Coolmore's Daddy Long Legs to Run Without Shoes in Dubai Stakes Race; Interference Given as Reason for Rule Exception

Halfway around the world, a South African racehorse trainer is taking a chance with a well-known stakes-winning Thoroughbred. And he had to get official clearance to do it.

British Racehorse's Story Touches a Nerve: Illicit Neurectomy Revealed After Breakdown and Euthanasia

Nerves in the distal limb of the horse, shown in yellow in this image, are very specialized. It is possible to selectively de-sensitize only the heel area of the foot, a common location of foot pain, with a neurectomy, a relatively simple surgical procedure that is commonly used for many racehorses in the United States but banned in Great Britain on welfare grounds. Image from The Glass Horse: Elements of the Distal Limb.

Political scandals often draw a line in the sand for the accused. It comes down to: “What did they know and when did they know it?”

Sometimes, lame racehorses can make the same question a valid one. And the wrong answer can cost a trainer his career.

That’s what happened in England this week, when a trainer received a four-year ban, ostensibly for the off-season use of steroids. But what really earned him the ire of the public and the racing world was the post-mortem discovery that a horse in his stable had run eight races after having a chronic foot lameness caused by an ulcerated corn resolved by surgically severing the nerves to the back part of his foot.

The British racehorse suffered from a lameness problem stemming from an infected corn, which is a form of heel bruise in an area of the horse's foot known as the "seat of corn". Corns are common in so-called "thin-soled" horses. (Photo © 2011 Hoofcare Publishing, from the Wildenstein Photo Library.)

How did anyone come to know the horse had been secretly nerved? During the horse's eighth race since surgery, the horse ruptured the superficial flexor tendon in the same leg as the injured foot. The trainer ordered the horse to be euthanized on the track. A subsequent necropsy looked closely at the injured limb; the pathologists reported their finding, that the horse had been nerved in that foot, in violation of British racing rules.

The very same surgical procedure would have been legal in many racing jurisdictions in the United States.

It's not all bad news for lame horses in jump racing. Here's a horse who's been on the Hoof Blog before. This is Knowhere, one of the original poster colts for stem cell implantation in tendons. He suffered a serious tendon bow in 2005 but has managed to stay in training and racing since his return. He lost his rider somewhere at Cheltenham this year.

The procedure is known as a “low” palmar digital neurectomy (PDN). This minor surgery has traditionally been performed on many horses that have so-called incurable navicular disease. It is sometimes performed repeatedly in the same horse, since the nerves regenerate. And it is sometimes even performed on multiple limbs of the same horse.

The problem in America? Buyer beware: it is difficult to ascertain if a horse has been “nerved” or not. Nerved horses (sometimes called de-nerved horses) are suspected by some of being unsafe mounts.

The problem in Britain? No one knew the horse had been nerved until it broke down on the track and necropsy examination revealed the surgery.

Debates go on and on in the United States about both the safety of nerved horses and the ethics of performing the procedure. If you believe that it is best to relieve a horse’s chronic pain, neurectomy certainly achieves that goal.

The nerves of a horse’s distal limb are very specialized, and it is possible to selectively desensitize the palmar or plantar region of the front or hind foot. This is where heel pain and “navicular” type pain are centered. One snip and the horse’s pain is gone.

So is its ability to know if it stepped on a nail or not. The British and some US states—such as California and Arizona—think a horse shouldn’t race if it can’t feel its foot. In the show horse world, nerving is still a common and economical solution to the problem of a lame horse that has not responded to therapeutic shoeing. FEI rules prohibit a nerved horse from competing. But how would anyone know?

Nerving salvages the careers of laid-up show, performance and rodeo horses. Horses that I see nerved are usually older horses with chronic conditions and the owner understands that it is a salvage procedure to keep the horse comfortable. They ride with care It makes a less painful retirement for many geriatric horses with chronic foot pain.

But I don't live in the real world. In some cases, horses return to the show ring. In some states, neurectomy keeps a horse racing and earning money.

Jump racing horses are among the fittest equine athletes of the horse world. This is Neptune Collonges, one of the top horses in Great Britain. He's expected to race again this year, at age 11. (Charles Roffey photo)

And that was all British trainer Howard Johnson wanted: a horse that kept racing, so its owners would be happy.

On page 32 of the rules of British racing it says simply: "Neurectomy operation: horse may not start 152(iv)".

Compare this with most US states that require a nerved horse's surgery to be recorded on a list (Massachusetts), or added to his official registration records, as is the case with harness racing horses in the state of Kentucky.

In Britain, there is no list and apparently no official recording of the surgery. It's a Catch-22: the procedure makes it illegal for a horse to race so the horse would be removed from racing. But then again, there's no record so if the horse changed hands...how many trainers are savvy enough to really tell if a horse has sensation in his heel bulbs or not? How many actually feel their horses' feet?

The effects of a neurectomy gradually wear off but the timeframe varies from horse to horse. Some horses might benefit from the surgery, such as the case of the British horse, who suffered from an infected corn and went on to race successfully in the tough sport of National Hunt racing.

But the flip side is also true: an infection could go deeper into the foot and cause more damage...but the horse might gallop on until the infection spreads to an area served by other nerves or until a structural rupture or fracture occurs.

Neurectomy surgery is performed at the site of the nerve branch that the surgeon wishes to sever. (Modesto Bee photo of surgery at Pioneer Equine Hospital as published previously on The Hoof Blog.)

Johnson's hearing before the British Horseracing Authority conflicted with the testimony of his veterinarian. It was vague whether the vet knew that the trainer planned to race the horse again; the vet testified that he hadn't ever heard of a neurectomy being done on a racehorse before.

When interviewed, Johnson gave the following explanation when questioned as to what was his understanding of the denerving operation: “…Well, when you de-nerve something like say in the foot he said the horse would become sound, and I just wanted the horse to run.…you have to try every corner to get a horse to win a race.”

The Panel received expert evidence from (veterinary surgeon) David Ellis from the Newmarket Equine Hospital. He explained that a neurectomy removes sensation from the painful area, masking the signs of pain but not curing any pathology which gives rise to the pain.

Following a palmar neurectomy, such as undergone by the horse in question, Mr Ellis explained that the gelding was at risk that an injury, such as a fracture of the heel or navicular region or a penetration or infection, would go undetected.

As to the welfare aspects of equine care, Mr Ellis noted that it cannot be in the best interests of a racehorse’s welfare that in order for it to be sound enough to be trained and raced it has to have an operation to permanently desensitize the area which is giving rise to pain and lameness. The Panel accepted this evidence.

Racehorses of all types are under scrutiny for how their welfare is being protected. What seems like an act in the best interest of the horse is sometimes disputable.

Hoofcare and Lameness originally learned of the judgment against Howard Johnson when word came from the British charity World Horse Welfare that it welcomed the British Horseracing Authority’s decision to impose a four-year ban from training on Johnson, who subsequently announced his retirement. The charity’s Chief Executive Roly Owers said: “We welcome the BHA’s verdict and sentence of Howard Johnson which is proportionate to the seriousness of his crime.

“When we use horses in sport, that places a significant burden of responsibility on our shoulders for their welfare, and Howard Johnson simply did not live up to that responsibility. He showed a callous disregard for the well-being of the horse when he made the decision – not once but eight times – to run Striking Article without any feeling in one of his forefeet.

"This was a reprehensible act that clearly crossed the line between the acceptable and unacceptable use of horses in sport.

“We are also dismayed that a trainer of Johnson’s experience and stature is pleading ignorance of the rules. Ignorance is no excuse for not knowing the rules but more importantly it’s no excuse for cruelty. Looked at it another way, we just need to apply a little simple common sense: how could anyone think it was acceptable to race a horse that was in so much pain it needed a neurectomy in the first place?

“This case should send out a clear message to everyone involved in racing that the welfare of the horse has to come first, not the need to win at any cost.”

There are plenty of ways for a jump racing horse to go lame. (Pablo Camera image)

Remember the old saying, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"? We're learning that equine welfare is in the mind of the owner (or trainer). What seems like the kind thing to do in one country is seen as the antithesis in another.

The moral of this story: Remember what you say and when you say it. And to whom. Most of all: know the rules...and follow them. Work to change them if you don't think they're in the best interest of the horse.

Maybe that's what Howard Johnson will do in his retirement.

 TO LEARN MORE

Hoof Blog: Neurectomy Ethics Rear Up Again in California (October 2007): What happens when you buy a horse in a state where nerving does not have to be disclosed but you intend to run it in a different state...where nerved horses are prohibited from racing? That's what happened in California a few years ago. The following year, running nerved horses was banned in California.

Hoof Blog: Watch a horse undergo a neurectomy procedure at California's Pioneer Equine Hospital in a special video.

Hoof Blog: Cobra Venom Raises Its Numbing Head at Racetracks (Cobra venom use has been described as creating a "chemical neurectomy" when injected into a horse's foot)

Watch a detailed procedural video of a neurectomy at Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine

Thanks to Charles Roffey for the photo of Neptune Collonges, to Pablo Camera for the action photos and to Carine06 for the photo of Knowhere.

 © Fran Jurga and Hoofcare Publishing; Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog is a between-issues news service for subscribers to Hoofcare and Lameness Journal. Please, no use without permission. You only need to ask. This blog may be read online at the blog page, checked via RSS feed, or received via a digest-type email (requires signup in box at top right of blog page). To subscribe to Hoofcare and Lameness (the journal), please visit the main site, www.hoofcare.com, where many educational products and media related to equine lameness and hoof science can be found. Questions or problems with this blog? Send email to blog@hoofcare.com.  

Follow Hoofcare + Lameness on Twitter: @HoofcareJournal

Read this blog's headlines on the Hoofcare + Lameness Facebook Page

 

Disclosure of Material Connection: I have not received any direct compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the brands, products, or services that I have mentioned, other than Hoofcare Publishing. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.

The Unshod Racehorse: Racing Commissioners Table Model Rule on Barefoot Racehorses

When the Association of Racing Commissioners International (RCI) met at the Holiday Inn in Saratoga Springs, New York on Tuesday, the state regulators had Lasix on their minds. But after lunch, the meeting turned to the model rules that had been proposed for 2011. 

Model Rule 5 proposed allowing horses to race without shoes. It has a proviso attached to it, however: a horse that runs in a race unshod would not be able to race in shoes for 60 days. This requirement seemed to be based on the way that Lasix is handled rather than on the way that equipment changes like bar shoes or blinkers are handled, although their requirements may vary between states as well.

After some discussion, the decision was made to table the rule proposed at Saratoga.

The state of California has gone through an extensive period of evaluating the decision whether or not to allow horses to race without shoes. The question of allowing the practice came up in November 2007, when the state was installing artificial surfaces on the major racetracks. In February 2008, Dr. Diane Isbell, one of the CHRB’s official veterinarians, spoke on behalf of trainers who were training horses without shoes and wished to race without shoes. She also listed some of the improvements seen in the horses training without shoes.

California initiated a temporary open-rule period, with records of unshod horses compiled for reporting to the California Horse Racing Board. During the trial period, data was collected on 211 horses racing in the state, of which 172 were unshod in all four feet, 27 wore shoes in front and not behind, 4 ran with only hind shoes, and 8 horses were running with shoes after having previously raced unshod.

In terms of success of these horses, 77 of the 211 finished in first, second or third place in their races, while 24 finished last and 10 horses were scratched. The great majority (191) of the horses ran at Golden Gate Fields.

At the time that California was considering this rule change, the CHRB found that 13 states and/or tracks allowed horses to race barefoot, with restrictions and stipulations varying between the states. Twelve states or tracks required that horses be shod.

A model rule is not the same as a rule. A model rule gives each racing jurisdiction a framework, or suggested text for a rule, based on the research and expertise of committees within or attached to a larger group like the RCI. So that each state does not have to go out and research a subject, it is provided a model rule that has gone under scrutiny of the RCI system.

Documents from the California Horse Racing Board were referenced in preparing this article. Thanks to Teresa Genaro, who was present at the RCI meeting in Saratoga, for her assistance with this article. Photo credits: "No Shoes" sign by Joshua Barrett, racing on the beach at Laytown Races in Ireland by Paul Walsh.

In stock and ready to ship! Call or email to place your order.

© Fran Jurga and Hoofcare Publishing; Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog is a between-issues news service for subscribers to Hoofcare and Lameness Journal. Please, no use without permission. You only need to ask. This blog may be read online at the blog page, checked via RSS feed, or received via a digest-type email (requires signup in box at top right of blog page). To subscribe to Hoofcare and Lameness (the journal), please visit the main site, www.hoofcare.com, where many educational products and media related to equine lameness and hoof science can be found. Questions or problems with this blog? Send email to blog@hoofcare.com.  

Follow Hoofcare + Lameness on Twitter: @HoofcareJournal

Read this blog's headlines on the Facebook Page

 

Disclosure of Material Connection: I have not received any direct compensation for writing this post. I have no material connection to the brands, products, or services that I have mentioned, other than Hoofcare Publishing. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.

FEI NSAID Congress Presents Medication Facts and Philosophies for Equestrian Sport Decision Makers

Background: In November, the Federation Equestre Internationale, the world governing body of horse sports, will convene its General Assemby in Taipei. On the agenda is the groundbreaking and emotional vote whether or not international horse sports should allow horses to compete on low levels of mild anti-inflammatory medication, similar to what is now allowed in the United States. Currently the FEI operates under a zero tolerance policy, which is in keeping with many nations' national policies and even legal statutes. 

An attempt to pass this important rule change at last year's General Assembly was clouded in confusion and resulted in international furor that led to a decision to reconsider and re-vote in 2010. To make sure that the latest information was available to all voting nations, a congress convened in Switzerland last week with leading veterinary experts.

For this reason, the Alltech FEI World Equestrian Games in Kentucky next month will be competed under current FEI rules. Had last year's attempt passed permanently, horses from all over the world would have come to the USA and perhaps competed on medication for the first time in their careers, much like the international racehorses who come for our Breeders Cup. Some countries had grumbled about boycotting the 2010 WEG if the drugs were allowed. 

An emotional issue? It's hard to think of a more hot-button issue in international sport or racing. It is what sets the USA apart from the rest of the world. We think they should be like us. They think we should be like them. And so the world goes round.

Last week's FEI Congress on Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAID) Usage and Medication in the Equine Athlete has been called an invaluable contribution to the debate on the in-competition use of NSAIDs. In a ground-breaking approach by the FEI, the Congress brought together both the most up-to-date scientific data and non-scientific aspects of NSAID usage for over 200 delegates from 29 countries at the two-day Congress, which was held at the Olympic Museum in Lausanne, Switzerland.

The second day of the Congress clearly demonstrated that this is a debate that cannot be viewed purely from a scientific perspective and that ethical values and legal issues also have to be taken into account.

Following Monday’s mainly science-based presentations, FEI General Counsel Lisa Lazarus opened Tuesday’s session by outlining details from nine European countries that prohibit or may prohibit the use of NSAIDs under national law.

In light of these legal issues, Ms Lazarus stated that the FEI has two options: either abandon any proposed change in the treatment of NSAIDs, maintaining the status quo that NSAIDs cannot be administered to sport horses during FEI competition anywhere in the world; or permit the use of NSAIDs at appropriate levels as far as the FEI and its members are concerned, but make it clear to all athletes and participants that the FEI’s rules do not supersede national law, and that anyone participating in the sport in any of the nine countries must note that national laws prohibit, or may prohibit, the use of NSAIDs.

Lynn Hillyer (GBR) of the British Horse Racing Authority, explained that the Racing Authorities of Europe, Hong Kong, North and South Africa, Australasia, Asia and the Middle East (except Saudi Arabia) rule that horses must not race under the effects of any drugs, but acknowledge that medication is necessary – off the racetrack – to ensure a horse’s physical well-being. “In other words, medication should be an aid to recovery, not a tool to enable a horse that should be resting and recuperating to race or train.”

Stephen Schumacher, Chief Administrator of the Equine Drugs and Medications Program of the United States Equestrian Federation (USEF), stated that the USEF Equine Drugs and Medications Rules allow NSAIDs usage with quantitative restrictions. “We believe that the welfare of our horses is not put into jeopardy with the judicious use of NSAIDs and their use may in fact be beneficial,” he said.

Dominik Burger, President of the Veterinary Commissions of the Breeding Associations for Swiss sport horses, spoke on the breeding perspective. He concluded that the issue would benefit from a pluralistic ethical analysis based not just on the welfare of horse and rider but also on regional and global public values like integrity, equity, justice, duties and responsibility.

Steve Maynard, Laboratory Director at Horseracing Forensic Laboratory Sport Science, outlined that quantitative analysis, applied to determine the exact level of a substance being present in the body, is significantly more costly than qualitative analysis carried out to detect the presence of a substance.

The public perception of equestrian sports, sponsors and the media perspective were all aired in Tuesday’s panel discussion, when British journalist Brough Scott asked some hard-hitting questions about the possible repercussions of reintroducing NSAIDs in competition.

Sven Holmberg, FEI First Vice President chaired the final debate on the pros and cons of the in-competition use of NSAIDs. Tim Ober (USA) and Mike Gallagher (CAN) spoke for the use of NSAIDs and Peter Kallings (SWE) and Christian Paillot (FRA) spoke against their use.

FEI Veterinary Director Graeme Cooke, who had earlier updated participants on the work of the FEI List Group, summarized both sides of the debate, drawing on key points from all the speakers over the two days. The FEI has achieved a number of key objectives through the Congress, he said, gathering up the science that had become available since 1993, bringing together the scientific and non-scientific, providing an opportunity to hear related views, and ensuring there will be a record of this unique event in order to inform not just National Federations, but everyone with an interest in the debate and allowing for further review before the FEI General Assembly in November.

In his final summing-up, Holmberg stressed the importance of keeping the debate alive between now and the vote on in-competition use of NSAIDs in November, so that the decision taken at the FEI General Assembly is one that is founded on sound knowledge and in the best interest of the sport and the horses.

“There is no doubt that both sides of the Atlantic and the rest of the world have the same clear goal in mind: that the welfare of the horse is really paramount to whatever we do,” he said.

A report on the Congress will be sent out to all National Federations, and the FEI website will continue to offer a feedback area for comments. To maintain the flow of information for National Federations that were unable to attend the Congress, videos of all speeches and power point presentations, as well as the panel sessions and full debate, will be made available on the FEI YouTube Channel later this week. 

A mini site for the Congress with documents and abstracts has been set up on the FEI web site. Comments on the medication issue are invited; please email your opinions to nsaidcongress2010@fei.org

© Fran Jurga and Hoofcare Publishing Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog is a between-issues news service for subscribers to Hoofcare and Lameness Journal. Please, no use without permission. You only need to ask. This blog may be read online at the blog page, checked via RSS feed, or received via a digest-type email (requires signup in box at top right of blog page). To subscribe to Hoofcare and Lameness (the journal), please visit the main site, www.hoofcare.com, where many educational products and media related to equine lameness and hoof science can be found. Questions or problems with this blog? Send email to blog@hoofcare.com.

Follow the Hoof Blog on Twitter: @HoofcareJournal

Join the Hoofcare & Lameness Facebook Page

Tweet

USEF Reduces Medications Levels: Only One NSAID Allowed in Competition Horses After This Year

16 January 2010 | Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog at Hoofcare.com

Horses showing in USEF-sanctioned horse shows will be subject to new drugs and medications policies beginning at the end of 2010 as more than 30 years of permissive use of pain medication is being restricted under a more conservative rule. Even with half the medication formerly allowed, US horse shows still have a very liberal policy compared to most countries.

Big news from Louisville, Kentucky tonight: At the annual convention of the United States Equestrian Federation (USEF), the governing body of most equestrian sports in the United States, a significant rule change is being agreed upon which will reduce the number of medications that a horse can have in its system when competing.

Various committees within USEF have been working toward a compromise on this issue throughout the convention, which began on Wednesday. Current USEF rules allow two non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications to be used simultaneously; that policy has been in place for more than 30 years.

The change was not without its opponents; the US Hunter Jumper Association's Open Hunter Task Force had filed for a rule change (GR410.1) that would have allowed two medications if written notification was given, but then withdrew its proposal on December 9.

Some breed and sport representatives felt that limiting medication is a penalty to older horses or to lower-level shows that do not have the best footing. Perhaps some horses will now show in fewer shows, or be entered in fewer classes. Some arguments were made that the current low value of horses makes it a hardship to sideline horses that could be competing if medicated. It remains to be seen if the new rule will affect horse show revenue; it is not expected to take effect until December 2010.

In most European countries, no medications are allowed; no medications are allowed in competitions sanctioned by the Federation Equestre International (FEI), the world governing body of horse sports. A recent vote to change the FEI medication policy caused an international uproar.

There is a lot to this story, and more will emerge in the days and weeks to come as the official final wording of the rule and dates are made public. One thing is known, and that is that the push to make the change came from veterinarians, who are often accused of promoting drug use in show horses.

Dr. Kent Allen, longtime chair of the Drugs and Medications Committee for USEF, commented on the obvious rise in joint injection that may be the result of a limit on medication. In a document available on the USEF website he offered this insight: "First, it is important to understand that a joint injection properly performed in experienced veterinary hands is the single most effective anti-inflammatory treatment we have for (an) equine joint.

"Secondly, there are numerous medications to inject into joints. Often it is hyaluronic acid in combination with a variety of cortisones, or bioregenerative therapies such as IRAP. Some of these medications are extremely safe and all of them will significantly reduce joint inflammation.

"On the question of 'are joint injections going to be overused', the answer is that is already happening today! In some cases joint injections are being used as treatments in 4, 6 or 8 joints without a diagnosis of joint inflammation ever being established. This is dangerous not only from the standpoint of increasing the number of joint injections in the horse and potential side effects but you may or may not be treating the real problem. Accurate diagnosis, including lameness examination, nerve blocks, joint blocks and diagnostic imaging is the most effective method of determining what the problem is and if the horse needs joint injections. This also has the benefit of reducing the cost to owners as well as the risk to the horse."

USEF approved the use of Surpass, a topical anti-inflammatory recently; there's no prediction so far if there will be a trend to more specific treatments rather than generalized medication for pain, stiffness or soreness.

While rumors of a compromise were circulating today, equestrian journalist Nancy Jaffer broke the news tonight in her column for the Star-Ledger in New Jersey that the new medication policy would be adopted. More insight into the process of the rule change can be found in Nancy's article.

The new rule will affect most breed shows, including Arabians, Saddlebreds and Morgans, plus USEF-sanctioned hunter-jumper, dressage, driving, endurance and eventing competitions and individual breeds and sports who are under USEF's umbrella. It will not affect Quarter horse, Paint, Tennessee Walking horse or Appaloosa shows, as well as many other breeds, or the sports of reining, cutting and barrel racing, unless they are held at a USEF event or as part of a USEF-member breed show.

The medication policy change is endorsed by the American Association of Equine Practitioners, the American Veterinary Medical Association and by the Humane Society of the United States.

USEF assembled an impressive bank of articles and information on medications in sport and performance horses for the delegates to the convention. Since medication policy is sure to be a topic of conversation throughout the coming months, you might want to save some of those documents for reference.

© Fran Jurga and Hoofcare Publishing. Please, no use without permission. You only need to ask.

Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog is a between-issues news service for subscribers to Hoofcare and Lameness Journal. This blog may be read online at the blog page, checked via RSS feed, or received via a digest-type email (requires signup in box at top right of blog page).

To subscribe to Hoofcare and Lameness (the journal), please visit the main site, www.hoofcare.com, where many educational products and media related to equine lameness and hoof science can be found.

Questions or problems with this blog? Send email to blog@hoofcare.com.

Monmouth Park Loosens Track Shoeing Rules to Allow 4mm Toe Grab

by Fran Jurga | 14 August 2009 | Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog

Monmouth Park in New Jersey is the latest track in the Mid Atlantic region to take advantage of the Jockey Club Thoroughbred Safety Committee’s memorandum to allow toe grabs up to four millimeters in height on front shoes on dirt racing surfaces only. The Safety Committee's loosening of the 2mm height restriction was recommended to allow racetracks the option if their trainers and horseshoers felt that their track surfaces might call for a taller grab.

Monmouth's new rule will go into effect for all dirt races at the track – including graded stakes – on Wednesday, August 19, 2009.

The previous rule allowed for toe grabs up to two millimeters, but the adjustment was made when it was reported that an unusually high number of horses were stumbling at the start of races, according to a press release issued today by Monmouth.

The rule applies to toe grabs on front shoes only, and in no cases is a height greater than four millimeters allowable. No traction devices of any kind are allowed on shoes worn in grass races.

Delaware Park made a similar change.

Click here to read the text of the Jockey Club's recent statement on toe grab regulation relaxation. The rule changes, if desired, must be done track by track and only allow the option of a higher grab on front shoes. State-wide rules may also be relaxed or may stay at 2 mm but that is a more involved process. It's not known how many trainers will take advantage of the option or what effect the change might have.

© Fran Jurga and Hoofcare Publishing. No use without permission. You only need to ask.

Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog is a between-issues news service for subscribers to Hoofcare and Lameness Journal. This blog may be read online at the blog page, checked via RSS feed, or received via a digest-type email (requires signup in box at top right of blog page).

To subscribe to Hoofcare and Lameness (the journal), please visit the main site, www.hoofcare.com, where many educational products and media related to equine lameness and hoof science can be found.

Questions or problems with this blog? Send email to blog@hoofcare.com.

New Kentucky Derby Logo Might Need a Re-Design

by Fran Jurga | 22 April 2009 | Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog

Do you notice anything about the new Kentucky Derby logo? It's a nice piece of artwork, but it's interesting that it fancifully represents a horseshoe that would not be allowed to touch the hallowed dirt that lies before the Twin Spires.

Here's a story you would only read on the Hoof Blog:

Churchill Downs has created a new family of logos for the Derby and the Oaks this year. I've already become so accustomed to seeing it that I didn't realize until today that the shoe in the logo is illegal at Churchill Downs since the CDI family of racetracks changed its shoeing rules back on October 14...and especially since it was double-scrubbed and approved for its safety policies by the NTRA recently.

Churchill Downs' rules state: "Front horse shoes which have toe grabs greater than two millimeters shall be prohibited from racing or training on all racing surfaces at all Churchill Downs Incorporated racetracks. This includes but is not limited to the following: toe grabs, bends, jar calks, stickers and any other traction device worn on the front shoes of Thoroughbred horses. "

And on hind shoes:

"Any hind shoe with a turndown of more than one-quarter inch will not be allowed on the dirt courses. Hind shoes with calks, stickers, blocks, raised toes or turndowns will not be allowed on the turf courses. This includes quarter horse shoes or any shoe with a toe grab of more than one-quarter inch."

Those heels on the logo shoe are not going to get past the horseshoe inspector.

Am I the only one who notices these things? Or is this artwork supposed to be a nostalgic icon for bygone days when you could nail anything you wanted on the bottom of a horse's foot and send it to the gate?

Now when the conversation lags at your Derby party next weekend, you can point to the logo and ask your friends, "What's wrong with this picture?" and impress them with your command of shoeing rules and horseshoe design.

© Fran Jurga and Hoofcare Publishing. No use without permission. Permissions for use elsewhere are mostoften easily arranged. Fran Jurga's Hoof Blog is a between-issues news service for subscribers to Hoofcare and Lameness Journal. This blog may be read online at the blog page, checked via RSS feed, or received via a digest-type email (requires signup in box at top right of blog page). To subscribe to Hoofcare and Lameness (the journal), please visit the main site, www.hoofcare.com, where many educational products and media related to equine lameness and hoof science can be found. Questions or problems with this blog? Send email to blog@hoofcare.com.

Kentucky Adopts Toe Grab Limitation Model Rule Change; Process to Ratify Begins

Lisa Underwood, executive director of the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission, confirmed tonight that her agency today announced that they would adopt the model rule proposed by the Grayson Jockey Club Foundation's Thoroughbred Safety Committee and significantly add to the language describing how horses may be shod for racing and training on all types of racing surfaces in the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

On June 17, the Committee issued a model rule suggestion to the individual state racing jurisdictions around the country.

The recommendation calls for :

1) An immediate ban on toe grabs other than 2-millimeter wear plates, turn downs, jar caulks, stickers and any other traction devices worn on the front shoes of Thoroughbred horses while racing or training on all racing surfaces.

2) The Association of Racing Commissioners’ International (RCI) and all North American racing authorities to implement this ban by rule as soon as possible, but no later than December 31, 2008, and for all racetracks to consider immediately implementing this ban by “house rule” in the interim.

We all know that most of those adaptations are worn on hind shoes, but this does clarify the previous model rule change suggestion, which called for a ban on toe grabs higher than four millimeters.

The new rule sounds like it would limit horses to wearing flat plates in front.

Hoofcare and Lameness will host a forum on the topic of racehorse shoeing regulations on Tuesday, August 5, 2008 as part of our "Hoofcare@Saratoga" event series. Come and meet Bill Casner of Winstar Farms, chairman of the Grayson Jockey club's Welfare and Safety Summit's Shoeing Committee, and hear farrier instructor Mitch Taylor, who will present new research conducted by the Welfare and Safety Summit (WSS), and get real-world insights from Kentucky Thoroughbred shoer Steve Norman. Introductory lecture about artificial surfaces will be by the "mad genius" trainer, Michael Dickinson of Fair Hill, Maryland and Tapeta. Other speakers and participants will be announced.

All in the horseshoeing and racing worlds are welcome to attend...and it might be a good idea, given these new rule changes. Watch this blog for more news about this important event, or send an email to Saratoga@hoofcare.com to get on our email notification list for the Hoofcare@Saratoga series.

Photos for this post courtesy of Dan Burke of FPD, distributors of Kerckhaert shoes in the USA. Thank you!