―
In the Covid-19 times of high stress and high emotion many horse owners find themselves facing the extra challenge of not being able to visit, ride or spend any time with their horses that are on lockdown at boarding establishments.
 |
| A note from Editor at Catskill Horse magazine, Nikki Alvin-Smith |
While the owners of the horse farms have to work hard to keep all the chores done and offer nightly video check-ins with the horses under their care, custody and control, horse owners wait nervously at home for the opportunity to get back to spending real time with their pets.
There is a flood of well-intentioned folks out there on social media, setting up helpful and sometimes not so helpful pages and resources to help their clients navigate this new normal in horse keeping. Unfortunately some of the information is their 'interpretation' of the guidelines offered in their respective State. Occasionally in their earnest quest to provide more 'resourced at the source' information, they will take emails and letters from veterinarians and various government officials speaking 'off the record' in private emails in an effort to offer guidance and post them in the public domain.
The fair use (copyright) of such materials can create a wave of interest as anxious horse owners share the information around to try and fathom just what their boarding horse farm can and can't do, and to try and pressure horse farm owners to allow perhaps more 'visiting' than is strictly allowed. This can be devastating to a boarding farm owner who is already dealing with a lot of extra work and financial stress with missing lesson revenue and horses sitting idle but still costing hay and grain and bedding, and who really does want to reopen their facilities but is torn between what is truly allowed and legal and what is 'interpretation'. Another complication is that if a barn allows folks to visit the facility, even if following CDC hygiene guidelines, their insurance company may not cover the liability if the activity is deemed illegal.
Unfortunately among non-professional publishers, distribution of materials without the permission of the author into a public domain is fairly common. The author is left with a difficult situation. It is important that if you are responsible for disseminating information that you post responsibly. Know that it will be picked up and distributed by others once it is out there.
In an effort to help spread useful information from government sources for horse and boarding barn owners dealing with these unprecedented issues Catskill Horse magazine recently shared information that was published in the public domain that was issued directly by a vet from the NYS Agricultural Market ( position and release source according to the person that posted the original letter). While our social media sharing of the post reached a relatively small audience of approximately just 33% of our monthly unique magazine views that total over 75,000, the 25,000 plus hits it received certainly guaranteed a higher viewership than perhaps the vet in question intended. We had validated the identity/author of the source before sharing and the content aligned with other sources we had researched and as it was in the public domain it was 'fair use' under copyright laws to republish it.
However, when the vet noticed the posting on a Sunday afternoon, she contacted all persons that had commented on the post to contact her directly for more information stating that her original letter was causing confusion. Later she asked us to remove her address from the bottom of the post (apparently it was her home mailing address) and substitute her email address with a request for folks to contact her. Of course Catskill Horse magazine complied. We had no wish to cause her difficulties for issuing advice that was not official from the government for which she worked. Later still she thought better of it altogether and requested the post be removed.
The rules of copyright were explained, as we asked the author if the information was accurate to which we received no response. In an effort to help her with the dilemma created by the person responsible for making the post public in the first place (a horse farm owner in Clinton Corners, NY who we shall not name or shame, as probably it was just their earnest intention to help other horse farm owners but for this purpose we will call Fanny), we directed the author to the various public forums where it had appeared and suggested she ask them to remove the original post so that any other posts would be automatically removed also, and we agreed on Sunday night that we would do the same as soon as the original post was removed.
When 9am Monday morning rolled around and our staff member that handles social media checked on the original public postings, it had been removed or/and amended and consequently our post was amended also.
The post apparently caused a lot of drama, all caused by one person, 'Fanny', trying to do a good thing but working outside of the confines of the professional publishing world, with no knowledge that her actions would create such a situation for the vet, however unintended, by making that original letter public and available for others like Catskill Horse to pick up and share.
It is important that if you set out to provide information in this crisis to help people deal better with the situation that you cite, 'on the record,' and accurate information.For my part, I suggested to the vet in question, that as this topic was evidently a 'hot topic,' that the Department of Agriculture needed to issue a clearer directive with better clarity for horse barn owners and equine owners. She advised that this is currently being worked on and that new guidelines should be forthcoming. In the realm of what is considered 'essential' and what is considered 'low risk business' the intent of the order and the availabe waivers applicable need to be addressed more succinctly and there is much confusion as the guidelines issued are so ambiguous.
Unfortunately, although Catskill Horse had published material from the public domain in good faith, the an episode of cyber bullying ensued from 'Fanny' that published the original post while we were in discussion with the author, and were trying to figure out the conflicting requests that were being made and follow the timeline and back check the resource. 'Fanny' deemed it necessary to make an attack on certain volunteer staff and contributors of the magazine through finding their private Facebook accounts and sending them private message, tried to shame the same volunteer parties on social media and even attempted to bully staff, including myself on a personal level with veiled threats and fictitious nasty comments trying to smear other businesses that I work for.
An amazing example of how one person can cause much drama by making a poor decision, and then not accepting any responsibility for their actions or making any apologies.
These are stressful times and emotions can run high but please consider the consequences of what you post online and how you choose to conduct yourself.
The Covid-19 pandemic is a crisis we must all endure. Choose to be kind.
 |
