The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 264
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jun. 3, 2012
    Location
    Louisa County, Virginia
    Posts
    285

    Default

    This specific article only referred to one day of discussion by the USEF Drugs and Medication Committee. I read it, hoping against hope, that maybe they are going to move on to the penalty side at the next day's meeting . . . or hoping that another USEF committee is in charge of setting punishments? Hope hope? I am not a USEF member and it's been 5+ years since I took a student to an A show, so I apologize for not knowing chapter and verse.

    I think the 12 hours/no injection proposal would be helpful. If your horse needs IV dex or antibiotics, you can give them 12 hours before your class, give horsie oral meds that morning, and back to IV after his classes are over for the day. Or, you may have to decide -- is it more important that I keep this horse on strictly IV meds daily, OR that I enter him legally in this competition? If the rules change (which everyone on the BB wants), our behavior will be changed too, such as having to make new choices like this.

    I would say, that to outsiders looking in, above-the-fold page A1 of the NYT means that show hunters are now lumped in with doping racehorses, rotating event horses, bad rodeo practices and soring TWH's in the greater public's mind. As the foxhunters in England found out, once the (non-horsey but highly motivated) general public starts to view you as the bad guy, you cannot simply be reactive or close wagons or get defensive. If we equestrians can't police ourselves effectively, and communicate and demonstrate how we're doing that, we will get policed by non-equestrians, and we sure won't like it.


    6 members found this post helpful.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Oct. 7, 2010
    Posts
    475

    Default

    Education? USEF thinks education will fix this issue? They are talking about educating the very people who already, or should already, know the rules? What a waste of our membership dues. I did a quick search and did not find anything, but isn't there a rule, maybe it is unwritten? that says not knowing about a rule that has been made reasonably available does not mean you are absolved if found in violation of that rule?

    The way to fix this issue is to take away the incentive (financial gain) to cheat, give the USEF more teeth, and improve transparency. I think banning therapeutic meds and/or needles other than those used by vets on show grounds is too far.


    3 members found this post helpful.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jun. 23, 2008
    Location
    Bedminster, New Jersey
    Posts
    465

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by busylady View Post
    Pathetic, simply pathetic, that is what I think of the USEF's proposed solutions to the drug problem (with the exception of requiring a necropsy and full cooperation with investigations).

    If USEF really has wronged Amber Hill (), perhaps she can use this opportunity to bring about real change. Yep, sue USEF and only settle the case if USEF agrees to the following:

    i. owner provides necropsy report to USEF for any animal who dies on the grounds of a USEF sanctioned competition;
    ii. membership requires full cooperation with USEF investigations, including granting USEF authority to subpoena records;
    iii. USEF to provide an online searchable database that includes information relating to violations, including hearing transcripts;
    iv. mandatory six-month suspension for calming-relating drug violations (in my mind drug violations of the calming variety are more egregious than soundness related violations such a NSAID stacking).

    If Mandarino is truly committed to the well-being of the animals and the integrity of the sport, I expect her motivation for bringing an action against USEF to be about change not money.

    Alas, the chance of any of the above occuring are as likely George W. Bush getting re-elected as President.
    I can assure you I have not asked for one penny from the USEF, agree with the much needed change in our industry and am willing to stand up for the rights of all USEF members and their animals without hiding behind a screenname. If you read my Humble initiative I actually notified the New York Times about the drugging issues before the Bogdanich ever knew my name. I have published everything for the equine community as I have nothing to hide.

    http://amberhillponies.com/Amber_Hil...nitiative.html
    Elizabeth Mandarino
    www.amberhillponies.com
    cell 908.397.0977



  4. #44
    Join Date
    Nov. 30, 2006
    Posts
    904

    Default

    People show outside the U.S. without dex. Can't show in Canada with dex. Just saying.

    Quote Originally Posted by searching12321 View Post
    There are many times where a horse who is on antibiotics or who needs dex for an allergic reaction could be healthy to show.

    What about a horse who has a cut and is put on a seven day cycle of antibiotics? Original cut may not have ever caused him to be lame. Should he be out of competition for seven days because a vet was being cautious with a cut?

    What about the horse who has a spider bite or a reaction to the shavings and gets hives? Should they not be allowed to show if the dex took down the reaction and they are perfectly fine?

    We need some common sense. The antibiotics are not the reason we are having this discussion.

    Dex is a little bit of another story but there are reasons to give dex which do make sense for a horse to show on it.


    6 members found this post helpful.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jul. 31, 2007
    Posts
    14,888

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amberhill View Post
    If you read my Humble initiative I actually notified the New York Times about the drugging issues before the Bogdanich ever knew my name.
    Wait, what? Your 'Humble Initiative'? I though the term was created by a COTHer who started the second thread just after the NYT article was published? I don't remember that being you, Amber Hill Farm. Or did you present something, somewhere under the same name *before* that thread was started?

    I'm confused.
    The armchair saddler
    Politically Pro-Cat


    7 members found this post helpful.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jun. 23, 2008
    Location
    Bedminster, New Jersey
    Posts
    465

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvp View Post
    Wait, what? Your 'Humble Initiative'? I though the term was created by a COTHer who started the second thread just after the NYT article was published? I don't remember that being you, Amber Hill Farm. Or did you present something, somewhere under the same name *before* that thread was started?

    I'm confused.
    Relieve your confusion and start reading all the documents I published for all to see. I have laid claim to the "Humble Initiative" because no one else out there is willing to come out from behind their anonymous screen names and do anything.

    Start with reading this...

    http://amberhillponies.com/Amber_Hil...er_to_NYT.html

    and then read the rest

    http://amberhillponies.com/Amber_Hil...nitiative.html

    then comment.
    Elizabeth Mandarino
    www.amberhillponies.com
    cell 908.397.0977



  7. #47
    Join Date
    Nov. 26, 2008
    Posts
    85

    Default

    Quick question:
    Since Usef is not to concerned with making med changes....Would individual shows have that right?
    Say...if HITS made their own rules...if a horse dies at their show mandatory necropsy. If your horse is drug tested and it comes back positive....baned from hits shows for 6 months. Could they ban certain drugs? Dex for example?
    If I knew that a show had high standards to keep things honest, and the horses best interest at heart, I would think it would be a good selling point.



  8. #48
    Join Date
    Jun. 23, 2008
    Location
    Bedminster, New Jersey
    Posts
    465

    Default

    This is the response we get from the USEF in house general counsel .. a NON-RESPONSE. I have been trying to address the issues at hand for 8 months and the USEF, our USOC's NGB is NON-RESPONSIVE.

    From: tamara.tucker <tamara.tucker@nelsontucker.com>
    To: Sonja Keating <skeating@usef.org>
    Subject: RE: Fwd: SECOND Request for a Meeting
    Date: Thu, Jan 17, 2013 11:26 am
    Sonja,
    Do you represent Mr. Long, Mr. O'Connor and Ms. Tauber in their individual capacities as well as in their capacities as USEF officers? Please advise.
    Thank you,
    Tammy

    Tamara L. Tucker
    Tucker Law Firm, PLC
    414 3rd St. N.E.
    Charlottesville, VA 22902
    434-979-0049
    434-979-0037 facsimile



    This message and any attached documents contain
    information that may be confidential and/or
    privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you
    may not read, copy, distribute, or use this
    information. If you have received this transmission in
    error, please notify the sender immediately by reply
    e-mail and then delete this message.


    -------- Original Message --------
    Subject: Fwd: SECOND Request for a Meeting
    From: Sonja Keating <skeating@usef.org>
    Date: Thu, January 17, 2013 12:21 pm
    To: "tamara.tucker@nelsontucker.com" <tamara.tucker@nelsontucker.com>

    Hi Tammy,

    Ms. Tauber forwarded the emails that your client has sent to her whereby she requests a meeting. I am responding on behalf of Ms. Tauber. She requests that all communications go between counsel.

    Kind regards,

    Sonja

    Sonja S. Keating
    General Counsel
    Senior Vice-President
    United States Equestrian Federation
    Elizabeth Mandarino
    www.amberhillponies.com
    cell 908.397.0977



  9. #49
    Join Date
    Oct. 6, 2002
    Location
    Philadelphia PA
    Posts
    15,365

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amberhill View Post
    Actually, you are incorrect. USEF sanctioned competitions are covered by the Ted Stevens Act and the USOC which were enacted by Congress. Please read for comprehension before commenting.
    Assuming for the sake of argument that you are correct (and only for the sake of argument), that still doesn't mean CRIMINAL standards of proof apply. Perhaps your lawyer can explain to you wh ythe preumption of innocent and "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard do not apply in CIVIL proceedings?

    I won't hold my breath waiting for your apology or mea culpa
    ~Veronica
    "The Son Dee Times" "Sustained" "Somerset" "Franklin Square"
    http://photobucket.com/albums/y192/vxf111/


    4 members found this post helpful.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Jul. 31, 2007
    Posts
    14,888

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amberhill View Post
    Relieve your confusion and start reading all the documents I published for all to see. I have laid claim to the "Humble Initiative" because no one else out there is willing to come out from behind their anonymous screen names and do anything.

    Start with reading this...

    http://amberhillponies.com/Amber_Hil...er_to_NYT.html

    and then read the rest

    http://amberhillponies.com/Amber_Hil...nitiative.html

    then comment.
    That's not how attribution works. The first person to publicly use the term gets credit. It doesn't matter whether that person uses their given name or a pseudonym. If you can identify the author, you make the attribution.
    The armchair saddler
    Politically Pro-Cat


    1 members found this post helpful.

  11. #51
    Join Date
    Jun. 23, 2008
    Location
    Bedminster, New Jersey
    Posts
    465

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vxf111 View Post
    Assuming for the sake of argument that you are correct (and only for the sake of argument), that still doesn't mean CRIMINAL standards of proof apply. Perhpas your lawyer can explain to you whythe preumption of innocent and "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard do not apply in CIVIL proceedings?
    Have you read the USEF rules which state the proponent has to provide a preponderance of the evidence. Please read General Rule Chapter 6, as I have for clarification or you could read my interpretation as follows:

    http://amberhillponies.com/Amber_Hil...ould_Know.html
    Elizabeth Mandarino
    www.amberhillponies.com
    cell 908.397.0977



  12. #52
    Join Date
    Oct. 6, 2002
    Location
    Philadelphia PA
    Posts
    15,365

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amberhill View Post
    Have you read the USEF rules which state the proponent has to provide a preponderance of the evidence. Please read General Rule Chapter 6, as I have for clarification or you could read my interpretation as follows:

    http://amberhillponies.com/Amber_Hil...ould_Know.html


    That supports my argument. Preponderance is a civil standard. NOT the reasonable doubt standard utilized in criminal cases.
    ~Veronica
    "The Son Dee Times" "Sustained" "Somerset" "Franklin Square"
    http://photobucket.com/albums/y192/vxf111/


    3 members found this post helpful.

  13. #53
    Join Date
    Jun. 23, 2008
    Location
    Bedminster, New Jersey
    Posts
    465

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mvp View Post
    That's not how attribution works. The first person to publicly use the term gets credit. It doesn't matter whether that person uses their given name or a pseudonym. If you can identify the author, you make the attribution.
    Ok so some anonymous user that hides behind a computer who used the phrase in a malicious fashion that did not have all the facts gets credit. Really?
    Elizabeth Mandarino
    www.amberhillponies.com
    cell 908.397.0977



  14. #54
    Join Date
    Jun. 23, 2008
    Location
    Bedminster, New Jersey
    Posts
    465

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vxf111 View Post
    That supports my argument. Preponderance is a civil standard. NOT the reasonable doubt standard utilized in criminal cases.
    Read the Ted Stevens Act please before commenting. I obviously have consulted with attorneys well versed in this particular law.
    Elizabeth Mandarino
    www.amberhillponies.com
    cell 908.397.0977



  15. #55
    Join Date
    May. 5, 2000
    Location
    Aiken, SC
    Posts
    2,356

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amberhill View Post
    An online petition has been created at Change.org to demand the USEF remove the Temporary Suspension Rule GR609 which is in direct conflict to USOC NGB Rules and Regulations and the Ted Stevens Act.

    https://www.change.org/petitions/uni...are_after_sign

    Please support this cause and show the USEF that members demand CHANGE and our rights to Due Process.
    Seven supporters thus far. Lets see, that accounts for you, your husband and your lawyers. LOL!


    9 members found this post helpful.

  16. #56
    Join Date
    Oct. 6, 2002
    Location
    Philadelphia PA
    Posts
    15,365

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amberhill View Post
    Read the Ted Stevens Act please before commenting. I obviously have consulted with attorneys well versed in this particular law.
    I have read the Ted Stevens act. It doesn't vest the USEF with the right to enforce criminal laws. Nor does it require criminal burdens of proof in USEF proceedings.

    I think maybe you need to do some additional "consulting" before spouting off and looking really ill informed. If looking ill informed bothers you.
    ~Veronica
    "The Son Dee Times" "Sustained" "Somerset" "Franklin Square"
    http://photobucket.com/albums/y192/vxf111/


    10 members found this post helpful.

  17. #57
    Join Date
    May. 17, 2000
    Location
    Where am I and what am I doing in this handbasket?
    Posts
    23,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vxf111 View Post
    If looking ill informed bothers you.
    I'll take "Things that never occurred to Elizabeth Mandarino" for $500, Alex...
    Definition of "Horse": a 4 legged mammal looking for an inconvenient place and expensive way to die. Any day they choose not to execute the Master Plan is just more time to perfect it. Be Very Afraid.


    24 members found this post helpful.

  18. #58
    Join Date
    Nov. 30, 2006
    Posts
    904

    Default

    Can you only see who has signed after you sign yourself? Could account for more than one signature. Folks just want to see who the other whackos are.

    I don't care enough about who they are to sign it.

    Quote Originally Posted by pds View Post
    Seven supporters thus far. Lets see, that accounts for you, your husband and your lawyers. LOL!


    5 members found this post helpful.

  19. #59
    Join Date
    Dec. 22, 2005
    Location
    Chicago. Again.
    Posts
    2,404

    Default

    I think it's a bit distasteful to make this entire thing about you, amberhill.

    To spin the whole event into some saga where you come out as the heroic renegade out to end all equine drugging and abuse.

    Whether or not your pony fell due to a "forbidden substance" is rather irrelevant now. He was, undeniably, a pin-cushion for your syringes.

    Now we face a ban on needles or 8 years of school and a medical license to give a dose of legend.

    No in between for those that are using the wonderful advances in medicine appropriately.

    The widespread, non-educated use of all these new "options" to keep the horse sound & happy is what keeps blurring the line, to the point we lawyer up on all sides just to figure out where to put our toes.

    I thank you for bringing all this front & center with ramparts and sensation, I mean, we finally do have people talking. But I think we are looking for a different path than yours.
    ExchangeHunterJumper.com
    Now promoting sale horses from North Carolina to the Netherlands. Follow us on Facebook.


    21 members found this post helpful.

  20. #60
    Join Date
    Jun. 29, 2004
    Posts
    10,345

    Default

    If the article on Humble's death hadn't appeared in the NY Times, USEF wouldn't even be addressing the doping issue IMO. Ned Bonnie's idea was the only useful one to come out of that meeting, those other suggestions were pathetic. Lucassb had the right idea when she didn't renew her membership. Better to concentrate on developing a good unrated show series in your area and unsubscribe from USEF. Voting with your check book is the only way to get through to these people.


    5 members found this post helpful.

Similar Threads

  1. Sign the Horse Anti-Doping Petition to USEF
    By Rabbitman9 in forum Eventing
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Feb. 26, 2012, 11:43 PM
  2. Sign the Horse Anti-Doping Petition to USEF
    By Rabbitman9 in forum Off Course
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Feb. 26, 2012, 10:22 PM
  3. Sign the Horse Anti-Doping Petition to USEF
    By Rabbitman9 in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Feb. 25, 2012, 12:05 PM
  4. Sign the Horse Anti-Doping Petition to USEF
    By Rabbitman9 in forum Dressage
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Feb. 25, 2012, 09:31 AM
  5. USEF CONVENTION
    By OAK in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 309
    Last Post: Feb. 19, 2006, 10:12 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness