USEF Competition Calendar Webinar

[j_feil]

Hi all,

I’m intensely interested in this Competition Calendar debate stuff, so I watched the webinar today and took notes. As a public service, I went ahead and put them on a Google Doc here if you’d like to see them: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Tr_bJiAEmhydo6WQjv82JCrRYylSzT-DgqRmYbn8k08/edit?usp=sharing

Warning - it’s very much my rough notes from frantic typing!

Additionally some highlights for those who don’t want to parse my short hand and misspellings or spend an hour+ watching the recording:

• Tom O’Mara really wants everyone’s feedback. If he said that once, he said it 100 times. You can email them at CompetitionsTaskForce@usef.org.
• They gave good details on what the current rules are and how they work, but it felt woefully light on how they are moving forward. They kept talking about the Task Force they are creating, but they couldn’t even give a clear answer on how they are selecting people to participate.
• Moroney emphasized the rules, regulations, dispute process, etc. as to why they are worried about the standards at WEC. Further, they did advise FEI not to allow competitors, officials, etc. to participate at WEC, but that is a decision for FEI.
• O’Mara noted that data in the past few years shows that shows have grown and expanded under the mileage rule. But he cited shows like Tryon, Saugerties, Split Rock. No reference to smaller shows.
• They seem eager to put in a more robust competition feedback system.
• About 10% of competitions annually apply for an exemption to the mileage rule – about 80% have been approved. When a show gets an exemption year after year, that can trigger reevaluation and consideration of a more permanent solution.

There were also a couple polls, so I’m going to attach screen shots of those below.

This was a bit “mileage rule 101,” but I do appreciate them putting themselves out there for this discussion at least. It seems like it took a true uproar to get things moving, but maybe they are.

I’ll keep an eye on this to answer questions if you have them.

(Although, if I felt safe traveling this winter to show, I’d be at WEC )

[pds]

While this is their first webinar on this subject I still felt most of it was lacking in substance with respect to vision, general membership, willingness to seriously address membership concerns about the mileage rule etc. Did you notice how Bill M tap danced around the question of a show selling it’s license? He chose not to elaborate on this and while technically true that a show can not sell it’s license, shows do sell their dates and the new show applies for a license unopposed.
The more I listened the stronger the feeling that USEF/USHJA is still just a “association” of horse shows serving the top tier membership and is not really interested in truly becoming a member centric association.
I also felt like they “cherry picked” the easy less political questions.

[Lucassb]

@pds

While this is their first webinar on this subject I still felt most of it was lacking in substance with respect to vision, general membership, willingness to seriously address membership concerns about the mileage rule etc. Did you notice how Bill M tap danced around the question of a show selling it’s license? He chose not to elaborate on this and while technically true that a show can not sell it’s license, shows do sell their dates and the new show applies for a license unopposed.
The more I listened the stronger the feeling that USEF/USHJA is still just a “association” of horse shows serving the top tier membership and is not really interested in truly becoming a member centric association.
I also felt like they “cherry picked” the easy less political questions.

100% agree with this. The repeated comment that “shows, like any business, need to be able to make a profit…” offered as justification for the monopolistic practices was to me an indication that they are putting in some effort to appease the membership while choosing to do nothing substantive to address member issues or concerns.

[MHM]

That was my first view of Mr. O’Mara, and I will say he made a good impression on me. He seemed genuinely interested in getting feedback from all directions, and he was coming at the whole thing from the view of a horse show dad (granted, at a pretty high level) who did not seem to have any prior involvement other than that. That might be a refreshing change going forward. I wish him the best of luck.

When I logged out of that Zoom meeting, I got a survey to make any suggestions about the competition calendar issue. So that seemed like a good sign. At least they provided an opportunity for input from everyone who watched.

[MHM]

Thanks for taking the time to put that together!!

[Jealoushe]

If anyone sees the tour of WEC in Ocala…they won’t be going anywhere else. That place is straight up Palatial.

[j_feil]

I totally agree with @pds. The more I think on this, the more I feel disheartened. Moroney absolutely was not answering questions directly. When talking about their recommendation to FEI not to approve WEC Ocala, he went on and on about how they cannot support WEC because there is no way to verify they are following USEF’s rules and standards. Well, OK sure but the way to ensure they follow your rules is to license them. And presumably FEI is perfectly capable of instituting and enforcing their own rules if that’s the route they want to go (as well as any of the NGB’s ever do…).

He didn’t answer the question that was actually posed, which is how - if at all - NSBA falls short in this department. It was just a rehash of that email they sent a couple weeks ago tsk-tsking at WEC when they announced they were pulling the approvals.

I agree with @MHM that O’Mara seems like a nice change of pace, but I’m going to reserve optimism. His tone was definitely the better of the two, but I felt his answers lacked substance, either because he doesn’t know the answers (yet?) or he doesn’t know how to communicate them to the public. He did say several times that he’s very data driven, and when he leaned on some of the data he does have (e.g., approval rates for mileage exemptions, expansion of shows), he was able to convey much more useful information. Hopefully that mindset will serve him and by extension the organization well.

On top of this I’ve been watching a bit of the USHJA annual meetings, and on the one hand, it is great to have better access to all of this stuff virtually. But on the other hand, I am just left again with the feeling that the average working amateur doesn’t matter.

[Tackpud]

@j_feil

I totally agree with @pds. The more I think on this, the more I feel disheartened. Moroney absolutely was not answering questions directly. When talking about their recommendation to FEI not to approve WEC Ocala, he went on and on about how they cannot support WEC because there is no way to verify they are following USEF’s rules and standards. Well, OK sure but the way to ensure they follow your rules is to license them. And presumably FEI is perfectly capable of instituting and enforcing their own rules if that’s the route they want to go (as well as any of the NGB’s ever do…).

He didn’t answer the question that was actually posed, which is how - if at all - NSBA falls short in this department. It was just a rehash of that email they sent a couple weeks ago tsk-tsking at WEC when they announced they were pulling the approvals.

I agree with @MHM that O’Mara seems like a nice change of pace, but I’m going to reserve optimism. His tone was definitely the better of the two, but I felt his answers lacked substance, either because he doesn’t know the answers (yet?) or he doesn’t know how to communicate them to the public. He did say several times that he’s very data driven, and when he leaned on some of the data he does have (e.g., approval rates for mileage exemptions, expansion of shows), he was able to convey much more useful information. Hopefully that mindset will serve him and by extension the organization well.

On top of this I’ve been watching a bit of the USHJA annual meetings, and on the one hand, it is great to have better access to all of this stuff virtually. But on the other hand, I am just left again with the feeling that the average working amateur doesn’t matter.

I’m the one who asked the question about why the USEF felt the other associations would not have drug rules, support suspensions, etc., and felt the question was not answered at all. Lots of tap dancing around having to actually say that these shows would be totally fine. Really disappointed in the entire webinar.

[MHM]

I will just point out that Mr. O’Mara is not actually the president yet. At this time he is still the president- elect, so I don’t know if that affected his information or his level of knowledge at this point. I believe his new position becomes official around the USEF annual meeting in January.

[yaya]

I just went through the survey USEF emailed out. Like most surveys, the questions were posed in such a way as to get the results they want. Yeah, sure, they asked if various services they provide are important to me, but nowhere was there a way to give feedback as to my satisfaction with how well they were performing those services!

For instance, drug testing. Yes, it’s important to me for horse welfare and a fair playing field, but I show at dressage shows, and only TWICE in over THIRTY YEARS of showing, have I seen drug testing at one of our area shows. So yes, they can point at the survey answers and say “see, our drug testing is important to our members!” But nowhere will they have anything saying whether we think it is being done effectively.

[MHM]

@yaya

I just went through the survey USEF emailed out. Like most surveys, the questions were posed in such a way as to get the results they want. Yeah, sure, they asked if various services they provide are important to me, but nowhere was there a way to give feedback as to my satisfaction with how well they were performing those services!

For instance, drug testing. Yes, it’s important to me for horse welfare and a fair playing field, but I show at dressage shows, and only TWICE in over THIRTY YEARS of showing, have I seen drug testing at one of our area shows. So yes, they can point at the survey answers and say “see, our drug testing is important to our members!” But nowhere will they have anything saying whether we think it is being done effectively.

I will say that I’ve had horses drug tested many, many times over the years at hunter/jumper shows. Certainly not at every show by a long shot. But I see drug testers out and about on a pretty regular basis, even at the shows where my horses were not selected.

[AllOverFarm]

I’m wondering at this point why people are even talking about USEF sanctioning shows at WEC. The hunter Jumper crowd now has the chance to have a choice which show circuit they want to follow. WEC has NSBA, HITS has USEF.
I know people want points for indoor shows. Or End of year awards. Other hunter jumper show Venus can now host “A” shows under NSBA. Riders can chase NSBA points and , NSBA can host finals.
They can start their own “ Big Eq’, “Pony finals” Derby finals, etc… Heck, Robby can rent out the Devon show grounds and host a WEC at Devon week for those with NSBA top points.
Seems to me this is the beginning of 2 different sand boxes. Those who want to show USEF and those who want to show NSBA. Choice is nice.

[yaya]

@MHM

I will say that I’ve had horses drug tested many, many times over the years at hunter/jumper shows. Certainly not at every show by a long shot. But I see drug testers out and about on a pretty regular basis, even at the shows where my horses were not selected.

Yes, h/j shows seem to be their focus, but the rest of us have to pay for it! If they really mean to have a fair playing field across the board, then they would test all disciplines equally, or they should not charge drug fees in the disciplines they are not going to test.

[IPEsq]

WEC is still hosting dressage CDIs right? No concern for dressage horse welfare? This is so strange.

Yes, the mega circuits have grown in recent years. The mileage rule has been around for a long time.

I have been told by a show manager that it takes a really long time typically for an exemption request to be processed. Early last year, when the Colorado horse park appeared to be “closing” yet keeping its licenses, this other manager said it was already too late to try to get an exemption for the summer dates. Months and months away. They did wind up hosting some shows just not the full range, and of course, some COVID issues with state mandates that would have affected anyone. Exemptions are also given for certain limited special events like one off derbies vs full blown horse shows. So I wonder if that 80% approval number really has any meaning for someone aspiring to bring in competition.

[pds]

The 80% exemptions granted is meaningless without the context of the numerical data, though it makes a good sound bite for the USEF to publicize.
BUT
8 of 10 is 80% so is 80 of 100

We need to see the actual numbers for this to have any real meaning.

[trubandloki]

@pds

The 80% exemptions granted is meaningless without the context of the numerical data, though it makes a good sound bite for the USEF to publicize.
BUT
8 of 10 is 80% so is 80 of 100

We need to see the actual numbers for this to have any real meaning.

And… is it the same 8 of 10 barn/organizers would also be good information to have.

[j_feil]

True, but he’s currently on the Board and clearly has access to information given his citing to the “data.”

Also, if you’re going to put the president-elect up there to talk to membership, he better be briefed and ready.

[Edited cause I got posts mixed up.]

[MHM]

@j_feil

True, but he’s currently on the Board and clearly has access to information given his citing to the “data.”

Also, if you’re going to put the president-elect up there to talk to membership, he better be briefed and ready.

I agree with your other comment about it being disappointing.

Where did I say it was disappointing? I don’t believe I said that. Perhaps that was someone else.

[pds]

Maybe National Snaffle Bit Association should rebrand as the USHSA - United States Horse Sports Association - adopt the USEF rule book, make the needed changes to the rules, focus on the majority of membership, leave the olympic and FEI to the USEF and bypass the need for USEF all together.

[Peggy]

Yesterday I felt like amateurs mattered to USHJA, at least during the Adult HQC meeting. They invited a few of the people who did the finals for that this year to provide feedback. One of the things they said was that they want to do more things for amateurs, who are often people who have been supporting the sport for decades. None of the four amateurs on the panel shows extensively on the A circuit and the chair of the committee noted that USHJA wanted to provide more for people like us. So I left with some hope.

Two things people need to do:

1. Fill out that USEF Competition Survey. I took great pleasure in ranking VIP tents in the bottom category.
2. Participate in the HQC if you’re so inclined. I learned a lot, feel more connected with USHJA, and got excellent swag and awards.