[QUOTE
My question to those that honestly think that there are owners out there who have no clue the horses are drugged - who is paying the bills on the horses? I have a hard time believing the bills are simply paid with no review.[/QUOTE]
You’d be surprised at how many people never see their bills. They are sent to accountants and if they are in a “generally acceptable range” they are paid without any questions.
[QUOTE=Flash44;8324150]
Good post.
Any time one person is responsible for making a decision and another person is responsible for payment, there will be issues with control and input.
My question to those that honestly think that there are owners out there who have no clue the horses are drugged - who is paying the bills on the horses? I have a hard time believing the bills are simply paid with no review.[/QUOTE]
I think that many have accountants who pay their bills without asking the owners. As long as they are in the “generally acceptable range” the bills are paid without any questions asked.
For many who have multiple home, this is a very common practice so that bills are paid on time and they don’t have to worry about forwarding mail/bills etc.
Thank You…BeeHoney…if the judges collectively took a stance and boycotted or refused to Lin the half asleep slow as molasses trips the culture would change…coupled with trainers actually teaching the client to ride…not provide a robot who is chemically induced into submission
“This is why I strongly believe the judging has to change. If you reward horses that look like they have been sedated or that jump in an unnaturally quiet manner–a manner that for many/most horses CANNOT be achieved through any amount of training–then people are going to use anything they think they can get away with to relax their horses.”
I am an amateur with a DD learning to ride. I read this and shutter to think what happens when these kids get on a green horse that is straight up! They are both being set up for failure and someone can get seriously hurt. Learn to really ride and not be a passenger and have good honest training for the horse, yes it well take time and money… I am very glad we do not do Hunters or Eq any more… My DD is learning dressage and eventually wants to event… Our horse is a sensitive Trakehner and she is learning to ride him as he is… She may never go to the top but she will be able to ride the horse she has that day… JMHO
I wish the governing bodies were about the rules. Maybe they should test the top three places kinda like they do in racing… it is not random it is the rule… Would you expect a hurdle runner(human) to run under the influence?
I will go back to lurk mode.
Wasn’t there a pony that dropped dead and had a list a mile long with supplements? What ever happened to that?
[QUOTE=carroal;8323815]
This spin is fascinating. First TC is lauded as the most “hands-on” junior rider out there. But suddenly when her horse tests positive and additionally the outrageous overdosing of supplements becomes a matter of public record, she’s not hands-on enough to know anything about it at all.
And on top of that, those who are critical of giving a horse nine tubes of a supplement plus some kind of bespoke paste and Gaba must have never had their horse “at a boarding barn” and be some kind of lower-level hacks who just don’t understand the importance and the complexityof prep at a “boarding barn.”
Well shucks, m’am, excuse me while I go back on the lower forty to feed my pony in his run-in shelter made of sticks while listening to banjo music. I’ve no doubt that there are many clients who somehow don’t see or ask what goes into their horse, but come on.[/QUOTE]
Holy Failure to Read for Comprehension, Batman!
That was the most creative misinterpretation of what was generally perceived to be a compliment to the average COTH poster that I think I have ever read…
ETA
However there is simply no way people in full training board don’t know a great deal about their horses’ show prep.
Sorry, there’s EVERY way people in full training board can be in complete ignorance about such things. This ignorance can come willfully (I don’ wanna know) to genuine ignorance (never thought to ask) to even a deliberate deception to hide the program on the part of the trainer.
As in anything, the two extremes (willful ignorance or deliberate deception) are probably least common, but all the shades in between are fair game.
A long time ago I worked for people who started experimenting with drugging. The clients absolutely DID NOT KNOW if their horse was getting a calming agent/tranq. They did know if the horse was getting bute or dex at shows, but that was it. The other drugs were just billed as “supplements” (as the all the good horses got a special feed mix) and this was used to subsidize the less ethical medications.
Although I do not think this is the case in this situation, I do think that it is VERY possible that people in a show barn may not know what all goes on medication/supplement wise. Of course this was pre-internet, so maybe now days people are more educated?
(if I recall correctly, the vet would also be ambiguous on some of his billing, so people didn’t know what all their horse had done by the vet)
I also knew a trainer who would sometimes Ace horses at local shows and I am QUITE SURE the teenage owners didn’t know. There wouldn’t be a line-item on the bill for “Ace,” it would be wrapped into the show charges without being itemized. The parents were not horsey and I don’t see how they would know to even ask what the show charges were for.
[QUOTE=vineyridge;8323809]
Charybdis[/QUOTE]
yeah. Thanks for setting me straight :).
[QUOTE=Ghazzu;8323866]
That is at least somewhat dependent upon location.
I had a conversation on this subject with a member of the state board of veterinary medicine, and asked specifically about the common practice of dispensing a bottle of this or that to be used “as needed”.
I was told, emphatically, that it was a violation of the practice act in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
…
The owner isn’t going to complain…unless something goes wrong. And if the owner is unaware, well gee whiz, Weedwhacker just colicked. Or blew out an aneurysm. Very sad.[/QUOTE]
First, I knew a vet who dispensed drugs in this tight and correct way: The prescription was glued onto the bottle and she sold you just as many pills as had been prescribed. And it was a total PITA from a HO’s perspective. I do like the looser (if illegal) convention of a vet that will sell me a bottle of Bute or tube of Banamine to have on hand.
And also, my real reason for posting: OMG I laughed out loud about “Weedwhacker” I’d give my ass to have an ugly, bad-moving but great-jumping hunter named Weedwhacker. It would be even cooler if the horse could go in all three rings the way great campaigners used to.
Not Daisy Cutter, Weedwhacker. Now that’s funny. I don’t care who y’are.
[QUOTE=vineyridge;8324043]
There is a new FEI decision suspending an Arab Sheika (endurance) for two years for her first drugging violation. The USEF still just gives a slap on the wrist and censure, per the August report cited above.
My question is whether or not most of the drugging is found in hunters and equitation, not jumpers? Because people here keep raising the issue of safety for the young rider, and young riders do low level jumpers as well. You really can’t tell from most of the USEF decisions what the horse was showing in.
It might make more of a public relations impact if the class the horse showed in was found in EVERY decision of the hearing panel. More transparency and more fingers pointing would make uproars more based in fact. And the more uproar the better, because things won’t change otherwise.[/QUOTE]
In answer to your question about jumpers, my assumption would be because jumpers don’t need to go around looking like a metronome–they can be quirky and hot. They need to be fast and careful–they don’t need to look “robotic” as someone else has described.
[QUOTE=Flash44;8324150]
Good post.
Any time one person is responsible for making a decision and another person is responsible for payment, there will be issues with control and input.
My question to those that honestly think that there are owners out there who have no clue the horses are drugged - who is paying the bills on the horses? I have a hard time believing the bills are simply paid with no review.[/QUOTE]
I feel the same way: I want to be part of all decisions that affect me, my horse, my own physical safety while on the buggar and my wallet. 'Cause here’s the thing: If some kind of treatment** gets screwed up and my horse suffers a bad injury, he becomes my problem, and mine alone. Do you think the pro is going to keep us in the barn but not in training? That doesn’t happen. My choices are to fill his stall with another horse or move on down the road so he can fill that stall with another full training horse.
**You want an example? How about the trainer who wants a multiple joints injected in a horse in short order to achieve uber-soundness for some upcoming shows. The treatment team gets unlucky and their attempt to push the envelope fails: The horse has a level of steroids circulating in his blood that’s too high and he founders. I know this has happened at least once and in the barn of a BNT in Zone 2.
The HO could afford that size “oops” for one of her horses. I can’t, so I never want to be part of a team in which those who make decisions are not folks who are accountable for them. For that reason, I do read my barn bills and I don’t know what it’s like to the be HO who doesn’t. Also, I assume that the people who made enough money to support show horses aren’t stupid or careless. So I think they must read their bills and, essentially, endorse their trainer’s behavior in full knowledge of it. Maybe someone else can explain the “I just paid, I have no idea what’s going on” phenomenon.
[QUOTE=mvp;8324919]
The HO could afford that size “oops” for one of her horses. I can’t, so I never want to be part of a team in which those who make decisions are not folks who are accountable for them. For that reason, I do read my barn bills and I don’t know what it’s like to the be HO who doesn’t. Also, I assume that the people who made enough money to support show horses aren’t stupid or careless. So I think they must read their bills and, essentially, endorse their trainer’s behavior in full knowledge of it. Maybe someone else can explain the “I just paid, I have no idea what’s going on” phenomenon.[/QUOTE]
Totally agree - ignorance is the worst possible excuse and totally unacceptable in most circumstances. When you enter the show, you agree to abide by the rules and regulations. As much of a hot topic that drugs have been for years, and suspensions, etc, anyone really want to tell me that someone showing at the higher levels never ever ever thought to ask the trainer about medications? Or simply confirm that the trainer plays by the rules? As much GOSSIP that flies around, really truly there are ignorant owners who are that clueless?
Yep, I’ll be with that other poster feeding the ponies in the back forty while playing my banjo.
Well, I am an incredibly hands-on, well-educated boarder and I have been duped more than once by a BO doing something I didn’t know about. For example- one of my horses was on single turnout for two weeks before I knew about it. This was (apparently) due to a scuffle he had gotten into with another horse that I also didn’t know about. This was a low-end barn with the BO as trainer and only doing local shows, and it seemed like there were a lot of things her clients didn’t know about that she did on her own volition. I didn’t train with her, I just boarded (until I couldn’t take it anymore), but most of her boarders did train with her and they were clueless.
I can imagine all sorts of stuff happens without owners knowing about it in the big operations, under trainers running the whole thing and simply sending out the invoices every month to the owners.
[QUOTE=judybigredpony;8324459]
Thank You…BeeHoney…if the judges collectively took a stance and boycotted or refused to Lin the half asleep slow as molasses trips the culture would change…coupled with trainers actually teaching the client to ride…not provide a robot who is chemically induced into submission
“This is why I strongly believe the judging has to change. If you reward horses that look like they have been sedated or that jump in an unnaturally quiet manner–a manner that for many/most horses CANNOT be achieved through any amount of training–then people are going to use anything they think they can get away with to relax their horses.”[/QUOTE]
In theory, this ais a wonderful idea. It was tried by the AQHA re: peanut rollers by making it illegal for the horse’s ears to be below their withers for more than a few steps. Watch video from World or Congress and they are still using the head hanging " pleasure" horses. It’s pervasive in that industry as the affected slowness and flat demeanor for hunters is in USEF hunters. I wish I had the answer but I don’t.
Also re: the sharps containers line up? I might be there with discards from Legend (injectable), Adequan(injectable), Polyglycan(injectable), I hope you see where this is going? Not every injectable is a nefarious or illegal drugging. Just food for thought
I used to have a lesson horse (warmblood, fancy jump) that was naturally dopey. He likely looked drugged. How unfair would it have been for him to not place at shows because he was quiet and robotic by nature, and well trained?
if the rules changed to penalize the easy rides, it will mean horses like that would have to be drugged to perk them up!
[QUOTE=Jumphigh83;8325056]
Also re: the sharps containers line up? I might be there with discards from Legend (injectable), Adequan(injectable), Polyglycan(injectable), I hope you see where this is going? Not every injectable is a nefarious or illegal drugging. Just food for thought[/QUOTE]
While I was driving to work early this morning I thought about how much I’d like to see the result of a sampling study: Test all the stuff in the sharps boxes for a big show, maybe on Wednesday and again on Sunday and tell me what’s on the needles. I’m well aware that non-nefarious stuff gets injected at shows. But I’d love to see what was in the mix and the proportions.
And some of the big barns take home their own sharps? I didn’t know that and, without spying eyes like mine, I can’t see why they’d bother. Perhaps their “leave no trace” policies would skew the results of my study.
There are a lot of trainers/BOs who have very fragile egos and have real problems with anything that questions their expertise. These are the “my way or the highway” trainers/BOs. I’ve been kicked out of a barn before because I bought a riding horse for home that was not what trainer thought I should have. Horse was never going to be in trainer’s barn, but my independence was unacceptable.
[QUOTE=CHT;8325070]
I used to have a lesson horse (warmblood, fancy jump) that was naturally dopey. He likely looked drugged. How unfair would it have been for him to not place at shows because he was quiet and robotic by nature, and well trained?
if the rules changed to penalize the easy rides, it will mean horses like that would have to be drugged to perk them up![/QUOTE]
I agree, my horse is the same, he naturally carries his head low, he’s slow moving with a big stride and a really slow jump. He is spooky as all get out too, so that’s usually our sober tell. :lol:
When I hand-walk him at shows, he tends to lower his head when he is curious or nervous and walks super slowly…I’m sure people think I’ve drugged the living daylights out of him. To help him with his spook, we usually try to go for a walk in the arena at 6 or earlier to make sure those hoses by the side of the ring have not moved (though they are definitely lethal).
But that was why I bought him honestly, I wanted a winning horse that didn’t need to be lunged or drugged. I was willing to accept spooky and green. I honestly think it would be hard on judges to have to ferret out the drugged ones.
That said, I am HUGELY in favor of allowing judges to award bonus points for horses that are bright and look interested in their jobs. I don’t think play should be penalized and I don’t think an enthusiastic lead change should be kiss of death. Bucking yes. And there are some judges who do favor the horses with expression, I know bc they’ve beaten my slow-moving floppy eared beast! 
I still think there’s no silver bullet. Judging should evolve to prize enthusiasm for the job, penalties should be for the horse, owner and rider. Testing should not HAVE to be ramdomized. It’s going to take time to undo the damage we have done, but I’m heartened how many people want to participate in the discussion.
[QUOTE=mvp;8325190]
While I was driving to work early this morning I thought about how much I’d like to see the result of a sampling study: Test all the stuff in the sharps boxes for a big show, maybe on Wednesday and again on Sunday and tell me what’s on the needles. I’m well aware that non-nefarious stuff gets injected at shows. But I’d love to see what was in the mix and the proportions.
And some of the big barns take home their own sharps? I didn’t know that and, without spying eyes like mine, I can’t see why they’d bother. Perhaps their “leave no trace” policies would skew the results of my study.[/QUOTE]
I’ve often thought the same thing. It’s one way at least USEF could know what to test for given the creative drugging that is going on. However what seems most important is that USEF create meaningful punishments for those horses who do test positive and perhaps routinely test winners or all those who pin. I don’t envy them however trying to come up with a plan or even a range of drug tests that can keep up with the creative behavior we are seeing now.
[QUOTE=CHT;8325070]
I used to have a lesson horse (warmblood, fancy jump) that was naturally dopey. He likely looked drugged. How unfair would it have been for him to not place at shows because he was quiet and robotic by nature, and well trained?
if the rules changed to penalize the easy rides, it will mean horses like that would have to be drugged to perk them up![/QUOTE]
Change the courses to add some complexity and then maybe that will do the trick!
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.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
