PDA

View Full Version : The "NO REINSTATEMENT" thread.



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14

Fairview Horse Center
Feb. 18, 2006, 08:25 AM
I don't think there was much consideration that anyone cared, and the fact that we DO care, and can even get the media to notice that we do, is probably quite unexpected. Whether or not it will be effective, we don't know.

and of course, PV will not file for reinstatement until we all get bored with the subject, and go about our normal lives. One already slipped thru the process unnoticed by all, but hopefully this thread will make us all aware that we have to stay alert, and keep our voice strong so the USEF does not slip them in the back door when no one is looking <"oops, too late"> They have to know we DO care - this year, and next, as well as in 20 years or 50.

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 18, 2006, 08:28 AM
Joe Plemmons said he was welcome at Wellington and he goes down just to sell some horses.

Christ with an alligator clip.

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 18, 2006, 08:59 AM
I am prefacing this by saying it is my opinion only. We as members gave more credit to the then AHSA now USEF as a parent organization then they could do. They heard, set down and went about their business. When something occured, it took weeks, even months to fully get it looked at. IE: suspended persons being on show grounds, horses of suspended persons being shown. Stewards, judges, show managers are not police. Nor should they act as such. They are rule keepers. Trying to work within the confines of said rules. When given facts concerning rule infractions, AHSA/USEF looked at it. Many rule changes were put into place to allivate these problems. So they thought.

It is unfortunately similar to the drug rules. For every drug which is banned, someone somewhere, will come up with something new. For every rule on felons within our organization, someone is out there figuring out how to circumvent it. It is a game to many as we have seen.

Stopping a trainer, rider, owner, exhibitor from being reinstated is the one thing which USEF has come up with, that works. It won't stop business as usual, but it does mean they are not welcomed back with open arms either.

Yours Truly
Feb. 18, 2006, 09:02 AM
I have a couple of question, some of which may have been answered already, so bear with me. Also, I'm ignorant of USEF Rules on this matter, so forgive any goofy statements on my part.

1) If PV is currently in violation of the Rules, can any USEF member lodge a complaint? Has this been done?

2) Is there a mechanisim to monitor who is applying for reinstatement? (Does USEF post this on their website?)

3) Once someone does apply for reinstatement, can any USEF member submit comment? What is the comment period?

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 18, 2006, 09:27 AM
YT these are not goofy what so ever!!
To the best of my knowledge here are your answers: 1) yes and yes. 2) yes they do monitor it, but each case has to be looked at individually. So far this is not posted on their web site. Excellent thought tho. 3) do not know. Comments may be submitted on liscensing of officials whose names are in the magazine. But haven't seen anything concerning re-instatement.

N&B&T
Feb. 18, 2006, 09:52 AM
YT, the answer to number 3 appears to be yes, based on the USEF quote in this Nancy Jaffer article in the New Jersey Star Ledger (http://www.nj.com/columns/ledger/jaffer/index.ssf?/base/columns-0/1139722677231210.xml&coll=1)

Also see the Get Out Your Pens thread started by Coreene for further information on letter writing.

To consolidate, http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif this thread (http://chronicleforums.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/7076024331/m/143201398) contains links to the above article and to two other articles, in the Providence Journal and the Palm Beach Post.

Finally, waaaaay back somewhere in the beginning of this thread, Erin mentioned that this issue was suitable for someone wishing to submit commentary to the Horsemens Forum.

meadow lark
Feb. 18, 2006, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
Excuse me C.Boylan but you limited your debate to Article 704 on GR68 however...
Article 702 on page GR67 is more difficult to evade.

GR702 Violations
1. A violation is any act prejudicial to the best interests of the Federation, including but not limited to the following:

c. Penalization by an administrative agency, human society or<span class="ev_code_red"> court of law </span> for violation of Federation Rules.

g. Failure to obey any penalty imposed by the Federation.

<span class="ev_code_red">h. Exhibiting any horse while in the care and training or custody of a suspended person.

i. Riding, exhibiting, coaching or training for the benefit , credit, reputation or satisfaction of a suspended person.</span>

I think by virtue of all of your statements and those others who ride with PV you have certified that all of you are in violation of these rules. By placing people in violation of these rules PV has proved that he has no remorse and no intention or regard for his penalty as worth following.

Further he has corrupted the system by permitting those who are his friends to be in jeopardy of being violators of these rules and therefore subject themselves to penalties by the USEF.

Wouldn't it be a pity if he were re-instated and all his clients were then suspended?

Yes, but none of that is applicable

1. No one was penalized by a court of law for violation of Federation rules--they were all found guilty of insurance fraud.
2. No amatuer rider is exhibiting a horse while in the care of a suspended person--PV, BW and others only give lessons and clinics.
3. Amateurs can't ride, exhibit, train, etc. for the benefit of a suspended person--they would have to be professionals to do any of those things, and they are not...

Being able to critically read is important in reading these legal rules.

meadow lark
Feb. 18, 2006, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
In as much as I sent the film clip and Joe Plemmons made his confession on national TV. He confessed to killing a horse owner because she was going to the DA to have them all prosecuted.

I received no answer at all from John Long or anyone from USEF in response to my suggestion of the rules that could be used to immediately ban him from any USEF show even until he had a hearing.

Now, if someone who was essentially unsavory to say the least...and the court ruled the AHSA the had a right to ban unsavory characters from their shows if that did not get any reaction! Would you not wonder if others would be afraid they might wind up like Helen Brach by the same people?

I hope that satisfies as an answer as to why no one has enforced the existing rules Boston Chicken.

yes, but killing horse owners is not a violation the the USEF rules--it is not even a federal crime.

meadow lark
Feb. 18, 2006, 11:59 AM
Originally posted by Yours Truly:
I have a couple of question, some of which may have been answered already, so bear with me. Also, I'm ignorant of USEF Rules on this matter, so forgive any goofy statements on my part.

1) If PV is currently in violation of the Rules, can any USEF member lodge a complaint? Has this been done?

2) Is there a mechanisim to monitor who is applying for reinstatement? (Does USEF post this on their website?)

3) Once someone does apply for reinstatement, can any USEF member submit comment? What is the comment period?

the answers to your questions, are yes you can file a complaint, but he is not in violation of the rules--and the hearing committee has the sole right to decide who is readmitted [not a few members]

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:06 PM
Yes! it really is! We have two reports published by Phelps Media saying that Equitation Riders in the Maclay were showing horses owned by PV.

We have friends of PV who stable with him saying he has a proxy on his payroll. We have all of you that are his students and show giving PV credit and we have ads in the Chronicle giving him credit and Thank you! for his teaching.

Tsk! Tsk!

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:11 PM
Last I checked horse owners are usually human and it is illegal to assault a human and certainly criminal to shoot them in the head and then burn the body in a steel furnace.

I am certain that killing even a "horse owner" is a capital offense. Conviction for which should be an automatic ban if the person happens to have been a client who bought horses from said killer; or was hired by same to do the deed.

I do agree that most of these types do not consider a person to whom they have sold horses more than sub-human and a "target".

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:17 PM
The Federation does not exist except for the members. So if the members get cranky and call the Attorney General of New York they might enforce a lot of rules pertinent to a New York Non-Profit where no one is supposed to do anything for profit in either money or prestige. This is an educational charity. Supporting only the High Performance folks who can afford the expense might not be what New York had in mind when the IRS granted USEF a non-profit status.

You see you really can't have it both ways. You can't say no one who isn't rich can afford to be competitive and then claim to be a charity.

And, if they lose their non-profit status they can't be an NGB so we're all back to square one. You never know when someone will play the "Go to Jail" card.

meadow lark
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
Yes! it really is! We have two reports published by Phelps Media saying that Equitation Riders in the Maclay were showing horses owned by PV.

We have friends of PV who stable with him saying he has a proxy on his payroll. We have all of you that are his students and show giving PV credit and we have ads in the Chronicle giving him credit and Thank you! for his teaching.

Tsk! Tsk!

PV doesn't own any horses--those were horses owned by others and held for sale...the kids took lessons from PV/and there is no rule stating that you cannot take lessons from a suspended person.

PV does not own Acres Wild Farm, and he has no payroll.

TSK/TSK yourself

meadow lark
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
The Federation does not exist except for the members. So if the members get cranky and call the Attorney General of New York they might enforce a lot of rules pertinent to a New York Non-Profit where no one is supposed to do anything for profit in either money or prestige. This is an educational charity. Supporting only the High Performance folks who can afford the expense might not be what New York had in mind when the IRS granted USEF a non-profit status.

You see you really can't have it both ways. You can't say no one who isn't rich can afford to be competitive and then claim to be a charity.

And, if they lose their non-profit status they can't be an NGB so we're all back to square one. You never know when someone will play the "Go to Jail" card.

I think with the move to KY, the USEF changed their state of incorp...but that is not the issue...their charitable status is not in any jeopardy in the Real World...

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
The Federation does not exist except for the members. So if the members get cranky and call the Attorney General of New York they might enforce a lot of rules pertinent to a New York Non-Profit where no one is supposed to do anything for profit in either money or prestige. This is an educational charity. Supporting only the High Performance folks who can afford the expense might not be what New York had in mind when the IRS granted USEF a non-profit status.

You see you really can't have it both ways. You can't say no one who isn't rich can afford to be competitive and then claim to be a charity.

And, if they lose their non-profit status they can't be an NGB so we're all back to square one. You never know when someone will play the "Go to Jail" card.

If the members are the ones running it, what do you need all these petitions for?

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:48 PM
Maybe! but then maybe not! I don't Think you have the full story either. Mason Phelps said he owned the horses. SO! suspended person got credit and benefit...don't you think?

Of course I guess the USEF could just punish the kids.

SheilaH, just to tell the employees what the Federation expects them to do as Members in good Standing who pay their salaries. Those who are not members are stating the fact that it is not in the best interests of the sprt to permit convicted felons to be members in good standing.

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
Maybe! but then maybe not!

Are you sure about that?

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by Boberry:
George Morris complains of the swaybacked, leave early, high crested equitation riders from the 80's on, and so many credit PV with accolades from this, maybe it's truely natural selection to pan out the posers who would "kill for it" to the true artists.

Typical of that twisted old fruit to complain about something he created.

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:01 PM
Hmmm! not according to the required current Membership form where it counts.

And, yes! their non-profit status is definitely at risk. Having just incorporated as a sport club 501(c)(3) in New Jersey there are big differences between classifications to the IRS. Do you have any idea what the penalties could be if they are found in violation?

An Educational Charity has a lot of trouble running horse shows. That's what the whole issue of Conflict of Interest is about. The Board can decide to overlook a conflict of interest for David O'Connor but that doesn't make it legal...It just makes them guilty too.

Erin
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:02 PM
Sheila H... contribute like an adult, or don't contribute.

For the record, the only one who can state unequivocally that PV is in violation of any USEF rules is a USEF official. I don't mind people citing the rule and questioning whether or not what he's doing is kosher under the rules, but I DO mind people stating that yes, he is definitely breaking rules. Rules are subject to interpretation, and since no one here is a steward, I don't think anyone can unequivocally state that they know for sure how the rules are interpreted.

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:16 PM
that twisted old fruit


Okay, okay..I'll return to the leper colony; But you gotta admit..you all cracked up at THAT one http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:36 PM
Meadowlark, according to the USEF, PV does in fact still own Aces Wild Farm in RI. It is in good standing and listed as active.

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:40 PM
Well here's a news flash for you: thats wrong.

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 01:47 PM
Originally posted by Erin:
Sheila H... contribute like an adult, or don't contribute.

For the record, the only one who can state unequivocally that PV is in violation of any USEF rules is a USEF official. I don't mind people citing the rule and questioning whether or not what he's doing is kosher under the rules, but I DO mind people stating that yes, he is definitely breaking rules. Rules are subject to interpretation, and since no one here is a steward, I don't think anyone can unequivocally state that they know for sure how the rules are interpreted.

I think its unlikely that not one person on this bored is a steward. How do you know I'm not one my own self?

ise@ssl
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:00 PM
Helloooooooooomeadowlark - Insurance Fraud is FELONY - covered by FEDERAL LAW. Helloooooooooo!!


YEAH!! sheila - I LOVE YOUR POST ABOUT GM http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

The USEF is still incorporated in NY - that's why they maintain a small office there.

ponybreeder
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:01 PM
Ah... Aren't stewards fairminded sorts? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

ponybreeder
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:03 PM
I will give you this, though, Sheila. Spelling is not required.

Duffy
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:04 PM
There are some stewards on the BB. But, the ones I know are stewards haven't been on this thread to my knowledge...(Can't say that I blame them. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:04 PM
All the ones I have met have been. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

"Typical of that twisted old fruit to complain about something he created." Have to admit, that is a good one Sheila H. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:06 PM
I don't know. Why don't you ask Mr Valliere?

ponybreeder
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:08 PM
YOU don't know??!!! (she faints dead away http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif)

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by ponybreeder Aefvue Pig Farm:
YOU don't know??!!! (she faints dead away http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif)

Thats right. I've never bothered to speak with a steward. I let my awesomeness speak for itself. Urging officials to intervene on their behalf has always been the refuge of the incompetent.

Seal Harbor
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:24 PM
What do you do when you don't follow the protocol - beat them up behind the barn? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:30 PM
Originally posted by Seal Harbor Aefvue Farms PNW:
What do you do when you don't follow the protocol - beat them up behind the barn? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif

I'm pretty much doing what I do when I dont follow the protocol when I'm doing what I'm doing right now.

Seal Harbor
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:35 PM
I see, you talk circles around them that make no sense and they do whatever you want.

Hmm probably pretty effective.

ponybreeder
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:40 PM
Sheila, we are in total agreement. Your awesomeness definitely speaks for itself.

Webster. Awe. N. dread

I shall let you all get back on topic now.

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:44 PM
OK - back on topic. How many think PV would be a shoe-in for reinstatement if he was as charming and funny as me?

anthem35
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:45 PM
Originally posted by meadow lark:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Snowbird:
Yes! it really is! We have two reports published by Phelps Media saying that Equitation Riders in the Maclay were showing horses owned by PV.

We have friends of PV who stable with him saying he has a proxy on his payroll. We have all of you that are his students and show giving PV credit and we have ads in the Chronicle giving him credit and Thank you! for his teaching.

Tsk! Tsk!

PV doesn't own any horses--those were horses owned by others and held for sale...the kids took lessons from PV/and there is no rule stating that you cannot take lessons from a suspended person.

PV does not own Acres Wild Farm, and he has no payroll.

TSK/TSK yourself </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Finally, someone well-informed.

Thank You.

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:52 PM
Originally posted by Seal Harbor Aefvue Farms PNW:
I see, you talk circles around them that make no sense and they do whatever you want.

Hmm probably pretty effective.

How many of the pages on this thread are devoted to me? Am I the greatest person in the history of horse jumping or something?

Equit8tor
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:55 PM
Haven't noticed anything "devoted" to you.

mxyplyzyx Aefvue Farm Apres Hunt Lounge
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:57 PM
Am I the greatest person in the history of horse jumping or something?

Absolutely! With supporters of your caliber, PV will be most fittingly rewarded. Bravo!

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 02:58 PM
Thats because you havent read carefully.

Equit8tor
Feb. 18, 2006, 03:04 PM
Ah, but my dear, I HAVE! This being such an important topic/issue I am quick to discard the garbage.

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 03:05 PM
Keep it up, wonderkids!

I wonder if this thread will be shut down any time soon.

mxyplyzyx Aefvue Farm Apres Hunt Lounge
Feb. 18, 2006, 03:09 PM
Make it so, Sheila H.

Erin
Feb. 18, 2006, 03:10 PM
Are you people going to make me shut yet another thread because you can't simply IGNORE the trolls who are trying to get a rise out of you?

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 18, 2006, 03:14 PM
Erin why aren't the trolls just plain banned?

Sheila H
Feb. 18, 2006, 03:16 PM
Because its the legit posters who are the real problem.

Just so you all know, Erin is asking rhetorically - she already knows you people are going to make her close this thread (with or without me).

Erin
Feb. 18, 2006, 03:18 PM
The trolls are just plain banned, sometimes. If they become enough of a pain in the ass. (And yes, you're getting there, Sheila.)

But if some of you would simply GROW BRAINS and put a sock in it, Sheila wouldn't be much of a problem...

I'm not on here 24/7. And it really pisses me off when I've been gone at the barn for 3 hours and come home to this kind of crap. Just because Sheila is acting like an idiot doesn't mean the rest of you have to stoop to her level. Take a little responsibility for your own playground, please.

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 03:26 PM
I want to take the opportunity to remind you all that I will ship braceletss tomorrow. So please send any orders tonight and tomorrow morning.

Buy your No-Reinstatement Bracelets now (http://www.usAHSA.org/Bracelets_for_Sale.htm)

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 18, 2006, 03:28 PM
Anthem, I think we all know that PV does not own Acres Wild on paper. However, plese realize that we are not naive enough to think that he is not paid for his services at that establishment. If he is training for free, maybe I better change my outlook towards him, suck it up, and let the wife take a few lessons. Perhaps she could figure out changes before she reaches retirement age.

Equit8tor
Feb. 18, 2006, 03:31 PM
Oh now Harry, don't rush the poor dear...

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 18, 2006, 03:33 PM
Not to worry Equitator, she still has to ask if she has the right diagonal.

Snowbird
Feb. 18, 2006, 03:34 PM
But he does under the terms and conditions of USEF Harry. As a Farm Acres Wild is Active and owned by Paul Valiere on their books Acres Wild may compete even though owned singularly by PV. No red flags go up.

Very inconsistent record keeping it seems to me. Who's fault is that?

The Private paperwork may say other wise however and we all know that too. That's the problem everyone who deals with him knows and they don't care either. Unless they get suspended themselves that is!

jetsmom
Feb. 19, 2006, 12:09 AM
bump

N&B&T
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:27 AM
From the March 2006 issue of Sidelines
H/J gossip column (http://sidelinesnews.com/1803/HIngate.html)

"We all know there’s been a huge internet move afoot to keep Paul Valliere’s ban in place. However, Marcella has been told that he’s back on the WEF showgrounds...it will be very interesting to see how this all shakes out.

There is a link where USEF members can sign a petition NOT to reinstate Paul: www.PetitionOnline.com/valliere/ (http://www.PetitionOnline.com/valliere/) . It is hosted on the web by PetitionOnline.com, the free online petition service (however you should be aware they send you a confirmation which asks for support)."

It will also be interesting to see how many more equestrian periodicals and websites pick up the story--as well as how many more in the mainstream...

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 10:11 AM
O.K., back to one my earlier questions. If one or more USEF members suspect PV is breaking the Rules, and a complaint has been lodged, is it now in the hands of USEF officials? Are they investigating these allegations? If so, how does one stay informed of the progress of the investigation?

War Admiral
Feb. 19, 2006, 10:23 AM
Let's be real, real careful about alleging anything, people. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif As far as I'm concerned, if it ain't already thoroughly documented, it's horse show gossip. And we all know how reliable that is. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

That said, and just making a general observation here, suspicion of someone violating the rules would not be sufficient grounds to file a protest.

meadow lark
Feb. 19, 2006, 10:43 AM
Originally posted by radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA:
Meadowlark, according to the USEF, PV does in fact still own Aces Wild Farm in RI. It is in good standing and listed as active.

"according to the USEF", is just your statement...where is that found?

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 10:53 AM
We all know there’s been a huge internet move afoot to keep Paul Valliere’s ban in place. However, Marcella has been told that he’s back on the WEF showgrounds...it will be very interesting to see how this all shakes out.

There is a link where USEF members can sign a petition NOT to reinstate Paul: www.PetitionOnline.com/valliere/ (http://www.PetitionOnline.com/valliere/) . It is hosted on the web by PetitionOnline.com, the free online petition service (however you should be aware they send you a confirmation which asks for support).

This is the direct quote from Sidelines pertinent to this discussion.

War Admiral
Feb. 19, 2006, 10:56 AM
Right here. (http://www.usef.org/content/searches/farmSearch/farmResults.php)

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 19, 2006, 10:56 AM
It is found Meadowlark, on the farm sites. Or you can call the USEF to have the information validated. Show managers do have access to that.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 11:02 AM
O.K., back to one my earlier questions. If one or more USEF members suspect PV is breaking the Rules, and a complaint has been lodged, is it now in the hands of USEF officials? Are they investigating these allegations? If so, how does one stay informed of the progress of the investigation?

The Acres Wild Farm in good standing is in Rhode Island. But the location in Wellinton is not listed? Are they both Acres Wild Farm or is there another name in Florida?

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 11:07 AM
If some one entered in a Horse Show knows for a fact as an eye witness that a violation of the Rules has been committed they are required to notify the Steward who is required to list such infraction on their Report to the Federation.

After that we are in limbo. No one has filed a charge and put up the required fees to do so. No they are not required by the Rules to tell us there is or is not and investigation; therefore no report. What is published is the results after a Hearing has ruled it was a violation. They are not required to tell us if the erson was exonerated.

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 11:31 AM
O.K.--the onus to file a complaint is on the person with proof of a violation. And you're telling me that no one has done that.

Is there someone out there with the proof and the desire to file a complaint?

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 11:40 AM
YEP! That's the hole in the system. I think you have to file a protest and give the Steward $100.00. Most people feel let someone else do. In 35 years the only protest every filed at any of my shows was one for a pony measurement.

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 11:48 AM
So no one posting on this thread has the proof of a violation AND the desire (+ $100) to file a complaint?

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 12:05 PM
I suspect the vast majority do not have plans to go to Wellington; and PV rarely seems to go anywhere else that I've heard.

Seal Harbor
Feb. 19, 2006, 01:04 PM
It's $200 to file a protest, $300 if filed by non member of the USEF.

Dancing Lawn
Feb. 19, 2006, 01:21 PM
in other words, the organization itself puts up roadblocks to ensure that filing a protest is difficult, time consuming, and costly.

Personally, i wouldn't want to be a member of any club, group, organization etc. that would open its doors to people who have no respect for the law-abiding members who are good sportsmen, in good standing. If I was a member, then, I would cancel my membership.

But, that's just me. I wonder if there are others out there who feel strongly enough that they're willing to cancel their membership.
After all, they can't operate without you.
or they could, but who would go to the shows?

I

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 01:33 PM
I can see why USEF makes it a little difficult to file a protest. Otherwise, there would a slews of silly protests filed every day.

But it seems hard to believe that if there really has been a violation of this magnitude at Wellington (with eyewitnesses), there isn't a single USEF member with $200 willing to file a protest.

OAK
Feb. 19, 2006, 01:41 PM
I think they will need a camera with a date and time on it for evidence. They need proof. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

ponybreeder
Feb. 19, 2006, 01:43 PM
Actually, If someone who is suspended is seen on the show grounds, one is supposed to go and get a steward.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 01:55 PM
We all know there’s been a huge internet move afoot to keep Paul Valliere’s ban in place. However,<span class="ev_code_red"> Marcella has been told that he’s back on the WEF showgrounds</span>...it will be very interesting to see how this all shakes out.

Now if a Sidelines reporter says he's been seen on the WEF show grounds why wouldn't the Steward have reported it as well?

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 02:10 PM
I agree that the proof is difficult to acquire. That's what I'm driving at. Conjecture is useless. For those who truly believe PV is in violation of the Rules, getting the proof should be their focus. I'm not suggesting a mob of unruly mercenaries armed with video cameras descend on Wellington and skulk around from behind the bushes. But I do think that those who feel passionately about it should keep tabs on PV and his comings and goings, documenting violations when they occur.

N&B&T
Feb. 19, 2006, 02:10 PM
Snowbird, please remember that this is a gossip column. "Marcella" is a pen name, I think. So that statement could mean absolutely nothing, just as well as it could mean what you think it does.

I posted the quote to illustrate that the petition is beginning to receive press in equestrian periodicals as well as mainstream media. And remember, most monthlies have a *very* long lead time for publication, so we may see more down the road. Or not.

If PV is on the showgrounds when he shouldn't be, etc., I'm sure that will eventually come out in the wash.

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 02:11 PM
Documenting and REPORTING violations.

Boberry
Feb. 19, 2006, 02:14 PM
A true sportsman seeking reinstatement would not even allow his person, or persona to be perceived as violating the rules. It is not our burden to prove he is in violation. It is PV burden to prove he is able to be reinstated.

N&B&T
Feb. 19, 2006, 02:21 PM
But I do think that those who feel passionately about it should keep tabs on PV and his comings and goings, documenting violations when they occur.

Good heavens, just how would you suggest doing that? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Letter of the suspension is one thing, but I would think repeated blatant violations would catch up with a person. Please note: I did not say they are happening, because I have no idea if they are or are not.

I think trying to understand issues and facts is one thing, but I think some of this speculation needs to stay a bit more grounded.

JMHO of course...

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 02:34 PM
But I do think that those who feel passionately about it should keep tabs on PV and his comings and goings, documenting violations when they occur.


Good heavens, just how would you suggest doing that?

That's my point. I have no idea. But it sounds as though some folks feel pretty strongly that PV has been violating the Rules. If it's happening, it should be documentable.

I'm not defending PV. I just think that if it's as blatant as has been suggested, it should be documented and reported.

Duffy
Feb. 19, 2006, 02:45 PM
It could be that PV was on the WEF grounds while the show was not in progress, which would be legal, even if shitty.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 02:52 PM
OK! Take this back to the day we submit the petition. We say we believe there is no evidence to prove that PV (or any other such person) convicted and confessed to murder of a horse for money should not be Reinstated with the benefits of full membership because.......?

No Duffy I don't think that's true because most show grounds are sanctioned or licensed for a full 24 hours per day. There could be a day in between each 5 day show but I doubt that's true because it would allow another show to sneak in on the Calendar with another C/B Rated Show and if there were three days with another A Rated Show.

N&B&T
Feb. 19, 2006, 02:55 PM
YT, I signed the petition, and even I think some people might be getting a little ahead of themselves here on a few things.

N&B&T
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:02 PM
Snowbird, if he isn't on the showgrounds, he isn't on the showgrounds; I don't know whether or not he is. I'm simply suggesting that no one take gossip as gospel.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:14 PM
I agree with you. We don't know! I agree with you that a gossip columnist in print might not be true.

I'm saying that while everyone is getting signatures and being heard let's look ahead a little. Let's say we have 10,000 signatures and we are ready to present this petition how do we frame that presentation?

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:16 PM
No Duffy I don't think that's true because most show grounds are sanctioned or licensed for a full 24 hours per day. There could be a day in between each 5 day show but I doubt that's true because it would allow another show to sneak in on the Calendar with another C/B Rated Show
And, hey, look, that's exactly the case here.
2/15/2006 - 2/19/2006 FLORIDA CLASSIC/WCHR SPECTACULAR
WELLINGTON, FL
Type: R Zone: 4
Division(s) & Rating(s):
Hunter - AA
Jumper $25000+ - N
Young Jumpers


2/20/2006 - 2/21/2006
LITTLEWOOD PRESIDENTS DAY HUNTER
WELLINGTON, FL
Type: R Zone: 4
Division(s) & Rating(s):
Hunter - B

2/22/2006 - 2/26/2006 WELLINGTON MASTERS
WELLINGTON, FL
Type: R Zone: 4
Division(s) & Rating(s):
Hunter - AA

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:24 PM
I hope some of the lawyers on the BB will chime in, but maybe it could be worded something like this:

"We, the signers of this petition, believe that Paul Valliere should not be reinstated due to violations of USEF Rules forbidding banned members from entering USEF-sanctioned horse shows. Mr. Valliere was witnessed on the grounds at ________ horse show, _________horse show, and ________horse show, (with dates.) Notarized affidavits attached."

Sherry
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:25 PM
Originally posted by OAK:
I think they will need a camera with a date and time on it for evidence. They need proof. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The problem with a date and time on a picture is that you can change the date and time to anything you want before shooting the photo.

anthem35
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:27 PM
Let me ask you all this...WHY would Paul even want to be on showgrounds at all on off-days???

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:36 PM
To school his students and horses over the fences provided by the show; like any other trainer.

Kap
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:40 PM
Anthem, why does it matter WHY he'd want to be there?

anthem35
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:41 PM
Snowbird,

Off days here in Wellington, there ARE NO fences in ANY ring.

We do quite nicely training over our own course on AWF property.

Fairview Horse Center
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:43 PM
Let's get real about who could report this.

A disgruntled worker with inside info is probably not going to have the $200. to spare. Others that may be privy to info are not going to report - because they are a buddy, or hope no one would report them if they are ever in violation.

We also should not forget the power & connections involved. A bit of fear of retribution also may keep mouths shut.

anthem35
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:43 PM
KAP,it doesnt at all..just seems as though the masses are focusing now on his apparently subversive attempts to crawl about the showgrounds on off days in an attempt to piss off the USEF. Quite amusing, really.

Kap
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:46 PM
Rules are rules, though. If he's not allowed at USEF shows, then he's not allowed there. Period. It doesn't matter if it's an off day, a carnival day, or nude riding day.

anthem35
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:49 PM
I get that...what I'm saying, he has no desire whatsoever to BE there...what on earth would he need there???

And I have NO idea where on earth he would have the time...

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 03:58 PM
anthem35 the fact is looking at the Calendar there are no OFF days so anytime he was there was a show day and it was illegal. The fences were set for the show and it was schooling time.

A Lunch Break or a schooling break or unrecognized or unrated classes to not put an end to the show day. I wish it would! I could save a lot of money and so could our exhibitors.

anthem35
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:00 PM
Snowbird-

What show have YOU seen Paul at?

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:05 PM
is looking at the Calendar there are no OFF days
That's not true. I just posted the calendar.
Littlewood and Stadium Jumping shows are at DIFFERENT grounds.

It's academic anyway, as I have never seen Paul on the showgrounds at any time during his suspension, and, like anthem, can't imagine why he would want or need to be there on a non-show day.

Sherry
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by anthem35:
I get that...what I'm saying, he has no desire whatsoever to BE there...what on earth would he need there???

And I have NO idea where on earth he would have the time...

Ummmmmm anthem...how do you know what he desires? Are you married to him or something? Lots of trainers conduct business on the showgrounds on "off" days at shows (buy, sell, lease deals, etc).

anthem35
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:10 PM
OK-I guess its time for the bitter attitudes...

No, I am not married to Paul..

I do, however, ride at AWF.

I can tell you that he has no time to leave his 'sandbox' in Wellington, or to actually see ALL the horses that trainers and dealers come walking up the driveway everyday to his farm for him to see.

Go to the showgrounds?? WHY????

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:12 PM
I'm frustrated and confused. Has he been seen on the showgrounds (since banned) or not? --on or off days, motivation notwithstanding.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:12 PM
anthem35 my friend not since it was illegal for him to be at any show. BUT then I don;t go south or to Rhode Island to shows. I would guess he had to be at Syracuse in order to be able to lend the Maclay riders horses on which they could compete.

As to why he would be there! Just because he could! To show how he was above the rules of the USEF. It's nice you can speak so well FOR him and you know exactly how his mind works. You might be a very good witness for us.

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:16 PM
Has he been seen on the showgrounds or not? --on or off days, motivation notwithstanding.
Not by anyone I know. I have never heard anyone say otherwise, other than this anonymous gossip columnist.

anthem35
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:19 PM
Snowbird-Shows in RI????

Do you honestly think that he wants to waste his time to go to the showground JUST to show the USEF that he was above the rules???

Can you really be that bitter and cynical?? You know nothing about this man other than what the media wants you to believe.

Without going into too much detail, I rarely see the man have time to eat, much less waste time on the showgrounds.

The reason his kids do so well is that he WORKS. HARD. The amount of horses and riders that come through the door everyday, especially in Welly, is astounding.

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:23 PM
But I do think that those who feel passionately about it should keep tabs on PV and his comings and goings, documenting violations when they occur.
stalk 2 (stôk)
v. stalked, stalk·ing, stalks
vv.tr.
1. To pursue by tracking stealthily.
2. To follow or observe (a person) persistently, especially out of obsession or derangement.
3. To go through (an area) in pursuit of prey or quarry

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:25 PM
http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

anthem35
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by C.Boylen:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But I do think that those who feel passionately about it should keep tabs on PV and his comings and goings, documenting violations when they occur.
stalk 2 (stôk)
v. stalked, stalk·ing, stalks
vv.tr.
1. To pursue by tracking stealthily.
2. To follow or observe (a person) persistently, especially out of obsession or derangement.
3. To go through (an area) in pursuit of prey or quarry </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:35 PM
ru·mor
Pronunciation: 'rü-m&r

1 : talk or opinion widely disseminated with no discernible source
2 : a statement or report current without known authority for its truth
3 archaic : talk or report of a notable person or event

Fairview Horse Center
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:40 PM
Originally posted by anthem35:
The reason his kids do so well is that he WORKS. HARD.

<span class="ev_code_RED">i. Riding, exhibiting, coaching or training for the benefit , credit, reputation or satisfaction of a suspended person.</span>

So why would a responsible person that was trying to clean up their reputation, put kids at risk, by allowing them to be in violation? That ALL BY ITSELF shows just what he is made of, and where his heart truly still is... all about HIM.

anthem35
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:44 PM
Originally posted by Fairview Horse Center:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by anthem35:
The reason his kids do so well is that he WORKS. HARD.

<span class="ev_code_RED">i. Riding, exhibiting, coaching or training for the benefit , credit, reputation or satisfaction of a suspended person.</span>

So why would a responsible person that was trying to clean up their reputation, put kids at risk, by allowing them to be in violation? That ALL BY ITSELF shows just what he is made of, and where his heart truly still is... all about HIM. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is SOOO crazy!!!

There are NO Kids in violation!!!!

There are NO Kids at risk!!!

There are NO kids at AWF who do anything other than respect their trainer and focus on learning.

You have yet to provide FIRST HAND PROOF that ANY USEF rules have been violated.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:44 PM
Snowbird-Shows in RI????

Do you honestly think that he wants to waste his time to go to the showground JUST to show the USEF that he was above the rules???

Yep! I think he is just that arrogant and self assured.


Can you really be that bitter and cynical?? You know nothing about this man other than what the media wants you to believe.

Oh! Dear anthem35 I surely hope your judgements about PV are better than your analysis of me.So you think the media wants me to believe that he is so egocentric that he is compelled to break the rules and flaunt his control over other people. What media might that be? I'd love to read some of those stories.

I am by the way a pragmatist which is neither cynical or bitter. I think people need to follow the rules of a civilization or that civilization declines. We're seeing that already.


Without going into too much detail, I rarely see the man have time to eat, much less waste time on the showgrounds.

Unless, you are his favorite gopher I would imagine you're not there all the time. I have never seen him take time to eat either and I don't know him at all. He doesn't however look either undernourished or over worked. Actually as very attractive man. I can understand why he is so successful with women.


The reason his kids do so well is that he WORKS. HARD. The amount of horses and riders that come through the door everyday, especially in Welly, is astounding.

And, you know this how? A lot of trainers work very hard especially at Wellington, are you saying he does better than all of them? In all of the elite community is he really the very best we have?

Duffy
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:46 PM
Deep breath, anyone? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:48 PM
Tsk! Tsk! anthem we have proof from his own esteemed friend that two rode and won on his horses. That's a really big No-No for those inexperienced students of his. Imagine that they had won and had to forfeit their ribbons and victory. That would have been very sad for them.

Thank you for the concern Duffy but I'm breathing just fine. I am enjoying reding anthem35's posts very much for all his insight and the close proximity he seems to share with PV. They must be very close indeed. If it's not his wife it must be his boyfriend.

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:50 PM
Snowbird, if horses are being shown at USEF shows those horses are in good standing with the USEF. No one that rides them is subject to penalty of any kind.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 04:53 PM
C.Boylen you don't know that at all. It could be that people felt so sorry for those kids they just didn;t want to punish them. Surely, if Mason Phelps knew they were the horses of Paul Valiere so did a lot of other people and if not at the time after the fact. Phelps Media did after all publish the information.

Don't you find that if these are all errors there is something very wrong with the record keeping. The show office can't be that inefficient.

By the anthem35 no I don't have to prove he has violated the rules...HE has to prove he is remorseful and has tried to contribute a good attitude. Letting unknowing children be at risk on his horses is not very good sportmanship in my opinion that's all. Not correcting he Farm records that show him as the sole propietor of Acres Wild is not very diligent or business like if you're really sorry.

His own clients have proved he is breaking the rules, I don't have to. They publish all the information necessary. Really, I'm beginning to feel sorry for him. With such friends who needs enemies.

Uberraschung
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:00 PM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
C.Boylen you don't know that at all. It could be that people felt so sorry for those kids they just didn;t want to punish them. Surely, if Mason Phelps knew they were the horses of Paul Valiere so did a lot of other people and if not at the time after the fact. Phelps Media did after all publish the information.

Don't you find that if these are all errors there is something very wrong with the record keeping. The show office can't be that inefficient.
You seriously need to chill out. All these suppositions in this thread are so far out in left field, that no one will EVER take some of you people seriously. You lack concrete proof (someone once told me that someone saw him walk across the showgrounds is NOT proof) of anything, especially any rule violations.

God, why do I even bother?

Fairview Horse Center
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by anthem35:
There are NO Kids in violation!!!!
There are NO Kids at risk!!!
There are NO kids at AWF who do anything other than respect their trainer and focus on learning.

so they are not exhibiting? "his kids" are just riding at home "doing well"?

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:17 PM
C.Boylen you don't know that at all. It could be that people felt so sorry for those kids they just didn;t want to punish them
If the horses were shown, they have valid, active USEF numbers. End of story.

Not correcting he Farm records that show him as the sole propietor of Acres Wild is not very diligent or business like if you're really sorry.
Acres Wild Inc. is not owned by Paul, and does not come up under the search as owned by Paul. Check it.

Jane
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:22 PM
Originally posted by TWOLEFTFEET:
in other words, the organization itself puts up roadblocks to ensure that filing a protest is difficult, time consuming, and costly.

Personally, i wouldn't want to be a member of any club, group, organization etc. that would open its doors to people who have no respect for the law-abiding members who are good sportsmen, in good standing. If I was a member, then, I would cancel my membership.

But, that's just me. I wonder if there are others out there who feel strongly enough that they're willing to cancel their membership.
After all, they can't operate without you.
or they could, but who would go to the shows?

I

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif why don't you do your homework before spewing all that non-sense? it's a good thing they have rules for filing protests, otherwise all the loose canons would be filing left and right based on unfounded GOSSIP.

BTW, the deposit are refunded in the event the protest is upheld, so no, the USEF isn't looking to rip anyone off. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Boston Chicken
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:24 PM
I know I'm whispering into a howling wind, but personally, I find the latter part of this whole thread alarming. The extreme opinions and directives *may* only serve to drive away people who are trying to find their own stance on the issue.

If you have issue with this man being reinstated, fine - power to the people and all that. To suggest however that following this man to "document" infractions is nothing short of screwy and smacks or some left (or right) wing vigilantism that has gone far beyond the original intent of the petition.

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:26 PM
Chanda you are correct Acres Wild Inc is not owned by Paul. But Acres Wild Farm in RI is. And is listed with the USEF as active and in good sted. War Admiral did post the link to the information. This also can be validated by the USEF.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:27 PM
I would like to add that someone named on the "horse welfare" committee of USHJA should have a very difficult time backing someone who was found guilty of killing a horse with the intent of collecting an insurance premium.

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:29 PM
Yeah, I was a bit extreme in my earlier post. I was trying to make a point, which is this: if someone really thinks PV is on the showgrounds at Wellington, then they should get down there and check it out. File a protest if evidence is found. To rely on gossip and rumor is always a bad idea.

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:31 PM
For those of you who are interested, this is

THE USHJA CODE OF CONDUCT for Horse Welfare
Code of Conduct for Horse Welfare:

The USHJA expects that every person involved in showing horses adhere to the USHJA’s Code of Conduct for the Welfare of the Horse. Horses are one of only a few animals used as athletes, often required to undergo extensive training before reaching their physiological or psychological limits as competitive individuals. Under these circumstances, decisions about horse welfare may be strongly influenced by the potential benefits to the rider, the owner or trainer.

Therefore:

v All equestrians must acknowledge and accept that at all times the welfare of the horse is the first priority and must never be second to competitive or personal commercial influences.

v The well-being of the horse takes precedence over the demands of trainers, riders, owners, organizers, sponsors or officials.

v Competition management must always consider the horses’ welfare relative to the competition and schooling areas, ground surfaces, weather conditions, stabling, equipment and other related site safety issues.

v Adequate provisions must be made for ventilation, feeding, watering and maintaining a healthy environment when horses are stabled on competition grounds.

v In the interests of the horse, the competence of the rider is considered essential.

v The highest level of veterinary care available must be provided at all levels of competition.

v The USHJA will establish adequate controls in order that all persons and bodies respect the welfare of the horse.

v Emphasis will be placed on increasing education in training and equestrian practices and promoting scientific studies in equine health.

v The USHJA urges its membership to pursue the highest level of horsemanship by continued education through clinics at all levels. The USHJA Horse Welfare Committee is dedicated to bringing the best horsemanship ideas together, throughout the United States, in an effort to promote understanding and fair treatment of horses at every opportunity.

Erin
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:33 PM
Folks, if you want this thread to stay open, you need to CHILL... BIG TIME.

You're welcome to discuss what appeared in Sidelines because it IS in print. You are welcome to discuss the USEF rules and whether or not certain actions COULD BE in violation of them, as long as it is a discussion that is clearly based on opinion, and not assertions of fact. (Unless anyone posting here is a steward, but I doubt that is the case.)

But, frankly, spouting off conjecture is really not productive to anything and is going to get this thread closed.

Uberraschung
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by Boston Chicken:
I know I'm whispering into a howling wind, but personally, I find the latter part of this whole thread alarming. The extreme opinions and directives *may* only serve to drive away people who are trying to find their own stance on the issue.

If you have issue with this man being reinstated, fine - power to the people and all that. To suggest however that following this man to "document" infractions is nothing short of screwy and smacks or some left (or right) wing vigilantism that has gone far beyond the original intent of the petition.
Exactly. Just what the man needs...his own personal stalkers from an online BB http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Just downright screwy...

Jane
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by Yours Truly:
I hope some of the lawyers on the BB will chime in, but maybe it could be worded something like this:

"We, the signers of this petition, believe that Paul Valliere should not be reinstated due to violations of USEF Rules forbidding banned members from entering USEF-sanctioned horse shows. Mr. Valliere was witnessed on the grounds at ________ horse show, _________horse show, and ________horse show, (with dates.) Notarized affidavits attached."

I'm not a lawyer, but I am fairly certain you can not change/edit a petition once signatures are collected.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:34 PM
Anthem the very fact that the these children are showing under the tutelage of Mr. Valliere is indeed in violation of The Sportsman's Charter outlined on the USEF website. Please, do not insult our intelligence, or lack thereof, by attempting to portray Mr. Valliere as a humane being. Unfortunately, he is not. I normally do not wish to take such a firm stand, but I am sorry, you kill a horse, you have a dead horse - you do not have citizen of the year.[

Duffy
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:35 PM
I'm sure that is correct, Jane.

Uberraschung
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:36 PM
Originally posted by harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens:
I would like to add that someone named on the "horse welfare" committee of USHJA should have a very difficult time backing someone who was found guilty of killing a horse with the intent of collecting an insurance premium.
I don't see Chanda backing anyone. I see her trying to insist that people concentrate on facts instead of crazy rantings, which is not easy around here! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

Duffy
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:36 PM
Looks pretty cut and dry to me, radio. Thanks for posting that.

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:37 PM
But Acres Wild Farm in RI is. And is listed with the USEF as active and in good sted
But all of the horses owned by it are not in good standing, except for two, which are I believe too old to still be competing.

I would like to add that someone named on the "horse welfare" committee of USHJA should have a very difficult time backing someone who was found guilty of killing a horse with the intent of collecting an insurance premium.
Why? I have made no statements on behalf of the horse welfare committee on this issue.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:38 PM
Perhaps not Uberrashung, however, from my point of view, she is certainly going to the defense of Mr. Valliere. I do not think I have ever posted irrationally, and although I do not have a horse in my barn that can hold a candle to any of hers, nor do I have the recognition that she enjoys, I do feel that someone here must indeed come to the defense of horses who have been abused.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:40 PM
quote:
I would like to add that someone named on the "horse welfare" committee of USHJA should have a very difficult time backing someone who was found guilty of killing a horse with the intent of collecting an insurance premium.

Why? I have made no statements on behalf of the horse welfare committee on this issue.

As a member of that committee, an opinion weighs heavily with general membership.

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:42 PM
As a member of that committee, an opinion weighs heavily with general membership.
As a member of that committee, I personally concern myself with issues and conditions that currently affect horse welfare.

Jane
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:44 PM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
Unless, you are his favorite gopher I would imagine you're not there all the time. I have never seen him take time to eat either and I don't know him at all.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">[QUOTE]The reason his kids do so well is that he WORKS. HARD. The amount of horses and riders that come through the door everyday, especially in Welly, is astounding.

And, you know this how? A lot of trainers work very hard especially at Wellington, are you saying he does better than all of them? In all of the elite community is he really the very best we have? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Snowbird, anthem may not be around PV 24/7, but don't you think it's silly on your part to imply she may not know everything he's doing, yet you, after admitting not having seen or been anywhere near him in years, are implying you know more about what he's been up to? why, you were all ready to take a gossip in Sidelines to be the gospel.


He doesn't however look either undernourished or over worked. Actually as very attractive man. I can understand why he is so successful with women.

http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:45 PM
As a member of that committee, I personally concern myself with issues and conditions that currently affect horse welfare.

Enough said. Thank you so much for caring about horses of the past.

BLBGP
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:46 PM
So Anthem, why did he have the horse killed? If so many people don't care, he must have had good reason which could be explained to those who do still care.

Jane
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:47 PM
Originally posted by harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens:
I would like to add that someone named on the "horse welfare" committee of USHJA should have a very difficult time backing someone who was found guilty of killing a horse with the intent of collecting an insurance premium.

What did you mean by "backing"?

Equit8tor
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:48 PM
Harry- got to agree with you on that one. Animal welfare is animal welfare..Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:48 PM
BLBGP, please, take note, we are only concerned with issues and conditions that currently affect horse welfare here. Someone who has abused horses in the past is not really a matter of consideration. We need to forgive.

Jane
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:51 PM
Originally posted by harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens:
As a member of that committee, I personally concern myself with issues and conditions that currently affect horse welfare.

Enough said. Thank you so much for caring about horses of the past.

Oh that was cute. One thing about playing alters...one needs to remain consistant his/her postings. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

Uberraschung
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens:
Perhaps not Uberrashung, however, from my point of view, she is certainly going to the defense of Mr. Valliere. I do not think I have ever posted irrationally, and although I do not have a horse in my barn that can hold a candle to any of hers, nor do I have the recognition that she enjoys, I do feel that someone here must indeed come to the defense of horses who have been abused.
What horses people here have or don't have compared to Chanda really is not an issue, nor is whether or not one is "known" (the "little people" thing is getting a bit cliche, guys).

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:53 PM
As a member of that committee, I personally concern myself with issues and conditions that currently affect horse welfare.
Enough said. Thank you so much for caring about horses of the past.
I care about horses of the past, but not as a member of the horse welfare committee. In that aspect I am concerned with those of the present and future.

Duffy
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:53 PM
Jane, what are you talking about? Harry has always been Harry.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:56 PM
Excuse me, but I was alluding to the fact that C.Boylen is far more esteemed than I. With that said, I fear that my concern with horse welfare goes deeper than hers. Also, Jane, I do not "play alters". I was ambivalent towards this issue in the beginning, now I am NOT ambivalent. I have a very difficult time reconciling this issue, however, there is, in my opinion, only one "right".

Duffy
Feb. 19, 2006, 05:59 PM
Chanda, I'm confused. Are you saying that the members of the horse welfare committee are not concerned about the atrocities of the past and won't do what they can to make sure they won't happen in the future? Because that will be the message sent to the horse world if the horse killers are allowed back into the USEF.

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:00 PM
Chanda, backing someone found quilty of insurance fraud in the death of a horse, is hard to understand when that person is seated on the Horse Welfare Committee of the USHJA. Stating that you are only concerned with current issues is also not readily understood.

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:04 PM
Chanda, I'm confused. Are you saying that the members of the horse welfare committee are not concerned about the atrocities of the past and won't do what they can to make sure they won't happen in the future? Because that will be the message sent to the horse world if the horse killers are allowed back into the USEF.
I am not saying anything about members of the horse welfare committee. If you want the opinions of any other members you will have to ask them. I said I, personally, am concerned with current issues. This is not one.

Chanda, backing someone found quilty of insurance fraud in the death of a horse, is hard to understand when that person is seated on the Horse Welfare Committee of the USHJA.
The only thing I have backed in this thread is Paul's right to apply for reinstatement. That is not a horse welfare issue.

ponybreeder
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:05 PM
I tend to spend more tme reading this thread than writing, as it seems to go round and round. However I have to say that I am extremely offended by C. Boyln's declaration that she is concerned with horses in the present, not in the past. Historically, we learn from what has happened in the past, and when it is evil, we try to use those examples to keep evil from happening again. I had no feeling about PV being reinstated before this thread, but from his supporters, I have decided that he does not bear supporting

VirginiaBred
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:06 PM
That is not a horse welfare issue.

Why can't you see that IT IS a horse welfare issue taking into consideration what he did!!!!!

Duffy
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:08 PM
Chanda, none of us have tried to deny Paul his right to apply for reinstatement either. But, ya know, sometimes one has to take a stand beyond that...And, I don't know why the horse welfare committee wouldn't have a say...

Fairview Horse Center
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:09 PM
Originally posted by C.Boylen:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As a member of that committee, I personally concern myself with issues and conditions that currently affect horse welfare.
Enough said. Thank you so much for caring about horses of the past.
I care about horses of the past, but not as a member of the horse welfare committee. In that aspect I am concerned with those of the present and future. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

so is your support of PV on this thread due to your only concern with the welfare of horses of the future as a representative of the Horse Welfare Committee? and not your own view points which would be caring about horses of the past?

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:11 PM
Originally posted by C.Boylen:

The only thing I have backed in this thread is Paul's right to apply for reinstatement. That is not a horse welfare issue.

And if he becomes reinstated? Would it then become a horse welfare issue?

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:11 PM
But Chanda, it is a horse welfare issue. You can back his right to reapply, but the issue isn't just of that. It is what he was found guilty of. Suspended from the AHSA/USEF for. Insurance fraud in killing a horse. His own. If that isn't a horse welfare than what is?

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:15 PM
Obviously, radiotalk, it is in the past, and does not concern anyone. Just like here in Connecticut, where a man threw his dog out of a 3rd story window, and was not allowed to keep the dog. Gee, I wonder why. But here, we are talking about a BNT........PAUL VALLIERE....so what he did does not matter. I apologize. Let us welcome him back, after all, he is the BEST trainer ever to have graced the earth. However, to have someone with the wherewithal and ability to take this to the USEF and make a positive influence on the sport callously state that they are concerned only with the present and future, well that is just wrong.

Jane
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:18 PM
Originally posted by harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens:

Also, Jane, I do not "play alters". I was ambivalent towards this issue in the beginning, now I am NOT ambivalent. I have a very difficult time reconciling this issue, however, there is, in my opinion, only one "right".

Fine, Harry. You certainly have a right to change your mind and express your opinion, like most people here. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BTW, how are those size 3 Chicos fitting? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

jetsmom
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:19 PM
Chanda, would you agree that not allowing someone to be reinstated to USEF, might be a deterrent to those that might consider doing what he did in the future? Because letting someone back in certainly ISN"T a deterrent to killing a horse.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:20 PM
Jane, I don't wear Chico's clothing.

VirginiaBred
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:22 PM
Chanda, you have the wherewithall to take these comments and these emotions people have back to the USEF and do something positive and constructive with it.
Why can't you see that?

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:22 PM
so is your support of PV on this thread due to your only concern with the welfare of horses of the future as a representative of the Horse Welfare Committee? and not your own view points which would be caring about horses of the past?
I have already said I'm not representing the horse welfare committee. I always state my own viewpoint. My support here is of Paul's right to apply for reinstatement, and of the FACTS of the case. I oppose vigilantism and speculation. I care for horses of the past, present, and future, personally. When operating as a member of the committee, I focus on current conditions and how they can improve the welfare of horses now and in the future. There is nothing a committee can do, of which I am aware, to help a dead horse.

And if he becomes reinstated? Would it then become a horse welfare issue?
Sure. Then my work as a committee member will be for the benefit of both his horses and yours. Presuming of course that you are also a USHJA member. There are no distinctions between members in good standing.

TheOrangeOne
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:22 PM
I was trying to stay away, but do ya'll really think he would do it again? Honestly and Reasonably consider my question if you would. I am sort of indifferent about the topic, but had to throw that out there.

Yours Truly
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:24 PM
Perhaps Jane needs to brush up on her joke recognition skills.

P.S. It's only an alter if you use a different NAME.

Jane
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:26 PM
No kidding, Yours Truly. Trust me, my joke recognition skills are just fine....a lot finer than most. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

jetsmom
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:27 PM
I don't think he would kill a horse that way again. But how many are you allowed to kill and still be part of an organization where ethics, sportsmanship and care/concern for your equine partner are what matters? I would question whether someone who has the mindset that allowed them to have a horse killed like that, would always make decisions that keep the horse's best interest at heart.

Racetb*Aefvue Farm*Biziz Ltd.
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:29 PM
History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are.

David C. Mcculough


The PAST MATTERS.
racetb

Duffy
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:30 PM
Grace, I believe that to be a mute question. I can't believe any insurance company would insure any horse with him as payee/proceeds recipient.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:30 PM
jetsmom, it is apparent that the only thing that matters is how well connected you are. If some no name trainer that didn't rub elbows with the hoi polloi did the same thing, well gee, he would be drawn and quartered. But because it is someone that buys and sells horses with the hoi polloi, has students winning at the big shows, we need to look only at the welfare of horses in the present and future. DAMN, we better let Scott Peterson out of jail, he killed his wife a couple years ago. Oh, and maybe Charles Manson too - that had to be 30 years ago, and they are both very sorry, they feel remorse every day.

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:31 PM
Chanda, would you agree that not allowing someone to be reinstated to USEF, might be a deterrent to those that might consider doing what he did in the future?
Seriously? I highly doubt that. I think the penalties for insurance fraud are a much greater deterrent than anything the USEF could impose.

Chandra, you have the wherewithall to take these comments and these emotions people have back to the USEF and do something positive and constructive with it.
Why can't you see that?
I see it just fine. I just don't agree with most of the comments and emotions represented here, and I do not care to be their proponent. I am entitled to my own opinion as a person, no matter upon which committee I sit.

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:34 PM
Maybe the committee can Chanda. By not allowing something of this nature ever to occur again. You aren't police we know that. But if someone who commits the unthinkable is allowed to come back, it doesn't bode well for an organization which in its forward, states horse welfare is paramont. It does not give credence to them or what they stand for.

jetsmom
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:34 PM
This thread has made me take off my rose colored glasses and not idolize some of the people that post on here. The pedastal I had them on, because of their horses, just came crashing down.

I still am curious if anyone who is friends with PV can answer, Does PV bring up his past and explain what he did to new clients, without them having to ask?

Fairview Horse Center
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:35 PM
GR702 Violations
1. A violation is any act prejudicial to the best interests of the Federation, including but not limited to the following:

i. Riding, exhibiting, coaching or training for the benefit , credit, reputation or satisfaction of a suspended person.

What do you all think is TRULY the INTENT of this rule???

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:36 PM
Excuse me for being dense. Your opinion is such that the needless death of a helpless horse is insignificant? WAIT That was a stupid question, it was already answered.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:36 PM
I think that the USHJA as our National Affiliate representing all of us in the Hunter and Jumper world needs to be concerned. Acceptance for Reinstatement requires remorse and a change of attitude from the horseman who hired a killer to make a horse's death look like an accident.

I am really disappointed that in this respect you find no empathy for the horse that had it's life shortened for no reason. This horse could have been sold down and made someone talented a real opportunity. If as you believe Paul Valiere has not technically broken any rules there certainly seems to be little doubt that he has also not respected them.

That doesn't look like remorse to me. I think in your position with USHJA you should be concerned about who may become a role model for youngsters.

Duffy
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:37 PM
One doesn't have to agree with some of the comments and emotions stated on the thread (I don't either) to still believe that the horse killers do NOT belong back in the USEF.

If you believe he deserves to be reinstated, that's your opinion. But, don't think that by stating a case of horse welfare that you are being a proponent of some bb posters who's comments and emotions you don't agree with. (Both sides have their, errr, outspoken proponents, correct?)

Jane
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:37 PM
Harry, now you're getting dramatic. I have not read any posts, especially recently, that stated PV should be reinstated. What I read were people defending PV's right to reapply, SHOULD HE DECIDES to even go there, as well as those who know him challenging the alligations that he's been breaking rules, nothing more.

Duffy
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:39 PM
Jane, NO ONE has stated that he doesn't have a right to re-apply. If that were the only issue, this thread would be a one-pager.

Jane
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:48 PM
Duffy, you're right, but I was referring to all the posts alluding to certain posters "backing" PV, or worse, implying Chanda thinks the death of those horses as insignificant......that was not how I interpreted her posts.

Showponymom Aefvue Mid Atlantic Division
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:50 PM
There is nothing a committee can do, of which I am aware, to help a dead horse.


I have been reading more than posting on this thread. But this statement floored me. If you are on a horse welfare committee you would certainly look at past grievances and want them to never happen again. So as a member of such I would want to pass rules and regulations to prevent it or make sure people would not get away with it.

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 06:54 PM
So as a member of such I would want to pass rules and regulations to prevent it or make sure people would not get away with it.
There are already rules and regulations to that effect.

Hucklebug
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by C.Boylen:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As a member of that committee, an opinion weighs heavily with general membership.
As a member of that committee, I personally concern myself with issues and conditions that currently affect horse welfare. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's right. There's not a welfare issue if the horse is dead. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Uberraschung
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:15 PM
Originally posted by Hucklebug:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by C.Boylen:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As a member of that committee, an opinion weighs heavily with general membership.
As a member of that committee, I personally concern myself with issues and conditions that currently affect horse welfare. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's right. There's not a welfare issue if the horse is dead. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Chanda's current position on the USHJA board has no relevance with her personal opinions, as she has stated. Perhaps instead of berating an individual member of that committee, it might be beneficial for one or more of you to approach the committee as a whole at one of their meetings. This way you could obtain the opinion of the group as a whole instead of trying to twist what you want to hear out of someone's personal statements. Seems like a more effective approach to me.

Dancing Lawn
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:16 PM
This whole issue just makes me shake my head in disbelief.
So, a man who is known as a horse killer will get to be a member in good standing.
a person who is on the horse welfare committee feels that a horse killer should have the right be become a member in good standing.

This leaves the horses where, exactly?
Is there ANYONE in the upper echelons, at all concerned with the welfare of horses?
makes me not want to show ever again. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

Uberraschung
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:20 PM
Originally posted by TWOLEFTFEET:
This whole issue just makes me shake my head in disbelief.
So, a man who is known as a horse killer will get to be a member in good standing.
a person who is on the horse welfare committee feels that a horse killer should have the right be become a member in good standing.

This leaves the horses where, exactly?
Is there ANYONE in the upper echelons, at all concerned with the welfare of horses?
makes me not want to show ever again. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif She never said that. She said he has the right to apply. Way to not read for clarity http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:24 PM
Well taken Uberraschung. He has the right to apply, and he has all the support in the world, HOWEVER, even if the efforts I extend on behalf of any horse he has killed or abused make no difference at all, I feel, after seeing the results of his work that someone needs to speak for the animal who cannot. If that one person is me, so be it.

Uberraschung
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:26 PM
Originally posted by Showponymom Aefvue Mid Atlantic Division:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">She never said that. She said he has the right to apply

I believe she has never said that he was wrong in what he did. It is obvious that when you stay and train with someone that has done this terrible thing, you are validating it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Huh? Chanda doesn't train with him...what are you talking about?

slainte!
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:26 PM
Originally posted by radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA:
Chanda you are correct Acres Wild Inc is not owned by Paul. But Acres Wild Farm in RI is. And is listed with the USEF as active and in good sted. War Admiral did post the link to the information. This also can be validated by the USEF.

There is NO Acres Wild Farm in the state of Rhode Island owned by Paul Valliere. That farm was sold about 10 years ago. Perhaps you are looking at our of date information?

Showponymom Aefvue Mid Atlantic Division
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:28 PM
Originally posted by Uberraschung:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Showponymom Aefvue Mid Atlantic Division:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">She never said that. She said he has the right to apply

I believe she has never said that he was wrong in what he did. It is obvious that when you stay and train with someone that has done this terrible thing, you are validating it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Huh? Chanda doesn't train with him...what are you talking about? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, I thought she did, my post has been deleted.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:28 PM
I think the term "our of date information" is perhaps most correct. The "OUR" being Acres Wild Farm. Perhaps we should rename this thread to be the "Bring Back Paul Valliere" thread. Does anyone else remember seeing RP dragged behind a tractor at Sugarbush????? Horse welfare at it's very best. They could have just chopped the animal into convenient pieces and handed them out to the spectators as souvenirs of the pleasant day in Vermont.

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:30 PM
Nope slainte, current 2006 info from the USEF. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

slainte!
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:30 PM
Harry - your posts have made me sick since the original thread.

Anyhow, please excuse my misprint. I meant "out of date information". My typing isn't so hot. Mid WEF has me tired and away from my computer and with my horses...

Lord Helpus
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:31 PM
Anthem,

Since you see Paul so often, would you be so kind as to ask him the details of Touch The Sun's death and report back to us?

Thanks.

Were you around back then? Do you remember those days? I know that Chanda was, at best, only in diapers back then and so has no personal recollection of the 1970's.

Perhaps Uberaschlung is old enough to remember the *good* old days?

slainte!
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:32 PM
Originally posted by radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA:
Nope slainte, current 2006 info from the USEF. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Acres Wild Farm north is located in Plainville, MA (next to the best outlets ever, btw!). The huge Rhode Island farm was sold years ago.

Boberry
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:33 PM
In the NJ Star-Ledger PV stated "I'm very remorseful. I hope someday I'll be reinstated," continued Valliere, who has yet to apply to the USEF.

Even though he is barred from setting foot on the grounds of any USEF-recognized show, he still runs a thriving instruction and sales business in a development next to the home of the Winter Equestrian Festival in Wellington, Fla.

Valliere hopes that when he does apply for reinstatement, the USEF will re-admit him. he would like to be reinstated." 2/12/2006

Chanda should step down from her animal welfare position if she doesn't think this PV thing is a current issue.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:35 PM
slainte, I am SO sorry if my posts have made you ill. It makes me ill that such a travesty happened, and that people are so desperate to win a satin ribbon that they ignore the fact that it DID happen.

Jane
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:36 PM
Originally posted by TWOLEFTFEET:
This whole issue just makes me shake my head in disbelief.
So, a man who is known as a horse killer will get to be a member in good standing.
a person who is on the horse welfare committee feels that a horse killer should have the right be become a member in good standing.

This leaves the horses where, exactly?
Is there ANYONE in the upper echelons, at all concerned with the welfare of horses?
makes me not want to show ever again. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

Please read for comprehension and stop twisting others' words.

War Admiral
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:43 PM
PLEASE can we keep it civil? Let's not turn this into a "Let's Bash Chanda" thread for x more pages.

I happen to disagree with Chanda, rather vehemently, as to whether the reinstatement of the "horse killers" is a current horse welfare issue or not. But we've always been able to be polite about the disagreement and I hope that will continue.

The reason I believe it IS a current horse welfare issue is that USEF has already reinstated one of these people, and will probably reinstate the rest as and when they become eligible to apply, UNLESS there is significant public opposition to that.

As I've stated many times, I don't feel that reinstatement is appropriate for ANY of these people. You knowingly kill a horse for profit - you should no longer be a member of USEF.

BaliBandido
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:44 PM
Originally posted by C.Boylen:
Sure. Then my work as a committee member will be for the benefit of both his horses and yours. Presuming of course that you are also a USHJA member. There are no distinctions between members in good standing.

Umm, I think I'll pass on that.

Oh and Jane, try to keep up.

filly3
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:44 PM
I think that I'll have nightmares tonight knowing that people sitting on supposed "animal welfare" boards appear to not particularily care or be unduly affected by the deliberate and cruel act of killing a horse. Yikes.

Jane
Feb. 19, 2006, 07:52 PM
Originally posted by BaliBandido:


Oh and Jane, try to keep up.

Keep what up? I can barely understand your points most of the time, and I know it's not me. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:00 PM
I don't think BaliBandido has been unclear, but perhaps my powers of comprehension are greater than others.

Renn/aissance
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:04 PM
You know, I was trying to stay out of this.

But imagine that this horse was your horse. Maybe he wasn't ever going to be what you and your trainer had hoped he would be- maybe he never would have succeeded over the bigger fences. But this was a good horse, and a horse that you love. You arrive at the show one day to find that he's dead, and you're heartbroken. Your horse, the one that you love, your baby, is dead. Maybe you watch him being dragged away- or maybe you couldn't bear to watch. But then you find out that your trainer, whom you admire, killed him.

What would you do?

You know what I think about every time I hear about the possibility of reinstating Paul Valliere? I think of the sight of my own horse lying dead in a gully and of the effort it took to cuddle his head in my lap. I think of the way he was lying. I think of his eye, glassy and unmoving. And I think of his paroxysms of death, as the blood from his heart flooded his body and his lungs, and then the way that time stopped when I saw him lying still. I will never, ever forget that sight. I don't think that any horse owner who has seen their horse die will forget the way their horse looked, dead. A few months before John died, he had finally convinced us all that he wasn't happy as a hunter and equitation horse. Instead of forcing him to do something he hated, we switched careers and he went foxhunting instead. What would have happened to John if Paul Valliere had been his trainer? My dear horse, who was fabulous in the hunt field and an amazing teacher, would have been killed because he didn't fit the trainer's ideal. Let me tell you what I would have done if I found out that my trainer had had my horse killed because he was unsuccessful at his job. I would have bided my time and planned. And I would have killed my horse's murderer in such a way that he saw my face before he died.

I say murderer because that is what Paul Valliere had done to this horse. First-degree murder in cold blood. Nobody's denying that. But look at the difference in punishments between his murder of a horse and the way he would have been punished had he murdered a human. Instead of life inprisonment or even the death penalty, Paul Valliere has continued life as usual, with some adjustments- maybe he's not physically on the show grounds anymore, but he's still training and he's still making a living off of the horses. And now we're going to accept him back into society, all smiles, and shake his hand and say "So glad to have you back, I know you've changed"? While we're at it, let's open up the doors to the prisons and free the convicted murderers. Okay, maybe not the serial killers; after all, Valliere just had one horse killed. But the guys who've knocked off one person? Eh, they've done their time, I'm sure they're sorry.

You know what? Maybe he has changed. I don't know the guy. I'm not saying it's impossible. But it's too late now. Paul Valliere made his decisions years ago and he's going to have to deal with the consequences.

I wouldn't know Paul Valliere if I met him on the street. But I do not support his reinstatement. It's not about him. It's about the people who cried for that horse, and the horses that he might have killed if he hadn't been caught. But mostly, I do not support reinstatement because of the horse that he killed. The horseman's charter posted in the front of the USEF rulebook says it all. This sport is about the horse and the horse's welfare. We are in this sport, not out of money, but out of love for the horse. And that's what it comes down to.

Uberraschung
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:04 PM
Originally posted by Jane:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BaliBandido:


Oh and Jane, try to keep up.

Keep what up? I can barely understand your points most of the time, and I know it's not me. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
There were points? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

Erin
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:04 PM
Folks, I am getting VERY tired of having to babysit this thread. If it becomes too much of a pain in the ass, with too many people sniping back and forth at each other, it's simply not going to be worth my time anymore and I'll close it.

This *is* a legitimate issue and I think it's worth having open discussion about it, but if people are just going to continually derail the thread with nasty, catty comments, it's simply not going to be allowed to continue.

Most of you are well-spoken, rational adults. Please act like well-spoken, rational adults if you want to be able to continue to discuss this issue.

Jane
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:05 PM
Originally posted by harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens:
I don't think BaliBandido has been unclear, but perhaps my powers of comprehension are greater than others.

Perhaps, but a selective one, apparently. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

talloaks
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:13 PM
You know, I was trying to stay out of this.

But imagine that this horse was your horse. Maybe he wasn't ever going to be what you and your trainer had hoped he would be- maybe he never would have succeeded over the bigger fences. But this was a good horse, and a horse that you love. You arrive at the show one day to find that he's dead, and you're heartbroken. Your horse, the one that you love, your baby, is dead. Maybe you watch him being dragged away- or maybe you couldn't bear to watch. But then you find out that your trainer, whom you admire, killed him.

What would you do?

I just lost my horse this winter, of completely natural causes; it was just his time. John had finally convinced us all that he wasn't happy as a hunter and equitation horse. Instead of forcing him to do something he hated, we switched careers and he went foxhunting instead. What would have happened to John if Paul Valliere had been his trainer? My dear horse, who was fabulous in the hunt field and an amazing teacher, would have been killed because he didn't fit the trainer's ideal. Let me tell you what I would have done if I found out that my trainer had had my horse killed because he was unsuccessful at his job. I would have bided my time and planned. And I would have killed my horse's murderer in such a way that he saw my face before he died.

I say murderer because that is what Paul Valliere had done to this horse. First-degree murder in cold blood. Nobody's denying that. But look at the difference in punishments between his murder of a horse and the way he would have been punished had he murdered a human. Instead of life inprisonment or even the death penalty, Paul Valliere has continued life as usual, with some adjustments- maybe he's not physically on the show grounds anymore, but he's still training and he's still making a living off of the horses. And now we're going to accept him back into society, all smiles, and shake his hand and say "So glad to have you back, I know you've changed"? While we're at it, let's open up the doors to the prisons and free the convicted murderers. Okay, maybe not the serial killers; after all, Valliere just had one horse killed. But the guys who've knocked off one person? Eh, they've done their time, I'm sure they're sorry.

You know what? Maybe he has changed. I don't know the guy. I'm not saying it's impossible. But it's too late now. Paul Valliere made his decisions years ago and he's going to have to deal with the consequences.

I wouldn't know Paul Valliere if I met him on the street. But I do not support his reinstatement. It's not about him. It's about the people who cried for that horse, and the horses that he might have killed if he hadn't been caught. But mostly, I do not support reinstatement because of the horse that he killed. The horseman's charter posted in the front of the USEF rulebook says it all. This sport is about the horse and the horse's welfare. We are in this sport, not out of money, but out of love for the horse. And that's what it comes down to.


* * *

Renaissance
"John"
January 1, 1992 - November 24, 2005
Rest In Peace


Thank you!! Well said.

Dancing Lawn
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:13 PM
I'[m not twisting anybodies words. I'm just interpreting.

this whole thing makes me want to stay as far away as possible from all the elite "horsemen" that are out there showing, riding, training.
I prefer to not jeopardize the safety of my horses. Even if its just a perceived risk.
i'ld rather not take it.
and I have a feeling there are a lot of other little people out there, just like myself, who find this whole issue to be a bit nauseating.
Are there NO heroes for us to look up to?

Countryhawk
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:15 PM
Originally posted by Renn/aissance : Aefvue's Pharmacist:
You know, I was trying to stay out of this.

But imagine that this horse was your horse. Maybe he wasn't ever going to be what you and your trainer had hoped he would be- maybe he never would have succeeded over the bigger fences. But this was a good horse, and a horse that you love. You arrive at the show one day to find that he's dead, and you're heartbroken. Your horse, the one that you love, your baby, is dead. Maybe you watch him being dragged away- or maybe you couldn't bear to watch. But then you find out that your trainer, whom you admire, killed him.

What would you do?

You know what I think about every time I hear about the possibility of reinstating Paul Valliere? I think of the sight of my own horse lying dead in a gully and of the effort it took to cuddle his head in my lap. I think of the way he was lying. I think of his eye, glassy and unmoving. And I think of his paroxysms of death, as the blood from his heart flooded his body and his lungs, and then the way that time stopped when I saw him lying still. I will never, ever forget that sight. I don't think that any horse owner who has seen their horse die will forget the way their horse looked, dead. A few months before John died, he had finally convinced us all that he wasn't happy as a hunter and equitation horse. Instead of forcing him to do something he hated, we switched careers and he went foxhunting instead. What would have happened to John if Paul Valliere had been his trainer? My dear horse, who was fabulous in the hunt field and an amazing teacher, would have been killed because he didn't fit the trainer's ideal. Let me tell you what I would have done if I found out that my trainer had had my horse killed because he was unsuccessful at his job. I would have bided my time and planned. And I would have killed my horse's murderer in such a way that he saw my face before he died.

I say murderer because that is what Paul Valliere had done to this horse. First-degree murder in cold blood. Nobody's denying that. But look at the difference in punishments between his murder of a horse and the way he would have been punished had he murdered a human. Instead of life inprisonment or even the death penalty, Paul Valliere has continued life as usual, with some adjustments- maybe he's not physically on the show grounds anymore, but he's still training and he's still making a living off of the horses. And now we're going to accept him back into society, all smiles, and shake his hand and say "So glad to have you back, I know you've changed"? While we're at it, let's open up the doors to the prisons and free the convicted murderers. Okay, maybe not the serial killers; after all, Valliere just had one horse killed. But the guys who've knocked off one person? Eh, they've done their time, I'm sure they're sorry.

You know what? Maybe he has changed. I don't know the guy. I'm not saying it's impossible. But it's too late now. Paul Valliere made his decisions years ago and he's going to have to deal with the consequences.

I wouldn't know Paul Valliere if I met him on the street. But I do not support his reinstatement. It's not about him. It's about the people who cried for that horse, and the horses that he might have killed if he hadn't been caught. But mostly, I do not support reinstatement because of the horse that he killed. The horseman's charter posted in the front of the USEF rulebook says it all. This sport is about the horse and the horse's welfare. We are in this sport, not out of money, but out of love for the horse. And that's what it comes down to.


Nicely said Renn. Sums it up well.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:15 PM
Renn, thank you for putting things clearly, and in an adult manner. And Jane, what have you or anyone else on here said that I have not been able to understand?

Renn/aissance
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:16 PM
Thank you, Mr. Harry. You taught me well.

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:16 PM
Most of you are well-spoken, rational adults.
Now we can argue about who doesn't fall into the "most" category. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Countryhawk
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:19 PM
Originally posted by TWOLEFTFEET:
Are there NO heroes for us to look up to?

Unfortunately the 'names' people choose to look up to are not heros.

harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:21 PM
At this point in time, people who run rescues, the people who volunteer for CANTER, the people who keep their aging animals comfortable in warm barns with plenty of feed, they are the heroes.

Renn/aissance
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:23 PM
Amen to that.

War Admiral
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:25 PM
Originally posted by harryjohnson Aefvue Senior Gardens:
At this point in time, people who run rescues, the people who volunteer for CANTER, the people who keep their aging animals comfortable in warm barns with plenty of feed, they are the heroes.

Yup.

AND the people, pro and ammie alike, who play a clean game.

Unfortunately, there are fewer of 'em than a lot of people would like to think, but they ARE out there. Honest.

Countryhawk
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:27 PM
I have a friend who quietly sponsors PMU foals, and now in addition to her dtr's show horse, has one of the foals with a trainer. She now is getting more vocal, and doing fundraising to help them out. She is one I would call a hero, tho she doesn't consider herself one.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:32 PM
But C.Boylen you're telling me that nobody cares! That's pretty sick! Espewcially for somene on the Animal Welfare Committee. Don't you think it's a really bad example for the new young trainers? Hell! No cares, you can do whatever you need to get ahead of the pack.

Sherry
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by War Admiral:
PLEASE can we keep it civil? Let's not turn this into a "Let's Bash Chanda" thread for x more pages.

I happen to disagree with Chanda, rather vehemently, as to whether the reinstatement of the "horse killers" is a current horse welfare issue or not. But we've always been able to be polite about the disagreement and I hope that will continue.

The reason I believe it IS a current horse welfare issue is that USEF has already reinstated one of these people, and will probably reinstate the rest as and when they become eligible to apply, UNLESS there is significant public opposition to that.

As I've stated many times, I don't feel that reinstatement is appropriate for ANY of these people. You knowingly kill a horse for profit - you should no longer be a member of USEF.

WA...I didn't know that anyone had been reinstated already. Would you mind telling us who that is?

filly3
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:33 PM
True. There are a lot of people who really do dedicate their lives and make tremendous sacrifices to try and make this world a better place for horses. I guess the main theme of this thread is so negative it just encourages harsh words and feelings. Thanks for the uplifting stories! Maybe I will be able to have sweet dreams tonight after all.

CBoylen
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:35 PM
But C.Boylen you're telling me that nobody cares!
I am? Where?

Uberraschung
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:36 PM
Originally posted by TWOLEFTFEET:
I'[m not twisting anybodies words. I'm just interpreting.

this whole thing makes me want to stay as far away as possible from all the elite "horsemen" that are out there showing, riding, training.
I prefer to not jeopardize the safety of my horses. Even if its just a perceived risk.
i'ld rather not take it.
and I have a feeling there are a lot of other little people out there, just like myself, who find this whole issue to be a bit nauseating.
Are there NO heroes for us to look up to? Your "interpreting" looks like twisting to me, but I digress.

First of all, you are in canada and as I understand it, you don't show...so a man completely on the other side of an adjoining country in shows you don't participate in is really no threat to you. Secondly, lots of things are more jeopardizing to the safety of horses than one man who had a horse of his own killed (not one of his client's, renn...he owned Roseau Platiere) - let's say bad fencing for one. I find that a lot more dangerous! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

And again I repeat, the "little people" cliche is becoming very cliche, but perhaps that is just me who feels that way...

Also something that bothers me is that if killing a horse were murder, then where would one draw the line? No one would be able to put down a horse anymore because that would be murder too. And it definitely isn't murder currently to kill your own horse...it's just illegal to try and profit off of that. How do you define "horse murder"? I'm not saying it's right or wrong to kill a horse one way over killing it another way, but just that it's something that needs to be quantified. And when does it approach PETA-esque proportions? Horses aren't people and we don't want to have laws for them that emulate those we have for people.

Just some rhetorical questions on my part....

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:37 PM
Uberraschung of course it matters what Chanda's personal opinion is on any committee; she's been appointed to represent the "welfare of the horses".

I know I'm on a USEF Committee and I'm there to represent the the "grass roots" to protect the level playing field for everyone and not just those who are politically correct. My opinions are my opinions wherever I am. I'm not going to change my color.

Sherry
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:39 PM
Renn....What you said makes all of us at Aefvue Farm proud http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

War Admiral
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:40 PM
Originally posted by Sherry3313 Groom of Winners Aefvue Farms:
WA...I didn't know that anyone had been reinstated already. Would you mind telling us who that is?

Nancy Banfield. That discussion was on another thread, if I remember right.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:40 PM
Harry you're not alone! We all agree with you. Someone has to defend those horses who have already died for no reason except vanity and greed or simple PRIDE.

There has not yet been one good reason why that horse had to die. AND, we only know about one for sure because that brought a conviction.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:45 PM
Excuse me slainte! But as a show manager if a horse owned by Acres Wild Farm comes to my show under these circumstances I have no right to refuse the entries.

This isn't just a little bookkkeeping error.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:50 PM
slainte! It's not unusual for two farms to have the same name. The Acre Wild Farm in Rhode Island not Massachusetts is owned by Paul Valiere and is in good standing in spite of the fact that he is suspended. Many farms have two locations. The one in Wellingon is not listed as a registered owner of any horses.

Uberraschung
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:54 PM
Originally posted by Snowbird:
slainte! It's not unusual for two farms to have the same name. The Acre Wild Farm in Rhode Island not Massachusetts is owned by Paul Valiere and is in good standing in spite of the fact that he is suspended. Many farms have two locations. The one in Wellingon is not listed as a registered owner of any horses. I think slainte's point is that the farm in RI doesn't even exist anymore.

Boberry
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:55 PM
Instead of little people, how about "most" people. Like most people believe a person who "put down" a horse to falsely gain insurance money should not be allowed back into the USEF. And most people think it's disappointing some people would still support a person who committed these crimes. It's only a matter of time before most people will express their opinion to the satisfaction of some people and the rules will get enforced. I think this is what most people would agree to be the right thing to do for the welfare of horses.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 08:57 PM
Way to go War Admiral! Right on target. We don;t care if he reapplies he can do that every day if he wants. We do care that someone who CONFESSED and was convicted get back full membership rights so he can judge and compete against the plain folks.

If he wants to teach and people want to do business with someone who was too cheap to sell a horse down and too vain to take a chance he could be better with another trainer. That's their choice but please don;t insult my intelligence with the conviction that he is one of the best we have.

All I did was take out time for dinner and I can't catch up with all this tripe.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:05 PM
Well Renn that was well put and no one could misunderstand your message. I'm proud to agree with both of you. It is the horses that matter and not a $2.00 piece of blue rayon or a trophy. We can get those on ebay and some really great ones were available at the George Morris Auction.

It scares me to think of what would happen to all my horses if their lives depended on the like of Paul Valiere.

BaliBandido
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by Uberraschung:
Secondly, lots of things are more jeopardizing to the safety of horses than one man who had a horse of his own killed (not one of his client's, renn...he owned Roseau Platiere) - let's say bad fencing for one. I find that a lot more dangerous!
Just so I understand what you have said here- you find fencing more dangerous than a professional horsetrainer who due to his desire to save his own overinflated ego and satisfy his own personal greed opted to have a horse killed, entered into a business arrangement with a man who killed horses for people in ways that were hard to detect, knowingly submitted a fraudulent claim to the insurance company and wore a wire to lessen his legal punishment? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

I agree there are probably more horses who die or are injured from fences, however those we call accidents (even if due to someones ignorence) not premeditated planning to kill a healty, useful, animal and defraud the company who insured it. So if you are just going with the numbers I guess you have a point, however to me that is like saying more people are killed by automobiles than by serial killers so we should work on auto safety (I agree) and when a serial killer is at large we should not be to concerned because that one man is not nearly as jeopardizing to the safety of people as the Volvo.

War Admiral
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:06 PM
OK y'all, I'm whupped and I've got to go sleep b/c I've got a big day tomorrow.

But before I go: in view of the fact that we're probably going to get booted off of here soon, does anyone have any recommendations for Bulletin Board hosting software?? Preferably low-cost & low-volume...?? I'll add a forum to www.noreinstatement.org (http://www.noreinstatement.org) if I can.

Thank you and goodnight...

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:13 PM
C.Boylen if you're answering me. In your post where you felt your personal opinion was OK! even though your position on the animal welfare committee requires a different perspective.

To me it's like saying only the atheletes coming matter, only the beauties and only those people maybe with a great brain are worth worrying about.I can't help but see your two posiions as a serious conflict of interest. But then, that's only my opinion and I'm not in USHJA now. I guess next year I will be compelled.

There are ugly horses without a whole lot of talent that are the most lovable creatures I have ever known. I would hate to think that because I died it would be OK! to kill them all because they have no sales value. All they're good at is teaching kids how to be good people.

Sherry
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:18 PM
Originally posted by War Admiral:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sherry3313 Groom of Winners Aefvue Farms:
WA...I didn't know that anyone had been reinstated already. Would you mind telling us who that is?

Nancy Banfield. That discussion was on another thread, if I remember right. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks...I didn't realize that she had been reinstated. I didn't see the other thread.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:19 PM
Cheez!Uberraschung don't you understand PV isn't a threat to any of us. He's a threat to horses because others will think it's OK!

Good sport depends on rules of behavior and attitude. You can't legislate that; you've proved how easy it can be to bend and twist and stretch them to sy what you think is OK!!

Don't get angry because the majority of us think more about horses than as a vehicle for our own fame and success. If money was what I cared about, I could have made lots of it; heck! I could have even married for it. But, who wants to go the bank and pet your money. It can't snort back and whinney or give you a kiss. Greenbacks are no pleasure at all.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:25 PM
Uberraschung there are many farms that don't own any land.As a show manager I have to go by the book and the book says if a horse want's to compete owned by Acres Wild Farm from RI; I have to accept the entries as it is now listed as active.

It may not be PV's fault but it's there and if there is no such farm at that address he should have retired the name.

Boberry
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:27 PM
But, who wants to go the bank and pet your money.


http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

$um people do.

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:31 PM
Well usAHSA has volunteered to help with the bracelets and I know the Leadership Council of usAHSA would be pleased to welcome you to our message board which is exactly like this one with different colors.

No problem and ready to go tonight fo whoever want's to join us. That's our point. usAHSA is for the people who love horses more than themselves.

http://www.usAHSA.org when the home page opens click on the Message Board and welcome to you all including our worthy opponents if they choose to continue this discussion.

Linus
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:34 PM
Originally posted by BaliBandido:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Uberraschung:
Secondly, lots of things are more jeopardizing to the safety of horses than one man who had a horse of his own killed (not one of his client's, renn...he owned Roseau Platiere) - let's say bad fencing for one. I find that a lot more dangerous!
Just so I understand what you have said here- you find fencing more dangerous than a professional horsetrainer who due to his desire to save his own overinflated ego and satisfy his own personal greed opted to have a horse killed, entered into a business arrangement with a man who killed horses for people in ways that were hard to detect, knowingly submitted a fraudulent claim to the insurance company and wore a wire to lessen his legal punishment? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

I agree there are probably more horses who die or are injured from fences, however those we call accidents (even if due to someones ignorence) not premeditated planning to kill a healty, useful, animal and defraud the company who insured it. So if you are just going with the numbers I guess you have a point, however to me that is like saying more people are killed by automobiles than by serial killers so we should work on auto safety (I agree) and when a serial killer is at large we should not be to concerned because that one man is not nearly as jeopardizing to the safety of people as the Volvo. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Huh? Of course bad fencing is more dangerous than PV, whatever way you look at it. Maybe not as sexy a cause to get worked up about, though.

People worry about things they think they don't control -- airplanes more than cars, marauding serial horse killers more than fencing -- regardless of statistics. I think it's a good point that PV didn't kill other people's horses, without their consent, so I find Renn/aissance's post (however well-written) completely off base. And the outrage about anyone who would *dare* disagree with the No Reinstatement Party Line is really doing the cause no favors, IMO. Sanctimony and personal attacks aren't very attractive. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sleepy.gif

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:39 PM
Boberry, not my idea of a party! We can do better than that any day.

I have the ugliest $5.00 pony that qualified for pony jumpers at Harrisburg and I really wanted to bring him there and then show them how much their expensive ponies were really worth. What they DO is more important than what they look like in my book.

It's just like a horse show is not a beauty pageant! If the girls want a beauty pageant they can try out for Miss America.

Andrew
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:53 PM
As a member of that committee, I personally concern myself with issues and conditions that currently affect horse welfare.
Sweetie.... what about the ones that were executed???

Andrew
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:55 PM
that was not how I interpreted her posts.
Janie.. re read it the post... "current" well being... could care less about the ones executed..???????????? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Snowbird
Feb. 19, 2006, 09:57 PM
Well said Andrew! What about those other horses who have been abused. By the way as I understand from my fading memory PV was suspended from AHSA not for Insurance Fraud but for animal abuse.

OK! I caught up and now I can sleep peacefully. I always feel better after I've had a chance to say my piece.

Fairview Horse Center
Feb. 19, 2006, 10:05 PM
Originally posted by Linus:
I think it's a good point that PV didn't kill other people's horses, without their consent, so I find Renn/aissance's post (however well-written) completely off base.

Let me put my twist, as a breeder, on Renn's post then...

But imagine that this horse was your horse. <span class="ev_code_BLUE">insert: a horse that I bred</span> Maybe he wasn't ever going to be what you and your trainer had hoped he would be- maybe he never would have succeeded over the bigger fences. But this was a good horse, and a horse that you love. <span class="ev_code_BLUE">and maybe a horse that I waited for 11 months for, delivered in the wee hours of the morning, and nurtured. Raised to be a good citizen, and then sold him to what I thought was a SUPER home with a TOP professional http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif believing he would have a great life.</span>You arrive at the show one day to find that he's dead, and you're heartbroken. Your horse, the one that you love, your baby, is dead. Maybe you watch him being dragged away- or maybe you couldn't bear to watch. But then you find out that your trainer, whom you admire, killed him.

This is a person that should not only just barely be squeaking by on any rules with some VERY good grease, but as an icon, he should be at a very high standard.

The best??? Not in my opinion. I consider him one of the worst. Someone with less talent is a much better trainer than anyone that at ANYTIME in their life, would be willing to consider killing a horse for financial gain, or status.

Uberraschung
Feb. 19, 2006, 10:14 PM
Originally posted by Fairview Horse Center:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Linus:
I think it's a good point that PV didn't kill other people's horses, without their consent, so I find Renn/aissance's post (however well-written) completely off base.

Let me put my twist, as a breeder, on Renn's post then...

But imagine that this horse was your horse. <span class="ev_code_BLUE">insert: a horse that I bred</span> Maybe he wasn't ever going to be what you and your trainer had hoped he would be- maybe he never would have succeeded over the bigger fences. But this was a good horse, and a horse that you love. <span class="ev_code_BLUE">and maybe a horse that I waited for 11 months for, delivered in the wee hours of the morning, and nurtured. Raised to be a good citizen, and then sold him to what I thought was a SUPER home with a TOP professional http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif believing he would have a great life.</span>You arrive at the show one day to find that he's dead, and you're heartbroken. Your horse, the one that you love, your baby, is dead. Maybe you watch him being dragged away- or maybe you couldn't bear to watch. But then you find out that your trainer, whom you admire, killed him.

This is a person that should not only just barely be squeaking by on any rules with some VERY good grease, but as an icon, he should be at a very high standard.

The best??? Not in my opinion. I consider him one of the worst. Someone with less talent is a much better trainer than anyone that at ANYTIME in their life, would be willing to consider killing a horse for financial gain, or status. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Which brings me back to my questions about "what is the definition of horse murder?" that no one has deigned to answer yet. Horses aren't people or babies. They are bought and sold, which I don't believe you would do with your child in the normal course of things. Neither would you put down a child with a broken leg or a terminal illness. We get attached to them but in all reality, the horse that one breed and sells is a commodity.

Thus why I don't understand why yours and renn's suppositions are relevant to this case.

Boberry
Feb. 19, 2006, 10:18 PM
Snowbird, that image of petting and kissing the money is priceless http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

Fairview Horse Center
Feb. 19, 2006, 10:23 PM
"what is the definition of horse murder?"

To me it would be the reason for the killing. If it is for the financial gain and ego, it would be murder. If it is in the best interest of the horse (pain? quality of life?), or maybe human safety with a dangerous horse, or even a horse that you can no longer provide a comfortable existence for, that is different. Murder is the lack of caring about the animal, and the illegal financial gain because of it.

Uberraschung
Feb. 19, 2006, 10:27 PM
Originally posted by Fairview Horse Center:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"what is the definition of horse murder?"

To me it would be the reason for the killing. If it is for the financial gain and ego, it would be murder. If it is in the best interest of the horse (pain? quality of life?), or maybe human safety with a dangerous horse, or even a horse that you can no longer provide a comfortable existence for, that is different. Murder is the lack of caring about the animal, and the illegal financial gain because of it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
What about people who send horses to slaughter? That's not a particularly pleasant death and they do profit from it. Should all of them be indicted for horse murder as well?