Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

That is very, very sad.  For a RM/sanctioning director to place a 2-3 week buffer around his rides is a disservice to riders.  Here in CT region, we have a lot of rides, and try to have rides just two weeks apart if they are in the same general area (such as in Texas - generally just a few hundred miles apart).  We'll often even alternate weekends for rides in TX and OK, since they, for the *most* part, attract different groups of riders.  That has worked well.  Very few RMs in CT region have felt the need to try and insulate their rides with "no ride" buffers of 2-3 weeks surrounding them...doing so reduces the number of weekends available for rides, and hurts both riders and RMs...most RMs realize that.  Your ride sounded delightful...I'm sorry to hear that it won't happen this year due to politics.

 

Dawn Carrie, Texas

 

On 3/18/08, Rusty <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear Friends and fellow riders,

 

I regret to inform you the Scottsdale ride that was to take place on November 1, 2008 has been cancelled. Below you will find my email to AERC and a small taste of the frustrating process I went through in trying very hard to get this ride to happen again.

 

Rusty

 

Without Prejudice

 

Dear Mike, Susan and Kathleen,

 

I would like to express my great dissatisfaction with the entire process of sanctioning the 2008 Scottsdale McDowell Mountain Endurance Ride (SMM).

 

I tried in vain for two months to confirm several proposed dates for SMM, all of which were refused because they were within two to three weeks of one of Mr. Eiland's numerous rides (which appear to take place more or less on a monthly basis during the southwest ride season). Mr. Eiland's closest ride is some 450 miles from SMM. Are there any other regions that use a 450 mile distance as a reason for refusing sanctioning for rides that are at least two weeks apart?

 

It gets better: I was approved sanctioning for a date that turned out to be one week before Marilyn McCoy's ride in Sonoita – a distance of 180 miles from SMM. This seemed not to be an issue for Messrs Eiland or Taylor, but I chose not to proceed with that date because of the proximity and out of respect for Ms. McCoy. I was finally approved sanctioning for SMM for 11/1/08 only after I made it known that I would start proceedings to protest the sanctioning procedure.

 

Now, three weekends after convention, I have now been notified that Moab Canyons Pioneer, a first year three-day ride, has been sanctioned for the very same date as SMM. This ride is 470 miles from mine and was, I assume, approved by Mr. Eiland as a voting member of the Board of AERC in full knowledge that it is on the same date as SMM. Should I conclude from this that there are two different rule structures relating to sanctioning?

 

To say that I am frustrated by this process would be an understatement. In fact, I am now insulted. The most significant outcome of the sanctioning shenanigans is that the AERC members have just lost a ride – a ride that that attracted more than 115 riders and 30 volunteers last year.

 

If the Moab Canyons Pioneer Ride is indeed to take place on 11/1/08, please be advised that I have decided to cancel SMM and have notified Judy at the AERC office. I refuse to participate in such a flawed process that does not serve in the best interests of the rider membership of this organization.

 

Yours, disillusioned,

 

 

Rusty Toth

M19810

 

Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.15/845 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 6:39 AM