Someone correct me if I’m wrong… GABA and Gabapentin (human drug, muscle relaxer) are NOT the same drug.
or…you can stand up for change in judging, and never get hired. Its the show managers that don’t want to upset the trainer that has 40-80 stalls at their multi week shows.
[QUOTE=jr;9008071]
It’s not trainers or riders, it’s owners. Until they are held responsible along with the professionals very little will happen. They turn a blind eye as long as they take home a trophy. How many train with Paul Valliere. People continue to work with Scott Stewart, Glefke etc.
Owners must be set down along with trainers and riders. It must effect ALL of their horses. It is socially acceptable to drug. The culture must change which means we all have to be outspoken critics. We need to up the drug fees and must test all shows, all winners and random other competitors. If we don’t clean this up, someone like HSUS or PETA will and that won’t be good for anyone, us or the horses.[/QUOTE]
This is more complicated than it sounds. As an owner and also a rider, I often send horses to shows that I myself cannot attend. Now I am confident that my very competent and judicious trainer is not giving my horses any drugs, but some owners may not know their trainers that well or may think they know what goes on behind stall doors but they don’t. My point is, owners have jobs, families and other commitments and can’t be there every step of the way. We shouldn’t discourage even further the ownership
of top show horses for professionals to bring along and show as this niche is dying a slow death in this country already.
So, it’s a start. I agree a mass email is appropriate if the USEF actually is starting to mean business.
Our barn student just returned from a stint out East and South with a very, very BNT. It was disheartening to me the level of drugs used on all the horses on a daily basis. Just for rider convenience.
We have to accept that this is the culture of horse management and showing for many. And culture is the hardest thing to change.
Good luck to the USEF. A step system is a good start. Each proven offense ups the punishment until you are banned for life. Will folks work around it? Sure, you can’t get rid of that. However, microchipping and full owner/registration history will help. I think most folks understand there is only so much the USEF can do, but the fact that it has been so very apparent that they do not care and keep greasing the palms of the ‘old boys club’ is just ridiculous.
Mr. Kessler has the opportunity to change the playing field and the reputation of the USEF. Up until now it’s been in the crapper as far as I am concerned. I will sit back and watch the show, as the tickets are free.
USEF - you’ve started to try and make things better. I appreciate that and I truly wish you luck in attempting to improve this sport. You have your work cut out for you. Mr. Kessler I do hope that history will look back on you and say you were the pivotal person in turning this sport around. What a true legacy that would be for you and your family. And for all of us who truly love our ponies and the sport itself.
If the welfare of the horse is the root of our concern, then suspending the horse would seem a reasonable result of a positive test. 1. It gives the horses system time to recuperate from the drug dose (likely multiple doses over an extended period of time). 2. The horse will be perfectly happy eating hay and letting it’s forlock get long. 3. It will impact the owner and trainer by affecting the value of the horse.
[QUOTE=scrbear11;9008139]
Someone correct me if I’m wrong… GABA and Gabapentin (human drug, muscle relaxer) are NOT the same drug.[/QUOTE]
That is correct. They are not the same.
http://www.gammaaminobutyricacid.org/difference-between-gaba-gabapentin/
I agree, but…
[QUOTE=APirateLooksAtForty;9008182]
This is more complicated than it sounds. As an owner and also a rider, I often send horses to shows that I myself cannot attend. Now I am confident that my very competent and judicious trainer is not giving my horses any drugs, but some owners may not know their trainers that well or may think they know what goes on behind stall doors but they don’t. My point is, owners have jobs, families and other commitments and can’t be there every step of the way. We shouldn’t discourage even further the ownership
of top show horses for professionals to bring along and show as this niche is dying a slow death in this country already.[/QUOTE]
Wouldn’t it then force the owner to move their horses to more trustworthy trainers? I don’t think anyone is saying the owners need to be there every step of the way, but rather, if it did impact the owners, then the owners are the ones that can make the biggest impact back to the trainers. If as a trainer you are worried you are going to lose the business of the owner (which is how you really make your money) then isn’t that a larger incentive to play clean? Are you going to risk having your owner set down, and losing the ability to make money off their entire string?
Since it is clearly about money and status and not about the horse and it’s training now, then isn’t it time to play hardball? And if this latest huge suspension isn’t actually hardball for these trainers, then it’s time to figure out what is.
I mean personally, for me, at the end of the day, I don’t care who loses and gets penalized so long as horse welfare wins. It would be an awful wake up call for an owner who had all good intentions and got burned by an untrustworthy trainer, but if that happened a few times maybe it would help? But I don’t wear rose coloured glasses either and I know that its not black and white, and while it’s simple to say that it’s harder to apply once the issue runs this deep. However, as complicated as it gets, as much money as there is involved and as much as we all don’t want to impact the industry as a whole, it needs to be remembered at the end of the day that the horse needs to come first. We are supposed to be their voice.
Because if it keeps happening, and gets bigger and bigger because the judging doesn’t change, and the owners don’t pay closer attention, and the trainers don’t stop taking shortcuts… then as it has been said, the industry is going to attract the attention of outside, far less knowledgeable critics -groups of activists- and that is not good for anyone, including the horses.
Cannonball, in some ways yes, time off will obviously benefit the horse.
But “affecting its value” may not.
Not real comfortable with leaving the insurance policy as the only way to get your investment back.
Tricky situation but many finallys breathed all over the circuit this week.
I await the fallout from the next shake up… several other BNs on my list.
Well done USEF. USE. USEq. Whatever you are now.
This is more complicated than it sounds. As an owner and also a rider, I often send horses to shows that I myself cannot attend. Now I am confident that my very competent and judicious trainer is not giving my horses any drugs, but some owners may not know their trainers that well or may think they know what goes on behind stall doors but they don’t. My point is, owners have jobs, families and other commitments and can’t be there every step of the way. We shouldn’t discourage even further the ownership
of top show horses for professionals to bring along and show as this niche is dying a slow death in this country already.
I think this is a cop-out.
I am in favor of penalizing owners more harshly as well, including “vacations”. It is time the owners hold the trainers accountable for their actions (in addition to USEF). If the trainer is going to lose clients for infractions then perhaps that will have more of an impact.
If owners know what the trainers are doing, then they should be throwing the dice right along with the trainer. If they don’t know what the trainer is doing then they should. If the trainer is lying to them about what they are doing then that could open the door up for legal action by the owner against the trainer which would be a further hit.
[QUOTE=RockinHorse;9008245]
I think this is a cop-out.
I am in favor of penalizing owners more harshly as well, including “vacations”. It is time the owners hold the trainers accountable for their actions (in addition to USEF). If the trainer is going to lose clients for infractions then perhaps that will have more of an impact.
If owners know what the trainers are doing, then they should be throwing the dice right along with the trainer. If they don’t know what the trainer is doing then they should. If the trainer is lying to them about what they are doing then that could open the door up for legal action by the owner against the trainer which would be a further hit.[/QUOTE]
I agree. I also think it’s ridiculous how many people assume that owners are ignorant and unaware of the “prep” involved in getting their horse to the ring. There may be some neophytes out there (at the top levels? Really??!!), but I believe that most owners either are fully aware and support whatever “prep” it takes to win, or they are deliberately choosing not to know in order to maintain plausible deniability.
So there are those of you who have had blood/urine taken, but didn’t check for results, but when L & K don’t check, damn them. Not my monkey, not my circus, but the double standard is glaring.
“So there are those of you who have had blood/urine taken, but didn’t check for results, but when L & K don’t check, damn them. Not my monkey, not my circus, but the double standard is glaring.”
How so?
I didn’t need to check my horses’ drug test results, since I knew for a fact that the horses did not get anything that was against the rules. I simply mentioned that the means to check the results are available. What does that have to do with a double standard?
PirateatForty - I disagree. I too, am one of those owners that entrusts my horse to a trainer for shows as well as at home. If I was set down for the horse being drugged, i would not tolerate that behavior in the trainer. Owners would stop patronizing the repeat offenders. As it is now, they just move the horse temporarily then go right back.
We are responsible. Until we start holding ourselves responsible as well as the trainers, this will continue.
“So there are those of you who have had blood/urine taken, but didn’t check for results, but when L & K don’t check, damn them. Not my monkey, not my circus, but the double standard is glaring.”
Not sure where you’re getting that. I never followed up when I was tested, and so I don’t fault L+K for not doing so. And I think others on the thread were making that same point, in response to one poster’s suggestion that one would normally follow up after being tested.
There is plenty of other stuff I do fault L+K for, though 
Right now it’s a version of he said/she said. L+K claim that they didn’t get notice in any form; USEF claims that notice was given legally. Personally, I cannot believe that USEF wasn’t extremely careful to ensure proper notice was given before dropping the hammer and making them an example.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out in court.
Somebody asked upthread about previous lengthy suspensions? You can’t really look back via USEF records but USEF has referred to him being suspended in the big Reserpine crack down figuring into the severity of this one. That was…maybe 12 years ago? Think she went down in that one too but not for as long.
It was multi year but, like I said, can’t remember and you can’t check back that far. He disappeared from zone 5 where he was based, resurfaced out in Cali several years later. Another zone 5 trainer set down in the same action who also had priors got dinged for a very long stretch, more then a year for sure.
Good example why USEF needs an accessible data base of past major penalties.
[QUOTE=APirateLooksAtForty;9008182]
This is more complicated than it sounds. As an owner and also a rider, I often send horses to shows that I myself cannot attend. Now I am confident that my very competent and judicious trainer is not giving my horses any drugs, but some owners may not know their trainers that well or may think they know what goes on behind stall doors but they don’t. My point is, owners have jobs, families and other commitments and can’t be there every step of the way. We shouldn’t discourage even further the ownership
of top show horses for professionals to bring along and show as this niche is dying a slow death in this country already.[/QUOTE]
On the one hand, I agree because I had that very experience 10 plus years ago. I inadvertently found out that my horse was being drugged without my knowledge or consent. He was in training to be sold. I questioned the trainer and was asked to leave which I did the next day. (She did not deny it, instead was insulted that I dared question her.) I was a small time owner and not in a big time barn at the time.
Ten years later, I have two horses in training with a well known jumper trainer whom I trust and have known since childhood. There is no way I would go anywhere near the hunter world now partly because my non horsey husband reads the Chronicle and is absolutely horrified by the stories: hidden commissions , drugging, etc…but mostly because it is not a level playing field.
Today, the rampant use of calming agents is well known. No owner can be reasonably say they are unaware that the problem exists. Owners are also USEquestrian members and bound by the rules. They should be expected to be responsible to have the conversation with their trainer about the use of prohibited substances. If they don’t or are afraid to, then they are part of the problem.
[QUOTE=dags;9008233]
Cannonball, in some ways yes, time off will obviously benefit the horse.
But “affecting its value” may not.
Not real comfortable with leaving the insurance policy as the only way to get your investment back.
Tricky situation but many finallys breathed all over the circuit this week.
I await the fallout from the next shake up… several other BNs on my list.
Well done USEF. USE. USEq. Whatever you are now.[/QUOTE]
Dags, I agree with your thought. It’s sad and scary that we would consider that as an outcome!
Was not the reserpine bust in the eighties. The big crackdown in the middle of the night at Devon?. When drugs were a real problem back in the day I believe a trainer’s barn was burned down. Must be someone around who remembers all this.
At the top of the horse show game, I believe that the mental balance beam for those that use chemical assistance would have ‘Not Winning’ on one side, and all possible penalties; being set down, owner possibly charged, horse possibly vacationed, etc on the other side, as equally weighted and even less onerous than Not Winning. The revolving door of fresh (and not so fresh) owners wanting to win is part of the problem.
Hope Murray Kessler can stay the course to affect change for real.
Reserpine was in the 80’s. But pretty sure in the early 2000’s tree was a Euro import concoction that people were using that was called Olympic 2000 that they were hawking as being non testable that ended up with reserpine as one of its additives. Quite a few got caught with it then.
