Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Equine Sales topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Canterbury rescinds sale, buys back yearling after questionable buyer; commissioners press background checks
Summary
Canterbury Park staff said they rescinded one sale and purchased a yearling back after identifying a buyer with a troubling background. Commissioners and staff discussed adding background-check or contract conditions to future sales and noted an emergency remedial order that stopped removal of the horse.
Canterbury Park purchased back a yearling and rescinded other sales after staff identified a buyer they said had a history of animal-neglect issues, commission members said Monday during the Racing Commission meeting in Saint Paul.
Commissioners and Canterbury staff described a sequence in which lower-priced horses sold at a recent yearling sale were quickly acquired by a single buyer. Canterbury staff said they raised concerns during and after the sale, then negotiated with the buyer and, in at least one case, rescinded the sale and returned horses to the original consignors. The horse named Peacemaker, which remained on Canterbury grounds while the dispute was resolved, was purchased back by Canterbury and turned over to the original consignor group, commissioners said.
“Those horses did go through the sale. We noticed very quickly a person at the lower end of the tier buying horses, the $1,000 horses...we kind of raised our red flags that night and trying to figure out who this was,” Canterbury staff member Sonia said during the meeting.
Commissioners said the chair, McCardell, issued an emergency remedial order that prohibited removal of at least one horse while the dispute was resolved. Commissioners credited that order and coordinated action for allowing Canterbury to keep the horse on-site until it could be returned to the consignor.
The incident prompted repeated discussion of whether the sale process should require pre-sale licensing or post-sale background checks. Commissioners suggested adding a clause making release of a purchased horse conditional on passing a background check before the buyer takes possession. “You can make this purchase, but before the horse is released to you, you have to go through the background check,” a commissioner said during discussion of next steps.
Canterbury staff said the sale had a code of conduct and standard terms copied from prior organizers but acknowledged the incident showed gaps that should be addressed before future sales. Sonia said Canterbury offered to buy the horses directly from owners before the sale but was declined; after the problematic purchases were identified, Canterbury and others negotiated buybacks and other remedies.
Commissioners discussed practical obstacles to requiring licensure or background checks prior to sale—chiefly timing: sales often complete, and horses change hands the same day—while endorsing contract-language changes or post-sale checks that could prevent immediate release to buyers with disqualifying histories.
No formal rule change was proposed or voted on at the meeting; commissioners said staff will return with recommended changes to sale terms and procedures for future yearling sales.
Ending — commissioners said the episode will inform new sale safeguards. Canterbury and the commission signaled they will pursue procedural changes (licensing, contract language, or release conditions) to reduce the risk of horses being transferred to buyers with disqualifying records.
