Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

Kat said:

>>He was a bit foot sore at the 55 mile vet check (in fact, I knew he was
a bit foot sore before the 55 mile vet check and I had gotten off to
lead him through the really stony bits because of it), but the vet (same
as the head vet for Camp Pendleton mind you) didn't pull him for being
foot sore despite the fact that I TOLD him, "He's a bit foot sore."
Probably because he didn't look all that sore being trotted out in hand.
At that time he was only sufficiently foot sore to wince occasionally
when he stepped wrong on a rock while being ridden.  This is a vet for
whom I have a great deal of respect and is also a well respected
endurance vet world-wide.  He didn't pull my horse for being foot sore,
and I didn't either, until I rode the horse another 5+ miles, and it
took me a long time of arguing with myself to convince myself that I had
to stop, get off, and go back even though the horse wasn't always foot
sore but only in the bad footing.

or were you referring to this part?

>>Not in my experience.  I have been to more than one endurance ride where
the vets are muttering among themselves about how foot sore some
barefoot horse is, will perhaps try to mention to the riders that this
is what they are seeing only to have it fall on deaf ears as the rider
insists that it isn't so, and so shrug their shoulders, let the horse go
on, and go back to muttering among themselves.<<

I'd guess it's because the horse isn't sore enough to pull, recommendation is made to the rider who maybe considers it, thinks the horse is fine and opts to go on.  Thereby risking that horse's health and maybe future plus of course maybe getting stuck out in the middle of nowhere with an ailing horse.  

----

And to what Kat wrote, as a fellow PS rider and former ride mgr, I can only say huzzah!  You told it like it is.  And the biggest part of why I stopped managing rides was because of riders who made bad decisions on the behalf of their horses, especially at the 3rd vet check of a 50.  It's not the majority of course.  But that minority left a real sour taste in my mouth.  And when I take ride photos, I'm able to focus just on footfalls and not soundess, except in the vet checks.  ;-)  See you guys at Swanton next week!

Lynne

<http://www.photo.lynnesite.com>

<http://lynnesite.blogspot.com/>

On Aug 7, 2008, at 9:55 PM, heidi larson wrote:

why would they let the horse go on if it's clearly having difficulties and is sore?  And, more than one vet is in agreement.....


heidi larson


--- On Fri, 8/8/08, k s swigart <katswig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

endurance ride where

the vets are muttering among themselves about how foot sore

some

barefoot horse is, will perhaps try to mention to the

riders that this

is what they are seeing only to have it fall on deaf ears

as the rider

insists that it isn't so, and so shrug their shoulders,

let the horse go

on, and go back to muttering among themselves.