[RC] Racing vs Riding or Racing vs Racing - KimFue
It was very insightful to read Pauline's post. Her paragraph about no "true wilderness to conquer" resonated strongly with me. So many of us that endurance ride in the AERC talk about the "challenge of the trail" being one of the most appealing aspects of our sport. Obviously, in other parts of the world this is not possible so I guess the only challenge left to conquer is speed records. No doubt, if we here in North America, lost many of our wilderness trails and we were reduced to riding 10-15 mile loops several times that were basically groomed briddle paths, many of us might change our focus to "speed records" or more likely get out of the sport. Endurance riding or racing, is a competition, test, or challenge regardless of the many ways it can be defined whether it is stepping up to the challenges a technical trail presents, whether it is speed, or whether it is to see how many miles an individual horse can go in a lifetime or in a single event (like XP2001). If we are not interested in a challenge we would all just be weekend pleasure riders.
That said, it doesn't mean that because what seems to be the trend in other parts of the world and other riding organizations should be used as a model for North American endurance riding/racing. I find it disturbing that at the international level here, the WEC nomination requirements as well as the WEC competition age requirement was lowered. The age requirement for competition was dropped to 7 years old when all previous PAC & WEC required a horse to be 8 years old to compete. So it seems that at least at the highest level of competition here we are following a "fad" trend that other countries, some with much less historical and actual experience in the sport, for no other reason except that right now they are winning on young horses. From what Pauline writes, the use of young horses has more to do with economics and accolades/recognition of the rider then what is best for taking that horse to it's highest potential. By highest potential, you can include speed in the equation. Although, horse welfare is a consideration at the individual competition level as is shown by the strict criteria used at these races, it says nothing for the long term longevity of the individual animal. This is the major fault I see in "endurance" outside of North America. It is not the speed of the individual competitions. Again, understand that I am not looking at individual riders or stables or barns but the way endurance recognition is promoted through the National organizations and FEI. When one recognizes the rider/owner and not the horse, when there are no incentive awards geared towards longevity - there is nothing to balance the "speed" component which is obviously a necessary ingredient for the "challenge" in the UAE and some European endurance organizations. In this sense, I feel that our program is superior if horse welfare and putting the horse first is an important value. Speed is not the demon here - it is the value we put on the individual animal that is the difference between endurance in North America and endurance in some other parts of the world.
Economics is always a consideration. What I find interesting is that some of the programs that are not into "longevity" are either run by very wealthy barns and stables (example the Sheiks of the UAE) or have government funding (The French endurance team). When you think about this, there is really not a dire economic reason to push young horses. In fact, it seems to me that most of us in AERC, have more economic reasons (like many of us are not wealthy that participate in endurance) to push young horses into competition or run through a string of potentials.
I think without a change in the "value of the individual animal" that endurance in North America and endurance abroad will continue to move in two different directions. As a participant in AERC endurance, my focus is that as the US tries to compete at the international level in the "speed challenges" we do so keeping the welfare of the animal first. Although I believe that 90% of the individual involved at this level do feel that way, the fact that we lowered nomination requirements and the competition age show something quite contrary. I hope that this trend does not trickle down to the AERC level. Although many of us may not think that this is possible we must remember that those that were responsible for the WEC requirement changes are almost all AERC members.
I appreciate hearing from endurance riders abroad. It really does bring some perspective to how endurance is viewed in other parts of the world. Just as there is so much diversity between the different regions in AERC, there are different views on endurance riding/racing world wide. As important as it is to appreciate the different types of riding/racing world wide, it is just as important to understand what values were in place when setting those riding programs and where the individual horse figures in to that value system.
Kim Fuess
AERC # 6648
Inevitably with money entering the sport and people starting to 'professionalise' and trying to make a living out of it - speeds are up, average career lengths of horses are down
Horses are started younger, have less time to prove themselves, the pool of potential endurance horses is growing as breeders produce more stock.. riding costs are rising all the time ( think extra administrative stuff, passports, chips, registration, ...) so horses have to start earning their keep earlier.. etc.
More emphasis is placed on rider fame rather than horse fame - read some ride reports from say UAE and you'll know who won but not whom he/she (well, rarely she) was riding!
UAE & even parts of Europe ofcourse don't help from a geological aspect - no 'true' wilderness to conquer anymore at low speeds... what else can you do in the desert but RACE?
