Stupid question time again: Are there any training clinics for the vets, or is it a learn as you go process--i.e., vets get their training at the competitions?
Lisa ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Morris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "ridecamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 4:22 PM Subject: RE: [RC] Pre-Ride VC Issues and a few others > Roger: > > Your latest posting is very interesting. I have endured and > observed endurance vetting since 1977, that is 25 years and > I would say that what is now called endurance vetting is a > far cry from what it used to be. > > First off, endurance vetting was originally intended as just > that. Vetting the horse to determine if it was fit to > continue (or start)for a considerable distance in a sensible > manner. Today, vetting the horse has turned to a CYA process > that determines if the horse is in condition to be raced to > the next vet check. > > I think your comments and suggestions are well thought out > but let us take a look at the suggestions one at a time; > > 1. CRI at all rides at all Vet Checks NOT AT THE FINISH. > > This one is good if the CRI is standardized. I have seen > horses pulled because the CRI varied by two beats. I have > seen horses allowed to continue when the variation was four > beats. Now I do not consider that to be a standard. We must > establish an acceptable range of variation. > > 2. NO chasing hazing of horses by anyone at the VC to obtain > a trot. Crops for > unruly horses only, NOT to make a horse trot. > > Agreed. If the horse will not trot out then it is not fit to > continue. > > 3. Fix COMPLETION PULSE to 64 for 50 miles and up (NO more > lower 60 pulse for completion). > > Disagree here. I believe that ambient conditions should > dictate. I have seen times where 56 was a reasonable pulse > criteria. I would opt for a standard of 60 bpm but feel > there should be some acceptable range considering > conditions. However our AERC Rules do provide: 6.2.1.2 The > equine must reach a reasonable pulse recovery based on > ambient conditions, within 30 minutes of arrival time at > all control points during the ride. The maximum pulse > criterion is 68 beats per minute; however, the ride > veterinarian(s) may allow a higher pulse criteria in > documented extreme weather conditions. Respiration > should be evaluated on its own merit. Ambient > tempera-ture and humidity effects need to be recognized and > there effects on respiration rate considered. > > 4. Completion time at finish LEFT as is at one hour - > includes pulse recovery > and vet out process. (NOT the 30 minute pulse recovery I > have seen at > a few rides) > > Our AERC Rules call for one hour. 6.2.1.1 All Equines must > stand a mandatory post ride evaluation within one hour of > finishing. Riders may present their equines for the > final examination at a time of their choos- ing during the > one-hour period. An equine that does not meet the > established criteria within one hour of crossing the finish > line shall be disqualified. Once a competing equine has > passed the post ride examination, it may not be removed from > completion for veterinary reasons. When the 30 minute > recovery is instituted it is a violation of the rules and > disputable when used for completion criteria. > > 5. More then ONE VC on 50 milers and above. Some standard on > the number of VC per mileage and conditions- yes within > reason- may not apply to ALL rides. > > Well we can go round and round on this one but just let's > say we strongly disagree. We have no need to get > paternalistic in endurance riding. > > Now for your last comment "I suggest YOU run for the BOD > this time with all the DAL seats open." > > I have run more times than you can count but my politics do > not make me a suitable candidate. My stance is that the AERC > Rules and Regulations are very satisfactory and if > stringently enforced there would be fewer problems. Most of > those who would be my constituents do not agree. So! Never a > candidate again. > > Bob > > > Bob Morris > Morris Endurance Enterprises > Boise, ID > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Roger > Rittenhouse > Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 1:29 PM > To: ridecamp > Subject: [RC] Pre-Ride VC Issues and a few others > > > FROM Roger Rittenhouse > > I noted TWO posts from riders about the pre-ride VC > procedures and > the issue with 'strange or inconsistent way of going; NOT a > real > issue with lamness. > This problem appears to be an issue at more and more rides. > It tends to be more prevalent with 'big time' rides with > more then one > vet doing the trot evaluation - the sort of gang up vetting. > It occurs at the OD every year and other bigger rides as a > few riders have > commented. > Part of this situation is caused by ' the top vet I see > something > and you dont' syndrome. > IF one top vet 'sees' something ALL the other have to go > along to > not appear as they dont know what they are doing, sort of a > group > hysteria thing, one sees 'something' and all the others - > say 'yeah > maybe so'. Just to be on the same team and all of one common > mind set. > > Its mostly bunk as far as I am concerned. IF the horse is > REALLY LAME > that is, which means the AERC RULES definition of lameness > are > applied , then there is > no question, but this sort of uneven crap and missed ONE > step that is > ONE head nod -inconsistent - that is, is baloney. I see > too much of > this. > To be pulled you have to show a consistent uneven gait in > ALL > directions of the trot out - out back and circles. The old > policy was > IF the horse took a few bad steps the condition was noted > as 'G1 > inconsistent LF - or what ever. > > NOT this stuff we are seeing today. > Some of this made up criteria is getting out of control. > One up mans-ship vetting. Why ?? to prevent a problem > later? > Well I believe someone quoted a vet at the OD saying Lame > horses generally do NOT die > - but metabolic problems will kill.?? I think I have that > right. > > Then we have the other end of the spectrum where tired > horses are > chased - hazed - to make them trot- they may be sound but > are dead > tired - fatigue? .. this has been one of may major bitches. > > Talk about inconsistent vetting. a little bobble at vet in > gets you a > no start- but having to chase - smack- hit - whapping with > crop at every > step - yelling- dragging - what ever to get the > tired, but maybe sound horse, to trot out at the end gets > you > a completion?? go figure. It is NOT a training issue. > > I actually thought the idea with undefined motion gait > issues,was to let you start then REALLY look hard > at the horse at the FIRST VC. This assumes the horses is NOT > indicating an abnormal gait that causes NOTED irregular > motion- head > bob or hip hikes etc WITH EVERY STEP. > I would of course NOT like to see a G2,(almost every step) > start or > continue. > But not this minor uneven gait - as in 'we dont really know > but > there is something there' , so your out thing, this is > improper. > Sort of like the pull for 'he dont look right' no real > issue found > just the vet does not like the way horse is looking. There > are > standards on what constitutes a not fit to continue horse. > Not self defined - > non-specific criteria. > The ONLY time this really means anything is when YOU the > rider thinks > something is wrong AND the vet supports your 'feeling' THEN > YOU the > ride should re-evaluate and either adjust your ride or > withdrawal. > > Far too many times I see or hear of riders getting pulled > for in-vaild > reasons. Of course the vet can 'make something up' then you > get > pulled for a 'real reason' and we are not allowed to object. > > Seems horses are not being allowed to start for LESSOR > inconstant > gaits then would be allowed to continue on trail or at the > finish. > > Let me toss this one out - Does anyone other then ME think > all this > excessive picky nondescript vetting have anything to do with > the influence of FEI > and a transference of mind sets from the FEI vets? > > I have complained about this 'do it your self' vetting rules > interpretation to a few vets - defined what I thought was > improper and > suggested we have rules to follow. IF we do not care for > these rules > and want stricter standards THEN we should make the changes > to > conform with new standards. > > Since I was NOT at the OD - let me ask this one - DID ALL > the horses > get the CRI done at ALL VC- AND - at the FINISH - was it > used as a > finishing criteria? COULD you have been pulled for a > 'failed' CRI at > the finish?? Need to define that one? > > I have ranted on this before- I would like to know, How > many other > rides (riders) have noted this? Is it being done at more > rides. It > sure is NOT consistent at the rides I went to last year. > > I have brought these issues(and others) and lack of > consistent vetting and > following the rules, up to the BOD and vets both on the BOD > and the Vet > committee. I have gotten no where expect - ridicule - no > action and told by the vets > that they will do as they please - what ever the vet of the > day wants to do - even > outside the rules and guide lines of AERC. > > So after reading this stuff from two rides (riders) I now > take it public. > > Should we make the rules of starting and fit to continue as > well as > completion stricter, do we need to codify the policy and > vetting > standards to insure ALL the vets perform the process the > same way at > ALL rides? Do we want to develop standards as done in > Australia and > other places. Logs books all that which goes long with that? > > OR do we just ask - demand- the rules, policy, and > guidelines we > currently have in place be followed? > I believe our current rules and vet procedures are for the > most part- adequate. > > I would like to see a few changes but overall the rules and > procedures are acceptable for the protection of the horse. > > OK now that you asked ?? WHAT would I change ? > > 1. CRI at all rides at all Vet Checks NOT AT THE FINISH. > 2. NO chasing hazing of horses by anyone at the VC to obtain > a trot. Crops for > unruly horses only, NOT to make a horse trot. > 3. Fix COMPLETION PULSE to 64 for 50 miles and up (NO more > lower 60 pulse for completion). > 4. Completion time at finish LEFT as is at one hour - > incudes pulse recovery > and vet out process. (NOT the 30 minute pulse recovery I > have seen at > a few rides) > 5. More then ONE VC on 50 milers and above. Some standard on > the > number of VC per mileage and conditions- yes within reason- > may not apply to ALL > rides. > > Just a few to get the flames up to temp > > I dont really expect any changes to anything- though. No one > wants to > go on the hot plate- as many of you will take exception to > most of my > comments. > I suggest YOU run for the BOD this time with all the DAL > seats open. > > OF course we can do it the way Dr Matthew wants to go, > Get rid of the hard ball rules and 'racing' > > Say just how did THAT work out the OD? > Guess the 50 would be more valid then the 100 miler. > I really dont see that going anywhere either. > > Roger Rittenhouse AERC #8263 > > > > > > > > > Roger Rittenhouse > > > > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > =-=-=-=-= > Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, > http://www.endurance.net. > Information, Policy, Disclaimer: > http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > =-=-=-=-= > > > > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. > Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net. Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
