PDA

View Full Version : PETA Wants $360 fee added...



ThisTooShallPass
May. 26, 2011, 12:31 AM
PETA Wants $360 Fee Added to TB Horse Registrations & Ownership Transfers
According to a piece written on the Opposing Views blog, New York Times sports columnist William C. Rhoden will no longer cover horse racing because he believes it's inhumane. The blog goes on to say: "Rhoden also joined PETA in condemning the racing industry's abandonment of burned-out, used-up thoroughbreds and backed PETA's proposed Thoroughbred 360 Lifecycle Retirement Plan, which would require that thoroughbred owners and breeders pay a $360 retirement fee for every foal registration, ownership transfer, and breeding registration."



Read more: http://www.quarterhorsenews.com/index.php/news/industry-news/10426-peta-calls-for-360-fee-to-be-added-to-every-tb-horse-registration-a-ownership-transfer-.html#ixzz1NQhORfjL

BansheeBreeze
May. 26, 2011, 12:47 AM
Ummmmm, and that $360 is going to cover what exactly?

Kwill
May. 26, 2011, 08:27 AM
That would add up to a lot of money, if it is charged every time a transaction takes place.

I would be concerned that the money would be managed by a responsible agency or board. Would qualifying retirement/placement organizations be able to apply for funds or grants for rehoming or retiring?

It's a great idea, but implementation could be a nightmare if not managed correctly. Some horses can be retrained, some retire as pasture pets. What about mares? There are plenty that could go into the breeding shed, but probably shouldn't. So who gets the money and for what purpose?

Edit: I just did a google search for "PETA's Thoroughbred 360 Lifecycle Retirement Fund" and all I get is the same message -- write the JC and ask for it to be implemented. No actual details on what they propose. Anyone else have details or is this just a nice idea with no real substance to it?

Chaila
May. 26, 2011, 08:50 AM
It actually sounds like a reasonable way to cover retirement. IF it's managed correctly. Perhaps the fee could only be required for horses that are raced, vs purpose bred sport horses.

I know that's a big IF, but if the money were given to organizations like CANTER and New Vocations and other reputable programs, you'd really have something.

DressageFancy
May. 26, 2011, 08:58 AM
A new fee added on to registrations of this size would burden large breeding farms into bankrupcy. It would also send a bunch of old broodies straight to the kill pens as farms cut the number of foals raised. I know from experience---this happened to the Standard breeding farms when across the board the registry implemented bloodtyping fees for every broodmare (due all in the same year).

LaurieB
May. 26, 2011, 09:08 AM
Who would the $360 fee go to? You only have to read recent headlines to see how badly the current TB retirement homes are managing the money they bring in. Throwing more money into the hands of people who are more intersted in glorifying themselves than in saving horses does no one any good.

LaurieB
May. 26, 2011, 09:10 AM
A new fee added on to registrations of this size would burden large breeding farms into bankrupcy. It would also send a bunch of old broodies straight to the kill pens as farms cut the number of foals raised. I know from experience---this happened to the Standard breeding farms when across the board the registry implemented bloodtyping fees for every broodmare (due all in the same year).

That is PETA's aim--to put breeders out of business. And to have animals killed rather than owned by humans.

Kwill
May. 26, 2011, 09:15 AM
It is possible that the awareness factor of what happens to ex-racers, plus the financial burden of this fee, might make some backyard breeders think twice about putting more mediocre foals on the ground.

On the other hand, we could lose some valuable old bloodlines if people don't want to take the chance on breeding a cross that isn't proven in today's market.

However, I am more concerned about the implementation and dispersal of this money. The potential for fraud or misuse could be huge if it's not managed correctly.

Pronzini
May. 26, 2011, 09:25 AM
It is possible that the awareness factor of what happens to ex-racers, plus the financial burden of this fee, might make some backyard breeders think twice about putting more mediocre foals on the ground.



You think there are a lot of backyard breeders in racing? Not in my experience. It's too expensive all the way around.

starrunner
May. 26, 2011, 09:33 AM
There are certainly a lot of smaller Thoroughbred producers/breeders in the business, not necessarily the racing end of the spectrum.

freshman
May. 26, 2011, 09:44 AM
You think there are a lot of backyard breeders in racing? Not in my experience. It's too expensive all the way around.

I agree. I see commercial stallion owners and breeders as the cause of *most* of the problems in this industry.

Kwill
May. 26, 2011, 09:48 AM
You think there are a lot of backyard breeders in racing? Not in my experience. It's too expensive all the way around.

You are probably right. However, if the financial aspect makes anyone a more thoughtful breeder, I think it's a good thing. What will probably happen, however, is people will just stop doing the paperwork on horses they don't think can win at the track.

Glimmerglass
May. 26, 2011, 10:02 AM
Posted elsewhere as well this is Rhoden's article against racing and embracing PETA's fee/charge (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/21/sports/racing-industry-should-care-for-its-own.html?_r=1)

If he wants to stop writing articles about racing fine. But actually do it - stop writing any racing articles be it pro or con.

Laurierace
May. 26, 2011, 10:11 AM
If it has the word PETA attached to it, it is automatically a bad idea. I personally am in favor of a per start fee as well as a additional fee added onto the registration cost. That way you get them all in the beginning and get continuing support throughout their careers for the ones actually out there racing. The problem of course is who will oversee it and make sure the money actually gets to the horses that need it. It is a huge problem but not one that can't be solved in my opinion.

rustbreeches
May. 26, 2011, 10:12 AM
I agree. I see commercial stallion owners and breeders as the cause of *most* of the problems in this industry.

The large commercial industry tends to focus on proven bloodlines and producing foals with an attractive enough pedigree to make them sellable. The NUMEROUS backyard breeders have a local no-name stallion's daughter with blacktype, or hell, even a win 3 generations back and they breed to the guy up the street's unraced stallion because it is free or cheap.

The large breeder's foals are bred for specific athletic abilities, the nicking reports are used to maximize the potential of the progeny by carefully deciding what characteristics are likely to come through on each side. The results overall, tend to be better than the small time guy who bred to a stallion just because he had the necessary equipment

rustbreeches
May. 26, 2011, 10:15 AM
There are certainly a lot of smaller Thoroughbred producers/breeders in the business, not necessarily the racing end of the spectrum.

Agreed :). Search CL any day and you can find many homebred TBs that closely resemble yaks. My favorite ads are where they have a mother/daughter pair that have never accomplished anyhting, yet are both in foal and for sale because the owner is downsizing. Maybe the owner should have thought of that before they BRED them again

Kwill
May. 26, 2011, 10:21 AM
From the article:

"“We began to look into what the retirement plans are, and they’re practically nonexistent,” said Kathy Guillermo, the PETA vice president."

OK, what does she propose to implement for horse retirement? I would like to see a plan, here. A farm? Grants to existing farms/placement services? Rebates to race breeders that keep retired horses when they are done racing?

The devil's in the details.

Kwill
May. 26, 2011, 10:30 AM
Agreed :). Search CL any day and you can find many homebred TBs that closely resemble yaks. My favorite ads are where they have a mother/daughter pair that have never accomplished anyhting, yet are both in foal and for sale because the owner is downsizing. Maybe the owner should have thought of that before they BRED them again

I am on an email list for what I would regard as smalltime race breeder sales site -- I inquired about a two year old filly with very unremarkable breeding as a sporthorse prospect. I thought she was cute but she's nothing special (I didn't buy because the cost of shipping just wasn't worth it). This filly is listed at $1000 but he would just give her away. This farm bred a bunch of horses for the track, his "investor" pulled out, and now he's left with horses that aren't going to race and really have no future, as the mares at least shouldn't be bred and sporthorse people probably aren't that interested. A lot of hope there, and little sense.

I realize we are talking about helping ex-racers here, but these horses probably aren't even going to GET to the track, because as you say, it's expensive.

Pronzini
May. 26, 2011, 10:40 AM
I realize we are talking about helping ex-racers here, but these horses probably aren't even going to GET to the track, because as you say, it's expensive.

And getting to the track requires training at a minimum of $30 a day(more like $50-55 but we are talking bottom feeders) and registration which involves photos, DNA, stallion certificates etc and then tattooing, gate cards etc

So I doubt very much that too many people raising actual racing horses are really part of the backyard equation to any significant degree unless we have a different idea of what backyard means.

rustbreeches
May. 26, 2011, 10:53 AM
Alot of people breeding backyard horses either hold a trainer's license or have a friend that does. They will feed substandard hay, rent the cheapest facility possible or attempt to train them on their 4 acre farmette. They use the cheapest grain, like Country Acres and feed minimal amounts and bedding is a luxury few will afford. The farrier makes an appearance every few months and a vet only sees the horse in the receiving barn. The exercise rider will show up sporadically so they "paddock train" alot. Most will be 4 and 1/2 horses so they can walk and run, walk and run. Yes, there are alot of these shit bred horses that make it to lower end tracks all over the country

Kwill
May. 26, 2011, 11:01 AM
And getting to the track requires training at a minimum of $30 a day(more like $50-55 but we are talking bottom feeders) and registration which involves photos, DNA, stallion certificates etc and then tattooing, gate cards etc

So I doubt very much that too many people raising actual racing horses are really part of the backyard equation to any significant degree unless we have a different idea of what backyard means.

My definition of "backyard" is taking a mediocre stallion, mares with marginal bloodlines, and breeding a bunch of horses in the hopes that some of them will make it to the track. These people believe they are raising actual racing horses, that is the purpose in breeding them, at least that's the hope. But as someone pointed out, without research, a lot of money, and foresight, it doesn't happen. I think there are more of these people than you might think, sadly.

But back on topic, this retirement thing would actually postively affect one aspect of the industry: horses in the claimers game. A fund to make a valid effort to find those rideable ex-racers homes or place them in a retirement facility when they can't race any more is a good idea. I find the lower-ranked claiming horses can really be at risk, as well as those who are too slow and the owners have given up trying.

There are many private individuals, such as the guy in California that takes in ex-racers, that could use a helping hand for their efforts. As it is, they all rely now on private donations and grants.

witherbee
May. 26, 2011, 11:03 AM
Are they going to do the same for Quarter Horses, Warmbloods, Appaloosas, Arabians etc? Check your slaughterhouse and low end auction sites and see those numbers are just as high if not higher. The TB industry is doing more and more, and while I am all for advocacy, PETA is far to extreme for my taste. Those of us in the business are trying to police this and things are improving. The Jockey Club just launched Thoroughbred Connect - http://registry.jockeyclub.com/registry.cfm?page=tbConnectLanding and have also set up funds for breeders to donate when registering etc. Does it need to get better? Yes it does, but mandating more fees via a third party like PETA is not the way IMO. Targeting just one discipline and trying to influence things in this manner is pretty heavy handed IMO. I just rescued a TB from a hunter riding instructor who was starving him (the horse had been boarded here at one time and I happened to have seen him and got her to sign him over) are we going to penalize them in any way or is it just us "bad race people"?

SmartAlex
May. 26, 2011, 11:07 AM
From the article:

"“We began to look into what the retirement plans are, and they’re practically nonexistent,” said Kathy Guillermo, the PETA vice president."

WTF... most companies don't offer a retirement plan for humans. I suggest the horses invest their $360 in a 401k like everyone else.

rustbreeches
May. 26, 2011, 11:10 AM
WTF... most companies don't offer a retirement plan for humans. I suggest the horses invest their $360 in a 401k like everyone else.

Best. Quote. Ever!
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Glimmerglass
May. 26, 2011, 11:11 AM
Conceptually the idea of some sort of "social security" pool of money for retired TBs is interesting. However it doesn't take a Wharton MBA to grasp that collecting, managing, and allocating funds it is fraught with all sorts of problems.

As we all know, or at least should know, from human-versions of these programs there is considerable fraud to be found. Any such program becomes a target for crime. Set best of intentions aside and realize that it simply will become a system with fraud, waste and abuse being paid for by horses of the future. Not to mention that the numbers of new payees are shrinking each year.

Further the administering of the money will cut significantly into the funds collected. Non-for-profits have some of the most bloated payroll and admin costs around. Working for a charity in 2011 no longer means donated time.

I'm not a fan of the widespread backyard farms of varying quality of "care" who hang a shingle out front calling themselves a "rescue". [Humane death beats the living conditions of some.] I presume it will be open season for these pop-up orgs to suddenly put in claims for the money.

How would a horse get money from the system? Submit evidence of the tattoo to get the check? Just like relatives collecting checks for dead relatives from social security you can see the motivation for some of these places to keep the horse alive even if death is more humane. I'm sure you'd also see examples of horses dead for years but claims for "their check" submitted. Who is going to do random audits? How much would that cost in salary, transportation, et al?

Also the question of who would be qualified comes into play: is it only horses who start in at least one race could be eligible? How about that horse who gets injured training to be a racer and must be retired? Will "the checks" stop if the horse is still "working" in another vocation? Think about it - it's like a human Social Security recipient today. Typically a payee gets paid back everything they put in loooong before they stop collecting checks. So eventually it runs in the red unless the number of people/horses paying in suddenly increases.

Again the concept has some merits but a true plan - even a test plan - needs to be completely developed well before people start shouting in the media for it to be done.

BradlyR
May. 26, 2011, 11:12 AM
I know a few of these "backyard" breeders. They have a stallion or a friend does. They find a cheap mare. They breed them, raise the baby in a cheap field with cattle fencing or on a friend's farm, and then try to train it themselves or their brother is a trainer. (LOL, one of the biggest problems with the racing industry is how easy it is to get a trainer's license, but that's another story.)

Or, they buy a cheap TB -- and there are tons out there for a few thousand or less, some free -- bring it home and train it as cheaply as possible. If it gets hurt or has to be sold at slaughter auction, so be it.

These "backyard" breeders, and maybe some of you have a different definition, so lets say "cheap-as-possible, the-horse-means-nothing owners" are out there, and there are lots of them. It's very sad, actually, and I'd love seeing them priced out of the business -- they can only afford it now at the expense of the horse's well-being:(

I like the idea of money being tacked on for retirement when a horse is registered or ownership is transfered. Yes, the details need to be cleared up, but it's a good idea. I know a lot of people/groups who have been advocating this for years, too bad PETA had to be the one in the limelight:(

BradlyR
May. 26, 2011, 11:14 AM
I think The Jockey Club could do a decent job of handling the money without fraud -- they make enough money to worry about cheating that system. There are some worthy groups out there, too, who work only with Thoroughbreds. TCA comes to mind. It can be done.

Kwill
May. 26, 2011, 11:16 AM
I was under the impression that PETA wants the Jockey Club to assess the fees and administer them, not PETA. They are just suggesting that it happens.

Glimmerglass
May. 26, 2011, 11:20 AM
I think The Jockey Club could do a decent job of handling the money without fraud -- they make enough money to worry about cheating that system. There are some worthy groups out there, too, who work only with Thoroughbreds. TCA comes to mind. It can be done.

You are kidding right? The JC would take this financial burden on for free?

Unquestionably some organizations do it right and shouldn't be lumped in with those failing in their duties. The reality is that retirement would involved more than a small clutch of farms. It's exceedingly naive to think every will work accordingly to plan.

Kwill
May. 26, 2011, 11:36 AM
Here's my vision of how this might work:

Farms could apply to be a "host farm" for retired TBs. They would have to pass some kind of inspection, for acreage, care, personnel, etc. The farms could submit expenses to the fund to be reimbursed for the care they gave the horses like an expense form used in business. Obviously all kinds of inspections and safeguards could be implemented to make sure the horses weren't being starved or something. Maybe the farm would have to apply for 5013c status to have more oversight.

A horse, with a documented race record, could be donated by the current owner to a farm that was accepting ex-racers.

Meanwhile, there should be rehoming programs implemented to move horses along that could go on to new careers. Horse moves off the farm, or dies, replaced with another one.

I realize this is fraught with problems, but it's a framework.

RNB
May. 26, 2011, 11:38 AM
That is PETA's aim--to put breeders out of business. And to have animals killed rather than owned by humans.

Agreed.

danceronice
May. 26, 2011, 12:15 PM
From the article:

"“We began to look into what the retirement plans are, and they’re practically nonexistent,” said Kathy Guillermo, the PETA vice president."

OK, what does she propose to implement for horse retirement? I would like to see a plan, here. A farm? Grants to existing farms/placement services? Rebates to race breeders that keep retired horses when they are done racing?

The devil's in the details.

If she wants to retire thoroughbreds I'm sure PETA has plenty of money to buy them.

Honestly, we need (not just in horses but everything) to get back to the idea of keeping our noses out of other peoples' business unless we're willing to cough up and cover it ourselves. If PETA wants to run a retirement farm, let PETA pay for it. Otherwise the horse is the responsibility of the last person to legally own it. The JC is not in the business of rescues and 501(c)3s (and I doubt you'd get many volunteers to turn private farms into them as it's a massive hassle to get that tax status, plus it turns into a paperwork nightmare if you're also running a real business out of the same location.)

vineyridge
May. 26, 2011, 12:42 PM
I prefer Laurierace's plan. Only I'd reserve a small part of the handle for horse welfare, just as there is an employment tax for Social Security. Treat the horses as employees of the tracks and give them a tiny chunk of the betting that they generate. I have no idea what the total betting handle is today, but less than 1% would still be better than the present or proposed system. Take half from the State and half from the track. :) Then start looking into horse annuities. :)

Kwill
May. 26, 2011, 12:55 PM
It's a knotty problem no matter how you look at it. Raising the money is just the tip of the iceberg.

Luckydonkey
May. 26, 2011, 01:06 PM
Honestly what would happen is that they would just stop registering the majority of foals. WHich means that there would be a huge number of grade thoroughreds flooding the auction houses. They would only bother to register the foals they thought might make it to the track. As for running a retirement farm for TB's...look how many Joe at TB friends always has... I am sure he can tell anyone who asks that the $360 fee won't go far to care for a horse who could possibly live as a pasture puff for close to 30 years...

danceronice
May. 26, 2011, 02:28 PM
Yes, because Social Security is such a brilliant system.... :rolleyes:

The only way $360/transaction would make any difference is if you had a REALLY good private investment broker managing it to develop some sort of profit-turning endowment fund. And the JC's not going to run day to day farms, you can't trust most fly-by-night "I wanna rescue horsies" type to have any business management sense, and given the news about places like TRF and Old Friends's plea for help, it's hard enough when you ARE a "reputable" NFP. So who is going to take these horses? Does it make any financial sense to keep ones that are, through physical condition or temperament, permanent pasture puffs? And what are the PETA types going to do if the best thing to do with the money is put down the broken (physically or mentally; look at fleur's thread on her nutty Storm Cat who's now crazy AND possibly crippled)?

BradlyR
May. 26, 2011, 02:44 PM
PETA has no problem with euthenasia. From what I can tell, they think that's better than having a human "master." LOL.

There was a thread somewhere (facebook?) about how many animals (cats, I think) PETA has had put down -- it was astounding.

RNB
May. 26, 2011, 06:02 PM
PETA has no problem with euthenasia. From what I can tell, they think that's better than having a human "master." LOL.

There was a thread somewhere (facebook?) about how many animals (cats, I think) PETA has had put down -- it was astounding.

Nope...they have no problem what so ever. Check the stats...they've put down more animals than any other organization, IIRC. Their world headquarters is in Norfolk, basically my backyard......and have been a headache for horse owners in my area for years. If people only knew....and the fact that they are sitting on a prime piece of waterfront real estate makes me ill. :no:

JSwan
May. 26, 2011, 06:43 PM
PETA's euthanasia rate is almost 100%. And it is not because they take in unadoptable animals.

It's because they kill every animal they can get their hands on. Their employees were arrested for dumping dead animals into shopping center dumpsters.

Turns out they'd gone to vet clinics, promised owners, vets, and vet clinic staff good homes for animals they'd surrendered, and then killed the animals in the back of their van - before the van left the parking lot.

That big freezer at PETA HQ isn't for storing food for office parties.

I am ashamed that this org is headquartered in my state - and my wish is that one day, people see this org for what it really is.

It is a horrible, horrible org that cares nothing at all about animal welfare or the human/animal bond. Their idea for a fee for retiring racehorses is a smokescreen - either they want publicity and/or they want an "in" with racing.

The truth is - they'd rather see every TB in the United States dead.

Roadapple Cider
May. 26, 2011, 08:46 PM
Nope...they have no problem what so ever. Check the stats...they've put down more animals than any other organization, IIRC. Their world headquarters is in Norfolk, basically my backyard......and have been a headache for horse owners in my area for years. If people only knew....and the fact that they are sitting on a prime piece of waterfront real estate makes me ill. :no:

What about approaching the Virginian Pilot newspaper? Do they have an investigative reporter that could research this story?

The TB groups would be better off supporting each other with a conservative fund than being assessed by a 3rd party.

ThisTooShallPass
May. 26, 2011, 11:58 PM
Dear COTHers, let me introduce you to Roadapple Cider from Arabian Breeders Network's forums. They are a HUGE, HUGE supporter of Marsha Parkinson. You know the Polish Arabian Breeder that recently had her herd 100 plus herd of horses seized due to her hideously pathetic care of them.

BansheeBreeze
May. 27, 2011, 12:44 AM
I agree that there are too many backyard TB's out there. I think even many small breeding farms should not be breeding what they do, and honestly I'm astounded that some of these places are able to make any money.

I wonder if PETA realizes how far $360 goes towards taking care of a horse, particularly an ex racehorse. The don't live on air those ones.

The entire thing is flawed beyond belief. I don't understand why everybody needs to RETIRE ex racehorses! Wouldn't it make more sense, that if you were going to implement a program such as this, instead make it a TB Rehoming Program. Of course some DO need retirement, but many many many can go on to become wonderful personal horses. There is such a stigma associated with horses off the track, that many people are afraid to give them a try. But if there was a farm, who could take these horses in, give them the "down time" they need, and retrain them so they could actually be USABLE, wouldn't that make more sense? I mean, people make a living off of doing this exact thing!

I so wish there was a TB Sporthorse program, with breed shows and year end awards and such. I know some people have tried to get it going, doesn't seem to have made much progress though. I think it would go a long way in getting people interested in OTTBs and giving them a future after the track.

rustbreeches
May. 27, 2011, 01:06 AM
Banshee, there is a TB celebration show series in VA. Even Upperville started having a Back From the Track Hack and a Too Slow to Go class for registered TBs

BansheeBreeze
May. 27, 2011, 07:51 AM
Banshee, there is a TB celebration show series in VA. Even Upperville started having a Back From the Track Hack and a Too Slow to Go class for registered TBs

That is great to hear! I just think there really should be a large scale state or national organization for this to really get it going.

red mares
May. 27, 2011, 08:27 AM
This same thread is over on Trot.

The Jockey Club, ASHA, et. al. need to actively start pushing back (together) against PETA and HSUS. It would be great to see commericals showing the cute, fuzzy, healthy puppies and kittens that PETA has killed during the evening news. Something along the lines of "Their only crime was being a pet, which PETA feels is worse than death." You know, right after the sob story commerical that HSUS puts out.

magnolia73
May. 27, 2011, 08:38 AM
A new fee added on to registrations of this size would burden large breeding farms into bankrupcy. It would also send a bunch of old broodies straight to the kill pens as farms cut the number of foals raised. I know from experience---this happened to the Standard breeding farms when across the board the registry implemented bloodtyping fees for every broodmare (due all in the same year

OK, I don't think that putting large breeding operations that can't afford an extra $360 a horse out of business is necessarily a bad thing. I think we NEED to breed fewer horses in the US, period.

I completely support the rehoming of racehorses, but there are not enough homes, particularly for the ones who can't be rehabbed. The number of people who can support a horse is going to continue to decrease. And we have an excellent network of rehoming organizations, but they are going to struggle to sell someone on buying an injured horse.

I don't know how far $360 can go, but if it is pooled and used for the ones with no other options, then yes it could go far, particularly if used for humane euthanasia of badly injured animals.

I'm not so sure the fee should apply to every transaction- particularly the transition from track to a new home. Certainly a big part of the appeal of OTTB's is the price and adding a tax would probably lessen that appeal.

I think if an organization like CANTER had come out with an idea to collect a bit extra money with each registration for retirement, people would support the idea more.

LauraKY
May. 27, 2011, 08:47 AM
The entire thing is flawed beyond belief. I don't understand why everybody needs to RETIRE ex racehorses! Wouldn't it make more sense, that if you were going to implement a program such as this, instead make it a TB Rehoming Program. Of course some DO need retirement, but many many many can go on to become wonderful personal horses. There is such a stigma associated with horses off the track, that many people are afraid to give them a try. But if there was a farm, who could take these horses in, give them the "down time" they need, and retrain them so they could actually be USABLE, wouldn't that make more sense? I mean, people make a living off of doing this exact thing!



It's called New Vocations and Second Stride. There are others, but those are the two I'm familiar with.

Bits & Bytes (for profit) does an excellent job too. They're out there...they just don't have the sob stories like some of the rescues use to generate money.

LauraKY
May. 27, 2011, 09:15 AM
WTF... most companies don't offer a retirement plan for humans. I suggest the horses invest their $360 in a 401k like everyone else.

Perfect!:lol:

Mara
May. 27, 2011, 09:52 AM
This same thread is over on Trot.

The Jockey Club, ASHA, et. al. need to actively start pushing back (together) against PETA and HSUS. It would be great to see commericals showing the cute, fuzzy, healthy puppies and kittens that PETA has killed during the evening news. Something along the lines of "Their only crime was being a pet, which PETA feels is worse than death." You know, right after the sob story commerical that HSUS puts out.

I would donate $$$ towards an ad campaign like that.

caffeinated
May. 27, 2011, 09:56 AM
It's called New Vocations and Second Stride. There are others, but those are the two I'm familiar with.

Bits & Bytes (for profit) does an excellent job too. They're out there...they just don't have the sob stories like some of the rescues use to generate money.

Gosh, there are bunches of programs. Re-Run. Exceller Fund. Friends of Ferdinand. CANTER. TB Friends. TROT. FLTAP. SCTR. MAHR. There are tons, lots more I'm forgetting since I'm rattling them off the top of my head.

Not to mention the many, many people who do rehoming on a small or private scale.

I will admit it sort of chaps my hide a little, knowing all of the groups out there (many of whom receive support from their racetracks and local racing folks) to have some PETA spokesperson lament the apparent total lack of rehoming programs. Apparently I'm a figment of my own imagination.

Petstorejunkie
May. 27, 2011, 12:26 PM
That is PETA's aim--to put breeders out of business. And to have animals killed rather than owned by humans.
Yep
Strangely how adding money will put more into an untimely demise...
plus, that means rescues would have a $360 higher up front cost to rescue, as racing barns tried to cover their investment loss.

saanengirl
May. 27, 2011, 03:28 PM
I suspect that if that fee were implemented and fewer TBs were registered, more would end up in illegal racing. Here in GA we do not have legal horse racing (except for harness), but I know several people who "dirt road race" backyard TBs and Appendix QHs. I had one of those individuals ask me to ride for him, but I told him I already had enough horses to ride.

Laurierace
May. 27, 2011, 08:22 PM
I suspect that if that fee were implemented and fewer TBs were registered, more would end up in illegal racing. Here in GA we do not have legal horse racing (except for harness), but I know several people who "dirt road race" backyard TBs and Appendix QHs. I had one of those individuals ask me to ride for him, but I told him I already had enough horses to ride.

That is absolutely ridiculous. Registering the horse with or without PETA's stupid fee least expensive part of getting a horse to the races. People are racing them illegally because they are asshats not because they didn't want to pay to register them.

rustbreeches
May. 27, 2011, 08:32 PM
Actually, I don't think the racing is illegal, it is the wagering on it that is. It is still very common in many parts of the nation to have bush track racing. The Louisiana "arpents" are the breeding ground of some of the greatest jockeys in the last few decades. I'm pretty sure not all of them are asshats

RNB
Jun. 1, 2011, 02:00 AM
Gosh, there are bunches of programs. Re-Run. Exceller Fund. Friends of Ferdinand. CANTER. TB Friends. TROT. FLTAP. SCTR. MAHR. There are tons, lots more I'm forgetting since I'm rattling them off the top of my head.

Not to mention the many, many people who do rehoming on a small or private scale.

I will admit it sort of chaps my hide a little, knowing all of the groups out there (many of whom receive support from their racetracks and local racing folks) to have some PETA spokesperson lament the apparent total lack of rehoming programs. Apparently I'm a figment of my own imagination.

PETA does not have a clue nor do their "spokespeople".....and they ALWAY have a hidden agenda. If I may summarize one of my dealings with PETA.

PETA decided to try and stop horse activities on city property in Va. Beach, VA. A horse person's contract with the city was up for renewal and going before City Council. PETA decided to bombard the hearing...CC postpones hearing so horse people could have a chance to speak. PETA then sends in the troops. They called the tv stations, had interviews, 300+ PETA 'people' show up wearing t-shirts and big round badges, they had KIDS carrying 3'x5' photos on foam board of dead horses (no kidding):sigh:, their 'speakers' talked about the horrible living conditions for horses, how horses should not live in 'boxes', how cruel it was to put a horse on a trailer, how traumatizing it was to put tack on a horse, horses should live free and without constraints, blah, blah, blah.

Interestingly, out of all the PETA folks in attendance, when asked by one of the Council members, only ONE had ever owned/ridden a horse. :rolleyes:

I don't trust ANYTHING PETA does or says. BTW, the City Council did not buy in to the PETA BS and the contract was renewed.

Bacchus
Jun. 1, 2011, 10:13 AM
BTW, the City Council did not buy in to the PETA BS and the contract was renewed.

Hurray!