Is it time for the thoroughbred world to embrace the concept of artificial insemination?
Why is it allowed in the standardbred world and not thoroughbreds?
Think of the benefits-
1. Stallions no longer need to shuttle
2. Risk of injury to mare and stallion is drastically reduced
2. No need to serve up to 3 mares a day
3. Mares would not need to travel all over the world
4. No associated costs for travelling a mare and a stallion
5. A stallion could have his sperm frozen at 3 or 4 and return to the racetrack
6. When we lose a stallion all is not completely lost for the owner(s) and mare owner(s) especially if the death is premature and the stallion goes on to be a runaway success
7. Numbers of frozen sperm released each year could be capped
What do you think?
Please let me know all of your views for and against as I am researching an article on this topic for a thoroughbred magazine and eveyone's valuable feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Is it time for A.I.?
________
Is it time for A.I.?
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
-
arganaut
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 155
- Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 5:18 am
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
Is it time for A.I.?
Last edited by arganaut on Wed Feb 02, 2011 8:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.
No.
AI would cause the gene pool to be severely limited.
It would put most regional stallions completely out of business.
It would kill off lines from stallions whose semen didn't "ship."
If people think Kentucky has a "lock" on stallions now, AI would make it much worse.
AI would cause the gene pool to be severely limited.
It would put most regional stallions completely out of business.
It would kill off lines from stallions whose semen didn't "ship."
If people think Kentucky has a "lock" on stallions now, AI would make it much worse.
So Run for the Roses, as fast as you can.....
madelyn wrote:No.
AI would cause the gene pool to be severely limited.
It would put most regional stallions completely out of business.
It would kill off lines from stallions whose semen didn't "ship."
If people think Kentucky has a "lock" on stallions now, AI would make it much worse.
Horses wouldn't necessarily stay in Kentucky though and if the mares aren't there, there is really no particular reason for the stallions to be there other than perhaps the equine fertility infrastructure that is in place. Most vets would probably follow the mares and the mares would follow their owners.
The real reason we don't have AI is because of economics and breeding centers like Kentucky. The other arguments are just other arguments.
A.I.
A.I.---Absolutely No! No! No!......I am against cloning also !!!...I see big trouble in the horse world if cloning prices come down.....somebody will try something to get that leg ahead of the rest !!.....Hope I never see it...but probably out there somewhere it has already happened..
For the sake of argument:
1: why would AI limit the gene pool? I think it would give folks MORE access to studs that do not live near them.
2:It would put regional stallions out of business. Again, if they were quality studs that really had something to offer then why would this happen? I think the stud fee is mostly going to set who is going to breed to stallion X. At a 500K studfee even IF bred by AI how many folks will really breed to Storm Cat?? In my case there are a bunch of midwest mares with owners that would like to breed to my colt. They weighed the shipping costs and having to keep the mares here until 60 days in foal so safe to ship back that kind of a distance and decided to stick with a local stallion. Does that support the local stallion thing in number two? Yes. Does it mean they necessarily made the best choice for their mare?No. They only chose him becuse he was handier. Not really the best way to pick a stud......though for them more economically do-able.
3:It would kill off lines whose semen does not ship: this probably affects a handful of stallions. There are a few that do not ship well.......most do just fine. I think there are FAR more stallions being kept out of the gene pool that cannot live cover due to some sort of health problem or injury and that is keeping THEM out of the gene pool. The few that don't ship? They can still LC.
On the original post: I agree with all the stuff except number 7:
Legally you can't cap the number of frozen or AI breedings realeased. It's all or nothing with trade restraint laws etc. The stallion owner however CAN say only to approved mares and have the approval at their discretion. Stallion owners approve mares as it is.
The cloning thing: since there is part nature and part nurture.......I see cloning as at best more like producing a full sibling. Might have the same genes, but still not be the same horse. Clones don't even necessarily have the same markings as the original.....and there are other influences in the making process. The clone is not really even a twin.
As to the old argument "LC ensures who is the sire"........well we have DNA testing now don't we?
Yes, I think it would most affect the KY industry if AI was approved. There are more affordable places for folks to stand studs if they did not feel they had to be in the TB epicenter. And of course I understand where the folks that now live in KY would want to protect that. They spent a lot of money to set up shop there! In the big picture though.......should the horses have to be in KY to benefit the breed as a whole? No, I don't think so.
1: why would AI limit the gene pool? I think it would give folks MORE access to studs that do not live near them.
2:It would put regional stallions out of business. Again, if they were quality studs that really had something to offer then why would this happen? I think the stud fee is mostly going to set who is going to breed to stallion X. At a 500K studfee even IF bred by AI how many folks will really breed to Storm Cat?? In my case there are a bunch of midwest mares with owners that would like to breed to my colt. They weighed the shipping costs and having to keep the mares here until 60 days in foal so safe to ship back that kind of a distance and decided to stick with a local stallion. Does that support the local stallion thing in number two? Yes. Does it mean they necessarily made the best choice for their mare?No. They only chose him becuse he was handier. Not really the best way to pick a stud......though for them more economically do-able.
3:It would kill off lines whose semen does not ship: this probably affects a handful of stallions. There are a few that do not ship well.......most do just fine. I think there are FAR more stallions being kept out of the gene pool that cannot live cover due to some sort of health problem or injury and that is keeping THEM out of the gene pool. The few that don't ship? They can still LC.
On the original post: I agree with all the stuff except number 7:
Legally you can't cap the number of frozen or AI breedings realeased. It's all or nothing with trade restraint laws etc. The stallion owner however CAN say only to approved mares and have the approval at their discretion. Stallion owners approve mares as it is.
The cloning thing: since there is part nature and part nurture.......I see cloning as at best more like producing a full sibling. Might have the same genes, but still not be the same horse. Clones don't even necessarily have the same markings as the original.....and there are other influences in the making process. The clone is not really even a twin.
As to the old argument "LC ensures who is the sire"........well we have DNA testing now don't we?
Yes, I think it would most affect the KY industry if AI was approved. There are more affordable places for folks to stand studs if they did not feel they had to be in the TB epicenter. And of course I understand where the folks that now live in KY would want to protect that. They spent a lot of money to set up shop there! In the big picture though.......should the horses have to be in KY to benefit the breed as a whole? No, I don't think so.
-
summerhorse
- Breeder's Cup Winner
- Posts: 2178
- Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 6:40 am
- Location: Panama City, FL
- Contact:
madelyn wrote:No.
AI would cause the gene pool to be severely limited.
It would put most regional stallions completely out of business.
It would kill off lines from stallions whose semen didn't "ship."
If people think Kentucky has a "lock" on stallions now, AI would make it much worse.
Knee-jerk, fear induced response and just about all of it is illogical and misguided.
The TB is one of the most inbred animals on the planet to begin with. You wouldn't 'severely limit' the gene pool, just redistribute the major lines.
Most regional stallions SHOULD be out of business. Far as I'm concerned, if you can't justify a $2k stud fee for your stallion (or think your mare is worth sending to a $2k stallion) DON'T BREED THE DAMN HORSE. There's enough well-bred trash on the track, I'll never understand why people insist on breeding more.
It's not going to 'kill of lines that don't ship', but it will show you which regional stallions really are worth their stud fee. JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE CAN, DOESN'T MEAN THEY WILL. (hypothetically) Just because AI gets approved, that doesn't mean stallion owners MUST use it. If the JC ever approves AI, that doesn't mean YOU personally Madelyn have to start using it. If Rocking Trick hits big and you don't want to use AI, no one is going to force you to. The only thing you'll lose will be boarding fees.
And THAT, my friends, is the REAL reason AI will have a real fight to be approved. KY knows damn well if AI gets approved, they will lose their REAL cash cow ... Mare care fees and shipping fees. They won't need to have these huge farms if the mares aren't being sent to them. Think about all the money that is associated with mare care. The impact won't be on the stallions, it'll be on all the little things involved with the mares. Shipping, boarding, vets, grooms, etc.
AI will not help KY keep a lock on breeding stallions, it will do exactly the opposite.
arganaut,
What magazine is the article for and what impact do you expect it to have?
How important is it for Australia Registry to follow the American Jockey Club guidelines? If multiple international registeries began allowing AI would that make any difference to our system?
I believe if there ever is a change to allow AI it will be the result of competition for the registery money as opposed to a change in philosophy by old-money running things. In effect, the Jocky Club is a monopoly and monopolies always lose if there is someone who wants to create opportunities in the market. When there is another registery to choose and be afforded the right to race at state tracks then you will see the JC open itself up to AI.
Today the JC registers about 34,000 TB each year. If they had to compete for that registery money against a competitor who wanted your business and allowed AI they would be in trouble.
This may sound far fetched, but American law is already in place to support a new player. There just needs to be a new player ready to get started.
JonR
What magazine is the article for and what impact do you expect it to have?
How important is it for Australia Registry to follow the American Jockey Club guidelines? If multiple international registeries began allowing AI would that make any difference to our system?
I believe if there ever is a change to allow AI it will be the result of competition for the registery money as opposed to a change in philosophy by old-money running things. In effect, the Jocky Club is a monopoly and monopolies always lose if there is someone who wants to create opportunities in the market. When there is another registery to choose and be afforded the right to race at state tracks then you will see the JC open itself up to AI.
Today the JC registers about 34,000 TB each year. If they had to compete for that registery money against a competitor who wanted your business and allowed AI they would be in trouble.
This may sound far fetched, but American law is already in place to support a new player. There just needs to be a new player ready to get started.
JonR
Just a question, I've never heard the answer myself but I'm sure people on this board have studied it enough to know.
In terms of costs, what is it to the people using AI and do stud fees take into account cost of having it done? What I mean is I'm sure there shipping payments,etc so I'd like to know about that for one thing if you're purchasing breeding via AI but if you're a stallion owner and you're trying to use that as well as live covers, is there an effect on overall stud fees (up or down) as compared to only live cover studs?
I would say that sure I realize there are many stallions and mares who shouldn't be breeding. I'll see someone asking who wants to match their mare to a stallion and you look at her pedigree, accomplishments, and what I can glean from her conformation and just go 'why??' One aspect of my question of cost though is how cheap is it to do that they'd be able to justify spending on procedures. I mean if you don't do it enough, I'd imagine it's a bloody fortune and waste of time to breed AI to one mare and only one but make that 100 and some cost of 'production' goes down right? Rightly or wrongly wouldn't that affect smaller breeders? I do wonder though if that'd affect the bagillions made in the sales ring if there's 500 Giant's Causeway's one would hope to heaven cost would go down--ah ha! there we have it, it's harder to market the lesser sons to stud if there's too many just like him. And if other lesser sons are churning out AI who knows what's going to happen to the ones that don't sell. I figure the big argument is the crop's already overblown generally and we could maybe increase the number who go to slaughter by just pumping them out for a few years til the market rights itself. Remember it plays catch up. This is just a concern but certainly something to consider.
I figure it's still Sport of Kings and the money control AI's admission and where the stallions would go. Tradition and prestige mean, at this point, even if there's a pretty farm in Kansas or something, it's doubtful they'd ever move stallions out there. Generally it's money first, then the horses..few do it the other way around right? Even if you claim a cheap horse, gotta have the money first, and short of the Black Stallion few people walk right into a great horse with $5 in their pocket. And if they do what usually happens? They sell it for as much as it'll bring to, guess who, the real money...as in multi-millionaire from birth or businesss money.
In terms of costs, what is it to the people using AI and do stud fees take into account cost of having it done? What I mean is I'm sure there shipping payments,etc so I'd like to know about that for one thing if you're purchasing breeding via AI but if you're a stallion owner and you're trying to use that as well as live covers, is there an effect on overall stud fees (up or down) as compared to only live cover studs?
I would say that sure I realize there are many stallions and mares who shouldn't be breeding. I'll see someone asking who wants to match their mare to a stallion and you look at her pedigree, accomplishments, and what I can glean from her conformation and just go 'why??' One aspect of my question of cost though is how cheap is it to do that they'd be able to justify spending on procedures. I mean if you don't do it enough, I'd imagine it's a bloody fortune and waste of time to breed AI to one mare and only one but make that 100 and some cost of 'production' goes down right? Rightly or wrongly wouldn't that affect smaller breeders? I do wonder though if that'd affect the bagillions made in the sales ring if there's 500 Giant's Causeway's one would hope to heaven cost would go down--ah ha! there we have it, it's harder to market the lesser sons to stud if there's too many just like him. And if other lesser sons are churning out AI who knows what's going to happen to the ones that don't sell. I figure the big argument is the crop's already overblown generally and we could maybe increase the number who go to slaughter by just pumping them out for a few years til the market rights itself. Remember it plays catch up. This is just a concern but certainly something to consider.
I figure it's still Sport of Kings and the money control AI's admission and where the stallions would go. Tradition and prestige mean, at this point, even if there's a pretty farm in Kansas or something, it's doubtful they'd ever move stallions out there. Generally it's money first, then the horses..few do it the other way around right? Even if you claim a cheap horse, gotta have the money first, and short of the Black Stallion few people walk right into a great horse with $5 in their pocket. And if they do what usually happens? They sell it for as much as it'll bring to, guess who, the real money...as in multi-millionaire from birth or businesss money.
"Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana"
Folks you are not going to magically sprout new mares and I don't think expenses will drop enough to allow more mares into the breeding shed.
As for capping numbers, The Jockey Club is essentially the governing agency of the breeding end of the sport, no? Not unlike the NBA. And farm owners would equate to your Mark Cubans' of the world (is it just me or does he always look smelly?). With FuPeg playing Shaq and GC playing Kobe. The NBA has limited Shaq and Kobe's rights to make as obscene a salary as possible, why couldn't the Jockey Club do the same for the good of the industry?
I mean if players salaries were allowed to run unchecked ticket prices would go through the roof and your average joe would stop buying season tickets in the nosebleeds. If AI were allowed to run unchecked, yearling prices would falter enough to make it tough on the little guy, smaller farms would falter, and people would leave the industry. I'm not saying the previous scenario would happen, but ...that could be the reasoning put forth. The MLB has its luxury tax, the NFL and NBA their salary caps. Sports is about socialism durn it!
And in yet another twisted, circular bit of logic, isn't the Jockey Club already limiting stud farms' and mare owners' right to free enterprise by not allowing AI and embryo transfer. Free enterprise has always been limited when its in the best interest of the industry or the general public (unless it involves oil) and I don't see what makes the horse industry any different.
As for the narrowing the gene pool thing, that can and will happen with AI its inevitable, but in retrospect and I'm contradicting a previous post, I have 5 mares from the Mr. P. line (not a line one necessarily wants to inbreed to) and let me tell you the pool of stallions with no Mr. P in my price range and that don't make me puke is pretty small.
Edit: To Heidilady's question, just because AI comes in does not mean you have to use it. Obviously any commercial enterprise would have to offer the option, but the cost of collection is not insanely high past the initial investment in equipment and the breakeven point would not be prohibative for smaller operations. Also, many vet schools offer a collection service at least OSU did.
As for capping numbers, The Jockey Club is essentially the governing agency of the breeding end of the sport, no? Not unlike the NBA. And farm owners would equate to your Mark Cubans' of the world (is it just me or does he always look smelly?). With FuPeg playing Shaq and GC playing Kobe. The NBA has limited Shaq and Kobe's rights to make as obscene a salary as possible, why couldn't the Jockey Club do the same for the good of the industry?
I mean if players salaries were allowed to run unchecked ticket prices would go through the roof and your average joe would stop buying season tickets in the nosebleeds. If AI were allowed to run unchecked, yearling prices would falter enough to make it tough on the little guy, smaller farms would falter, and people would leave the industry. I'm not saying the previous scenario would happen, but ...that could be the reasoning put forth. The MLB has its luxury tax, the NFL and NBA their salary caps. Sports is about socialism durn it!
And in yet another twisted, circular bit of logic, isn't the Jockey Club already limiting stud farms' and mare owners' right to free enterprise by not allowing AI and embryo transfer. Free enterprise has always been limited when its in the best interest of the industry or the general public (unless it involves oil) and I don't see what makes the horse industry any different.
As for the narrowing the gene pool thing, that can and will happen with AI its inevitable, but in retrospect and I'm contradicting a previous post, I have 5 mares from the Mr. P. line (not a line one necessarily wants to inbreed to) and let me tell you the pool of stallions with no Mr. P in my price range and that don't make me puke is pretty small.
Edit: To Heidilady's question, just because AI comes in does not mean you have to use it. Obviously any commercial enterprise would have to offer the option, but the cost of collection is not insanely high past the initial investment in equipment and the breakeven point would not be prohibative for smaller operations. Also, many vet schools offer a collection service at least OSU did.
I don't have low self-esteem. I have low esteem for everyone else. ~ Daria
-
FancyHorse
- Allowance Winner
- Posts: 250
- Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 3:39 pm
- Contact:
No way! Especially to this point
"5. A stallion could have his sperm frozen at 3 or 4 and return to the racetrack"
If you have a stallion that has proven himself worthy enough to be held at stud, why would you put him back on the track! The older he gets and the more injuries he aquires the less likely he will beable to perform well in the races! Then once he starts dropping down in class no one will respect him and want to breed to him! You retire stallions at the TOP of their game, not the bottom!
Its such a shame to the QuarterHorse world, that they do allow artificial insemination, basicly every single race QH is out of the same sire! Its just crazy and not classy at all!!!! Very cheap!
"5. A stallion could have his sperm frozen at 3 or 4 and return to the racetrack"
If you have a stallion that has proven himself worthy enough to be held at stud, why would you put him back on the track! The older he gets and the more injuries he aquires the less likely he will beable to perform well in the races! Then once he starts dropping down in class no one will respect him and want to breed to him! You retire stallions at the TOP of their game, not the bottom!
Its such a shame to the QuarterHorse world, that they do allow artificial insemination, basicly every single race QH is out of the same sire! Its just crazy and not classy at all!!!! Very cheap!
"LIFE IS RACING, ANYTHING BEFORE OR AFTER IS JUST WAITING" -McQueen
-
FancyHorse
- Allowance Winner
- Posts: 250
- Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 3:39 pm
- Contact:
No way! Especially to this point
"5. A stallion could have his sperm frozen at 3 or 4 and return to the racetrack"
If you have a stallion that has proven himself worthy enough to be held at stud, why would you put him back on the track! The older he gets and the more injuries he aquires the less likely he will beable to perform well in the races! Then once he starts dropping down in class no one will respect him and want to breed to him! You retire stallions at the TOP of their game, not the bottom!
Its such a shame to the QuarterHorse world, that they do allow artificial insemination, basicly every single race QH is out of the same sire! Its just crazy and not classy at all!!!! Very cheap!
"5. A stallion could have his sperm frozen at 3 or 4 and return to the racetrack"
If you have a stallion that has proven himself worthy enough to be held at stud, why would you put him back on the track! The older he gets and the more injuries he aquires the less likely he will beable to perform well in the races! Then once he starts dropping down in class no one will respect him and want to breed to him! You retire stallions at the TOP of their game, not the bottom!
Its such a shame to the QuarterHorse world, that they do allow artificial insemination, basicly every single race QH is out of the same sire! Its just crazy and not classy at all!!!! Very cheap!
"LIFE IS RACING, ANYTHING BEFORE OR AFTER IS JUST WAITING" -McQueen
As to the cost question:
Avatar Boy stands to non TBs by AI. The collection facility I use is 35 min from me. I did not invest in my own equipment. Not a big enough book at this time to be worth it. SO....I run him over to Hilltop Farm where it costs me 160. for the collection and extending. It is packed in the equitainer that cost me 200 bucks to buy. Most stallion stations/owners charge 35 to 45 bucks to rent theirs if you do not have your own. I provide their use free as a service. Approx. 65 bucks to FedEx the shipment to the mare owner. It gets there pretty reliably if the MO picks it up at the FedEx OFFICE> tends to tool around a bit going to a street address. So........looking at about 200 to 300 bucks to ship the goodies. On the MO end: the tricky part is guessing when to order. Vet US follicle and usually you order on about a 35. Sometimes the mares ovulate early and you miss it. Sometimes they hang onto it forever and you end up needing a second collection. On rare occasion FedEx really does lose the goodies or misses a connecting flight. Nope, it's not foolproof. BUT...if Joe Schmo wants to ship his mare from the midwest and keep her here for 60 days and ship her back again......it will cost a lot more than that and risks getting my boy clobbered.
With the warmbloods: there are a small handful of stallions that breed a couple hundred mares a year and the rest average 6 mares or so a season. If you look at the JC breeding reports I don't think it looks all that different.
Avatar Boy stands to non TBs by AI. The collection facility I use is 35 min from me. I did not invest in my own equipment. Not a big enough book at this time to be worth it. SO....I run him over to Hilltop Farm where it costs me 160. for the collection and extending. It is packed in the equitainer that cost me 200 bucks to buy. Most stallion stations/owners charge 35 to 45 bucks to rent theirs if you do not have your own. I provide their use free as a service. Approx. 65 bucks to FedEx the shipment to the mare owner. It gets there pretty reliably if the MO picks it up at the FedEx OFFICE> tends to tool around a bit going to a street address. So........looking at about 200 to 300 bucks to ship the goodies. On the MO end: the tricky part is guessing when to order. Vet US follicle and usually you order on about a 35. Sometimes the mares ovulate early and you miss it. Sometimes they hang onto it forever and you end up needing a second collection. On rare occasion FedEx really does lose the goodies or misses a connecting flight. Nope, it's not foolproof. BUT...if Joe Schmo wants to ship his mare from the midwest and keep her here for 60 days and ship her back again......it will cost a lot more than that and risks getting my boy clobbered.
With the warmbloods: there are a small handful of stallions that breed a couple hundred mares a year and the rest average 6 mares or so a season. If you look at the JC breeding reports I don't think it looks all that different.
Last edited by camohn on Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
arganaut
- Maiden Special Weight
- Posts: 155
- Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 5:18 am
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
Is it time for A.I.?
Hi JonR,
It is for Racetrack Magazine in Australia.
I would imagine down here if AI was allowed it would still be monitored by the same regulatory bodies e.g. Australian Studbook, Australian Racing Board, Thoroughbred Breeders in each state, etc. I will be asking for their feedback in researching this article as well and also studmasters and broodmare owners.
There is no policy on capping the number of matings per stallion per season in OZ and also New Zealand I believe, so there is still quite a lot of responsibility in the hands of stallion owners and of course, broodmare owners, in the present environment.
I just wonder if the rising fuel prices and also the new threat of diminishing water supplies around the world may also impact directly or indirectly on this topic becoming more of a reality?
Thankyou very much for your feedback and to all who are contributing - it is greatly appreciated.
Best Wishes,
Andrew
________
It is for Racetrack Magazine in Australia.
I would imagine down here if AI was allowed it would still be monitored by the same regulatory bodies e.g. Australian Studbook, Australian Racing Board, Thoroughbred Breeders in each state, etc. I will be asking for their feedback in researching this article as well and also studmasters and broodmare owners.
There is no policy on capping the number of matings per stallion per season in OZ and also New Zealand I believe, so there is still quite a lot of responsibility in the hands of stallion owners and of course, broodmare owners, in the present environment.
I just wonder if the rising fuel prices and also the new threat of diminishing water supplies around the world may also impact directly or indirectly on this topic becoming more of a reality?
Thankyou very much for your feedback and to all who are contributing - it is greatly appreciated.
Best Wishes,
Andrew
________
Last edited by arganaut on Fri Feb 04, 2011 9:09 am, edited 3 times in total.