Truman wrote:>>I had hoped the HWC would be much more proactive - but it hasn't
happened. Like most of the BOD and committees - they are good people but they
can't bring themselves tog row some fangs and get the job done and end up paying
lip service. It takes set of balls to address the issue of abusive riders. What
does the HWC do - try to push through a bone headed rule changing one hour to 30
minutes at the end. Will this catch a single abuser - hell no. Will it impact
rides - hell yes. It is a total cop out. For my money the HWC has not worked.
Maybe time to try something else. I had great hopes for it - but the baby turned
ugly. I don't know why - nor do I care - it is time to rethink the whole
issue.<<
OK
Truman, you have called me out. A few days ago I put my phone number and
email address on a post and offered to listen to people's opinions of the
proposed rule change. Several considerate and caring people who wish to
communicate in a civil manner, have contacted me. I have to spend some
time tomorrow answering some of the questions I have not gotten to. Thank
you to those people, you have been heard and your voice counts. SO I come
here to RC to see what I can learn, and I find I need to grow a set of
balls, or fangs (depending on the paragraph)to live up to the standards you have
set for me.
Let
me tell you something, Mr. Prevatt, I have no need for either of those nasty
accessories. I have done the animal welfare scene for many years,
just fine without. Call the former District Attorney in
Chautauqua County NY and ask him who changed the precedent for animal
cruelty in NYS in 1996 by not backing down and by prosecuting and winning the
biggest puppy mill case in the east. I did that without balls or
fangs.
By
the way, before I tell you what we have accomplished, it would be good to tell
the truth about the formation of the committee. *I* stood up in Chattanooga and
suggested the AERC form a committee to deal with welfare, not you and not Jim
Holland. All you two did was complain, I put my money and my heart where
my mouth is, and there it has stayed.
Since the inception of the Welfare
of the Horse committee, we have seen giant strides in the care of animals at
endurance rides. No longer is it a shame to have your horse
treated. Fewer horses are being packed away in trailers and whisked
out of ridecamp so that the owners do not have to suffer the humiliation of
having their horse be treated when they so desperately need it. Now when
your horse has a crisis that could not be avoided, you can confidently go to the
vet and she can do her best to start to save his life. Someone will bring
you a cup of coffee and a chair instead of whispering behind your back and
spreading rumors, making a horrible situation worse. UNLESS, you DID over
ride your horse, then ride managers will rethink whether they want to accept
your ride entry, other riders will outright tell you that you messed up, or they
will not sell you a horse when you come looking. There is no quantitative
analysis of this paradigm shift, but it is there, and it is a direct result of
the Welfare committee's openness and education.
The fatality reports that we write
that are published in EN approach your worst nightmare in a compassionate and
educational manner. By publishing those articles, people know what to look
for, or what not to ignore, they sometimes learn that nothing can be seen ahead
of a crisis, but immediate intervention can help save their horse. Many
hours go into these reports that openly and honestly address these
tragedies.
I personally take care of most
of the informal complaints we receive. I contact riders who
are perceived to be on the verge of hurting their horse and talk to or
write to them . I often
set up (without making it a big deal) a mentor for them of a rider I trust or a
vet who can watch and teach. Recently I heard back from such a mentor in
the SE that the rider was doing much better, and took our advice to heart.
You don't hear about that stuff, but it happens, and it is a good
thing.
Theodore Roosevelt
said:
It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points
out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done
better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face
is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes
short again and again, who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and
spends himself in a worthy cause, who at best knows achievement and who at the
worst if he fails at least fails while daring greatly so that his place shall
never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.
From a speech given in Paris at the Sorbonne in 1910
