Gisser: PETA has a target on harness racing’s back

"Animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment, or abuse in any other way.” That is the header of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) website. And while I think we can all agree on the abuse part, it really comes down to definitions. In PETA’s world, any human activity with animals is abuse.

In December of 2015, I wrote “Some of you may say reptiles are to horses as apples are to oranges. But we both face . . . the biggest threat that we will ever see. It will come from animal rights activists funded by wealthy groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and The Humane Society of the United States. These organizations want to end all human ownership of animals.”

PETA, through its President and co-founder Ingrid Newkirk, regularly espouses the idea that animal ownership is wrong, equating it to slavery. Newkirk also compared Jews in concentration camps to broiler chickens in the Washington Post, and back in 2005, she told the Huffington Post, “The best bet for the horses would be to stop betting on the Derby and other horse races, and to stop breeding and racing thoroughbreds altogether.” I did not realize horses were betting on the Derby, but I will forgive her the error in syntax.

Now, PETA has an opening. Jeffrey Tretter, a gambler from Illinois is suing over a positive EPO test, stating that when the horse Tag Up And Go, trained by Robert Bresnahan, Jr., was disqualified in 2016, Tretter should have been paid for a winning superfecta wager since he had correctly bet on the four horses in the revised order of finish.

The suit’s claims include, fraud, federal and state anti-racketeering law violations (RICO-Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act). Tretter seeks recovery of his lost winnings (about $31,000) and punitive damages (not specified).

Tretter’s attorney, Michael Waller, is a partner in K&L Gates, a worldwide firm. He has won numerous multi-million dollar judgements. Why is Waller bothering with a suit that features $30,000 in alleged damages and perhaps $100,000 in alleged punitive damages, which if found to be a valid RICO claim would be tripled? It seems to be small potatoes for Waller.

Cleveland attorney J. David Ingersoll thinks Waller may be looking at making this a class action suit, bringing in others who were “harmed” by the positive test, and opening the door to future class actions, but I disagree. I strongly believe this is the first shot in a strategy by PETA, which has millions of dollars to spend, to end horse racing.

Meadowlands owner Jeff Gural also disagrees with my take. “When I talked to the AP reporter, nothing was mentioned about PETA,” he said. “I am not sure how they are involved. I am not sure how AP even got the story.”

PETA clearly takes pride in the action, announcing on their website’s homepage, “FIRST EVER LAWSUIT,” declaring, “The drugs may not have been discovered without the efforts of PETA. In 2012, we asked Meadowlands to step up efforts to prevent drugging and excessive whipping.”

Gural did meet with PETA representatives previously, but says they had no influence on drug rules. “I have always pushed for stronger drug measures. They did influence me on whipping. I have been going to the races for 50 years and it was always part of the sport,” he explains. “That changed.”

PETA has attacked racing before. Most notable was an undercover expose of Thoroughbred trainer Steve Asmussen in 2014, which the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission ruled had neither factual nor scientific basis. PETA called on the public to never bet on or attend another horse race. Let’s get real. Either action would result in the end of racing.

I expect to see PETA on the offensive against horse racing, building on the publicity of this lawsuit, on future suits (which PETA is “hopeful” will follow), and other actions which would be expensive for horse trainers sued to defend. Gural estimates it could cost Bresnahan $25,000 to defend himself. According to the Associated Press, PETA is critical of horse racing, but is pushing for reforms rather than actively campaigning for an all-out ban. That is disingenuous, coming from an organization that proclaims, “Eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship, enjoyment at a distance.” That WOULD mean the end of racing.