I'm not beating you up. I just commented that I
think it is sad that a concept like this would be considered to soothe
rider ego. I can't argue with you that it is also pretty bad that a
vet has to point out to a rider when a horse is really lame and the rider wants
to continue. I guess considering this is just a line I don't
think should have to be crossed. Why can't riders just enjoy their horses,
enjoy their friends, enjoy the trails, participate in healthy competition and
accept the fact that there are no guarantees? This is what I
don't get.
Kim
Kim - our rulebook is full of rules implemented to safeguard and protect
horses, added as people saw the need or opportunity . I'm not sure why this
particular concept is disgusting to you, any more than a rider that needs a
vet to point out that their horse is lame. Our sport is about healthy
competition and an opportunity to enjoy our horses, our friends, our trails.
What difference does it make really if the outcome is a healthier horse and
more satisfied rider?
I'm not on the bandwagon, and I really don't care
enough about this to try to change anything, so don't beat me up too bad
:)
