Re: Negative Treatment Towards LD riders and horses!

["Joe Long" <jlong@mti.net>]

On Sat, 28 Mar 1998 21:34:40 -0700, Cheryl Newbanks <horsetrails@inficad.com>
wrote:

>Ok, here goes.  This weekend I did a ride, to remain un-named but you all
>know what state I live in:}  From the get go the Ld's were made to feel
>like second class citizens.  

I'm sorry you felt this way (and I was not at the ride) but that isn't the point
I want to address.

>They started the 50's 15 minutes before the 30's so we bottle necked at
>times.  The first vc was ok, we breezed right through, but when we got to
>the completion it was a total joke!  Granted it started to rain pretty
>heavy and the horses were cold and shivering along with the riders, but hey
>when you are in line YOU WAIT YOUR TURN, but not at this ride, the vet
>continously picked 50 milers out of the line to vet first and 50 milers
>intentionally butted ahead of us also, even though they had a 1 hour hold
>and we had to be at the vet within 30 minutes from the time we crossed the
>finish line to complete.  

I think it is a good policy that, at a vet check where some horses are finishing
and others are continuing on a longer distance, that in the event of a backup
the continuing horses get preference.  No matter if it's 25/50, or 50/75, or
50/100 or whatever.  The horse returning to the trail should get preference over
a horse that has finished his distance and is going to be remaining at that
location. 

Of course, if the ride does this, it is imperative that they have pulse-takers
and timekeepers who will verify the "finishing" horse's meeting his time
requirement, so that if he is held up seeing the vet by "continuing" horses
being taken ahead, it will not affect his completion.  If the ride doesn't have
enough personnel to do this then they *must* allow completion to horses that
miss the time "window" due to other horses being taken ahead of them.  That
comes under what I consider to be a fundamental principle of ride management:
the horse/rider should never be made to suffer for ride management mistakes or
understaffing.

I think this is a good idea not because the horses going the shorter distance
are less deserving, but because the ride should make every reasonable effort to
get those horses who *are* continuing through the vet check on time.  The riders
of the "finishing" horses may be inconvenienced, but less so than a rider who
has half his ride still to run being delayed.

-- 

Joe Long
jlong@mti.net
Business Page  http://www.mti.net
Personal Page  http://www.rnbw.com