Horse Racing Forum - USA Thoroughbred Races

Steve Haskin lamented about Omaha Beach's impending retirement in his piece, Getting Ready for Yet Another Goodbye; which can be read here: http://cs.bloodhorse.com/blogs/horse-ra ... odbye.aspx

I was skimming through the comments and found one from our own Victoria Keith championing the use of AI. Her response is below; I'm curious to hear what breeders and fans here think.

There is only one solution that I can think of, and that is for the Jockey Club to allow AI and give stallions the opportunity to pull double duty -- breeding and racing. I have been in favor of AI for many years for this very reason, so it is frustrating to know that we could be looking at a different situation with Omaha if only AI was allowed. Perhaps not all horses would be good at pulling double duty, but it's certainly worth a shot to see if it keeps our star colts on the track while enabling the owners to get the returns they need to stay in the sport. In addition, AI would be kinder than shuttling, less expensive for smaller breeders, and give more of the "second tier" Kentucky stallions a better shot when they're able to draw from a larger market. We could even bring in blood from outside of the country that we wouldn't normally be able to get. The bluegrass farm owners needn't worry -- owners who currently board their mares still need your grass and horsemanship, so the only fear is book size. The JC is already looking at limiting books, so if they can do it with live cover, they can certainly do it with AI. Personally, I don't know if limiting books would survive a legal challenge but have faith in the market would ultimately speak on the upper limit they're willing to accept. The benefits far, FAR outweigh any negative to AI. We'd even have the opportunity to develop a new market of having "stock" in horses while they're still racing which could go up or down based on track results. It'd be a new and different world for us, but I feel confident it'd be a big boost to the sport.

I agree with her points. I think the big fear of AI use has been that breeders would overuse certain top stallions (like Tapit), leading to further narrowing of the gene pool.
However, if the Jockey Club can put in place restrictions on the total AI books, that could address the issue.
Another plus, which I did not see Victoria mention in that above paragraph, is that AI would give breeders access to deceased stallions (if their owners have stockpiled their frozen semen). That could mean we wouldn't suffer such complete losses to the breed due to the early deaths of studs like Pioneerof the Nile, Scat Daddy, Summer Bird or Dubai Millennium, to name a few.

Allowing AI hasn't stopped the harness folks from retiring their best horses after their 3yo seasons. A rule was even enacted in 2011 by several stakes administrators (following the early retirements of superstars like Donato Hanover, Deweycheatumnhowe and Somebeachsomewhere) requiring stallions to race at 4 in order for their offspring to be eligible to race in big races like the Hambletonian but this was rescinded a few years later at the pressure of major stud farms. The top 3yo trotter of 2019, Greenshoe,is off to stud next season and the only reason the top 3yo pacer of 2019, Bettors Wish, is returning next year is that he's a ridgling and his semen tested poorly.

And the harness horses don't continue racing after they start doing AI, they're much too valuable! Occasionally they will stand a small book of mares their final season of racing but this is usually done when their fertility is too low for a full book (like with Bettors Wish) but this is not the norm.

Allowing AI would likely give way to cloning (which even if the JC tries to fight, there's precedent set when the AQHA was taken to court and forced to register clones).