This entry was posted on 5/19/2007 12:18 PM and is filed under uncategorized.
First of all, same as New Zealand, I met some wonderful people who took time out
of their busy lives to host me and give me a glimpse into their worlds. In New
Zealand I met some of the smaller trainers and endurance riders; in Australia I
met some of the icons of international endurance and the Arabian horse. Many
thanks to Meg Wade and Chris Gates of Castlebar, (and all their workers), the
Tofts of Toft Endurance, (and all their workers), and Ron and Val Males of
Ralvon Arabian Stud, and I hope to meet many more people on my next
visit!
There are quite a few similarities in endurance riding in
Australia and the US.
Most notably, though a majority of endurance riders
don’t participate in FEI, most people don’t mind it, and many support
it.
We’re both losing trails we used to have easy access to, to housing
developments and people closing their land because of insurance.
There’s
rumors in both countries (and others) about people cheating: drugging horses,
taking shortcuts on course. Only those who might do it know if the rumors are
true, and only they have to live with themselves. Did you really win if you did
any of this?
The differences:
Australia and New Zealand have logs
books for every horse, which seem to be a good idea. In the book, every ride is
recorded, every vet check and the results of the vet’s evaluation, and where the
horse finished or when he vetted out (pulled) and why. The US doesn’t - we only
have vet cards for each ride, which we present to the vets at the vet checks,
and carry with us during the ride, and turn it over to the vets (ride manager)
after the ride. If you want these after the ride, you can have them. However, we
in the US have the great resource of online records, for horses and riders, with
our AERC organization online, which is very handy and convenient, which is not
available in Australia (or New Zealand), though I’ve heard that it might be
available in the future. It takes a great deal of work, and our AERC people do a
great job of keeping it up to date as soon as possible.
While Australian
40 km rides (25 milers) are strictly Training Rides, have a time limit of not
finishing faster than 6 hours (and not slower than 8 hours), US training rides,
or Limited Distances (LDs), have become quite competitive and many LD riders
want placings, awards, and Best Conditioned judging just like the 50 mile and
over rides.
As for the 160 km FEI rides, especially the FEI rides, where
the ride is supposed to be 6 loops, it seems that strategy and speed are the
focus of the ride, and the strappers and veterinarians carry more responsibility
for the welfare of the horse. In 100 mile US rides where there are, say, 3 long
loops, with 3 hour-long vet checks and maybe another 15-minute hold on one of
the loops, the rider has more time where he or she must be responsible for the
horse out on the trail and adjust his or her riding accordingly. In the US now,
at many rides, 30 miles, 50 miles, 100 miles or multi-days, at least in the West
and Pacific Southwest where I ride, the trend is becoming so that every head
veterinarian of every ride will give a pre-ride speech deferring the
responsibility of the horse’s wellbeing on the RIDER. The vet sees the horse for
maybe 2 minutes at each vet check - and likely not the same vets see the same
horses - and he or she is there to HELP the rider assess the condition of the
horse during those two minutes. The rider has been on the horse the last few
hours and should know how the horse is feeling, and the rider should know if the
horse needs slowing down or stopping. The veterinarian can’t possibly be
expected to know how the horse feels underneath the rider, nor predict what
might happen another 20 miles down the trail, even if the horse does look good
in those two minutes. If you don’t know your horse, you really shouldn’t be
riding it, their opinion. Of course, anything can happen at any time out on the
course, but it’s certainly not the vet who should blamed for anything that goes
wrong. Fairly recently in the US one vet was sued by a rider who, after his
horse passed a vet check, went back out on trail, over-rode his horse, and the
horse died. Whose fault was it? If actions like this become common it will
threaten rides, because what vet would possibly consent to vetting a ride if
he’s held responsible for a rider killing his horse?
Australia has
commentators broadcasting at vet checks throughout the rides (as does New
Zealand). Of course that’s for the strappers, so they know when their riders are
approaching, since time in the vet check gates into holds is crucial, especially
for those out to compete, not just complete. The US has some radio check people,
which do number checks out on course for some rides, but it’s just to guard
against emergencies, and to turn the list into ride management later to make
sure people have stayed on course.
In the US, we don’t put a lot of work
into strapping, especially at the non-FEI rides. Personally I hadn’t even heard
of ‘strapping’ and had to look up what the heck it meant. Sure, we put water on
our horses if their heart rates need bringing down, but normally we don’t have a
crew of people and a slew of buckets doing it. We might have a ‘crew,’ who will
maybe be carrying a bucket of water and a sponge in one hand for the horse, and
a beer or Dr Pepper J in the other hand for the rider.
Most people I
visited in Australia heavily use electrolytes, and by ‘heavily,’ I mean feeding
in feed before and during rides, and electrolyting by mouth syringe going out on
every loop. Plenty of people in the US do that also, but some of the ‘old
school’ endurance riders, whom I learned from, might add electrolytes to feed
before and during rides (if then), but don’t syringe additional electrolytes
during the rides. I know that with a couple of horses I rode a couple hundred
miles on each, we tried it both ways, and there was no difference, although of
course I was not doing hundreds in 12 hours, nor 50 milers in 4 hours. There is
a corroborating study I just read about, in one of the Australian States’
endurance newsletters. The French endurance team had always, prior to the year -
I think it was around 2002 - given their horses oral electrolytes going out on
every loop in 160 km endurance rides. For the 2-year study, they completely
stopped supplementing the horses during the rides, and it was found that every
single horse had better completion rates and less metabolic problems once they
stopped administering the electrolytes. From my observations, my conclusion is,
both people - those who use a lot of electroytes, and those who don’t - swear by
their methods.
Again, I didn’t spend nearly enough time in Australia
either, to come to enough concrete conclusions about the endurance world there.
I will just have to return one day and continue my studies!
http://www.endurance.net/merri/stories/2007/05/australian-endurance-conclusion.html