Ridecamp: [RC] More Thoughts- and those going away

FROM   Roger Rittenhouse     roger@xxxxxxxxxxx
Well too bad so many are going away. When this list gets so bad  at
times - I just stop posting - but I read.

I have found out some great ENDURANCE related information. Applied it
and asked questions to find out answers. I dont always get the
response I prefer, but any response is better then NONE.

Such has been the case with the posts I have made this week.

I have a LARGE amount of private posts, MOST positive with reports of
many of the same issues I addressed. Sure wish they were public.

I may cut and paste a few of the comments.  You would be quite
surprised about some situation we have. More issues were addressed
then I defined.

I have noted MORE response from the riders about these issues then I
received from the closed BOD list. In fact as we have seen 2 BOD
members jump in on the discussion. AND I might add provided a good sound
position for or against my suggestions.

MOST of the time I bring up issues such as I have presented here on
RC to the BOD and they are are ignored. go figure?


The only way to either improve our sport or to accept it as is,
 is to discuss issues. To pretend all is just perfect is blind sided.
Do many issues need fixing NO - but some do need to be addressed and
adjusted.

Sadly though I see very little hot items ever being addressed by the
AERC BOD or many members either.
No one wants to go into harms way and step out and take a stand or
MOST importantly take on those in charge.
That was the MAIN point made by most of my private posts from riders, they are
truly concerned about repercussions if they spoke up.

The issues   I addressed will never be dealt with by the BOD.

We will never see the 2 VC rule or the 2 VET rule added to our rules.
Or another I left out - the vet license issue. That is vets without a
license to practice,  vetting a ride, and maybe treating a horse.

Never will the issues of hazing be addressed, since one HAS to make
the horse TROT for evaluation. That one just LOOKS bad to see a rider
wacking a horse on every stride and pulling on the rope. It is a
public display of what 'someone' may call abuse.

Vetting policy and standards will never be hard coded. Not to restrict
vetting process, but to prevent the current changes or misapplication MANY see in the
process. The consistency from vet to vet and ride to ride is not
there.
The standards are far to variable and left up to the free form
interpretation by the vet in charge, and there is no recourse for the
riders.  (In spite of some comments - I have NOT been a victim of those
actions)

Since we dont have horses dying  all over the place and large numbers
of horses are not being treated, then we dont have any problems.
Right?
Well, in fact horses are dying and horses get treated at many rides.

The data, as in public information, is not provided for all to review.

Horses have problems and die under both vetting protocols - that
is; the easy going vetting style we have in some regions to the strict hard line
process we see at other rides. It does not prevent a horse from being
damaged or as some would call it abused.
Therefore the call to codify the vetting process and protocol is
unfounded. ???

Since we choose to assume we do NOT have ANY problems within AERC
either with our rules or vet polices then we can just let it be -
until some one outside AERC requires us to take action.

Eventually rules will forced on us weather they prevent horse problems
or NOT. It is  HOW it looks to 'others'  By that I mean codified
vetting protocol and procedures.

We do not have data or records to support the claims we provide for the
safety and care of the horse.  Read on - COMPLETION percentages are
NOT the issue.
We do not have data or reports to offer
to a review group, that details  the treatments and or death of horses over the
past 5 years or more.
 The 'rights' groups do not want to see the completion
data, they want to see the  DNF -treatment and death reports, AND what
we are doing to prevent that problem.  At the very least - LOOK like
we are doing something.

Remember the bashing from last year with the new rider - with the
horse that died?
Has anyone seen any changes to address that?  Many demands were made
from this list. The rider is still running(racing) - I think?

 Well horses dont die often and our percentage is lower then others and we do have very good
treatment methods to fix damaged horses, so there is no issue here. ?

It is all based on the premise 'it ant broke dont fix it'

So we do nothing  for now.

I just happen to think we should 'fix' issues that are not really
broken but 'look' a bit cracked. The perception is to the public and groups
that would shut us down.

I suspect within     5 years we will be running our rides under
a system very close to the Australian process, log books, chips,
graded events with performance levels and tests to move up..outside
intervention and review..rider censure and so on.
Control  will be placed on us from outside.

 Roger Rittenhouse



=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
 Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=