Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

First of all, I am NOBODY. I do not have the power nor influence to stop 
or change the way this ride is overseen. Mine is but ONE voice. It would 
probably take thousands of voices from people who feel the same as I do 
to make "The Adventurists" organization even re-think their support 
system for this race.The Adventurist don't need or WANT the approval or 
input from AERC or it's members anyway. I believe that the reason 
ridecamp has been so full of heated debate from all sides is that we all 
belong to the AERC and our organization has been asked by other horse 
groups to look at all aspects of this race and either give our support 
or make efforts to stop it or at least voice our suggestions for changes 
to it. The president of our AERC organization has already made a 
statement that this ride NOT be run as is. As I said from the start, I 
am new to this sport and much of what I have learned about the care of 
horses in endurance and long distance riding has come directly from this 
organization and the suggestions of mentors, vets and those here on 
ridecamp. I DO believe that the criteria and requirements that have been 
put in place by our organization is there for a reason and not just 
whimsical numbers pulled out of a hat by inexperienced people. From the 
time Wendle Robie made the wager that started the Tevis cup and launched 
competitive distance riding, there ensued a debate on the welfare of the 
horse. DEBATE IS GOOD and has resulted in well thought out and 
acceptable standards that we as members of AERC now feel that we MUST 
adhere to as endurance riders and ambassadors of the sport. The Tevis 
ride has now become the world wide STANDARD for how to safely run an 
extreme long distance endurance ride and is looked up to and envied 
around the world. NOW there is great debate on how much oversite and 
care needs to be in place in this NEW extreme race in Mongolia. We as 
members of the AERC organization apparently BELIEVE in the logic and 
responsibility of having acceptable requirements that address the needs 
and care of the horse or we wouldn't be members. Over the years since 
Tevis first started the ball rolling, because of increased  research and 
experience with horse physiology, the requirements and criteria that 
organizations such as ours have in place, have changed, become stricter 
and leaned heavily toward the care of the horses on these rides to 
compensate for the mistakes that their RIDERS might make. In order to 
ride the Tevis cup, you have to have already completed 350 documented 
competitive miles and so has the horse, before your application is ever 
accepted. The horse is continually monitored at short intervals 
throughout the race. If a horses heart rate does not drop and stiffness 
of gait is observed among Soo many other things, your horse is pulled 
from the race. The article in this months Endurance News by Susan 
Garlinghouse talks of still raising the criteria bar some more. Just  
because this Mongolian race is to take place in a foreign country does 
NOT mean that we as members of  an endurance group that has standards, 
should suddenly  feel that those standards are NOT worthy or necessary 
anymore. It would seem odd to me that when our opinion is sought by 
other horse groups concerning the safety of this race and acceptable 
risks, that we would have a double standard and say, "Gee we wouldn't 
allow it or sanction it here, but what the hell, we don't REALLY care 
how they do it there". We should care. We are ambassadors of a sport 
where we are claiming to care for the welfare of the horse in endurance 
races anywhere in the world. One major concern is still that if 
something goes terribly wrong and this DOES get world wide attention, it 
COULD indeed affect our own rides here.Why NOT voice our opinion that we 
think the horses in this ride need to have better and guaranteed care 
and a real support team in place and the riders needing to have 
documented miles to qualify? I needed to have AERC send a document to 
the Quilty that I had completed 100s before they accepted my application 
and why not? What did it hurt? Nothing. What did it help? It proved that 
I at least had SOME experience at riding endurance, pacing and the 
ability to complete and take care of my horse. Not a guarantee, but at 
least a step in the right direction in regards to a 100 mile ride. 
Should less really be asked for a 1,000 km ride? I truly AM sorry if I 
got out of line in any way in this heated debate. The opinions of so 
many people on this forum have helped (I hope) to make me a better rider 
and Kats opinion is one that I respect most all of the time. Kat put on 
the Main Divide 100 which was my first 100 miler. It proved to be as 
tough if not tougher than the Tevis, just ask the winner Kim Fuess who 
has finished Tevis several times yet still deemed Kats ride the CSMF of 
all time. (use your imagination). Kat indeed is tough and her opinion on 
how this Mongol ride will be as easy for the horses as a ride through 
Kansas with a guarantee that no riders will ride their horses into the 
ground, may indeed be right on the money and I hope, with my heart in my 
throat, that that's the case.When the Tevis was first run it was untried 
and still proved to be a success, and based on the criteria that Western 
States Trail put into place, Dr. Dave Richardson (Duck) put forth a new 
idea for XP rides but he still used the same basic criteria for horse 
care. Those XP rides were untried too but proved to be a success.This 
Mongol race is also"untried" but if it follows that same basic criteria 
we have come to expect and respect, then maybe it too will prove to be a 
success. And only the outcome will tell us how wisely it was run.I feel 
that it is best to try new territory with MORE caution and fore site 
than less, to assure the success of the outcome. I am an adventurer 
myself and if this race does end up being a great and well run race with 
all the necessary support in place to prevent undo distress or injury to 
the horses, then you bet it will the next difficult ride on my list to 
attempt to do. It is great to see this sport grow and branch out but in 
a responsible way. If our organization is asked to sanction this ride 
and deem the oversite acceptable, I don't think that the way the ride is 
ride now, that our approval is wise. If we as a group, feel that changes 
have been made that would make the outcome a more assured success and 
safer for the horses, you can count my voice being one in favor of it. 
Till then, I'm willing to hold out and voice my opinion and sign any 
petition till I see those changes have been made. And again, my heart 
felt apologies if the wording of my opinion came off as self righteous 
or arrogant. I did not mean it to be. I appreciate this type of forum to 
share opinions that can illicit change that is hopefully for the better. 
I am usually "lurking" and absorbing everyone else's thought here and 
every now and then I get my panties in a bunch or a burr under my saddle 
and speak up. Maybe TOO strongly this time. Still, I will sign the 
petition and watch the race take place anyway, as it probably will. I 
truly do HOPE for the best outcome and that all 800 ponies make it out 
healthy and not worse-for-the-wear.
Melissa Margetts


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

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!!

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