WELFARE OF THE HORSE IN THE 21ST CENTURY:

Meeting the Needs of the Performance Horse in Our Changing Environment

REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
December 5, 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1) Horse Welfare Overview - June 3, 2013 2) AAEP White Paper 3) 12 Hour Rule/Collapse Rule Press Release 4) 12 Hour Rule FAQ 5) Important Changes for 2014 Show Season 6) Letter from USEF President, Chrystine Tauber to the Breed and Technical Committees 7) Proposed Rule Changes Considered in January, 2014 at USEF Annual Meeting a. Page 44 - Freezing Samples b. Page 47 - Freezing Samples Fact Sheet c. Page 48 - Freezing Samples Q&A d. Page 49 - Shockwave e. Page 50 - Shockwave Fact Sheet f. Page 51 - Intra-articular Injections g. Page 52 - Intra-articular Injections Fact Sheet

UNITED STATES EQUESTRIAN FEDERATION : 4047 IRON WORKS PARKWAY, LEXINGTON, KY 40511 : WWW.USEF.ORG

WELFARE OF THE HORSE IN THE 21ST CENTURY:

Meeting the Needs of the Performance Horse in Our Changing Environment
Since its inception in 1917, USEF has been dedicated to pursuing excellence and promoting growth in equestrian sport, all while providing and maintaining a safe and level playing eld for both equine and human athletes. Modern equestrian competition occurs in a dynamic environment where advancements in nutritional science, equipment innovation, and sports medicine contribute to higher-level and more intense competition. In recent years, horse sports have experienced increased public scrutiny to both therapeutic techniques and medication practices in racing. More recently, this focus has raised a number of questions about treatment of horses in the show arena. The Federations Drugs & Medications Program is underpinned by a belief that restorative therapies are appropriate for horses in competition and this philosophy will continue to guide the program. A review of the issues contributing to the changing landscape of the equestrian competitive environment points to specic areas where the USEF has an opportunity to evaluate and improve the conditions of USEF Licensed Competitions.

I. Creation of Over-Arching - Catastrophic Incident Protocols

The need to consolidate the ow of information from the competition venues to the Federation is important. Improvements to current reporting processes are called for as well as clear communication procedures within the Federation. Current process and protocol regarding the management of potential catastrophic incidents at USEF Licensed competitions is distributed throughout several departments in the Federation. Certain responsibility and communication processes following an incident might occur in the Sport Program Departments, while others ow through the Safety Committee and Competitions Department or are reported through the Licensed Ofcials Department. Other incidents however (e.g. a member ling a protest) rely on regulatory processes to relay information about what is occurring in the eld. A. Collapse Rule [Proposed Rule Change attached] 1. Informs USEF of collapses 2. Empowers USEF to investigate the circumstances 3. Holds the owner and trainer accountable for refusal to cooperate B. Necropsy Rule [Rule Change Proposal being developed for review by Committees] 1. USEF may mandate a necropsy. 2. USEF would have access to necropsy report. C. Sport Integrity Unit [Best practices review industry evaluations underway by Executive & Legal] 1. Enable USEF to launch and investigation of certain reported incidents. 2. Engage an independent investigative agent as needed. 3. Provide an improved resource for members to report issues of abuse in the sport. D. National Equine Health Plan [Currently underway with American Horse Council and industry leaders] 1. Recent EHV-1 outbreaks point to the need for a national reporting system for dissemination of consistent and reliable information. 2. Distribution and management of appropriate Bio-Security requirements and standards. E. USEF Accident Report Protocol [Process will follow development and implementation initiatives listed above] 1. Update current Accident Report Process. 2. Implementation of new Protocols.

II. Introduction of a New Category of Rules - Prohibited Practices

The Federations rules have, over time, been primarily focused upon detection of prohibited substances and have provided guidelines for the administration of permitted therapeutic medications for competition horses. The concept of legislating prohibited practices was introduced in the 1970s by the USDA in the Horse Protection Act and was focused primarily upon soring techniques which are prevalent in certain segments of the Tennessee Walking Horse industry. Todays advances in medicine, cutting-edge therapies, and nutritional science afford practitioners and equestrians alike with numerous opportunities to aid and assist the equine athlete in the competition environment. However, medical science when taken to an extreme which counters its benet to the health and well-being of horses. With a view to the landscape of these advancements coupled with analysis of the current equestrian competition environment, there is a need to evolve best practices for owners, trainers, and treating veterinarians regarding the use of new techniques in sports medicine such as shock wave therapy and the judicious and benecial use of intra-articular medications in sport horses. Additionally, training and preparation techniques which have been deemed as inappropriate and potentially harmful to performance horses have been identied and are currently under review at the committee level. A. 12 Hour Injection Rule [Proposed Rule Change Attached] B. Parameters of Permitted Shock Wave Therapy Treatment [Proposed Rule Change being developed for Review by Committees] C. Development of Treatment Regimens for the Use of IA Corticosteroids [Under Veterinary and D&M Committee Review] D. Review of Surgical or Chemical Alteration of Tail Carriage E. Review of Shoeing Practices [Topic of Discussion in several Breed & Discipline Technical Committees] F. Review of Training and Preparation Practices (which include but are not limited to excessive lunging, bitting, and over-exion) [On the Agenda of Breed & Discipline Technical Committees] G. Review of the Competition Culture 1. Judges Criteria and Class Specications 2. Over-Competing Horses 3. Review of qualication requirements and point chasing

III. Responsibility for Performance Horses in the Sport

The Role of the Owner Trainer Rider Treating Veterinarian Equestrian competitors, leisure riders, coaches, fans, and enthusiasts each share a personal bond with the horse. This commonality denes the membership of the Federation and guides an unwavering dedication to promote the safety and welfare of both equine and human athletes in equestrian sport. A fair and even playing eld is tantamount to this core mission. It is incumbent upon the Federation to take a lead in regulatory and educational initiatives which further this mission. Current Considerations Include the Following Concepts: A. Regulatory Reform Resulting in Greater Accountability 1. Require Federation membership for treating veterinarians. 2. Redene Person(s) Responsible Broaden Scope to Include Trainer, Rider, Coach, Owner, and Veterinarian 3. Suspend the horse/pony subject of the violation. 4. Report activities to State and Federal Regulatory Agencies. 5. Increase in penalties from the Hearing Committee for violations B. Modify and Intensify Drug & Medications Testing to include: 1. Targeted Testing 2. Focused Testing includes mandatory testing of top placing 3. Increased Testing random horses in number of competitions 4. Questionable behavior C. Create Additional Programs and Guides that Promote Safety and Welfare in the Sport 1. Educational materials regarding appropriate therapeutic treatment of performance horses. 2. Enhance communication and transparency in the owner trainer- veterinarian relationships. 3. Develop tools to better manage and document treatment records of horses in competition.

ClinicalGuidelinesfor VeterinariansTreatingthe NonRacingPerformance Horse

American Association of Equine Practitioners 4075 Iron Works Parkway Lexington, KY 40511 (859) 233-0147 www.aaep.org

Introduction
The non-racing performance horse competes in a wide range of athletic activities. A majority of AAEP members work with this type of horse during its years of training and competition. The AAEP recognizes that veterinarians need to be responsive to various discipline demands, which influence the ways in which they practice. However, irrespective of the influence current competition business/economic models may have on treatment protocols, the AAEP believes that appropriate treatment of performance horses requires accurate diagnostics and the development of evidence-based therapeutic regimens. Non-specific treatment including multiple joint injections, without specific indication, is an example of under diagnosis and over treatment. Some horses are simply unable to perform effectively in todays intensive scheduling of competitions and may require periods of decreased activity as part of appropriate medical management. Ignoring the individuals needs while responding to the demands of the particular competition may lead to excessive treatment and failure to consider the best interests of the horse. Veterinarians are trained to evaluate and manage performance-limiting problems, and when actively involved in the care of a horse, can provide expertise effective in preventing injuries resulting from training or competition and can help prolong a horses career. The judicious use of therapeutic techniques and medications is at the core of successful veterinary intervention. The current use of medications to manage competition horses is often permissive and excessive.1-8 This environment is propagated by owners, trainers and veterinarians who fail to appreciate the potential harm to the horse inherent in the excessive or frivolous use of multiple medications and supplements in the quest for competitive success. Failure on the part of the primary care veterinarian to evaluate the supplement and medication menu of each individual horse can lead to inadvertent overdoses and antagonistic effects between compounds. The administration of medications, implementation of treatment techniques and the recommendation of nutritional supplementation should be based on thorough examination, the subsequent development of a differential diagnosis and a thorough understanding of the athletic and scheduling demands of the particular discipline in which the horse participates. The mission of the AAEP is to improve the health and welfare of the horse, to further the professional development of its members and to provide resources and leadership for the benefit of the equine industry. The AAEP recommends these Clinical Guidelines for the Treatment of Non-Racing Performance Horses to enable its members and the equine industry to provide appropriate care of the horses involved. While veterinary practices may vary depending upon the type of competition, basic tenets concerning diagnosis, treatment and safe and ethical use of medications must be employed. Treatment of equine athletes must be directed toward normalizing their performance and avoiding performance enhancement by illegal or unethical means. While veterinarians are required to follow the regulations governing the discipline in which their patients are

competing, participation in the establishment of these rules and regulations can be the most effective way to ensure that they are reasonable, uniform and give due consideration to the health and welfare of the horse.

Definitions
For the purposes of this document the following definitions apply: complementary and alternative therapies: Acupuncture and chiropractic therapy, also called integrative therapies, which may be used alone or in conjunction with other medical therapies deemed in general to be more traditional or conventional. desensitization procedure: The placement of a local anesthetic or other chemical agent adjacent to a nerve or within a synovial structure for the purpose of desensitizing a portion of the body, such as a joint, muscle, limb or tail. extra label (off label) drug use: Use of a drug which is not approved for the horse or for a particular disease, but which has FDA approval for use in another species or for a different disease or route of administration. Off-label use does not apply in cases in which the product label prohibits a certain use or AAEP medication guidelines prohibit a certain practice for ethical reasons. Off -label use does not apply to illegally compounded products or to medical devices. All the criteria for therapeutic medications apply to off-label use. extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT): The application of acoustical shocks to bone or soft tissue to reduce inflammation, reduce pain and promote healing. intra-articular (IA) injection: An injection intended to deposit medication into a joint space, such as the carpus, tarsus or fetlock. intramuscular (IM) injection: An injection intended to deposit medication in the muscle. intrathecal (IT) injection: An injection intended to deposit medication into a tendon sheath. intravenous (IV) injection: An injection intended to deposit medication into the circulatory system by way of a vein. medication: substances administered to horses for the purpose of preventing, treating or alleviating the clinical signs of disease or injury. non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID): A drug which inhibits cyclooxygenase enzymes which are needed for the production of prostanoids and leukotrienes and which results in analgesic/anti-inflammatory effects.

performance-enhancing treatments: Medication intended to create a level of performance that is beyond the capability of the horse in its natural state. prohibited medications: Those agents that can affect a horses disposition, performance or appearance. These substances should not be administered internally or externally to a horse prior to or during an event except in a medical emergency under proper veterinary care and within competition regulations. Any stimulant, depressant, tranquilizer or sedative that could affect the performance of a horse. Stimulants and depressants are defined as substances that stimulate or depress the cardiovascular, respiratory or central nervous system. Any substance that might interfere with or mask the detection of a prohibited drug or medication. Any non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) other than those allowed by the governing discipline. Any metabolite and/or analog of any of the above described forbidden drugs or substances. soring (hypersensitization): The term used to define an intentional increase in sensitivity to a portion of the body. subcutaneous (SQ) injection: An injection intended to deposit medication beneath the skin. therapeutic medication: A drug or pharmaceutical used to control or cure a disease or disease process. therapeutic procedure: a veterinary activity intended to treat disease or injury. veterinarian-client-patient relationship: The veterinarian-client-patient relationship (VCPR) is the basis for interaction among veterinarians, their clients and their patients.9 A VCPR exists when all of the following conditions have been met: The veterinarian has assumed responsibility for making clinical judgments regarding the health of the horse(s) and the need for medical treatment, and the client has agreed to follow the veterinarians instructions. The veterinarian has sufficient knowledge of the horse(s) to initiate at least a general or preliminary diagnosis of the medical condition of the horse(s). This means that the veterinarian has recently seen and is personally acquainted with the keeping and care of the horse(s) by virtue of an examination of the horse(s), or by medically appropriate and timely visits to the premises where the horse(s) are kept. The veterinarian is readily available, or has arranged for emergency coverage, for follow-up evaluation in the event of adverse reactions or the failure of the treatment regimen.

Medication and Treatment Guidelines

All therapeutic treatments for performance horses should be based upon a specific diagnosis and administered in the context of a valid and transparent ownertrainer-veterinarian relationship. All therapeutic treatments for performance horses should be based upon a specific diagnosis and administered in the context of a valid veterinarian-patient relationship. All therapeutic medications should be administered to performance horses by or under the direction of a licensed veterinarian. All therapeutic procedures should be performed with a sufficient interval provided to allow evaluation of the response to treatment prior to competition. All treatments should be scheduled and administered with an underlying recognition that the health and safety of the horse are the ultimate objectives. Maintenance therapy is an inappropriate medical concept. Systemic and or intraarticular medication administered on a periodic basis must be based on a prior diagnosis with periodic monitoring of the diagnosed condition to determine the appropriate frequency of administration. Non-therapeutic or non-prescribed medications or substances should not be administered to performance horses by anyone. The use of some non-therapeutic substances prior to competition is considered unethical, i.e., as in the use of substances intended to produce a calming effect. Some of these substances may carry a risk of injury or illness for the horse. Veterinarians should not perform surgical procedures or injections of any foreign substance or drug that could affect a horses performance or alter its natural conformation or appearance, except for those treatments or procedures, which have the sole purpose of protecting the health of the horse or are therapeutic. Understanding of regulations in specific competitions is imperative. Any medication administered prior to the day of competition should be done so in accordance with the rules of the competition and should not affect performance, behavior, normal movement or inhibit the physiologic response which protects the horse from injury. No medication should be administered to a horse within 12 hours prior to competition. Only one (1) Non-Steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drug (NSAID) should be permitted in plasma or urine samples collected for testing purposes.

The AAEP recognizes that the judicious use of intra-articular medications with a valid veterinarian-patient relationship is appropriate treatment and can benefit a horses health and well being. The AAEP defines this relationship to be a clinical or lameness examination with appropriate diagnostic tests prior to initiation of a therapeutic plan. Clinicians treating performance horses in the competitive environment are encouraged to develop treatment regimens, particularly with reference to the use of IA corticosteroids, which allow adequate evaluation of the horses response to treatment prior to competition. Intra-articular use of local anesthetics is indicated for diagnostic procedures only. Under no circumstances should the intra-articular, intrathecal or subcutaneous administration of anesthetic agents be permitted within 24 hours prior to competition. Subcutaneous or intramuscular injection of drugs or substances including corticosteroids and pitcher plant extract should only be used as analgesics in conjunction with a specific diagnosis. Timing of these treatments should provide an adequate opportunity for the evaluation of treatment results and should be prohibited within 24 hours of competition. Anabolic steroids should not be present in therapeutic levels in the performance horse at the time of competition. Their use during rehabilitation from illness or injury is recognized as valid; however, adequate withdrawal periods prior to competition to insure their absence are vital.10

Adjunctive Therapeutic Treatments: 1. Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy: The extent and duration of the analgesic effect of ESWT is a matter of controversy. AAEP recommends that shockwave therapy should not be used within 5 days prior to competition. 2. Acupuncture & Chiropractic Therapy: The AAEP recommends that integrative therapies be based upon a valid medical diagnosis, be administered by or under the direct supervision of a licensed veterinarian and be documented in the horses medical record. (http://www.avma.org/issues/policy/comp_alt_medicine.asp) 3. Cold therapy: Cooling with ice and water is a valid treatment when prescribed for a specific condition. Machines that can cool below 0 degrees C (32 degrees F) should not be used.

Documentation of Veterinary Procedures

Medical record: All medical treatments and procedures performed on horses in competition or training should be documented in the horses medical record. One medical record should be kept for each horse and this should be available, with the owners or owners representatives permission, to all veterinarians treating the horse. Medical records should include the results of the examination, a working diagnosis and specific treatments including dosages and routes of administration of medications. Documentation of the use of all prescription drugs should conform at a minimum to the requirements of the applicable states veterinary practice act. Infectious disease control: Management of infectious disease at competitions and horse sales is a high priority for the general health of the horses. Practicing veterinarians and regulatory veterinarians should work together with competition management to identify index cases of infectious disease and provide a plan, including an isolation area, for containing an outbreak and managing affected horses in order to protect the population at large. The AAEP guidelines for management of infectious disease may serve as a model for disease control practices. (http://www.aaep.org/infectious_control.htm) Iatrogenic transmission of disease: In consideration of the potential for transmission of infectious disease (e.g. Piroplasmosis, Equine Infectious Anemia, Equine Influenza, Strangles, and Equine Herpes Virus) by contaminated needles and syringes and multiple horse contact, the AAEP recommends that practitioners do not reuse needles, syringes or any equipment that might be contaminated with blood or other body fluids. Drug compounding: Legal drug compounding requires a valid veterinarian-clientpatient relationship and compounded medications can only be used when there is no equivalent FDA-approved drug or medication available. The veterinarian should limit the use of compounded drugs to unique needs in specific patients. Further, medication withdrawal times are calculated only for FDA-approved medications. For this reason, use of compounded medications in the performance horse competition environment is accompanied by an increased risk for drug overage, which has resulted in fines from regulatory agencies and legal exposure for the treating veterinarian. The lack of quality control for compounded medications may result in errors in dosage and has resulted in therapeutic failure or toxicity. (https://www.aaep.org/drug_compounding.htm) Extra label Off-label (extra label) medication is the use of an FDA-approved product for a condition other than that for which it is labeled for use in another species. Off-label use does not apply in cases where the product label prohibits a certain use or where AAEP medication guidelines prohibit a certain practice for ethical reasons. By definition, off-label use does not apply to compounded products or medical devices. All the criteria for appropriate use of therapeutic medications apply to off label use. (http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/NewsEvents/FDAVeterinarianNewsletter/ucm10 0268.htm)

(http://www.aaep.org/images/files/White%20Paper%20on%20Medical%20Devices%20i n%20Equine%20Medicine.pdf)

Guidelines developed by the AAEP Task Force on Medication in the Non-Racing Performance Horse: Kent Allen, DVM Jeff Berk VMD Jeff Blea, DVM Doug Corey, DVM Scott Palmer, VMD Midge Leitch, VMD Rick Mitchell, DVM Stephen Schumacher, DVM Stuart Shoemaker, DVM Nat White, DVM, Chair

Approved by the AAEP Board of Directors, July 2011.

References
1. Allen K. Welfare issues in the event horse. Chapter in Equine Welfare, ed. CW McIlwraith and BE Rollin, Blackwell-Wiley, London, 2011; pp 463-472. 2. Baldwin J. Welfare issues with the carriage horse. Chapter in Equine Welfare, ed. CW McIlwraith and BE Rollin, Blackwell-Wiley, London, 2011; pp 394-407. 3. Black JB, Frisbie D. Welfare concerns in the training and competition of the cutting, reining and reined cow horse. Chapter in Equine Welfare, ed. CW McIlwraith and BE Rollin, Blackwell-Wiley, London, 2011; pp 302-317. 4. Corey D. Welfare issues in the rodeo horse. Chapter in Equine Welfare, ed. CW McIlwraith and BE Rollin, Blackwell-Wiley, London, 2011; pp 275-301. 5. Heird J. Abusive Treatment and subsequent policy development within various breeds of show horses in the USA. Chapter in Equine Welfare, ed. CW McIlwraith and BE Rollin, Blackwell-Wiley, London, 2011; pp 245-254. 6. Leitch M. Welfare in the discipline of dressage. Chapter in Equine Welfare, ed. CW McIlwraith and BE Rollin, Blackwell-Wiley, London, 2011; pp 332-340. 7. Loving NS. Raising welfare standards for endurance riding. Chapter in Equine Welfare, ed. CW McIlwraith and BE Rollin, Blackwell-Wiley, London, 2011; pp 341-369. 8. Mitchell RD. Welfare concerns in the care, training and competition of the hunterjumper. Chapter in Equine Welfare, ed. CW McIlwraith and BE Rollin, Blackwell-Wiley, London, 2011; pp 370-378. 9. Principles of Veterinary Medical Ethics of the AVMA. Section III. The Veterinarian-Client-Patient Relationship, AVMA Policy (http://www.avma.org/animal_health/vcpr_poster.pdf). 10. Soring KH and Hyde WG. Review of anabolic steroid testing in a racing environment. Proceedings AAEP Ann Convention 2008; 54: pp 38-43.

May 24, 2013

An Invitation to Attend the USEF Town Hall Meeting June 3, 2013 - 6:00-9:00 PM ET
From the USEF Communications Department

In the face of overwhelming response from its membership and requests to host USEF Town Hall Meetings in many cities around the U.S., Federation staff and leadership opted to host a Town Hall Meeting to be broadcast LIVE on USEFNetwork.com on Monday, June 3 at 6:00 p.m. ET. This interactive broadcast replaces the previously scheduled meetings in an attempt to provide greater access to more people across all breeds and disciplines nationwide. "This innovative use of technology presents a unique opportunity to share opinions and experiences from every corner of the Federation," remarks USEF President Chrystine Tauber. The webcast can be viewed at: http://www.usefnetwork.com/featured/USEFTownHallMeetings/ The Fifth Third Theater at the Kentucky Horse Park in Lexington Kentucky has been selected as the host venue for this live webcast which is open to all USEF equestrians. Participation from every breed and discipline is strongly encouraged. The panel of experts assembled includes: USEF President, Chrystine Tauber; USEF Vice President of National Affiliates, Bill Moroney; Chair of the USEF Drugs & Medication Committee, Dr. Kent Allen; U.S. Eventing Team Coach, David O'Connor; USEF Chief Executive Officer, John Long; USEF General Counsel, Sonja Keating; and Chief Administrator of the USEF D&M Program, Dr. Stephen Schumacher. The panel will speak to the agenda topics listed below and will take questions and suggestions throughout the webcast from a live audience as well as from equestrians tuned into the webcast. To attend this event either in-person or via the live streaming broadcast, please register here. AGENDA FOR USEF TOWN HALL MEETING - June 3, 2013 Welfare of the Horse in the 21st Century: Meeting the Needs of the Performance Horse in Our Changing Environment

Since its inception in 1917, The USEF has been dedicated to pursuing excellence and promoting growth in equestrian sport, all while providing and maintaining a safe and level playing field for both equine and human athletes. Modern equestrian competition occurs in a dynamic environment where advancements in nutritional science, equipment innovation, and sports medicine contribute to higher and more intense competition. In recent years, horse sports have experienced increased public scrutiny to both therapeutic techniques and medication practiced in racing. More recently, this focus has raised a number of questions about treatment of horses in the show arena. The Federation's Drugs & Medications Program is underpinned by a belief that restorative therapies are appropriate for horses in competition and this philosophy will continue to guide to the program. A review of the issues contributing to the changing landscape of the equestrian competitive environment points to specific areas where the USEF has an opportunity to evaluate and improve the conditions of USEF Licensed Competitions. Talking points breakdown into three basic categories: I. Creation of an Over-Arching - Catastrophic Incident Protocol A Catastrophic Incident Protocol that will eventually encompass a range of, subjects from biosecurity preparation to horse collapse, will be discussed. A collapse rule has already been introduced to the USEF Executive Committee and will likely be acted upon early this summer. The balance of this protocol will be developed over the balance of the year. II. Introduction of a New Category of Rules - Prohibited Practices A new section of the rule book will be introduced dealing with "Prohibited Practices." As part of this discussion, another rule will be explained which would prohibit administering injections to horses within 12 hours of scheduled competition. This rule has also been circulated to the USEF Executive Committee and will likely be acted upon this summer. Like the catastrophic incident protocol, the balance of the prohibited practices would be discussed and then implemented over the next year or two. III. Responsibility for Performance Horses in the Sport. The Role of the Owner - Trainer - Rider Treating Veterinarian Panelists will speak to the regulatory and educational initiatives underway to further advance the Federation's mission to promote safety and welfare of both equine and human athletes in equestrian sport. The vision of the United States Equestrian Federation is to provide leadership for equestrian sport in the United States of America by promoting the pursuit of excellence from the grassroots to the Olympic Games, based on a foundation of fair, safe competition and the welfare of its human and equine athletes.

July 29, 2013

Prohibited Practice Rule Changes, Board of Directors Restructure, and Western Dressage all Receive Yes Votes at USEF Mid-Year Meeting
From the USEF Communications Department Lexington, KY - At the United States Equestrian Federation (USEF) Board of Directors mid-year meeting on Monday, July 22nd, some significant rule and bylaw changes were brought to the table. The changes concerned horse welfare, the structure of the USEF Board of Directors, and the discipline of western dressage. Each of the changes brought forth received a majority vote to approve and a summary of each change is detailed below. Horse Welfare Changes Two important Proposed Extraordinary Rule Changes were introduced in March of 2013 by the USEF Veterinary Committee. Following extensive feedback from USEF Technical Committees, Working Groups, and from attendees at USEF Town Hall Meetings held in Florida in March, and via interactive webcast in June, the USEF Board of Directors has approved the following two changes. The first change introduces a new category of rules called Prohibited Practices to the USEF Rule Book which will take effect December 1, 2013: GR 414 Prohibited Practices - to read the entire rule change click here. Important points in this change include the following: No horses or ponies may be injected within twelve hours prior to competing. There are only three exceptions to this rule: therapeutic fluids, antibiotics, and Dexamethasone for the treatment of hives (specific dosing guidelines are provided for the exceptions concerning fluids and Dexamethasone). All excepted substances must be administered by a veterinarian and cannot be administered to a horse or pony within six hours prior to competing.

The second rule change becomes effective on August 1, 2013, and concerns the actions taken should a horse or pony collapse at a USEF Licensed Competition. This rule change proposal has been commonly referred to as the "Collapse Rule" and is the first to be presented in the formation of an over-arching Catastrophic Incident Protocol.

The intent of this rule is to keep the USEF informed of any collapses, empower the USEF to investigate the circumstances surrounding such an incident, and hold the trainer, or the owner if the trainer is unavailable, accountable for refusal to cooperate. GR 843 Mandatory Reporting & Cooperation of Horse/Pony Collapse - to read the entire rule change click here. Important components of this change are summarized below: A collapse is defined as "a fall to the ground with no apparent cause." The trainer, owner, or rider of a horse must report a collapse no later than three hours after it has occurred. Any horse or pony that collapses is subject to drug and medication testing and inspection by a USEF appointed veterinarian (at USEF's expense). Cooperation with the Federation as to an investigation concerning a horse/pony collapse or death is mandated.

Extensive documentation and a Q&A regarding the rules can be viewed at http://www.usefnetwork.com/featured/USEFTownHallMeetings/ If you have questions about either of these rule changes, please email them horsewelfare@usef.org. You can find the USEF Rule Book online, and mobile friendly, at www.usef.org/rulebook/. USEF Board of Directors Restructure In an effort to make a more agile and efficient organization, the Board of Directors voted to amend Bylaws to restructure the Federation's governance structure. USEF Planning Committee Chairman Bill Moroney presented an extensive Bylaw rewrite that facilitates the reduction in size of the USEF Board and empowers a council structure consistent with a Restructure Concept Document approved earlier this year at the January USEF Annual Meeting. "We have come to realize that the Federation is not structured to maximize the contributions of its greatest assets - our passionate volunteers." Moroney continued to say, "The membership expects leadership to operate within a governance structure that reflects its leaders' knowledge and experience, as well as one that facilitates their ability to address issues in a timely manner." Effective January 9, 2014, the Board of Directors will be streamlined to 20 members from the current 54. Additionally, the Administration & Finance Working Group, FEI Affiliates Working Group, High Performance Working Group, and National Affiliates Working Group will transition to become the Administrative and Finance Council, International Disciplines Council, and the National Breeds and Disciplines Council. USEF President Chrystine Tauber remarked, "The overhaul of our governance model is the first bold step in ensuring a strong and prosperous future for our Federation. The new system of councils will provide all of our breeds and disciplines with a much more powerful platform for governance and effectuating timely changes to their respective areas of the sport." The composition of the restructured Board will include representatives from across the spectrum of the Federation. Three seats will be occupied by USEF Officers including a President, Vice President, and Secretary/Treasurer. Eligible Athletes will be elected to four seats respectively, as will representatives from the International Disciplines and the National Breeds and Disciplines Councils. One member of the Administration &

Finance Council will also sit on the Board of Directors and two Independent Members will be elected by the new Board. The final two seats will be filled by representatives from the two USEF Sustaining Affiliate Members. Tauber commented further, "The new Board will be able to concentrate on oversight and the overall future plans and vision for the Federation. Members of the smaller Board must be fully engaged and understand that they do not participate as a special interest director, but rather as a member of a leadership team where their input is vitally important to all matters of the Federation. "Many associations are currently experiencing restructures. The traditional model for associations doesn't work well in today's environment of rapid changes and new technology. Our efficacy and relevance will diminish in the future if we do not keep up with the continually shifting landscape. This changing environment requires us to adopt new and different approaches. It is about fundamental changes in how we operate." A transition plan has been developed by USEF Senior staff and will be implemented throughout the Fall of 2013 as the Working Groups are reseated into the new Councils. The new restructured Board is expected to be seated at the 2014 Annual Meeting. To learn more about the Board of Directors Restructure and Bylaw amendments visit; http://usef.org/_IFrames/RuleBook/RuleProposals/Docs/BylawAmendments.pdf. Western Dressage Chapter Added to Rule Book The USEF Board of Directors voted to add a new discipline to the Rule Book and in the process welcomed a new Recognized Affiliate. Effective December 1, 2013, Western Dressage will be removed from the Morgan chapter of the USEF Rule Book and become an independent discipline with it's own chapter. With that change the Western Dressage Association of America (WDAA) will become the USEF Recognized Affiliate for Western Dressage. In a press release the WDAA stated "The Western Dressage Association of America is honored to be the USEF Recognized Affiliate for the exciting new discipline of western dressage. WDAA is excited to bring its focus and mission of "Honoring the Horse" to the USEF's Horse Welfare Initiative. WDAA will work closely with USEF coordinating rule processes and other affiliate functions." To learn more about the Western Dressage Association of America go to www.westerndressageassociation.org/

The vision of the United States Equestrian Federation is to provide leadership for equestrian sport in the United States of America by promoting the pursuit of excellence from the grassroots to the Olympic Games, based on a foundation of fair, safe competition and the welfare of its human and equine athletes.

Frequently Asked Questions

The following is a compellation of questions raised as part of the Welfare of the Horse in the 21st Century Initiative. GENERAL QUESTIONS I am confused by all the terms used in the Drugs & Medications Rules. Please define the terms. USEF General Rule 410 provides a thorough definition of substances forbidden in competition. For the most part, these substances are consistent with the FEI Banned Substances. Forbidden Substances are any substances that are not permitted to be in the horses system at the time of competition. More information can be viewed at: http://www.usef.org/issuu/flipbook.ashx?docname=DrugsMedsGuidelines2013 &pdfurl=http://www.usef.org/documents/drugsMeds/DrugsMedsGuidelines201 3.pdf

The USEF Equine Drugs and Medications Program is underpinned by a belief that judicious use of certain therapeutic substances is appropriate for horses in competition and provides recommendations to comply with Quanitatively Restricted Medications List. Quantitatively Restricted Medications are any substances in which there is a maximum permitted plasma concentration. More information can be viewed at: http://www.usef.org/issuu/flipbook.ashx?docname=DrugsMedsGuidelines2013&pdfurl= http://www.usef.org/documents/drugsMeds/DrugsMedsGuidelines2013.pdf

1|P a g e

The FEI regulates prohibited substances. Prohibited Substance is an umbrella term used to identify any substance that is not allowed in a Horses system during competition. Prohibited Substances fall into two categories, Banned Substances and Controlled Medication Substances. These are regulated by the FEI Equine Anti-Doping & Controlled Medication Regulations. These regulations are frequently referred to as the EADCM regulations and can be found on the Clean Sport website at www.cleansport.org. Equine Prohibited Substances List. The list identifying the Banned Substances/Controlled Medication Substances and Banned Methods/Controlled Medication Methods. The List contains individually-named substances that are either Banned or Controlled at FEI Events and is subject to annual review. The List is revised by a group of experts (List Group) who propose changes to the FEI Bureau once a year. All changes come into effect 90 days after publication. The List is available in the Resources section of this Clean Sport toolkit, on the Clean Sport website (www.cleansport.org) and as a smartphone app.

What are the definitions of trace amount, threshold level, SLOD, and at what level is a positive called? The USEF Equine Drugs and Medications Program does not utilize the term trace amount. This is a term that is commonly used to describe an amount that is believed to be associated with no pharmacological effect. The term threshold is intended to differentiate between the amount of a naturally occurring substance that is normally present and a level that is indicative of an administration. Testosterone is a good example, as it is a hormone in all mammals and its presence is expected. However, a threshold would distinguish between what level would be normal and what level would indicate an exogenous administration (Exogenous: Any material that is present and active in an individual organism or living cell but that originated outside of that organism). SLOD is the Screening Limit of Detection. This is a level that is applied to substances that are not exogenous and would not normally be found in a horse unless an administration had occurred. A qualitative finding above the SLOD would be considered a positive. Is a positive ever called if the amount is below the SLOD? No

2|P a g e

What is the definition of zero tolerance? Zero tolerance was a term used to describe the policy that any amount of a forbidden substance would constitute a positive finding. However, with improving testing technology and the ability to detect substances at lower levels, the detection of some substances could occur well outside a reasonable expectation for pharmacological effect. The use of Screening Limit of Detection (SLOD) takes into consideration the improvement in technology and the risk assessment of the specific substance and provides a limit at which excess is considered a positive finding. Why is the SLOD not available to the membership? It is standard operating practice for testing laboratories not to disclose the Screening Limits of Detection (SLOD) of restricted substances. For example, WADA (the World Anti-Doping Association) does not disclose SLOD. Why is the level of some substances different for horses, humans, and other animals? Not every drug affects every species the same way. Species metabolize drugs differently, and some drugs react differently in various species. For example, the dewormer Ivermectin commonly used in horses can be fatal for some breeds of dogs. Another example is the NSAID (Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug) firocoxib. The equine product is Equioxx and the canine product is Previcox, but the drug itself is the same. In dogs the labeled dose is 227mg daily for a 100lb dog, but in horses the labeled dose is 45.5mg for a 1000lb horse. For a 20lb dog, the labeled dose for Previcox is 57 mg daily; this is nearly 25% more than a 1000lb horse should be administered in a day. Example of detection levels between humans and animals: Airline pilots were held to the Department of Transportation detection cutoff of 300 nanograms of cocaine because this represented the limits of testing technology at the time. Horses are far more sensitive to cocaine than humans. As a result, cocaine positive is called for levels less than 300 nanograms in a horse. For many years the cutoff level of detection for cocaine was not harmonized between the Department of Transportation and the Department of Health and Human Services. It is interesting to note that in 2010 the detection levels for cocaine for the Department of Transportation and the Department of Health and Human Services were harmonized and changed from 300 to 150 nanograms. This resulted in more than 1300 additional cocaine positives on tests performed in 2011.

3|P a g e

Why arent the Testing Veterinarian Guidelines made available to the membership? These are not testing protocols. Instead, these are guidelines to assist the testing teams to comply with the intent of USEF General Rules Chapter 4. These guidelines contain specific information regarding communication between the Equine Drugs and Medications Program office, the testing veterinarian, and the USEF laboratory. In January 2013, the USEF Board of Directors deemed information in this manual as Confidential to ensure the integrity of the program. Are samples frozen and retained? Can a member be held accountable for a positive test at a later time? The USEF Lab does not routinely retain samples; however this policy is currently under review. The human anti-doping world does retain samples for future analysis. The USEF is seeking feedback from members; please email concerns to horsewelfare@usef.org. What is the process for the development of tests for new substances? The development of tests for new substances starts with intelligence and surveillance from the industry. The process can be very different depending on the substance being investigated. The establishment of a SLOD or a threshold considers whether a substance is endogenously produced, is ubiquitous in the environment, or only detected following an administration. The pharmacology of the substance is taken into consideration when establishing a SLOD or threshold. Why cant we allow horses to be administered cc of Acepromazine in competition if it is reported on medication reports and filed with the competition steward prior to competing? No rational justification for the presence of any substance that alters mental activity in a horse in competition exists. Can USEF rules require identification of a specific location of testing? While it is possible to identify the exact location of testing within the USEF rules, it has been found preferable to maintain flexibility in order to be more responsive to specific situations. The guidelines for testing are reviewed annually to determine what procedures work best for each breed and discipline respectively to better respond to the current competition environment.

4|P a g e

What are the side effects of overusing NSAIDs (Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs)? Ongoing research reveals that the overuse of NSAIDS can cause potentially harmful, even severe side effects. Outwardly, diarrhea, loss of appetite, and a dull attitude can be seen. Each of these symptoms can be a clinical sign of more severe colic-related problems. Please refer to the NSAID and Your Horse brochure: http://issuu.com/equestrian/docs/nsaidandyourhorseweb?mode=embed&layout=http: //www.usef.org/issuu/nsaids/layout.xml&showFlipBtn=true How can we prevent/predict reactions like colic from happening to a horse because of a poor reaction to drugs? There is no way to predict when a horse might incur an adverse reaction to an administration. Is there really a test for Carolina Gold? Yes Are there other testing labs that can identify the presence of Carolina Gold (GABA)? Can members purchasing horses have samples drawn during a pre-purchase exam tested for this and other substances? We understand other labs have been developing tests and are identifying the presence of GABA. The USEF is in the process of evaluating the feasibility of providing pre-purchase screening, but the USEF lab does not currently offer this service. However, USEF leadership believes such a service could be a valuable benefit to members and is exploring the possibility of getting into this business.

5|P a g e

What is the timeline from when a horse is tested to announcement of any penalty? In 2011 and 2012, it took an average of 81 days for the disposition of a positive finding to occur in matters where an Administrative Penalty was offered by USEF and accepted by the trainer. This calculation includes the period from when the Testing Veterinarian collected the sample at a competition until the case closed. This time period does not include the suspension period. In 2011 and 2012, for positive finding cases that went to a hearing before the USEF Hearing Committee, the average number of days was 246. This calculation includes the period from when the Testing Veterinarian collected the sample at a competition until the Hearing on the matter closed. Following a Hearing, it may take up to 60 days before the Findings from the Hearing are issued to the parties, which includes the penalties imposed. The average for these cases is due, in part, to cases that are continued to a later hearing date at the request of the trainer. How long after the completion of a class is a horse subject to being tested? Consistent with GR 402.1, a horse/pony may be tested at any time while on the competition grounds. How will the 12 Hour Rule affect ship-ins and animals stabled off property? Currently, the responsible party for a horse entered in USEF competition could be required to make the horse available for testing even off the grounds of a USEF licensed competition. Since this issue is one that affects the equal playing field, clarification in the rules to make this abundantly clear is currently underway. Is there or will there be a test for magnesium? Research for a test for excessive magnesium administration is currently underway. Is there or will there be a test for calcium? The detection of administration of excessive amounts of calcium is associated with the magnesium test research.

6|P a g e

Is there or will there be a test for oxytocin? Oxytocin is a hormone used to induce labor in pregnant women. It has been reported that this hormone is being administered to horses to create an extreme cramping episode from which the horse emerges exhausted and relieved from the painful experience. The USEF is diverting precious resources to dispel such a horrific practice by investing in research to establish appropriate threshold levels for Oxytocin. However, the adoption of the 12 Hour Rule will also likely reduce the use of Oxytocin since the desired affect requires administration in close proximity to competition. What action will be taken against vets who assist trainers in cheating? This is an area currently under review. The first step is to identify a process by which the Federation can identify the treating vets on the competition grounds. A category of membership is being considered for treating veterinarians. The USEF expects a rule change proposal to be submitted in the rule change process this year. What action will be taken against a veterinarian who writes prescriptions without knowledge of the horse? If reported to the Federation, the USEF will notify the respective State Pharmacy Board of this illegal activity.

What are the USEF's plans to stay ahead of the designer drugs? The term designer drugs is primarily known in human doping and refers to drugs that are chemically altered to produce a similar effect but lessen the chance of detection. With regard to the administration of cocktails (the combination of substances administered together) shortly before competition, there are ongoing efforts to suppress this practice. However, the eradication of such dangerous practices cannot be done solely in the lab or through testing, but also relies heavily on receiving intelligence tips. As a unified sport and community, the USEF and its members must realize a change in culture and attitude in regard to sporting practices and safety plays as important of a role as that of laboratory testing.

7|P a g e

When will a penalty schedule be published? The concept of a published penalty schedule has been discussed at the committee level. The USEF is aware that the level of fines and suspensions has been the subject of debate. The USEF Hearing Committee has been part of this discussion and understands the concerns that have been raised. Thus far, the group has been guided by a belief that maintaining flexibility in assessing penalties is an important component of the current process. Will the USEF consider suspending all concerned (owner, trainer, rider) in a positive finding? Yes, there is currently discussion with respect to who should be held responsible for a positive finding. To share opinions on this topic, please email horsewelfare@usef.org. Will the USEF consider taking away all of the horse's points for that competition year ? Yes, this is as well as suspension and further sanctions are currently under review. When will USEF members hear about the results of the horses that tested positive for Carolina Gold? What happened to all the Carolina Gold positives? The USEF Hearing Committee has heard a few cases regarding Carolina Gold. Findings are published on the Rulings and Findings section of the usef.org website and are available for viewing at: http://www.usef.org/_IFrames/rulebook/HearingCommittee.aspx Additional cases are pending in the USEF regulation process. Is it true that certain de-wormers contain GABA? No Is it true that the powdered form of Perfect Prep contains GABA? There are five different formulations of Perfect Prep listed on the companys website. None of the published ingredient lists identify GABA as an ingredient. Is the company that manufactures Perfect Prep a sponsor of USEF? No

8|P a g e

Since I compete in California what rules do I have to comply with?

Over the last two years the USEF Equine Drugs and Medications Program and the Equine Medication Monitoring Program of the California Department of Agriculture have collaborated to align the future drug rules of the two programs. Both organizations strive for consistent programs that protect the health and welfare of the equine athlete. The USEFs understanding is that this ongoing effort will be presented as proposed legislation in the near future with an expectation that changes could occur within the next 12 months. If successful, the drug rules governing competition in the state of California could be more harmonized than they have been for many years. Until that time, the best course of action is to become educated on both sets of rules and comply with the most restrictive rule for the drug or medication being administered.

9|P a g e

PROHIBITED PRACTICES What is a Prohibited Practice Rule? Why do we need this type of rule? The Federation rules have, over time, been primarily focused on detection of prohibited substances and have provided guidelines for the administration of permitted therapeutic medications for competition horses. The concept of legislating prohibited practices was introduced in 1970 by the USDA in the Horse Protection Act and was focused primarily upon soring techniques which were (and continue to be) prevalent in certain segments of the Tennessee Walking Horse breed. Todays advances in medicine, cutting-edge therapies, and nutritional science afford practitioners and equestrians alike with numerous opportunities to aid and assist the equine athlete in the competition environment. In some cases, however, therapeutic treatment is taken to an extreme that counters its benefit to the health and wellbeing of these horses. With a view to the landscape of these advancements coupled with the current equestrian competition environment, there is an apparent need to evolve acceptable parameters for owners, trainers, and treating veterinarians regarding the use of new techniques in sports medicine such as shock wave therapy and the judicious and beneficial use of intra-articular medications in sport horses. Additionally, training and preparation techniques that have been deemed as inappropriate and potentially harmful to performance horses are currently under investigation at the committee level. I'm concerned that we will not be able to give our horses medication by injection i.e., Adequan and Legend. Will the USEF Equine Drugs and Medications Program demand that only licensed vets be able to give our horses injections? Injections should always be given by someone who has been appropriately trained. The only time the USEF proposes to require a veterinarian administer an injection is within the context of the 12 Hour Rule. Does the USEF plan for us to go medication free? In recent years, horse sports have experienced increased public scrutiny to both therapeutic techniques and medication practices in racing. More recently, this focus has raised a number of questions about treatment of horses in the show arena. The USEF Equine Drugs and Medications Program is underpinned by a belief that judicious use of certain therapeutic substances are appropriate for horses in competition, and this philosophy will continue to guide to the program.

10 | P a g e

Please explain why it is illegal (dangerous) to use a calming element (drug) on a horse to improve its safety and performance? It is the Federations viewpoint that while it is not necessarily wrong to sedate (calm) a horse for a specific therapeutic purpose or to contribute to its safety as the result of a trauma or stress, it does significantly endanger equine health and wellbeing. It also violates the concept of fair play, upon which this Federations principles in sport is founded; to unnecessarily and artificially affect mentation (level of attention and clarity of focus) in a horse strictly for competitive gain, or to improve its performance in the show ring, is therefore against the Federations rules. What is the science that supports the proposed 12 Hour Rule? The American Association of Equine Practitioners (AAEP) published Clinical Guidelines for Veterinarians Treating the Non-Racing Performance Horse in December 2011. The USEF Drugs and Medications and the USEF Veterinary Committees reviewed and discussed the findings of the AAEP Special Task Force and suggested some modifications to the AAEP suggested protocol, resulting in the proposed 12 Hour Rule. The AAEP Report can be seen here: http://usefnetwork.s3.amazonaws.com/pdfs/00/00/00/07/64/aaep+clinical+guidelines+ performance+horses+final+12-1-11.pdf What is the most effective and beneficial administration of Adequan? How does the 12 Hour Rule impact the effectiveness? The USEF asked an Adequan representative for answers to the following questions: Will a dose administered four hours prior to competing have any advantage over a dose administered more than 12 hours prior to competing? Once administered IM (intramuscularly), the drug reaches the systemic circulation in 20 minutes and crosses over the synovial membrane within two hours and imbeds in the articular cartilage within 24-48 hours after administration. Is there any advantage to administering Adequan within 12 hours of competition? While not on the product label, Dr. Michael Collier noted in his work with radiolabeled Adequan that the hyaluronan concentration almost doubled after IM administration within 48 hours.

11 | P a g e

What does Adequan i.m. reaches peak therapeutic levels in joints two hours after intramuscular injection mean? This refers to the drug arrival and crossing over the synovial membrane within two hours after IM administration (Collier). The drugs unique benefit is its ability to maintain this level for the next 96 hours (four days) as it winds up chondrocytes to increase production of proteoglycan complex. This process must be repeated every four days for seven treatments to overcome the deficiencies of chondrocytes that have led to DJD (degenerative joint disease).

If my horse has never had an injection of Adequan before, would it be helpful to administer it within a few hours of competition? In the original clinical studies that were utilized for the FDA approval we did not see improvements in the main end points of lameness, stride length or joint circumference until the administration of the third and fifth injections. These cases had a chemical OA of Feuds adjuvant, which is quite severe, but the repeated injections are what reversed the clinical signs (Dr. G White and D Hamm).

How long does Adequan take to start working? The original data continues to match up with the clinical world in that most veterinaries that work with trainers and riders find the benefits of lameness improvement after a series of injections, typically three, and continued improvement with the full-labeled series. Despite the popular use of pre-race or pre-competition use, the current data for immediate benefits remain the increased concentration of hyaluronan, which as veterinarians we are unclear of the full benefits of such an effect.

12 | P a g e

What science supports the changes in recommended withdrawal time from ketoprofen from six to twelve hours? The excerpts from the ketoprofen package insert reprinted here demonstrate that following a three-day treatment plasma levels are actually higher than following a single dose at four hours.
Pharmacology: KETOFEN is a non-narcotic, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agent with analgesic and antipyretic properties. Additional studies using the same model in horses have shown that the effects of ketoprofen are maximal by 12 hours and still measurable at 24 hours after each dosage as depicted in the following graph.

Maximum Flexion (mean Sem, N = 6)*

*sem = Standard Error Of The Mean

N = Number Of Animals

How Supplied: KETOFEN (ketoprofen) Solution 100 mg/mL is available in 50 mL and 100 mL multidose bottles. Store at controlled room temperature 20 to 25C (68 to 77F). Distributed by: Fort Dodge Animal Health, a division of Wyeth, a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer Inc, New York, NY 10017. Revised: July 2012
ZOETIS INC. Distributed by ZOETIS INC. 333 PORTAGE STREET, KALAMAZOO, MI, 49007 Telephone: 269-833-4000 Customer Service: 800-733-5500 and 800-793-0596 Veterinary Medical Investigations & Product Support: 800-366-5288 Technical Services (USA): 800-366-5288 Website: www.zoetis.com Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the Ketofen information published above. However, it remains the responsibility of the readers to familiarize themselves with the product information contained on the US product label or package insert.

13 | P a g e

How will the 12 Hour Rule be applied if I am at a show and my class goes earlier than anticipated? The proposed rule states scheduled time. As is the case in adjudicating other medications for which the USEF currently has quantitative restrictions, interpretation of the rule is guided by determining what the reasonable expectation for when a class was to be held. If upon examination, the evidence demonstrates that a class was held prior to what was expected, this will be considered. What is the purpose of the 12 Hour Rule? How will it be enforced? The rule is being introduced is to stop the unnecessary injections to horses close to competition. Implementing the 12 Hour Rule will not change the therapeutic value of any of currently permitted substances, but it may be the rule that allows the Federation to penalize (hold accountable) practices that may lead to horse collapses or death.

How will the Federation detect if a horse that collapsed or died received an injection within twelve hours? The USEF will rely on corroborating evidence such as eyewitness testimony or forensic evidence.

If my horse collapses and was administered an injection by my vet within twelve hours of competition will I be penalized? Welfare of the horse is paramount. Emergency treatment should never be withheld. However, the horse would not eligible to compete for 12 hours (except as provided for in the rule).

14 | P a g e

Once the 12 Hour Rule is put into place, how will the USEF stop high levels of lunging, trainers withholding water, and other cruel practices? What steps will the USEF take to educate licensed officials about judging horses that show a certain amount of spirit? In an attempt to engage the USEF membership in the discussion about evolving and improving conditions in the changing environment of equestrian sport, USEF President Chrystine Tauber has sent a letter to the chairs of each USEF Breed /Discipline Technical Committee. In this letter Tauber says, I believe it is time to undertake a thorough review and begin the discussion of training and preparation practices for every discipline and breed within the USEF. From shoeing practices, tail carriage and alteration, to training practices including excessive lunging and over-flexion, I believe it is critical to put these and other practices on the table to begin the discussion. We also need to initiate conversation about competition culture. Has judging evolved to rewarding robotic behavior in the show ring? Are horses showing too much and too often in the quest for year-end points? It is imperative we begin this dialogue for ourselves before others begin it for us. Tauber has requested submission of a written report from each USEF Technical committee chair by August 1, 2013.

Explain why FEI rules allow for injections inside 12 hours in their treating stalls. The FEI Rules currently provide for treatment of horses (including allowed injections) in the controlled environment of the FEI treating stalls. This is an attempt by the FEI to create greater transparency with respect to treating horses in competition. The USEF Veterinary Committee (which includes several FEI Veterinarians) endorses the AAEP position that nothing vital and necessary for the wellbeing of a horse needs to be administered by injection (except as provided for in the rule) within twelve hours of scheduled competition. The 12 Hour Rule preserves the ability to treat with acceptable therapeutic treatments, many of which are not allowed under FEI Rules. Are there other substances currently being allowed that will be impacted by the proposed 12 Hour Rule? Aside from ketoprofen, the administration of methocarbamol will move from six hours to twelve hours. Its muscle relaxation properties will be maintained at twelve hours, but the sedation effect will be eliminated.

15 | P a g e

What are the three exceptions to the 12 Hour Rule? What is the rationale for these carve outs? Upon review by the Veterinary Committee, three specific circumstances were identified where the use of an injection could be therapeutic for conditions that did not adversely affect the health or wellbeing of a horse to compete. These exceptions were only determined to be appropriate at least six hours prior to competing; injections of any sort inside of six hours were considered to be inappropriate. The three exceptions are as follows: 1. The use of fluids to hydrate a horse secondary to adverse weather conditions, transport, etc. The minimum amount to be infused would be 10 liters of polyionic fluids. 2. The use of IV antibiotics to treat infections. Many skin infections are unresponsive to oral antibiotics, and can be better managed through IV treatment. These type of infections are not issues of orthopedic disease or lameness, and dont adversely affect the fitness of a horse to compete. 3. The use of dexamethasone to treat allergic reactions involving hives. While this condition does not adversely affect the fitness of a horse to compete, the intent is to provide resolution of clinical signs, and to alleviate discomfort to the horse.

16 | P a g e

CATOSTROPHIC PROTOCOL What is the rationale for consideration of creating a USEF Tip Line? In recent months, the USEF has met separately with the FEI, the NFL, the Thoroughbred Racing and Protective Bureau, and the American Kennel Club to better understand what procedures have been developed by similar organizations for monitoring issues of concern within the sports they regulate. We have learned that each of these organizations has some form of Integrity Unit, a communications network available for exhibitors, trainers, and participants to report issues of concern or abuse. Taking aspects from each organizations approach, the USEF can be guided to create its own program. With consideration given to the number and the broad landscape of USEF licensed competitions, current thinking is to establish a hotline reporting to an independent agency. This independent agency would be empowered, if so directed by the USEF President, CEO, and General Counsel, to investigate or corroborate reports, then, if appropriate, referred back to the USEF. If a collapse is reported can the horse still compete? Upon examination by appropriate responsible parties, if a horse that has collapsed appears to be fit for competition, then the horse may compete. The Collapse Rule is not a rule that prohibits the collapse of a horse; instead it requires that the collapse be reported to the Federation. If a horse collapses at a competition and a USEF Drugs and Medications tester is on the grounds is it possible to request or require that the horse be tested? Yes. What is the USEFs position with respect to the use of bio-security protocol for testing vets? The Equine Drugs and Medications Program directs and implements appropriate biosecurity measures for testing personnel. How many horse deaths were reported in 2012? Sixteen horse deaths were reported in 2012.

17 | P a g e

November 27, 2013

Prohibited Practice Rule Changes, Board of Directors Restructure, and Western Dressage all Receive Yes Votes at USEF Mid-Year Meeting
From the USEF Communications Department Prohibited Practices A new category of rules referred to as Prohibited Practices has been introduced to the USEF Rule Book which will take effect December 1, 2013. The first rule to be adopted in this category is commonly referred to as the "12 Hour Rule." It was introduced in March of 2013 by the USEF Veterinary Committee and following extensive feedback from USEF Technical Committees, Working Groups, and from attendees at USEF Town Hall Meetings held in Florida in March, and via interactive webcast in June, the USEF Board of Directors at their mid-year meeting approved the proposal which is printed in its entirety here: GR 414 Prohibited Practices 1. No injectable substances may be administered to any horse or pony within 12 hours prior to competing, with the following three exceptions subject to paragraph 2 below: a. Therapeutic fluids, which amount must consist of a minimum of 10L of polyionic fluids; and which must be used in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations and guidelines. The fluids must not be supplemented with concentrated electrolytes, such as magnesium. b. Antibiotics. Procaine penicillin G is prohibited under this exception. c. Dexamethasone. This is permitted only for the treatment of acute urticaria(hives). The dose must not exceed 0.5 mg per 100lb (5.0 mg for 1000lb horse) if administered more than 6 hours and less than 12 hours prior to entering the competition ring, and must not exceed 1.0 mg per 100lb (10.0 mg for 1000lb horse) within any 24-hour period.

2. The above exceptions are permitted only when (i) the substance is administered by a licensed veterinarian and no less than six hours prior to competing; and (ii) the "Trainer" as defined under General Rule 404 properly files, or causes to be properly filed, an Equine Drugs and Medications Report Form with the Steward/Technical Delegate or competition office representative within one hour after the administration of the substance or one hour after the Steward/Technical Delegate or competition office representative returns to duty if the administration occurs at a time outside competition hours. The Steward/Technical Delegate or competition office representative shall sign and record the time of receipt on the Equine Drugs and Medications Report Form. In summary, there are a few bullet points to remember about this rule change. No horses or ponies may be injected within twelve hours of competing. There are only three exceptions to this rule: therapeutic fluids, antibiotics, and Dexamethasone (for the treatment of hives). All excepted substances must be administered by a veterinarian and cannot be administered to a horse or pony within six hours of competing. There are three restricted medications that are affected by this change: Dexamethasone (Azium)* - maximum 24 hour dose has been decreased from 20mg/1000lb horse to 10mg/1000lb horse and must be administered in accordance with the new "12 Hour Rule" GR414. Ketoprofen (Ketofen) - maximum 24 hour dose 1.0 gram/1000lb horse remains the same, however it must NOT be administered within 12 hours prior to competition. Methocarbamol (Robaxin) - maximum 24 hour dose 5.0grams/1000lb horse remains the same, however must NOT be administered within 12 hours prior to competition. *Regarding dexamethasone, no administration should take place within the 12 hours prior to competing; however, one exception is for the treatment of hives for which an intravenous administration of 5mg dexamethasone may be permitted if the treatment is conducted by a veterinarian and a medication report form is filed. This administration must not take place within the 6 hours prior to competing CHANGES TO FEI EQUINE PROHIBITED SUBSTANCES LIST FOR 2014 The FEI Bureau has approved changes to the FEI Equine Prohibited Substances List proposed by the FEI List Group. The new List will become effective January 1, 2014. The changes are summarized here and below: Two new Controlled Medication substances have been added to the List for 2014: Metformin - a potent but legitimate oral anti-diabetic drug with a potential welfare risk; Levothyroxine - an exogenous thyroid hormone replacement that could enhance performance; Adrenocortico-trophic hormone (ACTH)is currently classified as a Banned Substance and will be moved to the Controlled Medication section of the 2014 List due to its therapeutic value in equine medicine.

Three previously unlisted substanceswill be added to the Banned Substances section of the 2014 List, as they are considered to have a potential for abuse, or to improve athletic performance: Ammonium Chloride injectable Gamma-Butyrolactone (GBL) Gamma-Hydroxybutyrate (GHB) The changes to the FEI Equine Prohibited Substances List are also accessible on the FEI Clean Sport webpage. The FEI Equine Prohibited Substances Database will be amended and the complete 2014 Equine Prohibited Substances List will be made available on the Clean Sport website prior to January 1, 2014. These changes have been noticed in accordance with FEI Rules requiring all changes to the List to be published 90 days in advance in order to allow National Federations, athletes and veterinarians sufficient time to familiarize themselves with the revised List prior to implementation. The new competition year begins December 1, 2013. The USEF encourages every exhibitor, trainer, coach, and owner to take time, prior to competing, to carefully review the "Guidelines for How Long Drugs Remain Detectable" which is included in the 2014 USEF Drugs & Medications Guidelines and can be accessed by clicking here or by contacting the USEF Drugs & Medication Program atMedequestrian@aol.com. You may also call the USEF Drugs & Medications office at 800-633-2472 to request a copy.

The vision of the United States Equestrian Federation is to provide leadership for equestrian sport in the United States of America by promoting the pursuit of excellence from the grassroots to the Olympic Games, based on a foundation of fair, safe competition and the welfare of its human and equine athletes.

May 29, 2013

Dear Committee Chair: As Im sure you are well aware, the USEF has embarked on a major horse welfare initiative undertaken as a result of several incidents which have occurred in the last couple of years. While horse welfare has always been one of the underpinnings of the Federations Mission Statement, the subject is more timely than ever given the issues that racing and other breed organizations outside the USEF are currently facing. It is not only appropriate, but essential, that we take a close look within our family to make sure we live up to our pledge. On June 3rd, the USEF will host a live Town Hall meeting that will be simulcast on the USEF Network. The purpose of the meeting will be to launch the initiative through two initial threads dealing with specific equine welfare aspects. A Catastrophic Incident Protocol that will eventually encompass a range of subjects from bio-security preparation to horse collapse will be discussed. A collapse rule has already been introduced to the USEF Executive Committee and will likely be acted upon early this summer. The balance of this protocol will be developed over the balance of the year. The second thread of the Town Hall meeting will introduce a new section of the rule book dealing with Prohibited Practices. As part of this discussion, another rule will be explained which would prohibit administering injections to horses within 12 hours of scheduled competition. This rule has also been circulated to the Executive Committee and will likely be acted upon this summer as well. Like the catastrophic incident protocol, the balance of the prohibited practices will be discussed and then implemented over the course of the next year or two. It is the topic of prohibited practices about which I write to you. I believe it is time to undertake a thorough review and begin the discussion of training and preparation practices for every discipline and breed within the USEF. From shoeing practices, tail carriage and alteration, to training practices including excessive lunging and over-flexion, I believe it is critical to put these and other practices on the table to begin the discussion. We also need to initiate conversation about competition culture. Has judging evolved to rewarding robotic behavior in the show ring? Are horses showing too much and too often in the quest for year-end points? It is imperative we begin this dialogue for ourselves before others begin it for us. With this as the background, Id like your Committee to perform a full assessment of current practices for your breed or discipline and answer the following questions:

1. From the committees perspective, are there any training or preparation practices in your breed or discipline that push the boundary of horse welfare? What are the obstacles faced in changing and correcting it/them? 2. Are we judging horses in competition in the correct manner? If not, why? How can it be changed? 3. What changes would your Committee recommend in order to construct a best practices approach for training and showing? 4. Will culture get in the way of change? If so, how would the Committee handle the situation? I am interested in receiving a written report from your Committee by August 1, 2013 regarding the questions discussed above, as well as any additional input you would like to provide about this important topic. I thank you in advance for your assistance. Very truly yours,

Chrystine J. Tauber President

The following committees have submitted responses to the questions posed by USEF President Chrystine Tauber in her letter to the Breed and Discipline Technical Committees: American Endurance Ride Conference American Saddlebred, Hackney, Roadster and Saddle Seat Equitation Committees Task Force Andalusian/Lusitano Committee Arabian Committee Carriage Pleasure Driving Committee Connemara Committee Dressage Technical Committee Driving Technical Committee Endurance Technical Committee Eventing Technical Committee Friesian Committee Jumper Committee Morgan Horse Committee National Hunter Committee National Show Horse Registry Paso Fino Committee Reining Committee Shetland Pony Committee Steward/Technical Delegate Committee Vaulting Technical Committee Welsh Committee Western Committee

Responses are currently under review of the Equine Welfare Task Force.

USEF

Status: Active

Proposed Rule Change/Bylaw Change

GR402 - DRAFT 1
Rule Number: Rule Change Type: Draft: EO Reason: GR402 Standard 1 Given the welfare initiative and advances in testing methods, it is the best interest of the sport and horse welfare to begin freezing blood samples.

From time to time rules are adopted which change the sequence of rule numbering. The rule reference used here is the rule number that appears in the current website version of the United States Equestrian Federation, Inc. Rulebook

Proposed Change:
GR402 Testing[CHAPTERGR4DrugsandMedications]add and renumber as necessary: GR402Testing 1.Horsesand/orponiescompetingataLicensedCompetitionaresubjecttoexaminationbyalicensedveterinarianwhomustbe appointedbytheAdministratoroftheEquineDrugsandMedicationsProgram.Saidappointedveterinarian,withtheapprovalofthe Administrator,mayappointatechniciantoperformcertaindutiesunderthisRule.Theexaminationmayincludephysical,urine,blood testsand/oranyothertestorprocedureatthediscretionofsaidveterinariannecessarytoeffectuatethepurposesofthisrule.Said veterinarianmayexamineanyorallhorsesand/orponiesinaclassorallclassesinacompetitionoranyhorsesand/orponiesentered inanyclass,whetherincompetitionornot,ifonthecompetitiongrounds,oranyhorseand/orponywithdrawnbyanyexhibitorwithin 24hourspriortoaclassforwhichithasbeenentered. 2.Whetherahorseand/orponyisincompetitionornot,refusaltosubmitthehorseand/orponyforexaminationortocooperatewith theveterinarianorhisagentsconstitutesaviolationandsubjectstheresponsiblepersontopenaltiesunderGR406. 3.TrainerswhoarenotabletoaccompanyFederationdrugtestingpersonnelandthehorseand/orponytothelocationwheresample collectionistotakeplace,toactaswitnesstothecollectionandsealingofbloodandurinesamples,andtosignthedrugcollection documentsintheappropriateplacesaswitness,mustappointanagenttodoso.Theabsenceofsuchawitnessshallconstitutea waiverofanyobjectiontotheidentificationofthehorseand/orponytestedandthemannerofcollectionandsealingofthesamples. 4.Uponthecollectionofasufficientnumberoftubesofbloodfromthehorseorpony,thetubesshallbedividedintotwogroups.One groupshallbelabeledandidentifiedasBloodSampleAandtheotherasBloodSampleB,andtheyshallbesealedaccordingly.Upon thecollectionofasufficientvolumeofurinefromthehorseorpony,aportionofthesampleshallbepouredintoasecondurinesample container.OnecontainershallbelabeledandidentifiedasUrineSampleAandtheotherasUrineSampleB,andtheyshallbesealed accordingly.Theseproceduresshallbeperformedwhetherornotthetrainerorhis/herappointedwitnessispresentasprovidedforin Section3above.

5.Intheeventreasonableattemptsatsamplecollectionsfromthehorseorponydonotprovideasufficientnumberoftubesofblood
orasufficientvolumeofurinetobedivided,labeled,andidentifiedasSamplesAandB,asdeterminedbythetestingveterinarian and/ortechnician,thesample(s)obtained(ifobtained)shallbelabeledandidentifiedasSample(s)Aonly,anditshallberecordedin therecordsoftheEquineDrugsandMedicationsProgramthatthecorrespondingSample(s)Bdoes(do)notexist,inwhicheventthe obtainedSample(s)shallbesubjecttotesting. 6.Anactionmaybecommencedundertheserulesatanytimewithineight(8)yearsfromthedatetheallegedviolation occurred.Inordertoconstituteaviolationundertheserules,thesubstancedetectedmusthavebeenforbiddenatthetime thesamplewascollected.

Proponent: Officers

Sonja Keating

Staff

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

559-13

Page 1 of 3

USEF

Status: Active
Staff

Proposed Rule Change/Bylaw Change

GR402 DRAFT 1 Sonja Keating

Contact: Email: USEF#
skeating@usef.org

Date Received: 10/29/2013

Intent of Proposal:

The intent is to provide a limitations period for bringing an action based on a frozen sample.
Proposed Effective Date: Immediately Upon Notification Linked Rule Changes:
GR406 (560-13), GR412 (561-13)

Committee/Organization American Saddlebred

Draft: Action-Date 1:Recommend Disapproval - 11/14/2013

Draft 1 : It was the consensus that they feel this should go standard to allow committees to thoroughly discuss and take into consideration all aspects of the ramifications of retesting eight years out--with an eye toward horse welfare yet taking into consideration returning prize money, children's titles at major events, owners that may no longer be active in the sport, horses that have been sold etc.
1:Recommend Disapproval - 11/15/2013

Arabian

Connemara

Draft 1 : too long - recommend two years

1:Recommend Approval - 11/15/2013 1:Recommend Disapproval - 11/18/2013

Equine Drugs & Medications

National Hunter Roadster

Draft 1 : the committee agrees in principle but feels that more discussion is necessary before the rule is adopted.
1:Recommend Approval - 11/11/2013 1:No Action

Draft 1 : The committee would like this to go standard to allow more time for discussion. They are concerned about holding frozen samples for eight years. They feel this will bring up many legal issues upon the sale of a horse and could affect the sale of horses. It will be difficult to get someone to give back prize money which could be very large amounts eight years later. They feel this proposal will negatively impact all breeds. This to applies to all linked rules.
1:Recommend Approval - 11/15/2013 1:No Action - 11/14/2013

Welsh Western Committee

Draft 1 : The feel that on the international level there might be a plausible explanation for an eight year window and they understand the need to be consistent internationally. However, for the weekend horse show trainer this time period is unreasonable, impractical and unfair. If an individual gets notice of violation within the eight year time period, how are they to reasonably prepare a defense. At that point recollections have faded, witnesses have been lost, and defendants may no longer be in the industry. This applies to all linked rule changes.

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

559-13

Page 2 of 3

USEF

Status: Active

Proposed Rule Change/Bylaw Change

GR402 - DRAFT 1
Other Comments:
11.18.13 Ex Comm - referred to Annual Meeting

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

559-13

Page 3 of 3

USEF

Status: Active

Proposed Rule Change/Bylaw Change

GR406 - DRAFT 1
Rule Number: Rule Change Type: Draft: EO Reason: GR406 Standard 1 Given the welfare initiative and advances in testing methods, it is the best interest of the sport and horse welfare to begin freezing blood samples.

From time to time rules are adopted which change the sequence of rule numbering. The rule reference used here is the rule number that appears in the current website version of the United States Equestrian Federation, Inc. Rulebook

Proposed Change:
GR406 Results, Confirmatory Analysis, and Retest[CHAPTERGR4DrugsandMedications]change to read: GR406Results,ConfirmatoryAnalysis,andRetest 1.BloodandurinesampleslabeledandidentifiedasSamplesAshallbesubjectedtochemicalanalysisbytheFederationDrugTesting LaboratoryorbyalaboratorywithwhichtheFederationhascontractedforitsservices.Bloodandurinesampleslabeledandidentified asSamplesBshallbestoredsecurely,unopened,attheFederationDrugTestingLaboratory,tobeusedintheeventthatofa confirmatoryanalysis,orintheeventofafutureanalysisshallberequired. 2.IntheeventthechemicalanalysisofBloodorUrineSampleAisnegative,i.e.,noforbiddensubstanceoranymetaboliteoranalogue thereofisfoundtobepresentinthesample,thecorrespondingBloodorUrineSampleBshallbedestroyedbythelaboratorymaybe frozenandmaintained,attheFederationEquineDrugTestingandResearchLaboratory,forpossiblefuturechemical analysis. 3.IntheeventthechemicalanalysisofBloodorUrineSampleAispositive,i.e.,aforbiddensubstanceoranymetaboliteoranalogue thereofisfoundtobepresentinthesample,thisshallbeprimafacieevidencethattheforbiddensubstancewasadministeredinsome mannertosaidhorseorpony,whetherintentionallyorunintentionally,orotherwisewascausedtobepresentinthetissues,bodyfluids orexcretaofthehorseorponyatthecompetition,whetherintentionallyorunintentionally,suchthatthetrainer(s)deemedresponsible andaccountableforitsconditionis(are)liableundertheprovisionsofGR404. 4.IntheeventthechemicalanalysisofBloodorUrineSampleAispositive,andupontheissuanceofNoticesofChargetopersons deemedresponsibleandaccountableundertherules,apersonchargedwhorequestsaconfirmatoryanalysisofthecorresponding BloodorUrineSampleBmustmaketherequestinwritingtoCounseloftheEquineDrugsandMedicationsCommittee,anditmustbe receivedwithin15daysofthedateoftheNoticeofCharge. 5.TheconfirmatoryanalysisofthecorrespondingBloodorUrineSampleBshallbeperformedbyadrugtestinglaboratorythatmust bemutuallyagreeduponbythepersonchargedwhorequeststheconfirmatoryanalysisandCounseloftheEquineDrugsand MedicationsCommittee,whichlaboratorymusthavedemonstratedproficiencyinperformingthenecessaryconfirmatoryanalysis, providedthecorrespondingBloodorUrineSampleBexistsandisofsufficientvolumetopermitaconfirmatoryanalysis.Intheevent thedrugtestinglaboratorythatanalyzedSampleAistheonlylaboratorythathasdemonstratedproficiencyinperformingthenecessary confirmatoryanalysis,asdeterminedbyCounseloftheEquineDrugsandMedicationsCommittee,thislaboratoryshallbetheonly laboratorytowhichCounseloftheEquineDrugsandMedicationsCommitteeshallagreetoperformtheconfirmatoryanalysisofthe correspondingSampleB.Uponthecompletionoftheconfirmatoryanalysis,thelaboratoryperformingtheconfirmatoryanalysisshall forwarditsfindingsandsupportingdatatoallparties. 6.Intheeventnoagreementisreachedastoalaboratoryasrequiredinsection5above,andthepersonchargedwhorequeststhe confirmatoryanalysisdoesnotrevokehis/herrequest,theconfirmatoryanalysisofthecorrespondingBloodorUrineSampleBshallbe performedbytheFederationDrugTestingLaboratory,orbyalaboratorywithwhichTheFederationhascontractedforitsservices,as determinedbyCounseloftheEquineDrugsandMedicationsCommittee,whichlaboratoryshallforwarditsfindingsandsupporting datatoallparties.BoththeresultsoftheanalysisofSampleA(andsupportingdata)andtheresultsoftheconfirmatoryanalysisofthe correspondingSampleB,ifany(andsupportingdata,ifany),shallbeadmissibleasevidenceinanyhearingorproceedingpertaining tothismatter. 7.IntheeventthecorrespondingBloodorUrineSampleBdoesnotexist,orisofinsufficientvolumetopermitaconfirmatoryanalysis, asdeterminedbyCounseloftheEquineDrugsandMedicationsCommittee,andthereexistsaremainingaliquotofBloodorUrine SampleAwhichisofsufficientvolumetopermitaretest,asdeterminedbyCounseloftheEquineDrugsandMedicationsCommittee,a personchargedwhorequeststheretestofBloodorUrineSampleAmustmaketherequestinwritingtoCounseloftheEquineDrugs andMedicationsCommittee,anditmustbereceivedwithin7daysofthedeterminationthatthecorrespondingBloodorUrineSample Bdoesnotexistorisofinsufficientvolumetopermitaconfirmatoryanalysis. 8.Anyrequestedre-testoftheremainingaliquotofBloodorUrineSampleA,provideditisofsufficientvolumetopermitaretest,shall beperformedbytheFederationDrugTestingLaboratory,orbyalaboratorywithwhichTheFederationhascontractedforitsservices, asdeterminedbyCounseloftheEquineDrugsandMedicationsCommittee. 9.TheretestoftheremainingaliquotofBloodorUrineSampleAmaybewitnessedbyaWitnessingAnalystappointedbytheperson chargedwhorequestssuchanalysisatthesametimeastheretestisrequested.TheWitnessingAnalystmustbeaqualifiedanalytical chemistemployedbyanequinedrugtestinglaboratory.IfnoWitnessingAnalystisappointedbythepersonrequestingtheretest,orif

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

560-13

Page 1 of 3

USEF

Status: Active

Proposed Rule Change/Bylaw Change

chemistemployedbyanequinedrugtestinglaboratory.IfnoWitnessingAnalystisappointedbythepersonrequestingtheretest,orif theWitnessingAnalystisunavailablewithinareasonabletime,therequestedretestoftheremainingaliquotofBloodorUrineSample AshallproceedwithouttheWitnessingAnalyst. 10.IntheeventtheWitnessingAnalystappointedbythepersonrequestingtheretestoftheremainingaliquotofBloodorUrineSample Aissatisfiedthatthepositiveresultiscorrect,CounseloftheEquineDrugsandMedicationsCommitteemustbeinformedimmediately byfaxwithconfirmationbyletter. 11.IntheeventtheWitnessingAnalystisnotsatisfiedthattheresultoftheretestoftheremainingaliquotofBloodorUrineSampleAis correct,CounseloftheEquineDrugsandMedicationsCommitteemustbeinformedimmediatelybyfaxfollowedbyawrittenreport settingforththebasisfortheWitnessingAnalystsopinion.Copiesoftheoriginalandsubsequentresultsandsupportinganalyticaldata mustbesubmittedtotheFederationHearingCommitteeaspartofthehearingrecordinthecase,forresolutionbyitofanyandall issuesregardingtheoriginalanalysisofBloodorUrineSampleAandtheretestoftheremainingaliquotofBloodorUrineSampleA. 12.ByrequestingtheconfirmatoryanalysisofthecorrespondingBloodorUrineSampleB,ortheretestoftheremainingaliquotof BloodorUrineSampleA,orbyrequestingthattheretestbewitnessedbyaWitnessingAnalyst,thepersonchargedwhomakessuch request(s)agreestoandmustpayanyandallfees,costsandexpensesrelatingtotheconfirmatoryanalysisortheretest,whetheritis performedbyamutuallyagreeduponlaboratory,bytheFederationDrugTestingLaboratory,orbyalaboratorywithwhichThe Federationhascontractedforitsservices,uponthepresentationaninvoicebyCounseloftheEquineDrugsandMedications Committee,andanyandallfees,costs,andexpensesrelatingtotheWitnessingAnalyst. 13.Inthecaseofahorseand/orponycompetingundertheTherapeuticSubstanceProvisions,ifthechemicalanalysisofthesample takenfromsuchhorseand/orponyindicatesthepresenceofaforbiddensubstanceoranymetaboliteoranaloguethereofandallthe requirementsofGR411havebeenfullycompliedwith,theinformationcontainedinsaidEquineDrugsandMedicationsReportForm andanyotherrelevantevidencewillbeconsideredbytheFederationindeterminingwhetheraruleviolationwascommittedbyany person(s)responsibleoraccountablefortheconditionofthehorseand/orponyundertheprovisionsofthisrule. 14.Whenapositivereportisreceivedfromthechemistidentifyingaforbiddensubstance,oranymetaboliteoranaloguethereof,a hearingwillbeheldinaccordancewithChapter6,exceptasmayotherwisebeprovidedbyGR412.Notrainer,responsibleor accountablefortheconditionofsaidhorseand/orpony,willbesuspended,orahorseand/orponybarredfromcompetition,untilafter anadministrativepenaltyhasbeenassessedoraftertheconclusionofahearingandawrittenrulingthereonhasbeenmade. 15.Theownerorownersofahorseand/orponyfoundtocontainaforbiddensubstanceoranymetaboliteoranaloguethereofmaybe requiredtoforfeitallprizemoney,sweepstakes,addedmoneyandanytrophies,ribbonsandpointswonatsaidcompetitionbysaid horseand/orponyandthesamewillberedistributedaccordingly.Theownermustpayafeeof$300tosaidcompetition.Points accumulatedtowardHorseoftheYearAwardspriortosaidcompetitionmaybenullifiedandredistributedatthediscretionofthe HearingCommittee.If,priortooratahearing,theFederationasthechargingparty,determinesthatoneormorepersons,not previouslychargedasatrainershouldalsobechargedasatrainer,then,uponapplicationbytheFederation,theHearingCommittee may,initsdiscretion,continueoradjournthehearing,inwholeorinpart,topermitaneworamendedchargetobeissued(unlessthe person(s)tobechargedwaivenotice). 16.Atrainerofahorseand/orponyfoundtocontainsuchforbiddensubstanceoranymetaboliteoranaloguethereofissubjectto whateverpenaltyisassessedbytheHearingCommittee,exceptforadministrativepenaltiesissuedbytheChairmanoftheEquine DrugsandMedicationsCommitteeandaccepted,asprovidedbyGR412.Saidtrainermaybefinedandmaybesuspendedfromall participationinLicensedCompetitionsforaperiodofoneyearforthefirstoffense,andforalongerperiodforasecondorlateroffense, saidsuspensiontobeservedatanytimeatthediscretionoftheHearingCommittee. Thehorseand/orponymaybesuspendedforanyperiodoftimespecifiedbytheHearingCommittee.Indetermininganappropriate penaltyundertheserules,theHearingCommitteemaytakeintoaccountsuchfactorsandcircumstancesasitmaydeemrelevant, includingbutnotlimitedto a.thepharmacologyoftheforbiddensubstance, b.thecredibilityandgoodfaithofthepersonchargedorofotherwitnesses, c.penaltiesdeterminedinsimilarcases,and d.pastviolationsofanyFederationrules(orthelackthereof). e.relianceupontheprofessionalabilityoradviceofaveterinarianwhoisalicensedgraduateofanaccreditedveterinaryschooland whoisingoodstandinginthestateinwhichhe/sheprimarilypractices. 17.IftheHearingCommitteedeterminesthatanyviolationorattemptedviolationofthisRulewaswillfuland/orintentional,thereshall notbeanylimittotheperiodofasuspension,andtheHearingCommitteemayimposeotherandsignificantlygreaterpenaltiesthanit wouldhaveintheabsenceofsuchadetermination. 18.Anactionmaybecommencedundertheserulesatanytimewithineight(8)yearsfromthedatetheallegedviolation occurred.Inordertoconstituteaviolationundertheserules,thesubstancedetectedmusthavebeenforbiddenatthetime thesamplewascollected.

GR406 - DRAFT 1

Proponent: Officers

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

560-13

Page 2 of 3

USEF

Status: Active

Proposed Rule Change/Bylaw Change

GR406 - DRAFT 1
Contact: Email:
Sonja Keating skeating@usef.org

USEF# Staff Date Received: 10/29/2013

Intent of Proposal:

Intent is to notify participants that USEF may freeze blood samples collected at competitions and test later and bring an action within an 8 year period of time
Proposed Effective Date: Immediately Upon Notification Linked Rule Changes:
GR402 (559-13), GR412 (561-13)

Committee/Organization Arabian

Draft: Action-Date 1:No Action

Connemara

Draft 1 : too long - would recommend two years

1:Recommend Approval - 11/15/2013 1:No Action

Equine Drugs & Medications

National Hunter Welsh

Draft 1 : the committee agrees in principle but feels that more discussion is necessary before the rule is adopted.
1:Recommend Approval - 11/11/2013 1:Recommend Approval - 11/15/2013

Other Comments:
11.18.13 Ex Comm - referred to Annual Meeting

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

560-13

Page 3 of 3

Freezing Samples Fact Sheet Proposed changes to GR 402 and GR 406 have been submitted by the USEF Officers for discussion in January at the 2014 Annual Meeting. The intent of these changes is to notify participants at USEF Licensed Competitions that the Federation may freeze blood samples collected at competitions and test later and bring action within an eight year period of time. By way of background, the current rules do not prohibit freezing of blood samples, in fact, blood samples have been frozen in the past and the Federation has been successful in obtaining favorable results from the USEF Hearing Committee for drug violations based on positive findings from the frozen samples. Since that time, however, other sport anti-doping regulations have aligned and promulgated rules that more clearly and expressly reflect the parameters surrounding the freezing of samples. Notably, WADA, USADA, and the FEI now have regulations that expressly permit freezing samples for future testing. Importantly though, those rules clearly state that the retention time is eight years - as is the prosecution period. The rule changes adopted by the USEF Executive Committee mirror these and also make clear that the frozen sample is subject to testing for the detection of substances forbidden or prohibited at the time that the sample was collected. Please note that these rules do not mandate that all samples are frozen. Instead it is discretionary. The purpose of freezing is, in part, to detect substances forbidden today but not necessarily detectable for one reason or another. The USEF may be able to detect at a future date because either a new or better test is developed or the technology or acquisition of equipment enables such detection. The USEF Officers proposed this as a best practice for an organization that manages a sport antidoping program; in the interest of horse welfare; as a way to strengthen the Drugs & Medication Program; and to protect the integrity of the Federation and the sport.

Freezing Samples Q&A Q: Isn't the USEF rule stricter than the FEI rule in that USEF's rule allows retesting samples for all forbidden substances when the FEI only retests for "banned" substances? A: No the USEF rule is not stricter. The FEI just changed the rules regarding retesting samples for controlled medications. Article 6.5 of their rules provides that the sample may be retested for controlled medications and may lead to a violation if the sample was taken at the Olympic, Paralympic, or World Equestrian Games. Q: Does the proposal permit USEF to freeze samples from any competition? A: Yes, the rule is written to permit the collection and freezing of blood samples at any USEF licensed competition. Q: How would an offender of the rule be sanctioned years later for a violation? A: The matter would flow through the regulatory process in the same manner it does currently. The matter would fall under the jurisdiction of the Hearing Committee for a determination of appropriate sanctions. The facts of the case would be significant to determine appropriate sanctions. In all cases it would not make sense to seek return of prize money for example. The sanctions would be determined on a case by case basis. Q: How will USEF determine when to retest samples? A: USEF may retest samples in circumstances where more cutting edge equipment is acquired, new methods for detecting substances are developed, or when circumstances warrant due to intelligent information. USEF will not however retest samples due to a phone call or tip that is not corroborated by credible information. When samples are retested, the samples retained from the entire event will be retested. Q: Eight years is too long to retain samples. Most of USEF is not international, why should we follow the international rule? A: The eight year period for retention was chosen because it is the time period that has been established by other anti-doping programs and deemed to be legally defensible in the USA.

USEF

Status: Active

Proposed Rule Change/Bylaw Change

GR414.3 - DRAFT 1
Rule Number: Rule Change Type: Draft: GR414.3 Standard 1

From time to time rules are adopted which change the sequence of rule numbering. The rule reference used here is the rule number that appears in the current website version of the United States Equestrian Federation, Inc. Rulebook

Proposed Change:
GR414 Prohibited Practices [CHAPTER ] add and renumber as necessary: 3.Nohorsemaybeinjectedwithanysubstance,forbiddenorpermitted,intoanintra-synovialspace(joint,tendonsheath,or bursa)withinthe5daysprecedingcompetition.

Proponent: Veterinary

Contact: Email:

Stephen Schumacher sschumacher@usef.org

USEF# Staff Date Received: 8/29/2013

Intent of Proposal:

This is to adopt an appropriate time following intra-synovial injections (joint, tendon sheath, or bursa) to allow adequate evaluation of the horses response to treatment prior to competition.
Proposed Effective Date: 12/1/2014 Linked Rule Changes: Committee/Organization Administration & Finance Working Group American Saddlebred Andalusian/Lusitano Arabian Carriage Pleasure Driving Draft: Action-Date 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:Recommend Disapproval - 11/14/2013

Connemara Dressage Driving Endurance

Draft 1 : not enforceable

1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action

Monday, November 18, 2013

437-13

Page 1 of 3

USEF

Status: Active

Proposed Rule Change/Bylaw Change

GR414.3 - DRAFT 1
English Pleasure Equine Drugs & Medications Eventing FEI Affiliates Working Group Friesian 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:Recommend Disapproval - 11/07/2013

Hackney

Draft 1 : Obstructs preventative medicine

1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:Recommend Disapproval - 11/06/2013

High Performance Working Group Jumper Morgan

Draft 1 : Not enforceable

1:No Action 1:No Action 1:Recommend Disapproval - 10/29/2013

National Affiliates Working Group National Hunter National Show Horse

NSH Paso Fino Reining Roadster

Draft 1 : Cannot enforce

1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:Recommend Disapproval - 11/05/2013

Saddle Seat Eq Safety Shetland

Draft 1 : Draft 1: Would approve if permitted substances were allowed.

1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action

US Saddle Seat World Cup USA Reining USHJA Vaulting Welsh

Monday, November 18, 2013

437-13

Page 2 of 3

USEF

Status: Active

Proposed Rule Change/Bylaw Change

GR414.3 - DRAFT 1
Western Committee 1:Recommend Disapproval - 11/05/2013

Western Dressage

Draft 1 : Draft 1: Not enforceable; not in best interest of horse.

1:No Action

Monday, November 18, 2013

437-13

Page 3 of 3

Shockwave Fact Sheet Currently, most racing jurisdictions prohibit the use of shockwave within the five to seven days preceding competition. The FEI prohibits the use of shockwave within the FEI compound and within the five days preceding competition. While shockwave is a valuable tool to be used in the treatment of soft tissue injuries in horses, it can also misused if solely used to provide analgesia close to competition and/or without a specific diagnosis. While there are questions regarding the enforceability of these rules, there is current research focused on the detection of biological markers that would serve as definitive evidence of recent shockwave therapy. The end goal is for there to be a blood test that would be used to detect treatment with shockwave therapy having been applied within days prior to competing. Concerns in racing focus around the analgesic effect provided by extracorporeal shockwave therapy, and its potential to place a horse at risk for catastrophic failure and further injury or death. The USEF Veterinary Committee has recommended a three-day withdrawal from competition following extracorporeal shockwave therapy. The deviation from a five- to seven-day prohibition as implemented by other governing bodies is due to the acknowledgement by the USEF Veterinary Committee that horses competing at USEF competitions are at less risk for catastrophic failure. However, the Veterinary Committee agrees that no horse should be exposed to shockwave and then compete within three days based on current science and expert opinion.

USEF

Status: Active

Proposed Rule Change/Bylaw Change

GR414.4 - DRAFT 1
Rule Number: Rule Change Type: Draft: GR414.4 Standard 1

From time to time rules are adopted which change the sequence of rule numbering. The rule reference used here is the rule number that appears in the current website version of the United States Equestrian Federation, Inc. Rulebook

Proposed Change:
GR414 Prohibited Practices [CHAPTER GR4] add and renumber as necessary: 4.NohorsemaybesubjectedtoShockwaveTherapywithinthe3daysprecedingcompetition.Ifsedationisrequiredfor ShockwaveTherapy,onlysedationperformedbyalicensedveterinarianandadministeredatthesametimeastheShockwave TherapywillbeconsideredtherapeuticandGR411willapply.

Proponent: Veterinary

Contact: Email:

Stephen Schumacher sschumacher@usef.org

USEF# Staff Date Received: 8/29/2013

Intent of Proposal:

The intent is to provide an appropriate withdrawal time from a therapeutic modality that has documented analgesic effects. Currently, most racing jurisdictions and FEI have a withdrawal time for this modality.
Proposed Effective Date: 12/1/2014 Linked Rule Changes: Committee/Organization Active Athletes High Performance Active Athletes High Performance - Dressage Active Athletes High Performance - Driving Active Athletes High Performance - Endurance Active Athletes High Performance - Eventing Active Athletes High Performance - Jumping Active Athletes High Performance - Reining Active Athletes High Performance - Vaulting American Saddlebred Draft: Action-Date 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action

Thursday, November 21, 2013

439-13

Page 1 of 3

USEF

Status: Active

Proposed Rule Change/Bylaw Change

GR414.4 - DRAFT 1
Andalusian/Lusitano Arabian Athletes Advisory Breeders Breeds Carriage Pleasure Driving 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:Recommend Disapproval - 11/14/2013

Draft 1 : not enforceable. obstructs preventative medicine.

1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:Recommend Disapproval - 11/07/2013

Competition Management Competition Secretaries Connemara Disciplines Dressage Driving Eligible Athletes Endurance English Pleasure Eventing Friesian

Hackney HP - Vaulting Jumper

Draft 1 : Cannot enforce

1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:Recommend Disapproval - 10/30/2013 1:No Action

Licensed Officials Morgan National Affiliates Working Group

National Hunter

Draft 1 : Can this be enforced?

1:No Action 1:Recommend Disapproval - 11/05/2013 439-13 Page 2 of 3

National Show Horse Thursday, November 21, 2013

USEF

Status: Active

Proposed Rule Change/Bylaw Change

GR414.4 - DRAFT 1

NSH Owners ParaEquestrian Paso Fino PFHA Reining Roadster Saddle Seat Eq

Draft 1 : Cannot enforce

1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action - 11/05/2013 1:Recommend Disapproval - 11/18/2013

Safety Shetland

Draft 1 : Not enforceable; not in best interest of horse.

1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:No Action 1:Recommend Disapproval - 11/05/2013

Show Jumping Computer List Show Jumping Eligible Athletes US Saddle Seat World Cup USA Reining USHJA Vaulting Welsh Western Committee

Draft 1 : Draft 1: Not enforceable; not in best interest of horse.

1:No Action

Youth Sports Committee

Thursday, November 21, 2013

439-13

Page 3 of 3

Intra-articular Injections Fact Sheet In December 2011 the American Association of Equine Practitioners (AAEP) published the Clinical Guidelines for the Treatment of Non-Racing Performance Horses. The document is frequently referred to as the AAEP White Paper and was intended to provide AAEP members and the equine industry an understanding of appropriate care that should be considered when treating the competition sport horse subset of the equine population. The USEF Veterinary Committee has been working with USEF Drugs & Medications Committee to apply insight and recommendations from the document to the USEF rules, all while recognizing that there are differences between the various breeds and disciplines and their respective requirements. One of several topics explored in the AAEP White Paper is the use of intra-articular injections. AAEP recognizes that the judicious use of intra-articular medications with a valid veterinarianpatient relationship is appropriate treatment and can benefit a horses health and wellbeing. AAEP defines this relationship to be a clinical or lameness examination with appropriate diagnostic tests prior to initiation of a therapeutic plan. Clinicians treating performance horses in the competitive environment are encouraged to develop treatment regimens, particularly with reference to the use of IA corticosteroids, which allow adequate evaluation of the horses response to treatment prior to competition. There is a growing concern in the field of equine practice that intra-articular injections are less frequently used to treat a specific diagnosis and are more commonly used as a type of maintenance therapy. Frequently Medication Report Forms are received in the Equine Drugs and Medications office documenting intra-articular injections of yearlings within 24-48 hours of competing in in-hand classes. These injections are not being performed as part of a specific treatment plan for a specific diagnosis. Additionally, the timing does not provide for a sufficient interval to allow evaluation of the response to treatment prior to returning to competition. Intra-articular injections are intended to be therapeutic, but are not necessarily benign procedures. Not all substances being injected are considered to be protective of the articular cartilage and some corticosteroids are even thought to be damaging to articular cartilage. Due to these concerns, racing authorities around the world have begun to address the issue of intra-articular injections. In May of this year, the International Federation of Horseracing Authorities (IFHA) introduced the concept of International Standstill Time (IST). Following any therapy given to a horse in training, a sufficient period, which for some specific medications can be defined as an International Standstill Time (IST), should elapse prior to racing such that the therapy is not detrimental to its welfare. The IFHA Horse Welfare Committee recommends the standstill approach to control the use of corticosteroids in equine joints for both medication control and welfare assurance. The proposed IST for corticosteroids used in an intra-articular injection was a 14 day period of time between injection and a return to racing. In December of 2012, the Racing Medication and Testing Consortium (RMTC) adopted rules prohibiting intra-articular use of corticosteroids within seven days of a race.

The recommendations were developed during an RMTC hosted Corticosteroid Experts Conference in Anaheim, California, on November 30. The meeting brought together qualified individuals with professional expertise in key areas with the goal of providing a comprehensive plan for regulating corticosteroid use in horse racing to protect equine health and welfare. Participants included analytical chemists, veterinary pharmacologists, veterinary surgeons, racing regulatory veterinarians, and practicing racetrack veterinarians. These recommendations were based on recently completed work funded in- part by RMTC and conducted at the University of Pennsylvania, University of California-Davis Kenneth L. Maddy Laboratory and HFL Laboratory-Kentucky and other corticosteroid research conducted both in the U.S. and abroad. RMTC Press Release 12/20/12 In many European nations the recommendation for a withdrawal from racing following and intraarticular injection stands at 28 days. The USEF Veterinary Committee decided upon a five-day withdrawal recognizing that horses competing in USEF competitions represent a different population of equine athletes as compared to horses involved in racing.