Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

Hi Heidi,

  I think because you fervently believe in keeping the Arabian breed as pure as 
possible and are upset by the results of this lawsuit, you might be reading Mr 
Krause's comments as supportive of the terms of the settlement when in fact, you, and 
I, have absolutely no idea how he feels about it.  For all we know he might be 
angrier than hell that these half-arabs are being crammed down AHA's throat, or he 
might own several himself and be tickled pink.  My point is that whatever he FEELS, 
he WROTE about the settlement, not its terms, and he did so as President of AHA, 
responsible for making that which is a fait accompli as palatible as possible, not as 
Myron the Ridecamp poster who can say any damn thing he wants.  For the following 
arguments, I will try to use Occam's Razor as my justification, "one should not 
increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain 
anything" or KISS <kind>.  [BTW, I am just a little old lady trying to get herself 
and horse into decent enough condition to do 50's again, not a breeder and only a 
recently-rejoined member (cheapie version) of AHA (saves on re-registering my new 
horse).]
> I read #2 to be extolling the virtues of accepting the horses as well. 
> One might argue that the "business benefits" would be the cessation of
> legal fees, I suppose--but it is "benefits" in the plural, and I read that
> to mean increased business for the association and its members, inferring
> trafficking in these horses.
Since Mr Krause doesn't say there is any virtue in accepting theses horses, I fail to 
see why you think he did. And as to the plural "benefits", besides legal fees there 
will be savings in staff time and office expenses, travel fees for court time.  I can 
imagine that there will be better relations with Arabian organizations in other 
countries that might have supported allowing these horses in which in turn will 
facilitate the exchange of data on horses registered elsewhere in the world.  I'm 
sure an AHA exec could come up with many more "benefits".  Better yet, reading the 
terms of the lawsuit would spell out EXACTLY WHAT AHA GOT in exchange for accepting 
these horses.  Which brings up another point... of what benefit is it to current AHA 
members to accept as pure, documentably impure horses?  Sure it benefits the SA 
breeders, but THEY don't belong to AHA.  Unless there is a buried proviso that states 
from now on, partbreds with at least 99.8% Arabian blood can be registered with AHA 
as purebreds, the members don't get diddly.

> I also see #3 as assuming a whole heckuva lot--it doesn't "settle" any
> disagreements "between camps" as he puts it.  That's sure a good glossing
> over.
I agree that it doesn't settle people's disagreements on this issue but it does put a 
LEGAL end to the dispute.

> And while #7 lists the "milestone" as being the freedom of lawsuits, the
> wording that this is a "successful" conclusion certainly leads one to
> believe that he was firmly in favor of it.
Remember which side of the argument AHA was on.  They did not support accepting these 
horses so clearly being forced to accept them could not logically be called a 
"successful conclusion".  Again, he is clearly referring to the settlement, not its 
terms.  And yes, I can see him being "in favor of it" if "it" is a settlement that 
succeeds in legally resolving this issue from Hell.

Regards, Diane


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp

Ride Long and Ride Safe!!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=