Re: [RC] Preventing Treated Horses - Howard Bramhall
I never did say the rider should be dragged over the
coals. Your words, not mine. I just suggested the event of a
horse dying at an endurance ride should be "discussed." Why isn't
it? Ever? Except on Ridedcamp. The only time I've ever seen
it talked about in Endurance News was when someone filed a protest. If
we have those files in the closet in the AERC office, why can't this
information be disclosed? If nothing else, some of that information
might actually vindicate the rider instead of letting the rumors and
innuendoes fly, like they will if the facts are not presented. Get
it out in the open.
I did not imply the rider should be taken to task
at all in my post. I think the information should be published for
educational reasons and to let the rest of the world (the non-endurance one)
know that AERC is not trying to hide or omit anything. Check out Horse &
Rider this month and see what they say about the WEG in Spain. And, a
few other horse magazines that have also broached the topic. We need to
say something whenever a horse dies at an endurance ride as an organization
or others will do it for us.
> > Does it take a protest to be filed to get it in
print? This is sad if > > that's the case. After reading
the last protest published concerning the > > rider whose horse was
out of control at an endurance ride, which resulted > in > >
their punishment being a 6 month suspension and censure, you would think >
> someone who lost a horse at a ride would have a similar, or worse, >
sanction > > placed against them. But, as it turns out, a horse
death doesn't seem to > > warrant any discussion anywhere except on
Ridecamp. I do think we might > > want to consider which is more
important here. > > Is a horse out of control more important than a
horse who is no longer > with > > us? Where are our
priorities? > > And I would submit, Howard, that not everyone who
loses a horse at a ride > should be "punished." Ridecamp (as well as
many internet forums) seems to > assume the worst, and many posters seem
to want to be as punative as > possible without ascertaining the
facts. The priority should be the > truth--and that isn't what
always comes out in "internet court." > > As I've stated previously,
virtually every death that I've personally > witnessed at endurance events
has been due either to a non-detected > pre-existing condition or to an
unavoidable accident. What ghoulishness is > it in people that
would have the rider drug over the coals in print after > such tragic
occurrences? Your assumption alone that all riders who have > horses
die should be punished in some way seems to me to be good reason NOT >
to print every death incident in gory detail. > > That said, I DO
think the year-end stats should be readily available, as > well as the
breakdown of WHY the horses died. It is my opinion that such > stats
might go a long way toward educating people to the fact that
there ARE > some deaths that are simply tragic, and likely could not
have been > prevented. > > Heidi > > >
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >
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!! > >
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >
