First of all, I find it very distressing that when I asked the national office to forward this message this morning, they refused to do so, stating that here had been a large number of messages received and that Terry Wooley Howe was going to make a "synopsis" of them. I feel if any individual takes the time to write their BOD, that the BOD should receive the full content of the message, even if all they do is hit the delete button.
That being said, I hope you will do me the courtesy of reading this message. To some of you, it may be garbage, although I can claim riding just about every distance from 25 to 150 in one day (bet most of you didn't know I was an LD'er. Guess you could say I'm finally coming out!). Funny, I always that that every member had a right to an opinion, no matter the total number of miles, years of membership or distances ridden.
I am a west region ride manager and put on an average of two to three rides a year. I have been doing so since 1989. I do not award an AERC LD BC award. An alternative is offered which we call BC-10. We have a drawing when people sign in. Those 25 milers who draw #1 through 10 can show for BC if they complete the ride. The riders and vets love this - it gives everyone a potential chance to show for BC and the incentive from the start of the ride to ride carefully. We use the AERC form, but do not consider time or weight. At this time, there is no National AERC LD BC award. No one is missing out on a chance for it because, contrary to recent publications, it doesn't exist!
However, this argument seems to me more about our fundamental definition of endurance. Is endurance 50, 100 or more miles, or do we now consider 25 miles to be "endurance"? I think the AERC needs to answer this question first, before mandating a BC award on 25 miles. When limited distance was brought into the AERC fold, it was considered a novice division with the intent of educating and training up and coming riders for endurance. I strongly believe that should continue to be the primary purpose of LD rides. We all make choices in life. We can choose to stay in the rookie division or strive to move up. As a riding instructor I could have chosen to stay at Level 1 and make less money or I could choose to move up the ranks and be appropriately compensated. A dressage rider can choose to compete in training level for years, but they do not expect to win prestigious national awards.
We hear much about "growing the AERC". I question how much "growth" is necessary and the methods used to obtain this growth. Due to good management our organization has a healthy bank account and is able to contribute to other organizations. So why do we need to encourage career 25 milers? Is this truly in the best interest of our organization? How does anything other than a novice division at this distance contribute to the "welfare of the horse"? By encouraging an award based on speed and time, we are, in fact, running marathons. Interestingly enough, this idea was presented years ago by the FEI, and was soundly denounced by our board and international committee.
Over the years my ride entries have stayed about the same - between 60 and 80 horses per ride. The percentage of 25 mile riders has increased. In the early years there were 3 or 4, now there are around 20. Most of them seem to be on the edge as to whether or not to do 50. If the 25 mile BC rule is mandated then I believe my 50 mile ride entry would increase as there would not be a 25 mile ride offered.
Obviously, I am opposed to a 25 mile BC award that must be judged out of the top ten. At your phone conference I hope you will discuss this matter in preparation for the mid-year meeting. I trust we will see the pros- and cons discussed in the AERC News well before the mid-year.
Sincerely,
Becky Hart # 1917 West Region Ride Manager Shine and Shine Only Rides
