This Rule Change is so stupid!

Read the rule as written. It’s excessive, and unenforceable. As written, anyone who’s ever joined USEF is forever under their watch, and that watch defines abuse as anything that causes the horse discomfort. So, lunging in side reins? Insisting on going forward? Taken to extreme, active use of a bit in the mouth?

No, this is just Yet Another example of USEF shooting itself in the foot. Are there problems? Of course. But for $ome rea$on, the real problems aren’t being addressed.

Full disclosure: both of my current horses have lifetime registrations, but I haven’t been a USEF member for more than 5 years, and am unlikely to ever rejoin, in part because of things like this.

11 Likes

USEF absolutely must have rules that can be enforced across the board. This is plainly not enforceable. It requires everyone to report any incident of anyone making a horse uncomfortable. Obviously many people won’t recognize non abusive discomfort, and if they report, the USEF will be overwhelmed.

USEF does need a set of rules to be able to sanction people who abuse horses, but this is not it.

13 Likes

Alternate meaning to “covered“ in this context. People put blankets or sheets on horses and then beat them through the fabric so it doesn’t leave marks. Not kidding. Vomit.

3 Likes

Seriously? You think this rule change is written in a manner to be remotely enforceable?
People opposed to it here thus far have objected because it looks as though it was generated by a bad AI prompt.
Not because we’re all in favor of beating horses.

12 Likes

Of course no one is OK with abusers. My complaint about this rule is that USEF can make all the rules they want, THEY DO NOT HAVE JURISDICTION on private property. Now they are judge, jury and executioner? That’s what I find stupid. This isn’t enforceable. Are you going to let someone who claims to represent USEF come onto your property to find proof of abuse?
Even Child Protective Services has to walk a fine line between investigation and criminal trespass. USEF doesn’t get to appoint itself adjudicator of all things abuse.

10 Likes

Personally this feels like a poor attempt at saving face in the wake of several high profile abuse scandals. It’s unenforceable, vague, overstepping legal bounds, and unlikely to be used for more than “hey!!! USEF cares about horse welfare, see??” while nothing changes.

At best, it’s useless. At worst, it will be a case of unintended consequences where PETA-ish types use it to ban bits or “prove” horse sports are abusive because “discomfort”, or some other BS.

I do wonder if any lawyer looked at this at all.

13 Likes

I’m willing to bet this is the best they could come up. They can’t do nothing and they have no intention of doing any of this unless Parra 2.0 comes up.

They do have the right to suspend people from participating in USEF events so there will be plenty of that.

It is my opinion that organizations like USEF are far more interested in maintaining the power balance of the most influential members rather than horse welfare. Because if horse welfare was important horses wouldn’t be ridden as they are now.

8 Likes

I agree! I actually read the text of the new rule elsewhere, some other article, and appreciate that it is a step in the right direction. I’m sure it’s imperfect, I’m sure we’d all like it to have more teeth/enforcement, but no doubt in my mind that having a major organization like USEF say it’s not okay to cause harm to horses, on or off competition grounds is a good step!

2 Likes

A very poorly written rule is worse than no rule at all.

14 Likes

Maybe I’m missing something. Why under the old rules couldn’t they kick Parra out of USEF? The Code of Conduct (found here: Microsoft Word - Code_of_Conduct_Sept_2022_final.docx (usef.org) says that members are to “Place the well-being, health, and safety of horses and others above all other considerations, including developing performance” and “As ambassadors for the sport of equestrian, this Code of Conduct applies to the following individuals at all times…” No where does it say only at USEF events.
He violated to Code of Conduct. Kick him out. I didn’t check, but I would guess the FEI has similar wording. Call in law enforcement on animal abuse charges. He belongs in jail.

13 Likes

There was a recent discussion in the Eventing forum where an event rider at a big event was DQ’d because a member of the ground jury thought her bit set-up was not USEF approved - yet the rider had used that rig before at other events, had cleared it beforehand with other officials, and there were other riders at the same event riding in the same set-up. I can’t remember all the details but it was some kind of hackamore+bit and had to do with the way a piece of rope or cord went under the chin/over the nose or something like that and the rider was using it the exact way it came from the manufacturer (i.e., she had not modified it in any way). IIRC, she was going to appeal the DQ to USEA/USEF but I don’t know the status of that appeal.

3 Likes

USEF is a master at poorly written rules. I sometimes think they are using college interns to draft their rules and wonder if they even bother to have a sharp legal person vet the verbiage before putting policy changes to a vote. I also think groupthink is in full force at USEF in many instances, with one or two powerful people at the top pushing for something and everyone else just goes along with the gag because they want stay on his/her good side.

5 Likes

It was a Myler combination bit, made exactly as the manufacturer intended, and apparently the rule that was used against her was for “modifying” the bit.

Her appeal was denied and the FEI has since clarified that the bit is now illegal so there is no confusion any more.

I still want to know what happened to the other riders at the same competition using the same bit. I know the rider was trying not to throw them under the bus too but it’s ridiculous if some riders had their scores stand when another was eliminated for the exact same tack.

14 Likes

Politics.

2 Likes

Especially when you’re the steward trying to enforce the poorly written rule.

7 Likes