How do we make sure this never happens again?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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

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)?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

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

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

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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

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?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

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?

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?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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

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

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?

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?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

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?

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?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

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)?

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

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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

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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

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.

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?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

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.

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.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Paying a track vet to do the same is stupid when each horse and trainer have a regular vet that provides this service.

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?

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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

I guess that line can be applied to the ambulance too

[Riot]

Originally Posted by helicopter11

I guess that line can be applied to the ambulance too

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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by helicopter11

I guess that line can be applied to the ambulance too

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.

[Riot]

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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

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.

At least this post makes some sense