Ferrand response to dover cease and desist ltr 10 15 13

Robert Ferrand Saddle Industry Insider 2995 Woodside Rd. Woodside, CA 94062

Oct. 15, 2013

PertriFlaherty John Sullivan P.O. Box 1318 Concord, NH 03302

Re: The issue is Failure to Disclose Material Facts – Specifically “Lack of Accuracy” Dear Mr. Sullivan,

Let me repeat: THE ISSUE is Dover Saddlery’s legal responsibility of disclosure of “material facts”.

NO THREAT HAS EVER BEEN MADE TO GO TO THE SEC, BECAUSE OF A LACK OF A CONTRACT, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED.

This letter and the attached supporting 25 exhibits will clearly demonstrate that you have been misinformed by your client, Dover Saddlery. I take these accusations very seriously. I will dispel any doubt; anyone may have, by taking every accusation, one by one, and disclosing the facts with 25 supporting exhibits.

So we are clear, my motivation, as it has been for 20 years, is the welfare of the horses, paramount, and in turn the consumers who own them, as well as investors, so that there is a level playing field, for all parties.

Your client has “deep pockets”, so you are totally misstating my position in order to threaten me with a lawsuit that can bury me in legal costs. The truth is your client does not want to comply with the Laws of Physics and Physiology or the Uniform Commercial Code of the United States or the legal requirements of being a Publicly Traded Company (DOVR).

More importantly, Dover’s CEO, is trying to use a Cease and Desist letter to suppress the truth. This Cease and Desist letter, in and of itself, is evidence that I have something to say, that Dover Saddlery does not want anyone to hear. What does Dover Saddlery have to hide? Is there not a “requirement” for transparency?

On 6/5/2013 I wrote Dover’s CEO Mr. Steve Day, “Just as Dover Saddlery has just delayed filing Form 10-Q with the SEC because, "It is management's opinion that with this method there was not sufficient accuracy in the recording of the gift card liability account", Dover should also find that it is “management’s opinion that with DOVER'S CURRENT method OF SADDLE FITTING, there (IS) not sufficient accuracy” and this fact should also be disclosed to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Mr. Day responded to me on 6/7/2013 stating “I will not be contacting the SEC with what I regard as your theories on saddle fitting. Dover Saddlery presents the empirically developed methodology which has hundreds of years of history behind it. I do not want to make enemies of one another.” (Exhibit B).

I wrote back to Mr. Day on 6/9/2013, “… just so there is not any confusion, and I do not misrepresent anybody can you explain what ‘the empirically developed methodology which has hundreds of years of history behind it’ actually means?”

“In my 20 plus years of research, I have never come across such a citation, and I have been looking. If you have that information, I would really like to know what it is for my own education.” (Exhibit B).

With no response from Mr. Day, I followed up with him on 6/28/2013 with this simple question, “….. I have downloaded all the literature I think is available on the Dover Saddlery website relating to saddle fit, and I do not see anything that is an "empirically developed methodology which has hundreds of years of history behind it."

So that there is no confusion here, can you please explain what I am missing?

I also do not seek enemies; I only seek the truth, and a more practical method to fit saddles.” (Exhibit B).

Instead of asking “What are the saddle defects that you have found and what can we do to correct the problem?”, I received a “Cease and Desist” letter from you. Why? 1

1 of 236

The simple answer is: the CEO does not really have a credible answer, that can go on record.

In Dover’s S‐1, to the SEC, Dover reported that 52% of revenue was generated by saddles.

With such a significant amount of Dover’s profits being generated from selling saddles, and if the company does not know how to fit its flagship product – that “lack of accuracy” would be very significant. The following 25 Exhibits will “scientifically” prove that Dover does not know how to fit the saddles it sells……and this a “material fact” that should have been and should currently be disclosed to the SEC, investors, shareholders and consumers.

More importantly, Mr. Day does not want me to blow‐the‐whistle and disclose “material facts” which are Dover Saddlery’s Achilles’ Heel. Mr. Day knows, that I am an insider. Hence, the “Cease and Desist” letter is an attempt to suppress the TRUTH and to intimidate me into silence. That was ill advised, as this 236 page, fully documented with 24 exhibits, letter proves.

“The laws and rules that govern the securities industry in the United States derive from a simple and straightforward concept: all investors, whether large institutions or private individuals, should have access to certain basic facts about an investment prior to buying it, and so long as they hold it. To achieve this, the SEC requires public companies to disclose meaningful financial and other information to the public. This provides a common pool of knowledge for all investors to use to judge for themselves whether to buy, sell, or hold a particular security. Only through the steady flow of timely, comprehensive, and accurate information can people make sound investment decisions.”

SEC “What we Do”. http://www.sec.gov/about/whatwedo.shtml

I do agree with your statement, “Nor is Dover compelled to accept your opinion and perspective as controlling”. (Exhibit A) However, as a Harvard graduate, Mr. Day is compelled to accept Mathematics, Geometry, Physics and Physiology as controlling. Arguing against science, in this day and age, is a fool’s errand.

Let me be clear, my position, is totally based on Mathematics, Geometry, Physics and Physiology and I dare say the “Scientific Method”. Please Read “Scientific Saddle Fitting 1998” – (Exhibit Q). You will quickly see that I really do have the “scientific” data to support my claims.

This is my business, I invent “accurate” saddle‐measurement instruments that acquire that Objective Numerical data. What market differentiates my technology, from Dover’s Saddle Fitting Guidelines, (Exhibit U).

Is……‘VALIDATION’. By providing a feed‐back loop with mathematics and two measurement instruments permits the “Scientific Method” to be employed. (Exhibit J) The Scientific Method is how “theories” become facts, in this day and age.

This fully documented letter is in response to your fraudulent allegations and is an issue of Speaking Truth to Power. Your Fraudulent Claims are pointless because they would be dismissed at Summary Judgment for the following reasons.

First, let me refute your claim that I: “have continued to harass Dover and threatened to instigate some sort of regulatory investigation by providing false and misleading information to the SEC regarding Dover.” (Exhibit A) This statement is FALSE. All I did was ask a simple question to Mr. Day and in Dover’s Chat‐room,….. “How does Dover Saddlery fit saddles it sells?” (Exhibit B) This is not harassment, in any way, shape or form.

I HAVE NEVER MADE ANY INFERENCE BETWEEN THE SEC AND/OR ANY DOVER CONTRACT OR LACK THEREOF.

There has never been any inferred and expressed extortion. There has never been any inference of any relationship between any Dover Contract, or lack of a Dover Contract and any threat of Disclosure to be made by me to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The only suggested I made was that Dover Saddlery had a legal responsibility to Disclose “material facts” with respect to Dover Saddlery’s “lack of accuracy”. (Exhibit B) Specifically, I stated,

2

2 of 236

1. “I will assume, that you (MEANING DOVER) will be making the proper disclosures to the Securities and Exchange Commission” 2. “Please do provide me a copy of the SEC Disclosures you (MEANING DOVER) will file” .

At no point have I have threatened “I” would do anything, other than “add a “Measured” perspective” to Dover’s disclosure that Dover will make,….. not me. This is certainly allowable since Dover is a Public company.

Your allegation is FALSE. E‐MAIL TO Steve Day, FROM Robert Ferrand 6/5/2013 (Exhibit B)

“Therefore, now that you have personally witnessed the direct evidence that gravity is a factor in the fit of a saddle, and because Dover's current method of fitting a saddle lacks sufficient accuracy, as there are no numerical values, I will assume, that you will be making the proper disclosures to the Securities and Exchange Commission and your shareholders and your customers with respect to Dover's current methods of selling saddles.

Just as Dover Saddlery has just delayed filing Form 10-Q with the SEC because, "It is management's opinion that with this method there was not sufficient accuracy in the recording of the gift card liability account". Dover should also find that it is “management’s opinion that with DOVER'S CURRENT method OF SADDLE FITTING, there (IS) not sufficient accuracy” and this fact should also be disclosed to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Dover's latest press release stated, "Our investigation determined that the Company had material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting in accounting for gift card liabilities as of December 31, 2011 and 2012." An additional Dover internal investigation should reveal that there is a significantly greater "material weakness" in how Dover Saddlery sells saddles.

Please do provide me a copy of the SEC Disclosures you will file, so that I may add a "Measured" Perspective, so that the Securities and Exchange Commission can determine the appropriate response.”

Now, there is, also, a very practical reason your extortion allegation is FALSE. I could not have threatened to disclose Dover Saddlery’s defective products to the SEC, because I already did, eight years ago. This explains why I wanted Steve Day to make the disclosure, HIMSELF, ….and not me.

In 2005, prior to Dover Saddlery going public, I raised many of these very same product defect issues with the SEC. (Exhibit G) At that time, this disclosure was under the Bush Administration, and before Sarbanes/Oxley Act and Dodd/Frank Act. The current Obama Administration may look at these SAME issues very differently.

Additionally, I raised the same issues with Dover Saddlery’s investment bank, “WR Hambrecht+CO”, that took Dover Public. I contacted Mr. Hambrecht, himself, as he was one of my lead investors in my specialty hospital bed company. Dover S‐1 – Kiss of Death(Exhibit H) For your information, Bill Hambrecht, personally, signed off on my Golden Parachute, when I retired as Chairman of the Board of American Life Support Technology. I invested my “Golden Parachute” in this saddle fitting technology. It is an ironic twist, that this very saddle fitting technology is what has allowed me to prove the defects in the saddles, and was a Silicon Valley spin off, from this Hambrecht and Quist investment.

Now, the fact that I had already alerted both the SEC and Mr. Hambrecht with respect to Dover’s Saddlery Product liability issues, stresses the importance of “DISCLOSURE” of material facts. Had you known that I had already disclosed some of the “product defects” to the SEC, you would not have made this fraudulent allegation

3

3 of 236

that I threatened to turn Dover in to the SEC” if I did not have a contract. Someone should have told you about my 2005 SEC disclosure. I did disclose this same information to WR Hambrecht, Dover’s investment bank, before Dover’s Initial Public Offering. There is no way for me to know what Bill Hambrecht disclosed to Steve Day, or vis a versa, however, had you known this information you would not have made this FRAUDULENT allegation about extortion.

So, let us put the allegations of “extortion” to bed. Once you read the 2005 “Disclosure to the SEC” (Exhibit G) and Dover S‐1 Kiss of Death” (Exhibit H), you will see Dover Saddlery has much bigger problems on its hands, right now, than me.

Because…the failure to disclose this “lack of accuracy” issue, now, has a documented “History” of WITHHOLDING MATERIAL FACTS that were known by Steven Day, CEO prior to the IPO, and not disclosed in the Dover S‐1. After almost a decade, no “disclosure” and no attempt to correct the “deficiency” has been taken, as well.

Second Point, your statement: “Thereafter, Dover made the determination that it would not pursue a business relationship with you or your company” (Exhibit A) is totally FALSE. In fact, the opposite is True. It is “I”, who choose not to pursue a business relationship with Dover Saddlery. I believed that Dover Saddlery was knowingly selling defective products and I did not want my technology to be party to the deception. This situation has actually occurred TWICE – once in 2004 and again, almost a decade later, most recently, in 2013.

The REAL issue is that Dover Saddlery’s CEO, Steven Day was “on notice” that there were product defects, since 2004, before Dover went public, because I personally alerted Mr. Day, in the Cover Letter, (Exhibit D) when I provide Mr. Day, the then new, Saddletech Gauge Mk II, I stated that “less than 10% of saddles fit“.

I went on to say, “The bad news is that it proves that what the “saddle fitting experts” have been recommending for years is incorrect, because they have overlooked the effect of gravity”. (Exhibit D) That is a clear statement that there is something wrong. It was Mr. Day’s responsibility, at that point, to research the facts.

Such research requires “objective” measurement methods and standards. Mr. Day has chosen, up until now, to ignore Mathematics, Geometry, Physics and Physiology.

RE: SIGNIFICANT MARKET OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYING 3-D MEASUREMENT - (Exhibit D)

“While I do appreciate that many equestrians assume that baling wire and cardboard have worked for years, unfortunately, without numerical values it is impossible for baling wire to be an accurate method of measurement. Accuracy does matter when humanely fitting a saddle to a horse. In the 12 years that I have been computer pressure mapping saddles, I have documented that less than 10% of saddles fit, with the majority of equestrians and saddle fitters using baling wire. However, this fact reveals that there is a market opportunity to sell new saddles that DO FIT.

In past few years, the introduction of the “Saddletech Orthotic” has provided Saddletech a significant research platform, because we can accurately make saddle shapes within an accuracy of a few degrees.

This capability not only proves that the Saddletech Gauge and Saddletech Calibration Formula are accurate, it validates the Saddletech Evidence Based Saddle Fitting Method by employing Saddletech Pressure Mapping to create a “Feed Back Loop”, which permits the use of the “Scientific Method” for validation.

4

4 of 236

Good News/Bad News. The good news is we have the most accurate method to fit a saddle. The bad news is that it proves that what the “saddle fitting experts” have been recommending for years is incorrect, because they have overlooked the effect of gravity. The reason for this error is their so called “fitting” techniques are so crude they cannot even detect that gravity is a factor, when common sense should have alerted them.

While the animal’s welfare should be the concern, what really makes this a critical issue is an array of federal and state consumer protection laws that require manufacturers and vendors to provide products without defects. Now, if the saddle does not fit – the product is defective for the use intended, no way around it. The fact is: the way saddles are currently sold, without any 3‐D measurement, is a negligent misrepresentation lawsuit looking for a place to happen. It is only a matter of time, before an equestrian / plaintiff’s attorney connects the dots, to protect the horses.”

In point of fact, during a conference call 7/30/2004 Mr. Day, is actually the person that alerted me that there were wide spread product defects in Dover Saddles. Up until that moment, I was unaware of the extent.

Steve Day said, “We have a big problem even getting the panels to be even. One is bigger than the other. There are not any saddle companies that can put out a consistent product.” (Exhibit E) Note: I did not tell Mr. Day,…..

Steve Day told me.

What is more significant is that Mr. Day failed to disclose this Product Defect information in the SEC Dover Saddlery S‐1, despite the fact he was aware that there was a “saddle fitting issue” and stated so in an e‐mail to me, 8/2/2004 before Dover went public (Exhibit E)

To be clear, Steve Day is the one that told me that Dover’s Saddles are defective.

RE: TRANSCRIPT OF CONFERENCE CALL - May 11, 2004 (Exhibit E)

During this conference call, 7/30/2004 8:30PST Mr. Day said, "My concern is that this could be a double edged sword. We might be setting a standard that we cannot meet. We have a big problem even getting the panels to be even. One is bigger than the other. There are not any saddle companies that can put out a consistent product.”

I was so shocked by his blatant admission of product defects, that I immediately transcribed the conversation verbatim, within 30 minutes, because I immediately understood this was a clear admission of Fraud.

If required, I will sign an affidavit as to the accuracy of this transcription. You can read that the transcription is in such detail that it is credible evidence that the conversation occurred, as documented.

Even more shocking, further in the conversation, after I explained that a saddle makers wife (Monica) walked out of one of my computer saddle fitting demonstrations, when the computer revealed that their saddle did not fit, Mr. Day said, “Monica is the best business person in the group. She knows that their saddles are all over the place, so the last thing anyone wants is some instrument that is going to show that".

Contrary to your allegation in the Cease in Desist letter, “It exercised its informed business judgment not to use or market your saddle fitting technology. Dover has no duty to purchase your technology, simply because you have offered it.” (Exhibit A) In point fact, Dover did want to buy my products, first in 2004, not as you allege.

5

5 of 236

E-Mail to Robert Ferrand from Stephen Day – Received 8/02/04 - (Exhibit E) Bob, Sorry I had to get off the phone on Friday in order to accommodate my next meeting.

I wanted to recap Dover's position so there is no misunderstanding.

1

We are willing to buy one gauge and start sending it out to customers to judge their reaction this must be an outright purchase with no additional fee's.

2

I would like to see another demo of the computer system, after all it was 8 years ago that I last saw the system live. I think it would be very informative to do this at Tad Coffin's factory in Virginia. Dover would be willing to buy the plane ticket to ease the cost of this demo.

I do not want to seem too arbitrary but, these are the only business resources that I want to commit to saddle marketing and the surrounding saddle fitting issues at this time.

Regards, Steve Stephen L. Day President Dover Saddlery

IMPORTANT TO NOTE: Mr. Day was willing to buy a Saddletech Gauge and pay for a plane ticket to Virginia and it is “I” who did not respond for nine years because I saw Mr. Days admission of Fraud as dangerous for my measurement technology to be associated with this deception. In those 9 years, Mr. Day did not contact me, either, dispite he was aware of the “saddle fitting issue” and that I had the solution.

Now, I do appreciate that Mr. Day can deny making these statements, however that begs the question.

The real question is….. are the statements true? If “There are not any saddle companies that can put out a consistent product.”, then this fact should have been disclosed in the original SEC S‐1, to current shareholders, potential investors, and the saddle consumers and allow those individuals to draw their own conclusions.

Mr. Sullivan, you can see why I keep repeating ‐ The issue is Disclosure of Material Facts – because, if the saddles are all over the place and you have no three dimensional measurement – there is no way to know which saddle fits which horse. This is a material fact, if your flagship products are selling saddles and are the significant source of profits.

So the question arises, why did I approach Steve almost a decade later? The first important reason is: I had an entirely “new and improved” measurement instrument: the Saddletech Gauge FDXX, that fits into a Fedex box. Additionally, as I said in my cover letter to Steve Day, 4/17/2012: (Exhibit F) “Dear Steve, Since we last spoke on 7/30/2004, there have been many changes in the world.

1. Dover Saddlery has gone public and needs a “Strategic Market Differentiator” to increase shareholder value.

2. SmartPak, Valley Vet, and everybody and their kid brother competes with Dover in ecommerce saddle distribution.

3. Fedex has purchased Kinko’s Office, creating a worldwide “local distribution” network for Saddletech Gauges. When you reviewed the “Prototype” Saddletech Gauge MK II and Saddletech Database and there were still challenges.”

6

6 of 236

Th he focus of m my value proposition to Dover Saddlery was SIMPLE: (Exhibit F)

ory three‐dim mensionally, D Dover will ow wn the sadd dle “If Dover measures their ssaddle invento market,, by default. B By being ablee to provide th he customer aa MATHEMATTICAL PROBAB BILITY OF FIT T, the sadd dle purchase iis no longer a a leap of faith h. More imporrtantly, if the saddle does n not fit, the customeer immediatelly knows the “mathematiccal” amount oof the discreppancy.

y UPSELL a Sa addletech Shiim Kit, or Tadd Coffin pad o or any other p pad Dovver can then iimmediately that solvves the probleem. Saddletecch can provid de Dover is aability to selll the saddle e that the custom mer wants wiith a “measu ured saddle fitting soluttion”. The criitical point is the customerr can get a better fit w with a Saddleteech Gauge, th han with balinng wire and ccardboard, wiithout a Sadd dle Fitter. Th This can allow Dover to incrrease market share with 1 00% Customeer Satisfaction n.”

Now, in 2012, I did appreciate thatt I was walking into the lionn’s den, but ssomeone had d to pin the beell on the caat. I thought tthat a decade e later, we might both have matured. I will admit thaat I did appro oach Steve with some trrepidation, be ecause of past experiencess, but the botttom line is: Steve hass a problem a and I have a ““new and improved” solu ution. That is a good start for a contracct, ho owever, as yo ou will quicklyy see, old dem mons surfaced.

I walked into these ne egotiations knowing that there were ddefective pro oducts. More importantly,, I actually sh howed some of those defe ects to Mr. Daay, at his own n barn on Decc.16, 2012. However, I also o had a comp prehensive so olution. There e is a Big diffe erence, this tiime. He has P Problem ‐ I haave a Solution.

Steven Day CEO is in Dover Jacket, t, I am in the saddlle and ddle interface presssure measuremeent the computer sad device (PROOF) iss in the center of tthe picture.

What is so siignificant abo out the follow wing series off computer interrface pressurre saddle sccans is these scans illusstrate the product defects. The fact thatt there is acttually a pictu ure (on the left) of Mr. Day, i n a Dover Jaccket, looking at the data aas the data was being acquirred, really m makes this “smoking gun”” evidence that Mr. Day waas “on noticee”, that theree really was a product defect issue. Th ere is also an hour lon ng video on n YouTube (private) docume nting this demonstration.. (Private Linkk Available upon n request)

below: the sccan shows If you look aat the “So So Fit” scan b relatively even bllue pressure being applieed to the horrse, with a 12 20 lbs rider m mounted in th he saddle. How wever, once I mounted intto the saddlee at 200 plus llbs., you can clearly see in n the “Does N NOT Fit” scan that the SAM ME SADDLE is “bridging”, m meaning that there is yello ow and red co olors in the sccan, indicating higher presssure, in the range of 3‐4 P PSI. That is to say, the SAM ME SADDLE DO OES NOT FIT.

SAM ME DOVER SA ADDLE – SAME HORSE – DI FFERENT WIEEGHT RIDERS 7

7 of 236

Now the “Fits with ¾ Shim” scan and a 200 plus lbs. rider ‐ drives the point home, proving the point, that the animal’s back bends a little bit, under heavier riders. In other words, a saddle that fits the animal WITHOUT the rider, will not fit with heavier riders. Physics is “controlling”, regardless to what Mr. Day may wish to claim.

The above computer interface pressure scans proves that Gravity is a significant factor and Dover Saddlery saddle fitting guidelines (Exhibit U) are defective AND THE CEO KNOWS IT…because Mr. Day witnessed the acquisition of the data, himself, thus he was “on notice”.

This evidence of the effect of gravity, from the weight of the rider, is a serious issue for Dover, because Dover’s Saddle Fitting Guidelines states to the customer: “Press on the seat of the saddle with one hand, and run your other hand under the front of the panels. You want to feel even pressure under the saddle points; you don’t want the front of the panels to pinch the horse’s withers. Next run your hand under the entire panel along the back, on both sides, feeling for even pressure. Any unevenness in pressure that you feel would be felt by your horse as you ride. A common problem in saddle fitting is bridging.” (Exhibit U) The above guideline is to be performed without a rider in the saddle. At no point is the effect of gravity suggested, because you cannot run your hand under the saddle with a rider mounted. Dover Saddlery does not have any other suggestions on how to determine the saddle panel pressure under the saddle.

This is a critical issue because these same Saddle Fitting Guidelines state: “Saddle panels are supposed to distribute your weight evenly along your horse’s back when you ride.” (Exhibit U) If the saddle is supposed to distribute the weight ‐ evenly, with the weight of the rider, and Dover is suggesting to feel the saddle without the weight of the rider, there is a serious discrepancy. This is another “smoking gun” piece of evidence.

Further, your other statement in the “Cease and Desist” letter: “In addition, you falsely asserted that (i) Dover’s products are defective; and (ii) that Dover’s decision not to contract with you is somehow material information that should be disclosed to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and to Dover’s investors. You have no grounds to make these allegations.”. (Exhibit A) This statement is FALSE. Dover did want to make a contract with Saddletech, in 2004 and then again in 2013, not as you allege. email from Ferrand to Steven Day - May 20, 2013 (Exhibit B)

Now, addressing your comments, I did not react negatively. I do not understand how you can say, "your proposal was unrealistically high for the equestrian industry", since I did not provide a price.

I provided a 7 profit center spreadsheet. (Exhibit I) Spreadsheets by there nature can be modified as part of the process of negotiation. So no price was actually ever provided for any of the systems. There were only 7 potential income streams outlined for discussion only.

The Option Agreement (Exhibit K) specifically stated: "The intent of this document is to describe, for negotiation purposes only, certain principal terms."

As I remember the sequence, you said, that you were only interested in 5 computer systems, AT MY COST. You were not interested in the gauges, database or the shim kit.

So I did not provide a price.....since there was no incentive for me to make any money.

8

8 of 236

Therefore, I do not understand how you can say, "your proposal was unrealistically high for the equestrian industry" Your statement is false.

During these negotiations, in May 2013, Mr. Day, also, offered $20,000 for an “exclusive” license for the technology. Mr. Day even suggested a semi‐exclusive license, which made no sense to me, since either it is exclusive or it is not. Since I had suggested $1,000,000 for a 90 day option to discuss a contract, (Exhibit K) we were a bit far apart. However, in the light of current events….I think my offer was a deal. However, once I understood that Mr. Day was only interested in 5 computer systems, at cost, and was not interested in the gauge, shim or database, (which provides a comprehensive solution to the problem of the product defects in Dover’s Saddles), my old fears surfaced,….something is terribly wrong.

The computer system is really a “validation” methodology – a very sophisticated “Go, No‐Go” gauge. The real work‐horse that solves the problem is the gauge, which measures both the horse and saddle, and calculates the effect of gravity on the shape of the animals back. These measurements permit the data to be entered into a database, to calculate the “probability of fit”, mathematically. This calculation is calibrated and validated by the computer interface pressure measurement device. (Exhibit J) The fact that Mr. Day, did not have any interest in the gauge was a red flag, to me, that something was wrong. Since I was well aware of Dover’s product defects, I saw the possibility that Dover Saddlery could use my computer saddle measurement technology to “Market” Dover as “high‐tech” using the Saddletech name to gain credibility. My concern was, and is, that Dover could possibly manipulate the computer data to give the consumer the “illusion” that Dover can fit saddles, which in fact is not true.

How do I know this? Because, the gauge is required to make the computer saddle fitting system successful.

You have to know the shape of the animal as well as the saddle in order to figure out which saddle is even close to be able to get a good scan. Without three dimensional measurement the computer interface pressure measurement device is just a sophisticated “Go‐No Go” device and will reveal that about 10% of the saddles fit. As Mr. Day said, “the last thing anyone wants is some instrument that is going to show that". (Exhibit E) A measurement company has to take responsibility for the “quality” of it’s data. Allowing, Dover to possibly corrupt the data and mislead the customer would be disastrous for Saddletech’s technology. So “I”, personally never did actually provide any “price” for any of the systems. (Exhibit B) Your allegation is wrong.

IMPORTANT TO NOTE: Mr. Day was willing to pay a low ball price for an “Exclusive” for the technology and to buy FIVE COMPUTER SADDLE FITTING SYSTEMS AT MY COST. I AM THE ONE THAT DID NOT PURSUE THE CONTRACT BECAUSE I FLASHED BACK TO THE FRAUD ISSUES AND I THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE DANGEROUS TO GET INVOLVED WITH A PUBLIC COMPANY THAT IS ENGAGING IN FRAUD. MY PRODUCTS COULD EASILY BE USED TO ACTUALLY GIVE THAT FRAUD CREDIBILITY, WHICH WOULD BE FRAUDULENT IN ITS OWN RIGHT.

I DO NOT WANT A DOVER CONTRACT

Now, to be clear, I have no interest to license my technology to Dover Saddlery, for a simple reason. It would be in Dover’s interest to possibly sabotage any measurement technology in general, to avoid, disclosure of the product defects and responsibility for UCC‐2‐315 Implied Warrant for Fitness: “If the seller has reason to know the buyer’s particular requirements and that the buyer is relying upon the seller’s recommendation, an implied warranty will arise that the goods will be suitable for the buyer’s particular purposes.”

9

9 of 236

Dover knows what the saddle is used for and the buyer is relying on the seller’s recommendation, because Dover provides, Prefect Fit “Saddle Fitting Guidelines” (Exhibit U) and chat room support that says, “we have people here just for that to help” (Exhibit B)

One does not need a court to rule whether saddle makers and distributors have a legal responsibility under UCC‐2‐315, because that ruling has already been made by Judge Wopner, in Animal Court. While this was a televised “arbitration”, the judge does state the case well. It would be difficult to refute the obvious. I told Steve about this ruling in 2004 during our conference call. (Exhibit E) I then provided the actual Youtube link to Steve on 5/29/12. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ux_PWV9H98M Mr. Day has been on notice about this saddle fitting issue for quite some time, and should have disclosed this UCC legal requirement to investors.

To make matters even worse, Steve Day was, further, put on notice with respect to the specific issue in 2004. Because I told him, point blank. (Exhibit E)

DAY: “Well, Dover has such a brand name I am concerned we could be setting a standard that we cannot meet.

FERRAND: Wait a minute, there are legal issues here. UCC 2-315, if the vendor knows the uses for which the product will be used and the consumer is relying on the vendor to make a choice, there is an implied warrantee for fitness.”

DAY: I know but I really do not think that is a problem.

FERRAND: “if everyone gives a refund if the saddle does not fit, you are right, but that is not how it works.” “Steve I am doing you a favor here, the issue is not whether you are going to get sued, but having a business model that is in compliance with consumer protection. Now if you take the position that you do not want to test, they will ask why not, if you say you tested and know the saddles do not fit…Steve you have been through enough litigation….you get my drift” DAY: Maybe in California, since you can get sued for hot coffee.

Steve repeated “we could be setting a standard that we cannot meet”. This is the wrong attitude, the standard is accuracy. If you cannot meet the standard you should not claim that you can. So, my position, as it has been for a long time, (Please Read “Don’t Shoot the Messenger” 2000 ‐ (Exhibit L) the litigation potential for Dover Saddlery is significant. While my technology could solve the problem, if my technology is not used ethically, I could find myself in the middle of the litigation, through no fault of my own. This is why I have been very nervous about negotiating a contract with Dover Saddlery. To stress how paranoid I was about Dover, please note, I offered an “Option” (Exhibit K) to negotiate a term sheet. However, I did not offer prices or a contract, that is paranoia.

Therefore, the issue is not as you stated: “In an attempt to coerce Dover into revisiting its decision”. Since, I believe that Dover is knowingly selling defective products and also failing to disclose material facts, I have no interest to enter into a contract with Dover. I believe that there are shareholders and consumers that have standing to sue Dover, for good reason. Dover really has no defense, because the CEO was “on notice”. I do not want my technology to be involved in any those lawsuits, for any reason. Your “an attempt to coerce” statement is false.

Your additional allegation in Cease and Desist letter, that ““In addition, you falsely asserted that (i) Dover’s products are defective. (Exhibit A) This statement is FALSE. Dover’s saddles are defective. ….and here is the laundry list.

First, What is a Product Defect?

“Consumable, commercially produced and distributed good that is (1) unfit for its intended use, (2) dangerous or harmful for normal use, (3) does not carry adequate instructions for its use, or (4) is inherently dangerous due to defective design, assembly, or manufacture.”

10

10 of 236

If you compare choosing saddles to choosing shoes, it becomes readily apparent why product defects are so pervasive. With shoes, there is the “Brannik device” that will measure your foot and permit you to get close to the correct shoe size. Then, all you need to do is try on the shoe. But there is a big difference, your foot has a very sophisticated computer interface pressure measurement device in your foot…the central nervous system. If the shoe does not fit, you feel it, and can tell someone actually where is does not fit, and you do not have to buy the shoe. This is a simple solution that encourages shoe manufactures to set standards, and they have.

This situation does not apply to buying a saddle. With saddles, there is a “Brannik device” that does exactly the same thing for saddles, it is called a “Saddletech gauge”. But, Dover Saddlery does not use such a three dimensional measurement instrument or even anything like it. In the absence of any real “objective” measurement, because the Horse cannot talk, there are really no way for the saddle customer to really know which saddle will fit their horse. So, Dover Saddlery does not have an incentive to solve the problem, because if the saddle does not fit, it cannot be returned if it is worn.

There is the problem in a nutshell, no way to measure horse, no way to measure saddle and no interface pressure measurement……and no accountability. If the customer were aware of the defects, the defects would have to be corrected or the saddle could not be sold. The saddle customer would not buy a saddle that does not fit – if they knew it did not fit. Hence, the importance of disclosure, the subject of this letter.

In fact, I do have grounds to make the allegations with respect to product defects in Dover Saddles.

The First Evidence is, because Steve Day, the CEO admitted there were defects to me.

1 "My concern is that this could be a double edged sword. We might be setting a standard that we cannot meet. We have a big problem even getting the panels to be even. One is bigger than the other. There are not any saddle companies that can put out a consistent product.” (Exhibit E) Sounds like an admission of a product defect to me.

2

“Monica is the best business person in the group. She knows that their saddles are all over the place, so the last thing anyone wants is some instrument that is going to show that". (Exhibit E) Sounds like an admission of a product defect to me and even worse, admitting that failing to disclose that defect is considered a “good business practice”.

Now here is the irrefutable laundry list of saddle defects: that should strike terror in your heart.

1. THE 800 LB. GORILLA ‐ TISSUE PHYSIOLOGY The 800 lb. Gorilla in the room that Dover Saddlery wants to ignore, because Tissue Physiology really is controlling, is the EFFECT OF PRESSURE ON BLOOD FLOW IN MAMALIAN TISSUE. This subject is actually my specialty, as you will see, below. I conducted extensive research on this very subject, before I invented the specialty hospital bed, for the prevention and treatment of bed‐sores. The, then, $500,000,000 market opportunity I discovered was, the existing bed manufacturers were making fraudulent marketing claims with respect to the pressure distribution of their beds, and the claims they were making with respect to physiology. I saw the opportunity to provide better technology, lower price, with greater efficacy, if I could VALIDATE my claims to FDA standards.

I invented the “Airlogic” high‐tech specialty hospital bed, that solved the bed‐sore problem, by applying Mathematics, Geometry, Physics and Physiology. Bill Hambrecht thought I was credible enough to invest $1,000,000 in the Series A round and another $5,000,000 in subsequent rounds, in a total investment north of $16,000,00. I began development of a computer interface pressure measurement device, in 1986, to prove the efficacy of the invention. Validation… if you will. I was setting a standard that I could meet.

11

11 of 236

I secured even more credibility for my specialty hospital bed, when Dr. Lars Vistnes, Chairman of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery at Stanford University agreed to be the Chairman of my advisory committee. The reason this is relevant is: Dr. Vistnes, was also the Lead Researcher for the paper, “An In‐Depth Look at Pressure Sores, using Monolith Silicon Pressure Sensors.” (Exhibit M) This research revealed that pressure was 3 to 5 times higher internally closer to bone than on the surface.

This is an important issue for horses, because the longissimus dorsi muscle, one of the major muscles used in locomotion, lies adjacent to the spinal column and is directly affected by saddle pressure.

This explains why I am more than an “avid horseman”.

While it is all fine and dandy that Dover claims to allow the customer to return the saddle if it does not fit, this is the flaw in the Dover Saddlery business model. The Dover claim is, “If you purchase a new saddle there is no time limit but it must be returned to us in the condition you received it in.” Unfortunately, Dover really does not have a method to determine if the saddle does fit, much less be able to objectively prove that any saddle fits.

Even worse the saddle customer does not have any measurements to be able to determine if the saddle does fit.

Here is the flaw in the business model. As a practical matter, Dover cannot accept saddles that are worn, because that would destroy the profit of selling saddles. The problem for Dover is TISSUE PHYSIOLOGY. Physically it takes time for the muscle tissue in the animal to be traumatized. It is a pressure over time equation – greater pressure will take a shorter time to traumatize the animal’s muscles. Shocking recent research, shown on the graph on the right, pushes the potential time for initial trauma of muscle tissue to less than one hour. (Exhibit P) I do appreciate we can get teams of “experts” to discuss “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin”. However, this new research, and a staggering large body of “peer review” physiological research, has staggering implications for saddle fitting, because it shortens the time of potential trauma to about the same length of time of an average horseback ride…which makes the issue of “accurate” saddle fitting even more important. To make matters worse, it does take even longer for that tissue trauma to become obvious to the saddle customer, trainer or veterinarian. In that time it takes for the trauma to become obvious, the saddle becomes worn and cannot be returned. That is the Catch 22, for Dover Saddlery.

Therein is legal problem: the saddle consumer is provided false information in Dover Saddle Fitting Guidelines, (Exhibit U) or chat room, (Exhibit B) or store clerk, on how to determine the fit of the saddle in order to make the sale……and by the time the customer determines the saddle does not fit…the saddle is worn and the customer is trapped. The fact that the CEO is concerned that “We might be setting a standard that we cannot meet” (Exhibit E) reveals that he is aware that something is wrong and wants to hide the TRUTH from the customer.

Mr. Day may wish to champion lowering standards on Dover’s behalf, however, the standard is either the saddle fits or it does not fit. Simple. (Please see United States Saddle Standard, that I sponsored in 1999. (Exhibit Z)) Dover cannot make a profit accepting saddles that are worn. This is a critical issue that is an Achilles’ heel for Dover Saddlery, and cannot be resolved without “accurate” measurement. This critical information should have been disclosed to investors, because it totally changes the valuation of the investment, because there are significant risks. Since Bill Hambrecht, Dover’s Investment Bank, invested in me to develop this pressure measurement technology, and was also put “on notice” that this information was relevant to the Dover IPO, this information should have been disclosed in the Dover Saddlery SEC S‐1, as well as, subsequently.

12

12 of 236

Now, here is the real nightmare. If the animal is injured sufficiently to throw the rider, and the rider is injured: these various product defects become a significant legacy legal liability. Even worse, there is no defense to this product liability, because the CEO was on notice. (Exhibit B,C,D,E,F,J,L), almost a decade ago. This is a legacy legal liability that Dover has accrued because Dover cannot prove that any of their saddles fit. Even worse, Dover Guidelines (Exhibit U) make claims that defy the laws of physics and physiology. This is a critical issue that is an Achilles heel, and should be disclosed to investors because it needs to be factored into the valuation of the company and let the investors draw their own conclusions.

So WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? Saddle fit is a multifaceted biomechanical problem in which many different factors converge, including: 1 The weight of the rider, affecting the 2 Tree of the saddle, affecting the 3 Panels of the saddle, affecting the 4 Saddle pad or (pads), affecting the 5 Capillaries in the skin of the horse, affecting the 6 Capillaries in the longissimus dorsi muscle, affecting the 7 Curvature of the spine of the horse, affecting the 8 Horse's range of motion, affecting the 9 Performance of the horse, affecting the 10 Behavior of the horse, affecting 11 Attitude and performance of the rider

MANAGEMENT OF PRESSURE SADDLE FIT IS THE MANAGEMENT OF PRESSURE. There is no way to eliminate the pressure under the saddle, nor is there any need to. There is only a need to understand what the horse's tissues need to remain healthy. With that knowledge, we can learn how to intelligently administer pressure to the horse's back.

As a practical matter, if we do not see any damage to the horse, we assume that the saddle fits, but is that an accurate assumption? A rider and tack usually represent 15% to 20% of the weight of the horse when standing, in motion the rider's downward force (moment) can represent 25% to 50% of the weight of the horse ‐which is a significant force applied perpendicularly to the spine of the animal. The question remains: what is the physiological effect of the saddle and rider on the horse?

PHYSIOLOGY To understand what might be a good saddle fit, we need to understand the "Issue" with saddle fit in the first place. There is a significant amount of scientific research applied directly to the problem of saddle fitting, are there has been extensive research on the effect of external pressure on blood flow in mammalian tissue. This research was undertaken because of the devastating problem of bedsores, which traumatize over 2,000,000 Americans every year. Bedsores are caused by the pressure from the weight of the patient cutting off the blood 3

flow to the skin. Bed sores and saddle sores have many similar physiological factors. Most of this tissue research has been applied to a variety of mammals, providing a scientific perspective of saddle fitting.

CAPILLARY CLOSING PRESSURE Skin and muscle tissue require a constant intermittent flow of 4

blood to remain healthy. In strenuous exercise the muscles require significantly more blood flow to maintain a healthy metabolism. This 5

exchange of oxygen and waste products occurs in the capillary bed.

13

13 of 236

The saddle fitting problems occur when the saddle causes continuous excessive pressure on the capillaries that exceeds the blood pressure and structural strength of those vessels and the capillary vessels collapse. This collapse leads to the deprivation of oxygen and nutrients brought by fresh blood and the removal of 7

waste products. CAPILLARY CLOSING PRESSURE IS THE CRITICAL ISSUE IN PREVENTING SADDLE‐RELATED TRAUMA AND IMPROVING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE HORSE'S MUSCLES UNDER SADDLE.

IT DOES NOT TAKE MUCH TO STOP THE SHOW The following experiment was made to determine the relationship of 133

external pressure on blood flow by using a radioactive isotope Xe. The amount of radioactivity was measured as external pressure was applied. One can observe that as external pressure increases the blood flow reduces. What is most notable is that pressures as low as .25 P.S.I. or 4 ounces can reduce 8

flow by as much as 60%. This is a significant point when related to saddle fit, especially with a bridging saddle that has significantly higher increased pressures.

Serious saddle fitting problems develop particularly on "bridging" saddles in a relatively short amount of time because pressures can easily reach 4 P.S.I or 64 ounces. This excessive pressure not only cuts off the blood supply, but can additionally traumatize the muscle tissue itself.

IN GOES THE GOOD BLOOD OUT GOES THE BAD BLOOD

In all cases, pressure release is followed by reactive hyperemia and the parts originally starved of arterial blood are instantly flooded with oxygen. The extent and duration of the blood in flow is proportional to 10

the needs of the tissues.

Below is a study performed at University of Georgia on a horse using a compression bandage. One can observe that the blood flow decreases significantly with the application of pressure, however, when released the 11

blood flow increases beyond the original base flow. This is a clinical verification of reactive hyperemia and reveals what happens to the tissue when the saddle is removed i.e. heat bump.

INTERNAL EFFECT OF SADDLE PRESSURE

For a given pressure, applied to the surface of the skin (interface pressure), capillary closure pressure will vary from horse to horse, as well as location to location on the horse, depending on the amount of fat, location of adjacent bone, status of the vascular system, systemic blood pressure and general health of the 13

animal. As the animal ages its physiology also changes, compounding this significant Issue.

A critical discovery in tissue research was that in a given location, pressure is not even throughout the tissue. Clinical studies have established that the internal pressure close to bones is three to five times higher than 14

on the surface.

14

14 of 236

15 16 This principle is easily demonstrated with a simple sponge as illustrated above. One can observe that when two different size areas are pressed towards each other, the smaller area will create higher pressures. Weight divided by surface area equals interface pressure. This is shown by the lines moving closer together nearest the smaller surface.

This is an important issue for horses because the longissimus dorsi muscle, one of the major muscles used in locomotion, lies adjacent to the spinal column and is directly affected by saddle pressure. Each vertebrae of the spinal column has bony prominences with small surfaces that concentrate points of pressure down the length of the longissimus dorsi muscle.

It is critically important to understand that muscles are far more 17

susceptible to the effects of pressure than skin. The internal damage to the tissue caused by the surface pressure only becomes obvious at the surface over an extended time. Many serious pressure sores first occur 18

internally adjacent to the bone and then radiate to the surface.

This fact makes it very difficult to use apparent trauma to the horse's back as an indicator of saddle fit, because during the time interval that the horse is not being ridden, the horse begins to heal the internal trauma.

This makes it virtually impossible to develop a cause and effect relationship between saddle fit using observable external trauma to the horse as the standard. Therefore, just because we do not see obvious damage to the skin of the horse, does not mean that damage has not occurred internally.

PRESSURE OVER TIME

The most important issue to remember with tissue trauma is that higher pressures do damage in shorter periods of time, however, even low pressure for 19

long periods of time can do damage. the following graphs illustrates the point.

This is significant to saddle fit because the fit of the saddle relates to how much time one can ride before causing trauma to the horse. Obviously, if the saddle fits, one can ride the horse longer without sustaining damage than a saddle the bridges and causes high pressures.

THE CRITICAL ISSUES

Tissues do not need a constant flow of blood, but tissues do need a CONSTANT INTERMITTENT FLOW OF 21

BLOOD. This is the reason a healthy individual does not get bedsores. By tossing and turning in our sleep we provide our tissues a constant intermittent flow of blood.

15

15 of 236

It is alsso important to understand that tissue damage is vaariable from vvery slight damage to extreemely deebilitating damage. As an example, hum man bedsoress are graded iin Stages I, II,, III, IV, from aa slightly red skin to an op pen sore.

ollowing is a ssimple scale o of increasing sseverity of traauma caused by an ill‐fittin ng saddle: The fo

1. De ecline in perfformance 2. Discomfort ‐ in ndicated by aattitude changge in the horrse 3. In nhibited Gait ‐ noted by th he horse bein ng a little "offf" 4. La ameness ‐ seccondary lame eness due to pain or excesssive pressurre 5. Sw welling ‐ sligh ht swelling un nder the sadd dle panels 6. Brruising ‐ signiificant inflam mmation indiccating capilla ry damage 7. W White hair ‐ du ue to damage ed follicles 8. Ha air loss ‐ obvious trauma tto the skin an nd internal m muscles 9. Ulcerous condition ‐ an ope en, oozing wo ound with sw welling

W WHAT DO WE "REALLY" SC CIENTIFICALLY Y KNOW ABO OUT TISSUE PPHYSIOLOGY??

Th he clinical ressearch on a vaariety of mam mmals has esttablished the following facctors to give u us a better un nderstandingg of the issuess relating to saddle fit.

1. Tisssue damage iis a function of pressure o over time.

22 23

2. Pre essure is not distributed e evenly througghout tissue.

24

3. Pre essure on the e surface of the skin increeases 3 X ‐ 5 X X closer to bo ones.

25

4. Mu uscle is more e susceptible to pressure d damage than skin.

5. Low pressure fo or long periods of time is more damagging 226

than higgh pressure fo or short perio ods of time.

SO O WHAT IS GOAL HERE? IN PRA ACTICE, THE G GOAL IS TO ACHIEVE THE M MOST EVEN PPRESSURE TH HROUGHOUTT THE SADDLEE CO ONTACT AREEA WITH A RID DER MOUNTEED AND TO R REMOVE THE SADDLE EVERY FEW HOU URS FOR A SH HORT PEERIOD OF TIM ME TO PERMIT BLOOD TO O FLOW TO TH HE TISSUES. 2. CATASSTOPHIC DESSIGN DEFECT While Mr.. Day does claim c that Dover D has an n “empiricallly developed methodology y which has h hundreds off years of history behind iit”. THIS STATTEMENT IS FA ALSE. Becausee the design o of the saddle panels have changed, significantly, over the last 5 50 years.

quest to increa ase profits byy “In a q reeducing costs: by 1. Reduciing the ph hysical amount of materia al” in the sa addle panel th hat contacts tthe horse’s ba ack and 2. Ma aking the pro oduction moree m modular so thee less skills weere required tto m make the sadd dle panel, the “surface arrea” of the sa addle that con ntacts the ho orse was redu uced by moree than 30% co ompared to trraditional dessigns, even on nly fifty yearss ago, made bby the same ccompany, and d currently solld by Dover Saddleryy. Illustrated a above.

16

16 of 236

Th his design cha ange (product defect) has had profound d effect on th e pressure disstribution tha at the saddle exerts on th he animal’s ba ack. A simple mathematica al calculation n would provee that a 30% rreduction in ssurface area w would in ncrease pressu ure: Weight d divided by surf rface area in iinches = presssure per squaare inch that h has to proporrtionately in ncrease the prressure on thee animal’s ba ack.

H However, that is only part o of the problem m. The criticall design produuct defect is tthat by reduccing the width h of the pa anel, in the ceenter of the p panel ‐ directlyy under the riider, to aboutt two to threee inches, rath her than traditional deesigns of five to seven inch hes, prevents the “arc” of tthe saddle to be adjusted tto the curvatu ure of the aniimal’s ba ack.

Trraditional Eng glish saddles built over thee past centuryy had a large panel to perm mit additiona al wool or horsse hair to bee added to th he panel undeer the rider, so o that the secction of the paanel became larger and th hereby permittted the sh hape of the pa anel to be adj djusted to the shape of the animal’s bacck, thereby addjusting the “a “arc” of the sa addle to th he “arc” of the animal’s ba ack.

Th his serious deesign product defect has beeen introduceed relatively rrecently, in thhe past few deecades and sh hould have beeen disclosed in the Dover Saddlery S‐1,, since that is the type of saddle Dover ssells. Saddle p panels of tw wo inches in d diameter, make it physicallly impossible to make the panel larger by adding ma aterial; the pa anel only geets harder, to otally defeatin ng the purposse of the sadd dle panel, in th the first place. This product defect preveents the “A Arc” or “Rockk” in the saddlle to be increa ased which ca auses the sadddle to “bridgge” creating higher sustain pressures on n the front an nd back of thee saddle, whicch causes thee damage to tthe horse’s baack, over timee. Or in other words, TH HE SADDLE N NOT TO FIT.” (EExhibit G)

Th his is a classicc product design defect thaat should havve been and sshould be discclosed.

3. PERMU UTATION NIG GHTMARE – LLET US NOT TTRIVIALIZE TH HE SIGNFICA ANT MATHIMATICAL CHALLLENGE OF MATCHING A SADD DLE TO A HOR RSE – “As a p practical mattter, fitting the vast multitude m of shapes of animal a backss becomes aa permutationn nightm mare. To sim mply illustratee: if one takkes cross seections of the animal's back in on nly three placees 1, 2, & 3 an nd then only considers two differeent angles at eeach cross section and theen only considder two anglees A & B between each cross sectio on the permutation would d be 2×2×2×2××2=32 differeent combinatiions. There is no w way that one; two or even three sizes, co ould fit the m majority of aniimal backs.” ((Exhibit T).

Now, tthat is the good news, the bad news is the same meeasurements must also be assigned to tthe saddle.

So in this simplistic example there t are another 32 shaapes. So to figure out the permutattions: the b 32 X 32 = 1,024 possib ble combinattions. If you then add, M Mr. Days comm ment that, calculaation would be “We have a big pro oblem even g getting the pa anels to be evven. One is biigger than th he other.” Ch hoosing the correct fitting saddle is a PERMU UTATION NIG GHTMARE

You caan see that fin nding the corrrect shape o of saddle for aa particular aanimal in not a trivial exerrcise. Thus, the staage is set for defective products. The rreason why D Dover Does n not want to eemploy measu urement is becausse Dover wou uld then beco ome accountaable and the ddefects would d be easily do ocumented.

Mr. Jack Le evy, President of the English/Western Manufactureer Association n (from whom m Mr. Day purcha ased saddles for StatelineeTack) told me m the truth,, in 1998, wh hen I inventeed the first SSaddletech Gauge e. “We will ne ever support measuremen nt, because iit would shift ft the invento ory from the retailer to the wh holesaler.” Do over is a retailer, as well as wholesaler..

17

17 of 236

If the horses were measured three‐dimensionally and the saddles were measure three‐ dimensionally the consumer could order saddles that fit, just like they currently find shoes that fit. Dover Saddlery would, then, become responsible for the fit of the saddle. As Mr. Day said, “There are not any companies out there that can put out a consistent product.” Therein, is what Dover Saddlery is fighting ‐ a logistical permutation nightmare. TRUTH be known, this fact is why you wrote the Cease and Desist letter.

Dover Saddlery does not want anyone to know this truth, because this permutation, totally changes the valuation of the company and rocks the “Dover business model” to its foundations.

4. LACK OF THREE DIMENSION MEASUREMENTS MAKES THE CHALLENGE EVEN MORE SIGNIFICANT. Currently, Dover Saddlery categorizes saddles in narrow, medium and wide. But that is only the front of the saddle – one dimension not three dimensions. Now, the following conversation was pasted into an email from Mr. Day, of a Dover chat room conversation, I had with Dover’s Staff(Exhibit B).

[16:12:38] Sue B: hers what I would like you to do [16:12:49] Sue B: heres* [16:12:59] Sue B: get your camera out [16:14:37] Sue B: stand the horse square , take pictures for us , side from rear , take the front picture from the point of the shoulder we want to see the neck/ withers and topline [16:15:56] Sue B: do there pictures with the saddle you have (no pad) and without , that way we can get an idea on fit, we have people here just for that to help. (Exhibit B) if you get the gauge (one dimension) I told you about then you can also give us the size idea we need for the gullet of the saddle

In the Light of the Permutations involved to determine which saddle will fit, these statements from Dover’s Staff, do not carry adequate instructions for its use and lack disclosure of material facts and create a product defect.

5. THE WEIGHT OF THE RIDER CHANGES THE FIT OF THE SADDLE RELATIVE TO THE WEIGHT OF THE HORSE. This means that even if Dover were able to determine the fit of the unladen horse, the correct fit is actually something else. This fact was demonstrated to Mr. Day Dec, 16, 2012, and the scans are noted below.

Does NOT Fit So So Fit

ALL SCANS SAME HORSE

SAME SADDLE

DIFFERENT RIDER WEIGHT

200 LBS RIDER 120 LBS RIDER

To stress the greater importance of the arc of the animal’s back on fit of the saddle, the following series of 9 pressure scans were performed with 9 separate plastic orthotics that were manufactured with the Saddletech Gauge as an adjustable jig, so that great accuracy within 2‐3 degrees was possible. The same horse and same rider were used for all scans.

18

18 of 236

Each of these separate orthotics were manufacture within 2‐3 degree variations as to angle of the width, as well as, the rock or arc to the back.

Revealing that: as the arc of the saddle becomes “flatter”, as would be expected, “bridging” is seen. However, what is more interesting is that 10 degrees wider and 10 degrees narrower really has not that much effect, contrary to Dover Saddlery’s Perfect fit Guidelines (Exhibit U). This saddle still bridges.

This research has serious implications for Dover Saddlery because Dover Saddlery only considers the angle at the front of the saddle – narrow, medium and wide. This means that contrary to Dover Saddlery’s Perfect fit Guidelines (Exhibit U) the saddle will still “bridge” or not fit, even if you do change the width of the saddle. The legal issue is, the consumer is given the illusion that the width of the saddle is what determines the fit. Which is not true, it is just one factor of three. The arc of the back is significantly more important. This is basic Geometry.

What is also remarkable with this data set is once the saddle shape does FIT, 10 degrees wider and 10 degrees narrower, does have an effect but significantly less than when the saddle is bridging.

Now, this is the I eye‐opener, adding additional rock of 10 degrees has an effect but not that much, totally contrary to Dover Saddlery’s Perfect fit Guidelines (Exhibit U). “The saddle should remain fairly stable, not shifting side to side or rocking front to back.” Is wrong. There is another “smoking gun” piece of evidence.

Dover Saddery’s legal challenge, is they do not have any such “Objective” measurement data, and they should, or disclose that they do not. Remember I received the Patent for this measurement technology in 1992.

(Exhibit R). The question should be raised, if this technology has been available for 20 years, “Why does Dover Saddlery not conduct this sort of research, to be sure they had a “Reasonable Basis” (as is legally required) that what they are telling consumers is correct?” Simple answer is they know their saddles do not fit.

At another point in the Dover chat room conversation, I had (Exhibit B) I specifically asked: [15:18:20] Robert Ferrand: No apologies for saddle confusion, it is not your fault. We are all struggling with how to fit the saddle. That said, it seems to me that my 200lbs must have an effect on the fit.

[15:19:09] Sue B: I don't believe so no, that should not have an effect on a saddle that is fitting well [15:20:04] Robert Ferrand: So, let me understand the horses back remains flat with even a 200lb load. I have trouble carrying a 50lb sack of grain.

[15:21:37] Sue B: no the back will not remain flat with a 200lb load nor a 100 lb load , but the tree and panels of the saddle disperse the weight evenly over the back, [15:22:17] Robert Ferrand: how do you know that?

[15:23:29] Sue B: how do I know that the panels and tree of the saddle disperse the weight over a larger area?

[15:23:51] Robert Ferrand: yes [15:27:38] Sue B: that is the whole reasoning for saddles, if you were to sit a horse bareback your seatbones you create pressure points where you are sitting , the saddle which covers a wider area , on either side of the spine ( the channel of the saddle relieves spinal pressure ) relieves those's points and disperses the weight, I know this from being not only a long time owner but by working with vets , chiropractors and saddle fitters [15:28:32] Robert Ferrand: have you ever used a computer saddle fitting system to check your fit?

[15:29:37] Sue B: I have not but have used the really cool equifit saddle pads those are very interesting 19

19 of 236

Clearly, what Dover Saddlery is telling customers ignores Physics, and more importantly, the company has not used computer saddle fitting systems to validate that there is any “reasonable basis” for their claims. In the Light of the computer saddle interface pressure measurement data demonstrated to Mr. Day, these statements not only do not carry adequate instructions for its use but actually mislead the consumer and lack disclosure of material facts…and create a product defect.

6. WHAT DOVER SADDLERY IS TELLING DOVER’S SADDLE CUSTOMERS ABOUT HOW TO ATTAIN THE “THE PERFECT FIT” IS FALSE.

FROM Dover Saddlery Website 3/2013 English Saddle‐Fitting Guidelines

Check panel pressure and contact.

Saddle panels are supposed to distribute your weight evenly along your horse’s back when you ride. ……

Press on the seat of the saddle with one hand, and run your other hand under the front of the panels. You want to feel even pressure under the saddle points; you don’t want the front of the panels to pinch the horse’s withers. Next run your hand under the entire panel along the back, on both sides, feeling for even pressure. Any unevenness in pressure that you feel would be felt by your horse as you ride. A common problem in saddle fitting is bridging. Bridging occurs when the front and the back of the panels are in contact with the horse, but there is no even pressure in the center of the saddle. (Exhibit U).

Now the fact that the horse’s back extends or hollows under the weight of the rider is a “material fact” because it would change how a consumer would fit the saddle IF THEY KNEW THAT INFORMATION. “run your hand under the entire panel along the back is misleading and useless, because the saddle that “Appears to Fit” unloaded does NOT ACTUALLY “Fit” when the rider mounts into the saddle, relative to the weight of the rider.

“Check the stability of the saddle. The saddle should remain fairly stable, not shifting side to side or rocking front to back.” (Exhibit U).

Dover’s statement the saddle should “NOT ROCK” is dead wrong as is documented in the above nine scans.

Dover’s recommendation is smoking gun evidence that Mr. Day/Dover have NO idea how to fit a saddle. Now, you do not need any fancy‐dancy technology to prove this….just a little bit of commonsense.

The fact that Dover Saddlery suggests the saddle should “NOT ROCK” not only misleads Dover’s customers, but reveals a complete lack of understanding of saddle fitting. Now, how much it should “Rock” requires, some form of three dimensional measurement. Had Dover performed any valid measurement “research” this fact would have become blatantly obvious and Dover would not have made this false statement.

Therein is Dover’s responsibility and legal liability, because they are creating product defects and they were “on notice”, that there actually was a solution

20

20 of 236

This fact was proven to Mr. Day during the demonstration, whereby the saddle with me, at 200 plus lbs, clearly does not fit, however by adding a ¾ inch extra shim material to the bottom of the saddle, that same saddle with the same rider weight can be made to fit.

Once seeing this demonstration, it was Mr. Days legal responsibility to do something 1. Stop selling saddles, 2. Research the Facts, 3. Change Saddle Fitting Guidelines, (Exhibit U). 4. inform investors ‐ we have a problem.

7. LACK OF ANY OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE or “REASONABLE BASIS” THAT ANY DOVER SADDLE FITS ACCORDING TO DOVER “SADDLE FITTING GUIDELINES”

I am not the only one that discovered that the animals back deflects a small amount under load. In fact, even before Dover went public the fact that the shape of the animal’s back is deflected by rider weight, and thereby significantly effects the fit of the saddle, was further substantiated in independent clinical research at the Ultrecht University and published in 2004 in the Equine Veterinary Journal under the title “Effects of girth, saddle and weight on the movements of the horse”. (Exhibit N).

Results: At walk and trot, there was a significant influence on back kinematics in the ‘saddle with weight’ situation, but not in the other conditions. Overall extension of the back increased, but the range of movement remained the same. Limb kinematics changed in the sense that forelimb retraction increased. At canter, both the ‘saddle withweight’ and ‘saddle only’ conditions had a significant extending effect on the back, but there was no effect on limb kinematics.

The fact that the animals back changes when mounted is a “Material Fact”, when purchasing a saddle. A material fact is defined as a fact which, if known, would have affected the judgment of one or more of the parties to a transaction. In an action for fraud, a material fact must be of sufficient importance to the matter that a reasonable person would have been likely to rely on it. As a leading saddle distributor, it is reasonable that saddle customer will “Rely On” Dover’s “expertise” in fitting the saddle.

Dover’s Saddle Fitting Guideline for a Perfect Fit” (Exhibit U) not only do not carry adequate instructions for its use, but actually mislead the consumer as well as a lack disclosure of material facts and create defects.

8. SADDLE FITTING CLAIMS OF HISTORICAL PRECEDENT ARE FALSE

When I asked Mr. Day “How does Dover Saddlery actually fits the saddles they sell”, Mr. Day claims that Dover employs an “empirically developed methodology which has hundreds of years of history behind it”. (Exhibit B).This statement is FALSE.

While this statement may sound logical, to anyone who has not studied the history of saddles, there are a number of problems, which refute Mr. Days claim. First, because Dover Saddlery does not sell saddles made in the “old fashion way, using the old fashion materials”, any claim to historical precedent is false and misleading.

Traditionally, hundreds of years ago, English saddles were made with wool serge panels filled with horse hair, because those materials were readily available and they worked very well. As you are now aware, my original scientific research began in the Silicon Valley, building state‐of‐the‐art hospital beds for the treatment of bedsores on humans. Thus, I have extensively “researched” not only the “effect of pressure on blood flow in Mammalian Tissue”, but I also researched high‐tech pressure distributing materials. I am not aware of any modern product that is anywhere close to the “efficacy” of horse hair for distributing pressure on saddles. This is a great product, that is no longer available in the U.S., because all the hides, both horse and cow, are immediately frozen at the slaughter house and go to China.

Because horse hair is adjustable and molds to the animal to some degree, the traditional saddle fitting method which really does have 100’s of years behind it, is talcum powder. By lightly dusting the animal’s back and carefully lowering the saddle on to the animal, the areas of greater pressure are obvious, when the saddle is removed, because the talcum powered transfers to the saddle panel.

21

21 of 236

The horse hair in the saddle panel can then be adjusted until an even contact of the unladen saddle is possible, easily seen as an even pattern of talcum powder on the panels of the saddle. Now, key to the success of this strategy is that the horse hair, because it will mold “the small amount necessary” to correct for the riders weight, it will self‐adjust. Which is why the saddle could be adjusted unladen and then permits the saddle itself, to corrects for the weight of the rider. Our ancestors were pretty smart.

Dover Saddlery does not sell saddles with this centuries old method of construction. Nor Does Dover Saddlery fit the saddle in the “empirically developed methodology which has hundreds of years of history behind it, using talcum powder for a simple reason. The majority of saddles that Dover sells have foam panels and are not adjustable. The few so‐called wool flocked panels have some adjustability, however because of the catastrophic design defect, noted above #2, that adjustability is significantly reduced, if not completely useless. Mr. Day’s statement is blatantly false.

9. UNFORTUNATELY ‐ SADDLE PADS DO NOT CORRECT FOR POOR SADDLE FIT

So equestrians are faced with an impossible situation to fit a saddle to their animal. Most equestrians employ saddle pads in an attempt to solve the problem. Saddle pads can provide subtle improvements to a saddle that fits, properly. However, a poorly fitting saddle cannot be properly fitted by just adding a saddle pad, for the following reason.

Physics, again, (Remember, Physics really is controlling) regardless of whatever material makes up the saddle pad, when it is compressed by the weight of the rider it makes the material denser. (See illustration on right) Therefore, the high spots are pressed denser than low spots, so rather than being softer in the high spots, the pads are actually denser or harder right where you want them to be softer. Dover Saddlery should understand the physics of materials, before it makes product claims or suggesting what a saddle pad can do to correct the fit of any saddle.

NO PAD 1” FLEECE 1” FLEECE ½ FOAM 1” FLEECE ¾ FOAM

What makes these computer scans (shown above) relevant is the extraordinary amount of material required to cause any effect. While all the saddle pads companies claim their saddle “distribute pressure”, the data proves that very little pressure distribution actually takes place. What is more important is that neither Dover Saddlery nor the saddle pad companies that Dover sells provide any of this interface pressure measurement data. If the product is supposed to distribute pressure, should not the standard be, to measure that interface pressure. Why does Dover not, provide interface pressure scans to support their claims? As Mr. Days said, the last thing anyone wants is some instrument that is going to show that".(Exhibit E)

Here is the Catch 22. This pressure measurement data is not relevant without knowing the three dimensional shape of the horse relative the saddle. If the saddle fits, of course , the saddle pad will work.

However, if the saddle does not fit, how much is the difference between animal and saddle that a particular saddle pad can correct and by how much? Unfortunately you have to have a three‐dimensional measurement instrument to be able to answer that question. Dover does not employ three‐dimension measurements. This information has direct relevance on Dover’s potential Income and potential liability and should have been and should be disclosed so that investors can draw their own conclusions.

22

22 of 236

10. CONSUMER AND ANIMAL PROTECTION GOES OUT WINDOW ‐ THE CONSUMER IS TRAPPED

“If you purchase a new saddle there is no time limit but it must be returned to us in the condition you received it in.” Dover provides the customer misleading information, and then refuses to accept the saddle if it is worn.

(Exhibit U).

How can the saddle consumer possibly determine if a saddle fits, if the information they “Rely On” with Dover’s “expertise” in the subject is; in fact FALSE. Even worse, if they actually follow the Dover Perfect Fit “guidelines” (Exhibit U) the chances that the saddle does NOT fit is significantly increased, incrementally relative to the weight of the rider, because the deflection of the back is not considered. This “lack of accuracy” with respect to saddles should be disclosed because it is not a viable business model.

[15:49:56] Sue B: we can tell if you wrap the leathers and have tried to keep the saddle as new as possible , as long as you are careful as we really would like it back as close to new as possible , did you see my message about our trial saddles as that sounds like a much better fit for you since you are so concerned about damaging the saddle [15:52:04] Robert Ferrand: I am trying to understand the "saddle policy" close to new as possible is a little vague. Either it has been ridden in, or not. Careful is not the issue. If I check the fit by sweating the horse, the saddle will look used quickly.

[15:54:33] Sue B: sorry I have to disagree, use a saddle pad to absorb the sweat on the panels , don't ride in the woods and wrap your leathers it will be fine, we have a liberal return policy and will take it back but if you go through our trail saddle program there is no need for wrapping leathers ect and you can ride all you want for several days including out on the trail.

[15:55:29] Sue B: I am not trying to argue at all with you just trying to be clear , all we ask is you try your best to be careful if you think you might need to return

My current interest is to have an even playing field. As Dover states publicly, there are 10,000 mom and pop tack shops in a fractured equestrian market. That is Dover’s “Market Opportunity, as so stated. However, If Dover is allowed to “withhold material facts”, no one will be able to compete with Dover. The 10,000 Mom and Pop tack shop will disappear. That is downright un‐American.

More importantly, everyone is injured in this process of withholding material facts, but Dover. In the end, the animal is injured, the consumer is injured, the investors are injured, and the saddle industry, itself, is injured, because innovation is stifled as viable solutions ignored. This explains why, “….the SEC requires public companies to disclose meaningful financial and other information to the public”

In all the discussions, someone should ask, “Why does Dover not have a Research & development Department. If this saddle measurement technology was invented 20 years ago, and there are half a dozen companies selling computer saddle fitting systems, why does not Dover has an ongoing research program?

The answer is simple. As Mr. Day clearly stated, “My concern is that this could be a double edged sword.

We might be setting a standard that we cannot meet. We have a big problem even getting the panels to be even.

One is bigger than the other. There are not any saddle companies that can put out a consistent product.” “Monica is the best business person in the group. She knows that their saddles are all over the place, so the last thing anyone wants is some instrument that is going to show that".”(Exhibit E).

Sounds like knowingly selling defective products to me. That is a serious matter for the SEC and FTC as well as Consumer Protection. While we are all focused on the money, let us not forget it is the animals that carry these ill fitting saddles on their backs, hour after hour and some are injured. Mr. Day would never ride in boots that fit as poorly as most of the saddles he sells.

With a better understanding of the “Material Facts”, at a minimum, the following 10 points should be disclosed to the Securities and Exchange Commission, shareholders, potential investors, and saddle consumers, and let them draw their own conclusions.

23

23 of 236

1. SADDLES ARE NOT MEASURED. SADDLES ARE ONLY CATEGORIZED. NARROW, MEDIUM AND WIDE

2. SADDLES HAVE NO THREE DIMENSIONAL MEASUREMENTS.

3. SADDLEMAKER/DISTRIBUTORS HAVE NO WAY TO “ACCURATELY” RELATE SHAPE OF ANIMALS BACK TO THE SADDLE.

4. SADDLE FITTING EXPERTS CLAIM THAT YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE TO "DISTRIBUTE THE PRESSURE ON THE SADDLE PANELS ‐ EVENLY" ON THE HORSES' BACK BUT THEY DO NOT ACTUALLY MEASURE THAT PRESSURE – JUST GUESS.

5. THE MOST DAMAGING SADDLE FIT IS "BRIDGING". THIS IS CAUSED BY RELATIONSHIP OF THE ARC OF THE BACK TO THE ARC (OR ROCK) TO THE SADDLE – WITHOUT 3D MEASUREMENT THE 3D RELATIONSHIP CANNOT BE DETERMINED ‐ “ACCURATELY” .

6. SADDLE FITTING EXPERTS IGNORE GRAVITY AS A FACTOR IN THE FIT OF THE SADDLE.

7. THE SADDLE INDUSTRY HAS FAILED TO DISCLOSE THE DESIGN OF SADDLES HAS CHANGED ‐ CREATING SOME PRODUCT DEFECTS.

8. HORSES BACK ARE NOT STANDARD AND VARY AND CHANGE DUE TO BREED, CONDITIONING, AND AGE.

9. SADDLE FITTING SOLUTIONS DUE EXIST. COMPUTERS & GAUGES, BUT ARE NOT EMPLOYED BY DOVER.

10. THE CONSUMER IS PROVIDED "FALSE" INFORMATION AND IF FOLLOWED ‐ THE SADDLES ARE STILL NOT RETURNABLE.

Mr. Day was quoted in the Deal.com, 10/7/2013 article “Dover poised for expansion” (Exhibit Y) referring to my technology, "He's developed this saddle-fitting system, which is state of art, but way beyond the needs of today's horseman and horse owners," Day said, acknowledging the encounter. "There just isn't any commercial demand for what Robert has put together”.

This statement, from Mr, Day, is direct evidence that whatever Dover is using to fit saddles, is less accurate or in other words has a “Lack of Accuracy”. I point this out, because it is the subject of this response.

So there really is not a market for SmartPhones, because all the phone customers are happy with rotary?

Come on. How can any investor, in their right mind, invest in antiquated technology. If for no other reason, some other company could use the state‐of‐the‐art technology to destroy the investment. Most of the technology from the Silicon Valley, does that, over and over. But, the investor has to know that the state‐of‐the‐art technology does exist. Hence, the importance of disclosure. I point this out, because it is the subject of this response.

What you measure will improve. What is Steve thinking? There “just isn’t any commercial demand” for measurement? Measurement is the critical factor that permits our high standard of living. Mr. Day is Dead Wrong.

Mathematics, Geometry, Physics and Physiology are controlling.

Again I repeat, The issue is Failure to Disclose of Material Facts Instead of a sending a Cease and Desist letter, what Dover Saddlery and Duff & Phelps, both, should have asked is: “What are the saddle defects that you have found and what can we do to correct the problem?”

Clearly, rather than doing the right thing, Dover Saddlery has chosen to attempt to silence the Truth.

“What did the President know and when did he know it?” is a relevant question here.

For over a decade, Steve Day has successfully pushed the day of reckoning with science, down the road.

This document, in response to your Cease and Desist letter, makes that day of reckoning, Today.

Dover Saddlery, now, has no choice but to provide this document to the SEC and face the consequences.

Truth is the absolute defense against Slander and Libel.

Please respond that Dover Saddlery will stand down from this threat to take legal action against me FOR TELLING THE TRUTH, because there is no evidence to support any such claim, so that I can close the file.

Respectfully submitted,

Robert Ferrand Saddle Industry Insider 650‐576‐3334

24

24 of 236

Again I repeat, The issue is Failure to Disclose of Material Facts Instead of a sending Cease and Desist letter, what Dover Saddlery and Duff & Phelps, both, should have asked is: “What are the saddle defects that you have found and what can we do to correct the problem?”

Clearly, rather than doing the right thing, Dover Saddlery has chosen to attempt to silence the Truth.

“What did the President know and when did he know it?” is a relevant question here.

For over a decade Steve Day has successfully pushed the day of reckoning down the road.

This document, in response to your Cease and Desist letter, makes that day of reckoning, Today.

Dover Saddlery, now, has no choice but to provide this document to the SEC and face the consequences.

Truth is the absolute defense against Slander and Libel.

Please respond that Dover Saddlery will stand down from this threat to take legal action against me FOR TELLING THE TRUTH, because there is no evidence to support any such claim, so that I can close the file.

Respectfully submitted,

Robert Ferrand Saddle Industry Insider 650‐576‐3334

25

25 of 236

2995 WO OODSIDE R D , W OO ODSIDE , CA 94062 SADDDLEE @ SBCGLOBAL . NET WWW W . SADDLETECH . NET

650‐631‐8400

EXH HIBITS TABLE O OF CONTENTS 10//14/2013

A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. O. P. Q. R. S. T. U. V. W. X. Y. Z.

addlery Lettter to R. Ferrrand Saddlettech 10/2/13 Dover S 3………………… …………………… ………… 27

So How does Doverr Saddlery Fitt Saddles? Email exchannge 6/13‐7/113………………………… 29

Demand d Letter for t the two (2) SSaddletech G Gauges 5/200/2013………… …………………………… 42

Significaant Market O Opportunity Employing 3 3‐D Measureement 5/11//04……………………… 45

Transcriipt of Phone e Call betwee en Steven Daay & Ferrand ………………………….. 46 d 7/30/04……

Cover Le etter to Day from Ferran nd 4/17/12… …………………… …………………… …………………… ………… 51 Ferrand d disclosure tto Securitiess and Exchan nge Commisssion 9/16/055………………… …………. 52 Ferrand d disclosure tto Hambrech ht – Dover S‐1 – Kiss of D Death 9/16//05……………… …………. 55 Saddletech System Seven Incom me master 2//4/13………… …………………… …………………… ………… 60 Saddletech System Brochure 1//2/13…………………………… …………………… …………………… …………. 61 Saddletech Option aand Term Sh heet…………… …………………… …………………… …………………… ………… 72 Don’t Sh hoot the Me essenger – TaacknTogs Op p‐ed 8/20000………………… …………………..……….. 83 An In‐de epth Look A At Pressure SSores using M Monolith Preessure Senso ors……………… ………… 84 Effects o of girth, sadd dle and weigght on move ements of thhe horse 20004……………………….. 94 Validity of Saddle Prressure Meaasurements using FSA Teechnology 19999 …………… …………. 100 How mu uch time doe es it take to get a pressu ure ulcer? 20008………………………………………. 107 Scientifiic Saddle Fittting by Robe ert Ferrand 1 1998…………… ……………………………………………. 116 U.S. Pattent 5,375,39 97 Curve‐Co onforming Se ensor Array, RF Inventorr 1994………… …………. 141 U.S. Pattent 6,33426 62 Gauge an nd Method for Measurinng Animals 22002…………… ………… 162 U.S. Pattent 6,948,25 56 Saddle Su upport Devicce and Jig RFF Inventor 20005…………… …………. 173 Dover Saddlery – En nglish Saddle e Fitting Guid delines. 29113………………………………… …………. 191 Dover Saddlery – Ho ow to Selectt an English SSaddle 20133………………… …………………… ………… 195 Dover Saddlery – Sizing Informaation Guide 2013………… ………………… …………………… ………… 196 Dover Saddlery – Se ecurities & Exchange Com mmission S‐‐1 2005……… …………………… ………… 200 Dover Saddlery “po oised for exp pansion ride”” 10/7/20133………………… …………………… ………… 202 United SStates Saddle Standard 1 1999…..……… …………………… …………………… ………………………… 205

26 of 236

Portland, ME

PretiFlaherty

Augusta, ME

Concord,

NH

8oston,

MA

John M. Sullivan jsuliivan@preti,corn Direct Dial:

Washington,

603.410,1550

DC

Bedminster, NJ

Salem, MA

October 2, 2013

VIA EMAIL AND CERTIFIED MAIL Robert Ferrand Saddletech 2995 Woodside Rd Woodside, CA 94062 inventor@saddletech.net

650-631-8400

RE:

Attemnted Coercion. Fraud. Tortious Interference and Cease and Desist — Market Manipulation

Dear Mr. Ferrand:

I write on behalf of our client, Dover Saddlery, Inc.

("Dover" ).

We hereby demand that

you immediately cease and desist your continued pattern of harassment false and misleading statements about Dover and its products.

and dissemination

of

Previously, you approached Mr. Stephen Day, CEO of Dover, to discuss your saddle fitting technology. Mr. Day willingly engaged in a discussion with you. He tested your product and gave thoughtful consideration to whether your technology could be commercialized through Dover and whether it would be worthwhile in light of Dover's current practices, customer needs and business plan. Thereafter, Dover made a determination that it would not pursue a business relationship with you and your company.

In an attempt to coerce Dover into revisiting its decision, you have repeatedly threatened to manipulate Dover's investors and to otherwise attempt to adversely affect Dover's contractual relationships by making and threatening to make disparaging and fraudulent remarks about Dover. Most recently, you disseminated false statements, both orally and in writing, to Duff & Phelps Securities, LLC, Dover's financial advisor ("Duff dk Phelps" ). Specifically, on September 23, 2013, you sent an email to Duff & Phelps in which you falsely stated that you have been in ongoing discussions with Dover regarding a strategic relationship. In addition, you falsely asserted that (i) Dover's products are defective; and (ii) that Dover's decision not to contract with you is somehow material information that should be disclosed to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SKC") and to Dover's investors. You have no grounds to make these allegations.

Mr. Ferrand, a "discussion" entails give and take between two or more parties. In this instance, Dover chose not to engage in further discussions with you. It exercised its informed business judgment not to use or market your saddle fitting technology. Dover has no duty to purchase your technology, simply because you have offered it. Nor is Dover compelled to Preti Ftaherty

Beliveau & Pachios LLP

Shipping Address Only- No Mail Delivery: 57 North Main Street, Concord,

Attorneys at Law

Mailing Address: PO Box 1318, Concord,

NH

03302-1318

j

Tel

NH

603.410.1500

03301 ~

www.preti.corn

27 of 236

5809786.1

PRETI FLAHERTY

October 2, 2013 Page 2

accept your opinion and perspective as controlling. Dover's refusal to do business with you does not now trigger new or additional reporting obligations to the SEC or otherwise. Dover has determined that your technology has no material bearing on its products, services or the financial Despite these facts, you have continued to harass Dover and have health of the company. threatened to instigate some sort of regulatory investigation by providing false and misleading information to the SEC regarding Dover.

This pattern has persisted despite requests from Mr. Day, in which he respectfully and repeatedly has declined your invitation to do business. Apparently in an effort to derive some sort of economic advantage, you have disregarded Mr. Day's requests and have resorted to attempted extortion.

Your statements and patterns of behavior are actionable as trade libel, defamation, and tortious interference with prospective economic advantage, commercial disparagement among other claims, including potential violations of federal and state securities laws. Dover will not be coerced into using your technology through these unlawful means, and we hereby demand that you immediately and permanently cease and desist this behavior.

Please acknowledge receipt of this letter. If your behavior does not immediately cease, Dover will take all steps it deems necessary or appropriate to protect itself, its employees and customers from your intentionally distracting, unlawful and potentially damaging behavior.

Very truly yours,

cc:

Stephen L. Day, Dover Saddlery

28 of 236

5809786.1

SO HOW DOES DOVER SADDLERY FIT SADDLES?

Executive Summary EDITED version E‐MAIL EXCHANGE BETWEEN

Steve Day, CEO Dover Saddlery & Robert Ferrand, Inventor Between June 5, 2013 ‐ July 2, 2013 UN‐EDITED version follows

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

Subject:Dover Saddlery Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 14:19:05 -0400 From: Steve Day <sday@doversaddlery.com> 'Robert Ferrand' <inventor@saddletech.net> To:

“….I do not want to become enemies. However, I request that you cease and desist with your repeated communications to me and our employees…..”

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

Subject:A simple question Date:Fri, 28 Jun 2013 10:43:36 -0700 From:Robert Ferrand <inventor@saddletech.net> To:sday@doversaddlery.com Steve, Three weeks ago, I asked you a simple question:

"please explain how Dover Saddlery actually fits the saddles they sell."

Since then I have downloaded all the literature I think is available on the Dover Saddlery website relating to saddle fit, and I do not see anything that is an "empirically developed methodology which has hundreds of years of history behind it."

So that there is no confusion here, can you please explain what I am missing?

Robert

1

29 of 236

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

Subject:O.K. Maybe I am WRONG Date:Sun, 09 Jun 2013 20:16:47 -0700 From:Robert Ferrand <inventor@saddletech.net> To:sday@doversaddlery.com, Steve, Having had the weekend to think about it, maybe I am wrong. Maybe the "Saddle Fitting Issue" is that I do not understand how Dover Saddlery Fits the saddles its sells.

There is something to be said, for hundreds of years of experience. That said, so that I do not misunderstand and misrepresent you or Dover Saddlery, can you, for the record, please explain how Dover Saddlery actually fits the saddles they sell.

I also do not seek enemies, I only seek the truth, and a more practical method to fit saddles.

Robert

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

Subject:RE: Saddletech Gauges and the SEC Date:Fri, 7 Jun 2013 16:02:41 -0400 From:Steve Day <sday@doversaddlery.com> To:'Robert Ferrand' <inventor@saddletech.net>

Bob,

The gauges are in their original packaging from you.

I will not be contacting the SEC with what I regard as your theories on saddle fitting. Dover Saddlery presents the empirically developed methodology which has hundreds of years of history behind it. I do not want to make enemies of one another.

Regards, Steve

2

30 of 236

Subject:Saddletech Gauges and the SEC Date:Wed, 05 Jun 2013 14:13:11 -0700 From:Robert Ferrand <inventor@saddletech.net> To:sday@doversaddlery.com Steve, …

Steve Day

Robert Ferrand

Dover CEO

Inventor

Now, to refresh your memory, from the Computer Saddle Fitting and video taping, that you and I, and others, witnessed at your own personal barn, in December of last year, I have attached a few of the relevant computer saddle pressure scans....to make a few points.

This data supports the obvious conclusion that gravity is a factor in the fit of a saddle.

The above scan with a 120 lbs. rider reveals relatively even saddle contact pressure.

However, the middle scan, with my 200+ lbs, reveals that the same saddle DOES NOT FIT. In contrast, the 3/4 shim with the 200+ rider has significantly improved the FIT.

The simplistic drawing, above, illustrates the saddle fitting issue....if the saddle is fit to the animal's back without any weight, and if the rider's weight causes the animal's back to deflect any amount, then the saddle will "bridge" or NOT FIT. Therefore, Dover's "Perfect Fit" Guidelines for fitting the saddle so the saddle "Fits evenly on the horse's back" is, in fact, incorrect for riders weighing more than 120 lbs. This is a "material fact" when it comes to selling saddles.

3

31 of 236

THE FOLLOWING ARE THE COMPETE “UNEDITED” EMAILS WITH TIME/DATE/ORIGIN -------- Original Message -------Subject:Dover Saddlery Date:Tue, 2 Jul 2013 14:19:05 -0400 From:Steve Day <sday@doversaddlery.com> Reply-To:<sday@doversaddlery.com> Organization:Dover Saddlery To:'Robert Ferrand' <inventor@saddletech.net>

Bob, As I have said in previous emails, I do not want to become enemies. However, I request that you cease and desist with your repeated communications to me and our employees which are intended to interfere with our business practices. I have included (below) a chat with 2 of our customer service agents which took up a substantial portion of their time when in fact, you had no intention of purchasing a saddle from Dover Saddlery. Therefore, I must now demand that you cease and desist.

Regards, Stephen L. Day Stephen L. Day President Dover Saddlery 525 Great Road Littleton, MA 01460 978-952-8062 x225 978-952-8063 Fax

****************************************************************************** [14:53:59] [--- DOVER SADDLERY CHAT ROOM CONVERSATION COPY PASTED INTO EMAIL BY STEVEN DAY. THIS DOCUMENTS THAT DOVER SADDLERY DOES NOT REALLY KNOW HOW TO FIT A SADDLE.

Matthew B: Hello, how can I help you?

Robert Ferrand: I am looking at saddles and I am trying to understand the saddle return policy Matthew B: With our new saddles we ask that you wrap the leathers and girth it up lightly Matthew B: You can ride very lightly in it but the saddle should come back in new condition Matthew B: You do have to pay to ship it back if you need to return it Robert Ferrand: How can I check the fit if I do not ride it, hard Matthew B: If you place it on your horse and it looks like a decent fit, you can girth it up and ride lightly in it.

Robert Ferrand: lightly is the question....what does "lightly" mean?

Matthew B: Walk trot Robert Ferrand: for how long?

4

32 of 236

Matthew B: There isn't really a time limit we just ask that it comes back in new condition Robert Ferrand: Isn't that a bit hard to do? If you ride in it, to see anything it will be marked somehow?

Matthew B: We just ask that the leathers are wrapped and it is used gently Robert Ferrand: OK I have a 22 year old foxtotter and his withers are begining to show, How do I know which saddle will fit.

Matthew B: You would have to try the saddles on to determine the best fit Matthew B: You'd want to look for about 2-3 fingers width of wither clearance Matthew B: Also want to check that the saddle is sitting level Matthew B: Lastly run your hand on the panel to make sure it's not to tight and pinching the shoulders Robert Ferrand: Is my weight a factor. I can only check the panel when I am dismounted. What happens when I mount?

Matthew B: You can also check once you're in the saddle Matthew B: If you have a saddle fitter you could also have them check the fit of the saddle Robert Ferrand: check what when I am in the saddle?

Matthew B: The fit of the saddle Robert Ferrand: how can I check the saddle fit when I am in the saddle?

Matthew B: You should be able to see if you can fit atleast 2 fingers in the gullet while mounted and also run your hand down the panel to make sure it's not pinching Robert Ferrand: wait a minute, how can I run my hand down if I am in the saddle?

Matthew B: Simply reach your arm forward while halted Robert Ferrand: come on, how do I do that, my fingers would only go in a little bit.

Matthew B: I've done it myself many times but you could also ask someone at your barn to check for you as well Robert Ferrand: is not bridging the problem. How do I check under the middle of the saddle if I am in the saddle.

Matthew B: I personally check my horses sweat marks after I ride Matthew B: I've also had mine professionally fitted which I recommend Matthew B: Are you looking at a specific brand?

Robert Ferrand: wait a minute, that is where we started this conversation. How do I check for sweat marks, and ride the saddle "LIGHTLY"? are not these mutually exclusive?

Matthew B: I'd be happy to see if we have the saddle you're looking for in a trial version [14:54:48] Robert Ferrand: That is great, but I still am trying to understand this sweat/ride lightly issue.

[14:59:08] Matthew B: Start out on the ground with the saddle girthed on the horse without a saddle pad.

[15:01:18] Matthew B: To check for bridging you can lift the flap up to check for even contact from front to back. There could be a tiny amount of gap but when you get in the saddle that will disappear and there will be even contact. You can also check unmounted by pressing both hands on the pommel to see if the saddle moves forward or comes up in the back.

[15:01:50] Matthew B: I do apologize for the confusion.

[15:03:17] Robert Ferrand: There could be a tiny amount of gap but when you get in the saddle that will disappear and there will be even contact..how do I know that there will be even contact.

[15:03:51] Matthew B: It would be a very small gap [15:03:57] Matthew B: Only about a 1/4 of an inch [15:04:34] Robert Ferrand: but doesn't the horses back bend a bit under my 200 lb load?

[15:06:37] Matthew B: I've been consulting with our saddle consultant and she would be happy to speak to you. She has much more knowledge than me when it comes to saddle fit. Her name is Cynthia and she can be reached at 1-800-989-1500 ext 365 or she would be happy to call you.

[15:08:04] Robert Ferrand: Great....I will call her. but back to my question doesn't the horses back bend a bit when I get into the saddle?

5Â Â

33 of 236

[15:09:44] Matthew B: By bend do you mean the horse hollows it's back?

[15:10:36] Robert Ferrand: Yes...which would mean that if there were a little bridging then there would be more [15:13:15] Sue B: Hi Robert I am sorry for the confusion on the saddle fitting , it is always easier to do this over the phone sometimes the lines get blurred via chat email ect [15:14:42] Sue B: that said we would like the saddle to fit as well as possible on the ground , and yes the horses back may dip/ drop slightly when mounted but due to the design of the panels on the bottom of the saddle they conform to small differances in the backs of the animals [15:15:07] Sue B: also saddle pads afterwards can help improve saddle fit [15:15:56] Sue B: but as long as the saddle has decent clearance at the withers , is not rocking badly on the back , and you have the saddle slipped back into the sweet spot/ pocket behind the witheres [15:16:39] Sue B: then go ahead and get on with and ride , we prefer if you can wrap your leathers but if you think the saddle will work for you and the horse go ahead and ride in it , not a problem [15:18:04] Sue B: your foxtrotter is still going to have fairly wide shoulders even if the withers have popped with age is a medium tree most likely will be a bit narrow for the horse [15:18:20] Robert Ferrand: No apologies for saddle confusion, it is not your fault. We are all struggling with how to fit the saddle. That said, it seems to me that my 200lbs must have an effect on the fit.

[15:19:09] Sue B: I don't believe so no, that should not have an effect on a saddle that is fitting well , [15:20:04] Robert Ferrand: So, let me understand the horses back remains flat with even a 200lb load.

I have trouble carrying a 50lb sack of grain.

[15:21:37] Sue B: no the back will not remain flat with a 200lb load nor a 100 lb load , but the tree and panels of the saddle disperse the weight evenly over the back, [15:22:17] Robert Ferrand: how do you know that?

[15:23:29] Sue B: how do I know that the panels and tree of the saddle disperse the weight over a larger area?

[15:23:51] Robert Ferrand: yes [15:27:38] Sue B: that is the whole reasoning for saddles, if you were to sit a horse bareback your seatbones you create pressure points where you are sitting , the saddle which covers a wider area , on either side of the spine ( the channel of the saddle relieves spinal pressure ) relieves those's points and disperses the weight, I know this from being not only a long time owner but by working with vets , chiropractors and saddle fitters [15:28:32] Robert Ferrand: have you ever used a computer saddle fitting system to check your fit?

[15:29:37] Sue B: I have not but have used the really cool equifit saddle pads those are very interesting [15:31:16] Sue B: have you used a computer designed saddle fitting system?

[15:31:30] Robert Ferrand: we are going in circles...back to my original question, it is hard to figure out what the saddle sizes are,...I understand that, but how do check the fit, without sweating the horse.

[15:34:56] Sue B: not was a mistake and I apologized for the operator misspeaking , if after you place the saddle on the horse and it looks to fit well , and you have sat in it and like how it fits you then , by all means ride in it , just as I said wrap your leathers but go ahead and ride or jump in it , walk / trot / canter you will know fairly quickly if the saddle fits you , so if you are liking then make your pony sweat if you like but add a thin pad before really riding to protect the panels please [15:36:40] Robert Ferrand: but, if I mark up the saddle , with the stirrup leathers, then I cannot return the saddle, correct?

[15:38:28] Sue B: if you wrap the leathers with a tube sock or fleece they will not mark the saddle , of course you can return the saddle we just would like you to be as careful as possible with a new saddle, that said we also offer a trial saddle program where you can ride in the saddle for 3-5 days as long or as hard as you want [15:38:57] Sue B: we have a 100 % satisfaction guarantee policy [15:39:12] Robert Ferrand: I can return the saddle at what cost?

6Â Â

34 of 236

[15:39:56] Sue B: you are responsible for shipping back to us [15:40:55] Sue B: you can return , through mail/ ups or fedex but please get a tracking # and insurance , it will also come with a return shipping label you can use if you would like the amount is deducted from the return [15:41:10] Sue B: and that is used through the post office [15:41:12] Robert Ferrand: ok we are getting somewhere, I can ride the saddle and sweat the horse and even if I mark it up, if it is returned I get my money back.

[15:42:48] Sue B: I am concerned by your statements of marking the saddle up ? we would prefer you did not trail ride in the saddle just use in a clear arena , we understand that there will be girth marks on the billets , but if you wear breeches and not jeans the there will be no scratches on the seat or flaps [15:44:34] Robert Ferrand: i have tried that, it is easier said than done. It does take some time to get the horse warmed up. I do not know how to keep the saddle from getting marked up. So if it is marked, can I get my money back. that is the issue.

[15:45:28] Sue B: yes you will get your money back , but if you don't mind how is your saddles getting marked up maybe I can understand better [15:46:57] Robert Ferrand: It does not take that much time for the flaps to get marked. but let me understand, even if I mark the saddle up I will get my money back. Coorect..sounds great if true.

[15:49:56] Sue B: we can tell if you wrap the leathers and have tried to keep the saddle as new as possible , as long as you are careful as we really would like it back as close to new as possible , did you see my message about our trial saddles as that sounds like a much better fit for you since you are so concerned about damaging the saddle [15:52:04] Robert Ferrand: I am trying to understand the "saddle policy" close to new as possible is a little vague. Either it has been ridden in, or not. Careful is not the issue. If I check the fit by sweating the horse, the saddle will look used quickly.

[15:54:33] Sue B: sorry I have to disagree, use a saddle pad to absorb the sweat on the panels , don't ride in the woods and wrap your leathers it will be fine, we have a liberal return policy and will take it back but if you go through our trail saddle program there is no need for wrapping leathers ect and you can ride all you want for several days including out on the trail.

[15:55:29] Sue B: I am not trying to argue at all with you just trying to be clear , all we ask is you try your best to be careful if you think you might need to return [15:55:58] Robert Ferrand: OK I bite. with the trail saddle...if I like it, how do I know the saddle I order is the same shape as the saddle I tested.

[15:58:39] Sue B: you have the option to keep the trial saddle (if it has been used then at a possible discount ) quite often the trials are sent out as new due to the last person purchasing the trial, if it has been used and you want to send it back for a new one it will be the same saddle just new and not previously ridden in.

[15:59:27] Robert Ferrand: yeah, but where is the quality control from saddle to saddle.

[16:00:29] Sue B: quality control is through the manufacturer , [16:00:50] Robert Ferrand: are there any standards?

[16:02:38] Sue B: of course there are , no differance then say a style of jeans , each saddle style is made to that particulars model standards . even custom saddle that are individually made are made from a uniformed tree mold.

[16:03:51] Robert Ferrand: no narrow or wide from Bates is the same as narrow or wide from Cuircuit?

[16:05:39] Sue B: No , each company has their own standards and each style saddle has a standard , the bates have a uniform gullet plate to put in , (by the way I have a Bates and it is awesome love it) the circuit saddles will have their own gullet measurement [16:06:13] Sue B: so if a wide bates fits it does not say a wide in the circuit will also [16:07:45] Robert Ferrand: so from you lips to Gods ears. "it does not say a wide in the circuit will also. How can I figure out which is which and which will fit my Foxtrotter....and I have not even mentioned the mule [16:08:23] Sue B: ha ha that's awesome you have a mule cudos or you !!!

7Â Â

35 of 236

[16:08:59] Robert Ferrand: the mule is another story. let stay focused.

[16:09:11] Sue B: sorry laughing to hard [16:09:28] Sue B: ok focusing [16:10:09] Sue B: this is what I would like you to do , I want you to get a gullet gauge and measure the fox trotter (and the mule ) [16:10:28] Robert Ferrand: That is the issue that is drving me nuts. How to figure out a three dimensional shape from a one dimensional term like wide....what does wide mean?

[16:10:38] Sue B: it is 29.95 and we will refund you for that when you send it back [16:11:07] Sue B: no I am understanding where you are coming from better [16:11:10] Robert Ferrand: but a gullet gauge is only the withers....what about the rock?

[16:12:20] Sue B: ok different panels on the different saddles will fit different horses , , [16:12:38] Sue B: hers what I would like you to do [16:12:49] Sue B: heres* [16:12:59] Sue B: get your camera out [16:14:37] Sue B: stand the horse square , take pictures for us , side from rear , take the front picture from the point of the shoulder we want to see the neck/ withers and topline [16:15:56] Sue B: do there pictures with the saddle you have (no pad) and without , that way we can get an idea on fit, we have people here just for that to help. if you get the gauge I told you about then you can also give us the size idea we need for the gullet of the saddle [16:16:35] Sue B: this is where we start [16:17:19] Robert Ferrand: better idea: [16:17:42] Robert Ferrand: here is a better idea: [16:17:48] Robert Ferrand: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4orfzRaY_Zo [16:18:09] Sue B: hold on let me look [16:20:10] Sue B: that is very interesting , so basically you did not need my help at all , you have your own system?

[16:20:34] Sue B: are you looking to sell this to us?

[16:21:34] Robert Ferrand: Well Steve Day has had a couple of these for a year....I am trying to understand Dover "Policy", because it does not make sense that you do not have them.

[16:23:58] Sue B: so let me understand you asked me questions for 2 hours when I could have been assisting other customers , when you really just wanted to understand why our company president has not asnwered you on your product ? please contact Mr. Day personaly and I will also forward this chat to him [16:25:32] Robert Ferrand: Good idea, I just asked him how does Dover actually fit saddles...before I got on with you.

[16:26:17] Sue B: thank you I will forward this on , have a great weekend .

[16:26:30] Robert Ferrand: Thank you for your time.

8Â Â

36 of 236

-------- Original Message -------Subject:A

simple question

Date:Fri, 28 Jun 2013 10:43:36 -0700 From:Robert Ferrand <inventor@saddletech.net> To:sday@doversaddlery.com, "pglover@doversaddlery.com" <pglover@doversaddlery.com> Steve, Three weeks ago, I asked you a simple question: "please explain how Dover Saddlery actually fits the saddles they sell."

Since then I have downloaded all the literature I think is available on the Dover Saddlery website relating to saddle fit, and I do not see anything that is an "empirically developed methodology which has hundreds of years of history behind it."

So that there is no confusion here, can you please explain what I am missing?

Robert

-------- Original Message -------Subject:O.K.

Maybe I am WRONG

Date:Sun, 09 Jun 2013 20:16:47 -0700 From:Robert Ferrand <inventor@saddletech.net> To:sday@doversaddlery.com, "pglover@doversaddlery.com" <pglover@doversaddlery.com> Steve, Having had the weekend to think about it, maybe I am wrong.

Maybe the "Saddle Fitting Issue" is that I do not understand how Dover Saddlery Fits the saddles its sells.

There is something to be said, for hundreds of years of experience. That said, so that I do not misunderstand and misrepresent you or Dover Saddlery, can you, for the record, please explain how Dover Saddlery actually fits the saddles they sell.

I also do not seek enemies, I only seek the truth, and a more practical method to fit saddles.

Robert

9

37 of 236

-------- Original Message -------Subject:RE: Saddletech

Gauges and the SEC

Date:Fri, 7 Jun 2013 16:02:41 -0400 From:Steve Day <sday@doversaddlery.com> Reply-To:<sday@doversaddlery.com> Organization:Dover Saddlery To:'Robert Ferrand' <inventor@saddletech.net> CC:'Sullivan, John M.' <JSullivan@preti.com>

Bob,

The gauges are in their original packaging from you.

I will not be contacting the SEC with what I regard as your theories on saddle fitting. Dover Saddlery presents the empirically developed methodology which has hundreds of years of history behind it. I do not want to make enemies of one another.

Regards, Steve Stephen L. Day, President Dover Saddlery 525 Great Road Littleton, MA 01460 978-952-8062 x225 978-952-8063 Fax -------- Original Message -------Subject:Re: Saddletech

Gauges and the SEC

Date:Fri, 07 Jun 2013 13:40:53 -0700 From:Robert Ferrand <inventor@saddletech.net> To:sday@doversaddlery.com, "pglover@doversaddlery.com" <pglover@doversaddlery.com> Steve, Great. I just talked to Pru. I understand that there are 3 boxes. I will called Fedex (Now that UPS gave you a better price) and see what the process is for a "call tag" and email you the results.

Now, in the meantime, just so there is not any confusion, and I do not misrepresent anybody can you explain what "the empirically developed methodology which has hundreds of years of history behind it" actually means.

In my 20 plus years of research, I have never come across such a citation, and I have been looking. If you have that information, I would really like to know what it is for my own education.

Robert

10

38 of 236

-------- Original Message -------Subject:Saddletech Gauges and the SEC Date:Wed, 05 Jun 2013 14:13:11 -0700 From:Robert Ferrand <inventor@saddletech.net> To:sday@doversaddlery.com, "pglover@doversaddlery.com" <pglover@doversaddlery.com> Steve, As you say, Great News. I will arrange to have Fedex Pick them up. Are they in the original packaging? As I remember the Mk II was in a rather large box with significant padding. The Saddletech Gauge FDXX was in a Fedex Box, as designed. Please indicate the status of both instruments, so that I can direct Fedex to take the appropriate action.

Now, addressing your comments, I did not react negatively. I do not understand how you can say, "your proposal was unrealistically high for the equestrian industry", since I did not provide a price.

I provided a 7 profit center spreadsheet. Spreadsheets by there nature can be modified as part of the process of negotiation. So no price was actually ever provided for any of the systems. There were only 7 potential income streams outlined for discussion only.

The Option Agreement specifically stated: "The intent of this document is to describe, for negotiation purposes only, certain principal terms."

As I remember the sequence, you said, that you were only interested in 5 computer systems, AT MY COST. You were not interested in the gauges, database or the shim kit.

So I did not provide a price.....since there was no incentive for me to make any money.

Therefore, I do not understand how you can say, "your proposal was unrealistically high for the equestrian industry" Your statement is false.

11

39 of 236

Now, to refresh your memory, from the Computer Saddle Fitting and video taping, that you and I, and others, witnessed at your own personal barn, in December of last year, I have attached a few of the relevant computer saddle pressure scans....to make a few points.

This data supports the obvious conclusion that gravity is a factor in the fit of a saddle.

The above scan with a 120 lbs. rider reveals relatively even saddle contact pressure.

However, the middle scan, with my 200+ lbs, reveals that the same saddle DOES NOT FIT. In contrast, the 3/4 shim with the 200+ rider has significantly improved the FIT.

The simplistic drawing, above, illustrates the saddle fitting issue....if the saddle is fit to the animal's back without any weight, and if the rider's weight causes the animal's back to deflect any amount, then the saddle will "bridge" or NOT FIT. Therefore, Dover's "Perfect Fit" Guidelines for fitting the saddle so the saddle "Fits evenly on the horse's back" is, in fact, incorrect for riders weighing more than 120 lbs. This is a "material fact" when it comes to selling saddles.

This bio-mechanical fact also creates a significant legal liability for Dover Saddlery.

If the saddle customer actually finds a saddle that does fit, by "Relying On" Dover's Saddlery's so called Saddle fitting "Expertise", and the rider weighs more than 120 lbs ....the saddle will probably not fit. By the time the customer discovers the error, the saddle cannot be returned, because the saddle is, now, used. This "material fact" should be disclosed to Dover Saddlery's customers, before they buy the saddle as well as shareholders and the SEC. Howard Bakers famous question, "What did the President, know and when did he know it", is relevant here. The reason is, in 2004, you personally, were in possession of the very same, Saddletech Gauge Mk II that you are currently in possession of. Therefore, as of 2004, you personally, were aware that not only was there a saddle fitting issue, but there was a method to manage this liability. You have failed to disclose this "saddle fitting issue" to customers.....shareholders or the SEC, despite the fact that it is your fiduciary duty, as CEO, to disclose those very "material facts".

12Â Â

40 of 236

Therefore, now that you have personally witnessed the direct evidence that gravity is a factor in the fit of a saddle, and because Dover's current method of fitting a saddle lacks sufficient accuracy, as there are no numerical values,I will assume, that you will be making the proper disclosures to the Securities and Exchange Commission and your shareholders and your customers with respect to Dover's current methods of selling saddles.

Just as Dover Saddlery has just delayed filing Form 10-Q with the SEC because, "It is management's opinion that with this method there was not sufficient accuracy in the recording of the gift card liability account", Dover should also find that it is “management’s opinion that with DOVER'S CURRENT method OF SADDLE FITTING, there (IS) not sufficient accuracy” and this fact should also be disclosed to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Dover's latest press release stated, "Our investigation determined that the Company had material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting in accounting for gift card liabilities as of December 31, 2011 and 2012." An additional Dover internal investigation should reveal that there is a significantly greater "material weakness" in how Dover Saddlery sells saddles.

Please do provide me a copy of the SEC Disclosures you will file, so that I may add a "Measured" Perspective, so that the Securities and Exchange Commission can determine the appropriate response.

Regards Robert

13

41 of 236

May 2 20, 2013 Dover Saddlery Steven Day CEO 525 Great R Road Littleton, MA 01460

Dear Steve, DEEMAND LETTTER FOR TH HE TWO (2) SSADDLETECH H GAUGES

Losing 2 Sad ddletech Gau uges is like lo osing a base e drum in a pphone booth h. They do haave a uniquee shape – that is harrd to miss.

Now, Come on...let us b be real...while you may tthink that "m measuremen nt" is, as you u say, "Radiccal",…. for Pete’s saake, everything in the Do over Saddlerry Catalog, EEXCEPT SADD DLES, are pu urchased witth measureme ent: shoes, boots, pants, shirts. In a few years frrom now, wh hen everyon ne in the world will have smartp phones, meaasuring the h horse and th he saddle to determine w which saddlee fits which horse will be "the only way it is done", forr obvious reaasons. This is the only w way to assurre any “accurracy”.

For most of this year, yo ou have had in your possession threee (3) protottype Saddlettech Gauges which have returne ed only one (1). The twoo (2) other SSaddletech ggauges are n not only are very valuable. You h valuable to me as the in nventor, but are valuable e from a histtorical persp pective. I bellieve these ggauges will go down n in history aas the first m mechanisms to scientificcally measure both the h horse, as well as the saddle with any “accura acy”.

These gauge es are signifiicant instrum ments, and in my opinio n, that will b be worthy caandidates fo or the Smithsonian n Technologyy Museum. These gauges are the fi rst instrumeents that can n measure not only the three dimensional sshape of the animal’s back, and can also calculatte the effectt of gravity. TThe Affect of Gravity, caused by the weiight of the riider, createss a different shape of the animal’s b back, which is the e correct fit ffor the saddle.

been any invvention to m easure this o Never beforre in history,, has there b obvious “diffferential facctor” in saddle fittin ng. This disco overy was on nly made possible by usee of Saddletech’s previo ous invention n ‐ the computer‐saddle‐fittingg ‐system, which validate es the formuula, as well aas, the threee dimensionaal ents. By emp ploying both instrumentss together crreates a feed‐back loop that permitts the measureme “Scientific M Method” to b be employed d. That is wh hy these insttruments arre such a bigg deal.

These 2 Sad ddletech gauges, that you currently p possess, doccument the eevolution off the currentt Saddletech Gauge Mk 6 6, which is th he first "scalaable" designn that can acchieve a worrld‐wide “Sad ddle Measureme ent Standard d" by employying low costt plastic.

You currenttly have the SSaddletech G Gauge Markk II, which is extremely vvaluable as th he first attem mpt to expand the functionalityy of this insttrument beyyond the origginal Mk I, developed in 1996, which h you first saw wh hen you were e the CEO off StateLineTaack, and is ccurrently in u use by over 1 100 saddle ffitters around the world, including SaddleFitforLife.

Additionallyy, the Saddle etech Gauge Mk II was illustrated in the book;

Th he Revolution in Horsem manship: And d what it Meeans to Man nkind,

By Riichard A. Lam mb and Dr. R Robert M. M Miller. (See Linnk above to aactual document.)

42 of 236

What is more legally significant is that you, personally, and your staff, had the opportunity, for months in 2004, to use this very same Saddletech Gauge Mk II, before Dover Saddlery went public in 2006.

This is legally significant, because in the Dover Saddlery’s, Security and Exchange Commission “S‐1” disclosure, you represented , at the time, that 50% of Dover Saddery’s Income was derived from saddle sales, but, you did not disclose, "the material fact", that Dover Saddlery actually did not have any “accurate” method to determine which saddle would fit which horse. Although, you were aware at the time, that there was an issue with the fit of the saddles, because you had used the Saddletech Gauge Mk II, which you currently possess. In addition, you emailed me, 8/02/04, acknowledging that there were “surrounding saddle fitting issues”.

This fact became more interesting a few days ago, on May 16, 2013, when Dover Saddlery Filed a SEC Form 12b‐25 , “Notification of Late Filing” stating: “Historically, the Company has been using the homogenous pool method for determining gift card liability. It is management’s opinion that with this method there was not sufficient accuracy in the recording of the gift card liability account.”

Now, Steve, please explain to me how “It is management’s opinion that with this method there was not sufficient accuracy” , however when selling saddles, Dover Saddlery’s name sake product, your two so‐called sizes, (medium and wide), are used to supposedly determine a three dimensional surface. It is geometrically impossible to describe a three dimensional surface with a one dimensional measurement. So Why is this “lack of ANY accuracy” with respect to saddles is not disclosed to the SEC as “management’s opinion that with this method there was not sufficient accuracy”

In fact, this “lack of ANY accuracy” creates a significant "Product Defect", because, if the saddle does not fit, the product cannot be "used for the use intended", thereby, violating UCC‐2‐315 ‐ Warrantee for Fitness. This violation, in turn, generates a significant legal "Achilles heel" for Dover Saddlery Business Model.

In 2004, when you first became aware that the rider's weight could significantly affect the saddle fit, because that is one of the factors the Mk II Gauge calculates, you should have alerted your customers, that Dover's Saddle Fitting instruction that the saddle must "fit evenly on the horses back", may, possibly, be incorrect.

At the very least, you had a fiduciary duty to your shareholders, to do your own peer review "scientific" research, to determine if gravity was a significant factor in the fit of a saddle. Not just asking saddle makers, with no “scientific” background. Since, by instructing your customers to fit the saddle "evenly on the horse's back" UNLADEN, and NOT even mentioning the weight of the rider or the horse, in effect, you are advising your customers that gravity is NOT a factor. If you are wrong, then Dover Saddlery is creating a product defect, and that is exactly what is happening.

Gravity is arguably the most powerful force in the universe. To argue that it does not apply to the horse, will be a significant challenge for Dover Saddlery. Why? Well, in 2004, before Dover Saddlery went public, the Department of Equine Sciences, at Utrecht University, performed a “peer review clinical trial” that proved that the horses back did in fact extend (meaning deflect downward) with a 150 lbs load.

43 of 236

You have the above clinical paper in your possession, called, “Effects of girth, saddle and weight on movements of the horse”. I know this, because I emailed it to you and I provided it in a larger set of Veterinary Peer Review Clinical Papers that were provided with a red bow….and we discussed it.

Therefore, 2 years before Dover Saddlery went public, there was peer review “scientific” evidence supporting the fact that the saddle fit to the “unladen” animal can NOT possibly fit accurately, because it is a different shape than the mounted horse’s back. Therein is your legal problem.

More significantly, the "the material fact" that gravity could possibly be a factor in the fit of the saddle, should have been disclosed to the Security and Exchange Commission, in the “S‐1”, as well as subsequently, to give investors the "heads up". Such disclosure would permit investors to determine for themselves, if this "the material fact" was a "Manageable" Legacy Legal Liability or “a catastrophic flaw” in the Dover Saddlery Business Model.

Thereby, Shareholders and the Stock Market would be able to factor “the material fact" into the Dover Saddlery stock value, which is the whole point of Security and Exchange Commission requiring disclosure of “relevant business” information, in the first place. When you sell saddles, “fit” is relevant.

If it is important to be “accurate” accounting for gift cards, then it should be equally or even more important to be “accurate” accounting for the fit of the saddles that those gift cards purchase.

The fact that Dover Saddlery has been in possession of this very same Saddletech Gauge Mk II, as well as 2, of its successors, the Saddletech Gauge FDXX , for almost a year, and has not employed this technology or any other saddle measurement technology is a significant historic as well as legal issue for Dover Saddlery.

To give some reference point on the value of early products: The “Apple I” went on sale in July 1976 at a price of US$666.66. On November 24, 2012 at Auction Team Breker , in Cologne, Germany, set a new world record price for a fully working “Apple I” unit of US $640,000.

While the Saddletech Gauges may not have that significant affect on our lives, as the “Apple I” ultimately has had, the Saddletech Gauge is significant to the Equestrian world as noted in the book “Revolution in Horsemanship”, and may well, in the future, prove to be a Revolution in how saddles are Researched, Manufactured and Sold.

The current price for the Saddletech Gauge Mk II ‐ Aluminum (1 of only 1 made) is $50,000 The current price for the Saddletech Gauge FDXX ‐ Plastic (1 of only 3 made) is $25,000

Alternatively, please return both the Saddletech Gauge Mk II and the Saddletech Gauge FDXX .

Respectfully submitted,

Robert Ferrand Inventor/CEO

www.saddlefittingsimplified.com 2995 Woodside Rd. Suite 400, Woodside, CA 94062 – 650‐631‐8400 inventor@saddletech.net 44 of 236

Steven Day, CEO Dover Saddlery 525 Great Rd. Littleton, MA 01460

May 11, 2004 RE: SIGNIFICANT MARKET OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYING 3-D MEASUREMENT

Dear Steven, Enclosed is a Saddletech Gauge Mk I I, a How to use the Saddletech System Brochure, as well as a set of directions and worksheets that can be taken to the barn. With this simple Saddle Fitting Kit and the use of the Measure Twice – Buy Once / Saddle Matchmaker measured saddle database, a significantly more accurate method to fit a saddle to a horse is possible, and thereby providing a significant market opportunity for Dover Saddlery.

While I do appreciate that many equestrians assume that baling wire and cardboard have worked for years, unfortunately, without numerical values it is impossible for baling wire to be an accurate method of measurement.

Accuracy does matter when humanely fitting a saddle to a horse. In the 12 years that I have been computer pressure mapping saddles, I have documented that less than 10% of saddles fit, with the majority of equestrians and saddle fitters using baling wire. However, this fact reveals that there is a market opportunity to sell new saddles that DO FIT. In past few years, the introduction of the “Saddletech Orthotic” has provided Saddletech a significant research platform, because we can accurately make saddle shapes within an accuracy of a few degrees. This capability not only proves that the Saddletech Gauge and Saddletech Calibration Formula are accurate, it validates the Saddletech Evidence Based Saddle Fitting Method by employing Saddletech Pressure Mapping to create a “Feed Back Loop”, which permits the use of the “Scientific Method” for validation.

Good News/Bad News. The good news is we have the most accurate method to fit a saddle. The bad news is that it proves that what the “saddle fitting experts” have been recommending for years is incorrect, because they have overlooked the effect of gravity. The reason for this error is their so called “fitting” techniques are so crude they cannot even detect that gravity is a factor, when common sense should have alerted them.

While the animal’s welfare should be the concern, what really makes this a critical issue is an array of federal and state consumer protection laws that require manufacturers and vendors to provide products without defects. Now, if the saddle does not fit – the product is defective for the use intended, no way around it. The fact is: the way saddles are currently sold, without any 3-D measurement, is a negligent misrepresentation lawsuit looking for a place to happen. It is only a matter of time, before an equestrian / plaintiff’s attorney connects the dots, to protect the horses.

Saddle Fitting is the management of PRESSURE. Without any saddle interface PRESSURE or 3-D measurement data, saddle makers really do not have any “evidence” that any of their saddles actually do fit, that will stand the scrutiny of a court of law. Many saddle makers have a significant legal exposure because they are aware that a calibrated measurement solution has been developed that proves there is an obvious error, and they are ignoring the data, injuring horses in the process. However, by using physics, physiology and the “scientific method”, “evidence” can be submitted to a court that proves that a mathematical relationship between the 3-D shape of the horse’s back and the 3-D shape of the saddle does exist, that can be defined as “FIT”.

Now, there is an easy solution: By employing a three-dimensional measured saddle inventory control system not only is the accuracy of the saddle fit significantly improved, but this method also provides a legal risk management strategy, without even involving the saddle makers. By just measuring the horse’s back and all Dover’s saddles, if for some reason the saddle does not fit, it is a mathematical calibration error that can be easily identified and corrected, NOT a fraudulent claim based on negligent misrepresentation.

This is a significant value of this system, that is in Dover Saddlery’s and the Saddle Industry’s enlightened self-interest because, without a credible defense, one saddle-fitting lawsuit could easily cost more than the implementation of a calibrated saddle measurement standard, and a saddle measurement standard would then need to be implemented anyway, to avoid further litigation. This really is a Catch 22, to the horses’ and consumer’s benefit.

1. GREATER SADDLE FITTING ACCURACY, 2. SIGNIFICANT M ARKETING ADVANTAGE, & 3. LEGAL COMPLIANCE The Saddletech Evidence Based Saddle Fitting System provides a market opportunity to create a Paradigm shift in the saddle industry and thereby shift a significant number of saddle sales to the Dover Saddlery.

Respectfully,

Robert Ferrand Inventor / CEO 2995 Woodside Rd. Suite 400, Woodside, CA 94062 – 650-631-8400 45 of 236

TRANSCRIPT OF PHONE CALL BETWEEN STEVEN DAY, CEO DOVER SADDLERY & ROBERT FERRAND, SADDLETECH 7/30/2004 8:30 PST THIS CONVERSATION WAS TRANSCRIBED BY FERRAND TO THE BEST OF HIS MEMORY - WITHIN ONE HOUR OF THE CONVERSATION WHICH EXPLAINS THE HIGH LEVEL OF DETAIL AND ACCURACY (Ferrand will sign affidavit to the accuracy of the conversation, if required)

Present on speakerphone in Massachusetts is Steven Day, CEO Dover Saddlery, Patricia Nestor, Director of Saddlery, Dover Saddlery Possibly Prudence Glover, Day’s executive Secretary (silent) and in California, Robert Ferrand Inventor CEO Saddletech

I.

BACKGROUND

Steve Day first saw a demonstration of the Computer Saddle Fitting System and Prototype Gauge in 1997, when he was President of State Line Tack. and met with Robert Ferrand, at that time. As of the date of the conversation, Dover Saddlery has had the Saddletech Gauge Mk I I for two months with various people testing it. One week ago, in a conference call with Ferrand, Day asks, Nestor and Glover, “Could our customers get a better fit with this gauge? Both Nestor and Glover said “Yes”.

II.

REASON FOR CONVERSATION

On Wednesday, Ferrand spoke with Day and Day said “You might have something here, lets speak on Friday”. So on Wednesday evening, Ferrand sent “DOVER LICENSING COVER LETTER” &“SAMPLE DOVER LICENSE” explaining a strategy and a Licensing agreement for one computer system, one saddle sizing stand, and ten gauges. The following is an account of the Friday conversation.

III.

THE CONVERSATION - 7/30/2004 8:30 PST

FERRAND: “Yesterday, I did a clinic with Tom Clark who owns Skito. that points out what I suggested to you in the letter.

DAY: I have never heard of him.

FERRAND: “I love this industry; it is so big none of us know what is going on. Skito has the best saddle pad I have tested over the twelve years. Now, he was very surprised by the data on the pads. His pads were not doing what he thought they were. Now, everyone is out there making all these claims without really understanding what is happening. Everyone is many claims about pressure without measuring pressure. And that is the opportunity”

DAY: My concern is that this could be a double edged sword. We might be setting a standard that we cannot meet. We have a big problem even getting the panels to be even. One is bigger than the other. There are not any saddle companies that can put out a consistent product.

Have you ever spoken to Peter Manet?

FERRAND: in 1997, I met Peter Menet, Harry Dabs, (both English Saddle Makers) and the VP of Marketing & VP of Sales for Eiser’s at some barn in New York…

46 of 236

DAY: Was Michael Diamond there?

FERRAND: No, I will get to the Michael Diamond punch line in a second. "The VP of Marketing, whose name I forget, came up to me and said, Peter and Harry are going to make sure the saddle fits before we do any testing. I said, “Good Idea, Then, Peter came strutting in and said, ”I want to see the computer, the Germans have a computer I want to see the computer.”

I said, “Well, I have this new gauge that can do a pretty good job”. Peter said, “I just want to see the computer.” I said, O.K. So, We put the computer sensor pad on the horse, put the saddle on the horse, and Peter mounted the horse. Then all hell broke loose. As soon as the data came up on the screen showing that the saddle that they thought fit, actually DID NOT fit, Harry Dabs wife, Monica, looked at the computer screen and walk out. Harry Dabs said, “You don't have to be a pilot to build an airplane". I said, “ What does that mean?”

“Well, take a look at this gauge”. .So we took the saddle off the horse, removed the computer sensor, and I measured the horse, with the Alpha Prototype Saddletech Gauge. Then I turned around and placed the gauge in the saddle, and it revealed the same “bridging” that the computer sensor array pad revealed.

Showing that the saddle did not fit this horse.

Peter Menet saddled the horse, mounted and said, “I am out of here”. The VP of Marketing walked up to me and said, “we can’t handle this information”. The VP of Sales walked up to me and said, “We need more men like you”. So within 20 minutes I stood alone in an empty barn, thinking….. I just flew 3000 miles to talk to these guys and what the hell just happened?”

“Now here comes the punch line. A few weeks later I called Michael Diamond, (CEO of Eiser’s,) for a follow up phone call and this exchange occurred.”

Diamond, “Bob we are not going to buy a Saddletech Gauge”. Ferrand, “It is just a simple way to relate the saddle to the horse” Diamond, “Bob, we only build saddles in one size” Ferrand, “Why would you do that, horses come in all sorts of different sizes?” Diamond, “For manufacturing efficiency” Ferrand, “What if someone finds out?” Diamond, “ We will take that risk!” I Gasped!

DAY: Monica (referring to Harry Dabs wife who walked out upon seeing the saddle did not fit on the computer) is the best business person in the group. She knows that their saddles are all over the place, so the last thing anyone wants is some instrument that is going to show that.

FERRAND: “But wait a minute, if you know that you are putting out a bad product and know there is a solutions, legal issues arise”.

DAY: I do not think that is a problem.

FERRAND: What I am offering is a solution, to build a standard. The market opportunity here is to be able understand what is happening under the saddle.”

DAY: What if I find out that none of the saddles can meet the tolerance.

FERRAND: "That is not a problem, because if you measure your 1000 saddles and they are all different …the horses are all different, that is my point, what I am offering is a way to match the two...that is where the money is."

47 of 236

DAY: Have you worked with Tad Coffin?

FERRAND: I spoke with him the other day and asked him if he ever measured his saddle with a computer pressure system? Coffin told me he had not. If you are trying to measure pressure, why not measure pressure? Then he told me that he only makes saddles in one size.”

DAY: That it is true that the saddle is only made one size, but he has a padding system that corrects for the differences. I used it on my horse and I could see a remarkable change.

FERRAND: “You can NOT change saddles and make any diagnosis in a short time, because you are just changing the pressure points. Let me give you an example, Len Brown (another saddle maker) told me a trick that he was doing with reining horses. He and his buddies were buying broken down $25,000 to $50,000 well-trained horses with sore backs for a few thousand dollars. They just put Orthoflex saddles on and bingo, horse comes back and they would then sell the horse for five figures.”

DAY: Then the horse gets sore again?

FERRAND: “Exactly. ”That is why you need the computer system. Everyone is trying to figure out what the pressure is by doing everything except measure pressure. Why not just measure the pressure?”

What I am offering is for you to get the Gestalt experience. When you use the gauge and the computer together, you can really begin to understand what is happening under the saddle. It is all measurement.

That is why it works. That is the opportunity. You have the distribution; you just need to really understand what is really happening under the saddle.

I can make you nine different orthotics, each ten degrees different, for one horse, now no saddle maker can be that accurate. You can then use the computer to test saddle pads. If the saddle fits, any pad will work…Tthe question is what is the breaking point. I can make the orthotics each ten degrees different or any other amount, and you can test all your pads to figure out which will work best,.”

NESTO: Now that is a good idea” DAY: “Well, Dover has such a brand name I am concerned we could be setting a standard that we cannot meet FERRAND: Wait a minute, there are legal issues here. UCC 2-315, if the vendor knows the uses for which the product will be used and the consumer is relying on the vendor to make a choice, there is an implied warrantee for fitness.”

DAY: I know but I really do not think that is a problem.

FERRAND: “if everyone gives a refund if the saddle does not fit, you are right, but that is not how it works.” “Steve I am doing you a favor here, the issue is not whether you are going to get sued, but having a business model that is in compliance with consumer protection. Now if you take the position that you do not want to test, they will ask why not, if you say you tested and know the saddles do not fit…Steve you have been through enough litigation….you get my drift”

DAY: Maybe in California, since you can get sued for hot coffee.

48 of 236

FERRAND: “Hey, the issue is the Uniform Commercial Code 2-315, it is no joke. There are other issues, but Orthoflex got sued in Judge Wopner’s Animal Court for saddle fitting, on this very point” Day said, “You are joking”. I said, No I am not, they even had the Horse in the court room and the Judge came down with the black robes asking what is this saddle fitting issue”

DAY: “You are kidding”.

FERRAND: No I am not, Len lost the case on this very issue. I will try to find a copy for you”

DAY: I understand your point.

FERRAND: Steve you have worry about legacy liability here. You have to go back four years.

DAY: Yeah.

FERRAND: “What I am offering is for you to get ahead of the game here. If you measure your whole inventory you are going to really have valuable information.”

DAY: The only saddle makers that can possibly use this is Tad Coffin.

FERRAND: “No way, the whole point of measuring the saddles after manufacture is to be able to match them to horses. If you need a manufacturer, use Jochen Schleese, he has been with Saddletech for seven years. He has the computer, gauge, and stand, he can make saddles for you.

DAY: I have seen Jochen at the shows, I respect him. I talked to him and he does not want to sell through Dover”.

FERRAND: Wait a minute, I know he has excess capacity, He might not want to sell under his label, but if that is an issue I can put that deal together.

DAY: I just want to walk before I run. I remember when I saw the demo of the computer a number of years ago; I thought it was too sensitive and complicated. You could have it so blue is good and red is bad and then you change it and the colors change.

FERRAND: “Now first the dumb cowboy that ripped off the computer patent learned how to use the system is 30 minutes. So that is not an issue. When I did the demo for Robert Meaghan, his secretary Robin..Davidson actually ran the system and put the SKU numbers in. Now, the colors just represent pressure. If you change the scale the colors change, but they are just measurement of the pressure. The issue is what is the pressure”

Secretary’s voice in back ground, “Your next appointment is here”.

FERRAND: “You really need to computer to understand the physiology. Especially, if your are going to support customers. There is so much misinformation out there. At a minimum you need the computer, sizing stand and gauge. You have to understand the effect of gravity…to really get it you need to see both.

Guys like Gene Freeze are going to get creamed, do you seriously think you can go into a court and claim that gravity does not exist. You can’t just use the gauge. The gauge is great but to understand what makes the gauge work you need the computer.”

49 of 236

You need the sizing stand to measure the saddles. You can use the gauge to measure the horse. You can put the saddle on the horse to determine the balance and then put the gauge in the saddle to determine the fit. But what if you do not have the horse. You need the sizing stand to measure the saddle without the horse.

DAY: I need to have another demo of the computer. Maybe here or at Tad Coffin’s in Virginia and I need to see that it really works.”

FERRAND: “Steve, I have been at this 12 years, do you seriously think I can go down to the United States Border Patrol and hand them a computer scan of all blue, if I did not have this figured out. Steve, I do not have any competition. There is no other measurement saddle measurement system in the world, I am it. The Equimeasure gives you a form, but you cannot put the information into a database. We are talking about making money, I have a comprehensive solution. Maybe you can come to California, San Francisco is not hard duty.”

DAY: Well, I am interested in a more modest proposal, like maybe we get a gauge and send it around to see if we can match saddles.

FERRAND: This issue is you need to understand what is happening under the saddle, you don’t get it.”

Secretary voice in back ground, “Your next appointment is here”.

DAY: I have six people standing around.

FERRAND: ”Where are we?”

DAY: I do not know. Bye

E-Mail to Robert Ferrand from Stephen Day – Received 8/02/04 Bob, Sorry I had to get off the phone on Friday in order to accommodate my next meeting.

I wanted to recap Dover's position so there is no misunderstanding.

1 We are willing to buy one gauge and start sending it out to customers to judge their reaction - this must be an outright purchase with no additional fee's.

2 I would like to see another demo of the computer system, after all it was 8 years ago that I last saw the system live. I think it would be very informative to do this at Tad Coffin's factory in Virginia. Dover would be willing to buy the plane ticket to ease the cost of this demo.

I do not want to seem too arbitrary but, these are the only business resources that I want to commit to saddle marketing and the surrounding saddle fitting issues at this time.

Regards, Steve Stephen L. Day President Dover Saddlery 50 of 236

April 17, 2012

Dover Saddlery Steven Day CEO 525 Great Road Littleton, MA 01460 Dear Steve, Since we last spoke on 7/30/2004, there have been many changes in the world.

1. Dover Saddlery has gone public and needs a “Strategic Market Differentiator” to increase shareholder value.

2. SmartPak, Valley Vet, and everybody and their kid brother competes with Dover in ecommerce saddle distribution.

3. Fedex has purchased Kinko’s Office, creating a worldwide “local distribution” network for Saddletech Gauges When you reviewed the “Prototype” Saddletech Gauge MK II and Saddletech Database and there were still challenges. a. Distribution: the gauges were shippable, but it was labor intensive and costly going through Fedex Memphis.

Today, the “New and Improved” Saddletech Gauge FDXX fits into a FedEx Box - ships though the local FedEx/Office network. b. Saddle Measurement: The Saddles were measureable, but it was labor intensive and required skilled labor.

Today, the “New and Improved Saddletech Measurement” permits anyone to easily measure a new or used saddle, on site.

Tad Coffin claims 18 different axes for a saddle. With so many variables, it is a difficult if not impossible, for the saddle customer to “accurately” determine the fit of the saddle, without measurement. Even worse, once the rider mounts, there is no way to touch, feel, see or “measure” under the saddle, so the effect of gravity is ignored and the customer can only find a saddle that fits by accident not by design. If the customer does not know the 3D shape of the animal and Dover does not know the 3D shape of the saddle, “Try Before You Buy” is a “Work-around” - not a solution.

Saddletech has the “Measure Before You Buy” Solution that defines the 3D shape of the animal as well as the saddle. The “Smartfit Wizard Saddle Database” can provide 100% Customer Satisfaction, because it is the most accurate saddle fitting method available, bar none. By providing, the Saddletech Gauge FDXX directly to the consumer, for rent or for free, empowers the consumer to accurately determine the 3D shape of their horse. By simply employing these calibrated 3D saddle measurements and SmartFit Wizard Saddle Database, Dover could turn this industry wide “lack of measurement” liability into an asset. Thereby, providing saddle customers with a VALUE ADDED saddle which can “satisfy” millions of frustrated saddle customers with a real solution, and Dover Saddlery a competitive advantage.

Over the past decade the Saddletech Gauge has garnered rave reviews, as your own 2004 test proved. However, the issue has always been where are the measured saddles? The “Saddlefit4life” high-end custom saddle makers are using the Saddletech Gauge all over the world, but they do not allow the saddle customer to touch the gauge.

If Dover measures their saddle inventory three-dimensionally, Dover will own the saddle market, by default. By being able to provide the customer a MATHEMATICAL PROBABILITY OF FIT, the saddle purchase is no longer a leap of faith. More importantly, if the saddle does not fit, the customer immediately knows the “mathematical” amount of the discrepancy.

Dover can then immediately UPSELL a Saddletech Shim Kit, or Tad Coffin pad or any other pad that solves the problem.

Saddletech can provide Dover is ability to sell the saddle that the customer wants with a “measured saddle fitting solution”. The critical point is the customer can get a better fit with a Saddletech Gauge, than with baling wire and cardboard, without a Saddle Fitter. This can allow Dover to increase market share with 100% Customer Satisfaction.

The customer only needs the Gauge when they are buying or fitting the saddle. Renting the Gauge is cheaper for the customer than buying. Consequently, the new Saddletech Business Model rents the Saddletech Gauge FDXX, because rental is significantly more lucrative than sales for Saddletech. However, we are offering “one” saddle distributor an opportunity for an “Exclusive License” for the “mathematics” that drives the SmartFit Wizard database to be able to use this “fleet of gauges”. Dover does not need Saddletech Gauges, Dover needs an accurate method to match the saddle to the individual horse by using this “fleet of gauges”. - the SmartFit Wizard is that solution.

Strategically, 3D saddle measurement actually provides Dover: 1. Added value to the saddle 2. Improved quality control, 3. The opportunity to UPSELL a “measured saddle fitting solution” and 4. a competitive advantage.

This “Strategic Market Differentiator” could provide Dover significantly increased shareholder value. Let’s reopen the conversation from where we left off, years ago, with the New Saddletech SmartFit Wizard – Saddle Fitting Simplified.

Respectfully submitted, Robert Ferrand Inventor/CEO

51 of 236

www.saddletechgauge.com 2995 Woodside Rd. Suite 400, Woodside, CA 94062 – 650-631-8400 inventor@saddletech.net

Robert Ferrand Saddle Industry Whistle blower 2995 Woodside Rd. Woodside, Ca 94062 650-631-8400 Sept 16, 2005 U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission Elena Ro Staff Attorney Division of Enforcement RE: DOVER SADDLERY S-1 Dear Elena, In the Dover Saddlery S-1 Prospectus it states on Page 3: " Excellent Customer Service: Our company-wide focus on exceptional customer service is integral to our success. We have a policy of offering customers a 100% satisfaction guarantee and, in a recent customer survey, we received a 9 out of 10 average rating for product quality and service. Our knowledgeable staff and our historically high fill rates are some of the reasons why we have low return rates and high repeat customer rates."

However on the Dover Saddlery Website is States: “Dover's Customer Satisfaction Guarantee We stand behind the quality of our products. If you find you are not satisfied with your purchase, simply return it and we will refund, replace or exchange it for you.* *We cannot accept personalized, custom items or underwear for return. *Saddles are returnable, if our saddle instructions are followed closely.

Oh there is an asterisk on the website that is not in the S-1 Prospectus.

The saddle instructions are that the saddle cannot be returned if the saddle appears worn.

Well wait a minute, if there are 1. No 3-D measurements to relate the saddle shape to the horse’s back shape, 2. There is no continuity because there is NO quality control in the manufacturing process, 3. The saddle fitting directions to put the saddle on the horse and make sure if fits evenly, actually ignores gravity, so the saddle that appears to fit - will not fit and 4. The customer cannot even ride in the saddle, HOW CAN THE CUSTOMER POSSIBLY DETERMINE IF THE SADDLE FITS prior to purchase?

The United State Uniform Commercial Code 2-315 states: “If the vendor knows the use for which the product is intended and the consumer is relying on the expertise of the Vendor to choose the product, there is an implied warrantee that the product can be used in the manner intended.

But that is not how is works in the saddle industry. Dover Saddlery and the saddle industry in general completely ignores UCC 2-315 and takes no responsibility for saddle fit.

Dover Saddlery representatives and their catalogue make claims that the saddles “FIT” in order to make the sale, which is a violation of Sec 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, because there is no “reasonable basis” for making these claims because there are no “objective” measurements: narrow, medium and wide are not three dimensional measurements that can be related to the animal’s back shape.

52 of 236

Dover Saddlery and the Saddle Industry, in generally provides misinformation on how to fit the saddle because the industry refuses to employ objective measurement instruments. Instead the Saddle Industry has created a false standard that, despite the fact the saddle consumer is provided misinformation, the saddle consumer still cannot return the saddle if it shows signs of wear (scuffing on the panels and flaps). The saddle consumers, unknowledgeable about the law, have accepted this procedure as standard practice, when it is actually a deceptive trade practice.

Now there is a more serious issue:

In a quest to increase profits by reducing costs: by 1. Reducing the physical amount of material” in the saddle panel that contacts the horse’s back and 2. Making the production more modular so the less skills were required to make the saddle panel, the “surface area” of the saddle that contacts the horse was reduced by more than 30% compared to traditional designs, even only fifty years ago, made by the same company, and currently sold by Dover Saddlery.

This design change (product defect) has had profound effect on the pressure distribution that the saddle exerts on the animal’s back. A simple mathematical calculation would prove that a 30% reduction in surface area would increase pressure: Weight divided by surface area in inches = pressure per square inch that has to proportionately increase the pressure on the animal’s back.

However, that is only part of the problem. The critical design product defect is that by reducing the width of the panel, in the center of the panel - directly under the rider, to about two to three inches, rather than traditional designs of five to seven inches, prevents the “arc” of the saddle to be adjusted to the curvature of the animal’s back.

Traditional English saddles built over the past century had a large panel to permit additional wool or horse hair to be added to the panel under the rider, so that the section of the panel became larger and thereby permitted the shape of the panel to be adjusted to the shape of the animal’s back, thereby adjusting the “arc” of the saddle to the “arc” of the animal’s back. That is a serious design product defect has been introduced relatively recently, the past few decades and should have been disclosed in the Dover Saddlery S-1 since that is the type of saddle Dover sells.

Saddle panels of two inches in diameter, make it physically impossible to make the panel larger by adding material; the panel only gets harder, totally defeating the purpose of the saddle panel, in the first place. This product defect prevents the “Arc” or “Rock” and the saddle to be increased which causes the saddle to “bridge” creating higher sustain pressures on the front and back of the saddle, which causes the damage to the horse’s back, over time. Or in other words, THE SADDLE NOT TO FIT.

53 of 236

Now, if a company wanted to go public it should want to “MARKET DIFFERENTIATE” itself from other companies selling the same product to justify The INVESTOR TO TAKE THE ADDITIONAL RISK. This situation in the saddle industry could actually provide a significant market opportunity if you could actually FIT THE SADDLE MORE ACCURATELY. Further, if there was a way to mathematically measure the three dimensional shape of the animal, and add a mathematical formula to correct for gravitational forces, and then separately be able to three dimensionally measure the saddles, then this data could be entered into a database and sorted to DETERMINE WHICH SADDLE WILL FIT WHICH HORSE MORE ACCURATELY and PROVIDE A SIGNIFICANT MARKET ADVANTAGE THAT WOULD JUSTIFIY AN IPO. That measurement technology and database has been built, and shown to Steven Day, CEO Dover Saddlery, by me, personally, which is why I received this insider information. (You can review the prototype database at http://www.tools.knowledgeblue.com/saddletech/ just click “Submit” and then the blue “detail” to see how it works.

I point this out, because the question should be raised; SINCE 50% OF DOVER SADDLERY’S INCOME IS GENERATED FROM SADDLE SALES WHY WOULD DOVER SADDLERY TRY TO GO PUBLIC WITHOUT A MORE ACCURATE WAY TO FIT SADDLES?” Good Question.

Could it be that there is collusion in the saddle industry to cover up the “PRODUCT DEFECTS”? A three dimensional animal and saddle measurement system coupled with a computer interface pressure measurement system and an Oracle database, would uncover the “PRODUCT DEFECTS” rather quickly. I submit a letter from Dover Saddlery’s largest competitor State Line Tack senior counsel rejecting the same measurement system as evidence that there is some cover up a play.

The critical issue relating to the Dover Saddlery S-1 disclosure is why was this information not disclosed. It certainly has direct relevance on the value of the investment. Why did WR Hambrecht not Google me, and ask me what I thought or worse what did I know?

Dover Saddlery has failed to disclose the critical underlying issues relative to selling saddles which is where all the companies profits are made. If those profits are made by illegal methods, or if Dover Saddlery’s Business Model could actually be made obsolete by technology investors should be alerted. Clearly this has not been done and has undermined the whole purpose of a SEC S-1 submission.

Robert Ferrand Whistleblower 650-631-8400

54 of 236

Robert Ferrand Founder American Life Support Technology 2995 Woodside Rd. Woodside, Ca 94062 650-631-8400 Bill Hambrecht, himself WR Hambrecht + Co 539 Bryant Street, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94107

Dover Saddlery S-1 – The Kiss of Death Dear Bill, Remember when you were preparing to take Netscape public. You were in New York, watching the 4th of July fireworks, and were handed a reorganization plan for American Life Support Technology (Lectus, Inc). The plan was required because, despite the fact the company had the world’s most sophisticated hospital bed in production with $16,000,000 from you and others, due to Bama Rucker and your lack of oversight, you personally placed the company into voluntary bankruptcy, for absolutely no reason.

You may remember, you were sued by the Dept. of Justice, U.S. Trustee for Breach of Fiduciary Duty. However, since you made so much money on the Netscape IPO, you settled out of court to avoid the embarrassment.

At the time, it was reported by your agent that you said, “It is not that Lectus is not profitable, why should I make five times money when I could put the money into Netscape and make 10 times money”? The reason to maintain the investment is make a profit while also helping 1,000,000’s of people dying of bedsores. In point of fact this bed would have save Christopher Reeves’ life. But you did not care about that, At that moment, you, Bill Hambrecht, personally, gave my company, the Kiss of Death.

Because all the other VC’s said, “Well if Bill won’t invest it must be a bad deal, it was not a bad deal but you killed anyway.

So that no kind deed shall go unnoticed, this letter is to inform you that I, personally, have reported you to the Securities and Exchange for failing your responsibilities, once again, in this case, as an underwriter, which requires Due Diligence before submission of an S-1 to the SEC. When I read through the Dover Saddlery S-1, I began to think I have seen this movie before, my my, another breach of Fiduciary Duty. You did it again; due to your lack of Due Diligence you have given Dover Saddlery the Kiss of Death. You should be really proud of yourself.

55 of 236

In the Dover Saddlery's S-1 prepared by your firm, no mention is made in the "Risk Factors" that the Business Model, of which the S-1 Prospectus reports 52% of the income from the enterprise is generated, is from saddles and tack, and that business model is based on deceptive trade practices.

You Bill Hambrecht should have asked the question “SINCE MORE THAN 50% OF DOVER SADDLERY’S INCOME IS GENERATED FROM SADDLE SALES WHY WOULD DOVER SADDLERY TRY TO GO PUBLIC WITHOUT SOME WAY TO FIT SADDLES?”

Since Mr. Day was put ON NOTICE May 11, 2004, in the Day Cover Letter, relating to the legal issues relating to saddle fit and strategies to avoid such deception, and Mr. Day had also admitted to KNOWINGLY selling defective products, the statements made in this S-1 are violations of your responsibility of Due Diligence.

Now, Bill, you personally were aware that there was a high tech way to fit saddles with a computer saddle fitting system, because, it was a spin off technology from the bed company, that you personally invested in. And I, personally, was dating your close friend, Susan Witter, who was taking care of your mother; at the time I built my second company, Saddletech to produce such an instrument.

If you remember, I retired in 1992 to start Saddletech and I retired from the ALST Board in late 1993, so you and Bama Rucker knew what I was doing, because you were paying for my golden parachute that I was using to finance Saddletech.

Additionally, the Silicon Valley Business Journal wrote an article about me in 1993, called “Ferrand's, Saddle, Bed may Build new Lungs”. This article was the talk of the board meetings and must have been provided to you, by Bama or Susan, because it was the first publicity the bed company ever had, and it was an interesting story.

Therefore, you, Bill Hambrecht, personally have liability here as well as the CEO, Steven Day. You should have known better because you knew the inventor of the world's first computer saddle measurement system, was in your stable, so you should have asked some serious questions to Mr. Steven Day, before submitting this document to the SEC. Because you Bill Hambrecht, know the laws relating to misleading statements made in an S-1 submission.

At no point is it mentioned, in Dover Saddlery's S-1 that the sale of these saddles, 52% of income, is based on the consumer not being able to determine the saddle's FIT prior to purchase, IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW. (UCC 2-315). THE LEGAL STANDARD IN COMMERCE IS THE PRODUCT CAN BE USED IN THE MANNER INTENDED. HOWEVER, THE SADDLE WILL SHOW SIGNS OF WEAR, BEFORE THE HORSE WILL SHOW SIGNS OF TRAUMA, CATCH 22. and the saddle can then not be returned, so the consumer has to buy another saddle. That is great for the saddle business, but it is illegal. Especially if you know the product is defective.

56 of 236

In the absence of any three dimensional measurement, there cannot be any quality control. Without quality control there is no consistency, (which Mr. Day admits in the transcript of the 7/30/2004 phone call between Steven Day, and myself. "My concern is that this could be a double edged sword. We might be setting a standard that we cannot meet. We have a big problem even getting the panels to be even. One is bigger than the other. There are not any saddle companies that can put out a consistent product." So Dover Saddlery is knowingly selling defective products, which you are well aware is illegal, and exposes the corporation to liability. and in turn the investors, but this was not disclosed.

Quoting directly from the e-mail to me from Mr. Day dated 8/02/04: I would like to see another demo of the computer system, after all it was 8 years ago that I last saw the system live” Excuse me, what has Mr. Day been doing for the past eight years to sell saddles. If he knew there was an accurate way to fit saddles, he should have been doing research to be sure that he is not selling a defective product. Has Mr. Day actually objectively verified that he has any viable method to fit saddles? If Dover is generating half its income from saddles and does not have an accurate way to fit the products it sells, why is Dover trying to go public? Bill, you should have asked these questions, not me, it was your job, that is why your are paid the big bucks.

Without any valid method of saddle measurement, if Mr. Day does not know what the shape of the saddle is or the shape of the horse, how can Mr. Day possibly know how to fit the saddle? Even worse if Mr. Day and his staff do not know how to fit the saddles, what are they telling customers so the customer believes the saddle will fit their horse, and will buy the saddle? Equestrians do not knowingly buy saddles that do not fit.

So Mr. Day, understands that Dover Saddlery, cannot buy saddles that are made, as Mr. Day says, “a consistent product.". However, without a consistent product how does Mr. Day know what he is buying, even worse he has no idea what he is selling? There are a number of Consumer Protection Laws directed toward such activity.

Quoting directly from the e-mail to me from Mr. Day, I do not want to seem too arbitrary but, these are the only business resources that I want to commit to saddle marketing and the surrounding saddle fitting issues at this time." despite the fact that the "SADDLE FITTING ISSUES' are the whole basis for the Business Model disclosed in the Dover Saddlery S-1, and where ALL THE PROFITS for the company are generated, that would justify the company to go IPO, in the first place.

This is why the representations in this Dover Saddler’s S-1 are misleading if not outright fraudulent, because the Business Model is based on misleading the consumer. which is illegal, and in the case of the S-1 is misleading the investor, which is also illegal.

So not only is the Business Model based on Deceptive Trade Practices, which gives the company a competitive advantage, and this is not disclosed to investors, even worse the CEO, Steven Day obviously understands the issues, as revealed in the attached e-mail to me three days after the conversation, which not only acknowledges

57 of 236

the existence of measurement equipment to correct the problem, reveals Mr. Day, has no interest in even addressing the issue of providing products that are “FIT FOR THE USE INTENDED”, which is required by Law. Now, what makes this situation completely insane, and a bad business model, is if a Dover Saddlery wanted to go public it should want to “MARKET DIFFERENTIATE” itself from other companies such as State Line Tack, selling the same product in exactly the same way, with far greater resources, to create a business model which would justify The INVESTOR TO TAKE THE ADDITIONAL RISK. This confusion in the saddle industry relating to saddle fit, could actually provide a significant market opportunity if you could actually FIT THE SADDLE MORE ACCURATELY. Further, if there was a way to mathematically measure the three dimensional shape of the animal, and add a mathematical formula to correct for gravitational forces, and then separately be able to three dimensionally measure the saddles, then this data could be entered into a database and sorted to DETERMINE WHICH SADDLE WILL FIT WHICH HORSE MORE ACCURATELY and PROVIDE A SIGNIFICANT MARKET ADVANTAGE THAT WOULD JUSTIFIY AN IPO. That measurement technology and database has been built, and shown to Steven Day, CEO Dover Saddlery, by me, personally, which is why I received this insider information. (You can review the prototype database at http://www.tools.knowledgeblue.com/saddletech/ just click “Submit” and then the blue “detail” to see how it works.

This research evolved out of the research I did to develop the Airlogic Hospital Bed. If you remember the whole reason you invested in my bed company in the first place, was that after I researched the Effect of Pressure on Mammalian tissue at Stanford University, I discovered that Hillenband and Kinetic Concepts actually were renting these beds based on false science. I invented the bed to comply with the physiological requirements, which is why Dr. Lars Vistnes, Chairman of Plastic Surgery at Stanford, was on ALST’s Board of advisors. The Pressure transducer pad was developed so the Dr. Vistnes and I could clinically prove the superiority of the bed. And this is why you invested in the bed in the first place, hello.

I point this out, because, another company, State Line tack, could employ this technology and make Dover Saddery’s Business Model obsolete, putting all the investors money at risk, and this should have been disclosed to investors.

The computer saddle interface pressure mapping system was developed from this sensor array developed for human research.. Since you knew that a measurement device to more accurately fit saddles was invented by one of the entrepreneurs in your stable, you should have performed far better Due Diligence before submitting a misleading and fraudulent S-1 to the Securities and Exchange Commission. But you and I both know this is not the first time you have done that, this movie is in reruns. I hope the SEC takes this movie off the air.

Hugs and Kisses, Robert Ferrand Founder American Life Support Technology P.S. Say Hi to Susan and Bama

58 of 236

59 of 236

SmartFit "SYSTEM" - U.S. ENGLISH SADDLE MULTI -PROFIT "7" CENTER INCOME MATRIX

SADDLETECH GAUGE FDXX CYCLES/MO

# GAUGES 250 500 1000

SALES

6 RENTAL DAYS

CYCLES

MONTH 1,500 3,000 6,000

PER YEAR 18,000 36,000 72,000

MARKET SHARE

$50

% ENGLISH SADDLES YR 13% 26% 51%

INCOME / MO $ 75,000 $ 150,000 $ 300,000

RENTAL

DOVER INCOME

10%

UNITS

90%

SADDLETECH ROYALTY

SADDLETECH GAUGE FDXX

INCOME / MO

FEDEX PARCELS

FEDEX RATE

FEDEX DISC

TOTAL

3000 6000 12000

30 $90,000 $180,000 $360,000

15% $13,500 $27,000 $54,000

INCOME / MO $88,500 $177,000 $354,000

$8,850 $17,700 $35,400

INCOME / YR $106,200 $212,400 $424,800

# GAUGES 250 500 1000

INCOME PER MONTH $79,650 $159,300 $318,600

INCOME 1 YEAR $955,800 $1,911,600 $3,823,200

INCOME 5 YEARS $4,779,000 $9,558,000 $19,116,000

INCOME 10 YEARS $9,558,000 $19,116,000 $38,232,000

CYCLES/MO

# GAUGES 250 500 1000

RENTALS

6

SADDLETECH GAUGE FDXX

RENTAL DAYS

CYCLES

MONTH 1,500 3,000 6,000

PER YEAR 18,000 36,000 72,000

MARKET SHARE

$50

% ENGLISH SADDLES YR 13% 26% 51%

INCOME / MO $ 75,000 $ 150,000 $ 300,000

RENTAL

NEW

6 RENTAL DAYS MONTH 1,500 3,000 6,000

FEDEX RATE

FEDEX DISC

TOTAL

3000 6000 12000

30 $90,000 $180,000 $360,000

15% $13,500 $27,000 $54,000

INCOME / MO $88,500 $177,000 $354,000

NEW

6 RENTAL DAYS MONTH 1,500 3,000 6,000

75% NEW SADDLES CLOSE RATIO 1125 2250 4500

MARKET SHARE

% ENGLISH SADDLES SOLD 10% 19% 39%

NEW / MO $2,500 $2,812,500 $5,625,000 $11,250,000

NEW / YR TOTAL $33,750,000 $67,500,000 $135,000,000

95%

NEW / YR PROFIT MARGIN 15% $5,062,500 $10,125,000 $20,250,000

75% NEW SADDLES CLOSE RATIO 1125 2250 4500

MARKET SHARE

USED

USED

CYCLES/MO

# GAUGES 250 500 1000

RENTAL DAYS MONTH 1,500 3,000 6,000

25% USED SADDLES CLOSE RATIO 375 750 1500

CYCLES/MO

6

75%

# GAUGES 250 500 1000

RENTAL DAYS MONTH 1,500 3,000 6,000

UPSELL PERCENT 1125 2250 4500

% ENGLISH SADDLES SOLD 10% 19% 39%

NEW / MO $2,500 $2,812,500 $5,625,000 $11,250,000

NEW / YR TOTAL $33,750,000 $67,500,000 $135,000,000

SERVICE

10%

NEW SADDLE SALES MO 1,125 2,250 4,500

FITTING UPSELL 113 225 450

MARKET SHARE

% ENGLISH SADDLES SOLD 3% 6% 13%

USED / MO $2,500 $937,500 $1,875,000 $3,750,000

Custom MARKET SHARE SADDLES SOLD 1% 2% 3%

USED / YR TOTAL $11,250,000 $22,500,000 $45,000,000

INCOME 1 YEAR $75,727,200 $151,427,400 $302,824,800

INCOME 1 YEAR $955,800 $1,911,600 $3,823,200

INCOME 5 YEARS $4,779,000 $9,558,000 $19,116,000

INCOME 10 YEARS $9,558,000 $19,116,000 $38,232,000

INCOME / YR

$2,671,875 $5,343,750 $10,687,500

$32,062,500 $64,125,000 $128,250,000

INCOME PER MONTH $140,625 $281,250 $562,500

20%

80% $250 $225,000 $450,000 $900,000

100%

INCOME / YR $32,062,500 $64,125,000 $128,250,000

# GAUGES 250 500 1000

INCOME / MO $937,500 $1,875,000 $3,750,000

100%

INCOME / YR $11,250,000 $22,500,000 $45,000,000

# GAUGES 250 500 1000

DOVER INCOME

TOTAL MO INCOME $258,750 $517,500 $1,035,000

VET RENTAL RENTAL DAYS MONTH 10 20 30

INCOME 5 YEARS $8,437,500 $16,875,000 $33,750,000

INCOME 10 YEARS $16,875,000 $33,750,000 $67,500,000

SADDLETECH ROYALTY

INCOME PER MONTH $2,812,500 $5,625,000 $11,250,000

INCOME 1 YEAR $ 33,750,000 $ 67,500,000 $ 135,000,000

INCOME 5 YEARS $168,750,000 $337,500,000 $675,000,000

INCOME 10 YEARS $337,500,000 $675,000,000 $1,350,000,000

SADDLETECH ROYALTY

INCOME PER MONTH $937,500 $1,875,000 $3,750,000

15%

COST $50 $56,250 $112,500 $225,000

INCOME 1 YEAR $1,687,500 $3,375,000 $6,750,000

SMARTFIT WIZARD DATABASE - USED

INCOME / MO $219,938 $439,875 $879,750

RENTAL FEE $250 2,500 5,000 7,500

INCOME / YR $2,639,250 $5,278,500 $10,557,000

# GAUGES 250 500 1000

DOVER INCOME

90% SCAN INCOME $200 $22,500 $45,000 $90,000

250 500 1000

DOVER INCOME

0%

USED / YR PROFIT MARGIN 25% $1,687,500 $3,375,000 $6,750,000

85%

$400 $90,000 $180,000 $360,000

SCANS / MO SYSTEM 11 9 9

INCOME / MO

$2,671,875 $5,343,750 $10,687,500

DOVER INCOME INCOME MONTHLY $6,310,600 $12,618,950 $25,235,400

INCOME PER MONTH $79,650 $159,300 $318,600

5% SADDLETECH ROYALTY SMARTFIT WIZARD DATABASE - NEW

Kit

FITTING SERVICE MARKET SHARE SADDLES SOLD 1.93% 3.86% 7.71%

LEASE COST $500 $5,000 $12,500 $25,000

INCOME / MO

10%

$246,000 $465,000 $900,000

INCOME PER MONTH $2,500 $5,000 $9,750

10 25 50

INCOME 5 YEARS $56,250,000 $112,500,000 $225,000,000

INCOME 10 YEARS $112,500,000 $225,000,000 $450,000,000

SADDLETECH ROYALTY SMARTFIT SHIM KIT

INCOME PER MONTH $38,813 $77,625 $155,250

INCOME / YR

$20,500 $38,750 $75,000

INCOME 1 YEAR $ 11,250,000 $ 22,500,000 $ 45,000,000

INCOME 1 YEAR $ 465,750 $ 931,500 $ 1,863,000

INCOME 5 YEARS $2,328,750 $4,657,500 $9,315,000

INCOME 10 YEARS $4,657,500 $9,315,000 $18,630,000

SADDLETECH ROYALTY SMARTFIT SCAN INCOME 1 YEAR $ 30,000 $ 60,000 $ 117,000

INCOME 5 YEARS $150,000 $300,000 $585,000

INCOME 10 YEARS $300,000 $600,000 $1,170,000

SADDLETECH ROYALTY

COMBINED "MATRIX PROFIT CENTERS" INCOME UNITS 250 500 1000

SADDLETECH ROYALTY

DOVER INCOME

INCOME / MO

SMARTFIT SCAN COMPUTER SYSTEMS 10 25 50

$106,200 $212,400 $424,800

# GAUGES 250 500 1000

90%

SADDLETECH GAUGE FDXX

SMARTFIT WIZARD DATABASE - USED

SMARTFIT SHIM KIT

SALES

INCOME / YR

DOVER INCOME

0%

NEW / YR PROFIT MARGIN 15% $5,062,500 $10,125,000 $20,250,000

SMARTFIT WIZARD DATABASE - USED 6

$8,850 $17,700 $35,400

UNITS

SMARTFIT WIZARD DATABASE - NEW/HIGH END CYCLES/MO

# GAUGES 250 500 1000

INCOME / MO

FEDEX PARCELS

SMARTFIT WIZARD DATABASE - NEW CYCLES/MO

# GAUGES 250 500 1000

DOVER INCOME

10%

INCOME INCOME 5 YEARS 10 YEARS $378,636,000 $757,272,000 $757,137,000 $1,514,274,000 $1,514,124,000 $3,028,248,000

COMBINED "MATRIX PROFIT CENTERS" INCOME

UNITS 250 500 1000

INCOME MONTHLY $1,199,088 $2,398,175 $4,796,100

INCOME 1 YEAR $14,389,050 $28,778,100 $57,553,200

INCOME 5 YEARS $71,945,250 $143,890,500 $287,766,000

INCOME 10 YEARS $143,890,500 $287,781,000 $575,532,000

SADDLETECH GROUP ‐ ROBERT FERRAND ‐ inventor@saddletech.net ‐ www.saddletechgauge.com ‐ 2995 WOODSIDE RD. WOODSIDE CA 94062 ‐ 650‐631‐8400

60 of 236

H HO DD SU OR DL UR RS LE RM SE EM ME E& EN ME NT &S EA TM AS SA ME AD ET TH HO OD DS S F FE EA AT TU UR RE EC CO OM MP PA AR RIIS SIIO ON N S Sa ad dd dllee F Fiittttiin ng gS Siim mp plliiffiieed d The “SYSTEM” Solution

D Da ar ree M Miig gh httyy T Th hiin ng gss

CONTACT: ROBERT FERRAND, INVENTOR/CEO 650.631.8400 inventor@saddletech.net WWW.SADDLETECHGAUGE.NET 2995 WOODSIDE RD. WOODSIDE, CA 94062 CCR # & DUNS # 03‐032‐5372 PROTECTED BY U.S. PATENTS #5,375,397, #6,334,262, #6,948,256, PCT069820& PATENTS PENDING

61 of 236

C Co om mp pu utte er r IIn ntte er rffa ac ce eP Pr re es ss su ur re e M Me ea as em su me en ur ntt re

3 3D D -- M Me ea as su ur re eH Ho or rs se e

O B J E C T I V E S A D D L E F I T T I N G VA L I DAT I O N

0

0

90

0

25

110

0 0

120

0 0

130

0 0

10 SAWBUCK10 PACK SADDLE 5

140

(Angles)

SHI M K I T T EST

(Arcs)

DECKER PACK SADDLE

(Arc)

(Arc)

Level

4 - P.S.I.

(Angle) THAT WHICH YOU MEASURE WILL IMPROVE

NEW, IMPROVED & USER-FRIENDLY FEATURES: ALL THE FUNCTIONALITY OF THE ORIGINAL MK I PLUS

1.

DESIGNED FOR MASS PRODUCTION

2.

FITS INSIDE A FEDEX BOX

3.

MEASURES SADDLE WITHOUT HORSE

4.

AVAILABLE FOR DAILY RENTAL

5.

SUPER‐LIGHTWEIGHT “MAGNESIUM”

2

WRITE MEASUREMENTS

DOWN

POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH

62 of 236

11

T Th he eS Sc ciie en nttiif fiic cM Me etth ho od d

3 3D D -- M Me ea as su ur re eS Sa ad dd dlle e

TH E

S Sc ciie en nttiiffiic cM Me etth ho od d

Applied to Animal and Saddle Fitting O Ob bsseer rv vee sso om mee A Assp peec ctt o off tth hee U Un niiv veer rssee

M Me assu ea ur re e

3 3--D D ““H Ho or rssee”” G GA AU UG GE EM ME EA AS SU UR RE EM ME EN NT T 3 – M2A1 AMMUNITION BOXES

IIn nv veen ntt a aM Ma atth heem ma attiic ca all R Reella attiio on nssh hiip p

H Hyyp po otth he essiiss

WATER, FUEL & AMMUNITION

W WE EIIG GH HT TC CO OM MP PE EN NS SA AT TIIO ON NF FO OR RM MU UL LA A U Ussee H Hyyp po otth heessiiss tto oM Ma ak kee P Pr reed diic cttiio on nss

P Pr re ed diic ctt

BRIDGES

3 3--D D ““S Sa ad dd dllee”” G GA AU UG GE EM ME EA AS SU UR RE EM ME EN NT T T Teesstt P Pr reed diic cttiio on nss b byy E Exxp peer riim meen ntt

T Te esstt

V Va alliid atte e da

FITS

C CO OM MP PU UT TE ER R IIN NT TE ER RF FA AC CE EP PR RE ES SS SU UR RE EM MA AP P R Reep peea att U Un nttiill tth heer ree a ar ree N NO OD Diissc cr reep pa an nc ciieess W WE EIIG GH HT TC CO OM MP PE EN NS SA AT TIIO ON NC CA AL LIIB BR RA AT TIIO ON N

ROCKS W Wiitth ho ou utt tth hee H Ho or rssee

A “MATHEMATICAL” RELATIONSHIP Weight Compensation Factor

Rider Weight

Established Rider Weight

RW

- C

WCF = -----------------B Incremental Weight

Established Horse Weight

Z

BALANCE BEAM IN CENTER OF GULLET CREATES A “Z” AXIS REFERENCE

Horse Weight

-

HW

--------------------

Y

Incremental Weight

TWO MEASUREMENT METHODS PROVIDES A “FEEDBACK” LOOP FOR VALIDATION

10

3

63 of 236

H Ho wT aS ad dd att F ow To Sa dlle Fiittss oF eT Fiin Th nd ha da

T Th he eH Ho or rsse eC Ch ha an ng ge ess o or r

Y Yo ou uC Ch ha an ng ge eH Ho or rsse ess

Saddle Specifications: Style Type Seat Size Rider Weight Horse Weight Gauge Measurements (Angle & Arc) Submit > FIND SADDLE THAT FITS

MAMP PACK SADDLE 2010

Flexes with the Horse

4 - P.S.I.

Tapered Shims

Infinitely Adjustable

ASSISTING SADDLE FITTERS TO FOLLOW TYPEWRITER REPAIRMEN INTO HISTORY

SmartPhoneApp

4

64 of 236

9

C Ch an ng ad dd ha ge dlle e tth eF Fiitt he eS Sa A An nyyw wh he er re e– –A An nyyttiim me e

M Me assu ad dd atta ab ba asse ea ur dlle e re ed eD dS Sa Da

M EAS U R E T W I C E – B U Y O N C E

Measure Gauge / Panel Difference

E Ev viid asse ad dd de ed dlle en dS nc eF ce Sa eB Fiittttiin Ba ng gM Me etth ho od d

Stack Tapered Shims To Match Gauge / Panel Difference

S Sa ad dd dllee F Fiittttiin ng gS Siim mp plliiffiieed d

8

5

65 of 236

The “ Sys t em” Sol ut io n

M ur reed dS Sa ad dd dllee D Da atta ab ba assee Meea assu 3 3D DH Ho or rssee & &S Sa ad dd dllee M Meea assu ur reem meen ntt

O Ob bjjeec cttiiv vee ““S Sa ad dd dllee F Fiittttiin ng g”” V Va alliid da attiio on n 6

R Reeffiitt tth hee S Sa ad dd dllee A An nyyw wh heer ree -- A An nyyttiim mee 7

66 of 236

C Ch an ng ad dd ha ge dlle e tth eF Fiitt he eS Sa A An nyyw wh he er re e– –A An nyyttiim me e

M Me assu ad dd atta ab ba asse ea ur dlle e re ed eD dS Sa Da

M EAS U R E T W I C E – B U Y O N C E

Measure Gauge / Panel Difference

E Ev viid asse ad dd de ed dlle en dS nc eF ce Sa eB Fiittttiin Ba ng gM Me etth ho od d

Stack Tapered Shims To Match Gauge / Panel Difference

S Sa ad dd dllee F Fiittttiin ng gS Siim mp plliiffiieed d

8

67 of 236

5

H Ho wT aS ad dd att F ow To Sa dlle Fiittss oF eT Fiin Th nd ha da

T Th he eH Ho or rsse eC Ch ha an ng ge ess o or r

Y Yo ou uC Ch ha an ng ge eH Ho or rsse ess

Saddle Specifications: Style Type Seat Size Rider Weight Horse Weight Gauge Measurements (Angle & Arc) Submit > FIND SADDLE THAT FITS

MAMP PACK SADDLE 2010

Flexes with the Horse

4 - P.S.I.

Tapered Shims

Infinitely Adjustable

ASSISTING SADDLE FITTERS TO FOLLOW TYPEWRITER REPAIRMEN INTO HISTORY

SmartPhoneApp

4

9

68 of 236

T Th he eS Sc ciie en nttiif fiic cM Me etth ho od d

3 3D D -- M Me ea as su ur re eS Sa ad dd dlle e

TH E

S Sc ciie en nttiiffiic cM Me etth ho od d

Applied to Animal and Saddle Fitting O Ob bsseer rv vee sso om mee A Assp peec ctt o off tth hee U Un niiv veer rssee

M Me assu ea ur re e

3 3--D D ““H Ho or rssee”” G GA AU UG GE EM ME EA AS SU UR RE EM ME EN NT T 3 – M2A1 AMMUNITION BOXES

IIn nv veen ntt a aM Ma atth heem ma attiic ca all R Reella attiio on nssh hiip p

H Hyyp po otth he essiiss

WATER, FUEL & AMMUNITION

W WE EIIG GH HT TC CO OM MP PE EN NS SA AT TIIO ON NF FO OR RM MU UL LA A U Ussee H Hyyp po otth heessiiss tto oM Ma ak kee P Pr reed diic cttiio on nss

P Pr re ed diic ctt

BRIDGES

3 3--D D ““S Sa ad dd dllee”” G GA AU UG GE EM ME EA AS SU UR RE EM ME EN NT T T Teesstt P Pr reed diic cttiio on nss b byy E Exxp peer riim meen ntt

T Te esstt

V Va alliid atte e da

FITS

C CO OM MP PU UT TE ER R IIN NT TE ER RF FA AC CE EP PR RE ES SS SU UR RE EM MA AP P ROCKS

R Reep peea att U Un nttiill tth heer ree a ar ree N NO OD Diissc cr reep pa an nc ciieess W WE EIIG GH HT TC CO OM MP PE EN NS SA AT TIIO ON NC CA AL LIIB BR RA AT TIIO ON N

W Wiitth ho ou utt tth hee H Ho or rssee

A “MATHEMATICAL” RELATIONSHIP Weight Compensation Factor

Rider Weight

Established Rider Weight

RW

- C

WCF = -----------------B Incremental Weight

Established Horse Weight

Z

BALANCE BEAM IN CENTER OF GULLET CREATES A “Z” AXIS REFERENCE

Horse Weight

-

HW

--------------------

Y

Incremental Weight

TWO MEASUREMENT METHODS PROVIDES A “FEEDBACK” LOOP FOR VALIDATION

10

69 of 236

3

C Co om mp pu utte er r IIn ntte er rffa ac ce eP Pr re es ss su ur re e M Me ea as em su me en ur ntt re

3 3D D -- M Me ea as su ur re eH Ho or rs se e

O B J E C T I V E S A D D L E F I T T I N G VA L I DAT I O N

0

0

90

0

25

110

0 0

120

0 0

130

0 0

10 SAWBUCK10 PACK SADDLE 5

140

(Angles)

SHI M K I T T EST

(Arcs)

DECKER PACK SADDLE

(Arc)

(Arc)

Level

4 - P.S.I.

(Angle) THAT WHICH YOU MEASURE WILL IMPROVE

NEW, IMPROVED & USER-FRIENDLY FEATURES: ALL THE FUNCTIONALITY OF THE ORIGINAL MK I PLUS

1.

DESIGNED FOR MASS PRODUCTION

2.

FITS INSIDE A FEDEX BOX

3.

MEASURES SADDLE WITHOUT HORSE

4.

AVAILABLE FOR DAILY RENTAL

5.

SUPER‐LIGHTWEIGHT “MAGNESIUM”

2

WRITE MEASUREMENTS

DOWN

POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH

11

70 of 236

H HO DD SU OR DL UR RS LE RM SE EM ME E& EN ME NT &S EA TM AS SA ME AD ET TH HO OD DS S F FE EA AT TU UR RE EC CO OM MP PA AR RIIS SIIO ON N S Sa ad dd dllee F Fiittttiin ng gS Siim mp plliiffiieed d The “SYSTEM” Solution

D Da ar ree M Miig gh httyy T Th hiin ng gss

CONTACT: ROBERT FERRAND, INVENTOR/CEO 650.631.8400 inventor@saddletech.net WWW.SADDLETECHGAUGE.NET 2995 WOODSIDE RD. WOODSIDE, CA 94062 CCR # & DUNS # 03‐032‐5372 PROTECTED BY U.S. PATENTS #5,375,397, #6,334,262, #6,948,256, PCT069820& PATENTS PENDING

71 of 236

SADDLETECH GROUP LLC & DOVER SADDLERY, INC. OPTION AGREEMENT 12.17.12 This Option Agreement (“Option”) between the Saddletech Group LLC ("Saddletech"), a Delaware Limited Partnership, and Dover Saddlery, Inc (“Dover”) a Publicly Trade corporation (Nasdaq: DOVR) is effective on the ____ day of _____, 2012 ("Effective Date").

PARTIES Dover Saddlery, Inc. (Publicly Held DOVR) is the leading multichannel retailer of equestrian products in the United States. Founded in 1975 in Wellesley, Massachusetts, by United States Equestrian team members, Dover Saddlery has grown to become The Source® for equestrian products. Dover offers a broad and distinctive selection of competitively priced, brand-name products for horse and rider through catalogs, the Internet and company-owned retail stores. Dover Saddlery, Inc. serves the English rider and through Smith Brothers, the Western rider.

Saddletech Group LLC (Privately Held) is the leading animal and saddle measurement technology company. Saddletech, Founded in 1992, in Woodside, California, is a “spin off” from a medical specialty hospital bed company, for the prevention and treatment of tissue trauma. Since then, employing State-ofthe-Art-Silicon Valley technology, Saddletech has revolutionized the fitting of saddles to animals with a wide array of patents. This array of patents include: saddle interface pressure and three-dimensional horse and saddle measurement instruments, gravity compensation formulae, measured saddle databases, manufacturing methods to build calibrated western saddle trees, saddle corrective orthotics, and saddle corrective shims, as well as military pack saddles.

INTENT Dover Saddlery is interested in securing Exclusive Rights in North America for certain specified Saddletech Technology for a period of 5 years, in order to secure a Market Differentiated Leadership Position in the North American English New Saddle Market. However, Dover may also have an interest in certain rights in the U.S. “Western” Saddle Market as well as the “World” Saddle Market.

This OPTION AGREEMENT (OPTION) is a good faith effort by both parties to facilitate this Exclusive Licensing Agreement which is defined in the SADDLETECH GROUP LLC / DOVER SADDLERY, INC. LICENSING TERM SHEET (Exhibit A) CONFIDENTIALITY The terms and conditions of this OPTION shall be confidential information and shall not be disclosed to any third party without the consent of Saddletech and Dover Saddlery except that the Parties may disclose the terms and conditions described in this Term Sheet including its existence to their respective officers, directors, employees, attorneys and other advisers, provided that such persons agree to the confidentiality restrictions contained herein.

1.0

Point of Contact 1.2. Licensor: Saddletech Group LLC Robert Ferrand CEO 2995 Woodside Rd. Woodside, Ca 94062

1.1. Licensee: Dover Saddlery Steven Day CEO 525 Great Road Littleton, MA 01460

1

72 of 236

2.0

DEFINITIONS

2.1 "Exclusive" means that, subject to Articles 3 and 4, Saddletech will not grant further licenses under the Licensed Patent in the Licensed Field of Use in the Licensed Territory or any other Licensed Territory in the U.S. or World.

2.2

“Licensed Field of Use” means North American “New” English Saddle Market.

2.3 "Saddletech Technology" means Saddletech – Patents, Trademarks, Know How: U.S. Patents and Applications, corresponding thereto, and any divisional, continuation, or reexamination application, and each patent that issues or reissues from any of these patent applications. Any claim of an unexpired Licensed Patent is presumed to be valid unless it has been held to be invalid by a final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction from which no appeal can be or is taken. “Licensed Patent” excludes any continuation-in-part (CIP) patent application or patent for Animal and Saddle interface pressure and three dimensional measurement instruments, methods and database, and methods to correct for the variations between animal back’s and saddles. Which include the following: 2.3.1. U.S. Patent #6,334,262 - Gauge and Method for Measuring Animal Backs and Saddles 2.3.2. U.S. Patent #6,948,256 – Saddle Support Device and Adjustable Form Jig and Method to Correct for the Variations Between Animal Backs and Saddles 2.3.3. Patent Pending – Folding Gauge and Method for Measuring Animal Backs and Saddles.

2.3.4. Patent Pending – Adjustable Saddle Support Device and Method to Correct for the Variations Between Animal Backs and Saddles.

2.3.5. Trademark - a. “SmartFit”, b. SmartFit Wizard”, c. “Don’t try – Measure Before You Buy” and d.

“Saddle Fitting Simplified” 2.3.6. Trade Secrets - Saddle Measurement and Saddle Fitting which includes the application of medical research to saddle fit.

2.3.7. Robert Ferrand, inventor of the technology “Know How”.

2.4

"Saddletech Technology" may or may not be confidential in nature.

2.5 “Saddletech Indemnities” means the Saddletech Group LLC and their respective affiliates, trustees, officers, employees, students, and agents.

2.6

"Licensed Product" means a product or part of a product in the Licensed Field of Use:

2.6.1 the making, using, importing or selling of which, absent this license, infringes, induces infringement, or contributes to infringement of a Licensed Patent; or 2.6.2 which is made with, uses or incorporates any Saddletech Technology.

3.0

GRANT

3.1 Grant. Subject to the terms and conditions of this OPTION, Saddletech grants DOVER an option to acquire an Exclusive license under the Licensing Agreement in the Licensed Field of Use to make, have made, use, import, offer to sell and sell Licensed Product in the Licensed Territory (collectively “Option Rights”). This Option does not give Optionee any Option Rights prior to entering into a license agreement.

3.2

Term. The term of this Option is until February 1, 2013 (2.1.2013) 2

73 of 236

3.3 Exercise. Optionee (Dover) may exercise this Option by providing written notice to Saddletech stating Optionee’s intent to enter into a license agreement with Saddletech. Optionee may exercise this Option at any time during the term of the Option.

3.4 Negotiation. If Optionee elects to exercise this Option, Saddletech and Optionee will promptly commence negotiation of a license agreement. Optionee and Saddletech will execute a license agreement no later than three (3) months after the date of the exercise of the Option under Section 3.3.

THE LICENSE AGREEMENT, IF EXECUTED, WILL INCLUDE OTHER STANDARD AND CUSTOMARY TERMS NORMALLY CONTAINED IN SIMILAR LICENSE AGREEMENTS. THE PARTIES WILL NEGOTIATE THE LICENSE AGREEMENT IN GOOD FAITH. 3.5 Retained Rights. Saddletech retains the right, on behalf of itself to practice the Licensed Patent and use Technology. Optionee agrees that, notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, it has no right to enforce the Licensed Patent against any other institution.

3.6

Specific Exclusion. Saddletech does not:

3.6.1 grant to Optionee any other licenses, implied or otherwise, to any patents or other rights of Saddletech Technology other than those rights granted under Licensed Agreement, regardless of whether the patents or other rights are dominant or subordinate to any Licensed Patent, or are required to exploit any Licensed Patent or Technology; or 3.6.2 agree to furnish to Optionee any technology or technological information other than the Technology or to provide Optionee with any other assistance than defined in the Licensing Agreement.

4.0

GOVERNMENTAL

4.1 This Agreement is subject to Title 35 Sections 200-204 of the United States Code. Among other things, these provisions provide the United States Government with nonexclusive rights in the Licensed Patent. Optionee will ensure all obligations of these provisions are met 5.0

DILIGENCE

5.1 Optionee agrees to exercise due diligence in conducting research on potential commercial applications for Licensed Patents and/or Saddletech Technology.

6.0

CONSIDERATION

6.1 In consideration of the grant by Saddletech of the Option and for Saddletech’s forbearance from licensing to other companies during the term of the Option, Optionee will pay Saddletech $2,000,000 payable upon signing this option agreement.

7.0

INDEMNITY

7.1 Indemnification. Optionee will indemnify, hold harmless, and defend all Saddletech Indemnitees against any claim of any kind arising out of or related to the exercise of any rights granted Optionee under this Agreement or the breach of this Agreement by Optionee.

7.2 LIMITATION ON LIABILITY. SADDLETECH IS NOT LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, LOST PROFIT, EXPECTATION, PUNITIVE OR OTHER INDIRECT DAMAGES IN CONNECTION WITH ANY CLAIM ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT, WHETHER GROUNDED IN TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE), STRICT LIABILITY, CONTRACT, OR OTHERWISE.

3

74 of 236

8.0

TERMINATION

8.1 Termination by Optionee. Optionee agrees to promptly notify Saddletech at any time during the term of this Option when Optionee has determined not to exercise the Option. Optionee also agrees to provide Saddletech, in reasonable detail, the basis for this determination.

8.2 No Residual Rights. Upon expiration or termination of this Option, or upon Optionee’s decision not to enter into a license agreement, whichever is earlier, Optionee will have no residual or other rights in Saddletech Technology or any Patents.

9

ASSIGNMENT

Optionee may not assign this Agreement.

10

NOTICES

All notices under this Agreement are deemed fully given when written, addressed, and sent as follows: All general notices to Optionee are mailed to:

b. Licensor: Saddletech Group LLC Robert Ferrand CEO 2995 Woodside Rd. Woodside, Ca 94062

a. Licensee: Dover Saddlery Steven Day CEO 525 Great Road Littleton, MA 01460 11

MISCELLANEOUS

11.1 Scope of Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties pertaining to the subject matter hereof. No representative of Saddletech or Optionee has been authorized to make any representation, warranty, or promise not contained herein.

11.2 Choice of Law. This Agreement and any dispute arising under it is governed by the laws of the State of Delaware, United States of America.

11.3 Non-Assignment. Neither party may add to this Agreement or any interest herein or delegate any of its duties hereunder without the prior written consent of the other party. Optionee shall not have the right to assign its obligations hereunder without express prior written approval of Saddletech.

The parties execute this Agreement in duplicate originals by their duly authorized officers.

SADDLETECH GROUP LLC Signature___________________________________ Name __________________________________ Title ______________________________________ Date ____________________________________

DOVER SADDLERY, INC Signature___________________________________ Name __________________________________ Title

______________________________________

Date

_______________________

4

75 of 236

Exhibit A

SADDLETECH GROUP LLC / DOVER SADDLERY, INC. LICENSING TERM SHEET 12.17.12

5 76 of 236

SADDLETECH GROUP LLC / DOVER SADDLERY INC. LICENSING TERM SHEET 12.17.12

PARTIES Dover Saddlery, Inc. (Nasdaq: DOVR) is the leading multichannel retailer of equestrian products in the United States. Founded in 1975 in Wellesley, Massachusetts, by United States Equestrian team members, Dover Saddlery has grown to become The Source® for equestrian products. Dover offers a broad and distinctive selection of competitively priced, brand-name products for horse and rider through catalogs, the Internet and company-owned retail stores. Dover Saddlery, Inc. serves the English rider and through Smith Brothers, the Western rider.

Saddletech Group LLC (Privately Held) is the leading animal and saddle measurement technology company. Saddletech, Founded in 1992, in Woodside, California, is a “spin off” from a medical specialty hospital bed company, for the prevention and treatment of tissue trauma. Since then, employing State-ofthe-Art-Silicon Valley technology, Saddletech has revolutionized the fitting of saddles to animals with a wide array of patents. This array of patents include: saddle interface pressure and three-dimensional horse and saddle measurement instruments, gravity compensation formulae, measured saddle databases, manufacturing methods to build calibrated western saddle trees, saddle corrective orthotics, and saddle corrective shims, as well as military pack saddles.

INTENT Dover Saddlery is interested in securing Exclusive Rights in North America for certain specified Saddletech Technology for a period of 5 years, in order to secure a Market Differentiated Leadership Position in the North American English New Saddle Market. However, Dover may also have an interest in certain rights to the U.S. “Western” Saddle Market as well the “World” Saddle Market.

The intent of this document is to describe, for negotiation purposes only, certain principal terms of the Saddletech Group LLC (Saddletech) License Agreement (“License”) with Dover Saddlery, Inc. (Dover).

Except for the paragraph immediately below regarding confidentiality, this term sheet is intended to serve only as a non-binding proposal for discussion purposes only, which only represents the present intent of the parties, and is not intended to be an offer or to be legally binding in any respect on Saddletech or Dover Saddlery.

CONFIDENTIALITY The terms and conditions of this Term Sheet shall be confidential information and shall not be disclosed to any third party without the consent of Saddletech and Dover Saddlery except that the Parties may disclose the terms and conditions described in this Term Sheet including its existence to their respective officers, directors, employees, attorneys and other advisers, provided that such persons agree to the confidentiality restrictions contained herein.

1.0 Point of Contact 1.2. Licensor: Saddletech Group LLC Robert Ferrand CEO 2995 Woodside Rd. Woodside, Ca 94062

1.1. Licensee: Dover Saddlery Steven Day CEO 525 Great Road Littleton, MA 01460 6

77 of 236

2.0

DEFINITIONS

2.1 "Exclusive" means that, subject to Articles 3 and 4, Saddletech will not grant further licenses under the Licensing Agreement in the Licensed Field of Use in the Licensed Territory or any other Licensed Territory in the U.S. or World.

2.2

“Licensed Field of Use” means North American New English Saddle Market.

2.3 "Saddletech Technology" means Saddletech – Patents, Trademarks, Know How: U.S. Patents and Applications, corresponding thereto, and any divisional, continuation, or reexamination application, and each patent that issues or reissues from any of these patent applications. Any claim of an unexpired Licensed Patent is presumed to be valid unless it has been held to be invalid by a final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction from which no appeal can be or is taken. “Licensed Patent” excludes any continuation-in-part (CIP) patent application or patent for Animal and Saddle interface pressure and three dimensional measurement instruments, methods and database, and methods to correct for the variations between animal back’s and saddles. Which include the following: 2.3.1. U.S. Patent #6,334,262 - Gauge and Method for Measuring Animal Backs and Saddles 2.3.2. U.S. Patent #6,948,256 – Saddle Support Device and Adjustable Form Jig and Method to Correct for the Variations Between Animal Backs and Saddles 2.3.3. Patent Pending – Folding Gauge and Method for Measuring Animal Backs and Saddles.

2.3.4. Patent Pending – Adjustable Saddle Support Device and Method to Correct for the Variations Between Animal Backs and Saddles.

2.3.5. Trademark - a. “SmartFit”, b. SmartFit Wizard”, c. “Don’t try – Measure Before You Buy” and d.

“Saddle Fitting Simplified” 2.3.6. Trade Secrets - Saddle Measurement and Saddle Fitting which includes the application of medical research to saddle fit.

2.3.7. Robert Ferrand, inventor of the technology “Know How”.

2.4 "Saddletech Technology" may or may not be confidential in nature.

2.5 “Saddletech Indemnitees” means the Saddletech Group LLC and their respective affiliates, trustees, officers, employees, students, and agents.

2.6 "Licensed Product" means a product or part of a product in the Licensed Field of Use: 2.6.1 the making, using, importing or selling of which, absent this license, infringes, induces infringement, or contributes to infringement of a Licensed Patent; or 2.6.2

which is made with, uses or incorporates any SaddletechTechnology.

3.0 Intellectual Property: Saddletech Technology – Patents, Trademarks, Know How Animal and Saddle interface pressure and three dimensional measurement instruments, methods and database, and methods to correct for the variations between animal back’s and saddles.

3.1. U.S. Patent #6,334,262 - Gauge and Method for Measuring Animal Backs and Saddles 7 78 of 236

3.2. U.S. Patent #6,948,256 – Saddle Support Device and Adjustable Form Jig and Method to Correct for the Variations Between Animal Backs and Saddles 3.3. Patent Pending – Folding Gauge and Method for Measuring Animal Backs and Saddles.

3.4. Patent Pending – Adjustable Saddle Support Device and Method to Correct for the Variations Between Animal Backs and Saddles.

3.5. Trademark - a. “SmartFit”, b. SmartFit Wizard”, c. “Don’t try – Measure Before You Buy” and d.

“Saddle Fitting Simplified” 3.6. Trade Secrets - Saddle Measurement and Saddle Fitting which includes the application of medical research to saddle fit.

3.7. Robert Ferrand, inventor of the technology, “Know How”

4.0 Scope of License: 4.1 The Saddletech Technology specified in this License includes: The Saddletech “SmartFit” System: 1. Saddletech Gauge Rental – 3D Animal and Saddle Measurement 2. SmartFit Wizard “measured” saddle 3D database 3. SmartFit Shim Kit – Saddle Fit Adjustment Method and Product 4. SmartFit Scan – computer saddle interface pressure measurement.

5. Trade Secrets 6. Know How 4.2 The intent of this agreement is to secure for Dover Saddlery, the sole right to develop, market, and sell certain Saddletech Technology, subject to the geographic scope, field of use, and term restrictions identified below, and provided that such right shall not bind Saddletech.

4.3 Saddletech shall be the sole manufacturer of the Saddletech Gauge that is not for sale, and is intended for rental use only.

4.4 The SmartFit Wizard Database will be programmed and maintained by Saddletech.

4.5 Dover does have the right to make the “Shim Kit” themselves or have a subcontractor make it for them.

4.6 The computer saddle fitting system is manufactured by a third party and is purchased by Dover from Saddletech.

4.7 No sublicensing permitted.

4.8 Geographic Scope: North America 4.9 Field of Use: English Saddle Market - Sales, Fitting, Marketing and Research in the North America.

4.10 Duration (Term) of license: Five Years The license will not include rights under any patents except those identified above, and any continuations thereto, but not any foreign counterparts.

4.11 Trademark License: The License will also contain a mutual non-exclusive trademark license for marketing and product marking. Dover Saddlery shall be required to include the Saddletech mark on any marketing materials and the Saddletech mark and patent numbers on any products sold under the License.

8 79 of 236

5.0 Ownership of Patents and Improvements 5.1 The Saddletech Group LLC retains ownership of existing IP and patent(s), and any improvements made by Saddletech. Dover Saddlery retains ownership of any improvements it makes, provided that Saddeltech shall have a license to such improvements.

5.2 Saddletech maintains and prosecutes the patents in its sole discretion and has sole authority on infringement proceedings.

5.3 The Saddletech Group LLC retains ownership of existing IP and patent(s) and future inventions.

5.4 Saddletech maintains patent carriage and has ultimate authority on infringement proceedings.

5.5 The Saddletech Group retains World “NEW” Saddle Market for “WESTERN” Saddles.

5.6 The Saddletech Group retains U.S. “USED” “ENGLISH” Saddle Market Rights 5.7 The Saddletech Group retains U.S. “USED” “WESTERN” Saddle Market Rights 5.8 The Saddletech Group retains WORLD “USED” “ENGLISH” Saddle Market Rights 5.9 The Saddletech Group retains WORLD “USED” “WESTERN” Saddle Market Rights 5.10 The Saddletech Group retains ownership of the physical Saddletech Gauges

6.0 Payments - Fees, Royalties, Reimbursements, and Costs: 6.1. Gauge: Upfront fee: Exclusive System: $2,000,000 Non-Exclusive Component: $4,000,000 Royalties:

6.1.1.10% of Gross Income from SmartFit Gauge rental reimbursed to Dover Saddlery 6.1.2. Saddletech will hold the “USED” “ENGLISH” Saddletech Gauge rental market back for 1 year, as an incentive for an immediate close 6.1.3. Saddletech will hold the “NEW” “WESTERN” Saddletech Gauge rental market back for 1 year, as an incentive for an immediate close 6.1.4. Saddletech will hold the “USED” “WESTERN” Saddletech Gauge rental market back for 1 year, as an incentive for an immediate close 6.1.5. Saddletech Gauge production costs are paid by Saddletech

6.2. Database: Upfront fee: Exclusive System: $3,000,000 Non-Exclusive Component: $6,000,000 Royalties:

6.2.1. 10% of Gross Income of SmartFit Wizard payable to Saddletech 6.2. 2. Saddletech will hold the “USED” “SmartFit Wizard” “ENGLISH” saddle market back for 1 year, as an incentive for an immediate close 6.2. 3. Saddletech will hold the “NEW” “SmartFit Wizard” “WESTERN” saddle market back for 1 year, as an incentive for an immediate close 6.2. 4. Saddletech will hold the “USED” “SmartFit Wizard” “WESTERN” saddle market back for 1 year, as an incentive for an immediate close 6.2.5. SmartFit Wizard Database development costs paid by Saddletech

6.3. Shim Kit: Upfront fee:

Exclusive System: $2,000,000 Non-Exclusive Component: $4,000,000

Royalties:

6.3.1. Royalty is waived for the North American English Saddle Market for 1 year, as an incentive for an immediate close 6.3.2. Saddletech will hold the “NEW” “ENGLISH” saddle “Shim” market back for 1 year, as an incentive for an immediate close 6.3.3. Saddletech will hold the “NEW” “WESTERN” “Shim” saddle market back for 1 year, as an incentive for an immediate close 6.3.4. Saddletech will hold the “USED” “ENGLISH” saddle “Shim” market back for 1 year, as an incentive for an immediate close 6.3.5. Saddletech will hold the “USED” “WESTERN” “Shim” saddle market back for 1 year, as an incentive for an immediate close 6.4. Computer: Upfront fee: Exclusive System: $2,000,000 Non-Exclusive Component: $4,000,000 9 80 of 236

R Royalties:

6.4.1. ”Me easurement Method” M Roy yalty of 10% % of Gross in ncome is waived for 1 ye ear, as an inc centive for im mmediate cllose 6.4 4.2. Dover Saddlery S will purchase t he Compute er Saddle Fittting System ms And rettain ownersh hip of those Computer S Systems.

6.4 4.3 Saddlete ech will sell th he Compute er Systems to Dover Sad ddlery for a “Re educed Proffit” over wholesale as an n incentive fo or immediate e close

nes 7. 0 Mileston To be Dettermined (TB BD) This following Ganttt Chart is forr discussion only

10 81 of 236

8.0. Performance, 8.1 Royalties will be paid on a quarterly basis.

8.2. The Upfront Fees will be due within 15 days following signing of the definitive agreement, 8.3. all other payments will be due within 30 days following the end of the quarter, or the date invoiced, as applicable.

8.4 Late payments will be subject to interest.

8.5 Saddletech will retain the right to audit Dover Saddlery’s records to verify the royalty payments.

8.6. Saddletech Minimum annual royalty: Gauge: $1,000,000, Database: $1,000,000, Shim: $1,000,000 8.7 Termination is for cause, failure to meet performance/milestones or prior to bankruptcy 9. Governing Law and Assignment 9.1 Delaware law is the governing law.

9.2 Saddletech would be allowed to assign the License in connection with a merger, sale of substantially all of its assets, or change of control.

9.3 Dover could not transfer or assign the License (including in connection with a change of control) without the prior written permission of Saddletech.

10.0 Liability, Warranty, Confidentiality 10.1 Dover will assume responsibility and liability for what it does under the License.

10.2 Under the License, Saddletech will disclaim any warranties of validity or non-infringement of any patent.

The License would also contain provisions protecting the confidential information exchanged between the parties.

This TERM SHEET is the initial basis for an offer to license the Intellectual Property defined as Saddletech Technology.

11 82 of 236

August 2000

83 of 236

84 of 236

85 of 236

86 of 236

87 of 236

88 of 236

89 of 236

90 of 236

91 of 236

92 of 236

93 of 236

758

EQUINE VETERINARY JOURNAL Equine vet. J. (2004) 36 (8) 758-763

Effects of girth, saddle and weight on movements of the horse P.

DE

COCQ, P. R.

VAN

WEEREN and W. BACK*

Department of Equine Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 12, NL 3584 CM Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Keywords: horse; back; kinematics; kissing spine; load; tack

Summary Reasons for performing study: Although the saddle is seen as one of the biggest causes of back pain, and weightbearing is seen as an important aetiological factor in ‘kissing spine’ syndrome (KSS), the effects of a saddle and weight on the back movements of the horse have never been studied.

Objective: To determine the effects of pressure on the back, exerted by tack and weight, on movements of the horse.

Hypothesis: Weight has an extending effect on the horse’s back and, as a compensatory mechanism to this extension, an alteration in pro- and retraction angles was expected. A similar but smaller effect was expected from a saddle only and a lungeing girth.

Methods: Data were captured during treadmill locomotion at walk, trot and canter under 4 conditions: unloaded; with lungeing girth; saddle only; and saddle with 75 kg of weight.

Data were expressed as maximal extension, maximal flexion angles, range of motion of L3 and L5 and maximal pro- and retraction angles of the limbs.

Results: At walk and trot, there was a significant influence on back kinematics in the ‘saddle with weight’ situation, but not in the other conditions. Overall extension of the back increased, but the range of movement remained the same.

Limb kinematics changed in the sense that forelimb retraction increased. At canter, both the ‘saddle with weight’ and ‘saddle only’ conditions had a significant extending effect on the back, but there was no effect on limb kinematics.

Conclusions and potential relevance: Weight and a saddle induce an overall extension of the back. This may contribute to soft tissue injuries and the KSS. The data from this study may help in understanding the reaction of the equine back to the challenges imposed by man when using the animal for riding.

Introduction Back pain is one of the most common and least understood clinical problems in horses. Causes are hard to identify but, as an important cause or aggregator, poorly fitting saddles are often mentioned (Harman 1999).

‘Cold back’, a syndrome of persistent hypersensitivity with temporary stiffness and dipping of the spine on being saddled, is *Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

[Paper received for publication 10.05.04; Accepted 13.10.04]

seen as a sign of saddle-fitting problems (Harman 1999).

Whether ‘cold back’ is actually painful, associated with some previous back pain or merely a matter of temperament is unclear (Jeffcott 1999). It is a fact that soft tissue injuries are important causes of back pain. Muscle damage and ligamentous strain are seen in about 25% of horses with back pain and are often related to accidents during ridden exercise (Jeffcott 1980). Chronic muscle or ligamentous pain could be caused or made worse by the pressure that a saddle with a rider puts on the muscles and ligaments.

Of the bony pathological conditions, crowding and overriding of the dorsal spinous processes or ‘kissing spine’ syndrome (KSS) is a common condition that may cause back problems. The lesions are detected most frequently in the saddlebearing area, between the 12th and 18th vertebrae (Jeffcott 1980; Walmsley et al. 2002). It can be diagnosed in about 30% of the healthy horse population (Jeffcott 1980) and it also occurred in the extinct horse Equus occidentalis (Klide 1989). Clinically relevant KSS usually has a higher degree of severity in radiological findings (Jeffcott 1980). The incidence of KSS is related to the type of work, probably to the amount of extension of the back required (Jeffcott 1980). One of the causes of KSS is thought to be weightbearing and other stresses inflicted on horses by the rider.

The kinematics of the back have long been unexplored, because the subtle movements are difficult to capture with the human eye and the back is difficult to access with kinematic analysis techniques. The normal movement range of the equine back has been studied in vitro (Townsend et al. 1983; Townsend and Leach 1984; Denoix 1987). Recently, the normal back movements of the horse in stance and in motion have also been studied in vivo (Pourcelot et al. 1998; Licka and Peham 1998; Audigié et al. 1999; Faber et al. 2000, 2001a,b; Haussler et al.

2001; Licka et al. 2001). The effects of high-speed trotting (Robert et al. 2001) and of conformational aspects on back movements (Johnston et al. 2002) have been studied. The effect of manual therapy has been evaluated in a case study (Faber et al. 2003).

The effects of a saddle and weight on the back-movements of the horse have never ben studied, we therefore focused on the analysis of the influence of tack (lungeing girth, saddle) and weight (saddle with 75 kg of lead) on back-movements and locomotion in general.

94 of 236

P. de Cocq et al.

759

Materials and methods Horses Nine Dutch Warmblood horses were used (8 mares and 1 gelding, mean age 9.4 years, mean weight 568 kg). The horses were clinically sound, had no apparent back problems, had comparable conformation and athletic ability and were in daily use by the

Veterinary Students’ Riding Association. Four horses were fully accustomed to the treadmill1 as a result of earlier kinematic research. These horses underwent at least 5 training sessions with saddle or saddle with weight before the measurements started. Five horses had no prior experience on the treadmill. These horses underwent at least 15 training sessions beforehand, from which at least 5 sessions were with saddle or saddle and weight. None of the horses showed signs of ‘cold back’.

Tack The same standard 17” (43 cm) dressage saddle (7 kg) and a standard lungeing girth were used on all horses. The same saddle was used in the situations with and without weight. In the latter condition, 2 bags each with 15 kg lead were attached to the stirrup bars of the saddle. Additionally, 2 lead flaps 22.5 kg were shaped similarly to the saddle and attached on top of it using safety belts and a lungeing girth (total additional weight 75 kg). To avoid any confounding effects of differences in tightening, the lungeing girth and saddle were always tightened by the same person and the saddle was tightened equally in both saddle only and saddle with weight situations.

L1 L3 L5 S3 1 3

Marker placement 2

4

Fig 1: Marker placement on back and limbs. Lumbar vertebrae 1, 3 and 5 (L1, L3, L5); sacral vertebra 3 (S3). 1 = Proximal spina scapula; 2 = Lateral collateral ligament of the metacarpophalangeal joint; 3 = Cranial part of the trochanter major of the femur; 4 = Lateral collateral ligament of the metatarsophalangeal joint.

The positions of the dorsal spinal processes of L1, L3, L5 and S3 were identified by palpation and used for marker placement (Faber 2001c, 2002; Fig 1). Identical marker position in all conditions was ensured by shaving small areas. At these positions, spherical, reflective markers (19 mm diameter) were placed. As marker positions for determination of pro- and retraction angles,

a)

c)

b)

d)

Fig 2: Pictures of all 4 situations: a) unloaded; b) with lungeing girth; c) with saddle; d) with saddle and 75 kg lead.

95 of 236

760

Effects of girth, saddle and weight on movements of the horse

A modern, commercially available analysing system was used. The system consists of 6 cameras and is based on passive infrared reflective markers and infrared cameras.

Calibration of the system is performed dynamically, using a calibration frame that defines the orientation of the coordinate system and a wand with a defined length. The positive y-axis was orientated in the line of progression, parallel to the treadmill. The positive z-axis was orientated upward and the positive x-axis was orientated perpendicular to the y- and z-axes.

The cameras were placed around the treadmill to obtain a field of view of 1.3 x 4.0 x 2.5 m. The system’s inaccuracy in identifying the location of markers in this set-up was less than 1.4%.

All horses had a 15 min warm-up period just before the measurements, which were performed under 4 conditions: unloaded; with lungeing girth; with saddle only; with saddle and weight (Fig 2). The order of the conditions was assigned randomly. For each horse under each condition, movement was captured in steady state locomotion at walk (1.6 m/sec) for 10 secs, and at trot (4.0 m/sec) and canter (7.0 m/sec) for 5 secs at a sample rate of 240 Hz. Data analysis The reconstruction of the 3D position of each marker is based on a direct linear transformation algorithm (Q Track)2. The raw coordinates were exported into Excel3 for further data analysis.

Individual stride cycles were determined,with the beginning of each stride cycle defined as the moment of hoof contact of the left hindlimb in walk and trot, or the trailing hindlimb in canter. Detection of the moment of hoof contact was based on the horizontal velocity profile of the marker on the metatarsophalangeal joint (Peham et al. 1999).

The back movements and pro- and retraction angles of the legs were calculated using the y and z marker coordinates. The back movements were calculated using a method that was developed and tested for validity and repeatability by Faber et al.

(2001c, 2002); briefly, the flexion-extension angular movement pattern (AMP) of a given vertebra (V2) is calculated from the position of the adjacent cranial (V1) and caudal (V3) markers.

The AMP of V2 is represented by the orientation of the line through V1 and V3. The maximal flexion, maximal extension and range of motion (ROM) (difference between maximal flexion and maximal extension) of L3 and L5 were used as variables for further analysis (Fig 3).

Pro- and retraction angles of the forelimbs were defined as the maximal angles between the line connecting the markers on the proximal spina scapula and on the metacarpophalangeal joint and a vertical line. Pro- and retraction angles of the hindlimbs were defined in a similar fashion using the markers on the cranial part of the trochanter major of the femur and on the metatarsophalangeal joint.

Flexion-extension (°)

(ProReflex)2

4 2

F1

F2 ROM 1 25 50

0 -2 -4 F 1

E1

75

ROM 2 100

F2

E2

-6 -8

ROM 1

ROM 2

-10 -12

E1 E2 Time (% of stride cycle)

-14 LH LF RH RF 6

b)

4 2 Flexion-extension (°)

Data collection

6

a)

F1 ROM 1 25 50

0 -2

E1

75

F2 ROM 2 100

E2

-4 -6

F1

-8 -10

F2

ROM 1 E1

ROM 2 E2

-12 -14

Time (% of stride cycle)

LH LF RH RF c)

6

F

4 ROM

2 Flexion-extension (°)

the proximal spina scapula, lateral collateral ligaments of the metacarpo- or metatarsophalangeal joints over the centre of rotation of the joint, and the cranial part of the trochanter major of the femur were used (Back et al. 1995a,b; Fig 1). For these marker positions, round, flat, reflective markers (18 mm diameter) were used and left on the horses between measurements.

0

25

-2 -4

F

50

75

100

E

-6 -8 -10

ROM

E

-12 -14

Time (% of stride cycle) TH LeF Leh TF Fig 3: Process data analysis. Angular movement patterns of L3 (lower curves, thin line) and L5 (upper curves, thick line) in a) walk, b) trot and c) canter. L3 = lumbar vertebrae 3; L5 = lumbar vertebrae 5. E = maximal extension angle of the vertebrae; F = maximal flexion angle of the vertebrae; ROM = range of motion of the vertebrae. 1 = first half, 2 = second half of the stride cycle. LH = left hindlimb; LF = left forelimb; RH = right hindlimb; RF = right forelimb; TH = trailing hindlimb; LeF = leading forelimb; LeH = leading hindlimb; TF = trailing forelimb.

Stastistics Means ± s.d. were calculated from the first 4 usable strides. A stride was unusable when marker losses occurred during this stride. Data were excluded from further analysis if not enough usable strides were available. Data were analysed96statistically in of 236 an ANOVA-repeated measurement test followed by a post hoc

P. de Cocq et al.

761

TABLE 1: Kinematic variables (mean ± s.d.) at the walk Unloaded

L3 ME 1 --11.2 L3 MF 1 -4.0 L3 ROM 1 7.2 L5 ME1 -4.5 L5 MF 1 1.2 L5 ROM 1 5.7 Protraction F 24.7 Retraction F 18.5 Protraction H 25.6 Retraction H 21.6

± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±

0.6a 0.5a 0.3 0.6a 0.7a 0.4 0.7 0.5a 0.6 0.6

Girth -11.3 ± -4.1 ± 7.1 ± -4.4 ± 1.4 ± 5.7 ± 24.4 ± 18.1 ± 25.1 ± 20.9 ±

0.7a 0.6a 0.3 0.7a 0.6a 0.4 0.4 0.7a 0.7 0.8

Saddle

0

Saddle + P value

-11.5 ± 0.6a -13.9 ± 0.6b -4.2 ± 0.6a -6.5 ± 0.6b 7.2 ± 0.3 7.4 ± 0.4 -4.6 ± 0.6a -6.3 ± 0.6b 1.1 ± 0.6a -0.9 ± 0.7b 5.7 ± 0.5 5.5 ± 0.5 24.3 ± 0.4 24.2 ± 0.6 18.4 ± 0.5a 19.4 ± 0.6b 25.6 ± 0.5 26.2 ± 0.4 21.3 ± 0.7 21.2 ± 0.7

<0.001 <0.001 0.885† <0.001 <0.001 0.764† 0.171†# 0.002 0.062† 0.773†

All variables are expressed in degrees; saddle + = saddle with 75 kg; L3 = lumbar vertebra 3; L5 = lumbar vertebra 5; ME = maximal extension angle of the vertebrae; MF = maximal flexion angle of the vertebrae; ROM = range of motion of the vertebrae; 1 = data of first half of the stride cycle, data of the second half of the stride cycle are similar; F = forelimb; H = hindlimb, data of the right-hand side of the horse, data of the left-hand side are similar. †No significant difference between groups (P≤0.05). abValues with the same superscript are not significantly different (P≤0.05, Bonferroni correction). #Data of only 8 horses were used.

-9.8 -5.8 3.9 -3.2 0.0 3.2 20.4 18.4 23.6 18.6

± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±

0.6a 0.6a 0.5 0.8 0.8a 0.4 0.6a 0.6a 0.4 0.4a

Girth -9.8 ± -5.9 ± 4.0 ± -3.1 ± 0.1 ± 3.3 ± 20.7 ± 18.5 ± 23.7 ± 18.7 ±

0.6a 0.6a 0.4 0.9 0.9a 0.3 0.6a 0.6a 0.5 0.4a

Saddle

Saddle +

-9.8 ± 0.7a -5.8 ± 0.6a 4.1 ± 0.6 -3.3 ± 0.8 0.0 ± 0.8a 3.3 ± 0.5 21.0 ± 0.7a 18.6 ± 0.6a 24.1 ± 0.5 18.8 ± 0.4ab

-11.8 ± 0.9b -7.8 ± 0.7b 4.0 ± 0.6 -4.4 ± 0.9 -1.4 ± 0.8b 3.1 ± 0.4 21.8 ± 0.6b 20.5 ± 0.6b 24.6 ± 0.5 19.3 ± 0.4b

0.8a 0.5a 0.4 1.0a 0.7a 0.5 0.9 1.1 1.0 1.2

-9.4 ± -4.0 ± 5.4 ± -3.5 ± 4.4 ± 8.0 ± 19.8 ± 31.2 ± 33.9 ± 20.6 ±

Saddle

Saddle +

0.7a -10.4 ± 0.9a -12.2 ± 0.7b 0.5ab -4.4 ± 0.6b -5.0 ± 0.5b 0.4 6.0 ± 0.5 7.3 ± 0.6 0.9a -4.0 ± 1.0a -5.8 ± 0.8b 0.8ab 4.2 ± 0.8b 3.8 ± 0.7b 0.4 8.2 ± 0.5 9.6 ± 0.4 0.7 19.4 ± 1.0 21.7 ± 1.2 1.3 31.1 ± 1.3 31.8 ± 1.5 1.1 33.4 ± 1.3 33.2 ± 2.0 1.0 21.1 ± 1.1 21.4 ± 1.2

LF = leading forelimb; TH = trailing hindlimb; due to frequent marker losses, data of the trailing forelimb and leading hindlimb are not listed. #Data of only 8 horses were used; ‡data of only 7 horses were used; §data of only 5 horses were used. See Table 1 for further explanation of abbreviations and symbols.

0

10

20

Time (% of stride cycle) 30 40 50 60 70

80

90

100

0

10

20

Time (% of stride cycle) 30 40 50 60 70

80

90

100

-8 -10 -12

-4 -6 -8 -10 -12

-16 LH LF RH RF

P value 0.022 0.021 0.065† 0.031 0.033 0.207† 0.177†# 0.653†‡ 0.945†§ 0.750†

100

-14

c) 0 -2 Flexion-extension (°)

L3 ME -9.3 ± L3 MF -3.7 ± L3 ROM 5.6 ± L5 ME -3.5 ± L5 MF 4.8 ± L5 ROM 8.3 ± Protraction LF 20.4 ± Retraction LF 30.9 ± Protraction TH 33.8 ± Retraction TH 21.0 ±

Girth

90

-2

P value

TABLE 3: Kinematic variables (mean ± s.d.) at the canter Unloaded

80

-6

b)

See Table 1 for explanation of abbreviations and symbols.

Variables

Time (% of stride cycle) 30 40 50 60 70

-4

0

0.050 0.002 0.807†# 0.080† 0.008 0.109† 0.005 0.002# 0.332† 0.003

20

-16 LH LF RH RF

Flexion-extension (°)

L3 ME 1 L3 MF 1 L3 ROM 1 L5 ME 1 L5 MF 1 L5 ROM 1 Protraction F Retraction F Protraction H Retraction H

Unloaded

10

-14

TABLE 2: Kinematic variables (mean ± s.d.) at the trot Variables

0

-2 Flexion-extension (°)

Variables

a)

-4 -6 -8 -10 -12 -14

Bonferroni test using SPSS4 software. A P value of )0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results Data for maximal flexion, maximal extension and the resulting range of motion for L3 and L5 at walk, trot and canter are given in Tables 1, 2 and 3, along with pro- and retraction angles for front and hindlimbs. Significance of differences has been indicated.

-16 TH LeF LeH TF Fig 4: Typical example of the angular movement patterns of L3 in a) walk, b) trot and c) canter, during one stride of one horse in all 4 situations: ◆ = unloaded; ■ = lungeing girth; ▲ = saddle; x = extra weight.

LH = left hindlimb; LF = left forelimb; RH = right hindlimb; RF = right forelimb. TH = trailing hindlimb; LeF = leading forelimb; LeH = leading 97 of 236 hindlimb; TF = trailing forelimb.

762

While no influence on any of the variables measured at walk was seen in the situations with a lungeing girth or a saddle only, an overall extension of the back, represented by a decrease in the maximum flexion and extension angles of L3 and L5, was provoked by a saddle with weight, whereas the range of motion of the back appeared unaffected (Fig 4). An increase in the retraction angle of the forelimb was caused by the saddle with weight.

The situation was comparable at trot and canter, with an overall decrease in flexion and extension angles in the ‘saddle with weight’ condition and no effect on the range of motion. At trot, the increase in retraction angle of the forelimb was accompanied by (smaller) increases in retraction angle of the hindlimb and in protraction angle in the forelimb. At canter, a smaller decrease in maximal flexion angles of L3 and L5 could also be seen in the ‘saddle only’ situation, but there was no influence on pro- and retraction angles.

Discussion No other studies on the changes in back movements caused by a saddle and weight exist, but there are models on back biomechanics. There is common agreement that the bow-andstring concept as proposed by Slijper (1946) is the best biomechanical model for the back of the horse (Jeffcott 1979). In this concept, the bow (thoracolumbar spine with adnexa) forms a functional entity with the string (abdominal muscles, linea alba).

There are several factors that increase tension in the bow (i.e. flex the back), or decrease tension (i.e. extend the back), among which limb action is one of the most important. There is a tight connection between limb movements and excursions of the back, due to the continuity of soft tissue structures such as the common aponeurosis of the longissimus dorsi muscle (which is one of the most powerful muscles influencing back motion) and the middle gluteal muscle (which is instrumental for propulsion) (Dyce et al. 1996).

Protraction of the forelimbs extends the back, as does retraction of the hindlimbs. Retraction of the forelimbs and protraction of the hindlimbs have the opposite effect (Jeffcott 1979).

Another important factor in the bow-and-string concept not included in this study is the position of the head. The head acts as an attached beam supported at one end only. This beam receives additional support from the cervical muscles and the nuchal ligament. The tail represents a similar beam, but is of much less biomechanical importance (Jeffcott 1979).

The weight used in this study (75 kg) is representative of the average rider. It may be argued that it is dead weight and not comparable to a rider. A study using a force-plate demonstrated that, compared with a sandbag, a rider was able to shift part of the weight towards the hindlimbs (Schamhardt et al. 1991). This may mean that, compared with a rider, the ‘saddle with weight’ situation will have more impact on the forelimbs. However, in kinematic studies on treadmill locomotion of horses with lead saddles and riders of the same weight, no significant differences could be demonstrated between the 2 conditions (Sloet van Oldruitenborgh-Oosterbaan et al. 1995, 1997). Therefore, we feel confident that the ‘saddle with weight’ condition sufficiently simulated a saddle with rider.

Saddling a horse influenced back movement at walk and trot only when at the same time the horse’s back was challenged with a considerable weight. Although perhaps obvious at first sight, this observation means that tightening a girth around the horse’s

Effects of girth, saddle and weight on movements of the horse

chest, thereby exerting pressure on the sternum and the withers, does not measurably influence back-movement. Girth tension has been related to reduced respiratory performance (Bowers and Slocombe 1999), but there seems to be no biomechanical restriction to locomotion.

The reduction in maximal flexion of the angles of L3 and L5 seen in the canter in the condition with a saddle only, may be explained by the bigger and faster vertical movement of the back of the horse causing a larger acceleration of the saddle resulting in a higher impact on the back due to inertial forces, compared to walk and trot.

The influence of a saddle with weight can best be described as an overall extension or ‘hollowing’ of the back. Both maximal flexion and maximal extension angles decreased and ranges of motion remained unchanged. This suggests that loading a horse’s back to the degree used in this study does not restrict the mobility of the back and hence will probably not significantly affect athletic potential. However, it should be understood that it slightly affects the conformation of the vertebral column and therefore the internal forces in this and adjacent anatomical structures. A slightly more extended back leads to a closer position of the spinous processes of the thoracolumbar vertebrae. This effect can be expected to be largest in the area where ventrodorsal flexion/extension excursions are largest, i.e. the last part of the thoracic vertebral column (Faber et al. 2000), which is the region where lesions associated with dorsal spinous processes of vertebral bodies are most frequently encountered (Jeffcott 1980; Walmsley et al. 2002). Further, the altered anatomical situation when loaded with a saddle with weight also leads to other stresses and tensions in the many ligaments and muscles that make up the equine back. It is clear that these alterations will not invariably lead to clinical problems, but they may represent a predisposing factor, just as in the case of kissing spines.

For evaluation of the effect of a saddle with weight on locomotion (pro- and retraction), the back should be considered in the context of the entire animal. In order to counteract the extension of the back seen in the saddle with weight situation, an increased retraction of the forelimbs and protraction of the hindlimbs can be expected. In the present study, it seemed that the horses sought to counteract this influence by adapting the gait such that the retraction angle of the forelimbs increased. Apparently the forelimbs take the lead in this compensatory mechanism, which may be unsurprising as it is known that in the horse the forelimbs support 60% of bodyweight (Merkens et al. 1985). At trot there is also an increase in retraction angle of the forelimbs, but accompanied by lesser increases in retraction angle of the hindlimbs and protraction angle of the forelimbs. These latter changes seem contradictory, but become logical when considering that the trot is a gait where, unlike the situation at walk, there is a tight coupling between front and hindlimb movement and between the movements of the contralateral limb pairs. A significant increase in retraction angle of the forelimb at trot will lead to some increase of retraction angle of the contralateral hindlimb if the limbs are to remain in phase. Similarly, an increase in retraction angle of a forelimb, which results in a slight increase in retraction time if speed remains the same, may influence the simultaneous protraction of the contralateral forelimb. At canter, no effects on locomotion were noted. There may be methodological explanations for this. Data variation was larger 98 of 236 here, because both right and left canter lead were used. In this

P. de Cocq et al.

asymmetrical gait, asymmetries in marker placement may have more effect and shifting of horses from the y-axis occurs earlier (Audigié et al. 1998). Further, because of frequent marker losses at this gait, not all horses could be used in the data analysis.

In conclusion, it seems intuitive that increased weight on the back might cause extension of the spine. This study confirms that loading of the dorsal back region with weights of the order experienced in competition does influence posture during exercise.

An overall extending effect on the back, but no effect on mobility, was observed. Although no causal relationship can be concluded from this study, these changes in back motion are consistent with those allegedly implicated in the pathogenesis of kissing spines. It seems that the horse tries to compensate for the extending effect of the saddle by increasing retraction of the forelimbs.

Manufacturers’ addresses 1Kagra AG,

Fahrwangen, Switzerland.

Sävedalen, Sweden.

3Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington, USA. 4SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA. 2Qualysis AB,

763

Faber, M., Johnston, C., Schamhardt, H., van Weeren, R., Roepstorff, L. and Barneveld, A. (2001b) Basic three-dimensional kinematics of the equine spine during canter. Equine vet. J., Suppl. 33, 145-149.

Faber, M.J., Schamhardt, H.C., van Weeren, P.R. and Barneveld, A. (2001c) Methodology and validity of assessing kinematics of the thorocolumbar vertebral column in horses on the basis of skin-fixated markers. Am. J. vet. Res. 62, 301-306.

Harman, J.C. (1999) Tack and saddle fit. Vet. Clin. N. Am.: Equine Pract. 15, 247-261.

Haussler, K.K., Bertram, J.E.A., Gellman, K. and Hermanson, J.W. (2001) Segmental in vivo vertebral kinematics at the walk, trot and canter: a preliminary study.

Equine vet. J., Suppl. 33, 160-164.

Jeffcott, L.B. (1979) Back problems in the horse - a look at past present and future progress. Equine vet. J. 11, 129-136.

Jeffcott, L.B. (1980) Disorders of the thoracolumbar spine of the horse - a survey of 443 cases. Equine vet. J. 12, 197-210.

Jeffcott, L.B. (1999) Historical perspective and clinical indications. Vet. Clin. N. Am.: Equine Pract. 15, 1-11.

Johnston, C., Holm, K., Faber, M., Erichsen, C., Eksell, P. and Drevemo, S. (2002) Effects of conformational aspects on the movement of the equine back. Equine vet. J., Suppl. 34, 314-318.

Klide, A.M. (1989) Overriding vertebral spinous processes in the extinct horse, Equus occidentalis. Am. J. vet. Res. 50, 592-593.

Licka, T. and Peham, C. (1998) An objective method for evaluating the flexibility of the back of standing horses. Equine vet. J. 30, 412-415.

References

Licka, T.F., Peham, C. and Zohmann, E. (2001) Treadmill study of the range of back movement in horses without back pain. Am. J. vet. Res. 62, 1173-1179.

Audigié, F., Pourcelot, P., Degueurce, C., Denoix, J.-M. and Geiger, D. (1999) Kinematics of the equine back: flexion-extension movements in sound trotting horses. Equine vet. J., Suppl. 30, 210-213.

Merkens, H.W., Schamhardt, H.C., Hartman, W. and Kersjes, A.W. (1985) Ground reaction force patterns of Dutch Warmblood horses at normal walk. Equine vet.

J. 18, 207-214.

Audigié, F., Pourcelot, P., Degueurce, C., Denoix, J.-M., Geiger, D. and Bortolussi, C. (1998) Asymmetry in placement of bilateral skin markers on horses and effects of asymmetric skin marker placement on kinematic variables. Am. J. vet.

Res. 59, 938-944.

Peham, C., Scheidl, M. and Licka, T. (1999) Limb locomotion - speed distribution analysis as a new method for stance phase detection. J. Biomech. 32, 1119-1124.

Back, W., Schamhardt, H.C., Savelberg, H.H., van den Bogert, A.J., Bruin, G., Hartman, W. and Barneveld, A. (1995a) How the horse moves: 1. Significance of graphical representation of the equine forelimb kinematics. Equine vet. J. 27, 31-38.

Back, W., Schamhardt, H.C., Savelberg, H.H., van den Bogert, A.J., Bruin, G., Hartman, W. and Barneveld, A. (1995b) How the horse moves: 2. Significance of graphical representation of the equine hindlimb kinematics. Equine vet. J. 27, 39-45.

Bowers, J.R. and Slocombe, R.F. (1999) Influence of girth strap tensions on athletic performance of racehorses. Equine vet. J., Suppl. 30, 52-56.

Denoix, J.-M. (1987) Kinematics of the thoracolumbar spine of the horse during dorsoventral movements: a preliminary study. In: Equine Exercise Physiology 2, Eds: J.R. Gillespie and N.E. Robinson, ICEEP Publications, Davis, California. pp 607-614.

Dyce, K.M., Sack, W.O. and Wensing, C.J.G. (1996) The hindlimb of the horse. In: Textbook of Veterinary Anatomy, 2nd edn., W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia. p 613.

Faber, M., Johnston, C., van Weeren, R. and Barneveld, A. (2002) Repeatability of back kinematics of horses during treadmill locomotion. Equine vet. J. 34, 235-241.

Faber, M.J., van Weeren, P.R., Schepers, M. and Barneveld, A. (2003) Long-term follow-up of manipulative treatment in a horse with back problems. Am. J. vet. med. Ass. 50, 241-245.

Faber, M., Schamhardt, H., van Weeren, R., Johnston, C., Roepstorff, L. and Barneveld, A. (2000) Basic three-dimensional kinematics of the vertebral column of horses walking on a treadmill. Am. J. vet. Res. 61, 399-406.

Faber, M., Johnston, C., Schamhardt, H., van Weeren, R., Roepstorff, L. and Barneveld, A. (2001a) Basic three-dimensional kinematics of the vertebral column of horses trotting on a treadmill. Am. J. vet. Res. 62, 757-764.

Pourcelot, P., Audigié, F., Degueurce, C., Denoix, J.-M. and Geiger, D. (1998) Kinematics of the equine back: a method to study the thoracolumbar flexionextension movement at the trot. Vet. Res. 29, 519-525.

Robert, C., Audigié, F., Valette, J.P., Pourcelot, P. and Denoix, J.-M. (2001) Effects of treadmill speed on the mechanics of the back in the trotting saddlehorse.

Equine vet. J., Suppl., 33, 154-159.

Schamhardt, H.C., Merkens, H.W. and van Osch, G.J.V.M. (1991) Ground reaction force analysis of horses ridden at the walk and the trot. In: Equine Exercise Physiology, Eds: S.G.B. Persson, A. Lindholm and L.B. Jeffcott, ICEEP Publications, Davis, California. pp 120-127.

Slijper, E.J. (1946) Comparative biologic-anatomical investigations on the vertebral column and spinal musculature of mammals. Proc. K. Ned. Acad.

Wetensch. 42, 1-128.

Sloet van Oldruitenborgh-Oosterbaan, M.M., Barneveld, A. and Schamhardt, H.C. (1995) Effects of weight and riding on workload and locomotion during treadmill exercise. Equine vet. J., Suppl. 18, 413-417.

Sloet van Oldruitenborgh-Oosterbaan, M.M., Barneveld, A. and Schamhardt, H.C. (1997) Effects of treadmill inclination on kinematics of the trot in Dutch Warmblood horses. Equine vet. J., Suppl. 23, 71-75.

Townsend, H.G. and Leach, D.H. (1984) Relationship between intervertebral joint morphology and mobility in the equine thoracolumbar spine. Equine vet. J. 16, 461-465.

Townsend, H.G., Leach, D.H. and Fretz, P.B. (1983) Kinematics of the equine thoracolumbar spine. Equine vet. J. 15, 117-122.

Walmsley, J.P., Petterson, H., Winberg, F. and McEvoy, F. (2002) Impingement of dorsal spinous processes in two hundred and fifteen horses: case selection, surgical technique and results. Equine vet. J. 34, 23-28.

99 of 236

100 of 236

101 of 236

102 of 236

103 of 236

104 of 236

105 of 236

106 of 236

26-35_OWM1008_Gefen.qxd:Feature 10/6/08 9:45 AM Page 26

FEATURE

A

TE

How Much Time Does it Take to Get a Pressure Ulcer?

Integrated Evidence from Human, Animal, and In Vitro Studies

IC

Amit Gefen, PhD

D

U

PL

Severe pressure ulcers and deep tissue injury are associated with higher mortality rates, longer hospital stays, and costly treatment. Time is a critical factor in commonly employed measures (eg, pressure redistribution for wheelchair users and patient turning schedules) to prevent pressure ulcers and deep tissue injury. Surprisingly, information regarding the timeframe for pressure ulcer onset, particularly for deep tissue injury onset, is scant. To create a timeframe for the development of pressure ulcers and deep tissue injury, available evidence from the following study types was obtained and reviewed: 1) studies involving patients who underwent surgeries of known duration and subsequently developed a serious pressure ulcer with subcutaneous tissue damage or deep tissue injury; 2) animal studies in which loads were applied on soft tissues of anesthetized animals and tissue viability monitored in real time or using histology post-euthanasia; and 3) in vitro models in cell cultures and tissue-engineered constructs. Findings from the three models indicate that pressure ulcers in subdermal tissues under bony prominences very likely occur between the first hour and 4 to 6 hours after sustained loading. However, research examining these timeframes in sitting patients is not available. Further fundamental research, employing animal and cell culture models, is required to narrow this range further and to correlate the time factor to the extent of tissue damage.

Ostomy Wound Management 2008;54(10):26â&#x20AC;&#x201C;35

D

O

N O

T

KEYWORDS: pressure ulcer, deep tissue injury, animal model, tissue engineering, injury threshold

Dr. Gefen is a Senior Lecturer, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

Please address correspondence to: Amit Gefen, PhD, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel; email:gefen@eng.tau.ac.il.

107 of 236

26

OstomyWound Management

26-35_OWM1008_Gefen.qxd:Feature 10/6/08 9:45 AM Page 27

lthough time is a critical factor in measures data from the above three study types that can be used taken (eg, pressure redistribution for wheelto develop guidelines and protocols relevant to the timeframe of PU onset. This information is fundachair users and patient turning schedules) to mental for clinical prevention of PU and basic minimize the incidence of pressure ulcers (PU), inforresearch (eg, design of animal studies and tissue engimation in the literature is far from definitive.

According to current prevention guidelines from the neering models) regarding the etiology of PU. The information was obtained through a search of the litEuropean Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (EPUAP) erature database included in MEDLINE of articles (www.epuap.org), “individuals who are able should be published from 1966 to 2008 in Hebrew and English, taught to redistribute weight every 15 minutes,” but as well as from books. this is qualified by a note that this recommendation is based on expert opinion and few clinical observations.

This is just one example of the overall paucity of data Evidence from Clinical Studies on times that are safe/unsafe relevant to positioning.

Perhaps the most cited paper about the effect of the Information is scant regarding the timeline for PU time on PU onset, the retrospective study by Reswick and onset and particularly for onset of deep tissue injury Rogers5 suggested that external pressures exceeding (DTI), a condition that places patients at high risk for (approximately) diastolic pressure cause PUs within sepsis, renal failure, and organ system failure. approximately 6 hours and higher external pressures To create a timeframe for the onset of PUs, a litera(approximately four times the systolic pressure) cause ture review was conducted of available published data PU in less than 1 hour. The data used in their studies involving time to subdermal tissue damage and particwere collected from more than 980 medical cases ularly DTI because it has been reported that pressurereviewed in the Rancho Los Amigos hospital (Downey, related damage occurs sooner and faster in muscle tisCalif). Because biomechanical studies have found that sue than in fat and skin.1,2 Indeed, the US National external pressures when a person is laying down may approach the diastolic pressure under bony promiPressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP) added a new nences6 and because general anesthetics lower the blood PU category in 2007 – “suspected DTI” — to adopt these changes. Moreover, it has become increasingly pressure (hypotension), which may compromise perfuaccepted in the clinical and basic research communision in loaded tissues, patients undergoing prolonged ties that PUs very likely start as deep tissue damage; surgeries are considered at high risk for PU developaccordingly, the definition of PU should probably be ment.7,8 In fact, the appearance of PUs in patients after 3 improved to reflect this understanding. surgery evoked the idea that they are acute injuries that develop rapidly in excessively/continuously Evidence on the timeframe for PU onset is available as the result of three types of research: 1) studies involving patients who underOstomy Wound Management 2008;54(10):26–35 went surgeries of known duration and subsequently developed serious PU with KEY POINTS subcutaneous tissue damage or DTI; 2) • The evidence base for frequently used repositioning schedules to help animal studies in which loads were prevent the development of deep pressure ulcers (PU) and deep tissue injury, is limited and was developed many years ago. applied on soft tissues of anesthetized • To develop a timeframe for PU onset, the author reviewed and summaanimals and tissue viability monitored rized currently available clinical and preclinical data. in real-time or using histology post• Although data from sitting patients with limited mobility are not availeuthanasia; and 3) in vitro models in cell able, clinical and preclinical study results suggest that subdermal cultures and tissue-engineered coninjury occurs approximately between the first hour and 4 to 6 hours structs, where predetermined loads were after sustained loading. applied to the culture for controlled • Additional preclinical and clinical research is needed to help narrow periods during which cell viability was this timeframe and help guide clinical practice. monitored.4 This review summarizes

D

O

N O

T

D

U

PL

IC

A

TE

A

108 of 236

October 2008 Vol. 54 Issue 10

27

26-35_OWM1008_Gefen.qxd:Feature 10/6/08 9:45 AM Page 28

PL

IC

A

TE

(~21%) developed PUs following surgery on a 2-cm gel mattress. The PUs were observed mainly on the sacrum and heels in patients who were operated in a supine position and mostly on the sternum and chin in patients operated in the prone (face down) position. In a US descriptive study14 that included patients having >10-hour surgery on a foam surface, 15 out of 33 subjects (~45%) developed a PU. Together, these study data not only provide a timeframe for onset of PUs in patients who are confined to bed for extended periods of time, but also indicate that the incidence of these ulcers markedly increases the longer the patient is laying down.15,16 It is apparent from the variability in the reported times for PU onset that some individuals can tolerate sustained tissue loading better than others. Likely, this is related to anatomical differences, variations in the mechanical characteristics of tissues, perfusion quality, general health status, the posture sustained, and perhaps interactions of these factors with the biomechanical performances of the specific support surface used. Accordingly, time for onset of PU is not exact but a range of probable times.

Patients who undergo surgery are protected by at least a standard operating room table mattress and in some cases also by gel/foam pads.11 In this regard, it is interesting to mention statistics relative to the time of sustained position and PU incidence in a cohort of patients who were confined to a bed or wheelchair for reasons other than surgery — eg, due to stroke or sepsis — during hospitalization. In a retrospective study17 conducted in a large geriatric center in Israel between 1983 and 1992, 128 of the 416 patients (~30%) who were immobile for at least 2 hours and not placed on special support surfaces developed PUs. Vanderwee et al18 investigated whether alternating patient position on a pressure-redistribution mattress (with 7-cm thick viscoelastic foam overlay) — 4 hours in a supine position and 2 hours in a lateral position — reduced the incidence of PUs in comparison with repositioning every 4 hours. Their specific turning scheme was as follows: semi-Fowler 30°, right-side lateral position 30°, semi-Fowler 30°, and left-side lateral position 30°. Patients in the study group were placed in a semi-Fowler 30° position for 4 hours and in a lateral position 30° for 2 hours; patients in the control group were repositioned at equal 4-hour intervals. Of the

D

O

N O

T

D

U

loaded tissues, as opposed to the traditional concept that they are slow-forming, chronic wounds.9 Therefore, the best evidence for the timeframe during which pressure ulcers appear in humans originates from case studies or clinical trials in which patients were evaluated to rule out existing ulcers, underwent a surgery of known duration, and examined postoperatively to detect a new PU. Not many published studies meet this design but the few papers available10-14 point to a rather narrow time range.

In the early 1970s, Hicks10 was one of the first to provide quantitative data for PU incidence among surgical patients. Of the 100 patients who had surgery lasting more than 2 hours, 13 developed PUs. This study concluded that patients should be assessed for PUs postoperatively at body areas in contact with the operating room table and that surgeries lasting longer than 6 hours involve a particular risk for PU development. However, a subsequent study11 of surgical patients (N = 505) suggests that PUs may occur within substantially shorter timeframes — specifically, skin changes may indicate internal tissue damage in patients who underwent 2.5hour surgeries on a standard surgical mattress (ie, a mattress with no special foam or gel designs or viscoelastic overlays to reduce PU risk).

Aronovitch12 reported that out of a cohort of 281 surgical patients hospitalized in the US, nine (~3%) developed a PU related to the surgical event. Six of the nine patients with a PU had at least one comorbidity and were managed with a warming device and eight received three or more anesthetic agents. Also, eight of the patients who developed a PU had been placed on a standard operating room mattress (2-inch foam pad) for the surgical procedure and four were operated in the supine (face up) position. Patients who developed PUs had a 269-minute (4.48-hour) median operating room time (range: 180 to 387 minutes).

Aronovitch’s study suggests that in patients undergoing surgery, PUs can occur after 3 hours. Also, Aronovitch noted that cardiac and orthopedic surgical procedures performed in the supine position were associated with PUs, which justifies studies that examine the impact of patient position on the operating room table on PU incidence.

In a prospective follow-up study13 of >4-hour surgery in the Netherlands, 44 out of 208 patients

109 of 236

28

OstomyWound Management

26-35_OWM1008_Gefen.qxd:Feature 10/6/08 9:45 AM Page 30

D

Evidence from Animal Models

O

N O

T

Results of a meta-analysis of pressure-time combinations causing muscle tissue damage in 174 rats used as models of PU and DTI recently were reported by LinderGanz et al.20 Adopting the concept of Reswick and Rogers,5 they calculated a pressure-time injury tolerance for skeletal muscle tissue of rats based on histopathology studies of compressed muscle tissue in the literature (including the contributions of Husain21 and Kosiak22).

Data collected from the literature were supplemented by similar, complementary studies conducted mainly for muscle tissue that was loaded for periods shorter than 1 hour. To review briefly, rats were anesthetized, the skin above their gracilis muscle was resected, and the muscle was subjected to constant pressures using a springderived precalibrated rigid compressor. After the pressure was delivered, the animals were sacrificed and samples from the compressed muscles were harvested for histopathology. Using histological staining (phosphotungstic acid hematoxylin, [PTAH]), the viability of muscle cells and integrity of cross-striation in the muscle were determined for different pressure-time groups. If cell death or loss of cross-striation could be identified in

D

PL

IC

A

TE

a PTAH-stained specimen under optical microscopy for a certain pressure-time combination, that pressure-time combination was classified as injuring. The researchers found that the critical pressure-time combinations causing muscle tissue damage form a decreasing sigmoid function shape, approximately corresponding to the inverse pressure-time relationship reported by Reswick and Rogers5 between the first and third hours after exposure to the sustained loading. However, at the extreme times (<1 hour or >3 hours), the pressure-time curve was different than that suggested by Reswick and Rogers â&#x20AC;&#x201D; it indicated that at short (<1 hour) and long (3- to 6hour) exposure to loads, critical loads causing tissue necrosis are nearly time-independent â&#x20AC;&#x201D; ie, they are almost constant. The observation that the amount of pressure needed to cause injury decreases significantly at approximately 2 hours post-loading indicates that loaded muscle tissue becomes more vulnerable to PU development and DTI at that time.

The rate studies conducted by Stekelenburg et al23,24 found that 2 hours of sustained loading is enough to cause DTI. Specifically, continuous loading was applied to the hind limb of anesthetized rats for 2 hours and damage to the tibialis anterior muscle in vivo was examined using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). After the animals were sacrificed, samples were taken for histopathology to verify the MRI findings.

These studies showed that compression of the muscle tissue for 2 hours induced elevated T2 values in the loaded muscle regions and location of these increased T2 spots correlated strongly with necrotic muscle regions shown in the histopathology. An additional study by Kwan et al25 documented the histopathological changes in subcutaneous tissues of rats (around the trochanters) following exposure to sustained external loads delivered in two loading sessions of 6 hours each on two consecutive days. The researchers found progressive degeneration of muscle cells characterized by numerous increases of nuclei occupying the central parts of the muscle fibers. They further reported internalization of peripherally located nuclei, replacement of muscle cells by fibrosis and adipose tissues, and the presence of pyknotic nuclei as well as karyorrhexis. These signs of massive tissue degeneration are believed to indicate that initial tissue damage occurred within much fewer than 6 hours.

U

122 patients in their experimental study group, 20 (16.4%) developed a PU (grade 2+, mainly under the sacrum, and less frequently on the ankles and heels), a rate statistically indistinguishable from the 24 (21.2%) of the 113 patients in the control group who were repositioned every 4 hours. Hence, consistent with the other data above from surgical and nonsurgical patients, a considerable number of immobile patients develop PU within 4 hours of confinement to bed.

The times for development of pressure ulcers reported in these clinical studies should be interpreted with some caution. Over the past 40 years, improvements in the technology of support surfaces were introduced concurrent with the accumulation of these data. Patients considered at risk for developing a PU now are usually prescribed high-density foam mattresses rather than a regular spring-form plastic-coated mattress to better distribute body pressures.19 It is possible that the older data, obtained before the availability of pressure-redistribution mattresses, indicates shorter times for PU onset, but currently no human or animal experimental data are available to support or reject this hypothesis.

110 of 236

30

OstomyWound Management

26-35_OWM1008_Gefen.qxd:Feature 10/6/08 9:45 AM Page 31

Evidence from In Vitro Models

PL

IC

A

TE

The use of tissue engineering model systems to study PUs (and DTI in muscles in particular) is rather new. The practice originated at the Eindhoven University of Technology (the Netherlands) over the last 5 years.26,27 Specifically, Bruels et al26 developed an in vitro model system of engineered skeletal muscle tissue constructs. The constructs were composed of multilayers of randomly oriented myotubes. Compression of these engineered muscle tissue constructs revealed that most cell death in the deformed constructs occurred between 1 and 4 hours post-loading at clinically relevant tissue deformations (~50%) and that higher deformations led to earlier damage initiation. Gawlitta et al27 developed a more complex tissue-engineered model system in which muscle cultures produced from murine muscle cells were suspended in collagen gel and allowed to arrange and form longitudinally organized myotubes that more closely mimic the fibered structure of native skeletal muscle. These bioartificial muscles were subjected to compressive

D

O

N O

T

D

U

The data obtained from animal models, while being extremely useful for understanding the etiology of PUs and DTI, need to be treated with reservations. First, marked anatomical and possible physiological differences exist between humans and rodents. Second, data in these studies were obtained from healthy and relatively young rodents; whereas, humans susceptible to ulcer development are commonly elderly individuals with complex chronic comorbidities such as diabetes or cardiovascular diseases.8,12,18 Third, to produce PUs in the animals, localized loads are applied to the skin23-25 or muscle20 using mechanical indentors â&#x20AC;&#x201D; an unnatural configuration that probably produces higher local geometrical distortions of tissues and interferes more with the local blood supply when compared with human tissues compressed in natural supported postures.

Nevertheless, data obtained in the animal studies20-25 facilitate understanding of the time course of PU and DTI development, which is impossible to obtain with human subjects for obvious ethical reasons.

111 of 236

October 2008 Vol. 54 Issue 10

31

26-35_OWM1008_Gefen.qxd:Feature 10/6/08 9:45 AM Page 32

D

O

N O

T

D

U

PL

IC

A

TE

system to determine the timedependent critical compressive deformations for necrotic cell death in bioartificial muscles. They used a half-spherical indentor to induce a nonuniform, concentric distribution of deformations in the bioartificial muscle specimens and measured the spread of damage in the muscle cell over time using fluorescence microscopy. Interestingly, the tissue-engineered muscle model system also produced a sigmoid function describing the tissue load tolerance with time parameters similar to those reported in the animal studies of Linder-Ganz et al.20 Specifically, the same timeframe for loss of muscle tolerance to the sustained loads (1 to 3 hours post-loading) manifested in both studies; this may indicate that loss of structural resistance to loads between 1 and 3 hours Figure 1. Suggested effects of the individual anatomy on the time to develop a serious pressure is an inherent property of ulcer (PU) or deep tissue injury (DTI), based on the pressure-time injury threshold obtained in animuscle tissue. mal studies by Linder-Ganz et al.20 Individuals who are obese and/or have atrophied muscles are As with the human and expected to develop DTI during a shorter period of time compared to persons with normal bodyweight and normal muscle thickness. Epidemiological studies indicate that an individual with spinal animal studies, results from cord injury (SCI) is likely to gain weight and lose muscle tissue over the years post-SCI; therefore, cell and tissue culture models he/she theoretically shifts from the condition of patient A to that of patient B, likely shortening the time for him/her to develop a PU or DTI under sustained loading. The seated buttocks are depict- must be interpreted with caued as an example where internal tissue loads are expected to be higher than when laying down.34 tion. First, cell cultures and tisThe theory suggesting that increased bodyweight and loss of muscle mass shorten the time for DTI sue-engineered constructs onset35 is hypothesized to hold for a supine position as well. currently lack the true microscopic organization and architecture of native tissue. Also, no interaction with other deformations of up to 40% and cell viability was recordtissues occurs. For example, the bioartificial muscles of ed using a confocal laser scanning microscope that monGawlitta27 do not contain connective tissue that forms itored fluorescent markers for apoptotic and necrotic cell death. It was found that after 5 to 6 hours, compressive endomysium and perimysium in native muscle. Second, deformations caused substantial damage in the bioartifino vasculature is involved and although some factors of cial muscles (defined as more than 20% cell death via ischemia can be simulated by manipulating the medium both apoptotic and necrotic pathways). Most recently, of the cultures,27,28 this is a simplification of the real inter28 27 Gefen et al used Gawlittaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tissue-engineered model ruption of vascular homeostasis. However, because the 112 of 236

32

OstomyWound Management

26-35_OWM1008_Gefen.qxd:Feature 10/6/08 9:45 AM Page 33

TE

biological variability is relatively small across cultures, these are excellent models for etiological PU research and eliminate the ethical issues involved when conducting animal experiments.

IC

D

O

N O

T

D

U

PL

In a case study collection, obese patients were observed to be at higher risk than nonobese for serious PU and DTI.29 Apparently, this is surprising, considering the fact that obese individuals tend to have lower interface pressure peaks, as shown in a group of 75 institutionalized elderly where those with the lowest body mass index had the highest peak seat-interface pressures.30 However, when the fact that interface pressures have been shown to be an unreliable measure of internal tissue loading is considered,31 this apparent paradox is resolved: the increased vulnerability of the obese patients to PU and DTI is due to their increased bodyweight loading on bony prominences, which in turn induces higher mechanical stress concentrations (ie, high forces per unit area of tissue) in their deep soft tissues. For example, in a study32 in Israel involving two healthy subjects, the addition of 5 kg to the bodyweight of a 27-year-old man (bodyweight 90 kg) and a 26year-old woman (bodyweight 55 kg) was shown to increase peak muscle and fat tissue deformations ~1.5-fold and their peak mechanical stresses 2.5-fold. Unfortunately, permanent wheelchair users, such as patients with a spinal cord injury (SCI), are more likely to be overweight and obese.33 Another change that occurs gradually with chronic sitting is loss of muscle mass (atrophy). In a study utilizing MRI measurements and computer models, Linder-Ganz et al34 showed that (on average) gluteus muscle thickness under the ischial tuberosities in individuals with SCI >1 year postinjury is less than one third the thickness of these muscles in healthy persons. Under sustained bodyweight loading, the thin muscles of paralyzed individuals bear highly elevated mechanical stresses because little natural cushioning is in place to support the loads of the bony prominences that, as mentioned previously, are typically transferring increased bodyweight.33 In fact, a theoretical study based on engineering mechanics recently showed that mechanical stresses in muscle tissue under the ischial tuberosities increase with a rise in bodyweight or with a decrease in the muscle thickness.35 Accordingly, based on the load-time injury thresholds of LinderGanz et al,20 severe PUs involving damage to muscle tissue and DTI are expected to develop sooner in patients in whom deep tissue loading is more intense â&#x20AC;&#x201D; namely, in patients who are obese, lost substantial muscle mass, or both (see Figure 1).

The issue of internal tissue composition in patients who are at risk of developing PUs and DTI requires additional study in order to gain better understanding of individual susceptibility. In Linder-Ganz et alâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s study,34 the authors acquired MRIs of the buttocks of seated individuals to measure the thicknesses of the gluteus muscle and overlying fat under the ischial tuberosities. The ratio of muscle thickness over fat thickness in five subjects

A

Hypotheses on the Effects of Individual Anatomy on Time for Injury

113 of 236

October 2008 Vol. 54 Issue 10

33

26-35_OWM1008_Gefen.qxd:Feature 10/6/08 9:45 AM Page 34

IC

A

TE

studies and case studies on wheelchair users with PUs and DTI that document the times of the sustained postures at which the injury occurred, the patient’s relevant anatomy, comorbidities, and the type of seating cushion used. Additionally, basic research employing animal and cell culture models is required to further narrow the estimation of the timeframe for PU onset and to correlate the time factor to the extent of tissue damage as well as to the anatomy (eg, thin versus thick muscles), mechanical properties of the affected tissues (eg, spastic versus flaccid muscle), and chronic morbidities (eg, diabetes, cardiovascular disease). - OWM

References 1.

Daniel RK, Priest DL, Wheatley DC. Etiologic factors in pressure sores: an experimental model. Arch Phys Med Rehabil.

1981;62(10):492–498.

Salcido R, Donofrio JC, Fisher SB, et al. Histopathology of pressure ulcers as a result of sequential computer-controlled pressure sessions in a fuzzy rat model. Adv Wound Care. 1994;7(5):23–28.

Berlowitz DR, Brienza DM. Are all pressure ulcers the result of deep tissue injury? A review of the literature. Ostomy Wound Manage.

2007;53(10):34–38.

Bader D, Bouten C, Colin D, Oomens C (eds). Pressure Ulcer Research: Current and Future Perspectives, 1st edition. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag;2005.

Reswick J, Rogers J. Experiences at Rancho Los Amigos hospital with devices and techniques to prevent pressure sores. In: Kennedi R Cowden J (eds). Bedsore Biomechanics. London, UK: University Park Press;1976:301–310.

Allen V, Ryan DW, Murray A. Measurements of interface pressure between body sites and the surfaces of four specialised air mattresses.

Br J Clin Pract. 1994;48(3):125–129.

Aronovitch SA. Intraoperatively acquired pressure ulcer prevalence: a national study. Adv Wound Care. 1998;11(3 suppl):8–9.

Versluysen M. How elderly patients with femoral fractures develop pressure sores in hospital. BMJ. 1986;292(6531): 1311–1313.

Bliss M, Simini B. When are the seeds of postoperative pressure sores sown? Often during surgery. BMJ. 1999;319(7214):863–864.

Hicks DJ. An incidence study of pressure sores following surgery.

ANA Clinical Sessions. New York, NY: Appleton-CenturyCrofts;1971:49–54.

Hoshowsky VM, Schramm CA. Intraoperative pressure sore prevention: an analysis of bedding materials. Res Nurs Health.

1994;17(5):333–339.

Aronovitch SA. Intraoperatively acquired pressure ulcers: are there common risk factors? Ostomy Wound Manage. 2007;53(2):57–69.

Schoonhoven L, Defloor T, Grypdonck MH. Incidence of pressure ulcers due to surgery. J Clin Nurs. 2002;11(4):479–487.

Grous CA, Reilly NJ, Gift AG. Skin integrity in patients undergoing prolonged operations. J WOCN. 1997;24(2):86–91.

Aronovitch SA. Intraoperatively acquired pressure ulcer prevalence: a national study. J WOCN. 1999;26(3):130–136.

Schoonhoven L, Defloor T, van der Tweel I, Buskens E, Grypdonck MH. Risk indicators for pressure ulcers during surgery. Appl Nurs Res. 2002;15(3):163–173.

Shats V, Kozacov S. Is diabetes mellitus a risk factor for pressure ulcers? Harefuah (Hebrew). 1996;131(11):485–486,535.

Vanderwee K, Grypdonck MH, De Bacquer D, Defloor T. Effectiveness of turning with unequal time intervals on the incidence of pressure ulcer lesions. J Adv Nurs. 2007;57(1):59–68.

PL

with SCI, excluding one subject who is a professional athlete, ranged between 0 and 1.4. For controls, this ratio ranged between 1.2 and 2.4 (when N = 6), demonstrating substantial loss of muscle mass in the group of patients with SCI. Although no comparable MRI data for obese or cachexic patients are available, it is commonly accepted that from a pathogenetic perspective, muscle and fat masses are strongly interconnected in the individual so the issue of how obesity per se (ie, without SCI) affects muscle mass in individuals susceptible to PU requires further study.

This article presents the point that even when considering bodyweight without accounting for internal tissue composition (ie, muscle/fat distribution), elevated mechanical loads on bony prominences in the obese theoretically increase risk for PU development and DTI. Potential consequences of obesity on internal tissue composition — eg, the replacement of muscle tissue by fat due to a sedentary lifestyle — is an additional bone load risk.

2.

3.

U

4.

Conclusion

D

O

N O

T

D

The etiology of PUs and especially DTI is still insufficiently understood. In particular, little methodological work has been performed relevant to timeframes for PU onset and development.20-27 When considered together, data from the three available model systems — surgical patients, animal models, and in-vitro cell culture models — indicate that PUs in subdermal tissues under bony prominences very likely occur approximately between the first hour and 4 to 6 hours after sustained loading. It is important to note that all the relevant clinical data reviewed here, which were used to determine that timeframe, were acquired in studies of patients who have been laying down. Muscle and fat tissue loading under bony prominences during sitting is substantially greater than when the patient is laying down,34 which, consistent with the schematic model data, theoretically indicates that for certain immobile patients, onset of PU and DTI while sustaining a sitting posture is likely to occur sooner than when laying.

Unfortunately, no published studies are available on the timeframe for PU or DTI onset in sitting patients; therefore, studies in this field are needed to expand the current knowledge base. All forms of clinical studies should be useful in this regard, including prospective

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

114 of 236

34

OstomyWound Management

26-35_OWM1008_Gefen.qxd:Feature 10/6/08 9:45 AM Page 35

PL

IC

A

TE

2007;35(2):273–284.

28. Gefen A, van Nierop B, Bader DL, Oomens CW. Strain-time cell-death threshold for skeletal muscle in a tissue-engineered model system for deep tissue injury. J Biomech. 2008; 41(9):2003–2012.

29. Baugh N, Zuelzer H, Meador J, Blankenship J. Wound wise: wounds in surgical patients who are obese. Am J Nurs. 2007;107(6):40–50.

30. Kernozek TW, Wilder PA, Amundson A, Hummer J. The effects of body mass index on peak seat-interface pressure of institutionalized elderly. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83(6):868–871.

31. Gefen A, Levine J. The false premise in measuring body-support interface pressures for preventing serious pressure ulcers. J Med Eng Technol.

2007;31(5):375–380.

32. Linder-Ganz E, Shabshin N, Itzchak Y, Gefen A. Assessment of mechanical conditions in sub-dermal tissues during sitting: a combined experimental-MRI and finite element approach. J Biomech.

2007;40(7):1443–1454.

33. Weaver FM, Collins EG, Kurichi J, et al. Prevalence of obesity and high blood pressure in veterans with spinal cord injuries and disorders: a retrospective review. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;86(1):22–29.

34. Linder-Ganz E, Shabshin N, Itzchak Y, Yizhar Z, Siev-Ner I, Gefen A. Strains and stresses in sub-dermal tissues of the buttocks are greater in paraplegics than in healthy during sitting. J Biomech.

2008;41(3):567–580.

35. Gefen A. The Compression Intensity Index: a practical anatomical estimate of the biomechanical risk for a deep tissue injury. Technol Health Care. 2008;16(3): to appear on June 2008;16(2):141–149.

D

O

N O

T

D

U

19. Whittemore R. Pressure-reduction support surfaces: a review of the literature. J WOCN. 1998;25(1):6–25.

20. Linder-Ganz E, Engelberg S, Scheinowitz M, Gefen A. Pressure-time cell death threshold for albino rat skeletal muscles as related to pressure sore biomechanics. J Biomech. 2006;39(14):2725–2732.

21. Husain T. An experimental study of some pressure effects on tissues, with reference to the bed-sore problem. J Pathol Bacteriol.

1953;66(2):347–358.

22. Kosiak M. Etiology of decubitus ulcers. Arch Phys Med Rehabil.

1961;42(1):19–29.

23. Stekelenburg A, Oomens CW, Strijkers GJ, Nicolay K, Bader DL. Compression-induced deep tissue injury examined with magnetic resonance imaging and histology. J Appl Physiol. 2006;100(6):1946–1954.

24. Stekelenburg A, Strijkers GJ, Parusel H, Bader DL, Nicolay K, Oomens CW. Role of ischemia and deformation in the onset of compressioninduced deep tissue injury: MRI-based studies in a rat model. J Appl Physiol. 2007;102(5):2002–2011.

25. Kwan MP, Tam EW, Lo SC, Leung MC, Lau RY. The time effect of pressure on tissue viability: investigation using an experimental rat model.

Exp Biol Med (Maywood). 2007;232(4):481–487.

26. Breuls RG, Bouten CV, Oomens CW, Bader DL, Baaijens FP. Compression-induced cell damage in engineered muscle tissue: an in vitro model to study pressure ulcer aetiology. Ann Biomed Eng. 2003;31(11):1357–1364.

27. Gawlitta D, Li W, Oomens CW, Baaijens FP, Bader DL, Bouten CV. The relative contributions of compression and hypoxia to development of muscle tissue damage: an in vitro study. Ann Biomed Eng.

115 of 236

October 2008 Vol. 54 Issue 10

35

Scientific

SADDLE FITTING By

Robert Ferrand Š9/1998*

SUMMARY For centuries, people have ridden horses with a multitude of different saddles, but with very little "scientific" understanding of the effect of the saddle on the horse. Saddle fit is not only important in the context of the humane treatment of the animal, but has even greater importance to equestrians who participate in sports that demand great athletic performance from the horse.

Signs of saddle related trauma include behavioral problems, tenderness, decreased performance, inhibited gait, loss of hair, white hairs, open sores, and certain forms of lameness. Obvious trauma to the animal promotes action, but there is often little thought given to the effect of the saddle and rider on the performance of the horse when there is no visible problem such as swelling or abrasion.

Much of the frustration with saddle fit occurs because it is unclear who are the authorities on the subject. Currently the saddle industry has no system to aid in fitting saddles or to help with manufacturing, design or quality control,1 so everyone ventures an opinion.

The saddler asserts the authority of experience, the trainer asserts the authority of experience, and the veterinarian asserts the authority of experience and so on. But, no one has been able to actually "PROVE" that the saddle truly fits the horse, so who should we believe?

Properly fitting a horse with the first saddle one buys is rare, because it takes time for the physical damage from a poorly fitting saddle to appear. By the time the equestrian has ridden the saddle long enough to determine the saddle does not fit the horse, the saddle appears used and cannot be returned. Consequently most equestrians have a collection of saddles, each with a story explaining why it "appeared" to fit the horse at the time of purchase. This "trial and error" approach costs a significant amount of money, often hampers the performance of the horse and is very frustrating for the rider.

What we really need to solve the majority of saddle fitting problems is some way to determine if the saddle panels actually contact the horse evenly. More importantly, if the panels do not fit we need to know what changes need to be made to achieve a proper fit. By applying a modern perspective to saddle fitting we can develop a "scientific" understanding of the problem as well as develop a method to objectively fit a saddle to the horse.

1 116 of 236

HISTORY Horses have been under saddle for thousands of years and it is likely that saddle fit has always been an issue. However, there is a significant difference in the methods of saddle fitting before and after World War II. If we look at the evolution of the horse, we see that breeds developed regionally to address the interests and needs of people in a particular area. Each breed had a variety of characteristics that were thought to be desirable in order to perform the tasks in vogue at the time. Thus, horses of a particular breed were regionally grouped, so the shapes of the horses' backs were similar. The saddles that evolved in those areas fit that particular regional breed.

The critical point is that, in the past, saddlers built saddles to address regional interests. In the 19th Century, people did not go to a tack shop to buy a saddle; they took their horse to a saddler. The saddler, a skilled craftsman, built the "tree" for the horse, built the saddle and then padded the panels to conform to the physical characteristics of that particular horse.

Historically, because horses were the only mode of transportation, they were ridden many hours a day. If the saddler made an error in the saddle fit or the horse's conformation changed, a saddle-fitting problem would quickly become apparent.

The saddle and horse would be returned to the saddler for saddle adjustment until a proper fit was found. Most importantly, that particular saddle remained with that horse.

This is not the case today. First, horse breeds are no longer specific to an area.

Second, there are many more cross breeds today, confusing the issue. This fact makes it very difficult for mass production saddlers to know which shape of back to make the saddle. In the current international market, for instance, a saddle could be built in England that will be used in California on a Friesian/Fox Trotter/Shire cross.

SO WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? Equestrians have no reason to purchase saddles that do not fit their horses. The reason so many saddles are sold that do not fit is that the equestrian is given the impression that the saddle actually does fit their horse. The problems arise because the equestrian has no way to determine for themselves that the saddle does or does not fit. Since the horse cannot speak, not only is the customer buying a product that does not perform as claimed, but the horse can be injured.

Equestrians cannot protect themselves from purchasing poorly fitting saddles, because once you place the saddle on the horse you cannot see under the saddle to determine fit. Some saddlemakers suggest that the equestrian can check for saddle fit by placing the saddle on the horse and then lifting the saddle skirts and looking under the saddle to be sure that the saddle panels fit evenly.

This advice completely ignores the effect of the weight of the rider on the shape of the horse's back. Thus if the saddle did fit the horse without the rider, as soon as the rider steps into the saddle, the back of the horse will flex to some degree under the weight of the rider, therefore, the heavier the rider the worse the saddle will fit.

2 117 of 236

Some saddlers suggest that the equestrian can determine saddle fit by riding the horse and looking for any obvious trauma to the horse's back after the ride. Analogous to humans trying on shoes, if you scuff the soles you cannot return the shoes. Therefore, the rider can only use the saddle for a short ride or the saddle may appear used and cannot be returned.

Unfortunately an equestrian cannot determine fit by obvious trauma to the horse on a short ride. Physiologically, it takes a few hours for the animal's tissue to show any noticeable trauma from the pressure from a poorly fitting saddle. Thus an equestrian can only discover that the saddle does not fit after riding the saddle for a number of hours, and have seriously injured the horse, at which point the saddle is scuffed and cannot be returned. Catch 22.

HOW BIG IS THE PROBLEM ?

An audit by KPMG Peat Marwick, for the American Horse Council determined that in 1997 there were about 7,000,000 horses in the United States.2 If you subtract the younger and older horses and breeding stock, there are at least 5,000,000 horses that require saddles. Since the vertebrae of horse's backs change as they age, it would be unusual for a saddle to fit for more that a few years. So a very conservative estimate would place a ten-year life on a saddle which would mean that at least 500,000 saddles are sold each year in the U.S. Due to the error of fitting saddles without compensating for the weight of the rider, it is estimated that as high as ninety (90%) percent of the saddles do not fit. Even if one conservatively estimates that only fifty percent (50%) of the saddles do not fit - that accounts for at least 250,000 saddles sold in the United States every year that do not fit the horses they are used upon WHAT IS SADDLE FIT? "FIT" means that the shape of the saddle panel that is in contact with the horse's back is the same as the shape of the MOUNTED horse's back. If the shape of the panel is FLATTER than the shape of the horse's back, the saddle will "bridge", touching only in the front and the back on both sides of the spine. If the shape of the panel is MORE CURVED than the shape of the horse's back, the saddle will "rock", touching only in the middle, on either side of the spine. If the saddle only touches front and back on either side of the horse it is "twisted."

ROCK, FIT, BRIDGE & TWIST

Fit

Bridge

Rock

Twist

3 118 of 236

Some saddles fit and some do not. The question is, how do you know which saddle fits which horse? Many people view saddle fit as a black and white issue: either the saddle fits or it does not. If the horse doesn't get white hairs on its back the saddle appears to fit, but is that truly the case?

WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? Saddle fit is a multifaceted biomechanical problem in which many different factors converge, including: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

The weight of the rider, affecting the Tree of the saddle, affecting the Panels of the saddle, affecting the Saddle pad or (pads), affecting the Capillaries in the skin of the horse, affecting the Capillaries in the longissimus dorsi muscle, affecting the Curvature of the spine of the horse, affecting the Horse's range of motion, affecting the Performance of the horse, affecting the Behavior of the horse, affecting Attitude and performance of the rider

MANAGEMENT OF PRESSURE

SADDLE FIT IS THE MANAGEMENT OF PRESSURE. There is no way to eliminate the pressure under the saddle, nor is there any need to. There is only a need to understand what the horse's tissues need to remain healthy. With that knowledge we can learn how to intelligently administer pressure to the horse's back.

As a practical matter, if we do not see any damage to the horse we assume that the saddle fits, but is that an accurate assumption? A rider and tack usually represent 15% to 20% of the weight of the horse when standing, in motion the rider's downward force (moment) can represent 25% to 50% of the weight of the horse - which is a significant force applied perpendicularly to the spine of the animal. The question remains: what is the physiological effect of the saddle and rider on the horse?

PHYSIOLOGY To understand what might be a good saddle fit, we need to understand the "Issue" with saddle fit in the first place. While there is little scientific research applied directly to the problem of saddle fitting, there has been extensive research on the effect of external pressure on blood flow in mammalian tissue. This research was undertaken because of the devastating problem of bedsores, which traumatize over 2,000,000 Americans every year. Bedsores are caused by the pressure from the weight of the patient cutting off the blood flow to the skin.3 Bed sores and saddle sores have many similar physiological factors. Most of this tissue research has been applied to a variety of mammals, providing a scientific perspective of saddle fitting.

4 119 of 236

CAPILLARY CLOSING PRESSURE Skin and muscle tissue require a constant intermittent flow of blood to remain healthy.4 In strenuous exercise the muscles require significantly more blood flow to maintain a healthy metabolism. This exchange of oxygen and waste products occurs in the capillary bed. 5

6

The saddle fitting problems occur when the saddle causes continuous excessive pressure on the capillaries that exceeds the blood pressure and structural strength of those vessels and the capillary vessels collapse. This collapse leads to the deprivation of oxygen and nutrients brought by fresh blood and the removal of waste products.7 CAPILLARY CLOSING PRESSURE IS THE CRITICAL ISSUE IN PREVENTING SADDLE-RELATED TRAUMA AND IMPROVING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE HORSE'S MUSCLES UNDER SADDLE. IT DOES NOT TAKE MUCH TO STOP THE SHOW The following experiment was made to determine the relationship of external pressure on blood flow by using a radioactive isotope 133Xe. The amount of radioactivity was measured as external pressure was applied. One can observe that as external pressure increases the blood flow reduces. What is most notable is that pressures as low as .25 P.S.I. or 4 ounces can reduce flow by as much as 60%.8 This is a significant point when related to saddle fit, especially with a bridging saddle that does significantly increase pressures.

9

Serious saddle fitting problems develop particularly on "bridging" saddles in a relatively short amount of time because pressures can easily reach 4 P.S.I or 64 ounces.

This excessive pressure not only cuts off the blood supply but can additionally traumatize the muscle tissue itself.

5 120 of 236

IN GOES THE GOOD BLOOD OUT GOES THE BAD BLOOD In all cases pressure release is followed by reactive hyperemia and the parts originally starved of arterial blood are instantly flooded with oxygen. The extent and duration of the blood in flow is proportional to the needs of the tissues.10 Below is a study performed at University of Georgia on a horse using a compression bandage. One can observe that the blood flow decreases significantly with the application of pressure, however, when released the blood flow increases beyond the original base flow.11 This is a clinical verification of reactive hyperemia and reveals what happens to the tissue when the saddle is removed i.e. heat bump.

12

INTERNAL EFFECT OF SADDLE PRESSURE For a given pressure applied to the surface of the skin (interface pressure) capillary closure pressure will vary from horse to horse, as well as location to location on the horse, depending on the amount of fat, location of adjacent bone, status of the vascular system, systemic blood pressure and general health of the animal.13 As the animal ages its physiology also changes, compounding this significant Issue.

A critical discovery in tissue research was that in a given location, pressure is not even throughout the tissue. Clinical studies have established that the internal pressure close to bones is three to five times higher than on the surface.14

15

16

This principle is easily demonstrated with a simple sponge as illustrated above.

One can observe that when two different size areas are pressed towards each other, the smaller area will create higher pressures. Weight divided by surface area equals interface pressure. This is shown by the lines moving closer together nearest the smaller surface.

6 121 of 236

This is an important issue for horses because the longissimus dorsi muscle, one of the major muscles used in locomotion, lies adjacent to the spinal column and is directly affected by saddle pressure. Each vertebrae of the spinal column has bony prominances with small surfaces that concentrate points of pressure down the length of the longissimus dorsi muscle.

It is critically important to understand that muscles are far more susceptible to the effects of pressure than skin.17 The internal damage to the tissue caused by the surface pressure only becomes obvious at the surface over an extended time. Many serious pressure sores first occur internally adjacent to the bone and then radiate to the surface. 18 This fact makes it very difficult to use apparent trauma to the horse's back as an indicator of saddle fit, because during the time interval that the horse is not being ridden, the horse begins to heal the internal trauma. This makes it virtually impossible to develop a cause and effect relationship between saddle fit using observable external trauma to the horse as the standard. Therefore, just because we do not see obvious damage to the skin of the horse does not mean that damage has not occurred internally.

PRESSURE OVER TIME The most important issue to remember with tissue trauma is that higher pressures do damage in shorter periods of time, however, even low pressure for long periods of time can do damage.19 the following graphs illustrates the point

20

This is significant to saddle fit because the fit of the saddle relates to how much time one can ride before causing trauma to the horse. Obviously if the saddle fits one can ride the horse longer without sustaining damage than a saddle the bridges and causes high pressures.

7 122 of 236

THE CRITICAL ISSUES Tissues do not need a constant flow of blood, but tissues do need a 21 This is the reason a healthy individual does not get bedsores. By tossing and turning in our sleep we provide our tissues a constant intermittent flow of blood.

CONSTANT INTERMITTENT FLOW OF BLOOD.

It is also important to understand that tissue damage is variable from very slight damage to extremely debilitating damage. As an example, human bedsores are graded in Stages I, II, III, IV, from a slightly red skin to an open sore. The following is a simple scale of increasing severity of trauma caused by an ill-fitting saddle: v v v v v v v v v

Decline in performance Discomfort - indicated by attitude change in the horse Inhibited Gait - noted by the horse being a little "off" Lameness - secondary lameness due to pain or excessive pressure Swelling - slight swelling under the saddle panels Bruising - significant inflammation indicating capillary damage White hair - due to damaged follicles Hair loss - obvious trauma to the skin and internal muscles Ulcerous condition - an open, oozing wound with swelling

WHAT DO WE "REALLY" KNOW ABOUT PHYSIOLOGY? The clinical research on a variety of mammals has established the following factors to give us a better understanding of the issues relating to saddle fit. v v v v v

Tissue damage is a function of pressure over time.22 Pressure is not distributed evenly throughout tissue.23 Pressure on the surface of the skin increases 3 - 5 X close to bones.24 Muscle is more susceptible to pressure damage than skin.25 Low pressure for long periods of time is more damaging than high pressure for short periods of time.26

SO WHAT IS GOAL HERE? IN PRACTICE THE GOAL IS TO ACHIEVE THE MOST EVEN PRESSURE THROUGHOUT THE SADDLE CONTACT AREA WITH A RIDER MOUNTED AND TO REMOVE THE SADDLE EVERY FEW HOURS FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME TO PERMIT BLOOD TO FLOW TO THE TISSUES. OH, MY ACHING BACK "Quantifying the degree and precise site of pain in animals always has been difficult. This is complicated further because the major clinical sign in many horses with a back problem is impair performance rather than pain. On the other hand, many horses appear to perform satisfactorily despite some low-grade back pain. To add to the confusion, some horses are naturally sensitive and resent being palpated along the back, which might be wrongly interpreted as a sign of pain." 27

8 123 of 236

After decades of equine back research, Dr. Leo Jeffcott, BvetMEd, MA, PhD, DVSc, FRCVS, Dean of Cambridge University Veterinary Clinic, notes that 1. Some horses can perform badly without suffering from a back problem 2. Some horses can perform adequately despite having a back problem 3. Spontaneous recovery for many types of back problem is quite common28 It is interesting to note that parallel research studying the human animal, drew similar conclusions. The August 1998 issue of Scientific American notes that "Part of the mystery of back pain comes from the diagnostic challenge of determining its cause in a mechanical and biochemical system of multiple parts, all of which are subject to insult." 29 The results of a national survey of physicians "can be summed up by the subtitle "What you see is what you get". For example rheumatologists were twice as likely as physicians of other specialties to order laboratory tests in search of arthritic condition.

Neurosurgeons were twice as likely to ask for imaging tests that would uncover herniated disks. And neurologists were three times more inclined to see the results of electromyograms that were implicate nerves. If patients are confused they were not alone." 30 The challenge is to understand this research in the context of a meaningful strategy to fit a saddle and rider to the horse. To put this research in context, let us retrace the steps of fitting a saddle starting with the rider.

The Rider The rider has a significant influence on the amount of pressure exerted by the saddle on the horse's tissues and the amount of curvature to the horse's spine. A saddle with a light rider could fit the horse, but when a heavier rider mounts, the saddle may not fit because the curvature of the spine of the horse was significantly changed by the additional weight.

The effect of the weight of the rider on the horse is compounded by how the rider sits in the saddle and the rider's equitation. English riders competing in jumping, hunting, and eventing have a tendency to ride out of the saddle which is different from western and dressage riders who tend to sit deeper in the saddle. Some riders lean to one side, some lean back. The better the rider's equitation the less weight they put in the saddle when the horse is in motion. Therefore, a heavy rider who rides well affects the horse less than a lightweight rider who rides poorly.

IN SEARCH OF THE "ULTIMATE" SADDLE Saddle design has evolved over the past centuries into three basic designs: English, Western and Australian, as well as a significant number of experimental designs. These designs have developed into a number of variations on a theme. Some have rigid trees, some have flexible trees and others have rigid trees with flexible panels.

Some of the panels are covered with a thick flocking, some are not. Some panels have adjustable flocking, some do not.

9 124 of 236

The search for the "ultimate" saddle design is a centuries old endeavor. In fact over 130 years the U.S. States government has searched for such a saddle for use by the U.S. Cavalry beginning in 1812. Early saddles were copies of European military saddles. The first American saddle came with the issuance of the Hope, or Texas saddle in 1857.31 The second was the McClellan saddle. The McClellan saddle itself evolved with over eight different designs. From 1812 to1942 the U.S. Cavalry issued over 29 different designs.32 No one design stood the test of time to remain as "the" saddle to fit all horses.

The fact that the U.S. Cavalry never found "THE" saddle is notable because the cavalry tended to only purchase horses that had a similar conformation. The reason they tried to maintain a similar conformation is to permit a universal saddle to be issued.

The problem is that even if the horse begins with a similar back over the years as the horses were conditioned and as they aged, the back change significantly. AFTER A CENTURY OF GOVERNMENT FUNDED RESEARCH WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO EVER BUILD THE "UNIVERSAL" SADDLE THAT WILL FIT ALL HORSES, HELLO.

Today, there are a infinite variety of saddles sold which claim every possible combination of features, again this is noteable because even with so many different variations, NO ONE SADDLE DESIGN HAS BEEN PROVEN TO BE SUPERIOR. There are many testimonials, but there is no "scientific" evidence supporting any particular design as having a superior fit to any other type of saddle. In fact, history has shown that Saddles must be fit to individual horses and be double checked over the years to be sure that the conformation for the horse does not change significantly.

BIGGER IS BETTER The following basic principle applies to all saddles. The larger the saddle panels, the lower the interface pressure between the loaded saddle and the horse's back.

This is a simple calculation: weight divided by surface area equals interface pressure. Thus a larger surface will spread the same load over a larger area and thereby lower the interface pressure.

Therefore, the size of the panel is a critical factor in saddle pressure. The challenge is to fit the saddle so that the twist and the arc of the saddle panels are the same as the twist and arc of the mounted horse's back so that there is an even distribution of pressure over the entire surface of the panel.

SADDLE PADS Saddle pads can provide subtle improvements to a saddle that fits properly.

However, a poorly fitting saddle cannot be properly fitted by just adding a saddle pad. Saddle pads are often thought to be the saddle equivalent of penicillin and will solve a saddle fitting problem. So we put the pad on and never give saddle fit another thought until a new problem arises. Unfortunately, there is no penicillin for saddle fit.

We usually judge a saddle pad by the touch; if it feels soft and pliable it must be good. However, we often overlook what happens to the saddle pad when we mount.

Basically, whatever material makes up the pad is now compressed and made denser because of the weight of the rider. With a gel pad, the gel is forced away from the saddle's high spots that cause excessive pressure and in time the gel often bottoms out. With felt, foam and sheepskin the high spots are pressed denser than low spots, so rather than being softer in the high spots the pads are actually denser or harder.

10 125 of 236

Many people are concerned with shock absorption in saddle pads. However, it should be noted that once the rider is mounted, the shock absorption capabilities change.33 If you fill your car with a number of people you see the shock absorbers lose some of their qualities. In a similar fashion, as the pad is compressed between the saddle and the horse the density of the material and the thickness of the pad change significantly and in turn lose some elastic or shock absorption properties.

This is why pads are generally not as effective as we would expect. Although pads do tend to even out some of the irregularities of the saddle panel, saddle pads generally do not permit an ill-fitting saddle to fit properly. In certain situations a saddle pad can actually make the fit even worse. This situation often occurs with horses that have higher withers. In this situation the gullet becomes significantly narrower with the thicker pad and can make a saddle no longer fit. Therefore, saddle pads need to be used with caution. Saddle pads should only be used to complement a good fitting saddle in order to compensate for the seasonal fitness changes in the conformation of the horse. Saddle pads can not adjust for a poorly fitting saddle.

WHERE DO YOU PLACE THE SADDLE ?

Saddle placement is a critical factor in saddle fitting. Because the back of the horse has a significant arc, small movements positioning the saddle forward or backward have significant effects on the fit of the saddle to the horses back.

The "Monty Foreman" school of thought believes that the saddle should be "all on the shoulder". The claim is that "there is one place on the horse where he is able to carry his weight fastest at any distance, jump higher and wider, yet be in control at all speedsâ&#x20AC;Śâ&#x20AC;ŚNow if a feller wants more speed, endurance, control and better performance, shouldn't he start figuring out how to ride that "carrying spot".34 On the other hand, there is another school of thought that believes that the balanced ride places the center of the saddle over the horse's 14th vertebrae.35 This places the saddle further back than the "all of the shoulder" theory and on many saddles frees the scapulae of the horse from touching the saddle. 19 Saddle placement stirs many zealots who argue their position with fervor, However, regardless of which saddle position is adopted, THE CRITICAL ISSUE IS THAT ONE MUST FIT THE SADDLE TO THE POSITION THAT IT WILL BE RIDDEN IN AND BE SURE THAT THE SADDLE CAN REMAIN IN THAT POSITION. If the saddle is fit in a forward position and

then because of the conformation of the horse slides back, one cannot expect the saddle to fit.

SADDLE BALANCE There may be situations where the saddle could actually fit the horse very well; however, because of the conformation of the horse the saddle would be completely out of balance for the rider. Some horses have loins that are lower than their withers, some horses are just the opposite with loins higher than the withers, and some are even.

These conformations are often referred to as uphill and downhill horses.

11 126 of 236

An UPHILL Horse

An EVEN Horse

A DOWNHILL Horse

The challenge in saddle fitting is to find a saddle that fits the horse as well as the rider or to be able to adjust the saddle accordingly. The positioning of the saddle "all on the shoulder" or back to free the scapulae will have a significant effect on this balance point.

A saddle that is fit forward on a downhill horse could fit both horse and rider, however, when placed on an uphill horse the rider is thrown backward and would find riding very difficult. The reverse is also true; thus the goal is to fit all the parameters.

PSYCHIC SADDLE FITTING "I think it fits, therefore it fits." The most common test for saddle fit is "Experience." Experience is based on the subjective observation of how the horse "feels" when ridden or how the horse "goes". While subjective judgements can often be correct, they can also be the source of misinterpretation.

The problem with using subjective "experience" is there is no way to verify that what someone thinks is happening is actually happening for the reasons they believe that it is happening.36 That is why the "Scientific method" was developed.

By using independently measured observation, if the observation is correct the same results should be repeatable. When we use "subjective" observations we often slant our view, so that we do not need to change our understanding of what we know through "experience" to be true.

For centuries it was obvious to everyone that the earth was flat and that the planets revolve around the earth. However, once instruments were invented that permitted OBJECTIVE observation a new understanding of planetary order evolved. That continues even today with the Hubbell telescope. New instruments provide new insight. MEASUREMENT IS THE KEY TO UNDERSTANDING. While psychic saddle fitting is the most common method of saddle fitting used today, its reliability should be questioned.

THE WORLD STILL IS FLAT: BALING WIRE, PLASTER CASTS, PEGBOARDS, AND BABY POWDER Some people use baling wire or flexible curves that are contoured to fit the shape of the horse withers to determine saddle fit. It is thought that by transferring this shape to cardboard that a "measurement" of the horse's back is possible. Many saddle fitting errors occur because using the withers is only one measurement of the three dimensional shape of the horse's back.

37

12 127 of 236

Even if a number of contours are taken along the back of the horse, the problem is determining the relationship of the contours to each other. Even if the contour of the spine is taken and a three dimensional form is constructed, that form is only the shape of the horse's back without the weight of the rider.

There are others who believe that taking a plaster cast of the horse's back is a solution to saddle fitting. The problem with plaster or fiberglass casting materials is that it takes some time to apply the material. During the curing process there is a significant amount of heat generated by the casting material. Even the most docile horse will move during the application of the material and thereby distort the shape.

To complicate matters the casting material itself does not apply evenly, so the bottom surface and the top surface are even further distorted. The other problem with this technique is that again it is the shape of the horse's back without the weight of the rider. So the information is incorrect and useless to determine the shape in the mounted back.

An ancient idea that has a few modern adaptations is the pegboard. This is a simple device consisting of about one hundred round pegs pushed into a flat board. This device permits a three dimensional contour of the horse's back to be made. If the pegs are all the same length, the top and bottom contour formed by the pegs will be the same.

This appears to be an accurate method to determine the shape of the saddle.

Unfortunately, it is the wrong shape, because it ignores the effect of the weight of the rider.

There are saddlers who recommend that saddle fit can be determined by applying baby powder lightly to the panels of the saddle and then carefully placing the saddle on the horse. While this technique is effective for fitting two rigid structures to each other, it is a useless technique when attempting to fit two compliant structures to each other. The baby powder technique only reveals the high points of the saddle without the effect of the weight of the rider. As soon as the rider mounts the baby powder is pressed into the horseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s hair and the information becomes misleading.

There is a more significant problem with all of these traditional saddle-fitting techniques; they all lack a "UNIT" of measure. While saddlers refer to baling wire, flexible rules, plaster casts and pegboards as measurement, they are not a method of measurement.

Measurement by definition requires a "unit" of measure. Once a unit of measure is established then relationships between different measurements can be made as well as formulas developed to correct for variables.

The reason that saddle fitting causes so much confusion is that no unit of measurement has been established. So subtle variations cannot even be detected.

This is why the difference between the shape of the unmounted horse's back and the shape of the mounted horse's back has not been determined.

OTHER TESTS FOR SADDLE FIT Historically, there have only been a few ways to "Test" that a saddle fits: palpation, white hairs and dry spots. The challenge is that these methods do not provide any "scientific" data that permits different saddling strategies to be OBJECTIVELY verified and repeated over time.

13 128 of 236

A common method to test for saddle fit is "palpation." This technique is used by veterinarians and many saddlers to determine muscle soreness. While under certain circumstances saddle fit can well be the cause of muscle soreness, so can exercise and a variety of other causes. Thus palpation can only determine that there is muscle soreness, but provides no information to determine the exact cause White hairs are an obvious sign of tissue damage. The problem is that there are months that pass between the initial trauma and the appearance of the white hairs. To risk the health of the animal by using this method to determine saddle fit is inhumane and should not be used. White hairs also do not provide any unit of measurement to compare one saddle to another.

Another test of saddle fit is "Dry Spots." There are some who theorize that moisture from the blood is brought to the sweat glands and secreted as perspiration. The theory maintains that when the saddle exerts excessive pressure on the skin the blood cannot flow so the fluid is stopped which causes dry spots to appear.

TEST THE TEST Despite this popular concept, there is no scientific research establishing a correlation between dry spots, tissue trauma and saddle fit. Physiologically the mean arterial pressure in the horse is between 30 mmHg (.5 PSI) - 40mmHg (.75 PSI) and venous return pressure is between 10mmHg (.25 PSI) - 20mmHg (.33 PSI). The venous capillaries are several times as permeable as the arterial capillaries. For determining fluid movement through the capillary membrane the venous capillary pressures 10mmHg (.25 PSI) are much more important than the arterial capillary pressures. 38 Extensive interface pressure measurements of good fitting saddles have established consistent saddle pressures in excess of 50mmHg (1 PSI). Therefore, the theory that blood flow is reduced to areas of high pressure is valid to a point, however, when applied to the problem of saddle fit we find that the saddle pressure is consistently higher than even arterial capillary closure pressure which would, cause consistent large uniform "dry spots" on good fitting saddles, if the "dry spots" theory were correct.

NO SWEAT To make the issue of "dry spots" even more confusing physiologically "dry spots" or the "absence of sweating" is also called "Anhidrosis." Anhidrosis is the loss of the ability to sweat in response to exercise or increased temperature. Sweating is prompted under the influence of the hormone epinephrine (adrenaline).39 When released into the blood stream; epinephrine acts directly on the sweat glands, causing them to secrete fluid.

Anhidrosis may be partial or complete and the onset gradual or abrupt. Thus, it is critical to understand Anhidrosis as a factor in "dry spots." The exact cause of the disorder is unknown. The most likely explanation is that prolonged or repeated exercise produces high blood levels of epinephrine. The sweat glands of some horses ultimately become desensitized to epinephrine and stop responding.40 Plugging of hair follicles by dried sebum may be a contributing factor. Regardless, we know that sweating is controlled by the hormone epinephrine and not pressure.

14 129 of 236

Sweating or the lack of sweating is not a reliable indicator of saddle fit because so many additional factors affect sweating. Therefore, a direct correlation can not be drawn between saddle pressure and sweat distribution.

FLAT, SWAY, HIGH One of the more challenging aspects to saddling horses is determining the size of the horse's back. What size is the horse? "He is a flat backed wide horse." "She is a high withered Arab." "He is sway backed."

Relative terms like flat, sway, and high do not provide any information to describe the twist and arc of the horse's back which is necessary to make an accurate comparison of the shape of the saddle to the shape of the horse's back. Using relative terms significantly hampers communication between rider, saddler and veterinarians, because each interprets the same terms in entirely different ways.

NARROW, REGULAR, WIDE & "ARC"?

Traditionally saddles come in three widths - narrow, regular and wide. The difficulty in fitting saddles arises because again these three widths are relative terms that have no established standards. Is "wide" 110 degrees or 142 degrees?

Some saddle tree makers categorize their saddles or bars as "full quarter horse", "three quarter Arab" or "Arizona bars". While this appears to be a size the fact is there are no standards so each saddletree maker interprets these terms "creatively".

Some saddletree makers measure the gullet opening at the pommel and cantle as well as the flair by measuring the distance at the between the edges of the bars.

While this appears to be a measurement method, it is completely dependent on how the bars are cut and how rounded they are sanded. More importantly, this strategy does not consider the "ARC" of the bar relative to the flair. So it is virtually impossible to establish consistency or quality control.

The only saddle measurement that is consistent and can be verified are the seat sizes of 14", 15", 16", or 17" which have nothing to do with the compound twist and arc that form the shape of the saddle panel. Thus each saddler interprets the terms differently, so there is no continuity of shape or size from saddle to saddle or brand to brand.

Any claims relating to saddle size are total speculation because there are no industry standards to determine what regular, narrow and wide mean. Thus a wide saddle from one manufacturer may or may not be similar to another saddle of the same "size" made by a different manufacturer or made by the same manufacturer.

To make matters worse, the supposed measurements of regular, narrow, and wide only focus on the angle at the shoulder of the horse. While the shoulder angle is important, it is more important that the "ARC" of the back of the "mounted" horse be the same as the "ARC" of the saddle, for optimum saddle to fit and distribution of pressure".

The saddle industry does not even have a measurement for the ARC of the horse's back.

15 130 of 236

Since horses come in all sorts of shapes and sizes, logic dictates that if the saddles only come in three sizes they would only fit three sizes of horses. So the question is: which horses are those sizes? If the saddles come in a variety of sizes, but they are only categorized in three sizes, the question is which size is which, OR EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY DO THE SIZES MEAN ANYTHING AT ALL? THE MEASUREMENT CHALLENGE CURRENT CLAIMS ABOUT SADDLE FIT ARE NOT BASED ON ANY FORM OF MEASUREMENT THAT CAN BE OBJECTIVELY VERIFIED. More importantly, without measurement there is no way to really determine the effect of subtle changes or compare different saddles or pads to a particular horse. Because, traditionally, there has never been a way to really "measure" saddle fit, the subject causes much confusion.

Current methods of saddle fitting, including using baling wire, flexible curves and cardboard templates, do not provide any calibrated measurement. Without a unit of measurement there is no way to determine interrelationships of these shapes.

Traditionally, saddle fit has been based on subjective observation which is impossible to verify. Even today, an "experienced" method to fit a saddle is to place the saddle in the position on the horse's back thought to be appropriate. The gullet of the saddle is checked, making sure it does not touch the spine. The pommel and front of the panels are examined to determine whether they conform to the withers and scapula of the horse. One then checks to see that light can be seen down the gullet. Then by lifting the flaps or skirts one checks that the saddle panels or bars fit evenly on the horse's back.

But how do we know that the panel conforms to the curvature of the horse's back when the rider mounts? How do we know how much and where pressure is being exerted on the horse? How do we know that the panels of the saddle actually contact the horse evenly, or press on one, two, three or four spots under the saddle where we cannot see?

The conforming quality of the panel also becomes another factor. If the panel is stuffed very tightly with flocking it will have a tendency to bulge and not conform as much as a soft panel. Some foam panels cover a larger area but are not adjustable. Some flexible panels appear to conform, but that conformation is dependent on the material strength of the panel, the position of the structural mounts and the weight of the rider relative to the weight of the horse.

Therefore, any measurement of the UNLOADED saddle will be significantly altered by the weight of the rider. The critical question is how much will the horse's back bend under the weight of the rider THE SOLUTION IS MEASUREMENT A practical method for sizing saddles would be similar to sizing shoes for humans. When you go into a shoe store the salesman can measure the size of your foot with, a Branick Device, a calibrated device that measures the length and width of your foot. Based on this "calibrated size", shoes can be chosen. A smaller or larger size can then be determined by "trying it on for size."

16 131 of 236

Saddles are far more challenging to fit because of the complexity of the angles and arc that constitute the shape of the horse's back. Traditionally, the focus of saddle fit has been on the withers. However, the fit of the withers is only part of the story. The other critical factor is the "ARC" of the spine of the horse relative to the angle of the withers. This measurement determines if a saddle will "fit", "bridge" or "rock" on the back of the horse.

What is needed to measure horse's backs is some way to see under the saddle.

If we could measure the contact area of the saddle with some sort of accuracy the interrelationships between the saddle and the horse could be determined.

In the picture below are a number of short pencils that have been placed on the horse's back in the same position as the contact area of the saddle. Each of the pencils describes a series of points of contact between the horse and saddle. Each of these short lines also has an interrelationship to each of the other lines. If we had some way to numerically describe the interrelationship of the series of lines to each other as well as to perpendicular we would have a new standard of measurement.

It is interesting to note that although the horse's body is generally round, at the contact point between the saddle and the horse, the back on either side of the spine is generally flat for about five to six inches. This phenomenon permits a new method to measure the back of a horse and relate this shape to the mounted saddle.

THE LOW TECH SOLUTION Until recently there has not been any calibrated method to accurately size saddles. However, a new method of measurement integrates some of the factors involved in saddle fit into an objective testing method that permits a "calibrated" solution to saddle fitting. A series of numbers define the degree of the angle and arc of the horse's back and the saddle - making saddle selection accurate, quick and easy.

17 132 of 236

The "SADDLETECH速GAUGE" (patent pending) is a simple device that permits a Three-Dimensional measurement of the horse and the saddle.

ANGLE 0

90

ARC

[ 20 0 ]

ANGLE

110 0

ARC

[ 10 0 ]

ANGLE

120 0

ARC

[50]

ANGLE

130 0

Measure the Horse

Measure the Saddle WHAT YOU SEE IS NOT WHAT YOU GET The reason that so many saddles do not fit is that the saddles are fit to the horse without considering the effect of the weight of the rider. The pegboard device made with about a hundred pegs that are pushed through a piece of wood can duplicate the contour of the horse's back. The pegboard can then be turned over to adjust the saddle to that shape.

Wrong. That is exactly the mistake that we do not want to make. If we fit the saddle to the shape of the unmounted horse and we do not consider the effect of the weight of the rider relative to the weight of the horse, the saddle will bridge more and more as heavier and heavier riders step into the saddle.

18 133 of 236

The SADDLETECH®GAUGE can measure the horse as well as the saddle.

But…what is the relationship of those two shapes? If the weight of the rider causes the back of the horse to deflect, then even the SADDLETECH®GAUGE measurements of the unloaded horse need to be "corrected" to determine the proper shape of the "loaded" saddle. However, how much does the horses back actually bend under the weight of the rider?

AS ABOVE, SO BELOW….. AIN'T SO We do not want the exact same shape of the horse's back for the shape of the saddle, consequently the SADDLETECH®GAUGE does not provide the same arc on the saddle measurement side as it does on the horse measurement side.

The "angles" of the SADDLETECH®GAUGE are the same for the horse as well as the saddle, however, because the parallelogram linkage that keeps the angles in relationship with each other is rotating around a short radius, this causes the top side of the gauge which rests against the saddle to be slightly smaller than the arc that rests against the horse. This is exactly what we want to achieve the best fit for the horse.

However, how do you know what is the correct permutation for the "ARC"?

CALIBRATION TO ACCURATELY DETERMINE HOW MUCH THE BACK OF THE HORSE IS ACTUALLY AFFECTED BY THE WEIGHT OF THE RIDER, which will then permit us to determine the proper shape of the saddle, and how that relates to the difference in shape or (hysterisis) in the Saddletech Gauge itself, we need some objective criteria.

The key to greater accuracy of any measurement is to build a "feed back loop". A feedback loop permits a cause and effect relationship to be established. If a factor is changed by one increment the feed back loop permits the documentation of the effect of that change. Repeating the process reveals a relationship than can be described in a formula.

Baling wire, plaster casts and even rows of pegboard pins do not provide any numerical values. Without numerical values there is no way to "calibrate" or compare any two shapes. Calibration by definition is the accurate comparison of any measuring instrument to a known standard, and more importantly the determination of the errors of its scale.41 Because saddle fitting has so many variables, it is critical to have a measurement instrument and formula to compensate for as many variables as possible. To compensate for the difference in the measurement of the horse's back without the rider to a new shape with the weight of the rider, a "Formula" is needed.

The question then becomes how to create a formula if you do not even know if the saddle really fits. To calibrate any instrument requires a second instrument that is itself calibrated to a known standard. Fortunately, that technology is available.

THE HIGH TECH SOLUTION To scientifically develop a calibrated formula and verify that these calculations are in fact accurate we must use another technology.

19 134 of 236

In 1993, the U.S.Patent Office issued U.S. Patent #5,375,379 for A Curve Conforming Sensor Array and Method for Measuring Pressures between a Saddle and a Horse.42 This technology is sold under the trade name Saddletech Computer Saddle Fitting System, and can provide the information needed to measure the effect of the weight of the rider on the saddle panels, saddle pad and the spine of the horse.

The Saddletech Computer Saddle Fitting System consists of a pressure sensitive pad attached to a computer. The pad contains an array of 256 pressure sensors that measures 24 inches by 32 inches.

The Saddletech Computer Saddle Fitting System sensors are themselves "Calibrated" with a pressure gauge that has been "Calibrated" to a "Calibrated" manometer. To calibrate the sensors, they are placed on a vacuum table and the air is carefully removed from the envelope containing the sensor array in incremental amounts. The computer then compares the resistance in each of the sensors to the known standard from the calibrated manometer and builds a look up table to compensate for the variations in the system. Each time the pressure pad senses pressure between the saddle and the horse, it compares the electrical resistance of that particular sensor to the known standard, corrects for any differences (hysterisis), and then displays that data to the screen or file.43 In this manner a very accurate measurement of interface pressure can be made.

To use this pressure sensitive pad, the pad is placed between the horse and the saddle/pad combination and is connected to the computer. When the rider mounts the horse, the system graphically displays a variable color map that shows the amount of pressure and the location of the pressure exerted by the saddle and rider on the horse.

A Saddle That Fits

A Saddle That Bridges 20 135 of 236

THE FORMULA We need to establish criteria to determine a formula that can use the measurement from an unmounted horse's back and then apply a calculation to approximate the effect of the load of the saddle and rider. A new set of numbers can then be established to represent the shape of the mounted horse's back and saddle shape.

By adding a predetermined number of degrees ( A ) for each increment of rider weight ( B ) greater than an established standard ( C ), relative to the riderâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s weight ( RW ) the curvature of the gauge can be increased to approximate the curvature the spine of the horse would experience placed under that incrementally higher weight. Conversely, the formula can be reversed for a lighter rider with weight less than a known standard, which would have less effect on the horse; the arc is proportionately reduced.

The same principle also applies to the weight of the horse. By subtracting a predetermined number of degrees (X) for incremental horse weight ( Y ) greater than an established standard ( Z ), relative to the horseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s weight ( HW ) the curvature of the gauge can be decreased. Conversely, the weight of the horse that is less than an established standard would be affected more by the weight of the rider and should therefore have an established number of degrees added to the arc of the gauge and the saddle measurements.

The basic formula for an eight wing Saddletech gauge to compensate for rider weight is A = (RW - C) / B. (patent pending) For an "average horse and rider" there is one degree increase for every 15 lbs. of rider weight over 150 lb. of rider weight.

The basic formula to compensate for horse weight is X = (Z - HW) / Y (patent pending) or one degree for every 100 lbs. of horse weight over 1000 lbs. of horse weight. By adding the two factors together a weight compensation factor, WCF = A + X, (patent pending) can be determined.

It should be noted that extreme rider/horse weight ratios that requiring more than 5 degree of adjustment should be calibrated with the computer system to identify additional factors such as age or conditioning which could alter the shape of the saddle.

NO BRAINER MEASUREMENT

Degree of SADDLETECH GAUGE adjustment

English - RIDER/HORSE WEIGHT CALIBRATION 10

800 Lbs. 9 8

1000 Lbs. 7 6

1200 Lbs. 5 4

1400 Lbs. 3 2 1 100

150

200

250

300

Rider Weight (lbs.)

21 136 of 236

Saddletech research has found that using a 150 lb. rider on a 1000 lb. horse happens to be the balance point for the Saddletech Gauge itself. This balance point permits the majority of riders to use the Saddletech Gauge without the need of adjustment.

However, it is important to note that this calculation is for an average weight rider on average weight horse, without consideration for other factors, such as age, breed, conditioning or discipline. The chart above only illustrates the basic relationship between horse and rider and may be different for a particular horse, rider and saddle combination.

CALIBRATING THE FORMULA FOR ADDITIONAL FACTORS It is important to note that the formula that is appropriate for the 8-wing gauge used on English saddles is different than the formula for the longer 10-wing gauge used on larger Western saddles. This is due to a number of factors. First the 10-wing gauge is longer and therefore is measuring over a greater area and the incremental hysterisis between the top and the bottom of the gauge is not the same.

Second the surface area that the 10- wing gauge measures is actually 25% more than the 8 wing gauge This means that the same load is spread over a larger area and will not have the same effect as is measured by the smaller gauge.

The basic formula for a ten wing (western) gauge to compensate for rider weight is A = (RW - C) / B. Thus for an average horse there is one degree increase for every 25 lbs. of rider weight over 100 lbs. of rider lbs. The basic formula to compensate for horse weight is x = (Z -HW) / Y, or one degree for every 100 lbs. of horse weight over 1000 lbs. of horse weight By adding the two factors together a weight compensation factor, WCF = A + X can be determined.

Degree of SADDLETECH GAUGE adjustment

Western - RIDER/HORSE WEIGHT CALIBRATION 10 9 8

800 Lbs.

7 6

1000 Lbs.

5 4

1200 Lbs. 3 2

1400 Lbs. 1 100

150

200

250

300

Rider Weight (lbs.)

Again, it is important to note that this calculation is for an average weight rider on average weight horse, without consideration for other factors, such as age, breed, conditioning or discipline.

22 137 of 236

By adjusting the predetermined number of degrees (X) or (A) and the incremental horse weight (Y) or (B) or the established standard (Z) or (C) the curvature of the arc of the gauge can be adjusted for a variety of factors.

If the Saddletech Gauge or the Saddletech computer scan reveals that the saddle is "bridging," causing high pressure on the withers and the loin, then the saddle can be readjusted to fit for each increment of rider weight ( B ) by incrementally increasing the arc of the saddle to permit the saddle to contact the back of the horse and evenly distribute the weight over the entire saddle panel.

Additional data acquired from the Saddletech Computer Saddle Fitting System can be used to refine the formulas to compensate for additional factors and increase the accuracy of the formulas. By testing a variety of horses under various loaded conditions, a relationship between the Saddletech Gauge measurements and actual real time interface pressure measurements can be made using the Saddletech Computer Saddle Fitting System. A database and offset table can be built and thereby compensate for any hysterisis in the gauge as well as the variety of factors affecting the horse.

THE CALIBRATING FOR THE BREED AND DISCIPLINE The age of the horse, style of riding, type of saddle and the condition of the horse will also affect this calculation. By using the Saddletech Gauge and the Saddletech Computer Saddle Fitting System calibrated measurements can be correlated to compensate for a variety of interrelationships.

As an example, there are some equestrians who observe that some horses lift their backs when trotting. It is then theorized that the horse must round its back into the saddle and therefore one needs the saddle to bridge to allow the horse to "round" into the saddle. While it is possible that a few very highly trained dressage horses may have the strength to lift their back with the rider mounted, it is unlikely that the majority of horses can achieve this rounding of their backs.

Saddletech Computer scans have been made of Olympic Grand Prix level dressage horses with equally skilled riders and the dynamic computer data has NOT confirmed that these particular horses did lift their backs. However, using the Saddletech Gauge and the Saddletech Computer Saddle Fitting System high level riders may find that their particular horse does lift its back and the saddle shape can be precisely adjusted based on the horse's performance and objective measurements.

In contrast, riders of Peruvian Paso horses believe the opposite is happening with their horses, because the Paso horse lifts its head when it is in gait. It is believed that an even greater arc, or hollow, is shown on the back of the horse. Western pleasure riders believe that good conformation includes having the horse's head held very low.

Each discipline has its reasons to train the horse to a particular conformation. Using the Saddletech Method of measurement each theory can be proven or disproven and the appropriate saddle fit to the horse.

LOOKING INTO THE TELESCOPE Since accurate saddle measurement instruments have only recently become available, the actual amount of back movement has not been documented with a large enough sample to observe significant patterns.

23 138 of 236

Further research with the Saddletech Gauge and Saddletech Computer Saddle Fitting System will provide the opportunity to refine our understanding of movement of the back of the horse relative to the saddle which will improve saddle fit and the horse's performance.

A FORMULA FOR EVERY BARN It is anticipated that different schools of thought will develop each with different formulas. Dressage riders will use entirely different formulas than endurance riders.

Ropers will build different saddles than barrel racers. Significantly, however, for the first time in history the performance of the horse can be "SCIENTIFICALLY" measured and correlated to the subjective observations of the riders.

THEORY INTO PRACTICE Theory is great, but how can someone actually translate all this information into a saddle that really does fit the horse. If it is the first time you are buying a saddle for over $1,000 or you have spent more money on saddles than you did for the horse, you may be interested in a new content rich internet site with over 100 pages about saddle fitting.

SADDLETECH.COM provides the basic information needed to find a saddle that really does fit your horse by using measurement.

The Saddletech Gauge permits an equestrian to measure existing saddles to find the appropriate saddle for the horse. Or, if an equestrian already has a saddle that they wish to keep, they can send the saddle to a saddle repair shop that uses the Saddletech Gauge to readjust the saddle to precise measurements.

Since horses' backs change shape as they age, this technique permits one saddle to be used with one horse over the years. If the equestrian uses one saddle on a number of horses, by measuring all the horses, the best average saddle shape for those horses can be determined and the saddler can adjust the saddle accordingly.

Additionally, the Saddletech Adjustable Jig uses the Saddletech Gauge for the frame and adds a stand and clamps. This system permits the saddler to adjust the Saddletech Adjustable Jig to the Saddletech Gauge measurements and in effect have a form of the horse's back, compensated for the weight of the rider, in the saddle shop.

The Saddletech Adjustable Jig also permits the saddler to make the saddle bars or panels out of thin pieces of veneer that are glued up and clamped into the "molded plywood" shape of the horse's back. Once the saddletree is built, the Saddletech Gauge can used to doubled check to be sure that the saddle fits the horse before the leather is attached.

SADDLETECH.COM provides research, education, a network of veterinarians and Saddlemakers, tack shops, measurement services, Saddletech Gauge rentals, and a data base of new and used saddles measured with the Saddletech Gauge that permits an equestrian to find a saddle that will fit their horse.

Fit Happens with Measurement

24 139 of 236

Footnotes 1

Harman, Joyce C, Practical Use of a Computerized Saddle Pressure Measuring Device to Determine the Effects of Saddle Pads on the Horse's Back, Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, Vol. 14, No. 11, 1994, pg. 606 2 American Horse Council, KMPG Peat Marwick, "Impact of Equine Industry on U.S. Economy.

3 Kosiak, Michael, Etiology and Pathology of Ischemic Ulcers, Arch. of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1959, pg. 62 4 Guyton, Arthur C., Acute Control of Local Blood Flow, Text of Medical Physiology, 1986, pg. 349 5 Guyton, Arthur C., Acute Control of Local Blood Flow, Text of Medical Physiology, 1986, pg. 349 6 Guyton, Arthur C., Acute Control of Local Blood Flow, Text of Medical Physiology, 1986, pg. 348 7 Burman, M.S. Paul Using Pressure Measurements to Evaluate Different Technologies, Decubitus, Vol 6 No. 3, 93 pg. 40 8 Holloway, Allen, Effects of external pressure loading on human skin blood flow measured by 133Xe clearance, Journal of Applied Physiology Vol. 40, No.4 April 1976, Pg 598 9 Holloway, Allen, Effects of external pressure loading on human skin blood flow measured by 133Xe clearance, Journal of Applied Physiology Vol. 40, No.4 April 1976, Pg 598 10 Husain, Tafazzul, An Experimental Study of Sore Pressure Effects on Tissues, with Reference to the Bed Sore Problem., J. Path. Bact, Vol LXVI, 1953, pg. 354 11 Allen, Doug, Blood Flow Restriction caused by bandaging and equine in vivo study conducted at the University of Georgia, March 1996, Kimberly-Clark Clinical Study-Flexus 3 12 Allen, Doug, Blood Flow Restriction caused by bandaging and equine in vivo study conducted at the University of Georgia, March 1996, Kimberly-Clark Clinical Study-Flexus 3 13 Chow, William, et al, Effects and Characteristics of Cushion Covering Membranes Kenedi, R.M. and Cowden, J.M. Bedsore Biomechanics, University Park Press, London, 1975, pg. 96-97 14 Le, Khanh M., et al, An In-Depth Look at Pressure Sores Using Monolithic Silicon Pressure Sensors Microvascular Research, Vol 17, 1979, PG 748 15 Le, Khanh M., et al, An In-Depth Look at Pressure Sores Using Monolithic Silicon Pressure Sensors Microvascular Research, Vol 17, 1979, PG 748 16 Husain, Tafazzul, An Experimental Study of Sore Pressure Effects on Tissues, with Reference to the Bed Sore Problem., J. Path. Bact, Vol LXVI, 1953, pg. 352 17 Husain, Tafazzul, An Experimental Study of Sore Pressure Effects on Tissues, with Reference to the Bed Sore Problem., J. Path. Bact, Vol LXVI, 1953, pg. 356 18 Le, Khanh M., et al, An In-Depth Look at Pressure Sores Using Monolithic Silicon Pressure Sensors Microvascular Research, Vol 17, 1979, PG 753 19 Husain, Tafazzul, An Experimental Study of Sore Pressure Effects on Tissues, with Reference to the Bed Sore Problem., J. Path. Bact, Vol LXVI, 1953, pg. 356 20 Kosiak, Michael, Etiology and Pathology of Ischemic Ulcers, Arch. of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 59, pg. 62 21 Guyton, Arthur C., Acute Control of Local Blood Flow, Textbook of Medical Physiology, 1986, pg. 349 22 Kosiak, Michael, Etiology and Pathology of Ischemic Ulcers, Arch. of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1959, pg. 62 23 Le, Khanh M., et al, An In-Depth Look at Pressure Sores Using Monolithic Silicon Pressure Sensors Microvascular Research, Vol 17, 1979, PG 748 24 Le, Khanh M., et al, An In-Depth Look at Pressure Sores Using Monolithic Silicon Pressure Sensors Microvascular Research, Vol 17, 1979, PG 748 25 Husain, Tafazzul, An Experimental Study of Sore Pressure Effects on Tissues, with Reference to the Bed Sore Problem., J. Path. Bact, Vol LXVI, 1953, pg. 355 & Groth, K.E. 1942, Acta Chir Scand.,lxxxvii,suppl 76 26 Husain, Tafazzul, An Experimental Study of Sore Pressure Effects on Tissues, with Reference to the Bed Sore Problem., J. Path. Bact, Vol LXVI, 1953, pg. 356 & Groth, K.E. 1942, Acta Chir Scand.,lxxxvii,suppl 76 27 Jeffcott, Leo, The Equine Back, the Essential Horse, May 1998, Pg.1 28 Jeffcott, Leo, The Equine Back, the Essential Horse, May 1998, Pg.10 29 Deyo, Richard, Low Back Pain, Scientific American, August 1998, pg 50 30 Deyo, Richard, Low Back Pain, Scientific American, August 1998, pg 50 31 Beatie, Russel, Saddles, 1981, page 301 32 Beatie, Russel, Saddles, 1981, page 301 33 Chow, William, et al, Effects and Characteristics of Cushion Covering Membranes Kenedi, R.M. and Cowden, J.M. Bedsore Biomechanics, University Park Press, London, 1975, pg. 96-97 34 Foreman, Monte, Riding by Reasoning, Past V, Western Horseman 1953 35 Christe, Sara, Dynamics of Saddle Fit, Trail Blazer, July 1998 36 Fernie, G.R. and Dornan, J, The Problems of Clinical Trials with New Systems for Preventing & Healing Decubiti, Kenedi, R.M. and Cowden, J.M. Bedsore Biomechanics, Univ. Park Press, 1975, pg. 753 37 Drawing by R Ferrand 38 Guyton, Arthur C., Acute Control of Local Blood Flow, Textbook of Medical Physiology, 1986, pg. 354 39 Giffen, James M DVM, Horseowners Veterinary Handbook, 1988, Anhidrosis pg 78 40 Giffen, James M DVM, Horseowners Veterinary Handbook, 1988, Anhidrosis pg 78 41 Encyclopedia Britannica, Volume 4, pg 585, 1960 42 Ferrand, Robert, U.S. Patent #5,375,379 for A Curve Conforming Sensor Array and Method for Measuring Pressures between a Saddle and a Horse 43 Sember, Joe, Jasco Products, Force Sensor Array Specifications

25 140 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

141 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

142 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

143 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

144 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

145 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

146 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

147 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

148 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

149 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

150 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

151 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

152 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

153 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

154 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

155 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

156 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

157 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

158 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

159 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

160 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 10-17-2000

161 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 01-07-2002

162 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 01-07-2002

163 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 01-07-2002

164 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 01-07-2002

165 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 01-07-2002

166 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 01-07-2002

167 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 01-07-2002

168 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 01-07-2002

169 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 01-07-2002

170 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 01-07-2002

171 of 236

Copy provided by USPTO from the CSIR Image Database on 01-07-2002

172 of 236

173 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

174 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

175 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

176 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

177 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

178 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

179 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

180 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

181 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

182 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

183 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

184 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

185 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

186 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

187 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

188 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

189 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

190 of 236

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

English Saddle-Fitting Guidelines No matter what your riding discipline is, a well-fitting saddle enables your horse’s natural freedom of movement. It also helps you find a correct or more effective riding position.

1 Position the 1 saddle correctly on your horse’s back.

Because proper saddle fit is so crucial, consider contacting a professional saddle fitter for assistance after using these guidelines, or at the very least get a second opinion from your horse’s trainer or a knowledgeable friend.

And remember—not only should you check a saddle that you’re considering for purchase, you should check the way your saddle fits at least twice a year. As your horse’s muscles or weight change through aging, an increase or decrease in workload, progression in training, changes in diet or illness, the way your saddle sits on your horse will change too.

How to Check the Fit of a Saddle Here are some guidelines to help you make a basic assessment about how a saddle fits your horse. To begin, ask your horse to stand squarely on level ground with his head and neck facing forward. You may find it helpful to have someone keep the horse still.

As you go through the steps outlined here, monitor your horse. Look for signs of discomfort and irritation or conversely, watch for signs of relaxation.

Don’t use a saddle pad because you want to see how the saddle sits directly on your horse. Place the saddle slightly forward on your horse’s withers, then slide it backward so that it stops at the natural resting place as dictated by his conformation. Repeat this process several times until you’re sure of the spot where the saddle repeatedly stops. This spot should locate the saddle behind your horse’s shoulder blades to allow his freedom of movement.

Note: Many people place saddles too far forward on the withers. When a rider’s weight is then added to the saddle, the points of the saddle tree located on each side of the pommel press on the horse’s shoulder blades, where they can hinder movement or cause pain.

22

If you have too much space for your fingers, the tree may be too narrow.

If you don’t have enough space, the saddle may be too wide.

An example of a tree that is too small.

Panels do not make continuous contact.

Test wither clearance.

If the saddle you’re trying is used or has synthetic or foam panels, you should be able to slide two to three fingers between the pommel of the saddle and your horse’s withers.

If you’re trying a new saddle with woolstuffed panels, it may settle as much as onehalf inch as the wool compresses and molds to your horse. Therefore, you could consider three or even four fingers between the pommel and withers as acceptable.

Saddle Fitting and Use Tips Throughout your saddle fitting process, keep an eye on your horse’s mood and facial expressions. The saddle may be bothering the horse if its ears are pinned, teeth are showing, or if the horse is threatening to kick, moving away or flinching.

To preserve the integrity of your saddle tree, use a mounting block. If you consistently mount from the ground on the same side of the horse, and pull on the cantle as you mount, the saddle tree can become twisted over time.

Dover Equestrian Library

An example of good wither clearance.

Panel contours shoulder nicely.

An example of a tree that is slightly too big.

Note: Sometimes you have to make minor concessions for wither clearance for horses that are either very flat and round at the withers, such as many Arabs and Morgans, or for horses that are very high and narrow at the withers, as you see in some Thoroughbreds.

If this is your horse’s case, adhere as closely as you can to other saddle fitting steps and then monitor your horse’s back closely over time. Special padding or customized flocking can help with saddle fitting issues related to wither clearance.

© Dover Saddlery 2011

191 of 236

English Saddle-Fitting Guidelines Under the saddle flap near the stirrup bar, you should see a pocket into which the points are fitted. You’ll see a point on each side of the saddle.

Good relationship of pommel to cantle.

Saddle fits well behind shoulder blade.

Note too that seat is level.

33

Check the relationship of the pommel to the cantle.

Look at the saddle from a side view. Imagine a straight line drawn parallel to the ground and stretching from the pommel to the cantle.

In a dressage saddle, the point of the cantle is designed to be higher than the point of the pommel—maybe a couple of inches higher— so your imaginary line should hit the cantle at such a point that there is space above the line.

Note that in shallower seats such as those used for jumping, the cantle may be designed to be level with or just barely higher than the pommel. If this is the case with your saddle, rely more heavily on other checks to determine proper saddle fit.

44

Check to see if the seat is level.

The deepest part of the saddle seat should be parallel to the ground, not tilted backward or forward. A level seat enables your weight to be properly distributed over your horse’s back, and it assists you in finding the correct riding position.

55

Check the vertical angle and width of the tree points.

Tree width does not necessarily ensure a proper saddle fit. For example, a wide tree in one saddle may be appropriate for a certain horse, but a wide tree in another saddle may be inappropriate for the same horse. This discrepancy could be because the length of tree points and their angles varies between saddle models and makes. Also, the shape of a tree affects the angle of the points.

Dover Equestrian Library

Channel or gullet

If the angles of the points are too narrow, the points will dig into the horse’s muscles and most likely, the middle of the saddle will not come in even contact with your horse’s back.

If the points are too wide, the saddle will sit low in front, putting pressure on top of the withers or the back. If your horse has hollow spots behind his withers, the points should not press down into them.

Note: All horses are asymmetrical. When comparing the angles of tree points, use your horse’s widest shoulder as your guide. The fit on the narrower side can be adjusted by a professional saddle fitter through the use of flocking, shimming or correction pads.

Panels Conversely, if your horse is very narrow with a high spine, or if your horse’s back muscle slopes dramatically away from his spine, you have to be sure the gullet isn’t too wide. If so, it could put pressure directly on his vertebrae.

Feel your horse’s spine and the soft tissue running along it. The gullet on the saddle should completely clear this area so that the panels rest only on your horse’s long back muscle. That way, his muscle will bear your weight and not his spine.

Bad fit because tree is too small. Points press straight down into the shoulder blade.

66

Being careful not to be kicked, stand toward the back of your horse and look to see light coming through the gullet.

Check channel or gullet clearance.

Turn your saddle over, and you’ll see a space between the panels that runs the length of the saddle. This area is referred to as the channel or gullet, and it allows room for your horse’s spinal processes to work.

Older saddles tended to have very narrow channels, but advancements in the study of equine biomechanics lead to saddles being designed with wider channels. If the channel of a saddle is too narrow for a particular horse, it will affect the freedom of a horse’s movement by pressing on the spinal processes or creating pressure on the spine. For example, wide-backed horses may require very wide gullets.

An example of good clearance with room for movement throughout the spine and withers. Panels contour to the shoulder well.

© Dover Saddlery 2011

192 of 236

English Saddle-Fitting Guidelines 77

Check panel pressure and contact.

Advantages of Synthetic and Leather Saddles

Saddle panels are supposed to distribute your weight evenly along your horse’s back when you ride. Panels can be stuffed with wool, foam or synthetic-filled systems to absorb pressure.

When you’re considering the type of saddle to purchase, keep the points outlined here in mind:

Press on the seat of the saddle with one hand, and run your other hand under the front of the panels. You want to feel even pressure under the saddle points; you don’t want the front of the panels to pinch the horse’s withers.

Next run your hand under the entire panel along the back, on both sides, feeling for even pressure. Any unevenness in pressure that you feel would be felt by your horse as you ride.

A common problem in saddle fitting is bridging. Bridging occurs when the front and the back of the panels are in contact with the horse, but there is no even pressure in the center of the saddle.

If the saddle has wool-flocked panels and all other steps in the fitting process make you feel that the saddle is essentially a good fit for the horse, a professional saddle fitter may be able to adjust the panels to correct bridging.

Otherwise, the saddle will be uncomfortable for the horse to wear and you should consider another choice.

88 Check the stability of the saddle.

The saddle should remain fairly stable, not shifting side to side or rocking front to back.

Shifting may be a result of your horse’s natural asymmetry, and a saddle fitter should be able to make suggestions to lessen or eliminate the problem.

99

Check the seat length.

The weight-bearing surface of a horse’s back is the area that is supported by the ribs. This area is known as the thoracic region. It runs from about the point of his shoulder to the middle of his back. The 18th vertebra represents the end of the thoracic, or weight-bearing, area and is associated with the last rib.

The lumbar region of his back has no ribs and therefore no support structure; it should not bear weight. This area runs from about the middle of his back to the point of his croup.

Dover Equestrian Library

Bad fit because saddle sits on top of shoulder blade and seat extends past last rib.

Feel your horse’s rib cage to locate his last rib. Follow that last rib up to his spine, and you’ll see the approximate location of the 18th vertebra and end of the thoracic area.

Ideally, your saddle should not extend past this point. If it does and you have no choice but to ride in a saddle that is slightly too long, be sure to check your horse continually for signs of soreness. Some saddles feature more compact designs than others, and one of those may be more appropriate for your horse.

10 Girth the saddle, mount and recheck 10

Synthetic Saddles • Available at economical prices • Low maintenance • Easily cleaned with soap and water • Lightweight • Virtually weatherproof • Durable Leather Saddles • Available in a range of prices • Develop attractive patina • Break in for a rider’s seat • Some leathers offer enhanced grip • Good resale value if properly maintained • Durable with proper maintenance

the fit.

When you’ve finished all the steps to check the saddle fit, put on a girth but consider skipping the use of a saddle pad. A properly fitted girth sits approximately five inches behind the horse’s elbow. While sitting in the saddle, check the wither clearance and gullet clearance again.

The pommel should still clear the withers by two to three fingers. Your helper—being careful not to be kicked—should be able to see daylight running the length of the saddle when looking at the saddle from the rear view. This is easiest to see without the use of the saddle pad.

Notice the feel of the saddle. It should feel stable and level under you, and you should feel balanced—not like you’re leaning backward or forward or struggling to sit up straight.

Again, assess how your horse is feeling. Is he able to move out freely? Is he relaxed? Or are his ears pinned and tail swishing?

Related Topics Choices in Saddle Panels Choosing a Saddle Pad About Stirrup Irons About Stirrup Leathers How to Select a Girth Tack and Leather Care

For more assistance or to request a catalog, call 1-800-989-1500 to speak with a Dover Saddlery product advisor, or stop by any of our retail stores.

Visit DoverSaddlery.com for a complete store listing and full product offering.

© Dover Saddlery 2011

193 of 236

How to Select and Size an English Saddle for a Rider No matter what your riding discipline is—hunter, jumper, dressage, eventing or trail riding—a well-fitting saddle will enable you to achieve an effective and comfortable riding position.

As you select a saddle, you’ll want to find one that is suitable for your riding discipline and that fits both your horse and you very well. (For details on fitting a saddle to a horse, refer to “English SaddleFitting Guidelines.”)

Sit in, borrow and try as many saddles as you can when making a saddle purchase.

Also, remember that the way a saddle feels when you’re sitting on a saddle buck will not necessarily be the same on a moving horse.

Always get a second opinion on the way you look in a saddle from your Dover Saddlery product advisor, your instructor or a very knowledgeable friend.

Riding Discipline Determines Saddle Style Your riding discipline influences the type of saddle you need, because the overall design of any saddle is intended to assist with your riding.

Hunter/Jumper and Hunter Equitation Riders require a jumping saddle that has a fairly shallow seat, with a low pommel and a low cantle. The saddle might have small knee rolls and small thigh blocks (though they vary greatly between models) combined with forward, short saddle flaps. Stirrup bars may be placed in a forward position. Typically, saddles for jumping have fairly narrow twists to provide a close contact feel with optimal leg contact, and will also have padding on or under the flaps to assist with security over fences. Together, these design features allow the rider to assume a forward seat position with a short stirrup length. Billet straps are short. Note though, that there are many differences in seat depth and flaps to accommodate rider preferences.

Test Ride!

Dover Saddlery has a Trial Saddle Program, which allows you to ride in a saddle for several days to get a good sense as to whether it will work for you. Over 75 saddle models in a variety of sizes are available through the program.

Dover Equestrian Library

Dressage Riders, who need to sit deeply in a neutral, balanced position, require a dressage saddle with a deep seat, thigh blocks and long, straight flaps that encourage a long stirrup length. The depth of the seat and the size of the blocks are very much personal preference. Some riders prefer a very deep seat and/or large blocks, while others prefer small blocks and a shallower seat. Dressage saddles are available in many styles to suit these very personal preferences. The twists on dressage saddles also range from fairly narrow to wide, again to accommodate the differences in rider preferences and anatomy. Stirrup bars are usually located in such a manner as to allow the leg to hang down naturally from the rider’s hip. Most dressage saddles have long billets so that the girth buckles are not under the flap where they can affect leg contact with the horse’s barrel.

Cross-Country (event) riders usually appreciate a seat with a medium depth, varying degrees of knee and thigh blocks, and typically, a longer twist since these riders sometimes assume a “standing” position.

The flaps of an eventing saddle are usually generous so that the rider can keep his or her legs on them while jumping drops downhill.

The flaps will also have a forward rotation to accommodate various stirrup lengths, particularly short lengths for galloping. Often the flaps have padding to assist the rider in going over fences. Billet straps may be long or short depending on the model.

Trail riders/Fox hunters can choose nearly any type of saddle that makes them comfortable. Many people favor an all-purpose saddle, which melds design features required for both jumping and flatwork into one saddle. Flaps are generally longer than those of a jumping saddle, yet not as long and cut on a more forward rotation than the average dressage saddle. Some all-purpose saddles have enough of a knee block and forward rotation to allow a rider to assume a jumping position.

Seat depths vary slightly to address the need for rider preferences, but in general these too are not as shallow as a saddle designed strictly for jumping. Billet straps are short.

Circuit Premier Master Saddle

Warendorf Dressage Saddle

Vega Monoflap Event Saddle by Amerigo

Stubben Siegfried VSD DL Saddle

© Dover Saddlery 2012

194 of 236

How to Select and Size an English Saddle for a Rider How to Fit You! After you’ve determined the type of saddle you need, consider these key points to determine appropriate saddle fit: • Hip to knee length • Seat size • Flap length and shape • Riding style

About the Twist Width

Twist width is a fairly personal choice, too, though the twist is supposed to accommodate the horse’s shape more than the rider’s. The front of any saddle tree has a steep angle to fit over the horse’s withers, while the back of the tree has a flatter angle to accommodate a horse’s back. The twist occurs where the bars of the tree “twist” to form the transition between the front and back of the tree. The twist is located behind the pommel and at the front of the actual seat, as illustrated in the photos below. The width of the strip of leather over the twist doesn’t indicate twist width.

Hip to knee length determines where your knee and leg fit in accordance to the angle and point of the flap. When you try out saddles, look to fit this part of your leg first.

The rotation and size of the saddle flap should complement the angle of your leg.

Your knee should hit at the top point of the flap with at least two fingers to spare.

Seat size affects your comfort level, ability to move and your effectiveness in your riding. Ignore the seat size measurement of the saddle, and work with what actually fits your body. Every manufacturer’s sizing will feel different between models of saddles.

Most saddles require that you fit between three to four fingers (or a hand’s width) behind your bottom and the tip of the cantle.

If you feel confined in a deep seated saddle, then try the next seat size up.

A well-fitting jumping saddle.

Note how the shape of the flap complements the natural position of the rider’s leg. Her knee hits at the point of the flap with exactly two fingers to spare. The saddle flap is long enough so that its bottom edge will not interfere with the top of her boot, yet she has plenty of calf area exposed for riding. The seat size is to her liking for jumping; she can fit exactly four fingers behind her seat and the cantle.

When you try a saddle, if you feel like you are sitting on a wide board, then the twist is too wide. The potential problem with riding in a saddle with a twist that is too wide for your build is that it could force you into a chair seat position. A twist that is appropriately narrow for you will allow your legs to hang down loosely on either side of the saddle. If a twist is too narrow for you, you may feel that your thighs are not being supported.

Tip: The seat size of an English saddle is measured in inches from either of the nail heads on the pommel to the middle of the cantle.

Flap length is less important than the way the flap shape complements the angle of your leg. As a very general guideline, the flap will fall only about a third of the way down your calf. The goal in determining flap length is to avoid having the edge of the saddle flap interfere with the top of your tall boot or half chap.

Riding style, your own personal preference for any one factor of the saddle, and your position as determined by your unique physical build is always important. For some riders, having two fingers behind their bottom at the cantle is sufficient as they prefer a snug seat. Others prefer a roomier feel in the seat.

Related Topics English Saddle-Fitting Guidelines Advantages of Synthetic and Leather Saddles Choices in Saddle Panels

Dover Equestrian Library

The area of the twist on this saddle tree is outlined in blue.

The area of the twist on this saddle is highlighted in orange.

A well-fitting dressage saddle.

Note how the shape of the long flap and the placement of the thigh block complement the shape of her leg. The flap length is excellent and to her liking as the top of her boot will not interfere with the edge of the saddle flap.

She can sit deeply in the saddle, fitting three fingers behind her seat and the cantle.

For more assistance or to request a catalog, call 1-800-989-1500 to speak with a Dover Saddlery product advisor, or stop by any of our retail stores.

Visit DoverSaddlery.com for a complete store listing and full product offering.

© Dover Saddlery 2012

195 of 236

| Dover Saddlery

6/20/13 8:53 PM

Ask our experts

800-406-8204

Enter keyword or item number

MONEY BACK ANY TIME, ANY REASON - 100% Satisfaction Guaranteed Riding Apparel/Clothing Breeches

Riding Boots and Chaps

Helmets, Hats & Vests

Riding Gloves

Horse Tack

Horse Blankets

Show Clothing

Horse Care

Casual Clothing

Call, email, or chat online Stable Supplies

Outerwear

Gifts

Socks & Support

On Sale

CLOSEOUTS

Spurs & Accessories

How to Measure Your Horse and Fit Your Blanket The fit of your blanket is extremely important to the comfort of your horse. Improperly fitting blankets can cause rubbing and slippage. To find blanket size, measure distance from center of the chest, across the point of the shoulder, and to the center of the tail. Many blankets are sized in two or three inch increments, so choose the closest size available.

Care of Your Blanket Blankets should be cleaned annually. First, remove excess dirt with a brush or hose, then wash by hand or on a delicate cool water cycle. Use very mild soap.

Allow to drip dry. Do not put blankets in the dryer as this will damage the waterproof coating and void any warranties.

For a properly fitted bridle, a caveson noseband should sit just below the horse’s cheekbones – generally no more than the width of 2 fingers from the bottom of the cheekbone to the top of the noseband (this does not apply to drop or figure 8 nosebands). Figure 8 nosebands should sit above the bottom of the cheek bone only if they have a ring that allows movement connecting the noseband to the cheek piece. The browband should never be gaping or flopping.

Properly adjusted cheek pieces will cause the bit to create two gentle wrinkles at the corner of the mouth on each side. Cheek piece buckles should generally be at the level of a horse’s eye, and on a bridle that fits a horse’s head very well, all buckles will generally be at the same level as each other. These cheek piece guidelines are just a suggestion, as finding a perfect fit on all horses is near impossible. Multiple holes are given on cheek pieces to allow for vast adjustment. Keep in mind that the proper position of the bit is a priority over buckle placement.

When shopping for bridles, it is important to know that German and French brands tend to run a bit larger when it comes to standard sizing. The difference is not a whole size up, but if you have a horse that fits on the smaller end of a full size, you may be able to move down to a cob size, or if your horse is wavering between full and oversized, you can most likely stick with a full size if switching to a German or French made bridle. Some horses can be difficult to fit in a stock size bridle. For this reason, additional bridle pieces can be bought in a variety of sizes and it is never a problem to mix and match sizes of individual pieces to get the proper fit.

http://www.doversaddlery.com/sizing-information-and-guide---text/a/321/

Page 1 of 4

196 of 236

| Dover Saddlery

6/20/13 8:53 PM

Looking for a Saddle Fitting Guide? Click Here for a step-by-step saddle fitting guide from Thorowgood. **Adobe Acrobat required.

Measure around your hand at the widest part, excluding your thumb. The number of inches = the size. Please refer to our size charts as a reference for sizes listed as Small, Medium, and Large.

For proper fit, Dover recommends that you take the time to determine your measurements before you order. Have another person measure your leg for the most accuracy. Properly fitted tall boots will, at first, be uncomfortably tight around the top of the boot and should come up into the back of your knee. They should be difficult to pull on and off or zip up. As they break in, they will drop comfortably around your leg.

Half chaps should fit similarly to tall boots and should also come up into the back of your knee at first. When fitted properly, they will be difficult to zip at first, should be uncomfortably tight around the top, and will drop comfortably around your leg as they break in. When referring to half chap sizing charts, it is important to keep in mind that all half chaps are measured at the widest part of the calf, but each brand measures height differently. Specific size charts can be found on individual product web pages.

How to Measure for Tall Boots: 1. Wear the clothing (breeches, tights, socks, etc.) you are most likley to wear with your boots.

2. Sit in a straight chair with feet flat on the floor and knees at a 90 degree angle.

3. Measure calf around the widest part, and measure height from the floor to back of the knee.

4. Add 1 1/2" - 2" to measured height to allow for drop as your boots break in.

Measure around your head at the widest part, be sure to do this with your hair up if that is how the helmet will be worn. Match the measurement up with a size based on the size chart below.

The tape measure should be snug.

http://www.doversaddlery.com/sizing-information-and-guide---text/a/321/

Page 2 of 4

197 of 236

| Dover Saddlery

6/20/13 8:53 PM

**ASTM F-1163-01 AND 04a/SEI Certified Helmets Helmet Notice, Disclaimer, and Warning All equestrian sports are inherently dangerous and involve the risk of serious injury or death. Riders using these products ride at their own risk with full knowledge of the hazards and risks associated with their activities. Helmets are designed for equestrian use only. Helmets cannot offer complete protection from injury or death to riders in case of fall, collision, impact, loss of control or otherwise. Helmets cannot protect areas of the head that are not covered. Helmets offer no protection against injuries involving forces other than impact.

CAUTION: Helmets must fit well and all retention straps must be securely fastened. Helmets are constructed so that the energy of an impact may be absorbed through partial destruction of the helmet.

Helmets that suffer an impact should be destroyed and replaced. The protective qualities of helmets may be compromised by prior impact, age, use and many common substances. Always follow the manufacturer’s recommendations before applying cleaning agents, paints, or adhesives.

Dover Saddlery disclaims any responsibility for injuries or death incurred while wearing any of the helmets offered for sale. Representations regarding testing results, equipment ratings, product specifications, ASTM and/or SEI standards, and the adequacy of all such standards and designations are made solely by the product’s manufacturer. Dover Saddlery does not warrant or confirm the representations of the manufacturers. Dover Saddlery makes no representations express or implied regarding the fitness of these products for any particular purpose nor the extent to which the products protect riders from injury or death. By purchasing any of the helmets offered for sale and using it in an equestrian sport, the purchaser AGREES FREELY AND VOLUNTARILY TO ASSUME ALL RISKS RELATED TO EQUESTRIAN SPORTS, including the risk of personal injury, damage, death or property damage. Further, to the maximum extent permitted by law, the purchaser does release Dover Saddlery from any and all responsibility or legal liability related to purchaser's participation in equestrian activities.

The following information is specific to hunt coats and does not necessarily apply to dressage coats.

While not all show coats are sized equally, there are some basic guidelines that can help you find a well-fitting, comfortable coat. Typically, the 3rd button down should be at the same level as your belly button and the coat tails should rest at the middle of your rear. Jacket sleeves should end at your wrist bone.

Keep in mind that if you cannot find a coat that gives you this fit, it is better for sleeves and coat tail to be a bit too long, rather than too short. Make sure that the coat allows enough room for you to move comfortably in the show ring; sit in a saddle if one is available and simulate the position of your arms to assess proper sleeve length. Some manufacturers label using U.S. sizing, while others use U.K. sizing. A general guideline for sizing is that a U.S. size is 4 down from its U.K. equivalent (example: U.K. 12 = U.S. 8). For more detailed measurements from individual manufacturers, please refer to the sizing charts on individual product pages.

While individual brands of body protectors may vary slightly in measurements and fit, the following are some basic pointers about the general fit of a body protector. Body protectors should be fitted over light clothing, heavier garments and outerwear should be worn on top. Take measurements of your chest, waist, back length, and over your shoulder (waist-to-waist) and then refer to size charts of specific brands and styles. Before trying on what you feel will be the correct size, loosen the chest and waist fasteners and flex the body protector to loosen the foam. Once on, fasten the chest and waist ensuring a snug fit and make sure there is still room within the fasteners for further adjustment. With the body protector fit securely around your chest and waist, begin to choose the length appropriate for your height. The shoulders and neckline should lie flat against your body; if this cannot be achieved then you may need a shorter length.

Check the back length by sitting in a saddle (if possible) and simulating all riding positions. There should be approximately a hand’s width between the saddle and the base of the body protector in the back. At the front, the body protector should reach your breastbone and cover your bottom rib at mid-chest level.

For individual size charts, please refer to each style’s specific product page. **Body Protector Notice, Disclaimer and Warning All equestrian sports are dangerous and involve the risk of serious injury or death. A properly fitted protective vest or body protector may offer protection against some injuries. However, protective vests and body protectors do not all conform to a uniform set of safety standards. Protective vests and body protectors offering more protection may be capable of being designed and/or may not be presently available. It is the sole responsibility of the purchaser (or in the case of minors, the parent, or other responsible adult) to select an appropriate protective vest or body protector that is well suited to the rider’s level of expertise and riding discipline and to ensure it is properly fitted. Dover Saddlery neither specifies nor recommends any particular protective vest or body protector and undertakes no responsibility or liability therewith.

CAUTION:The protective qualities of all protective vests and body protectors may be compromised by age, use and exposure to temperature extremes. Store protective vests and body protectors in well ventilated areas and follow the manufacturer’s recommendations for cleaning and maintenance. Dover Saddlery neither specifies nor makes warranties as to the fitness for use of any particular protective vest or body protector nor assumes any responsibilities or duties to any purchaser. Please consult manufacturer’s own warranty and safety disclaimers.

Contact Dover

Shopping at Dover

About Dover

Services

800-406-8204 Live Chat Email

Dover Visa Card Gift Cards Retail Stores

About Dover Saddlery Dover Employees Employment

Equine Rescue Password Recovery Monogramming

Stay Connected

http://www.doversaddlery.com/sizing-information-and-guide---text/a/321/

Page 3 of 4

198 of 236

| Dover Saddlery

Fax: 978-952-6633 Help

6/20/13 8:53 PM

Return Policy Pricing Information Shipping Information Shop by Brand Test Ride a Saddle Custom Order Booklet

Investor Relations (DOVR) Press Releases Privacy Policy Blog

Request a Catalog Equestrian Roadside Assistance Satisfaction Guarantee Sponsorship Sponsorship-USDF/Dover Medal Sponsorship-USHJA Hunter Derby

Sign up for our email: Get the latest information on special offers, sales, events and more.

Submit

email address

High Quality Customer Service

© 2013 Dover Saddlery, Inc., All Rights Reserved P.O. Box 1100 • Littleton, MA 01460 Not responsible for typographical errors. Prices subject to change without notice.

Powered by KalioCommerce™

http://www.doversaddlery.com/sizing-information-and-guide---text/a/321/

Page 4 of 4

199 of 236

Table of Contents As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 26, 2005 Registration No. 333-

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM S-1 REGISTRATION STATEMENT UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

DOVER SADDLERY, INC. (Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)

5941 (Primary Standard Industrial Classification Code Number)

04-3438294 (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)

P. O. Box 1100 525 Great Road Littleton, MA 01460 (Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of Registrantâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s principal executive offices)

Stephen L. Day Chief Executive Officer Dover Saddlery, Inc. 525 Great Road P. O. Box 1100 Littleton, MA 01460 (978) 952-8062 (Name, address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of agent for service)

Please send copies of all communications to: Justin P. Morreale, Esq. Jeffrey S. Marcus, Esq. John J. Concannon III, Esq. Morrison & Foerster LLP 1290 Avenue of the Americas Bingham McCutchen LLP New York, NY 10104-0012 150 Federal Street Boston, MA 02110 (212) 468-8137 (617) 951-8245 Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the public: As soon as practicable after this Registration Statement becomes effective.

If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, check the following box.

If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering.

If delivery of the prospectus is expected to be made pursuant to Rule 434, check the following box.

CALCULATION OF REGISTRATION FEE Title of Each Class of Securities to be Registered

Common Stock, $0.0001 par value

Proposed Maximum Aggregate Offering Price(1)

Amount of Registration Fee

$40,000,000

$4,708

(1) Estimated solely for the purpose of computing the amount of the registration fee pursuant to Rule 457(o) promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which specifically states that this Registration Statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 or until the Registration Statement shall become effective on such date as the Commission, acting pursuant to Section 8(a), may determine.

200 of 236

Table of Contents Revenue Breakout

•

saddles and tack includes a broad range of riding equipment such as saddles, bridles, bits, breastplates, reins, girths, halters and leads, horse clothing, bandages and wraps, horse boots, whips and spurs.

•

specialized apparel includes riding jackets, boots, breeches, gloves, helmets, shirts and undergarments.

•

horse care and stable products includes such items as vitamins, deworming medicine and other stable equipment.

Our senior buying team has a total of over 50 years of equestrian experience and carefully reviews each product for quality and value. We are continuously increasing the breadth of our offering to meet customers’ demands and provide for a consistent one-stop shopping experience. We have been able to accomplish this goal while still maintaining inventory turns of approximately four times over the last four years.

We carry the premier names and the most comprehensive offering of the highest quality, broadest range and most technically advanced tack and related gear for serious equestrians. A selection of some of the high quality brands we carry is shown in the following chart: Selected High Quality Brands Saddles and Tack Amerigo Crosby Hermes Herm Sprenger Passier Pessoa Prestige Stubben

Specialized Riding Apparel Ariat GPA Grand Prix Mountain Horse Pikeur Tailored Sportsman Vogel Boots

Horse Care and Stable Products Absorbine Farnam Rambo Taka

The sales pattern for equestrian products is fairly consistent from year to year. Introductions of new fashions are generally limited, making sales per item more relatively predictable.

The heritage of English-style riding is very conservative and apparel and equipment rarely go out of style. As an example, the best selling colors of riding breeches for each of the last 58

201 of 236

Dover Saddlery poised for expansion ride - Deal Pipeline

http://pipeline.thedeal.com/tdd/ViewArticle.dl?id=10005892456

[RETURN TO ARTICLE]

Auctions Share

Reprint

Save to My Articles

Dover Saddlery poised for expansion ride

By Sarah Pringle

Updated 05:40 PM, Oct-07-2013 ET

Private equity firms have called Dover Saddlery Inc. every two months or so during the past three or four years to see if the equestrian retailer wanted to make a deal, but only now does the company's CEO said he believes the time's right to entertain a suitor that can provide needed capital.

"We've decided this is a good point in time to do this because we have been very successful in our retail store rollout through the recession," Dover CEO Stephen L. Day said in a phone interview about the Littleton, Mass., company's decision to assess its strategic options. "We want to crank out eight to 10 stores, possible 12, a year. And in order to do that, we need to bring in some equity capital."

The one-stop shop for English riders offers horse saddles, stirrups and other tack; riding apparel; and other supplies at its 18 Dover Saddlery stores as well as one Smith Brothers store, which serves the Western horseman. By the end of the year, the company will have added three Dover stores. Its strategic plan, Day said, is to reach 50, though there's no definitive timeframe for that.

Dover first revealed on Sept. 24 that it was exploring strategic alternatives after receiving unsolicited expressions of interest related to potential strategic transactions.

While the company isn't in talks with any particular party, Day said that the company has been approached by interested PE firms about every two months over the past three or four years.

Duff & Phelps Securities LLC, which is serving as Dover's financial adviser on the review, will also be looking at potential strategic buyers, PE investment opportunities and other options that may boost equity capital, Day added.

The New York-based investment banking firm's managing director, Josh Benn, is leading the review.

Day said he doesn't have any preconceived notions regarding a potential sale price for Dover at this time, given that it remains early in the review process.

He did, however, note that "every private equity firm that has talked to us agrees that the company is clearly

1 of 3

10/8/13 4:08 PM 202 of 236

Dover Saddlery poised for expansion ride - Deal Pipeline

http://pipeline.thedeal.com/tdd/ViewArticle.dl?id=10005892456

undercapitalized trading around $4."

Investors apparently agree. Since closing at $3.99 on Sept. 20, shares of Dover, which trade on the Nasdaq under the symbol DOVR, have advanced about 10.3% to $4.40 as of Oct. 7's finish.

Eric Kuby, chief investment officer of Chicago-based North Star Investment Management Corp., one of Dover's top shareholders with a stake of about 10.9%, still thinks the company's shares are worth more.

"It's a good company, unique and has good growth potential," Kuby said by phone. "Private equity still seems to us to be the most likely option, particularly if it's a business that you know has been getting calls every week from private equity firms."

Kuby said his firm expects Dover to sell within a price range of $5.50 to $6 a share. A medium value of $5.75 represents a premium of about 15.2% over Dover's Sept. 20 closing price of $3.99, which was before it announced it was considering its strategic options.

Based on North Star's anticipated price range and given that Dover has about 5.34 million outstanding shares, a transaction price would fall between about $29.37 million and $32.04 million.

"I'd be surprised if there was a significantly different price out of that range," Kuby noted. "But you could have somebody who just likes the space they're in and pays even more."

Day, a longtime rider and owner of 10 horses, isn't new to the equestrian business.

Before taking over Dover in 1998, he was at the helm at discount e-commerce equine business State Line Tack from 1991 until Jan. 30, 1996, when it was sold to Phoenix-based PetSmart Inc. for undisclosed terms.

"We had to cobble together about five venture capital firms to raise money for State Line," Day said, noting that about $55 million was raised. "I did not have controlling interest. There was pressure to sell and we went ahead and sold. I thought it was premature."

Privately held TABcom LLC, formerly Pets United LLC, later acquired Hazle Township, Pa.-based State Line Tack on April 30, 2007.

But Dover's situation is different, Day said.

"We don't have anybody pressing us [to sell] since we've gone public," he said of Dover. "It's just the decision of the board that it can serve shareholders better."

While the equestrian retailer hasn't incurred the ire of an activist shareholder, it has been the target of one disgruntled industry player since announcing its strategic review about two weeks ago.

Robert Ferrand, the founder of equestrian technology firm, Woodside, Calif.-based Saddletech, said in a phone interview that he has been pressing the company to disclose facts to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Ferrand has also alleged that Dover is knowingly selling defective products.

"The consumer is getting stuck with saddles that don't fit," Ferrand said. "The investor is getting injured in this whole process. All of the mom-and-pops are going to get creamed by Dover if they don't have an even playing field."

Ferrand said he approached Day about a year ago with a proposal to license his saddle-fitting technology to

2 of 3

10/8/13 4:08 PM 203 of 236

Dover Saddlery poised for expansion ride - Deal Pipeline

http://pipeline.thedeal.com/tdd/ViewArticle.dl?id=10005892456

Dover.

"He's developed this saddle-fitting system, which is state of art, but way beyond the needs of today's horseman and horse owners," Day said, acknowledging the encounter. "There just isn't any commercial demand for what Robert has put together.

"He made a proposal and it was extremely expensive and we've turned him down," Day added. "Ever since, he's been talking to private equity guys who have come to us."

For his part, Ferrand said he never named a price.

Dover's lawyers have since issued a cease-and-desist letter against Ferrand, requesting that he stop reaching out to third parties.

Share

Reprint

Save to My Articles

Privacy |

Terms and Conditions |

My Account |

Contact Us

@Copyright 2013, The Deal, LLC. All rights reserved. Please send all technical questions, comments or concerns to the Webmaster.

3 of 3

10/8/13 4:08 PM 204 of 236

United States Saddle Standard Voluntary Product Standard Draft v.1.0 1 / 1999

United States Department of Commerce Technology Administration National Institute of Standards and Technology

1 205 of 236

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Voluntary Product Standard Draft v1.0

United States Saddle Standard To be developed under procedures published by the Department of Commerce in Part 10, Title 15, of the Code of Federal Regulations

Sponsor: Robert Ferrand United States Saddle Standard 2995 Woodside Rd. Suite 400 Woodside, Ca 94062 650-631-8400

Standards Management Program Office of Standards Services National Institute of Standards and Technology Gaithersburg, MD 20899â&#x20AC;&#x201C;0001 JANUARY 1999

2 206 of 236

Development of Voluntary Product Standards Voluntary Product Standards are developed under procedures published by the Department of Commerce in Part 10, Title 15, of the Code of Federal Regulations. The purpose of these standards is to establish nationally recognized requirements for products and to provide all concerned interests with a basis for common understanding of the characteristics of the products. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) administers the Voluntary Product Standards Program on a reimbursable basis.

Role of NIST The role of NIST in the establishment of Voluntary Product Standards is to act as an unbiased coordinator in their development, provide editorial assistance in their preparation, supply such assistance and review as is required to assure their technical soundness, and to seek satisfactory adjustment of valid points of disagreement. NIST also determines compliance with the criteria of the Departmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s procedures, provides secretarial functions for each committee appointed under the procedures, and publishes the standards as public documents. Producers, distributors, users, consumers, and other interested groups contribute to the establishment of Voluntary Product Standards by initiating and participating in their development, providing technical or other counsel as appropriate, promoting the use of and support for the standards, and assisting in keeping the standards current with respect to advancing technology and marketing practices.

Use of Voluntary Product Standards The use of Voluntary Product Standards is voluntary. NIST has no regulatory power in the enforcement of their provisions; however, since the standards represents a consensus of all interested groups, their provisions are likely to become established as trade customs. In addition, when a Voluntary Product Standard is made a part of a legal document, such as a sales contract or code, compliance with the standard is enforceable.

Benefits of Voluntary Product Standards The benefits derived from Voluntary Product Standards are in direct proportion to their general recognition and actual use. Producers and distributors whose products meet the requirements of a Voluntary Product Standard may refer to the standard in advertising and on labels to promote greater public understanding for confidence in their products. At times, purchasers may order products conforming to the requirements of a Voluntary Product Standard.

For copies of the Voluntary Product Standards procedures or for more information concerning the development and use of these standards, contact the Office of Standards Services, National Institute of Standards and Technology,Gaithersburg,MD20899

3 207 of 236

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v 1. ABTRACT & SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2. TERMINOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3. PHYSIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF THE SADDLE ON THE HORSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4. THREE DEMENSIONAL SADDLE MEASUREMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10

5. "OBJECTIVE" SADDLE MEASUREMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . …………… . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. CALIBRATING SADDLE SHAPE ……………………………….. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10

6. INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION……………………………….. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10

7. WESTERN SADDLES STANDARDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12

8. ENGLISH SADDLES STANDARDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10

9. SADDLETREE WOOD QUALITY STANDARDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 10. SADDLETREE STEEL QUALITY STANDARDS . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 11. SADDLE LEATHER QUALITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 12. GRADE MARKING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 14. INSPECTION AND REINSPECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

13

15. UNITED STATES SADDLE STANDARD COMMITTEE . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 16. BOARD OF REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15

17. NATIONAL GRADING RULE COMMITTEE .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 18. IMPLEMENTATION, MAINTENANCE, AND HISTORY OF STANDARD 19. REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

APPENDIX A. COMMERCIAL NAMES OF THE PRINCIPAL SADDLE TYPES . . . . . . . . . . . .

. 19

APPENDIX B. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED IN DESCRIBING SADDLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

4 208 of 236

UNITED STATES SADDLE STANDARD

VPS DRAFT v 1.0

PREFACE A 1998 audit of the horse market by KMPG Peat/Marwick for the American Horse Council estimated that there were 7,000,000 horses in the U.S. If one subtracts the 1,000,000 young horses and 1,000,000 older and breeding stock horses, there are about 5,000,000 horses that require saddles. If one conservatively estimates that a saddle can be used on one horse for ten years, it can be estimated that at least 500,000 saddles are sold in the U.S. every year.

For centuries, saddles were made by individual saddlemakers fit to individual horses. After WWII, many saddles began to be made on production lines and sold through distributors to retail stores. Somewhere along the line the convention evolved to label the underside of the saddle, in contact with the horse, with the terms "narrow", "regular" or "wide". This convention cause confusion because one cannot "objectively" describe a three dimensional shape by using one "relative" term.

The current saddle labeling convention prevents the saddle customer from making "value comparisons." The top of the saddle seat is measured in inches from pommel to cantle (front to back) but English saddles are measured differently than Western Saddles. English saddles seats are measured in inches diagonally from the pommel button to the center of the cantle whereas Western saddle seats are measured down the center from the back of the forks to the center of the cantle. However, some English saddle companies in Germany and Italy measure the saddletrees between the points on the front of the saddletree in centimeters. This causes even more confusion because the angle of the front of the saddle will be different depending on the length of the points. So there is no consistent correlation between the measurement and angle of the front of the saddle.

The labeling of Western Saddles is equally confusing. There are terms for the shapes of the saddletree called "full Quarter Horse tree" and there is a term "3/4 Arab tree", and a variety of other names as well, but no standard has been established to determine what any of these shapes actually are, so each Treemaker is free to "creatively interpret" those shapes. Since there is no standard of measurement, there is also no quality control to determine consistency from saddle to saddle. To make matters even worse, some Western treemakers measure the distance between the bars both top and bottom and front and back, but they completely overlook the "ARC" of the saddle which is the critical factor in fitting the saddle to the "arc" of the horse's back. As amazing as it may be, the fact is the saddle industry has absolutely no measurement, whatsoever for the most important determination of saddle fit - the "Arc" of the horse's back.

The United States Saddle Standard draft v. 1.0 was written to initiate the process of establishing a Saddle Standard for the United States. This SADDLE STANDARD will be developed in accordance with the Procedures for the Development of Voluntary Product Standards of the U.S. Department of Commerce. The United States Saddle Standard Committee (USSSC) membership will be by appointment by the Secretary of Commerce to constitute a proper balance among producers, distributors, and consumers of saddles Pursuant to an U.S. District Court order, the USSSC and its Board of Review (Board) operate as independent bodies with defined functions with regard to maintaining, implementing, and enforcing this Standard. Through a consensus process, the USSSC maintains the Standard and establishes policies and adopts other standards by which the Board certifies grading rules, approves design values, accredits agencies to grade and inspect under those rules and monitors agenciesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; performance.

The purpose of this standardization program is to provide treemakers, saddlemakers, saddle distributors, saddle retailers and saddle consumers a method to measure saddles that permits "value comparisons." This Saddle Standard provides a means to grade the quality of leather, wood and steel or other materials that may be used in saddles, a method to measure and label the three dimensional shape of the underside of the saddle, a method to relate that shape of the saddle to the shape of the horse's back and an "objective method" do determine the saddle fit of a particular saddle to an individual horse. Any design values assigned to saddles are required to be in accordance with criteria determined appropriate by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. A separate consensus body, the National Grading Rule Committee, will be established to develop and maintain nomenclature and descriptions of grades of materials used in saddle construction that conform to this Standard.

5 209 of 236

ABSTRACT This Standard pertains to saddles. It establishes a "scientific" understanding of the physiological effects of the saddle on the horse. It establishes a standard to determine saddle seat sizes as well as a method of three dimensional saddle measurement of the underside of the side of the saddle. It establishes a method to "objectively" fit a saddle to a horse. It establishes methods to "calibrate" measurement instruments. It establishes requirements for development and coordination, the assignment of design values when called for, and the preparation of grading rules applicable to saddles. It provides for implementation of the Standard through an accreditation and certification program to assure uniform industry-wide labeling and inspection. It defines principal trade terms and procedures to provide a basis for the use of uniform methods in the measurement, grading, labeling, inspection, and description of saddles. It includes the organization and functions of the United States Saddle Standard Committee, the Board of Review, and the National Grading Rule Committee. Commercial names of the principal types of saddles, definitions of terms used in describing saddles and commonly used industry abbreviations. The United States Saddle Standard draft v.1.0 was written to initiate the development of this standard by the United States Saddle Standard Committee in accordance with procedures of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

KEY WORDS Saddle, western saddle, English saddle, Australian saddle, saddle measurements, saddle fit, saddle sores, accreditation agency, certification agency, grade mark (stamp), grading rules, voluntary standard.

1. SCOPE 1.1 This Voluntary Product Standard establishes and maintains, through a consensus process and in the public interest, methods of saddle measurement that determine shape, quality and fit that permit "value comparision". It is implemented through an internationally recognized consensus accreditation and certification program, the purpose of which is to provide for uniform, industry-wide labeling and inspection of saddles.

1.2 This Standard also provides a basis for the coordination of the grades of the various species of softwood lumber used in the construction of saddle trees, the assignment of design values to lumber when called for, and the preparation of grading rules applicable to each species.

1.3 This Standard also provides a basis for the coordination of the grades of the various types of leather used in the construction of saddles, the assignment of design values to leather when called for, and the preparation of grading rules applicable to each type of leather.

1.4 This Standard also provides a basis for the coordination of the grades of the steel used in the construction of saddle trees, the assignment of design values to steel when called for, and the preparation of grading rules applicable to each grade of steel.

1.5 This Standard also includes the following: 1) organization and functions of the United States Saddle Standard Committee (USSS), the Board of review, and the National Saddle Grading Rule Committee (NSGRC); 2) commercial names of the principal types of saddles (Appendix A); 3) definitions of terms used in describing standard grades of lumber (Appendix B); 4) commonly used saddle industry abbreviations (Appendix C); and

6 210 of 236

2.0 TERMINOLOGY 2.1

"A" fork — A narrow saddle fork with no swell, shaped like the letter A, peaking at the base of the horn.

2.2

Back, horse's — The flat back bone area of a horse between the withers and the loin. Technically, the area from the ninth to the eighteenth dorsal vertebra..

2.3

Barrel — A cross section of the horse about the middle of the back, below the backbone and behind the withers.

2.4

Bars, saddletree — Two long horizontal tree bars that rest of the back of the horse, one on each side of the spine, supporting and anchoring the fork and cantle.

2.5

Blanket — Any padding or blanket placed between the horse and the saddle to ease the pressure of the saddletree bars on the horse and also to absorb perspiration and prevent it from getting on the saddle.

2.6

Breast collar — a leather strap going around the shoulder point of the horse, attaching at each end to the rigging rings of the saddle.

2.7

Cantle — the up-curved back of the saddle. The rear, scooped out section of the saddletree, separate form ant attached to the bars.

2.8

Channel — The long, narrow area between the bars of the saddletree.

2.9

Certification —Procedure by which a third party gives written assurance that a product, process or service conforms to specified requirements..

2.10 Characteristics —Distinguishing features which by their extent, location, and number determine the quality of a saddle. The limiting characteristics of any saddle described in certified grading rules shall be expressed within the terms of the definitions in Appendix B. 2.11 Cinch — A wide band, usually more than 22 inches long, made of parallel strands of cotton, mohair, or tough webbing material, and in some case of folded leather, that goes underneath the horse from the off side to the near side. Its purpose is to hold the saddle firmly on the horse.

2.12 Crupper — A leather strap attached to the rear of the saddle, extending to the horse's tail 2.13 Dressage — the French term for the training of horses.

2.14 English Saddle — A Saddle distinguished from a western saddle by its small, flat shape, absence of skirt and horn: and large, rounded fenders, or flaps.

2.15 Equus Caballus — The scientific name of the horse 2.16 Fender — The part of the saddle attached on each side to the stirrup leathers that protects the legs of the rider.

2.17 Flap — A large, flat piece of leather placed under the riders legs t increase grip and prevent the horse's sweat from getting on the rider. It corresponds to the fender on a western saddle.

2.18 Fork — The front, vertical portion of the saddletree that is dovetailed and grooved into connection wit the two bars.

7 211 of 236

2.19 Girth — The measure of the circumference of a horse's body behind the withers.

2.20 Gullet — The opening through the fork and above the bars that sits over the horse's withers, including underneath, the curved portion of the underside of the fork.

2.21

Grade marked (grade stamped)—Lumber that displays the official grading mark of an agency that is made by rubber stamps, ink jet sprayers, tags and/or other methods when found acceptable by that agency.

A grade mark is owned by the grading agency and is applied to saddle that conforms to the requirements of a designated grading rule.

2.22

Grading agency—An organization accredited by the Board that engages in the grading of lumber or that licenses and supervises facilities that employ graders to grade and/or to place grade marks upon lumber products.

2.23 Grading rules—Requirements and specifications for the manufacture, inspection and grading of designated species of lumber. Lumber manufactured and graded according to the provisions of this Standard and the grading rules for the species in question shall be regarded as ALS lumber.

2.24

Green lumber—Lumber of less than nominal 5- inch thickness which has a moisture content in excess of 19 percent. For lumber of nominal 5-inch or greater thickness (timbers), green shall be defined in accordance with the provisions of the applicable lumber grading rules certified by the Board

2.25

Hand — A unit of measure used in giving the height of the horse. One hand equals four inches. The horse's height is measured vertically fro the ground to the highest point (sixth vertebra) of the withers.

2.26

Hollow back — A horse whose back has a pronounce curvature. (sway back)

2.27

Horn (pommel) — the knob on the upper side in the middle of the western saddle. The name was probably derived from antlers or horns used by Indians and mountain men for the of their home made saddles.

.

2.28

Kiln dried (KD)—Lumber that has been seasoned in a chamber to a predetermined moisture con-tent by applying heat.

2.29

Latigo — A cinch strap

2.30

Lumber grades—Manufacturing categories of lumber that provide the extent and limitations of the characteristics permitted in the particular grade.

2.31 Martingale — A "Y" shaped strap with rings on the ends through which the reins pass.

2.32 Mutton-withered — Said of a horse with very low, round withers; a horse with very little bone definition.

2.33 Narrow fork — A fork whose sdie do not extend outward beyond the outside attachment point to the bar.

2.34 Nominal size—The size designation for lumber that does not reflect the actual dimensions.

2.35 Numnah (cavalry) — A thick woolen of felt pad used under the saddle.

2.36 Panels (cavalry) — Heavy covering for the underneath side of the bars, made of felt, horsehair, etc.

8 212 of 236

2.37 Panels (English) — A cushion on the underneath surface of the saddletree. It gives clearance to the horse's back bone, between the horse's back and the saddletree.

2.38 Points ( English) — the part of the pommel arch on the English saddle that extends below the bars.

2.39 Points ( Western) — The long, pointed lower parts of the tapadero 2.40 Pommel — 1. The reinforced upper forward arch of the saddle, that covers the withers of the horse. 2. The horn structure of a western saddle, a term often incorrectly use to refer to the fork on a western saddle. 3.

The leg horns on a side saddle.

2.41 Rawhide — Material much like parchent but made from split cattle hide that has been dehaired and mimed but not taned.

2.42 Rigging — A leather yoke containing a metal ring, that attaches the saddle to the cinch.

2.43 Roach Back — A horse with a prominent spinal column. The opposite of hollow back.

2.44 Saddle — A leather seat, mounted on a framework (tree) which is secured to the horse's back by the rigging (saddle rigging and cinch) to which is attached a pair of stirrups.

2.45 Seam ( blind stiched) — A seam sewed as follows: the leather to be stitched is slit on the edge just below the grain surface, approximately 1/4 inch deep, The smooth-finished surface is lifted back, and the rough underpart is stitched to the other leather. The smooth-finished surface leather is flattened in its original position and glued down.

2.46 Seam ( gusset) — A trianglular piece inserted in a cut or seam to give more width, strength, or flexibility.

2.47 Seam ( laced) — A seam in which leather thongs are used to lace together two pieces of leather.

2.48 Seam ( split) — A seam formed when two pieces of leather are stitched together with a third piece between the two outside pieces.

2.49 Seat— The part of the saddle on which the rider sits between the fork and cantle 2.50 Sella equeestris Theodosian Code.

—

A Roman saddle dating after the fourth century B.C., first mentioned in the

2.51 Sheepskin— The lining on the underneath side of the skirt used to cushion the weight of the saddle on the horse's back, but primarily used to prevent slipping.

2.52 Sideboards — See bars and saddletree 2.53 Sidesaddle — A saddle on which the rider sits facing forward wit both legs on one side.

2.54 Slick Fork — See "A" fork 2.55 Species—The commercial names contained in Appendix A for lumber cut from the principal botanical species of softwoods that shall be used in the formulation of lumber grading rules and in the terms of purchase and sale of ALS lumber.

9 213 of 236

2.56 Split hide — The outer, or grain, layer of a hide for which the under, or flesh, side has been removed 2.57 Steele Fork — 1. A cast steel fork with a steel horn on the top. 2. A wooden fork reinforced with a steel strap countesunk in the gullet and a steel horn on top in the steel strap.

2.58 Stirrup — A foot support on each side, hanging down from the saddletree, used to support the rider laterally.

2.59 Stirrup Leathers— Long leather straps that support the stirrup. At the upper end each stirrup leather usually circle a notch in the tree bar.

2.60 Stock Saddle — See western saddle 2.61 Surcingle — A broad strap completely encircling the horse t hold the blanket or saddle in place. It goes over the saddle seat, not under it.

2.62 Swell — The portion of the fork that bulges on each side from a line perpendicular to the point where the frok attaches to the bars of the tree. Sometimes used interchangeably, but incorrectly with fork.

2.63

Tack — Items of saddlery and horse equipment

2.64

Tapadero — A leather hoodlike cover over the front a side of the stirrup

2.65 Throat (twist) — The portion of the saddle seat under and just in front of the rider's crotch.

2.66 Tree (saddletree) — 1. The wooden, plastic, or fiber-glass structure forming the foundation of the saddle.

It is the form on which the saddle is built, consisting of a fork, two bars, and a cantle. Wooden trees are usually covered with wet rawhide sewed tightly, which shrinks as it dries.

2.67 Welt — A piece of leather stitched into the outer seam in the leather covering of swell forks, up the sided of the swells. This seam is necessary to make the leather fork covering conform to the shape of the fork.

2.68

Western saddle — The saddle distinguished by a large, noticeable fork on which is some form of horn, a high cantle, and large skirts.

2.69 Withers — The convex prominence at the front of a horse's back above the rear part of the horse's shoulder blades.

10 214 of 236

3.0 PHYSIOLOGICAL EFFECT OF THE SADDLE ON THE HORSE 3.1 THE EFFECT OF THE SADDLE Saddles effect horses with a multifaceted biomechanical problem in which many different factors converge, including: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

The weight of the rider, affecting the Tree of the saddle, affecting the Panels of the saddle, affecting the Saddle pad or (pads), affecting the Capillaries in the skin of the horse, affecting the Capillaries in the longissimus dorsi muscle, affecting the Curvature of the spine of the horse, affecting the Horse's range of motion, affecting the Performance of the horse, affecting the Behavior of the horse, affecting Attitude and performance of the rider

3.2 WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? SADDLE FIT IS THE MANAGEMENT OF PRESSURE. There is no way to eliminate the pressure under the saddle, nor is there any need to. There is only a need to understand what the horse's tissues need to remain healthy. With that knowledge we can learn how to intelligently administer pressure to the horse's back.

As a practical matter, if we do not see any damage to the horse we assume that the saddle fits, but is that an accurate assumption? A rider and tack usually represent 15% to 20% of the weight of the horse when standing, in motion the rider's downward force (moment) can represent 25% to 50% of the weight of the horse - which is a significant force applied perpendicularly to the spine of the animal. The question remains: what is the physiological effect of the saddle and rider on the horse?

3.3 PHYSIOLOGY To understand what might be a good saddle fit, we need to understand the "Issue" with saddle fit in the first place. While there is little scientific research applied directly to the problem of saddle fitting, there has been extensive research on the effect of external pressure on blood flow in mammalian tissue. This research was undertaken because of the devastating problem of bedsores, which traumatize over 2,000,000 Americans every year. Bedsores are caused by the pressure from the weight of the patient cutting off the blood flow to the skin.i Bed sores and saddle sores have many similar physiological factors. Most of this tissue research has been applied to a variety of mammals, providing a scientific perspective of saddle fitting.

11 215 of 236

3.4 CAPILLARY CLOSING PRESSURE Skin and muscle tissue require a constant intermittent flow of blood to remain healthy.ii In strenuous exercise the muscles require significantly more blood flow to maintain a healthy metabolism. This exchange of oxygen and waste products occurs in the capillary bed. iii

iv

The saddle fitting problems occur when the saddle causes continuous excessive pressure on the capillaries that exceeds the blood pressure and structural strength of those vessels and the capillary vessels collapse. This collapse leads to the deprivation of oxygen and nutrients brought by fresh blood and the removal of waste products.v CAPILLARY CLOSING PRESSURE IS THE CRITICAL ISSUE IN PREVENTING SADDLE-RELATED TRAUMA AND IMPROVING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE HORSE'S MUSCLES UNDER SADDLE.

3.5 IT DOES NOT TAKE MUCH TO STOP THE SHOW The following experiment was made to determine the relationship of external pressure on blood flow by using a radioactive isotope 133Xe. The amount of radioactivity was measured as external pressure was applied. One can observe that as external pressure increases the blood flow reduces.

What is most notable is that pressures as low as .25 P.S.I. or 4 ounces can reduce flow by as much as 60%.vi This is a significant point when related to saddle fit, especially with a bridging saddle that does significantly increase pressures.

vii

Serious saddle fitting problems develop particularly on "bridging" saddles in a relatively short amount of time because pressures can easily reach 4 P.S.I or 64 ounces. This excessive pressure not only cuts off the blood supply but can additionally traumatize the muscle tissue itself.

12 216 of 236

3.6 IN GOES THE GOOD BLOOD OUT GOES THE BAD BLOOD In all cases pressure release is followed by reactive hyperemia and the parts originally starved of arterial blood are instantly flooded with oxygen. The extent and duration of the blood in flow is proportional to the needs of the tissues.viii Below is a study performed at University of Georgia on a horse using a compression bandage.

One can observe that the blood flow decreases significantly with the application of pressure, however, when released the blood flow increases beyond the original base flow.ix This is a clinical verification of reactive hyperemia and reveals what happens to the tissue when the saddle is removed i.e. heat bump.

x

3.7 INTERNAL EFFECT OF SADDLE PRESSURE For a given pressure applied to the surface of the skin (interface pressure) capillary closure pressure will vary from horse to horse, as well as location to location on the horse, depending on the amount of fat, location of adjacent bone, status of the vascular system, systemic blood pressure and general health of the animal.xi As the animal ages its physiology also changes, compounding this significant Issue.

A critical discovery in tissue research was that in a given location, pressure is not even throughout the tissue. Clinical studies have established that the internal pressure close to bones is three to five times higher than on the surface.xii

xiii

xiv

This principle is easily demonstrated with a simple sponge as illustrated above. One can observe that when two different size areas are pressed towards each other, the smaller area w create higher pressures. Weight divided by surface area equals interface pressure. This is shown by the lines moving closer together nearest the smaller surface.

13 217 of 236

3.8 SHARP POINTS

This is an important issue for horses because the longissimus dorsi muscle, one of the major muscles used in locomotion, lies adjacent to the spinal column and is directly affected by saddle pressure. Each vertebrae of the spinal column has bony prominances with small surfaces that concentrate points of pressure down the length of the longissimus dorsi muscle.

It is critically important to understand that muscles are far more susceptible to the effects of pressure than skin.xv The internal damage to the tissue caused by the surface pressure only becomes obvious at the surface over an extended time. Many serious pressure sores first occur internally adjacent to the bone and then radiate to the surface. xvi This fact makes it very difficult to use apparent trauma to the horse's back as an indicator of saddle fit, because during the time interval that the horse is not being ridden, the horse begins to heal the internal trauma. This makes it virtually impossible to develop a cause and effect relationship between saddle fit using observable external trauma to the horse as the standard. Therefore, just because we do not see obvious damage to the skin of the horse does not mean that damage has not occurred internally.

3.9 PRESSURE OVER TIME The most important issue to remember with tissue trauma is that higher pressures do damage in shorter periods of time, however, even low pressure for long periods of time can do damage.xvii the following graphs illustrates the point

xviii

This is significant to saddle fit because the fit of the saddle relates to how much time one can ride before causing trauma to the horse. Obviously if the saddle fits one can ride the horse longer without sustaining damage than a saddle the bridges and causes high pressures.

14 218 of 236

3.10 THE CRITICAL ISSUES Tissues do not need a constant flow of blood, but tissues do need a CONSTANT xix This is the reason a healthy individual does not get bedsores. By tossing and turning in our sleep we provide our tissues a constant intermittent flow of blood.

INTERMITTENT FLOW OF BLOOD.

It is also important to understand that tissue damage is variable from very slight damage to extremely debilitating damage. As an example, human bedsores are graded in Stages I, II, III, IV, from a slightly red skin to an open sore. The following is a simple scale of increasing severity of trauma caused by an ill-fitting saddle: v v v v v v v v v

Decline in performance Discomfort - indicated by attitude change in the horse Inhibited Gait - noted by the horse being a little "off" Lameness - secondary lameness due to pain or excessive pressure Swelling - slight swelling under the saddle panels Bruising - significant inflammation indicating capillary damage White hair - due to damaged follicles Hair loss - obvious trauma to the skin and internal muscles Ulcerous condition - an open, oozing wound with swelling

3.11 WHAT DO WE "REALLY" KNOW ABOUT PHYSIOLOGY? The clinical research on a variety of mammals has established the following factors to give us a better understanding of the issues relating to saddle fit. v v v v v

Tissue damage is a function of pressure over time.xx Pressure is not distributed evenly throughout tissue.xxi Pressure on the surface of the skin increases 3 - 5 X close to bones.xxii Muscle is more susceptible to pressure damage than skin.xxiii Low pressure for long periods of time is more damaging than high pressure for short periods of time.xxiv

3.12 SO WHAT IS GOAL HERE? IN PRACTICE THE GOAL IS TO ACHIEVE THE MOST EVEN PRESSURE THROUGHOUT THE SADDLE CONTACT AREA WITH A RIDER MOUNTED AND TO REMOVE THE SADDLE EVERY FEW HOURS FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME TO PERMIT BLOOD TO FLOW TO THE TISSUES.

15 219 of 236

4. THREE DEMENSIONAL SADDLE MEASUREMENT 4.1 THE PROBLEM Equestrians have no reason to purchase saddles that do not fit their horses. The problems arise because the equestrian has no way to determine for themselves that the saddle does or does not fit. Since the horse cannot speak, not only is the customer buying a product that does not perform as claimed, but the horse can be injured.

Equestrians cannot protect themselves from purchasing poorly fitting saddles, because once you place the saddle on the horse you cannot see under the saddle to determine fit. Some saddlemakers suggest that the equestrian can check for saddle fit by placing the saddle on the horse and then lifting the saddle skirts and looking under the saddle to be sure that the saddle panels fit evenly. This advice completely ignores the effect of the weight of the rider on the shape of the horse's back. Thus if the saddle did fit the horse without the rider, as soon as the rider steps into the saddle, the back of the horse will flex to some degree under the weight of the rider, therefore, the heavier the rider the worse the saddle will fit.

Some saddlers suggest that the equestrian can determine saddle fit by riding the horse and looking for any obvious trauma to the horse's back after the ride. Analogous to humans trying on shoes, if you scuff the soles you cannot return the shoes. Therefore, the rider can only use the saddle for a short ride or the saddle may appear used and cannot be returned. Unfortunately an equestrian cannot determine fit by obvious trauma to the horse on a short ride. Physiologically, it takes a few hours for the animal's tissue to show any noticeable trauma from the pressure from a poorly fitting saddle.

Thus an equestrian can only discover that the saddle does not fit after riding the saddle for a number of hours, and have seriously injured the horse, at which point the saddle is scuffed and cannot be returned. Catch 22.

4.2 WHAT IS SADDLE FIT? "FIT" means that the shape of the saddle panel that is in contact with the horse's back is the same as the shape of the MOUNTED horse's back. If the shape of the panel is FLATTER than the shape of the horse's back, the saddle will "bridge", touching only in the front and the back on both sides of the spine. If the shape of the panel is MORE CURVED than the shape of the horse's back, the saddle will "rock", touching only in the middle, on either side of the spine. If the saddle only touches front and back on either side of the horse it is "twisted."

4.2 FIT, BRIDGE, ROCK & TWIST

Fit

Bridge

Rock

Twist

16 220 of 236

4.4 WHICH IS WHICH? Some saddles fit and some do not. The question is, how do you know which saddle fits which horse? Many people view saddle fit as a black and white issue: either the saddle fits or it does not. If the horse doesn't get white hairs on its back the saddle appears to fit, but is that truly the case?

5.0 "OBJECTIVE" SADDLE MEASUREMENT 6.0 CALIBRATING SADDLE SHAPE FOR BREED & DISIPLINE 7.0 INSTUMENT CALIBRATION 8.0 WESTERN SADDLE STANDARDS 9.0

ENGLISH SADDLE STANDARDS

10.0 SADDLETREE WOOD QUALITY STANDARDS 11.0

SADDLETREE LEATHER QUALITY STANDARDS

12.0

SADDLETREE STEEL QUALITY STANDARDS

13.0

GRADE MARKING

14.0 15.0

INSPECTION & REINSPECTION UNITED STATES SADDLE STANDARD COMMITTEE

16.0

BOARD OF REVIEW

17.0

NATIONAL GRADING RULE COMMITTEE

18.0

IMPLIMENTATION, MAINTAINENCE, AND HISTORY OF STANDARD

19.0

REFERENCES

20.0 APPENDIX A APPENDIX B

17 221 of 236

20.

WOOD QUALITY

5.1 Rough size—The minimum rough thickness of dry or unseasoned lumber 1 or more inches in nominal thickness shall be not less than 1/8 inch (3 mm) thickerthan the corresponding minimum dressed thickness, except that 20 percent of a shipment shall be not less than 3/32 inch (2 mm) thicker than the corresponding minimum dressed thickness. The minimum rough widths shall not be less than 1/8 inch (3 mm) wider than the corresponding minimum dressed width.

5.2 Dressed sizes—Dressed sizes of lumber shall equal or exceed the minimum sizes shown in tables 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. [Refer also to 5.3.1 covering length and7.3 for grade marking nonstandard sizes.]

5.3 Lengths 5.3.1 Standard—Standard lengths of lumber shall be in multiples of 1 (0.3048 m) or 2 feet (0.6096 m) as specified in the certified grading rules.

5.3.2 Trimmed—Unless otherwise stated in the con-tract of purchase, lumber shall be trimmed for the removal of splintered ends, and if 2 inches or less in nominal thickness (except lath), shall be double-end- rimmed to a length that is not less than the nominal length and that is not more than 3 inches (76 mm) in excess of nominal length. The overlength tolerance in nominal 2-inch dimension over 12-inches (305 mm)wide or over 20 feet (6.1 m) in length is 12-inches (305 mm).

Advisory note: The marketing practice covering lengths of lumber should permit the buyer to obtain specified lengths or specified assortments of lengths.

6. REQUIREMENTS FOR GRADING RULES 6.1 General concepts 6.1.1 Grading parameters—To the extent to which differences in the characteristics of species, in the quality of logs, in conditions of manufacture and in the uses to which the product is put will permit, the basic provisions for the grading of lumber shall be uniform. The grading of lumber cannot be considered an exact science because it is based on either a visual inspection of each piece and the judgment of the grader or on the results of a method of mechanically determining the strength characteristics of structural lumber [see 6.3.2.2]. Grading rules shall establish a maximum of 5 percent below grade as an allowable variation between graders. If any grading rules indicate that a grade qualifies under two use clas-sifications, the grade provisions shall satisfy the re-quirements for both classifications.

6.1.2 Minimum grade requirements—The method of determining the extent and limitations of the characteristics permitted in the poorest pieces admissible in each grade of lumber shall be stated in a certified rule, except in the lowest grade of each classification. Since lumber grades are broad manufacturing categories, grades overlap and pieces are selected from a grade to comprise another grade outside of that grade category. A specific shipment shall not be made up of only pieces containing characteristics of the maximum number or size permitted in the grade.

6.1.3 Grade characteristics—Characteristics permitted and limitations for rough lumber shall be the same as those prescribed in grading rules for dressed lumber of the same grade and, in addition, such others as will disappear in standard dressing shall be allowed. If characteristics other than those described in certified grading rules are encountered, they shall be evaluated in relation to the characteristics permitted or limitations prescribed for the grade under consideration and shall be allowed if regarded as equivalent or less damaging in effect on the strength, appearance, or other utility value of the piece. In all grades, the size of allowable characteristics shall not exceed that specified in the respective grading rules.

Advisory note: In many grades, the size of permitted characteristics varies in proportion to the size of a face or the area of a cross section of the piece.

6.1.4 Special provisions—When heartwood, sap-wood, grain classifications, and other optional provi-sions are specified, and the lumber conforms to the requirements of such special provisions as well as to the regular grade designated, it shall be regarded as ofstandard quality.

18 222 of 236

6.1.5 Mixed grades—Mixed grades other than the two highest established grades for each grading rule category shall not be included in certified grading rules.

6.1.6 Nonstandard grades—When nonstandard grades, sizes, or patterns are specified, or when parti-ular provisions of a standard grade are waived or changed, inspection shall be made accordingly, but all of the other provisions of the certified grading rules shall apply.

6.2 Seasoning provisions 6.2.1 General—The grading rules shall include provi-sions regulating lumber seasoning and moisture con-tent.

The provisions shall be developed by each geographical region for each species based on its own conditions and the requirements of the users of its products subject to the other provisions of Section 6. Provisions shall be expressed in terms of maximum moisture content allowed in each piece of lumber and determined in accordance with ASTM D 4444 Standard Test Methods for Use and Calibration of Hand-Held Moisture Meters. The restrictions on the moisture content of seasoned lumber shall apply at the time of shipment, at the time of dressing (if dressed lumber is involved), and at the time of any reinspection (if moisture content is involved in the reinspection), as provided in the applicable grading rules.

6.2.2 Definitions—The grading rules for each species or region shall include clear definitions for dry lumber under nominal 5-inch thickness [see 2.7]. The definitions shall be based on a maximum moisture con-tent of 19 percent or less. The choice to grade and grade mark any item as green ALS lumber or dry ALS lumber shall be determined by each rules publishing agency in accordance with its own conditions [see 2.7, 2.11, and 2.12].

6.2.3 Dry size requirements—The grading rules shall require all lumber under nominal 5-inch thick-ness sold as dry to be 19 percent or less in moisture content at the time of dressing, and to be not less than ALS minimum dry dressed thickness and width at 19 percent moisture content, or at such lower maximum-moisture content when applicable to the lumber at the time of dressing. The minimum-dressed dry sizes are shown in tables 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Shrinkage that occurs after dressing to standard dry size shall be recognized through the allowance of a tolerance below minimum ALS dry sizes on the basis of 1 percent shrinkage for each four percentage points of moisture content reduction below the applicable maxi-mum or 0.7 percent shrinkage for each four percentage points of moisture content reduction for Redwood, Western Red Cedar, and Northern White Cedar.

6.2.4 Size differentials—When the grading rules in any region permit lumber less than nominal 5-inch thickness to be dressed green, the rules shall require that the lumber be dressed to sizes specifically stated according to both thickness and width, as set forth in tables 3, 4, and 5.

6.2.5 Green size requirements—The green sizes specifically stated in the rules shall be not less than the green sizes 4 shown in tables 3, 4, and 5, except for Redwood, Western Red Cedar, and Northern White Cedar. For these three species, the following minimum dressed thicknesses shall apply: 21/32 inch (17 mm) for corresponding nominal 5/8 inch dry, 25/32 inch (20 mm) for nominal 1-inch, 1-9/16 inch (39mm) for nominal 2inch, 2-1/16 inch (52 mm) for nominal 2-1/2 inch, 2-9/16 inch (65 mm) for nominal 3-inch,3-1/16 inch (78 mm) for nominal 3-1/2 inch, 3-9/16 inch (90 mm) for nominal 4-inch, and 4-1/16 inch (103 mm) for nominal 4-1/2 inch. The following minimum green dressed widths shall apply: 2-9/16 (65 mm) and 3-9/16 inch (90 mm) for nominal 3-inch and 4-inch, 4-9/16 (116 mm), 5-9/16 (141 mm), and 6-9/16 inch (167 mm) for nominal 5-inch, 6-inch, and 7-inch, 7-3/8 (187 mm), 9-3/8 (238 mm), 11-3/8 inch (289 mm) for nominal 8-inch, 10-inch, and 12-inch, 13-7/16 (341 mm) and 15-7/16 (392 mm) for nominal 14-inch and 16-inch.

The minimum green sizes are based on shrinkage factors of 2.35 percent in thickness and 2.80 percent in width from the fiber saturation point to a 19 percent maximum moisture content with recognition given to manufacturing practices and the differences in shrinkage characteristics between species of lumber or species groups of lumber.

4

10 Shrinkage that occurs after dressing to standard green size shall be recognized through the allowance of a tolerance below minimum ALS green sizes on the basis of 1 percent shrinkage for each four percentage points of moisture content below 30 percent, or 0.7 percent shrinkage for each four percentage points of moisture content below 30 percent for Redwood, Western Red Cedar, and Northern White Cedar.

19 223 of 236

6.2.6 Grade marking (grade stamping)—Grading rules that provide for grade marking of lumber less than nominal 5-inch thickness shall contain a provision for standardized marking so as to indicate whether the lumber was green or dry at time of dressing. The standardized mark shall be S-GRN if surfaced green, S-DRY if surfaced dry, or KD if kiln dried to a maximum moisture content of 19 percent at time of surfacing. Moisture-content limits of less than 19 percent maxi-mum moisture-content for dry or kiln dried shall only be specified if included in rules certified by the Board. For lumber of nominal 5-inch or greater thickness, other moisture-content limits shall be specified only if includedin rules certified by the Board.

6.3 Use classification provisions 6.3.1 Yard lumber 6.3.1.1 Grade classifications—The grading of surfaced yard lumber is based upon the uses for which the particular grade is designed and is applied to each kind with reference to its size and length when graded without consideration to further manufacture. On the basis of quality, the basic grade classifications of yard lumber shall be as follows: (a) Select: Lumber for natural and paint finishes. (b) Common: Lumber for general construction and utility purposes.

6.3.1.2 Yard lumber sizes—The dressed thick-nesses and widths of yard lumber as specified in 3.4, 5.1 and 5.2 shall be considered as minimum standards for the corresponding nominal sizes as shown. Advisory note: Lumber of standard size, rough or dressed, may be described by its nominal dimension providing actual sizes are shown on invoices and other documents.

6.3.1.3 Bundled lumber—Each length of bundled lumber, except end-matched lumber, beveled siding, and bungalow siding shall be bundled separately un-less otherwise specified.

6.3.1.4 Finish and boards—In shipments of rough finish/selects and boards, pieces 1/2 inch (13 mm) or greater than the nominal inch-unit thickness, such as are produced by uneven sawing, shall, at the option of the buyer, be rejected or be accepted as of the next lower grade.

6.3.1.5 Grading faces—Yard lumber other than timbers and dimension [see 6.3.2.3] shall be graded from the face or best side only unless otherwise specified.

6.3.2 Structural lumber 6.3.2.1 Development of design values—Design values contained in grading rules shall be developed in accordance with appropriate ASTM standards and other technically sound criteria. The National Institute of Standards and Technology, with the advice and counsel of the U.S. Forest Products Laboratory, shall be the final authority as to the appropriateness of such standards or criteria. The Board shall seek the assistance of the U.S. Forest Products Laboratory in reviewing design values set forth in grading rules and, in the case of each set of grading rules submitted for certification, the Board shall obtain a report from the Laboratory to verify that the procedures used in developing the claimed values are in accordance with the standards and criteria described herein. Rules-writing agencies shall make available upon request an explanation of the means by which the claimed values were derived. When more than one rules-writing agency has responsibility for writing grading rules for a given species, a group of species, or a geo-graphical subdivision of a species or of a group of species, a common set of strength and stiffness values shall be used by the agencies involved for that species, subdivision, or group of species in the interest of uniformity and standardization.

6.3.2.2 Grading—mechanical—The grading of structural lumber by mechanical means is recognized as an acceptable method of grading. When graded by mechanical means all such grading equipment and methods shall be subject to approval and certification by the Board.

6.3.2.3 Grading faces—Timbers and dimension shall be graded from all four faces.

20 224 of 236

6.3.3 Factory and shop lumber 6.3.3.1 Grade classification—The grade classifications of factory and shop lumber shall be those promulgated by the agencies which formulate and publish grading rules and which have been certified by the Board.11 6.3.3.2 Grade characteristics—Factory and shop lumber shall be graded with reference to its use for doors and sash, or on the basis of characteristics affecting its use for general cutup purposes, or on the basis of size of cutting. Its grade shall be determined by the percentage of the area of each board or plank available in cuttings of specified or of given minimum size and qualities and shall be determined from the poor face based on the quality of both sides of each cutting.

6.3.3.3 Grade sizes—The ALS grade sizes for factory and shop lumber shall be those promulgated by the agencies which formulate and publish grading rules and which have been certified by the Board.

6.3.3.4 Warped lumber—The cuttings in warped lumber shall be so laid out as to surface two sides to standard thickness and have straight edges parallel to the edges of the board or plank.

7. GRADE MARKING (GRADE STAMPING) 7.1 Agency procedures—Each accredited agency shall submit procedures with respect to grade marking to the Board for approval.

7.2 Agency symbol—Each accredited agency shall maintain a bona fide supervisory inspection service under which each mill authorized to use the registered symbol of the accredited agency 5 in conjunction with the grade mark will be inspected regularly as to grading efficiency and conformity to all the agency established rules for grade marking .

7.3 The Grade mark (grade stamp)—When ALS lumber is grade marked, the grade marking shall be subject to the following provisions: 7.3.1 The grade mark shall signify that the lumber conforms to the size, grade and seasoning provisions of the rules under which it is graded. When green lumber of less than nominal 5-inch thickness is graded and grade marked under the applicable grading rules [see also 6.2.6], it shall comply with the green size requirements of such rules. If lumber is dressed to a size below the minimum ALS requirements or below the minimum sizes set forth in the applicable grading rules, the mark shall show that size, and if less than of nominal 5-inch thickness, shall state whether the lumber was dry or green when dressed. If lumber is dressed to less than the standard for nominal1-inch thickness, the mark shall show the dressed thickness and whether the lumber was green or dry when dressed.

5

Facsimiles of the grade marks of the grading and inspection agencies that are accredited by the Board of the USSS shall be available to purchasers, consumers, and specifiers from the USSS, P.O. Box 210, Germantown, MD 20875-0210, Telephone (301)972-1700, FAX 301-540-8004.

7.3.2 A distinguishable mark or insignia, registered and symbolizing grading supervision by an accredited agency, shall be used in conjunction with the grade mark for each agency.5 7.3.3 All pieces and/or bundles of a given grade shall be grade marked.

7.3.4 Mixed grades, other than the two highest recognized grades for each grading rule category, shall not be grade marked with a combination grade designation. If grade marking is required, each piece of a grade shall be marked as of its actual grade.

7.3.5 The grade mark for lumber shall include an identification or designation of the commercial name of the species [see Appendix A] from which the lumber was produced. The identification of species shall not be required when the agency symbol also indicates the species from which the lumber was produced. Where grading rules contain provisions for the grouping of species, each individual species included in a group shall be identified in the rules, and the grade stamp shall include the designation assigned to the group.

21 225 of 236

7.3.6 These provisions are not intended to preclude the inclusion of additional regulations by an agency regarding the use of its grade mark provided the basic provisions of this section are observed.

8. INSPECTION AND REINSPECTION 8.1 Inspection 8.1.1 Agency accreditation and supervision—When ALS lumber is grade marked, the grade marking shall be under the direction, including regular grading supervision at mills, of an agency accredited by the Board as being competent and having adequate facili-ties12 8.1.2 Delegation of grading authority—Permission to grade mark shall be delegated only by an agency accredited by the Board to operate a mill supervisory service to those mills which have demonstrated and proven their ability to conform to and are currently in conformance with the grading rules for the species and grades which they manufacture. The mill shall also agree to maintain the established standards of size and grade and to submit its lumber to inspection by the supervisory agency both at the mill and upon complaint at destination.

8.1.3 Payment—certificate costs—When an ac-credited agency issues a certificate on a shipment, the party requesting the certificate shall pay for the cost thereof.

8.1.4 Service—Inspection service shall be required for the inspection of grades not described in the rules only when written detailed specifications accompany the request for such inspection. For the inspection of standard grades in nonstandard sizes, inspection service shall be required based on 6.1.6 unless otherwise prescribed in the contract of purchase and sale.

8.2 Reinspection 8.2.1 General—Subject to freedom of agreement between buyer and seller as to the settlement of complaints, the purchase, sale, or shipment of ALS grades of lumber shall be construed as involving agreement to submit lumber to reinspection by an accredited inspection agency under published rules by which the lumber was graded [see 8.2.4]. Grading rules shall include provisions for reinspection in case of complaint, and reinspection shall be available to anyone at reasonable cost.

8.2.2 Complaints—Grade complaints on lumber shall be recognized only when the lumber is in the form in which it was shipped. Any subsequent change in manufacture, working, or through kiln-drying shall relieve the seller of responsibility for any grade complaints.

8.2.3 Buyer’s responsibilities—In case of a com-plaint, the buyer shall accept that portion of the shipment that is of the grade, size, and moisture content specified and shall hold intact that portion which is disputed for inspection or reinspection. Any action on the part of the buyer in accepting and using such portion of the shipment that is of the grade, size, and moisture content specified shall not be construed as the acceptance of the entire shipment. The buyer shall hold the disputed lumber intact, properly protected, for not more than 30 days after the date of the request for inspection or reinspection. The buyer shall file a complaint with the seller within the time specified in 8.2.6 and 8.2.7. The buyer shall pay in accordance with the terms of the sale for that portion accepted, but acceptance of a part of a shipment does not prejudice the buyer’s just claims that any unused lumber does not meet the specifications of the grade, size, or moisture content.

8.2.4 Seller’s responsibilities—Upon receipt of a complaint from the purchaser, the seller shall immediately request the agency under whose rules shipment has been made, or such other agency that was agreed upon, to provide inspection, reinspection or retally as required according to the grading rules in effect at the time of execution of the contract.

8.2.5 Cost and assistance—The expense of such inspection, reinspection, or retally shall be borne in accordance with the inspection provisions of the applicable grading rules, but the person calling for the reinspection shall be responsible to the agency for the costs thereof. The purchaser shall lend all reasonable assistance to facilitate the inspection, reinspection or retally.

22 226 of 236

8.2.6 Tally, grade, and size complaints—In case of a complaint involving tally, the entire item shall be held intact for retally. In case of a complaint regarding grade or size, but not involving tally, the buyer shall hold intact that portion of the item that is of the grade or size which is in dispute for inspection and shall file com-plaint with the seller within 10 days of date of receipt of the shipment.

8.2.7 Moisture content complaints—In case of a complaint involving moisture content, the buyer shall inform the seller of the complaint within 72 hours after the lumber is unloaded. In such cases, the seller shall answer such complaint within 72 hours from receipt of complaint. A reinspection involving a complaint on moisture content shall be made in accordance with the provisions of the applicable grading rules. Each piece shall be tested for moisture content, and separation shall be made of all pieces conforming to the maximum allowable moisture content from any portion exceeding such maximum.

8.2.8 Reinspection results—Each item of a shipment shall be considered as of the grade invoiced if, upon reinspection under the grading rules under which the lumber was graded and sold, 95 percent or more thereof is found to be of said grade or better. When degrades in grade or moisture content or both are in excess of 5 percent of the board footage of13 each item, or when they are more than one grade lower than the grade invoice, such degrades shall be kept separate and shall be the property of the seller unless otherwise agreed. These provisions shall not apply in the case of specially worked lumber.

21.

AMERICAN LUMBER STANDARD COMMITTEE

9.1 Functions of Committee—The functions of the USSSC shall be: 9.1.1 To act as the Standing Committee for the purpose of considering proposals for future revisions of or amendments to this Standard. When acting as the Standing Committee, the procedures for the development of Voluntary Products Standards of the US Department of Commerce shall be applicable. The Department of Commerce shall provide the secretariat and appoint a chairman for the Standing Committee.

9.1.2 To cooperate with the U.S. Department of Commerce in establishing and making continuously available basic standards for lumber size, pattern, quality, inspection, and reinspection for use by industry and trade.

9.1.3 To determine the criteria by which the Board shall adjudge and approve the following as being in conformance with this Standard: 9.1.3.1 Any published rules.

9.1.3.2 The competency, reliability, and adequacy of the facilities provided by agencies publishing grading rules for the purpose of lumber certification, inspection, reinspection, and supervision of grade marking.

9.1.3.3 The competency, reliability, and adequacy of the facilities provided by lumber inspection agencies participating in this program that do not publish grading rules.

9.1.4 To advise the Board with respect to the interpretation or application of this Standard and the detailed requirements defined and established by the USSSC 9.1.5 To fix, after consultation with the agencies participating in the use of its facilities, such charges and fees as the Committee finds to be necessary to cover the actual cost, including reserves and provisions for contingencies, of carrying out its functions, those of the Board, and the NGRC. Such charges and fees shall be assessed at a uniform proportionate rate against the agencies participating in the use of the facilities of the Committee. The accreditation of any agency not paying its assessment within 60 days after notification by the Secretary of the USSSC shall be revoked by the Board.

9.2 Appointment of members—The principal and alternate members shall be appointed by the Secretary of Commerce for terms of not less than two nor more than five years.

23 227 of 236

9.3 Composition of Committeeâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;The following procedures shall apply in making appointments to the Committee.

9.3.1 Each agency which participates in this program and which formulates, publishes, and maintains grading rules and maintains inspection facilities covering the various lumber species may nominate a principal and an alternate for each member allotted to that agency. Principal members and their alternates shall be appointed from the nominees furnished by each agency as follows: Agencies Members Allotted Southern Pine Inspection Bureau 2 Western Wood Products Association 2 West Coast Lumber Inspection Bureau 2 Redwood Inspection Service 1 Northeastern Lumber Manufacturers Association 1 Northern Softwood Lumber Bureau 1 Each other agency qualifying under this category 1

9.3.2 Each lumber inspection agency which participates in this program and which does not publish grading rules may nominate a principal and an alternate member. Three principal members and their alternates shall be appointed from among the nominees so furnished.

9.3.3 Firms or organizations within lumber specifying, distributing, and consuming groups, at the request of the Secretary of Commerce, may nominate a principal and an alternate for each member allotted. Members and their alternates shall be appointed from those groups as follows:14 Groups Members Allotted Lumber Distributors & Wholesalers 2 Lumber Retailers 2 Intermediate Manufacturers (formerly millworkmanufacturers) 1 Wood Using Industries 1 General Contractors 1 Home Builders 1 Architects and Engineers 2

9.3.4 The Secretary of Commerce may appoint consumer- at-large principal members and their alternates to represent the general public.

9.3.5 Each nomination shall be submitted to the Secretary of Commerce by the appropriate agency, firm, or organization upon request or whenever a vacancy occurs in the segment represented. Each nomination shall contain the following: 9.3.5.1 A summary of the qualifications of the nominee.

9.3.5.2 A statement of the method or procedure by which the nominee was selected and the procedures under which the nominee will exercise the responsibility of membership for the agency or industry segment represented.

9.3.5.3 A statement of any interests, financial or otherwise, which the nominee has in agencies or segments of the industry other than the one the nominee represents.

9.3.5.4 For agencies submitting more than one nominee, a listing in the order of priority for appointment.

9.3.6 Ex officio, non-voting principal and alternate members may be appointed by the Secretary of Commerce from the following Federal agencies: Department of Defense Department of Agriculture Department of Interior General Services Administration Federal Housing Administration National Institute of Standards and Technology

9.3.7 Balance of representationâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;The Secretary of Commerce may make such changes in the constitution of the Committee or make additional appointments as the Secretary deems necessary to ensure that the Committee has a balance of interest and is not dominated by a single interest category.

24 228 of 236

9.4 Committee secretary—Except as provided in 9.1.1, the manager or executive officer of the Board, employed as provided in 10.5, shall serve as the Secretary of the USSSC. 9.5 Transaction of business 9.5.1 Meetings—A majority of the members of the USSSC representing agencies which formulate, publish, and maintain grading rules and maintain inspection facilities, together with a majority of the other members, shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. A vote of the majority of those present shall decide any question that comes before a meeting; but if at any meeting of the Committee there shall be less than a quorum present, a majority of those present shall adjourn the meeting or act on the subjects before it, subject to ratification in writing by the respective majorities which constitute a quorum.

9.5.2 Correspondence—Business that has not been previously presented at a meeting of the Committee shall be held until the next meeting or transacted by correspondence in accordance with rules to be established by the Committee.

10.

BOARD OF REVIEW

10.1 Autonomy of Board—The Board shall be an autonomous body functioning under by-laws approved by the USSSC and consistent with Section 10.

10.2 Certification functions—Upon application, the Board shall examine and certify the following as conforming to the requirements of this Standard and to additional detailed requirements established by the USSSC: Grade strength ratios, nomenclature, descriptions of grades published by the NGRC and grading rules published by accredited, competent and reliable agencies having adequate facilities for mill inspection and for reinspection of lumber (provided that no such rules for any species in any region shall be certified if certified published rules and service applicable thereto are adequate and already fully and fairly available to all manufacturers, distributors, and consumers of such lumber, on equal terms and conditions without discrimination). Certification shall be subject to these conditions: 10.2.1 Rules conform to the basic requirements of this Standard.

10.2.2 Published rules carry specific references to such certification.

10.2.3 The originating agency permits the publication of the rules without charge in whole or in part, including all applicable provisions and with all quoted parts clearly so indicated by anyone desiring to do so. Any such publication shall carry reference to the source of the rules and their effective date, and shall be revised to conform with any subsequent changes in the rules, giving the effective dates thereof.

10.2.4 Subsequent revisions made by the promulgating agency to grading rules that have been certified by the Board shall be acted upon within 90 days after submission to the Board.

10.2.5 Grading rules of an agency shall not be certified as conforming to this Standard if the Board determines the dimension lumber rules therein fail to conform to the provisions of the National Grading Rule for dimension lumber established pursuant to Section 11 of this Standard.

10.3 Accreditation functions—Upon application, the Board shall examine and accredit rules-writing agencies and non-rules-writing lumber inspection agencies as conforming to the requirements of this Standard and to additional requirements established by the USSS. Accreditation shall be subject to these conditions: 10.3.1 The competency, reliability, and adequacy of the facilities provided by agencies participating in this program for the purposes of lumber certification, inspection, reinspection, or supervision of grade marking.

10.3.2 The adequacy of the procedure followed in authorizing mills to grade mark when providing adequate supervisory service.

25 229 of 236

21.3.3 The continuing conformance of grading rules to this Standard.

10.3.4 The continuing competency and adequacy of performance of lumber inspection and grade marking agencies.

10.4 Composition, election, terms, compensation, and removal—The Board shall be composed of three members, concurred in by the Department of Commerce, none of whom shall be members of the USSS or affiliated with a grading agency or any member of a grading agency.

10.4.1 Nominations—The chairman of the USSS shall appoint a spokesperson for each of three membership groups within the USSS that shall nominate the members of the Board. The spokesperson shall determine and report the decision of the group to the Chairman. Except as provided in 10.4.1.4, Board members shall be nominated as follows: 10.4.1.1 One member by majority decision of those USSS members representing the accredited rules-writing agencies.

10.4.1.2 One member by majority decision of those members representing the accredited non-rules-writing lumber inspection agencies.

10.4.1.3 One member by majority decision of those remaining USSS members representing other interests.

10.4.1.4 Nominations for membership on the Board for individuals who have served two or more terms shall be by unanimous decision of the nominating group.

10.4.1.5 The names of the nominees shall be submitted to the Department of Commerce for concurrence prior to election and shall be accompanied by a summary of the qualifications of each nominee and a statement of any interests, financial or otherwise, which the nominee has in the lumber industry.

10.4.2 Election—Board members shall be elected from among the aforesaid nominees by the members of the USSS by a majority of those voting. In the event that a nominee designated under 10.4.1.1 or 10.4.1.2 fails to receive a majority of the votes cast at any election, a new nominee shall be designated in accordance with the procedure set forth in 10.4.1.1 and 10.4.1.2.

10.4.3 Terms—The three members of the Board shall be elected for terms, respectively, of three years, two years, and one year, or until their successors are duly elected. Annually thereafter, one member shall be elected for a term of three years or until a successor is duly elected. Vacancies on the Board by reason ofdeath, resignation, or removal shall be filled at any regularly called committee meeting subject to the provisions of 10.4.1, 10.4.2 and 9.5.2. Any person elected to fill a vacancy shall serve the unexpired term of the predecessor.

10.4.4 Compensation—The USSS shall fix and pay compensation to the members of the Board and shall reimburse them for all reasonable expenses incurred in fulfilling their duties.

10.4.5 Removal—The removal of any Board member shall require a vote of not less than two-thirds of all the members of the USSS, with the concurrence of the Department of Commerce.

16 10.5 Board manager—The Board shall select and employ a salaried manager or other executive officer, subject to the approval of the USSS, who shall assume the responsibilities and perform the duties delegated by the Committee or the Board. Such manager or executive officer shall not be in the employment of any lumber organization, company, or inspection agency while employed by the Board.

10.6 Withdrawal of accreditation—If at any time the practices of any accredited agency are found not in conformity with this Standard and other requirements adopted by the USSS, and if, after due notice in writing to that effect, according to established procedures, those practices shall not have been brought into con-formity 26 230 of 236

with such standards and other requirements by the agency concerned, the Board is empowered to revoke all previous accreditation granted that agency.

10.7 Actions of Board—In all actions in relation to the certification of grading rules, accreditation of agencies and inspection facilities, and grade marking prac-tices, the Board shall proceed in a fair and nondiscriminatory manner giving full and due consider-ation to the past experience and performance of agen-cies seeking accreditation, and shall apply uniform standards of judgment in making all determina-tions. In the matter of inspection agencies, definite requirements as to the integrity, competency and adequacy of the agency, and the adequacy of its facili-ties shall be established, but all such requirements shall be uniformly applied with respect to all agencies seeking accreditation from the Board. No inspection agency that is controlled by any person or firm whose own products are subject to its inspection and certifica-tion shall be accredited. Inspection services furnished by buyers and users for inspection of their own purchases shall not be accredited by the Board.

10.8 Availability of Board—The facilities of the Board shall be available at all times on equal terms to any affected party. The Board’s facilities shall also be available to all lumber inspection agencies, without fa-vor or discrimination and without any requirement for joining or otherwise subscribing to any trade association or supporting any service or activity other than those of grading, standardization, grade marking, and inspection that fall within the jurisdiction of the Board.

10.9 Enforcement—The Board shall adopt, subject to prior approval by the USSS, and administer rules, regulations, and sanctions to ensure the continued competency, reliability, and integrity of accredited agencies providing inspection services.

10.10 Board hearings—Any party affected by a decision or action of the Board shall have the right to require the Board to hold a hearing at which such party may appear personally or be represented by counsel to present supporting evidence and argument of the party’s position in accordance with procedures established by the Board.

10.11 Reports of action—The Board shall within 30 days following an official action make such official action public.

22.

NATIONAL GRADING RULE COMMITTEE

11.1 Autonomy of NGRC—The National Grading Rule Committee (NGRC) shall be an autonomous body functioning under bylaws (providing, among other things, for the appointment of subcommittees) approved by the USSS. The bylaws shall be reviewed at least every 5 years and reaffirmed or revised, as appropriate.

11.2 Functions of the NGRC—The NGRC shall establish, maintain, and make fully and fairly available grade-strength ratios, nomenclature, and descriptions of grades for dimension lumber conforming to this Standard. Grading rules of an agency shall not be certified as conforming to this Standard if the Board determines that the dimension lumber rules therein fail to conform to the provisions of the National Grading Rule for dimension lumber established pursuant to this section.

11.3 Composition of NGRC—In the interest of ob-taining balanced views, the NGRC shall be composed of persons representing the following organizations that desire to participate: Organizations Members Allotted Consumer Organizations 1 Distributor Organizations 1 U.S. Non-rules Writing Agencies 1

Ex officio, non-voting members shall be appointedfrom the following Federal agencies that desire to participate: Federal Housing Administration 1 Defense Logistics Agency 1 Forest Products Laboratory 1 National Institute of Standards and Technology 1

11.4 Appointment of members and chairman— Members of the NGRC shall be competent in the field of lumber technology. Every 5 years each organization or group of organizations desiring to participate and entitled to representation shall appoint a principal member and an alternate for each member to which it 27 231 of 236

is entitled. The USSS shall appoint the principal and alternate representing consumer organizations. The Chairman of the NGRC shall be elected every 5 years by the NGRC from among its members.

11.5 Transaction of business—A majority of members representing rules-writing agencies and a majority of the other members shall constitute a quorum to conduct business. Each member shall have one vote. The majority vote of those present and voting at a meeting shall prevail.

12. REFERENCES

12.1 ASTM Standards 6 • ASTM D 9 Standard Definitions of Terms Relating to Wood.

• ASTM D 1165 Standard Nomenclature of Domestic Hardwoods and Softwoods.

• ASTM D 4444 Standard Test Methods for Use and Calibration of Hand-Held Moisture Meters.

12.2 Other publications • Little, Elbert, Jr ., Checklist of United States Trees (Native and Naturalized), Agriculture Handbook No. 541, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC 20090-6090, 1979.

APPENDIX A. COMMERCIAL NAMES OF THE PRINCIPAL SOFTWOOD SPECIES The commercial names listed below are intended to provide a correlation between commercial names for lumber and the botanical names of the species from which the lumber is to be manufactured. In some instances more than one species is associated with a single commercial name. For stress-graded lumber, the species to be associated with a commercial name will be determined in accordance with 6.3.2.1. These commercial names are to be used in grading rule descriptions and in specifications [see 2.15].

Commercial Official Common Species or Species Group Names 8 Tree Names 9 Botanical Names CEDAR: Alaska Cedar Alaska-cedar Chamaecyparis nootkatensis Incense Cedar incense-cedar Libocedrus decurrens Port Orford Cedar Port-Orford-cedar Chamaecyparis lawsoniana Eastern Red Cedar eastern redcedar Juniperus virginiana Western Red Cedar western redcedar Thuja plicata Northern White Cedar northern white-cedar T. occidentalis Southern White Cedar Atlantic white-cedar Chamaecyparis thyoides CYPRESS:10 Baldcypress baldcypress Taxodium distichum Pond cypress pondcypress T. distichum var. nutans FIR: Balsam Fir 11 balsam fir Abies balsamea Fraser fir A. fraseri Douglas Fir 12 Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii Noble Fir noble fir Abies procera White Fir subalpine fir A. lasiocarpa California red fir A. magnifica grand fir A. grandis noble fir A. procera Pacific silver fir A. amabilis white fir A. concolor The information contained herein was obtained from ASTM Standard D 1165-80, Standard Nomenclature of Domestic Hardwoods and Soft-woods, which was reapproved by ASTM in 1987.

8 The commercial names for species represent those commonly accepted. Some grading rules certified by the Board provide for the inclusion of additional species under the established names.

9 The official common tree names conform to the Checklist of United States Trees (Native and Naturalized), Agriculture Handbook No. 541 (1979), and are sometimes used as names for lumber. In addition to the official common names for a species, the Handbook lists other names by which the species and the lumber produced from it are sometimes designated.

10 Cypress includes types designated as Red Cypress, White Cypress, and Yellow Cypress. Red Cypress is frequently classified and sold 7

28 232 of 236

separately from the other types.

11 Balsam fir lumber is sometimes designated either as Eastern fir or as Balsam.

12 When Douglas fir is specified by region, it is specified as either Coast Region Douglas fir or as Inland Region Douglas fir. If not specified, both types are allowed.

19 Commercial Official Common Species or Species Group Names 8 Tree Names 9 Botanical Names HEMLOCK: Eastern Hemlock Carolina hemlock Tsuga caroliniana eastern hemlock T. canadensis Mountain Hemlock mountain hemlock T. mertensiana West Coast Hemlock western hemlock T. heterophylla JUNIPER: Western Juniper alligator juniper Juniperus deppeana Rocky Mountain juniper J. scopulorum Utah juniper J. osteosperma western juniper J. occidentalis LARCH: Western Larch western larch Larix occidentalis PINE: Jack Pine jack pine Pinus banksiana Limber Pine limber pine P. flexilis Lodgepole Pine lodgepole pine P. contorta Norway Pine red pine P. resinosa Pitch Pine pitch pine P. rigida Ponderosa Pine ponderosa pine P. ponderosa Radiata/Monterey Pine Monterey pine P. radiata Sugar Pine sugar pine P. lambertiana Whitebark Pine whitebark pine P. albicaulis Idaho White Pine western white pine P. monticola Northern White Pine eastern white pine P. strobus Longleaf Pine 13 longleaf pine P. palustris slash pine P. elliottii Southern Pine (Major) loblolly pine P. taeda longleaf pine P. palustris shortleaf pine P. echinata slash pine P. elliottii Southern Pine (Minor) pond pine P. serotina Virginia pine P. virginiana sand pine P. clausa spruce pine P. glabra REDWOOD: Redwood redwood Sequoia sempervirens SPRUCE: Eastern Spruce black spruce Picea mariana red spruce P. rubens white spruce P. glauca Engelmann Spruce blue spruce P. pungens Engelmann spruce P. engelmannii Sitka Spruce Sitka spruce P. sitchensis TAMARACK: Tamarack tamarack Larix laricina YEW: Pacific Yew Pacific yew Taxus brevifolia The commercial requirements for Longleaf Pine lumber are that it must be produced not only from trees of the botanical species of Pinus elliottii and Pinus palustris, but each piece in addition must average either on one end or the other not less than six annual rings per inch and not less 13

29 233 of 236

than one-third summerwood. Longleaf Pine lumber is sometimes designated as Pitch Pine in the export trade.

20

APPENDIX B. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS USED IN DESCRIBING STANDARD GRADES OF LUMBER

B1. The commonly recognized characteristics and conditions occurring in softwood lumber are as follows: Bark pockets Knots Pith Checks Mismanufacture Shake Cross breaks Pitch Splits Decay Pitch pockets Wane Gum spots, streaks, etc. Pitch seams Warp Holes Pitch streaks B2. Metric units: ASTM Standard E 380 was used as the authoritative standard in developing the metric dimensions found in this Standard. Metric dimensions are calculated at 25.4 millimeters (mm) times the actual dimension in inches. The nearest mm is significant for dimensions greater than 1/8 inch, and the nearest 0.1 mm is significant for dimensions equal to or less than 1/8 inch.

The rounding rule for dimensions greater than 1/8 inch: If the digit in the tenths of mm position (the digit after the decimal point) is less than 5, drop all fractional mm digits; if greater than 5 or it is 5 followed by at least one nonzero digit, round one mm higher; if 5 followed by only zeroes, retain the digit in the unit position (the digit before the decimal point) if it is even or increase it one mm if it is odd.

The rounding rule for dimensions equal to or less than 1/8 inch: If the digit in the hundredths of mm position (the second digit after the decimal point) is less than 5, drop all digits to the right of the tenths position; if greater than 5 or it is 5 followed by at least one non-zero digit, round one-tenth mm higher; if 5 followed by only zeros, retain the digit in the tenths position if it is even or increase it one-tenth mm if it is odd.

In case of a dispute on size measurements, the conventional (inch) method of measurement shall take precedence.

B3. Definitions of terms used in describing standard grades of lumber: air dried—seasoned by exposure to the atmosphere, in the open or under cover, without artificial heat. all-heart—of heartwood throughout; that is, free of sapwood. annual ring—denotes the amount of growth for a tree in a single year. bark pocket—patch of bark partially or wholly enclosed in the wood. Classified by size the same as pitch pockets. blemish—anything marring the appearance of lumber. bow—see WARP. boxed heart—with the pith enclosed in the piece. bright—unstained. burl—a distortion of grain, usually caused by abnormal growth due to injury of the tree. The effect of burls is assessed in relation to knots.

21 check—a separation of the wood normally occurring across or through the annual rings and usually as result of seasoning. roller check—crack in the wood structure caused by a piece of cupped lumber being flattened in passing between the machine rollers. surface check—a separation that occurs on a face of a piece. small check—not over 1/32 inch (0.8 mm) wide or 4 inch (102 mm) long. medium check—not over 1/32 inch (0.8 mm) wide or 10 inch (254 mm) long. large check—over 1/32 inch (0.8 mm) wide or longer than 10 inch (254 mm) or both. through check—a separation that extends from one surface of a piece to the opposite or adjoining surface. chipped grain—a barely perceptible irregularity in the surface of a piece caused when particles of wood are chipped or broken below the line of cut. It is too small to be classed as torn grain and is not considered unless in excess of 25% of the surface involved. chip marks—shallow depressions or indentations on or in the surface of dressed lumber caused by shavings or chips getting embedded in the surface during dressing.

30 234 of 236

very light chip marks—not over 1/64 inch (0.4 mm) deep. light chip marks—not over 1/32 inch (0.8 mm) deep. medium chip marks—not over 1/16 inch (1.6 mm) deep. heavy chip marks—not over 1/8 inch (3.2 mm) deep. clear—free or practically free of all blemishes, characteristics, or defects. compression wood—abnormal wood that forms on the underside of leaning and crooked coniferous trees. It is characterized, aside from its distinguishing color, by being hard and brittle and by its relatively lifeless appearance. Compression wood shall be limited in effect to other appearance or strength reducing characteristics permitted in the grade. corner—the intersection of two adjacent faces. crook—see WARP. cross break—separation of the wood across the width. crosscutting—cutting with a saw across the width. cup—see WARP. cutting—resulting pieces after crosscutting and/or ripping. decay (unsound wood)—a disintegration of the wood substance due to action of wood-destroying fungi, and is also known as dote or rot. advanced decay—an older stage of decay in which disintegration is recognized because the wood has become punky, soft, spongy, stringy, shaky, pitted, or crumbly. Decided discoloration or bleach-ing of the rotted wood is often apparent. heart center decay—a localized decay developing along the pith in some species and is detected by visual inspection. Heart center decay develops in the living tree and does not progress further after the tree is cut. honeycomb—similar to white specks but the pockets are larger. Where permitted in the grading rules, it is so limited that it has no more effect on the intended use of the piece than other characteristics permitted in the same grade. Pieces containing honeycomb are no more subject to decay than pieces which do not contain it. incipient decay—an early stage of decay in which disintegration of the wood fibers has not proceeded far enough to soften or otherwise change the hardness of the wood perceptibly. It is usually accompanied by a slight discoloration or bleaching of the wood.

22

APPENDIX C. Footnotes

APPENDIX D. IMPLEMENTATION, MAINTENANCE, AND HISTORY OF STANDARD

D1. STANDING COMMITTEE The American Lumber Standard Committee (USSS) acts as the Standing Committee for this Standard for the purpose of its interpretation and for considering future proposals for amendments and revisions. Members of the USSS and their alternates are appointed by the Secretary of Commerce in accordance with Section 9 of this Standard. The names of the members are available from the Committee’s secretariat: Office of Standards Services, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899. Comments regarding the Standard and suggestions for its amendment or revision may also be sent to this address. No product shall be advertised Or represented in any manner that would imply approval or endorsement of that product by the National Institute Of Standards and Technology and/or the Department of Commerce.

D2. EFFECTIVE DATE Voluntary Product Standard PS 20-94, United States Saddle Standard , a voluntary standard developed under the Department of Commerce procedures, shall be effective March 1, 1994 for products produced thereunder on and after that date. The Standard being superseded, United States Saddle Standard PS 20-70, is effective for products produced thereunder through February 28, 1994.

D3. HISTORY OF THE STANDARD 31 235 of 236

Early in 1922 Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover, responding to a request from the lumber industry, offered the cooperation of the Department in activities directed toward simplification, standardization, and development of ade-quate quality guarantees for the lumber-consuming public. This cooperation lead to the development and publication in 1924 of Simplified Practice Recommendation R 16 Lumberunder the guidance of the Departmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Division of Simplified Practices, which was to become a part of the National Bureau of Standards (now the National Institute of Standards and Technology). The history of R 16â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s development and its subsequent revisions is summarized in editions issued, respectively, in 1924, 1925, 1926, 1929, 1939, and 1953.

R 16-53 was revised in 1969 and superseded by Voluntary Product Standard PS 20-70 American Softwood Lumber Standard. The significant provisions added to PS 20-70 were: 1) separate size standards for dry and green lumber, under nominal 5-inch thickness, were established in order to achieve greater uniformity in the dimensions of seasoned and unseasoned lumber at the point of use; 2) an independent National Grading Rule Committee was created to establish and maintain a national grading rule for dimension lumber conforming to PS 20; 3) an indepen-dent Board of Review was formed to assure uniform approval of grading rules and of agencies to grade under these rules, and to enhance enforcement of the accreditation program ; 4) the composition of the American Lumber Standard Committee was expanded to reflect a broader representation of interests; 5) uniform methods for assignment of design values were accepted. Non-substantive changes were made to the Standard in 1985, 1991, and 1992. i

Kosiak, Michael, Etiology and Pathology of Ischemic Ulcers, Arch. of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1959, pg. 62 Guyton, Arthur C., Acute Control of Local Blood Flow, Text of Medical Physiology, 1986, pg. 349 Guyton, Arthur C., Acute Control of Local Blood Flow, Text of Medical Physiology, 1986, pg. 349 iv Guyton, Arthur C., Acute Control of Local Blood Flow, Text of Medical Physiology, 1986, pg. 348 v Burman, M.S. Paul Using Pressure Measurements to Evaluate Different Technologies, Decubitus, Vol 6 No. 3, 93 pg. 40 vi Holloway, Allen, Effects of external pressure loading on human skin blood flow measured by 133Xe clearance, Journal of Applied Physiology Vol. 40, No.4 April 1976, Pg 598 vii Holloway, Allen, Effects of external pressure loading on human skin blood flow measured by 133Xe clearance, Journal of Applied Physiology Vol. 40, No.4 April 1976, Pg 598 viii Husain, Tafazzul, An Experimental Study of Sore Pressure Effects on Tissues, with Reference to the Bed Sore Problem., J. Path. Bact, Vol LXVI, 1953, pg. 354 ix Allen, Doug, Blood Flow Restriction caused by bandaging and equine in vivo study conducted at the University of Georgia, March 1996, Kimberly-Clark Clinical Study-Flexus 3 x Allen, Doug, Blood Flow Restriction caused by bandaging and equine in vivo study conducted at the University of Georgia, March 1996, Kimberly-Clark Clinical Study-Flexus 3 xi Chow, William, et al, Effects and Characteristics of Cushion Covering Membranes Kenedi, R.M. and Cowden, J.M. Bedsore Biomechanics, University Park Press, London, 1975, pg. 96-97 xii Le, Khanh M., et al, An In-Depth Look at Pressure Sores Using Monolithic Silicon Pressure Sensors Microvascular Research, Vol 17, 1979, PG 748 xiii Le, Khanh M., et al, An In-Depth Look at Pressure Sores Using Monolithic Silicon Pressure Sensors Microvascular Research, Vol 17, 1979, PG 748 xiv Husain, Tafazzul, An Experimental Study of Sore Pressure Effects on Tissues, with Reference to the Bed Sore Problem., J. Path. Bact, Vol LXVI, 1953, pg. 352 xv Husain, Tafazzul, An Experimental Study of Sore Pressure Effects on Tissues, with Reference to the Bed Sore Problem., J. Path. Bact, Vol LXVI, 1953, pg. 356 xvi Le, Khanh M., et al, An In-Depth Look at Pressure Sores Using Monolithic Silicon Pressure Sensors Microvascular Research, Vol 17, 1979, PG 753 xvii Husain, Tafazzul, An Experimental Study of Sore Pressure Effects on Tissues, with Reference to the Bed Sore Problem., J. Path. Bact, Vol LXVI, 1953, pg. 356 xviii Kosiak, Michael, Etiology and Pathology of Ischemic Ulcers, Arch. of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 59, pg. 62 xix Guyton, Arthur C., Acute Control of Local Blood Flow, Textbook of Medical Physiology, 1986, pg. 349 xx Kosiak, Michael, Etiology and Pathology of Ischemic Ulcers, Arch. of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1959, pg. 62 xxi Le, Khanh M., et al, An In-Depth Look at Pressure Sores Using Monolithic Silicon Pressure Sensors Microvascular Research, Vol 17, 1979, PG 748 xxii Le, Khanh M., et al, An In-Depth Look at Pressure Sores Using Monolithic Silicon Pressure Sensors Microvascular Research, Vol 17, 1979, PG 748 xxiii Husain, Tafazzul, An Experimental Study of Sore Pressure Effects on Tissues, with Reference to the Bed Sore Problem., J. Path. Bact, Vol LXVI, 1953, pg. 355 & Groth, K.E. 1942, Acta Chir Scand.,lxxxvii,suppl 76 xxiv Husain, Tafazzul, An Experimental Study of Sore Pressure Effects on Tissues, with Reference to the Bed Sore Problem., J. Path. Bact, Vol LXVI, 1953, pg. 356 & Groth, K.E. 1942, Acta Chir Scand.,lxxxvii,suppl 76 ii

iii

32 236 of 236