Ridecamp: [RC] RO

Bob said:

"I find this a bit disconcerting , the use of rider option, as a reason for 
the pull. It was obviously a lameness pull and should have been recorded as 
such. When the RO option is used in like cases, it completely skews our 
studies of the problems encountered in endurance riding. True reporting of 
the cause is very important in all cases."

Sue replied:
 "We were given the go-ahead from the vet but opted to pull anyway."

Sue, you are missing Bob's point.  The only reason we even HAVE pull codes 
is that we are trying to amass data on "what goes wrong at rides, what 
causes horses to pull".  We don't care who detected the problem, we care 
what the problem was.  IMO it was very wise of you to elect to pull, but we 
are not (at this time) trying to track data on how many riders are as 
conscientious as you were, we are trying to track data on why horses are 
pulled.  RO is intended to be used *only* when the RIDER is unable to 
continue.  Personally, I think we need another code (W?) for wounds or 
injuries which don't result in lameness (girth galls? breast collar rubs?); 
but there may be few enough of these that they can be lumped under L or 
M.  I once had a horse run thru a barbwire fence (without me)--he looked 
like he'd been in a Cuisinart, but was neither lame nor metabolically 
compromised at the time I pulled him (altho he did stiffen up and get a 
little shocky later)  I think we called him L.

terre


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
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!!)

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