USEF Drug Testing: When is it too much?

[sunshinestate]

I was recently speaking to a trainer with a moderate show string of horses (10 or less) and he mentioned that he is being drug tested at almost every show for the last two years. He has never had a positive drug test and doesn’t recall pissing anyone off at the USEF home base. He noted that some of his horses have been tested five and six shows in a row. Some tested more than 10 times over the course of one year. Many chosen were no where near the top of the class. Many got no ribbons. One was even kicked out of the jog for limping and still was drug tested. Some tested between rounds of hunter derbies when the rules say testing at the end of a class.

I understand that showing means you can be tested but is anyone else aware of trainers being tested time and time again?

There is no common denominator. Some horses show High Performance and some are client horses who do the adults or juniors.

It just makes me wonder at what point is pulling blood week after week bad for the horse. They pull multiple vials each time.

[Kestrel]

I know a trainer that had multiple horses tested at every show, but she had someone in power which a grudge against her. She finally reported it, and it stopped.

[rosebudranch]

It just makes me wonder at what point is pulling blood week after week bad for the horse. They pull multiple vials each time.

If a horse is shown two weeks in a row, no probably not… if they are shown an extensive amount of weeks in a row that the pulling blood would be an issue… the issue might be they need to be rested more…

[ladyj79]

I worked for a guy who also complained about his horses being tested at “nearly every show.”

Probably because he drugs. A lot. For years. And everyone knows it, and it’s finally started to catch up with him.

Sometimes people are judged unfairly, but sometimes they absolutely reap what they sow.

[Kestrel]

I wouldn’t worry about the loss of blood volume, but maybe about the skill of the person sticking needles in the horse. Just looked it up, and in TBs, they average a total blood volume of 49 Liters +/- 5 L (people have roughly 4.5-5 Liters). Drawing a vial or two (say a 10ml red top or two, but more likely a 3mL lavender top) would barely be a tiny dent. People who donate blood give about 450mL each time, so since the horse has a much, much larger blood volume, a few tubes really aren’t an issue.

[dab]

Horses have about 6 gallons of blood – I wouldn’t expect donating a few vials even weekly would be an issue –

I’ve witnessed cases where I wondered if the drug testers were being influenced – None of the horses/connections in those cases were disciplined, so I’m assuming the drug tests came up clean –

Seems like some trainers/riders are ‘inconvenienced’ at shows more than others – It’s not just drug testing – Think about how stalls are assigned or orders of go are determined – It might be considered paying your dues – Whatever it is, I don’t think it’s worth worrying about (I don’t compete in classes with significant prize money … I might have a different opinion if I did)

[Credosporthorses]

I’m my junior years I had one show season where my horse got tested at least 3 of the 5 shows I attended. I was rarely in the ribbons and doing pretty much all I could to make my horse go nicely and slowly around the hunter/eq ring. He definitely was not drugged. I also don’t get the testing the same horse back to back weeks. Even later when I moved him to the jumper ring he was tested frequently.

[Nickelodian]

My black horse was more likely to be pulled for a test than not pulled. I think it was because of his distinctive look in the ring. In my area one of the main testers let’s his vet students on rotation with him pick the horse. A big black horse seemed to always get the nod. I was selected twice in ONE show, which was an embarrassing moment for the testers.

If there was a real grudge going on, I would think it would be a good time to phone USEF.

[copper1]

Generally speaking, the testers are vet students or volunteers of some kind and many have no idea who is who at the particular discipline/show. I have been tested multiple times at more than one show in a year and at one show I had 4 of my 5 tested. I told the tester they may as well do the last one as well and she said they were out of tubes! It was a small show and they had a quota they needed to fill. I question the testers each time and always ask why they chose this particular horse. Unless they were told to test a certain group of horses such as every one that was champion, their choices were totally random such as the “big black horse” or the pretty one with the white face. They chose one of my horses once because they decided as they watched a class they would test the second place horse. All of the testers have been very polite and pleasant, not to mention patient waiting to fill the cup and when that didn’t work it was always a vet who pulled the blood. I don’t mind the testing because at least we can see our money at work!

[sunshinestate]

Yes, worried more about making mistakes as this person mentioned the drug testers didn’t wear gloves; dropped vials in the shavings, etc.

By the way, all in this inquiry were licensed vets pulling blood and one vet actually did the drug testing 5 weeks in a row granted different horses, but in the same barn, were tested. In those 5 weeks the same horses were tested at least three times. Crazy.

[trubandloki]

I am glad to hear that the level of drug testing has gotten to be annoying. That is far better than no drug testing.

[QUOTE=Credosporthorses;7532161]
I also don’t get the testing the same horse back to back weeks. [/QUOTE]

I think it makes perfect sense. If you (general you, not you specifically) were the type to drug you would assume that if you were tested last week you are pretty safe from being tested this week. Testing the same horse back to back weeks seems to be a great idea and makes the point that drug testing is not like jury duty, you are not off the hook after you have had it done once.

[supershorty628]

I had a year where I got drug tested a bunch of times - I think 4 times over the course of that year, and I’ve been tested since then. I asked one of the vets if there was a reason that, for random testing, I seemed to get selected a lot. The answer that I got was really interesting:

I was told that at several of these shows where I got tested (winter shows in NY/CT), the drug testers would look at what classes each horse/pony was showing in. I was showing a green pony at the time, but I wasn’t eligible to do the regular ponies with him because I was too old, so I was always done after the early division. That was why I got selected a lot with him, according to them. I’m sure that’s not the case at bigger, multi-ring shows, but for the icicle circuit with one ring going at a time, it did make sense.

I’ve also been tested in situations where I would expect it; after getting a ribbon in an equitation final or in a Grand Prix.

[Angelico]

I don’t see the big deal. In racing the top two finishers in EVERY race are tested, as well as any horse that runs abnormally poor or well, plus a few random samples and at some tracks the entire field of a randomly selected race. In racing we are not allowed to administer any sort of medication, only the vet is allowed to do that, and NOTHING besides Salix can be given within 24 hours of the race. So what is the big deal with getting tested at a show?

Everyone has to do their part if you want to level the playing field.

[RiverMist]

In college I worked with a vet that did some of the testing in the area. We often chose horses because “oooh that one’s pretty!” or a certain placing, or “the next one out of the ring”. With the exception of some FEI events where the organizers picked the horses. Which was usually the winner, a foreign competitor and another random number.

What most people don’t understand is that drug testers are independent contractors don’t work together from show to show. So if you are at a show in FL and then the next week are in GA you won’t have the same testers and in general they won’t have any knowledge of who got tested the week before.

Though being tested for weeks in a row, or having 4 out of 5 horses in the barn tested would raise some red flags to me…

[SidesaddleRider]

My side saddle horse was tested 4 times last year – out of 12 shows! I don’t really mind getting pulled for testing, as I prefer them to be testing than not, so that we are all on a level field. What I DO mind is making me wait for 30-45 min for him to possibly pee after I untacked and hosed him off, even though I always tell them he will NOT pee in front of people, when I still have to unbraid him, pack up, and then haul home 3-6 hours – THAT is irritating. Just pull blood and be done with it!

[hunterrider23]

Unfortunately what I’ve seen is stewards picking who to test based on who they know won’t test, mostly because they don’t want to deal with any backlash. I think the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen at a show was the management electing to test three 20+ year old short stirrup ponies. I’m of the opinion that if your old 2’ jumping pony needs a little bute or robaxin to be comfortable, that’s alright.

[comingback]

[QUOTE=hunterrider23;7532423]
Unfortunately what I’ve seen is stewards picking who to test based on who they know won’t test, mostly because they don’t want to deal with any backlash. I think the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen at a show was the management electing to test three 20+ year old short stirrup ponies. I’m of the opinion that if your old 2’ jumping pony needs a little bute or robaxin to be comfortable, that’s alright.[/QUOTE]

Management and the steward have no say in recommending who should and who should not be tested. If you saw that you should report it to the drugs and medication program (normally you would start with the steward but since you are questioning their actions just go to d&m).

Also, while one vet might work many shows in a row, they may have a totally different group of techs with them. I’ve had that happen when I pull a horse only to have the vet come to do blood and tell me they did that horse or trainer last week.

It’s either random or not. You can’t have it both ways.

[Nickelodian]

What’s odd to me is that there’s no process for the random selection. “Big black horse” shouldn’t be a qualifier IMHO. Why aren’t all of the numbers entered in the show put in a hat and then drawn lottery style? If that particular horse isn’t showing the day the testers are there, keep drawing until you get horses that are. Doesn’t seem that hard to me?

As it stands now it is an easily scrutinized process…because there is no process.

[ybiaw]

[QUOTE=Nickelodian;7532487]
What’s odd to me is that there’s no process for the random selection. “Big black horse” shouldn’t be a qualifier IMHO. Why aren’t all of the numbers entered in the show put in a hat and then drawn lottery style? If that particular horse isn’t showing the day the testers are there, keep drawing until you get horses that are. Doesn’t seem that hard to me?

As it stands now it is an easily scrutinized process…because there is no process.[/QUOTE]

I agree - it should be a random computerized selection based on the “back numbers” that are showing on any given day. Why isn’t it? It seems so simple.

The only issue I see is that then when someone sees a horse standing at the gate looking doped out of its mind and going around the course like a zombie - would there still be testing done at the testers discretion?

[comingback]

How would you account for post entered horses? If people knew there was a number being pulled out of a hat full of pre entries, what’s to stop them from eating the post entry fee so they can administer something illegal? Plus the horse show doesn’t know the show is being tested till the vet shows up that morning. There is no way to really pre plan it.

While many shows are computerized, many are not. Remember is not only big A and AA shows that are subject to testing.