Re: Charges only pertain to AERC members

["Linda Hedgpeth" <lth@thegrid.net>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rides 2 Far" <rides2far@juno.com>


> Folks...would everybody just stop and think about this for a minute?
> I've been competing for 14 years and I've seen one horse die and
that one
> shouldn't have (the vets left the grounds after one bag of fluids
and the
> horse went down like 12 hours later).

I have received several emails so far from people who have each seen
more than one horse die at an endurance race.  They have all said that
these deaths were not discussed afterward.   If, as you say, the
system is good and these things are not swept under the rug, then are
the reports of those deaths published to the membership anywhere?  Are
those incidents published in Endurance News and are the causes
reported anywhere that can be accessed by the masses?  How many cases
of death due to abuse have been protested and what were the results of
those protests?

The case of Dancer at the Oakland Hills ride comes to mind.  His rider
was seen by an eye witness whipping this horse every step.  This horse
was so exhausted that he would stop when the rider stopped whipping
him.  Yet the whipping continued because this rider had *goals* to win
this race.  This was reported and protested by an eye witness.  In my
mind, this was animal abuse.  If I walked outside and started beating
my horse or my dog in a similar manner, and my neighbor saw it and
called the police, I could get some jail time.  Yet, nothing was done
to this rider other than the publishing of the protest in Endurance
News.  AERC felt that the rider had suffered enough already because
the horse ultimately died later in a fall into a canyon.  How about
Dancer's suffering *before* he went over the cliff?  I wonder if
Dancer would have felt that justice had been served by AERC.  This is
a system that doesn't need a discussion for improvement?

> All the good thoughts in the world aren't going to bring that mare
back,
> but jumping to change rules could sure cause some problems.

No one is "jumping" to change rules.  People are discussing
improvement.  Why do you oppose discussing something that could help
protect our horses?  The safeguards we have in place now were put
there by people with the same intentions.  Is AERC perfect?  Is 1 vet
check on a 50-miler perfect?

Do you
> honestly want a court of law...which knows nothing about endurance
or the
> stresses involved, and LAWYERS, trying to regulate what goes on in
our
> sport? Want to make it less personable, try making everyone worry
about
> covering their own liability if they let a particular horse go on.
> "Excuse me Dr. XXX DVM, you obviously allowed this horse to continue
on,
> even though his CRI went up one beat...you share the blame for this
> attrocity".  Now *that*'ll make it easy to get vets.

No, Angie.  No one does.

> Linda, we've got a good system.  We're using it.  This could have
been
> brought up in Endurance News and discussed in the old days (yes,
there
> *was* life before the internet) and the problems would be
> addressed...slowly and thoughtfully, not coming up like a sudden
> thundershower on Ridecamp, then fading away as fast as it came.
It's not
> a fool proof system, because we have fools in our sport
occasionally, but
> we do have the right to deny the guilty parties entry in rides.

> I'm sorry someone who heard of an injustice didn't get instant
results
> from the system...but justice takes time.  So what if you didn't see
the
> 19 year old's mentor hanging by their thumbs? That doesn't mean that
> other endurance riders, managers, and board members didn't take note
of
> the event and won't take it into account when planning their next
> competition.  Believe it or not, you're not the only person out
there who
> cares about our horses.  Just because we don't think Ridecamp is the
> proper format for this discussion does not mean we are "sweeping it
under
> the rug".
>
> Angie

I don't know how to respond to the paragraphs above.  No one is
talking about "instant" justice.  No one is talking about "hanging
people by their thumbs".  No one is talking about blaming a vet for a
death due to a "CRI up one beat."  I know I'm not "the only one who
cares about our horses."  Yes, we know there "was life before the
internet".  How was a horse death on the east coast made known and
discussed by people on the west coast in the "old days"?   Who brought
the issue to the forefront for discussion?  I agree that the present
system is a "good one".  Couldn't it be better?

Linda