Can i add my two penneth. The whole point of this, as I have been told, is about numbers. Yes AQHA.UK members and WES members and WHA members etc will not be members of BR (Unless of course they already are members separately) but the affiliation means that the numbers will be counted together.

For example, AQHA.UK is affiliated to the BHS and so they are already being counted twice with the BHS membership numbers. This is normal practice as just like the western associations, people are in more than one english riding club just the same. The thing is though that BHS will not do anything for western with their funding.

The more BR can swell the number count the more funds will be available. I trust David Brimson will correct me if that is wrong, but I'm pretty sure its correct.

Post edited by: Muffin, at: 2008/01/02 16:01

Hi Muff – Beeb and all,

In trying to give as much information as possible in my initial posts, they did inevitably become quite lengthy and in turn so did some of the responses. I felt it was becoming a little clogged up with long posts and having a negative effect on peeps that might have just wanted to make the odd comment although equally as valid, so I stood back a little and just let the debate develop. I am delighted with everyone’s responses which ever way you think, for this truly is the democratic process which I for one felt was being sidetracked by some councils by not letting their members have either the full facts or opportunity to guide their councils as to the members wishes.

I would just like to give a little clarification on a couple of points.

For Beeb
In terms of any proposed structure: ………..

“Societies do not ‘merge’ nor ‘join’ each other. What this affiliation structure means is that each association sits down together and decides on a code of practice and maps out the format of how they agree to work together. It may only include specific items that are of mutual concern/benefit and will not include the whole of the day-to-day running of your organisation. Each association can negotiate separate and different terms if necessary” etc., etc………….(please go back to my original post for this whole para).

So it is the societies themselves that decide how they want to work alongside each other. This can start small/slow then grow…….or indeed different projects and incentives can find their own level of involvement that suits each individual society with time.
As I see it there will be no “if you want to affiliate this is what you will have to do”.
BR will have specific needs and so will other societies. Deciding how to start will be the first step in working together.

For Muffin.

Yes it is pretty much a numbers game but not necessarily only BR’s way, What it will mean is just as you suggest a new total number in respect of the whole of ‘BR/Western’ in all its forms and the total number of each affiliate member will be counted. So let’s say, two major associations affiliated to BR each with 500 members almost certainly at least half the members of each association will belong to the other, so the real total of the two will be nearer 500 and not a 1000. BUT if both affiliate to BR then the number that will be recognised by BEF would be 1000,(al la each seperate total) ADDED to BR’s total. This is how the numbers game is played to get more recognition. This recognition goes right up the chain to Sport England and the devolution of funding…..It’s a bit like how the government play games with NHS waiting lists…!!

On the funding issue, I must stress that this is not about getting huge chunks of cash into BR. What it does mean, is when funding is allocated to projects and incentives that benefit each BEF member body, the level at which those incentives are funded are based on …...yep you guessed it, NUMBERS. When we are a greater force, we deserve more financial support for the benefits we need.

…………………………….

I would once more like to emphasise how ‘western’ has benefited from BR’s involvement with the UKCC from within the BEF.
BR along with each BEF member body has been involved in developing this huge new structure. BR only had the requirement to develop a ‘Reining’ structure and reining alone. It was around the time Pauline B took over, that BR recognised that ‘Western’ was about to loose out big time. Western riding in all its other forms would not have had and never would ever have had a UKCC system available to it.
Of the thirty one different sports that are involved in the UKCC, ONLY BR has been given the opportunity to develop TWO level three qualifications (which is the advanced qualification) otherwise any non-reining western trainer could only have taken level two.
We now have ‘level three reining’ and ‘level three advanced western’ qualifications. BR are the only sport in the whole structure to have achieved this.
We decided that this would be so counter productive to the whole western way of riding that we could not let this happen and this was totally without any of the ‘Trust issues’ that Beeb has raised.
I personal do not think we could have been more magnamous with our efforts for the whole of western riding. Nobody asked us to be included, nobody paid us, and neither did we hold any other society to ransom with it. We jus did it coz thats what western needed. This is exactly how western can further develop; we just need to work together.

I would like to thank everyone for their contributions and wish everyone a great competition year 2008.

DB.

REINMAN wrote:
It was around the time Pauline B took over, that BR recognised that ‘Western’ was about to loose out big time. Western riding in all its other forms would not have had and never would ever have had a UKCC system available to it.

David has suffered another lapse of memory!
I decided that there should be a Western Riding Coach UKCC qualification. The UKCC Western Riding Coach level 2 Qualification was written long before Pauline was appointed as BR's Coaching Development Officer. The Level 2 and 3 Reining Coach was also written by that time. I know this as I wrote the original paperwork which may or may not have been modified since then.


Richard

I think I have got something stuck on my shoe..........??

At the time RA left BR the level two qualification was based on the WES instructors assessment and subsequently considered by BR totally inadequate for purpose.
The syllabus was enhanced and approved by BR's technical verifier, Doug Allen.
At that time there was only ONE level three REINING syllabus and NO level three advanced western..........

This is categoric.

DB

Hi all,

I am so appreciative of the last few posts, thank you all.
I am not sure I can add anything now that will help the debate. The call has now gone out to go to the Westernscene Poll and vote..............
When the result is clear, it will then be time to go tell your individual councils what 'you the members want them to do on your behalf'

Reinman

Although I agree that members should be telling what their council what they want, this very rarely happens.
As I see it councils of the associations should be informing their members and debating the issue to be voted on by the members.
If left to the members you will only get division and the debate will go on and on. Some one has to take a lead, or as I said before another year will pass and we will get left behind.