The producer, manager and FUND PROVIDER of the event is the non-profit
Virginia Trail Conservatory, Inc., FOUNDED BY AERC MEMBERS ( I was exposed to
endurance riding at the first Old Dominion at the age of thirteen when it was
still in Leesburg... and that don't make me nothin' special ) to provide
funding to create, maintain and preserve trail networks throughout the state
of Virginia and elsewhere for ALL USERS including hikers, mountain bikers,
campers, fisherpersons, all terrain vehicle operators, hunters and horseback
riders. The divisions created by separated usage groups and
conservation-only minded folks has led to the loss of many trails to various
user types not too mention the constant unproductive bickering among users.
The VTC was created to develop methods to combat this fractionalization of
trail users uiniting them instead to combat those who would deny access to
public lands without real merit to any of the users. So to the composer of
messages on this service who implied the VTC was " a trail group with no
endurance experience whose motivation was dollar signs " I personally send a
big raspberry. Now go wipe off your face and read on
The board members of the VTC have been planning the production of the "Mouse
Mountain" event for over two years ( well before Nutramax contacted Valerie
Kanavy concerning the possible sponsorship of an endurance event ) to serve
both the desire of endurance riders to compete as well as to provide one of
many "meager" sources of funding for the VTC's trail oriented operations.
The "Mouse Mountain" event was scheduled AND SANCTIONED by AERC for May 1997.
As Val has stated in her letter on this service, Nutramax, a generous sponsor
of other equine events, approached her regarding the sponsorship of an
endurance event. Nutramax DID NOT OFFER TO PROVIDE PRIZE MONEY FOR THE
EVENT... we suggested they offer to provide it to the competitors directly
and we also suggested the amounts and placings. Nutramax has NEVER donated or
paid any moneys to the VTC, it's members, officers or board of directors.
Nutramax has no management oversite or input into any facet of operation of
the VTC or the Cosequin Challenge. Under IRS and USFS guidelines they cannot
and this was brought to the table early on in discussions between the VTC and
Nutramax. I would also like to say that to the individual that stated "
Nutramax sent some kid out with a briefcase full of cash etc etc etc.." that
it would be nice in the future if you would take five minutes next time, use
a phone and attempt to confirm these wonderful "psychic visions" of yours
before you provide the rest of us with your pessimistic interpretations of
"facts" based on assumptions. Nutramax sponsors or advertises at numerous
equine events, and desired to be recognized by the endurance community as
well. The AERC members of the VTC "guided" them into the role that they have
assumed through their sponsorship involvement of the "Mouse Mountain" event
renamed to the "Cosequin Challenge", and as such take full responsibilty for
the situation we have placed their firm in with regard to the almost
slanderous statements and vicious attacks of their company, products as well
as their intentions offered by some users of this service. To Nutramax I
offer my sincerest apologies on behalf of those few AERC members who chose to
make these reactionary statements or threats regarding their firm or
products instead of voicing their concerns to either ride management or AERC
both of whom would have welcomed their viewpoints on any subject regarding
the event. Hopefully Nutramax, and any other potential sponsor, will stick
with all of us while the issue of corporate sponsorship and cash awards to
competitors are reviewed by all of us involved in endurance riding.
Cash and product awards are provided directly by Nutramax and other sponsors.
The VTC, AERC, nor ride management can make no garruntee, nor will we the VTC
intervene, in the disbursement of any cash payments or product awards between
any individual or company with regards to, or on beh2alf of, any competitor
of the Cosequin Challenge except as outlined by AERC rules. This is due to
IRS guidelines with regards to 501-C-3 non-profit corporations and "quid qou
pro" donations as well as to ensure ethical AERC event management.
Statements on this service regarding a pending "AERC board mail-in vote
concerning whether to approve sanctioning for the Cosequin Challenge". Any
AERC directors feel free to correct me on this point but, my understanding is
the "Mouse Mountain" event was sanctioned by AERC during the Summer of 1996.
The "Mouse Mountain" event has, to date, not been found in violation of any
AERC rule and as such has not been subjected to having had it's sanctioning
revoked. The "Mouse Mountain" event management notified AERC of a change in
name of the event from "Mouse Mountain" to "Cosequin Challenge". "Event
management also notified AERC of Nutramax's intention to provide cash
directly to competitors as allowed for in AERC rules and also of our
intention to secure a ride steward as required by AERC rules. Concerned, as
are all of us, of the possibilty of unworthy competitors entering merely for
the cash awards and the potential for abusive riding or tactics, we requested
that AERC allow ride management to impose certain mileage requirements of the
applicants to the 100 mile event. My understanding, based on the statements
of an AERC BOD member, is that it is this proposed request for prerequisite
mileage of the horse by our ride management team and veterinarians, WHICH WE
WERE NOT REQUIRED TO ASK FOR, that is to be considered for
approval/disapproval by the mail-in AERC BOD vote in February and NOT any
sanctioning approval/disapproval of the "Cosequin Challenge" which had
recieved sanctioning under the name "Mouse Mountain".
Before suggesting to Nutramax that they offer the cash awards directly to
the competitors, ride management checked with the AERC rules, as well as an
AERC director for their opinion as to the AERC specific legalities of doing
so. Finding that it was indeed allowed and had been PROVIDED FOR DIRECTLY IN
THE AERC RULES, and acknowledging that this had existed evidently
unchallenged even by the "grassroot" endurance riders of this message service
in various forms at other events from sweepstakes money to high end prizes
including trailers and certificates for same, we proceeded in the direction
of making the suggestion to Nutramax. Why those of you that are undoubtedly
so involved in the "grassroots" of this sport have neglected to voice your
concerns to the AERC BOD regarding the AERC rules as written allowing for
cash awards in the past and, instead, laid in wait for some unsuspecting
group of volunteers to blindly venture into this arena before making your
concerns known to your BOD, the general public and a generous sponsor is
beyond my understanding of the knowledgable, outspoken "grassroots"
individuals you portray yourselves to be.
The incentive cash awards will have in urging some competitors to compete in
a manner different than they are allowed thereby causing abuse, injury or
death to the animals. I only have one thought on this entire issue. Anyone
who believes the awarding of money for placement will lead to some riders
SUCCESFULLYcondoning abusive behavior/riding techniques to place well MUST
also believe that the AERC criteria for the management of the events, and
control of the horses before, during and after the event does NOT really work
and that, theoretically and statistically speaking, some amount of those
highly competitive consistent top five riders now involved in the sport are
guilty of this type of riding and are getting away with it somehow. I don't
believe that nor have I witnessed it.
The reasoning behind the offering of cash awards to top ten competitors.
This was not some whimsical spur of the moment idea designed to propel our
ride to the forefront of other events. Our intentions with our "Mouse
Mountain" event was to design a ride that would eventually secure the
sponsorship of a company such as Nutramax who was willing to do exactly as
they have agreed to do. We were fortunate that a combination of "dumb luck"
combined with our association with such a wonderful ambassador of our sport,
Valerie Kanavy, placed them directly in our lap at such an opportune junctor
in the design of our initial event. I have seen many areas closed down to
both horses and events. It would have been nice to have been able to muster
some political muscle from either the general public, business or the media.
Like it or not, our sport is not recognized by the general population and
that alone is what will lead to its' eventual demise. As populations
increase, we will witness the loss of more and more areas currently utilized
by this sport due to political pressures from those uninformed or careless of
our interests. One method to combat this before it happens is to use the
available media to not only educate the public with regards to our sport but
to interest and involve them. This, combined with Nutramax's offer to
investigate possible media promotion/broadcast of the sport via this event,
was the ideology behind the cash awards. These awards are not for the rider,
nor to increase the "draw" of top-level high entry paying competitors to our
event (why do you think we have a 25 and 50 mile event? These are where we
will make the money which will go to supporting the VTC and its' trail
interests, also, how many of you seriously think someone could
"profesionally" compete, i.e. make a living, for $5,000 if the majority of
the riders offered it. Go ahead and produce a budget of 26 rides winning 75%
of them and then subtract your expenses training and utilizing multiple
horses to do so. It doesn't add up. ). The cash awards are designed to
inspire the general public to become interested in the sport of endurance
riding and, hopefully, siding with us when the issues of land use regarding
our sport arises in the future. Whether this would function satisfactorily
none of us could say, but since AERC rules specifically allow this, we
elected to test the theory. Also let me state that safety was one issue which
was tantamount in the structuring of the prizes leading to their being
designed so deeply in the top ten to help reduce a rider's temptation to do
something stupid. With regard to media coverage of an endurance event, I have
recently seen comments regarding the broadcasting of endurance by the likes
of ESPN and others. I would remind those of you that are perhaps naive on
this subject that the 1996 World Championships were not covered by ESPN
because they required a payment of $50,000.00 by the organizational comittee
( so I was told in Kansas ) to do so. So how do you on this message system
propose that we promote this sport if they won't even carry an International
event of this caliber? Also the Premiere Horse Network ( PHN ) which we were
seeking as an ally for our sport, tentatively scheduled to begin
cable-satellite broadcasts of equine activities in 1996, has been delayed as
they seek $72,000,000.00 from investors to begin operations. I believe we
must rely on the commercial interests of sponsors such as Nutramax and others
to this end. I agree with many of you regarding the need to review how AERC
allows for the cash awards issue. I do NOT agree with any of you that
vehemently state that there is no room in this sport for cash awards of any
amount. If AERC were to eliminate the cash awards option from our sport this
is what will happen. Those desiring them will establish a new sanctioning
body. This group will then secure many sponsors that AERC rides will later
have little or no access to. If this new group is smart, they will duplicate
what AERC has done with regards to the "amatuer" class of riders in effect
having two separate types of rides. Those with money, and those without. Then
they would require riders of cash rides to qualify on a continuing basis at
so many non-cash rides in the previous 12-18 months to provide support of the
"grassroot" events by direct involvement of these aspiring cash ride
eventers. This is very basic, but how long before you think a new sanctioning
group with corporate sponsors and media involvement competing for trail time
on public lands leads to the demise of AERC sanctioned ride after AERC
sanctioned ride? Why should we allow, or aid by exclusion, the creation of a
competing organization when, like it or not, money is entering this sport for
good or for bad. The answer is to decide the why's and how's of the issue not
the whether or not. It seems to me that from what I have read thus far, some
of you have some experience with this in other equine activities as well as
good ideas regarding the issues. I would suggest the tone of this message
system change from attacking something that was done in good faith and with
the best interests of the sport in mind to that of researching how money has
been included incorrectly in similar situations and suggestions that may
prevent AERC from making the same mistakes.
I would also like to take this oppotunity to point out that MANY of the
individuals that have spouted off their negative response to rides that
offer cash or high end prizes ALSO attend these events as competitors,
vendors or both. While you may state "I don't ride for the money" you still
actively support the event offering it. Maybe it's me but I find this an
example of hypocrisy in action to state how "grassroots" you are and how
"evil and damaging" any event that would payout to the faster riders is when
you actively support the producers of the event. How is anyone to respect
your position and opinion on the issue when you admittedly turn a blind eye
to it while handing over your cash ?
Nutramax is not the ONLY commercial sponsor of this event, only one of the
newest. Will those of you that "attacked or proposed attacking" Nutramax also
go after these other LONG TIME AND SUPPORTIVE sponsors of our sport for
aiding in producing the event, sponsors, I don't mind stating , that
contacted us and ASKED if they could possibly be involved ? I have NEVER
before had a sponsor call and ASK if they could be involved, until now.
Thanks Nutramax.
In closing I would invite anyone to E-mail, call or write, but don't go after
any sponsors of any endurance event no matter how irate you may be especially
on a public forum such as this, that's just downright ignorant and
irresponsible and does not serve the best interests of our sport, AERC or its
members. I would ALSO SUGGEST those responsible for the publication of
messages on this system seriously reconsider the continued availability to
the public of SOME of the messages on this system as currently drafted with
regards to content referencing ANY sponsors. In the future, I would also
suggest the excercise of some personal responsibility by all with regard to
the posting of messages and replies in a public area. As an example, by
posting my name and address, and the related messages, I have been forced to
"no comment" a reporter questioning the validity of the vet controls as
defined by AERC when implemented in a "amatuer" versus "professional" ride
(his terms... not mine). After reviewing these messages, I can see where he
got the idea to investigate this angle. I guess we can all hope to see some
"great" press on the treatment of horses at endurance rides in the near
future. Thanks a lot guys...way to advance the sport!
To those of you that support our event, or our position,...THANKS A LOT.
To those of you who do not, but at least voice your opinion in a responsible
well thought and non-destructive manner... I Thank You Even More...sorry
supporters...just laying some honey for the flies.
Anyone else should go back and read their posts and THINK next time they
respond to this topic.
If you feel the need to attack this issue, LEAVE THE SPONSORS ALONE, attack
me...Hell, I can take 24 hours in the saddle, I can take your abuse too.
To those applicants of the "Cosequin Challenge" who have called this past
week...hang in there guys, we'll be sending the applications out to you by
12-15-96 as soon as we work out the legaleeze on the forms ( there's a ton of
it ) .
Tracy Ingram
President
Virginia Trail Conservatory, Inc.