Accident at Tevis '09?

[gothedistance]

WTF?

@marta;4286118

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

What crap!! (Not you, marta! We love you!!) THERE WAS AN EYE WITNESS who was riding with Skip that clearly stated the mare stumbled and in the process of recovering fell off the edge of the trail and plunged to her death.

Black and white. He was there, saw it, and at the end of the ride emailed that information to close friends who sent that email onto me.

Whatever fleshes out from all this, there is NO question that the trail was the major contributing factor to the death of this experienced horse. The rider can only bless the heavens that he was leading her, not riding, otherwise this would have been something the AERC and the WSTR committee wouldn’t be frantically trying to sweep under the table as a “tragic accident”.

The AERC doesn’t evaluate trails, nor do they inspect them – their sole role is to merely provide sanctioning to independent individuals or organizations that agree to follow AERC rules in hosting/holding an endurance ride. That’s it. End of sentence. The trail is the sole domain of the organizers of the ride. As long as it meets AERC distances, it can be anything the ride manager(s)/committee wants it to be.

With this incident being such a clear indication of a dangerous trail - when an experienced 100 mile ride and 100 mile horse take ALL the precautions of walking, leading, going slowly, being careful in the dark, yet are put at a level of risk that is so extreme that a simple stumble could result in a horse falling to it’s death - I think what the AERC needs to do IN ALL CASES OF A HORSE DYING AS A DIRECT RESULT OF A RISKY TRAIL is immediately implement a outside review (NOT the ride manager or ride committees or AERC officals but an peer panel formed from other equestrian organizations) to examine the incident and give a determination of the trail before that trail can be used again.

Having the WSTR do a review of their own trail is like letting the fox count the chickens in the hen house. They CAN’T (unless they are supremely stupid!) say anything other than it was a “tragic accident” because admitting that the trail was so dangerous that a simple misstep would cause a death is thowing the door wide open to a major lawsuit. So of COURSE they aren’t going to say anything near the truth – that the trail is very dangerous in sections to the point of being fatal.

[myvanya]

It was a tragic accident and one that until more is known about it, cannot contribute much to our ability to prevent similar accidents if that is even possible.
I had a friend riding in the Tevis whose horse I helped train…and after hearing his story of his ride I feel that Endurance rides are definitely the extreme sport of equestrian sports. I think that to speculate as to the cause and nature of Ice Joy’s death before we have more information is just going to cause yet more dissension and cause divisions that are not needed. Could we perhaps express our condolences to the rider of Ice Joy and appreciate the achievement of all those who finished?
I think that until more information is known it will be a pointless exercise to determine what, if anything, should be changed, when right now most of what has been suggested is based on speculation. JMHO

[Beverley]

@gothedistance;4286327

THERE WAS AN EYE WITNESS who was riding with Skip that clearly stated the mare stumbled and in the process of recovering fell off the edge of the trail and plunged to her death.

Black and white. He was there, saw it, and at the end of the ride emailed that information to close friends who sent that email onto me.

Whatever fleshes out from all this, there is NO question that the trail was the major contributing factor to the death of this experienced horse. The rider can only bless the heavens that he was leading her, not riding, otherwise this would have been something the AERC and the WSTR committee wouldn’t be frantically trying to sweep under the table as a “tragic accident”.

With this incident being such a clear indication of a dangerous trail - when an experienced 100 mile ride and 100 mile horse take ALL the precautions of walking, leading, going slowly, being careful in the dark, yet are put at a level of risk that is so extreme that a simple stumble could result in a horse falling to it’s death - I think what the AERC needs to do IN ALL CASES OF A HORSE DYING AS A DIRECT RESULT OF A RISKY TRAIL is immediately implement a outside review.

Having the WSTR do a review of their own trail is like letting the fox count the chickens in the hen house. They CAN’T (unless they are supremely stupid!) say anything other than it was a “tragic accident” because admitting that the trail was so dangerous that a simple misstep would cause a death is thowing the door wide open to a major lawsuit. So of COURSE they aren’t going to say anything near the truth – that the trail is very dangerous in sections to the point of being fatal.

I utterly and completely disagree with you. If the ‘eyewitness’ account of which you speak was the one posted earlier in this thread, well, it was more like an ‘earwitness’ account- ‘heard the horse stumble.’ If indeed the eyewitness account (whether or not it’s the one I reference) is accurate (try surveying any law enforcement body regarding the reliability of eyewitnesses, generally), sorry, no, that does not lead to a conclusion that this section of trail is unacceptably dangerous.

And yes, there IS question as to the contributing factor of the trail- absent a necropsy, we have no idea whether the horse was having any metabolic/cardiac/other health issues at that moment, which may have caused a stumble.

As for your allegations that ANYBODY is trying to sweep the incident under the rug- utter and complete nonsense. By any reasonable standard, based only on the INCOMPLETE information and RAMPANT SPECULATION posted in this thread, this was indeed a TRAGIC ACCIDENT, nothing more.

Do we add you to the list of posters who has never laid eyes on the average Rocky Mountain horse trail? If so, you, too, have no idea what you are talking about. We DO have a poster who has weighed in here as having ridden sections of that trail. More posters who have competed in the ride would be a fabulous addition to our knowledge base.

In the meantime, you are shooting from the hip, and your gun is loaded with blanks.

[rainechyldes]

The mare stumbled, backed up to recover, and fell.
I have an email from Ashley over the incident, (Skip’s daughter- who was there) as well as one from Skip- both of which I don’t wish to put up, since they are very emotional emails, and I don’t think it’s right to put them here. (they were not sent to not just me alone, but to a group of several mutual friends,)As well as the segment I posted very early in the thread from one of our club riders who was right behind Skip.
I’m unsure how much more eyewitness one can get.

In the event a necropsy is done, - then we may have more information on if there was a causal reason for the original stumble. Other then that… I doubt we will ever know anymore then Skip and Ashley know.

As for sweeping the incident under the rug, no, I don’t think that is a valid point to make …yet. Meaning it’s only been a few days, I doubt they’ve had time to get all the facts and sit down and discuss them. I myself would like to give these people and this organization the benefit of the doubt, and that it will be discussed in due time. It behooves them to do so. Otherwise they face allegations of exactly this. I also doubt that Tevis ride management shrugged and went ‘oh well’ and walked away, already. Of course they would send out a condolences right off, wouldn’t you? But that doesn’t mean they aren’t about to investigate the matter- but they need concrete data, that takes more then what… 4 days to get I’m sure.

Now if it were already 2 years after the event, yeah I’d been wondering why nothing has been investigated yet. And would seriously question it, just as some are doing.

I have crewed Tevis 4 times, and I’ve ridden parts of the trail, but yet to compete, or ride it in its entirety-as I’ve never had a horse I felt who was ready for it. Someday, I might.

[Beverley]

@rainechyldes;4286692

The mare stumbled, backed up to recover, and fell.
I have an email from Ashley over the incident

But that doesn’t mean they aren’t about to investigate the matter- but they need concrete data, that takes more then what… 4 days to get I’m sure.

And you are not Go The Distance. And you have an email from a person who was right there.

And you’ve crewed the event, and ridden parts of the trail.

And I can’t recall disagreeing with anything you have posted on this matter, in particular that yes, Tevis is a tough ride, and making it easier (which, frankly, would involve moving it out of the mountains, in my opinion) so that riders of lesser capabilities can have their ‘Tevis experience’ is not a thing to consider.

And I haven’t seen or heard of any statements from those involved, or any others that made the ride for that matter, that the particular section of trail was ‘unacceptably dangerous.’

And I think we can agree that it’s unfortunate that the absence of facts is not stopping some posters from making ‘expert’ declarations and launching unfounded accusations, which is lovely for gossip purposes, but hardly productive for the horse sports, and the horses, we all love and enjoy.

[rainechyldes]

[QUOTE=Beverley;4286771]
And you are not Go The Distance. And you have an email from a person who was right there.

And you’ve crewed the event, and ridden parts of the trail.

And I can’t recall disagreeing with anything you have posted on this matter, in particular that yes, Tevis is a tough ride, and making it easier (which, frankly, would involve moving it out of the mountains, in my opinion) so that riders of lesser capabilities can have their ‘Tevis experience’ is not a thing to consider.

And I haven’t seen or heard of any statements from those involved, or any others that made the ride for that matter, that the particular section of trail was ‘unacceptably dangerous.’

And I think we can agree that it’s unfortunate that the absence of facts is not stopping some posters from making ‘expert’ declarations and launching unfounded accusations, which is lovely for gossip purposes, but hardly productive for the horse sports, and the horses, we all love and enjoy.[/QUOTE]

I wasn’t aiming my post at you Beverly, I was a bit disconcerted that I saw ‘shying’ etc posted, and some suppositions that have not been mentioned by either Skip, or Ashley, or the other riders nearby. We can ‘suppose’ I guess, but to have some things tossed out as fact, and adding hysteria to a sad situation- when we don’t have all the facts yet, other then eyewitness/rider accounts… makes the water way too muddy- I fully agree.

[tkhawk]

The only way to make that ride absolutely safe and foolproof is to move it down to the central valley below or maybe at least the foothills(that still has some oopsies). I love the Sierra mtns. On the east you have the high desert-which is pretty high and flat with some mountains and then you hit the Sierras, all mountains and if your drive down Highway 80, in about 75-80 mi you are coming down from 8000+ ft to pretty much sea level. Other roads have much higher elevations -but are not highways and the peaks are much higher.

In the 8yrs I lived in N. Cal I pretty much explored most of the back country there and put in a few rides there too. Lovely country-but just the nature of the mountains, unless you get into valleys , it is steep, rugged, tough terrain. Maybe if you wan’t to do a few miles ride, you can avoid certain stretches-but when you wan’t to do a 100 mi ride, certain stretches are going to be tough. There is no way around that. It comes with the terrain.

Also unlike arena disciplines,where the venue is under the control of management, here the trails are public trails -not under the control of ride management. You can’t make changes-you may clean up or reroute, but you can’t make changes without the proper authority.

You have some awe inspiring vistas there. One of my colleagues sprained her ankle just walking on the sidewalk. Tripped herself and sprained her ankle-now if that had happened in a high mountain trail, she might have tumbled down. But can you really blame the trail for that? Not saying the trail is not difficult-it is. It is tough and the margin of error is much lower than on flat. But it also is slowly coming downhill-if it was the reverse, that would be even tougher. They can change sections, but we must recognize, it is not “their” trail. The management just has the right to use it as does everybody else.

I am planning on a 100+ mi ride myself in the Sierras in a year or two. There is a trail in the High Sierras that goes around Lake Tahoe. Of course mine is a camping style ride so it may take up a few days, while we enjoy the vistas, relax and stuff. But that is no easy ride either-I know the risks . I try and mitigate it by going with a good guide and/or group , so I won’t have to be wandering around in country I don’t know. I like seeing the country and am in no rush-love a good canter-but can stop and stare at something scenic and wait there for an hour or more. My point is in that country, for a 100 mi ride, you would be hard pressed to find the entire trails that did not have difficult conditions. The lower elevations are much easier-but high up there is tough-unless you go to the high desert -then you have altitude and flat. But I doubt you would have folks lining up from so many different places to do that ride?

[gothedistance]

Beverely - I read “hysterical” and “expert declarations” and “launching unfounded accusations” in your posts, too. Such blind devotion to this ride. Guess in your eyes the trail can do no wrong. Whatever.

It will be interesting to see if, because of this death, the AERC becomes more involved in the issue of trail safety for sanctioned competition – something they currently do not really do.

But that is the nature of all sports bodies – they tend to be reactive rather than proactive. Eventing is the classic example - nothing really advanced regarding the safety of the sport without being predicated by some fatal, or near fatal, event. In some cases it took more than one incident. Seems like the cross country course was being littered with rotational falls, broken horses and broken riders before safety measures were taken to help prevent those that would become fatalities.

Overall, the situation is a very sad one, for the rider, certainly for the poor horse, and the reputation of the Endurance sport.

[goeslikestink]

[QUOTE=Equibrit;4285950]
Can anybody say wether the horse suffered some other event - like heart failure or such ?[/QUOTE]

that would do it - equibrit hors ehas heart attack of course it would stumble a drop downwards or backwards sidewards etc

i knew a horse that drop down on a gallops - heart attack there and then rider was unhurt
didnt suspect a thing just local bod going up local gallops -1/2 way u horse drops from underneath her

as regards to the trial – then something needs to change as in re routing so rides are safer for humans and horses

[Painted_Horse]

When a trail is on public land, like forest service land, sponsors of events often don’t have the ability to move the trail.

I sponsored and put on a CTR ride for 6 years. It’s evolved into a endurance ride. When I laid out the trails, the forest service allowed me to CLEAR the trails of dead falls or blow down trees. But I could not BUILD a new trail. The trails are where they are and if I didn’t like it, go some where else.

So sometimes re routing a trail is not an easy option. Especially now days when most managing agencies would rather just see you vanish from the back country vs seeing you build a new trail.

[PiaffeDreams]

I’ve not ridden Tevis, but I’ve ridden sections of the trail as I live in the area. I have crewed a couple of times including last Saturday for a student of mine who usually rides sweep.

Riding the Western States is one of the top things on my list of things to do with horses. You absolutely do have to have the right horse and the right preparation. In spite of it though, things can go wrong very unexpectedly.

BUT… for me… I always remember that

1. for the number of horses and riders who traverse the prominent sections of the WST like the ‘canyons’ on a daily basis in the good weather months there is a very low incident of accidents let alone fatal ones. For the past 2 months I’ve had more than one ‘non-Tevising’ student/friend a week out riding the canyons and they are always out with others… a small sampling of how many are out there even a good portion on greener horses who are just getting their first tastes of those serious climbs. Any time you drastically increase the number of riders you drastically increase the likelihood… on that 1 day, 100+ riders passed through that section. You cannot make any section 100% fatality proof… heck people die skiing on the bunny slopes.

2. these things happen in arenas too. The sandbox does not make riders or horses immune to the effects of gravity should something go wrong. I’ve seen horses trip doing flatwork and break a leg… rare yes, but it happens. I’ve had one of my own horses cantering along in the ring and stumble hard enough to do a serious face plant before somersaulting over and somehow managing not to land directly on me to crush me. She could have hit slightly differently and fractured something just as easily as any other slight deviation might have made it simply a drop to her knees. I had a pony when I was quite small cantering a wide easy corner to a jump simply lose her footing and fall flat on her side. I managed to not break my leg, but she hit her head hard enough she suffered a concussion. I can only trust my trainer’s insistence that I did not cause it… but who knows.

3. Horses can die taking a wrong step in the pasture… I can think of 3 people I know personally in varying locales who have lost horses to fracturing a leg after an exuberant buck in a pasture. I know of another horse who mistepped in a gopher hole in her pasture happened to find some underground metal object that subsequently severed much of her leg… heck think of what happened to poor Theodor O’Connor!

4. I personally know members of the Board of Governors of the Western States Trail, vets who officiate, vets who ride it, volunteers who work it, sweep it, maintain it, direct the competitive ride, and riders who ride to top placings etc…I don’t know one of them who I would not trust implicitly to use their best judgment to the safety of horses and riders in reviewing any inch of the trail for potential problems, ways to make it legitimately safer and a fair test of a properly prepared horse and rider.

There is no doubt in my mind that the rider in the tragic accident, Skip and his horse Ice Joy were properly prepared. By all accounts it sounds like it was an unfortunate accident that but for the grace of something divine could happen to anyone on any section of inclined trail.

As for guardrails… :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: seriously… I’m sure we’ve all seen what happens when even a trotting horse stumbles at a small solid obstacle on a x/c course and how tangled they can get. Geez… should we put frangible pins on those guard rails? Not to mention how many times horses simply plow on through even rather sturdy fences… And as a dressage instructor I can tell you how drastically better everyone rides on the quarterline OFF the little white PVC rail. Tell them to go on the rail and you have a mess as they don’t use their outside aids at ALL and the horse leans into the visual barrier.

Back to being serious, however, it would also be very wrong for anyone to think that riders do not care. I was standing down at Bath Rd. (not far from Prudence) waiting for my rider to come in to Foresthill and there was a distinct change in tone and mood for all the riders that came in who followed after Skip and Ice Joy. Everyone seemed somber and the first thing out of most of their mouths to their crews were “did you hear?” and then much sighing and consoling… no one was unaffected. No one was callous or blowing it off. The riders were concerned and will each come to their own conclusions as they get all the official information as to how they proceed with the sport. Everyone will take something from it to stay vigilant about doing what is best for their individual horse’s with each individual situation that comes along. Critical thinking will yield the best answers and responses. I guess some people just love to get the fires burning and cry “witch” though.

[gothedistance]

I’m sure everyone cares - riders, officials, bystanders. One would be a heartless beast not to care about the death of a horse.

We need to be very careful, however, in separating out pasture and leisure accidents vs ones that take place in sanctioned competition. They are NOT the same thing. When a competition takes place the risk falls on the organizers to ensure that the people who pay to take part in the competition are given reasonably safe venues in which to do that sport which will not result in fatal outcomes when due care is taken by the competitor.

Endurance is a tough call because the way the sport is set up now (at least in the continental US) requires that it gobble lots of miles of land with natural conditions prevailing. Each area is different - Fl & NJ have sand, Mid-Atlantic & New England has flat and old growth woodlands and even older mountains, NM & west has new mountains, rocks and canyons. Sometimes the trail is what it is, and fully traverable for the leisure riders – but that doesn’t mean it is also suitable for a long distance horse race. I do know the Nat’l Forest Service will give the green light to repairs and fixing of questionable trail - as long as it stems from a good working relationship of an organization and the NFS. Currently, the only one in the Endurance sport having the say-so on use of a trail in competition (outside the private owner/public body controlling the land) is… the ride management.

Again, AERC doesn’t get involved. They rely upon rider feedback if a trail is highly questionable, but I haven’t come across anything that showed they ever stepped in to suggest a trail not be used because it didn’t meet a reasonable level of safety for competitors. The AERC is pretty hands off when it comes to the actual ride trail itself – there aren’t a surplus of rides to begin with, and they aren’t about to start dipping into a bucket that is hard to get filled in the first place. They do have measures in place to help mitigate harsh weather (heat, humidity) but that isn’t a mandate and still is always left to the ride management and the head vet to determine if those measures need to be put in place…or not.

But for the say-so on the trail?? Nothing. Nada. Zip.

When the welfare of the horse is involved, I think the AERC should be FAR more proactive, rather than just benignly passive. To their credit they have instituted a trail building program to help ride managers plan and design safe competition trails, but this wisdom needs to be brought forward into the current arena of existing trails. Showing an active interest in the trail itself, and helping the ride managers ensure a reasonably safe venue, not only benefits the riders, their horses and their crews, but lessens the liability all around.

What needs to be implemented is a system or program in which both parties (sanctioning body and ride management) can evaluate the risks of the trail prior to competition and eliminate any venue that would present unreasonable risk to a competitor. Many ride managers (to their credit) do this as a matter of course to begin with, as they want to hold the type of competition that riders will attend again and again. To have a second body give approval to the trail should be part and parcel of the sanctioning. The competitors should be given the assurance they should expect that a trail, in and of itself, will not present a unreasonable liability in the face of due care.

The definition of a “tough” trail should never include the word dangerous.

[gothedistance]

PiaffeDreams wrote: I guess some people just love to get the fires burning and cry “witch” though.
Uh, darling – did you get a F in history, or are you seriously diss’ing Beverely and everyone else posting in defense of the Tevis trail?

If this post confuses you, better go back and re-read your history books to find out exactly who it was lighting the fires and screaming “witch”. :rolleyes:

[CosMonster]

I too will be interested to see the results of the investigation, but as far as the trails in general I will say this: I have not ridden there, but judging from the pictures and videos I’ve seen, I ride as dangerous or sometimes even worse trails on a regular basis. Like others have said, the simple fact is that if there is a ride in the Rockies, the trails are going to be dangerous at times. The other option is to stay in the foothills.

The ride management absolutely needs to do everything they can to minimize risk, and these accidents should be thoroughly investigated and if reasonable changes would have prevented it, those changes should be made. Riding in the mountains and endurance riding in particular has a certain level of inherent risk, though. That is unavoidable.

I don’t know if I agree that it is AERC’s place to regulate the safety of every trail. That seems to me beyond the scope of a governing body. Perhaps some sort of TD-like person to keep an eye out for extreme situations would be feasible and not a bad idea, although then you run into the problem of training them and making sure they are familiar with the normal risks of the different types of terrain.

Overall, from the accounts I have been reading, fully aware that I was not there and am simply engaging in rampant speculation like pretty much everyone else except for a handful of people right now, it sounds like this was one of those things that happens sometimes when you’re riding narrow trails with steep drops. My condolences go out to those involved.

[Beverley]

@gothedistance;4287789

The competitors should be given the assurance they should expect that a trail, in and of itself, will not present a unreasonable liability in the face of due care.

The definition of a “tough” trail should never include the word dangerous.

You seem to be saying that ride management should babysit the competitors and make guarantees that they cannot make. All ‘tough’ trails are by definition dangerous if any one of a wide variety of unpredicatable variables comes into play. There is no way around that. If would be competitors cannot accept that inescapable fact, they should not compete.

There are many, many factors involved in trail accidents that are way beyond the control of ride management. A trail that is pretty safe in dry conditions can become a nightmare with 5 minutes’ worth of rain. Ride competitors need to know, and accept that, and have the expertise to deal with it, or stay home. Really, this premise is a leap from the constant safety reviews we all agree are reasonable, to a guarantee that nothing bad will happy to a competitor. That can’t be made by any ride management, for any ride. If you want to go there- ride management is accountable up front for anything bad that might happen- you’ve killed the sport, because there isn’t a liability insurer out there that will take that on.

[Beverley]

@gothedistance;4287847

Uh, darling – did you get a F in history, or are you seriously diss’ing Beverely and everyone else posting in defense of the Tevis trail?

I think you might be having a low reading comprehension day.

[PiaffeDreams]

[QUOTE=gothedistance;4287847]
Uh, darling – did you get a F in history, or are you seriously diss’ing Beverely and everyone else posting in defense of the Tevis trail?

…[/QUOTE]

No, I did not get an F in history. I was a very solid student thank you.

I was hardly dissing Beverly in any way. I agree with just about everything she has written on the topic. You’ve grossly misunderstood the point of my comment and that is my fault for taking a vague stab at those who would like to blow events far out of proportion. There are those on this thread… at least one anyhow who simply likes to fan and ignite flames (Hence my little twist on ‘witch-hunting’.

That was all my comment was aimed at. The majority are discussing things rationally which is exactly why I commented. I appreciate the rational discourse rather than the emotional uninformed knee jerk reactions. Sorry that you misunderstood. There was no intent on my part to conduct a history lesson. Since you apparently have significant knowledge in that department I will defer any further historical comments to you and keep my sarcastic mouth shut.

[gothedistance]

Sorry PD, that really was a rather mean spirited comment I made. Shouldn’t feed the tiger. When history gets misquoted or twisted, intentionally or otherwise, it just drive me up the wall.

Just for the record, it was the established order that did the hunting and burning, targeting those who dared think different, or those that would suggest change.

[katarine]

[QUOTE=gothedistance;4288177]
Sorry PD, that really was a rather mean spirited comment I made. Shouldn’t feed the tiger. When history gets misquoted or twisted, intentionally or otherwise, it just drive me up the wall.

Just for the record, it was the established order that did the hunting and burning, targeting those who dared think different, or those that would suggest change.[/QUOTE]

do you work for Obama, or does vague cloak in dagger speak, just come naturally? LOL

[mp]

[QUOTE=katarine;4288208]
do you work for Obama, or does vague cloak in dagger speak, just come naturally? LOL[/QUOTE]

Corollary to Godwin’s law, anyone?