5 Response(s)

1. Zantke says : July 18, 2018 I appreciate what the proponent wants to do here – in this as well as the following RCS’s (up to No 19-43) = put our Para drivers into a more structured set of rules – however, I’m afraid, some of it is too formalistic – and rather than encouraging beginning para drivers – as I agree we want to do – some of this I’m afraid will rather discourage them as too many hoops to jump through. Accordingly, as the dispensation requirements through USEF & FEI really are cumbersome, especially for a beginner, who might just want to see if all of this might be for him – I suggest at least for Training & Prelim levels we should let them compete on a more informal basis as we do now under GR 1.8. which, it seems to me, has worked well so far. Further, trying to load most of the following RCS all into GR 1.8 might really overburden GR 1 – which is called an Introduction. So, I think we should create a separate Appendix with the Para details – similar to what the FEI has done with their Annex 10. So, to fix the above, let’s just strike the last sentence, or at least, restrict that sentence just to the Intermediate level.

2. keithy says : July 19, 2018 While the intent is good I am not in favor of the RCS. Hardy states my reasons well. The difficulty Linda had in getting her dispensation is proof of, as Hardy says, the cumbersome process. We had to go to Florida for the inspection.

3. Jeff Morse says : August 16, 2018 First, ADS rulebook does not include any definition of “Para-equestrian” or “Para-Athlete” . Somewhere such a term needs to be defined for the purposes of the application of our rules. Since this is a General Rule , it is applicable to all ADS disciplines, not just Combined Driving. For Pleasure Driving, the improvement of GR1.8 put forward in this round of changes would be sufficient. That said, if this particular change does go forward, the use of “shall” should be changed to “must” as has already been done throughout the ADS rulebook.

4. rules says : August 28, 2018 this comment was posted by Kate on behalf of Mary Jo Stockman. It applies to the complete set of new “Para Rules.” From: “mjstockman@frontiernet.net” Subject: Para driving rule change proposals Date: August 28, 2018 at 4:14:05 PM EDT Because legal parameters for working with the disabled are controlled by United States law, I recommend that these Para regulations be tabled for further study and expert legal advice. Even government agencies are strictly restrained from anything that could interfere with the person’s privacy. This is viewed so strictly that the Transportation Safety Authority cannot ask for details of a disability or for a doctor’s statement before an individual may fly on an airplane – even with an animal. As a nonprofit corporation, it would be extremely unfortunate for the ADS to violate the Americans with Disabilities Act and might impact our standing with the New York Secretary of State’s Office. A notice of disability, to be filed with an entry, appears reasonable but should be professionally reviewed prior to publishing. The position of the USEF or FEI is irrelevant to the extent it varies from the law and would offer no defense should a complaint be filed and, further, neither has authority over ADS Pleasure Driving. The proposed rules need to be amended to reflect this. Thanks Mary Jo Stockman

5. Zantke says : August 28, 2018 I agree with Mary Jo: We should table the complete set “Para” rule change proposals. They do need more work!

Comments are closed.