 |
Re: [RC] Chicken Little Hysteria? - heidiPlease Reply to: kim kimfue@xxxxxxxxxxxx or ridecamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ========================================Indeed one is sometimes. And I've found that "friends" who resort to the sort of hyperbole and Chicken Little hysteria that has been too often used in reference to this topic are often cumbersome. Heidi, Who would have thought just a short time ago that the USEF would take away any qualifying criteria for the WEC in 2006. It seems to me the the "Chicken Little" hysteria you talk about is actually more like fact and if you choose the "bird" analogies continue be an "ostrich with your head in the sand" if you choose. This is just the latest in a series of developments with USEF....wasn't there just a discussion about how AERC can no long use the name "National Championship" for it's NC as USEF has claimed title? We have no control over USEF but they sure seem to have some kind of control over us. Why is that? Whether the USEF has any control over AERC remains to be seen. They have claimed a rather generic phrase, and again, certain ridecampers have told us that the sky is falling. Quite frankly, I think this is just another case of hyperbole and overreaction. And while I vehemently disagree with the proposal of removing the qualifications for nomination, it is a gross exaggeration to think that this will have a major impact (or really ANY impact) on AERC. Please, tell us just in what way this will cause AERC riding to deteriorate? It has no impact whatsoever on our own vetting standards, sanctioning processes, awards processes--or quite frankly on ANYTHING relevant to AERC rides. Now just for discussion sake....not advocating one position or another. What is wrong with the board discussing this issue? What if AERC chooses NOT to be the recognized endurance organization of USEF? Does AERC I decide that issue or does the entire board and/or membership decide. Nothing is wrong with the board discussing ANY issue--what IS wrong is the notion that the thing will be changed by any discussion by the AERC board! We have people jumping up and down screaming for the AERC board to "do something!" about it when in fact, it is not anything on which they can act. At most, they can make a resolution stating non-support for such proposals--but the difference will be made by those members of AERC who actually are in positions to have any say--those who are members of AERC-I. (Which, Truman, does not act like any other AERC committee, which is why one has to pay separate dues to it--which you say you may choose not to pay, which is one way to voice your opinion, and which I just did choose to pay for this year, precisely so that I COULD have a recognized opinion. AERC decreed long ago that the AERC-I would have a degree of separation from AERC, which has its points and its drawbacks--personally, I think it is a darn good thing that it HAS some autonomy, so that it can't be run by the obvious "anti-international" faction which has been rampant in AERC since the inception of the committee, but rather is run by those who DO have in interest in international competition as a thing separate from AERC!) Please review Steph's excellent posts on the relationship between AERC, AERC-I, and FEI. I am surprised by Truman's adamant denial of previous knowledge of how the system is structured, since it has been structured thus since the beginning of our involvement in international riding, and Truman purports to have been a member of AERC-I for well over a decade. Where does the line get drawn in your book....if USEF chooses not to change the new policy on requirements for the WEC in 2006 would you, Heidi, continue to support that organization? Will you continue to support an organization that will allow 6 year old horses that have never been in a 100 to represent the US in the WEC? It's hard to set the example you talk about so often when we may be sending less qualified horses in 2006 then we have in previous WECs. It seems this is a lot more then "chicken little" hysteria. And it seems that once again, those of you who seem to have an agenda to rush in and bash FEI riding are not reading what is being written. Again, read Steph's posts. The change is in the nomination requirements--NOT in the requirements necessary to compete. Big difference! Horses are nominated a year or more prior to the event, and there is still the minimum FEI requirement of having done at least one ride at the distance--ie 160km or 100 miles, and horses to be 7 years of age. The USA has long had far more strict requirements, and I support those more strict requirements--eliminating requirements for nomination and eliminating requirements for competition are NOT one and the same. Reacting so strongly on misinformation does, in my book, constitute hysteria, bird analogies or no. Heidi =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= 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!! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|