learn more about it here:
http://www.patha.org/turning-for-home.html
Finger Lakes also has a remarkable retirement and adoption program based at that track.
And finally, Suffolk Downs, which is always struggling to stay afloat, never ceases to amaze me with its commitment to its horses. They don’t have a formal program, but work closely with NE CANTER, and of course were one of the first tracks to formulate — and enforce — an anti-slaughter policy. [Many tracks have such policies, on paper. I won’t be impressed with NYRA’s policy until I see it enforced.]
Frankly, in some ways, Kentucky has a lot of work to do to catch up with what’s happening in other states.
Nancy - I think you’ve got the makings of a great op-ed piece for the Times here! I seriously think you should consider writing an op-ed piece that highlights the good works these places are doing. Particularly because you can highlight how many horses some of these places have helped!
Thanks to you, Jennifer and anyone else who works on the front line of this issue!
I found your blog through Equidaily - very good information your passing along.
Has there every been a conclusion to Mr Paragallo’s animal abuse case in Greene County ? The public needs to keep informed and updated with this case so justice is served.
Thanks so much for not only shining a light on this issue but also for bringing it more into the mainstream.
And an excellent point vis a vis the shuttering of the dog track in Massachusetts. Yes, it can happen in the thoroughbred game, too; the anti-voices always scream the loudest.
Thanks again!
JRP
In response to hoofprintsandhorseplay:
It now looks like Paragallo won’t go to trial until the spring. The county upped the ante by re-indicting him for a total of 35 misdemeanor counts of animal abuse & neglect. But that only means the maximum penalty he could get would be a $35,000 fine and 2 years in prison.
Perez of the county humane society is also talking about suing in civil court for restitution.
Ernie still has something like 60-70 horses on that property, and last I heard/read Perez and a vet are allowed to go check them out every few weeks. Back in late Oct./early Nov., Perez described conditions there as “adequate” in terms of food, water, and shelter and such, although he also said it still isn’t what you’d expect a TB farm to be.
Thanks Nancy for answering that question!
hoofprintsandhorseplay - Thanks for the kind words! I’m not a journalist… places like Thoroughbred Times, Paulick Report and Bloodhorse are the best places to look for up to date news, or just ask Nancy, lol! :)
John - Thanks! And you’re so right about the anti-voices screaming the loudest. This is always my concern re: NYT. When they don’t balance out their coverage and editorials by including more positive examples, like the ones noted by commenters, where the industry has taken it upon themselves to address the issue, the anti-voices have more “legitimate” claims when in fact they don’t have all information. And let’s hope folks in the industry take note of Finely’s post!
Really good piece Dana. Well done!
Dana- I think that’s the heart of the matter; the NYT needs balance. There are bad apples in any sport. I don’t think you can look at the industry with rose colored glasses, but there are certainly many a person who do care about their horses, and try to do right by them. And they really are very grateful for the choices they now have. It is very troubling to only see the negativity for all the reasons already mentioned in the other comments.
I have to add to Nancy’s praises for Suffolk Downs (and a lot of their people), who as she mentions, works closely with CANTER NE but the TRF as well. In November they helped to open a new TRF facility in Plymouth and five Suffolk “grads” are happily living there now. Good things all around.
PTP - thanks!
Jennifer - indeed and nice to hear re: Suffolk!
Can anyone explain to me how this is happening. While watching a rerun of Dirty Jobs on Discovery - how they were feeding Lions and Tigers in the Zoo - horse meat and horse blood !! I was appalled.
Wow, I’d be curious to know about that too.
I think, though I’m not an expert, that I remember them saying in that episode that the big cats prefer horse because it is leaner than beef; closer to what they would eat in the wild.
If you do a quick Google search you’ll get a bunch of articles on how zoos are dealing with the closing of US slaughterhouses; it looks like many have explored other options.
I do know that donating your horse personally to the zoo is an option for people; as well is donating your animal to a veterinary school for teaching purposes. I personally feel that as long as the horse is humanely euthanized, it is better (and more responsible as a horse owner) than sending it to the auction.
I wouldn’t do either, personally. :) But I’ve been fortunate enough to be able to bury the few horses I’ve lost. Many don’t have that option. And as for rendering plants…well it took another episode of Dirty Jobs for me to never, ever want to have to consider that option for a horse ever again.