With the landmark Artificial Insemination (AI) case starting in the Federal Court in Sydney on 5 September 2011, I thought you would be interested in my answers to the questions most frequently asked by journalists, industry participants and interested observers on the subject.
Kind regards
Peter McGauran
CEO Thoroughbred Breeders Australia
1. What is the major objection to AI?
It needs to be said at the outset that AI proponents are free to breed and race AI horses. However, Thoroughbreds have built a highly competitive industry over 150 years based on natural coverings and have the same rules as behind events such as Wimbledon or F1 motor car racing. No one is stopping the development of an AI industry separate to naturally bred Thoroughbreds.
2. What would be some of the repercussions for the breeding and racing industry if the upcoming court case was lost and AI was made legal in Australia?
Australia will likely sell fewer horses overseas as international trade is underpinned by international agreements to which every major racing country is a signatory. Australian breeders benefit significantly by Australia being a party. AI horses by definition are outside theses international agreements.
3. Breeders often complain about stallion prices being too high, the general theory is that AI would see a dramatic decrease in fees, that has to be a positive?
The laws of supply and demand determine service fees so it’s no surprise to see how much they have fallen over the past 2 years. Thoroughbred breeding is a highly competitive market even if overly influenced by fashionable trends and a bit of a herd mentality at times. A move to AI would likely see a reduction in competition and a concentration of power in the hands of the owners of the top stallions. There is no evidence that service fees would significantly fall especially as the owners of the top stallions under AI would have many options to meet the market given they would have virtually unlimited numbers of services available to them. They could turn on or off the tap as it suited them. Consider a top stallion limited by nature to 150 services increasing to, say, 300 under AI. That would not be a number which necessarily floods the market so there would be little or no reduction in the service fee and in the process that stallion would become even more dominant. Some service fees would reduce, others would not. But you have to assess all the components of this debate to reach an informed position and not just single out one alleged benefit.
4. Semen is a lot easier and safer to transport around the world than stallions, that must have cost benefits for studs and the possibility of opening up multiple markets at the one time? That's good too isn't it?
Frozen semen is highly unreliable and will not replace the need for shuttle stallions. In the same vein chilled semen has a relatively short shelf life and over a 24 hour period deteriorates. The collection, transport and injection of fresh semen is far more expensive than generally understood. Analysis of the harness racing industry appears not to support the claims made in support of the introduction of AI. To maximize fertility results breeders will still need to send mares to stallion standing farms or centres which negates the alleged cost savings under AI.
5. Some argue that AI would mean that the already successful stallions would have even more progeny on the ground thus decreasing the gene pool, but couldn't the studs self regulate or have an imposed number of mares so that that doesn't happen?
No, legally it is not possible to impose a cap on AI services. It would be open to every stallion owner to decide how many progeny suit their commercial interests but I would think that the top stallions could easily double or treble their services if the demand was there without the need to reduce service fees. That's just a market reality. Self regulation has been advocated in the past to try to curb the dominance of the top stallions but has never been successful. AI will make the situation infinitely worse in my view. By concentration of market power there carries the risk of narrowing of the gene pool.
6. Isn’t it better for broodmare owners to have every available option to get their mare in foal, AI is arguably more successful at achieving pregnancy than a manual service?
No. Fertility rates in harness racing, where AI is commonly used, are lower than in Thoroughbreds. Obviously fresh semen as opposed to frozen or chilled semen is equivalent to a natural covering but the costs are also comparable to a natural covering. It is misleading to blandly state that AI is easier and cheaper when the harness experience suggests otherwise.
7. How do you combat the perception that most of those against AI are the big studmasters who want to protect their investment by keeping stud fees at their current level? What have you found to be the general attitude of the small to medium breeder in regard to AI?
To the contrary, I am convinced that the big studs will be the beneficiaries if AI were to be introduced into the Thoroughbred industry. TBA is made up of 3,700 small, medium and large breeders who on careful consideration of the complex economic and scientific issues involved, believe it is not in the industry’s best interests to incorporate AI. TBA believes that the Thoroughbred industry will be adversely affected if Australia goes it alone in the world. It will be a self-inflicted wound. The industry needs to expand its export markets to give all breeders whatever their size the greatest range of potential markets for their horses. We believe that we are fighting to retain a competitive and grass roots industry against the concentration of economic power AI will bring.
Thoroughbred Breeders Australia Ltd - Royal Randwick Racecourse - Alison Road Randwick NSW 2031
Phone: 02 9663 8444 - email: member@tbaus.com - Website: www.tbaus.com
