I truly welcome all the businesses/organizations who want to "throw
money" into the sport. However, I think the $ should be put where they
do the most people/horses the most good like research and trails. The
only thing I take issue with is big prize money. (Although I do concur
with those who note that people override horses for glory, when no money
is involved.) I just think a $ award encourages more people to do so who
normally would not even be involved in endurance.
I also worry about the prize money working it's way down to 50 and 25
milers. I'm sure you could see the possible results of this scenario.
This was what I meant when I associated the UAE marathons and the
thought of $ in the sport of endurance.
In another point on this issue, someone else also mentioned that the UAE
was new at this marathon thing. Not so. They've been running those 26
mile races in the Saudi desert for centuries. The point of the original
races was to eliminate all the stallions but the fittest. (I believe
there was also betting on the side). Then the mares could only breed to
the best stallions. Personally I think castration of colts is a much
more humane way to accomplish selective breeding. (But then, I'm from a
different culture).
Anyway, I think AERC should deal with the issue of $ in the sport. There
is enough concern on both sides of the issue to warrant action. This
issue has come up repeatedly and the only policy initiated so far is the
requirement of a steward at a ride with any prizes worth over $1000. A
steward can be any AERC member with 1200 miles or more.
Will I see you at the convention? Hope So!!
LindaVan