The Commonwealth Stud: Can Virginia follow European lead to restore its breeding business?

Virginia's thoroughbred breeding business is in sharp decline.

I've noticed. The Washington Post has noticed. Certainly Glenn Petty, executive director of the Virginia Thoroughbred Association, has noticed.

I have an idea for spurring the industry with a stallion stakes series, similar to Maryland Million Day or any number of other states' efforts to promote breeding in their state via premium restricted races. Petty has a different idea.

He thinks Virginia should follow the well-established lead of England and Ireland and establish a "national" stud.

Petty is of the mind that Virginia is so handicapped by Colonial Downs' relatively short meeting, lack of sufficient off-track betting locations, and better incentive programs in nearby states (namely West Virginia and Pennsylvania) that maintaining any significant private commercial breeding interest is impossible.

"Enter the government," Petty told me in an e-mail last August.

Petty said he has "developed a plan for a National Stud" that would couple a commercial stallion operation with "an educational component" at Virginia Tech University, which long has operated the Middleburg Agriculture and Research Center, first for cattle research, but rededicating the facility to equine study in 1992.

Virginia's "national stud" (or "commonwealth stud," perhaps more appropriately) would be "modeled after the national studs in England and Ireland," Petty said. That would suggest that the facility would maintain a respectable roster of stallions, provide boarding and foaling facilities for private mare-owners, and perhaps perform other services such as sales-prep or boarding horses on layup.

"There is no private funding for such an endeavor" due to the aforementioned issues facing Virginia, which limit the profitability of a large stallion operation, Petty said. "But people agree it could work over time if subsidized."

Petty explains that the state of Virginia receives 1.7 percent of every traditional wager on horse racing in the state, and 0.5 percent of each advance-deposit wager. Out of those funds, the Commonwealth of Virginia Racing Commission must operate its "shop," Petty says -- that's pay for its entire staff, licensing process, drug-testing, stewards and so forth. Then the VRC must return a "surplus" $800,000 to the Virginia General Fund.

"Surplus" is an interesting word the commonwealth's General Assembly has co-opted in this case. Truth be told, the government wants $800,000 from the VRC's budget before anything else is paid and regardless how much the VRC collects from the 1.7/0.5 percent shares on wagers.

"Actually, the (General Assembly) requires them to pay the $800,000 up front," said Petty about the VRC, "so they'd better get their budget right!"

Since wagering began in Virginia, Petty said, the industry has returned more than $7 million to the commonwealth's General Fund.

Trouble is, over the course of more than a decade, that really isn't a lot of money for running the entire commonwealth. Petty believes -- rightfully, I would add -- that the funds would be better-spent in the hands of the racing industry, to promote its own growth and development, generating tax revenues for the commonwealth through sales, higher property values and job creation.

"I've got kids in public school, so I'm a fan of the General Fund and the school buses it buys and the roads it paves," Petty wrote. "But imagine what the $7 million could have done if applied to programs like the one you suggest or to a Virginia National Stud?"

Indeed, the $800,000 the Virginia General Assembly siphons-off from wagering each year is a drop in the state's budget bucket, but would more than fully fund the stallion stakes series I recommended or could greatly subsidize Petty's plan for a commonwealth-run stud.

Petty says that support for his ideas has been voiced.

"Everybody sees the logic of my request and the merit of the projects this money could support," he says.

But the roadblocks to reclaiming those funds for industry use have proven impossible, thus far, to clear.

"Nobody is willing to advocate giving this money back," Petty said.

"I have asked the General Assembly for years to give us back all or some of this money. I spent all last summer visiting members in their homes and I have had two high-level meetings with the governor's office about this, plus one with the secretary of commerce and trade (he oversees the VRC) and one with the secretary of agriculture.

"Nothing. Zip."

I just hope Virginia's General Assembly is pleased with its work when those two words are all that's left of the commonwealth's thoroughbred breeding business.

Virginia's breeding business: Chickens and goose eggs

Virginia might be for lovers, but these days it's hardly for thoroughbred breeders.

That sad state of affairs -- particularly appalling to those who appreciate the Old Dominion's equine history -- is readily discernible in the numbers. I've harped on it before, but it bears at least summarizing again: Since 1991, the oldest records available online from The Jockey Club, Virginia's stallion numbers have declined from 154 resident sires serving 837 mares to a mere 41 stallions covering 123 mares in 2008.

In 1991, Virginia's number of registered thoroughbred foals totaled 747. By 1997, the number of foals registered in Virginia had plummeted to 517, and a decade later had fallen another 22 percent to 401.

It's abundantly clear where the business has gone; it's close by in neighboring states. From 1997 to 2007, West Virginia's foal crop ballooned 237 percent, from a paltry 194 registered foals to 654. Pennsylvania's crop swelled by 38.5 percent, from a solid 898 all the way to 1,244. (In the same period, Maryland, which is in the process of fouling up its own breeding and racing industry, has slipped 32 percent, from 1,186 foals to 837.)

I've recommended trying to spur a Virginia recovery by establishing a slate of stakes events -- a Virginia Stallion Champions Day, as it were -- open only to Virginia-sired horses, regardless of their state of foaling.

My post was in response to a post by Glenn Petty, executive director of the Virginia Thoroughbred Association, on the VTA's blog. Petty mused that perhaps it's time to abolish the Grand Slam of Grass and direct the money that Jeff Jacobs, owner of Colonial Downs, has been spending on that four-race turf series for 3-year-olds on a major turf stakes race for older horses. Petty responded at length to my post right here at the Fugue, and also wrote to me at even greater length via e-mail, sharing not only his personal thoughts but considerable background information and insights on the state of breeding and racing in Virginia.

Petty says the problem has become a chicken-and-egg dilemma: How can Virginia rebuild its stallion industry with such a greatly diminished broodmare band; yet with such a short meeting at Colonial each summer and a comparatively small annual Breeders' Fund of $1 million, how can the incentives for stallion owners be increased without depleting the kitty that rewards the mare owners?

"If you talk to folks like Debbie Easter, Larry Johnson or Donna Hayes who have recently stood stallions in VA, they will tell you there isn't a sufficient mare population to support Virginia stallions. That's the chicken," Petty writes.

"The egg is that our Breeders' Fund is so small and our race meet so short, we can't create enough financial incentives to motivate breeders to breed here or to support local stallions. If we put 50 percent of the Breeders' Fund into stallion awards and a program like the one you advocate, more folks would be motivated to stand a stallion. But how will they fill their books with a declining population of mares, a third of which are owned by commercial breeders looking to KY for big-name stallions?

"That would leave $500,000 for Breeders' Awards to motivate the folks who own the mares. Heck, if we put the whole $1 million in a stallion program, I don't know if it would move the ball."

The good news is, the suggestion I made wouldn't require an extra nickel from the $1 million Breeders' Awards fund.

And to start the ball rolling on rebuilding Virginia's stallion and breeding industry, the key isn't to find some gimmick that moves the ball the whole length of the field in one play. It's to stop the ball's inexorable tumble downhill long enough that we can even start moving it back in a positive direction.

The stallion series idea I floated was spurred by Petty's call for Jacobs to funnel $200,000 to $250,000 away from the Grand Slam of Grass and into the Kitten's Joy Stakes, an open race for older horses, making that race a $250,000 to $300,000 purse. (And, I would presume, likely earning it at least Grade 3 status eventually.)

I say that if Jacobs and Colonial Downs drop the Grand Slam and are willing to toss up to a quarter-million bucks at some other project, it's money better-spent on Virginia horses -- specifically, Virginia-sired horses. Plus, this season, a day's race-card at Colonial carried at least a total purse of $125,000 to $150,000. Put one day's purse money with the hypothetical extra quarter-million from the defunct Grand Slam and you have $400,000 in purse money for an eight-race, all-stakes Virginia Stallion Champions Day without ever touching the $1 million Breeders' Fund.

But what of the mare situation?

Petty is right (how could he miss it?) that the numbers are slim and still on a diet; 401 registered foals of 2007 and reportedly around 350 VA foalings in 2008. And he's most likely correct that at least third of those mares are owned by "commercial" interests who are looking to Kentucky instead of Virginia regardless what kind of quality regional sires the Old Dominion might boast. After all, Edward P. Evans alone keeps a reported 90 mares at his sprawling Spring Hill Farm near Casanova, Va., and owns an interest in several KY-based stallions.

If I'm a Virginia stallion owner -- and I am, just one -- Mr. Evans won't be using my horse's services. But that's O.K.; I don't really need for him to.

With around 123 mares being covered in Virginia in 2008 but around 350 foaling there, some roundabout math suggests that around 225 mares are being covered outside Virginia and are returning home to foal. "Ned" Evans and those with the money to go wherever they wish are probably accounting for about half of those "nomadic" mares.

Job 1 for Virginia is to take back the other half.

I know it doesn't sound like much. It isn't, if you're trying to stand four or five stallions, advertising them heavily, carrying any significant staff on the property and needing to pull in 12 to 20 (or more) mares per stud just to stay in business. But there's pretty much nobody like that in Virginia anymore.

There are some beautiful properties and some dedicated horsemen and horsewomen in Virginia; people working very hard every day to keep the Old Dominion's equine business alive -- Mortgage Hall Farm (where racehorses also are broken and trained), Mid-Atlantic Stallion Station at Ravenwood Plantation (where there are also Arabians and Percherons), Moon Star Farm near Emporia, Griffinsburg Equine (which also runs a transport service), and Hilltop Farm VA, where my stallion and mares reside, among others. But few are trying to make it by standing thoroughbred racing stallions alone.

That's bad news in a way. But it can also be taken on the bright side. It won't require much positive change to be noticed and appreciated, and probably to raise the quality of in-state stallions, which has predictably declined with the mare population.

The average Virginia stallion's book in 2008 was just 2.9 mares. In 1991, when there were 837 mares covered in Virginia, the job was done by 154 stallions -- still an average book of only 5.4 per sire. With just 40 or 50 stallions still in the state, simply reclaiming half of Virginia's small, "nomadic" mare population (around 100 to 125 more VA-covered mares annually) could increase the average Virginia stallion's book to 4.9 or 5.9 mares.

Those figures aren't the dozen or more mares that a farm would like to see as the least any of its stallions serve. But essentially doubling the market almost overnight could hardly be a negative.

Petty noted in an e-mail to me that Virginia-bred and Virginia-sired foals share most of the same racing incentives at Colonial Downs. I'm not sure whether he meant that as a plus, but it's actually a drawback -- if you own a stallion. It allows Virginia mare owners to breed anywhere so long as they foal at home and it provides no real race-earnings incentive either for VA-based mares to stay at home nor for outside mares to use a Virginia stallion and retreat to their own state to foal. Yes, a VA-sired West Virginia-bred can run in a VA-restricted stakes race at Colonial, but so can one of Ned Evans' uber-bluebloods, if he decides to aim so "low."

This year's mixed-gender Jamestown Stakes for 2-year-old VA-breds at Colonial saw as its top three finishers horses sired in Kentucky (first and third) and West Virginia. The 2008 running was a sweep by KY-sired fillies, by Mr. Greeley (presently $75,000 fee), Marquetry and Smoke Glacken. In the inaugural Jamestown of 2007, the winner was by Posse ($20K for 2009 in Kentucky) while the place- and show-horses were by Housebuster (now deceased) and Black Tie Affair (just pensioned) in their Old Dominion swan song seasons of 2004, before relocating to West Virginia.

Petty says the problem is that the competition is just too well-financed.

"Simply put, people make much more money breeding horses in MD, WV or PA than they can make in VA. That's why the mare, stallion and foal numbers have shrunk so dramatically," Petty writes. "Horse racing and breeding used to be a sport, now it's a business, and no sensible business-minded person would participate in a $1 million program when there are two $4 million programs right next door."

Again, Petty's absolutely right -- from a major stud farm standpoint. There's just not enough economic incentive right now to stand a whole slate of stallions on a big stud farm in Virginia. And with a short season at Colonial and a comparatively small Breeders' Fund (which would be augmented considerably if the legislature ever allowed slots in Northern Virginia) there's not a lot that can be done right away for big-ticket businesses and breeders.

So if Virginia's breeding business is ever again going to see the light of day and be even moderately viable -- let's say, half a shadow of what it once was, rather than stuck in total darkness -- then the state will have to start small.

I know the breeder of one of those Kentucky-sired Jamestown Stakes-placed fillies. She owns a smaller farm and I believe she'd like to stay in Virginia more often with her mares, were the stallion options and racing incentives even a little bit more attractive.

Another small Virginia farm with which I'm familiar might have sent two mares to our stallion this year, but was lured away to Kentucky by recession-provoked discounts. Her pair returned with only one of the mares in foal, and toting a stack of transport and vet bills that by themselves would've paid a decent Virginia stallion's stud fee several seasons over. ... A serious financial setback that ranks high among the perils of shipping to Kentucky for a small Virginia breeder, many of whom have decided they have almost no other choice if they want to raise a viable racehorse on their farm at all.

Virginia needs to give these breeders, the mom and pop farms that make up roughly half of the "nomadic" mare population, something for their babies to run at: A Virginia Stallion Champions Day. I think many of them would keep their mares at home, most of the time. And because West Virginia statebred rules are perhaps the most generous in America, I think you might attract a few of that state's mares, too, from owners who realize they can take a shot at the new slate of Virginia stakes races without losing any of their rights to race among restricted company at Charles Town and Mountaineer.

And while I appreciate the Grand Slam of Grass, if Jeff Jacobs decided to take Petty's thought-provoking advice and spike that series (and act generously toward the state's stallion owners), there might be money to start a Virginia Stallion Champions Day without raiding the Breeders' Fund at all.

Coming soon: Glenn Petty has an idea for improving Virginia's stallion offerings, too, and nobody can say he's thinking small.

Hey, VTA, no love for the Slam? Then how about a little love (and money) for VA-sired horses?

With even the Virginia Thoroughbred Association calling for its demise, I have to wonder if I'm the only person alive who appreciates the concept of the Grand Slam of Grass.

Battle of Hastings -- this year's winner, albeit hard-fought, of both the Colonial Turf Cup-G2 and Virginia Derby-G2 -- positioned himself to be the first-ever horse to claim the Grand Slam, a four-race series sponsored by Jacobs Investments (Jeffrey Jacobs owns Colonial Downs) that has the Grade 1 Secretariat Stakes at Arlington Park as its third leg and the Breeders' Cup Turf-G1 as the final base in the equine circuit clout. But Battle of Hastings won't be running this weekend in the Secretariat, apparently because the race is too close on the calendar to the horse's last effort 21 days ago in the Virginia Derby.

So, per the VTA blog, it's "Time to abandon the Grand Slam of Grass."

"Since 2004, when Colonial Downs owner Jeff Jacobs first offered the $5 million bonus (purse winnings included), no horse has come close to winning the four races that make up the Grand Slam," the blog states. "Colonial Downs management continues to cling to the Grand Slam of Grass bonus ignoring the obvious fact that owners and trainers aren’t embracing it for some pretty obvious reasons. The schedule is tough, and winning the Breeders Cup Turf against the best older horses from the U.S., Canada and Europe with a three-year-old is a tall order most won’t even consider pursuing. History has a nasty habit of repeating itself."

The VTA apparently would prefer to see the money Jacobs has spent funding big purses for the Turf Cup and Derby, the insurance premium that would actually pay the bonus of the Grand Slam, and the "considerable (advertising) dollars" spent airing the first two races on national television be applied toward "funding a turf stake for older horses so former Turf Cup and Virginia Derby horses could return to Colonial Downs." Those funds could bump the purse of the Kittens Joy Stakes to $250,000 or $300,000, the VTA writes.

So I oppose the VTA here on two counts.

First -- and again, I might be the only guy -- I think the Grand Slam of Grass is a great idea, though obviously one that has never really found traction.

The VTA and probably others, including the connections of top 3-year-olds, are apparently convinced the Grand Slam is unattainable. It isn't, and there is plenty of evidence to show that a truly great and deserving horse could win it. And, with $5 million total on the line, only a great horse should be good enough to take all four legs.

But let's examine what's so darned difficult about the Grand Slam of Grass.

Exactly how rigorous is the schedule, really? The Colonial Turf Cup-G2 in June, the Virginia Derby-G2 in mid-July, the Secretariat S.-G1 in early August. ... Then the Breeders' Cup Turf in late October or early November.

So the first three races fall in three different months; two of them at the same track. There's a 28-day span between the Turf Cup and the Virginia Derby, and another 21 days before the horse has to be fit again to try the Secretariat in Chicago. If a graded-stakes horse's conditioner can't figure out how to get a horse tight and right for three races in 50 days, perhaps he should call someone who trains a bunch of $5,000 platers for a little advice. Or anybody who's ever had a colt on the Triple Crown trail, which demands three races in 36 days.

So the Grand Slam of Grass races simply are not too close together. And even if they are, a one-week alteration in Colonial's schedule would add seven days between the Virginia Derby and the Secretariat, and if four weeks isn't enough, then either your horse or your trainer -- or both -- just aren't good enough anyway.

As for the difficulty of a 3-year-old winning the Breeders' Cup Turf at a mile and a half among older horses, such a win historically is improbable, but far from impossible.

In fact, seven of the 25 B.C. Turf winners have been 3-year-olds; that's 28 percent or nearly three in 10. Two of the first three winners of the race (Lashkari 1984 and Manila 1986) were younger horses facing older. So were two of the last three, including Conduit's stakes record in 2008 and Red Rocks' victory in 2006.

The remaining 3-year-olds to win the Breeders' Cup Turf were Prized in 1989, Tikkanen in 1991 and High Chaparral when he won his first of two at age 3 in 2002 (he dead-heated with Johar in 2003).

And other 3-year-olds have come close. Lately, Shamdinan was second to 5-year-old English Channel in 2007 and Kitten's Joy was runner-up to Better Talk Now in 2004, meaning that in four of the last five years, a 3-year-old has either run first or second in the Breeders' Cup Turf.

Kitten's Joy might be the best possible evidence that the Grand Slam is attainable. He didn't have a Colonial Turf Cup to try, but would have been among the favorites if he had. Then he won the Virginia Derby and the Secretariat before finishing second in what could have been his shot at the big bonus, the B.C. Turf, had his connections been targeting such a series from the get-go.

And the more we retire accomplished 3- and certainly 4-year-olds to stud, the more likely it becomes that a younger horse will win such a big race at the end of his 3-year-old season -- even on turf, even at a distance.

But if Jacobs and Colonial did drop the notion -- and the costs -- of the Grand Slam of Grass, funneling all those funds into only one other race would be a greater folly. Colonial Downs would benefit little from another Grade 3 or even Grade 2 race. And for the good of Virginia horse racing -- which is what the VTA is supposed to be all about -- a lower-graded race for out-of-state-breds certainly isn't the worthiest goal.

If Jacobs and Colonial were to drop the Grand Slam of Grass, the $200,000 to $250,000 that the VTA suggests should be added to the Kitten's Joy purse in an effort to make that one race a featured event on a third "big" Colonial date (to go along with Turf Cup Day and VA Derby Day) would be much better utilized in establishing a Virginia Stallion Series to save the state's breeding industry.

I've detailed repeatedly the sickening decline of Virginia's thoroughbred breeding business. It's the VTA that should be at the forefront of saving that industry and the jobs of those who work in it, and whatever the organization has tried for the past 15 years or so, hasn't worked. Once one of the nation's proudest and most active breeding states (where Secretariat himself was foaled in 1970), Virginia has declined from 154 resident stallions serving 837 mares in 1991 to just 41 stallions serving 123 mares in 2008.

"Epic fail," as my kids would say.

The best way to turn around Virginia's breeding industry -- and to add another big-ticket day of racing to Colonial Downs' annual schedule -- would be the establishment of a Virginia Stallion Champions Day. Like similar events in other states, I envision a full card of stakes races open only to Virginia-sired horses, regardless where they're foaled. (By contrast, this year's first two VA-bred stakes races drew 22 entries, 17 of which were sired outside the state, albeit born there, and none of which were sired by a horse still standing in Virginia.)

Taking a fairly modest estimate of a daily Colonial Downs total purse -- say, $125,000 to $150,000 -- and adding in the $250,000 the VTA advocates tossing wholesale at the Kitten's Joy Stakes (typically dominated by non-VA-breds) would create a $375K to $400K basic purse structure for such a "Champions Day." That's potentially eight $50,000 races for VA-sired horses, and that's a real incentive to use a Virginia-based stallion. With a major sponsorship, added funds from nominations and other minor sources, or an increase in available monies should the VTA ever succeed in its worthwhile goal of getting OTBs situated in Northern Virginia, that purse structure and the number of races on the card could grow.

The VTA is proud of its "100 percent VA-bred bonus program" at Colonial, wherein owners of Virginia-breds that win among open company get double the purse payout. That's great if you campaign a VA-bred; not nearly so beneficial over the long haul if you're the breeder who sold the horse to make a living. And it's no incentive whatsoever for a mare owner to use a Virginia stallion so long as said mare returns to the Old Dominion to foal, as a couple-hundred do each year.

It's far past time for the VTA to start supporting its staggering stallion industry. So if the VTA is going to advocate abandoning the Grand Slam of Grass, then it certainly shouldn't be touting a massive purse addition for the Kitten's Joy, a race that had exactly zero Virginia-breds entered this year.

The VTA instead should be pushing for that money to directly support Virginia farms, horses and jobs.

Virginia's 'vanishing' breeding biz

I've alluded to this fact in a prior blog, and The Washington Post caught up to the story for Tuesday's editions. (You'll need a free logon I.D. to read.)

Thoroughbred race-breeding farms in Virginia are becoming very few and quite far between. From my limited experience as a budding horseman in my neighboring state -- plus evidence that continues to pile up -- it has a lot to do with the men and women in Virginia's government not really caring enough about the industry enough to cultivate it. And the fact that a significant percentage of the general public neither appreciates, nor understands horse racing.

Virginia has a fine racing venue in Colonial Downs. I happen to like the location, a rural setting near Interstate 64 on the way from Richmond to Virginia Beach, but apparently it isn't closer to bigger markets because of the NIMBY factor -- Not in My Back Yard. (Dear North Carolina: Feel free to build a racetrack in my actual back yard.)

But other than horsemen themselves, Virginians' minds are consumed by visions of the venue, off-track betting and the controversial notion of slots or other gaming to augment revenues.

Witness the immediate response of Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine when asked by a radio show host to comment on the Post's story about the loss of farms. Kaine can't get his mind off the gambling: "We have a track," he said, "we have a lottery and that's enough for me." It took multiple attempts for the program's moderator to get Kaine merely to understand that the question was about raising horses, not racing them or, the logical leap in the mind of the governor, the subject of gambling on those horses.

Kaine goes on to say that Virginia has "a number of good raising opportunities," though he admits to not being an expert on the race scene. That lack of expertise is clear, for when it comes to breeding and raising racers, the Virginia horse business could be on its last legs.

Despite the superb track that Kaine touts, Virginia's breeding, foaling and horse-development businesses are tanking. In the 1960s, Virginia was home to around 1,400 new thoroughbred foals a year; now that figure is closer to 350. As I've blogged before, the Virginia stallion scene has wilted from 154 studs serving 837 mares in 1991, to 41 stallions serving just 123 Virginia mares in 2008. I suspect the numbers will be worse again in 2009.

How many millions of dollars in Virginia income (and taxes) are lost in that decline? How many hundreds or thousands of jobs have disappeared? How many farms are folded, their green spaces paved over for a Super Wal-Mart parking lot or turned into cookie-cutter houses?

It's all but certain Tim Kaine isn't aware of those figures; nor are most members of Virginia's legislature. Perhaps it's equally likely that they don't care. That's both wrongheaded and sad.

Racing is, or should be, a key element of any thriving Virginia equine industry, particularly since the state does maintain a racing venue. And that equine industry is bigtime business for Virginia. The law firm of Sands, Anderson, Marks & Miller, which numbers equine law among its specialties, cites the horse biz as a $1.65 billion annual industry for the state, in some fashion still supporting up to 20,000 jobs. If virtually any other industry that helped employ 20,000 in the Old Dominion were struggling, you can bet Tim Kaine and the legislature would take note, and try to do something to help.

Meanwhile, many laymen simply consider horse racing, and the gambling that surrounds it, a vice that Virginia would be better off without. They figure a track and nine OTBs are more than enough, even if there doesn't happen to be a wagering facility anywhere near most of the 3.5 million who live in Northern Virginia, losing an estimated $100 million in wagering annually to neighboring states. And there's no way these opponents of horseplaying want slots or other gaming approved for the state.

Fully detailing all the present challenges about the breeding business in Virginia, and all the potential fixes, would be better-suited for a future post. (Or a book.) Suffice to say that while 100 percent owner's bonuses paid at Colonial Downs last year were great, they do little or nothing for the breeder who sold that foal to the racing connections. And with a brilliant but brief Colonial meeting that completely lacks a Virginia stallion series (like successful models in New York, Louisiana and elsewhere, stakes races for which only foals sired in Virginia would be eligible), there's almost no point in standing a sire in Virginia.

The numbers don't lie. If action isn't taken soon, the race-breeding business in Virginia will die.

Of course, then it won't cost much at all to fund 100 percent owner's bonuses for VA-breds running among open company at Colonial.