Menu

Stay in Touch
Sign up for ENews
Subscribe Now

Unlimited access >

Menu

Accident at Tevis '09?

Endurance and Trail Riding
#61

(the trail needs to have) guards (installed) to keep horses who slip and trip from going “over the edge.”

Seriously???!

There’s your nanny gate state, boys and girls. There It Is.

Folks, some of you just need not ride trails where one might get hurt. Better stay on sandy soft flat ground, boys and girls.

I recall two FL ladies i met fretting how tough the trails are at Heart of Dixie in Troy. Troy is in south Alabama, folks, it is FLAT FLAT FLAT. Peanut and cotton country. Total elevation changes? MAYBE 30 feet? Not a rock to be found for miles. But the hills! Oh, the hills!!! Oh, the humanity!

Just cracks me up to no end.

#62

Absolutely. You pointed this out earlier, and I paid attention. Are there other posts I missed? At the time, I was responding in kind to what seemed to me to be exaggerations in the other direction. It was the tenor of the posts that I was trying to draw attention to. Instead, I got ya’all hot and bothered about the way I said it.

I believe people here are all upset about what happened to the horse, and nobody thinks “Tough Cookies.” What we disagree about is how to go forward. Some would like to call it an accident and move on, trusting that it was a fluke and statistics are on their side. Others seem to be calling for stricter standards, additional safety measures, etc.

What I’d like to see is for people to reserve their judgment either way until more information is available. And if it appears that the trail there has degraded, then we admit it, whether only one horse fell there or not. And if it hasn’t degraded and it was a fluke, then we admit it and let Tevis alone.

#63

Boy, I don’t. The one and only time I crewed for a 100 miler- the friend competing is a DVM- the vet passed her horse at the halfway point, I observed that the horse looked NQR, she took the horse back to the vet who declared ‘I have passed the horse to continue. If you want to withdraw, that’s your call.’

She withdrew the horse, based on my gut feeling. He crashed within about 5 minutes. Had she trusted the ride vet, he’d have had that crash about a mile down a skinny mountain trail, at 10,000 ft elevation. 11 liters of saline later he was fine- but to me it was an example of the need to know YOUR horse in particular, and know horses in general, and NOT place blind trust in ANYBODY ELSE.

Re your latest post- I do think the tenor of a good many posts in this thread are over the top- references to ‘horses falling off trails’ when there was only one, allusion to ‘cover ups,’ ‘sweeping it under the rug,’ etc when such has NOT occurred. As has been noted- AERC routinely investigates each fatality, ride organizers in general, and Tevis in particular, DO check out their trails before each year’s ride, and you can have all the safety standards in place you want- freak accidents are still going to occur. So count me among those NOT calling for stricter standards or additional safety measures. Instead, count me among those calling for the participants themselves to take greater accountability for themselves and their horses and the quality of their own preparation. Really, truly, not just in horse activities, I’m just plain tired of people expecting to be babysat and coddled and catered to.

#64

Yeah, WE. ME. As a paying member of the AERC. My discipline. I pay fees to do endurance rides. I don’t want the discipline of endurance riding to be in the limelight with bad publicity.

Are YOU a paying AERC member? If your horse registered with the AERC? Do you pay money to compete at endurance events?

#65

NO, it has NOT occurred. I did not say that it did, and I don’t think anyone else here said it did either. I am saying that I hope the AERC pays attention to the fact that this is not the first time a horse has gone over a drop off on the Tevis ride. I hope they can INVESTIGAGE and SEE if there is anything they can do to add some extra precautionary measures. If there is not, then there is not. But I hope they investigate the possibility.

All deaths are investigated and reported by the Welfare of the Horse Committee. All I’m saying is that if WE as paying, voting AERC members don’t want the general horse population cracking down on our organization, we need to question whether the trail can be made safer.

I am not suggesting that trails should be flat, sandy trails that a 3 year old riding a shetland pony could complete. But I am saying that perhaps the Tevis trail could be improved in some way so that falling over a cliff isn’t part of the normal lineup of dangers. The ride can remain challenging, and prestigous without so much danger of going over if your horse takes one wrong step. Again, this isn’t a podunk trail rider out west on a week long trail. This is an international level competition in which riders are packed on the trail with people who are racing to win. You have some of the greatest endurance riders and horses in the world on the same trail as the “overweight, unfit women” as referenced in the Chris Martin article. The horses adrenaline is pumping, everyone involved is exhausted, hot, hungry, thirsty. I think the danger is greater for a bad accident during the Tevis ride than say Suzie Q out for her 18 mile pleasure ride along a mountain facing. Suzie Q is probably riding with people of her own experience level, with the same goal in mind - to have fun, to be safe, etc.

I’ve been on the endurance trail with the nicest people you could imagine, and then some who are more rude, and rough because they’re out there to race and to win.

We have a couple of trails here with drop offs. Not 600 foot cliffs, but you could easily flip end over end a few times before hitting the bottom. We go slow, we ride during the day when we can see. Our horses are not exhausted. We aren’t racing. We aren’t packed up with 5 horses in front of us and 15 behind us.

It is a similar type of “dangerous trail” but the circumstances are completely different, and I think therefore somewhat safer.

As has been noted- AERC routinely investigates each fatality, ride organizers in general, and Tevis in particular, DO check out their trails before each year’s ride, and you can have all the safety standards in place you want- freak accidents are still going to occur. So count me among those NOT calling for stricter standards or additional safety measures. Instead, count me among those calling for the participants themselves to take greater accountability for themselves and their horses and the quality of their own preparation. Really, truly, not just in horse activities, I’m just plain tired of people expecting to be babysat and coddled and catered to.

I take chances when I ride too. Last year I rode Sweets over the top of a gravel quarry where the trail was about 12" wide with a steep drop on either side. I was scared sheeetless. But I dropped the reins on her neck and trusted her to get us across, and she did. On that section of trail, you have an option to do a bypass that is much safer for those who don’t want to be too risky.

But the difference is that this is not an international level event that is publicized, televised, sanctioned, documented on YouTube, Facebook, other websites and horse journals, reported about in the AHA magazine, etc…

All I’m saying is that when our organization is out there in the public eye like that, people might crack down on us if the organization doesn’t make some reasonable attempt to make it appear that they did everything they could to mitigate the risk of serious injury or death.

#66

[QUOTE=Auventera Two;4285068]
But I am saying that perhaps the Tevis trail could be improved in some way so that falling over a cliff isn’t part of the normal lineup of dangers…[/QUOTE]

From the photos, videos and my own experience of mountainous areas, I do not believe that the Tevis trail would be considered by most to be “improved” if what you are suggesting (barriers, from a previous post) were added. I also do not believe that there is ANY possible route in existence that would eleminate all risk of a horse falling off the trail without said “barriers”.

It does not matter how WIDE the trail is, a horse can spook and go over. The risk might be greater with a wider trail, actually, as the horse might feel it has a wider margin for error, riders might be more relaxed and not paying attention, that sort of thing.

How about we all simmer down, let them investigate, say what they say, and then we can draw our conclusions?

#67

Obviously, everybody feels strongly about this which can never be a bad thing. I am still very conflicted about it… I do wonder why exactly the trail shouldn’t be changed in the most dangerous areas though considering 1) the trail historically has been changed often for several reasons including safety 2) one must ride lot faster than in previous years to get through vet checks 3) certain dangerous areas (cal loop) were not even in the original route and 4) the public attention these sorts of deaths will continue to get. Its hard for me to accept the argument that it shouldn’t be changed just because it is the trail and life’s short, etc, though I am sure that in order to head down these trails, most of us subscribe to those beliefs. But I don’t know we would have the same attitude if we were to lose our horses in one of these most dangerous areas. There is such guilt felt when you lose your horse, your companion like that.

#68

OF COURSE IT IS. Just as the danger of a wreck is greater during a real horse race than it is when riders and horses are breezing on the same track. If you’re saying you think the race should have more stringent qualifications, great idea IMO (although lack of experience doesn’t appear to have been a factor in this accident).

But thinking you can lessen the risk of racing on trails like this to the degree that no horse or rider will fall is contradictory and impractical, given the terrain. AERC evaluates the trail, but if you enter this race, you’re taking a risk because of the kind of trail it is. You pleasure ride on these trails, you’re also taking a risk, albeit a lesser one. But still a risk and it’s choice of the individual.

I take chances when I ride too. Last year I rode Sweets over the top of a gravel quarry where the trail was about 12" wide with a steep drop on either side. I was scared sheeetless. But I dropped the reins on her neck and trusted her to get us across, and she did. On that section of trail, you have an option to do a bypass that is much safer for those who don’t want to be too risky.

But the difference is that this is not an international level event that is publicized, televised, sanctioned, documented on YouTube, Facebook, other websites and horse journals, reported about in the AHA magazine, etc…

All I’m saying is that when our organization is out there in the public eye like that, people might crack down on us if the organization doesn’t make some reasonable attempt to make it appear that they did everything they could to mitigate the risk of serious injury or death.

So YOU taking unnecessary risks is OK because no one other than your trail companions would know if you and your horse fall. It appears that your biggest concern is the reputation of your sport, not the safety and welfare of WSTR participants. Nice.

It was your choice to take the riskier route. You weighed the consequences and decided to go for it. Good for you. Just as it is the choice of the riders who enter the WSTR.

#69

[QUOTE=Kyzteke;4283009]
Soring is not an accident. People do it on purpose. Can’t compare.

And that brings up another problem – this idea that everything must be fixable and/or preventable and, if it DOES happen it must be SOMEBODY’S fault. If you break your leg in your back yard it’s YOUR fault? But if you take a bad step at work and it’s your EMPLOYER’S fault? Can’t it just be a bad step?

I’m sure there WILL be an “investigation” and much speculation (since I doubt anyone was filming the event) – chances are a tired horse and tired rider took a bad step and there you go.

Four years ago a friend of mine’s boss rode the Tevis on a horse my friend had conditioned. It was dark, they got off trail and fell off an embankment into the river. Managed to get back up to the trail, got reoriented by trailer volunteers and actually finished the ride – 15 minutes over time. That horse was pretty banged up (as was the rider), but he did recover. However one or the other could have easily died.

You are riding up to 24 hrs. straight on tough, challenging ground – the last part of the ride is done in the dark…geeze, it’s a wonder there aren’t MORE problems.

As for the general public – when it comes to horses, they are, by and large, total and complete idiots who don’t know horses, don’t know the sport and really don’t know the risks. Besides, as I mentioned before, everyone today seems to think Life should be risk-free.

It’s not and never will be. If you don’t want to take a risk like Tevis, which is obviously more extreme than just sitting at a desk (but FAR less risky than driving any freeway you care to name), then don’t do it.

But I am SO sick of everything being dumbed down…the value of the achievement dwindles to Zero.[/QUOTE]

Boy , you are kickin’ ass and takin’ names ! Good job !

#70

Good grief. My post was not addressed to you. But, as a matter of fact, you’d best go back and re-read the first two paragraphs of your first post (post #4) where indeed you did refer to ‘horses’ in the plural and a need to construct barriers.

I perceive that you have not ridden any trails in the Rocky Mountains. If you had, you would know that the geography is such that trails go where they can go, and there is no way to completely eliminate areas where horses might fall off of trails. It’s just what is, people who don’t want to face that risk just don’t ride on mountain trails.

Pogo was right, ‘we’- horse owners, are our own worst enemy, when we ‘demand’ a solution before even knowing whether there’s a problem. In general, your suggestions that safety improvement should always be a goal, is good on the merits- but your criticisms regarding Tevis in particular are not based on fact or knowledge. Get out there and ride the trail, plenty of AERC members in that neighborhood who will loan you a horse and take you for a ride- and then you will know more about the nature of Rocky Mountain trails.

#71

That is NOT what I said.

I am finished with this conversation because it has got unnecessarily nasty and hateful. It is a tragedy that this mare lost her life. It breaks my heart. Others on this thread are just as upset about what happened. I’m not the only one who has said that perhaps something should be done to minimize the chance of this happening again.

You’ve made my position out to be something it is not. Suggesting that I don’t care about the safety and welfare of Tevis ride participants? :eek: :no: That takes a lot of nerve. If anyone has read my posts for years, as you have, you would know that I speak pretty loudly on welfare issues because I am VERY much concerned about horses and what happens to them.

#72

Suzie Q here, chiming in. A2 if you’d open your eyes and quit chasing your tail, you’d see the hypocrisy in your OWN WORDS.

You disrespect Painted Horse, Beverly, etc etc in your Suzie Q net regarding mtn riding and hazards and safety. You disrespect their experience, their knowledge, their first hand KNOWLEDGE of western mtn trails. Why, I’m not sure.

You want barriers built so horses don’t fall off trails. But in the same breath it’s ok if you pick a dangerous route…when a safer, saner route was available? WHY? Presumably b/c you thought your horse was up to it. Same logic every entrant applies to any race or competition: I think we’re up to it, let’s do it. Why you think you have more sense about what to do than, say, oh I don’t know…people that RIDE these types of trails, know this terrain, KNOW more than you, that is the height of ego right there, folks.

Sounds like you want to protect innocent people from other aggressive riders? ummm…Isn’t that THEIR own job? If someone’s harda$$ enough to undertake 100 miles in 24 hrs in the mtns, I doubt they are also candya$$ enough to let an aggressive rider do what, exactly? shove them off a trail? Is that where your nannygate vision sends you? If THEY let that happen- shame on THEM. Not the organizer, not some anonymous glob of ‘those people shouldn’t have let this happen!’ Hells bells for that matter- think about this guys, think of the relative safety of traveling in numbers- horses in a pack follow a good horse in front of them, they keep moving, clicking along. Not much to spook at, they get in that clicking along groove.

So, you just can’t STAND it. You can’t be wrong, you can’t admit you have no clue how stupid the idea of guardrails?!?! is on stretches of these trails. You are hearing this from fellow endurance riders, but no matter, you’re smarter than everyone else. I tell you what, it’s funny as can be to me: You can’t stand me, but you can’t stand being corrected in general even more.

You’re wrongheaded on this, ma’am.

Signed,
Susie Q :slight_smile:

PS: From your first post before you delete it to hide the lunacy of your rantings:

[I]It took me a while to be able to put this post together because I am so angry I could scream. There is NO EXCUSE FOR THIS. Endurance is a dangerous sport, and the Tevis ride is the most dangerous of all, but seriously, some sections of this trail need to be re-routed, or barriers erected to help protect horses and riders more.

Sure, it’s macho to beat your chest and shout “Raarrrrrh!!! We made it!!” But seriously, when horses DIE on this trail… we have to change something.

I long for the day I can ride that trail. Everything I do with my horse is aimed at the day we’ll do 100 mile rides, and the thought of doing Tevis gets me teary eyed and emotional. But if this isn’t fixed, there won’t be a Tevis for me to ride because public outcry will have the ride shut down.

Something has to be done. [/I]

That’s what most of us disagree with. Nothing more than what the organization already does, needs to be done.

#73

[QUOTE=Kristiesunny;4284760]
WE, We in the limelight, we as in who we? You we? Oh Please.[/QUOTE]

Are you actually reading this thread, or just stalking A2.? I vote for stalking since you didn’t actually contribute anything to the thread.

#74

We fight the ‘ride too tough’ thing here as well due to the simple topography of our region. Our rides consist of going up… going down… rinse and repeat.

I think there is another issue at work, even here on this thread we are probably dealing with two distinct sets of rider types. The ones who want the 2 track flat straight ride, to post the absolute fastest time on their Arab racehorse, and the rider type who is more interested in the ‘endure’ aspect of the sport. How to combine those two desires would never be an easy thing.

Accidents happen, so do incidents where the rider/horse/trail is obviously at fault. In this case, it’s really hard to say this is a purely a trail issue. Skip was leading his horse -the horse stumbled. So does this make it a trail fault, or a horse fault?

So many ifs and buts here: If Ice Joy had stumbled in another spot, would the result have been different or the same? Can we even manage to frame an answer to that? I can’t.

There is an inherent risk in any sport, equine sports in particular. Many non endurance types think that endurance horses aren’t ‘real’ horse athletes, they just mosey down the trail out back of the barn- those of in the sport know that the truth is far different.

The question becomes what do we(we as in endurance riders) consider acceptable risk. That is something that is different for each rider/horse combination. I ride in very rough country, (deadfall, roaring creeks, steep cliffs, bears, cougars, I’ve used my horse as a battering ram more than once in thick brush. etc etc)so acceptable trail risk for me,may be far different then someone who rides on the Prairies.

I think of Tevis as a higher risk ride. Does that mean it should be culled? No, I think it means that its appeal is aimed more towards those riders who have the horses with that skill level and ability. Tevis has always had a high pull/completion ratio for this very reason. It’s one heck of a ride challenge. Can evey rider/horse do it? No. Should every rider/horse be able to do it - well I don’t agree with that either. That’s like saying PSG tests should be changed to w/tc/ both ways around the ring so every rider/horse can win a gold medal at the Olympics in dressage.

In any sport, there is an elite section. I think it would do a huge disservice to remove the elite rides from endurance just to make it ‘dumbed down’ as someone said.

#75

Can anybody say wether the horse suffered some other event - like heart failure or such ?

#76

[QUOTE=Auventera Two;4285728]
That is NOT what I said.

I am finished with this conversation because it has got unnecessarily nasty and hateful. It is a tragedy that this mare lost her life. It breaks my heart. Others on this thread are just as upset about what happened. I’m not the only one who has said that perhaps something should be done to minimize the chance of this happening again.

You’ve made my position out to be something it is not. Suggesting that I don’t care about the safety and welfare of Tevis ride participants? :eek: :no: That takes a lot of nerve. If anyone has read my posts for years, as you have, you would know that I speak pretty loudly on welfare issues because I am VERY much concerned about horses and what happens to them. [/QUOTE]

Yes, I’ve read your posts over the years. And you have pointed out things that should change. But in this instance, you’ve inadvertently pointed a finger back at yourself.

You proudly write about taking a risk with your horse, then imply others shouldn’t be trusted to do that. Plus, since your risk-taking isn’t in the public eye and there won’t be a public outcry against endurance racing if your horse stumbles and falls, that makes your risk-taking somehow more acceptable. Sorry. You can’t have it both ways. It’s either OK to take risks on technical trails you believe you and your horse can handle … or it isn’t. Whether the world finds out (and thinks you’re crazy) or not is macht nichts.

Stomp off if you want (another hallmark from past threads), but I wasn’t being nasty and hateful. Just pointing out the faulty logic.

ETA – what rainechyldes said. Acceptable risk varies widely from horse to horse and rider to rider. I’m not an endurance rider, but I’ve ridden in the Rockies. Whole 'nother ballgame for this flatlander. If I’d known about some of those drop offs before we got started, I would have run away screaming. :lol: But they were beautiful rides, and I’m glad I took the “risk.” :wink:

#77

[QUOTE=Equibrit;4285950]
Can anybody say wether the horse suffered some other event - like heart failure or such ?[/QUOTE]
I haven’t heard if a necropsy is being done or not. The information so far is the stumble caused a fall, and a broken leg and a shattered skull.

#78

from reading about the accident on other boards

it sounds like the mare spooked and lost her footing (when she backed up?).

you know they do that sometimes, spook that is :winkgrin: they have their flaky moments. it sucks when that flaky moment happens on a side of a mountain but that’s a risk trail riders take on daily. even when i’m riding along a local road i take a chance that my mare might spook at the least opportune moment and get tangled up with a passing car or truck.

#79

Do I remember reading some years ago that modifications were made to one of the bridges?
Am I confusing “no hands” bridge and “swinging” bridge? Seems to me something changed with “no hands” bridge - like rails were added?

#80

one of the changes was that

you now have to walk your horse over the swinging bridge (used to be able to ride over it).
i’m sure there were others but this is the only one i know of specifically.

Get your Digital Subscription here - only $21.95 / year

Subscribe here
See gift options

Sign up to our monthly newsletter!

By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.

Copyright © 2023 The Chronicle of the Horse