Prior to the 2010 Iditarod, I had told friends that if I believed the ITC would follow its own rules, I would drop my litigation. Sadly, my worst fears were borne out by Iditarod’s actions regarding several mushers during the 2010 race. Perhaps the clearest example is what happened to Hank Debruin. This is described in:

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/projects/iditarod-2010/4498-debruin-told-hes-not-going-fast-enough-and-must-quit

as well as Craig Medred’s new book, “Graveyard of Dreams.”

What is clear is mushers were bullied into scratching. Though my response to the race marshal was different, I was bullied as well. And aside from statements made by Nordman to me as well as others that were designed to intimidate us, the fact that we were given no warning to speed up prior to our being forced out of the race by itself demonstrates that Nordman was acting as a bully.

With the 2010 Iditarod, my battles with the ITC have been validated and vindicated. I am not sure where all this will end up, but now more than ever, I believe in what I am doing.

Iditarod Withdrawal and Litigation   (January 20, 2010)

I was withdrawn from the Iditarod on Saturday, March 14 at 20:15.   At that time, I was finishing my 24 at the Ophir checkpoint.  As stated in the press release ( http://www.iditarod.com/press/release/pressrelease_663.html ),  I was withdrawn based on the first part of Rule 36, shown below, the part which refers to “valid effort to compete.”

Rule 36 -- Competitiveness:  A team may be withdrawn that is out of the competition and is no longer making a valid effort to compete.  A musher whose conduct constitutes an unreasonable risk of harm to him/her, dogs or other persons may be withdrawn.

It is my contention that the withdrawal was against Alaskan tradition, unfair, and against the rules. 

I appealed the withdrawal.  At that time, for redress I asked only for the withdrawal to be overturned, a public apology, the 340 miles I completed be counted as a 300-mile qualifier, and my entry fee to be donated to a rescue.  Essentially, I was asking for a glorified admission of an error.  The ITC Board of Directors sat as the appeals board and upheld the race marshal’s decision without comment or rebuttal to my arguments (ITC is the Iditarod Trail Committee, the non-profit corporation that runs the Iditarod). 

Let me start with Alaskan tradition.  I had a healthy dog team and wanted to continue the race but was withdrawn from the race for “slow progress being made.”   At that time, about six days into the race with 10 days or so remaining, I was approximately nine and a half hours behind the next team.  Being in last place, my team was carefully checked by race veterinarians.  They all agreed the team was healthy.  Additionally, race judges seemed to think the team was fine as there were no negative reports on the team’s condition.

During my only conversation with the race marshal, I had asked to continue the race.  He said I could choose to scratch; otherwise he would withdraw me.  To his surprise, I didn’t scratch.

Alaskans have always rallied behind mushers who wanted to continue.  Historically, this has even included mushers who officially were withdrawn but continued with the race anyway.  I did not join them but chose to abide by the rules regarding withdrawal and be evacuated.  At the time I was withdrawn, I wasn't aware of that history.  In any case, moving forward without the guarantee of support from Iditarod, including the availability of my drop bags, could have put my dogs at risk.

The point is, pulling a healthy team when a musher wants to continue is certainly not what Joe Redington, Father of the Iditarod, or most Alaskans envision for the Iditarod.

Perhaps what is most disturbing to me is the lack of fairness with which I was treated.   In this process, there have been three elements of my treatment that clearly have been unfair.  First, the decision to withdraw my team was made prior to any discussion with me.  Given a musher’s team is healthy, a fair evaluation of either part of Rule 36 cannot be made without talking to that musher.   In fact, there are few if any rules violations that justify a decision to pull a musher without his or her input.  Certainly, determining whether a musher is “….making a valid effort to compete” cannot be done without talking to the musher.  Second, I was given no warning that I was in danger of being withdrawn for simply going too slow.   The withdrawal came as a surprise to me.  Third, the notion that the board of directors of the ITC could act as an impartial appeals board was and is absurd since they have a vested interest in presenting Iditarod and its staff as not having made errors.

The last contention I have is the removal for going too slow was not a valid use of Rule 36 as it was written.  

That the withdrawal was based solely on my speed was confirmed by the race marshal’s submission to the appeals board and reported in the Anchorage Daily News article by Craig Medred (http://www.adn.com/outdoors/story/797497.html).

During the 2009 race, there was no rule allowing a race marshal to remove a team based solely on speed.  The requirement of Rule 36 as it was written was that I be  ”… making a valid effort to compete,” not that I was competitive.  The race marshal never evaluated the question of whether or not I was making a valid effort to compete.   The word “effort” did not appear in the race marshal’s submission to the appeals board.

If Iditarod had wanted to be able to remove a team based solely on its speed, the rule would simply read that a musher may be withdrawn “who is out of the competition” or “no longer competitive.”  The phrase “and no longer making a valid effort to compete” would not have been included in Rule 36.  Many races do have rules that allow withdrawing a team based solely on speed.  Iditarod did not in 2009.  However, it does in 2010; Rule 36 was rewritten.

While it is my contention that there was no rule that allowed a race marshal to remove a team based solely on speed, it is interesting to note that the conclusion that my team was going too slow was at best questionable.  During the 2007 race, the last time the southern route was run, there were two teams that left Ophir four hours later than I was going to leave, and one that had left only an hour ahead of my scheduled departure.  All three completed the race.  Even my last leg from McGrath to Ophir (I did not stop in Takotna), as slow as it was, was only three minutes slower than fellow back of the pack musher,  Blake Matray.   Blake was coming out of his 24 and I was going into mine.   He was allowed to continue and I was not.   Finally, Rule 36 for the 2010 event allows the race marshal to remove a team for going too slow based on benchmarks.  If that rule had been in place, I WOULD HAVE MET the one benchmark I would have been subject to. 

I have tried every means available other than litigation to have Iditarod reconsider its position.  They have neither reconsidered what the race marshal did nor rebutted or even addressed the arguments above.  I now find myself with only the choices of giving up or pursuing litigation.  My lawsuit was filed on September 10, 2009.

While the arguments above speak to why my lawsuit is justified and valid, they do not actually capture my motivation.  The reason I am pursuing this, more than anything else, is I want to change the arbitrary manner with which non-competitive withdrawal is handled.  I am afraid that even though rule 36 was rewritten and benchmarks are now in place, non-competitive withdrawal will continue to be handled in an arbitrary manner.  

The ITC’s response to my lawsuit, unfortunately, supports my fear.  My lawsuit claims that, “The ITC agreed with dog team mushers to operate the Iditarod sled dog race in 2009 pursuant to a set of written rules.”  In its response, the ITC specifically and completely denied this.   Beyond this, the ITC’s defense is based on the premise that it does not have to follow its own rules. 

I am gravely concerned that even though there are now benchmarks in the rules, they will not be followed.  I am equally concerned that this lack of commitment to the rules ultimately can affect every musher in the race.

I am not so much angry with the ITC and how it has handled me as I am disappointed.  I am, however, hoping changes will be made and Iditarod will move to being the great race we all want it to be.  I remain an avid supporter of the Iditarod. 

Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat.

Theodore Roosevelt, Speech before Hamilton Club, Chicago, April 10, 1899.