Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Main Forum > The Paddock
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #26  
Old 04-13-2009, 09:43 AM
Monarchos1 Monarchos1 is offline
Tropical Park
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
It was obviously not a well thought out policy and as you say positive PR motivated. But keeping these three trainers banned under a bad rule in no way helps animal welfare. They didnt have to announce the reinstatements at all but they did. What would be the proper punishment for someone found to be improperly accused? People who truly care about animal welfare should send the track an email stating that they should spend some money on the issue and set up an adoption program or at the very least a humane euthanasia program instead of a lame zero tolerence policy that can't be properly enforced or monitored.
According to the TT article, these trainers admitted violating the policy as a condition of reinstatement. As for the announcement, Suffolk had little choice but to make it, as the trainers surely would have themselves. They took a proactive approach but timed it to coincide with Derby preps when no one would be paying attention. The Suffolk management isn't stupid, just hypocritical.
Reply With Quote
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.