Re: What vet checks are for (was:Completion times)

[K S Swigart <katswig@deltanet.com>]

On Sun, 18 Jan 1998, Truman Prevatt wrote:

> >> _I_ would like to dispel the notion that we have vet checks at endurance
> >> rides so that horses can rest.  This assumes that ride managers and/or
> >> vets are responsible for resting our horses.  As far as I am concerned,
> >> vet checks are so that the vets can inspect the horses to confirm that
> >> they are "fit to continue."
> 
> That's probably a function of the ride manager and the vets.  I do know
> that at my ride, one of the first things that I hash out with the vets is
> the hold times.  One of the prime considerations is ample time for rest for
> the horses to recover.  If it is going to be a hot/humid day we will allow
> extra time.  If it is going to be cold and windy we will most likely cut
> the hold time to minimize the prospect of the horses getting stiff.
> 
> So like all general statements, including this one, the above is clearly
> false.

The general statement that I make is "vet check are so that vets can check
the horses" if at your ride you and the head vet schedule and place your
vet checks so that the horses will have "ample time for rest" then you and
the vet are over-stepping your bounds.  It is the rider's responsibility
to rest his/her own horse.

I do not deny that many ride managers and head vets do this at many rides.
I just contend that such a course of action is inappropriate.

To stop the horses so they can be properly checked is within the
responsibility of ride officials.  To stop the horses because you think
that they need to be stopped to rest is not.  Riders can and should stop
their own damn horses (and ride managers should not deceive the riders
into thinking that because they have scheduled the vet checks where THEY
think that horses need to rest, it is no longer the responsiblity of the
rider to do that him/herself). And riders who have prepared and
conditioned their horses well enough that they don't need to rest as much
should not be stopped to rest just because the ride manager and the head
vet think its a good place.  If vet checks are used in this way, vet
checks provide an unfair advantage to lesser prepared horses.

And I don't buy that bull shit that "in the heat of competition" riders
will not have the nous to know that they need to rest their horses.  In
the heat of competition, such riders will over-ride their horses anyway
even if there are vet checks along the way to make everybody stop.

I have been to many rides with differing difficulties with differing
numbers of vet checks (which more often than not are a function of
accessibility and availability of vet staff than anything else) and have
seen no indication that the placement of vet checks and scheduling of hold
times has any effect on whether horses get over-ridden or not.

This does not mean that ride management is not allowed to provide
water/food stops along the way where riders may choose to stop and
provision their horses.

It is, I think, for this reason that I am developing a strong preference
for multi-day rides.  All the ones that I have been to have one vet check
somewhere around the middle (if it can be fit in there) with other
convenient places (either placed there by ride management, or just
naturally a part of the trail) where you can stop for food/water/whatever
if you feel the need.  And a very strong inclination on the part of riders
to ride their horse so that it is "fit to continue" at the end (because
generally speaking it needs to be if it is going to go again the next
day), and a very strong inclination on the part of the vet/s to allow the
riders to manage their horses as they see fit.

I still remember the very first multi-day ride I went to and the head vet
(the Duck) saying at the pre-ride meeting, "I assume that all of you here
have ridden your horses out on the trail, NOT at an endurance ride." (i.e. 
not under veterinary control, and therefore we ARE capable of determining
the fitness of our horses and keep them out of trouble) and letting us
know, in no uncertain terms that it was our reponsibility to keep our own
horses out of trouble.  He also went on to let us know that the nearest
veterinary hospital was over 150 miles away...and left us to understand
the implications of this ourselves.

Everybody understood this just fine, and no horses got into trouble (as is
the case at most endurance rides).  And the riders rested and fed their
horses as the opportunity presented itself...even if there wasn't a vet
check there to "force" the horses to stop.  And people paced their horses
according to their fitness levels, not according to ride management's
and/or the vet's preconceived notion of how the horses ought to be paced.

I'm not saying that ride managers and vets don't do this, just that they
shouldn't.  Vet checks should be placed at the best place/s for the vets
to check the horses, not at the best places for the horses to rest.  Ride
management can put "rest stops" at the best places for horses to rest and
give riders the option (not requirement) to rest/refuel their horses
there. 

It may be that the vet check can/does serve both purposes, and ride
managers can/should consider this when laying out the course.  However,
resting the horses should not be a primary consideration in the laying out
of vet checks, and if the horses don't need to be checked at that place
then ride managers should not put a vet check there, no matter how sure
they are that all horses OUGHT to rest there.

That said, I am also of the opinion that the post-ride vet check ought to
be much more stringent and that horses that are not "fit to continue"
ought not be given completions.  (This would go much further in reducing
the "heat of competition" pushing of horses by their riders than forcing
unnecessary rest on all the riders.)

On the first day of the Outlaw Trail (55 miles) the vet check is at ~mile
45 (the first access that the vets have).  This does not mean, nor does
anybody take it to mean that the horses don't need to rest before that.
There are plenty of places along the way where you can rest your horse:
meadows, lakes, water crossings, patches of grass, flat areas in the
middle of a climb.  DIfferent riders rest their horses differently along
the way to the first vet check...as needed.  This is as it should be.

No more horses get into trouble or are under rested on the first day of
the Outlaw trail than at any other endurance ride (less so, in fact, than
it seems at rides with more mandatory rests) I have been to, and it isn't
because the first day of the Outlaw Trail is an easy ride, you climb up
over 11.5 thousand feet. It is because, I contend, that riders are
responsible for resting their own horses and they know it (to paraphrase
Doc Hansen, the head vet of the ride the first time I went there: if the
horse doesn't come "back" to the first vet check under its own steam, that
horse is NOT coming back).

kat
Orange County, Calif.