UPDATE. USEF Proposed Rule Change on Tail Alteration.

[ASB_Stars]

OK. Here is what I am looking to do; stop any form of Equine Tail Alteration from happening in any breed or discipline governed by USEF.

Here are things that I am not worried about- banged tails, braided tails, switches- real or artificial, cruppers- because, you know, a horses natural tail carriage is whatever it is. If they are wearing a crupper, than it will be slightly altered, and STILL be natural, in the sense that it has not been altered. The CDE horses I have watched do NOT carry their tail in some awkward way, just because they are wearing a crupper. Additionally, FEI allows cruppers of specific design, on these horses- no argument here.

In any event, if YOU were designing the rule- within the foregoing parameters- how would YOU do so?

Thank you for any proactive, thoughtful, kind suggestions! While this rule has very little chance of getting through this year, I plan on presenting a better structured one for next year- to the same general rules section.

[MyssMyst]

So WHY put this forth as a general rule? The changes you are looking for you want in ONE breed - Saddlebreds. Are you trying this as a general rule because you think it won’t get past the saddlebred folks if you are trying to get it passed as specific to saddlebreds?

No one doubts the intent, but you are opening a giant can of worms going as a general rule. I would address it maybe like this:

3. No horse or pony may compete in any division with tail carriage that has been altered by mechanical or chemical means excluding: cruppers, artificial tails, tail wraps, or cosmetic treatment such as braiding, pulling, or trimming. Alterations made due to veterinary necessity are permissible with documentation (although this would need to be clarified a ton).

It would need additional clarification, but might be a starting point.

[lindac]

This is not just ONE breed (Saddlebreds). This is Saddlebreds, Morgans, Hackneys, National Show Horses, Paso Fino’s, Shetlands, and even Arabian Western horses are having their tails cut to “lay them down” like Quarter Horses. Tail alteration affects MANY breeds and thus a general rule is needed.

[lindac]

@D_BaldStockings;8896457

Why would a horse with open raw wounds anywhere on it’s body or appendages be permitted in any USEF showring?

They are! Raw open pressure sores from the tail set. And those are just the ones that you can see that are not in a brace that hides all the scarring, sores, and twisted tails.

Shouldn’t the judge excuse them?

The judges don’t look at the tail except to see if it is braced for a performance class. Plus they are trainers themselves and they would be calling out their friends who might be judging them at the next show.

Or the ring steward bring it to the judges attention?

No one is looking at tails. They should have to be checked for signs of abuse.

Who would you report this to? To file a complaint against a competitor it is loads of paperwork and I believe a $200 fee.

This is why it is important to document this abuse, otherwise they deny it even exists.

Pictures of open sores on tails.

https://www.facebook.com/HALTequinetailalteration/photos/a.1095198440575871.1073741831.1071042066324842/1095206927241689/?type=3

https://www.facebook.com/HALTequinetailalteration/photos/a.1075101589252223.1073741828.1071042066324842/1085721371523578/?type=3

Picture of scarring from pressure sores.

https://www.facebook.com/HALTequinetailalteration/photos/a.1095198440575871.1073741831.1071042066324842/1095204493908599/?type=3

Sore on the point of hip due to pressure from the tail set crupper. There was one on the other side but not as bad.

https://www.facebook.com/HALTequinetailalteration/photos/a.1075101589252223.1073741828.1071042066324842/1075103679252014/?type=3

[Pennywell_Bay]

Are there 2 threads on this? I think there is one in H/J.

JMO- change has to start somewhere, with someone. I am not a saddlebred/harness etc horse person but what some people do (not just to saddlebreds) is pretty horrific so something needs to be done.

Someone proposed a rule change/addition. Ok- there are some possible unforeseen consequences of said rule change, which is great to bring to light. But instead of insulting and picking it apart, calling the creator short-sited/closed minded (extrapolating here)- why not some HELPFUL edits/clarifications.

Some people are just so downright hostile (over, in this case, a fake hunter tail in jeopardy). Another poster said it - hysteria is rising (over a fake tail). Good lord.

Remember, especially us hunter peeps getting all crazy, no rule is going to be perfect. There are going to be loopholes people will try to exploit (ammy rule, drug rule). The best we can do is try to assist in clear language (which I agree the rule is a tad rambly) and tighten loopholes.

Pennywell Bay, fake hunter tail user

[trubandloki]

Sorry to be a jerk but… stop with all the dramatic beating of the people who are trying to be helpful (and ignore those who are ranting about fake tails).

You (the OP) ask for comments, people are trying to help you by giving comments. You are then pouncing on them and screaming ‘do you not care about the horses, this has to stop’ type comments.

People here are trying to help you fix your rule so it works. As stupid as it is, you will never get anything passed that makes simple things like braiding, fake tails and trimming tail hair against the rules; and that is what your current wording does.

I can see the poor short stirrup kid on their fat pony being DQ’d because they have a crupper on to keep the saddle from going up the pony’s neck every time the pony puts its head down… all because of some poor wording on what seems like a good rule (if it is worded right).

I looked at your photos. I am going to show them to my pony who sometimes rubs her tail (snotty pony) and gives herself rub marks that are worse than what your photos show.
I am all for making disfiguring for the sake of showing against the rules.
I just get a little confused with all the ‘the world is ending’ drama posts with ‘horrible’ photos which end up showing something less than truly horrible.

[Halt_Near_X]

[QUOTE=ASB Stars;8896719]
In any event, if YOU were designing the rule- within the foregoing parameters- how would YOU do so?[/QUOTE]

I would reach out to the breeders behind the microchipping group, hoping for some mentorship. They’ve been through/are going through this process (yes, the rule only passed for a small set of hunters so far–it’s no secret that they intend to expand it to cover all horses in the future). I would hope to learn from them and streamline my own process rather than reinventing the wheel. I don’t even agree with everything they are doing with that rule, but I have respect how much work they have put/are putting in to it, and I would hope they were open to mentoring another group along.

I would go through the rule book and identify any rules that currently apply to tails, tail carriage, or humane rules (e.g. the “blood” rules). I’d be looking for things that might be affected by any rule I proposed and things I might be able to leverage when proposing my rule.

I would reach out to USEF breed and discipline groups to understand what tail alterations–the good, the bad, and the ugly–happen in their discipline. I would make sure I clearly understood why alterations were done in that group–were they merely cosmetic (e.g. banging tails), for safety (e.g. cruppers in driving), “traditional,” or other?

I would start analyzing all the information I gathered and figuring out what was really inhumane, what was trends or fads that might or might not be sticking points for people, and what I needed to make sure the rules specifically included.

I might reach out to the public, e.g. via COTH, to check general opinion and get a feel for how they reacted to things, but I wouldn’t rely on them to ensure I understood all the ramifications of the rule. The odds that someone from every potential discipline is reading a thread in Off Course, for example, and is willing to speak out in public are not so great.

And then I would start drafting. I would follow up with USEF breed/discipline groups or individual experts as needed.

I’m sure that’s not the type of answer you were looking for, but it’s what I would do. And I would do it because even if I thought I could write some reasonable rules based on what I know, this thread has raised two things that I wasn’t even thinking of in my original reply (e.g. the use of cruppers, the comment that implied there may be a valid reason to tie tails to the cart while driving). I assume there are more out there like that, and I’d want to make sure I had all of that information from the start.

So that is what I would do.

[trubandloki]

Great post Halt Near X. (It only allows me to like it once.)

I want to say one point - I understand why the OP and company want to make this a broad rule to cover more than one type of showing and that is why they are going for a rule that applies to everyone. This might be one of those situations that starting with a small select group, the target group, might be better than nothing while you figure out wording that applies more broadly but does not cause problems.

[Bent_Hickory]

[QUOTE=Pennywell Bay;8896894]
Some people are just so downright hostile (over, in this case, a fake hunter tail in jeopardy). Another poster said it - hysteria is rising (over a fake tail). Good lord.[/QUOTE]

It’s not hysteria – it’s frustration. I tried to point out how the rule implicated fake tails. The sponsor stated that the proposed rule wasn’t intended to cover fake tails and that she would exclude it. The amended proposed rule comes out that still qualifies use of fake tails directly in line with the original concern. And then the amended proposed rule adds new prohibitions on tail braiding, trimming and banging – a step backwards. Forgive me for expressing some frustration!

I have repeatedly stated that the rule should be directed toward prohibiting the specific objectionable practices. Instead, the rule is drafted as a catch-all that pulls in legitimate, non-welfare issues. Aside from rewriting the entire rule myself (which I am not qualified to do because the saddleseat/harness horse world is not my world), what further suggestions must I provide?

[Pennywell_Bay]

[QUOTE=Bent Hickory;8896987]
It’s not hysteria – it’s frustration. I tried to point out how the rule implicated fake tails. The sponsor stated that the proposed rule wasn’t intended to cover fake tails and that she would exclude it. The amended proposed rule comes out that still qualifies use of fake tails directly in line with the original concern. And then the amended proposed rule adds new prohibitions on tail braiding, trimming and banging – a step backwards. Forgive me for expressing some frustration!

I have repeatedly stated that the rule should be directed toward prohibiting the specific objectionable practices. Instead, the rule is drafted as a catch-all that pulls in legitimate, non-welfare issues. Aside from rewriting the entire rule myself (which I am not qualified to do because the saddleseat/harness horse world is not my world), what further suggestions must I provide?[/QUOTE]

Is the wording you most have a problem with (and please note- I did not point a finger at you or call you out in any manner) A]ny device or substance used to alter the natural tail carriage shall be illegal. and the fact that hunters using a fake tail may alter the way the carry the tail?

I realize there are other parts that need work, but since you quoted me- I’m asking you if that specifically is what you are concerned about (from post 2, I realize you posted multiple times).

A simple bullet of “tail extentions, braiding, banging blah blah” are not considered alteration of function and are permissible in accordance w/ INSERT DISCIPLINE language here".

However, I do not agree that people read the rule and go “AH HA!!! NO tail extensions/fake tails!!!” because 95% are vanity tails, not to weight the tail down etc. You can take it like that, just like people interpret other rules and we delve into the spirit of the rules. Which is murky, not enforceable.

Again, since I didn’t point the proverbial finger at you, I was not asking you to rewrite anything. Just pointing out helpful suggestions and both sides not getting crazy is the best way to benefit the welfare of the horse- which is the rules intent.

Pennywell Bay, non-hysterical fake hunter tail user

[roseymare]

Tails are sometimes weighted in order to discourage high carriage as well. In that case fake tails are definitely altering tail carriage.

[enjoytheride]

Yes, you can buy fake tails with weights added to deliberately alter tail carriage.

[Amwrider]

I HAVE SEEN THE LIGHT!!!

I am not only going to support this, I am going to propose some of my own changes so that our horses are shown in more natural and less artificial ways.

I am going to propose that all horses compete bitless. Who needs bridles. We have all seen horses bleed from the mouth before, we have all seen the purple tongues on the RollKur horses.

Going bitless will solve this problem! I KNOW that many people share this wonderfully altruistic sentiment with my new enlightened self. I know I can post photos all over the place and make my own Facebook page and get all of those HSUS and PETA people to jump on board with me. They have a lot of strength and a lot of numbers that will back my endeavors. I will have numbers and backing that USEF and USDA cannot ignore!

Horses shouldn’t be ridden “on the bit” …it is not natural. And honestly, if you cannot jump an eventing course or race in the Kentucky Derby without relying on a bit to stop and control your horse, then you are a piece of crap trainer relying on gadgets instead of training. If you cannot get your dressage horse collected bitless then you are just a piece of crap trainer that relies on gadgets to make your horse look as nature did not intend.

This is my opinion and I am going to try to get in enforced to stop horses from bleeding at the mouth and to stop tongues from turning purple because this should not happen and it does happen.

Bits are simply torture devices that are all for SHOW. A truly trained horse with a talented trainer should be able to go bitless.

Who is with me?

<sarchasm>

[Pennywell_Bay]

[QUOTE=enjoytheride;8897101]
Yes, you can buy fake tails with weights added to deliberately alter tail carriage.[/QUOTE]

You can. It is not typically done. Shrug. I have put in hundreds of fake tails for clients on the AA circuit. Not one was weighted. So it is a small percentage if THAT is your argument. Shrug. There is a site that sells weights with the tails. Maybe other braiders will weigh in, as I have been Out of the Business as far as braiding, as to whether that is now typical.

[Bent_Hickory]

[QUOTE=Pennywell Bay;8897079]
Is the wording you most have a problem with [A]ny device or substance used to alter the natural tail carriage shall be illegal. and the fact that hunters using a fake tail may alter the way the carry the tail?[/QUOTE]

Yes, my read is that this language may exclude fake tails as well as braiding tails.

@Pennywell Bay;8897079

A simple bullet of “tail extentions, braiding, banging blah blah” are not considered alteration of function and are permissible in accordance w/ INSERT DISCIPLINE language here".

I agree that this would resolve the problem. However, when the sponsor added this simple bullet, she qualified it with “provided that the fake tail doesn’t alter the natural tail carriage,” leaving the rule open again to interpretation.

@Pennywell Bay;8897079

However, I do not agree that people read the rule and go “AH HA!!! NO tail extensions/fake tails!!!” because 95% are vanity tails, not to weight the tail down etc. You can take it like that, just like people interpret other rules and we delve into the spirit of the rules. Which is murky, not enforceable.

Not sure what you mean by “not enforceable,” but I choose not to hope that one interpretation will be preferred over another, entirely plausible interpretation wielded by a fanatic, especially when clarity can be so easily added. (To be clear, I don’t believe that the sponsor of the proposed rule is a fanatic, but I can’t say the same for other posters on the related thread.)

[Amwrider]

That was just something for you to think about. You may be pointing fingers at others, but there will be others pointing fingers at you.

What matters in the long run is if the horses are happy and healthy. Once we start pointing fingers at each other and start trying to regulate rights away from each other then we put ourselves at greater risk of having our own rights regulated away from us by other finger-pointers.

[Pennywell_Bay]

[QUOTE=Bent Hickory;8897130]
Yes, my read is that this language may exclude fake tails as well as braiding tails.

I agree that this would resolve the problem. However, when the sponsor added this simple bullet, she qualified it with “provided that the fake tail doesn’t alter the natural tail carriage,” leaving the rule open again to interpretation.

Not sure what you mean by “not enforceable,” but I choose not to hope that one interpretation will be preferred over another, entirely plausible interpretation wielded by a fanatic, especially when clarity can be so easily added. (To be clear, I don’t believe that the sponsor of the proposed rule is a fanatic, but I can’t say the same for other posters on the related thread.)[/QUOTE]

BH- I agree with you- for the record. OP has to clarify some language, but I think there will always be loopholes. I can think a some rules that have loopholes that have been trying to be closed for what seems like forever.

(the enforceable was just if something is classified “illegal” then it delves into enforceable/fined/penalized whatever-). I, personally, would love to be the first person listed in the “suspended” section as “rocking a fake tail” [sarcasm].

Pennywell Bay, user of fake tail (but to clarify- when I have time and not every show and when I can find it).

[roseymare]

[QUOTE=Pennywell Bay;8897124]
You can. It is not typically done. Shrug. I have put in hundreds of fake tails for clients on the AA circuit. Not one was weighted. So it is a small percentage if THAT is your argument. Shrug. There is a site that sells weights with the tails. Maybe other braiders will weigh in, as I have been Out of the Business as far as braiding, as to whether that is now typical.[/QUOTE]

Unintended consequences though. If it becomes illegal to have a driving horse with surgical altered tail carriage, will using weighted tails become more prevalent as a way to discourage a horse from lifting a tail and thus getting a rein under it? Or will the risk of getting a rein under a weighted tail outweigh using one?
Just trying to think of all of the consequences as this is to be a general rule.
Weighted tails came about in the stock horse world in part because of the increased testing for dead tails.

[MyssMyst]

[QUOTE=lindac;8896841]
This is not just ONE breed (Saddlebreds). This is Saddlebreds, Morgans, Hackneys, National Show Horses, Paso Fino’s, Shetlands, and even Arabian Western horses are having their tails cut to “lay them down” like Quarter Horses. Tail alteration affects MANY breeds and thus a general rule is needed.[/QUOTE]

Arabians have been penalizing unnatural tail carriage for a long time, and it’s been a huge push with our judges… And no, educate yourself. Arabian tails were NOT being cut. The issue was reining horses having their tails deadened to be more quiet since they’re showing under actual reining judges at the national level.

[QUOTE=trubandloki;8896900]Sorry to be a jerk but… stop with all the dramatic beating of the people who are trying to be helpful (and ignore those who are ranting about fake tails).

You (the OP) ask for comments, people are trying to help you by giving comments. You are then pouncing on them and screaming ‘do you not care about the horses, this has to stop’ type comments.

People here are trying to help you fix your rule so it works. As stupid as it is, you will never get anything passed that makes simple things like braiding, fake tails and trimming tail hair against the rules; and that is what your current wording does.

I can see the poor short stirrup kid on their fat pony being DQ’d because they have a crupper on to keep the saddle from going up the pony’s neck every time the pony puts its head down… all because of some poor wording on what seems like a good rule (if it is worded right).

I looked at your photos. I am going to show them to my pony who sometimes rubs her tail (snotty pony) and gives herself rub marks that are worse than what your photos show.
I am all for making disfiguring for the sake of showing against the rules.
I just get a little confused with all the ‘the world is ending’ drama posts with ‘horrible’ photos which end up showing something less than truly horrible.[/QUOTE]

This, this, exactly this.

[ReSomething]

Tail alteration in the most extreme sense means something on the order of a cat’s tail that has been slammed in a door and permanently kinked, the question is how to make that clear to those of you that have never seen such a thing in a horse’s tail. Or a photograph on Facebook that is not something you can put your hands on every day and realize that this thing is barely mobile and inflexible and there is not one thing that can be done to restore normal ROM.

It’s not the use of a crupper or a tied in tail extension,( though those can change tail carriage if weighted). Can we come up with some useful language for next year please that addresses the desire to retain the tail extension and ensures that horses are allowed to retain full mobility of their tails for their entire lifetimes regardless if they “move them too much” or “hold them too high” or are desired to hold them high and tight in a set so have them “cut to fit”.
Supposedly the fashion in the US was to dock tails on saddle horses till 1919 when a particular English judge placed horses with tails over docked tails - amazingly horses grew tails afterwards. How about we move towards a bit more performance based reward system, just a tiny bit? Reading about people who have to have a false tail because someone wrapped it too tight overnight and I gather they lost a chunk of tailbone? They wrapped it to keep the braids nice and lost half the tail, say what? What’s really important here? What happens to that horse when it is to old to compete and be kept up?