I think people are proposing that owners are held accountable in addition to trainers, not instead of, and I am all for that. I think there are huge numbers of owners who are involved in the riding and showing part of their horses’ lives while ignoring (or even turning a blind eye to) whatever is going on care-wise, and there is no excuse for that. If the owner is suddenly banned from showing all of their horses for a year because their trainer got caught drugging one of their horses, then they can’t just move to another trainer and act like nothing ever happened. If that is the consequence to owners who associate with trainers who act unethically, those unethical trainers will eventually have a hard time attracting clients, and that is what needs to happen.
I just skimmed the Arabian rulebook out of curiosity. There’s a section on ginger/capsaicin that specifies that horses who show signs that irritants have been used must be penalized/not pinned, plus judges can request horses be checked/swabbed for irritants. And: “any trainer, owner, agent or other person who administers, attempts to administer, instructs, aids, conspires with another to administer, or employs anyone who administers or attempts to administer a chemical or other irritant of any kind… shall be subject to penalties.”
Swap “irritants” for “drugs” and that’s a pretty solid framework.
I may have missed it, but where do they currently keep the drugs and medication violations that are current? I can’t find it on US Equestrian/USHJA But I may be blind.
This is the whole thing. WHY the abuses are occurring.
The abuse is being incentivized by the judging.
Judges are another set of accountable parties – some have even said so. If some see it as an indirect accountability, at the end, they are at the top of the reasons for many or most of the abuses.
Maybe at the top of the excuses, but good horsepeople can’t, with any credibility, abuse their horses to win subjectively judged classes and blame it on the judge.
At the bottom, though, this is a culture issue. IMO. Trainers, judges, riders are responding to what they think the culture thinks about WHY they are showing at all.
It seems that, for hunters, the primary center of the abuse is calming down horses that are bred to be “up”, excitable, reactive. Even if not intentionally, that is where the energy to jump larger jumps comes from.
A strong, energetic jumping horse needs to level out its mood to meet the current judging criteria for a calm, smooth presence in the ring. And to carry the rider in the most attractive manner.
Other disciplines have other primary centers for abuse, based on what is needed to win. From an above post, obviously Arabian showers like waving tails. QH showers like dead tails.
For hunters, a lot of it seems to center around the horse being calmly flat-mood in the ring.
So – I can hear abusive trainers mocking and dismissing the efforts to ‘clean up abuse’ with their caution that junior/amateur Suzie is going to get rocketed out of the saddle by her un-prepped horse’s jump. Or canter depart, or canter-trot transition, or what-have-you. Or spook! Or casual buck, even just a little one.
There will be more of all of that. That she does not have the seat to sit through. According to the trainer – who may be right?
The secondary layer of attacking the abuse does seem to be the quality of the riding in the hunter circuit – or lack thereof?
Is that the core issue behind the underhanded efforts to meet the judging criteria? There may be a conflict from the quiet horse who will safely carry a less-skilled rider and the powerful horse needed to show well over jumps.
Getting rid of the incentive for a quieter horse means – what? Re how we re-think the path to the show ring for both rider and horse, and the principles behind why we show. A roomful of ribbons and trophies can’t be the only purpose, the only thing the culture recognizes.
A change in the culture of expectations, of reasons, would reward the true horsepeople among the trainers and riders. It would slow down progress from early-learner to master of the ring to truly be able to ride the horses we have today. It might filter out quite a few trainers & riders as well. There will be major resistance to that.
Why not? They do it all the time.
Well ok, not the good ones.
Hearing “I don’t know why I didn’t pin, the judge must not like chestnut mares!” makes me feel sad for the future of the sport. “The judge doesn’t like horses with a belly spot.” “The judge doesn’t like horses under 16h.” "The judge doesn’t like … " it goes on and on.
The people who always have an excuse have no clue what they should be doing. The question is how they get as far as they do without learning it.
Hunters and dressage are subjective. What judges reward are what people are trying to achieve. Reduce the incentive to use some of the more extreme measures by not rewarding the extreme performance. Jumping and eventing are different, but can still make safety changes that don’t reward extremes. A change in judging standards isn’t the only answer, but I believe it is an important piece of a very complicated puzzle that we are all in some way responsible for solving. It’s a culture shift, not one change.
Bolding mine. That is my point. Riders need to take responsibility for choosing competent and humane trainers. Clueless trainers are hired by clueless riders.
It’s a pretty basic process that apparently many beginners in horse sport are unaware of. A trainer that teaches new riders the basics, needs to be competent, have a verifiable record and/or video of them riding and training at the level they claim to be able to teach. We’ve seen the charlatans here on COTH before, and I can only imagine the number of them out there in the U.S. that are still getting away with it.
Hunters are the more subjective in MHO since hunter judges don’t give feedback, but yes, those are the most subjectively judged disciplines.
That fact that they are subjectively judged does not not relieve riders of the responsibility for abusing their horses in pursuit of a win.
This is exactly the problem. LTD and drugging is being used as an excuse to keep the riders “safe” instead of the trainer teaching the kid to actually ride.
There are a lot of both. And there is a science to staying clueless. Stay away from the more-informed people. Find new customers/clients from outside of the sport, so they will be dependent on the trainer’s knowledge and in no position to question it.
And especially, always have an excuse ready for the next fall-short. Both clueless riders and clueless trainers. By staying in their bubble, there is no reason to know anything else.
And they get away with it because of the lack of challenges. Bottom line, classes need filler, shows need entry fees. So come on and bring your horses and riders, and you can clutter up the warm-up and think of more excuses for why your top bill-payer isn’t pinning the way she and her family wish she were. Or – maybe she is!
I believe there was a term limit involved in the bylaws, not an ouster.
I understood that she lost the election against the new incumbent. I could be mistaken, but I don’t think so?
Because that requires work. On both the trainer and student’s part.
I was in a lesson the other day with kids, like beginner level (riding a pony for a kiddo and got a free lesson!) and it brought up memories. Memories of thinking ground poles were boring. Memories of thinking “I can jump. Why am I not jumping??” Memories of “I’m only doing ground poles? But I want to show in the rated ponies!” And so on and so forth.
As an ammy who was once a pro (aka I’ve “done time”), I LOVE pole lessons. I see the challenge now and appreciate it.
But all of this did make me think why people don’t want to learn how to ride correctly. Because you can go to another barn and have a horse handed to you to go jump around poorly and probably still win. And that’s that.
Go to USEF.org > Compete > Rules, regulations, &grievances
There you can select either findings, or the ineligible list and filter by reason (there are just a lot of people who haven’t completed Safesport training so make sure to select another reason).
Mary was supposed to finish her second term at the end of 2024, which meant she had to step down at that time due to term limits.
The plan was to have the president-elect work with her throughout 2024 to learn the ropes, but she decided to resign over the summer, so he stepped into the president’s role at that point.
Here is my rule change proposal: No more random samples. Drug test 1st,2nd of random classes. Maybe you don’t send all the samples in. But I propose no “random” samples anymore. No one is drugging to lose, and seldom are the winners tested.
Or something like this. I’d pay more in USEF fees (hot take) knowing that people are ACTUALLY getting tested.
off to email USEF & USHJA now
@Ghazzu, brilliant! Say it louder for the folks in the back. Conveniently “not knowing” about the care given to your own animal is not an excuse.
Oh, I beg to differ.
I’ve had plenty of winners tested, with clean results.
There was one year we had the same animal get tested at two or three shows in a row, as I recall. Or maybe it was at two shows out of three.
