<% appTitle="Ridecamp Archives" %> Ridecamp: [RC] Protecting Horses / vet checks
Ridecamp@Endurance.Net

[Archives Index]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]   [Author Index]   [Subject Index]
Current to Wed Jul 23 17:28:19 GMT 2003
  • Next by Date: RE: [RC] Protecting Horses
  • - Bob Morris
  • Prev by Date: Re: [RC] Protecting Horses
  • - Milinda Ellis

    [RC] Protecting Horses / vet checks - Steph Teeter


    Offering more opionions here (Roger, you shamed me into speaking up :)
     
    1)Having a P/R gate into a timed hold, but no vet check:
     
    I've been to rides where this was done, seemed like a reasonable idea. Useful if loops are long, or if conditions are difficult - may give horses a needed short break to eat and drink. Gives ride managers a little more freedom when designing courses and working out the logistics of loop length, vet checks, etc. May be especially useful in areas that are hard to reach by 'normal' vehicles, or are a long drive from the other vet checks or base camp. I may do this on my multiday ride this fall, since there will be some long loops and remote areas.
     
    2) Requiring a minimum of 2 vetchecks per 50 miles:
     
    I have a few objections to this. - one, I don't like to see rules passed which are either hard to enforce or don't necessarily solve the problem. Unless you specify a minimum loop length, requiring '2 VC's per 50 miles' doesn't guarantee that the horse will be examined at optimum intervals. A ride manager could have both VC's with 5 miles of each other, or one VC a mile from camp, and would satisfy the rule, but not address the issue. One could address this in the rule by stating a minimum loop length - e.g. 17.5 miles, but it would be very difficult for ride managers to have to adhere to a minimum loop length rule. In some areas it would prohibit them from using some trails. Things are very different between East and West, and it may be easier to do this in the East, but out here in the West, things are still pretty wild and remote, and vehicle access to trails is minimal.
     
    Also - having ridden many multiday rides, where one VC half way through the ride is the norm, I haven't seen that there is a problem. Even single day rides often have 20 mile loops - and I haven't seen problems that seemed related to the loop length. A 15 mile fast/flat loop in hot/humid conditions may be much more difficult on horses than a 25 mile loop in an arid climate, with natural obstacles to slow the speed. There are too many other variables (terrain,weather,competition) which have a greater effect on horse health during endurance rides, to warrant singling out one variable, especially a variable which also causes hardship to ride managers.
     
    If a rule such as the '2 vet check per 50 miles' or '17 mile minimum loop length' came before the BOD for a vote, at this point I would not support it.
     
    Steph
    -----Original Message-----
    From: ridecamp-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ridecamp-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of LSimoni197@xxxxxxx
    Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 11:44 AM
    To: tprevatt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; sshaw@xxxxxxxxxxx
    Cc: RideCamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Subject: Re: [RC] Protecting Horses

    I was out at Ft. Schellbourne multi-day ride last week.  There is only one vet check on the 50 mile ride, each day.  There were not any number of metabolic holds, and actually, few for lameness.
    Perhaps the reason for this is that for the most part the riders who attend multi-day rides have been doing endurance for years, and also are trying to make their horse last for 5 days?
    So, perhaps the extra attention should be spent on the new riders who are learning how to keep a horse going long distance for long years.
    I personally hate to see more rules and regulations put on everyone, just to ensure the safety of the least able contestant.
    Endurance, to many, is just "To Finish Is To Win." To many others it is a race to prove the fastest, best conditioned, best managed horse of the day.  WE even award the "Top Ten" as well as The fastest in each weight division.
    I hope our sport can remain flexible enough to allow for many diverse riders with different interests and horses with different abilities to participate.

    Lynge

    Replies
    Re: [RC] Protecting Horses, LSimoni197