*Proposed* USEF Microchip Rule

[MHM]

[QUOTE=vxf111;7251815]
Maybe there could be a threshold? Horses that show in 3 or more USEF rated show in a year have to comply but other horses don’t?

I actually don’t have a problem with the rule. Or chipping my horses. I think it’s a good idea. But perhaps there could be some exception for horses that very very very rarely show rated and just want to do 1-2 special shows each year.[/QUOTE]
I think that would make sense, and maybe add on the Opportunity classes, the ones that don’t require participants to pay all the fees now.

I just hate to see anything else that would discourage people from dipping a toe in the waters at USEF shows. Maybe they will continue showing at USEF shows, maybe they will decide it’s not their cup of tea. But they won’t know if they don’t get to try in the first place.

[Jaideux]

Heck, as a buyer I’d pay a bit extra to purchase a microchipped horse that I can verify age/breed/etc. Even if I wasn’t planning on showing. The idea of using it for identification purposes if, heaven forbid, a horse was stolen or got lost/loose is also wonderful. My dog and cat are microchipped.

Maybe it will one day become a kind of general (voluntary) standard at birth. Vet does the wellness exam, chips the baby, and voila. Tracking for life.

[4ponies]

Halleluiah!!! Glad to see this is finally getting some traction! Keep in mind - its not only for rule following - tracking livestock disease is a key component of being able to reduce the type of problems that happened last winter and being able to track origins and spread. Insertion of chips is easy - should be done as foals - I know most breeders would happily foot the cost if it meant they could easily access the long term performance record of the horses they breed. I know I would! The USEF/USHJA have to make sure that databasing happens in a timely manner and make it a benefit - not just a way to catch rule breakers.

[vineyridge]

So under the new proposed exception, European jumpers under 6 can show as Green. What about Pre-Green? The scandal of this year’s Pre-Green Incentive Series would or would not be prevented in the future? And the exception only seems to apply to FEI competitions, not National ones, which is probably bad drafting or reasoning.

Showing in Germany in National jumping competitions over 3’6 is just as much experience as showing FEI.

IMO, Rule 103.1 needs to go back to the drafting board. There has to be a better way.

[Peggy]

[QUOTE=vineyridge;7252092]
So under the new proposed exception, European jumpers under 6 can show as Green. What about Pre-Green? The scandal of this year’s Pre-Green Incentive Series would or would not be prevented in the future? And the exception only seems to apply to FEI competitions, not National ones, which is probably bad drafting or reasoning.

Showing in Germany in National jumping competitions over 3’6 is just as much experience as showing FEI.

IMO, Rule 103.1 needs to go back to the drafting board. There has to be a better way.[/QUOTE]Agree that 103.1 doesn’t go far enough. It’s the same for Pre-Green, which bothers me even more.

I just realized that when I did my copy and paste of 103.1, the strikeout and boldface didn’t come through. It reads a bit better with the strikeout parts gone, so interested parties should follow the link I provided back on page 2.

[2bayboys]

I am absolutely in favor of micro chipping my horses. I do it with my dogs, companion animals only and all of them rescues, so the arguments against cost are somewhat ridiculous when we are considering the benefits for the welfare of the animal.

I think chipping will become so routine eventually that all breeders will automatically chip their foals and buyers will be suspicious of purchasing a horse that is not chipped.

I wish it was an enforceable rule that anyone who imports a horse that is not already chipped must implant a micro chip and record the horse’s age, breeding, and origin on the chip prior to the horse’s release from quarantine. Since losing passports seems to be such a prevalent problem. :winkgrin:

[merrygoround]

Just so long as the USEF doesn’t charge an exorbitant fee for re registering microchipped horses. And also so long as they charge the going rate for microchips AND accept microchips already in place.

The concept is good and the reasoning behind it excellent.

[vineyridge]

[QUOTE=Peggy;7252116]
Agree that 103.1 doesn’t go far enough. It’s the same for Pre-Green, which bothers me even more.

I just realized that when I did my copy and paste of 103.1, the strikeout and boldface didn’t come through. It reads a bit better with the strikeout parts gone, so interested parties should follow the link I provided back on page 2.[/QUOTE]

The more I think about the new 103.1 not applying to foreign national competitions EVER no matter the horse’s age and only having an FEI exception, it looks to me as if the foxes are definitely running the henhouse. You could have a grand prix jumper in Germany, albeit not FEI, who is ten and just imported and under the new rule he’s going to be given the whole pre-green/green hunter career. If the USEF is going to do that for imported horses, why not for North American ones as well? Why do US and Canadian and FEI jumpers get dinged and out, but not national horses in any other country?

Also under the changed rule, you could have an advanced event horse who jumps 3* heights but not at 3* competitions and it would be covered.

Did Larry Glefke write this rule?

Here’s the 2013 Rule:

HU103 Green Status - Hunter

1. A Green Hunter is a horse of any age in its first or second year of showing in any classes in which the national specifications require horses to jump 3’6" or higher, regardless of whether or not the fences are actually set at 3’6" or higher at Regular Competitions or Eventing Competitions of the Federation or Equine Canada or any national or international competition.
   a. When shown in a Green section a horse in its first year of showing over fences 3’6" or higher must be shown as a First Year Green horse.
   b. When shown in a Green section a horse in its second year of showing over
   fences 3’6" or higher must be shown as a Second Year Green horse.
2. A horse’s green status is considered to be broken once it competes over fences 3’6" or higher.
3. If a competition starts prior to or on November 30th, Green status at the start of the competition is maintained throughout the competition.

Here’s the Proposed new Rule:

HU103 Green Status-Hunter

A Green hunter is a horse of any age in his first or second year of showing in any hunter, jumper, hunter seat equitation or jumping seat equitation classes held at Federation Licensed competitions, Equine Canada competitions and/or FEI competitions in which the specifications require horses to jump 3’6" (1.075m) or higher, regardless of whether or not the fences are actually set at 3’6" ( 1.075m).
Exception: Horses 6 years of age and under competing over fences of 3’6" or higher in jumper classes at FEI competitions will retain eligibilty as green hunters. The green status is the responsibility of the owner.

The rationale seems to be that the USEF and the owners shouldn’t have to be bothered with show records of foreign National Competitions for imported horses. Why would the USEF give foreign horses who have competed in National jumping competitions a pass and not give the same pass to US and Canadian and FEI jumpers?

[dianehalpin]

If they would simply scan the class winner in rated classes at A or AA shows, I’d be tickled pink. My understanding is that the chip already implanted in GOV Oldenburgs is FEI-approved. Am I wrong?

[chunky_munky]

You know , kind of an interesting thing that maybe people missed is that the HITS 500K class (3’3") was open to all ages of horses…and a 5 year old beat them all. It is not that unusual for quality to beat experience.

[SarahKing]

Are these microchips going do be different that the ones currently in use for dogs and cats? Because the average AVID / Home Again chip doesn’t actually “store” any information other than a unique ID number. If you find a chipped dog, you have to contact the company of origin and get the owner information from them.

[vxf111]

[QUOTE=SarahKing;7255611]
Are these microchips going do be different that the ones currently in use for dogs and cats? Because the average AVID / Home Again chip doesn’t actually “store” any information other than a unique ID number. If you find a chipped dog, you have to contact the company of origin and get the owner information from them.[/QUOTE]

If other information is on file with the USEF, it can be associated in their database with the chip number.

[Derby_Lyn_Farms]

I haven’t read everything on this, so I am sorry if this has been talked about. Couldn’t they offer incentives for registered horses? AQHA and other breeds offer points and sometimes paybacks. I know someone would have to step up to this task, each registry or USEF. But it would encourage people not to “lose” papers and bloodlines on horses.

[poltroon]

I appreciate the intent, but I am not 100% in favor as written. $100 (plus a vet call) isn’t a lot if you’re off to Florida or Thermal, but for someone showing at only one or two Recognized shows a year, that’s adding to the tipping point of the USEF membership, plus a horse recording, plus the expenses of the actual show. Thus, I would expect that one impact would be that more people will choose to stick with unrecognized or local outings.

If I were writing this, I might restrict it to A rated divisions, or perhaps only to horses showing for USEF year end awards.

[findeight]

The breed association itself would have to preside over any incentive program. AQHA, for example, could offer and finance something for QHs in Open competition at USEF shows. USEF is not into promoting specific breeds and it’s members are not going to want to pay more fees to finance a cash incentive program for specific breeds they don’t own.

[SonnysMom]

[QUOTE=findeight;7256736]
The breed association itself would have to preside over any incentive program. AQHA, for example, could offer and finance something for QHs in Open competition at USEF shows. USEF is not into promoting specific breeds and it’s members are not going to want to pay more fees to finance a cash incentive program for specific breeds they don’t own.[/QUOTE]

I don’t think she meant it to be a breed specific recognition. She was just using the AQHA as an example.
So any horse that is microchipped would be eligible for cash incentive based on wins in the year. So if your horse was microchipped you would be eligible and it doesn’t matter if the horse is a purebred or a mutt. She said registered but I took it to mean registered with the microchip program not registered with a breed association.

[findeight]

Having a dense day I suppose, and I had coffee. But if they all have to be chipped in 2 years if this passes? What would the incentive be for? And, more important, how much would they want from us, the membership, to fund cash awards to hundreds of horses?

[SonnysMom]

[QUOTE=findeight;7257557]
Having a dense day I suppose, and I had coffee. But if they all have to be chipped in 2 years if this passes? What would the incentive be for? And, more important, how much would they want from us, the membership, to fund cash awards to hundreds of horses?[/QUOTE]

Do they all need to be chipped in 2 years or only certain division in 2 years? I think AQHA the breeder nominates and pays a fee for the Incentive fund when they register the foal. Both the breeder and the owner at the time of the points get the incentive money.
Maybe the non-mandatory classes the breeder would pay to have the foal/young horse chipped and pay the fee. This way they would get the benefit of being able to track their stock’s career and maybe get a little bit of financial benefit from it.
If a particular owner wanted to nominate for the incentive fund that could be an option too. Make it cheaper to nominate a foal then a YH than a mature horse. This also might lead to an increase in class sizes for In-hand if they count towards the incentive fund.
The breeder would not get any of the incentive fund if they were not the ones that nominated the horse.
So if you set it so the nominating individual gets say 15% of the incentive fee and the owner at time of points gets say 85%. Or 10%/90% or 20%/80% etc… The fees for the fund would come from the people that would benefit the most. Breeder/nominator and current owner.

I dont’ show at this level so it is really just a mental excercise for me. I also only have a very fuzzy memory of how the AQHA Incentive Fund worked because Sonny was nominated. But since I never showed him at anything that would qualify under the program I didn’t benefit or look that hard into the details.

[Trevelyan96]

I’m all in favor, except for this part.

[QUOTE=Peggy;7249296]
USEF will control the source of the microchip ID used, the distribution of the microchip ID’s, the vets whoare authorized to implant them . "[/QUOTE]

What do you do if your vet is not ‘controlled’ by USEF? My horse is already chipped, so will I have to do a 2nd one if the manufacturer or vets are not on the USEF control list?

It might just be the wording, but it could be important for many who’ve already had their horses chipped.

[vineyridge]

The actual rule proposal does not say what the summary does.

It’s not the chip manufacturer that is important but the radio frequency of the chip. The USEF will definitely HAVE to accept any chip that is FEI compliant, so if yours can be read on the FEI accepted frequencies, you probably won’t have a problem. If your current chip is read at a different radio frequency, then it might not be acceptable, depending on whether the USEF limits chips to the FEI frequencies.