How do we make sure this never happens again?
 

Oh, god, that's sickening and sad.

The track has to have a vet there during hours they have their track open for training. Period. Seems that's clearly encoded in their own rules.

That is truly sad. Penn National should be ashamed of themselves. I will never bet that track ever again

Penn National is a cesspool. This is one track that should be shut down.

Very sad.
I bet you if one of the slot machines broke down, someone would be there in less than an hour to fix it.

I'm not sure why the trainers vet isn't getting the bulk of the blame here?

I agree. But the Penn National spokesman should have been a bit more compassionate and not come off as indifferent, even though we know that's exactly what he is.

I hope NYRA never loses control in NY because if you think an casino operator gives a dam if a race horse needs a lethal injection...

Why? By being indifferent he is sure to fuel the people who write letters, start campaigns and protest horseracing period. That plays right into their hands as they try to denigrate the sport as much as possible so that they can end racing.

The fact is that there are lots of places where horses train where a vet emergency may take an hour or more to be addressed. The horses regular vet should have someone that covers when he isnt there.

:zz: He was the one that ended up sending a vet to euthanize the horse. Where wasn't he "covered"?

The question is, are tracks responsible for having a vet (paid by the track) on the premises for on-track emergencies during training and racing hours, or not (just during racing hours here)?

If he was covered there would be no story. Isn't that kind of obvious? Do you think this is the first horse to ever breakdown on a Sunday morning at Penn National? He wasn't covered because had he been he wouldn't have to have been contacted, the vet covering for him would have already been there

Why would tracks pay a vet to do nothing virtually all of the time?

Ah, you mean the vet is responsible because he wasn't physically at the track, even though he did have another vet covering for him on his day off.

In that case, maybe the trainer should make sure there's a vet on the track before he takes a horse out?

Gee ... so horses who break legs during morning training hours can be euthanized appropriately, rather than suffering?

I'll put you in the, "No, tracks are not responsible for having a vet on the premises during training hours" category, I guess. Even though they are required to have a horse ambulance readily available. Weird.

How does a vet cover for another without being physically at the track?

Do you not agree that the attending/regular vet has a responsibility to see that his horses are cared for when he/she isn't not there?

I guess that line can be applied to the ambulance too

Why do you think the entirety of this equine practice is on-track work?

He did. That's who euthanized the horse.

Do you not think the trainer had a responsibility to his horse, to ensure a vet was around if needed?

It applied to me for the 10 years I was a paramedic. Strangely, nobody complained about paying me to "wait around" for their accident or heart attack.

If tracks agree they need a vet and a horse ambulance available during racing, they should consider doing the same during training hours.

Why wouldn't the vet who cares for the horse 365 days a year be responsible for that? You really think that the horse ambulance and track vet are similar issues?

So the track should pay a vet to do virtually nothing on the odd chance that the practicing vet and every other private vet happens to be busy at that very moment that a horse breaks down?

Gee. It appears that would have been a good thing for this poor horse. What number of horses do you think it should apply to?

Again, the question is, should a track have a horse ambulance and vet available on-track during training hours or not? I guess Chuck says no. I would say yes.

No the ambulance is there to transport injured horses off the track. It is not manned until it is used. There are no private horse ambulance companies so the track provides this service.

Maybe tracks could work with the on-track vets to ensure training hours are always covered by some private physically being on the track.

I can't see them forcing any vet to have to work a particular day, of course, but the vets would most likely be willing to agree cover to prevent this type of nasty disaster happening again.

If not, yeah, the track should consider pay a stipend for arranging to have a vet on premises "on call" for on-track emergencies during training hours.

Are you seriously going to try to make this argument?

yeah he euthanized the horse an hour after the horse was initally injured. Are you not lucid enough to understand that if the vet had someone oncall, AT THE TRACK, we wouldn't be talking about this story because it wouldn't have been one?

Are you seriously going to blame the trainer for the vet's ineptness in not having anyone covering for him at 7:30am during training hours?

Yeah, just ignore the parts you don't want to read. Geeshus. You're making an absurd "it's the vet's fault" argument. God no, don't discuss the trainer's responsibility to his horses. Or the tracks responsibility to it's trainers and the horses that are there.

LOL

At least this post makes some sense

How is the vets absence the trainers fault?

I dunno. The regular vet sent someone to euthanize the horse as soon as notified.

When a horse colics seriously at 2:00pm, and a trainers private vet isn't physically on track, we blame the vet then too, right?

So your argument is that any private vet who works a race track has a responsibility to have a physical presence on track ... when? During training hours? Training and racing? 12 hours a day? 24 hours a day? What about tracks that run at night, does the vet have to be there 4am to ... when? Get specific with your answer for us.

An ambulance for horses is parked at the track. You don't have to pay the ambulance. It just sits there until needed. Paying a track vet to do the same is stupid when each horse and trainer have a regular vet that provides this service. Just because a vet dropped the ball here and didn't have anyone covering for him doesn't mean we need track vets sitting around doing nothing until a horse breaks down and his/her vet isn't available and no other vet responds to a call for help.

So you say it's the private practices' fault they were not physically on the premises (even though that's who responded as soon as called and euthanized the horse).

Okay. So again: what hours do you say a private practice has a responsibility to physically be on the track premises?

A vet has a responsibility to be at the track when horses are racing or training. IF they can't physically be there then they should have an associate/another practice/another private vet that will cover for them during those hours. A vet also has a responsibility to provide emergency care or in their absence provide an adequate replacement. Every vet I know with a racetrack practice does this.

Do they have to be standing at the ready? No but they need to be there a reasonable time after an injury occurs which happens not to be the case in this instance at Penn.

For tracks that run at night they have a responsibility to see that they are there or someone is covering until after the last race is run.

??? The vet responded immediately when called and sent a locum. He wasn't called immediately because they were looking for someone on track. Please re-read the story.

Let's get this straight ok? If the person who ultimately euthanized the horse was on the premises when the horse was injured this would not be a story.

If Dr. X was my vet and he took Sundays off then I'm quite sure Dr X would have not only made arrangements to have another vet cover for him BUT would make sure his clients knew as well. Obviously the vet in question called another vet that put the horse down. This is not in question. What is in question is why that vet (the responding one) did not answer the call for a vet or from this trainer specifically when the horse was originally injured? Everyone at every track knows when the siren/horn comes on and the call for a vet to come to the track comes what is going on.

Does a private practice have a responsibilty to physically be on the premises OR have someone else there during racing/training hours? Of course they do.

He wasn't at the track. How can you cover for a vet without physically being there? What good to a horse is a vet NOT at the track?

At what point do you understand that had the regular vet had a vet covering for him AT THE TRACK this would have never been a story, just another broken down horse at Penn?

If I have a horse that is a bit off or has a fever what good does a vet not at the track do for me? Sure the guy he called came and put the horse down. That isnt in question. What is in question is why none of the vets including the regular, absent vet weren't on the grounds during training hours?

Only the writer really knows how the Penn Nat GM responded, so I don't think there is any reason to call him out for needing to be more compassionate. He came off indifferent based on the way the story was written, and that's all we know. It's impossible to know how he really sounded unless that was explained in the story.

Are there laws governing the administering of euthanasia solution? Can it only be injected by a licensed veterinarian?

Don't the best trainers keep spikes around with meds at Penn Nat? Couldn't they just borrow some "works"?

Yes. Per Dr. Allday in the segment we had on ATR this morning about the incident.