Statement from the USEA Professional Horsemen's Council

[TB or not TB?]

http://useventing.com/aboutus.php?id=1453

In light of recent comments in a variety of formats and settings, the Professional Horsemens’ Council would like to weigh in on the recent events at the Red Hills Horse Trials. As many readers know, at that horse trials there were two equine fatalities and one rider seriously injured. Though each of these incidents is tragic, it is the position of the Professional Horsemens' Council that each incident needs to be considered in context.
With regards to the injuries sustained by Darren Chiacchia, who is in fact chair of the Professional Horsemens’ Council, the PHC wishes him a speedy and full recovery. It is encouraging to us to know that he is surrounded by so many friends and family members. We hope and pray that his native physical strength and athleticism, coupled with world class medical care, will see him through. But we also feel strongly that Darren would be the last to point a finger with regards to his fall. All of us who pursue eventing at the professional level accept that our job is a dangerous one. We plan to have the right horse with the right preparation at the right level. But we all live with the potential for injury every time we get on a horse, be it at home for a hack or in the thick of competition.

With regards to the death of each horse, the PHC defers to the veterinary experts. FEI Veterinary Delegate Dr. Jim Hamilton, who served at Red Hills, as well as independent veterinary specialists consulted by the PHC, has confirmed that both horses died as the result of a massive internal hemorrhage. While the pathology investigation into the cause of death continues still, each veterinary specialist consulted has consistently expressed that neither exertion nor course design were factors in the fatalities. Each has consistently expressed that while there are several physiologic mechanisms where by hemorrhage can take place, this type of hemorrhage is impossible to foresee and impossible to prevent. Further, veterinary specialists consulted have indicated that this type of catastrophic blood loss is impossible to treat. According to the same veterinary specialists, there was no way to know prior to the fatalities that either horse was at risk and no way to treat either horse once the hemorrhaging began.

To touch on the third topic that has been raised following Red Hills, the Red Hills course designer, Mark Phillips, who originally brought European standards and quality to American eventing in the early 1990s, is one of the top course designers in the world. At Red Hills riders were in the whole confident in Mark's design. The Rider Representative, Karen O'Connor, has stated that the majority of the feedback she received from other riders prior to the start of cross-country was positive. On an additional note, it is worth observing that the Omnibus listing for the Red Hills Horse Trials describes the cross-country courses as "Difficult, technical, challenging courses." No one should go there expecting less.

In summation, the Professional Horsemens’ Council views the incidents at Red Hills as a terrible, unfortunate series of accidents. We whole heartedly support increased funding and research into equine health, will press for alternative construction methods to make cross-country riding safer, and encourage riders and course designers to work together to improve our sport. As professionals in eventing, we will lead that process.


PHC Members
Frederic Bouland - Fbets@cox.net
Jan Byyny – jan@surefireeventing.com
Will Coleman - wcoleman5883@gmail.com
Bobby Costello – rcostello@gmail.com
Phyllis Dawson – pwindchase@aol.com
Eric Dierks – ercdrks@aol.com
Phillip Dutton - Trueprospectfarm@aol.com
Peter Gray – psgray007@hotmail.com
Holly Hepp – holly@hollyheppeventing.com
Jonathan and Jennifer Holling – willowrunfarm@hotmail.com
Liza Horan – lah1996@aol.com
Mike Huber – mikehuberusa@hotmail.com
Robert Kellerhouse – rkeller92592@verizon.net
Carol Kozlowski – mothersfield@aol.com
Gina Miles – ginamiles@msn.com
Bonnie Mosser - pointabovefarm@aol.com
Karen O'Connor – ocet93@aol.com
Kim Severson – kvinoski@aol.com
Craig Thompson – craigthompsoneventing@gmail.com
Amy Tryon – furrypony@aol.com
Cathy Weischhoff – cathy@cwevent.com
John Williams – boscowilliams@earthlink.net

[vineyridge]

Everything is ALWAYS an unfortunate accident. Same old, same old.

So what are the new course standards likely to be with Kim Severson and Gina Miles in charge?

[RunForIt]

I will send them a copy of the quote in COTH by Karen O'C FOLLOWING the event that would contradict the statement the committee posted. Should the membership conclude from the content of the statements before and after the RH competition that the upper level riders can't read a course from walking it, or (as I do) that Karen didn't get any comments before the event, didn't get a sense that she SHOULDN'T run her horse and did, and THEN, had the good values, guts, integrity (label is up to you) to make a public statement that was a negative review of many of the questions used on the course.

Perhaps the Professional Horseman's Council should refer to the article in the Chronicle of the Horse, March 28, 2008.

I may not be able to ride as well as these ULRs, but I can reason, quite well.

[TB or not TB?]

I don't know.

I'm tempted to copy the PHC in on my letter to Kevin about the results of my research, but it doesn't really sound like they'd want to hear anything other than that these tragic accidents are unavoidable and eventing is awesome. :(

That rider deaths could virtually be eliminated fairly easily does not seem to be a line of thought inspires anything but criticism.

[BarbB]

Business as usual.
I honestly did not expect anything else, we have been down this road before, but I was hoping.
Although I only got to do a few horse trials with my last horse, eventing was uppermost in my mind when I chose him.
I am looking for a new partner, I think that show jumping will be the main criteria. This is all very discouraging. :(

[RunForIt]

I don't know.

I'm tempted to copy the PHC in on my letter to Kevin about the results of my research, but it doesn't really sound like they'd want to hear anything other than that these tragic accidents are unavoidable and eventing is awesome. :(

That rider deaths could virtually be eliminated fairly easily does not seem to be a line of thought inspires anything but criticism.

I'd put this letter in the same file as I did the ULR CHAT on COTH - they haven't figured out that patronizing and spewing the "party line" isn't working any longer...I'm sending it to Kevin, along with several of the comments by the riders on the CHAT - do I think they're listening, NO; do I think they care - sure don't have any evidence of it!

[3horsemom]

this just makes me sad.

[snoopy]

The PR machine in full force...admitting to nothing, paying lip service, and business as usual. I am incredably disappointed that some of these riders on this commitee would support this stance....because it is not their view in private. All I can think now is that they are bowing to pressure from above...and this saddens me as we need these types of high profile riders to "speak up"...it seems all they did was "shut up":(

[vineyridge]

It's an Olympic year, and every one of them would like to make the Team. So whatever the Captain and the USEF tell them to say, they have great motivation to say.

Maybe now that DC is almost sure to survive his accident doesn't seem so, well, so out of the ordinary.

[Jazzy Lady]

Well I don't know about the rest of you all but I sure feel relieved! PHEW. Nothing is wrong with the world afterall.

Now I can go back into my safe house where it's always sunny.

[TB or not TB?]

Well I don't know about the rest of you all but I sure feel relieved! PHEW. Nothing is wrong with the world afterall.

Now I can go back into my safe house where it's always sunny.

:lol::lol::lol::lol: Well played.

[RunForIt]

The PR machine in full force...admitting to nothing, paying lip service, and business as usual. I am incredably disappointed that some of these riders on this commitee would support this stance....because it is not their view in private. All I can think now is that they are bowing to pressure from above...and this saddens me as we need these types of high profile riders to "speak up"...it seems all they did was "shut up":(

What I say in public is my view. Anyone who agreed to having their name on that statement BELIEVES it.

[LexInVA]

The PR machine in full force...admitting to nothing, paying lip service, and business as usual. I am incredably disappointed that some of these riders on this commitee would support this stance....because it is not their view in private. All I can think now is that they are bowing to pressure from above...and this saddens me as we need these types of high profile riders to "speak up"...it seems all they did was "shut up":(

Unfortunately many of them have to maintain the status quo for various reasons they feel are important, namely their own lives. At the top it's all about donor and sponsor money and who does what for whom. Even if some of them did have an opinion that went against the party line, they sure as hell couldn't say it without suffering financial hardship. It's a quid-pro-quo system that got American equestrian sports where they are today. When the Olympics and beating Europe in every FEI covered sport to get some kind of credibility or respect became the obsession of wealthy socialites with too much time and money to spend, it all went down the shitter. Some of those frilly positions in the various organizations have a lot more power than their name implies.

[clovis]

Everything is ALWAYS an unfortunate accident. Same old, same old.

So what are the new course standards likely to be with Kim Severson and Gina Miles in charge?

I think I missed something... what are Kim and Gina in charge of, and what does it have to do with course standards?

[flutie1]

Can you spell SPIN?????

flutie

[snoopy]

Can you spell SPIN?????

flutie


Yes....B.U.L.L.$.H.I.T

[Jazzy Lady]

Yes....B.U.L.L.$.H.I.T

SHHHHH. Big Brother is watching!

[vineyridge]

I think I missed something... what are Kim and Gina in charge of, and what does it have to do with course standards?

See Kevin Baumgartner's second letter to the Membership about the BOD meeting on the weekend after Red Hills. Basically, DC and Gina Miles were asked to and did prepare a white paper on course standards. After DC's accident, Gina M was appointed to put the paper into standards that could be presented to the USEF at its April meeting, and KS volunteered to help.

I don't know if the standards that were discussed at the post Red Hills meeting are the same ones that are posted and discussed from the Eventing Standards Task Force, but this one would assume they are. And those have very little to do with the Upper Levels, which, as we all now know, are just perfect.

[subk]

Actually, I think this is about as good as can be expected and it's a positive development.
Did anyone really think they would say "The sport is screwed up so that makes us idiots to participate."? They aren't going to say that and they shouldn't have to.

I suspect what they don't want is more knee jerk reactions with new rules that won't (or wouldn't have) addressed the situation. Sounds like they want safety without giving up challenging, competitive courses. That's fair; it's what I want too. I think most of the rest of you do too. So that makes us all on the same team, same page. Anyone remember when most of the BNR weren't particularly concerned that the short format change was presented and implemented with out research or data as to possible issues? We have progress. If they believe the "unfortunate series of accidents" began and ended with Red Hills (and they don't exactly say that) then I'm not terribly worried that that's a major sticking point as it's a difficult position for them to defend.

I take issue with only one comment: "As professionals in eventing, we will lead that process." Be involved, be a major element, but no I don't think it is right for active riders who currently are in the hunt for Team positions to "lead" this process. There are plenty of other "professionals" in this sport who have a better vantage point, a better sense of history, better analytical skills and significantly less conflict of interest. They are absolutely the wrong group to lead--thanks for the offer, but no thanks.

[RunForIt]

Unfortunately many of them have to maintain the status quo for various reasons they feel are important, namely their own lives. At the top it's all about donor and sponsor money and who does what for whom. Even if some of them did have an opinion that went against the party line, they sure as hell couldn't say it without suffering financial hardship. It's a quid-pro-quo system that got American equestrian sports where they are today. When the Olympics and beating Europe in every FEI covered sport to get some kind of credibility or respect became the obsession of wealthy socialites with too much time and money to spend, it all went down the shitter. Some of those frilly positions in the various organizations have a lot more power than their name implies.

but what about the horses...are the Olympics justification for what's happening to horses...is it for you? should it be for ULRs? for the coach? for the USEA? IT's NOT for ME. I cannot justify any medal won by another horse being put in a situation where it has a good chance of being hurt. Horses go eventing because they trust us.

ULRs may play the "but they love to event" game when they need to put the SPIN on their decisions and actions that affect horses wellbeing for sport, but don't expect me to look the other way when they do. Can only hope that you don't either.

Eventing can work for sport, riders, horses - but responsibility for recognizing that eventing is a form of recreation belongs to the participants. Great - some of the participants can make money helping the others get better at the recreation of choice - I'm happy for them and happy for me to get better at my hobby. However, this game comes with a caveat - you can't do eventing without a horse. Horses can be trained to do what we ask, so since we also know that this level of animal can also feel intense levels of pain, we don't participate in events that obviously may put the living, feeling, part of our eventing at risk. Nope, medals, livlihood lived and made because of horses can't be a reason to rationalize its okay to put them in very risky situations just so we can have fun.

I won't do it. I won't support it. Hope the ULRs that aren't scared to jump those big ol' jumps have similar guts. JMHO

I forgot to say, I quit a teaching job 7 years ago because I was working for an unprincipled principal and there was no where else I could transfer. I knew at 50 I could still waitress if necessary, but my standards for behavior with children FAR outweighed everything else. This can be documented, as well as the fact that no less than 10 days after resigning from that school system another had hired me. I quit because kids mattered - seems like horses could for ULRs.

LC-B

[JER]

To touch on the third topic that has been raised following Red Hills, the Red Hills course designer, Mark Phillips, who originally brought European standards and quality to American eventing in the early 1990s...

This statement claims that CMP took US eventing out of the Dark Ages and onto the world stage. Which means that before his arrival/coronation, the US lagged behind the rest of the free world in eventing. But that's just not the case.

Looks like the riders that signed this letter forgot about Neil Ayer and Jack LeGoff. Very, very sad.

[Aimee Thanatogenus]

The most disgusting piece of tripe imaginable.

Well, pull the sponsor list and forward your complaints. And Olympic sponsors.

Mark Phillips as been crowned here because we are a bunch of lickspittle lackys when it comes to anyone in horses who has an ounce of blue in his blood.

The guy can't finish the course in the mpm and he knows it. Don't let him practice is brand of horse trading on your sport.

[snoopy]

The most disgusting piece of tripe imaginable.

Well, pull the sponsor list and forward your complaints. And Olympic sponsors.

Mark Phillips as been crowned here because we are a bunch of lickspittle lackys when it comes to anyone in horses who has an ounce of blue in his blood.

The guy can't finish the course in the mpm and he knows it. Don't let him practice is brand of horse trading on your sport.



Mark Phillips has NO blue blood..none...let us get that straight.

[vineyridge]

This statement claims that CMP took US eventing out of the Dark Ages and onto the world stage. Which means that before his arrival/coronation, the US lagged behind the rest of the free world in eventing. But that's just not the case.

Looks like the riders that signed this letter forgot about Neil Ayer and Jack LeGoff. Very, very sad.

Party line, perhaps??

It sounded VERY familiar, so I went back to the Live Eventing Chat which I had just read and found this:
Between us we've ridden just about every course designer's courses. Most of the time they get it right. Some times they get it wrong. Let's not loose sight of the fact that Mark Phillips brought European course design and standards to this country in the early 1990s. One result is that foreign riders now come to the US to up their game -- just ask Boyd.


signed CRT, MDD and LVV

[TB or not TB?]

Mark Phillips has NO blue blood..none...let us get that straight.

I happen to descend directly from European royalty on my mother's side. Commence with the kowtowing. :D

[vineyridge]

Sigh!!! My family is inescapably plebian. The best thing we've ever come up with was a great uncle with a medical record for syphilis longevity. :lol:

[snoopy]

I happen to descend directly from European royalty on my mother's side. Commence with the kowtowing. :D



Yes and I do have an indian princess in the family...but then don't we all!;)

[LexInVA]

And the beat goes on....

[TB or not TB?]

Lex, you're not authorized to opine or reply unless you are an ULR or royalty. :yes:

[subk]

The best thing we've ever come up with was a great uncle with a medical record for syphilis longevity. :lol:
Well! I have a direct descendent who was supposedly the oldest private in General Lee's Army of Virginia. Of course, considering my father's family moved to VA in the 1600s and never left I'm probably related to half the state!

And the beat goes on....
Not my fault. I pulled the flame suit out of the closet on page 1 and no one lit a match.

[Hannahsmom]

If you want to make a statement, make it with your pocketbook. Don't like what they said? Then don't ride in clinics or support their sponsors. Simple.

[LexInVA]

Lex, you're not authorized to opine or reply unless you are an ULR or royalty. :yes:

Bitch, do you know WHO I am?! :lol: (just kidding about the bitch thing) I'm seriously upset (but not surprised) we're being fed the same line that the USEF always gives us whenever there is a problem/issue with their manifest destiny or whatever the hell they call it in the inner circle. Perhaps the time is coming where we need to ask some difficult questions and debate many of the things we've been lead to believe were true in the last 20-something years.

[RunForIt]

originally posted by subk:
I take issue with only one comment: "As professionals in eventing, we will lead that process." Be involved, be a major element, but no I don't think it is right for active riders who currently are in the hunt for Team positions to "lead" this process. There are plenty of other "professionals" in this sport who have a better vantage point, a better sense of history, better analytical skills and significantly less conflict of interest. They are absolutely the wrong group to lead--thanks for the offer, but no thanks.

Hey, could you elaborate on WHY you think riders in the hunt for TEAM positions shouldn't lead the process" ...I'm inferring to making eventing safer, which leads me to the inference that the ULRs must think its NOT safe. The leaders of eventing safety shouldn't be our heroes? Or does this place them in a conflict of interest position? So does that lead us to conclude that CMP - regardless of ability - should not be designing the courses that the ULRs must compete on for TEAM consideration?

Just please find time to fill in the blanks...your ideas are some of the ones that I can use to make sense of stuff.

[LexInVA]

Not my fault. I pulled the flame suit out of the closet on page 1 and no one lit a match.

Well according to the powers that be, we shouldn't have matches because we're more likely to light our own farts than create a fire and that would be dangerous...:rolleyes:

[TB or not TB?]

Bitch, do you know WHO I am?! :lol:

Oh my poor virgin ears. :lol: Let me guess, you're 'kind of a big deal?'

[LexInVA]

Oh my poor virgin ears. :lol: Let me guess, you're 'kind of a big deal?'

Yes. I am. People know me. My home is filled with many leather-bound books and smells of rich mahogany. :winkgrin:

[3horsemom]

Sigh!!! My family is inescapably plebian. The best thing we've ever come up with was a great uncle with a medical record for syphilis longevity. :lol:

things are tough around here to night. thank you for making me laugh out loud.

[TB or not TB?]

Yes. I am. People know me. My home is filled with many leather-bound books and smells of rich mahogany. :winkgrin:

:uhoh: Oh that IS impressive. Very well, you can be in the cool kids club with me and Snoopy. Viney, you may come too, but only because for some clubs of prestige in Victorian England, syphilis was a requisite for entrance.

[3Day-Eventer]

So, becuase a course is listed as "Difficult, Technical, Challenging Courses" we should expect 2 horse fatalities, and a major rider injury??? WTF????
That is the biggest bunch of crap I've ever heard! Sad really.
I guess I'll start paying attention to that line in the omnibus. I'm only entering events that say: "Average for horses with some experience at this level". Wait... thats almost all of them!!

[BarbB]

Yes. I am. People know me. My home is filled with many leather-bound books and smells of rich mahogany. :winkgrin:

My home is filled with paper bound books and sometimes smells of wet dog.

Am I close to being invited to tea??

[LexInVA]

My home is filled with paper bound books and sometimes smells of wet dog.

Am I close to being invited to tea??

Sure! Just be sure to bring your best frilly hat. We can have some cookies and other assorted baked goods too. :D

[TB or not TB?]

My home is filled with paper bound books and sometimes smells of wet dog.

Am I close to being invited to tea??

Sorry dear, you'll have to marry in. :winkgrin:

[BarbB]

I'll have to pass. I don't know what I would do with the Corgis.

I'll have tea with Lex, all I need is a frilly hat.

[TB or not TB?]

I'll have to pass. I don't know what I would do with the Corgis.

Oh! You didn't say they were Corgis! Those are the dogs of the queen. You may enter. :lol:

[vineyridge]

:uhoh: Oh that IS impressive. Very well, you can be in the cool kids club with me and Snoopy. Viney, you may come too, but only because for some clubs of prestige in Victorian England, syphilis was a requisite for entrance.

That's very kind of you, but I really think I'd be more comfortable in the kitchen. :cool: And I'll be sure to wash my hands with anti-bacterial soap.

[RunForIt]

So, becuase a course is listed as "Difficult, Technical, Challenging Courses" we should expect 2 horse fatalities, and a major rider injury??? WTF????
That is the biggest bunch of crap I've ever heard! Sad really.
I guess I'll start paying attention to that line in the omnibus. I'm only entering events that say: "Average for horses with some experience at this level". Wait... thats almost all of them!!

USEA - TAKE HEED! Someone send mrghook over here ...:eek::winkgrin: :cool:

[Bensmom]

Okay, I want to warn you that this post should not be taken seriously, because I am a middle aged, overweight, re-rider with a bunch of broken down OTTBs in my barn, some of whom get bute every now and again . . :lol:

And, you guys aren't going to take me seriously anyway, because I am so associated with the event and what I say doesn't go along with all the fun that is being made here, but . . .

I suck at keeping my mouth shut.

So, I've just come back from Darren's fundraiser (which went very well, btw, but that is another thread or two) where I actually discussed what went on in the discussion that produced that statement with one of the people that signed it.

I did not get any sense from that discussion that it was motivated by any fear of the Captain or not making the Team (but I've said that now for days) and in fact, the very idea that you guys keep pushing of being afraid to speak out because they are terrified they won't be on the Team was thought ridiculous.

Perhaps by some riders that aren't on that list, it is a valid concern, but for the ones that are, that was a non issue.

I didn't get the impression from that statement, combined with what karen said in the COTH article that they thought everything was just ducky. In fact, what I have gotten from all of it is that that darn course rode a lot more awkward and harder than it walked.

Which is what I had guessed from the beginning -- what the riders thought before the first horse went out on course was, "gee, it is a stiff course, but that is what Red Hills claims to be." And then, since no one knew how the new stuff would ride, they were surprised. This is the kind of feedback you wish you *did* have prior to the event, but usually, you don't.

Everyone here, that in the absence of the feedback that deltawave and Reed have called for, that is assuming that the deaths of those two magnificent horses was the result of the course at Red Hills must know something that the extremely well respected vets that examined them don't know.

I've met with the vets. I was on the scene for both incidents. I've discussed it with the riders and I've seen what they had to say, both in public statements and in private.

I guess what is making me angry now, and I'm getting there, is that people seem to think they know more and better than the experts that were involved and that the experts involved care more about appearances and the status quo than the horses.

I was THERE for it guys, and that is simply NOT TRUE. Go and read what Jon has to say about the loss of Direct Merger on his journal on the website. Then realize that he signed the above statement, not because he's afraid not to, but because he believed in it.

I'm giving up at this point with trying to say anything more -- do I think everything is hunky dory and shouldn't be investigated? Of course not -- we met less than 12 hours after everyone had pulled out to analyze what went wrong and how it could be addressed and in fact, what it means for where our sport is in general.

But, before you characterize what these professionals, who actually suit up, and hop into the saddle to jump this stuff, say as "tripe" at least consider that this might be an area where things are debatable and that there is more to it than you might think, and that I have found each and every one of them that I have addressed on the issues perfectly happy to discuss it with a smurf like myself. I wish I had read the statement before I went to the benefit tonight, as I could have asked specific questions about it rather than discussing the conference in which is was drafted in general.

Sorry to be a wet blanket, but at least that can just serve as a flame suit for the rest of this thread.

Libby, who again, is NOT speaking officially for RHHT

[subk]

Libby, personally I don't see the horses that died to be so much a part of the equation that's creating this buzz. I do think some research on how we've changed the way stress is applied is called for. What I'm pinging off of is Darren's accident on top of Ralph's accident on top of Debi's accident on top of some pretty awful recent statistics on rider deaths. It is too much for me to look at and keep saying that "it's dangerous and accidents happen." And trust me I've said that in the past. At some point we need to take a deep breath and and a good look around. And in a manner that we haven't before, because I'm not sure the way we've done that in the past has been as effective as it should have been.

[Bensmom]

Yes, I said I was done, but I ought to clarify. I guess I'm responding to the tone of several posts, not to any one thing said specifically, basically that "gee, the ULRs are so happy with the status quo that they don't care about the horses involved here."

Which I disagree with and don't believe this statement reflects.

I agree that the accidents bear looking at, though I think they will be difficult to draw conclusions on. I don't know details of Debi's accident like I do Ralph's and Darren's, but other than the fact that ULRs were injured horribly, they may be difficult to compare.

Ralph was going Advanced on his experienced, but maybe not well suited for that level, horse. Darren was running prelim on a much greener horse, but one that he felt was ready for the challenge and that took a misstep on a black flag option. One that the course designer felt was at the top of difficulty for that level and that wasn't required by the course.

I agree that our course needs to be examined and considered, because even the ones that did well here (Karen was, after all, second in the W Cup on Allstar, and Mike Winter won his division) spoke out about the poor way that some of the course rode. But, especially when you throw in Kim's accident, which happened schooling at Rocking Horse not associated with a competition, it is difficult to summarize them as more than bad accidents.

I don't think anything that causes us to examine what we are doing, where the sport is going, and why is a bad discussion, I just react poorly to the piling on of posts that all say "gosh, that is a load of crap."

It may have had a positive spin on it, which is what flutie noted, but I don't think it was the candy coated, la-la-la, fingers in the ears statement that some have portrayed it as.

Perhaps I just see this as a matter that is ripe for discussion, not a bash fest. Discussion is always good. Sitting around with post after post saying "boy, these guys are idiots!" is no different that the cheese and wine post.

Which, btw, when I relayed that to an ULR tonight, was greeted with horror and shock that any of the ULRs would say such a thing. It was true surprise and I was asked who it was, to which I could only respond that this person was hiding behind a made up name and we don't know but can only guess.

In any event, I am more trying to comment on the comments engendered by the statement. Maybe more than anything, to totally dismiss it as tripe and the words of people that don't care about the horses, really challenges the integrity of someone like Jon, who actually lost a beloved partner that weekend and still believed in the statement of the PHC enough to put his name on it and his contact info.

And, as he is one of the nicest guys, with the most integrity in the sport, it made me mad. Or at least mad enough to start typing, which might not be a good thing!! :lol:

I promise to shut up now. Really.

Libby

[HappyHoppingHaffy]

Wow, I went out to ride Eukanuba, settled in with a cup of tea and found this...
Ah, politics. I LOVE the part when they speculate on what Darren would have done/and thinks should he not be suffering from TBI...and well, very sadly, may never be able to tell us what he thinks/thought about the sport/what it has become. What a cop out by the author
Anywho, I'm about done. I think I'd rather go do hunter paces and fox hunts rather than play this game anymore. The arrogance of these pricks is amazing. I deal with enough *ssholes at work (MD's, MD/PhD's and sponsor companies) but they're least they're trying to cure cancer/said diseases and generally save the world. (No offense docs, but I work with spine surgeons and orthopaedic surgeons mostly...You can rip me if you are one/know one, but I'll counter it in a PM...:) And really, that was a compliment! )
Seriously, it's my hard earned money from slaving 9-5...okay really 8:30-6:30, that pays for the *professional* riders/trainers (my own included).
I'm about done being slammed for an opinion and an outrage. Stupid idiots; Shape up or I'm done paying your paychecks.


Oh, ya, Victoria Stewart, Boston, MA, aka HappyHoppingHaffy

[Aimee Thanatogenus]

Mark Phillips has NO blue blood..none...let us get that straight.

Oh, hon, I know, he just f###ed it. Really quite the joke, he is.

Americans need to realize that. :yes::yes:;)

[HappyHoppingHaffy]

Oh, hon, I know, he just f###ed it. Really quite the joke, he is.

Americans need to realize that. :yes::yes:;)

How much to take him back?

~Victoria Stewart, Boston, MA

[TB or not TB?]

Libby,

Let me give a quick explanation why I am up in flames about some of the current issues, and why the letter by the PHC rubbed me the wrong way. I have nothing against anyone who signed that (I hold a rather high regard for many on that list), and I certainly don't think any one person or people are responsible for the years of tragedy in our sport (even CMP, and I'll get to that). I do, however, feel that those who's lives and livelihood revolve solely around eventing are not impartial to the current state of affairs. I don't say that because of Olympic pressures or Team issues or anything even close - I say that because is isn't proper science or human nature to objectively assess something one is emotionally and financially attached to. The more entrenched one is, the less objective s/he becomes.

I've been researching night and day since Red Hills. (And let me state for the record, the tragedies had nothing to do with the event itself and were simply a manifestation of the state of the 'union,' nothing to do with the hosts, officials, volunteers, etc). The sabbatical/roadtrip/life evaluation I'm on has taken an odd turn, and I feel driven to complete this project, though I am sure it will take longer than the 6 or so months I have available. I'm in an unusual position, for while I have a great interest in the sport, I haven't competed in over 5 years. Hell I haven't even ridden these past 18 months. Because of this, I feel like I'm an outsider looking in. OTOH, I do have the benefit of of riding since I was 5 and eventing since I was 10, so my horse credentials are not lacking.

From my vantage point, I've watched the sport take some odd turns, what with Olympic concerns, the short format, and technical courses. These changes seemed at odds with the eventing I had grown up with, and while I was not pleased, it wasn't really affecting me. And then... death after death kept popping up, and injuries to top level riders. Like many others, Red Hills was merely a turning point for me. It also came at a time in my life when I could devote some serious energy to finding out why. Because, whether I'm in the saddle this moment or not, eventing is the sport I want to do, and my generation is its future. I figure that includes me.

Now, investigation was done on every death and accident. Every time, the result was "Gosh what a tragedy. One of those freak accidents, and nothing could be done to change it." Reading that in print over 40 times, which is approximately the number of deaths and serious injuries in the past 10 years (and that's riders only), kind of made me think otherwise. And so I researched. And patterns are appearing all over the place. A freak accident is something that happens once a decade, not 40 times.

What's more important is that, from my very preliminary findings, it appears we could virtually eliminate these serious injuries and deaths. Can you imagine not having to hold your breath come Rolex weekend? Now, if a 23 year old can find patterns in an unofficial study she is running herself that could save countless people from tragedy, what do you think a major organization with unlimited time and funds could do?

Eventing is a broken system right now. Technical courses are contributory, but they are not the sole factor. Consider with me, friends, that as a sport, eventing requires mistakes. We depend on mistakes from our riders and horses to determine the ribbons. We create a course so that s/he with the fewest mistakes wins. Normally this works well. In a healthy system, a rider misjudges the striding in the combination and tries to squeeze in one more. The horse slams on the breaks and the team incurs penalties. This is an acceptable consequence.

But sometimes the mistakes are not so harmless, and the consequences are UNACCEPTABLE. A green horse doesn't understand the question and smashes into the jump with his shoulder, in which case he has NO OTHER OPTION but to flip over the fence. Whether the rider is crushed and killed/seriously injured is a coin toss, though the approach speed does factor in as well. That is absolutely, positively UNACCEPTABLE. Broken bones, fine. An embarrassing but harmless fall into water? Even better. But I draw the line at getting maimed and killed.

And so, a system that relies on the mistakes of its competitors to exist, yet doesn't accommodate or work to prevent unacceptable mistakes, is broken. WHY, if we could continue to create challenging courses that test our riders, would we not want to do it in a way that eliminates unacceptable consequences?

And then I hear drivel like the statement from the USEA PHC, about how accidents happen and there's not a darn thing we can do about it.

To hell with that.

[Auburn]

Well said, TB or not a TB! Thank you for taking the time to do the research. Hopefully, someone in the USEA will take note and ask for your findings.

[flyingchange]

Professional Horseman's Council? When did this happen? I'm totally roflmao. Might as well call it Heathers. Or Mean Girls.

Thank You! Ha ha ha ha ha. So true.

[Jeannette, formerly ponygyrl]

There is an old Suzanne Vega song, with the line
"It's a one time thing
It just happens


A lot"

which springs to mind. Libby, thanks for making me re-read the statement several times. While it's true there are some points which are open to debate or revision with more facts, the statement itself is fairly reasonable.

Choosing to open the statement with a phrase about considering the events "in context" led me to expect a bigger picture view.

It is true that in one view, the context of the deaths and injury was one event, by all accounts a very well run one, which riders went on course expecting a tough but challenging course.

Many of us, and undoubtedly many if not all of the signers of that statement, are thinking long and hard and actively about the larger context, the one where there do seem to be an awful lot of "unfortunate incidents" occurring.

Though the end of the statement does talk about the need to look at construction and design, if I were the PR editor, I would have led with that portion of the statement, and probably expanded on it a bit.

The context that statement is being released into is a pretty fired up crowd, middle aged housewives or no, so I can't blame folks for reading what was meant to be a straightforward account of facts as a dismissal of larger concerns. Glad I re-read it, because there are a lot of people on that list I like and respect.

Libby, don't shut up, please. It is easy to fall into demonizing the "other" and your posts do an excellent job of reminding me at least that there aren't really two sides. There are varying perspectives, but everyone wants a safe, challenging sport. Reasonable people may differ in their risk tolerance, and their exact definitions of "safe" and "challenging" but that is a more nuanced conversation than "You suck" retorted by "You don't understand!"

[gully's pilot]

TB or not TB--

Thank you. You've articulated well something I was struggling to find words for: that mistakes are an integral part of eventing, and therefore we must find a way to make the mistakes non-fatal. I'm thrilled you're finding patterns--kick on. If you're 23, you may not remember the days when horses had to carry at least 165 pounds cross-country. Carol Kazloski (I'm sure I'm not spelling that right!), a petite woman who rode the 15h Connemara stallion Erin Go Bragh at advanced, was convinced that the lead weight she carried affected horses differently than the weight of a moving rider--and, in fact, made them much more prone to certain types of injuries.

She developed a study to test her theory and it was proven correct. The next year, the weight requirement was dropped, world-wide.

What you're doing has the potential to really help our sport. Good luck, and if I can help, let me know.

Kim Bradley--Bristol, TN

[BigRuss1996]

Yes ...she started a petition that was circulated at events including Radnor Three day that almost all of the riders signed. I did the Intermediate Three-Day at Radnor that year and it was the last year of the weight requirement.... I did sign and there were tons of names on there...



TB or not TB--

Thank you. You've articulated well something I was struggling to find words for: that mistakes are an integral part of eventing, and therefore we must find a way to make the mistakes non-fatal. I'm thrilled you're finding patterns--kick on. If you're 23, you may not remember the days when horses had to carry at least 165 pounds cross-country. Carol Kazloski (I'm sure I'm not spelling that right!), a petite woman who rode the 15h Connemara stallion Erin Go Bragh at advanced, was convinced that the lead weight she carried affected horses differently than the weight of a moving rider--and, in fact, made them much more prone to certain types of injuries.

She developed a study to test her theory and it was proven correct. The next year, the weight requirement was dropped, world-wide.

What you're doing has the potential to really help our sport. Good luck, and if I can help, let me know.

Kim Bradley--Bristol, TN

[Debbie]

Libby, please don't shut up and thank you for relaying your experiences of talking real time about these issues. I've really pondered the statement from the PHC and the chat from the other day and tried to not let my feelings be too impacted by the unfortunate stink bomb that is Cheese & Whine's initial post. I do feel there is a disconnect between the PHC and the smurfs in terms of each group's overarching view of the state of the sport. My career is association management and a large part of that is consensus building. You can almost never build consensus or promote mutual understanding in anything other than a face-to-face setting.

I think it is time for USEA to consider an "Eventing Summit." Recruit across the spectrum of stakeholders throughout all levels of the sport and then get the group in a room and really delve into these issues. The only rules are that no one can be dismissive of any view and that everything is up for discussion. I think it would be eye-opening for all "sides" to hear from one another and be thoughtful about the perceptions and realities of the sport today.

My 2 cents.

I hate that C&W got smurfs shooting at UL riders as a group. I don't think that's reflective of reality despite occasional tensions.

[flutie1]

"What's more important is that, from my very preliminary findings, it appears we could virtually eliminate these serious injuries and deaths. Can you imagine not having to hold your breath come Rolex weekend? Now, if a 23 year old can find patterns in an unofficial study she is running herself that could save countless people from tragedy, what do you think a major organization with unlimited time and funds could do?"

Have you shared your "fixes" with Kevin and the Task Force he set up? They meet again on Monday. It would seem a productive way to go.

[Bensmom]

Thanks, guys. I am not sure that I'm capable of shutting up ;)

Firstly -- TB or Not TB -- I have great admiration for your analytical powers -- I have the horse that you chose using those powers in my barn now, remember, and I think you did an awesome job picking him out and I'm grateful that he came into my life every day (he would like to say though, that if you want to rescue him from stall rest, he'd be ever so grateful. He feels fine and is READY TO GO OUT! :lol: )

I think that your study will be the result of the best type of thought provoking discussion. And, thank you Jeanette and Debbie -- all I want is for people to REALLY read what these guys say -- I've heard almost no one say that everything is fine and dandy -- even Mark said in the COTH article that course design needs to be looked at.

This statement summarizes what I have tried to do throughout these threads:


It is easy to fall into demonizing the "other" and your posts do an excellent job of reminding me at least that there aren't really two sides. There are varying perspectives, but everyone wants a safe, challenging sport. Reasonable people may differ in their risk tolerance, and their exact definitions of "safe" and "challenging" but that is a more nuanced conversation than "You suck" retorted by "You don't understand!"


Turning this into an "us against them" fight will do none of us any good, and is no different than what C&W did on that thread attacking lower level riders.

And, RBJ, you know I love you, but especially after talking to one of the people involved in the conference call that produced that statement and looking at the work that the PHC is set up to do, I got no "Heathers" or "Mean Girls" feeling from it at all. These guys care about the future of the sport as much as we do, their perspective is just really different than ours.

One more question for TB - - as you do your research, where does an accident like Kim's fit in, since it was over a schooling stadium fence and not xc? Does that get considered, or are you just examining accidents on xc? I am really glad that you are gathering data -- as Reed and DW keep reminding us, the data is the only way that we will really know what is happening and if there is any way to prevent it.

Libby

[RAyers]

I take issue with only one comment: "As professionals in eventing, we will lead that process." Be involved, be a major element, but no I don't think it is right for active riders who currently are in the hunt for Team positions to "lead" this process. There are plenty of other "professionals" in this sport who have a better vantage point, a better sense of history, better analytical skills and significantly less conflict of interest. They are absolutely the wrong group to lead--thanks for the offer, but no thanks.

Agreed. "Excuse me Mr. Fox, I got to head to town. can you watch the henhouse?"

Now, I know a few of those riders and I respect them immensely, but the people who LEAD the process should NOT just be professional riders, trainers, CDs, etc. They should be PART of it, but not lead it.

Reed

[Jazzy Lady]

I think that, for me anyway, that I don't really need to hear the ULR's say "things are bad, they need to change", but I think that we are all looking for them to say that things will be looked at and maybe everything isn't peachy keen. Data is what is needed, but for me, as I am moving into intermediate this year with my eyes set on a CCI** in the fall and Advanced in the spring, this is touching me close. Yes I am from Canada, but we don't have opportunity to move up to Advanced or run that many quality intermediates up in Ontario, so we travel to the US a lot. I want to feel like this is do-able for a keen rider who isn't a weekend warrior, but a full-time and committed amateur. I feel like right now, the upper levels are reserved to the pro's, and I don't think that's how it should be.

Libby, your posts are well thought out and articulate and necessary to bring the board back into reality. Please don't shut up, we love hearing your thoughts!

[mbarrett]

What a cop out! They are so blind to not know what is going on in eventing? Do they see it or do they chose not to see it?

The whole situtation reminds me of a sign I used to see in the dark room at the newspaper I once worked at: "The only difference between this place and the Titanic, is that the Titanic had a band."

The ship (eventing) is taking on water, folks. Time to do something about it or go down with the ship, while saying, "The ship is not sinking, the ship is not skinking, the ship is not sinking..."

I for one would like to do something about it.

My suggestion to the riders who signed the letter: "Get your heads out of the sand!"

[RAyers]

Hey, could you elaborate on WHY you think riders in the hunt for TEAM positions shouldn't lead the process" ...I'm inferring to making eventing safer, which leads me to the inference that the ULRs must think its NOT safe. The leaders of eventing safety shouldn't be our heroes? Or does this place them in a conflict of interest position? So does that lead us to conclude that CMP - regardless of ability - should not be designing the courses that the ULRs must compete on for TEAM consideration?

Just please find time to fill in the blanks...your ideas are some of the ones that I can use to make sense of stuff.


While these riders can see and understand the feel it takes to ride courses and horses, they have significantly smaller understanding than the vets about horse physiology. They have no experience in data reduction and interpretation or accident investigation. They have minimal understanding of biomechanics or the mechanics of falls and/or trauma.

How many of these riders even have the experience or contacts to create a quality team to cover all aspects they claim to want to lead?

Note, again, I am disparaging the riders for their skills, but this is an example of being raised to their level of incompetence.


Reed

[Hannahsmom]

One more question for TB - - as you do your research, where does an accident like Kim's fit in, since it was over a schooling stadium fence and not xc? Does that get considered, or are you just examining accidents on xc? I am really glad that you are gathering data -- as Reed and DW keep reminding us, the data is the only way that we will really know what is happening and if there is any way to prevent it.

Libby

You know, before one just gathers data, it is good to know what questions one is trying to answer. I would assume TB or not TB has started with a hypothesis and is now putting together data to prove or disprove that hypothesis.

Oh, and TB or not TB, as far as being a 23 year old, that's some of our best minds and ideas in research, so ressearch away! Much better than us old fogies with prejudices and preconceived notions! :)

[frugalannie]

I read the PHR letter, and my thought was "True. True. Unrelated." it is true that the horse deaths at Red Hills were not caused specifically by the course. It is true that everyone accepts that eventing is a dangerous sport, and that Darren's accident was just that. But that should be unrelated to to the desire to try and decrease these outcomes, and the feeling (which needs to be tested) that XC courses as a whole are devolving from the original intent. And there is the possibility that in studying the rare occurence of internal hemorrhage in equines will result in our learning more about it. Sometimes researchers have to think outside the box.

TB or not TB, my hat is off to you. Thank you for spending your time and effort to help the sport. I can't wait to read the results of your research. And if I can help, PM me.

I don't think that fear of the team selection process resulted in the statement from the PHR. But I would think that a pending lawsuit would have any statement from anyone who could be construed as under the USEA auspices completely vetted out before publication. Under these circumstances, one has to say what one knows is true, and not speculate at all. The statement does that beautifully.

[bambam]

Nope- sorry- I reread it and it still reads to me like a failure acknowledge what is going on and that there is potentially anything wrong.
They can acknowledge that the increase in deaths recently is indicative that there may be a problem and that it should be looked at without crying "the sky is falling" (which they won't and shouldn't do). This statement fails to do that despite the fact that it is likely some if not most of the people who signed it believe that. And THAT is the problem in my opinion- stand up already. If you think everything is ducky and 11 deaths including 5 (?) at prelim (or that country's equivalent) in slightly over a year is nothing to be concerned about and not indicative that we should be looking at ways to minimize a risk that admittedly cannot be and should not be eliminated then great but if you think there is a problem and you sit silently by as a high profile pro in the sport, shame on you.
Now obviously everyone is entitled to their opinion and if they actually think everything is peachy, they are entitled to think that (even though I might think they are delusional and simply trying to rationalize continuing to go out on these courses and make their living that way ;)) but if they don't think that then these types of statements are not helping- very few people if anyone think Red Hills itself was the problem- rather it is a vivid illustration that there is an over-arching problem and we need to figure out what it is. By couching their statement in terms of "Red Hills is not bad and those were accidents" they avoided and trivialized the real issue in my opinion.

[RAyers]

Speaking of unrelated, I mentioned to the USEA a good analogy of ow unrelated accidents are actually related to make the ENTIRE system safer.

Consider a drunk driver in CA who runs off the road into a tree. Now consider a driver in MA who slides off an icy road into a tree. Both accidents are completely unrelated in cause, however automobile makers take into account both incidents as a COMMON occurrence that must be considered in designing a safe car.

As TBornotTB mentioned, 40 "unrelated" incidents cease to be unrelated if we look at the overall, general safety of the sport. This is something the PHC does not see and takes a person away from the professional aspect of the horses with other expertise to find.

Reed

I read the PHR letter, and my thought was "True. True. Unrelated." it is true that the horse deaths at Red Hills were not caused specifically by the course. It is true that everyone accepts that eventing is a dangerous sport, and that Darren's accident was just that. But that should be unrelated to to the desire to try and decrease these outcomes, and the feeling (which needs to be tested) that XC courses as a whole are devolving from the original intent. And there is the possibility that in studying the rare occurence of internal hemorrhage in equines will result in our learning more about it. Sometimes researchers have to think outside the box.

TB or not TB, my hat is off to you. Thank you for spending your time and effort to help the sport. I can't wait to read the results of your research. And if I can help, PM me.

I don't think that fear of the team selection process resulted in the statement from the PHR. But I would think that a pending lawsuit would have any statement from anyone who could be construed as under the USEA auspices completely vetted out before publication. Under these circumstances, one has to say what one knows is true, and not speculate at all. The statement does that beautifully.

[deltawave]

both horses died as the result of a massive internal hemorrhage. While the pathology investigation into the cause of death continues still, each veterinary specialist consulted has consistently expressed that neither exertion nor course design were factors in the fatalities

This is the part that raises my eyebrows. How on EARTH can a statement like this be made when the current "state of the art" thinking on this topic is a vast unknown?? It's like saying, 50 years ago, that smoking did not cause cancer. At that time we didn't KNOW it did, but medical knowledge has a way of evolving and making us feel very foolish about the dogmas we clung to even 10 years before. I hope this topic gets some serious attention, funding, and research! I am never going to make a ripple in this sport in any other way, but this is one specific area where I really think there's a lot to be done, and learned, and I hope it can happen. I've already volunteered my services, FWIW. :)

[Bensmom]

Thank you, dw. This is the kind of response that is so valuable -- right now, that is what the experts are saying, so if it needs to be challenged, I am thrilled that a human heart expert is willing to help!

I really don't object to the statement engendering questions, but the bashing posts really bother me because they aren't constructive. This spurring of research is the best kind of constructive! :yes:

libby

[Camstock]

DW, that jumped out at me too. Not because I know anything in particular about the circulatory system, but because of my experience of horses NOT having this pulmonary difficulty in all the years I have been foxhunting on very serious terrain with a lot of jumps, and for a much longer period of time and distance than even a 4* course. My working theory is that the lack of mental letdown is very stressful to horses and that stress shows itself in a very ugly and terminal manner.

You go, and let me know if you can use some help from a communications specialist/meteorologist/horsechick.

[deltawave]

Well, you have to allow that there are a HUGE variety of emotions going around right now, I daresay on ALL (not both) ;) sides of this issue. People need to vent, they need to be pissed off, they need to say their bit. Some feelings will doubtless be hurt in the process, on all sides. But after that, I'm pretty sure a little progress will go a long way towards unruffling feathers. Call me an optimist. :) But name calling and negativity really are sort of the kind of thing that just HAPPENS. Ripples on the surface of the ocean and all that.

I try to put myself in the boots of an ULR these days, one maybe trying to make the team, but more importantly, one trying to make a living. What other skills do they have? Some have a good education and/or private means, some do not. If their sport went away, what would they do?

I'm reminded of what a BNR once told me: this rider pulled up halfway around a VBE (very big event) because the horse was not going perfectly, although well enough, and the rider remembered the thought flashing through their head "I have no long-term disability insurance, what the heck am I doing?" I have enormous respect for this person for this and many other reasons. But what if there are riders out there who would have kept going because they see no other way of making a living? SCARY.

But then, I'm plagued with indecision in a lot of things because I have what may be a talent or a curse of putting myself in other peoples' shoes pretty well. Makes one tend to be non-judgmental.

And to offset that statement, I'm giving one big, huge :rolleyes: to the riders who gush about being so freaking safety-conscious, NONE OF WHOM I have ever witnessed riding with a helmet unless they're absolutely required to do so. GAG ME WITH A SPOON, you dang hypocrites! :mad: If I can withstand the funny looks of a busload of tourists in Aruba for carrying my riding helmet along to go on a beach ride, you big, important, awe-inspiring ULRs can wear a stinking helmet and set a stinking EXAMPLE!

OK, disjointed rant over. :)

[Hony]

"In summation, the Professional Horsemens’ Council views the incidents at Red Hills as a terrible, unfortunate series of accidents. We whole heartedly support increased funding and research into equine health, will press for alternative construction methods to make cross-country riding safer, and encourage riders and course designers to work together to improve our sport. As professionals in eventing, we will lead that process."


PHC Members
Frederic Bouland - Fbets@cox.net
Jan Byyny – jan@surefireeventing.com
Will Coleman - wcoleman5883@gmail.com
Bobby Costello – rcostello@gmail.com
Phyllis Dawson – pwindchase@aol.com
Eric Dierks – ercdrks@aol.com
Phillip Dutton - Trueprospectfarm@aol.com
Peter Gray – psgray007@hotmail.com
Holly Hepp – holly@hollyheppeventing.com
Jonathan and Jennifer Holling – willowrunfarm@hotmail.com
Liza Horan – lah1996@aol.com
Mike Huber – mikehuberusa@hotmail.com
Robert Kellerhouse – rkeller92592@verizon.net
Carol Kozlowski – mothersfield@aol.com
Gina Miles – ginamiles@msn.com
Bonnie Mosser - pointabovefarm@aol.com
Karen O'Connor – ocet93@aol.com
Kim Severson – kvinoski@aol.com
Craig Thompson – craigthompsoneventing@gmail.com
Amy Tryon – furrypony@aol.com
Cathy Weischhoff – cathy@cwevent.com
John Williams – boscowilliams@earthlink.net
__________________________________________________ _______________________

I may be blind but I don't see the issue. PHC has said that they support further research and that they want safer jump construction and want to promote safe riding. It is true that Baron Verdi had an accident, it is true that two horses died of the same cause which apparently needs more research so that we can determine which horses are predisposed to this defect.
I don't feel that the PHC is snubbing anyone. They made ALL of their emails available so that people can contact them.

[Horsepower]

I forget which event it was, but I will never forget watching a cross country event on tv several years ago in which the announcers proclaimed a particular jump a "death trap." Then later in the event they had to announce that indeed a rider died at that jump. I think that is pathetic. Yes, the sport is dangerous, but if it was obvious to all that a particular jump was that dangerous, isn't it pathetic that it was allowed to remain until it did finally kill someone?

[JER]

Speaking of unrelated, I mentioned to the USEA a good analogy of ow unrelated accidents are actually related to make the ENTIRE system safer.

Consider a drunk driver in CA who runs off the road into a tree. Now consider a driver in MA who slides off an icy road into a tree. Both accidents are completely unrelated in cause, however automobile makers take into account both incidents as a COMMON occurrence that must be considered in designing a safe car.

Reed

A few months ago, I posted about statistics/safety legislation on small children and car air bags as an example of the same thing. There were a very small number of deaths/serious injuries to small humans caused by front seat car airbags deploying according to protocols but there was enough public outcry (and lawsuits) to prompt experts to look at the data and fix the problem. The individual cases were all individual car accidents but the cause of death/injury was related.

As for cardiac issues, F1 racing was able to measure various physical parameters (body temp, HR, sweat content, mental fatigue, etc) and correlate them to windows of time when accidents were most likely to happen. We should be able to do the same with horses. And until we do so, we have no business calling these horse deaths 'unrelated'. We just don't know.

[deltawave]

I'd like to see them put their money where their mouths are. I'd love to challenge every single rider on that list to commit to wearing a certified helmet, every time they put a leg over a horse, damn the excuses, as a statement of solidarity and as an unspoken commitment to SAFETY. If I look at a BNR wearing a baseball cap while schooling a horse, I may be in awe at their technique and skill, but a part of me is always also saying "what an idiot".

Maybe I'll send them all an email to that effect. :yes: Minus the "what an idiot" part, of course. :p

[frugalannie]

By the way: I really like the posting on the USEA site about the goals of the standards and safety committee (forgive me if I got the name wrong). At least they are going to valuate a number of issues that have been identified. Wish the PHR had responded similarly!

[RAyers]

"
I may be blind but I don't see the issue. PHC has said that they support further research and that they want safer jump construction and want to promote safe riding. It is true that Baron Verdi had an accident, it is true that two horses died of the same cause which apparently needs more research so that we can determine which horses are predisposed to this defect.
I don't feel that the PHC is snubbing anyone. They made ALL of their emails available so that people can contact them.



It is not that they are snubbing anyone but that here we have "experts" who don't necessarily practice what they preach and then profess they will lead the way? It's kinda like George W. saying he will lead the fight to fix the education system in the US.

Reed

[flutie1]

"It's kinda like George W. saying he will lead the fight to fix the education system in the US.:

Maybe he could start by learning to string together a few words that don't reveal how utterly stupid he is?

flutie (partisan and proud of it!)

[Fallbrook]

Reading about this Professional Horseman's Council brought to mind a web site I ran into a few months ago. At the time I thought it was a really interesting idea and I planned to do further checking, and then something came up and I forgot about it until this topic came up.

With the PHC, there is an organized group to speak for, and represent the interests of event riders who have a professional/financial interest in the regulation, promotion, and organization of eventing. Where is the representation for the other 95% of the members? In the UK, they seem to have formed an organization called the Event Horse Owners Association to provide this representation with British Eventing. I don't know if we need a similar group in the US, separate from the USEA - but I think this organization does offer some of what we Housewives, Househusbands, and otherwise unpaid Horse slaves would like to see in the sport:

From their web page

http://www.ehoa.org/about.html

ABOUT THE EHOA
QUICK LINKS
With over £300,000 put into the sport of Eventing since the EHOA was formed and countless training awards and vouchers distributed, the EHOA continues to be a strong voice for owners and owner-riders. In 2007 the EHOA and its sponsors supported events with a total investment of over £60,000.


Owner representation - your views are heard
Excellent working relationship with BE, organisers and riders
EHOA place on the BE Board - owners' views well represented
FREE £10 training voucher for all members annually
Opportunities for additional training vouchers
Training days at less than cost with top riders and trainers
£3000 worth of training awards; £2000 worth of rider awards p.a.
Recognition Awards for owners, riders and organisers
Hospitality: Burghley, Gatcombe, Chatsworth, Breeding Champs + Badminton competitors
Generous product discounts from over 20 providers
Guidance leaflets, newsletter, web site and handbook

[Shortstroke]

One of the points that I find interesting and keeps coming up is the distinction that is made (by the professionals) between the professionals and the amateurs. The point of view of the professionals seems to be that they own the high ground in all aspects of the sport which would include horsemanship, ability, knowledge, judgment, experience etc... But what does it take to become a professional other than a declaration? True, there is a rulebook monetary threshold but that it pretty low. The fact of the matter is that the mere fact of having the "professional" designation does not confer authority. Bill Steinkraus was an amateur. And there are many other examples of amateurs with all the same horse related skills as top professionals. I think we are all in this together and we need to figure it out together. I've seen too many "professionals" who had the sizzle but not the steak to fall blindly into line behind their leadership. "Trust me - I'm a professional!" is actually pretty scary!

[deltawave]

Agreed, shortstroke. Being a professional horseman does not necessarily confer expertise in all aspects of horsemanship. But of course if you see Big Name Rider Jones touting such-and-such a supplement, product, or feed you automatically assume that person has the weight of authority behind them on the topic of supplements, products, or feeding horses. Many of them DO have that expertise, but many of them DON'T. You want respect as a horseman? That has to be earned, and most of us smurfs are savvy enough and knowledgeable enough in our own right to make the call.

I have no doubt that the very best riders give their horses much of the very best care, but that is not an absolute. Just last month in Practical Horseman there was an article comparing top jumper trainers, one of whom bragged about his gorgeous paddocks and in the very same sentence mentioned his horses were "too valuable" to be turned out in them. :rolleyes:

I can't ride like the BNRs, but I can take care of a horse. I don't really need "leadership" from them on that score. Nor do I need "leadership" in how to be safe from someone who won't wear a helmet. :lol:

[Speedy]

I've ridden with several of the people on the PHC and each one has been firmly committed to safety and good horsemanship. I don't have the time or inclination to catalogue it all, but my own experience with them has been overwhelmingly positive.

And, believe it or not, some of them do wear helmets.

I wish more of you had more exposure to the people you are publically trashing, because the reality is a bit different than you seem to imagine.

[RAyers]

I've ridden with several of the people on the PHC and each one has been firmly committed to safety and good horsemanship. I don't have the time or inclination to catalogue it all, but my own experience with them has been overwhelmingly positive.

And, believe it or not, some of them do wear helmets.

I wish more of you had more exposure to the people you are publically trashing, because the reality is a bit different than you seem to imagine.


I have ridden against or work with (in some form or another) at least 7 of the folks on the list. I don't think it is "trashing" to point out how the words contradict the actions. It does not mean they are bad people. For example, I have the utmost respect for Frederic and his abilities. I would ride with him in a minute. However, actions speak louder than words and when people sign their name to a statement, if the signee does not follow that statement, it makes the words ring hollow.

Reed

[bambam]

I suspect many of us have first-hand experience with these riders, I know I do with a few. They are by no means bad people but in my opnion they are doing a disservice to the sport with this statement

[bornfreenowexpensive]

I respect several people who are a part of the PHC....but considered the letter to not really say anything. I agree that much of the finger pointing is crap....and I don't really have an opinion about Red Hills. But do really think that much of the up roar is not about Red Hills...but the direction this sport is taking and that is where that letter really shows a lack of understanding.

I also strongly disagree with this statement

"To touch on the third topic that has been raised following Red Hills, the Red Hills course designer, Mark Phillips, who originally brought European standards and quality to American eventing in the early 1990s, is one of the top course designers in the world."

American eventing was at the tops in the 80s and 90s and continued to be not because of MP. The statement about European standards is hog wash. Our courses were already very good and some of the best were not designed by MP although he has designed some good ones. Riders are coming to the US (and have been coming to the US for some time) NOT because of our courses or our competitions....they are here because of our money. They are here because they can support a business teaching and selling horses and because there are more sponsors and owners located here in the US.....NOT because of MP's grand design on xc courses. Our competition is good and we have good courses.....but most of all, they can make a living here in the US BEING professional horsemen. US riders still need to go to abroad to continue their educations and compete in international competitions just as foreign riders will continue to come here to the US.

Do I have an issue with the CD of today...yes. I think it has gone too far and moved too far away from what was the core of eventing in xc. This has not been an over night occurence. It started with the initial thought that more narrow fences were perhaps safer...or a more technical course was safer since it would cause run outs....not falls. That has shown not to be the case as the more technical courses have encouraged riders to ride backwards...and not learn the art of galloping and jumping which is the heart of xc. And a slow rotational fall at a skinny fence is just as (if not moreso) dangerous as a fall at any other kind of fence. I'm not impressed with a lot of the riding that I watch....and while I may not be an UL rider...I am an educated rider who knows good riding when I see it....and I'm seeing less and less of it on today's courses (especially at the higher levels).

I'm sure that there are many many reasons for this....and I do not blame any one person or one event....but I can say that I do support the energy now being aimed at taking a good hard look at our sport and the direction that our sport is heading. The letter by PHC doesn't affect what I think of several of those riders....but it rang hollow and meaningless to me when instead, I think they could have used that forum (and perhaps will) to be a much stronger force then what basically came across as lip service.

[TB or not TB?]

Firstly -- TB or Not TB -- I have great admiration for your analytical powers -- I have the horse that you chose using those powers in my barn now, remember, and I think you did an awesome job picking him out and I'm grateful that he came into my life every day (he would like to say though, that if you want to rescue him from stall rest, he'd be ever so grateful. He feels fine and is READY TO GO OUT! :lol: )

Haha, I BET he is!!! Has he destroyed anymore 2x's??


One more question for TB - - as you do your research, where does an accident like Kim's fit in, since it was over a schooling stadium fence and not xc? Does that get considered, or are you just examining accidents on xc? I am really glad that you are gathering data -- as Reed and DW keep reminding us, the data is the only way that we will really know what is happening and if there is any way to prevent it.
Libby

Right now I'm limiting it just to XC, since that's where most accidents are occurring. I am, however, examining videos of falls in stadium. The same pattern for the start of a rotational fall happens all the time, except since the poles collapse, the horse is able to catch himself. It's interesting stuff, but I recommend some hard liquor. :no:

[Bensmom]

(small journey OT) Well, he's gotten cast twice -- once before surgery and once since. :( But, we had a HUGE advancement this week. I realized that he is GREAT in his electric pen at an endurance ride. So, I emailed the surgeon and asked her if it mattered if his "stall" was inside or outside. She said it didn't, so he moved outside this week, where he is MUCH happier. Even though there are BUGS there. And MUD. And BUGS. and RAIN. And, did I mention, BUGS?! :lol:

I commend you on being able to watch the videos -- I have a really hard time watching falls of any kind, so I'm really glad that you are willing to take this research project on! If you head down this way in your travels, perhaps to see some of the disney-esque ( ;) ) course for yourself, make sure and let me know!

[TB or not TB?]

I wish more of you had more exposure to the people you are publically trashing, because the reality is a bit different than you seem to imagine.

I'm in the minority since I haven't met any of them personally. I have to rely on the statements they publish, rather than just "knowing" that they are good people, or that their opinions are different than the words they stand behind.

[TB or not TB?]

(small journey OT) Well, he's gotten cast twice -- once before surgery and once since. :( But, we had a HUGE advancement this week. I realized that he is GREAT in his electric pen at an endurance ride. So, I emailed the surgeon and asked her if it mattered if his "stall" was inside or outside. She said it didn't, so he moved outside this week, where he is MUCH happier. Even though there are BUGS there. And MUD. And BUGS. and RAIN. And, did I mention, BUGS?! :lol:

I commend you on being able to watch the videos -- I have a really hard time watching falls of any kind, so I'm really glad that you are willing to take this research project on! If you head down this way in your travels, perhaps to see some of the disney-esque ( ;) ) course for yourself, make sure and let me know!

Oh I'm SO glad to hear it - he must be in heaven to be outdoors!!! Hahaha, but don't you know, as his peon you're supposed to keep the bugs AWAY? I thought all minions understood this. :lol: He's such a diva.

I will of course let you know if we get down there. It probably won't be until later this year (FL in the summer is not my cup of tea ;)) but we have friends and family in that area to visit as well. Plus I could get my picture taken with a mouse and cheese. That's not something that happens every day! :D

[Speedy]

I'm in the minority since I haven't met any of them personally. I have to rely on the statements they publish, rather than just "knowing" that they are good people, or that their opinions are different than the words they stand behind.

I guess I fail to see what was so offensive or misleading in the published statement...what in the statement itself, exactly, makes you assume that they are NOT good people? They actually indicated that they support more research and improved fence construction. I think its so interesting that very few people have really focused on that.

I also think the statement was carefully crafted so that it would be something that everyone on the list would be comfortable signing...but I could be wrong, and you could find out one way or the other, simply by writing to them at the addresses provided.

[Hony]

It is not that they are snubbing anyone but that here we have "experts" who don't necessarily practice what they preach and then profess they will lead the way? It's kinda like George W. saying he will lead the fight to fix the education system in the US.

Reed

So these riders don't practice or promote safe riding and don't have an interest in having more safe jump designs used? RAyers, help me out with this please?. I've been raking paddocks all day and I'm pretty tired and slow today!

[TB or not TB?]

I guess I fail to see what was so offensive or misleading in the published statement...what in the statement itself, exactly, makes you assume that they are NOT good people? They actually indicated that they support more research and improved fence construction. I think its so interesting that very few people have really focused on that.

I also think the statement was carefully crafted so that it would be something that everyone on the list would be comfortable signing...but I could be wrong, and you could find out one way or the other, simply by writing to them at the addresses provided.

I don't think they're not good people :) As I stated, I hold many of them in high regard from their reputations as horsemen and -women. Yet there is still a certain amount of laissez-faire in that statement, as well as the overriding sentiment that we shouldn't question the system.

I'm not angry about the letter or ready to shoot down anyone who supports the riders in question. Like I said, it just rubbed me the wrong way.

[BigRuss1996]

...they didn't really say anything in there that wasn't what has already been said in all the press releases and articles from USEA , USEF, etc. It is really more just restating what has already been said ....

I can tell you though for those doubting this group of riders that I personally know many of them and none of them are bad people. A few of them are actually really great people and I think they do have the sports best interest at heart..... it just isn't coming across right and is instead very repetitive of what has already been said so sounds more like nothing "lip service" as someone else said. I don't think that is the intent though.

[bornfreenowexpensive]

...they didn't really say anything in there that wasn't what has already been said in all the press releases and articles from USEA , USEF, etc. It is really more just restating what has already been said ....

I can tell you though for those doubting this group of riders that I personally know many of them and none of them are bad people. A few of them are actually really great people and I think they do have the sports best interest at heart..... it just isn't coming across right and is instead very repetitive of what has already been said so sounds more like nothing "lip service" as someone else said. I don't think that is the intent though.


I agree...I doubt that was the intent and I do think that many of them want to make sure that they have a voice in the process and to stay active in the process of examining eventing. You are not going to hear them scream that the world is crashing and that all courses are horrible dangerous and the MP is the "antichrist". If any of them thought that....I highly doubt they would be eventing...they are not idiots with a death wish. The letter didn't offend me (much)....but it also really didn't add to the discussion either and I would hope that many of these riders and the PHC do add more valuable input.

[RAyers]

So these riders don't practice or promote safe riding and don't have an interest in having more safe jump designs used? RAyers, help me out with this please?. I've been raking paddocks all day and I'm pretty tired and slow today!

You are only focused on fences. Safety is not a single point or event. Safety is a process across the board. Sure you can look at fences and courses but if a rider doesn't take care of - or even wear - a helmet, even if it is approved, a safe fence can kill. You can have an interest in making things safer but if you only do 3 out of 5 things or 90 out of 100, the remaining components become dangerous unto themselves. We see this all of the time in factories, in labs, driving cars, going out in a thunderstorm,...

As pwynnnorman pointed out, to make eventing safe you have to influence the entire culture. Something as simply wearing a good helmet every ride can have great influence on young riders to be safer.

Part of making eventing safer is as much advertising and EDUCATION as it is research. Well, these pros are supposed to be educators and are well positioned as role models to do something very simple right away to make a difference.

I can tell you right now there are common points to incidents, based on our own cursory investigations, that already point out that a crash is WAY more than the fence. The pros should be able to acknowledge that fact and lead by example.

An example: the easiest way for me to get my students to start wearing personal protective equipment in the lab is to wear it myself every time I go in there. Why, because I would be devastated if a reaction went wrong (like they have) and a student was killed. Sure, the gear and shields are a royal pain and cumbersome but when you know you could get the equivalent of a 1/4 stick of dynamite from 5 grams of impropoerly handled material accidently going off 2 feet from your face or in your hand, I sure don't want to to see my students be statistics. (My lab sometimes makes Mythbusters look like wimps. "Ooo, I can't stand too near the explosion.")

Reed

[Hony]

I agree that safety needs to be a culture. It is certainly part of my eventing culture. I got the impression from the PHC letter that that's what they were trying to get at too. Certainly if there is someone on that list who doesn't wear a helmet or practices some other sort of bad safety call they should be brought to attention and taken off the board. I don't know the riders personally and therefore can not say whether they practice what they preach or not but my impression of the letter was that they were on board to promote safety but they did see the accidents at Red Hills as just that, accidents.
Thank you for elaborating.