USEF Press Release

[halfpass]

4047 IRON WORKS PARKWAY, LEXINGTON , KY 40511-8483 : (859) 258-2472 : (859) 231-6662 FAX

UNITED STATES EQUESTRIAN FEDERATION®

WWW.USEF.ORG



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

January 15, 2008



Concept of Dressage Qualification Standards Supported by USEF Board; Action Postponed Until 2009

By Joanie Morris



Lexington, KY − On January 13, the final day of the USEF Annual Meeting, the Board of Directors considered rule change proposals for all breeds and disciplines. Included in this review was the much-discussed “performance standards” proposal from the Dressage Committee, which would establish a qualification process for competing at certain levels at USEF-Licensed Dressage Competitions. After extensive discussion, the Board voted to officially table the proposal until the next USEF Annual Meeting in January 2009, but also included in their motion to specifically note its support of the concept and charged the Dressage Committee to bring back a detailed proposal for final approval.



"There was overwhelming support from the USEF Board for this concept of performance standards for dressage,” said USEF President David O’Connor. “This was an important first step. We look forward to seeing the specific proposals as they are further developed."



The Dressage Committee will further develop the specifics of the “performance standards” proposal over the coming months, with a possible implementation in stages by dressage level. Current plans are to have the proposal ready for distribution to the membership in the summer of 2008, and feedback will be collected from potentially affected affiliates. In particular, the United States Dressage Federation (USDF), the national affiliate for dressage, will develop a communication network through its Group Member Organization (GMO) delegates and USDF Participating Member (PM) delegates this summer, which will allow for a more efficient system of communication and feedback to the Dressage Committee. Opportunities for further discussion of the proposal will be scheduled during the 2008 USDF Annual Convention in Denver , Colorado .



“We are pleased to have the support of the USEF Board of Directors for the concept of qualification standards for certain levels of dressage competition,” said Marianne Ludwig, chair of the USEF Dressage Committee. “The Committee appreciates all of the feedback received from members, and we welcome the opportunity to bring a detailed proposal back to the Board for next year’s Annual Meeting.”



ENDS



For more information about USEF dressage programs, please visit the Federation website at www.usef.org or contact Jennifer Keeler , USEF National Director of Dressage, jkeeler@usef.org or (859) 225-2024.











The vision of the United States Equestrian Federation® is to provide leadership for
equestrian sport in the United States of America by promoting the pursuit of
excellence from the grassroots to the Olympic Games. This is based on a
foundation of fair, safe competition and the welfare of horses. Embracing
this vision, the USEF strives to be the best national equestrian
federation in the world.

[slc2]

anyone still lthink they are going to 'defeat' this?

[Eclectic Horseman]

anyone still lthink they are going to 'defeat' this?

No, but I think that a good many people will "vote with their feet."

[Portia]

This is not meant to be snarky, I'm just wondering what the contemplated alternatives are -- how are people going to "vote with their feet"? By not showing in USEF/USDF recognized shows? By not showing at all? By changing disciplines?

[Eclectic Horseman]

This is not meant to be snarky, I'm just wondering what the contemplated alternatives are -- how are people going to "vote with their feet"? By not showing in USEF/USDF recognized shows? By not showing at all? By changing disciplines?

All of the above.

[Portia]

So you really think there are a significant number of people who will choose to quit showing simply because there is a rule that provides that, on some yet to be determined basis, riders have to meet a minimum standard to be allowed to move up above 3rd level? Again, I'm just trying to gauge the level of discontent with the concept of qualifying -- it can't be with the specifics because we don't have them yet.

For the record, as of now I don't have a dog in this fight. While I school dressage, I don't show in it (I do the jumpers), and while my youngsters start out doing and showing dressage at training or 1st, they are pretty much destined to be jumpers too. So my interest is mostly just curiosity and trying to figure out what the underlying objection is, other than that I am actively involved in the USEF and would like to be educated on the issues.

[flshgordon]

Personally I have no issue with the "concept". They just haven't found a workable system yet IMO....

I don't see the point in creating a system for something that really isn't much of a problem.

[canyonoak]

Portia-- are there any demands/requests for qualification standards in the jumper world? the eventing world?

I ask because of the obvious reality that people/horses can actually get hurt in those two sports, talking in terms of welfare of the horse.

And I ask because I believe that although dressage is 'fastest growing' etc etc, jumpers still outnumber the other disciplines in terms of entries/shows/etc.

[JRG]

A question I pose, is why did an Organization that is largely Hunter/Jumpers decide to take a crack at the dressage community....their own back yard too big to tackle?

[Portia]

Canyonoak -- Yes, eventing has very definite qualifications requirements to move up, beginning after Training level. They're set out in the EV rules, Appendix 3, for Horse Trials. (There are greater requirements for participating in 3 day events -- CCNs and CCIs.) They're not based on scores but on having completed horse trials or events at lower levels and they apply to the rider up to Prelim, and to both the rider and the horse above that -- based on the theory that you have to prove you and your horse can get around and not be eliminated at the lower level before you prove you are qualified to move up.

Jumpers don't have specific qualifications to move up, but the fact is a horse simply won't keep jumping if it is consistently overfaced. A few years ago they incorporated a requirement that in practice effectively limits moving up, which is that at Levels 5 and above a ride only gets two refusals before elimination. (At the lower levels, it's three refusals before elimination.) Also, there's a built-in disincentive since you have to pay nomination fees and higher entry fees as the levels increase. Competitions are also allowed to set restrictions on entries according to money won, ranking on the USEF computer list, and other criteria. That's not to say that people don't overface themselves or their horses, but as a practical matter they're just not going to be able to keep doing it over and over again and get around the course.

[LexInVA]

A question I pose, is why did an Organization that is largely Hunter/Jumpers decide to take a crack at the dressage community....their own back yard too big to tackle?

*pulls out his conspiracy theory hat*

Any rule they make for dressage will also effect eventing to a certain degree and with the recent accidents/deaths, they've got some ammunition to put a requirement rule in place for that discipline as well. They wouldn't do this to the h/j people because there are business implications that would cause uproar.

[molliwog]

[QUOTE=Portia;2941922]So you really think there are a significant number of people who will choose to quit showing simply because there is a rule that provides that, on some yet to be determined basis, riders have to meet a minimum standard to be allowed to move up above 3rd level? Again, I'm just trying to gauge the level of discontent with the concept of qualifying -- it can't be with the specifics because we don't have them yet.

QUOTE]

No I don't think there are a lot of people who are going to "quit". I think, unfortunately, there are a lot of future dressage riders out there who are going to look to other equestrian disciplines instead. And I think it will be the end for many USEF-approved shows in middle America that aren't near large metropolitan areas. Many amateurs will choose to go the unapproved schooling show route, which doesn't bode well for either the USDF or USEF.

Face it....the sports where the US truly excels internationally are the ones where there is the strongest grassroots support, and if there are performance standards, the standards are inclusive and well thought out, not exclusive, reactionary, and elitist. The qualifying standard as currently proposed has a myriad of issues that have been thoroughly discussed in other threads, so I'm not going to reiterate them here.

[SGray]

So you really think there are a significant number of people who will choose to quit showing simply because there is a rule that provides that, on some yet to be determined basis, riders have to meet a minimum standard to be allowed to move up above 3rd level? Again, I'm just trying to gauge the level of discontent with the concept of qualifying -- it can't be with the specifics because we don't have them yet..........

.... So my interest is mostly just curiosity and trying to figure out what the underlying objection is, other than that I am actively involved in the USEF and would like to be educated on the issues.

My objections are:

a) that a proposal is being put forth without any objective facts to demonstrate the need for the new restrictions

b) that implementation and administration of the new program will cost the federation in time and $s -- both of which could be put to (imo) better use working to promote the sport and/or provide educational opportunities

c) the program will cost riders in time and $s without a demonstrable benefit to the sport or the horse

[Eclectic Horseman]

So you really think there are a significant number of people who will choose to quit showing simply because there is a rule that provides that, on some yet to be determined basis, riders have to meet a minimum standard to be allowed to move up above 3rd level? Again, I'm just trying to gauge the level of discontent with the concept of qualifying -- it can't be with the specifics because we don't have them yet.

For the record, as of now I don't have a dog in this fight. While I school dressage, I don't show in it (I do the jumpers), and while my youngsters start out doing and showing dressage at training or 1st, they are pretty much destined to be jumpers too. So my interest is mostly just curiosity and trying to figure out what the underlying objection is, other than that I am actively involved in the USEF and would like to be educated on the issues.

Many, many people that I know have sufficient funds to be responsible horse owners. But in my area, the cost of board alone is like paying a mortgage anywhere else. Some own their own trailer and tow vehicle, most do not. Most take regular dressage instruction with qualified instructors whose lessons are not inexpensive. And/or they may pay their trainer to school the horse when they are too busy with work or for assistance in training the horse. They also like to do a clinic now and again, perhaps once a year or every other year.

These people like to show once or twice a year (some much less) just to make sure that they are on the right track and making progress. They usually do not choose the large multiple day shows or shows that are so far away that they will need stabling. This is not just a question of money (although it is certainly that too); these riders have high level full time jobs that they need to finance the horse hobby.

While riders who do one or two shows per year like to do them as a reality check, the qualifying system will not allow them to show at the level that they are working at without going to many more shows. Such people may go to schooling shows instead of recognized shows or they may stop showing altogether and opt to do more clinics or what have you.

[Portia]

Query -- Are a significant number of the people who are doing one or two shows per year showing at third level and above?

Also, do the non-recognized schooling shows have classes that are at third level and above? The ones around here, from what I remember, are mostly green as grass, training, maybe a few first level or rarely a second level.

[Fence2Fence]

A question I pose, is why did an Organization that is largely Hunter/Jumpers decide to take a crack at the dressage community....their own back yard too big to tackle?

Huh? Where do you get that? Because David O'Connor (an eventer, btw) is quoted in the press release? Since when was the USEF "largely hunter/jumper"??

[Eclectic Horseman]

Query -- Are a significant number of the people who are doing one or two shows per year showing at third level and above?

Yes. Very many adult amateurs with family and/or work obligations.

This is very, very different than the hunter/jumper world where people start "chasing points" as children in medal classes. It is one of the attractions of dressage for many people-- not to have the need to show all the time.

Also, do the non-recognized schooling shows have classes that are at third level and above? The ones around here, from what I remember, are mostly green as grass, training, maybe a few first level or rarely a second level.

Many do. At the very least they offer "test of choice." They use judges that are USDF certified, some to the R level.

This all really depends on where you are located. All I can speak to is my area. Some areas, from what I understand, may have only one local recognized show within driving distance and no schooling shows.

I suggest that you follow this thread http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=130331

in order to see where people are coming from on this.

[LexInVA]

Huh? Where do you get that? Because David O'Connor (an eventer, btw) is quoted in the press release? Since when was the USEF "largely hunter/jumper"??

They always have been. It's the discipline with the largest membership base and it's the one with the big money businesses, donors, and participants. The USEF was primarily the brainchild of the leadership in the h/j world who felt they needed a national governing body to be taken seriously by the FEI and the rest of the world while creating a collective authority from which to control the domestic equestrian competitions and all international representation in the disciplines they oversee.

[Portia]

Anybody who thinks H/J dominates the USEF needs to go to an Annual Meeting. Yes, it is a large group by numbers of members. But take the dressage, driving, eventing, reining, endurance, vaulting, paraequestrian, roadster, Arabian, Morgan, Saddlebred, Andi/Lusi, Welsh, Friesian, National Show Horse, Shetland, and veterinary folks and add them up, and the H/J reps are vastly outnumbered. Proporational representation was a big issue when the organization was re-formed as the USEF, and the bylaws are explicit about ensuring that all the groups get adequate representation on the Board. The FEI disciplines will always have additional representation, because the Amateur Sports Act and the USOC require that the NGB have at least 20% active athlete representation.

Only one of the current elected officers is H/J (Chrystine Tauber). The rest are eventing (DOC), Arabians/western (Bill Hughes), Saddlebreds (Judy Werner), and Saddlehorses (Keith Bartz).

The current Executive Committee consists of 15 people, four of whom have hunter or jumper backgrounds -- Chrystine Tauber, Bill Moroney, Armand Leone (who is there as VP of High Performance), and Anne Kursinski (who is there as an elected athlete and has never attended a board meeting so far as I know ). Four have dressage backgrounds -- Janine Malone, Sue Blinks, Debbie McDonald, and Mike Tomlinson (who is the FEI vet rep but specializes in dresage and endurance). Two have eventing backgrounds (DOC and Robert Costello), and one is driving (Tucker Johnson). The rest are from the breeds and other national disciplines (Bill Hughes, Judy Werner, Keith Bartz, and Alan Balch, as representative of the USAE Trust, but who is Executive Secretary of the ASHA).

On the Board as a whole, out of a total of 52, I count 12 members who have a hunter or jumper background, although several of them are on the Board in different capacities.

[Holly Jeanne]

Whether my young horse and I would have the talent to do 3rd and above remains to be seen. I can, however, answer the question as to whether I have the money to do so. The answer is no with the proposed new system. I will do schooling shows and trail ride. At home and in lessons, I will school at the highest level my horse and I find we are capable.

[sm]

speaking of H/J people, it's too bad the new dressage proposal doesn't take a page from the H\J book and focus on factoring in AA prize money in the entry fee so competitors get that benefit, and it also increases interest in attending shows overall **sigh**

Same deal with the AQHA and AA prize money --- attendance is up and the AQHA is thriving. Instead the proposal on the table is to lop off Third Level AAs at the knees. What are they thinking, I still don't see WHY or the BENEFIT to the dressage world.

[JRG]

I understand that the USEF has a goal of equal representation. My comment made is about the membership number. H/J memebership out numbered the individual other diciplines. I tried to find the numbers that some time ago we actually had someone post the membership numbers.

Understand I am not anti establishment, I am for open and distinct rules and guidlines plainly spelled out and adheared to. I dont think they have been in this particular case.

Someone also posted about possible solutions. I found it very intersting that I was one of the posts along with very few others that attemted to come up with something. The discusion went by the weighside.

I think I am dissolusioned with the process. But I stand by my thoughts on why the dressage community...LexinVA, I like appreciate the theory, all things to think of.