Shortly after our new federation`s formation in December, a number of people sent emails concerning the use of drugs in competition horses to the new president, David O`Connor. These authors told him they believed that drug use has become common practice to “enhance” the performance of our show horses.
And their criticism was directed toward our federation`s drug-testing programs and toward the penalties the federation`s Hearing Committee impose whenever someone is found to have broken the rules.
Our program may not be perfect, but some of us remember “way back when” there was no drug testing whatsoever. Not long after I arrived in the United States, just over 30 years ago, I went to my first horse show. This is what I observed: The flat classes, especially the various hunter under saddle divisions, were populated by beautiful Thoroughbreds shuffling along with their noses on the ground like anteaters and an absent look in their eyes. On their backs were hunched-over riders, frozen in position, holding the buckle, with the reins in a big loop. The slower and more earthbound the gait, the greater chance for a ribbon.
To a European, this was a mighty strange way to ride a horse! The animals looked drugged, they moved like they were drugged, and–guess what?-hey were drugged. And it seemed nobody thought anything about it!
My husband and I went to look for horses in Virginia. At one of the fully appointed sales barns, a groom, much like a nurse, carried around a tray full of injections, which he routinely gave to each horse a few minutes before going in the ring. And it was considered a brilliant way to cut down on warm-up time.
It sure was efficient, and nobody seemed to view this program as strange or unsafe. The concept baffled our minds.
Not long afterward, a few brave men and women in the American Horse Shows Association (people like Dick McDevitt and Ned Bonnie) took a stand against the routine use of performance-enhancing drugs, often at peril to their own safety. Death threats and burned-down barns and houses were some of the things these people had to endure for their convictions.
But are we drug-free? Well, no, but by comparison to the old days, both competitors and their horses are a lot better off.
Still, with increased sophistication our top levels require today, the so-called “sports medicine” appears to have entered the “gray zone.” Obviously, tranquilizers and stimulants, as well as painkillers, are in direct violation of our rules` principles. But then there are the multitudes of hormones, homeopathic remedies, herbs and feed supplements that may not enhance the performance and are not harmful, or could even be of value to the horse.
Some of these are considered “masking agents” and are, therefore, not allowed. There is a whole science of “do`s and don`ts” here, and I marvel at the expertise of some of my colleagues, who are very careful not to break any rules but still have top horses who are difficult to maintain.
The pounding a dressage horse has to withstand when he`s headed for the big time is to be compared with a top gymnast preparing for tough competition, and many injuries lurk on the way. It becomes necessary for the rider, trainer or owner to learn how to best handle every situation. The big question for each individual to ponder then becomes, where does sports medicine end and drug abuse begin?
We dressage folks have had a habit of congratulating ourselves on being a “clean” discipline. Not because we`re better people, but because our sport really doesn`t lend itself to drug use. Since regularity of the gaits is one of our holy principles, even the slightest disturbance is a disaster. Therefore, it`s difficult to mask lameness with a heavy dose of painkillers. A drugged mind could become a slow reactor in the ring too, and consequently it becomes really unpredictable to play with tranquilizers.
So, until now, we`ve been fairly smug about having very few drug cases. With the well-publicized international case of Ulla Salzgeber and a couple of high-profile national trainers being set down for use of illegal substances, I guess we have to admit we`re not lily white any more.
The letters to David didn`t just contain horror stories from the horse show scene; some also suggested how to improve the program. Today, when a trainer is found guilty, the penalties are usually a $500 to $5,000 fine and a month or two of suspension, plus a tiny notice in the back of the Equestrian magazine, which is easy to miss.
The first proposal was a substantially higher penalty for not only the trainers, but also the owners of horses that test positive. Sums from $15,000 to $25,000 were suggested.
Second, they suggested suspensions of at least a year. In addition, some letters advo-cated creating a permanent website where members could easily access the list of people currently suspended any time.
Most of all, the letter writers wished for more testing, such as routinely pulling blood from horses placing in the top three or six.
We have to admit that a penalty that really stings and brings the owner into the picture would create some valuable checks on human desire. Additional testing is, of course, a very expensive proposition. But why not always select the top horses? Such an agenda is neither unfair nor “politically incorrect” if it`s a routine procedure everyone is aware of. It`s common practice already at championships and selection trials, and I think it would be more useful than random selection, which works just about as well as it does in the airports.
Now the winners would have to prove they`re “clean,” instead of us wasting time and money on testing the amateur-owner training level horse at show after show. The poor thing will never win, but he has an uncanny knack for attracting the person with the bottles and the vials. This does not do the job of either detecting or deterring the big fish from illegal drug use.
Most competitors want a level playing field, and they support our USEF drug-testing program. There is, however, a fear in the back of every competitor`s mind that their horse could inadvertently test positive. One simply has to stay vigilant. Some substances remain in the system for a very long time. Even the most innocuous liniments, fly sprays or feed supplements can become a monster in the test tube.
The worst of all worlds would be to have your horse test positive, knowing you never did anything intentional to beat the system. I still wonder about the Ulla Salzgeber case. Surely, Ulla knew her horse was likely to end up near the top and be tested. Since she is neither stupid nor inexperienced, my feeling is she got caught in the “time warp” between necessary veterinary work and the World Cup Final. And, if that`s the case, I bet she went through some tough times we all want to avoid.
It`s a sad commentary on the present state of sportsmanship that drug testing has to have been introduced in almost all sports. Since we cannot set the clock back or uninvent the “designer drugs,” we must depend on these restrictions to ensure fairness to us and our horses, who cannot defend themselves when our ambitions overcome our sense of ethics.