Andrew McConnon horse abuse

[Demerara_Stables]

@anonevent

" **Changes to GR838 Addressing Unethical Treatment of a Horse

"At US Equestrian, we fully believe that the care and welfare of horses, both inside and outside of the competition arena, must be held to the highest standards and levels of ethical behavior. Good horsemanship and a positive image of our sport is, now more than ever before, of critical importance to our social license to continue to operate our sport. It is the duty of each one of us to do our utmost to preserve and safeguard the integrity of our sport.

Individuals who engage in unethical treatment of horses—regardless of location—are compromising the integrity of our sport and endangering its viability, sustainability, and public perception at a time when all equestrian sport, including USEF-governed breeds and disciplines, is under increasing scrutiny.

Situations such as those that have come to light recently via social media are unacceptable. US Equestrian has heard your concerns and appreciates the courage it takes to report alleged incidents of cruelty to and abuse of our equine partners. We understand and share your frustration that, in many instances, we could not act on incidents that occurred outside of the competition environment.

Based on your feedback and conversations that occurred during our annual convention, the USEF Board of Directors approved revisions to GR838, the rule addressing cruelty and abuse. The revised GR838 will go into effect December 1, 2024.

||•||The revisions replace the phrase “cruelty to and abuse of a horse” with “unethical treatment of a horse” to more accurately reflect US Equestrian’s role as guardian of both sport and our horses.|

|•||Most significantly, the revised rule applies anywhere, regardless of whether the unethical treatment is in connection to or occurring at a USEF licensed or endorsed competition. ||

To be clear, this new rule does not mean that US Equestrian will be coming onto your property. We will not.

Rather, we will continue to rely on you to report incidents of unethical treatment of the horse. Once a report is received, US Equestrian will work diligently to interview witnesses with personal knowledge and authenticate any photographs, videos, or other physical evidence related to the alleged incident. This takes time. All allegations are taken seriously. While we are eager to hold wrongdoers accountable, fairness and the integrity of the process dictate that they have the opportunity to be heard and offer evidence in response.

The time has come for the US Equestrian community to strengthen our existing leadership on this issue for the betterment of horses and equestrian sport. This also means that each of us must model exemplary behavior at all times. We believe the revisions to GR838, coupled with the existing process and procedures, protect both our horses and our members.

Lead with us.

William J. Moroney
Chief Executive Officer"

Thank you very much for posting. This is a great thing to hear from USEF, and I’m hopeful they will actually put their money where their mouth is and follow through on these cases.

[FitzE]

But why the delayed effective date of Dec 1? Their own docs state that an extraordinary rule change takes effect immediately unless a different effective date is provided. I.e., if they had NOT set a date of Dec. 1, 2024, this rule would already be in effect. They had to actively create a situation in which it did NOT take effect immediately. If I were a member, I’d want a clear explanation of the rationale behind the delayed effective date.

Also, USEF, see your CoC which applies ‘at all times’. If you only look to your rules that address competitions and ignore your CoC, then I’m not surprised you found you had no reach in all these cases that happen outside competition. It’s like someone asking me to tighten a screw and I reach into my toolbox and pick up a hammer and tell them, ‘sorry, I can’t tighten a screw with this hammer here’ but they are looking in my wide-open toolbox at the screw driver I refuse to pick up. Madness! And dereliction of their duty to follow their own org docs and their duty to protect horses and their duty to protect the sport.

[skydy]

This is not news. The rule change was proposed early this year. The Chronicle had an article about it. https://www.chronofhorse.com/article/usef-proposes-rule-changes-strengthening-its-ability-to-punish-abuse-off-show-grounds/

It was approved in July. It will come into force in December.

https://www.usef.org/forms-pubs/UbdlK2wO6pI

FitzE is wondering why the wait.

ETA Sorry, meant for anonevent.

[Texarkana]

@anonevent

"**Changes to GR838 Addressing Unethical Treatment of a Horse

"At US Equestrian, we fully believe that the care and welfare of horses, both inside and outside of the competition arena, must be held to the highest standards and levels of ethical behavior. Good horsemanship and a positive image of our sport is, now more than ever before, of critical importance to our social license to continue to operate our sport. It is the duty of each one of us to do our utmost to preserve and safeguard the integrity of our sport.

Individuals who engage in unethical treatment of horses—regardless of location—are compromising the integrity of our sport and endangering its viability, sustainability, and public perception at a time when all equestrian sport, including USEF-governed breeds and disciplines, is under increasing scrutiny.

Situations such as those that have come to light recently via social media are unacceptable. US Equestrian has heard your concerns and appreciates the courage it takes to report alleged incidents of cruelty to and abuse of our equine partners. We understand and share your frustration that, in many instances, we could not act on incidents that occurred outside of the competition environment.

Based on your feedback and conversations that occurred during our annual convention, the USEF Board of Directors approved revisions to GR838, the rule addressing cruelty and abuse. The revised GR838 will go into effect December 1, 2024.

||•||The revisions replace the phrase “cruelty to and abuse of a horse” with “unethical treatment of a horse” to more accurately reflect US Equestrian’s role as guardian of both sport and our horses.|

|•||Most significantly, the revised rule applies anywhere, regardless of whether the unethical treatment is in connection to or occurring at a USEF licensed or endorsed competition.||

To be clear, this new rule does not mean that US Equestrian will be coming onto your property. We will not.

Rather, we will continue to rely on you to report incidents of unethical treatment of the horse. Once a report is received, US Equestrian will work diligently to interview witnesses with personal knowledge and authenticate any photographs, videos, or other physical evidence related to the alleged incident. This takes time. All allegations are taken seriously. While we are eager to hold wrongdoers accountable, fairness and the integrity of the process dictate that they have the opportunity to be heard and offer evidence in response.

The time has come for the US Equestrian community to strengthen our existing leadership on this issue for the betterment of horses and equestrian sport. This also means that each of us must model exemplary behavior at all times. We believe the revisions to GR838, coupled with the existing process and procedures, protect both our horses and our members.

Lead with us.

William J. Moroney
Chief Executive Officer"

I think this is the right response from USEF.

It accounts for both situations like the topic of the conversation and the rights of the accused. Because as much as we want all bad actors OUT, you also don’t want to be at risk of losing your livelihood because of AI fakes or moments out of context.

There is a protocol for rule changes and they are following said protocol.

[anonevent]

USEF finally releasing a statement condemning Andrew’s conduct as patently “unacceptable” to them is the newsworthy part, in my opinion.

[frugalannie]

My only question is how they are going to define “unethical”. Is it like porn (you know it when you see it)? It seems like without some definition, one person’s “ok” behavior could be another’s “unethical”. Ethics can be harder to define than abuse, IMHO. But I guess the courts will straighten that out.

[Texarkana]

@frugalannie

My only question is how they are going to define “unethical”. Is it like porn (you know it when you see it)? It seems like without some definition, one person’s “ok” behavior could be another’s “unethical”. Ethics can be harder to define than abuse, IMHO. But I guess the courts will straighten that out.

I think it has to be a “know it when you see it” situation because otherwise it runs the gamut. For example, something like using draw reins… oy vey. If it can be hotly debated like that they likely won’t touch it.

But repeatedly hitting a horse in the head? That’s pretty clear cut.

[anonevent]

This is total speculation. I’m not an attorney. I could be totally off base, but I wonder if part of the reason that these organizations do not take immediate action without the wrongdoers admitting that what they did was egregious, or without them being charged with a crime, might be that disciplinary action that is made public (like a temporary ban from certain competitions while an investigation is completed) risks compromising someone’s business/income and, if the wrongdoer were litigious and could prove financial damages, it could expose the FEI/USEF etc to expensive lawsuits.

Charlotte came out and said “yeah…what I did in this video was really f’ed up.” so it was safer to penalize her. If Andrew stays silent or argues that what he did by punching the horse in the head was sweet and affectionate or something, the USEF/FEI really has to go through a process that provides enough proof that their disciplinary action would hold up in court. Maybe? I don’t know.

[Tackpud]

@kt

However, after weeks later and nothing and now hearing the FEI is claiming they haven’t even received the report, just want to recap what was said on this podcast–

Wait - am I reading this right?? FEI has claimed they never received the report that USEF supposedly sent??? WTF? Why doesn’t USEF send it again??

[Jealoushe]

They would have a D&O insurance policy which would cover the lawsuits I would think?

[Dr_Doolittle]

If so, ugh.

This almost guarantees that people who “won’t admit wrongdoing” will get away with this horrific and abusive behavior - and this is unconscionable.

Compromising his business/income?? Boofreakinghoo. He doesn’t deserve to have a thriving business.

I guess there is nothing to be done if this is indeed the case.

Since public stoning, chasing people out of town with torches and pitchforks, putting people in stocks in the public square, shunning (etc.) is no longer allowed - how is this man ever going to be held accountable?

[kt]

@Tackpud

@kt

However, after weeks later and nothing and now hearing the FEI is claiming they haven’t even received the report, just want to recap what was said on this podcast–

Wait - am I reading this right?? FEI has claimed they never received the report that USEF supposedly sent??? WTF? Why doesn’t USEF send it again??

I was referencing Allie Conrad’s statement in the FB comments of her post that stated the FEI is saying they didn’t receive her submitted complaint. @Jealoushe uploaded Allie’s screenshot comment, which I’m attaching here just for reference.

[Tackpud]

@kt

was referencing Allie Conrad’s statement in the FB comments of her post that stated the FEI is saying they didn’t receive her submitted complaint. @Jealoushe uploaded Allie’s screenshot comment, which I’m attaching here just for reference.

Thank you! I totally missed that thought you were referring to the first complaint.

I hope she has resent her complaint.

[FitzE]

The point you make is correct. However, I’m not asking why they are taking more time handing out sanctions to AM in the absence of a statement and cooperation (like Charlotte).

I am asking why:

1. They did not (and heretofore have not) use the tool they already have in their toolbox to address abuse that happens outside a competition: the CoC; and

2. Why the put through an Extraordinary Rule change and purposely delayed the effective date of that change until Dec 1 when, by their own organisational documents, that rule would have taken effect immediately.

Both of those things are avoidance. The delayed effective date in particular suggests someone knew something was coming out and wanted to make sure the new rule was not effective when it did.

There is no argument that I can come up with that delaying the effective date helps animals, whistleblowers, or the sport as a whole. So what did the delay do for the USEF? What benefit was/is gained by delaying the effective date for months and months?

Those are the questions I’d want answered if I were a member and as upset about this abuse as most decent members seem to be: why didn’t you apply the CoC (in this and other cases) and why did you delay the effective date of the new rule?

[Jealoushe]

She commented on her post that she did.

[Dr_Doolittle]

I find their new catchphrase to be deeply ironic in the face of all of this.

[anonevent]

I don’t know.

You could reach out to them and ask, or reach out to Eventing Nation or something to request that they reach out for comment.

[FitzE]

I could, but I’m not a member (or even a resident of the US) so I doubt they’d care to answer me. I suppose I can still try but it would be much stronger coming from a member.

[Aussie_2020]

Let’s tar and feather him. I’m not joking. That guy is despicable. And yes, the people that continue to send their horses to him…

[Warmblood1]

I also wondered why the delay so I wrote USEF.

My question was, “why the delay with the GR838 revision?”

Response:

“Hi XXXXX-

You email inquiry regarding the revision to GR838 was forwarded to me for a reply. There are several factors that contribute to the implementation date for any new rule. One reason for the December 1 implementation date is that it aligns with the beginning of the competition year, which is customary for USEF rule change effective dates. Another reason for the December 1 date is that we needed to ensure that we had the staff necessary for the implementation and enforcement of the new rule. At the time that the rule was passed, we simply did not have the bandwidth for an increased volume of complaints and investigations. We have added additional staff to the legal department and are in process of recruiting more. A third reason is that we’re also reviewing our policies and procedures to identify any areas that need to be strengthened. As a result of our review, there are some additional rule changes coming forward that will support our efforts around investigating and enforcing rules around horse welfare.

We understand the importance of this new rule and we are committed to ensuring its successful enforcement. Our priority remains to uphold the integrity of the processes and implement the rule in a manner that ensures fairness and outcomes that are not overturned when challenged.

Thank you for your commitment to the well-bring of the horse and for contact us about this.”