(I wrote this at the end of June, so the word "latest" probably isn't accurate.)
Neil Clarkson's latest article presents the views of some of the vets from a ride in Compiègne where a horse died despite treatment.
However,
responsibility for the health and wellbeing of racing endurance horses
cannot solely rely on veterinarians, judges or rules, they said. It was,
they added, impossible for monitoring vets to know if an endurance
horses had received appropriate diet, adequate training, and sufficient
water.
“It is always for the rider and its team to know the horse best and be tuned to its needs,” they said.
I see the point they are making, that jockeys can't answer vets' questions about a horse they just met that day. What I don't get is the text in green.
Am I mising something? Why would it be impossible for vets to know these things? That's what a vet check specifically tests. If a horse is inadequately trained, malnurished, or dehydrated, those things are clear if you just go down the card item by item.
Is the authority of the vet somehow diminished at these rides? They mention riders cheating and lying to vets, beyond just not knowing what is normal for that horse.
Is the vet check itself the problem? Maybe someone can explain this to me.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I have no idea but I'm interested in seeing what someone else has to say. Thanks for sharing!
They may be highlighting that the vets at the vet check cannot be expected to be the *only* stopgap between the horse and abusive tactics. Sounds like the vets at that event felt like they were constantly having to defend their diagnoses of problems. What they're probably looking for is support from the FEI and any other ruling body to set a different tone & stop the escalation of practices they see as injurious to the horses and the sport. The vets are just the onsite authority, they may feel helpless without rulings from the top.
I *think* they are trying to remind people that the vets can only see what they see...that a horse may have adequate muscle but not adequate fitness for what the rider is going to push in performance, that a horse may have adequate weight but an inappropriate diet, etc.
Also, this is probably a translation, yes? Always problematic, those.
Just my impressions....
Post a Comment