AERC has quite a few sponsors who aren't 100 percent, all inclusive,
related to the sport of endurance. Do all endurance riders use only
Sundowner or Gulf Coast trailers to bring their horses to endurance
rides? Not from what I've seen; myself included. Do all endurance
riders use only Alpha-Plex Internet Solutions when they're performing tasks on
the computer? Do all of you subscribe to "Arabian Horse World" magazine?
Is all of the art work inside an endurance rider's home paintings done by
Susan Norris Romera?
Heidi, when the BOD starts telling me that I need to buy and ride a feral
horse at an endurance ride that is when I'll start to think you might be right
here. I have yet to hear anyone saying that at all. Heck, a
sponsor is a sponsor, and to blow off the BLM because you have some sort of
personal problem with the agency is not valid.
I'm more likely to take a free horse (yes, I understand that there really
is no such thing) than I am to purchase a Susan Romera painting (they're
beautiful but I doubt I can afford it) or another horse trailer (give me
one for free and I'll be first in line). These are all sponsors for
AERC. Why are you attacking BLM because of this? What's next?
Are you going to go after Sundowner or Gulf Coast or "Arabian Horse World"
because there's something about them you don't like?
Well, I already replied to this exact same post on the
AERC list, and Howard didn't like my answer there, so I'll rephrase
it.
AERC is about endurance riding. AERC's involvement
and endorsement of the program makes a public impression that the BLM mustangs
would make good endurance mounts. We just got done with a thread in
which we (and Howard quite frequently and vocally) discussed the need for AERC
to investigate deaths and treatments, and to find ways to reduce same.
One of the often-mentioned items was horse selection and horse
suitability. So now, on one hand, Howard would have us trying to educate
riders about horse suitability, and on the other hand, have us merrily
embracing an adoption program that is largely made up of horses not suitable
for the sport. I gave this a label on the other list, and Howard didn't
like it. OK, Howard, I won't put a label on it here, but it sure is
strange that you can so wholeheartedly embrace the death/treatment issue, and
then turn right around and suggest that it is a Good Thing for us as an
organization to endorse horses that are likely not suitable for the
sport. I'll let others fill in the blank here.
As for the lack of suitability of some of your horses
for the sport, Howard, good for you for recognizing that, but again, I'll
rephrase what I said on the other list. Over there, I stated that I
didn't feel I had any like that, other than a couple with physical injuries,
and your response was pretty much, "Who cares?" Well, Howard, the same
goes for the lack of suitability of the ones you have. Who cares, unless
you bring them to a ride? Their existence is not germain to the
fundamental conflict here, which is the fact that AERC is espousing an
adoption program of largely unsuitable horses. We all know that
unsuitable horses exist--hey, that was a part of the whole death/treatment
thing. They shouldn't be out there in the first place. And
therefore, AERC should not be endorsing them. Is that so difficult to
grasp? BLM should be seeking partnerships with sports or activities to
which more of them ARE suited. Our three therapeutic mustangs would make
great poster children for BLM. But not for endurance! And I'll
reiterate what I said in the beginning of this post--AERC is about
endurance....
Why are some folks getting so upset about all of this? It seems
to me that BLM is looking for ways to improve the chances of these horses
going to good homes. Those who came up with this idea are right on
about endurance folks being a logical choice. We have some of the best
horseman in the world and it takes a really good one to train a wild feral
horse and make them ride-able.
This is a good thing. It's called a partnership for a
reason. We benefit by aligning ourselves with BLM concerning trails,
which, in case you haven't noticed, are kind of necessary to put on an
endurance ride. They ask, from us, to try and place a few of their
horses into good homes. Hey, you don't have to buy a raffle
ticket. And, if you win, you don't have to actually take home a horse
you do not want. If you're so against the program then don't buy a
ticket.
I'm a little wacky when it comes to horses. I feel that every
horse on earth deserves to live with someone who will take care of
them. Radical, I know, because there are those who think
superior breeding is the only thing that counts. I
disagree. I think what is more important is what is inside one's
own heart, their love for horses and the desire to put the needs of a
fragile creature ahead of their own. If we, as horse owners,
don't take care of them, who will?
The thing is, why is it all about endurance anyway? Don't some of
you own horses that you would never consider entering in a 50 or 100
miler? I own three that I would not run in endurance, ever. It
doesn't have to be entirely about the sport, does it? Can't it, for
once, be about the horse? Someone has to own these horses unless we
plan on slaughtering all of them. Why can't it be an endurance
rider? No one is forcing you to do anything here. We need to
hook up with as many agencies as possible to survive, and BLM is a good
choice, no matter how you feel about their program.
I think it's an interesting and courageous idea. Hey, if the
riders don't like it, it won't work. No one will buy a raffle ticket
or take home one of these horses. My guess is, some of these honorable
creatures will find homes. I've seen too much heart at our rides for
it to turn out any other way.
