In the December AERC News, Randy Eiland is right to question the
whole matter of international riding and specifically dual
sanctioning (FEI and AERC) for upcoming rides. He allows that
he doesn't know a lot about FEI rules and he expresses some
concern about the "international mentality." That's one of the
great things about AERC, there is room for those who wish to
ride with AERC rules only in all sizes of rides (including
"little old AERC rides") and for those who wish to ride FEI only
from national events right up through official international
events. And now,we can even have events that combine the "best"
of AERC and FEI in some rides. As I see it, these combined
sanctioned rides have lots of advantages for riders, ride
managers, endurance ride organizations and the sport:
1) It gives riders and ride managers a chance to become familiar
with both sets of endurance ride rules, i.e., you have to know
the rules if you're going to implement them. Knowledge is
usually more satisfying and less dangerous than ignorance. So
this gives us all a chance at learning and at being more
positive than dangerous.
2) In experiencing both sets of rules, riders and others can
assess the value of the rules from either AERC or FEI.
Ultimately, it is the competitors that will, in time, have the
final say about rules.
Certainly, AERC rules have had a vital (overwhelming) influence
in the FEI rules for endurance. I suspect there will be
additional modifications of the FEI rules because of experience
gained using AERC rules and perhaps visa versa. What I think all
of us strive for is the best rules for the sport. My 30 years
around the sport has proved to me that we mostly reach good
decisions, although sometimes very slowly. The lesson I take
from this is that if we keep the good of the sport in mind, we
will most likely, in time, arrive at sensible rules, and there
can be two (or more) sets of rules depending on which group
you're riding with on any one day.
3) When we ride together we learn we aren't them (FEI) and
us(AERC), but that we are just "us." Maybe we each have
different goals in the sport, yet as Randy points out, we are no
better than the horse we're riding and our ability to ride them
well.
To answer Randy's questions, first we need to define what rides
may be dual sanctioned. Rides that include just riders from a
single country with only a limited number (defined number) of
foreign competitors are likely to be dual sanctioned [FEI names
these rides National Events (CN), Frontier Events (CF) and
Friendly Events (CA)]. However, World Championships, World
Equestrian Games, and the Olympics in which any of the 108 FEI
nations may enter individuals or teams must be run under FEI
rules only.
It is also important to know that there is an "intermediary"
between ride management and FEI. It is the National Federation,
American Horses Shows Association (AHSA). AHSA will help
interpret FEI rules and regulations for those wishing to have an
FEI sanctioned ride.
1) Does my vet have to be FEI approved and what does that entail?
Is there going to be additional cost to us for FEI approval?
While it may be desirable to have a veterinarian with FEI
credentials, it may not be necessary for a CN ride (riders all
from the host nation). It is important to have at least one
individual who is either a certified FEI official or veterinarian
to help interpret/implement FEI rules as they apply to a
particular ride. This is likely to be a requirement for the ride
to be sanctioned. Briefly, for an individual to become FEI
sanctioned requires experience, completion of an FEI course,
passing an FEI test, being nominated by one's National Federation
and accepted by the FEI.
The details of this process are beyond the scope of this
communication, but can be obtained by writing AHSA (or myself).
To maintain FEI certification, one must stay current on the FEI
rules and be active as a judge or veterinarian.
Under current circumstances, there will not be extra costs to
have a ride sanctioned by FEI and AERC if it is a local CN ride.
This could change, but I feel confident the current AHSA
endurance committee will resist any additional costs.
2) If there is a conflict of some kind in interpretation of an
aspect of the ride, which rules have precedent, AERC or FEI?
Good planning and communication should prevent any major conflict
in interpretation. Further, the important fundamentals; care of
the horses and fairness for all competitors are part of both the
AERC and FEI rules. If there is a minor grievance, I would
imagine ride management, the head veterinarian and the FEI
official would meet to determine a fair and sensible resolution.
If a ride manager anticipated such a conflict, they could
announce before the race which rules would have precedence in
case of conflict. In the early going of dual sanction rides, we
should seek harmony not conflict; I think the host organizations
(AERC & FEI) will want to do so. After all, we're doing this
mostly as an exercise in learning.
3) If an alleged violation or misunderstanding occurs, how is it
resolved with respect to ride management, AERC Protest& Grievance
Committee, and FEI?
In a conflict, ride management is obligated to work with all
parties to find a fair resolution. Both AERC and FEI have
grievance procedures. Which is chosen would seem to be a matter
to be decided by the ride management and/or the person with the
grievance.
Certainly, it must be understood that the outcome of the
grievance in one organization will not necessarily affect the
standing of the grievance in the other. I feel certain both AERC
and FEI will wish to maintain the right of riders to grieve, and
that these processes will be separate and unaffected by the
other. One of the reasons FEI has a Ground Jury and an Appeals
Committee at FEI rides is to resolve most grievances on site.
There is an additional FEI appeals process with ultimate decision
authority which is rarely ever used; in part because the FEI
Ground Jury regularly upholds the decisions of the Appeals
Committee. FEI certainly would have no authority to reverse the
decision of the AERC Protest & Grievance Committee nor would AERC
have authority to reverse the decision made by the FEI grievance
process. They would each stand within each separate
organization.
4)Does FEI/AERC dual sanctioning require certain marking
criteria, such as certain colors and distance apart?
No, if it is understood that there will be a variance of FEI
prescribed marking. The intent of standard marking set forth by
FEI is to assure fair competition for all competitors. If it
makes no sense to use FEI marking and the FEI officials are
satisfied the marking used will allow all riders to follow the
trail fairly, then other marking can be used. FEI becomes more
rigid about all rules the more the ride involves foreign
competitors; but for CN rides rules are meant to assure fairness
for competitors, safety for horses and to make sense. Again,
that is why it is important to have at least one qualified,
experienced FEI official at these rides. They have the authority
to make these sorts of decisions on rule interpretation.
5) Does an FEI/AERC dual-sanctioned ride require a steward?
No, stewards are not always required, particularly at CN rides.
Again, FEI officials are helpful and if one can arrange to have
several qualified FEI officials available, ride management's job
is made easier.
6) Is a helmet mandatory at an FEI/AERC dual-sanctioned ride?
Yes, helmets and stirrup guards are required at FEI sanctioned
rides at all levels.
7) Is there a dress code? Tack requirements? Could they
disqualify riders who did not adhere to these requirements?
Only at international rides does FEI insist on a specific dress
code, and then, most specifically at ceremonies. What FEI does
require is that the tack used is safe for the horse; I would
require the same at any ride (AERC or FEI) of which I was the
manager.
Yes, there are more questions that can be asked and will be. What
is needed is a spirit of cooperation and a desire to learn from
experiencing and experimenting with both AERC and FEI rules. It
would be unwise and certainly not good for all of us who love
endurance horses and the thrill of endurance competition to
become confrontational about details of rules. It seems to me we
need to look to see how rules affect fairness and safety of the
horse. If the rules accomplish these fundamentals then we
shouldn't hassal too much over details.
Finally, I do not agree that FEI/International is a glorified
version of NATRC riding. We can thank AERC members who have
represented endurance riders on the FEI Endurance Sub-Committee
for assuring that FEI rides are anything but NATRC rides.
Thanks for the opportunity to be a part of the dialogue.
JERRY R. GILLESPIE, DVM, PhD.
Kansas State University
Phone 913/532-5708
FAX 913/532-4309
e-mail gillesp@vetmail.trotnet.vet.ksu.edu
Rick Stewart
stewart@postoffice.ptd.net