• 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

Chronicle report on USEF Town Hall Meeting in Wellington

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

  • #41
    Originally posted by ybiaw View Post
    I really thought Chris Kappler brought up a good point - if the FEI is the International standard, why don't we just follow FEI guidelines and zero tolerance policies across the board?
    Because our shows aren't run under FEI rules. Our shows are run under USEF rules as they are our governing body. An international standard and a national standard are two very different things.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by War Admiral View Post
      Well... Among the many (ahem!) lifestyle changes that trainers, owners and exhibitors might be undergoing in the near future, I would submit y'all are going to have to spend a LOT more time handwalking.

      If you think back to the thread that was along the lines of "If you don't drug what do you do? [in terms of prep] - the preponderance of the answers were "I hand walk." That's a very physically low-impact way to get the stupids out of a horse. It even works on greenies. Thing is, 15-20 mins twice a day isn't going to do it. Your clients (and DO make your clients do it, or charge them treble for every groom that has to do it for them) are going to have to be out there w/ their horses for 4-5 *HOURS* strolling around, in order for it to be effective.
      Why?
      Change the rules so excessive time on the line is not needed.

      If the current judging standard contributes to the problem then change the standards.
      And by all means go after people like Scott Stewart who got picked up 3 times in a year for med violations. And after that he was the 'cover boy' on the USHJA magazine. LMAO.
      Nothing will happen because it's the BNT trainers and owners who are involved.

      And the original protocol for Adequan was a once a month IM shot.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by ybiaw View Post
        Multi-thinking is not your strong suit today!
        No kidding! *lesigh* (In case you're wondering, no, I'm not getting much work done, either....)

        I have 3 pages of notes from the meeting, and I'm hoping to put them into readable, non-chicken scratch format this weekend.
        I would absolutely LOFF to read these and I'm sure lots of others would as well. Again many thanks for your efforts! I think you may rest assured I'll be riveted by what turns up on the USEF Network, as well.

        I can relate to the proximity-induced stroke, despite the fact that way back decades ago as a junior I was sort of on nodding/speaking terms with him at the shows. I saw him at this past year's NHS and was WAY too shy to ask him to autograph my program, despite having no such fears whatsoever concerning anyone else I met, LOL!
        "The standard you walk by is the standard you accept."--Lt. Gen. David Morrison, Austalian Army Chief

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by ybiaw View Post
          I really thought Chris Kappler brought up a good point - if the FEI is the International standard, why don't we just follow FEI guidelines and zero tolerance policies across the board?
          If zero tolerance is the only way we can deal with some of these issues, then I would accept that. However, I don't think it's actually in the best interests of the horses or the sport. There are older horses who can go around happily and comfortably with an NSAID, and who get beneficial exercise and attention out of the deal while taking good care of beginner riders.

          FEI is high performance. High performance horses for high stakes with high wear and tear need to be 100% sound. USEF is overseeing walk-trot classes. Horses with physical limitations can do those classes without creating harm on their bodies.

          FEI *riders* are also not permitted medications. I'm not feeling the need to implement that for USEF.

          But, the medications administered need to be in and for the horse's best interest, and a horse who is sick or hurt does need to be withdrawn from competition.

          Zero tolerance can work against the horse's interests as well if the horse is denied needed or helpful medications solely to allow it to compete. I think Long's point that our horses are having long, safe careers compared to other nations is not one to dismiss lightly.
          If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by poltroon View Post
            If zero tolerance is the only way we can deal with some of these issues, then I would accept that. However, I don't think it's actually in the best interests of the horses or the sport. There are older horses who can go around happily and comfortably with an NSAID, and who get beneficial exercise and attention out of the deal while taking good care of beginner riders.

            FEI is high performance. High performance horses for high stakes with high wear and tear need to be 100% sound. USEF is overseeing walk-trot classes. Horses with physical limitations can do those classes without creating harm on their bodies.

            FEI *riders* are also not permitted medications. I'm not feeling the need to implement that for USEF.

            But, the medications administered need to be in and for the horse's best interest, and a horse who is sick or hurt does need to be withdrawn from competition.

            Zero tolerance can work against the horse's interests as well if the horse is denied needed or helpful medications solely to allow it to compete. I think Long's point that our horses are having long, safe careers compared to other nations is not one to dismiss lightly.
            I agree that there can be instances in which a gram of bute at 12 hour intervals can be beneficial for the older campaigner to keep them comfortable.

            Keep in mind, please, that these were not MY thoughts, but those of CK. I was merely stating that I thought they were good, interesting points.
            Adversity is the stone on which I sharpen my blade.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by poltroon View Post
              Let's walk through this.

              Dropping dead is bad whether or not it's within 12 hours of a class.

              IMHO, an injected medication - whether IV, IM, or IA - indicates an acute issue with a horse and for the sake of horse welfare - which is more extensive than merely dead/not dead - a horse that needs an injection less than 12 hours before a class IMHO should be seen and cleared by a veterinarian to compete. I welcome discussions and counterexamples, but we have to remember that the welfare of the horses is more important than our right to canter around for a ribbon.

              (I can see a veterinarian also using judgement about whether the treated horse is going in the Grand Prix or showing in hunter breeding classes.)

              Calming pastes and other concoctions are flat out illegal by USEF rules, whether or not they test. The mere intent of the administration makes them illegal. Also, they're not injected.

              Bute and Banamine are both available as oral formulations, and are most often given that way. Banamine is long acting, such that if you were using the injected form, > 12 hours would probably be desirable from the therapeutic point of view as well.

              So I'm still looking for a reason a trainer has to be able to inject a horse with anything less than 12 hours before a class without a veterinarian.
              A huge number of people routinely using calming pastes. One catalog company clearly states that their product doesn't test. At WEF, there is a banner hangimg ringside that advertises
              Perfect Prep.

              Comment


              • #47
                yes, isn't it ironic that Perfect Prep is an A list sponsor now???
                "You can't really debate with someone who has a prescient invisible friend"
                carolprudm

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by S A McKee View Post
                  Why?
                  Change the rules so excessive time on the line is not needed.

                  If the current judging standard contributes to the problem then change the standards.
                  And by all means go after people like Scott Stewart who got picked up 3 times in a year for med violations. And after that he was the 'cover boy' on the USHJA magazine. LMAO.
                  Nothing will happen because it's the BNT trainers and owners who are involved.

                  And the original protocol for Adequan was a once a month IM shot.
                  No, that was not the original protocol for Adequan. It has always, per the manufacturer and any knowledgeable vet who prescribes it, been a 28 day protocol of seven injections given every four days. And someone earlier included it in IV injections. It is IM and the reaction when someone accidentally hits a vein with it is not good.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by poltroon View Post
                    Zero tolerance can work against the horse's interests as well if the horse is denied needed or helpful medications solely to allow it to compete. I think Long's point that our horses are having long, safe careers compared to other nations is not one to dismiss lightly.
                    But do we know if that is true (that US show horses have longer, safer, careers compared to other nations)?
                    Janet

                    chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by S A McKee View Post
                      Why?
                      Change the rules so excessive time on the line is not needed.

                      If the current judging standard contributes to the problem then change the standards.
                      And by all means go after people like Scott Stewart who got picked up 3 times in a year for med violations. And after that he was the 'cover boy' on the USHJA magazine. LMAO.
                      Nothing will happen because it's the BNT trainers and owners who are involved.

                      And the original protocol for Adequan was a once a month IM shot.
                      And those that got up and spoke are always showering SS with compliments so who will they go after? some small trainer who gives a dose to keep up with the big guys? And the same characters gave tons of compliments to the robot like horses that were winning in the Hunter Derby. they should have tested those.

                      Comment


                      • #51
                        Originally posted by poltroon View Post
                        If zero tolerance is the only way we can deal with some of these issues, then I would accept that. However, I don't think it's actually in the best interests of the horses or the sport. There are older horses who can go around happily and comfortably with an NSAID, and who get beneficial exercise and attention out of the deal while taking good care of beginner riders.

                        FEI is high performance. High performance horses for high stakes with high wear and tear need to be 100% sound. USEF is overseeing walk-trot classes. Horses with physical limitations can do those classes without creating harm on their bodies.

                        FEI *riders* are also not permitted medications. I'm not feeling the need to implement that for USEF.

                        But, the medications administered need to be in and for the horse's best interest, and a horse who is sick or hurt does need to be withdrawn from competition.

                        Zero tolerance can work against the horse's interests as well if the horse is denied needed or helpful medications solely to allow it to compete. I think Long's point that our horses are having long, safe careers compared to other nations is not one to dismiss lightly.
                        FEI riders are not permitted to use certain specified medications, and those that mask them, lasix etc.. They certainly CAN use Ibuprophen, Tylenol, even Hydrocodone (though not Oxycodone). Technically you could have a stiff gin and tonic and Vicodin before your Olympic ride (not that many would choose to) and be within the rules.

                        I think the important point is ,that even if the medications allowed for horses are different between the FEI and USEF, the penalty for breaking the rules should be the same.

                        If USEF adopted the penalty structure that the FEI has in place, there would be fewer people willing to risk violating the USEF rules.

                        It doesn't need to be an "all or nothing" solution.
                        Last edited by skydy; Mar. 28, 2013, 05:12 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #52
                          Originally posted by MHM View Post
                          Because the FEI deals with the governance of horse sports at the highest levels. It is not set up to worry about what's best for a 20+ year old pony doing the short stirrup classes, or the older schoolmaster teaching the ropes to the umpteenth person starting out in the 2'6" hunter division.

                          Those animals can benefit from the responsible use of a little Bute or the like, just as I can benefit from the occasional Advil. Could I get through the day without it? Yes, but I will be more comfortable with it. Ditto for those horses.
                          OK, but once the rules permit "a little bute" for the benefit of the older schoolmasters, we find that the "highest levels" of USEF competion are ALSO being given bute, and it is not so clear that THAT is in the horse's best interest.
                          Janet

                          chief feeder and mucker for Music, Spy, Belle and Tiara. Someone else is now feeding and mucking for Chief and Brain (both foxhunting now).

                          Comment


                          • #53
                            Originally posted by mvp View Post
                            Here's your counter example: You want your adequan or other IV medication to be at its maximum level for the big class on Saturday. It's not Thursday and the day to give the stuff for that important class. But you also need to go in a "let him see the jumps and just get around" little class this afternoon.
                            Give it after the class, or 12hrs before the class.

                            Comment


                            • #54
                              So nice to see this in the Chronicle.

                              I'm wondering about this:

                              It’s the first in a series of seven nationwide town hall meetings called in the wake of several accidents and a New York Times article that pushed the issue of drugging show horses into the sunlight.
                              Can someone enlighten me on those 'several accidents'? More specifically, (1) what happened, (2) how the incident relates to drugging show horses and (3) what makes these incidents 'accidents' rather than 'consequences of drugging'?

                              Comment


                              • #55
                                Originally posted by Janet View Post
                                OK, but once the rules permit "a little bute" for the benefit of the older schoolmasters, we find that the "highest levels" of USEF competion are ALSO being given bute, and it is not so clear that THAT is in the horse's best interest.
                                Yes, and that's why the whole D&M thing is so fraught with complications. It's not easy to write and enforce rules that allow responsible horsemen to use reasonable medications to help their horses and also prevent bad horsemen from doing unreasonable things to their horses.

                                I do think the penalties should distinguish between the use of allowed substances that test over the limit and banned substances. It is possible to make an honest mistake that results in a positive test for an allowed substance. The banned stuff- not so much.

                                And I still think there should be an easy way to check the USEF database for someone's history of past infractions, so everyone can make informed decisions about the people they choose to patronize.

                                Comment


                                • #56
                                  Originally posted by MHM View Post
                                  Yes, and that's why the whole D&M thing is so fraught with complications. It's not easy to write and enforce rules that allow responsible horsemen to use reasonable medications to help their horses and also prevent bad horsemen from doing unreasonable things to their horses.

                                  I do think the penalties should distinguish between the use of allowed substances that test over the limit and banned substances. It is possible to make an honest mistake that results in a positive test for an allowed substance. The banned stuff- not so much.

                                  And I still think there should be an easy way to check the USEF database for someone's history of past infractions, so everyone can make informed decisions about the people they choose to patronize.
                                  The FEI does distinguish between controlled medication and banned substance violations when considering sanctions.. There is no reason USEF can't do the same.

                                  I agree wholeheartedly that it should be as easy for people to look up those who have violated the USEF rules, it is easy find FEI rule breakers (and the list goes back for years) on the FEI website.

                                  Comment


                                  • #57
                                    Originally posted by skydy View Post
                                    The FEI does distinguish between controlled medication and banned substance violations when considering sanctions.
                                    Yes, I know. My point was that the USEF should do the same.

                                    Comment


                                    • #58
                                      Originally posted by skydy View Post
                                      The FEI does distinguish between controlled medication and banned substance violations when considering sanctions.. There is no reason USEF can't do the same.

                                      I agree wholeheartedly that it should be as easy for people to look up those who have violated the USEF rules, it is easy find FEI rule breakers (and the list goes back for years) on the FEI website.
                                      The USEF Hearing Committee already distinguishes between a violation involving a therapeutic substance and one involving a forbidden substance when they issue a fine or suspension. They also consider prior violations. If a plea agreement is reached rather than a charge going all the way to hearing, then the punishment may seem light but it is impossible to determine from the blurb on the website what factors led to an agreement in the first place.

                                      Comment


                                      • #59
                                        Originally posted by tricolor View Post
                                        The USEF Hearing Committee already distinguishes between a violation involving a therapeutic substance and one involving a forbidden substance when they issue a fine or suspension. They also consider prior violations. If a plea agreement is reached rather than a charge going all the way to hearing, then the punishment may seem light but it is impossible to determine from the blurb on the website what factors led to an agreement in the first place.
                                        Is that specified in the rulebook? MHM, I believe, is well versed in USEF rules.

                                        I think it would behoove USEF to have more clear cut procedures and penalties,and documentation of disciplinary actions, a la FEI.

                                        Anyhoo...the subject is finally being addressed in the public forum by USEF and that's a good step forward!

                                        Comment


                                        • #60
                                          I am all in favor of sanctions being much longer a la FEI. (That said, it seems that while the 2 year FEI suspensions have been imposed multiple times, my impression is that most if not all of those very long suspensions have been overturned in legal proceedings.) One month is kind of puny, short enough that people might not even notice.

                                          I also think that making the database of infractions searchable would go a long way. I understand that many people don't want it... but the rationale of self-protection is pretty hard to defend.

                                          I would also suggest that if we need changes to the Amateur Sports Act to allow USEF to appropriately protect the interests of horses, especially where the rights of a qualified international rider are not in play, that should be investigated and pursued.
                                          If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X