RE: ill, IV'd, dead horses on rides.

[Rightrider@cs.com]

At the risk of dragging an uncomfortable topic out, I've got some long range 
and recent experience on multiple levels of this topic.  First, Bob Morris 
makes a good point re: let's check the facts against the channels provided 
for processing them in order to end up with information that is accurate, 
useful and preventative in nature.  Second, the guest post re: my horse on 
IV's @ Tevis at 22 (?) miles while clock indicates the horse is not being 
pushed for speed only reaffirms my recent personal experience with two 
different clients that I shared with RCers, ie, two horses needed IV 
intervention (one a mild case of colic post ride - later thought to be 
contributed to by a muscle pull which didn't show up until the horse had 
cooled out sufficiently, while the other involved a sever calcium/potassium 
imbalance in a horse that had been electrolyted consistently throughout the 
ride, and is still a puzzel).  Todays ride vets seem to have reached a 
consensus that when in doubt one of the most important treatment protocals is 
to get LOTS of fluids in a questionable horse, much more so, I think, than 
ever before.  If we make this act suspect by second and third guessing the 
owner and vet with post ride opinions on RC, we are, in effect contributing 
to a situation LESS supportive to the continued welfare of the horse.  After 
all, if all your riding friends looked down on you because your horse got 
IV'd at a ride, you might be more careful in your riding (which would be 
good), but you also might be less likely to take a marginal horse to a vet 
before you took it home (which would be bad) and as it's been pointed out, 
horses on IV's are not ALWAYS horses which have been over ridden. 
    The electrolyte advice re: only electrolyte when horse is drinking, has 
also been called into question recently by articles which state that if a 
horse's system is allowed to get electrolyte depleted, the horse's brain 
won't register its thirst and therefore it won't drink a definate "catch 22". 
 So even this issue is not a clear cut any more as it might seem on first 
glance!
    Finally, most agree that education is at least one key to making 
endurance a safer, more humane sport and I certainly agree.  Not only that, 
but AERC has its tax exempt charter to do business BASED on the fact that it 
is an "educational" organization.  My personal experience regarding that 
however is that the BOD has basically said the organization "can't afford" 
education, at least not in the form of articles for its membership magazine.  
There ARE experts out there writing for other magazines on material which 
would be valuable to endurance riders....I know because I make it a point to 
read the stuff, for instance in "The Horse," etc., and that's not the only 
one, but I doubt if most of those journalists want to give their livelyhood 
skills away for nothing, at least not more than once or twice.  There could 
be a lot more done to contribute to the knowledge of the membership if 
"education" in all its various presentations got something more than the lip 
service in AERC's circles of power, but to get it done probably means members 
would have to indicate that education is an important issue and follow 
through with elected representatives and that, of course, leads us into the 
rats nest of politics and "government," where, with todays moral climate, 
most of us are loath to go, especially when the alternative is to be out on 
the trail with a good horse!  A totally understandable position from my 
perspective.  
Happy Trails    Donna Snyder-Smith