Re: ridecamp-d Digest V98 #39

[Kimberly Huck <khuck@magicnet.net>]

>------------------------------
Paula,

	We buy "No Ad" sunscreen from Eckerds Drug Stores.  It's cheap and it
works great! Kim.


>
>VervaetP@deruyter.K12.NY.US
>I have a horse with a white face/nose.  He gets sunburned in the summer. 
>Should I use regular human sunscreen?  Is there a product designed for
>horses that anyone's tried?
>Paula
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 12:31:08 -0500
>From: "The Vervaet's" <VervaetP@deruyter.k12.ny.us>
>To: "Ridecamp" <ridecamp@endurance.net>
>Subject: bit to hackamore
>Message-Id: <199801131708.JAA27738@fsr.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>VervaetP@deruyter.K12.NY.US
>I want to try a hackamore on horses that have been previously ridden in
>bits (mild types). Any suggestions in change over?  Do I just "do it", or
>is there something that I should do in-between to help adjust them to it? 
>What type would everyone recommend....mechanical hacks.....or other types?
>Thanks
>Paula
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 10:50:55 EST
>From: SandyDSA <SandyDSA@aol.com>
>To: barfield@primenet.com
>Cc: ridecamp@endurance.net
>Subject: Re: Prospects/Prices/etc
>Message-ID: <36f2f3cf.34bb8d60@aol.com>
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
>
>In a message dated 98-01-13 02:31:27 EST, you write:
>
><<  The direction of the Arabian show world over the recent years would not
>lead me to a "show" breeder for my next endurance prospect.  The high croups
>and somewhat light loins that get pinned in halter classes are not what get
>you to the other side of the mountain and back.  Not to mention the long
>cannon bones required for the height that sells in the show ring. >>
>AMEN to THIS - been there and seen it all!
>sandy
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 11:58:45 EST
>From: RUN4BEAR <RUN4BEAR@aol.com>
>To: barfield@primenet.com, ridecamp@endurance.net
>Subject: Re: Prospects/Prices/etc
>Message-ID: <9a741d86.34bb9d46@aol.com>
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
>
>In a message dated 98-01-13 04:04:34 EST, you write:
>
><<  The direction of the Arabian show world over the recent years would not
>lead me to a "show" breeder for my next endurance prospect.  The high croups
>and somewhat light loins that get pinned in halter classes are not what get
>you to the other side of the mountain and back.  Not to mention the long
>cannon bones required for the height that sells in the show ring. >>
>
>Also, the "show breeders" no NOTHING when it comes to performance
>conformation...neither do the judges.  PLUS, many of these horses are OVERFED
>and STEROIDED to increase early growth...too much too soon.  They are, IMO,
>NOT a good prospect (unless you are lucky enought to get the NICE one when he
>is 3 months old - even then, the MARE is often overfed to produce a bigger
>foal - that is transmitted on to a foal that is asked to grow to soon too
fast
>BEFORE he is born).
>
>Teddy
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 11:58:47 EST
>From: RUN4BEAR <RUN4BEAR@aol.com>
>To: bobmorris@rmci.net, equine_athletes@hotmail.com, ridecamp@endurance.net
>Subject: Re: AERC completion time rule - feedback wanted
>Message-ID: <dc331886.34bb9d49@aol.com>
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
>
>In a message dated 98-01-13 04:04:42 EST, bobmorris@rmci.net writes:
>
><< 
> Yes, Yes, something needs to change. Most particularly ATTITUDE!!  This is
> ENDURANCE RIDING not a Sunday picnic in the park. If you want to have every
> thing easy and sure then go ride on a merry-go-round (even then the thing
> may break down). Why can we not live with the thought endurance riding was
> not intended to be easy??? It once was "to finish is to win" Now it is "if
> I don't finish I will complain".
> 
> Guess being a Marine spoiled me.
>  >>
>
>Maybe it did, Bob.  BUT, consider the expertise of ride managers (some
>judgements regarding trail difficulty not made well, MANY courses not
measured
>well) and course designers (ditto) and good old mother nature....there ARE
>instances when times cannot be met through NO fault or decision on the
part of
>the rider.  I still vote for total RIDING time, not just total time.
>
>Teddy
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 12:59:15 -0700
>From: "Robert J. Morris" <bobmorris@rmci.net>
>To: "Steph Teeter" <step@fsr.com>, <ridecamp@endurance.net>
>Subject: Re: AERC completion time rule - feedback wanted
>Message-Id: <199801132001.MAA15086@fsr.com>
>
>Steph & Ride Camp:
>
>Long before the Trilby/Les episodes (my apologies to you both, but this is
>how it is recognized) I find in the 1980 Ride Managers Handbook (Jim
>Remillard was AERC Pres.) the following:
>
>A prescribed maximum time is usually set for completion of the ride.
>Typically this is 12 hours for 50 miles, and 24 hours for 100 miles
>
>This was an offshoot of the Tevis "100 miles in one day". My records do not
>extend back beyond that as far as Ride Managers handbooks are concerned.
>
>I have always been in favor of the 12 hour rule and continue to do so. (as
>you can see from my recent posts.)To me it is disconcerting to have
>persons,  with inadequately prepared horses and/ or not properly prepared
>themselves, who are not willing to be prepared to COMPETE, be given the
>same recognition as those persons making the effort.
>
>If at my age (and that also includes Arlene and many others of like
>longevity such as Bill Ansenberger, Julie Suhr and Bob Suhr and many
>others), if we ask no quarter, no special conditions, then let the younger
>set, those wanting special  considerations show why they REALLY need them.
>
>To finish is to win and winning is not a given in life
>
>Bob Morris
>Morris Endurance Enterprises
>Boise, ID
>
>----------
>> From: Steph Teeter <step@fsr.com>
>> To: 'bobmorris@rmci.net'; ridecamp@endurance.net
>> Subject: RE: AERC completion time rule - feedback wanted
>> Date: Tuesday, January 13, 1998 11:23 AM
>> 
>> Bob - I have a couple questions for you:
>> 
>> As Joe Long pointed out, there was originally NO time limit
>> imposed by AERC. The rule came about because of individuals
>> trying to ride a billion miles in one season, and the only way 
>> they could do it was if they walked the entire course. So they
>> did, and it kept ride managers up all night and drove everyone
>> crazy.
>> 
>> So, were you in favor of the new time limit rule when it was
>> proposed? I assume you were competing at the time. And
>> if so, why was 12 hours the magic number? This is still a
>> pretty slow pace for a *real* endurance ride.... and when the
>> rule was originally put in place, did it address the question
>> of variation in hold times, or did that come about later?
>> 
>> st
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:	Robert J. Morris [SMTP:bobmorris@rmci.net]
>> Sent:	Monday, January 12, 1998 9:00 PM
>> To:	Linda Van Ceylon; ridecamp@endurance.net
>> Subject:	Re: AERC completion time rule - feedback wanted
>> 
>> Linda and Ride Camp:
>> 
>> I very definitely disagree with Ramey. He fails to state the entire rule
>> 61.1 This rule pertains only to those finishing in the TOP TEN, not those
>> finishing in over 12 hours in a fifty!!!  Ramey , you should know
>better!!
>> 
>> <<The problem I have with the overtime situation is the diversity of 
>> courses we have>> 
>> 
>> This is the name of the game, meet the challenge and endure. No one said
>> the bear in the cave you enter would be in a good mood!!!
>> 
>> <<Then  if you have a tough 50, with two holds, or the weather gets
>really
>> bad,  etc...., you have more time to finish without an *exception* to the
>
>> rule.>>
>> 
>> This is ENDURANCE RIDING, not a therapy session to make every one feel
>> good. Adversity builds character and personal strength. These excuses,
>and
>> they are really excuses, would be a crutch for those with out strength,
>> with out the ability to take things as they occur. If I do not finish a
>> ride it is MY fault, not the fact there was not enough time, the trail
>was
>> mismarked, the weather was bad etc. IT WAS MY FAULT AND I DO NOT NEED AN
>> EXCUSE!!!
>> 
>> <<> I think something needs to change & I'm open to lots more
>> discussion.>>>
>> 
>> Yes, Yes, something needs to change. Most particularly ATTITUDE!!  This
>is
>> ENDURANCE RIDING not a Sunday picnic in the park. If you want to have
>every
>> thing easy and sure then go ride on a merry-go-round (even then the thing
>> may break down). Why can we not live with the thought endurance riding
>was
>> not intended to be easy??? It once was "to finish is to win" Now it is
>"if
>> I don't finish I will complain".
>> 
>> Guess being a Marine spoiled me.
>> 
>> Bob Morris
>> Morris Endurance Enterprises
>> Boise, ID
>> 
>> ----------
>> > From: Linda Van Ceylon <equine_athletes@hotmail.com>
>> > To: ridecamp@endurance.net
>> > Subject: Re: AERC completion time rule - feedback wanted
>> > Date: Monday, January 12, 1998 8:21 PM
>> > 
>> > Hi Steph,
>> > 
>> > I think Ramey's argument is sound.  We already have a rule to deal with
>
>> > the overtime situation.  It sounds as though Bob would disagree, but,
>to 
>> > me, it seems clear.  
>> > 
>> > .  And, it seems in some cases, there is a great 
>> > variation of the number of feet in a mile.  Here in our area, there are
>
>> > 5,280 ft. per mile.  That is why a winning time for a flat 50 is over 4
>
>> > hours and a tougher 50 takes over 7 hour to win.  Granted, sometimes 
>> > there are new courses or courses change and the mileages are 
>> > miscalculated.  But, for the most part, we try to keep our mileage 
>> > accurate.
>> > 
>> > On a really tough course, with two vet holds, it is really easy to be 
>> > pushing the 12 hour envelope.  The suggestions of other ride managers, 
>> > and many riders, seems to be "just make the course shorter, no one will
>
>> > ever complain about a course that is too short".  Well, I just don't 
>> > think this is right.
>> > 
>> > In my mind, the best way to handle the situation would be to change the
>
>> > rule to *exclude* the hold times and count the riding time only.  Then 
>> > if you have a tough 50, with two holds, or the weather gets really bad,
>
>> > etc...., you have more time to finish without an *exception* to the 
>> > rule.
>> > 
>> > We have particular problems with LD rides.  Because, when you include 
>> > the hold times in the total 6 hours they get, this magnifies the speed 
>> > they are actually doing on the course compared to the longer distances.
> 
>> > Let's say you have 2 vc's in your 25-miler and your 50-miler.  At 1.5 
>> > hours total hold time, the 50's must average 4.76 mph but, the 25's
>must 
>> > average 5.55 mph. while they are on the trail.  The 25's have to "go 
>> > like h..." to meet the cut-off.  This is not in keeping with my 
>> > philosophy of the purpose of LD.
>> > 
>> > I think something needs to change & I'm open to lots more discussion.
>> > 
>> > Lindavan, Buhni, Sunny, Fiddler, Rabbit & Rain Maker
>> > Equine Athletes <equine_athletes@hotmail.com>
>> > 2921 Moore Lane, Fort Collins, CO  80526
>> > 970-226-1099
>> > 
>> > 
>> > ______________________________________________________
>> > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>> > 
>> 
>> 
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 21:07:31 +0100
>From: Leonard.LIESENS@DG10.cec.be
>To: <ridecamp@endurance.net>
>Subject: Orthoflex new pad system
>Message-ID:
<WIN938-980113190802-64AD*/G=Leonard/S=LIESENS/O=DG10/PRMD=CEC/ADMD=RTT/C=BE
/@MHS>
>Content-Identifier: Orthoflex new pa
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>I gor finally my Orthoflex saddle. Wonderful. exactly what I was expecting
as color, but their new pad system...
>
>The one I rode during the Tevis had booties and the whole system was
looking perfect and did peerfectly work, I mean for Sukaro HCC, Steph's
arab gelding.
>
>But now they changed this and the saddle was delivered with a so_called
'numnah' which is made of 2 parts :
>- one is a white fleece shaped as a saddle with felt on one side and
something looking like wool (but it can be synthetic as well) on the other
side.
>- the other part is something looking like a regular dressage/jumping
saddle pas, but with a whole shaped as a saddle in the middle and velcro
attachments.
>
>No schema, no explanation or getting started to be found...
>
>I think that the white fleece goes on the horse with the whole part in
contact of the horse and the felt in contact with the panelling system.
>
>The pad with the whole seems to be there only as a finishing touch, maybe
to protect or hide the panelling system and presumely goes on top of the
first pad and around the saddle.
>
>Are other ridecamp buddies experimenting this new system and can you tell
me if I am right or not.
>
>Thanks for help
>
>Leonard, from Belgium
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 12:50:24 -0800 (PST)
>From: guest@endurance.net
>To: ridecamp@endurance.net
>Subject: Osceola National Forest post; Osceola l00 results Post;
>Message-Id: <199801132050.MAA17760@fsr.com>
>
>PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO GUEST@ENDURANCE.NET!!!
>You must post replies to the actual sender listed below.
>
>From: Jean Wonser 
>Email: cpfjean@bellsouth.net
>
> Please determine the problem as the two above news items do not appear on
the Archives other than their respective titles (January l2 and l3, l998).
As a browser  I'd like to read  the results. etc.
>
>Thanks
>Jean Wonser
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 13:05:10 -0800
>From: charla cranor <arabian@flash.net>
>To: suendavid@worldnet.att.net, ridecamp@endurance.net
>Subject: Re: Pendleton Challenge etc
>Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19980113210510.006b1e14@pop.flash.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>Becky Hackworth is considering taking on this ride with alot of help. 
>I would e-mail her. Her husband already arranges all the entertainment
>,and activities on 32nd St. Naval Base.
>
>Charla Cranor
>Alpine, Ca.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>At 08:28 AM 1/13/98 -0800, you wrote:
>>> If the ride were ever to be held again, the ride mgr or spouse must be
>>> in the military, dunno whether it has to be an officer or not, since it
>>> takes place on the military reservation.
>>
>>
>>Is it just a matter of having someone in the RM's group be military? 
>>David is Navy Reserve, AND an officer and drills all the time at
>>Pendleton.  He definitely has the connections, but neither of us are
>>experienced enough to just jump in and say, Shazam, we're ride
>>managers.  But if it's a matter of just needing someone involved with
>>all the right connections...well, those we got.
>>
>>Susan Garlinghouse
>>
>>
>>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 13:22:19 -0800
>From: Lauren Horn <fourhorn@fea.net>
>To: "Craig W. Hadley" <willard@eagleut.com>
>CC: ridecamp@endurance.net
>Subject: Re: digging to China
>Message-ID: <34BBDB0B.5A35@fea.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Craig W. Hadley wrote:
>  He said that every so often they have to
>> change out their rubber conveyor belts.  He put our name on a waiting 
>
>
>I know a few people who use rubber conveyor belts in their stall. They
>do a good job but are easier for the horse to move around then the
>heavier rubber mats.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 21:45:58 GMT
>From: "Joe Long" <jlong@mti.net>
>To: ridecamp@endurance.net
>Subject: Re: AERC completion time rule - feedback wanted
>Message-ID: <34c4dfda.353466788@mail.mti.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>On Mon, 12 Jan 1998 22:00:08 -0700, "Robert J. Morris"
><bobmorris@rmci.net> wrote:
>
>>Yes, Yes, something needs to change. Most particularly ATTITUDE!!  This is
>>ENDURANCE RIDING not a Sunday picnic in the park. If you want to have every
>>thing easy and sure then go ride on a merry-go-round (even then the thing
>>may break down). Why can we not live with the thought endurance riding was
>>not intended to be easy??? It once was "to finish is to win" Now it is "if
>>I don't finish I will complain".
>
>Bob, you know I've often agreed with you  in the past about the
>challenge of *endurance* ... but that challenge is a real challenge,
>against the trail.  We don't  need arbitrary rules or barriers to
>produce it.  The "good old days" when trails were tough and no one
>complained (did they really exist?) also were the days when the AERC
>didn't have a riding time rule.
>
>-- 
>
>Joe Long
>jlong@mti.net
>http://www.mti.net     Business
>http://www.rnbw.com    Personal
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 21:48:00 GMT
>From: "Joe Long" <jlong@mti.net>
>To: ridecamp@endurance.net
>Subject: Re: AERC completion time rule - feedback wanted
>Message-ID: <34c5e098.353656300@mail.mti.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>On Tue, 13 Jan 1998 14:04:02 -0700, Ramey Peticolas-Stroud
><ramey@wvi.com> wrote:
>
>>Gosh Bob, maybe I goofed.  But I quoted the entire Rule 6.1 in my post
>>to Steph.   Could you point out the additional langauge that limits Rule
>>6.1 to Top Ten Finishers?   
>
>>Save yourself the effort, Bob, it's not there.  Your argument is based
>>upon your personal interpretation and understanding of the rules.  
>
>Rule 6.1 isn't limited to Top Ten, but the AERC Board has always held
>that it doesn't allow exceptions to the time limit, either.  Perhaps
>that needs to be made more clear, but I wouldn't advise a ride manager
>trying to allow an overtime completion based on it.  
>
>-- 
>
>Joe Long
>jlong@mti.net
>http://www.mti.net     Business
>http://www.rnbw.com    Personal
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 14:04:02 -0700
>From: Ramey Peticolas-Stroud <ramey@wvi.com>
>To: bobmorris@rmci.net
>CC: ridecamp@endurance.net
>Subject: Re: AERC completion time rule - feedback wanted
>Message-ID: <34BBD6B8.7E50@wvi.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Gosh Bob, maybe I goofed.  But I quoted the entire Rule 6.1 in my post
>to Steph.   Could you point out the additional langauge that limits Rule
>6.1 to Top Ten Finishers?   
>
>Save yourself the effort, Bob, it's not there.  Your argument is based
>upon your personal interpretation and understanding of the rules.  
>
>My discussion was based on the actual words of the rule itself.  Nothing
>in the rule limits it's application to top ten finishers, they are only
>mentioned.  Since the rule was adopted as written, it is subject to my,
>as well as your, interpretation.  In other words it is ambiguous.
>
>You might note that in most cases a court will reverse any sanction
>issued to a rider based upon an alledged violation of an ambiguously
>written rule.  
>
>So now I suppose you will argue we should all know what the rules mean
>regardless of what they say.  Skip it, Bob, I've heard that one before.
>
>Ramey.
>
>--------------------------------
>End of ridecamp-d Digest V98 Issue #39
>**************************************
>
>