Re: Sanctioniong of AERC Rides

[K S Swigart <katswig@deltanet.com>]

On Wed, 9 Dec 1998, Joe Long wrote:

> The recent Bylaws change defines rides less than 50 miles in length as Limited
> Distance rides.
> 
> However, it should be clear to anyone that the only rides that can fit that
> definition are rides that meet the endurance/LD format as defined by AERC.  As
> Competitive Trail Rides have a minimum time limit, along with other rules that
> do not meet the AERC definition of an endurance/LD ride, they are clearly *not*
> endurance or LD rides -- and do not require (and can not get) AERC sanction.
> 
> The very fact that nowhere in the AERC rules, Bylaws, etc. are Competitive Trail
> Rides mentioned is further evidence that they simply have nothing to do with
> AERC and do not fall under any AERC control.  No changes are necessary.

This would mean that as long as I don't format my "fun ride" (whatever
distance it is) in compliance with AERC rules, then I don't have to
sanction it either.  Good, this means that I can have my 25 mile ride,
don't call it a Limited Distance Ride, and allow three year olds to enter
(since then it will make it so I can't get AERC sanctioning), and I can
hold it with my endurance ride.

Under that reasoning, ride managers will be able to drive a whole fleet
(not just the truck that Dane Frazier referred to in his president's
letter) through the rules and hold unsanctioned rides, not conforming to
AERC rules in conjunction with their endurance rides.....which, BTW, is
how I think it should be.

kat
Orange COunty, Calif.