The USEF Wants To Hear You

[vxf111]

[QUOTE=ynl063w;8018331]
I understand this; I was speaking more to those who have been suggesting that a horse MUST be microchipped in order to show, and that a microchip would only be issued to those who had proof of their horses’ identities. There are probably more horses and ponies out there that are registered with the USEF that HONESTLY don’t have any proof of identity, than there are those who have the documents but just don’t bother using them (for whatever reason) to register their horses with the USEF.[/QUOTE]

I would agree with requiring a chip to show (or to show in certain classes) but not that there be proof of identity. For all I care you can register your horse as “Nameless” by Unknown out of Unknown… but from the chip point forward your showing is tracked so that horse is that horse with its record and cannot become green again or become someone else. And you’re not eligible for breed awards if you didn’t register the horse as that breed and show some proof. If you want to have an unknown origin horse-- that’s fine-- but from this point forward he STAYS that horse and his showing is traceable.

I don’t believe USEF requires any proof of identity to register now. When I registered my TB I didn’t happen to have his JC papers at hand and USEF happily took my money and gave him a number and didn’t make me prove he was any specific horse. I foresee it functioning the same. If the horse is already chipped it must be registered with that chip number and all chipless horses get registered now… and whatever identity does or doesn’t get put in goes with the horse.

[vxf111]

[QUOTE=orangecrush;8018410]
I have never gotten the impression that USEF really cares about recording and the reason why is that I imported a horse from Holland and filled out all of the registration information to record with USEF. It was cold at the show where I did the form so my handwriting was admittedly not great. They spelled the stallion’s name wrong and didn’t bother to even guess at the mare’s name or the sire of the dam (who is easy to decipher and famous). Instead of contacting me to ask for clarification, they recorded all of the dam’s information as unknown and put the wrong spelling on the sire. I looked up how to fix this and the process, at least at the time, to correct the recording was too much of a pain to deal with given that I filled out all the information correctly the first time and have no intention of selling him.[/QUOTE]

Similar experience when they misspelled “Fabuleux” (which I had spelled correctly in TYPE on the form) and then they gave me the runaround and made me feel like it was MY fault before they’d change it to the correct spelling.

[adcurtiss]

I really like the idea about having a searchable trainer database with possible a list of students’ results under the trainer’s tutelage. It would make it easy to tell successful trainers from fakers, and I would also love to have a list of infractions if it applies.

[ynl063w]

[QUOTE=vxf111;8018512]
I would agree with requiring a chip to show (or to show in certain classes) but not that there be proof of identity. For all I care you can register your horse as “Nameless” but Unknown out of Unknown… but from the chip point forward your showing is tracked so that horse is that horse with its record and cannot become green again or become someone else. I don’t believe USEF requires any proof of identity to register now. When I registered my TB I didn’t happen to have his JC papers at hand and USEF happily took my money and gave him a number and didn’t make me prove he was any specific horse. I foresee it functioning the same. If the horse is already chipped it must be registered with that chip number and all chipless horses get registered now… and whatever identity does or doesn’t get put in goes with the horse.[/QUOTE]

I agree with you - I don’t think the chips will be much more useful than the current method of registration, other than once the horse is chipped, it should be harder (hopefully impossible) to change its identity.

I might be misunderstanding, but it seems as though some believe that microchipping is going to keep horses out of divisions for which they are not eligible. I don’t see how that is going to happen.

I agree with those who suggest getting rid of the mileage rule. I really think that was the downfall of the hunter industry. Before that was implemented, the middle class was able to participate, and participate successfully, by attending local, one day A shows, B shows, and C shows. You didn’t have to be extremely wealthy to enjoy the sport and be successful. If you worked hard enough, even if you didn’t have the fanciest animal out there, qualifying for Devon was an achievable goal. The amount of money it costs to show these days is obscene.

[vxf111]

It’ll keep horses out who came from overseas with chips (and matching verifiable show records) <–this assumes we go back to the days of a green rule that didn’t discount overseas showing.

And it’ll keep horses out of green divisions improperly from now on. No more new identities… no more changing names and losing the prior history. Once the record shows the horse stepped into a USEF class at a certain height-- it’ll be known forever and not ever lost.

If chipping becomes a requirement a LOT of breeders will do it young and ALL the imported horses from Europe and the UK already come with the chips. So the only horses without identities who can be fudged will be primarily second-career types and miscellaneous types. I’m frankly less concerned with those. I don’t think those are the ones swooping up all the pre-green prizes. The OTTB whose papers are lost who is doing the baby greens isn’t the one that gets people upset. It’s the 6 figure warmblood that was doing 4’6 jumpers in Germany and comes over to clean up in the pre-greens. Even if some horses have chips but unknown background, from now ON their show history at LEAST will be known. Over time, chipping will become more and more common younger and younger (I’d support a sliding fee scale that encourages chipping young) and truly “unknown background” horses will be less common.

I am also no big fan of the mileage rule but I’ll pick my battles and I know the powers that be aren’t going to want to change that. So I prefer to go for (1) enforce the damn rules as written; and (2) let’s start chipping and tracking horses now.

[Peggy]

[QUOTE=ynl063w;8018406]
I guess those who truly do not know the identity of their horses (and those horses aren’t already microchipped) could just make an educated guess for the birth year of the horse and assume that it’s jumped in the Olympics at the time of registration. It’s true that there are plenty of divisions in which to show a non-provable green horse. But then, you are restricting the green divisions to horses that have registration papers and are already microchipped (the only way to prove they haven’t shown above a specific height). Is that requirement going to apply to the green pony division too? The ponies don’t have the unlimited divisions that horses do.

And just how do you show positive proof that a horse HAS NOT shown over a certain height? Microchips won’t be able to provide enough data to do that until at least several years after implementation.

I do think that microchips are the way to go, but I just don’t think it’s as easy to implement as some seem to think it is.[/QUOTE]

The set of microchipped horses could include those whose owners had them microchipped. A horse does not have to be registered or have a known identity to be microchipped. At least then you’d have a record going forward. The vets check for an existing chip when they put one in. My vet, and I’m sure she’s not the only one, checks for a chip as part of every PPE.

If you have the chip number for a horse chipped in Europe, it isn’t THAT hard to get a horse’s identity and European record. The record would show how high the horse had been jumped. I don’t know, but I suspect it would be possible (don’t know how easy) to determine that a particular horse had not shown.

Agree that it’s going to take a couple of years for the records to catch up to the chips, but if we were to start chipping now at least it would be now plus a couple of years when we’d have useful data, as opposed to a couple of years from now plus a couple more years.

Ponies have the Schooling Ponies and the Children’s Ponies. It is interesting that there don’t seem to be the same level of complaints about European not-green ponies coming over and competing in green classes. Am I just not tuned into PonyLand? Might be a bigger gulf between a pony jumper and a hunter than between a horse that’s done the Young Jumper classes and a hunter?

[ynl063w]

Are the chips implanted in the European horses universal and able to be read by the same scanner? Are all horse show results for every horse embedded in those chips? I seem to remember someone “in the know” when it comes to imports reporting here more than once that tracking show results for horses imported from Europe isn’t quite as easy as hovering a scanner over the withers.

And whatever the new rules are, they will have to apply equally to the imported warmblood as well as the OTTB whose papers are lost. If the warmblood’s owner has to prove that her horse has not broken its green status, then the OTTB owner will have to do the same. It doesn’t really matter that no one is concerned about the OTTB because it’s not going to win anyway. I agree that years from now, when microchipping has become ubiquitous, this will not be so much a problem. Although maybe not so much for the OTTB, or any horse or pony that for whatever reason was not microchipped as a youngster.

As I said earlier, I think microchips will be a great improvement, but it’s going to take time and it’s not going to be as easy as some like to think it will be.

[vxf111]

[QUOTE=Peggy;8018583]

Ponies have the Schooling Ponies and the Children’s Ponies. It is interesting that there don’t seem to be the same level of complaints about European not-green ponies coming over and competing in green classes. Am I just not tuned into PonyLand? Might be a bigger gulf between a pony jumper and a hunter than between a horse that’s done the Young Jumper classes and a hunter?[/QUOTE]

Various factors at play…

1. Ponies are ridden by kids and there are few real pros. A quality pro can take a jumper and make it a hunter much easier than a kid, even a good one.

2. The perception (right or wrong) that Europe is killing us in making quality warmbloods. They’re not killing us in making quality ponies.

3. Judges like and are pinning what we make here when it comes to the pony ring. Less so in hunters (again may be just perception not reality but the perception is that many of the best hunters are imported).

4. There’s not as much glamour (read prize money) in green ponies as green hunters. They only real benefit show wise to being a green pony is that it’s slightly easier to get to pony finals-- but often your classes don’t fill and you show with the non-greens anyway. The pre green classes for horses fill, have year end prizes/incentives.

5. The people more willing to play the oops we lost the papers game are the people who want fancy horses for the eventual big ring to be shown by pros. They’re not the same people buying ponies.

Some combination of the above with other stuff sprinkled in like how fast kids outgrow ponies whereas horses don’t get outgrown by pros, etc.

[orangecrush]

[QUOTE=ynl063w;8018589]
Are the chips implanted in the European horses universal and able to be read by the same scanner? Are all horse show results for every horse embedded in those chips? I seem to remember someone “in the know” when it comes to imports reporting here more than once that tracking show results for horses imported from Europe isn’t quite as easy as hovering a scanner over the withers.

And whatever the new rules are, they will have to apply equally to the imported warmblood as well as the OTTB whose papers are lost. If the warmblood’s owner has to prove that her horse has not broken its green status, then the OTTB owner will have to do the same. It doesn’t really matter that no one is concerned about the OTTB because it’s not going to win anyway. I agree that years from now, when microchipping has become ubiquitous, this will not be so much a problem. Although maybe not so much for the OTTB, or any horse or pony that for whatever reason was not microchipped as a youngster.

As I said earlier, I think microchips will be a great improvement, but it’s going to take time and it’s not going to be as easy as some like to think it will be.[/QUOTE]

Unless things have changed recently, each country in Europe keeps track of their respective shows. I am unaware that results are universally tracked, through chips or otherwise. I have looked up records for horses that showed over there and it was not an easy task.

[Peggy]

[QUOTE=ynl063w;8018589]
Are the chips implanted in the European horses universal and able to be read by the same scanner? Are all horse show results for every horse embedded in those chips? I seem to remember someone “in the know” when it comes to imports reporting here more than once that tracking show results for horses imported from Europe isn’t quite as easy as hovering a scanner over the withers.

And whatever the new rules are, they will have to apply equally to the imported warmblood as well as the OTTB whose papers are lost. If the warmblood’s owner has to prove that her horse has not broken its green status, then the OTTB owner will have to do the same. It doesn’t really matter that no one is concerned about the OTTB because it’s not going to win anyway. I agree that years from now, when microchipping has become ubiquitous, this will not be so much a problem. Although maybe not so much for the OTTB, or any horse or pony that for whatever reason was not microchipped as a youngster.

As I said earlier, I think microchips will be a great improvement, but it’s going to take time and it’s not going to be as easy as some like to think it will be.[/QUOTE]
My only experience with this is via a horse a friend had vetted and eventually bought. The horse had come from Europe some time ago. Vet scanned for a chip, found one, and got the chip number. Assistant trainer took a photo of the number she wrote down and texted it to me. With the help of a few people on this BB, I was able to ID the horse. I contacted the registry (KWPN) and they sent me a copy of the first page of his papers and his show record in Holland. What happened to him between when he set foot on US soil and when my friend vetted him is far more of a mystery.

Incidentally, the horse was being advertised as of a certain registry and age, of which he was neither. The registry was not of consequence, but the age got her a nice reduction in price.

[mroades]

[QUOTE=adcurtiss;8018524]
I really like the idea about having a searchable trainer database with possible a list of students’ results under the trainer’s tutelage. It would make it easy to tell successful trainers from fakers, and I would also love to have a list of infractions if it applies.[/QUOTE]

Except what about people like me, who have been assistants for BNT, and our name never goes on the entry blank?
I have sent many winners into the ring, but haven’t signed an antry blank for many of them over the years.
Not an argument, just a question?

[vxf111]

There are different chip brands but not an UNKNOWN/UNKNOWABLE number. Same as with dogs and cats, if you scan for the 3 most common brands you sweep in 99% or so.

[adcurtiss]

Question: Can chips be removed relatively easily? What if a horse comes over a trainer decides to remove the chip and implant a new on? Sorry if this sounds ignorant or naive, I’m not quite 100% sure how chips works and how easily they can be removed.

[vxf111]

I don’t understand that it is all that easy to remove a chip and you run the risk of leaving a pretty obvious scar. I am sure someone determined enough could do it, but it’s not going to be the kind of thing you can just do on a whim and would likely involve the cooperation of a vet (you’d have to locate the chip on some diagnostic and then probably go in with local anesthesia). In short, not impossible but not easy either.

[yaya]

@ynl063w;8018589

Are the chips implanted in the European horses universal and able to be read by the same scanner? Are all horse show results for every horse embedded in those chips? I seem to remember someone “in the know” when it comes to imports reporting here more than once that tracking show results for horses imported from Europe isn’t quite as easy as hovering a scanner over the withers.

Microchips simply show a number. There is no more info than that.

You would have to then use that number to search whatever database would have the identifying info and show record for that number.

It’s not like something uploads to the chip itself every time the horse goes in the ring.

[Halt_Near_X]

@Thoroughbred1201;8017323

I would like to see a searchable database of trainers and owners that lists any and all infractions.

I got bored this summer and did a proof of concept with about a year’s worth of data. End result is the ability to see infractions by name, horse name, or show, as well as some generalized roll-up views (categories of infractions, like drugs vs conduct issues, and even counts of infractions by specific drug names).

That took about 2 weeks, mostly because the data entry is boring.

So I don’t see why USEF can’t do it. Even if they haven’t put that information in a database yet, it could be automated at least from 2008 forward. And USEF would also be able to link the infractions to USEF member numbers, which I couldn’t do with the information I had available to me.

It is just NOT that technically challenging. It really isn’t.

[BeeHoney]

[QUOTE=adcurtiss;8018650]
Question: Can chips be removed relatively easily? What if a horse comes over a trainer decides to remove the chip and implant a new on? Sorry if this sounds ignorant or naive, I’m not quite 100% sure how chips works and how easily they can be removed.[/QUOTE]

Adcurtiss, it would be impossible to remove a microchip without damaging a horse and leaving a significant scar. The chip is about the size of a grain of rice and is inserted into the ligaments in the neck. To dig it out you would have to cut apart/dig through the horse’s neck to search for a tiny little object.

[meupatdoes]

[QUOTE=Halt Near X;8018688]
I got bored this summer and did a proof of concept with about a year’s worth of data. End result is the ability to see infractions by name, horse name, or show, as well as some generalized roll-up views (categories of infractions, like drugs vs conduct issues, and even counts of infractions by specific drug names).

That took about 2 weeks, mostly because the data entry is boring.

So I don’t see why USEF can’t do it. Even if they haven’t put that information in a database yet, it could be automated at least from 2008 forward. And USEF would also be able to link the infractions to USEF member numbers, which I couldn’t do with the information I had available to me.

It is just NOT that technically challenging. It really isn’t.[/QUOTE]

Do you want to pitch this to them?
Horse Show Data Systems LLC??
Is startup capital a problem and if so can we get a COTH pool together?

One of the kids at my college was a software programmer and actually sold the psychology department (I think) a statistics (I think) program they ordered from him for like $50,000.

[Halt_Near_X]

[QUOTE=meupatdoes;8018842]
Do you want to pitch this to them?
Horse Show Data Systems LLC??
Is startup capital a problem and if so can we get a COTH pool together?[/QUOTE]

Pitching it to them is down the line. It’s mostly stalled right now because there are legal questions I’d need to sort out before going any further/investing the time in doing the rest of the data entry.

[Peggy]

[QUOTE=meupatdoes;8018842]
Do you want to pitch this to them?
Horse Show Data Systems LLC??
Is startup capital a problem and if so can we get a COTH pool together?

One of the kids at my college was a software programmer and actually sold the psychology department (I think) a statistics (I think) program they ordered from him for like $50,000.[/QUOTE]I would definitely contribute to a crowd source on this.