Open for Discussion:
((SEND US YOUR DISCUSSION QUESTION AND WE’LL SEE IF WE CAN GET SOME ANSWERS FROM THE READERS))
PETE BRANCH SUSPENDED, FINED; SUSPENSION AFFECTS HIS RUN FOR VICE PRESIDENT
By Glory Ann Kurtz
March 27, 2009
The 2008 World Champion rider Pete Branch, Farwell, Texas, who is a candidate for Vice President of the NCHA, was suspended for 90 days, fined $1,000 and put on probation for a year by the Grievance Committee of the NCHA. Action was taken by the Grievance Committee following an altercation with Russell McCord, Director of Judges during the NCHA World Finals held in Amarillo.
According to Pete, he will appeal the decision of the Grievance Committee so he can show the horses he is scheduled to ride during the NCHA Super Stakes which starts on Monday. He is in the draw with three of his horses on Monday, which are owned by his employer Lonnie Allsup, a past president of the NCHA.
Asked about the charges, Pete said, “They make the charges sound like I cut someone’s throat. But I really didn’t , I didn’t do very much.”
To write this article, I tried to contact both Bronc Willoughby, the current NCHA President and who was a witness to the alleged altercation between Pete and Russell, and NCHA Executive Director Jeff Hooper for an official statement about the decision from the NCHA; however, neither of them has contacted me. Pete returned my call moments after I called him. Following is the conversation that I had with Pete regarding his suspension.
Ironically, Pete will grace the cover of the April Chatter which has not yet reached members but is available on the NCHA web site at www.nchacutting.com. If Pete’s appeal does not work, he will be the first presidential candidate in NCHA history to be suspended before he is even voted into office.
INTERVIEW WITH PETE BRANCH FOLLOWING HIS 90-DAY SUSPENSION, $1,000 FINE AND PROBATION FOR ONE YEAR
By Glory Ann Kurtz
March 27, 2009
Following is a conversation I had with Pete Branch following his suspension for 90 days and $1,000 fine imposed by the Grievance Committee. G = Glory Ann, P = Pete Branch
G – I heard that you got in a altercation with Russell McCord and you got suspended for 90 days, and a $1,000 fine.
P - … and a year’s probation.
G - What did you do?
P - It sounds like I slit his throat, but I really didn’t. I didn’t do very much but I guess that’s however you want to look at it. I told him what I thought about the judging and I don’t guess he liked it very much.
G – What precipitated this?
P – The judging in general: It was at the World Finals in the $5,000-added Open and Bronc Willoughby and I were standing up on top after the finals was over with and talking about the run that I had because I thought that I was supposed to have won it. And I really was talking to Bronc because I trust Bronc’s opinion; he don’t tell me what I want to hear; he’ll tell me the truth. He agreed with me; he thought I was supposed to win it too and really the cutting was over; it really wouldn’t make any difference. It wasn’t going to change anything. The results were in. Russell wasn’t anywhere around and he came walking up there while we were talking and actually butted in the conversation and started to tell me why I didn’t win. I proceeded to tell him – well …I’m pretty outspoken.
G - Who turned you in?
P - Russell
G – and it went to the Grievance Committee?
P - Yes – and they supposedly said that I was guilty and you know, I don’t guess I really have a problem with that. If they think I’m guilty, then I’m guilty. And should I have said anything? Probably not. But should he (Russell) have walked up there and said anything to me? Absolutely not. You know this deal stinks. It’s obvious from way back there that there are a lot of them that didn’t want me to run and you know it’s very convenient that the 90-day suspension covers just enough time where I can’t run (for vice president).
G – You have three horses in Super Stakes?
P – Correct.
G - Are you going to appeal this?
P - Yes, if I have to appeal it just so that I can show. But actually, that’s just so I can show. Because it will go back before the Executive Board and it’s stacked in Keith Deaville’s favor, so I’ve pretty much had it any way you look at it.
G - I’ve never seen anything official that the NCHA has put out that says who is running for Vice President. Have they put anything out?
P - You know, I don’t think they have. I’ve done a profile for the NCHA but I called them and told them not to run it in the Chatter, there’s no reason to. I think the QHN has supposedly sent me a questionnaire yesterday to fill out for it, but I think - now don’t quote me on this, but I think it’s May when the profiles are supposed to come out in the Chatter.
G - It’s not the April issue because that’s already on the Internet. But you’re on the cover.
P - Thank goodness I got that far anyway.
G - Why do you think it’s stacked against you – why do you think they don’t want you to win?
P – Glory Ann- you’ve known me a long time, I’ve never been one to keep my mouth shut. And I say what I think and you know I stand up for what I think is right or wrong. I did that and I don’t know if they’re scared of me running – I don’t know. Who knows.
G - Do you think they are sorry that Chubby’s in there?
P - I don’t think there’s any doubt about that.
G - He kind of does the same thing – he says what he thinks and gets in trouble.
P – you know what though, we need people like Chubby. We’ve got to have somebody who has the courage and the integrity to stand up and say “This is wrong” and be accountable for it. If I make a mistake, then I make a mistake. That’s just like this suspension. Should I have kept my mouth shut. Yes. Did I – No. Am I supposed to be punished? I guess so. Am I supposed to get the book thrown at me for a first offense? I don’t think so. Is Russell supposed to have some kind of punishment out of it? Absolutely.
G- Do you think Russell has too much authority?
P – Oh Lord yes. He doesn’t have a boss. Who tells him what to do? Nobody. Who does he answer to? Nobody. That’s why he is so against me because I was going to change that. And it needs to be changed. It really needs to be changed for his sake. It would take a lot of pressure off of him.
G – I thought it was disappoint when he changed the score board so only the total score showed rather than each of the judge’s scores. It took the spectator out of it because they enjoyed judging each run to see how close they got to what the judges scored.
P – That’s just like the ½ point deal. He went to using the half point before he ever got it approved. Just stuff like that.
Here’s the thing about judging and sooner or later we’re going to have to change the facts. Here’s the facts of judging:
You can teach somebody penalties and you can teach it to them until they never miss one. You cannot teach run content. The person has to have experienced that to understand what they are looking at. And for us to be so naïve as to think that we’re going to get those five guys up there looking at the same picture - is wrong. And why would you want that anyway? I want their opinion.
If we are going to get everybody to judge in exactly the same way as what Russell is headed for right now – we might as well all stay home and send our video in and say “Do you like my horse? If you do, I’ll enter him and show. Otherwise, I’m staying home.” Really, that’s where we’re headed. Cutting never has been a spectator sport, but it’s really not now. It’s getting worse.
Personally – that’s just like down at Houston the other day. I was helping somebody show a horse – I was turning back. It was a person who was showing pretty wild and their horse Is pretty wild. We have two judges sitting up there. I’m sitting there thinking the whole time I’m turning back – you know they’re either going to love this run or they’re going to hate this run He marked a 75 and a 71. The point is he ended up with a 146 – right where he’s was supposed to be – a 73. One guy absolutely loved it and one guy thought it was wild and didn’t like it. It’s an opinion. That’s what we pay them for. It’s their opinion. Did he have any penalties – no. They both got that part of it. That’s my point. We can’t teach that. That’s what they think they are trying to do by controlling what somebody marks.
I’ve had so many judges – and people who are capable of judging – come back from judging one of those aged events and say “Buddy, never again. I will never get up there again.” It’s sad.
WHAT’S THE PLAN:
I’ll appeal it and to tell the truth, I really don’t know what I’m going to do yet. I don’t know how I’m going to approach it. You know, obviously , because of the way the EC is, I obviously am not going to win an appeal so I won’t be able to run. They’ve made that obvious.
G – Are they going to just let Keith take it?
P – No they can’t do that – he has to run against somebody. Probably the best thing that I can do for the sake of the NCHA and the people who supported me and who wanted me to run in the first place, is to step down and give them some time to try to put somebody else in there, where they can get a profile in the Chatter. Otherwise, if I wait until after they hear the appeal, if I lose, which I probably am, it would be so late that whoever they got, wouldn’t be able to run a profile or anything else and nobody would know who they were. And they’re counting on that. The best thing I can do is step down – and that’s what they want.
WHAT’S THE LONG-TERM SOLUTION:
G – Is this ever going to change?
P – Not as long as we keep putting the same old people in there. It’s not going to change. That thing is stacked and it has been stacked and it continues to be stacked. But until the membership says that they’ve had enough and they go to really thinking about who they are voting for – I don’t see any change happening. People have got to be responsible for voting. You can’t just go down there and say, “I know that guy – let’s vote for him.” You can’t do it that way. You have to know what that person stands for.
G - Someone wrote me the other day and sad the VP candidate should put out a profile stating why they are running for office and what they would like to do while in office. She wondered the area directors couldn’t do that like the VP candidates do, so we know who we’re voting for.
P – Absolutely. They are as an important part of the political process as anything is. You know actually, they have as much power as anybody does if they just use it. It just doesn’t get used. Most of the time, you can’t even get the directors to show up at the Convention.
G – Are they afraid to speak up too?
P – Yes – but everybody is right now. Look what happened to me. Everybody is afraid they’re going to get their head chopped off. If you’re feeding your family doing this, you sure get scared to say anything. Like me, thank God I have a good job and my people are behind me either way and they are livid over this whole thing. Thank goodness that I found out before I did the mail-out. They were going to pay for a $6,000 mail-out to all the members so I got that stopped before that went out. I rented space on the scoreboard at the Super Stakes; I canceled that. I had a full-page ad in the Chatter that I paid for – I cancelled that. I don’t know what to say.
People say, “What can I do? Well, there’s nothing you can do. They got me and in the long run, they still end up winning and it’s sad.
G – But the members need to know what’s going on. This is crazy.
P – It is crazy. It’s insane. I tell you that whole process of that Grievance Committee deal is wild. You don’t get to go up in front of them - you get a conference call. You don’t get to look anybody in the eye. Plus, in a conference call, they don’t have to take any minutes. So there’s no documentation of what was said.
G – Do you know who is talking on the other end.
P – Yes – and there were very questions asked by anybody other than Dennie Dunn.
But you know what. If you live by the sword , you die by the sword I stand for what I believe and I won’t back down. I just won’t back down from it. If I get prosecuted for it, I just do. The only thing I have in this world is my integrity and I’ll stand on that.
G – I really appreciate your calling me back.
P - No problem – I have nothing to hide. It’s just sad. I really felt I could have made some changes that would have been for the good of the membership and it’s just not going to happen. At least not right now. That’s for sure.
This is not right. Russell McCord should also be reprimanded.
What about suspending Russell McCord for actions detrimental to the association? It seems that several of the NCHA EMPLOYEES don’t think that discipline could apply to them as well. I am a long time member (32 years) and am feed up with the actions and behavior of these EMPLOYEES. Let’s take our NCHA back.
Thanks
Pete Branch has got the ball rolling lets all step up to the plate and clean this assoc. up. Start by getting Russel McCord out now is our chance and we will see ncha grow more than ever.
Hello Glory Ann-
After reading your article on Mr. Branch and Mr. McCord I am not sure why Mr. Branch got fined and suspended??? It seems to me that Mr. McCord started the confrontation by approaching Mr. Branch. We all have the right to agree & disagree and if Mr. Branch didn’t agree with the judges, that is his right. Obviously if Mr. Branch was throwing a fit or screaming at the judges in front of the spectators he should get punished for bad sportmanship as with anyone in sports would. BUT, as your article stated he and Mr. Willoughby were talking privately AFTER the show about his run and then Mr. McCord interupted their conversation. To me that is trying to “pick a fight.” Even if the conversation got “heated” as long as their are no punches being thrown it should have ended there. When we get angry we do say things that may be out of line-I know I can run my mouth pretty good when I am mad, but after people cool off and think about what they’ve said there are usually appologies being made. I think that Mr. McCord was out of line turning Mr. Branch in. If you are going to be in a position such as his, people will disagree with you. You have to have big shoulders and let it roll off!
McCord should have NEVER approached Willoughby and Branch. McCord, as end arbiter of all NCHA judging matters had no right nor reason to discuss a current cutting competition with ANY contestant, but only with that class’ Rep by NCHA rules.
President Willoughby, as a participant to this conversation, should have put short shrift to the whole affair, rather than let it get to this sorry juncture.
As far as the printed transcript of the interview above, Branch’s comment about the Executive Board being stacked in Keith Deaville’s favor is one of the most self serving, outrageous and pussified statements I have ever seen. Whether or not Branch’s run for NCHA office is still valid, that comment alone has removed him from any consideration I may have given to vote for him.
The only clear advantage to this whole sorry affair is to bring to light just what kind of leadership this organization is laboring under. Wake up people!
After reading Mr. Branch’s transcript again, he seems to me like a man that would stand up for the little people! Mr. Branch, if you do run for VP you definately have our vote and anyone else that I can round up. I do not know you but from what you have said to Glory Ann in your transcripts to me you would be a great asset in the NCHA organization. Don’t step down!!!
DID YOU KNOW ABOUT FIELD MONITORS?
For the last year the NCHA has been sending out a few field monitors to weekend shows, primarily one or two open riders that work well under Russel’s system. They receive their monitor salary, compensation, and travel expense to shows. The judge knows they are there, as does the show secretary. These monitors also compete, I would assume they’re paying their own entry fees, or their owners do. Most of the general members don’t pay attention to this, or know that it is happening.
My question is, can a judge fairly mark this monitor/competitor? The judge knows that he is being evaluated, if the judge doesn’t use the monitor in his placing on a clean run, how will it effect the judge in the future.
I’ve seen one monitor not like his horse, go to jerking on it throughout the run, not get whistled out, take him behind the judge’s stand still jerking on him, and no one said a word.
The NCHA speaks of a level playing field. It seems to a lot of us that this practice puts a hill in this field that is not fair to the other competitors, or the judge.
Human nature being what it is puts undo pressure on these judges when he is at a time under obligation to place a class correctly, not just fit someone in to protects his next judging job.
Please bring this topic up to the general membership for their input.
Thank you for your time!
WHAT ABOUT LOPERS AND ASSISTANT TRAINERS?
Glory Ann,
In conjunction with your articles on trainers, trainer billing, etc. I
would like to hear your response as well as other readers’ responses
on the following items. And I would like to remain anonymous… Sorry.
Lopers: hired by trainers for trainers. These are the people who truly
care for the horses that customers put in training. Why is it that
they get treated poorly and paid terribly. $1000-$1500 a month isn’t
near comprable to what a Loper should make based on the number of
hours worked as well as the amount of money a trainer brings in.
Also on lopers, these individuals work hard 7 days a week to care for
customer horses as well as prepare them for shows. Some customers tip
lopers and some don’t. Interesting… especially when a trainer shares
this information with his lopers but his wife usually prepares the
horses that do get tipped.
Assistant trainers: usually the ones who work the horses majority of
the time. All they are looking for is a chance, why can’t owners and
trainers give them that opportunity? Where do you think Clint Allen
started? He was the assistant trainer to Matt Gaines for many years.
They also work many hours and care for horses, cows, and manage the
lopers and barn help and get paid horribly.
I just wish that the people who want it the most and work for it the
hardest would get the credit they deserve and treated with respect
instead of like slaves.
I would simply like to hear yours and others’ thoughts on this subject.
Thanks.
Your site is our bible!
——————————————————————————–
I just read that the NCHA has appointed a board of seven former association presidents, rather than the Executive Committee, to hear and rule on Pete Branch’s appeal. The hearing will be in the NCHA office in Fort Worth on April 20 and the past presidents are expected to make a decision on the appeal soon after the hearing.
My questions are: who is the “NCHA” that appointed these past presidents?? I thought the NCHA WAS the Executive Committee. So does that mean that the Executive Committee appointed these past presidents? Or is the “NCHA” Jeff Hooper, the Executive Director? Also, who are the seven presidents they appointed? Shouldn’t this be public information?
With the ballots for the election scheduled to go out the end of the month, (obviously less than 10 days following the presidents’ decision) what if they decide to not let Pete run. Since it is in the constitution that there needs to be at least 2 candidates to choose from - how will they (the Nominating Committee) select another candidate and get his message out to the members in less than 10 days (unless they already have one in the bag)?
I agree that Russell McCord should be punished. He should recieve a stiffer penalty than Pete. I think it was a setup deal, knowing Pete would object and speak his thoughts. Who knows Bronc could have been involved in the setup. Look at who Russell gets to judge aged events. Ever notice how many executive members are there making the $1200/ day. I will vote for anyone except Keith Deville.
I do not understand how the Hearing Committee suspended Mr. Branch. Apparently they didn’t HEAR anything… How can Mr. Branch get suspended and not Mr. McCord??? Had Mr. Branch NOT been approached by Mr. McCord, this whole deal probably wouldn’t have happened. I think Mr. Branch is getting railroaded!!! To punish one and not the other-HOW FAIR IS THAT??? If Mr. Branch has to go through this UNFAIR suspension then Mr. McCord should have the same suspension/fines as well. Mr. Branch, I do not know you and have never met you, but this is VERY WRONG!! From everything that I have read & seen about you in the QHN & Chatter you & the Allsups contribute alot to the NCHA. With you just being suspended & fined this really shows that things really ARE STACKED AGAINST YOU.. I think in all fairness the Hearing Committee should send out a survey and ask us paying NCHA members if Mr. McCord should receive the same diciplinary actions as Mr. Branch. Come on Hearing Committee-WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO LOSE?????
RUSSELL MCCORD IS AN NCHA REPRESENTATIVE WHO WORKS FOR PETE BRANCH- A MEMBER OF THE NCHA.. MR. MCCORD IS NOT “GOD”.
PETE BRANCH DID NOT TALK TO THE JUDGES. HE TALKED TO THE REPRESENTATIVE. BUT NOT UNTIL THE REPRESENTATIVE TALKED TO HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I AM AN AREA DIRECTOR AND IF A MEMBER COMPLAINS TO ME ABOUT THE JUDGES OR THE NCHA —AM I SUPPOSED TO CALL FOR THEIR SUSPENSION FOR COMPLAINING????????
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE?????
HAS THE NCHA FORGOTTEN WHAT THE NCHA IS ALL ABOUT?——- THE MEMBERS!!!!!!!!
This is in response to cuttothechase. There are alot of people who think “all trainers” make this huge living charging their customers $1,000-$1,500 per month per horse. They get out their pads of paper & pencils and start adding up all the “income” these trainers make. Well, instead of looking at all the income, they need to look at all the expenses as well. Unless you are a self-made millionaire, these trainers have mortgages, utilitiy expenses, grain, hay, insurance, maintenance on their facility, saddles, horse tack, etc…. Also, have you looked at their rigs??? I will tell you they cost them a pretty penny! This is so they can safely haul your & my horses safely down the road. These trainers have an “Expense” I sure wouldn’t want to try and pay each month. Also, think about their insurance they have to have for their facility. They have to have fire insurance, care, custody, & control insurance (incase someone sues them because they didn’t care for their horses like they should), they have to carry several million dollar “umbrella” policy incase someone is riding their horse on the trainers property and gets hurt. When you start adding up all of these expenses and see where their money goes, then you will understand why they charge what they charge. Personally, if Matt Gaines charged $2000 per month-HE IS DEFINATELY WORTH EVERY PENNY. Also, lets face it.. When you go to college, do you get paid a salary for going??? NOPE. Atleast when you are working for a trainer of Matt Gaines/Phil Rapp/Clint Allen/JB McLamb’s caliber, when you decide to venture off on your own you have a name to stand behind you, those names are pretty impressive on a resume.
In thinking about all the members who have some great idea changes they would like to see implemented or at least voted on. I would like to see the members have a convention on how we want the NCHA to behave. I think it’s time we at least discuss some things. If anyone out there has an email list part or all, maybe send it to Glory and we can get something moving on this. Our opinions have been pushed aside at the NCHA convention, even when it about how they do not respond to us.
The trainers held their own meeting at PC a while back. EC has their meetings. We should have our own and then go to the EC with it. “Members Only” no directors, no task force people, etc…. When we as a group have decided on some changes, then go to the EC. We will have the majority and they have to do what we members want.
So again, if anyone has email addresses for members, I encourage you to send them to Glory A. Subject line: members meeting PLEASE think about it.
Changing how we are treated by the current administration
How riders are catorgorized (Bob Nelson idea and others similar)
Pete Branch’s treatment, while Russell went untouched
All information is a secret only to be let out by lawsuits
How added money is divided
Age of futurity horses
World Show
South Point
How judging is to be judged
This is just a partial list of things I am aware of that have gone unexlpained or stale.
I for one am tired of the lack of response or canned answers.
DRUG WARS IN THE HORSE WORLD
Most of you know that my life is devoted to the health and well being of all the horses and animals that come to me. In years past I have been the victim of some abuse to my own horses — everything from hitting my jumping horse in the knees to injecting one with human blood pressure medicine and tap water in the vein. That is why the following scenario is so shocking.
I am very distressed that the new drug war is in the horse world. Since the rodeo season started in Texas, I have had so many horses coming to me that have been poisoned, injured or crippled. One of the horses has already died. These horses are innocent bystanders to all this. Where is the security for the horses like there are for the people attending the rodeos? The horrible part of this is the perpetrators are fellow competitors! It is shocking how many Barrel racers, Cutters, Reiners, Halter and other high dollar competitors routinely drug their horses with anabolic steroids, pain killers and performance enhancing drugs. Steroid use in horses hasn’t been studied as much as other drugs, so there is really no evidence that it is harmful. There has been some unpublished data that indicates anabolic steroids could lead to increased rates of injury.
Currently about one catastrophic injury is logged per 1,000 horses at the track. That doesn’t sound like much until you think how many horse events occur every weekend. Zero tolerance (no traceable drug allowed in a test sample) is an ever-changing standard because no chemist can test down to zero. The recent tragic events at the race track have prompted a more serious approach to testing. It used to be a $300 fine against the trainer. Now more serious financial penalties and racing suspensions have been implemented for multiple infractions of positive tests for anabolic steroids. Not only is the trainer penalized but the owner as well. They are beginning to use a blood sample instead of a urine sample because the drug residues are there for a longer period of time. The public outcry has brought this to the forefront.
The race horse industry is being held accountable, but not in all states. We need to get the AQHA, NRHA, NCHA, PRCA, & WPRA on board to really crack down. They say they test at the shows but you know as well as I do that they really don’t. I have been showing for 35 years and have never had a horse tested.
We are thinking differently now than we did 20-30 years ago about drug use in horses. Did you know that it takes 21 days to eliminate a single Bute injection from a horse’s body? Detectable traces remain in the body for almost 3 weeks beyond that! Injectible Bute also causes stomach problems. Doesn’t it make sense to use herbs whenever possible? There is a Bute substitute available. I know it takes longer and it’s not an instant fix, but it’s so much healthier for the equine athlete.
Too, if you kill the pain how does the horse know when he has hurt himself? This may give you the “edge” for the short term, but it can cause undue harm in the long run. Most of us can’t afford to buy a new horse or are lucky enough have someone give us a horse to show. We have to prolong our horse’s athletic life as long as possible. Why not be prepared and have them on herbs and supplements to stop the problem before it begins?
It’s in futurities and major shows when there is a lot of money available that the horse suffers. This is why the U.S. is cracking down on the human athletes. Don’t be afraid to speak up if you see drug abuse going on. An outstanding horse is the true winner and a joy to behold. It takes away from their efforts if we think it is only possible because of the drugs they have been given.
The above article by Toni Trimble, Angel Hand Ranch, is a reprint from Angel Voices 2009.http://www.angelhandranch.com
Keep up the great work and being a voice for those that can’t speak. I have always hated the futurity thing, pushing the babies and then having a boat load of “what do we do with them now’s” when they are 10-12 and can’t even do trail. We in drill team know what a great ride a “reject cutting horse” could do for us, but stay away because history has shown they only make it a year or two and they are lame.
L.
The weekend shows are still a political stew. Even with the monitor who is also showing it definitely does not help. The big name competitor still has an advantage. He or she can have reining points, working off center, or forced off a cow as happened in one run at a recent show and still mark a 74! the average cutter will mark a 66. How is that a level playing field?
It is unbelieveable that the NCHA feels they are above the law when it comes to being NON-PROFIT. I have worked as a board member on several non profit organizations in San Antonio and our books were always open. It was and is the law. They benefit from no taxes so why should we be stopped from seeing where our money is being spent? I applaud the efforts of every one involved in making the information public.
Glory ANN, Maybe its time to start thinking about changing the 3 yr old events to 4 year old events throughout all the performance horse events. When will we all come to gather and agree on ” start them as 2’s train as 3’s show as 4’s and up Yogi
I am amazed at the stupidity I see in this entire debate.
Costly research studies show that exercise strengthens young musculoskelatel structures., obviously ! In the wild, young animals play and exercise all day long.
Does that mean that the violent exercise necessary in racing, cutting, reining or jumping is beneficial for young growing horses? Of course not. Common sense tells us that movements that nature does not excessively and repetitiously impose on young creatures can cause damage. Our children today do not exercise enough. Does that mean that Olympic level gymnastics is GOOD for them?
What does “moderation” mean? Where is common sense?
As per last post. I have wondered the same thing, stalling for time only.
If you want research go to the cutting pen and the cutters. Not a computer or University.
We know what happens currently.
Why can’t we vote on it, if there is any confusionby the EC.
The members know what they want.
Thanks for the update Glory.
What a mess, all the figting. The best comment made was to “burn the rule book”. It does not matter was the intent was, it’s what printed for all the members. If intent is rule then we all can interpret the rule book as we see it an not what it says by it’s words.
Why are they even voting it’s all up to the EC anyway. CRAZY!!!!!!!!!!!!
Subj: RE: National Cutting Horse Association
I do not have the firsthand experience to make specific recommendations for cutting horses. However, I will state some general principles about problems I am concerned about. One of the most serious animal welfare concerns for many species is what I call “Biological System Overload.” An animal is pushed past its biological limits and it breaks down. Biological system overload may occur if horses are pushed into performing before their bones are mature. In pigs and chickens, serious leg problems and lameness have been caused by indiscriminant genetic selection for lots of meat production.
Sincerely,
Temple Grandin