Say it isn't so....Inclusive on USEF Drug List

[RugBug]

[QUOTE=DMK;8276622]
I have never figured out the logic behind not testing the winners.[/QUOTE]

It doesn’t seem logical to me either. If you drug to win, lessen the ability to win while drugged and you’re halfway there.

@OverandOnward;8276699

What is the source of the incentive to cheat with drugs? Fix that and the problem will solve itself.

Wouldn’t that be easier? Why isn’t it?

People drug for two reasons, I think:

1. Winning

2. Keeping riders “safe.”

IMO, 1. can be solved for, 2. is the trickier piece. There is a whole lot of money tied up in getting Amy Amatuer or Hannah Horse-Show-Mom’s precious Penelope Pony Rider to the ring quickly and safely (and maybe successfully, defined as something other than staying on). It’s awfully hard to convince them that the answer is staying home longer, buying the horse/pony that is safe but isn’t competitive, for a while, etc. Number two has a greater impact on income for trainers, so while 1. seems fairly easy to fix especially in the pro divisions, 2. is the real crux, if you want lasting results.

[ynl063w]

[QUOTE=OverandOnward;8276733]
Completely missed my point. COMPLETELY. :winkgrin:[/QUOTE]

You said that most effective way to regulate behavior is to remove the incentive, and get people police themselves, rather than testing and punishing.

The incentive is to win. Are you suggesting trying to find a way to stop people from wanting to win? Good luck with that LOL! :winkgrin:

[vxf111]

My point is to write better USEF rules rather than rely on private parties to contract around less well written USEF rules

[ynl063w]

[QUOTE=vxf111;8276748]
My point is to write better USEF rules rather than rely on private parties to contract around less well written USEF rules[/QUOTE]

I agree with this. The private party contract approach seems as though it would be messy, time-intensive, ineffective, and very expensive for the owner of the horse that was leased out if it came to taking the violator to court.

[ynl063w]

[QUOTE=RugBug;8276739]
It doesn’t seem logical to me either. If you drug to win, lessen the ability to win while drugged and you’re halfway there.

People drug for two reasons, I think:

1. Winning

2. Keeping riders “safe.”

IMO, 1. can be solved for, 2. is the trickier piece. There is a whole lot of money tied up in getting Amy Amatuer or Hannah Horse-Show-Mom’s precious Penelope Pony Rider to the ring quickly and safely (and maybe successfully, defined as something other than staying on). It’s awfully hard to convince them that the answer is staying home longer, buying the horse/pony that is safe but isn’t competitive, for a while, etc. Number two has a greater impact on income for trainers, so while 1. seems fairly easy to fix especially in the pro divisions, 2. is the real crux, if you want lasting results.[/QUOTE]

My thought is that safety is a potential issue at the very lowest levels, but maybe not so much when you get to the average amateur owner or junior rider showing at the A or AA levels. I don’t subscribe to the opinion that none of these people can actually ride. The majority of them are perfectly capable of staying on a horse that crow hops or playfully bucks around a corner. The problem is that as soon as they walk into the show ring on a horse that consistently behaves that way, they are out of the ribbons. And they are spending way too much money to play in that sandbox to have that happen. These are probably the horses that are most likely to be drugged, because maybe the owner can’t afford a horse of equal quality that DOESN’T exhibit that behavior.

Any rider who shows on the A circuit who winds up with a horse that is truly unsafe most likely has a trainer that is not going to have any interest in keeping that horse in his barn, and the horse will be gone and replaced very quickly.

[Lord_Helpus]

[QUOTE=juststartingout;8276594]
Wish this would work – unfortunately much of these meds are from that source – maybe without a script, but enforcing writing a script is next to impossible – this is why setting the horse down makes so much sense, no chasing or defining or identifying the “responsible” party - the horse tests positive, it gets set down[/QUOTE]

Hmmmm, interesting. Are you saying that, instead of trying to pin the drugs on the person who might have drugged/ordered the administration of the drug, the rule is swift and clean – suspend the horse.

The trainer gets ‘hurt’ because his reputation is tarnished and he will probably lose the customer. The owner is hurt because it is her horse which cannot be shown (this is the best way to make owners REALLY careful about who they train with) and the horse gets a vaca.

The only way this would work is if horses have to be microchipped. We all know how easy it is to change a horse’s name and identity; so only of a horse is microchipped can this rule work.

[I doubt if such a rule would ever pass, but it is an interesting concept.]

[showjumper2009]

[QUOTE=vineyridge;8273102]

Western Pleasure people seem to often permanently block tails so they won’t show tension. Will showhunters come to that?

OT, but did y’all know that nerved horses can’t show FEI?[/QUOTE]

Show hunters already do nerve block tails. The blocks I’ve seen weren’t usually permanent & had to be redone every 6-12 months. I’m not sure how common it is in the horses, but I know it’s prevalent in the pony ring to ensure no tail flagging (or even the tiniest shake). All true welsh ponies can trace bloodlines back to some Arab blood (or so I was told as a pony kid). I’m not sure if that was supposed to imply that welsh ponies flag their tails more often (?) but I’m not trying to imply that. Pony classes are supposed to be judged on suitability, so tail shakes may be more harshly penalized, though I would think that’d apply in children’s more than regulars.
I have seen some of these blocks go wrong, causing terrible abscesses & permanent scarring. It did also affect some ponies’ ability to lift their tails to go to the bathroom & left them unable to swat flies. I don’t know about the legality of it per USEF rules, but I remember being told not to talk about it when I was younger (10-12 years ago) & a pony I rode “needed” his tail blocked. People usually try weighted fake tails first.

[Ghazzu]

[QUOTE=alteringwego;8275971]
I have this wild idea of legalizing medications and supplements but making it so you have to have a vet’s prescription to be administered. Just like in humans. Also legalize things such as ace, dex, etc. but make owners pay a fee to have them administered by vets at the show.
All of the criminalization and legalization of drugs continues to drive competitors to alternative means of getting by. I agree that the nature of the law is good but I don’t think you can criminalize folks in to compliance. If it’s not ace, it dex, if it’s not dex, it’s gaba, if it’s not gaba, it’s perfect prep, if it’s not perfect prep, it’s 4 hours of lunging and 4 hours of riding.
Take a look at drug rules for reiners and get back to me.[/QUOTE]

What possible rationale do you have for making tranquilizers legal so long as they’re administered by a DVM ? dos that somehow alter their effect?

[RugBug]

@ynl063w;8276770

My thought is that safety is a potential issue at the very lowest levels, but maybe not so much when you get to the average amateur owner or junior rider showing at the A or AA levels. I don’t subscribe to the opinion that none of these people can actually ride. The majority of them are perfectly capable of staying on a horse that crow hops or playfully bucks around a corner.

I’m not of the opinion that they all can’t ride, either. BUT there is a huge push to get folks into the ring ASAP…because people want it. The low divisions at the A shows are full and the horses have to deal with a lot. People ARE showing at the A shows well before they are ready…and the quiet horse is going to rule that area. And those fancy ponies? Fancy often comes with quirky.

Maybe unsafe is the wrong word, or only a small portion of the ever present need to be successful in the ring.

[mroades]

If you all knew how many hunters tails were “done” you would not believe it

[caballogurl]

At the hunter barn I briefly rode at, I would say about 30% of the horses had their tails blocked. I had never even heard of such a thing until one of the kids let it slip…and I started to wonder why none of the horses could properly swish their tails to get rid of flies :(.

[ynl063w]

[QUOTE=RugBug;8276809]
I’m not of the opinion that they all can’t ride, either. BUT there is a huge push to get folks into the ring ASAP…because people want it. The low divisions at the A shows are full and the horses have to deal with a lot. People ARE showing at the A shows well before they are ready…and the quiet horse is going to rule that area. And those fancy ponies? Fancy often comes with quirky.

Maybe unsafe is the wrong word, or only a small portion of the ever present need to be successful in the ring.[/QUOTE]

Oh I agree with you that there are plenty of people showing at the huge show circuits all over the country who aren’t ready for it, and those are probably the ones who CAN’T handle the crow hops and playful bucks around the corners. That’s why I said those horses are probably the most at risk for being given something that shouldn’t be given. Those people are even less likely to keep a truly unsafe horse than the ones who can handle a bit of bad behavior.

No BNT wants the show world to see his clients riding around the ring on a horse that plays too much on the corners, let alone one that behaves really badly. It’s bad for business.

[huntersgonewild]

[QUOTE=Ghazzu;8276796]
What possible rationale do you have for making tranquilizers legal so long as they’re administered by a DVM ? dos that somehow alter their effect?[/QUOTE]

To stop horses from dropping dead from IV magnesium and colicking to death from GABA. Anyone who has been around long enough knows that a small amount of ace (which is easily regulated if the threshold level is set appropriately) is far, far safer than a lot of what is going around for both horse and rider. It is also easy to test for. Just think if the GABA test is somehow thrown out? The people who have stopped using it will go back to it and the ones who kept using it and never got caught will keep on. More horses being made to feel like crap so their riders and owners can feel good about themselves. I think the idea of a vet administering is to ensure correct dosage and safety of the administration of an injection. It will never happen and maybe it shouldn’t but in my lifetime, I have watched the lengths that people have gone to to mimic .2 cc of Ace and the effect that it has had on horse welfare. For anyone who likes to look at old pictures and think they were achieved naturally, you would be surprised.

[Sticky_Situation]

So even if all drugs were legal as long as they were administered by a vet, what will stop people from obtaining their own drugs from less legitimate sources and medicating their horses themselves? Maybe they want to give a higher dose of something, or a combination of drugs the vet doesn’t believe is advisable and won’t do himself, etc.

Drug testing would then still be necessary to detect those trying to circumvent the rules, so costs would likely be even higher once you factor in paying for the show vet.

And where do oral medications fit into this scheme?

Or should we just legalize everything and let it turn into to a horse drugging free-for-all?

I just can’t bring myself to believe it is a good idea to jump around a course of decent sized fences on a sedated horse.

[snaffle1987]

I have never once seen a welsh pony flag its tail the arena except when running around free and “feeling their oats”. I find it sad that these practices are kept behind closed doors like this. If our judges cannot look past a tail swish in the arena; then they should perhaps look to find another job elsewhere.

[jhg140]

[QUOTE=snaffle1987;8277145]
I have never once seen a welsh pony flag its tail the arena except when running around free and “feeling their oats”. I find it sad that these practices are kept behind closed doors like this. If our judges cannot look past a tail swish in the arena; then they should perhaps look to find another job elsewhere.[/QUOTE]

I guess I’m in this boat, as I’m a bit surprised by this talk about tails being done. I groomed for some of the top ponies and horses in the country (I’m talking Pony Finals champions, a horse that won Medal finals, and a junior hunter who was retired at Devon), and we didn’t do any of this. We did things that I did not agree with, but that was not one of them.

[RockinHorse]

[QUOTE=jhg140;8277212]
I guess I’m in this boat, as I’m a bit surprised by this talk about tails being done. I groomed for some of the top ponies and horses in the country (I’m talking Pony Finals champions, a horse that won Medal finals, and a junior hunter who was retired at Devon), and we didn’t do any of this. We did things that I did not agree with, but that was not one of them.[/QUOTE]

Then your barn must not have been showing Arab ponies and calling them Welsh.:eek:

[findeight]

Yes…the “Welsh cross” that’s actually Half Arab.

Not a practice I care for but there are several different types of procedures ranging from tightly wrapping to injections to surgical fixes out there with differing lifespans. Flagging or crooked tails is distracting at best, a deduction at worst, those that can afford it with trainers who tell the truth just pay more for horses who don’t have the problem. The rest live with it or…

BTW, IME it exists across the board discipline wise and, except for ASBs, is either specifically forbidden or falls under artificially changing the horse’s appearance to hide a flaw in the various rule books.

I never did it, don’t condone it but pretty sure one of my Western horses and two of my Hunters had something done at some point before I got them. Never was a practice at the barns I was in but they are out there and a good job makes it pretty hard to tell.

Some of the not so good jobs or those that caused a little bit of white hair (not a “skunk stripe”, a little bit) to grow around a scar somewhere around the top of the tail? Get accredited to getting their tail caught in a trailer or stall door-yeah, sure, whatever you say:cool:

[bugsynskeeter]

[QUOTE=alteringwego;8275971]
I have this wild idea of legalizing medications and supplements but making it so you have to have a vet’s prescription to be administered. Just like in humans. Also legalize things such as ace, dex, etc. but make owners pay a fee to have them administered by vets at the show.
All of the criminalization and legalization of drugs continues to drive competitors to alternative means of getting by. I agree that the nature of the law is good but I don’t think you can criminalize folks in to compliance. If it’s not ace, it dex, if it’s not dex, it’s gaba, if it’s not gaba, it’s perfect prep, if it’s not perfect prep, it’s 4 hours of lunging and 4 hours of riding.
Take a look at drug rules for reiners and get back to me.[/QUOTE]

I am very familiar with the medications rules for reiners. More so than most I would say. So what would you like me to get back to you on?

[mvp]

[QUOTE=RugBug;8276739]
It doesn’t seem logical to me either. If you drug to win, lessen the ability to win while drugged and you’re halfway there.

People drug for two reasons, I think:

1. Winning

2. Keeping riders “safe.”

IMO, 1. can be solved for, 2. is the trickier piece. There is a whole lot of money tied up in getting Amy Amatuer or Hannah Horse-Show-Mom’s precious Penelope Pony Rider to the ring quickly and safely (and maybe successfully, defined as something other than staying on). It’s awfully hard to convince them that the answer is staying home longer, buying the horse/pony that is safe but isn’t competitive, for a while, etc. Number two has a greater impact on income for trainers, so while 1. seems fairly easy to fix especially in the pro divisions, 2. is the real crux, if you want lasting results.[/QUOTE]

I can’t imagine the optics of a discussion among high-level folks that goes like this:

“The USEF and top horse trainers have decided to allow the drugging of horses in the name of keeping riders safe. Kudos to us!”

How are you going to explain to anyone that these lovely, broke-looking show horses need to be drugged to be rideable? How are you going to explain to the rider that she’s so bad that she needs to ride one that has been sedated? How you are you going to tell her that you’re a great trainer when, even after you have done your work, her horse still needs to be drugged? How are you going to tell the rider that she should feel safe-- which was the point-- cantering and jumping on her drugged horse?"

I suspect that more trainers, more of the time, and for more horses think about drugging them (or wish they could) to keep some client either safe or competitive than do pros with professional riders looking for an edge with a really great horse. But there’s now way that drug-it-for-the-client problem can be acknowledged publicly.