Re: [RC] Here is to hoping it is not - Elizabeth Walker
On Nov 18, 2009, at 10:01 AM, Sandy Adams wrote:
Read what I said - I said - IF MORE RIDES - not new rides - went this way, a huge number of us are priced right out of the market.
It ain't gonna happen. I doubt very much that there are enough riders willing and able to support those prices to make that a sustainable practice. I give the RMs credit for enough smarts to figure out that if they charge an FEI price for a ride where they *need* the volume from non-FEI riders to meet costs, they will end up deep in the hole.
perhaps it is time for FEI to manage and sponsor their OWN events under the eye of USEF which would be most appropriate.
I guarantee that if you do that, AERC rides will suffer. USEF will find corporate sponsors for the rides, who will be happy to pay money for facilities and other incentives to local vets, support people, land managers, etc. They will be totally oblivious to the fact that they scheduled their ride right on top of an AERC ride, using the same venue. The Land Manager will come to AERC and say - sorry, they have money to give me to support their ride. Pick another place / day.
AERC is *far* better off dual-sanctioning FEI rides, and running them under the umbrella of the AERC.
As an aside, I was bothered at a ride not too far past when I was forced to work with the FEI pulse box to vet system. The RMs just decided to stream line the vetting process so all of us "AERC ONLY" riders had to vet through like the FEI riders. As a rider who does not have crew - more than I THINK 5 times in 15 years - i was not allowed to take my horse to get a drink or food etc - and when I TRIED, I was told to get back in line if I did not want to be DQ'ed and BTW< strip your saddle off your horse (and ostensibly, apparently, drop it in the dust, since I have nowhere to put it.).
That is then an issue between the rider and the RM. If things like this become an issue, they should be raised up so that they can be discussed.
