Ridecamp: [RC] AERA Letter to FEI re Jerez 16.10.02

From:

 Australian Endurance Riders Association Inc.
Inc. No. Y1458516        ABN 14 684 748 206        ARBN 095 622 914
1327 Belli Creek Road.,
RIDGEWOOD via COOROY   QLD   4563
Phone: (07) 5447 9308
Fax:     (07) 5447 9162
Mobile: 0427 479 308
International:  Phone:  61 7 5447 9308
                         Fax:      61 7 5447 9162
Email:              secretary@xxxxxxxxxxx
16th October 2002



Dear Sir,

WEG 2002.

The AERA would like to raise some problems that arose at the WEG with the
FEI. Whilst the problems are raised with the benefit of hindsight we would
like to point out that the way in which the FEI reacts to our concerns may
determine our future relationship with the FEI.

Our concerns come under three headings: -

The organisation of the ride by the OC and the TD

The operation of the ride on the day and the management of the ride by the
Ground Jury.

The demise of two horses and the control of horse welfare by the FEI.


1           The organisation of the ride by the OC and TD

There are a number of issues surrounding the Organisation of the ride that
are of concern. As it takes up to three weeks for endurance horses to
acclimatise thus necessitating a local presence well prior to the event, the
lack of information forthcoming from the OC was a cause of concern to Chef d
?Equipes.  For example information on the track was only available in
Spanish on the Web Site until just prior to the event. Chef d?Equipe
meetings were disorganised and very poorly structured. Strong direction and
presentations from the TD, and Presidents of the GJ and VC would have
helped. A distinct lack of coordination between the OC, TD and GJ was the
overwhelming impression emanating from those who were responsible for the
regulation of the event. The FEI should show leadership by producing a guide
to the running of a World Championship Event so that the same basic mistakes
are not repeated in future competitions.

Having had the benefit of running the trial ride with its disastrous vet out
rate we had hoped that the OC would make the event a much more horse
friendly ride. Certainly this was promised for the event.

We are concerned that a hold time of 30 minutes for each of the legs was
ever considered, as it does not show sufficient appreciation of the
difficulty of the conditions with which the horses had to cope.  The ability
of the TD, GJ and OC to show greater depth of understanding of the need to
change such aspects of the ride when faced with adverse weather is a crucial
factor in the administration of such rides.  It seems that the GJ did want
to alter some of these aspects further but were prevented from doing so by
the OC.  This does not appear to be in accordance with the FEI rules. We are
aware that hold times were increased, but in our view not enough, and we are
also aware that the bottom end speed limit was dropped. We think the bottom
end speed limit is an encouragement to override your horse and has no place
in endurance events ever.

We are concerned that the fourth leg of the ride was clearly the most
difficult, and that this contradicts standard course design practice whereby
the more difficult legs are done first, for obvious horse welfare reasons.

For the OC/TD to establish/approve a track, which required horses and heavy
vehicles to travel down a tar road with no shoulder, was not what we would
expect in a ride of this standard.  Did the TD understand the issues
involved in the fourth leg and the open road section of the ride?

To have the horses stabled 1.5ks from the ride base was always going to
cause logistic problems

To have the area within the hold area tent too small for 6 horses to be
dealt with at once was a problem that occurred at Compiegne and we thought,
should have been understood following criticism of that ride.

The fact that the vet-commission had a large number of Spanish-speaking only
personnel led to significant communication problems between them and the
riders. How many were accredited FEI endurance Veterinarians with
international competition experience? Were the treatment vets practising
equine vets with experience in endurance sports medicine?

2           The operation of the ride on the day and the management by the
ground jury and other officials.

We have significant concerns about the GJ allowing the ride to start in the
dark in the middle of a thunderstorm.  There are obvious added risks with
this, and these were very seriously compounded by the situation where cars
and riders were all trying to exit the secure area before the start, with
some of the people in cars hooting and pushing horses out of the way to get
to the start. We were surprised to see the chairman of the FEI Endurance
committee at the forefront of this.

We were gravely concerned by the situation where a Russian horse, obviously
suffering considerable stress, was eventually (after two hours) given fluids
in full view of all, including the subsequent press photographers who turned
up to photograph it. We would have thought that the stewards would stop this
instantly. However, they were unaware of the problem until Australia and the
USA made a complaint.

The standard of vetting ? in particular of determining lameness ? seemed to
demonstrate considerable inconsistency. To put this politely the winning
horse seemed to display a pronounced gate abnormality.

3           The demise of two horses and the control of horse welfare by the
FEI.

We do not want to comment on the specifics of the deaths of the two horses
on the day as we hope that the FEI will release the details of this matter
in the very near future.

We are utterly amazed that the FEI could grant the Malaysian NF or indeed
any NF, exemption from the requirement for either its horses or its riders
to meet the absolutely minimal qualification standards that were required of
other NFs to compete in this ride. Unfortunately, the granting of this
exemption can now be seen, correctly or otherwise, as being directly
responsible for the demise of the Malaysian horse. We trust that a full
explanation of this situation will be forthcoming and that those responsible
for this lamentable situation will be sanctioned appropriately.

The AERA has been highly critical of the horse welfare regime at FEI rides
for several years. We have been roundly criticised in the media by the FEI
for this stance. It is indeed most unfortunate that our predictions have
come to pass in such a public forum that it may well have set back endurance
ridings? prospects by many years. We hope that the FEI will now grasp this
nettle and institute requirements within each NF, which in the long term
will help to solve the problem. We do not think that this is a veterinary
problem; we think that the veterinary standards for invasive treatment are
satisfactory. This is a rider problem and until riders are sanctioned if
they damage their horses, the FEI rules are not strong enough, we believe,
to discourage overriding.

Summary.

Australia has been actively managing horse welfare for many years, with our
current system being developed and refined considerably in the last ten
years, and, while our record is, of course, not perfect, we believe we have
had a considerable amount of success in achieving good Horse Welfare
outcomes.  We are happy to assist the FEI in strengthening its rules and
procedures with the aim that similar outcomes be achieved elsewhere in the
world.  To do this, we feel that the following should happen:

 The FEI Endurance Committee needs to be restructured so that it is truly
representative of the sport.  We would suggest that, at the very least, this
committee should have a representative who is a nominee from each of the
regions/zones of the world, and not individuals who are pre-selected by the
FEI EC before they are nominated.

 The FEI should insist that all NFs that want to be affiliated with the FEI
have a suitable Rider Qualification Procedure and Horse Welfare monitoring
system, and that this be maintained and subject to ad hoc inspection by the
FEI.

Australia would welcome a member of the FEI EC to come and discuss with us
these aspects of the sport.  The management of the sport in Australia has
been highly supportive of the FEI and of encouraging the running of FEI
rides and the subsequent participation in international events.  However,
there is increasing pressure from our members to make sure that any further
involvement by Australia is not done in any way, which will compromise the
integrity of our sport.  We are not convinced that we can do this unless the
FEI gives serious and fast consideration to the points raised above.



Yours sincerely



Anne Jones,
Secretary AERA
Cc: - Members FEI Endurance Committee, Michael Stone, and EFA. (By email).









=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
 Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp

 If you are an AERC member - PLEASE VOTE in the upcoming By-Laws 
 Election!!!! (it takes 2/3rds to tango!!)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=