In a message dated 7/25/2005 3:17:23 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time,
guest-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
I wonder
if the declining 100 mile rides being offered is related to the declining
amount of land available to have them on.
The number of hundred mile endurance rides is declining because it is
easier, for the rider, the horse and the management to conduct shorter distance
rides. That, coupled with the attitude of "I dipped my toes in the water,
so I must've been swimmin' " doesn't really engender a broad base of folks who
want to ride 100 miles. And that's a shame.
Our sport is a reflection of how most of us have come to live our
lives...whether we consciously want everything "curbside" or not.
The truth of the matter is, there is no real incentive to ride a hundred
miles on a horse...it's in the doing where the rewards of 100 miles of endurance
are uncovered...some at the start, some at the base of a horrendous descent,
some at an unexpected hole of cool water on a hot, dusty day. Rewards of
that nature will call to you in the middle of the night and you'll awaken eager
to condition your horse and put the pennies together for gas and hit the
road.
If the mass of endurance riders want to ride shorter distances, that's what
is going to happen.
Initially, this sport EXCLUDED horses and riders, by its very trying
nature.
Somewhere, the coin flipped and now, INCLUSION seems to be the driving
dynamic.
It's like the internet...it just IS...there isn't much real control it
seems...it just goes on and on.
Growth of something is not a bad thing, but when that "growth" becomes
"change" (at the cellular level), what was ain't no more.
