This week, we’re debuting a new series about proposed rule changes. Rule changes go through a long process wherein members, committees, and councils review and revise them before they are passed or rejected. (You can learn more about that process in this article from Equestrian Magazine.) Right now, rule change proposals that will be considered at the 2026 mid-year meeting of the US Equestrian Board of Directors are available for member comment. The rule change proposals will enter their first blackout period on Feb. 15 to allow the proponents to consider making revisions in response to existing feedback and will return for member comment again on March 6.
This series is aimed at helping members understand why rule changes have been proposed, why they’re constructed the way they are and how they may change as they go through the process.
One of the most talked-about General Rule change proposals in our system right now is Tracking 027-25, which would change parts of Chapter 4 in the General Rules.
Currently, the rule change draft suggests adding language to GR406 which would impose an immediate, provisional 60-day suspension for trainer, owner, horse, and other persons responsible in the event of an initial finding for one in a handful of the most serious substances regulated by the US Equestrian Drugs and Medications program. This would include selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs), barbiturates, specific anticonvulsants, anabolic steroids, long-acting tranquilizers or psychotropics, and Category IV substances. These drugs have no place in a competing horse and findings for them are extremely rare (there were none in 2025).
The goal of this rule proposal language is to address member frustrations that someone could theoretically dose a horse with a dangerous substance and continue competing while the case worked its way through the investigation and regulatory process. The purpose of including the horse in a 60-day provisional suspension is twofold: it protects the horse who may need time to recover, or finish metabolizing a serious substance and acts punitively against anyone who may be inclined to keep showing the horse otherwise. The purpose of including responsible parties beyond the trainer is to broaden the scope of consequences for the use of these most serious substances.
The biggest criticism with this proposed change is that a provisional suspension would be issued before the B sample could be tested in a case like this. Statistically, it’s extremely unlikely that B sample test results conflict with the primary test sample because of the level of testing technology used today. Still, many committees reviewing this rule felt this element led to a “guilty until proven innocent” impression, which is not what the Federation wants members to feel when it comes to our investigations or resolutions process.
That was a common refrain in the Rule Change Forum held at the recent 2026 US Equestrian Annual Meeting, too.
Other commenters have raised concerns about the rule’s ability to issue sanctions against horse owners. The member feedback we’ve received in town halls and other forums has been divided on this. Some people feel that this provisional suspension would be unfair to owners who are not hands-on in the care, custody, and control of their horses and who rely on professional trainers to make decisions about what medications are given to horses. Others feel that there are owners who apply pressure to trainers to push the envelope on drug rules, and those people should face consequences if they’ve done so. Still others have commented that such a rule could work to change the culture for owners, encouraging them to have more direct involvement with their horses’ care and to scrutinize veterinary bills.
Ultimately, the most vocal parties in the Rule Change Forum indicated they would be comfortable with a rule change that issued the 60-day provisional suspension to the trainer and horse, but not necessarily to the owner or rider.
From here, this and other rule change proposals will enter a blackout period next month, so the US Equestrian Legal Department can review existing feedback and update current rule change drafts, if necessary. You will see rule change proposals back on this page on March 6 with any updates in place. Want to add your voice to the conversation? You can! Jump to Tracking #027-25 on this page and click the Comment button to send us your thoughts.