A FEW YEARS LATER THE OLD DOMINION FOUND ITSELF FIGHTING ABOUT THE REMOVAL
OF THE MANDATORY NEXT DAY COMPLETION EXAM FOR FEAR THAT IT WOULD ENCOURAGE
RACING, DAMAGE TO HORSES, AND DEATH TO THE SPORT AS WE KNEW IT.
Let me try to ofer a different perspective. We already have the
awarding of high value products. This is simply evolution which is painful,
but is going to happen. The question is how well is a cash sponsored event
going to be managed both by the Organizing Committee and the sanctioning
body AERC. The organizers are not ignorant. They know that there are deep
concerns in the community and that if they mismanage this event with horses
getting hurt or dying, then they will lose the support of the good and "
professional quality riders " that they are trying to attract. So you should
expect a high quality of management, rule checking, and vet control. If this
does not occur, then the wrath of the endurance community combined with the
legal system ( humane officers have police and arrest powers in Virginia)
will spell the end of this endeavor. So lets look at what we as a community
can do to make this a success, for I really don't believe that by simply
objecting, that the Consequin Challenge is going to be stopped.
AERC has had 20 years to prepare for this event which has long been
predicted. How well AERC manages its sanctioning, and oversite is crucial.
Right now it is not prepared to do so ; though it certainly can be prepared
by May, 1997.
First; AERC will have to consider the idea that sanctioned rides of
a certain class ( ie Championships, and those which offer money or valuable
prizes) will have a Steward (judge) who will see to it that the rules are
followed by both riders and Organizers. Some guidelines must be changed into
rules. I know that this will be painful, but with a lot at stake there have
to be rules with the officials to enforce them.
Second, the notion that Stewards' rulings can be appealed to AERC
needs to be changed or we will not get good officials. No other equine
discipline makes their judges subject to second guessing. I know that we are
adverse to " more rules" but if we want to do this well; then AERC must step
up and make rules that truly spell out what riders and organizers can and
cannot do.
All this I suggest is evolution; painful, disruptive, and making our
own futures as riders, trainers, and devotees to the sport nervous.
Pandora's box is open; we wanted more money backing, we wanted more news
coverage, we wanted all these good things and now we are going to have it.
The box is not going to be closed because we are in pain.
Twenty years ago, there were some who predicted:
a. Sub 10 hour 100 mile rides,
b. That use of the Canter and Hand Gallop would be common- place and perhaps
be beneficial,
c. That there would be races to the finish after 100 miles.
All of those looks into the future were treated with disbelief; but
here we are. What we as a community did was manage the change with educated
riders, better horses, better nutrition, better management which couldn't be
" fooled" and most of all high quality no nonsense vets backed up by
determined management. I believe that that is exactly what should be
expected and demanded of the ride management and AERC.
We have had professional quality riders for 15 years, we just don't
see them getting a salary. The training and conditioning regimen of our top
riders are professional in time and quality of effort. Now they will compete
for renumeration and those who are not so professional will have a target to
measure achievenments just like the Race of Champions.
My suggestion is that we should consider that:
1. None of the bad predictions have to or will take place, that if we
examine the records closely concerning money type awards, we may not find
that all the bad things predicted are happening;
2. This really could be advantageous for the sport;
3. We should encourage and help AERC meet this challenge;
4. And finally we should expect and demand the highest caliber of ride
management.