If you’re (g) seeing rampant drug use and beating and LTD and lack of food/water etc etc, at the shows you attend - report it! If no one reports anything ever, then the whole point is moot. The TD/Steward can only investigate and address things they see or are told about.
Shouting online at everyone that “HJ SHOWS ARE CRUEL!!!1!” doesn’t help anything. Insert your discipline of choice here.
To be clear - I’m not a current USEF member nor do I plan to become one because I simply do not have the budget or the horses to compete at rated shows. I groom and spectate and support friends, but I’ll stick to my local circuit with my horses unless something changes drastically.
The problem with that (though I like the idea) is that SafeSport was made law by the U.S. Congress so any changes would literally take an act of Congress.
“Not terribly likely to get any action from them at this point in time”, is an understatement.
The OP question is about people convicted of horse abuse. So, the outside authorities have already taken action. And as it can be extremely difficult to get these convictions, I’m ok to assume that the conviction is a credible finding of serious abuse.
It makes sense to me to work within the organization to make a rule barring convicted horse abusers. The work has already been done by LE and prosecutors. The only process change is being made aware of, and validating, the conviction.
Making that rule happen takes: Work. A rule change (not a process change) takes a long-term, step-by-step effort inside the organization. That will rely on communications and raising awareness, as well as lobbying the right people with the right solution. Effecting that change will need the help of special people with persuasion qualities that a lot of us don’t have, so those people have to be found, recruited, and onboarded. But the new rule can be done, in time. Maybe sooner than later.
If someone can convince a noticeable number of people to quit over it, how much better to convince those same people to stay and help put the pressure on the leadership to make this change – pressure from the inside, from the actual active membership. That is the faster, surer way to the best outcome.
It could be argued that ruling off convicted abusers can be seen in the same light as professional organizations that withdraw accreditation from practitioners who are convicted of certain crimes. Someone can lose their CPA, or their license to practice law or medicine, if they are convicted of certain things.
This rule sounds like a good and reasonable cause to me, without knowing any more about it. But the right channel for change is within the organization, imo.
If OP’s thread-starter had been “would you support a new rule” rather than “would you quit over it”, I think there would have been a different response.
If this rule is not being implemented right now, then a push to get it working harder to keep abusers out.
I keep going back to the original title question: "Are you willing to concel your USEF Membership if nothing is done to punish horse abusers … "
If a rule is already in place, and nothing is done, that’s the fault of the membership as much as the leadership. Members can find many ways of moving the issue forward.
I dropped my membership ages ago. Didn’t like the direction USEF was going and still don’t.
But as long as they are the only game in town mostly I fear nothing will change.
Things are hugely better than they were in the 80s and 90s, both in terms of abuse of riders and horses. and USEF is taking action on Parra, aren’t they? Where specifically do you see them not doing so?
Yes, they are taking action on Parra, so far. We’ll see what the consequences are for him or others like him.
I wasn’t showing in the 80s and 90s, so I can only speak to the last 20ish years.
ETA I reported someone to the show office and to a steward and nothing was done, and the people in the show office were practically mocking the fact that I was wanting to talk to the steward. I know they aren’t USEF, but that’s not the first story I’ve heard of action not being taken.
At the shows I attend, yes I see it being ignored.
I agree that the owners ignore it as well, all in the name of winning a ribbon. USEF isn’t the only at fault party here, and I’d argue they aren’t even the most at fault party, but I can’t do anything about other trainers or owners. What I can do is try to influence how USEF responds to what other trainers do.
I think it is more in the name of belonging to their barn community and not being ostracized from it. Which is even more pathetic imho. But I do not see stewards ignoring abuse- I’m surprised you think that is so common, that’s not something I see at either dressage or jumper shows.
Agreed! My only thinking is that, having not read the act itself, I’m not sure how much discretion was left in the implementation. Since we’re ultimately still targeting the people who do the abusing, and animal abuse is a documented precursor to abuse of people, there might be room to include animal abuse as reportable to SafeSport without changing the Act (or their might not).
It is likely that we have different definitions of abuse. I’m not saying that either is correct, simply different.
I look forward to USHJA/USEF defining abuse and defining things such as excessive longeing, showing, riding a lame horse, inappropriate training aids, etc, as I think that is the first step in ensuring that we all have the same definition that we can then use to enforce horse welfare.
I’m sorry that happened - specifically being laughed at for wanting to talk to the steward. I’d say that’s crappy show management and not exactly to do with USEF.
HOWEVER (and I’m not pointing this at you, Demerara), I do think we need to be careful of saying “I reported XYZ at a show and nothing was done”, because you may not know WHAT was done. Was the offender warned? Was the offender given the rundown and served xyz consequences? Was there actually no proof the steward could use outside of a “he said she said” scenario? Was the abuse you saw (let’s say… drugging) not actually abuse under the rules (vet clearance, not an illegal drug or administration method, etc)?
Just because a huge announcement wasn’t made and the reported barn/trainer/horse remained at the show doesn’t equal “nothing was done”.
If you see something, document and say something. Stewards are generally responsible people who WANT to do their job - but they can’t drag people off the show grounds just because someone reported that person for “abuse”. There is a process, and repeat offenders ARE noted for harsher consequences. Sure, I’m very aware that there will be celebrity trainers that seem above the rules, but those high horses are getting pulled down by regular people speaking up. So let’s keep speaking up.
Totally agree. In this instance I was there as a show photographer, and took pictures of large, bleeding spur rubs on a horse. I showed them to the steward and after that I don’t know what happened other than the horse continued to show.
I actually presented this question at the USHJA town hall last night, specifically asking what can be done. One steward said someone can get a yellow card, and someone else said that the steward has to have support from USEF and show management to bar the person from showing - Mary said that stewards have a hotline they can call.
I don’t know what happened with this horse - did USEF say to let it show? Did show management (this is probably most likely, knowing the venue) not support eliminating the horse for the weekend? Whatever happened, it left an incredibly sour taste in my mouth. In addition to other things I’ve seen more recently, it’s just not something I want to be a part of.
I’d also be uncomfortable with that - especially since the rider still had spurs on (I remember your post). So I get it, and would certainly be critical of the system in place.
Asking an active show office and a steward to a) validate this conviction in the legal records, b) make an official decision barring this person, and then further c) formally communicate and enforce it with the individual, is really bass-ackward, IMO. They are not the right level or the right people to take this action.
Putting a validation and decision of a convicted abuser at the level of show offices spread out all over the country is unreasonable and unwise, for a lot of reasons. This needs to be centralized with a correct formal process in the organization headquarters. They can have some sort of list of these actions, accessible to the show office.
This sounds like you were at a show, noticed that a convicted abuser that you are aware of, was an entrant, and had a personal feeling of rage – I get that, entirely. BUT then you acted hastily and emotionally, wanting an immediate response to your demands from entirely the wrong set of people. You didn’t follow any real process within the national organization. That’s how your story reads.
So now you are proposing that everyone rage-quit with you to force the action that you want.
Could I suggest as kindly as possible that this kind of emotional impulsiveness really isn’t effective? Results come for working the system properly.
OK wait. The situation you presented in the first post is about “convicted horse abuser” – I assume you meant that as legally convicted, because that is what ‘convicted’ means in this country.
Then you presented your horse show office adventure without this new information. Giving the impression that you spotted a convicted abuser as an entrant (or coach) at a USEF horse show, and you wanted the show office to do something about a convicted abuser who hasn’t yet been flagged by the USEF.
But wait. Now you have a completely different story. There is no legal conviction on record. Rather, what we actually have are photos you just took on the show grounds being shown to a steward. Something that just happened and hasn’t been investigated and actioned by any USEF official.
What stewards should do when shown evidence of abuse currently happening on the grounds is a very different issue, a very different process, than abusers with a conviction on record.
And, you admit that you don’t know how your report was handled. You don’t know that it was ignored. The horse showed, but the horse didn’t cause its own injuries. You don’t know about the rider who made the marks.
Plus, you are complaining about the behavior of office staff who are not the steward – or maybe they aren’t at fault, as you say it was your impression. We can wonder if maybe that wasn’t their intent.
So is everyone supposed to rage-quit over the behavior of the show office staff at one show, or … what and why are we cancelling our memberships?
What is it that you want to do here? Just vent?
Or stick with a consistent issue and a request for a specific action path? Because this new situation you just presented is losing the plot of the first post.
Are you discussing one USEF abuse issue, two USEF abuse issues, or … what?
I’m very confused about why you’re confused. I never meant to indicate that I was talking about a convicted horse abuser. My story was solely centered about the situation I saw at a show that I outlined here.
To be clear, I didn’t expect show management to do anything, other than point me to the steward. I went into the office, asked to see the steward, they asked why I wanted to see the steward, and I explained. I was then smirked at and told who the steward was. That was the end of my interaction with the office, and I did not expect anymore action on their end. However, according to a random internet stranger the town hall last night, a steward has to have “support” from show management to immediately act on (eliminate) a competitor for abuse. Is that true? I don’t know. But what I do know is that even if the steward spoke to the rider, the horse continued to show. Whether that is a failure of the steward or the system , I don’t know that either. At the end of the day, the system in place did not protect the horse and that is all I care about.
No, you did not clarify the actual situation for several more posts. The only discussion to that point was the one you raised in Post #1, convicted horse abusers.
Post #31
Trainers? Riders? Owners? All you have pointed to so far is “convicted horse abusers”. Could be anyone who is a member of the USEF.
Post #36
Only now do you present this entirely different situation.
You are undermining whatever it is that you actually want to action. I suspect that this is just a vent thread. I get the anger and frustration. But your inconsistency will mean that this thread isn’t going anywhere, as it is to this point.
