TREC GB Board Meeting th December 2016, 8.00pm Rules discussion & Voting Minutes By Conference call immediately after the AGM.

Transcription

1 TREC GB Board Meeting th December 2016, 8.00pm Rules discussion & Voting Minutes By Conference call immediately after the AGM. 1. Present:- Sarah Leggat South East Rep Chair Cath Cromarty North Wales Rep Dave Rogerson North East Rep Jenny Snowdon (JSN) East Anglia & Lincs Rep Helen Martin Central Rep, Sarah Thurnell North East Dep. Vanessa Warren South West Rep Julie Brand, SW Deputy Mary Weston Central Dep, Julia McHugh North Wales Dep. Ailsa Gibson North West Rep Jane Scott (JSct) East Anglia & Lincs Dep. Dot Still Scotland Rep Karen Waite Scotland Rep Jen Sheen (JSH) Admin 2. Apologies: - Sheila Watson Scot Dep, Polly Lloyd Owen- S. Wales Rep, Chris Paine S Wales Dep, Amanda Marfleet - South East Dep, Jo Ralston North West Rep. 3. Intro from Rules Chair and meeting etiquette: - CC Following events recently brought to my attention I would like to remind everyone we run under British TREC rules and we must use these rules when officiating at any TREC GB competition, not ones we feel are ours! For the Board call one person to speak at a time, everyone will get a chance to make a comment at the end of each rule. 4. Vote of acceptance on proposals: See below. Discussion then took place on item 3.62 This is to be re voted on after a change of wording VW, CC & HLM, are to decide the exact wording along the lines of adding rider does not need to be eliminated it can be at the TD s discretions if circumstance warrant. Also on 3.62 wording needs to be changed to unauthorised use of the PTV Discussions following Board observations a) New Rule Local rules for countries/regions/competitions: - Accepted, however the Scottish concussion rule is to go into the rule book KW to suggest a line of wording to be inserted in the rule book and then come back to the Board for voting. KW to give send the wording to CC b) Help with Remounting To be re voted by with an option a as it stands and option b with returning the horse to the rider is considered outside assistance removed. c) Body Protectors MW bp not needed for other disciplines (dressage, Show Jumping, & Endurance) SL as a lot of events are on x country courses where there are fixed obstacles and bps needed. Suggestion for bp optional if there are no fixed obstacles. Low branches heights Rule group needs to re assess and but forward options to the Board as the current height does not allow additional height for bp s and the feeling this is causing additional accidents. Decision - options to be put forward for re voting on and also height change for PTV. Action All members on the call with a BP to measure to height from withers to top of BP when in a position to go under low branches and let HLM know. d) Control of Shoeing- Discussion took place. JSct / AG to put forward a 2 point option and a 3 point option and to re vote. HLM to add a sentence regarding check point judges ringing the TD if unsure.

2 e) Jump heights L4- International height much higher. Suggestion to raise the height doesn t mean they have to be that height, just to have the option of max Discussion took place. Decision to re vote with 3 options No change, Change as suggested, change height for champs only and then to re vote. f) Tack & Equipment deduction of -10 (with reference to the martingale on the PTV) A competitor undertaking an obstacle leading their horse from reins to which a running martingale is still attached will get a zero for effectiveness. Also HLM is also going to take out the wording from the new rule book that a deduction -10 be taken out of the rule book and replace it with zero for effectiveness so that the confusion of zero for the obstacle and not a minus for the obstacle is clear. To re vote. 6. Other areas for discussion: - a) Pairs regarding Vet penalties discussion Wording Rule Penalty points 5 points for every 5 mins additional halt imposed by the vet to allow the HR to come within permitted levels. Maximum 15 points. Up to a maximum of 30 minutes after arrival at the vet check. New wording needs to be voted on. b) BP s juniors - Only applicable if body protectors are not kept as compulsory on the PTV. Should juniors wear BP on the POR and MA. Our juniors are under parental control. The decision of BP rest with the parent and they fill in parent consent form. Need to state on PC form that the parent has read the rules, particular in regard to safety equipment including but not limited to hat, and body protector. NEW PC form to be put forward for voting on. Dot and Jen to look at the parental consent form for reviewing by the Board. c) L2A Rule (Grid references and Bearings) Add at Level 2A. Plus at From 2017 Level 2A will exist as a new level in its own right with its own league. It follows all existing level 2 rules, with the added features normally associated with Level 3 POR eg Grids and Bearing. 7. Quotes for Rulebook printing: - HLM has quotes for the printing of the new rule book, she is to pass them onto the FWG for them to review. 8. AOB: - None. 9. Date of next Board meeting: - Meeting 9 th Jan pm. Rulebook amendment proposals December 2016 Rule Page number 2 nd ed New Additional rules for specific countries/ regions/ competitions Rule concerns Text for ratification Vote from the Board There may be specific rules for a competition or region or country but those will always be notified to riders in the schedule, competitors information and/or displayed on the day Outside assistance Add the words Catching a loose horse and/or helping with remounting is allowed, but returning the horse to the rider is considered outside assistance Elimination from event Add the following sentence after the bullet point list: 'A rider eliminated from the event cannot be placed. Accepted plus the wording for a new rule re the Scottish concussion rule to be voted on. To be re voted on by with option A and option B as discussion.

3 Rule Page number 2 nd ed Elimination from phase Rider clothing and equipment Rule concerns Text for ratification Vote from the Board Amend the rule to read: Zero score for MA or PTV phase A competitor will receive a zero score for the phase concerned for: - Making an error of course of the PTV [as existing] - Unauthorised Riding any part of the MA or PTV course prior to the competition. - Getting a zero score on both stages of the MA [as existing] The rider's score (from other phases) will be included in placing calculations in the usual way.' [FITE now only require body protectors on the PTV for Junior and Senior Championships. Body protectors are not required by our insurers.] Amend rule to read: Body protectors are compulsory for the PTV for levels 3 and 4 and are recommended at levels 1 and 2. Unauthorised added to point 2 To be re worded and re voted on & & 25 Control of shoeing Amend both rules using text attached below. To be re voted on with a 2 or 3 option POR penalties The POR penalties will be marked to differentiate between Navigation penalties (applied to both members of a pair) and Shoeing/Equipment penalties (only applied to the rider at fault). [Shoeing/equipment penalties are the last 3 types of penalties on the list in the 2 nd edition.] Veterinary and Time penalties will continue to be applied to both riders in a pair Jump heights Increase L4 height to 1.10m maximum (including at National Championships) [in line with FITE international rules] [Note this issue was discussed in December 2014 and the Board voted to keep the height at 90cm maximum, 1m at National Championships.] To be re voted on with 3 options to keep it as is. To increase it as proposed or for height increase a National Champs only Tack & equipment (in PTV chapter) A Standards for safety helmets Add: A rider undertaking an obstacle leading their horse from the reins when a running martingale (that can't be unclipped) is used will incur a deduction of -10. List to be amended to read: The approved standards for British TREC are - PAS 015 (1998 or 2011) - VG ( ) - SEI ASTM 95 - SEI ASTM F1163 (2004a or 04a onwards), providing it has an SEI mark - SNELL E2001 OR E2016, providing it has a SNELL label and number - AS/NZS 3838 (2006 onwards), providing it has an SAI Global mark Any hat used must conform to one or more of these standards. A3 55 Body protectors Add Beta level 3 standard, Purple label. From 1 st April 2018 all body protectors must have a label dated 2009 or later. Wording changed and to be re voted on. Proposed new rules concerning shoeing: Shoeing

4 Horses may compete in the state they are normally ridden (i.e. shod, booted, unshod or a combination of these). Horses wearing horse-boots on the POR may compete in other phases shod or unshod. Horses with loose or badly fitting shoes will not be allowed to compete. At the preliminary veterinary check (or tack check for non championship competitions), it is noted whether the horse s feet are shod, booted or unshod (or a combination of these). The observed condition of the shoeing at this point is considered a minimum for the POR phase. At Level 3 and above it is compulsory for a rider to carry a hoofboot (or equivalent, including Hoof Cast, hereafter included in the phrase hoofboot ) and emergency farriery kit on the POR. Riders competing on an unshod horse must still carry a hoof boot, in case of damage to a foot. At Levels 1 and 2 this is not compulsory but riders are strongly advised to do so Control of shoeing The procedures for horses feet depend on the minimum shoeing state recorded: - Minimum shoeing state = Shod: Penalties will be incurred for a horse arriving at a CP with one or more feet missing the shoe. Lost shoes must be replaced by a suitable boot or equivalent. The rider will be eliminated from the event if their horse loses a shoe and they do not have a boot to put on. Eliminated horses must return to the venue by being led/walked by the shortest route or transported. - Minimum shoeing state = Boot: Penalties will be incurred for arriving at a CP with one or more booted feet bare. The boot must be replaced by the original boot or equivalent. The rider will be eliminated from the event if they cannot put a boot back on their horse. Eliminated horses must return to the venue by being led/walked by the shortest route or transported. - Minimum shoeing state = Unshod: The rider may add boots to unshod feet while doing the POR and remove them later if appropriate. The shoeing state of the horse on arrival at each CP should be recorded accurately by the CP judge. The CP judge may ask to check that removed boots are still being carried. If a boot has been lost then penalties will be incurred [*]. The rider will be eliminated from the event if the foot is damaged, such that the horse is lame, and they do not have a boot to put on. Eliminated horses must return to the venue by being led/walked by the shortest route or transported. If a horse has a combination of shoeing states on the POR then each foot is subject to the appropriate procedure for its shoeing state (above). * The proposed penalty for a lost boot is 10 penalties, as for a lost shoe. For information, the existing rules concerning shoeing are as follows: Existing Shoeing Horses may compete in the state they are normally ridden (i.e. shod or unshod). Horses wearing horse-boots on the POR may compete in other phases shod or unshod. Horses with loose or badly fitting shoes will not be allowed to compete. At the preliminary veterinary check (or tack check for non championship competitions), it is noted whether the horse is shod or not. The stated condition of the shoeing at this point is considered a minimum for the POR phase. At Level 3 and above it is compulsory for a rider to carry a horse-boot and emergency farriery kit. Riders competing on an unshod horse must still carry a hoof boot (or equivalent), in case of damage to a foot. At Levels 1 and 2 this is not compulsory but riders are strongly advised to do so. Existing Control of shoeing Penalties will be incurred for arriving at a CP with one or more bare (horse s) feet. If a shoe or shoes have been lost they must be replaced by a suitable boot or equivalent. The rider will be eliminated from the event if their horse loses a shoe and they do not have a boot to put on. Eliminated horses must return to the venue by being led/walked by the shortest route or transported.

5 Background I have been talking to various people about the use of boots, particularly Ailsa Gibson as she has Guinness barefoot and uses hoof boots as a sustainable alternative to shoes. She favours the possibility of putting boots on when the ground dictates it and taking them off when she is able to (and does so quite routinely on a POR Mum and I have passed her making boot adjustments on several occasions!) When we were discussing it after the GB Champs she made the point that it is important to check that a rider has taken the boots off deliberately rather than taken one off because its pair has been lost. This is the reason for the reference to the judge checking that the boots are still being carried, so that they could be put back on if the terrain changed such that they were warranted again. Helen Martin Other proposals made by Working Group: - Amendments to be released as a list of changes as well as incorporated into the 3 rd edition of the British TREC Rulebook. - Some questions have been asked about the format of the PTV data sheets. The Rules WG proposes that the format is left as it is for a further year, in order to give judges and riders more time to become familiar with them. - The changes will be issued on 1 st February 2017, to come into force on 1 st April 2017.