 |
Re: [RC] New Poll up - Heidi SmithThank you, thank you, thank you, Joe, for calling a spade a spade. Truman, what ARE you thinking? This is on par with the old question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" No metabolic death is "acceptable" in the sense of sweeping it under the rug--indeed, every one should be questioned and examined and hashed over and every attempt made to understand why it happened so that we can be smarter in preventing future ones. But indeed, the only way to achieve zero is not to ride. And even then, the death rate is one apiece, and all horses will die of something. I personally found the death of my filly who fractured her leg out playing and "just being a horse" to be "unacceptable." But the only way to insulate myself from such things would be to sell 'em all and take up knitting. I'm not going to give this poll the dignity of a response. Heidi ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Long" <jlong@xxxxxxxx> To: "Truman Prevatt" <tprevatt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: "AERC" <AERCMembersForum@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Ride Camp" <RideCamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "enduranceriders" <Enduranceriders2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <DR@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 6:46 PM Subject: Re: [RC] New Poll up On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 20:20:32 -0500, Truman Prevatt <tprevatt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Given the current discussion on various sites concerning deaths at endurance rides, a new poll question has been put on the SERA website. It is Are 10 deaths a year resulting from metabolic failure acceptable? Let your voice be hear go vote at http://www.seraonline.org/Truman, What the...????????? What a loaded "poll." What is "acceptable?" What is the alternative? There is a way -- and ONLY one way -- to eliminate equine fatalities in endurance rides: stop having endurance rides. If someone really, truly believes that equine fatalities resulting from endurance rides are unacceptable (literally, "can not be accepted"), that person MUST believe that we must stop having endurance rides. This is a case where you cannot say A without saying B. If you are asking if that *number* (ten annually) is acceptable, why that arbitrary number and no other choices? But then, how could I or any horseman answer that ten, or five, or one is "acceptable?" I think most of us would say that even one a decade is a tragedy that we must work to minimize, while being realistic enough to know that zero is an unreachable number. It's like some politician asking how many traffic deaths a year are acceptable (or how many casualties in Iraq are acceptable). I can see no purpose behind a "poll" like this other than to sensationalize a complex problem with a question that has no answer. I will not participate in this "poll" and I urge others to refuse to participate as well. -- Joe Long jlong@xxxxxxxx http://www.rnbw.com =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp Ride Long and Ride Safe!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp Ride Long and Ride Safe!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|