With a revision date of March 21, 2014, the Indiana Horse Racing Commission has posted their 2014 Medication Withdrawal Times. The caveats this year, however, are that the withdrawal times the IHRC has provided are for just 37 medications and they will somehow "Expire April 30, 2014." (Of course, their disclaimer as well as ours is that "Reliance on these guidelines is no guarantee of compliance with Indiana Horse Racing Commission (IHRC) medication rules." In IBOP's view, no withdrawal time should ever be posted without stated dosages.) This year's withdrawal times raise a few questions that we'll try to answer, if that is even possible. The IHRC's current 2014 Medication Withdrawal Times can be found at the following link: http://www.in.gov/hrc/files/Medication_2014_Withdrawal_Times.pdf.
Q. Why are there withdrawal times for only 37 medications? A. Your guess is as good as ours as we have no idea as to why there are 37 medications with withdrawal times. The 2013 Medication Withdrawal Times issued by the IHRC included withdrawal times for 72 medications! (A link to that 2013 document is at the bottom of this article.) At their March 5th meeting, the IHRC was to consider emergency rules that would have established supposed thresholds for 24 controlled therapeutic medications approved by the Association of Racing Commissioners International (ARCI) as recommended by the Racing Medication & Testing Consortium (RMTC). After first hearing testimony from the RMTC's Executive Director, Dr. Dionne Benson, the commissioners, based upon some very weak arguments by Chairman William Diener, decided to table any further public testimony on these medications and thresholds until the next IHRC meeting which is to be scheduled for late April. (This was an unbelievably disrespectful move to the industry groups in attendance that were prepared to provide testimony, but respect for the industry has never been a high priority with the IHRC.)
With any further discussion on adopting the 24 controlled therapeutic medications tabled, IHRC Executive Director Joe Gorajec raised this issue of providing what he felt were appropriate withdrawal times for 2014. Here's what he proposed, "What I would propose and what I would do, unless the Commission instructs me otherwise, is the guidance that we give the veterinarians and the horsemen leading up to the next meeting with regard to withdrawal times would be consistent with the current RMTC proposal." Mr. Gorajec went on to say, "What we do is we work with the lab and based upon the best available science we give horsemen guidance on withdrawal times. That doesn't change." (Official Transcript Page 84, Lines 15 through 23) After some brief discussion, the commissioners voted to approve this proposal which would lead anyone to believe that what the IHRC was going to do was publish the withdrawal times for only those 24 controlled therapeutic medications, not for the 37 medications currently published.
Mr. Gorajec's comment "that doesn't change," leads us to assume that the 72 medication thresholds published in 2013 were established with the "best available science." Yet, if the IHRC was interested in truly preventing medication violations, wouldn't an expanded list of those 72 withdrawal times make sense to the public anyway? Since the IHRC will never use documented compliance with a withdrawal time as a mitigating circumstance to a medication penalty, then why not publish as many withdrawal times as possible? And, if they truly wanted to assist horsemen, why not provide a specific recommended dosage from the best available science along with that withdrawal time! For guidance on dosages for at least the 24 controlled therapeutic medications, perhaps the best idea is to consult the actual ARCI Controlled Therapeutic Medication Schedule - Version 1.0 which can be found at the following link: http://arcicom.businesscatalyst.com/assets/1arci-controlled-therapeutic-medication-schedule---version-1.0.pdf. The IHRC should have considered publishing this document as well.
What we also find interesting is the following comment made by Dr. Benson from the RMTC at the March 5th meeting, "We have no problem with people medicating horses. It's whether they can run on a specific medication. We don't prohibit any appropriate medication from being used or even being kept on the backside of a racetrack. What we are concerned about is the integrity and safety of the horse and whether that horse should actually have that medication and at what level in its system at the time that it actually competes." (Official Transcript Page 52, Lines 10 through 18) In other words, Dr. Benson is saying that medications beyond the RMTC & ARCI's 24 controlled therapeutic medications can be used, but do not have thresholds on race day and their presence would be considered a violation. That's nothing new to Indiana racing. Again, if other medications can be used, wouldn't a responsible commission provide as many medication withdrawal times (and dosages) as possible, especially if in the past they've established withdrawal times with the "best available science" in conjunction with testing labs.
Of the 37 medication withdrawal times published by the IHRC, there are only 21 that were provided by and approved by both the RMTC & ARCI (yes, three RMTC & ARCI recommended medication withdrawal times are missing from the IHRC's current list); two medications, albuterol and isoflupredone, were recently approved by the RMTC, but not the ARCI, for the controlled therapeutic list; another two medications, cimetidine (Tagamet®) and ranitidine (Zantac®), currently have thresholds under Indiana's medication rules, but those race day thresholds would be eliminated as they are not part of the controlled therapeutic medications list; and the other 12 medications are hold overs from prior year's list. Why have these 12 on the list and not the full 72 from 2013?
Q. Why are there no withdrawal times for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) flunixin (banamine), ketoprofen, phenylbutazone (bute)? A. Once again, your guess is as good as ours as we have no idea. Below the withdrawal times, the IHRC simply points to the "Regulations regarding administration" of these widely used medications. If you read these regulations you will find their current race day thresholds, but what you won't find is a withdrawal time. So much for guidance. These NSAIDs are the three medication withdrawal times that are missing from the RMTC & ARCI vetted 24. As a service to horsemen, the RMTC recommended dosage and withdrawal times are as follows: a single IV dose of flunixin as Banamine® (flunixin meglumine) at 1.1 mg/kg outside of 24 hours before racing; a single IV dose of ketoprofen as Ketofen® at 2.2 mg/kg outside of 24 hours before racing; and a single IV dose of phenylbutazone at 4.0 mg/kg also outside of 24 hours before racing.
This link will take you to more detail regarding the RMTC recommendation and guidance regarding flunixin:
http://www.rmtcnet.com/resources/Flunixin%20Withdrawal%20Guidance.pdf
Q. Why are there no withdrawal times for boldenone (Equipoise®), nandrolone (Durabolin® and Deca-Durabolin®), stanozolol(Winstrol), and testosterone? A. Here's another head scratcher of a question. Similar to the NSAIDs, these androgenic-anabolic steroids (AAS) have thresholds in the rules of racing in Indiana which means they are legal to use. Yet, the IHRC is providing no guidance, not even a reference to 71 IAC 8.5-1-8 (flat racing) or 71 IAC 8-1-8 (standardbred) that provide details on their thresholds. The IHRC is also considering the ARCI Model Rule for AASs along with their controlled therapeutic medications list. If approved, stanozolol would be eliminated from use In Indiana racing. In addition, so would the use of Equipoise and Durabolin as boldenone, nandrolone, and testosterone would be limited to "endogenous concentrations" which means only concentrations naturally occurring in a horse and no supplements.
Q. Why will the 2014 Medication Withdrawal Times expire on April 30, 2014? A. First of all, how does a withdrawal time expire? Any legal or therapeutic medication, with or without a threshold, has a withdrawal time for race day whether it's published or not. They don't expire unless all medications are banned from being used with race horses both in and out of competition.
Secondly, with a so-called expiration date of April 30th, are these withdrawal times only going to be used for the first month of the Hoosier Park standardbred meet which begins today, March 28th, and not the thoroughbred meet which begins on May 6th? We find that difficult to believe. The suggestion that the withdrawal times for the 24, soon to be 26, controlled therapeutic medications would expire is dumbfounding, or for any other medication for that matter. Assuming that the IHRC does approve the ARCI controlled therapeutic medications at the next IHRC meeting in late April, there would be no logical reason to ever suggest an expiration date for those 24 or 26 medications. Assuming that the IHRC does not approved the ARCI Controlled Therapeutic Medications, which would mean no administrative rule changes from 2013, then it's not logical to suggest that there is any expiration at all of any medication. In fact, in that scenario, logic would dictate going back to guidance on the withdrawal times for the 72 medications from 2013. But, unfortunately, logic has never been a strong suit at the IHRC, and perhaps never will be.
2013 IHRC Medication Withdrawal Times http://www.ai.org/hrc/files/Medication_2013_Withdrawal_Times.pdf
Here's a list of the other medications with a withdrawal time published by the IHRC in 2013, but not in 2014: acebutolol, aminocaprioic acid, atropine, beclomethasone, benzocaine, bupivacaine, cromolyn, dipyrone, dyphyline, ergoloid mesylate, ergonovine, fenoterol, fenspiride, guanabenz, ketorolac, medetonidine, methylprednisolone, pentazocine, pentoxyfyline, phenytoin, polyethylene glycol, procaine HCI, promazine, propantheline, propionylpromazine, propranolol, salmeterol, terbutaline, triamcinolone, trichlormethiazide, and triflupromazine.
Friday, March 28, 2014
Saturday, March 15, 2014
The Jockey Club Report of Mares Bred to Indiana Stallions Available
Effective July 1, 2013, the Indiana Legislature placed a new reporting requirement upon the Indiana Horse Racing Commission (IHRC) with a change to 'IC 4-31-3-8 Duties.' As part of the IHRC's annual report, there is now a requirement to provide, "the competitive status of the Indiana horse racing industry as compared to the horse racing industries of other states and measured by purse, handle, and any other factors determined by the commission." Indiana Breeder & Owner Protection, Inc. (IBOP) is eagerly awaiting the IHRC's 2013 Annual Report to see what the IHRC considers to be "other factors" worthy of noting in their review of the competitiveness of the thoroughbred racing industry. The spin that will be required to put a positive on certain aspects of the thoroughbred breeding industry will be worth the read. While the breeding industry is part of Indiana's "horse racing industry," some statistics may not even see the light of day in the IHRC's Annual Report.
One "other factor" that we believe will require some major spin, if included in the IHRC's 2013 Annual Report, will be the number of mares bred to Indiana stallions in 2013. According to numbers released by The Jockey Club on March 14th, the number of mares bred to Indiana stallions dropped to 639 mares from 975 mares in 2012 which is a decrease of 34%. While the trend nationally of mares being bred is down 5% year-over-year, the decline in breeding mares to Indiana stallions is quite significant. This is especially true when comparing the 2013 figures to the all-time high of 1,154 mares bred to Indiana stallions just four years ago in 2010. This is a 45% decline from the peak to the results from 2013.
To 'spin' these numbers into a positive will require some creativity if not outright misdirection. The easy spin will be to suggest that competition from other states is the reason, especially where Ohio and their slot machines are concerned. While that would be easy to assume, the numbers don't suggest that Indiana's loss is Ohio's gain. According to The Jockey Club numbers, mares bred to Ohio stallions in 2013 increased by only 69 over their 2012 result (174 to 243) versus the year-over-year loss of 336 mares being bred to Indiana stallions. To put Indiana's losses in perspective, West Virginia had more mares being bred to West Virginia stallions (653) in 2013 than the numbers being bred to Indiana stallions (639). West Virginia's year-over-year decrease in mares being bred to their resident stallions from 2012 to 2013 was only 45.
The Jockey Club data also point out that there is a significant decline in the number of active thoroughbred stallions in Indiana. For the 2013 breeding season, the number of active Indiana stallions reported was 72 which is a decline from 94 active stallions in 2012. The peak for active stallions in Indiana was 122 in 2010. The 2013 results for active stallions is a drop of 41% from the peak, but also the lowest number of active stallions in Indiana since the 70 in 1998!
On an individual basis, only 21 Indiana stallions bred 10 or more mares in 2013 with the top five being; Pass Rush (37), Sangaree (32), Spanish Steps (28), Rock Pulpit and Quite A Handful (26). What doesn't bode well for the thoroughbred sired program is that the only two stallions ever to stand in Indiana that have sired a Breeders' Cup winner, Spanish Steps and Zavata, have both left the state for stallion duty in Saudi Arabia. Not only has there been a significant decline in the quantity of mares being bred to Indiana stallions, given the number of stallion losses over the last few years, it could also be argued that the overall quality of Indiana's stallions has declined as well. There are still a number of quality stallions with decent pedigrees, but just not enough of them. The 'spin' on these declines will be interesting reading assuming that the IHRC considers them to be a significant enough factor to be reported.
The Jockey Club numbers of mares bred and active Indiana stallions can be found at:
http://www.thejockeyclub.com/default.asp?section=FB&area=3. All mares bred numbers and active stallions are current as of March 13, 2014. Any individual stallion's numbers are as of Reports of Mares Bred on file at The Jockey Club by February 6, 2014 which can be found at: http://www.thejockeyclub.com/default.asp?section=Resources&area=12.
One "other factor" that we believe will require some major spin, if included in the IHRC's 2013 Annual Report, will be the number of mares bred to Indiana stallions in 2013. According to numbers released by The Jockey Club on March 14th, the number of mares bred to Indiana stallions dropped to 639 mares from 975 mares in 2012 which is a decrease of 34%. While the trend nationally of mares being bred is down 5% year-over-year, the decline in breeding mares to Indiana stallions is quite significant. This is especially true when comparing the 2013 figures to the all-time high of 1,154 mares bred to Indiana stallions just four years ago in 2010. This is a 45% decline from the peak to the results from 2013.
To 'spin' these numbers into a positive will require some creativity if not outright misdirection. The easy spin will be to suggest that competition from other states is the reason, especially where Ohio and their slot machines are concerned. While that would be easy to assume, the numbers don't suggest that Indiana's loss is Ohio's gain. According to The Jockey Club numbers, mares bred to Ohio stallions in 2013 increased by only 69 over their 2012 result (174 to 243) versus the year-over-year loss of 336 mares being bred to Indiana stallions. To put Indiana's losses in perspective, West Virginia had more mares being bred to West Virginia stallions (653) in 2013 than the numbers being bred to Indiana stallions (639). West Virginia's year-over-year decrease in mares being bred to their resident stallions from 2012 to 2013 was only 45.
The Jockey Club data also point out that there is a significant decline in the number of active thoroughbred stallions in Indiana. For the 2013 breeding season, the number of active Indiana stallions reported was 72 which is a decline from 94 active stallions in 2012. The peak for active stallions in Indiana was 122 in 2010. The 2013 results for active stallions is a drop of 41% from the peak, but also the lowest number of active stallions in Indiana since the 70 in 1998!
On an individual basis, only 21 Indiana stallions bred 10 or more mares in 2013 with the top five being; Pass Rush (37), Sangaree (32), Spanish Steps (28), Rock Pulpit and Quite A Handful (26). What doesn't bode well for the thoroughbred sired program is that the only two stallions ever to stand in Indiana that have sired a Breeders' Cup winner, Spanish Steps and Zavata, have both left the state for stallion duty in Saudi Arabia. Not only has there been a significant decline in the quantity of mares being bred to Indiana stallions, given the number of stallion losses over the last few years, it could also be argued that the overall quality of Indiana's stallions has declined as well. There are still a number of quality stallions with decent pedigrees, but just not enough of them. The 'spin' on these declines will be interesting reading assuming that the IHRC considers them to be a significant enough factor to be reported.
The Jockey Club numbers of mares bred and active Indiana stallions can be found at:
http://www.thejockeyclub.com/default.asp?section=FB&area=3. All mares bred numbers and active stallions are current as of March 13, 2014. Any individual stallion's numbers are as of Reports of Mares Bred on file at The Jockey Club by February 6, 2014 which can be found at: http://www.thejockeyclub.com/default.asp?section=Resources&area=12.
Monday, March 10, 2014
The Jockey Club's Equine Injury Database Figures For Indiana Downs
Since 2009, Indiana Downs (and Hoosier Park in past years) has been a participating racetrack in The Jockey Club's Equine Injury Database. Recently, the figures for their 2013 meet were released for both thoroughbred and quarter horse racing. According to The Jockey Club, the Equine Injury Database is designed to "identify the frequency, types and outcome of racing injuries using a standardized format that will generate valid statistics," "identify markers for horses at increased risk of injury," and "serve as a data source for research directed at improving safety and preventing injuries." The Equine Injury Database is really a Limited Equine Mortality Database.
The statistics are based on injuries occurring during a race resulting in the death of the equine athlete within 72 hours. Therefore, an injury in a race that results in the death of a horse after 72 hours is not counted. Hence, the use of "limited" in our description. Injuries during training that result in the death of the horse involved are not counted either. (Neither are on-track injuries that result in the retirement of the horse.) The Jockey Club uses these limited statistics to come up with a number of fatalities per 1,000 starts which will always be lower than true mortality statistics. While The Jockey Club has yet to announce the national statistics for 2013, in prior years that number has ranged between 1.88 and 2.00 fatalities per 1,000 starters.
Based upon the 11 fatalities from the 9,355 thoroughbred starters at Indiana Downs, the 1.18 fatalities per 1,000 starters would be lower than traditional national averages. This is an increase, however, from the 2 fatalities from the 4,350 starters in 2012 which worked out to be .46 fatalities per 1,000 starters. In 2013, 10 of the 11 thoroughbred fatalities at Indiana Downs occurred on the dirt course with 5 fatalities occurring in sprints less than 6 furlongs. Overall, if we add in the 2012 Hoosier Park fatalities (16 fatalities from 4,438 starters) to the 2012 Indiana Downs fatalities, the entire year numbers would be 18 fatalities from 8,788 starters which is 2.05 fatalities per 1,000 starters. So, there was a significant drop in thoroughbred fatalities, at least from those participating in races, from 2012 to 2013 in Indiana.
Indiana Downs Thoroughbred Racing 2009 through 2013:
http://www.thejockeyclub.com/pdfs/eid/IndianaDownsTB.pdf
Hoosier Park Thoroughbred Racing 2009 through 2012:
http://www.thejockeyclub.com/pdfs/eid/HoosierParkTB.pdf
The quarter horse fatality numbers for the 2013 Indiana Downs meet were above the traditional national average with 4 fatalities from 1,971 starters which works out to be 2.03 fatalities per 1,000 starters. This looks like a significant increase in fatalities as there was only one quarter horse fatality at Indiana Down in the past for years. However, from 2009 to 2011 at Hoosier Park, there were five fatalities, but none in 2012. To put the 2013 quarter horse fatality numbers in context, in 2012, according to The Jockey Club's parameters, there were 0 fatalities from 1,831 starters.
Indiana Downs Quarter Horse Racing 2009 through 2013:
http://www.thejockeyclub.com/pdfs/eid/IndianaDownsQH.pdf
Hoosier Park Quarter Horse Racing 2009 through 2012:
http://www.thejockeyclub.com/pdfs/eid/HoosierParkQH.pdf
Update: March 31, 2014 - According to The Jockey Club press release issued today, "The prevalence of race-related fatal injury for the timeframe from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2013, was 1.91 per 1,000 starts. The data was based on analysis of 1,871,522 starts. For 2013, the prevalence of fatal injury per 1,000 starts was 1.90." A statistical summary of the last five years can be found at the following link: http://jockeyclub.com/pdfs/eid_5_year_tables.pdf.
The statistics are based on injuries occurring during a race resulting in the death of the equine athlete within 72 hours. Therefore, an injury in a race that results in the death of a horse after 72 hours is not counted. Hence, the use of "limited" in our description. Injuries during training that result in the death of the horse involved are not counted either. (Neither are on-track injuries that result in the retirement of the horse.) The Jockey Club uses these limited statistics to come up with a number of fatalities per 1,000 starts which will always be lower than true mortality statistics. While The Jockey Club has yet to announce the national statistics for 2013, in prior years that number has ranged between 1.88 and 2.00 fatalities per 1,000 starters.
Based upon the 11 fatalities from the 9,355 thoroughbred starters at Indiana Downs, the 1.18 fatalities per 1,000 starters would be lower than traditional national averages. This is an increase, however, from the 2 fatalities from the 4,350 starters in 2012 which worked out to be .46 fatalities per 1,000 starters. In 2013, 10 of the 11 thoroughbred fatalities at Indiana Downs occurred on the dirt course with 5 fatalities occurring in sprints less than 6 furlongs. Overall, if we add in the 2012 Hoosier Park fatalities (16 fatalities from 4,438 starters) to the 2012 Indiana Downs fatalities, the entire year numbers would be 18 fatalities from 8,788 starters which is 2.05 fatalities per 1,000 starters. So, there was a significant drop in thoroughbred fatalities, at least from those participating in races, from 2012 to 2013 in Indiana.
Indiana Downs Thoroughbred Racing 2009 through 2013:
http://www.thejockeyclub.com/pdfs/eid/IndianaDownsTB.pdf
Hoosier Park Thoroughbred Racing 2009 through 2012:
http://www.thejockeyclub.com/pdfs/eid/HoosierParkTB.pdf
The quarter horse fatality numbers for the 2013 Indiana Downs meet were above the traditional national average with 4 fatalities from 1,971 starters which works out to be 2.03 fatalities per 1,000 starters. This looks like a significant increase in fatalities as there was only one quarter horse fatality at Indiana Down in the past for years. However, from 2009 to 2011 at Hoosier Park, there were five fatalities, but none in 2012. To put the 2013 quarter horse fatality numbers in context, in 2012, according to The Jockey Club's parameters, there were 0 fatalities from 1,831 starters.
Indiana Downs Quarter Horse Racing 2009 through 2013:
http://www.thejockeyclub.com/pdfs/eid/IndianaDownsQH.pdf
Hoosier Park Quarter Horse Racing 2009 through 2012:
http://www.thejockeyclub.com/pdfs/eid/HoosierParkQH.pdf
Update: March 31, 2014 - According to The Jockey Club press release issued today, "The prevalence of race-related fatal injury for the timeframe from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2013, was 1.91 per 1,000 starts. The data was based on analysis of 1,871,522 starts. For 2013, the prevalence of fatal injury per 1,000 starts was 1.90." A statistical summary of the last five years can be found at the following link: http://jockeyclub.com/pdfs/eid_5_year_tables.pdf.
Saturday, March 1, 2014
Administrative Rule of the Month - 71 IAC 14-2-1 Stallion Registration
Regular followers of the Indiana Breeder & Owner Protection, Inc. (IBOP) 'Administrative Rule of the Month' or anyone who has read our 'Letters to the Commission' and newsletters know of our concerns regarding the abuses of and the mistakes involved with the Indiana Horse Racing Commission's (IHRC) emergency rulemaking authority. We don't see many instances where true emergencies exist, yet in the history of the existence of the IHRC only one administrative rule has ever completed the more extensive and more scrutinized regular rulemaking process. And, in that lone case, our view was that the emergency rulemaking should have been used to correct an typographical error that significantly changed the meaning of the rule. (This rule became the subject of our 'Administrative Rule of the Month' for August, 2013. http://ibopindy.blogspot.com/2013/08/administrative-rule-of-month-71-iac-75.html)
So, there are times where the emergency rulemaking process does make much more sense. With that in mind, we made '71 IAC 14-2-1 Stallion registration' our 'Administrative Rule of the Month.' At their September, 17, 2013 meeting, the IHRC considered a change to this standardbred stallion registration rule to require that a stallion be registered before covering any mares. (A similar rule change was made to the thoroughbred stallion registration requirements in 2010.) Rather than copy the proposed rule change, which was a very minor change, we've copied the discussion on this change from the official transcript from that meeting. After reviewing the discussion, you'll understand the specifics of the change and maybe why it made sense to consider this rule change an emergency. The discussion, and the questions posed by Commissioner Barclay (now a former commissioner) to truly understand the implications, was one of the best examples we can find of a commissioner actually being engaged in the process. See if you agree, but make sure you read our final comments. The consideration of this emergency rule was item #7 on the agenda presented by Jessica Barnes, the IHRC's Director of Racing & Breed Development.
"CHAIRMAN DIENER: Number seven, Standardbred Breed Development.
JESSICA BARNES: In front of you you have a proposed emergency rule dealing with the registration of Indiana stallions. Under our current rule if a stallion comes in late to the state, so after our October 1st deadline, the stallion can be registered for the current season but may be registered up until July 15th so up until the close of the breeding season.
One of the things that we are finding is happening is mare owners are breeding to a new stallion that's in the state. And for some reason that stallion owner is forgetting to register the stallion so they are missing that July 15th deadline. And then after the July 15th deadline, there is no recourse for that stallion to be able to be registered. So somebody has bred their mare to a stallion in Indiana thinking it was registered with the Commission, and, in fact, it's not.
So this rule makes the clarification that the stallion has to be registered prior to covering any mares. So if a mare owner is breeding to a new stallion in Indiana, they have the opportunity to look on our website for our list, make a phone call to our office and say is that stallion registered and verify that that stallion was registered at that point in time to make sure that that stallion is Indiana eligible.
And in the old case if they call us, we can tell them, no, it's not registered, but they have up until July 15th. So the mare owner would breed to that stallion. And the stallion owner wouldn't fulfill their duty by July 15. And they would be out of luck.
This makes it cleaner for everyone. It protects the mare owner breeding to a stallion, as long as they have taken the proper steps to verify that the stallion is registered with the Commission.
And once again, it's an emergency rule because the registration deadline is October 1st. Any stallion registered after this deadline will fall under this new requirement. So what we will do once this rule is approved, is we will send a letter out to all of our stallion owners so they know that the stallion has to be registered prior to covering any mares that comes in late to the state.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: Questions of Jessica on the proposed change of stallions must be registered for the current breeding season? Is "current breeding season" a defined term that everyone knows what it is? In other words, I don't want to leave some ambiguity here.
JESSICA BARNES: I think it's defined -- there's actually two places it's defined. It's defined in B of this rule.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: February 15.
JESSICA BARNES: To July 15th.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: That's the same as the breeding season?
JESSICA BARNES: Yes.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: Okay. Questions from Commissioners about this proposed change to the Standardbred rules?
COMMISSIONER BARCLAY: What's the impact? So, say, the stallion is not registered. It's then bred. What happens to the mare?
JESSICA BARNES: The mare would actually have a foal that would not be eligible for Indiana programs. It would be eligible only to open races. It wouldn't be eligible to any of the breed development programs at all.
Under the rule change, this actually gives that mare owner a method to verify that that stallion is registered. So if they are going to breed their mare, that stallion has to be registered with us. Where in the past if somebody, if stallion owner A brought in a new stallion, and a mare owner called us up and said this stallion is new to the state, is it registered with the Commission, my answer would be, I would look it up and say, no, it's not registered, but technically they have until July 15th. So a lot of times that mare owner would breed their horse to the stallion with good faith that the stallion owner was going to fulfill what he needed to do.
Under this scenario, the mare owner when they call up and they say that, when I tell them, no, the stallion is not registered, then they know that it has to be registered before the mare is bred. Provides some protection to the mare owner.
COMMISSIONER BARCLAY: We're comfortable that the foal owner -- the stallion was in Indiana at that time that the breeding happened. We are comfortable that that foal is now ineligible for any Indiana bred purses in the future, even though they are able to establish the stallion was in the state of Indiana.
JESSICA BARNES: Yes. And there has actually been a couple of instances where stallions have not been registered on time, and we have denied them. They have actually appealed to the Breed Development Advisory Committee and the Standardbred Advisory Board because my approach has been if they're going to ask for an exception to a rule or a waiver of a rule, I would like to have the support of the breed development committee and the advisory board in bringing it forward to the Commission.
So there has been instances where a stallion was not properly registered. Somebody appealed to me. I actually took this in front of the advisory board and the breed development committee. And they have said, you know, this stallion owner didn't do their due diligence. They should have taken care of their paperwork. So they didn't think it was fair for somebody that did their due diligence and completed everything and got the registration in on time to allow a foal to be Indiana eligible that didn't fall under that scenario.
COMMISSIONER BARCLAY: I'm asking what if I'm the innocent purchaser of that foal, and I'm lead to believe that the stallion was in the state of Indiana, and I'm under the belief that I can race that horse in the state of Indiana for Indiana bred purses, what happens to me as the innocent purchaser of that foal who then learns it wasn't properly registered, and that the owner of the mare didn't confirm the registration?
JESSICA BARNES: The horse would be ineligible. I think that purchaser would have some recourse with the stallion owner or the mare owner that they purchased the foal from is who they would have to go back to.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: Go ahead, Joe.
JOE GORAJEC: I just want to piggyback on Jason's inquiry. The hypothetical that you just gave, is it based upon what's gone on in the past or what will go on in the future if this rule is approved?
COMMISSIONER BARCLAY: Either way. I want an explanation of what we've done in the past and understanding with this rule that was the implication.
JOE GORAJEC: Jessica, correct me if I'm wrong, what we've done in the past, as I think Jessica just mentioned, is that the innocent bystander who was lead to believe is out of luck. That's what's happened in the past. If this rule is passed, okay, that innocent bystander can't be as innocent as before because at the time she bred that horse, the stallion would have to have been registered. Okay. And she has, he or she would have had the opportunity to call, to look on the website and to verify that that stallion is indeed registered. So there won't be in the future, if the Commission approves this rule, quote the innocent bystander because that person would have had all the information available to them at the time of breeding.
JESSICA BARNES: The mare owner would still have a responsibility to check and verify that the stallion is registered.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: Further questions from the Commissioners? Can you represent the Standardbred Breed Development Committee supports this change?
JESSICA BARNES: Actually, the Standardbred Breed Development and Standardbred Advisory Board supports this.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: Thank you. I am ready for a vote. This is an emergency rule because of.
JESSICA BARNES: Because the deadline is October 1st. So any stallion registered after that deadline will fall under this. And just trying to provide, trying to close that gap for people if it's not approved now, it will be a whole other year.
COMMISSIONER SCHAEFER: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BARCLAY: Second.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: All in favor?
THE COMMISSION: "Aye."
CHAIRMAN DIENER: Amended rule passes as an emergency rule."
Well, do you agree that considering this administrative rule change on an emergency basis was the right move? We do. Do you agree that there are significant implications (love the "innocent bystander" term) if the change in the rule was not made and that the commissioners understood what those were? We do. Would you believe that the IHRC staff never filed this commission-approved rule change with the Indiana Register? We do.
In order for a rule to become effective, not only is a majority vote of the commissioners required, but the rule has to be filed with the Indiana Register. So, after all the importance, after all the urgency for an October 1st registration deadline, the IHRC staff never filed the rule. Yet, all other emergency rule changes approved by the IHRC that day were filed, most of them on October 3rd. Even as of today, '71 IAC 14-2-1 Stallion registration' remains unchanged, and can be found at the following link: http://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/T00710/A00140.PDF?.
We've notified Chairman Diener of this issue as past history tells us that the IHRC staff attempts to hide their mistakes and the individual commissioners are too disengaged from what should be their responsibility to 'inspect what they expect.' If we get a response, we'll let you know.
March 7, 2014 Update: While we didn't get a direct response from Chairman Diener about the most recent staff oversight, the standardbred stallion registration rule was filed with the Indiana Register on March 3rd which was almost six month after the commissioners approved this "emergency." The emergency rule filed with the Indiana Register, including how the rule was changed, can be seen at the following link: http://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/20140305-IR-071140066ERA.xml.html.
With the administrative rule now being effective as of March 3rd, the IHRC has now created two sets of registration rules for the 2014 breeding season. The issue that this rule was designed to eliminate, which was stallions covering mares prior to their registration or ultimately not being registered at all, has not been solved. If any standardbred stallion is registered late, they would more than likely rely on the IHRC's website and stallion registration form which don't indicate there has been a change in the registration requirements. Here's the Indiana Stallion Registration page: http://www.in.gov/hrc/2359.htm and here is the actual registration form, take a look at the second page: http://www.in.gov/hrc/files/2014_Stallion_Reg_Form.pdf.
So, there are times where the emergency rulemaking process does make much more sense. With that in mind, we made '71 IAC 14-2-1 Stallion registration' our 'Administrative Rule of the Month.' At their September, 17, 2013 meeting, the IHRC considered a change to this standardbred stallion registration rule to require that a stallion be registered before covering any mares. (A similar rule change was made to the thoroughbred stallion registration requirements in 2010.) Rather than copy the proposed rule change, which was a very minor change, we've copied the discussion on this change from the official transcript from that meeting. After reviewing the discussion, you'll understand the specifics of the change and maybe why it made sense to consider this rule change an emergency. The discussion, and the questions posed by Commissioner Barclay (now a former commissioner) to truly understand the implications, was one of the best examples we can find of a commissioner actually being engaged in the process. See if you agree, but make sure you read our final comments. The consideration of this emergency rule was item #7 on the agenda presented by Jessica Barnes, the IHRC's Director of Racing & Breed Development.
"CHAIRMAN DIENER: Number seven, Standardbred Breed Development.
JESSICA BARNES: In front of you you have a proposed emergency rule dealing with the registration of Indiana stallions. Under our current rule if a stallion comes in late to the state, so after our October 1st deadline, the stallion can be registered for the current season but may be registered up until July 15th so up until the close of the breeding season.
One of the things that we are finding is happening is mare owners are breeding to a new stallion that's in the state. And for some reason that stallion owner is forgetting to register the stallion so they are missing that July 15th deadline. And then after the July 15th deadline, there is no recourse for that stallion to be able to be registered. So somebody has bred their mare to a stallion in Indiana thinking it was registered with the Commission, and, in fact, it's not.
So this rule makes the clarification that the stallion has to be registered prior to covering any mares. So if a mare owner is breeding to a new stallion in Indiana, they have the opportunity to look on our website for our list, make a phone call to our office and say is that stallion registered and verify that that stallion was registered at that point in time to make sure that that stallion is Indiana eligible.
And in the old case if they call us, we can tell them, no, it's not registered, but they have up until July 15th. So the mare owner would breed to that stallion. And the stallion owner wouldn't fulfill their duty by July 15. And they would be out of luck.
This makes it cleaner for everyone. It protects the mare owner breeding to a stallion, as long as they have taken the proper steps to verify that the stallion is registered with the Commission.
And once again, it's an emergency rule because the registration deadline is October 1st. Any stallion registered after this deadline will fall under this new requirement. So what we will do once this rule is approved, is we will send a letter out to all of our stallion owners so they know that the stallion has to be registered prior to covering any mares that comes in late to the state.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: Questions of Jessica on the proposed change of stallions must be registered for the current breeding season? Is "current breeding season" a defined term that everyone knows what it is? In other words, I don't want to leave some ambiguity here.
JESSICA BARNES: I think it's defined -- there's actually two places it's defined. It's defined in B of this rule.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: February 15.
JESSICA BARNES: To July 15th.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: That's the same as the breeding season?
JESSICA BARNES: Yes.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: Okay. Questions from Commissioners about this proposed change to the Standardbred rules?
COMMISSIONER BARCLAY: What's the impact? So, say, the stallion is not registered. It's then bred. What happens to the mare?
JESSICA BARNES: The mare would actually have a foal that would not be eligible for Indiana programs. It would be eligible only to open races. It wouldn't be eligible to any of the breed development programs at all.
Under the rule change, this actually gives that mare owner a method to verify that that stallion is registered. So if they are going to breed their mare, that stallion has to be registered with us. Where in the past if somebody, if stallion owner A brought in a new stallion, and a mare owner called us up and said this stallion is new to the state, is it registered with the Commission, my answer would be, I would look it up and say, no, it's not registered, but technically they have until July 15th. So a lot of times that mare owner would breed their horse to the stallion with good faith that the stallion owner was going to fulfill what he needed to do.
Under this scenario, the mare owner when they call up and they say that, when I tell them, no, the stallion is not registered, then they know that it has to be registered before the mare is bred. Provides some protection to the mare owner.
COMMISSIONER BARCLAY: We're comfortable that the foal owner -- the stallion was in Indiana at that time that the breeding happened. We are comfortable that that foal is now ineligible for any Indiana bred purses in the future, even though they are able to establish the stallion was in the state of Indiana.
JESSICA BARNES: Yes. And there has actually been a couple of instances where stallions have not been registered on time, and we have denied them. They have actually appealed to the Breed Development Advisory Committee and the Standardbred Advisory Board because my approach has been if they're going to ask for an exception to a rule or a waiver of a rule, I would like to have the support of the breed development committee and the advisory board in bringing it forward to the Commission.
So there has been instances where a stallion was not properly registered. Somebody appealed to me. I actually took this in front of the advisory board and the breed development committee. And they have said, you know, this stallion owner didn't do their due diligence. They should have taken care of their paperwork. So they didn't think it was fair for somebody that did their due diligence and completed everything and got the registration in on time to allow a foal to be Indiana eligible that didn't fall under that scenario.
COMMISSIONER BARCLAY: I'm asking what if I'm the innocent purchaser of that foal, and I'm lead to believe that the stallion was in the state of Indiana, and I'm under the belief that I can race that horse in the state of Indiana for Indiana bred purses, what happens to me as the innocent purchaser of that foal who then learns it wasn't properly registered, and that the owner of the mare didn't confirm the registration?
JESSICA BARNES: The horse would be ineligible. I think that purchaser would have some recourse with the stallion owner or the mare owner that they purchased the foal from is who they would have to go back to.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: Go ahead, Joe.
JOE GORAJEC: I just want to piggyback on Jason's inquiry. The hypothetical that you just gave, is it based upon what's gone on in the past or what will go on in the future if this rule is approved?
COMMISSIONER BARCLAY: Either way. I want an explanation of what we've done in the past and understanding with this rule that was the implication.
JOE GORAJEC: Jessica, correct me if I'm wrong, what we've done in the past, as I think Jessica just mentioned, is that the innocent bystander who was lead to believe is out of luck. That's what's happened in the past. If this rule is passed, okay, that innocent bystander can't be as innocent as before because at the time she bred that horse, the stallion would have to have been registered. Okay. And she has, he or she would have had the opportunity to call, to look on the website and to verify that that stallion is indeed registered. So there won't be in the future, if the Commission approves this rule, quote the innocent bystander because that person would have had all the information available to them at the time of breeding.
JESSICA BARNES: The mare owner would still have a responsibility to check and verify that the stallion is registered.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: Further questions from the Commissioners? Can you represent the Standardbred Breed Development Committee supports this change?
JESSICA BARNES: Actually, the Standardbred Breed Development and Standardbred Advisory Board supports this.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: Thank you. I am ready for a vote. This is an emergency rule because of.
JESSICA BARNES: Because the deadline is October 1st. So any stallion registered after that deadline will fall under this. And just trying to provide, trying to close that gap for people if it's not approved now, it will be a whole other year.
COMMISSIONER SCHAEFER: So moved.
COMMISSIONER BARCLAY: Second.
CHAIRMAN DIENER: All in favor?
THE COMMISSION: "Aye."
CHAIRMAN DIENER: Amended rule passes as an emergency rule."
Well, do you agree that considering this administrative rule change on an emergency basis was the right move? We do. Do you agree that there are significant implications (love the "innocent bystander" term) if the change in the rule was not made and that the commissioners understood what those were? We do. Would you believe that the IHRC staff never filed this commission-approved rule change with the Indiana Register? We do.
In order for a rule to become effective, not only is a majority vote of the commissioners required, but the rule has to be filed with the Indiana Register. So, after all the importance, after all the urgency for an October 1st registration deadline, the IHRC staff never filed the rule. Yet, all other emergency rule changes approved by the IHRC that day were filed, most of them on October 3rd. Even as of today, '71 IAC 14-2-1 Stallion registration' remains unchanged, and can be found at the following link: http://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/T00710/A00140.PDF?.
We've notified Chairman Diener of this issue as past history tells us that the IHRC staff attempts to hide their mistakes and the individual commissioners are too disengaged from what should be their responsibility to 'inspect what they expect.' If we get a response, we'll let you know.
March 7, 2014 Update: While we didn't get a direct response from Chairman Diener about the most recent staff oversight, the standardbred stallion registration rule was filed with the Indiana Register on March 3rd which was almost six month after the commissioners approved this "emergency." The emergency rule filed with the Indiana Register, including how the rule was changed, can be seen at the following link: http://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/20140305-IR-071140066ERA.xml.html.
With the administrative rule now being effective as of March 3rd, the IHRC has now created two sets of registration rules for the 2014 breeding season. The issue that this rule was designed to eliminate, which was stallions covering mares prior to their registration or ultimately not being registered at all, has not been solved. If any standardbred stallion is registered late, they would more than likely rely on the IHRC's website and stallion registration form which don't indicate there has been a change in the registration requirements. Here's the Indiana Stallion Registration page: http://www.in.gov/hrc/2359.htm and here is the actual registration form, take a look at the second page: http://www.in.gov/hrc/files/2014_Stallion_Reg_Form.pdf.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)