#Soundbites - Are there adequate protocols and security on the backstretch to prevent outsiders from tampering with horses? If not, what would you suggest?

Ralph Nicks

The answer is yes. The tracks have fences around all the way—all the tracks I’ve ever been at.

Tom Amoss

I believe that because of the changing environment and the stigma of getting a positive test, more needs to be done—not only increased penalties. Getting to a horse on the backstretch is very easy to do. Ninety-nine percent of the people back there would never bother a horse. What about the other one percent?

Charlie Baker

At Belmont and Aqueduct, we’ve got enough protocol coming into the track. Every now and then, someone can slip through the cracks. There’s no foolproof security. If someone is totally intent on doing something, if they want to come over the fence, they can. If they are intent on doing it, they will. At Saratoga, there’s parking on the backside, and it’s more wide open. Most of the people are fans, but it’s wide open. You have to make sure someone is around.

Simon Callaghan

I think there is. Tracks are different. At Santa Anita, security is tight. We’ve got a night watchman. I have people at my barn 24/7. We’ve been doing that for quite a while. It’s very important to have someone there at night. We want to make sure that there are no problems.

Kathleen O’Connell 

I think on the backside at Gulfstream Park, people are very protective. I think we have a good network including workers in the barn. Multiple times, security makes sure badges are worn. I don’t see any strangers on the backstretch, especially the last couple years. We don’t have owners coming in and out since the whole COVID thing started.

CLICK HERE to return to issue contents or sign up below to read this article in full

#Soundbites - Would creating a uniform standard for drug testing horses be good or bad?

By Bill Heller

The Horse Racing Integrity Act currently before the U.S. Congress would create a uniform standard for drug testing horses that would be overseen by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency. Would that be good or bad?

****************************************

Ralph Nicks

It would probably be good. It would level the playing field. We need standard medication rules.

****************************************

Rick Schosberg

The jury’s out. I think uniform medication rules are a good thing. Whether it’s the government’s job to do, I’m not sold on that. A lot of people have been working very hard in the industry to get all the jurisdictions on the same page without government intervention. But absolutely it’s important that it gets done. 

**************************************

Eoin Harty

I think it would be good. Anything that’s going to enhance the public perception of our industry would be good. I believe this is a step in the right direction. I think it’s very important to enhance confidence in our industry. I think it’s at an all-time low. Anything that would improve that is a good thing.

**************************************

Norm Casse

I’m all for uniform rules, but I’m not in favor of the government being involved. It doesn’t seem like it ever works. I think we’re an industry that should be able to regulate ourselves rather than have someone else do it.

**************************************

Tom Proctor

When is the government getting involved ever a good thing?

***************************************

Ian Wilkes

Bad. I don’t think we need Congress getting involved in our sport. I think our testing is very sophisticated now anyway. I think it’s quite good. Yes, we need uniform rules, but we don’t need Congress involved.

***************************************

Jim Bond

It would be bad, though the way it is now is chaos. It’s sad. Ninety-nine percent of the people in our business are good people. You can have all the rules in the world, but they don’t punish the people that have overstepped boundaries hard enough. Not 60 days or 90 days. Make it real. Put some teeth into it. But getting the government involved would not be good. It never seems to work.

***************************************

Tim Hills 

If it’s properly instituted, I think it would be good; but horsemen must be included on how it would be set up and how it would be implemented. The horsemen have to have a seat at the table. They would have to be included in setting guidelines. We must be included in how it’s written up. 

***************************************

Chris Englehart

I guess it all depends on what the rules were. You’re talking about uniform rules. That would be fine, unless the rules included banning Lasix. I wouldn’t be in support of that. Where would we race our bleeders? I think it would be a good thing to have uniform testing. In a lot of ways, it would be great.

TO READ MORE —

BUY THIS ISSUE IN PRINT OR DOWNLOAD -

ISSUE 54 (PRINT)

$6.95

ISSUE 54 (DIGITAL)

$3.99

WHY NOT SUBSCRIBE?

DON'T MISS OUT AND SUBSCRIBE TO RECEIVE THE NEXT FOUR ISSUES!

Four issue subscription - PRINT & ONLINE -ONLY $24.95