• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Equine Canada Statement and backlash from Eric Lamaze

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Rocky XVI View Post
    Three cheers for Akaash Maharaj for taking a public stand on this issue. If you didn't read it above, here it is again:

    http://www.maharaj.org/blog/2012_08_08.shtml
    even a 5 year old could grasp the particulars elucidated by Maharaj..... well written and factually based philosophy.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by rodawn View Post
      Any cut, bruise, scratch will cause a rush of blood flow to the area. This is required for the wound to heal. You can run your fingernail across your skin to scratch without fully penetrating the skin or drawing blood, and you will have a red streak on your skin. Thermography will show a flush of hot there. It's a natural and required reaction. Thermography in and of itself is insufficient to determine lameness.
      I understand all of this, and it is exactly my point. Tiffany's horse was disqualified, with no jog or other determiner of lameness, because of a tiny cut on his coronary band. My question was why this test is not used in eventing between XC and stadium, if their concern is indeed the welfare of the horse. And because it is at that point that an eventer might be motivated to hypersensitive their horse, so why not look for it if THAT is the true reason for the test.

      I am certainly not targeting eventers, I have many eventer friendss. I am merely trying to illustrate how ridiculous FEI's reasons for the test are n how it is currently administered, and it seems to target only SJ.
      Laurie

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Glimmerglass View Post
        Never thought I'd see the day that was said about Eric. He was banned twice by Canadian sport officials after testing positive for cocaine before the 1996 Games in Atlanta and then testing positive for ephedrine before the 2000 Sydney Olympics, for which he was handed a lifetime ban. That was revoked later.
        He made some serious mistakes, but that was quite a few years ago, he has turned his life around, so I think he is to be commended for that. It would have been much easier to just continue on a path of self destruction.

        I am not sure whether I agree or not with his decision not to participate on the Canadian team. Does he own his own horses or are they owned by clients? If clients, then I think he would need their support, perhaps they might not be as willing to withhold their horses from team appearances.

        Comment


        • Of course the rule needs to be there, and almost all rules are designed to impact those who are looking for an unfair edge, but that simply does not excuse a process that clearly is not working. Exactly how is it useful to make excuses for a bad process because of bad actors? If that's the case we can just go half assed on ALL rules.
          Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Isabeau Z Solace View Post
            You know, honestly, a lot of the blame belongs on the shoulders of the yahoos who have been playing 'fast and loose' so as to require the implementation of this rule in the first place.

            I have personally known a retired GP horse that had been 'fiddled' with (had caustic substances applied to it's legs to prevent rail hits) in the stall so much, that you couldn't catch the damn animal in it's stall.

            There is a reason these protocols have been enacted. It's because greedy, dumb a$$es have been cheating (and abusing horses) for the sake of GP placings. I agree that the FEI needs to try harder to be fairer to riders at this time.

            But lets face it, they are in this position because jerks have made it necessary. Those jerks are the one's really at fault.

            There are lots of jerks in all the disciplines, but they haven't created an unfair, capricious test for them. I do agree, however, that maybe one of the flags to test a horse should be his unwillingness to have his front legs touched.
            Laurie

            Comment


            • Originally posted by crackerjack View Post
              In my lowly very unimportant amateur rider mind I certainly don't think he's acting like an a-hole... or running off his mouth.
              That was probably in response to my post. That was certainly my first thought (and I'm definitely a very unimportant amateur rider), but I don't think it was a completely hotheaded, knee jerk reaction, and I don't think he was deliberately trying to be jerk. The more I think about it he's probably one of the few brave enough to say what needs to be said. He's had lots of practice with the media so probably thought thought it through at least a little before just spouting off, although it was very clear he was disgusted (as it seems are so many people).

              I honestly wish more people were outspoken like that instead of trying to be politically correct and not ruffle any feathers. Part of the reason there is the rule is because people don't speak up enough (but that's a whole other thread entirely I suppose). I've got a ton of respect for the guy for being so gutsy, and standing tall and proud after all the crap he's dealt with. It'll be interesting to follow the story that's for sure. Glad to see EC is listening.
              "Those who know the least often know it the loudest."

              Comment


              • If you were really worried about the welfare of your horse you would be applying grease to the front of his coronary band to prevent nicks and bumps - just like the eventers do.
                ... _. ._ .._. .._

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Isabeau Z Solace View Post
                  You know, honestly, a lot of the blame belongs on the shoulders of the yahoos who have been playing 'fast and loose' so as to require the implementation of this rule in the first place.

                  I have personally known a retired GP horse that had been 'fiddled' with (had caustic substances applied to it's legs to prevent rail hits) in the stall so much, that you couldn't catch the damn animal in it's stall.

                  There is a reason these protocols have been enacted. It's because greedy, dumb a$$es have been cheating (and abusing horses) for the sake of GP placings. I agree that the FEI needs to try harder to be fairer to riders at this time.

                  But lets face it, they are in this position because jerks have made it necessary. Those jerks are the one's really at fault.
                  Ding, ding, ding we have a winner. That's exactly why the rule was implemented. So there are a lot of other folks Eric et al should be angry at, not just the FEI and EC.
                  "Those who know the least often know it the loudest."

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Equine Studies View Post
                    Ding, ding, ding we have a winner. That's exactly why the rule was implemented. So there are a lot of other folks Eric et al should be angry at, not just the FEI and EC.
                    No one's expressed outrage at the rule.

                    The outrage is at how the rule is applied, the lacksadaisical manner in which the testing is completed, the lack of thoroughness (not trotting out the horse when it is clear that this case was NOT one of equine abuse), and the lack of appeal process (which means there is no way to hold the FEI accountable for THEIR decisions).

                    The additional outrage is towards our national governing body for their abhorent lack of support for our riders and team.

                    The rule is good. The application of it, testing procedures, and lack of appeal process requires serious review and revamping.
                    *&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&
                    "Show me the back of a thoroughbred horse, and I will show you my wings."
                    &*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&*&

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by BoldChance View Post
                      No one's expressed outrage at the rule.

                      The outrage is at how the rule is applied, the lacksadaisical manner in which the testing is completed, the lack of thoroughness (not trotting out the horse when it is clear that this case was NOT one of equine abuse), and the lack of appeal process (which means there is no way to hold the FEI accountable for THEIR decisions).

                      The additional outrage is towards our national governing body for their abhorent lack of support for our riders and team.

                      The rule is good. The application of it, testing procedures, and lack of appeal process requires serious review and revamping.
                      ^^ YES ! ! ! ! ! ! !
                      Practice! Patience! Persistence!
                      http://www.mariposasporthorses.com/
                      https://www.facebook.com/MariposaSportHorses/

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by BoldChance View Post
                        No one's expressed outrage at the rule.

                        The outrage is at how the rule is applied, the lacksadaisical manner in which the testing is completed, the lack of thoroughness (not trotting out the horse when it is clear that this case was NOT one of equine abuse), and the lack of appeal process (which means there is no way to hold the FEI accountable for THEIR decisions).

                        The additional outrage is towards our national governing body for their abhorent lack of support for our riders and team.

                        The rule is good. The application of it, testing procedures, and lack of appeal process requires serious review and revamping.
                        Yes but there would be no need to complain about how the rule is implemented, if there were no need for the rule at all. There are many individuals, groups and governing bodies to be mad at here that's for sure.
                        "Those who know the least often know it the loudest."

                        Comment


                        • I think the horses are partly owned by Eric (as they had to show Canadian ownership to be able to compete in the Olympics), but that does not prevent Eric from competing as an individual in Europe, in the States or in Canada. He just would not be part of the Canadian team. To much to lose for EC and for Canada. And I know it would hurt Eric not to represent Canada as he is a staunch Canadian. BUT, still I think he had to make the point and I hope he will be in talks with EC and will be satisfied with their about face! Good on him!! If I were Tiffany, I would be so proud to have such a coach and friend!!

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by lauriep View Post
                            I understand all of this, and it is exactly my point. Tiffany's horse was disqualified, with no jog or other determiner of lameness, because of a tiny cut on his coronary band. My question was why this test is not used in eventing between XC and stadium, if their concern is indeed the welfare of the horse. And because it is at that point that an eventer might be motivated to hypersensitive their horse, so why not look for it if THAT is the true reason for the test.

                            I am certainly not targeting eventers, I have many eventer friendss. I am merely trying to illustrate how ridiculous FEI's reasons for the test are n how it is currently administered, and it seems to target only SJ.
                            At FEI levels, eventers jog for soundness before SJ. Not having any experience with intentionally sensitizing a horse (I have a chestnut TB mare, she's sensitive enough already, thank you!), I wonder if jogging before each day of competition would be enough to show evidence of sensitization? My understanding is that it's similar to what's done with the Big Lick horses, so I would think it would effect the movement enough to be obvious, right?

                            While I don't disagree at all with the intent of the rule, in execution, it seems to be proving more than a little lacking. Perhaps starting by implementing a jog, and then doing as the eventers do and examining the horses that look NQR would be a better way to go.
                            A Year In the Saddle

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Equibrit View Post
                              If you were really worried about the welfare of your horse you would be applying grease to the front of his coronary band to prevent nicks and bumps - just like the eventers do.
                              Huh? They do that for Stadium Jumping? Funny I have never seen that.

                              And tit-for-tat. If eventers really cared about the welfare of their horses, they would be clamouring for a sensitivity test between x/c and sj. I am sure there are any number of horses who have hit x/c jumps hard enough to be sensitive to constant prodding to their legs; obviously that is now the criteria for not being able to compete. The FEI has clearly shown that a horse does not have to be jogged to be eliminated. Sensitivity to probing and thermal scans are the new, higher level of judging soundness. Oh, and I forgot about the thermal scan. Any heat in a leg? Oh dear,it is cruel to ask a horse to jump if so.

                              We would see just how the eventing community feels about that!

                              Until then, eventers must be a callous bunch to not pull their horses after x/c if they perform the sensitivity test and discover that their horse reacts.

                              (Sarcasm here people --- please do not call me out on what I have written.)
                              "He lives in a cocoon of solipsism"

                              Charles Krauthammer speaking about Trump

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Lord Helpus View Post
                                Huh? They do that for Stadium Jumping? Funny I have never seen that.

                                And tit-for-tat. If eventers really cared about the welfare of their horses, they would be clamouring for a sensitivity test between x/c and sj. I am sure there are any number of horses who have hit x/c jumps hard enough to be sensitive to constant prodding to their legs; obviously that is now the criteria for not being able to compete. The FEI has clearly shown that a horse does not have to be jogged to be eliminated. Sensitivity to probing and thermal scans are the new, higher level of judging soundness. Oh, and I forgot about the thermal scan. Any heat in a leg? Oh dear,it is cruel to ask a horse to jump if so.

                                We would see just how the eventing community feels about that!

                                Until then, eventers must be a callous bunch to not pull their horses after x/c if they perform the sensitivity test and discover that their horse reacts.

                                (Sarcasm here people --- please do not call me out on what I have written.)
                                Sarcasm noted, but thanks for getting what I am trying to say.

                                Because stadium can make or break a big competition for an eventer, I cannot believe that they have never "lit up" their horse prior to The stadium phase. Love to be proved wrong, but I don't think so.

                                The REASON for the test, and the idea, is fine. The implementation sucks. And no, I am not mad at the nameless people who made this test necessary, any more then I am "mad" at those who made drug testing at shows necessary. I AM mad at them for using more and more dangerous drugs, however.
                                Laurie

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by crackerjack View Post

                                  The statement was oh so typically Canadian- didn't want to anger the powers that be... rather than causing a fuss to defend one of its own. Some of these reactions are also typically Canadian - oh Eric's having a temper tantrum- he shouldn't be making all this noise. No he's doing the right thing and actually defending a fellow athlete from a pretty major snub by their own organization.
                                  I thought that too but didn't want to say so for fear of offending Canadians! I guess I lived there long enough for some of it to rub off on me.

                                  Comment


                                  • reported
                                    Nevertheless, she persisted.

                                    Comment


                                    • Did anyone catch the update? I got this in the email:

                                      CLARIFICATION ON THE STATEMENT FROM EQUINE CANADA REGARDING THE DISQUALIFICATION OF VICTOR, CANADIAN SHOW JUMPER FROM THE 2012 OLYMPIC GAMES

                                      August 8, 2012, London, England - Equine Canada has issued the following further statements regarding the International Equestrian Federation's (FEI) hypersensitivity testing protocol.

                                      "Equine Canada agrees that the FEI's hypersensitivity protocol is in place to protect the welfare of the horse and the fairness of our sport," states Mr. Gallagher.

                                      "Victor sustained a superficial cut on the front of the left front coronary band," states Canadian Olympic Team Veterinarian for Jumping Dr. Sylvie Surprenant. "In our opinion the horse was fit to compete as he showed no signs of lameness. However the FEI hypersensitivity protocol is such that if the horse is sensitive to the touch, regardless of the cause, the horse is disqualified. While the FEI rules for the hypersensitivity protocol were followed, we believe that there should be a review of this protocol."

                                      "We feel that further discussion of the hypersensitivity protocol needs to take place in order to ensure a balance is reached between the philosophical intent and the real-world application. Canada looks forward to playing a role in those discussions along with other nations within the FEI family," states Mr. Gallagher

                                      "Equine Canada wants to make it clear that there is absolutely no accusation of any wrongdoing on the part of our athlete Tiffany Foster or any member of the Canadian Team. Equine Canada fully stands behind and supports our athlete Tiffany Foster, as well as our entire team. Everyone at Equine Canada and the Canadian Olympic Team are disheartened and extremely disappointed over the premature ending of Tiffany Foster's Olympic dream, and remain fiercely proud of both her incredible sportsmanship and athletic achievements," states Mr. Gallagher.

                                      Read more on the FEI's hypersensitivity protocol.

                                      Seems they want Eric back.

                                      Comment


                                      • Wait, need clarification.

                                        If a dressage horse or eventing horse had the same superficial scratch on its coronet band, would it be tested for sensitivity ? Or do the FEI vets only look at show jumpers....

                                        Surely there are some dings and scrapes on eventers...

                                        Comment


                                        • Is there any scientific evidence that the thermography plus manipulation (poking) the offending limb up to and around 50 times by various people (as reported by Lamaze and McLain) is the state of the art perfectly infallible way to detect a hypersensitive condition?

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X