<% appTitle="Ridecamp Archives" %> Ridecamp: RE: [RC] RO, Fit to continue

[Archives Index]   [Date Index]   [Thread Index]   [Author Index]   [Subject Index]
Current to Wed Jul 23 17:39:28 GMT 2003
  • Next by Date: Re: [RC] Endurance Horses Doing Their Jobs
  • - DVeritas
  • Prev by Date: Re: [RC] grooming and the coming cold weather - what's the best way to wash
  • - Maggie Mieske

    RE: [RC] RO, Fit to continue - Tom Dean

    I cannot disagree with you more.  There was an earlier poster that suggested
    that the ride data be used to monitor/sanction rider and horses.  I was told
    by a top NW rider that she would never buy a horse that had a metabolic
    pull.  Some people in endurance use a rider or horse's history to judge the
    rider or horse's success.  I think this creates an unhealthy stigma.  Pull
    rates, also, effect the value of horses.  This is not about egos, it is
    about allowing riders to make correct decisions for the good of the horse
    without the stigma of a pull, when it is not about a "pullable" issue.
    Then how WOULD you classify tired?
    If I had my way then I would classify a tired horse that has passed a vet
    check as a rider option.  It is grossly unfair to assume that the horse
    would have gone metabolic.  There are a lot of tired horses that complete
    endurance rides just fine.
    Whether endurance people like or not, pulls have a negative implication on
    the horse or rider.
    -----Original Message-----
    From: heidi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:heidi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
    Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 2:17 PM
    To: bdci@xxxxxxxxxxx
    Cc: ridecamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; bigcreekranch@xxxxxxxxxx; steph@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Subject: RE: [RC] RO, Fit to continue
    > I would not classify tired as metabolic, because the horse might just
    > finish the ride fine and does not have any metabolic problem at the time
    > the rider wants to pull.
    Then how WOULD you classify tired?  Tired is the precursor to exhaustion.
    If the rider chooses to pull because the horse is tired, that is a reason.
     The horse wasn't lame, the rider wasn't sick--the horse was tired.  The
    ull codes are an indicator of WHAT it was that caused WHOEVER pulled the
    horse to make that decision, be it the rider or the vet.
    > A rider should be able to pull a horse without penalty,
    <sigh> A pull code IS NOT A PENALTY!!  Where did we EVER get so far off
    track from simply trying to codify WHY we pull horses, in hopes of taking
    better care of horses in the future, to making the codification process
    into a penalty?  This is supposed to be about the horses, NOT the egos.
    > I believe that if a horse passes a vet check and the rider chooses to
    > quit, it should be RO no matter what the reason is.  We should not
    > punish the horse/rider's ride records for good decisions.
    The rider STILL has a reason why they pulled.  That is ALL the pull code
    is.  The pull codes are not and have never been penalties.
     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 Director at Large 
     and By Laws Elections.

    RE: [RC] RO, Fit to continue, heidi