Who knows the history of EQ102 - Equitation horses are not required to be sound?

[wanderlust]

@Renn_aissance

I agree that the language is contradictory. I favor “serviceably sound” as laid out in GR840, which is specific enough that it can’t be argued that a horse whose unsoundness “does not impair the required performance” is in fact “serviceably sound” only because he didn’t fall down or walk out on three legs today. What do you all think?

I think that at this level, with the amount of money spent to get to these finals, being legitimately 100% sound should be the baseline. Like it is for dressage, FEI eventing and FEI showjumping. There is no excuse to ride a horse at this level and height who is obviously sore (or head-bobbing lame). And they should in no way have put a horse that was obviously not sound into the top 5 to test.

Serviceably sound has it’s place, but competing at the Maclay Finals is not it.

Edited to add - mechanical gait abnormalities like stringhalt are obviously excluded from the above.

[ww3467]

@Tha_Ridge

One of the top equitation horses we watched yesterday has pretty severe stringhalt, I believe. I’m not naming names because I’m trying to find the article in which it was mentioned, but your comment made me remember that.

There was an article a while ago that mentioned Waldo having shivers. Could that be the one you’re remembering?

[Renn_aissance]

@wanderlust

Serviceably sound has it’s place, but competing at the Maclay Finals is not it.

I think we are working off of different definitions of “serviceably sound.” To me, “serviceably sound” is “for the purpose intended”- which means the athlete is physically capable of performing the requested level of sport comfortably and without predictable risk to its long-term well-being. Compare to “sound,” which I think of as “the pickiest vet in the world can’t find anything the matter with the creature.” A horse can be “serviceably sound” to show at the Maclay Finals and have questionable findings on x-rays or flexions because those questionable findings are treated appropriately and the joint mobility or whatever does not interfere with the horse’s ability to live his life doing that job. But that same horse might not be “serviceably sound” to compete in the Grand Prix, where the bigger jumps and greater concussion would be too much risk to that horse’s well-being. My 27-year-old retiree is “serviceably sound” to go on trail rides and do light flatwork, but his arthritis means he is not “serviceably sound” to go jump around, because while he probably could do it, the limitations in joint mobility mean he’s at higher risk for an injury. Etc.

“Serviceably sound” is also consistent with the other horse welfare rules in the rulebook, and is defined as: “”…all animals… must be serviceably sound for competition purposes i.e. such animal must not show evidence of lameness or broken wind." I’m comfortable with that definition as excluding horses who shouldn’t be in the ring. What do you think?

[CHT]

In general performance classes we aren’t allowed to mark a rider down for unsoundness if it doesn’t impede the ride either. The idea is we are judging the rider not the horse, and because we aren’t veterinarians, we can’t determine the nature of the lameness. (In regular classes a lame horse would be marked down for incorrect cadence).

A soundness exam would have to happen outside the show ring - have a vet watch them jog or something. This not something a judge should be asked to assess in this context and I could see people then complaining that the judge eliminated a rider for lameness out of favourtism or such.

[Janet]

It has been around a while
The 1990-1991 AHSA Rule Book (in a section that refers to ALL Equitation divisions) says
"Article 2204 Judging

1. Unsoundness does not penalize a competitor unless it is sufficiently severe to impair the required performance. In such cases the imposition of a penalty is at the judges discretion."

[quietann]

@CHT

In general performance classes we aren’t allowed to mark a rider down for unsoundness if it doesn’t impede the ride either.

Does this also apply to classes where the horse is being judged rather than the rider/driver/handler?

[AAHunterGal]

I’ve been reading all of these rules and the subsequent discussions, and I think the thing that keeps coming up in my mind is the unspoken piece (which I think someone did speak to earlier in the thread) - we all know these horses are pounded all year. The trainers for sure know how much they are jumped. You can’t prepare a kid for the Big Eq ring anymore without jumping a horse to death.

Just for this class, there were the two rounds (three for some horses) AND the warm up class the day before and all of the 5am lessons that happen over the course of the week. And this is just one week for one class.

I think the main issue for me is that this unsoundness is completely linked to the overuse of these horses.

Subsequently, the thing that gets me angry, more than the lame horses, it’s that they don’t HAVE to be lame. We can limit the number of classes they’re allowed to show in over the course of the year, or place ANY sort of limit on their use. But we don’t. So they’re lame.

[CHT]

We never mark down unsound riders

But, unless a horse is dangerously lame, we never judge a horse as lame, but rather “uneven cadence” , “poor rhythm” or poor quality gaits. In a good class this will keep them from placing, but in a small class, a lame horse might get a ribbon as modern judging discourages not using all the ribbons - so if the horse displays the required gaits (and both leads if canter or lope are asked for), they will just place at the bottom of the class.

At a big show, the horse can be pulled for a vet exam before their next class though, but only the vet can call the horse as lame…stewards and judges can just recommend the vet exam.

(this is general performance type classes. Obviously different for hunter classes with a jog for soundness)

[Bobby7]

I have a question. What veterinary care do you think is acceptable to make a horse serviceably sound? I recently was at Maclay finals and a trainer we were stabled with pulled the horses front shoes for the hack and then had the vet block both front feet. Apparently this is common practice but I thought how disgusting . What about giving diabetic medicine to keep them from sleeping all night so they don’t have to lunge to keep them sound?

[wanderlust]

@Bobby7

I recently was at Maclay finals and a trainer we were stabled with pulled the horses front shoes for the hack and then had the vet block both front feet.

Pulling the shoes is common practice for big hunter classes. Blocking the feet is 150% illegal and the local anesthetic used for that will test. Shame on that trainer and vet.

[Renn_aissance]

Obviously, none of that.

But I have to ask how sure you are about what you saw, because your description doesn’t make any sense. Pulling the shoes isn’t necessary to do a nerve block and is counter-productive if you’re trying to disguise a lameness- plus absolutely unnecessary for an equitation horse who isn’t judged on his way of going.

[vxf111]

Are you sure this is what you saw? The nerve blocking part sounds pretty crazy to me it’s against the rules and takes sufficiently long and requires a veterinarian’s involvement to the degree where there’s a huge risk of getting caught. Pulling shoes for a hack is done, but not nerve blocking. And that’s for hunter under saddle classes where movement is judged. The movement isn’t judged in equitation. And someone was doing this so brazenly in the open that you (a stranger) watched the whole thing? I’m pretty skeptical that this is what you actually saw.

I don’t know what diabetic medicine would keep a horse up all night. Can’t think of what would meet that description. But that would test and very likely be prohibited. I’ve never heard of that either.

[EmilyM]

@wanderlust

Blocking the feet is 150% illegal and the local anesthetic used for that will test. Shame on that trainer and

Serapin doesn’t test.

[EmilyM]

A lot of people block horses feet with Serapin especially during indoors. A lot of vets are complicit with cheating.

ETA: I had a discussion w a BNT who was trying to tell me that blocking feet at indoors was a kindness because of how they pounded on them to prep them. I disagree because if their feet are that sore you are creating an issue that could have a long term consequence. But a lot of people believe what her line of thinking is.

[endlessclimb]

Good god.

I was thinking about showing recognized next year, but every thread that comes out with this kind of stuff makes me want to puke. What’s the point of the drug fee if this stuff is ok, even in competitor’s minds? I don’t want to be associated with it, at all…

[fordtraktor]

The vets who are complicit in this should have their licenses revoked.

It’s absolutely disgusting what some people will do to win.

If this is a known thing, why doesn’t USEF send its whole enforcement team to indoors and monitor the barns?

[Renn_aissance]

@vxf111

I don’t know what diabetic medicine would keep a horse up all night. Can’t think of what would meet that description. But that would test and very likely be prohibited. I’ve never heard of that either.

Poor sleep can be a side effect of metformin. Metformin can be used to help with insulin reuptake in insulin-resistant horses. At a very quick glance, I do not see metformin in the prohibited substances or “permissible with TUE” list in the 2022 D&M brochure. Which of course does not mean that it’s legal if used as described.

[Bristol_Bay]

This discussion brings to mind the hornet’s nest Olivia Champ stirred up eight years ago by speaking out for the eq horses’ welfare.

COTH Article on Eq Horses

I just read the June 23 & 30 edition of COTH and I want to give kudos to both Olivia Champ and the editor. I am impressed by Olivia’s decision to stick her neck out and speak up about horse welfare. I agree with Ms. Champ that juniors (and ammies too) need to be more involved in the care and control of their horses. I also enjoyed the article about the price of ponies and points. Good job COTH.

[Impractical_Horsewoman]

I wonder if eq horses are particularly battered because it seems like the big barns which are virtually required for a rider to ride with to win rent these horses out for that purpose. If horses were limited to how many finals they could be ridden at, or how many classes a year, it’s interesting to see how that would affect results. Despite in theory it’s just the rider being judged, obviously people wouldn’t be paying big bucks if that was really the case.

[Foitin]

It seems like equitation is particularly hard on the horses because of the ridiculous prep that goes into it: lunging, 5am lessons, another lunge and ride before the class, and the finals courses themselves. I thought this Maclay course was more humane in that it tested the rider’s precision more than the scope and step of the horse. Some of the previous courses were absurd and honestly required a very solid 1.3m horse with a very. large, huge or giant step to be successful. This not only eliminates a ton of kids from possibility being competitive, it puts tremendous strain on horses not qualified for the courses. Sure, we can say that the kids just shouldn’t show unless they have a 500k horse to ride, but what kind of equity is that? The courses have to be controlled. The indoors hunter season is also very hard on horses because of the prep, but at least the courses and obstacles are more reasonable. I personally have never heard of blocking the feet (definitely the shoe removal for the hacks is unfortunately standard).