Deborah Rossum
Sat Mar 9, 10:43pm

I agree with and support the new rule and believe it is in the best overall interests of the dogs. It seems pretty basic to say that there would be no race without these magnificient dogs.

Bob Stewart
Sat Mar 9, 2:30pm

The ITC officials involved did exactly the right thing in withdrawing, not disqualifying, Rick Swenson. They followed the rule as written and applied it in a non-discriminatory manner to a well known musher in the same way as it would have been applied to one from the back of the pack. If your respondents don't like the rule, they can join ITC (it's open to everyone), pay their membership fee and become active to elect a board of directors that shares their views. I admit that takes more effort than just griping, but that's how things get done by those who really care.

Paul McGreal
Mon Mar 11, 2:23pm

Whine, whine, whine. That's all that seems to show up on this site about the disqualification of Rick Swenson. A proper understanding of the rule and how it functions would cut through most of this complaining. First, the rule does NOT make any judgments about whether Mr. Swenson -- or ANY musher -- was at fault in the death of a dog. Thus, to say that the decision of the judges somehow cast Mr. Swenson in a negative light is not only wrong, but slanders the judges. Second, the rule was written without a "fault" requirement to give an extra measure of protection to the dogs. Like many rules, this rule is intetionally overbroad. In other words, it WILL catch people who take excellent care of their dogs. However, the decision was made that it was worth the possibility of disqualifying an "innocent musher" to add an extra incentive to safety. This tradeoff is the tough question that people should be debating -- and, unlike many of the previous writers, I believe that it is a tough question. Third, I agree with a previous writer that, if the dogs could talk, they would tell us that they love what they are doing. I also believe that, if they could talk, the dogs would also tell us when they are hurt or when they need more rest. Until that day, however, it is not unreasonable to err on the side of protecting the silent party -- the dogs.

A. Peter Algover
Fri Mar 8, 10:47am

Although I still have not been able to find an account of the incident, other than that a dog died on the trail and the musher was disqualified, I would tend to disagree with Lisa and Richard. I don't think anyone's reputation or record has been ruined. Certainly not in the eyes of anyone familiar with the rules, or that has had the rules explained (as I did). Certainly the judges were protecting their own butts, as Lisa points out, as they were protecting the event! Yes, injury and death are always a risk in this event. However, if action was not taken and such incidents were to become more regular, it would not take much to have some animal-rights and other groups band together and have the event stopped altogether. I don't think any of us wants that.

Ron Mattson
Mon Mar 11, 12:15pm

Swenson is our "Dog Care" mentor! Why punish a man who has spends his life caring for animals! Sometimes life takes us earlier than we would like and that goes the same for our dogs, our best friends.

Jerry Mancinelli
Sun Mar 10, 8:14pm

It is truly disgusting that a musher of Swenson's calibre should be the victim of a rule brought in to placate the animal activists. If these activists were truly concerned with the welfare of dogs, they would concentrate their ieeforts on closing the puppy mills and hope that every dog on the continent received the care and attention tht Swenson and the other Iditarod greats give to their animals.

Terry L. Johnson
Thu Mar 7, 9:34pm

The Iditarod was based on risk.... somebody had to provide needed services to needy people. The whole concept is one of man, dogs and perseverance against nature and man's fallibility.
The fact that nature won causes man ( the charicature in this event) to react in the manner of Swenson's disqualification is unfortunate and against the principles of the race.
I deem it sad that the animals have suffered, but I deem it a greater loss for the struggle to uphold traditions and values, which the Race Committee has deemed secondary to the concept of Iditarod.

Kevin R. Tubbs
Thu Mar 7, 7:45pm

Woof! If these sled dogs could speak to you, they'd tell you that they LOVE to do what they were bred to do: PULL THE SLED WITH THEIR TEAM. If anyone who challenges this point would simply watch these dogs in action, they would have to agree, this is the olympics for them and they LOVE it! These mushers have a hard time STOPPING a team once it gets going! When I die, I hope it is doing something I love and something I am good at.

H.A. Red Boucher
Fri Mar 8, 6:05am

Most of it has already been said, but I would like to add my thoughts to the comments.
It's a bad rule that punished a great Alaskan.

Sheila Kuesthardt
Fri Mar 8, 12:41am

I am truly ashamed at the actions of these judges. Not only was Mr. Swenson wrongly convicted and sent packing from the race, he was humiliated, something that a man with his experience should not have to endure. He lost much more than this race, he lost a friend, one he has raised, fed, trained, and loved. No one purposelessly allows a friend to die. Not even the vets no the cause of death. I feel the judges gave in to some public opinions and pressure from animal actives. If I were one of these racers, I would pull my teams to support Mr. Swenson or boycott next years race. Who will be the next racer to be pull out of the race, for a rule that never should have been made?

Mike DeMarco
Fri Mar 8, 8:53am

Rick Swenson's "Withdrawal" is a travesty and taints the Iditirod Committtee and the officials who made this judgement call. As a past dog racer for ten years, including the 1978 Iditirod, I was an active proponent for better dog care and safety.
Rick Swenson was a pioneer in proper dog care and this action is unacceptable to me. The "withdrawal" taints a true sprortsperson and casts doubt as the the integrity of the officals who made the dicision.

Paul Adams
Thu Mar 7, 9:40pm

I don't agree with the discision to disqualify Swenson. It does say in the rules however the the musher will be disqualified if a dog expires during the race. Not knowing all the facts, I would still have to side with Rick Swenson. Just to be competetive in Iditarod he would have to be totally dedicated to mushing adn training his dogs. Not just for the year before the race, but for many years before the race. I cannot see a person who has committed so much time, energy, and money, to this one race abusing, neglecting, or otherwise causing the demise of this dog. Then to be disqualified from the race through no apparent fault of his own is not fair or reasonable. I believe that the race committee should take a hard look at this rule and change the wording so that a musher is not disqualified through no fault of his own.

Lisa Wehr
Tue Mar 5, 6:40am

It's truly unfortunate that this years race is already stirring controversy, as usual. The Iditarod Trail Commitee has done it again. Although it a sad thing to hear of any of the dogs dieing in the trail , it does happen and thats a fact of life and the race. It will ALWAYS happen. Maybe not next year but down the road, it will happen. Now it happens and the musher pays the ultimate price. Not only do they loose an important part of themselves, (as all the dogs own a piece of their heart) but now they get to be totally humiliated in front of millions of people around the world. On top of all of this is the financial commitment. Rick Swenson has spent a year of his life getting ready for this years race. His sponsors and family now get to bear the burden of being associated with a "dishonorable discharge". The Iditarod race judges get to sit there and try to figure ways to cover their own butts. How can we come out of this looking good is the question they pose to themselves. Of course it couldn't be the commitees fault. They couldn't be responsible for the trail. God forbid they post someone at the site where everyone is fallin through overflow. This man is one of the the most experienced musher in the world, I guarantee you that it wasn't his intention for that dog to die and no one is more broken hearted than he. What a shame.

I agree with Lisa Wehr. It is terrible that such a distinguished musher gets taken out of the race in a less than distinguished manner. No musher would go to the trouble of training a team and raising money to enter the race to go out one day into the race and lose a member of his team. If Swenson's past record of races and the fact that he has never lost a dog before aren't an indication as to his dedication to his team then I don't know what is.