Re: RC: Charges only pertain to AERC members

["Nancy Mitts" <mitts_n@hotmail.com>]

I think we need to understand what you (and others who have posted)mean by 
"charges" and "penalize"?
If someone files a protest, AERC can find a member in violation of AERC 
rules & punish them by taking away their points & denying them entry to 
future rides for a set period of time. All riders are "day members" that is 
what the $10 non-member fee is. If someone files a protest, a person can be 
found "guilty" of violating rules, & prohibit from entering future AERC 
sanctioned rides. They will have no points to be taken away. (And, if the 
protest is upheld, you get your money back. It's purpose is to discourage 
frivolous complaints.) AERC as a body has no authority to find anyone guilty 
of criminal charges and assess penalties whether they are a member or not. 
Any other type of prosecution would have to be pursued by the legal 
authority having juresdiction at the location of the ride. Any person can 
inform local authorities of alleged violations of the law. AERC membership 
would not have anything to do with it.

Nancy Mitts
AERC # 8558 (4700 miles)
Monte Mitts # 5851 (7000+ miles)


>From: Don Pollock <donp@dcr.net>
>To: Ridecamp <ridecamp@endurance.net>
>Subject: RC:  Charges only pertain to AERC members
>Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2001 22:28:24 -0400
>
>I was surprised to hear that if someone rides their horse to the point of 
>dying
>and they are not and AERC then there is no recourse to penalize the rider
>through AERC action.  I think this is something that can be accomplished.  
>The
>AERC should make every registered rider in a ride whether a member or not,
>accountable and understand they are liable for the overall health of the 
>animal
>and will be prosecuted if need be for malicous killing of an animal, in 
>this
>case a horse under AERC regulations for the ride. If this is not in the 
>laws of
>the AERC now then it should be taken up at the next BOD for inclusion.  
>However
>every horse that has died at an AERC ride has not done so through maliceous
>behavior of the rider.  Any death of a horse at a ride should be assumed 
>not to
>be maliceous at first and to be proved later at a hearing.
>
>I havn't been in the discussion much lately but have been reading with 
>great
>interest.  I am not a lawyer either.  But I think AERC should address the 
>issue.
><< donp.vcf >>


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp