First of all, I find it very distressing that when I asked
the national office to forward this message this morning, they refused to
do so, stating that here had been a large number of messages received and
that Terry Wooley Howe was going to make a "synopsis" of them. I feel
if any individual takes the time to write their BOD, that the BOD should
receive the full content of the message, even if all they do is hit the
delete button.
That being said, I hope you will do me the courtesy of
reading this message. To some of you, it may be garbage, although I can
claim riding just about every distance from 25 to 150 in one day (bet most
of you didn't know I was an LD'er. Guess you could say I'm finally coming
out!). Funny, I always that that every member had a right to an opinion, no
matter the total number of miles, years of membership or distances
ridden.
I am a west region ride manager and put on an average of two to
three rides a year. I have been doing so since 1989. I do not award an AERC
LD BC award. An alternative is offered which we call BC-10. We have a
drawing when people sign in. Those 25 milers who draw #1 through 10
can show for BC if they complete the ride. The riders and vets love
this - it gives everyone a potential chance to show for BC and the
incentive from the start of the ride to ride carefully. We use the AERC
form, but do not consider time or weight. At this time, there is no
National AERC LD BC award. No one is missing out on a chance for it
because, contrary to recent publications, it doesn't exist!
However, this argument seems to me more about our fundamental
definition of endurance. Is endurance 50, 100 or more miles, or do we now
consider 25 miles to be "endurance"? I think the AERC needs to answer this
question first, before mandating a BC award on 25 miles. When limited
distance was brought into the AERC fold, it was considered a novice
division with the intent of educating and training up and coming riders for
endurance. I strongly believe that should continue to be the primary
purpose of LD rides. We all make choices in life. We can choose to
stay in the rookie division or strive to move up. As a riding instructor I
could have chosen to stay at Level 1 and make less money or I could choose
to move up the ranks and be appropriately compensated. A dressage rider can
choose to compete in training level for years, but they do not expect to
win prestigious national awards.
We hear much about "growing the
AERC". I question how much "growth" is necessary and the methods used
to obtain this growth. Due to good management our organization has a
healthy bank account and is able to contribute to other
organizations. So why do we need to encourage career 25 milers? Is
this truly in the best interest of our organization? How does anything
other than a novice division at this distance contribute to the "welfare of
the horse"? By encouraging an award based on speed and time, we are, in
fact, running marathons. Interestingly enough, this idea was presented
years ago by the FEI, and was soundly denounced by our board
and international committee.
Over the years my ride entries have
stayed about the same - between 60 and 80 horses per ride. The
percentage of 25 mile riders has increased. In the early years there
were 3 or 4, now there are around 20. Most of them seem to be on the
edge as to whether or not to do 50. If the 25 mile BC rule
is mandated then I believe my 50 mile ride entry would increase as there
would not be a 25 mile ride offered.
Obviously, I am opposed to a 25
mile BC award that must be judged out of the top ten. At your phone
conference I hope you will discuss this matter in preparation for the
mid-year meeting. I trust we will see the pros- and cons discussed in
the AERC News well before the mid-year.
Sincerely,
Becky Hart #
1917 West Region Ride Manager Shine and Shine Only
Rides
