@clanter My suggestion based on the survey was to offer (affordable/accessible) courses in things like concussion awareness and Safe Sport topics, and offer a list of professionals/officials who have taken/passed courses, and promote it as marketing. Some of the education could also be required for insurance purposes (like first aid is now). However, affordability and accessibility are key to encourage participation.
1 Like
thanks for the follow up
But… at least here in the States horse ownership and participation in equine events is declining not because of certifications but more so due to increased costs
I agree that the insurance carriers should have greater responsibility but their market model is if they have claims they increase the premium … so maybe there should be imposed caps on premiums? but they would just remove providers from offering the product.
I would assume that if they wanted to make sure of the overall safety of the riders then they should require/mandate proof of medical insurance of all entries as it is a given there will be injuries in equine related events
1 Like
I know about licensing. In my life I’ve held licenses as a driver, real estate broker, attorney, and pilot (Commercial Pilot, Single and Multi-engine, Land, Instrument and Instrument Flight Instructor). I’ve also held certifications as a Naval Aviator (Carrier Air Plane Commander, Certified Nuclear Weapons Deliver Pilot, Instructor Pilot, Classroom Instructor, and Simulator Instructor).
ALL the military and aviation certifications were a multi-step process where I had to pass a written test, oral test, and practical test (demonstrate the skill required). Within those military and aviation skills could be subset specialties, such as weapons delivery (conventional weapons like bombs, rockets, torpedoes, etc.) or becoming a Standardization Pilot who would then test others. Sometimes the evaluator was a person, sometimes a board of persons. Sometimes it took more than one try to get the ticket!!!
The non-aviation civilian certifications, with the exception of the drivers license and admission to the bar, were done on paper forms only. There was no face-to-face meeting with the certifying agency.
When I read the Canadian proposal and took the survey I did it from my perspective as a very well tested person with multiple certifications. I find the proposal to be a real “camel” bred by people who want to exercise some sort of control but don’t really have the “horsepower” to make it happen. Maybe a more focused effort would be more productive.
If you want to emphasize “safe space” issues (and reduce the risks of sexual misconduct) then your job is different from one that intends to raise the skill level of instructors teaching the equestrian arts to students. And that’s different from a program that would be designed to improve and enhance the instructional skill of riding instructors, coaches, and trainers.
All these goals could be established under a singe aegis but to do so would require a substantial investment of time and money to develop the program and would require the same of persons who would want to successfully complete the program. The only way to ensure large scale participation in the program would be to require a certification BEFORE the person seeking same could practice their profession as an instructor, coach, or trainer. This is certainly possible. The DMV and FAA do it every day. Of course they have help in performing their tasks in the form of public appropriations and police agencies to make sure things are done correctly. The Canadian proposal will have to be funded by the students who take the courses.
Maybe our Canadian friends have to go back to the drawing board and decide just what their goal, or goals, are and be more precise in building an educational structure that can teach the desired curriculum and then evaluate the performance of the students. This last item is also an important way to evaluate the performance of the teachers in particular and the program in general. The survey seems to indicate a lot of “sloppy thinking.” That means the answers have a high probability of to lead to sloppy decision making. And that means a sloppy program.
Then there’s the question of unintended consequences. As clanter notes the equestrian arts are under serious pressure brought on by declining numbers in many areas of the equine industry. If you put a big, financial yoke on the shoulders of your instructors, coaches, and trainers what will that do to their ability to make a living? If they can’t make a living what happens then?
My comments are not meant to be insulting to Canadians. They are directed at the people who are pushing this particular idea. There have been attempts in the U.S. over the years to try and come up with a more structured equine training system. Two good friends of mine tried it a while back and developed a crackerjack program. And it didn’t sell. Not because it was bad; it wasn’t. But because it required a substantial investment in time and some money and the market place didn’t see that as beneficial. A couple of states (MA comes to mind) have tried licensing of equine professionals at some level. I don’t know much about it beyond that it exists. Maybe somebody from MA could tell us how it works and if it works to the benefit of the equine industry as a whole.
G.
3 Likes
and if you read in-depth their proposal it does not include males…
Isn’t that interesting.
G.
Yes, speaking as a Canadian who went back and took this survey after I started the post, I totally agree.
Note also that Equine Canada certification already requires an initial police background check, and yearly updates of first aid training.
But this is the kind of muddled survey that makes it easy to cherry pick the results.
It’s the kind of survey that asks things like:
- Should all coaches be licensed? yes or no
And then on the next page:
2 Should licensed coaches have to show photo ID at events?
The kind of survey that asks questions that continue on and assume an answer. What happens if 80% of respondents answer “no” to question #1, and then 75% answer “yes” to question #2? Is responding to “yes” to #2 taken as being a vote “yes” for #1?
So they could then report back that 75% of respondents agreed that licensed coaches should show photo ID at events, and just ignore that 80% of respondents don’t think all coaches need to be licensed.
Anyhow, like USEF, Equine Canada has no authority whatsoever outside of EC rated competitions.
4 Likes
I have no objection to offering coach licensing. But the idea that only licensed or certified coaches can coach at shows is ridiculous and pretty much unenforceable. The EC survey questions were written to elicit the responses they wanted. I am not very impressed.
4 Likes
EC is adept at money grabs.
3 Likes
Biggest concern with this proposal is that they want to make it so no one can coach at EC shows unless they are licensed. Well, in my area the amount of certified coaches you would actually want to ride with is NIL. So people will hev to go to the shows sans coach, or coaches wont be taking their students to EC shows and will be sticking to schooling shows.
Next they will make rules so all riders have to have a coach at shows Im sure…
1 Like
as the craziness expands and logic prevails the next rule will be the Horse must have its own licenced protective representative who is there to oversee its care
1 Like
As others have pointed out in this thread, the EC proposal separates certification from licensing.
You could be certified but unlicensed. Or licensed but uncertified.
However the survey questions muddle the two. And they are badly worded. “Do you think a coach should have qualifications to be recognized?” What on earth does “recognized” mean in this context? By whom? Or qualifications?
They most certainly do not come out and ask the obvious questions, like:
- Should only EC certified and licensed coaches be allowed to teach in Canada?
- Should only EC certified coaches be licensed?
The roof would explode if they said that because as other posters have said a lot of high level.coaches never bother with the EC certification. If you were already competing at high levels it would be silly and insulting to do those tests.
But if unlicensed and uncertified coaches are allowed to teach, then they need to be allowed to take their students to shows.
Also if you ban unlicensed coaches from the warmup area or showgrounds, do you also ban all parents, barn friends giving advice from the rail, working students setting poles for students? How do you ban only unlicensed coaches and not the whole entourage?
I mean as a total stranger I can hang out by the rail of the warmup arena at a rated show, and if a friend was in the ring they could stop and ask me advice (like if their hair was coming down or their number was on straight 
at least) or borrow my water bottle. How could a show let me interact with a rider but stop an unlicensed coach?
2 Likes
Yes, still having to be licensed to teach at EC shows, and wanting $500 a year to be licensed. It’s not a way to grow the sport imo.
1 Like
It is, as typical for EC, rather laughable and stinks of having limited knowledge of the “real world” part of the industry.
2 Likes
No, but it IS a way to grow the population of bureaucrats at EC.
G.
1 Like
No kidding the roof will explode…basically EC is now saying that all other countries certifications are crap compared to ours…sorry but I don’t believe that at all!
Plus, the banning of unlicensed people from the warm up areas…hmmmmm…now what happens when everyone’s out course walking? Who’s “allowed” in to hold the horses? …generally it’s a friend or parents because trainers are out there with their riders walking the course! As usual EC are so far removed from the normal showing or “grass roots” horse person they probably think we all just hand over to a groom!
1 Like
Yeah, there are currently no real limits on who can wander around a Bronze or Gold show at our local facilities. The survey asks if unlicensed coaches should be banned from or relegated to * the stands.* Even at TBird, the secondary rings don’t even have stands! Only the big GP ring has actual stadium stands etc.
There’s no entry gate to the property, you just wander in from the parking lot. If you look horsey everyone just assumes you are with some other contingent or you’re an auntie of some child on a pony. You would need to totally reconfigure the ethos and the physical setup if you were going to ban unlicensed coaches or anyone else, indeed, from the grounds.
You could block someone from competing obviously if their memberships weren’t paid up. But blocking from show grounds would require a real change and not for the better IMHO. I like watching warmups from the rail!
2 Likes
I can only imagine the caterwaulling if everyone had to stop and present photo ID before entering a warm up ring at a big facility like Palgrave! LOL!
1 Like
And if only licensed coaches can enter, then you couldn’t send in a working student to set rails.
3 Likes
Or, like, grooms…
1 Like
Why can’t they just be honest and call it an “Elite” membership, because that is what it amounts to. Oh. Right. Forget that.
1 Like
