• 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

Doping Takes Center Stage At USEF Convention

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

  • #41
    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.
    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Easy-K...22998204542511
    http://www.easykeeperfarm.com

    I can ride my horses without a sharps container.

    Comment


    • #42
      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.

      Comment


      • #43
        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

        Comment

        • Original Poster

          #44
          People show outside the U.S. without dex. Can't show in Canada with dex. Just saying.

          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.

          Comment


          • #45
            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

            Comment


            • #46
              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

              Comment


              • #47
                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.

                Comment


                • #48
                  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

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    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/

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      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

                      Comment


                      • #51
                        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

                        Comment


                        • #52
                          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/

                          Comment


                          • #53
                            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

                            Comment


                            • #54
                              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

                              Comment


                              • #55
                                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!

                                Comment


                                • #56
                                  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/

                                  Comment


                                  • #57
                                    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...
                                    Your crazy is showing. You might want to tuck that back in.

                                    Comment

                                    • Original Poster

                                      #58
                                      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.

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

                                      Comment


                                      • #59
                                        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.
                                        EHJ | FB | #140 | watch | #insta

                                        Comment


                                        • #60
                                          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.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X