I would hate to have to pay the bill for glue on shoes plus the vet - YIKES!!! I’m always interested in learning - why do the horses that are getting glue on shoes need to be sedated? Is it to give the farrier time to manage the adhesives? Or is it more about the removal process (I have always wondered how the heck you get them off).
Also, what discipline are these horses, and why glue on vs. a more traditional shoe (or even barefoot)?
On the rare occasions I’ve dealt with glue on shoes, it was because the horse’s feet were too broken up or worn down to have enough foot to nail something on. Once the feet grew out a bit, the shoes were switched to the regular nail on type.
Other people may have had different experiences.
The epoxy can get extremely hot.
I do not believe a farrier sedated this horse. Having said that half the farriers around here are borderline sovereign citizens who not only think they are veterinary experts but also agriculture, construction, marriage counseling and horse training experts and do not think any rules apply to them so I can see it happening some places as described in this thread.
Another possibility is that he paid the farrier to testify in the usef hearing that he was the one to give it to the horse… The farrier doesn’t have a lot to lose, and since that account probably represents a huge chunk of his income, one can argue it wouldn’t be a purely voluntary move.
It might also explain both the timing of the suspension and the possibility that penalties weren’t as stiff as other repeat offenders.
Interesting theory as always DMK. But if the people in the prior thread going back to 2009 quoted above (1st post in this string) are accurate, unlike the recent person who got 6 month suspension for 2nd offense, appears Mr. Britt-Leon has a bunch more than 1 prior suspension (and arrests). Of course since USEF erases all evidence of prior suspensions from their website once the suspension is over there is no way to go back and look how many times this has happened. Nor any way for people to research the past violations of trainers they are considering.
He wouldn’t be the first…
An intrepid person could go to a library that held print back issues of US Equestrian.
A really intrepid person could put it all in a spreadsheet.
libgrrl I should have said there is no easy way to go back and look. Hat tip!
I had no idea this was the case – I should have put it together. I noticed one of his popular riders on social media saying she was showing with Clarity. I assumed she had left after the MBL scrutiny. I guess not.
His Facebook post stated that he fully cooperated with USEF and there was no hearing.
If our NGB genuinely aimed to protect the horse , it would implement full transparency , giving members access to all past sanctions . We should not have to hunt down past issues of a magazine to find this.
We could easily crowd fund a simple searchable online database. The most expensive part would probably be the data entry from paper records.
That doesn’t mean he didn’t provide written testimony to explain any extenuating circumstances, in fact it’s exactly what you would do if you made an honest, albeit careless mistake, right? And it may have been a careless mistake. Even a broken watch is right 2x a day.
Bingo
I didn’t mean to sound snotty – I was a librarian for 30 years!
But then don’t you think the USEF would know who the farrier is and then restrict them from being the show farrier in the future (if it was a show farrier). OR report to the Georgia State Vet licensing board for the horse being injected out of protocol? If he provided a statement, then wouldn’t USEF have a responsibility to report to protect other members, especially IF this occurred at a show?
You didn’t sound snotty at all! I actually think that is the only way to go about it, which I find sad. I actually think this recommendation is the only way to go. If a group got together into a Google sheet, a team could work together to hunt them all down in a divide and conquer approach. Not just for this trainer, but for any trainer whose name seems to come up too often. Members should be able to see past sanctions.
Or be a member to have access. Safe Sport has an easily searchable data base for all its actions, open to all. It is easily done if the federation genuinely wanted it
Getting someone to fall on their sword isn’t new to horse showing or racing because it’s pretty hard to prove it happened. First party does x and gets caught through testing. A second unrelated party says they did it. Barring any first person eyewitness third party testimony contradicting the second party’s statement, that second party statement is going to stand. It doesn’t matter how truthful one may think that statement is if you can’t prove otherwise.
Also, how do you know it hasn’t been reported? But more importantly, what power do you think they might have over a farrier? Sure they obviously know that if it was true, the farrier got it from a vet, but they have no ability to compel the farrier to even return their phone calls.
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
