DAL Issues-Response

[Roger Rittenhouse-vmaxept <roger@vmaxept.com>]

AERC

BOD DAL ISSUES

A few questions have been asked of the members running for the DAL
position on the AERC BOD.

FEI ISSUES
AERC has the AERC INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE to manage and control the
endurance competition at the FEI level. This committee is not like the
other committees of AERC. They are a separate self managed origination
loosely coupled to the BOD by the AERC-INT Chair. The BOD does not
intervene in the management, decisions or procedures established by this
group. The BOD should only offer advice as needed. The financial cost of
doing business is within the budget of AERC-INT. There is no AERC
general funds used to support the AERC-INT efforts. 
AERC through the AERC-INT should support this level of competition.
Insuring the association with FEI type events does not impact the
standard US ride formats.
AERC has no responsibility to provide support or direction to riders or
ride management related to participation or sanctioning of rides under
FEI level of competition. That function is within the responsibility of
the AERC-INT organization.  Ride management has the option to offer an
FEI ride along with the standard AERC ride. There should be no impact on
the local ride format. I see no  difference between a dual sanctioning
of AERC and IAHA rides. The FEI riders must conform to the few unique
rules of FEI.
No compensation to AERC ride managers should come from AERC. The only
support for the FEI event should come from AERC-INT and the rider entry
fee.

MISC ISSUES

1. I have no problems with the publication of rider DNF status in
Endurance News. It is not to censure a rider but to show that we
complete a very high percentage of riders and the process of veterinary
control does work. Riders who withdraw under RO, must vet out. The
policy is in place for this procedure. I do not believe this places some
undue stigma or targets riders that do not finish.
2. Completion Criteria is acceptable as established. We need to insure
adherence to the policies.
3. I believe there is and always will be a very small percentage of
riders who over extend the abilities of their horse during competition.
The problem exists at all levels. The strict adherence to the 'fit-to
continue polices' will reduce the occurrence of these instances.
4. We have enough rules, just enforce them. One of my serious issues I
have with the current vet procedures and lack of following the polices
is the 'assisted' trot out, both at the VC and the finish. I have
observed this situation many times at rides. The issue is that of 
hazing, chasing, cropping  or just plain forcing a tried horse to trot
By this I mean NO ONE should aid the rider in the performance of the
trot out. No one should chase - clap or  throw stuff at the horse, run
along aside, or do anything to make the trot. The rider should have the
horse trained to trot on command. If the horse is too tired to trot
without the use of outside assistance then he may not be fit to
continue. I have seen a number of vets run behind a horse to get him
trot as well as other crew members running along side to make the horse
trot. This includes riders 'tapping' the horse with a crop every step of
the way, and when they stop tapping the horse stops. Horses are asked to
trot at the finish and they take 10 steps and stop. That is considered a
completion?  The veterinary polices are in place to prevent this. The
vets and ride management must just put them in practice. If we have a
125 ft trot lane then all horses must trot down and back, under their
own will and ability. The ride should cue and encourage the horse to
trot but no whipping hazing or pulling dragging should be tolerated. I
have seen this done and it is just too inappropriate and not within the
policies of the sport. I would not be very proud of my self if my horse
had to be presented that way to gain a completion. Horses that are shown
under this method are not fit to continue. I guess you note this is a
real issue with me.

5. LD was established as a training format to develop horses for higher
level of competition. However, the venue is now its own level of
competition. Personally I do not agree with the current LD program of
horse placing or  BC award. Since the program is in place and it does
appear to work well, I recommend no changes to the program EXCEPT
rider/horse miles. Since this form of competition has been accepted as a
form of 'endurance riding' and since the rides are sanctioned by AERC,
and riders pay membership, they should be able to receive the credit for
mileage. I would support a change to the LD award program to INCLUDE ALL
LD miles in the total lifetime mileage of the horse and rider. I would
NOT support the use of LD points in the overall endurance award program.
The LD competition award recognition program is working well.

6. NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP. I fully support a one time head to head
National Championship type of event. I believe this is the only venue
that is fair. Trailer races and point chasing is not the answer. The
current program is under development. It IS working. We need to make
small fine tuning adjustments each year. We need to look at the
qualification criteria each year and adjust the requirements as the ride
grows. This ride after only 2 years, is accepted by more riders each
year. We need to let the program develop. This type of competition is
not for everyone, nor can everyone compete. It is a step up from the
standard local backyard endurance format. It offers those who desire a
Championship race, a chance to race it out with riders with
approximately the same level of performance. The weight division format
is the BEST method for this event.  It offers a level of competition
based on the accepted weight division protocol. I commend Randy and the
original developers of this concept for taking the lead in establishing
this type of an event. I see this getting better each year. The ride
here in the east next Oct will be the best ever. As sponsorship programs
grow, we will get the funds to make the ride better. I believe this ride
can become the major event it should be. The ROC WAS our AERC National
Championship. It was the ride to do. Let this current format develop and
this ride will be the same. I would be pleased to work on the NC Ride
Committee.


7. VOTING ISSUE. The BOD has the responsibility to govern and manage the
AERC. We have to make decisions related to the general running of the
business, both financial and legal. All issues are not part of the
general memberships concern - nor should they be. There are issues which
impact the business only. The issue of the protest process and drug
testing are NOT part of the general membership consent. I also see
veterinary criteria as decision made outside the consent of the
membership. As a governing body we have the responsibility to provide
you the members with complete accounting of our actions pertaining to
the management of the business. We provide this information by BOD
Minutes and position papers presented in EN. However, the members must
have a voice in the polices, procedures and protocols that directly
impact the competitions. How the rides are run, scored, vetting-
procedures (not criteria), and the over all rules of competition. When
possible all these type of issues should be brought to the membership.
This is accomplished by EN and the BOD taking issues back to the regions
for comment. The board members should address these issues at rides. The
process of implementing  these type of changes may require the board to
propose the issues at one BOD meeting then vote at the next meeting. As
with all governments, we are elected because you the membership believe
we have the best interest of the population in the forefront of all
decisions. You entrust us to do the right thing, in this case run the
business according to proper and generally accepted business and
accounts practices, to provide proper support for riders- awards and
record keeping, and to insure the welfare of the horses. If you do not
agree with the positions of the board members, it is your job to vote
for others that will best represent the consensus of the whole
membership.


I trust I have responded in an appropriate matter on these issues. I
will do my best to promote the positions of the members. If some of the
points are clear or you do not understand my position, please email,
call or write. 

I am not sure if this can be published in the latest issue of EN. I will
post to Ridecamp. Of course RC is NOT AERC as it only addresses a small
portion of the membership.

Respectfully submitted
Roger Rittenhouse,  Candidate DAL
AERC 8263



Randy- I am sure all the BOD are NOT on Rc, would you please fwd this to
the list.

I appreciate the vote of support from
Donna Synder Smith  and 
Maryben Stover