California Horse Racing Board decision poses danger to all trainers

The racing industry has been taking a long look at ways to improve safety for horses and riders. In an attempt to reduce injuries, racing associations have spent millions of dollars on synthetic surfaces. Additional millions have been spent at UC Davis reviewing and analyzing injuries.But the search for safety may now have gone too far and it may be turning into a witch hunt. During the past few months, the CHRB has accused three trainers of violating CHRB regulation 1902.5:

Edward I. Halpern, CTT Exec (
08 April 2009 - Issue number 12)

No need for a rain dance in March after significantly wet February

The month of February has brought a significant amount of rain to Northern California. It is inconvenient, but this year it is sure needed. In years past, rain would have meant sealed racetracks, fortunately, that is no longer the case. That change came as a result of the Tapeta track at Golden Gate Fields.
Charles E. Dougherty, Jr. CTT Deputy Director
 (08 April 2009 - I2)

CTT - The Changing Face of Racing Part 2

Are any of us old enough to remember a time when the training of Thoroughbreds was about providing enough care and enough exercise to obtain optimal performance? I suppose such a time existed, but not in recent memory. Hands on therapy and horsemanship have been replaced by fast acting and less labor intensive drugs and medications. By way of example, in the last decade we have seen the elimination of equipment such as the whirlpool tub. The whirlpool was as simple as a trash can that was attached to the exhaust end of a vacuum cleaner and then filled with ice and water. It was an effective technique in dealing with knee, ankle, and foot problems. Massaging legs has also become a practice of the past. Those techniques are no longer attractive alternatives to fast acting and comparatively inexpensive anti-inflammatory drugs and analgesics. I think back also to a time when respiratory problems where handled by a change in bedding, time in an outdoor pen, and adjustments in feeding procedures and feed products. Those days have given way to easier and more effective bronchodilators such as Albuterol and Clenbuterol. Those are just a few examples of the changing nature of the role of the trainer. I am not so naïve as to believe the old methods were more effective. But I am convinced that the change to a dependence on drugs has been a considerable factor in shortening racing careers, increasing expenses, and damaging the sport.

The demands of time and labor and competition, along with the efficacy of modern drugs have driven us away from patience as a training technique and pulled us into the world of pharmaceuticals. Unfortunately, the medicine cabinet of the barn area has morphed from its intended role into a cornucopia of performance enhancing alternatives. There has been no middle ground. We are all victims of what author Kevin Phillips calls “the inherent vulnerability of human nature exposed to pecuniary temptation.” As more and more trainers were seized by the gravitational pull of easier victories, new owners, and greater income, more and more trainers were enticed or, in most cases, forced into using alternatives they didn’t prefer. If a trainer wants to compete and wants to attract new owner-clients, he or she is left with little choice but to take the medical route; some trainers more so and some less so. Some trainers use the kitchen sink approach and give horses everything in the medicine cabinet, while others prefer not to administer anything unless they are certain of the therapeutic necessity. Success in racing favors those who lean towards the former approach.

The legal use of approved substances is not a moral failing. It is neither immoral nor unethical for the trainer, the veterinarian, or the owner to use, prescribe, or condone the use of therapeutic medications. If an allowable threshold level is 10 picograms, then there is no wrongdoing in seeking a level of 9.99. By setting thresholds, it is the regulators who have dictated what is acceptable and what is not. The regulators’ mistake has been in believing that their edicts regarding medications would allow the use of therapeutic medications while not creating performance enhancement. They were clearly wrong. Their mistake was using a standard that said the substance should not allow the horse to run beyond its natural ability. Stated differently, it was assumed that performance enhancement could be determined by testing for the detectable level of certain drugs and medications when they were present on race day. It was assumed that if there was a certain level of given substances there was performance enhancement. If there was no detectable level, it was assumed there was no enhancement. Both propositions were incorrect as shown by our everyday experience with Clenbuterol. Does anyone doubt that given the same conditions the following will happen? Take two horses of equal ability and physical condition, and give one the standard dose of Clenbuterol for fifty-seven days and give none to the other. Then race them against each other on the sixtieth day. The horse that has been on Clenbuterol will win. Frankly, I don’t know if scientists would agree, but I’m certain almost all trainers would. 

If preventing performance enhancement is the goal, the standard should be that the substance should not allow the horse to run beyond its natural ability given its pre-administration physical condition. An exception could be made for substances that do no harm to the horse and do not have an effect on the betting public. (Under such a rule, a horse would be allowed to run on Salix, but not with the aid of corticosteroids.) Unfortunately, assessing harm to the horse or the betting public is difficult, if not impossible. Therefore, some make the argument for a total ban on medications. New rules are coming and they are certain to limit and/or ban the use of some medications. Like it or not, we have entered a new phase of regulation.

The Racing Medication and Testing Consortium (RMTC) has instigated major changes in drug classification and penalty rules. It has spearheaded the move to control steroids. It is about to attack the issues of corticosteroids, and there are rumblings of new limits on Clenbuterol. Although it has not yet been discussed at the RMTC, it is theoretically possible that a ban on NSAID’s is next. The movement has started, and the times they are a-changin’.     

 
On board with the California Thoroughbred Trainers

By Ed Golden, Turf writer

Arguing religion and politics can erode the best of friendships. Debating sports can lead to divisiveness among the bosomest of buddies, too. Fortunately for Jim Cassidy and Mike Smith, their allegiance to the New York Yankees and the New York Mets hasn’t compromised the success they’ve enjoyed together on the racetrack. 

    
Cassidy, a native of the Bronx, has been a lifelong Yankee fan, while Smith, born in Roswell, New Mexico, became a loyal Mets’ supporter while earning 15 riding championships on the New York circuit during a tour that began in 1989.

When Smith moved permanently to Southern California in 2007, after an earlier hitch in 2001, he joined forces with Cassidy and, baseball fidelity aside, it’s been a match made in heaven on the track, where they have won a plethora of stakes races together.

Cassidy, 63, like Smith, was weaned in horsemanship on the East Coast, working for among others the legendary Frank Whiteley, trainer of iconic champions Damascus and Ruffian, before coming to California in 1981. His stint in New York included nine years as an aide to veterinarian Jim Prendergast.
Other Cassidy tutors back east included trainers Joe Cantey and Charles Sanborn. In California, Cassidy learned the ropes as an assistant to Gerry Moerman, Darrell Vienna, and the late Brian Mayberry. Flying solo as a trainer since the mid 1990s, Cassidy currently is president of the California Thoroughbred Trainers (CTT), a relatively new organization devoted to “Horsemen Helping Horsemen.”

“I was voted in over a year ago, and it’s an absolutely worthwhile organization that’s a vital component of the horse racing industry,” said Cassidy, whose board members include trainers William Anton, Tim Bellasis, Jack Carava, Eoin Harty, Gloria Haley, Dan Hendricks, Cliff Sise, Jr., Howard Zucker, and retired 97-year-old trainer Noble Threewitt. “I’m hoping we can do things on this new board that haven’t been done before. Our goal is to help enhance racing in California and act as a buffer between the TOC (Thoroughbred Owners of California), the California Horse Racing Board, and management. Right now, we’re working on increasing the CTT’s presence and improving our effectiveness within the industry.”

Cassidy’s demeanor is one of leisure, but his core is impregnable, thanks in large part to Whiteley.
“He was tough as nails,” Cassidy remembered. “I was working for Prendergast when I first met him, and we did all his (veterinary) work. Whiteley used to call the vet ‘The Butcher’ and me ‘Butcher, Jr.’ I was there through the Ruffian years (1974-75) and it turned out to be very sad years (she was euthanized after breaking down in a match race against Foolish Pleasure in 1975).”

Fellow Irishman Harty, who says,“I joined the CTT for the betterment of racing and its personnel,” believes Cassidy is a good fit as CTT president.

“I know from being around him at the board sessions that he’s very opinionated, very forceful,” Harty said. “He seems to have the interest of the horsemen at heart, which is a good thing. You need somebody like that. He’s very passionate about what he does and has a strong sense of what’s right and wrong.”

Other board members have made significant contributions, among them trainer Howard Zucker.

“My objective has always been to speak for the horses, because no one can speak for their safety,” he said. “I’ve been head of our track safety committee for more than eight years, seeking improved conditions for our backstretch help and making sure our hospital and our benevolent programs run well. Mr. (Ed) Halpern has been a fabulous executive director helping on the workmen’s comp situation. We went through that crisis and remedied that problem. We try to offer our input in meetings with the TOC so that, in general, we can mutually benefit. Owners and trainers are on the same page, working for the same goals. We were responsible for bringing changes in our surfaces, and, hopefully, have made them much safer than they were.”

Said trainer and board member Dan Hendricks: “We’ll try to maintain positive thinking about our future. We want to be involved in many of the decisions and will try to make improvements we hope will benefit racing.”
Trainer Jack Carava, a relative newcomer, has similar objectives. “I’ve only been involved a short time, so I haven’t had a lot of long-term goals, but I’d like to maintain the goals that have been on the table since I got here,” he said.

“The reason I became a member of the board and vice president in Northern California was to try and bring management, trainers, and the TOC together,” said Bill Anton. “We’re like three spokes in a wheel. If one breaks, we all go down. Communication and cooperation between the three entities will make things better. These are very trying economic times, not only for racing, but every business, so we must be prudent and not selfish, otherwise, we’ll all be looking for a job.”

Tim Bellasis has become pro-active. “I didn’t like the way things were going,” he said in explaining why he became a board member. “I’m pretty vocal about what I think is right and wrong. I was unhappy with the purse structure up North. I thought the fairs were telling cheaper horses they were unwelcome. I thought it was time to get off the stick and do something about it.”

Participation in a Northern California committee to gain TOC voting rights in 2007 inspired Haley to seek a CTT directorship. “I want to see a continued dialogue among TOC, CTT, and the rest of the industry create a unified force to further our sport,” she said. “I’m concerned about the safety of the horses and the condition of the tracks. I’m also in support of horse rehabilitation and retirement organizations.”

As a new Director, Cliff Sise, Jr. wants to see the continued growth of CTT’s strength as an organization. “There are issues that require the CTT to make a stand on behalf of the membership, and I want to ensure that that action is taken.”

Cassidy, who moved to California in 1981 when Sanborn became ill, has made his mark in the Golden State with fillies and mares. His most recent stakes winner is Dancing Diva, who captured the Grade II CashCall Mile by a nose at Hollywood Park last July 5.

“She’ll be pointed to a race at the autumn Hollywood Park meet and then run at the Santa Anita winter meet,” Cassidy said. “I’m skipping the Breeders’ Cup. It’s true that my career has been dominated by good fillies (he won his first Grade I stakes with English import Ticker Tape in the 2004 American Oaks at Hollywood; later that year she won the Grade I Queen Elizabeth Challenge Cup at Keeneland).”

Other female stakes winners trained by Cassidy include Katdogawn (another English import), who won three Grade II races on turf in 2004; yet another English import, Singhalese, who won the Grade I Del Mark Oaks in 2005; and Passified, who last year won the Flawlessy Stakes and the San Clemente Handicap, each time with Smith aboard. In 2006, Moscow Burning, a six-year-old mare, became the career earnings leader for California-bred females, passing Fran’s Valentine with earnings of more than $1.4 million. Moscow Burning was claimed for $25,000 in 2003.

That’s not to say Cassidy doesn’t have a way with colts.

“We’ve had a few decent ones, like Milk It Mick (winner of the Grade I Kilroe Mile in 2006), Ocean Sound (third in the 2002 Blue Grass) and Golden Balls (2007 La Puente Stakes winner),” Cassidy said. “A few of those turned out to be OK, but the fillies have been sensational.”

The same can’t be said this year about his beloved Yankees. The Bronx Bombers, despite Major League baseball’s highest payroll, languished behind upstart Tampa Bay and defending champion Boston almost all season, and missed the American League playoffs for the first time since 1993. Cassidy is on good terms with former Yankee manager Joe Torre, himself a horse owner, who now manages the Los Angeles Dodgers.
“This season has been disappointing,” Cassidy said, “because I love the Yankees fiercely. I check the scores 20 times a day. I’ve talked with Torre a couple times and I did see him with (trainer Bobby) Frankel one day and we talked. I wished him good luck (with the Dodgers), but said I was never going to switch allegiance, and he understood. There was no chance I would switch to the Dodgers.”

Smith, whose Mets won the National League East title this year after blowing a 7 ½ game lead with 17 games remaining in 2007 to give the crown to the Phillies, reserves his jibes at Cassidy and the Yanks. Business, after all, is business.

“We’ve had really good success and really work well together,” Smith said. “Jim’s the type of guy who wants you to be part of the team. He listens to what you have to say and he’s willing to try things if you think they might work.

“Riding for him puts no pressure on you. He makes you feel like the horse is yours, too, and you’re going out there doing the best you can and he’s going to be OK with whatever the outcome is. If something happens, you explain it and he understands it. He’s a great horseman and a great friend, too. We go out and eat dinner a lot and have a great relationship together.”

That doesn’t mean Smith won’t take an opportunity to take a shot at the Yankees’ fall from grace.

“He’s a Yankee fan,” Smith said. “That’s his only vice, and I’m a Mets’ fan, so we argue about that. We get together on Sunday and have dinner and talk about what happened during the week and what the future holds and we always have a good time.”

Baseball and socializing aside, Cassidy has a realistic approach on racing’s future.

“To a large extent, it looks bleak, with the economy and all,” Cassidy said. “The sales are down in most places, but there are some positive signs. People have become more aware of what the public wants. There’s a big push against medications, which is really good. (Synthetic) tracks are a lot safer. Horses shouldn’t have catastrophic injuries that we’ve had in the past, so I see a lot of pluses.

“I know the overall picture looked dismal to a certain extent, but I look forward to the future. If the right minds get together and can stay on track, I believe we can make a big improvement.”

Edward I. Halpern, CTT Exec - (14 October 2008 - Issue Number: 10)

Eoin Harty - profile of the former assistant to Bob Baffert

Therewas always an air of levity at Bob Baffert's barn when Eoin Harty worked there. Not that the game they played wasn't serious. It was. Preparing 1,000-pound equine athletes with spindly legs to perform at their peak on the world's stage is not a job for anyone in short pants.

During the seven years Harty was Baffert's assistant, they won the Kentucky Derby twice–with Silver Charm in 1997 and Real Quiet in 1998–and missed by a heart-breaking nose with Cavonnier in 1996. But in between the regimented tedium, there was always time for a good hoot. Fact is, it was and still is part of Baffert's DNA.
"He's got a sense of humor," Baffert said of Harty. "He has a good disposition and we liked to have a lot of fun, so he fit in well."

But work came first, and Harty had his priorities in order. His foundation was ingrained. Lean and sinewy with chiseled features, Harty hails from a family of Irish horsemen that extends back at least five generations. His grandfather, great grandfather, and great-great grandfather were trainers in their native Ireland. Eoin (pronounced Owen) began to hone his craft under the learned wing of the late John Russell before joining with Baffert, who saw a master in the making.

"Eoin showed up every day," Baffert recalled. "He works hard and he's passionate about what he does, and I like that in all my assistants. He made sacrifices that have to be made in this business. He loves what he does."

Not that Harty doesn't have a touch of rebel in him. In fact, it was his streak of independence and his flair for adventure that brought him to America, not loyalty to convention. His sense of humor, indigenous to the Irish, helped, too. Asked how his clan developed their wit, Harty said it was "a case of poverty and depravation." Still, it was not mandated that he follow in his forebearers' footsteps.

"No, it was not pre-ordained that I would train horses," Harty said. "I left high school and came over here. I can't say I graduated; my time in high school was up, so that's why I ended up here. There was nothing going on in Ireland. Jobs were really hard to find. It was pretty much a third-world economy at the time, and America's the land of opportunity."

Following one year working for the Irish National Stud, Harty came to the United States at the age of 17.
"I had always worked around horses as a kid, so when I came here in 1981, I got a job at the track and worked for John Russell for a long time," Harty said. "He was winding down and Bob was starting up and I was lucky enough to get a job.

"I learned common horsemanship and basic training methods. Both were very good trainers, just different. John trained a lot of European grass horses and was kind of old school. Bob was more into developing 2-year-olds and 3-year-olds. They had different philosophies."

Harty struck out on his own in 2000 and was hired by Godolphin to take over the Darley Stud Management arm of Sheikh Mohammed al Maktoum's racing empire, with emphasis on developing young runners, an undertaking termed Godolphin's "American project."

In his second full season, he saddled Tempera to win the 2001 Breeders' Cup Juvenile Fillies. She earned an Eclipse Award for her achievement, but in 2002 was euthanized due to colitis and laminitis. Training her was a challenge.

"We tried to work together on Tempera," recalled David Flores, who rode her in the Juvenile Fillies. "She was not an easy filly and Eoin did a great job getting her to settle down, because she was one that wanted to run off. She was kind of flighty, but he got her to relax. I was so pleased when she was ready to go to the Breeders' Cup, and it was mainly due to Eoin's perseverance."

Now, if the fates allow, the clock of destiny will click Harty towards the Kentucky Derby on May 3, thanks to a robust 3-year-old named Colonel John, one of 25 horses Harty has in training at Santa Anita. A bay son of two-time Horse of the Year Tiznow owned by the Versailles, Kentucky-based WinStar Farm of Kenny Troutt and Bill Casner, Colonel John was preparing for the Santa Anita Derby at press time and was a leading Kentucky Derby contender. The colt looked like a million bucks in the post parade for the Sham Stakes on March 1 before winning that race, handing El Gato Malo his first defeat in the process.

In measured terms, Harty discussed the possibility of Colonel John capturing the Run for the Roses, a race in which Harty has never flown solo.

"I think Colonel John is good enough to run well, but I don't know if he's good enough to win," Harty said. "He's certainly good enough to show up and I feel pretty confident that he's a contender."

Winning the Derby would be a crowning achievement, of course, but not necessarily one that would perpetuate the Harty family custom to the next generation. Eddie, the 15-year-old son of Eoin and his wife, Kathleen, is not destined to be a horseman.

"Racing is a 24-7 business, with no days off, no vacations and no benefits," Harty said. "You have to love it and I wouldn't want him to do it unless he wanted to. I wouldn't push him. It's a tough life. There's got to be a better way to make a living."

Not that Eoin Harty is looking for one, especially if he wins the Kentucky Derby.

Then he can laugh all the way to the winner's circle.

26 June 2008 - Issue Number: 6

Taking Time to Review your Hiring Procedures

The Federal Government has stepped up enforcement and prosecution of EMPLOYERS who hire undocumented workers. Felony criminal prosecution and fines are being imposed for employers who cannot show they have taken the steps required in the hiring process.

If as an employer you have a perspective employee fill out the Form I-9 (U.S. Department of Homeland Security Employment Eligibility Verification form), and you examine the required documents, you will not be fined or prosecuted, even if it turns out that the documents were falsified and the employee turns out to be an undocumented alien. Of course, if you knew the worker was undocumented, you can still be fined or jailed.

Therefore, it is strongly recommended that you follow the procedures that are outlined below.

1. Have the employee complete Section One of the I-9 Form. He/she must sign the form. If the form is completed by someone other than the employee, that person must also sign;

2. You must complete and sign Section Two of the I-9 Form.  To do so, you must examine one document from List A, OR one from List B AND one from List C;

3. You must accept any document(s) from the List of Acceptable Documents presented by the individual which reasonably appear on their face to be genuine and to relate to the person presenting them. You may not specify which document(s) an employee must present;

4. You must retain the I-9 Form for three years after the date the person begins work or  one year after the person's employment is terminated, whichever is later; and

5. Upon request, provide Forms I-9 to authorized officers of the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Department of Labor, or the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration Related Unfair Employment Practices for inspection.
Another area of concern is "document abuse." This is the term used to describe unlawful practices by the employer related to verifying the employment eligibility of employees and discriminatory use of the I-9 form. An employer with four or more employees may be charged with unlawful discrimination for any of the following reasons - these practices should be avoided:

1. Improperly requesting that employees produce more documents than are required by the Form I-9.

2. Improperly requesting that employees produce a particular document such as a "green card," to establish identity or work eligibility.

3. Improperly rejecting documents that reasonably appear to be genuine and belong to the employee presenting them.

4. Improperly treating groups of applicants differently when completing Form I-9, such as requiring certain groups of employees that look or sound "foreign" to produce particular documents that the employer does not require other employees to produce.
Here are a few more tips that may be helpful

• Be certain you have complete I-9 forms 
 for all new hires, including U.S. Citizens.


• Make sure that all staff that process new 
 hires are trained to properly complete  
 the I-9 process and are trained to properly 
complete the I-9 form. Periodically interview staff to make sure they are properly processing new hires.   
Incomplete or improperly completed I-9   
forms will result in exposure to liability!


• Complete the forms at the same point in 
 the employment process for all employees 
 - after you have made the decision to hire 
 the person.


• The law does not require you to 
 photocopy documents. However, if you 
 wish to make photocopies, you must do 
 so for all employees, and you should 
 retain each photocopy with the Form I-9.


• Periodically review your I-9 procedures, especially prior to the employment of seasonal workers. Conduct occasional "spot checks" to ensure the procedures are being followed and the forms are being filled out correctly.


• Make sure your system is programmed to "flag" I-9's 90 days before the expiration date of any work authorization document!


• Periodically review your record retention practices. Be certain you keep I-9 forms on file for three years after the date of hire or for one year after termination of employment, whichever date is later.

Although following these suggestions does not guarantee that you will be protected against criminal or civil charges, it does minimize the possibility and will help to give you one less thing to worry about. If you would like more information on this subject, please contact me at the California Thoroughbred Trainers office.

Edward I. Halpern
  (14 February 2008 - Issue Number: 7)

News from North California - Saving Bay Meadows

The appeal by the “Save Bay Meadows” Committee was heard before the 1st District Court of Appeals on September 19. By all accounts, a decision is due by the Court before the end of the calendar year of 2007.

If successful, the citizens group will push that the Bay Meadows development be put to a vote by San Mateo residents as to whether they want the proposed project to move forward. If the appeal is denied, it basically ends any hope that Bay Meadows will not be developed in the near future. It seems almost certain that Bay Meadows Land Company would start their project in the fall of 2008.
 
After months of meetings and industry input, the CHRB awarded 2008 race dates for Northern California. In what seems to a certainty, Bay Meadows will hold its final thoroughbred race meet from February 6 through May 11. In addition, the San Mateo Fair will race from August 6-8. The CTT worked hard to get Bay Meadows to agree to stay open for stabling and training in the fall of 2008. There is a real possibility that construction could commence shortly after the finish of the San Mateo Fair. Bay Meadows management has agreed to work with the CTT in establishing training hours that will work to ensure the safety of both horse and human during any possible construction times.
 
The new Tapeta racing surface that was installed at Golden Gate Fields is being embraced by the trainers thus far. The first horse set foot on the surface on October 5. In fact, a horse even worked a half mile that first morning! The trainers seem to be extremely pleased and encouraged that the surface is kinder and safer for their horses. Michael Dickinson, the creator of Tapeta, has told trainers that his goal is to reduce the amount of injuries by 50 percent. Now, that is a worthy goal!
 
Golden Gate Fields management was clearly thrilled with the first three days of entries taken as they awaited the first race run on the Tapeta surface. The number of horses entered for the first 3 days averaged 8.5 per race in comparison to the average field size in Northern California this year of 6.9. The first race run on the surface was on opening day of the Golden Gate fall meet, and a flat mile race was clocked in a very respectable 1:38:1.
 
The fair circuit was finished for the year with the running of the Fresno Fair in early October. The management of the Fresno fair should be thanked as they spent considerable funds to install rubber bricks throughout the paddock area. The Stockton Fair has announced that they are in the process of securing funds to install a new turf course at their facility. If all plans go accordingly, the first turf race will be run at Stockton during their Fair of 2009.
 
Pleasanton is aggressively seeking funding to install a synthetic surface. Once Bay Meadows closes, the CTT is very hopeful that this facility will become the second barn area (besides GGF) in the Bay Area to accommodate the stabling needs for our horses. If all goes well, Pleasanton will have installed a new surface by the end of the fall of 2008. Good luck to them…

Charles E. Dougherty, Jr. CTT Deputy Director (First Published: 01 Dec 2007)

Northern California Report

As the summer fair racing circuit of 2007 starts to wind down, the anxiety as to what Northern California’s overall racing circuit will look like starts to grow. By all indications, Bay Meadows will not race after 2008.

While many horsemen held out hope that Bay Meadows would be spared of their development plans and continue to race, that scenario looks less likely each day. In fact, the Bay Meadows Land Company (BMLC) is telling the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) that they would only like to race until July of 2008. It is very disappointing that BMLC has taken this position, as they made such an issue of not originally being granted an exemption for the synthetic surface mandate. The CHRB granted the waiver, with BMLC now saying they can’t race past the summer months. Go figure! The CTT is very involved in negotiations in trying to get Bay Meadows to commit to a stabling program through the fall if they do not race after July of 2008.
 
There will be plenty of discussion surrounding the experiment of Vallejo and Santa Rosa running a combined meet this summer. Unfortunately, the handle figures did not increase, but rather decreased from previous years. Many on the circuit felt figures may have been different if Santa Rosa ran the first week of its meet without the carnival and then finished with its traditional fair meet the last two weeks. I’m sure that will be considered for next year.
 
After weeks of waiting for the City of Albany’s approval, the installation of the Tapeta racing surface at Golden Gate Fields (GGF) finally started on July 22. Horses were moved out to Vallejo, Pleasanton, and Bay Meadows during the construction time. The GGF management has set a tentative October 12 date as to when the horses can move back into the barn area. Besides the new racing surface, GGF is spending approximately $1 million to refurbish and paint all the stalls in the barn area. The areas between all the barns have been leveled off to improve drainage as well. In addition, the CTT is working closely with GGF to renovate its recreation hall for our backstretch workers.

Charles E. Dougherty, Jr. CTT Deputy Director
 (01 October 2007 )

California Horse Racing Board explain their drug testing procedures

>The rules of racing are intended to maintain a level playing field; any drug testing program is meant to monitor compliance to those rules. In reality, drug testing is a deterrent. For truly illicit activity where the intent is to take an unfair advantage (cheat), the current program in California is working well. But we know it isn’t perfect. We are always looking for holes in the system and ways to improve the program.

The CHRB began conducting out-of-competition testing as a routine part of their drug regulation program in mid-February. Blood doping agents are the targets of this testing. Specifically, these are epoetin (Epogen®, Procrit®, “EPO”) and darbepoetin (Aranesp®). These drugs are synthetic forms of the natural hormone erythropoietin; they all stimulate red blood cell production. These drugs are administered several days in advance of racing and will not be detected in post-race testing. Out-of-competition testing is the only way these drugs can be identified. This is the reason out of competition is critical in human sports testing. Other prohibited peptide hormones will be included in the testing protocol as those tests are brought on line. We will not be testing for routine therapeutic medications, but we will be specifically testing for the synthetic hemoglobin Oxyglobin®.

Horses are selected for out-of-competition testing by both random and non-random methods. Non-random methods will have specific objective criteria to identify a group of horses. For example, last fall horses nominated to the Cal Cup was the selection criteria. Trainers will not be targeted by non-random methods without cause. We have tried to make the program as unobtrusive as possible. This is a new program; we welcome constructive recommendations to make the sampling process easier for everyone. A key element to this program is unpredictability so we will not be able to restrict testing to any specific day or days.

The CHRB will be expanding its program of freezing routine, cleared samples for retroactive testing. Retroactive testing will involve testing random samples with new tests or selecting specific samples based on specific information. If an illicit drug is being used for which we did not have a test at the time the sample was analyzed, we now have the ability to go back and re-examine the sample with a new test.


We are also in the process of developing the anabolic steroid testing program. Currently, nandrolone (Durabolin®), boldenone (Equipoise®), stanazolol (Winstrol-V®), and testosterone are Class IV drugs and will be handled as category D penalties (warnings) under the new penalty guidelines. All other anabolic steroids are at least Class III violations. We will be asking trainers and veterinarians to assist us in developing withdrawal time information to avoid future problems. Within the next 12 months, anabolic steroids are expected to be regulated in most states. Congressman Whitfield of Kentucky has introduced federal legislation requiring a total prohibition as opposed to the proposed regulation state by state.

A new website should be of use to trainers and veterinarians. The RMTC is hosting a site for withdrawal time information around the country for cooperative jurisdictions. The site is www.rmtcnet.com; go to the Withdrawal Times box and follow the instructions. These are the best available estimates at this time for California and many other states. Not all drug withdrawal times are available, but additional information will be added in the future as it becomes available.

Horsemen need to be aware several drugs remain problematic:

Fluephenazine is a long-acting tranquilizer. Two separate fluphenazine (Prolixin®) positives are working through the process where the administration periods were purported to be 14 days and 16 days prior to racing. These administration dates are supported by the veterinarians’ confidential reports. Unfortunately, fluephenazine has been shown to be pharmacologically active for over a month and is a Class II violation, a serious offense. This should raise concern for any trainer or veterinarian when fluephenazine is being administered anywhere close to a race. A 30-day withdrawal time is recommended as a minimum until more research information becomes available. Be aware this drug is confirmed in the blood rather than urine because of its unique elimination characteristics.

Hydroxyzine is a very useful medication for chronic allergies, including urticaia (hives) and respiratory allergies. Hydroxyzine metabolizes to ceterizine, which is also a pharmacologically active drug.  Hydroxizine is administered orally and the last two positives have been in powdered formulations prepared by a veterinary compounding pharmacy. As with all oral medications administered by barn personnel, mistakes are easy to make. A single oral dose of 250mg clears in 96 hours, but we have seen 8 times this dose on some prescriptions. The trainers have claimed they stopped the medication at 5 days in two of the cases. A seven-day withdrawal time may not be adequate at high doses or when using compounded preparations.

Methocarbamol continues to be a problem. We had suspected these violations were coming from compounded injectable methocarbamol with inconsistently formulated strengths. That may be a factor, but the most common finding is oral administration along with a methocarbamol injection at 48 hours. Again, oral administration increases the chance for management error and can be expected to extend the delectability of the drug in post-race samples.

TCO2 is still occasionally a problem, but we believe some violations may be inadvertent. We advise trainers to minimize and closely monitor their pre-race medication schemes, keep your horse well hydrated, and never administer an imbalanced or excessive electrolyte load. A significant number of horses have been administered one or another paste formulation of vitamins and/or electrolytes within 24 hours of the race. Many of these paste vitamin/electrolyte preparations contain bicarbonate or other alkalizing agents. Some certainly have high electrolyte concentrations. Be aware that these products are not permitted on race day. Oddly, there is a glaring disparity between northern and southern California. There has been about twice the rate of violations in northern California as in southern California, which was not case prior to last summer. We do know the pre-race medication protocols are different between the north and south. Regardless, the pre-race testing TCO2 program has worked well to deter the race day use of alkalizing agents. We have had only one trainer exceed 39 mmls/l since the CHRB took over the program and he received a 15-day suspension for the violations. The warnings letters for over 36mmls/l has also worked well. Prior to this program, the rate of samples 36.0mmls/l or higher was 1.4%; the rate is now at 0.2%.

Methamphetamine is a great concern to every regulator and should be to every trainer. This is our most common Class I violation. These are most likely from human derived contamination by someone in the barn having a “meth” drug abuse problem. This is a surprisingly common and cheap drug. We do not believe there has been intent to drug any of the horses, but amphetamines cannot be tolerated in horse racing for obvious reasons. The lightest penalty for the trainer to date has been a 120-day suspension.

There are several developments of importance to trainers in the enforcement and hearing process. The CHRB has been willing to settle cases administratively if a trainer so desires. Any settlement has to be mutually acceptable to both parties. Whether to settle a complaint or go to hearing is entirely up to the licensee. All settlement agreements must be approved by the Board of Stewards or the Board. As CHRB policy, all settlements are publicly announced. The other change we are seeking is in the hearing process where Class I, II, & III violations would be heard first in front of a hearing officer or the Board of Stewards rather than the Office of Administrative Hearings. This requires legislative changes currently under consideration in Sacramento. Lastly, the new penalty guidelines will soon be finalized. The penalties are significant for Class I, II, & III violations, but the hearing officer or Board of Stewards must take into account mitigating factors from the licensee and aggravating from the state. The intention is to allow a fairer process for the trainer or any other licensee charged in the complaint.

Lastly, under the new penalty guidelines with NSAID violations (phenylbutazone, flunixin, ketoprofen), the trainer can elect to deal directly to the Official Veterinarian with a set penalty schedule or to go to the Board of Stewards for a formal hearing. All penalties in this category call for higher fines than have typically been issued under the current process. Fines are significantly higher for multiple violations and especially high levels of the NSAID’s.

The CHRB’s hope is that the programs we have established will protect the integrity of our racing, be fair to all horsemen, and reduce violations over time. The goal is for California to have the cleanest, fairest racing in the United States.

Rick M. Arthur, DVM, - (01 July 2007 - Issue Number: 4)

THE FUTURE OF RACING IN CALIFORNIA - A NEW SAGA

California is racing into the future, or maybe not. As of writing, there is turmoil and uncertainty as to how racing will develop in the immediate future. A long-term prognosis is even more uncertain. The California Legislature has placed a stranglehold on funding for the California Horse Racing Board.

The confirmation of one CHRB Commissioner is being threatened, while three other Commissioners are considering resigning in protest. In Northern California, Bay Meadows racetrack is refusing to commit to racing but refusing to provide information on when they will quit racing. Similarly in Southern California, Hollywood Park racetrack continues to operate, but has let it be known that the guillotine is poised to drop. The picture is confused, and the confusion is complicated because of a prior mandate that all tracks racing more than four consecutive weeks install synthetic surfaces before 2008.

Whether or not this all gets straightened out in the near future, and I suspect it will, it makes a fascinating story about racing, money, land speculation, personalities, and politics. The underlying theme of all this is the use of vast amounts of pension fund cash to purchase assets that are valuable for both their land value and their speculative value. The properties in question are possible beneficiaries of “mitigation funds” that may come from California Indian tribes. Stockbridge Capital, the owner of both Hollywood Park and Bay Meadows, invested pension fund money to buy what it saw as undervalued real estate. The plan was to close the tracks and reap the rewards of putting the land to its best use. Somewhere along the way the investor discovered there was a way to make a fortune in easy money while still holding the land for its continuing appreciation. A circumstance like this one is probably the derivation of the expression, “have your cake and eat it, too.”

THE REAL ESTATE ANGLE: 

The law requires that Indian tribes pay “mitigation” to industries affected because of decreases in revenue due to Indian gaming. Horse racing is clearly one of those industries. Stockbridge claims it is entitled to $25 million per year for each property it owns. That amount, in addition to what they can make off of racing, makes it worth while for them to keep their properties as racetracks. It’s a nice situation to be in, $50 million a year, with no work and no expenditure of effort. The Indian tribes aren’t falling for the deal. The days of buying Manhattan for beads are long gone. At a recent convention of Indian Gaming Tribes, the mere mention of the word “mitigation” brought an angry reaction from the crowd. “No mitigation, hell no, no mitigation” was the response. With the exception of the California Thoroughbred Breeders Association, every other segment of the industry recognizes the pie-in-the-sky nature of the demands of Stockbridge.

THE POLITICS: 

The Commissioners of the California Horse Racing Board are caught in a trap. They mandated installation of synthetic surfaces and Bay Meadows wants permission to race for some unspecified period without installing the surface. Golden Gate Fields planned to have a synthetic surface in this summer. Golden Gate management believed it deserved extra dates for meeting the mandate, and the majority of CHRB Board members believe they ought to have those extra dates if they comply with the mandate and have a safer surface. When Bay Meadows asked to be allowed to run for two years without a synthetic surface, the CHRB Board members said “no.” Terry Fancher, who is the Managing Partner of Stockbridge Capital Group, has spent what he calls a fortune for political contributions in Sacramento trying to “help racing.” One must assume he has, therefore, been able to make friends in the Legislature. Along comes State Senator Leland Yee, who represents the district in which Bay Meadows is located.  He attacks the CHRB members who voted to deny Bay Meadows the right to run without a synthetic surface. He introduces SR 14,  a resolution calling for the State Senate to ask for the resignation of CHRB Chairman Richard Shapiro. He also threatens to derail the confirmation of Commissioner John Amerman.  And the most recent twist architected by Senator Yee was to have the CHRB budget zeroed out, which could lead to the cessation of racing throughout the State. This story has the aura of the 1971 Roman Polanski film, “Chinatown.”  Racing is in the middle of a real life screenplay.

In reality, all Richard Shapiro has done is to be the most effective and constructive leader of the CHRB in the past two decades. He has made his chairmanship a full-time job, without remuneration. He has been the activist the industry has long needed. And he has worked tirelessly for the benefit of horsemen, for the control of drugs and medication, and for the safety of horses. Commissioner Amerman has improved the Board by bringing his wisdom, long-time knowledge of the industry, experience, and success to the table and supported the same programs as Commissioner Shapiro.

Senator Yee has a different agenda. He wants to use his political power to keep racing alive at Bay Meadows. Apparently, he doesn’t care about the fact that the ownership of Bay Meadows won’t make any commitment or agreement to race. He doesn’t care about the fact that the Bay Meadows management is willing to leave horsemen without any ability to plan for the future or to create alternative racing sites. And he certainly doesn’t care about the safety of the horses and the riders.  He says he wants to prevent people from losing their jobs. There will be no lost jobs. The jobs will move to the new venues. He just wants to keep them in San Mateo for a short period of time at the expense of the entire racing industry.

No doubt all this political posturing will pass and it may well have passed by the time this magazine reaches the reader.  One suspects that common sense will outpace political decadence. Sacramento politics often seems to encourage people to start with the most outrageous position one can take and back-off throughout the political process. None the less, the Leland Yee anti-CHRB campaign makes a juicy story. Unfortunately, it leaves a lot of wasted energy and anxiety in its wake. Senator Yee is either naively listening to a string of misinformation or is exhibiting callous disregard for the welfare of the 40,000 to 50,000 thousand people whose families are supported by the racing industry. One wonders how his sole purpose could be to get a few more days of racing at Bay Meadows in 2008.

Horsemen can be assured of one thing. The industry has put together contingency plans. Should Bay Meadows fail to race in 2008, the racetrack at Pleasanton is ready to step in and fill the void probably with a new synthetic surface, an expanded barn area, and improved fan facilities. The fairs are willing to realign their schedules to improve the quality of summer racing. The proposed schedule also includes a continuing series of turf racing opportunities. That is a first for Northern California and would be a considerable improvement over the current situation. It may just turn out that the death of Bay Meadows breathes new life into what has been a slow lingering decline in Northern California racing. If readers want to express any thoughts on this issue, a good place to start would be with a letter to Senator Leland Yee at State Capitol, Room 4048, Sacramento, CA 95814.  His telephone number is (916) 651-4008.  A copy should go to Senator Don Perata, State Capitol, Room 205, Sacramento, CA 95814.  (916) 651-4009.

Edward I. Halpern, CTT Exec - (01 July 2007 - Issue Number: 4)

Gregson Foundation Honors Joe & Barbara Harper

Twin Palms in Pasadena was jammed with 400 guests on April 23 to honor Joe and Barbara Harper of Del Mar at the annual Edwin J. Gregson Foundation benefit hosted by California Thoroughbred Trainers.

About $100,000 was raised for the foundation, which since its inception seven years ago, has raised close to $1 million specifically for educational purposes for backstretch workers and their families.


Following a video tribute and an introduction by Peter Tunney, Del Mar Thoroughbred Club officials Craig Fravel, executive vice president, and Tom Robbins, vice president-racing, spoke glowingly of the track’s long-time president, CEO, and general manager and wife Barbara.


The Harpers have long been viewed as the unofficial hosts and ambassadors of goodwill of the seven-week summer meet at the San Diego County coastal track.


For those in the racing industry who view Del Mar as a sort of summer camp, Joe and Barbara are perceived as its counselors.


CTT honored the Harpers for their outstanding leadership and countless charitable efforts to benefit those in need and for their many achievements and contributions to the horse racing industry.


Joe has donated his time as chairman of Winners Foundation, director of Grayson-Jockey Club Research Foundation, chairman of the advisory board of the UC Davis Center for Equine Health and a member of the advisory board of the University of Arizona Race Track Industry Program. Barbara has been busy with roles in numerous civic projects. 
Joe and Barbara have been married 43 years and are the parents of four daughters.

Joe, grandson of legendary Hollywood director Cecil B. de Mille, joined the track in 1977 and since taking over its leadership has orchestrated one of the biggest success stories in the sport.
“Joe is simply the best,” said Robbins. “His demeanor and style are perfect for the job.”
Fravel added, “Joe and Barbara both know the importance of putting on a good show.”


Harper took the microphone from his wife with his usual impeccable timing, deferring to her as the power behind the scenes and saying, “Thank you, Gracie.”
After several moments of roast-style humor, Harper turned serious and underscored the significance of the event and the late trainer after whom it was named.
“

Eddie Gregson was a guy I always went to, and he’d give it to me, right between the eyes,” said Harper appreciatively of the trainer’s no-holds-barred candor. “I wish there were more guys like him in the industry.”


One of the most fruitful programs in the foundation is a fund for scholarship grants that has enabled more than 60 individuals to attend college.
New grant recipients last year were Michael Ascanio, Bobby Ochoa, Lyssa Ortega, Francisco Rangel, Mayra Salmeron, Angel Solorzano, Luis Solorzano, and Daniel Valenzuela.


Noting the myriad problems plaguing the industry in recent years, Harper hoped the scholarship money would be well invested. “I hope some of you kids stick around to help us,” said Harper. “Our future is in your hands.”

Steve Schuelein (01 July 2007 - Issue Number: 4)  Posted 

Holiday Wishes

The New Year Brings New Benefits to California’s Trainers and Their Employees.

This edition brings news of two Christmas bonuses for trainers in California. The first is an accident and disability policy that will be provided without cost to trainers who are in the CHSA Workers’ Compensation Program. Trainers who are injured at the workplace are not covered by workers’ compensation because employers are routinely excluded from such coverage. Fortunately, because of the financial success of our program, we are about to announce a policy that will provide accident and disability coverage for trainers. This coverage will be at no cost to participants and will provide up to $500,000 in medical benefits and $200 in weekly wage loss indemnity for up to two years. It is anticipated that additional coverage will be available for a very small premium. We are hoping to announce the rollout of the program by January 1, 2008.

The second bonus is another increase in the amount contributed from each ADW wager to the CTT Backstretch Pension fund. The Plan was originally funded through a transfer of 1% of the purse pool. When the original ADW bill was passed in 2002, that amount was increased by an additional takeout from the ADW wagers. In 2006, that additional contribution equaled approximately $110,000 for the CTT Pension Fund. In the most recent version of ADW legislation, the Jockey Guild and the CTT were able to negotiate an additional .00295 percent of ADW bets that will be shared by the CTT Pension Fund, the CTHF, and the Jockey’s newly created pension fund. It is estimated that this could bring an additional $500,000 or more in revenue to the CTT Pension Fund annually. In summary, the CTT pension fund should now receive total contributions of approximately $2,300,000 per year. This fund, which benefits trainers and backstretch workers, is paid for in its entirety by the racing industry, and we continue to owe a debt of gratitude to all the racing associations and organizations that make this possible and that worked to attain the increased funding.
 
The message to trainers is, in order to qualify for maximum benefits at retirement, remember to sign up between February 2 and April 15 of each year. Also, encourage your eligible employees to sign up.
 
 It seems a New Year is not complete without a wish list, so here goes ours:
 
Lighter exercise riders
 
Heavier bettors
 
Old racing facilities that don’t close
 
New racing facilities that attract more fans
 
Faster training surfaces
Slower training surfaces
 
Whatever surfaces Bobby Frankel recommends
 
More protection for innocent trainers by the long-awaited final passage of the RMTC penalty guidelines that incorporate “mitigating circumstances” into the trainer-insurer rule
 
Legislators who are sympathetic to the needs of racing
 
A fair share of Advanced Deposit Wagering for purses
 
Stalls at the track where you wish to train
 
A never-ending supply of experienced grooms and hotwalkers
 
Condition books filled with the races you need at distances you need
 
A real cure for bowed tendons
 
A reasonably priced ulcer medication
 
Barns that don’t leak
 
Rail trips
 
More Gregson Foundation Scholarship applicants from Northern California
 
Increased California Thoroughbred Trainers Backstretch Pension Plan benefits
 
More television announcers like TVG’s Frank Lyons
 
AND a happy, healthy, and prosperous Holiday Season and New Year for all.

Edward I. Halpern, CTT Exec - ( 01 December 2007 - Issue Number: 6 )

Flunixin and Clenbuterol - changes in the CHRB rules

Two important amendments to CHRB rule 1844 became effective on October 20, 2007. The flunixin regulatory threshold was raised to 50ng/ml in blood form the previous 20ng/ml. This should have little impact in the day-to-day operation of most stables.

 A standard 500mg (10cc) IV dose at 24 hours seldom exceeds 20ng/ml in the average horse. The 50ng/ml level was established from administration studies with flunixin administered to 28 horses; all but a handful were thoroughbreds in race training at the track. The laboratory analysis was done by Dr. Scott D. Stanley at UC Davis and Dr. Rick Sams at Ohio State University. The results were statistically analyzed, and a flunixin level above 40ng/ml can be shown to be so improbable as to be unrealistic. The regulatory level was rounded up to 50ng/ml for California for simplicity and to add an additional margin of safety.
 
The second amendment to rule 1844 involves clenbuterol. The rule change gives the CHRB the ability to regulate clenbuterol in the blood as well as urine. The new regulation adds a 25 picograms/ml in blood threshold to the 5ng/ml threshold in urine. If either exceeds the threshold limit, there is a violation. This can have an impact on any trainer administering clenbuterol within 72 hours of race time. Administration of clenbuterol up to 72 hours at 5cc twice a day to the average-sized horse will not result in a violation in blood. We estimate between one-third to one-half of horses are at risk of exceeding 25 picograms/ml in blood from an administration at 48 hours and nearly 100% within 48 hours will results in a violation.  This is very different from the current clenbuterol level of 5ng/ml in urine, where a single dose within 48 hours could pass the post-race urine. That will no longer be the case.
 
Cobra Venom
 
All trainers should be familiar with CHRB rule 1867. The rule has been on the books for over 10 years and addresses prohibited practices. The rule specifically bans the possession of snake venom at CHRB facilities. The Kentucky equivalent to our rule was the basis for Patrick Biancone’s recent suspension. Biancone was suspended even though the cobra venom was found in a container marked as belonging to Biancone’s veterinarian, Dr. Stewart. Dr. Stewart’s container with the cobra venom was stored in a refrigerator in a tack room assigned to Biancone’s Kentucky stable. Biancone denied knowledge of the cobra venom, but was held responsible as it was found in his barn. Cobra venom has been used in the past by a number of trainers and veterinarians. Regardless, and so there is no question, California will be just as aggressive as Kentucky  in prosecuting any licensee found in possession of cobra venom or any other prohibited drug under rule 1867.  In addition to snake venom, erythropoietin (EPO) and darbepoietin (darb-EPO) are specifically identified in the rule.
 
In a somewhat related matter, the same Dr. Stewart from the Biancone cobra venom situation has a case pending in California for improper labeling of medications and practicing veterinary medicine at a CHRB facility without a CHRB license. This involves medication allegedly sent to California by Dr. Stewart related to Biancone’s salmeterol positive from January. Mr. Biancone was fined $10,000 and given a 15-day, stayed suspension, even though salmeterol is a Class III violation. Neither salmeterol administration nor salmeterol dispensing had been reported to the CHRB by his California veterinarians. Dr. Stewart is currently under suspension in California; his California case will be heard after the resolution of his Kentucky problems.
 
Law Change for Hearings of Class I, II, & III Violations
 
Governor Schwarzenegger has signed AB1616, which will change the way Class I, II, & III violations are adjudicated; the law is effective in January, 2008. The new law puts the hearing process back in the hands of the CHRB. For the last 8 years, a licensee could elect to go directly to the Office of Administrative Hearing (OAH) and bypass the CHRB with Class I, II, & III violations. OAH, especially in Southern California, often has a large backlog of cases and setting hearing dates has been problematic. Several CHRB cases have taken a year to get to hearing from the date of the violation. Both the CHRB and the licensee were forced into an expensive and slow process where no one benefits but the attorneys. Under 1616, there is an option of the hearing going before the stewards or an independent hearing officer. The CHRB envisions the hearings to take place at or near our racetracks to facilitate the process.  The goal is for the hearings to be scheduled, heard, and resolved much more quickly than is currently accomplished through OAH. 
 
Split Sample Procedures
 
A number of trainers have lost their opportunity to have their split samples tested under rule 1859.25 by not adhering to the deadlines expressly specified within the rule. Trainers need to take the deadlines in rule 1859.25 seriously if they intend to pursue a split sample analysis. There are two deadlines that must be met: The first is notifying the CHRB whether or not the owner or trainer wants a split sample analyzed. This must be done within 72 hours of the owner or trainer being notified of an adverse finding in the official sample. This is best done by notifying the Split Sample Custodian at the CHRB’s Sacramento office. That telephone number is 916-263-6050; the fax number is 916-263-6051. The notification needs to be accompanied by form CHRB-56 (Request to Release Evidence) and a check for $35 for handling and shipping expenses. The second deadline is completing arrangements with the split sample laboratory. There are nine (9) CHRB approved split sample laboratories. After the CHRB receives notification, the owner or trainer has five (5) days to finalize all arrangements with their chosen split sample laboratory. Each lab has somewhat different requirements to complete the process. This includes payment and any paperwork required by the laboratory. This is the licensee’s responsibility; it is not the CHRB’s.
 
The calculation of the deadlines gives the trainer more than adequate time to complete the process. The 72-hour (3-day) deadline to notify the CHRB of your decision to have a split sample analyzed begins the first working day after the licensee has been notified of the adverse finding and ends at the close of business on the third working day. For example, if you are notified on a Wednesday, the following Thursday, Friday, and Monday will constitute the 72 hours. If the CHRB has not been notified at the end of the workday on Monday, the licensee has missed the deadline. Similarly, with the above example and assuming the CHRB was notified on the Monday, the owner or trainer would have until the end of the following Monday to complete all arrangements with the chosen split sample laboratory. In the above example, the trainer would have 12 calendar days. This is more than enough time with any serious effort to meet the regulatory deadlines of 1859.25.
 
The Split Sample Custodian is willing to answer questions, but will not make the arrangements for you. The list of the nine (9) CHRB approved split sample laboratories is available through the Split Sample Custodian or the CHRB investigator handling the case. Keep in mind, most split sample labs are in earlier time zones than California. In addition, even though a lab is on the approved split sample laboratory list, it does not mean the laboratory can or will accept your sample. All racing laboratories experience workload constraints from time to time. This is especially true in the summer. In addition, the CHRB split sample laboratory contract requires that the lab can only accept a sample if they have the procedures and capability to confirm the target drug or medication at or below the level reported by the CHRB’s official laboratory. If they do not have that capability, they must decline the sample.
 
 
One other issue causes some confusion. The split sample is the property of the CHRB; it is not the property of the owner or trainer. In addition, the CHRB is the recipient of all reports generated by the split sample laboratory on any sample sent from the CHRB. Who pays for the analysis does not alter this. The owner or trainer requesting the split sample analysis will receive copies of all documents generated by the split sample lab. Nothing is hidden. Please be aware some labs will have additional charges for any report or documentation beyond the standard one- or two-page report confirming or not confirming the finding. The cost for any additional documentation or paperwork is the responsibility of the licensee. There may be additional charges for quantitative testing; quantitative testing provides drug levels. Depending on the drug, some quantitative testing is not important for the CHRB to proceed with a case, but may be important as a mitigating factor for the licensee during the subsequent hearing. All this needs to be finalized before the sample is shipped.
 
The CHRB does not consider an adverse finding by the official lab to constitute a positive until it is confirmed by the split sample lab. The exception is when a split sample is not requested or denied for not meeting rule 1859.25 deadlines or other requirements. Only then does the CHRB declare a positive and file a complaint.

Rick M. Arthur, DVM
 (01 December 2007 - Issue Number: 6)

Warren Stute - a look back at a lifetime of uncompromising standards

Shortly after his 80th birthday a few years ago, trainer Warren Stute agreed to stop galloping his horses.
“I could still do it, but I promised my family so they would stop worrying,” the wiry old-timer confided begrudgingly to a Hollywood Park publicist in his gruff voice after being slowed by a minor stroke.

That was vintage Warren Stute, a tough-talking conditioner who spent nearly seven decades on horseback before passing away in Arcadia at age 85 on August 9.

Stute, the senior half of the most famous brother training act in Southern California history with 80-year-old Melvin, left vivid memories as a top horseman with uncompromising standards.

Stute was not the easiest man to get along with, but he was respected by all and beloved by many, as several attested during a memorial service in the Del Mar Thoroughbred Club paddock attended by about 300 on August 13.

“Warren was tough, ornery and opinionated, but was the most lovable guy,” said Joe Harper, Del Mar president and CEO. He recalled his “introduction” to Stute in 1967 as a neophyte track cameraman nearly trampled by a horse Stute was exercising.

Harper would spend many mornings in the stable cafeteria at a table including the Stute brothers and the late Clement Hirsch, a track executive and owner who had horses with Warren for 50 years. “I cherished those mornings, listening to him and his suggestions at the coffee klatch,” said Harper.

Although an outspoken right-wing conservative and anti-feminist, Stute nevertheless earned admiration from a centrist veterinarian and a female trainer.

“We first saw each other in 1971--I can’t say met, because all he did was scowl,” recalled track veterinarian Rick Arthur. “The next year he wanted me fired because he said I was a hippie. He could only say liberal with disgust. I considered myself a moderate, but he thought that was liberal. He was gruff, had a temper and wouldn’t talk to you--some for hours, some for life--but for all his gruffness, he had a real kind heart,” said Arthur. “He helped his grooms when they got in trouble with the stewards and security and bailed one out of jail. He thought grooms should park in a lot near the Del Mar backside instead of owners, for which it was reserved.”
I turned a horse I owned named Guillermo over to him when he was 77 or 78 with the condition he couldn’t gallop him,” recalled Arthur of the Real Good Deal Stakes winner. “He got on him anyway and said he was the only one who could handle him.

“In 30 years, I can’t remember ever putting a horse trained by Warren down in a race,” added Arthur. “Warren knew when to stop. He didn’t try to get one more race out of a horse. We lost a good old-school trainer.”
Trainer Jenine Sahadi, no wilting violet herself, remembered a friendly truce with Stute. “He was my neighbor for 17 years (at Santa Anita),” said Sahadi. “He wanted to know why I wasn’t making eggs and bacon.
“One morning, I told Warren I was jogging a horse, and he said, ’If you want to jog those SOB’s, take them to Yonkers (a harness track).’ He said you gallop and work thoroughbreds.”

Octogenarian Jack Robbins, a retired veterinarian and president of the Oak Tree Racing Association, began on the track around the same time as Stute. “He didn’t have a lot of tolerance for owners,” said Robbins. “If anyone told him how to train, out he went.”

Yet a few owners maintained long alliances with Stute, none longer than Clement Hirsch. “As far as loyalty, if you were his friend, he was the best friend you could ever have,” said Bo Hirsch, Clement’s son who continued the family affiliation by keeping horses with Stute for seven years after his father’s death.

Stute made his first major mark in racing when he won the 1951 Santa Anita Maturity (later renamed the Strub Stakes) with Great Circle under Bill Shoemaker when it was the richest race in the world with a $205,700 purse.
Later in 1951, Stute won the Del Mar Debutante with Tonga, a race he would win again 51 years later in 2002 with Miss Houdini for Bo Hirsch. Stute spread his fame internationally earlier in 2002 when he scored the richest victory of his career with Grey Memo in the $1-million Godolphin Mile in Dubai.

There were dozens of stakes winners in between, particularly a blitz during 1969 and 1970 with South American imports Figonero and Snow Sporting and tomboy filly June Darling.

Warren and Mel formed a life-long mutual admiration society despite contrasting personalities, and each thought the other belonged in the Racing Hall of Fame.

“I might be the luckiest man in the world,” said Mel. “He’s not heavy; he’s my brother. He carried me since I was one day old. In my humble opinion, he was the greatest trainer who ever was.”
Mel conceded that his brother could be tough and stubborn, but that he came through when the chips were down. Mel recalled Warren bailing him out financially, once by paying his rent and once by buying tires for his car.

“I wanted to cancel a party for my 80th birthday and saw him 10 days before,” said Mel. “He said, ’I’ve made 79 of your birthdays and I’ll make your 80th.’ He died the morning after my birthday.”

Steve Stute, Warren’s older son, confessed that it was not easy growing up as a teenager during the 1960s. “He broke all my Bob Dylan records and threw all my sociology books for college out the window,” recalled Steve, whose father refused to speak to him for three years when he grew his hair long. “But he was honest.”

Glen Stute, Warren’s younger son and a trainer, thanked the racing community for its support. “The outpouring of love since this man has passed has blown my mind,” said Glen. “The tears in your eyes, the stories I have never heard carried me through all this.”

Steve Schuelein
 (01 October 2007 - Issue Number: 5)