[Lucassb]

Exactly. And I believe it was Long who said as much in his reference to "momentum" and just how difficult it is to work on a known issue like drugging without it.

That's an offensive attitude for a GOB to take, e. g. "Geez, we would have liked to have stopped drugging out animals for sport a while ago but, you see, we just didn't have the critical mass of public support for that kind of effort before."

Absolutely agree.

I used to really respect the efforts of the D&M program and in fact, maintained an active membership even when I was not showing, to help support it. But these days, it seems like the problem has spiraled so far out of their control that it's practically useless. I mean, all you have to do to see the extent of the problem is walk through the stabling area at any big A show and see all the sharps filling up the conveniently located containers at the end of every tent. It's horrifying.

And the best our association leadership can come up with is, "maybe we should have a summit meeting." Good Lord, get a clue, USEF.

[poltroon]

What about the horses who get Adequan and Legend? I'm sorry, I just don't see people who choose to use those as nefarious or scheming.. or bad horsemen.

But they don't need it the same day they're competing.

If we want to let people use dex ... then there needs to be a limit like 'once a year per horse'. I'd rather give it up entirely.

[poltroon]

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.

In California, there are some different rules imposed via the state that are independent of USEF recognition. The state and USEF work together, though.

[MHM]

But they don't need it the same day they're competing.

No, but if they're on the very common once-a-week schedule for those medications such as Adequan and Legend, the horses still need to get it if they're away from home for more than a week. So the meds and needles and syringes need to travel with them.

[poltroon]

I have a question about the Ted Stevens Act and how it relates to the USEF ability to impose temporary suspensions.

The intent is to keep an NGB from keeping an athlete out of elite, olympic-selection competition, without due process.

However, the person who is citing it is *not* an athlete. She is an owner and a trainer. I believe the Ted Stevens Act provision applies only to riders. If I am correct, the USEF rules can be adapted somewhat to show this distinction.

[poltroon]

No, but if they're on the very common once-a-week schedule for those medications such as Adequan and Legend, the horses still need to get it if they're away from home for more than a week. So the meds and needles and syringes need to travel with them.

Are you guys competing these horses 7 days a week? What happened to Mondays?

[gumshoe]

Monday is a fine day to schedule those once a week injections. Yep.

[Eventer13]

ACTH is a natural hormone that tells the adrenals to release corticosteroids. I would imagine its effect, like Dex, would depend on how much was given, and how often.

[MHM]

Are you guys competing these horses 7 days a week? What happened to Mondays?

Mondays they might get hand walked, or turned out if there are paddocks available, or whatever. But if you're at a show like WEF or Hits or Kentucky for multiple weeks, you don't ship your horses hundreds of miles home on Sunday and drag them back to the show the next day. You keep them on the showgrounds, which means you need to have their weekly medications like Adequan or Legend on the showgrounds as well. Which you might give on a Monday.

[amberhill]

I will remind everyone to desist from personal attacks back and forth and concentrate on the original topic at hand, or the thread will be closed pronto.

Mod 3

Is COTH guaranteeing its users anonymity? I was merely stating a fact not attacking, if you consider that attacking then please remove the threads concerning criminal liability by a governmental employee who works in the attorney general's office which are utterly false.

To make things perfectly clear, their was no criminal wrongdoing even though I was falsely accused by individuals of doing so and there is no open criminal investigation into the death of Humble as has been falsely reported.

Humble was brought up by your [COTHs] article and I have a first amendment right of Freedom of Speech.

Please let the record stand that this is the second attorney COTH has given immunity to on its forum.

[amberhill]

I have a question about the Ted Stevens Act and how it relates to the USEF ability to impose temporary suspensions.

The intent is to keep an NGB from keeping an athlete out of elite, olympic-selection competition, without due process.

However, the person who is citing it is *not* an athlete. She is an owner and a trainer. I believe the Ted Stevens Act provision applies only to riders. If I am correct, the USEF rules can be adapted somewhat to show this distinction.

No you are not correct. Please read http://amberhillponies.com/Amber_Hil...Directors.html

[Lucassb]

I have a question about the Ted Stevens Act and how it relates to the USEF ability to impose temporary suspensions.

The intent is to keep an NGB from keeping an athlete out of elite, olympic-selection competition, without due process.

However, the person who is citing it is *not* an athlete. She is an owner and a trainer. I believe the Ted Stevens Act provision applies only to riders. If I am correct, the USEF rules can be adapted somewhat to show this distinction.

The Act applies to coaches and trainers as well as athletes. However, it is worth noting that the Act primarily outlines the role and responsibilities of an NGB, which are fairly extensive. The USEF's mission statement details those roles and responsibilities, which include protecting the welfare of the horses involved in the sport, as well as developing and enforcing the rules that govern it.

http://www.usef.org/_IFrames/AboutUs...t/Default.aspx

[Lion1024]

I will remind everyone to desist from personal attacks back and forth and concentrate on the original topic at hand, or the thread will be closed pronto.

Mod 3

Why not simply ban posters who cannot follow forum rules?

[skydy]

It is clear to me USEF could not care less about the drugging problem (other than the fact that it has been brought to light in the mainstream media).

Quizzes about the rules? A voluntary medication log book? Really??

No mention of increasing the penalties for D/M violations? That would be a (glaringly obvious) place to start. Having read that article I have no faith whatsoever that this situation will be addressed in any meaningful manner.

Great, make necropsy mandatory for the dead ponies and horses.

How about enacting rules that will keep them from dying in the first place?

[skydy]

Is COTH guaranteeing its users anonymity? I was merely stating a fact not attacking, if you consider that attacking then please remove the threads concerning criminal liability by a governmental employee who works in the attorney general's office which are utterly false.

To make things perfectly clear, their was no criminal wrongdoing even though I was falsely accused by individuals of doing so and there is no open criminal investigation into the death of Humble as has been falsely reported.

Humble was brought up by your [COTHs] article and I have a first amendment right of Freedom of Speech.

Please let the record stand that this is the second attorney COTH has given immunity to on its forum.

[RoyalTRider]

Excellent, and with a snow storm moving in!

[Eventer13]

As a non-attorney, is it illegal for someone who works in law to give their legal opinion publicly? Just not sure why its a big deal whether 1) a poster is a lawyer 2) how that is relevant to whether they can post their own legal opinions (or advice).

But maybe once you enter law, you are held to a higher standard? On a related note- could a vet post proposed treatment and get sued if it killed the horse? I don't wish to derail the (already-derailed) thread, just trying to understand.

[2bayboys]

Is COTH guaranteeing its users anonymity? I was merely stating a fact not attacking, if you consider that attacking then please remove the threads concerning criminal liability by a governmental employee who works in the attorney general's office which are utterly false.

Humble was brought up by your [COTHs] article and I have a first amendment right of Freedom of Speech.

Please let the record stand that this is the second attorney COTH has given immunity to on its forum.

Freedom of speech does not apply here, you are not allowed to use profanity and your topics must be related to the forum's parameters. Freedom of speech means that you could state publicly that COTH is full of hate mongering homosexuals with a horse agenda and not get arrested for it, but you could still get kicked off this board. (pardon my satirical license here)

[SGray]

and if an attorney retires from practice then do they no longer need "immunity" from coth

[gumshoe]

COTH doesn't have to "guarantee its users' anonymity". COTH doesn't KNOW its users' identities. If you choose to let everyone know who you are, great. But it isn't up to you to decide for another user.

Is COTH guaranteeing its users anonymity? I was merely stating a fact not attacking, if you consider that attacking then please remove the threads concerning criminal liability by a governmental employee who works in the attorney general's office which are utterly false.

To make things perfectly clear, their was no criminal wrongdoing even though I was falsely accused by individuals of doing so and there is no open criminal investigation into the death of Humble as has been falsely reported.

Humble was brought up by your [COTHs] article and I have a first amendment right of Freedom of Speech.

Please let the record stand that this is the second attorney COTH has given immunity to on its forum.