New York Times article - USEF and Humble

[poltroon]

[QUOTE=Horseymama;6749373]
I don’t think $2,000 for the first infraction is enough. I think it needs to hurt, as in at least $15,000 for each person; owner, rider and trainer, and suspension for a year. Then make it progressively more if there are successive incidents. That way people will think twice before violating the rules. And they will take a lot more responsibility for the horses they ride, train, and own.

The USEF needs to be an organization that is standing up for the horses and the fairness of competition. Right now they are just an “ol’ boys club.”[/QUOTE]

Part of the problem in setting appropriate fines is that there’s no single level that has equal pain, because it depends on your income and financial resources. I prefer nice long suspensions. I don’t see how a large fine benefits me as a fellow competitor.

[englishivy]

[QUOTE=JER;6750500]
So Scott Stewart does only hunters? That would mean he never rides under FEI rules, and has no incentive to even experiment with a no-drugs regimen.[/QUOTE]

That’s an interesting point.

If you won’t ever be in a situation in which you cannot use drugs (meaning certain drugs at certain limits are always allowed), where is the motivation to develop your program so that you don’t need them?

Maybe there in lies the real crux of the problem.

[poltroon]

[QUOTE=vineyridge;6750195]
Yes, indeedy. The USEF has been a force in the FEI to move away from zero tolerance. I don’t consider that a benefit. As to your last question, the answer is “Yes”. If the FEI penalty applied, maybe more riders, trainers and owners would be less willing to inject.

I agree that hunters isn’t an FEI discipline, so FEI penalties wouldn’t apply there. But we’re still talking horses and riders and horse welfare; and why should hunters be less protected than reiners and show jumpers and eventers and dressage horses? Or, as the USEF has done, reduce the protection for the other disciplines to match that of hunters?[/QUOTE]

I think there is a case to be made either way on FEI zero tolerance. One of the issues has been that different labs around the world have different capabilities, so setting a threshold seems appropriate to equalize results across different labs. I also think there’s a difference in what’s appropriate medication for a horse competing at the Olympic games versus a horse that is taking a child to his first walk-trot class. That said, if we have to give up bute for the beginner horses in order to clean up the rest, then IMHO so be it.

However, there is honest disagreement about whether the FEI zero tolerance is actually in the best interest for the horses all the time. The problem truly is that there are too many people in this sport who don’t enjoy their horses as individuals and who don’t enjoy having a good time being with their horses at a horse show if they don’t win.

And we come back to the fact that magnesium isn’t going to test.

I like moving to a plan where the trainer, rider, and owner are all held responsible and suspended.

I like a plan that says that a horse can’t have an injection within 12 hours of competition, or that if it is it has to be given by a vet with a D&M report filed. I recognize that it wouldn’t be enforceable off the show grounds, but having that rule in place sure would have been handy for this particular case.

[poltroon]

Earlier I made a comment speculating that that list of regular drugs in combination could potentially contribute to the lung disease they saw.

It occurs to me this morning that if you were a veterinary researcher wanted to test the long term health effects of all those drugs stacked, you probably couldn’t get it past your university ethics committee.

[Hattie]

@poltroon;6750580

The problem truly is that there are too many people in this sport who don’t enjoy their horses as individuals and who don’t enjoy having a good time being with their horses at a horse show if they don’t win.

This is the one of the biggest issues we now have in the show world. So I agree that the owners bear the biggest responsibility and should share the consequences of harsher penalties.

[34thStreet]

[QUOTE=fair judy;6750322]
… and here you have it folks. if you even POST to Amber Hill’s wall you get the attention of tammy tucker, attorney to the lunatic. what a piece of work she must be… " Ms. Hochschwender,
Thank you for contacting my client, Elizabeth Mandarino. I understand that you post on the Chronicle Forums as “fair judy.” In June of this year, you posted that Kristen Williams, the woman who filed the protest regarding Humble, had “counsel for the protest.” You also have posted other comments that indicate a working knowledge of facts that are currently being litigated in a case pending in New Jersey. I would like to schedule a time to interview you by telephone regarding these facts. Depending on our discussion, I will be able to determine if we will ultimately need to issue a subpoena for your testimony.
Please let me know a convenient day and time after January 1 to talk.
Thank you, Tammy Tucker
tamara.tucker@nelsontucker.com, 434-979-0049"[/QUOTE]

Wow…I am just speechless!

[MHM]

[QUOTE=JER;6750500]
So Scott Stewart does only hunters? That would mean he never rides under FEI rules, and has no incentive to even experiment with a no-drugs regimen.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=englishivy;6750552]That’s an interesting point.

If you won’t ever be in a situation in which you cannot use drugs (meaning certain drugs at certain limits are always allowed), where is the motivation to develop your program so that you don’t need them?

Maybe there in lies the real crux of the problem.[/QUOTE]
Meh.

There are many, many people who will never be in a situation that involves FEI rules. The vast majority, in fact. Some of those people medicate their horses in a reasonable, therapeutic way, and some go crazy with the home chemistry experiments.

There are good horsemen and bad horsemen in every discipline, at every level.

[englishivy]

sorry, double post

[Hattie]

[QUOTE=fair judy;6750322]
… and here you have it folks. if you even POST to Amber Hill’s wall you get the attention of tammy tucker, attorney to the lunatic. what a piece of work she must be… " "[/QUOTE]

It always amazes me when they turn it around and make it sound like you are the problem. I didn’t see Sarah Hochschwender’s name in The NYT!

Sorry that this is happening to you - please keep us posted. I will donate to your defense fund!!!

[englishivy]

[QUOTE=MHM;6750638]
Meh.

There are many, many people who will never be in a situation that involves FEI rules. The vast majority, in fact. Some of those people medicate their horses in a reasonable, therapeutic way, and some go crazy with the home chemistry experiments.

There are good horsemen and bad horsemen in every discipline, at every level.[/QUOTE]

I’m not disagreeing. I just thought it was an interesting point that trainers whose horses must follow FEI rules at competitions have to develop a program without drugss (or cheat and risk getting caught, but that is not the point here).

If you only compete at USEF sanctioned shows, you can create a progarm that becomes dependant on legal drugs because…why not?

For what it is worth, I am not for zero tolerance nor am I for anything goes. I feel that if we altered how we judged hunters and looked at a better format for points (so we quit rewarding quantity over quality), the horses wouldn’t stay on the road for weeks at a time and therefore not require so much chemistry to keep them going.

[MHM]

[QUOTE=findeight;6749775]
Right now, saying something can be a career ender for a groom or braider, there is nobody to say it to and they don’t have 500 even if they are USEF members, and many are not so have no standing to protest.[/QUOTE]
One does not need to be a USEF member to file a protest, nor is the fee $500. It’s $200 for members and parents of junior members, $300 for non-members. From the current rule book, available for all to see at www.USEF.org :

                                            Gr603 protests.
                1. Any rider, driver, handler, vaulter, longeur, exhibitor, owner, agent, trainer or the parent of a junior exhibitor, or any Life, Senior, or Junior member present at the competition may file a protest with the Show Committee of a Licensed Competition or The Federation Hearing Committee alleging violation of any Federation rule(s).The protest must contain all information as specified in GR602.1 and must be:
                a. in writing,

b. signed by the protester,
c. addressed to the Show Committee of the competition at which the alleged violation occurred, or to the Hearing Committee,
d. accompanied by a deposit of $200 if made by a Federation member or the parent of a junior exhibitor member or $300 if made by a non-member (if check, payable to the competition or to the Federation); said deposit will be refunded in the event the protest is upheld, and
e. received by the steward, technical delegate, a member of the Show Committee, the competition manager or the competition secretary within 48 hours of the alleged violation. If made directly to the Hearing Committee, the protest must be received at the Federation office by the tenth business day following the last recognized day of the competition, or by the tenth business day following the date on which the alleged violation occurred if it occurred other than at a Licensed Competition.

[JenEM]

[QUOTE=englishivy;6750714]

For what it is worth, I am not for zero tolerance nor am I for anything goes. I feel that if we altered how we judged hunters and looked at a better format for points (so we quit rewarding quantity over quality), the horses wouldn’t stay on the road for weeks at a time and therefore not require so much chemistry to keep them going.[/QUOTE]

Just brainstorming, but what if we went to more of a Dressage system, where each round got a numeric score–which presumably most do anyway–and used the average for the year. The scores for each round would have to be tracked, but obviously there’s a system the Dressage folks use for that which could be modified, and you’d then end up with the horse who performed best, consistently, over the course of the year, regardless of number of shows.

[MHM]

[QUOTE=JenEM;6750764]
Just brainstorming, but what if we went to more of a Dressage system, where each round got a numeric score–which presumably most do anyway–and used the average for the year. The scores for each round would have to be tracked, but obviously there’s a system the Dressage folks use for that which could be modified, and you’d then end up with the horse who performed best, consistently, over the course of the year, regardless of number of shows.[/QUOTE]
Most hunter rounds already get a numerical score, but the scores are compared to the other scores in the class, not strictly against a hypothetical idea of perfection. So a winning score of 80 at a small show with three entries in the class would bear no relation to a non-winning score of 80 at a major show with thirty entries in the class.

[MyssMyst]

Just brainstorming here, but what if you also hit the horse in points for testing positive? Take them out of contention for Indoors and HOTY awards? Test positive, you automatically turn points for that competition year bad and are suspended for the rest of the competition year. Add suspension time for subsequent offences, leading to permanent suspension.

[MHM]

[QUOTE=Pennywell Bay;6750527]
Every see a cartoon with the little birds flying about going “cukoo cukoo”?[/QUOTE]
This thread is an interesting read for those who have not seen it. Note that when it started in June of 2008, less than four years before Humble’s death, the OP of the thread described herself as a “pony mom.” Not as a trainer at all.
http://www.chronofhorse.com/forum/showthread.php?154439-Need-to-find-out-who-the-owner-trainer-is-for-Bedazzled-(large-pony-hunter)&highlight=Bedazzled

[grandprixjump]

Here is what the USEF needs to do…

They don’t need policing or subpoena powers, All they need is one more rule about investigations, members must have complete transparency, and present all paperwork and testimony required or their suspension becomes permanent. Kind of like someone who writes a bad check to a show. Either make good on requirements or be suspended indefinitely.

They are a private club, and can make the rules as they see them, no judge can say your rules are illegal as long as they don’t discriminate. Suspending someone for failure to obey private club rules isn’t discrimination…

[juststartingout]

[QUOTE=grandprixjump;6750882]
They don’t need policing or subpoena powers, All they need is one more rule about investigations, members must have complete transparency, and present all paperwork and testimony required or their suspension becomes permanent. Kind of like someone who writes a bad check to a show. Either make good on requirements or be suspended indefinitely.

They are a private club, and can make the rules as they see them, no judge can say your rules are illegal as long as they don’t discriminate. Suspending someone for failure to obey private club rules isn’t discrimination…[/QUOTE]

Agreed and said before…

[Ruby_G_Weber]

As those of us who may be a little long in the tooth would have said in our youth, Right On DMK.

[Jeito]

Is Ms. Tucker representing EM in New Jersey? Is she licensed in New Jersey? According to her own website, she’s only been licensed in Virginia and South Carolina. And, according to this, she was suspended in South Carolina in 2010 for failing to pay dues (nothing nefarious about that, she probably just let it lapse) - http://www.judicial.state.sc.us/whatsnew/supportingDocuments/SUSPEND-June2010.pdf

These are the rules for practicing law in New Jersey -

http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/rules/r1-21.htm

I’m pretty sure you can’t subpoena someone to appear in a state where you’re not licensed, so you might want to ask her about that

[findeight]

[QUOTE=Jumper221;6750355]
Scott is one of the most successful hunter riders and trainers in the country. He was suspended for a month within the past year for a medication violation, I believe involving using bute and other NSAIDS in amounts over the allowed limits. He’s also apparently on the cover of this month’s In Stride (USHJA) magazine, which is leaving bad taste in people’s mouth given the recent infractions.[/QUOTE]

Just to be accurate, it was 2 violations with 2 different horses at 2 different shows within a short period of time and I think it was last year and ther supension was served earlier this year. He blamed a newish on the road barn person for screwing it up…for what the day care charges are in barns like that, I should think a little more oganization should be expected. And I like the guy and have always tried to catch his rounds.

And re the big names on Amberhills Facebook page? Most of those people don’t even “do” Facebook as a habit let alone remembering who they might have friended a few years back or to support that contest last year. The one that was made to sound like doing a favor for a lucky child that got some well known people helping her with it. They hardly knew her.

EM was never the biggest name in the business and came off at the shows as normal (or as normal as anybody else sweating by the gate for a Pony round). Seeing somebody casually for 15 minutes every so often does not mean you can tell they are crazy. Even on here, she posted under a different user name until recently-her posts always resulted in trainwrecks but I did not know it actually was somebody I knew very, very slightly until that contest and somebody linking to old posts under the old user name. Somebody with a user name Pony Mom with some numers after it, like a birth date, does not suggest a professional horse person any more then the thread contents did.

I dislike lawyer letters but can get one right back at her and still have no intention of posting anything on her wall…it just feeds the beast.