*Proposed* USEF Microchip Rule

[Peggy]

Proposed rule change (for December 2014) would start the process towards horses need microchips for USEF competitions.

US Equestrian

It would start with horses getting new ID# or recordings or name changes and eventually be a requirement for all horses showing at USEF shows. Proposed by USHJA.

The justification reads "Intent of Proposal: There is a problem in the hunter and jumper disciplines when already registered horses obtain “new identities” when FEI passportsare issued under new names even though they already have existing FEI passports and when horses already registered with theUSEF / USHJA are re-registered as “new horses” with USEF / USHJA. This practice makes it difficult to track past performancerecords, and allows unfair competition when experienced or older horses compete in competitions restricted by horse age orexperience. It also makes it possible to hide a horse’s past performance when due diligence is being done in connection with apurchase. The permanent identification of horses with microchips would eliminate these improper practices.The FEI currentlyrequires that all horses applying for a new passport must have microchip identification. The FEI has established standards formicrochip identification and has authorized two brands of chips to be used. There is a universal scanner that reads the chipinformation. Microchip identification is relatively inexpensive with chips at a cost less than $50, and microchip insertion isrelatively cheap. The expected cost for horse microchip identification should be about $100. Microchip is a safe and time testedidentification process. USEF will control the source of the microchip ID used, the distribution of the microchip ID’s, the vets whoare authorized to implant them and the minimum data set that each chip must contain. "

[Kestrel]

Works for me. Though it doesn’t say anything about when/why they would actually scan the chip. I do think it will put a huge dent in the blatant entry of experienced horses in classes where they aren’t eligible. As an owner, I would love to have more verifiable info on a horse that I was considering buying. And for a change, this cost is a one-time thing that’s only about the cost of a set of braids.

They sure are out to make some big changes this time. I didn’t read all the proposals, but they have quite a bundle of them

[rosebudranch]

think this is an amazing idea… soon enough smart phones will have the ability to scan micro chips… i see it in the future

[Pennywell_Bay]

Groan. I guess I’ll be the lone voice of dissent that I can’t stand having to microchip my horses to show USEF (and I am a current, showing member). I know why it is needed (example, the Devon debacle) but I guess I mildly resent having to do it. Sigh. Bad apples can spoil the whole bunch.

[vxf111]

I am not against microchipping but assuming this goes through the usual rule passage stuff… having to be chipped by 12/1/14 seems like a short timeframe to me (for all horses in restricted classes which is going to be basically all the ponies and junior and pro horses-- so most horses). Seems like chipping is the wave of the future, I guess it’s time to get on board!

[findeight]

[QUOTE=vxf111;7249510]
I am not against microchipping but assuming this goes through the usual rule passage stuff… having to be chipped by 12/1/14 seems like a short timeframe to me (for all horses in restricted classes which is going to be basically all the ponies and junior and pro horses-- so most horses). Seems like chipping is the wave of the future, I guess it’s time to get on board![/QUOTE]

The rule would be effective 2014 for the 2015 show year, if passed, since it’s a proposal at this point. Looks like a gradual phase in required to process transfers, name changes and new #s the first year except for restricted classes. Seems sensible and easy enough for the majority with a whole year of lead time IF it passes, almost 2 years for the unrestricted divisions.

I am in favor (as a member) of this type of gradual phase in as a response to many member complaints about the lack of ability to properly track a horse’s identity, ownership, past performance and eligibility.

[kmwines01]

I would think that’s a pretty generous time frame. Your horse gets yearly vaccinations so it should be really easy to just put a microchip in at that time. It’s not a difficult process.

[vxf111]

Sorry, mybad. I was thinking THIS December is 2014. Hadn’t had my coffee yet!!

[pattnic]

I think it’s a great idea.

[trubandloki]

It sounds like a great idea to me.

[ElementFarm]

I LOVE this idea!! I’m tried of seeing the same ponies in different parts of the country starting out their ‘green year’ every season. I agree that it’s only effective if the microcips are actually scanned at events (maybe random division or random horses like drug testing).
Also, how easy would it be for unscrupulous trainer/barn/vet to dig out the old “incriminating” chip so the horse could be issued a new identity?

[dags]

Thrilled. Less that we have to microchip everything, but more to see USHJA taking steps against an obvious issue with high visibility of late. And given all of our discussions, I don’t think we ever came up with an alternative that would work as well as the microchips, so here we are. Doing something about it. Yay!

The next discussion may center around where this will lead. A microchipped horse is very useful to a lot of agencies, very handy for veterinarians, a godsend for buyers and, quite possibly, a nuisance for some sellers. It is non-discipline specific.

Where will this database be held? Should USEF/USHJA be the ones in charge of it, or should it be tied into something more national, or global? Or will several enterprises/agencies build their own databases off the one MC #? Thereby having lots of info out there about the horse but none of it connected?

I’m imagining USDA thinking this is a GREAT idea, especially to track medications in the slaughter pipeline, and I don’t want to suddenly have 3 different MCs to implant, one per each Big Brother. We need usef to be thinking a little ahead here, predicting trends, so we’re not all wasting money on technology we will need to replace/redo in 3 years.

The idea of a non-affiliated outside entity coordinating with veterinarians to maintain a database of the horse’s vet records is intriguing and simultaneously scary. The thought of accessing the entire vet history of a horse I am interested in is so tantalizing, and having those records available for the various vets a horse will meet in his lifetime could be very useful.

The entire concept ties in with One Life/One Number, ie, the Universal Equine Life Number, and it looks like they focus solely on storing the number and allowing the various agencies/registries to maintain their own databases. http://www.ueln.net/

The USEF has long said it wants to manage sport, not track equines, so are they the wisest choice to manage the database? Should we tie in with UELN, or establish our own national spinoff? Might this be something (actually useful) for PHR to do? (the sparsely populated Performance Horse Registry, which I believe is run under USEF umbrella anyway)

These are just thoughts. I’m not saying any of this could, would or should happen, but it’s very interesting and a concept that may have ramifications beyond the HJ sport.

[Lostboy]

I can see how this would be useful to stop problems with cheating. But three other things come to mind

1. Have you seen what it looks like when bad people try and remove these things to avoid others from knowing what horse it is ?
2. ongoing charge by someone for record keeping/updates etc, yay more petty cash for USEF or whoever.
3. The beginnings of national horse tracking ability and eventual taxation by our friends the government. Taxing horses like real property pops up occasionally in states looking for other ways to get money. Call me paranoid, it’s OK

[JazCreekInc]

As a breeder and active competitor I think this is a wonderful idea and already implemented by many European registries. My GOV foals are already microchipped, I would imagine USEF will figure out how to use this existing chip to attach to.
Many breeders can not keep track of their horses achievements because names are changed and as it has been cheaper and easier to get a new ID than to change ownership horses records are very hard to track. If the American riders and breeders hope to track horses effectively and breed on a scale similar to the Europeans this is a step in the right direction.
Kudos to the USEF for finally getting their act together on this, I certainly hope it passes.
And to follow Dags train of thought- I see no reason why the UELN could not be the microchip number to continue to pool as much data as possible rather than preventing people from following horses.

[vineyridge]

The USEF proposes being the source of the microchips and ID numbers and authorizing which vets can implant them. That’s an awful lot of extra work. What about all the horses who are already microchipped with FEI compliant chips that came from registries or other sources? Will they have to be re-chipped with USEF compliant chips?

God knows I’m in favor of microchipping and have been for YEARS, but I do not like the idea of that much USEF control. Why can’t they just adopt what the FEI does, except of course the USEF doesn’t have passports?

I just had my guy microchipped with the Home Again chip, which is FEI compliant, but it was privately done. The microchip number would accompany all of his recordings with the USEF and disciplines.

Perhaps I’m not understanding the process, but IF the USEF were to adopt the UELN, wouldn’t it just be part of the data linked to the microchip number from the manufacturer and not the number itself?

[dags]

USEF will only provide a list of suitable MC types, not distribute them. And apparently they will “incorporate” the already existing FEI or Breed Reg number into the USEF/USHJA registrations.

As only the justification was included in the OP I have copied the actual rule:

From https://www.usef.org/documents/ruleChanges/278-13.pdf

Proposed Change:
EQ100 Microchip Identification [CHAPTER SUBCHAPTER EQ-1 REGULATIONS FOR ALL SEATS, EQ100 ELIGIBILITY TO
COMPETE] add and renumber as necessary:

3. Starting December 1, 2014, all horses receiving a new USEF Horse Recording or a new USHJA Horse Registration or a
   change of name with an existing USEF Horse Recording or USHJA Horse Registration must have an implanted microchip ID.
   The microchip ID device must be approved by the Federation and no substitute microchip device is permitted. A list of
   Federation approved microchips is available at www.usef.org.
   If the horse has a Federation approved microchip previously implanted by another recognized Federation or a Breed Registry,
   that number will be incorporated with the new USEF Recording and USHJA Registration number.

4. All horses that apply for a name change to an FEI Passport must have an implanted microchip ID.

5.a. Starting December 1, 2014, for USEF Hunter competitions Rated C and above, every horse competing in classes restricted
by the horse’s age, experience or other classification, must have an implanted microchip ID in order to compete. The
microchip ID device must be approved by the Federation and no substitute microchip device is permitted. A list of Federation
approved microchips is available at www.usef.org.

5.b. All horses competing in age restricted classes must have one of the following: registration papers issued by a World
Breeders Federation Sport Horse (WBFSH) recognized registry; a United States Equestrian Federation (USEF) recognized
registry (list available at www.usef.org); a Certificate of Pedigree from a breed or sport horse registry; or an Age Verification
Form signed by a veterinarian in good standing with the AAEP (American Association of Equine Practitioners). Breed
registries must provide the following information; age verification, DNA verification and UELN (Universal Equine Life
Number).

6. Starting December 1, 2015, all horses recorded with USEF and registered with USHJA must have an implanted microchip ID
   in order to compete. The microchip ID device must be approved by the Federation and no substitute microchip device is
   permitted. A list of Federation approved microchips is available at www.usef.org.

[vineyridge]

THANK GOD! The actual rule is rational and will most likely do its job.

[M_O_Connor]

I spoke with someone at USEF about this last week, as I wanted to clarify which chips were authorized. USEF plans to follow the FEI standard.

I was told that the AVID chips that some use here are not FEI compliant. I wrote down the info on the other types that are FEI compliant–now I can’t quite remember where I wrote that down… [it will turn up someplace].

Some have expressed reservations about the chips because:

1. the chip is only as good as the information placed on it, and if that information is fraudulent, then the system is no good.

To me, it’s a way higher standard than the one we now have, which leaves the door wide open for all sorts of abuse. Besides, it seems that one could only cheat one time in the above scenario, not multiple times as is the case now.

2. I have heard people sort of panicking and saying that stewards can’t be expected to scan every horse at every show, etc… :grief:

Good grief. No one is suggesting that. Just the idea that horses COULD be checked would serve as a deterrent to horse swappers and crooks and cheaters. Is it perfect? No, but it’s lightyears ahead of what’s there now.

And breeders and former owners being able to keep track of their former horses is a great thing. I’m all for it.

[Peggy]

When this came up before I asked my vet how easy it would be to remove a chip and she said very difficult, exacerbated by the fact that they migrate slightly so you don’t know exactly where they are. A horse with a removed chip would certainly not be showing in any conformation or model classes afterwards and I imagine it would leave a pretty obvious scar.

[ParadoxFarm]

I think it is a good idea.

That being said, I guarantee shows will find a way to make money one this. You will start seeing a new line item on bills:

Scanning Fee… $100