Retirement and Aftercare Programs Evolving, But Still a Work in Progress

For trainer Rick Violette, Jr., the realization that the racing industry had a significant problem with Thoroughbred aftercare was distilled in a single afternoon a few years ago in Washington, D.C.

In the aftermath of the Barbaro and Eight Belles tragedies, the United States Congress had convened equine welfare hearings, and the final question from the 20-member panel was “What are you doing about retired racehorses?”

Violette, who serves as president of the New York Thoroughbred Horsemen's Association, recalled the leaders of numerous racing industry organizations “tripping over themselves, trying to find an answer. And it was embarrassing, there was no question about it.”

After that, Violette concluded, “There was no place to go but up. We were now under a microscope and we were well-deservedly criticized for not paying attention to what horses had in store for them after they finished racing…You always thought you attended to business well until people shined a light on it.”

At a day-long summit Tuesdat on the issue of retired racehorses hosted in Saratoga by the New York State Gaming Commission, a number of other Thoroughbred stakeholders told similar stories about how the industry realized it had an ever-growing welfare problem.

Now, as that acknowledgement and awareness is transitioning through how to effectively address the need for proper racehorse retirement, horsemen, racetracks, regulators, and aftercare coordinators all seem to agree on three key components necessary for continued progress: 1) Sustainable funding; 2) The growth of accredited rehabilitation, retraining and re-homing facilities, and 3) The creation of demand in the general public for second-career Thoroughbreds.

“Start with the wellness of the horse. All the rest of it will fall into place. And I think the whole industry can take that as an example of really getting down to the nuts and bolts of it,” said trainer Richard Schosberg, who oversees the Take The Lead retirement program, which over the past several years has found new homes for nearly 150 horses retiring from New York Racing Association tracks.

Many speakers at Tuesday's four panel discussions admitted that Thoroughbred aftercare has been a trial-and-error endeavor. There was also an acknowledgement of the need for national, regional, and local approaches to racehorse retirement, because a program that is effective at, for example, Finger Lakes in upstate New York might not work so well at Del Mar in southern California.

“I don't want to say there is nothing but good news, because this is a moving target,” said Violette. “We try to get better every day, we know there's a lot of work to do. But from where we were then to now, it's an unrecognizable form of progress.”

Funding–referred at several points during the day as aftercare's “F-word”–was, to no one's surprise, the dominant theme.

Charitable donations from individuals and organizations. Per-start fees. Voluntary and mandatory “check off” fees collected at various points of a horse's registration and an individual's racing licensure. Micro-payments generated from horse auctions and stallion fees. Matching funds from horsemen's groups and racetracks. All of these options are currently being used to pay for aftercare, but there was no clear consensus on which blend of funding should evolve as the industry standard.

“I do believe that as owners, we are the primary source to go to,” said Madeline Auerbach, a Thoroughbred owner and California Horse Racing Board commissioner. “I'm not saying we're the only source, but if we aren't willing to take care of the horses, then who do we expect to help us?”

Diana Pikulski, the director of external affairs for the Thoroughbred Retirement Foundation (TRF), said people from outside the racing industry often ask her, “Why do you have to have charity to take care of these horses? Why isn't it just part of the industry?…Why, when you have so much going on in terms of your charitable efforts, [are there] still horses falling through the cracks and still so many Thoroughbreds going to slaughter?”

Violette offered a different take on charitable contributions.

“In this industry we tend to keep going to the same people for a handout, the same very philanthropic people,” said Violette. “And you wear out people. While we still have to go there, we [also] have to find some standardized funding.”

Violette and Auerbach agreed on the part about horsemen stepping to the forefront with money, but Violette stressed that racing associations also need to do their part, both in terms of instituting programs at their tracks and in contributing funds.

“Racetracks have been a little slow, they're catching up. Keeneland and Churchill broke through and I think that will start a number of 'dominoes,'” Violette said. “Frank Stronach's been great. [The Stronach Group tracks] have been a little ahead of the curve with their retirement programs.”

Regardless of where the money comes from, one point was hammered home by the panelists: The success of aftercare programs has created a self-fulfilling cycle that is increasing the need for even more accredited retraining and placement organizations.

“As the pressure becomes more and more to do the right thing by these horses, a greater number of horses are coming into the program,” said Parx director of racing Sam Elliott. “It just keeps coming.”

But, as Elliott pointed out, there seems to be increasing recognition on the part of horsemen that they must proactively map out plans of retirement before there is a dire need to have horses rescued. The Turning For Home program at Parx, he said, retired 220 horses last year.

“We've raised the consciousness of the horsemen wanting to turn these horses over in better shape,” said Elliott. “They're no good to anybody if they're all broke down.”

Erin Crady, the executive director for Thoroughbred Charities of America, said she encourages potential new owners of racehorses to build retirement costs into their budgets, in part so that horses aren't forced to race despite infirmities because the owners need the money.

“If you make every effort to retire that horse when he's sound, you're going to give him the best chance for that second career,” Crady said.

Elliott said that although it is not fair to compare the scale of financing of the two jurisdictions, a noble goal for U.S. racing might be the Hong Kong Jockey Club model, in which owners are required to pay a substantial up-front fee when a horse begins racing. That money then gets escrowed for the Thoroughbred's eventual retirement.

Several initiatives introduced over the past several years have been aimed at increasing the demand for Thoroughbreds in other equestrian disciplines. The TAKE2 program, for example, contributes prize money for Thoroughbred-only divisions at more than 200 horse shows nationwide as a way of creating an incentive for people to retrain ex-racehorses for other forms of competition.

Violette explained that for the previous several decades, Thoroughbreds had “a big red X against them” in the equestrian world, with a reputation for being too difficult to handle and/or retrain. Thanks to programs like TAKE2, he said, “once again the Thoroughbred is kind of on the wanted list in the horse show arena.”

Even horses whose physical limitations keep them confined to paddocks can have useful second careers in the ever-growing sector of equine therapy. Examples of this are inmate rehabilitation programs at prisons, like those pioneered by TRF.

Pikulski said TRF is planning on expanding its outreach to other types of equine therapy, like those that use horses to help physically and developmentally challenged children and adults.

“It's great for horses that are not sound enough for riding that the conversation has changed from 'Where are we going to turn him out for the rest of his life?' to 'Where are we going to put him so he can be a therapy horse?'” Pikulski said.