California Horse Racing Board to Leave ARCI

Image: 
Description: 

Photo: Benoit Photo
Rick Baedeker said California's added restrictions on medication this year are now out of step with the ARCI

After hearing from staff who noted California Horse Racing Board policies on medication are moving away from the model rules of the Association of Racing Commissioners International, board members unanimously voted June 20 to leave the racing umbrella regulatory group.

Meeting at the Alameda County Fairgrounds for its regular meeting Thursday, the commissioners unanimously approved leaving the ARCI. Because racing is regulated by individual states, the ARCI works to shape model rules and encourages member jurisdictions to adopt to provide uniformity. But CHRB staff and commissioners suggested Thursday that the ARCI is lagging too far behind its new policies and then voted to leave the organization.

Following a rash of breakdowns at the current Santa Anita Park meeting, the CHRB has put a number of policies in place that are more restrictive than the current model rules. CHRB executive director Rick Baedeker said California's added restrictions on medication this year are now out of step with the ARCI.

"In the last several months, racing in California has changed dramatically," Baedeker said.

Baedeker noted California's updated medication restrictions on anti-inflammatories; corticosteroids, which now call for a 14-day stand-down; and Lasix. Baedeker notes the board appears to be moving even further on these restrictions. For instance, it's considering eliminating race-day Lasix for 2-year-olds next year. He also said the CHRB's limitations on use of the riding crop are more restrictive than the model rule. 

"We have moved rapidly and arguably in a little different direction than the current ARCI," Baedeker said. 

ARCI president Ed Martin attended the meeting and asked the commissioners to continue membership in the organization, noting that California would have the opportunity to shape future model rules, which he said are always evolving. He noted that regulatory members often shape policies for other members, noting that a California change prohibiting the use of clenbuterol in Quarter Horse racing would eventually become the model rule.

"If the CHRB has a policy you think should be adopted by everyone, we urge you to submit it for model rule consideration," Martin said. 

Martin said other ARCI members are looking at what California is doing, and the policies could well shape model rules.

"I can tell you that your colleagues are watching with great interest the changes that you've made in the sincere hope that they are effective in reducing breakdowns. Existing rules have helped but have not solved the problem," Martin said. "All of us must collectively do better. That's what the CHRB as well as your colleagues are all focused on."

Martin said therapeutic medications currently are being abused.

"Does racing have a medication problem? Certainly to the extent that legal therapeutic medications are being misused or overused or used on horses that should not be getting in the starting gate, yes. There's absolutely no argument on that score," Martin said. "Nobody denies the problem. If we did, we wouldn't spend as much time as we do on it."

Beyond the move from ARCI model rules on medications, Baedeker said a recent change to the ARCI bylaws puts an emphasis on Greyhound racing and cost the CHRB one of five automatic seats on the ARCI board. He also said the CHRB may be concerned about being associated with a group involved in shaping Greyhound rules. Furthermore, he noted that California's ARCI membership costs $27,500 a year.

While Martin encouraged California to continue to have a voice within the ARCI, CHRB chairman Chuck Winner noted that what the regulator is doing in regards to medication is out front of what ARCI is doing.

"We believe that by participating in ARCI, that's sort of a conflict with what we're doing," Winner said, also noting that some of the board members are very much opposed to Greyhound racing. "For us to be a part of that organization is somewhat troubling for us."

Martin downplayed California's loss of a board seat as an oversight that will be revisited. He said California's opinion has always carried a lot of weight.

California's restrictive policies on Lasix especially seemed to be a sticking point. ARCI has been defending its model rule on Lasix as federal legislation has been introduced in the United States House of Representatives and Senate that would see the United States Anti-Doping Agency take the lead in overseeing medication rules and drug testing in horse racing. The legislation would prohibit the use of race-day Lasix.

"The ARCI board has been pretty vocal in its support of the current use of Lasix throughout the industry," Baedeker said. "That also is at odds with the direction this board has gone recently and has talked about going further."

Martin said as president of ARCI, it's part of his job to defend its model rules. Martin said other regulators also are considering following California's lead when it comes to Lasix.

"With the policy change you've made here in California (on Lasix), as well as requests being made to other commissions, this issue is being revisited as those requests are being considered," Martin said. "I do not know or predict what will happen with those requests."

Horse owner Susan Branch spoke in support of staying in ARCI because of its efforts to work toward uniform rules through model rules and best practices. 

In other actions at Thursday's meeting the CHRB approved a proposed addition to rules that would require a horse to not race or work for 30 days following a shock wave therapy treatment. The approval opens a 45-day period in which the proposal can be discussed before the rule is changed.

CHRB equine medical director Dr. Rick Arthur said he was comfortable with the change, noting that he personally doesn't understand why shock wave therapy is used in the racing environment. He noted that the 45-day period will allow vets who disagree with that opinion to address the board.

"I don't think a 30-day stand-down is unreasonable," Arthur said. "There are some who would disagree with me, but I'm not going to defend the way it's being used in horse racing."

CHRB vice chair Madeline Auerbach said she would support removing shock wave treatments completely from the racing environment, adding that a horse who needs such treatment should be at a farm recovering. The 45-day period will allow for that idea also to be explored.

The board also approved a proposed amendment (opening for the 45-day discussion period) that requires horsemen shipping into California for a race to provide a 14-day history of their horses' veterinary treatments.

A proposed amendment prohibiting the administration of bisphosphonates to any horse within a CHRB enclosure was approved. Also, any horse who receives bisphosphonates would be prohibited from entering a CHRB enclosure for 60 days.

The CHRB fully adopted an update on policies for horses on the vet's list that will require any Thoroughbred who has not raced for 12 months to perform "satisfactorily" in a workout before being allowed to start in a race. The rule update also requires a 4-year-old or older making its first career start to perform such a workout.

In the public comment period of the meeting, The Stronach Group founder Frank Stronach called on the CHRB to work with track owners to put track properties into trusts that will help ensure the land is not sold for development. It's a position he advocated at an April 24 presentation in Southern California and reiterated during Preakness Stakes (G1) week.

The Stronach Group, which owns Santa Anita Park and Golden Gate Fields, currently is chaired by Belinda Stronach, Frank Stronach's daughter. Frank Stronach has filed a civil suit against Belinda Stronach in Canada over her leadership of The Stronach Group. Belinda Stronach has defended her performance.

Frank Stronach was speaking on behalf of himself at Thursday's meeting. When asked by Winner if he was speaking for anyone beyond himself, Stronach said he was speaking on behalf of the rightful owners of The Stronach Group, adding, "The court will decide who the rightful owners are."