Safety Summit thoughts

[riderboy]

We just got back from the first day of the safety summit in Lexington Ky. I was very impressed with the large number of ULR's and BMOCs. Clearly, a lot of time and effort went into this. The large room discussions were great and for the most part our moderator stayed on topic. David O'Conner presented some of the most disturbing data on the very large increase in horse falls at the prelim and intermediate levels. Up from 2003 almost 40% to 2007 for prelim and up almost 33% at intermediate. Advanced were down about 35% but I'm not sure how that breaks out at the differnt star levels. A LOT of concern and well attended. I hope a lot of good comes out of this. But not, hopefullly, so much regulation and red tape that the sport ceases to be fun.

[Foxnhound919]

Thanks Riderboy for the info. Sure wish I was there. Let those of us back home in on any other interesting info coming from the Summit.

[tommygirl]

I attended the Summit today. I am still digesting all the input and ideas that were shared/discussed. It was a very well run summit and I applaud all the people that were able to come and those who stood up and shared their thoughts/concerns/ideas.

Overall, I found one thing that kept surfacing - accountability. It is easy to place the blame on trainers or riders or the USEA, but I really feel accountability has to begin with each individual. Are the riders really ready; are the TD's overlooking a bad jump because of time constraints; are course designers using sponsor money to make a better jump or eye candy; is our Association supporting our organizers in the correct areas.....

One person mentioned that they see eventers/trainers/owners/etc making bad decisions based on peer or owner pressure. I have seen this as well. In my opinion, money is not worth ANYONE getting hurt. I once had to drop a student because they were on a horse that was trying to hurt them. I knew that being honest with the parents would cause me to loose the other 12 students in that "group". I could sleep at night knowing I did the right thing, and maybe my message got thru.

We ALL need to stand up for what we believe in and be brutally honest with ourselves and those we teach/train/mentor. Broken feelings are better than a broken neck.

I have many other thoughts to share, but it's late and I still need a shower!

[RunForIt]

One of the few times my link was working, I heard you, tommygirl! I wish there had been more discussion about your comment that there needs to be more time spent developing partnerships with horses...

[gahawkeye]

I am here at the Safety Summit and just want to report on the professionalism and organization of the event. USEF/USEA have hired professional facilitators (very well scooled on the subject), organized topics in meaningful/reasonable way and kept to task to get to effective and implementable solutions/outcomes that will reduce horse falls. As David O stated at the beginning - if we can reduce horse falls, we reduce people falls.(especially the ones with catastrophic injury).

Some topics/changes that may come out of this (will know more after this morning's session):
USEF hires TDs and assigns to event (local organizer does not hire the TD)
More release language on entry forms to get access to human/horse indicent information inthe event of fall/death
Encouragement/incentive (maybe mandatory at some point) for ICP certification of trainers/coaches
Qualifying rides for T to P
Medical cards for horses
More stringent requirements/updating/compliance with the human med card
Rider licensing or some kind of point system to move up/down based on performance
A "harmony" score for CC - subjective evaluation of section of course to determine the quality, safety, flow, etc. of the ride.
MORE DATA Collection on lots of fronts -- incredible lack of data to really make any big suggestions without producing unwanted unintended consequences.

AGain, very impressed with the format, facilitation, organization, etc. And I'm confident that good things will come from this.

Lela Wulf

[Hannahsmom]

Based on some of the individual comments I have heard, it sounds like some really interesting, specific comments were brought out. I'm hoping to get a transcript or audio copy. I hope it doesn't all get too watered down. GAHawkeye's summarization is either a great summarization or the kind of thing that tends to happen in big corporations at some of these types of summits. Great ideas that are specific and maybe drastic are watered down into a very slight shift in the general trend. Yes, that doesn't rock the boat, but it can also be very frustrating and slow.

[Kementari]

I'm just listening, not actually there, but I've been very impressed by the facilitation, as well. They've done well keeping things on-topic, yet letting people have their say and really trying to boil it down ACCURATELY into "points" that are short enough to be going on with (and yet still capture what people are saying, not what someone thinks they should be saying ).

It also just really seemed like TPTB as far as USEA goes were both present and listening. It could be they're just putting on a good show, but for the time being, I'm very encouraged.

Of course, the feed died halfway through yesterday (though, knock on wood, it's working better today...), so I don't have the full picture.

[Mariequi]

Unfortunately, I take care of the barn here on Sundays and had hoped to get downtown by 9:30. But had a case of the local-ies where something always happens, doesn't it? In this case, an open gate and loose horses (all is well though).

A later discussion included wishing to have heard more from Phillip and Bruce. Dorothy offered quite a bit. Cathy's comment and others about the possible problems with the new rule re falls I hope were heard. Sally O had really insightful and realistic and helpful suggestions and as someone starting over after many years or a young horse and with these more technical lower level courses, I really appreciated her ideas and will be contacting USEA. I was once upon a time on the USEA Education Committee and have more motivation than ever to be actively involved in education and safety.

It was great to see Heather Bailey and Hollyn Mangione and folks I hadn't seen in quite some time unless at Rolex. I traveled at convention time the last few years, so do't get those "reunion" times. I missed a lot of Area III folks, which is my "old" area, because of the championships, but they had representation.

I'd like to hear the synopsis. Would like to get a copy of any handouts today. John Long said that because those who chose the vet session missed the course design session, USEF would make sure that the recordings were available. Not sure how that's happening, but most appreciated.

I didn't expect to be fed, but it was very nice and I'll miss the op to spend time and forks with everyone.

Thanks to Kevin and Jo and John and David and Malcolm, et al. It was just that we could've used a week for many of these subjects. But appreciate a beginning and op for voices. Some felt they were not being heard, but some also started speaking very defensively and I'm not sure that was necessary.

Mostly, I want to feel that the talking and listening isn't over.

Awaiting a report from Flutie and DLee and everyone.

[DLee]

Dang it Marie, the varnish is still in my car!!

I don't really have a lot to add, it was just pretty impressive overall. I am kind of glad David got to end up basically running it this morning, and it still went well.
I do worry about ICP being mandated (and I'm not even sure how they mean 'mandated') as a long time rider from Area IX, and voiced that today. But mostly I just learned a lot!

[Auburn]

I thought that David saying that the USEF would purchase all of the frangible pins that the organizers could use, was a huge thing!

I am hopeful that the ICP program will become more affordable for instructors. David, saying that, "In two years, our goal is to have at least 500 newly certified ICP instructors." is on the right track. I just hope that this will be doable for everyone who wants to become certified.

I think that having a red flag system, with consequences, is the right way to go, if the organizers, TD's and ICP certified instructors will step up to the plate and actually start implementing it.

The USEF footing the bill to hire full time, paid TD's is a good start, too. Maybe then, the Rider Reps will be taken seriously.

It was such a good conference. I wish that everyone who wanted to come, could have been there. Many Thanks to all of the organizers of this summit! We are taking a leadership role for change, for all of the World to see. Kudos!

[Kanga]

I was there at the summit both days. I guess I have a bit different opinion than some of you out there listening to it. The facilitator (Paul) in the main room I don't think did a good job at all and I was questioning even coming back on the second day because of how he was handling things. He constantly was "re-wording" what people would say each time after someone made a point. Most of the time it got twisted around and much time was wasted, when we could have been talking about real issues and getting them solved. I am glad I ended up going on Sunday because Dorothy finnally said what all of us were thinking and he essentially got fired and David took over. The summit then ran the way I thought it was going to run, when David took the reins.

A lot of the issues covered & presented were good.....
1) The Watch List
2) The Yellow/Red flag system
3) The point system Malcom Hook presented
4) The reverse qualifications when a rider has too many falls
5) Rider Licensing in the upper levels starting with 4* Riders
6) The Vets idea of monitoring the horses lungs/heart at some 3-days which will allow them to do more research.
7) All the research they are needing to do in terms of Vet care
8) The Database - creating a better one and really using it to be able to pick the riders out that are having constant trouble.


The things that personally I don't think will ever happen is Mandating Instructors to be ICP Instructors. There are many legal issues here with this so I do think the USEA will stay far away from a "MANDATE". I could go into further detail here but won't right now. You can make all the rules in the world but if we don't start having riders/parents/owners/trainers take a step back when things aren't going well and say lets go fix the holes in this and GO DOWN A LEVEL, this sport won't change the path it is on right now.

I hope that at least RESPONSIBILITY to your horse and yourself was brought to the forefront for everyone at this summit. If we missed everything else and got that then we got something out of it.

[RunForIt]

Could those of you who were there elaborate on the "licensing" per level idea that was put forth? evaluating riding skills in all 3 phases and horsemanship (I'm a diehard feminist but horsewomanship just doesn't work for me) needed for each level of eventing sounds promising - what did y'all think?

[LAZ]

I was so sorry to miss the meeting! I signed up weeks ago, but we had terrible weather on Friday, 80 MPH straightline winds that did some property damage and we were without power. I just wasn't comfortable leaving my barn with no power and thus no water for 27 horses.... We got power back on about 1 on Saturday but at that point it wasn't worth driving down.

[talkofthetown]

Flightcheck, Talkofthetown, and I are on our way home from the summit and won't rehash the excellent summaries that have been posted here.

I can address the issue of licensing -- I agree with Kanga that I don't think the mandatory certification/licensing of trainers will actually happen.

They did decide that licensing of 4* riders was a good idea, and I have a few concerns about that, but the licensing/mandatory certification is the only thing I spoke up about all weekend. As professional licensing is what I do in my "real" lawyer life, I cautioned everyone to consider the implications of licensing or making anything mandatory for either riders or trainers/instructors. As soon as you begin to mess around with those issues, you will get into all sorts of problems, additional paperwork and a great deal of extra expense.

It was a great weekend and I hope many things will come out of it

Libby

[bambam]

I must say I am much happier about the summit and what is coming out of it (and having schlepped all the way out here) after this morning's session.
I thought the discussion yesterday was good but frankly frustrating. I think today we had a much more fruitful discussion in large part because David took over leading the discussion (thank you Dorothy Crowell for inciting a polite coup of the facilitator - wish we had done it sooner) and allowed discussion to occur while keeping control and effectively directing the discussion. I think USEA and, hopefully, USEF were listening to what the participants had to say and I think decisions will be affected by the input from this weekend (as opposed to this being a pointless PR exercise of letting people talk while all the while heading towards the end goal that they had in mind all along- call me a cynic but I was concerned about that being the attitude at USEF).
While I think many, but not all, of the actions that will come out of this are aimed at the lower levels rather than the levels that had the accidents that prompted this meeting, we do need to address the issues at the lower levels and so I think that is a good thing and certainly some of the proposed actions would have prevented some of the recent serious accidents.
Here is a short and incomplete summary of some actions I think are being seriously considered or happening. A ton of things were discussed and even if I had the time nobody wants to read a post that long (I have pages and pages of notes because I am a compulsive note taker ). Since lots more was discussed both on other topics and with respect to each of the things mentioned, do not assume a topic or idea was not discussed just because I do not mention it. Also the powerpoint presentation including the one today with summaries of discussions/solutions will be on the website at some point so you can see a more complete summary there. Okay, here goes:
- more studies on speed issues (awesome presentation Reed), deformable jumps, equine cardio/pulmonary issues
- collect better accident data (new forms being developed), create a database for them. Sharing this information and making full investigation results public and accessible was discussed and I hope this happens as I think it is key.
- USEA/USEF committed to funding necropsies for fatal accidents and for paying for/providing frangible pins to any event that wants them
- USEA/USEF wants to encourage participation in and funding for ICP. There was discussion about making ICP certification mandatory (to coach at events, for approval for move-ups, for signing entries) but this was heavily opposed and I suspect will not go anywhere.
- Instead of organizers hiring/paying for TDs, having them be professionals hired and paid by USEF (this is how it is done in the UK and David very behind it). How much input organizers would have in who their TD was a question and would need to be worked out.
- there was lots of discussion about qualifications and licensing for prelim and up. If licensing goes forward at this point, it seemed like it will only go forward at the 4 star level for now. Malcolm Hook had an excellent idea about using points to qualify for move-ups and not straight qualifying results where you would not just earn points towards your move-up with qualifying results but you would also lose points for things like falls and eliminations. Another idea along these lines was reverse qualifications where, for example, you have 2 eliminations at a level then you have to move down until you re-qualify (this would apply prelim and up). I think the reverse qualifications and/or Malcom's idea have good chances of being developed and implemented.
- adding a yellow flag system was well supported with there being some questions that need to be resolved as to how exactly it would work (i.e. rider allowed to continue, rider stopped or flag just waived, etc).
- developing/instituting a watch list. This was prompted by Leslie talking about how in the UK when they had their spate of fatal accidents, the response back at the barn was often lack of surprise because they were an accident waiting to happen (or something to that effect) and that now there is a watch list of people who are putting in scary rides and these riders get a call from Yogi that they need to go back to the barn and do some training and that riders tend to be receptive and take it seriously given who the source of the call is. The list is also given to TDs so they know who to watch carefully. It has apparently been successful in the UK. The list is not made public.
- get more eyes on the ground at events watching xc and pulling people up
- make GJ more accountable with respect to their responses or non-responses to rider concerns (i.e. paperwork complaints even if GJ does not take any action and require GJ to certify that there were none otherwise)- I think I captured this idea accurately
- there seemed to be agreement with the idea that beginner novice, novice and training should not be mini-rolexes and should prepare people without asking unfair questions for the level. Sally OC suggested returning to the pre-2002 training and prelim guidelines and that was well-received but it is unclear where that was going.
In general, the main themes seemed to be education, personal accountability and changing the culture. Educate the riders who are riding dangerously and with poor basics, back up trainers who say no to move-ups and officials who pull riders, emphasize the quality of rounds with things like a prize for the best ridden xc round, pros should speak up if they see someone who is dangerous and offer to assist in warm ups if someone seems in trouble, riders should speak up to friends who they think are riding dangerously or moving up prematurely.
There were other things that I think will be looked at too, i.e. making the rider rep system more effective, but this is a decent sample and I will be surprised if anyone is still reading at this point.
I was also happy to see many many ULRs including Bruce, Buck, Phillip, Kim, Leslie, Karen, Gina, Darren, Dorothy Crowell, etc. CMP was there and I am shocked to say I agreed with almost everything he said

[Carol Ames]

does anyone know about the breeding of the pulmonary hemorrhage fatalities this year,; what percentage were Tbs?

[Rt66Kix]

DOC made several great statements, but the one that stands out to me concerned where the participants of the sport came from, and where they come from now. He said that the riders of the 70's and 80's were experienced-based, meaning they rode as kids and foxhunted, did P-P's, steeplechases, etc. The riders of today are more education-based, so eventing needs to acknowledge the shift.

The biggest thing I came away with is that it is truly RIDER RESPONSIBILITY. No matter what pressure the coach, trainer, instructor, owner, parent or peers place on a rider, ultimately it's up to them to make their own choice. And ultimately up to them to answer for any mistakes made, fatal or otherwise.

I also thought it was interesting that they invited a representative from the HSUS to attend the summit. She was asked to make a statement at the end of the summit, and she praised the strong leadership, and the fact that everyone there was all about the horse. I don't remember her exact words, but I got the impression that she felt it was outstanding that eventing was being so proactive about safety. Perhaps someone will be able to remember it better, but basically it was a very positive statement about the summit, the USEF/USEA leaders, and the commitment made to our horses.

We were all encouraged to take the energy and passion out of the room with us, and not to be afraid to point out dangerous riding, or people in over their heads. I hope that this will be done, but in a tactful way.

[RAyers]

Originally Posted by bambam

-more studies on speed issues (awesome presentation Reed), deformable jumps, equine cardio/pulmonary issues

Thanks! We are working hard to make this a quality study. We have been invited to put together a full research program that will tie in the EIPH. Even the FEI has taken note and are interested in this work. By the way, this work is not just me. Others involved include, 4Martini, Gnep, Deltawave, LAZ, blackwly, JER, and even denny. I want to thank 4Martini for the radar and video data from CHP (I was managing the GPS watches).

We have a LOT more work to do over the next few years.

The sad part is that the webcast link was not great. Every time our work came up or there was something I wanted to hear, it seemed that the link went dead.

Reed

[Gnep]

The rider rep and the greater acountability of the GJ especialy in conection with Rider Rep. and the paperwork, is based on a rule change I put in last year. It got stuck in what ever sub comitee. Maybe it finaly gets more to the front now and makes the rider rep more powerful. Additionaly I put in for Rider Reps for all levels, even shows that have just BN to T otr BN to P.

Deformable jumps, why does that come up again and again, deforming does not work, collapseble jumps will work.
I had a short discusion with DOC about that at CHP, but I got the feeling that only a high tech solution ( expensive ) will be understood.
I wish I had had brought that jump with me to CHP and could have shown how easy and simple a solution can be. But I it was one of those overnight emergency deals.
The young riders in august would be a good chance.

[ezmissg]

Well, I thoroughly enjoyed it, and feel like a lot was addressed with good input of what needs to be accomplished.

The recaps already posted here give a pretty accurate depiction, so I'm not sure that I can add much.

I think that the team from Burson-Marsteller (the PR agency who was there to facilitate the format and process) did a good job. There was SO much to be discussed that we could easily have spent 2 1/2 days in there -- so for them to manage the time in order to cover so much information was a really big task, and I think they accomplished it over all.

I think that David did an excellent job of recapping priority points in a very limited time this morning. And, I also believe that he and Kevin Baumgartner did an excellent job in each of their roles.

I believe that the vast majority left feeling like someone addressed their areas of concern, and the general feedback I heard was very positive. I also feel that people left feeling empowered.

For those of you asking what information will be provided, as I heard it (and someone please correct me if I mis-speak), they said that the PowerPoint presentations displayed will be posted to the USEA site for download, and that audios and/or DVD's of the meetings will be made available. Even though I was there, I'd buy a DVD just to be able to re-call all the information.

With all that being said, here are thoughts I still have:

• The point was made that many topics fell under the category of education. When the session ended today, I spoke to Paul from B-M and pointed out that when they work on "recapping" all the items, it would probably be more accurate to divide that into 2 areas: communication and education, because some of the items weren't necessarily NEW information, but just a greater need of effectively relaying information.
  
• We needed some "take aways" from the meetings. Howard Simpson commented this morning "this is great, but what can we do if there is an accident at an event in the next 30-60 days"? I asked that they frame today's points as either "long term" or "immediate", and I think we ran out of time before that happened. Personally, I considered an immediate was the discussion about dealing with rider reps and TD's at an event in an emphatic way so concerns cannot be "blown off by event officials". Another was the announcement that funding was being made available for frangible pens for all events where jumps could be retro-fitted. [For others who attended, I would like to hear what you considered an "immediate take away".]
  
• There was a great deal of time discussing the inability to mandate personal responsibility and education. I commented that it needs to be recognized that there are large areas with no event trainers within 5 hours. I failed to include that people are competing anyway without education. I wanted to make the point that although the USEA cannot mandate responsibility, it is within the organization's jurisdiction to mandate the level at which someone can compete. I think I failed to do so.

On a couple of "lighter points" --

1. So, yes, I was the person who commented about the lack of trainers. When asked to stand up, I mentioned that I was so short no one would be able to tell if I did stand up. That's me.
   
2. I nominate as the absolutely MOST HILARIOUS moment of the entire weekend: David was talking this morning, and making a serious point. He said, "We need to talk about the 800-lb gorilla in the room" and exactly as he said it, CMP stood up. The timing could NOT have been more perfect, and David added "Oh, Mark, I'm not talking about you!" I cannot tell you how funny it was! Everyone broke out in laughter. Heck, I'd buy a DVD just to watch THAT again!

THANKS to all who organized, attended and participated!

So, I'm interested to hear anyone else's feedback too!