USEF Upholds Horse Welfare and Fair Play with Stiff Penalties for Doping

[Pennywell_Bay]

I suppose I did not thing it was in poor taste at first. I have to mull that one over.

[B][I]Also thought it was in poor taste to email the announcement. All suspensions and findings should be emailed from now on. People can go read the announcements if they please.

I took it as a wake-up call, a “we are not messing around” kind of alert. If Amy Ammy got suspended, it wouldn’t have been blasted BUT if they blasted everyone who got suspended (besides blowing up the internet and my mail) maybe it would shame people in to following the rules.

My gut reaction to the email notification: It isn’t in poor taste. Poor taste is cheating and thinking you are above the rules. If you don’t want a mass email going around about you- don’t break the rules.

It isn’t like it is Weiner-gate.

[findeight]

They are repeat offenders though, not just stupid mistakes. If anybody deserved the blast…

[APirateLooksAtForty]

[QUOTE=dia916;9005721]
Of course this is going to hurt them financially. They make hundreds of thousands of dollars annually competing in Hunter Derbies[/QUOTE]

Your naïveté is showing, might want to tuck that back in. With Vanessa and the other girl showing they will still rake in derby big bucks. This will not adversely affect their business in any material way. A good friend just bought a horse from them and completed the transaction today, even after knowing about this as of this morning. She didn’t bat an eye.

Edited to add: sadly the scuttlebutt at WEF is they may actually sell more horses now that they are “home” more to focus solely on that while sending the others on the road. Larry will have an angle in some way shape or form

[APirateLooksAtForty]

I agree, did not think it was in poor taste in the least. Thought they were trying to make a statement, finally.

[poltroon]

This isn’t surprising at all. This is a USEF proceeding – not a court of law. With the way the rules and proceedings are set up, there is NOTHING – no testimony, no evidence, no expert opinion – that the accused can offer to overcome the results of a positive drug test. People have tried without success. Some folks have suggested that mounting a defense (even when useless) results in more onerous penalties.

I don’t have enough access or awareness of the process to be able to say completely, but from the Notices of Penalty I’ve read in the past, it seems pretty clear to me that there have been cases where circumstances were considered, at least in the penalty phase.

Obviously, people who lost at the Hearing Committee aren’t entirely objective on this point.

Under this new rule framework, it’s changed from “trainer is always the person responsible and the only person responsible” to “we can discipline anyone who we think is responsible.” So, telling your side would seem to be more valuable, not less.

Having read a couple of transcripts that became public, I don’t think it would be a surprise that certain kinds of testimony (as a ‘hypothetical’ paraphrase … “The barn is full of these syringes and we have carefully calibrated the doses but accidentally gave this horse an extra”) … would result in more onerous penalties.

It’s not like Farmer and Glefke couldn’t afford to be there, as is the case for some.

[JenEM]

Edited to add: sadly the scuttlebutt at WEF is they may actually sell more horses now that they are “home” more to focus solely on that while sending the others on the road. Larry will have an angle in some way shape or form

Which is an excellent argument for suspending the horses of suspended parties for the duration of the suspension as well.

[APirateLooksAtForty]

JenEM I agree completely

[Pennywell_Bay]

JenM and PLat40- totally agree. The horse should be suspended, as well.

[scrbear11]

Or rather than suspending the horse (which is the “innocent” party in most situations), make it so those suspended cannot do any business with the USEF while on their suspension… Like transfer recording.

[vineyridge]

The drugged horse in this case was just one of many controlled by Glefke/Farmer. You’d have to suspend all the horses that they train to have much impact.

[trubandloki]

[QUOTE=scrbear11;9005999]
Or rather than suspending the horse (which is the “innocent” party in most situations), make it so those suspended cannot do any business with the USEF while on their suspension… Like transfer recording.[/QUOTE]

The problem with this idea is they have months before their suspension begins. More than enough time to transfer everything of value (that they have now).

It will prevent them from doing a ton of buying and selling while on suspension but I am sure there is an easy way around that - Gosh that groom owns a ton of really nice horses.

[vxf111]

I don’t necessarily disagree that…

1. A punishment that follows the horse would also be appropriate/effective
2. People will come up with work-arounds

But don’t think being set down doesn’t impact the people who are named. Do you think they WANT to have to stay home for a year? Sure, they WILL. And in the meantime someone else is getting the ride/limelight. And what if the replacement isn’t as good, goes off on her own with the clients, etc. Some people (not all but some) may think twice before doing business with someone who is set down.

Sure, people will work around a suspension (PV being an example of working around a lifetime BAN) but it does make life more difficult and impacts them. Maybe not an impact to the point where they fold up shop, but it impacts them.

[vxf111]

$20,000 may not be small potatoes to someone rich either, but I guarantee even the richest person has a list of things they’d rather spend that money on than a fine for being caught drugging. Even if they can absorb the cost, it still hurts to pay it.

[vineyridge]

Probably what would be the best punishment would be guaranteed drug testing of every horse that Farmer shows or Glefke has trained or has an ownership interest in for a period of, say, five years.

Get caught drugging two or three times, get tested with every ride for years and have to pay a fine large enough to cover the extra drug testing costs.

Seems to me that would be a real penalty that might discourage drugging.

[APirateLooksAtForty]

[QUOTE=vxf111;9006017]
$20,000 may not be small potatoes to someone rich either, but I guarantee even the richest person has a list of things they’d rather spend that money on than a fine for being caught drugging. Even if they can absorb the cost, it still hurts to pay it.[/QUOTE]
It’s a drop in the bucket, really. To put it in perspective, this is less than most of their commissions on ONE horse. ONE. So I don’t think the money will be a deterrent in the least bit to them, but it might serve as a deterrent to the smaller operations who are reading the USEF’s notice that would take a huge hit if they owed that amount of money.

[subk]

I’m curious about the idea to suspend the horse. If you suspend the horse and some unsuspecting owner ends up with a horse they can’t show for a year does that open up the guilty parties to a potential legal suit? That might actually put a little fear into the game.

[vxf111]

[QUOTE=APirateLooksAtForty;9006049]
It’s a drop in the bucket, really. To put it in perspective, this is less than most of their commissions on ONE horse. ONE. So I don’t think the money will be a deterrent in the least bit to them, but it might serve as a deterrent to the smaller operations who are reading the USEF’s notice that would take a huge hit if they owed that amount of money.[/QUOTE]

My point is that although $20,000 isn’t going to put a big operation out of business, it doesn’t mean that paying it (in combination with a “public flogging” and being set down) doesn’t sting. I think it still stings.

Some of the wealthiest people I know go out of their way not to pay things they can avoid. No one wants to pay a 5 figure fine, even if they can.

[jhg140]

[QUOTE=vxf111;9006085]
My point is that although $20,000 isn’t going to put a big operation out of business, it doesn’t mean that paying it (in combination with a “public flogging” and being set down) doesn’t sting. I think it still stings.

Some of the wealthiest people I know go out of their way not to pay things they can avoid. No one wants to pay a 5 figure fine, even if they can.[/QUOTE]

Lane Change has sold 22 horses since mid-Dec. Assuming they don’t own any of those (probably not the case), and assuming they all sold for $100k each (I’m guessing the actual prices are closer to the $250-500k range), they made AT LEAST $440k in commission in less than a month. They will continue to buy and sell like this for the next 1-2 years and won’t miss a beat. People who do business with Kelley and Larry know what they’re getting in to, and will continue to do business with them.

[IPEsq]

[QUOTE=vineyridge;9006039]
Probably what would be the best punishment would be guaranteed drug testing of every horse that Farmer shows or Glefke has trained or has an ownership interest in for a period of, say, five years.

Get caught drugging two or three times, get tested with every ride for years and have to pay a fine large enough to cover the extra drug testing costs.

Seems to me that would be a real penalty that might discourage drugging.[/QUOTE]

USEF would then have to ensure that testers are at every show they go to and hire enough testers to cover each horse they have in a given division. If they (the previously suspended party) had to pay for that, it would be pretty interesting.

[Soaponarope]

I often wonder what possible chance my daughter has competing clean if Kelley Farmer has to drug her horse. And I sure am proud of every ribbon she has won in the rated hunters. Ugh. We should really have our heads examined. We all know how much it costs to enter a derby. Ugh.

Here is my question though. While Kelley is suspended, she can still buy and sell and school horses right? She’s not banned from the sport really, just from Usef. So she could sell Unexpected despite the fact that she drugged the horse? And she could profit as if she hadn’t been banned? Anyone know?

I assume she will also suddenly get interested in doing clinics at hundreds of dollars a pop at private barns and travel around doing that. I guess she’ll also spend some time working on some better drug cocktails.