Latest / Two Point Perspective / Members Comment. Boards Decide.

Transcript

Members Comment. Boards Decide. · Two Point Perspective

• 0:00
  Right now, the USHJA has more than 60 proposed rule changes out for member comment.
• 0:08
  If you're a member, you can log in and weigh in on any of them through November 8th.
• 0:14
  Last week we talked about one of them, the AA floating split.
• 0:20
  Instead of splitting the adult amateurs by age, it would take every adult amateur at the horse show and divide them into three sections that are about the same size, but it doesn't matter how old you are.
• 0:35
  So we went back to see what members were saying about it on the USHJA site.
• 0:40
  There were 12 comments so far and every one of them was against it.
• 0:47
  Then there's the topic everybody seems to be talking about, right?
• 0:52
  Suspensions, what happens to a barn, the other trainer, the staff, the clients when one trainer gets suspended.
• 1:02
  People have been going back and forth about it all over Facebook.
• 1:05
  So we looked into it.
• 1:07
  There are two competing proposed rules on it right now.
• 1:13
  And the number of comments on the USHJA site, None on either one.
• 1:21
  And while we were digging, we found two rules that we're being asked to comment on that the use has already set to take effect December 1st.
• 1:32
  Which got us asking a pretty simple question.
• 1:35
  When the USHJA asks for our opinion, does it actually even matter?
• 1:44
  This is two point perspective.
• 1:46
  Two writers with different viewpoints from different generations talking about the same sport.
• 1:54
  I will say that I've looked into this before, but I've never looked at it this in depth.
• 1:59
  I honestly have never thought about it and I just have always assumed, oh, you know, we're in good hands and I won't think about it.
• 2:08
  Well, I think maybe we are.
• 2:09
  But here's what we figured out.
• 2:11
  Every fall, USHJA posts the proposals and they come from all over.
• 2:15
  Committees, working groups, the USF and individual members.
• 2:20
  Maybe they do.
• 2:20
  And every fall, if they do, members can comment from October 1st to November 8th.
• 2:29
  And then apparently there's a town hall on Zoom that is scheduled for Monday, November 2nd at 7pm Eastern.
• 2:39
  There's also a forum at the USHA conference in December.
• 2:43
  The USHA board votes and then the USF board makes the final call next.
• 2:49
  Summer, which is kind of weird.
• 2:52
  That's a long way away.
• 2:54
  A.
• 2:54
  But B, the part that surprised me is that no members vote.
• 2:59
  I mean, we don't really vote at all.
• 3:01
  We have the ability to comment, but the board decides.
• 3:04
  But I do think that it's important.
• 3:07
  Like I think if we were trying to vote on all of those types of things, that would be kind of strange.
• 3:14
  Like we have a board of directors and I think that we have to be really kind of smart about who we have on the board.
• 3:22
  And I think that that is something that we need to pay attention to is like, who, okay, so if the board is the one making the decisions ultimately or discussing amongst themselves and we need to be paying attention
• 3:32
  about who's representing us on that level, I think.
• 3:34
  I don't disagree, but we don't really have any voice as it comes to that either.
• 3:42
  So I guess we're just basically giving advice.
• 3:46
  Yeah.
• 3:46
  And I guess, you know, ultimately the question that I think we are asking as members is whether or not anybody's taking, taking the advice or the comments.
• 3:56
  We have to heart, which is why we didn't just read the proposals, we read the comments.
• 4:03
  Let's start with the floating split.
• 4:05
  This was rule proposal number eight.
• 4:10
  And here's the detail that people don't really like.
• 4:13
  It's not something like may, that something may happen, it's guaranteed.
• 4:21
  So the idea is that if any one age group is more than 25% bigger than another, then the management has to float it.
• 4:32
  Not may float it, they have to float it.
• 4:35
  Right, right.
• 4:37
  And that's, that is a really key point because there's a lot of discretion in some of the rules.
• 4:41
  One of the commenters did the math on that particular proposed rule and it was 10 young riders, eight in the.
• 4:48
  Middle and 11 older, which sounds like it's pretty even.
• 4:52
  Right.
• 4:53
  But 11 is more than 25% bigger than eight.
• 4:56
  So you float them.
• 4:58
  And I can see why somebody would want that.
• 5:00
  You want the even sections, ribbons that may mean the same thing in every section.
• 5:05
  And you know, I think you end up with it feels like it's not equal.
• 5:10
  And then you know, your ability or I guess like your chance to get a piece of the prize is, you know, so much less.
• 5:17
  And so I can see why people would, would want that.
• 5:20
  I mean, I get that too.
• 5:22
  It's very efficient and I understand why that would appeal to somebody who was trying to make the numbers work.
• 5:30
  But efficient isn't the same thing as fair.
• 5:34
  Yeah, you took the words out of my mouth on that.
• 5:37
  And if you're the one in the ring, I mean, I just showed in a combined 36 and over section and there were 24 riders.
• 5:48
  And honestly that's my problem with it because when they split the amateurs two ways, it's usually 18 to 35 and then 36 and over.
• 5:59
  But when you're over 50, like I am a 36 year old isn't really your peer group.
• 6:06
  So if they're going to split it two ways.
• 6:09
  I think that line should at least be 40, maybe even 45 or 50.
• 6:14
  I don't know.
• 6:15
  Yeah, I mean, the other side of that is exactly what you were talking about.
• 6:19
  You know, as a competitor, like, I can see how on paper it would make sense to do a float, but realistically that's, I, I think, and as a competitor myself, it would feel that way to me.
• 6:31
  It would me off.
• 6:32
  And there's one comment that kind of really stuck with me in that there's an amateur in her late 30s.
• 6:37
  She'd finally aged into the middle section.
• 6:40
  So she's showing against her peers, not the college kids on sales horses or those that are a little bit more youthful and, and then all of a sudden you're getting slammed back with them.
• 6:51
  Well, that's my argument.
• 6:52
  Coming from somebody younger than me.
• 6:54
  Why would I want to show against somebody who's half my age?
• 6:58
  I mean, I guess sometimes I have to, but I've earned the right not to have to every single time.
• 7:06
  It's definitely not the first time that this particular issue has come up.
• 7:09
  I think around 2020amateurs were asking for more age protection and a task force proposed a three way split.
• 7:16
  There's 18 to 25, 26 to 41, and then 42 and over.
• 7:21
  42 and over.
• 7:23
  That's great if you're in a combined section, but for somebody over 50, that proposal was still terrible.
• 7:32
  And at some shows, even 50 and over isn't really your peers anymore.
• 7:38
  I had 27 in my 50 and over division at Maryland Horse and Pony.
• 7:46
  That's why last week I had said maybe 50 to 65 and 65 and over at my age.
• 7:55
  I don't know what to say, but I kind of think we deserve that.
• 7:59
  Well, to play devil's advocate on that, how many people in your 50 and like, what's the demographic of your 50 and older section?
• 8:08
  Like, are there like, okay, so let's say there was 25 of you in your section or however many you said there was, are 15 of them like 50 to 60 and like, I don't know, somewhere in the middle.
• 8:22
  And then only like three of you more and more.
• 8:27
  Most mature, like 70 and older.
• 8:31
  Because I think, I think you're gonna get hard pressed.
• 8:34
  Like, I think there are a handful of you amazing ladies that are doing this at your age, but I don't think there's many of you.
• 8:40
  So I think, like to have your own little division.
• 8:42
  I think you're gonna say, nice try, not happening.
• 8:46
  I don't know.
• 8:47
  I'm gonna tell you that next time, I'm gonna go through every single person and look and see exactly how much older they are, because I'm telling you, I think that there were quite a few people who were at
• 9:01
  least over 55, put it that way.
• 9:04
  Yeah, I mean, that's probably true.
• 9:05
  I would.
• 9:06
  I would agree with that.
• 9:07
  There's a lot of people that are in the adult amateurs that were juniors and they've, you know, for whatever reason, have gone on doing the adult amateurs or they're in college or whatever, then you get the 50 and
• 9:20
  over.
• 9:22
  And while some people could argue that some of them have ridden for a very long time and, you know, boots in the saddle are old, there are a lot of people who have not ridden since they were young
• 9:38
  and have come back because they can now afford it better or have more time or.
• 9:46
  Whatever, that they're thrown into that, like, competing against little young bucks.
• 9:50
  You're like, what the fuck?
• 9:52
  Exactly.
• 9:53
  I mean, I noticed, you know, I know a lot of people like that that have not ridden.
• 10:02
  They came back to maybe the low adult amateurs, but they've moved up, and that's the biggest thing for them.
• 10:09
  And they're not 35.
• 10:12
  They're not 36.
• 10:13
  They're probably like 55 or 56.
• 10:16
  So it's not just necessarily.
• 10:18
  I mean, I granted, I know a lot of people go, oh, the over 50s.
• 10:21
  They have all the money and the time, and they have all these great, great, great horses.
• 10:25
  Yeah, but.
• 10:25
  And their horses still doesn't mean that they need to be competing against kids in college.
• 10:29
  No.
• 10:30
  And it also doesn't mean they know how to ride.
• 10:32
  So that's why they have the nice, nice, nice, nice, nice horses, to be.
• 10:36
  Sure they get around safely.
• 10:37
  That's right.
• 10:39
  That's right.
• 10:40
  And apparently that rule that you were talking about went through several versions, including, believe it or not, the same thing, a floating split.
• 10:51
  But in February 2022, the board actually did say say no.
• 10:57
  Well, and I think this year's version came from Usha Hunter Working group.
• 11:02
  Yeah.
• 11:02
  The contact is Katie Patrick, Ushja's director of sport, and she and the working group's chair are both on the panel at the November 2nd town hall.
• 11:15
  So just as a side note for anybody who is listening, you can ask them directly, and we'll also post that info, too.
• 11:22
  And here's how we'll know if the comments matter.
• 11:25
  After November 8th, watch for a second draft.
• 11:29
  And if 12 people so far have said no, and nobody says yes, and it shows up in December unchanged then that seems like it tells you something.
• 11:41
  One of the ones that surprised me was the rule proposal of 48.
• 11:45
  It's the horse of the Year points.
• 11:47
  Nobody on a committee wrote it.
• 11:49
  One member did.
• 11:50
  And I didn't even realize that individual members were able to write or I guess you could propose a rule.
• 11:57
  But individual members riding rules, I think.
• 12:02
  At least six did this year.
• 12:04
  Cell phones draw reins, water and hay, older officials and suspensions and this horse of the Year rule were the ones that were mentioned.
• 12:12
  Only a horse's top 15 shows would count toward the Horse of the Year and Zone awards.
• 12:21
  The member who wrote it used Yousef's own numbers.
• 12:24
  More registered horses show at 20 or fewer rated shows a year and more than half show at five fewer.
• 12:31
  You know something that was interesting at about this proposal was when there's a, there's a finals horse show in Virginia and it, I don't know if it's still this way, but it used to be that, you know, like
• 12:43
  you could compete like let's say that you competed at a horse show every single weekend.
• 12:46
  Like it was a, it's a local circuit.
• 12:48
  That your final point, your final year end totals could only count your top 10 horse shows plus the points you won at finals.
• 12:57
  That's like how the year end awards were calculated.
• 13:01
  So you could show 15 times but only your top 10 counted.
• 13:04
  So it kind of helped.
• 13:05
  Like I think the idea behind it is to discourage crazy, crazy showing every single.
• 13:11
  Yeah.
• 13:11
  Amount of showing.
• 13:12
  Now on the, on the other hand, you could be like, oh well, I'm going to cancel out some more.
• 13:16
  You know, this was a bad show so I'm going to go have another good show.
• 13:19
  So I think you're a little damned if you do and damned if you don't.
• 13:21
  But I do think that it's, that is the idea of it is to try to encourage not showing at a 5 billion horse shows a year.
• 13:29
  The proposal says that capping it protects horses from being overused just to chase points.
• 13:36
  But honestly, I like the idea that 15 shows is still a lot and that's, that's actually more than one show a month all year.
• 13:48
  I agree.
• 13:48
  It's still, if you break it down by month, like it's still a lot.
• 13:51
  And there's another catch.
• 13:53
  It only counts your best 15.
• 13:55
  So it, like I was just saying, it doesn't stop you from going to more of them necessarily.
• 13:59
  So you could, you could still go to 25 shows, right.
• 14:03
  And keep your best 15.
• 14:04
  You might like I was saying you might do better so you could cancel one out and more chances at a, a bit a big result.
• 14:10
  And so I don't think that there's like a perfect way to propose how to do the horse of the year.
• 14:19
  But on the one hand I do like the idea that just because, so you can't, unless you propose a rule that caps the amount of horseshoes you can take, you know, take your horse to in a year, you're
• 14:30
  still going to write you can't necessarily control that variable.
• 14:34
  However, you aren't necessarily giving the horse of the year award to the horse that showed it every single horse show and managed like you're, you're not rewarding the horse that just chase points, you're rewarding the horse that supposedly
• 14:50
  is more quality and had more consistency is what.
• 14:54
  You're hoping for, I guess.
• 14:56
  I mean There were 4 comments on this proposed rule and they were all in favor.
• 15:03
  But it's interesting because most of them talk about money, not welfare, which is.
• 15:09
  Just crazy because I mean if you can't afford 25 shows a year, you can't compete for year end awards against somebody who can.
• 15:16
  And I, I get that in terms of money.
• 15:19
  But also it should like to me the big thing should be the welfare.
• 15:22
  And how do you, like I was just saying how do you control for that variable about how many times a horse is going.
• 15:28
  I mean it's kind of similar, runs along the lines of people talking about putting a cap on the amount of jumping classes a horse can do.
• 15:35
  What's interesting though is the Hunter breeding rule proposal which we're not talking about just because I don't think that's most of our audience.
• 15:43
  But only the first 12 shows count, so it's different.
• 15:48
  Oh, it's the, the for only the first 12.
• 15:51
  So you can compete at first 12.
• 15:53
  So you don't have the option to go to some more and then basically have them cancel out take your best 15.
• 16:02
  So I would have to ask, is this really, is it a welfare rule or is it an affordability rule?
• 16:10
  Well, it's an interesting, interesting question.
• 16:12
  I mean that's really interesting.
• 16:14
  I didn't know that about the, the horse breeding.
• 16:16
  That's really, really cool actually.
• 16:17
  And I think that potentially, you know, it's, it's both.
• 16:20
  I guess it depends on the person.
• 16:22
  For me I think it would be both.
• 16:23
  Like I don't think realistically that my horse could do that many horse shows.
• 16:29
  I mean I just sit there and I think about like okay, if you go down to Florida for, like, the circuit.
• 16:35
  Most of the time, you're not showing every showing every single week.
• 16:40
  You're doing, like, a handful of weeks or you're like, every other.
• 16:44
  And then maybe you do like, a couple in the spring.
• 16:47
  And I don't know.
• 16:47
  I think it really just depends on what problem it is you're trying to solve.
• 16:51
  If it's welfare, it's one thing.
• 16:53
  If it's affordability, it's something else.
• 16:55
  Because truthfully, if, let's say in the past, when we've gone to Florida for two weeks or four weeks, if you're there for four weeks, you're more than likely going to show every week, or at least three of the
• 17:10
  four in one month just because you're there.
• 17:13
  And it costs a lot of money to get there.
• 17:15
  So you're going to maximize whatever it is that you're doing there.
• 17:19
  So I think that really is something that needs to be a little bit more thought out or maybe better defined, I don't know.
• 17:28
  But the next one sounds boring, but it's not.
• 17:33
  Numbers 36 and 37 are two competing versions of essentially the same rule, and it's what happens to everybody around somebody who gets suspended.
• 17:47
  And both sides agree that the current rule is outdated, and they just disagree on who it should catch.
• 17:55
  So 36 was written by Bill Maroney, USF CEO, and it casts a really wide net.
• 18:04
  A suspended person can't influence any training or entry decision, and the Barn or business that they were connected to can't be promoted.
• 18:15
  No logos on tack trunks, no banners, no congratulatory post.
• 18:23
  Yeah.
• 18:23
  And I mean, even for the people still showing who did nothing wrong, they'd have to apply for relief.
• 18:28
  You know, I get what he, like what that rule is trying to propose, but also that's, like, literally impossible to, in my opinion.
• 18:36
  Like, there's not enough people to enforce that on that level.
• 18:40
  Really.
• 18:40
  Come on.
• 18:41
  Congratulatory posts.
• 18:42
  Get out of here.
• 18:44
  Well, they don't.
• 18:45
  They say they don't look at social media that often, but maybe they do.
• 18:48
  I don't know, but that seems.
• 18:50
  Seems kind of crazy.
• 18:51
  But, yeah, that's what I'm saying.
• 18:53
  That's just, like, reachy to me.
• 18:54
  But Rule 37 goes the other way.
• 18:58
  It was written by Bonnie Navin, a Florida trial attorney who handles equine cases.
• 19:05
  She.
• 19:05
  She writes a lot, and I think her point of view is really to be respected.
• 19:11
  But I agree.
• 19:13
  She says that spouses, staff, and business partners can continue running the Barn, and they can continue to bill the clients and continue competing.
• 19:25
  And if Yousef thinks that the suspended person is still really calling the shots behind the scenes, her proposal says that Yousef has to prove it.
• 19:36
  So putting a proof on them.
• 19:38
  Okay, so, so the assistant or the spouse doesn't have to prove that they're running things on their own.
• 19:45
  And Yousef.
• 19:46
  And if Youssef can't really tell either way, they get to keep working.
• 19:51
  Well, so it's not really protecting the suspended trainer.
• 19:54
  It's protecting everybody around them.
• 19:57
  And to.
• 19:58
  It sounds like Bonnie summed it up in a post that's been shared around Facebook.
• 20:02
  Association is not participation.
• 20:05
  And I, I think that's a real thing.
• 20:07
  But there's a reason that the old rule was so strict.
• 20:12
  Well, right.
• 20:12
  Otherwise a suspended trainer just gets to keep running things through an assistant.
• 20:17
  And in my opinion, there needs to be some real consequences in a way.
• 20:25
  Like, I guess for some people having a suspension, they're like, oh, okay, I got sat down for a month.
• 20:31
  It's not that big of a deal.
• 20:33
  The risk is not that big to me, so I'm going to do it anyways and business is going to go along as usual even if I get sat down.
• 20:40
  And so I think that from a member point of view, that's where I think some of the distaste comes from, is how, how are things continuing to keep going?
• 20:50
  What is the real consequence if that's, if that's effectively what's going to continue happening?
• 20:55
  Like, nothing, nothing changes.
• 20:56
  I do think that that is in need of a little bit of reformation.
• 21:01
  And to me, I think that that doesn't mean that your business has to be shut down.
• 21:08
  The thing that is like, mind boggling to me is how you can get a suspension.
• 21:12
  Like, right, like, say you went to a horse show, like this weekend, your horse gets pulled, let's say it tests positive, so you're sat down, your trainer sat down fine.
• 21:19
  But then like, your trainer isn't really suspended until like January.
• 21:24
  Yeah, it's so weak.
• 21:25
  Like, I'm like, why?
• 21:26
  I don't understand that.
• 21:27
  Like, because I think ultimately if, if the consequence came pretty fast, that's a little bit more disruptive.
• 21:37
  What I don't understand and what I keep coming back to is if the assistant works for the suspended trainer and gets paid by the suspended trainer, isn't that still the suspended trainer calling all the shots?
• 21:53
  I mean, yeah, that's, that's the real question.
• 21:55
  Under 37, working for them, even getting paid by them doesn't automatically mean you're breaking the rule.
• 22:01
  Yousef would have to show that the suspended trainer is actually giving the orders on how things are operating.
• 22:08
  To be fair, Navin, you know, did agree with that part.
• 22:12
  If the suspended trainer is really still running things behind the scenes, then she says that should be punished.
• 22:20
  But I just, I don't get that.
• 22:23
  Because if you think about a typical show barn that has a head trainer and an assistant and a head groom who manages all the other grooms, now the head trainer gets suspended.
• 22:34
  So the real question is, can that barn even stay in business?
• 22:38
  Because under.
• 22:39
  But under rule proposal number 37, the assistant can keep teaching, taking clients to horse shows, billing them, et cetera, as long as the suspended trainer isn't secretly doing things behind the scenes, like how the horses are trained or
• 22:59
  which shows they go to, what classes they enter.
• 23:02
  And under Rule 36, it's a lot less clear.
• 23:07
  The suspended trainer can't have any say in training or entries.
• 23:11
  The barn's name can't be promoted.
• 23:14
  So if the assistant has always worked for that trainer, then isn't every decision that they make now under some sort of suspicion?
• 23:24
  Right.
• 23:25
  And if the clients aren't sure what's allowed, they leave.
• 23:30
  So the barn could just go out of business over one person's suspension?
• 23:38
  I mean, it could.
• 23:39
  I bet.
• 23:40
  Ultimately, though, you talk to your friend up the road who's got a show barn or clients that have a show barn, you say, hey, you know, my horses are shipping out of here and they're coming with you.
• 23:49
  They're showing with you for the next couple of shows while I'm sat down.
• 23:52
  I mean, and you're still paying bored and having lessons and training at home.
• 23:55
  That's the thing.
• 23:56
  They're not going to be able to stop you from running your business at home.
• 24:00
  They're just going to send you with somebody else.
• 24:02
  Yeah, but Rule 36 kind of acts like it does to me.
• 24:07
  Feels like it's kind of pushing hard, you know, for you not to.
• 24:13
  If you can't take your clients to horse shows and not even your.
• 24:16
  And you can't even have your assistant, you know, work.
• 24:20
  If everybody that has something to do with it is suspended or set down, you can't run a business.
• 24:27
  I mean, and I guess too, it depends on the severity of whatever happens and how long you're being set down for.
• 24:33
  If it's just a month or two, yeah, you're right.
• 24:35
  But if it's anything that's slightly more serious, I don't really know.
• 24:40
  I'm not well versed in suspensions and how long they last.
• 24:43
  But to me, if it's something that's three months or six months, that's a different story than one show or one month.
• 24:50
  Well, and then you also have to consider the head groom.
• 24:52
  And I guess that's.
• 24:53
  Yeah, that's the gap there too, because the head groom takes direction from the head trainer.
• 24:59
  And so neither of these rule versions say clearly what a groom in that spot can do.
• 25:07
  The old rule actually addressed this, but rule number proposed number 36 strikes it out.
• 25:15
  This one wouldn't necessarily touch me because Loki's at home with me.
• 25:18
  So there's no barn to shut down, however, because I'd have to put myself, you know, when you.
• 25:22
  That's the whole reason you, like put who your trainer is on your entry blank.
• 25:26
  And it would be me.
• 25:28
  So me, myself and I would be shut.
• 25:29
  It would be shut down.
• 25:30
  Shut down.
• 25:32
  But you're at home, so you don't have clients.
• 25:34
  So no, just keep on as business, business as usual.
• 25:37
  Just not going to horse show.
• 25:39
  Well, so that's what I'm saying.
• 25:40
  So for a lot of us, these two rules decide whether one person's suspension can shut down a whole barn, amateurs included.
• 25:50
  And the comments on these two, none.
• 25:54
  On either one of them.
• 25:55
  Huh.
• 25:56
  That's pretty interesting, I think, because it's so multifaceted.
• 25:59
  This is like a little tiny infraction and then this is a really big infraction and what's the level of severity?
• 26:05
  And like, does the con, does the consequence match the infraction?
• 26:09
  And people get dicey because they don't really know.
• 26:12
  Right.
• 26:12
  What junior kid parent is going to come even though they're members and comment on something like that because.
• 26:19
  Well, and I think this could be a good use of Yousef or Usha in terms of like an educational series.
• 26:26
  People trying to understand what exactly does that mean?
• 26:29
  What are the different levels of punishment or infractions that you can have and understand what that looks like?
• 26:35
  I mean, obviously if you're going to change the rule, that's one thing, but for people to understand how it's set up now might give people just a better idea.
• 26:43
  I think you don't know what you don't know.
• 26:45
  But also that's why education across our membership is so important.
• 26:50
  I kind of wish that they would.
• 26:51
  Would spend some time doing that.
• 26:53
  Yeah, Talk about the next two.
• 26:55
  Yeah.
• 26:56
  So there's 61 and 62, which are the USF light shows, the lower cost competitions.
• 27:03
  And I almost skipped these because I figured that light shows light sounds like lights like, like they have a try on the drone light shows.
• 27:16
  No L, I, T, E.
• 27:20
  And they, I, I figured that those shows aren't really our world.
• 27:25
  Well, I almost skipped them too, but I, I didn't.
• 27:28
  And it is the Hunter and jumper light shows, and they give half value zone points.
• 27:33
  That's crazy, because here's what we found.
• 27:36
  In July, the USAF board voted to create a new, cheaper light pass.
• 27:44
  Then the USEF issued a presidential modification.
• 27:47
  It's posted on their website, putting new light rules into effect December 1st.
• 27:54
  And so some of those light changes are on our list for comment.
• 27:58
  Yeah, but both are filed by the Usef CEO.
• 28:04
  Both are labeled extraordinary.
• 28:06
  Both are dated October 13, which is almost two weeks after the comment period opened.
• 28:14
  And both have an official start date of April 1st of 27.
• 28:18
  So months after the presidential modification already put light changes in place.
• 28:22
  So what are the comments for?
• 28:24
  You know, I think they're feeling like, okay, we're doing our quote, due diligence.
• 28:32
  After the fact.
• 28:33
  After the fact.
• 28:34
  Go ahead, comment on them.
• 28:35
  Tell us what you think.
• 28:36
  And it's not gonna matter.
• 28:38
  Right?
• 28:38
  I mean, that's why people get frustrated, right?
• 28:40
  I mean, that you're reading through this stuff and if, if you're not spending any time looking at it, then you're kind of like just, okay.
• 28:48
  But then you, you go back and you start dissecting this kind of stuff and people are going, what the actual hell?
• 28:53
  So the comments on those two.
• 28:56
  Guess.
• 28:57
  None.
• 28:58
  Big old goose egg.
• 29:00
  Yeah, none.
• 29:01
  Honestly, it's hard to keep track of a lot of this because every rule has two tracking numbers.
• 29:05
  There's one from the USCF and then there's one from the Ushja.
• 29:09
  That one got me too, because while we were prepping this episode, I pulled up number 61 to check the light rule, and I got a rule about simple lead changes in young hunters.
• 29:23
  Yeah, it's easy to do because the number's the same on both websites, but it's a totally different rule.
• 29:29
  And then there are the duplicates.
• 29:31
  There were three proposals about cell phones.
• 29:35
  There were two about draw reigns, and there were three about schooling supervisors.
• 29:41
  Right.
• 29:41
  I mean, to comment usefully on any of the particular rules, you, you would need to find each version, and then you'd need to sit down and compare them.
• 29:49
  Who's going to do that?
• 29:51
  And every proposal has a section where whoever wrote it explains why the rule is needed.
• 29:59
  There's one from the Yousef National Hunter Committee about draw raids, and that section where they're trying to explain what the rule is for says coming soon.
• 30:12
  Yeah.
• 30:13
  And then no wonder people aren't commenting.
• 30:15
  If you go to the Ushja website, it's not obvious where.
• 30:21
  Oh, no.
• 30:22
  Where the rule proposal lives.
• 30:25
  So I had to actually go back and Google Ushja rule proposals and it gave me the link.
• 30:34
  Yeah, yeah.
• 30:35
  But that's the only way I could find it.
• 30:37
  Think about what we found, though.
• 30:39
  The floating split proposal got 12 comments and every one of them was against it.
• 30:46
  The Horse of the Year rule so far has got four, and they're all in favor.
• 30:52
  But the suspension rules and the light show rules, they have none.
• 30:58
  And these are the ones that could change whether a barn stays in business or the light rules that Yousef is putting into effect before the board even votes on them.
• 31:08
  And nobody said a word about that.
• 31:11
  Yeah.
• 31:11
  I mean, honestly, I think it says a lot about us.
• 31:15
  If it's about who we're showing against, everybody has an opinion.
• 31:18
  But if you have to read something three times just to figure out what it means, a lot of people just scroll on by, even if it's one that could hit us the hardest.
• 31:26
  And I think.
• 31:27
  I think a lot of that, too, goes back to what I was talking about, like, the education piece of it.
• 31:31
  If you, you know, you can quickly say, I don't want to show against X, Y and Z people.
• 31:36
  Like, I know what that looks like.
• 31:38
  No, thank you.
• 31:39
  But when you get into the suspension, like I said, it's multifaceted.
• 31:42
  You've got.
• 31:42
  There's a lot of information to try to understand, to have, like an educated opinion about it.
• 31:47
  Yeah.
• 31:48
  And on it.
• 31:49
  And so it's a little bit of, like, if the membership's head's in the sand and they don't know what's going on, then we're just going to do what we think is best, is a little bit of how that
• 31:58
  comes through.
• 31:58
  And then also, I think if the information was more readily available, people then would need to.
• 32:04
  Or members would then need to spend the time and do a little bit of the research and reading and education on it.
• 32:10
  Right.
• 32:11
  And so this year, there seems to be one group that's trying to do something different.
• 32:16
  A new trainers group, the US Equestrian Trainers association, which we have talked about before, but they actually polled their members and filed two rules based on what the membership said.
• 32:31
  One was about foam rails and one was about nose bands.
• 32:35
  Yeah.
• 32:36
  And I really appreciate the fact that they asked members about it first.
• 32:40
  Well, me too, but that's trainers that their members aren't us.
• 32:46
  So who's asking the amateurs, because, frankly, amateurs are a big part of who pays for this sport.
• 32:55
  I mean, think about entry fees and memberships and the horses, the training bills.
• 33:01
  And the kicker is that an amateur can join that trainer's group.
• 33:06
  It's $40 a year, which isn't a lot.
• 33:09
  But you don't get a vote.
• 33:11
  You might get a survey.
• 33:12
  I do think that that is trending more so in the right direction than any of the rest of it, though, because even though you're only getting a survey, at least you're.
• 33:19
  Yeah, you're not getting a full voting piece, but because of the membership and then how they go and they look at the results and the data that is then distributed, at least you're a part of what's being heard.
• 33:32
  And, like, you don't feel like you're one of, like, 5 million.
• 33:36
  I mean, I know that that's a gross number, but, like, it's.
• 33:41
  It at least trends in the right direction.
• 33:42
  So if you're getting a survey, then you're.
• 33:45
  You're.
• 33:46
  You have the opportunity to participate.
• 33:48
  It's not a.
• 33:48
  Yeah, you have an opportunity to participate.
• 33:50
  Like you said, it's not a vote.
• 33:51
  But then when you get to see, like, the results of it, you're at least you know that you're a piece.
• 33:55
  Of the pie, I guess.
• 33:57
  But if you've listened to any of the other horse podcasts or you've been on social media this month, then y' all know what everybody's talking about.
• 34:08
  The USF named its next CEO, Sonia Keating.
• 34:14
  She starts January 1st.
• 34:17
  And it's a fair conversation to have.
• 34:18
  It is.
• 34:19
  But while everybody's looking at who's in charge, I don't think people are really looking at how decisions are getting made.
• 34:27
  Like, the light rules, the board voted on it back in July, then Yousef made it official starting in December, and only then did it show up for us to comment on when the decision was basically already made.
• 34:39
  So that's not about any one person.
• 34:42
  It's not about the CEO or anybody else.
• 34:45
  It's the process.
• 34:47
  And the process is still there, no matter who's the CEO.
• 34:51
  Before they picked her, the USCF did survey members about what they wanted in the next CEO.
• 34:58
  And I, I do have to, like, look at it a little bit in.
• 35:03
  Okay, again, at least you're getting surveyed.
• 35:05
  At least you're getting to have a little bit of an opinion.
• 35:09
  No, I.
• 35:09
  And.
• 35:10
  And that's fair.
• 35:11
  And.
• 35:11
  And I.
• 35:12
  I guess you could just say I would like to see them ask us about the rules the same way.
• 35:20
  And I guess on some level they do by asking us to comment.
• 35:25
  But you know, if it was a survey or, you know, do you really need this rule?
• 35:31
  Do you really want that rule?
• 35:33
  I don't know.
• 35:33
  Just seems like there is a piece of this that's missing, so.
• 35:37
  Well, I think that Mary was really, really good about setting up town halls in the zones.
• 35:43
  You're talking about Mary Babak Knowlton, previous president of the USHJA and rule changes.
• 35:49
  And sort of sanctions and different things all came up as a part of the conversation.
• 35:54
  And she would take all of that information and go back to do, you know, to headquarters.
• 36:00
  And so I thought that that was always, I mean it's, it's always going to be hard and you don't want it to be like a roast style situation where it's like mob, mob like coming in.
• 36:12
  But the town halls were really good for people's voices to be heard.
• 36:15
  And if the person who was running the town hall at the USHA or the USF was listening to, then they could take it back and take those opinions.
• 36:22
  And I think the comments is a good way to get probably a lot more voices heard than just the town halls.
• 36:27
  But I also think the town halls I think are important.
• 36:30
  But I think what keeps tripping me up is we don't get a vote, okay?
• 36:38
  That's the way it runs.
• 36:39
  But anybody can write a rule.
• 36:42
  So make it up, write it, and any of us can comment on it.
• 36:47
  But for example, if the floating split gets 12 no's and not one yes and it still shows up in December looking exactly the same, then I think it's pretty clear how much the comments that we make really count,
• 37:04
  right?
• 37:04
  And honestly, in July I lost one of my closest friends, George.
• 37:10
  We've been friends for more than 50 years.
• 37:13
  He was a trainer, a barn manager, a mentor.
• 37:15
  He was a true horseman, the best he was.
• 37:20
  He was always the first one to show up when somebody needed help.
• 37:25
  So I wanted to try to set up a fund in his name through the USHJ foundation.
• 37:31
  And it would be something to help grooms and barn professionals when they get sick or they're hurt.
• 37:37
  And since July, I written to the person in charge of donor relations at the USHJA three times and I haven't heard a word back.
• 37:47
  And I asked in writing in hopes that I would at least get a reply.
• 37:53
  Now, in fairness, I did mention all of this and something about not receiving a response in a blog post that I wrote this week on Lizzo rides.
• 38:04
  And today I got a message from Brooke McCormick, current USHJA president.
• 38:11
  And to his credit, as for the rules, he said they read every comment.
• 38:17
  That's what he said.
• 38:19
  Yeah.
• 38:19
  That's great.
• 38:20
  And he said that they will talk about them at the town hall.
• 38:24
  And as for George, he did double check that I had the correct email for the person who's their director of sponsorships, which I did.
• 38:34
  So he did write me back today and said, what's your email address?
• 38:39
  Because I'll make sure that she reaches out to you, which is great.
• 38:43
  I set it back.
• 38:44
  Yeah.
• 38:45
  But I also think that, you know, in your world and how you operate and the wisdom that you have going through the world, you know how to be persistent.
• 38:56
  Right.
• 38:57
  And some people don't have the wherewithal to do that.
• 39:02
  Right.
• 39:02
  And I think that that is why some people can get highly discouraged when the answer that they're given to a problem that they're having within a membership is reach out to so and so and so and so, and
• 39:14
  they'll get back to you.
• 39:15
  And it feels really generic.
• 39:17
  And if.
• 39:18
  Or you don't get a response and you're kind of like, I'm just a number.
• 39:23
  Like, I'm just.
• 39:23
  I'm just poking.
• 39:25
  I'm just a, like, you know, a gnat, you know, and that pisses people off.
• 39:30
  Absolutely.
• 39:31
  So all I can say is if he's going to talk about it at town, at the next town hall, we'll be listening.
• 39:38
  Yeah, that'll be great.
• 39:40
  If any of this.
• 39:41
  Got any of y' all that are listening thinking there is still time.
• 39:46
  The USHJA has a town hall that we've been talking about on Zoom, and it's Monday, November 2nd at 7pm Eastern.
• 39:55
  And you can sign up on the USHJA website and if you go ask.
• 40:01
  A question, ask how they actually use those comments that they're reading, or ask.
• 40:05
  What happens to the grooms when a trainer gets suspended.
• 40:08
  I'd really like to know.
• 40:09
  You've got until November 8th to comment.
• 40:12
  And it doesn't have to be long.
• 40:14
  A sentence or two is fine.
• 40:15
  And we'll put a link to the rule proposals in the show Notes.
• 40:18
  And if you know somebody who thinks none of this affects them, please send them this episode and we'll be sure.
• 40:26
  To be checking back after the December vote and tell you what has changed.
• 40:29
  And whether anybody was listening.
• 40:32
  We'll see you next week.
• 40:34
  Let's ride.