I am coveting a signed edition of any of her books. I finally picked up a first hardcover edition of The Monday Horses. It is ex library but in very nice condition!
3 Likes
Is it clear on the financial statements how much theyāre collecting annually in drug fees, versus how many tests get administered?
1 Like
Historically speaking thereās no shortage of vets participating in this sort of thing. Iām cynical enough to think that overseas/dark web pentobarbital would also be useful to a less than ethical vet who also wanted to avoid any extra scrutiny around schedule II misuse and abuse.
Also wasnāt pentobarbital hard to source at one point? Or has that been resolved? (I have a vague memory but it could either be an incorrect memory or something related to the covid supply chain issues)
3 Likes
- It was quite awful.
More than once in my career.
USEF collected $5,650,478 in drug and medication revenue as of 11/30/2024. This is a decrease of $347,368 compared to 2023. That is astounding to me. They spent $3,732,687 in ābanned substance collection, testingā.
9 Likes
Wonder if anyone can request the detailed breakdown of that.
Would be interesting to know how much it costs them to run each sample on the margin and how many samples they run annually. I just paid $250 for a simple blood test on a cat and the USEF lab is running tests that are quite a bit more sophisticated. The equipment and staff are a serious investment also, and the staff on site to take the samples and ship them is an additional cost.
They collected $23 per entry in 2024 so thatās ~245,673 distinct starters.
Thatās both a lot and not a lot - if you imagine that shows on average have 200 horses entered across all USEF disciplines, thatās about 1200 shows. Which is not actually that many divided across ~50 weeks, all the disciplines, and all the regions.
Iād be sort of curious to know if they test the same percentage of all the different breeds and disciplines, or if they test some more than others.
Some disciplines are so small that thereās no way they see the same percentage as the larger ones. My suspicion is that some disciplines get tested more than others, but not without cause
1 Like
Just for comparison, hereās Texas A & Mās pre purchase drug screen:
https://tvmdl.tamu.edu/tests/drug-screen-equine-pre-purchase-lc-ms/
($152.25)
And UC Davis:
($175 out of state)
Iām sure there are other labs, and USEF might be testing for more/different things/etc, but theyāre also probably getting a volume discount with whoever theyāre using.
I was kinda surprised at how inexpensive these PPE drug tests were, tbh.
1 Like
Per the summary, which I will acknowledge I skimmed - USEF uses the University of KY lab. Their website says pre-purchase drug screens are $350.
Now Iām wondering how their standard pre-purchase drug screens compare to the drug tests that are done for the USEF.
1 Like
Given the whole Glefke lawsuit debacle I would assume the chain of custody requirements make USEF testing a whole lot different than your average PPE and none of it makes it cheaper. The UC Davis method validation fee is a healthy chunk of change so Iām guessing that is an example of additional costs. And the whole list of fees shows thereās something more to testing than just that ppe line item. The TOBA fee is probably closest since that is a list of 166 mandatory drugs plus 20 optional for racing. But again, in racing they know the cheaters want what makes a faster horse and the testing agencies draw on the experience of an entire planet for possible drugs, and still, the struggle is real. But Iād argue their job is easier than USEF looking for what makes a hunter, saddlebred, Arab, eventer or dressage horse be better at their job. Thatās just all over the place if you are chasing cheatersā¦
But in reality, I suspect a good chunk of that budget goes to funding research to find tests that can detect whatever the latest cocktail is and hold up to legal scrutiny. Also, mundane shit like storage is probably quite the line item!
9 Likes
I hear you and agree. How controlled is pentobarbital from the manufacturers? It just seems thatās a drug that should be more closely monitored considering the usage for euthanasia. Like shouldnāt the vets have to document where this medication is being given? Seems wild 
2 Likes
Depending on the specific euthanasia solution, it is a Schedule II or III controlled substance, which requires a DEA certificate to order and administer (and state controlled substances cert. in some places).
And yes, it requires documentation of use in the controlled substances log for the practice.
8 Likes
The amount of support that guy has in the aqha world is mind boggling. People acknowledge everything in the complaint and then basically say so what, heās a great vet, let him do his thing.
8 Likes
Guess theyāre panicky about losing their drug connection.
14 Likes
Thereās currently a big move afoot in the Arab world to sever their relationship with USEF and do their own thing with regards to drug testing, show rules, etc. They sent members a survey to gather opinions about such a move. I am 100% against it - AHA has historically been terrible at regulating themselves and have demonstrated over and over that they will kowtow to the biggies in the association. USEF has its many flaws but I would rather have them as a somewhat independent entity monitoring shows than AHA.
I think they think that if AQHA can do it, so can they. Not sure if AQHA has done a stellar job of monitoring their shows, but I am sure that the underfunded, insular Arab association will flounder.
4 Likes
