Ridecamp: Re: [RC] Ride shortages: maybe it's time...

On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:23:58 -0500, "A. Perez" <walkergirl@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>... to reconsider the rule that says LD rises can only take 
>place at events with 'real' rides (50 -100+ miles) (I know the 
>orginal topic was about multi-days, it just raised a pet peeve 
>of mine). The intent of this rule was, I assume, to make sure 
>LD rides at other locations did not draw down attendence at the 
>longer rides, and in effect, guaarnteeing that the "Real 
>Endurance" riders continue to be subsidized by the LD riders.

Actually, no.  The AERC started the LD program due to the popularity
of the "novice" rides at AERC events, a demand from our membership for
some kind of recognition of those rides, and most importantly a desire
to assure proper standards and veterinary control at those rides (the
ones held at AERC endurance events).  But the AERC had (and I presume
has) no interest in santioning LD rides on their own.

LD rides fit within the AERC umbrella only when they are part of an
endurance event, with endurance rides.  IMO it really doesn't make
sense for an endurance-ride organization to sanction standalone LD
rides.

Of course, managers and clubs can have clinics and trail rides of any
kind without involving the AERC.





=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
 Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
 Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp

 Ride Long and Ride Safe!!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=