At the midyear meeting the board of directors considered the issue of rewriting the protest and grievance rule (rule 14), along with a more general rewrite of all of the rules. We all agree this is needed.

I am acutely aware of the need to address this issue, having spent more time on protests than any other issue since becoming president of AERC. The board has also spent a great amount of time discussing protests. It is the board's belief that we can save a great deal of time if we streamline the protest and grievance processes. It is hoped that these changes may also mitigate the threat of lawsuits against the organization.

As part of this process of revising our rules, I would like the membership to provide input on the protest and grievance process. Christoph Schork has graciously agreed to compile the comments of the members. This will be important input to the Rules Committee which will be undertaking the rewriting. Chris's e-mail address is csluftmeister@aol.com and his mailing address is 4381 E. Heather Ln., Moab, UT 84532. I encourage all members to participate and let their voices be heard.

Before commenting, I'd recommend reading the current rules 14 and 15 which can be found at http://www.aerc.org/upload/Rules_2005.pdf or in the printed AERC rule book.

One step I've taken is to appoint all non-board members to the P&G Committee, including chair Mike Marino, a very capable former public defender and district attorney. Mike has developed a standard form that can be used by any protesting party which aids considerably in defining proper protests and gathering the proper information. The form is available on request from the office or online at www.aerc.org/upload/protestform.pdf.

Protests are almost always filed by one AERC member against another AERC member. AERC files protests only when a member rides an underage horse or when a positive drug test is reported to AERC, fortunately a rare occurrence.

AERC does not use stewards or other "AERC officials" at rides (except in the rare circumstances noted in rule 11.8 of the AERC rule book). Rather, AERC rides are put on by ride managers and controlled by ride veterinarians.

I am often asked why AERC does not do a better job of "enforcing" its rules. What that usually means is why has AERC not taken action related to thus-and-so incident. But action can only be taken when a protest is filed which means that we, the members, are in effect responsible for being the "police force." That's similar to a pick-up basketball game that is self-refereed as contrasted with, say, the Olympics, where officials may well outnumber athletes.

Moreover, our current process relies on written input from the protesting party and the accused party. The P&G Committee relies on written testimony. They are not an investigative body which collects evidence and interviews witnesses. Also, other parties who may be affected by an outcome may not be even aware of a protest.

So here are some key questions for your consideration:

-- What should our rules address? Should rules only address fair competition and welfare of the horse or should they be broader than that and include behavior and conduct of riders towards each other? (Our rules are not consistent on that point right now.)

-- Who should be principal agents responsible for reporting alleged violations?

-- Should the AERC P&G Committee have investigative powers? If so, how will these be paid for?

-- What is a reasonable fee for filing a protest? (The current fee has stayed the same for several decades, making it easy to file protests over non-substantive issues.)

-- Who should be notified when a protest is filed?

-- Should there be a "user-friendly" arbitration process using AERC volunteers trained in this area in addition to or instead of the process involving directors in the current guidelines as an alternative to filing a full-blown protest?

Please provide your input by sending your input to Christoph Schork or to a member of the AERC board of directors.