PDA

View Full Version : Real Suspension List Names



crime stopper
Feb. 1, 2004, 08:51 AM
The following people are listed on the USAE website as being suspended from participation in all USAE sanctioned events:

Ayers, Jeffrey PA. 12/01/03 - 2/28/04
Bond, Belynda TX. 2/01/04 - 5/31/04
Bragg, John CA. 1/01/04 - 6/30/04
Crandall, Robert MD. 1/01/04 - 3/30/04
Dlin, Darren FL. 1/01/04 - 5/31/04
Fenney, Tracy TX. 2/01/04 - 7/31/04
Gordon, Darcy FL. 2/01/04 - 5/31/04
Harris, Dennis OH. 1/01/04 - 3/31/04
Johnson, Thomas AZ. 1/01/04 - 3/31/04
Lobel, Sandra NJ. 1/01/04 - 4/30/04
McCormick, Michael TX. 2/01/04 - 11/30/04
Roulston, Buddy TX. 2/01/04 - 6/30/04
Stewart, Donald FL. 11/03/03 - 3/02/04
Yeager, Dianne CA. 2/01/04 - 7/31/04
Young, Gary MO. 1/01/04 - 6/30/04

The people listed above are currently suspended for a period of multiple months. Many are sat down for drug rule infractions. The others have not yet had their reasons for suspensions released.

Personally, I want to be kept very informed about who among my colleagues is not in good standing with my sport's national governing body. Anyone having further substantiated information regarding people suspended from USAE events, please let us know.

crime stopper
Feb. 1, 2004, 08:51 AM
The following people are listed on the USAE website as being suspended from participation in all USAE sanctioned events:

Ayers, Jeffrey PA. 12/01/03 - 2/28/04
Bond, Belynda TX. 2/01/04 - 5/31/04
Bragg, John CA. 1/01/04 - 6/30/04
Crandall, Robert MD. 1/01/04 - 3/30/04
Dlin, Darren FL. 1/01/04 - 5/31/04
Fenney, Tracy TX. 2/01/04 - 7/31/04
Gordon, Darcy FL. 2/01/04 - 5/31/04
Harris, Dennis OH. 1/01/04 - 3/31/04
Johnson, Thomas AZ. 1/01/04 - 3/31/04
Lobel, Sandra NJ. 1/01/04 - 4/30/04
McCormick, Michael TX. 2/01/04 - 11/30/04
Roulston, Buddy TX. 2/01/04 - 6/30/04
Stewart, Donald FL. 11/03/03 - 3/02/04
Yeager, Dianne CA. 2/01/04 - 7/31/04
Young, Gary MO. 1/01/04 - 6/30/04

The people listed above are currently suspended for a period of multiple months. Many are sat down for drug rule infractions. The others have not yet had their reasons for suspensions released.

Personally, I want to be kept very informed about who among my colleagues is not in good standing with my sport's national governing body. Anyone having further substantiated information regarding people suspended from USAE events, please let us know.

becca's boys
Feb. 1, 2004, 10:56 AM
WOW!! There are a few on there that I was not expecting!! If you want to stay up to date then keep your eye on the list for the next few months. From what I hear it will grow even more with additional surprising names.

Applesauce
Feb. 1, 2004, 11:22 AM
And there are some that are NOT on there that should!

*A fool and his money are soon partying!*

WWCountry
Feb. 1, 2004, 06:52 PM
Watch these names in the future--some are getting additional time for more recent infractions.

Anyplace Farm
Feb. 1, 2004, 06:55 PM
Wow. Texas was busy.

`````````````````````````````````````````
"I NOW INFORM YOU THAT YOU ARE TOO FAR FROM REALITY."
Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf, Iraqi Minister of Information

"Life ain't certain...ride your best horse first." Unknown

Mouse2713
Feb. 1, 2004, 09:13 PM
I am sorry, but I am not sure why this suspension thing is such a big deal to everyone.

Even though I am a small local trainer that doesnt use ANY drugs on my horses, I do show at smaller A rated horse shows.This weekend at Jacksonville one of our ponies got drug tested. The mom feeds him about 6 different things from smart pak, and a friend of mine who is a steward made the comment while we were waiting for our pony to "fill the jar", so to speak, that we should check out the smart pak products we were using, because a lot of the coat conditioners and joint supplements test positive. I almost had a heart attack, but then I thought, there but for the grace of god go I. I know most of the trainers that are listed on the above suspension list. I am VERY familiar with Don Stewart stables. His horses are impeccably turned out, and cared for. His students are happy and very well treated, and more importantly, the younger riders are polite well mannered, and sweet to other visiting riders.

I think it is vindictive and cruel for people who know NOTHING about why these people are on the suspension list to keep hammering on about it as if they are well informed. None of us know the real story behind any of those suspended. They got caught, they got punished, its none of our business, so enough with the grandstanding already.

Any of us could have this happen to us with the huge amount of items that are on the market that test positive. We asked a steward to tell us a few of the things that test positive and you wouldnt believe some of the products on the list. Suspension from the USAE could happen from feeding the wrong supplement, and in fact that has happened many times in the past.

I am pretty sure that as horsemen all of us have done things that we look back on and are not proud of. I try not to do things that are morally wrong, but I am not perfect and I dont expect other people to be either.

And, as a final footnote to this little diatribe of mine, I was at a 4-H show three weeks ago, listening to this lady who is a mother as well as a trainer in our area was telling everyone who would listen that Don Stewart was suspended. She made a huge big deal out of it for about 20 minutes until I asked her if she knew why he had been suspended. Her reply was that she didnt know, but that he deserved it if he drugged his horses. This same overweight insensitive woman yanked her kid off the horse when the horse didnt win, and called the kid stupid. She then proceeded to mount the horse, rip its head off, and beat it about 6 times with a stick. As far as I could tell the worst thing the horse was doing was standing around looking a bit dull because it was in need of a farrier, and 110 lbs in weight. I'd much rather send my horse to Don Stewart and risk that he might drug it, than send it to the fat lady who starves and beats her horses, but under USAE rules Don is guilty and the fat lady is not. Go Figure.

I guess what I am trying to say is we all sort of live in glass houses and we shouldnt throw stones.

hifi
Feb. 1, 2004, 09:14 PM
There are a couple names that are one step ahead of the drug testers..They know who they are.....

Poindexter, may he rest in peace.
Bobbie please rest in peace.
www.melodicfarms.com (http://www.melodicfarms.com)

lauriep
Feb. 1, 2004, 09:26 PM
Mouse, that is the most level headed post I have seen in ANY of these "suspension list" witch hunt threads.

Thank you for speaking out.

Laurie

Peggy
Feb. 1, 2004, 09:51 PM
From the USEF Jan/Feb publication for the above listed:

Jeff Ayers - Social Secretary - Penn National (10/14/02) - reserpine

Dennis Harris - Point Taken - Sweet Charity Farm Winter Series I (1/18/03) - reserpine

Don Stewart - Monte Cristo - Wellington Natl (11/27/02) - reserpine

Just the facts.

I ride with neither the aforementioned "fat lady" nor Don Stewart.

Saddlebag
Feb. 1, 2004, 09:57 PM
Mouse...You go girl! On that thought... I do not use forbidden substances on horses at shows, I think of myself as honest and kind to my horses, and as an Official as well as a trainer, I hold myself to a higher standard or behavior than many others. But I had a "light bulb moment" last year when eight months after the show in question, a groom told me that he had observed one of MY clients buying cocaine from another groom at the show! I must say that an image of my name on the "hit list" flashed before my eyes! Now, as it was, none of our horses were tested at that show, so I guess I dodged that bullet, but I do realize now that we trainers are quite vulnerable at shows. I don't question the need for the Trainer Responsibility Rule. That is what gives teeth to the whole concept of regulating Drugs and Medications. But, having had this "There But For The Grace Of God Go I" experience, I am a bit disturbed at the "Burn The Heathens" attitude that is so prevalent on this BB. Many of the miscreants are getting what they deserve, but THERE ALSO COULD BE SOME WHO ARE THE VICTIM OF CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND THEIR CONTROL.

It is easy to say..."Sure, fine the buggers $25K." Or "Fix it so that only Vets can have needles and syringes on the showgrounds" But...do you ever consider what that would cost the exhibitors? All those folks who think that the "rich guys" wouldn't win so much if we took away their drugs, and we "poor folks" would get our chance to be winners. That is total rubbish! If shows were required to sequester the barn areas and provide round the clock security, and if only veterinarians could give a shot, the cost of showing would increase at warp speed, and there would ONLY be "rich guys" showing! It is nearly that way now...but if the safeguards of the barn areas was implemented,those who are leading the witch hunt would be completely priced out of the sport.

I am by no way advocating the illegal use of drugs and medications. But there is a little thing called "Due Process" that is an important right, and without the expensive safeguards I mentioned, one has to consider that a $50K fine and a 2 year suspension could destroy an innocent person who was the victim of circumstances.

CoolMeadows
Feb. 1, 2004, 11:27 PM
I don't know that she meant it in a judmental way regarding overweight people, but she hit on one of my biggest pet peeves. Obese people who own or ride underweight horses. I've seen two around here... seriously obese, both with many downright skinny horses. I'm talking dips between the ribs and hip bones poking out. If they can afford to feed themselves enough to become medically obese then for the love of all things holy, I wish they would feed all their horses.

www.coolmeadows.net (http://www.coolmeadows.net)

Nitro's Mommy
Feb. 1, 2004, 11:48 PM
Wow......I've seen Tracey ride and always admired her, hopefully since i'm in this part of the country I'll hear the story of WHY. I hate to judge until I know why. Please PT me if you know!

"My insurance doesn't cover PMS." --10 things I hate about you

maclaydreams
Feb. 2, 2004, 12:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nitro's Mommy:
Wow......I've seen Tracey ride and always admired her, hopefully since i'm in this part of the country I'll hear the story of WHY. I hate to judge until I know why. Please PT me if you know!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ditto... Tracy Feeney... I've always really looked up to her... if anyone knows why she was supended please PT me... I'm still in shock lol...

------
Melodramatic "Melody" in the larges

CoconutGrrl
Feb. 2, 2004, 12:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CoolMeadows:
I don't know that she meant it in a judmental way regarding overweight people, but she hit on one of my biggest pet peeves. Obese people who own or ride underweight horses. I've seen two around here... seriously obese, both with many downright skinny horses. I'm talking dips between the ribs and hip bones poking out. If they can afford to feed themselves enough to become medically obese then for the love of all things holy, I wish they would feed all their horses.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


So it is ok for thin people to starve horses but if you are fat, you can't?

Your argument should be with people who mistreat their horses, not with people who are fat.

I am fat, but I don't dope or mistreat my horses.

CoolMeadows
Feb. 2, 2004, 03:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CoconutGrrl:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CoolMeadows:
I don't know that she meant it in a judmental way regarding overweight people, but she hit on one of my biggest pet peeves. Obese people who own or ride underweight horses. I've seen two around here... seriously obese, both with many downright skinny horses. I'm talking dips between the ribs and hip bones poking out. If they can afford to feed themselves enough to become medically obese then for the love of all things holy, I wish they would feed all their horses.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


So it is ok for thin people to starve horses but if you are fat, you can't?

Your argument should be with people who mistreat their horses, not with people who are fat.

I am fat, but I don't dope or mistreat my horses.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hell no it's not ok for anyone to starve, drug or in any way mistreat their horses in my book. But it irritates me to no end to see morbidly obese people stuffing their faces at the horse show while their horses are tied to their stock trailer in the blazing sun without hay and looking like a skeletal anatomy lesson. And there are only two people in my area who bring disgustingly skinny horses to local shows, and they're both closing in on 300lbs, if they haven't gotten there yet. I wouldn't care less if they were on healthy good sized horses and not 15.2 racks of bones. I'd be just as pissed if I saw Paris Hilton with a skeleton of a horse too.

www.coolmeadows.net (http://www.coolmeadows.net)

CoconutGrrl
Feb. 2, 2004, 03:35 AM
Listen closely to what you are saying, however.

Morbid obesity has NOTHING AT ALL to do with horse abuse.

You may think yourself smart for appreciating the "irony" of it all. However, in using an UNRELATED and UNNECESSARY descriptor of these people you loathe, you are also indicating your prejudice against and negative feelings about obese people.

It is no different than someone coming up to you and telling you about "the black man who robbed the neighborhood store". Describing the robber as black is no more necessary than describing those horse abusers as fat. It merely perpetuates STEREOTYPES and HATE. Neither of which, frankly, help horses or anyone else.

CoolMeadows
Feb. 2, 2004, 04:49 AM
OK, I don't loathe overweight people. I'm hardly svelte myself in the dead of winter, and looking at every single person in my family, I know exactly what my genetic weight destiny is. When morbid obesity goes together with puny, skeletal horses that are all sway backed and sore and starved, it does have to do with horse abuse. The owner should cut back his/her over indulgence and take some of the money they should save and put it into caring for their horses.

I do hate when people put their own desires and comforts ahead of their horses' health. If someone is getting enough to eat as to be as incredibly overweight, then they should be able to afford to feed their horses. Same goes for the boarder who goes out clubbing every single night and then whines about not having board money or money to buy the poor horse a blanket when it's freezing outside. Pisses me off to no end. Horses are a very big responsibility and sometimes owners have to make sacrifices to have them. I'm sure there are plenty of people on this board who've lived on Raemen noodles and rice in college or rough times to make sure there was enough to provide for their horse. If a serious over-eater doesn't want to make the sacrifice of cutting down their intake and giving their horse some food, then I wish they'd sell the poor thing. If the non-stop partier won't quit and ends up with a homeless horse, I wish they'd sell it too. If people have enough money or time to over eat or party every night and still take great care of their horse, I'm happy.

www.coolmeadows.net (http://www.coolmeadows.net)

Hasty
Feb. 2, 2004, 05:42 AM
Probably going to get blasted for this....


I believe if we are capable of finding this website, we are all capable of finding the AHSA (or whatever its called now) website, where it is very easy to find the suspension list. AND if we are AHSA (or whatever) members WE ALL recieve the magazine and we can all read who has been suspended and for what. There is absolutely NO NEED for posting these peoples names, horses, and what they were suspended for OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Maybe at first people did not know where to find the stuff...but at this point it has been on these boards for an extended period of time, numerous times. I realize what they did was wrong, yadda yadda yadda, but come on people GET OVER IT and MOVE ON.

Mouse2713
Feb. 2, 2004, 06:17 AM
Excuse me, but I dont need anyone to interpret what I said for me. The mention of the ladys weight was only because the horse was about 14 hands tall, and severly underweight. I only mentioned it because it was part of the cruelty aspect of the original statement. I am no lightweight myself and most of my family are 300 pounders. None of us that I know of jump on the back of 14 hand, underweight ponies with bad feet and yank its head off.

And to set the record straight, I have purchased a horse that was drugged when I bought it. I asked the trainer to take it back and when she wouldnt, I sued her and lost. I lost because there is such a thing as vetting a horse. Which I did, and told the vet that blood tests were unneccessary. That makes me the person who didnt CHECK to see if the horse was drugged first. Trust me though, I let everyone know what had happened to me and who did it and she is no longer training horses, she now works in a tack shop.

I also find it interesting that reserpine was the drug that most of these horses were caught on. I have had my own vet prescribe this drug on two separate occasions to two horses here at the farm for medical reasons. My vet also gave it a third time to a really fractious 3 year old that we were breaking, that we thought might hurt itself if we didnt try something really radical. The two horses with medical conditions cleared right up and the third horse was a happy boy around the barn, long enough for us to break him. He never went back to being spooky or stupid, once he learned we werent going to hurt him and we never had to give him another shot. My vet told me that she likes to try reserpine when all else has failed on horses that are terrified of everything around them, as it calms them and lets them learn to enjoy being handled in the right environment. I havent ever shown any of these horses, but I do remember my vet telling me that every horse is different, in the way the drug works, and that she has heard other vets tell her that it can test up to 90 days after it is administered. I can see where this might catch some people off guard, especially since the USAE rule I think says 30 days.

Flash44
Feb. 2, 2004, 07:55 AM
Reserpine comes in Smart Pak? How convenient.


I guess you could look at the show records of the horses associated with the reserpine suspensions and see if they had an injury 40-60 days earlier that required stall rest (and reserpine, because coincidentally, they couldn't handle stall rest). THEN you can go and proclaim the innocence of these trainers. Or maybe the injuries were serious enough to require stall rest and reserpine, but not so serious the horse had to stay home for a while? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Uberraschung
Feb. 2, 2004, 08:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Flash44:
Reserpine comes in Smart Pak? How convenient.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What in the hell are you talking about? You are twisting Mouse2713's words.

Mouse, you should have known better than to even try to reason, but I applaud your effort.

Flash44
Feb. 2, 2004, 08:15 AM
People who lie, cheat, steal or otherwise break the law do not necessarily look like monsters. Most white collar criminals are well dressed, well behaved, involved with their communities, and present a favorable face to the public. Their houses are well kept, their lawns mown, etc. So to say that a trainer is not capable of cheating becuase his horses are well groomed and his riders polite makes no sense at all. People who have something to hide are doing just that - hiding it.

Nickelodian
Feb. 2, 2004, 08:28 AM
Mouse -- congrats on sticking your head out to stand up for what you believe is true. A quick question for you. What IS Reserpine, a sedative?



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
www.scatteredoaksfarm.com (http://www.scatteredoaksfarm.com)

DMK
Feb. 2, 2004, 08:33 AM
Got to agree Flash. Tacky... Your position is not without some good points and logic, but that's hardly the way to express them.

And yes, substances can metabolize as reserpine without actually being reserpine. Reserpine is derived from a plant, and that plant may very well show up in some of the herbal substances available. It's entirely possible that the substance itself will not test as reserpine until metabolized in the body. That may or may not be an excuse, and one certainly should look at any herbals with a skeptical eye because your ability to prove your "intent" will be a tough road if the herbal in question does turn out test as something altogether different than what you thought it might be..

It's also quite likely that a horse could have been given reserpine well outside the "ideal" time frame suggested by the USEF and still have traces detectable in the blood stream.

But from all I have heard from more reliable people who might be in the position to know, that was not the case in at least some of the current round of suspensions. While I have no idea if this is the case, the length of the penalties/fines certainly seems to indicate that a jury of their peers thought there was a greater intent to alter performance than in the last round of reserpine related suspensions.

I do think it would be good to look at the D&M rules from two perspectives:

1) Allow for traces of certain drugs, as long as the levels allowed could not affect performance. Let's face it - there is a level of Drug X which simply does not affect performance, and must have been given a sufficiently long time ago so as not to affect the horse in competition. Most racing jurisdictions allow these trace levels (including cocaine!) to be present in racing animals without triggering fines/suspensions. It is quite possible the USEF does allow these trace levels, but if they do, they are an internal standard and not generally known to the public. In racing, these standards are available.

2) Hand in hand with this, I would like to see a tougher penalties/fines on those folks who DO end up proven guilty. If you take away the excuse of the residual effect (I gave the Rx 90 days ago, honest!), you should hopefully narrow the guilty pool down to those who were potentially altering the outcome of the competition. And I also think a 3 strikes and you are out rule would not be a bad idea...

"I used to care, but things have changed..." Bob Dylan

MellowM
Feb. 2, 2004, 08:34 AM
Correct me if I am wrong someone, but I believe Tracey Fenney is suspended only because she got brought down along with Mike.

DMK
Feb. 2, 2004, 08:38 AM
Mellow - how would that work? Does she co-sign as trainer along with McCormick? And if so, why the differing suspension time frames?

Certainly there are many other cases where the rider/ass't trainers of other suspended trainers are not involved, so it would be interesting to know why this case is different...

"I used to care, but things have changed..." Bob Dylan

Portia
Feb. 2, 2004, 08:48 AM
Mike McCormick and Tracy Fenney were not set down for illegal drugging of horses. They were set down because they broke the suspension/no competition rules last year during Mike's suspension for having verbally abused a steward the year before.

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 2, 2004, 08:50 AM
Hopefully, someone can answer that. One would assume her suspension would not be as assit. to Mike McCormick, but as an individual.

Thanks Portia...we were posting at the same time.

noname
Feb. 2, 2004, 08:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Portia:
Mike McCormick and Tracy Fenney were not set down for illegal drugging of horses. They were set down because they broke the suspension/no competition rules last year during Mike's suspension for having verbally abused a steward the year before.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

portia....i want to believe you on this. is it written up anywhere? many people, including myself, were under the assumption they were being set down because of a drug infraction at one of the houston shows. so, why is it that they have different length suspensions?

Magnolia
Feb. 2, 2004, 09:00 AM
Fat people on thin horses....

Please, the horses aren't thin because the fat people are spending hay money eating extra food. That is just childish and rude. Yes, the horses are being neglected, very wrong.

But please, don't assume a fat persons financial/care shortcomings are caused by spending too much money on food.

I'm fat, but losing weight. At my highest weight (no, didn't ride), I spent not too much money on food. Now, I am at my lowest weight since highschool, and I spend way more money of food.

As for the suspensions, well, shame on them - I hold the people at the top to a higher level than the "fat" 4-H lady. Is it OK for them to do wrong because a more ignorant person does worse? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif(though she sounded like a bit of a hypocrite...)

The witchy witch witch of south central NC.

Uberraschung
Feb. 2, 2004, 09:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by D@!$y:
No one tells you that the trainer you are with is known for their magic positions.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh do tell some of the magic positions! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Sorry, I couldn't help it http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

khobstetter
Feb. 2, 2004, 09:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>From experience let me tell you what a shock it is to take your wonderfully calm and sweet natured animal to a new barn and have it turn into a psycho lunatic. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Imagine being the new trainer that has to deal with that critter!!!! The instant your horse turns into a maniac the "old" trainer starts the nasty rethoric that YOU, the "new" trainer don't know how to do your job....after all, THEY (the "old" ones) never had a problem!!

It becomes very difficult to handle that situation....the client is usually the last to know and you (the "new" trainer) are the one to have to "wear" the horse...

http://www.foxpointefarm.com
http://www.go-sho.org

Portia
Feb. 2, 2004, 09:13 AM
I'm guessing -- and it's only a guess -- that Mike's suspension is longer because he was the one that was under suspension when they broke the rules trying to get around some of the restrictions of his suspension.

I'm sorry I can't give you a written source for the information about the reason for the suspension. It is just what I've been told by people in a position to know. So, you can take it for what it's worth, which I guess is not much until we see it in writing.

becca's boys
Feb. 2, 2004, 09:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Portia:
Mike McCormick and Tracy Fenney were not set down for illegal drugging of horses. They were set down because they broke the suspension/no competition rules last year during Mike's suspension for having verbally abused a steward the year before.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Are you sure about that?! I am pretty sure that is not the case.

ESG
Feb. 2, 2004, 09:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DMK:
And yes, substances can metabolize as reserpine without actually being reserpine. Reserpine is derived from a plant, and that plant may very well show up in some of the herbal substances available. It's entirely possible that the substance itself will not test as reserpine until metabolized in the body. That may or may not be an excuse, and one certainly should look at any herbals with a skeptical eye because your ability to prove your "intent" will be a tough road if the herbal in question does turn out test as something altogether different than what you thought it might be..
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're right - reserpine was originally found and brewed from the roots of Rauwolfia serpentina or Rauwolfia vomitoria, plants found in India and Africa. So far as I know, none of the horses testing positive have come from or been to those countries. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gifAnd while Dr. Forney's article (from whence this information springs) did mention the fact that "blood testing for reserpine use can be complicated by related herbs and plants found in supplements, pastures and hay which can also cause a positive drug test", she fails to mention which supplements, hay or pastures. Possibly a new excuse for those whose horses test for it? I think not. I think (actually personally know, in at least a few of these cases) that the drug was purposely administered, and not through any feed supplement. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/uhoh.gif

I think this will be my last post on the subject. I'm just really tired of reading so many on these boards attempt to justify the suspensions of trainers whose guilt the USEF has already determined. Shouldn't surprise me, I guess; I suppose even Charles Manson had a fan club......................... http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif

DMK
Feb. 2, 2004, 10:24 AM
ESG, if you had read for comprehension, you might have noted that I indicated that this may or may not be an excuse (in the same paragraph, no less), merely a warning for all those feeding herbal substances. No the horse probably isn't from India or Africa, but who knows where the stuff in that container is from.

And if this is considered a "justification," then try to refrain from reading the USEF's own D&M guidelines, as I believe they offer nearly the same warning. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

"I used to care, but things have changed..." Bob Dylan

DMK
Feb. 2, 2004, 10:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ESG:
Shouldn't surprise me, I guess; I suppose even Charles Manson had a fan club......................... http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/dead.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Step on over, Godwin. There's a new law in town! The ESG Axiom... http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

"I used to care, but things have changed..." Bob Dylan

Flash44
Feb. 2, 2004, 10:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DMK:
Got to agree Flash. Tacky... Your position is not without some good points and logic, but that's hardly the way to express them.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, I forgot to mention the fat thing.

BTW - I took 1.5 inches off my waist in 2 weeks with South Beach for those of you who haven't tried it!

nelson
Feb. 2, 2004, 11:03 AM
I have been reading all of the various suspension threads with interest. I must say that it is alarming to me how many people on this BB think it is no big deal (and in some cases that it is JUSTIFIABLE) to break the rules and show horses that have illegal substances in them.

If a horse is injured, and in legitimate need of a long-lasting tranquilizer tranquilizer to keep it from being injured further, then IT SHOULD NOT BE SHOWING! If the injury has healed and the horse is back in shape and ready to show, IT SHOULD NOT SHOW until the long lasting tranquilizer (read: reserpine) is out of its system.

I don't think that the rules are ambiguous at all: no performance enhancing substances are allowed at rated shows. Period. The end. If you can't, or won't, abide by that simple rule, you shouldn't be allowed to show at rated shows, no matter how "well-turned out" or "polite" you are.

I won't expect to be able to continue to practice in my profession if I broke the rules. I'm not sure why horsemen (especially well-known horsemen) are considered to be some sort of an exception when it comes to ethical considerations.

IMHO.

Flash44
Feb. 2, 2004, 11:40 AM
No good deed goes unpunished, Daisy.

CoconutGrrl
Feb. 2, 2004, 11:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CoolMeadows:
OK, I don't loathe overweight people. I'm hardly svelte myself in the dead of winter, and looking at every single person in my family, I know exactly what my genetic weight destiny is. When morbid obesity goes together with puny, skeletal horses that are all sway backed and sore and starved, it does have to do with horse abuse. The owner should cut back his/her over indulgence and take some of the money they should save and put it into caring for their horses.

I do hate when people put their own desires and comforts ahead of their horses' health. If someone is getting enough to eat as to be as incredibly overweight, then they should be able to afford to feed their horses. Same goes for the boarder who goes out clubbing every single night and then whines about not having board money or money to buy the poor horse a blanket when it's freezing outside. Pisses me off to no end. Horses are a very big responsibility and sometimes owners have to make sacrifices to have them. I'm sure there are plenty of people on this board who've lived on Raemen noodles and rice in college or rough times to make sure there was enough to provide for their horse. If a serious over-eater doesn't want to make the sacrifice of cutting down their intake and giving their horse some food, then I wish they'd sell the poor thing. If the non-stop partier won't quit and ends up with a homeless horse, I wish they'd sell it too. If people have enough money or time to over eat or party every night and still take great care of their horse, I'm happy.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


This is one of the more seriously idiotic things I've heard. You have NO IDEA why these people are overweight. There are far, far more factors to being overweight than spending too much money for too much food!

Cutting down ones food intake does not necessarily mean one will have the money to feed the horses! You CAN get fat off of ramen and rice! (Believe me, I know!).

Obesity often does not have anything to do with sloth or gluttony. The more you perpetuate that attitude, the more a disservice you do to everyone.

Have you ever asked these people why their horses are so thin?

Katie
Feb. 2, 2004, 12:42 PM
CoconutGrrl - Though I agree with you that prejudices are wrong, I think you're missing CoolMeadows' point. The point I see her trying to make is that people who don't care properly for their horses are unfit owners. On top of that, if you put a large person (fat, overweight, obsese, whatever you want to call it) on a horse barely making it around with his own weight to carry, you've got an abusive situation.

Now, I know a couple of people who complain about the price of an emergency vet call for colic, yet go out and spend $500 at Nordstrom on a new outfit. You have to wonder about their priorities...

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 2, 2004, 02:36 PM
I for one nelson, did not take any of the posts to mean "its no big deal" when it came to the drug issue. Maybe I'm wrong, but to me the inference is that we don't know the particulars of each case. Which is true. We all are assuming the facts. No one will argue that those who are suspended, were legally reviewed, and dealt with by the USEF rules. Its all the finger pointing, and inuendos that have been posted which stirs the pot. Now for some reason this thread is off on obesity. How? You got me.. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

Magnolia
Feb. 2, 2004, 03:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> BTW - I took 1.5 inches off my waist in 2 weeks with South Beach for those of you who haven't tried it! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Congrats - I've lost 30 lbs. since this Fall on SB diet! But I will say, my grocery bill has doubled on that diet! (well worth it though!)

The witchy witch witch of south central NC.

CoolMeadows
Feb. 2, 2004, 03:03 PM
CoconutGrrl - the horses are kept skinny so that they stay quiet. The owner boasts about all her lethargic Tbs. I don't know the reason the woman's obese. My guess from seeing her behaviour at shows is that she eats too much and doesn't move enough. Maybe she does have a medical condition, and having a thyroid condition myself, I feel for her if that's the case.

But that doesn't excuse the fact that 1)her horses are obscenely skinny and 2) she is way too heavy for them and is hurting them. Somewhere in her life she made the choice to give the level of care she does. I don't know that it's money, she appears to have some expensive assets. From the mud coating the skinny horses when they get off the trailer at shows, I can only guess laziness? Skinny horses bother the hell out of me, and yes to me it is that much more horrible for the horse when it's asked in that condition to carry someone too heavy for it. I'm really sorry I'm offending you, but I hate to see a skinny horse, and I hate even more to see a small, skinny horse trying to carry too much weight. I honestly don't have any prejudices towards overweight people... just ask me about my ex. His being overweight was the least of our problems!

www.coolmeadows.net (http://www.coolmeadows.net)

CAJumper
Feb. 2, 2004, 03:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lauriep:
Mouse, that is the most level headed post I have seen in ANY of these "suspension list" witch hunt threads.

Thank you for speaking out.

Laurie<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hear hear!!

caffeinated
Feb. 2, 2004, 03:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Uberraschung:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by D@!$y:
No one tells you that the trainer you are with is known for their magic positions.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh do tell some of the magic positions! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Sorry, I couldn't help it http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

BWAH!

_____________________________
"It takes a whole lot of testosterone to wear a beret and not look fruity"
**

Mouse2713
Feb. 2, 2004, 06:36 PM
I think that some of you missed the point of my very first post. I am not saying that the trainers who got caught shouldnt be punished. I am not saying that whatever they did was ok. I am saying that if you dont have personal information on whats going on, perhaps it isnt wise to make comments on what is happening.

As a trainer, I know that even though most of my students take thier horses home with them and take care of them, I am, in the end, responsible for whatever they do with their horses. If they feed a supplement that tests positive I have to be responsible for what happens to me. I wouldnt fight it either, because I believe that drug testing is necessary to take care of the horses. At the same time, I dont give my horses drugs unless a vet prescribes them and I never give them to a client horse unless the client and vet get together to talk about it and agree on whatever is going to happen. Again, I am resposible if said horse gets nailed because the reserpine hasnt left his system, even if the vet ok'd it and so did the client, and even if it was specifically medicinal. But, I wouldnt appreciate it if a bunch of people who had no idea what was going on with me, my horses, or my customers talked about it as if they had a clue what was going on.

I also think there are a lot of people who are trying to quietly serve their time, so to speak, and pay for whatever crimes the AHSA thinks they have committed and a bunch of people who dont even know them as trainers, let alone as people, are talking about them as if they have any idea what or who they are.

Give it a rest for god sake. Like someone already posted, if you are a member of the USAE then you get the magazine and its posted. If it is your meaning of life to know someone elses business on a regular basis, by all means look it up on the internet. But, it is a bit over the top to comment on someone or something when you are not personally involved.

Mouse2713
Feb. 2, 2004, 07:02 PM
Nickalodian, Reserpine can be used for a lot of things medicinally, but most of the time it is used as a long acting very mild sedative, to help horses who are on layup and cant be turned out to cope with thier stall rest.

It is only supposed to work for 30 days, and my experience has been that it works for about 22-28 days. You have to be careful with it and use it under supervision of a vet, because the horses can founder on it if it is used to often. Also, it works on young horses that are a bit tough to handle. It kind of makes them think that all is right with the world. And, if you do the right things with them while they are on it, they rarely need another shot after the first one. At least the one that I got didnt need it.

He was a tough little thing and he hadnt even worn a halter for the first two years of his life. He was pretty convinced he was about to be killed when we even tried to groom him, so the vet reccommended that we try reserpine. It worked great and he is a little soldier now.

I hardly ever use drugs on my guys, and the vet is the one who reccommended we use it, the few times that we did, so I am no expert on it. You could ask your vet if you are interested in learning more. I would feel more comfortable if you learned the info from a vet anyway, as I would never claim to be any kind of an expert on it.

Sea Monkey
Feb. 2, 2004, 07:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CoconutGrrl:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CoolMeadows:
OK, I don't loathe overweight people. I'm hardly svelte myself in the dead of winter, and looking at every single person in my family, I know exactly what my genetic weight destiny is. When morbid obesity goes together with puny, skeletal horses that are all sway backed and sore and starved, it does have to do with horse abuse. The owner should cut back his/her over indulgence and take some of the money they should save and put it into caring for their horses.

I do hate when people put their own desires and comforts ahead of their horses' health. If someone is getting enough to eat as to be as incredibly overweight, then they should be able to afford to feed their horses. Same goes for the boarder who goes out clubbing every single night and then whines about not having board money or money to buy the poor horse a blanket when it's freezing outside. Pisses me off to no end. Horses are a very big responsibility and sometimes owners have to make sacrifices to have them. I'm sure there are plenty of people on this board who've lived on Raemen noodles and rice in college or rough times to make sure there was enough to provide for their horse. If a serious over-eater doesn't want to make the sacrifice of cutting down their intake and giving their horse some food, then I wish they'd sell the poor thing. If the non-stop partier won't quit and ends up with a homeless horse, I wish they'd sell it too. If people have enough money or time to over eat or party every night and still take great care of their horse, I'm happy.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


This is one of the more seriously idiotic things I've heard. You have NO IDEA why these people are overweight. There are far, far more factors to being overweight than spending too much money for too much food!

Cutting down ones food intake does not necessarily mean one will have the money to feed the horses! You CAN get fat off of ramen and rice! (Believe me, I know!).

Obesity often does not have anything to do with sloth or gluttony. The more you perpetuate that attitude, the more a disservice you do to everyone.

Have you ever asked these people why their horses are so thin?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hahahaha, you're funny. And wrong.

Like others have said, you've missed he point here. CoolMeadows brought up the Ramen noodle issue because it's CHEAP and it's what college students eat, regardless if it makes you fat or not. Any food can make you fat..

Hate to break it to you, but a heavy weight person on a lightweight horse will do damage.

dogchushu
Feb. 2, 2004, 08:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DMK:

And yes, substances can metabolize as reserpine without actually being reserpine. Reserpine is derived from a plant, and that plant may very well show up in some of the herbal substances available. It's entirely possible that the substance itself will not test as reserpine until metabolized in the body. That may or may not be an excuse, and one certainly should look at any herbals with a skeptical eye because your ability to prove your "intent" will be a tough road if the herbal in question does turn out test as something altogether different than what you thought it might be..

_"I used to care, but things have changed..."_ Bob Dylan<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have a question about the herbal thing and the testing/suspension process. How does USAEq determine suspensions or other penalties? Is it a zero tolerance/mandatory sentancing kind of thing, or are they more or less lenient depending on the situation.

I ask because yesterday I was in a tack store and noticed that several of the Hilton Herbs preparations (next to a line of Epona body scrubs that I loooooove) had a line crossed out with magic marker. Of course, that made me curious as to what the line had originally said. So I held it up to the light.

It was something to the effect that the preparation was legal for racing (I can't remember the eact wording). After seeing that (and remembering all the recent suspensions) I was doubly curious, so I checked the ingredients of the preps with crossed out lines and all contained valerian. (There may have been other forbidden substances, but I'm not familiar with what each and every one of them are.) I also noticed that several brands of herbal supplements didn't even list their ingredients.

So how does the USAEq handle something like a trace amount of valerian from a supplement someone may have thought was okay? Is it a suspension? Forfeiture of points and monies won? A verbal reprimand?

Whether it's negligent to be less than vigilant about what you feed your horse or understandable human error to trust a package you buy at a reputable tack store is not something I'm asking. My question is just academic because I'm curious about how the suspensions work.



"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work." -- Thomas A. Edison

DMK
Feb. 3, 2004, 05:41 AM
dogchu, I don't know that anyone other than the committee truly knows how the committee works. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif But there does seem to be consideration for intent. If there is consideration for trace presence of certain drugs, it is not discussed in the rules. It may play a part in the decision process though...

Back before the great tempralex scandal hit, a lot of trainers used he herbal quieters such as quietex. A few of them used an herbal substance called tempralex imported from the UK, which had the dubious claim of "FEI Approved" on the label (along with "Approved by the Jockey Club - British JC, presumably). Since the contents were not known, some folks had it tested, presumably found out it contained no illegal substances, and gave it to their horses.

Oops. It apparently metabolized as reserpine in the horse. The people invovled went to great lengths to prove that their intent was not to illegally drug their horses, turned the stuff over the AHSA and as far as I know, fully cooperated. And spent a lot of legal fees. In the end, they had to return all prize monies from the event in question (a major GP win in one case), were censured but not suspended. Meanwhile the AHSA went on an information campaign about how herbal substances could fall under the same D&M violations as traditional drugs, and oh, by the way, you may not really know what is in them.

So the long/short answer is given the current treatment for reserpine, I think intent plays a role in their decision. But given all the press and education on the herbal issue since the temralex scandal of '00, I think all the Get Out of Jail cards may have been used up on herbal substances. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

"I used to care, but things have changed..." Bob Dylan

Ridin' Fool
Feb. 3, 2004, 06:59 AM
Definitely agree to check herbal and holistic supplements. Our farm uses several holistic supps - I had our vet review the ingredients as well as emailed the producer of the stuff directly asking for verification that nothing will test. Our stuff seems to be okay, but you should really be sure before you find out the hard way!!

Flash44
Feb. 3, 2004, 07:06 AM
Enough people have been hauled in over the years for giving supplements that were supposed to be legal that any trainer doing the rated shows should think long and hard about each and every supplement given to the horses in his or her barn.

And ANY supplement given to relax, quiet, or otherwise modify a horse's behavior is ILLEGAL, even if it doesn't test.

So work out the behavior problems with training, and you won't have to worry about the drug testing.

dogchushu
Feb. 3, 2004, 07:55 AM
DMK--That's what the crossed out language said! Something about approved or allowed by the British jockey club! Thanks for kicking my aging brain back into gear!

All the supplements I noticed that had that langauge crossed out and contained valerian were some sort of mood stabilizer or calmer--which I agree violates the intent of the rules.

However, there were lots of supplements for things other than calmness that didn't have any ingredients listed at all (they weren't the Hilton Herbs, they were brands I hadn't heard of). Kind of scarey to think you'd be giving your horse something with no idea what it is!



"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work." -- Thomas A. Edison

SGray
Feb. 3, 2004, 08:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mouse2713:
.....As a trainer, I know that even though most of my students take thier horses home with them and take care of them, I am, in the end, responsible for whatever they do with their horses. If they feed a supplement that tests positive I have to be responsible for what happens to me. I wouldnt fight it either, because I believe that drug testing is necessary to take care of the horses......
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

if the horse is not under your care/custody/control then you should NOT sign as trainer - if your student cares for their own horse then the student should sign as trainer

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

Portia
Feb. 3, 2004, 08:28 AM
Valerian is expressly listed in the USEF D&M Practical Advice guide as a forbidden substance.

Practical Advice on the D&M Rules (http://www.usef.org/documents/drugsMeds/2004Advice.pdf)

It's a very good guide that everyone should have a copy of (or rather, for you grammar gurus out there, of which everyone should have a copy http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif).

~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm not crazy, I'm just a little unwell.

dogchushu
Feb. 3, 2004, 08:31 AM
Thanks for the link Portia.

Am I reading it correctly (tiny font and bad eyes) that hops are on the list? I guess my horsey won't be sharing my beer! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif



"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work." -- Thomas A. Edison

Flash44
Feb. 3, 2004, 08:44 AM
Trainers, owners and exibitors are cautioned quite clearly and on several occasions against administering herbal supplements, and that they CAN follow the guidelines and STILL BE AT FAULT if a horse tests positive for a substance that was given in accordance to the guidelines.

The only real guarantee that you will not have a positive test is to not use anything in the first place. If you do choose to use a substance on the list, even within the guidelines, you are gambling that your test results will be within the legal limits. I believe the word in the guidelines are "Will Reduce the Odds of a Positive Test." Note they did not say it will ELIMINATE the chance of a positive test.

pwynnnorman
Feb. 3, 2004, 10:29 AM
DMK, I'm surprised you missed this one (you are usually so astute): <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> it contained no illegal substances, and gave it to their horses....The people invovled went to great lengths to prove that their intent was not to illegally drug their horses...So the long/short answer is given the current treatment for reserpine, I think intent plays a role in their decision. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As Flash44 implied, their "intent" was to LEGALLY "drug" their horses!

Don't y'all see--it isn't what the drug/substance is, it IS the INTENT, as DMK states. To "excuse" people for "honest" mistakes is to encourage everyone to ignore what is at the heart of the problem: management and training!

To those of you wanting to excuse these people, what do you say when asked "WHY?" Why did these people NEED to either use the stuff OR show a horse who, sometime in the past or via some "natural/legal" substance or whatever, NEEDED such a substance? Why was that horse showing? Why?

I realize that the answer may not actually point the finger at the person suspended, but rather at "the system"--but that is yet another reason why these discussions should NOT be disparaged. WHY have some of the top names in the industry found themselves in these positions?

Sportponies Unlimited
Specializing in fancy, athletic, 3/4-TB ponies.
http://www.sportponiesunlimited.com
http://www.sportponiesunlimited.com/Sportponies_Unlimited_stallions.html

Flash44
Feb. 3, 2004, 11:28 AM
To clarify, the trainers KNEW the substances they used were on the prohibited list, and KNOWINGLY took the risk of giving the substance to their horses, and knowing the horses were given the substance in the past, they showed the horse at a rated show.

Following the guidelines DOES NOT ABSOLVE ONE OF BLAME, which is clearly stated. It is a gamble.

If you don't want to get pregnant, don't have sex. If you don't want to lose money in the stock market, don't invest. Even if you follow all possible precautions when you engage in these activities, there is a teensy tinsy chance that the outcome will not be desirable.

IF your horse gets injured or sick, you should use the best possible means of getting the horse well. No one is arguing about that. But if that course of action involves the use of prohibited substances, you may have to wait a long time for those substances to clear the horse's system. The guidelines are quite clear in that, even if you follow the guidelines regarding the use of these substances, you could still have a positive test and be held responsible.

DMK
Feb. 3, 2004, 02:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pwynnnorman:
DMK, I'm surprised you missed this one (you are usually so astute):

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> it contained no illegal substances, and gave it to their horses....The people invovled went to great lengths to prove that their intent was not to illegally drug their horses...So the long/short answer is given the current treatment for reserpine, I think intent plays a role in their decision. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As Flash44 implied, their "intent" was to LEGALLY "drug" their horses!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you for the astute observation, although many would dispute it. But I actually I chose my words quite carefully. I meant to say that in that case (tempralex) they did not intend to give an illegal substance. I specifically did NOT say that they did not intend to alter performance. I think the way those cases were handled sets them apart from the current cases, where the intent seems to be (from what we have heard, which is all second hand, and therefore must not be taken too seriously except in a hypothetical discussion) to have altered the performance by giving an illegal drug.

Today it is clearly understood that to give any substance with the intent to alter performance is your basic no no. Unless of course that substance is B-1, legend, adequan, low carb feed, high fiber feed, regumate, progesteron, adequan, conquer, magnesium, and so on... But I digress into the vagaries of that concept. At that time, the AHSA really gave little guidance on the herbals. Valerian was pulled off the list a year or so prior, but it wasn't like it was widely communicated that giving herbals or supplements if they were performance enhancing was a violation.

After that people got edjamucated, and like I said, I doubt you would get the same consideration for that set of circumstances today.

"I used to care, but things have changed..." Bob Dylan

levremont
Feb. 3, 2004, 04:12 PM
I think alot of this comes down to the same question of personal responsiblity, or lack thereof today. The same way we blame the tobaco companies for "our" smoking, the fast food industry for "our" weight,the bars for drunk drivers... do I need to go on and on? It is a trainer's job to be informed, to know what is and is not legal and to obey those rules. If we start to acknowledge that people have a brain, and can use it to make decisions, we would not have to keep protecting people for "so called mistakes".

visit us at www.levremont.com (http://www.levremont.com)

radio talk Aefvue Farms RCA
Feb. 3, 2004, 05:49 PM
You made me smile sallylou. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> If we start to acknowledge that people have a brain, and can use it to make decisions, we would not have to keep protecting people for "so called mistakes". <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If that were only true, somewhat. Maybe we would have a peaceful world, and these threads would not be about drugging and abuse.

pwynnnorman
Feb. 3, 2004, 06:10 PM
Ah, I see, DMK. Sorry, I did misread you.

Sportponies Unlimited
Specializing in fancy, athletic, 3/4-TB ponies.
http://www.sportponiesunlimited.com
http://www.sportponiesunlimited.com/Sportponies_Unlimited_stallions.html

WWCountry
Feb. 3, 2004, 06:17 PM
Mouse--What SGray said is correct. If you are not in control of the feeding/medicating of all the horses you train at shows, you should sign the entry blank under "Coach" not "Trainer". This will CYA in case of a positive drug test--for whatever reason. Maybe Dad decided to share his Coke with Flicka?

Peggy
Feb. 3, 2004, 10:48 PM
As I understand it, it's not a matter of forbidden *drugs*, but of forbidden *drug actions*. (with a few substances, such as bute, that are permitted--with restrictions--despite having a forbidden action) Even an "unknown" or currently untestable drug that has a forbidden action is thereby forbidden--consider the recent tetrahydrogestrinone (THG) scandal in human athletes.

levremont
Feb. 4, 2004, 05:48 AM
Well I don't know about the world being more peaceful, there will laways be people trying to cheat the system and abuse, only we probably would not have as many people protecting them because it was not their fault, only a "mistake".

visit us at www.levremont.com (http://www.levremont.com)

nelson
Feb. 4, 2004, 07:21 AM
Sallylou, I agree with you 100%.

Although you forgot to mention the gun manufacturers who are at fault for people being shot. Oh, McDonald's where they dare to sell HOT coffee (God forbid) and food that contains fat. It's funny, I have never actually seen a McDonald's employee jam a Big Mac down someone's throat . . . . ?? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/uhoh.gif

horselesswonder
Feb. 4, 2004, 07:41 AM
OT, but to be fair to the woman who sustained third degree burns on her inner thighs, if I recall correctly, McDonald's coffee at that time was substantially hotter than the industry standard temperature, the company was warned that its coffee was dangerously hot and failed to decrease the temperature prior to the now infamous incident.

The Infamous Coffee Case (http://www.atla.org/ConsumerMediaResources/Tier3/press_room/FACTS/frivolous/McdonaldsCoffeecase.aspx)

crime stopper
Feb. 6, 2004, 02:14 PM
Sorry to see this thread get off base.
I'm sickened to read on Towerheads.com that we have the Don Stewart Report from the Superbowl. Those who are suspended from the USAE should be shunned through their suspension, not glorified!

Tweeds-n-Kip
Feb. 6, 2004, 02:35 PM
WOW...is it just me or are there alot from TX on that list...hmmmmm......

You don't throw away a whole life just 'cause he's banged up a little ~ Sam

Portia
Feb. 6, 2004, 02:44 PM
Of the four on the list that crimestopper posted, at least two (McCormick and Fenney) were suspended due to the same incident/rules violation.

Nikki^
Feb. 6, 2004, 02:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hasty:
Probably going to get blasted for this....


I believe if we are capable of finding this website, we are all capable of finding the AHSA (or whatever its called now) website, where it is very easy to find the suspension list. AND if we are AHSA (or whatever) members WE ALL recieve the magazine and we can all read who has been suspended and for what. There is absolutely NO NEED for posting these peoples names, horses, and what they were suspended for OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Maybe at first people did not know where to find the stuff...but at this point it has been on these boards for an extended period of time, numerous times. I realize what they did was wrong, yadda yadda yadda, but come on people GET OVER IT and MOVE ON.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Those who forget the past are deemed to repeat it.

Post away. I like to see those who are being naughty in the horse world. Serves them right! They shouldn't be drugging horses in the first place.

Kioko (http://www.geocities.com/area51/crater/5267/HeartofGold.html)

Look up your TB's bloodlines (http://www.dmtc.com/dmtc98/Pedigree/)

ise@ssl
Feb. 6, 2004, 02:52 PM
Interesting concept Mouse puts forward - apparantely the USEF needs to amend the rules to take into consideration if the trainer/owner is overweight, has underweight horses, whether using drugs is offset by having well turned out horses, having polite students offsets teaching them to CHEAT by using restricted substances.

This is just rot!

I don't care if the horse had perfect braids - it it had dope in it's veins - it's a disgrace. And if you feel so strongly about the woman ripping her kid off the horse then why in God's name didn't you walk on over and tell her so and add - "your fat and your horses are skinny". Really if it's something you had to preach about - why preach to the choir??

mcduffy
Feb. 6, 2004, 03:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crime stopper:
Sorry to see this thread get off base.
I'm sickened to read on Towerheads.com that we have the Don Stewart Report from the Superbowl. Those who are suspended from the USAE should be shunned through their suspension, not glorified!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This was exactly my feeling when I saw this on Towerheads. Making light of the fact that since he has alot of extra time on his hands he went to the Super Bowl, had great seats and to listen to his audio clip.

Tweeds-n-Kip
Feb. 6, 2004, 03:14 PM
Of course the issue of "doping" will always be a heated one, yet it is one that will truely never go away. Unfortuantely there will always be some that are innocent swept up in the turmoil.

Of course the accusations will always fly-it is just human nature. But is it possible that some products on the market do test positive in testing and can strict documentation of these medications/supplements when given to horses help shall we say "clear the air"?

Everyone is aware that these supplements cause positive testing, so is it possible that all horses entered will have shall we say a "meds list"? And if any of the supplements in question are on that list than the trainer/rider/owner be informed that these will almost always give a positive test if the horse is in fact choosen to be tested?

I am aware that there will always be those who wish to point the finger and berate those caught with a horse that tests positive, and for those who in fact do use the illegal substances to "enhance" the performance of their horses they should be treated as the rules already state. but for those who truthfully only use supplements that test positive-and do not realize the effects than it does not seem fair to put them into the circle with those who KNOWINGLY medicate their horses.

Pehaps a list of those supplements taht will make a postitive test will also be helpful, not only for the trainers but also for us the owners and riders, cause if we can not keep an eye on our sport who will right?

You don't throw away a whole life just 'cause he's banged up a little ~ Sam

Sandy M
Feb. 6, 2004, 03:26 PM
Well, personally, I've done H/J, I've been an eventer ( 17 years worth), and now I mostly do dressage. The only time I have ever, ever shown a horse that had any drugs in its system was when my horse had his yearly shots 3 days before a show and was given bute because he usually has a "reaction" (stiff neck) to the rabies shot. Even though the bute was given 72 (not 12) hours before the show, I reported it. By then, I'm sure it was out of his system, but still.

But if my horse NEEDS bute, then he's not going to show, he's going to rest and recover from whatever is bothering him. "Just bruises" can become serious abscesses, among other things. And if he "needs" a calmative, either he's not going to show, because he needs more training or he's going to show without a calmative and "get over it." ROFLOL

CBoylen
Feb. 6, 2004, 03:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sandy M:
Even though the bute was given 72 (not 12) hours before the show, I reported it. By then, I'm sure it was out of his system, but still.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You do not need to report bute under most circumstances. Even if you gave an excessive amount, which I can't imagine you needed for a shots reaction, 72 hours is plenty of clearance time for medication that is legal anyway. Especially if you gave the legal amount, why waste everyone's time on the paperwork?
If your horse had his shots that close to competition, I'd be more concerned about that, as most shows have rules stating that horses are inelligible to show within 20-30 days of their rhino shots.

http://community.webshots.com/user/anallie

mbp
Feb. 6, 2004, 06:10 PM
For those who asked about reserpine, here are some links. I do not view it as a mild "no sweat" (pun intended) drug. Blood pressure drops, sweating, diarrehea, depression,colic, ulcers - all are pretty *common* side effects. The drug has an ACTIVE effect for approximately 30 days. How many drugs do that? It actively interferes with the nervouse system for about a 30 day period. As noted from the human research, its work as a sedative does NOT operate as a cure for the underlying conditions

http://reference.allrefer.com/encyclopedia/R/reserpin.html
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/medmaster/a601107.html
http://www.wedgewoodpharmacy.com/monographs/reserpine.asp

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I also find it interesting that reserpine was the drug that most of these horses were caught on. I have had my own vet prescribe this drug on two separate occasions to two horses here at the farm for medical reasons. My vet also gave it a third time to a really fractious 3 year old that we were breaking, that we thought might hurt itself if we didnt try something really radical. The two horses with medical conditions cleared right up and the third horse was a happy boy around the barn, long enough for us to break him <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mouse - what were the two "medical conditions" that were actually treated with resperpine so that the horses medical conditions cleared right up? I have never heard of any treatment protocol for medical conditions in a horse with Reserpine.

You know, trainers make their money by people talking about them when they do something positive. It goes with the territory to be talked about for something negative. I had a wild yearling on long term lay up that was given reserpine and was told that the drug had serious side effects, we had him under very close colic/dehydration/depression watches for the first few days, and I was also told the drug had extremely variable time frames for both effect and to clear the system.

Horse showing is all about people talking. It comes with the territory and I think everytime a topic like this comes up, even if is for the umpteenth time, there is someone new (who doesn't know how to access the information or who doesn't know the process) or someone old who learns something new (like me - since I am about to learn how Reserpine is used to treat a couple of medical conditions).

WHy get so worked up that people discuss things?

BTW - when have joint supplements resulted in a positive test for anyone and which supplements? Just glucosamine and chondroiten - or were there analgesics? That would be a nice piece of information to learn too - might help prevent some misunderstandings on down the line.

SydneyS
Feb. 6, 2004, 06:47 PM
C.Boylen - Are you serious about the Rhino shot? Why would the shows require so much time pass after the shot?

I guess I need to plan my show schedule around the spring shots...

CBoylen
Feb. 6, 2004, 07:24 PM
Well, I haven't ever seen any evidence of it being enforced, but you can find that little blurb in a lot of prizelists, including those for Lake Placid and WEF. I just always find it amusing when posts railing against others for breaking the rules demonstrate a lack of understanding or education about those rules. I don't mean to pick on anyone, but if we're going to criticise others I think we should all be open to correction http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif .

As to the reasoning behind it, I assume there is some concern about the vaccine and the exposure of recently vaccinated horses. I'm sure someone knows more about that than I do.

http://community.webshots.com/user/anallie

mbp
Feb. 6, 2004, 07:51 PM
Are those blurbs in recent show programs? I know that years back - 60s and maybe even early 70s??? the Rhino vax was only "legal" in KY. It was live virus and there was containment concern - that if they let horses be vaccinated with the live virus vax they might actually spread the disease if those horses were exposed to breeding stock. There were some pretty devastating pregnancy losses in a lot of barns and they used to not want to vaccinate the mares with the live virus for fear of the vax itself causing abortions. I remember even in the late 70s being told my gelding could not be around breeding stock mares for 30 days after vax.

But I would think with the modified and killed virus and broodmare protocol now involving mare vax, that would not be an issue anymore. Hmmmmm. I wonder why they have that rule? If it relates back in time and has just been copied every year and carried forward without anyone asking why or if it is a rule that is based on current concerns and issues? Interesting.

PineTreeFarm
Feb. 6, 2004, 08:40 PM
C. Boylen:
Are you saying that the Rhino vax prohibition is a USEF rule or do you mean that it's a policy for some shows?

CBoylen
Feb. 6, 2004, 09:10 PM
Actually, it reads like a state rule, as it's in the passage about coggins and health certificates. It's in this years WEF prizelist, and I've seen it elsewhere as well, possibly in the LP prizelist if I recall correctly. I can't get my computer to access the USEF rulebook tonight to find out if it's addressed in there or not. I find it interesting, although it's not a big concern for me as mine are always vaccinated early in the December and April "off" months.

http://community.webshots.com/user/anallie

Janet
Feb. 6, 2004, 09:21 PM
Not a USEF rule.

There is a pretty strict FEI rule, but that is for flu, not rhino IIRC

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

hoopoe
Feb. 6, 2004, 11:39 PM
Nope never heard of a show in our region having Rhino issues, only the FEI sanctioned events with the flu requirements.

Some venues and managements may choose to enforce their own restrictions, particularly where the health of the home facility animals might be of consequence.

But it is not a USEF rule.

_\\]
-- * &gt; hoopoe
The ancient Greeks did not write obituaries. They only wanted to know if you had a passion.

Hopeful Hunter
Feb. 7, 2004, 09:06 AM
OK...another dumb question from the peanut gallery &lt;grin&gt;:

If you give your horse a drug for a legit reason, wait to show and also file a drug report FOR the show if the clearance time could be near the limit....if your horse is tested and the drug for which you filed the report shows up, are you suspended?

Just trying to understand how/why/when the rules are enforced...

barnie
Feb. 7, 2004, 09:14 AM
short answer...yes.

Hopeful Hunter
Feb. 7, 2004, 09:16 AM
OK...so then....what's the point of the report? Not being sarcastic, just wondering why the paperwork exists if it doesn't "clear" you in case of testing...

barnie
Feb. 7, 2004, 09:39 AM
I'm sure someone can explain this more eloquently than I can...but...the "rules" are onlyguidelines. So if you test over limit on a drug that you filed on and followed all the rules for...too bad. But I do believe they would take all this info into consideration at your hearing...make you feel any better? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Saddlebag
Feb. 7, 2004, 10:23 AM
http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gifHopeful Hunter...you got some wrong information on your question about whether a person would be in violation (and consequently, suspended) if they gave a forbidden drug for a legit (read: therapeutic) reason, waited the correct amount of hours (24) and file a medication Report. The answer is NO. That is the whole point! Say your horse gets a cut at a show. The vet gives it a sedative to stitch the cut. What you do is wait 24 hours before you show, and file a Medication Report stating when and why the forbidden substance was administered. Then you are good to go. The med reports are sent to the lab in Ohio, so if a horse is tested and found to have an illegal drug that does have legitimate uses, they cross reference the Med Reports, and if the lab findings match the info on the report, that is the end of it.

Bear in mind that clipping, hauling, training, etc. are NOT considered to be therapeutic uses of a drug, and for that, you are in deep ka-ka. Also...neverfile a med report for a non-therapeutic use of a drug. You will incriminate yourself. If you give your horse a sedative to clip it, you had better wait at least the recomended days (or more)before you show. I found this fact out the hard way, and almost ended up before the Hearing Committee. Only because I had asked the Steward what to do, and he said to file the report, (This was ages ago, before I became a Steward.)did I dodge that bullet...and that was only because the Steward wrote to the Rules Compliance Dept. of (then) AHSA and admitted that he had advised me to file the report. And in this case, the horse was not tested. It was the fact that I filed a report stating that I had given it Rompun to clip it, that put me on the hot seat!

Just thought you all should understand this part of the Drug Rules.

Happy Showing! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

barnie
Feb. 7, 2004, 11:53 AM
ooops, Saddlebag...my bad! With the vein of this thread, I just assumed she meant giving something like a tranq for clipping... http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/no.gif

Hopeful Hunter
Feb. 7, 2004, 01:18 PM
OK......THAT makes more sense -- thanks to both of you. So...let me be sure I understand this...

Situation 1: trainer chooses to tranqu horse for clipping or something....wait recommended time PLUS extra to be safe, no drug report filed. If you're tested and it shows, you're SOOL.

Situation 2: While showing/at showgrounds, horse plays hard and gets a small gash. Vet comes, decided to stitch and uses a tranqu. Wait recommended # of days, file drug report and go show -- if you're tested and that drug (and only that drug) shows, there are no consequences because you followed the rules for legit therapeutic veterinary use, waited the time set by the D&M cmt and filed a proper report.

Yes? That makes more sense then...and, honestly, to my mind also says to me that the rules for violations are certainly not too stringent.

subk
Feb. 7, 2004, 01:22 PM
mpb thanks for the resirpine links.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mouse2713: Reserpine...is used as a long acting very mild sedative<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Reserpine is NOT some simple sedative; it is and ANTI-PSYCHOTIC! It is a very serious, as well as an unpredictable drug that acts on the chemical and neurological functions of the brain. It can have very disturbing, damaging and bizarre side effects when given to horses. While there is certainly is a place for it in equine medicine, it is not a drug you ever WANT to give your horse and its abuse it very serious.

Giving horses reserpine to enhance performance is a hell of a lot more serious than getting caught with a litle too much bute in the system! I for one am glad to see public discussion about these types of abuses. For to long drug violations have resulted in nothing more than a smack on the offenders hand.

Silver Bells
Feb. 7, 2004, 06:58 PM
Very well stated SUBK!

Janet
Feb. 7, 2004, 10:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Situation 2: While showing/at showgrounds, horse plays hard and gets a small gash. Vet comes, decided to stitch and uses a tranqu. Wait recommended # of days, file drug report and go show -- if you're tested and that drug (and only that drug) shows, there are no consequences because you followed the rules for legit therapeutic veterinary use, waited the time set by the D&M cmt and filed a proper report.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Actually, in that case you only need to wait 24 hours, not "the recommended number of days".

Janet
chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle, and Brain

SGray
Feb. 9, 2004, 10:47 AM
so much useful information on this thread!

"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --Texas congressional candidate John F. Parker.

BO DA COUS
Mar. 9, 2004, 03:44 AM
D@!$Y YOU GO GIRL! &lt;double snap and a head twirll&gt; http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Cowboy Up Y'all

BO DA COUS
Mar. 9, 2004, 04:17 AM
cool meadows - this is not an attack - repeat - not an attack - but I just wonder if you've reported it to the ASPCA - a legal entity that can and does follow up on tips and complaints?

Cowboy Up Y'all

CoolMeadows
Mar. 15, 2004, 01:10 PM
Not taken as an attack. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
And no, I didn't report it. Here is one reason why: they couldn't have cared less about the state this one was in (http://community.webshots.com/photo/79303695/79304800tkeWtb)
That's a picture of my mare, the day she returned to me from being starved by a Purina dealer. If ASPCA didn't think she was in bad enough shape to be concerned about, they sure won't care about the ones who aren't quite as bad as she is.

I also tried to get them involved with what appeared to me to be an abandoned horse in my area. I had just returned to this area after several years away and saw a new barn sign on the road. It said boarding, training, etc... So I pulled in to see who it was and introduce myself. There was no one there. There was a half rotted deer carcas in the barn entrance. There was one horse in the 20+ stall barn, and he was a rack without hay, water, was standing in pure deep filth and had the most severe rainrot I've ever seen. Do you know what I was told when I reported it? I was yelled at for driving onto the property.

There is now a great horse rescue in my area and if I see anything again that I know is abusive, I'll notify them and let them take it from there.

Flash44
Mar. 15, 2004, 01:54 PM
No good deed goes unpunished, coolmeadows.

JEP
Mar. 15, 2004, 02:32 PM
Oh CoolMeadows-that is a very discouraging story; I'm sure that was a difficult day for you http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif Thank you for trying for that poor horse.

If I may ask, have you heard any word on him? Do you know what happened to him/the barn?

I finally got brave! Here is the webshots-now I need to find more current photos... Have a look (laugh) at it, if you like.

Webshots (http://community.webshots.com/user/iluvrenoir)

CoolMeadows
Mar. 16, 2004, 10:21 AM
I went back the next week and the owner was there. He said the horse just had extra sensitive skin and was a typical hard keeping TB http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif but that he was a winning Junior Jumper (y'know that's 5' and all http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif ) and that he'd sell him to me for $18,000. He also said that he used the horse for lessons and had kids jump him 5' all the time. Of course the riding area (it used to be an indoor but collapsed a long time ago) is now the parking lot/ring and had two standards that went to 4'.

I was then presented with a marriage proposal, since as a Mormon he could have as many wives as he needed and being a truck driver left too much work for the one wife and 5 kids already at home. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

I checked out the horses name afterwards and the rumor is that he's one of the survivors from a terrible van wreck that killed several horses and one person years ago who was given to this man to be a school horse restricted to X's only after the wreck.

The original owner moved away from this area but I saw him at a show last year (you might have seen him riding in a shoulder brace due to an injury he received in that wreck http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif) but forgot to ask him if it was the same horse.

I've also since seen the horse advertised in the local paper a few times a year so he's still around. The horse community around here can be very strange. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/uhoh.gif

Black Market Radio
Mar. 16, 2004, 10:37 AM
Coolmeadows, I want to let you know that TRUE Mormons CAN NOT have as many wives as they want. If a person claims to be "Mormon" and believes in/practices polygamy, they are NOT recognized as members of the church no matter what they may say. Polygamy was practiced in the 1800's mainly because there were so many men of the church killed during that time and it was a way for the widows and their children to be taken care of. And not everybody did it, only a small number had multiple wives actually. Just want to clarify that as it is a common misconception http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif No religious debates or flaming please.

Devilpups (http://f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/angelgregory87)
You have got to be the WORST Pirate I have ever heard of.
Ah, but you HAVE heard of me!

Flash44
Mar. 16, 2004, 11:17 AM
LOVED Pirates of the Carribean!

Black Market Radio
Mar. 16, 2004, 11:18 AM
Ah yes, how can you go wrong with Orlando Bloom and Johnny Depp? (Need a drooling smiley here)

Devilpups (http://f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/angelgregory87)
You have got to be the WORST Pirate I have ever heard of.
Ah, but you HAVE heard of me!

CoolMeadows
Mar. 16, 2004, 12:15 PM
devildog, I know that the Mormon church doesn't recognize polygamy... but this guy did, or tried to anyway. He was quite an interesting character. Claimed to have ridden with and worked for both GM and JF.

Black Market Radio
Mar. 16, 2004, 02:32 PM
Thanks coolmeadows, but I know others out there might not and I wanted to make sure that no one thought that Mormon=Polygamyst!
Don't think I was attacking you, and I know you didn't mean any harm http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Devilpups (http://f2.pg.photos.yahoo.com/angelgregory87)
You have got to be the WORST Pirate I have ever heard of.
Ah, but you HAVE heard of me!