SHOW vs. USE (Revisited)

 I imagine most of the readers of this blog are tired of the discussions covering the Plaintiffs Proposed Bylaws which will be voted upon at the convention.   I too am weary.   However, I received the mailing from Marjorie Hazelwood in the mail today (it apparently was sent out in November) and so I have had a chance to read the arguments in favor of completely overhauling the Board of Directors.    I have also went back and re-read the posted Revised Plaintiff Proposal on the AMHA website.  Despite a number of changes, it is this Proposal which I understand we will be voting upon. 

  There was one statement in the Hazelwood letter (Paragraph 5) which appears completely at odds with my reading of the published proposal.  The quote is: “ONLY members who decide to run for the board will be required to declare their category”.    The Revised Proposal at the AMHA website clearly states that Everyone applying for membership has to declare whether they are a Show or Use member.    Has there been yet ANOTHER revised proposal!?   I really want to know this, as that fundamentally changes the thrust of the Proposal.     She then goes on to state that voters are free to vote for whoever they think will do the best job.   Well, the revised proposal does not specifically spell that out anywhere that I can see.   If that is indeed the case, then why do we all have to declare our category?  This categorization of members/voters lies at the heart of the divisiveness I foresee from this proposal.    Our national politics are poisoned by labels such as “Librul, Repug, Elitist, RINO.”   Why would we ever want to introduce that vicious labelling into the heart of our breed?    Why not only require that those members running for a position on the Board have to make a choice of which category they are going to run in?   Believe me, if someone declares they are a USE candidate and they have shown anywhere or taken any money in the past 3 years, someone will pop up and point that out, so the category choice will be pretty forthright.  

  Someone help me out here (GoMorgans? AMHA?)     I am a retired attorney-I read and interpret insurance policies for a living and there is no way that I can read the Revised proposal as NOT requiring members to declare their category.  

  Once again: I agree there are fundamental problems with representation of all members in AMHA.    I might even be willing to support a board which contained Directors who were clearly declared either Show and Use.   However, I absolutely resist forcing me to categorize myself when my interests vary widely.  Why does it matter what MY interests are if my vote can be freely designated for the Director I wish?   Would I vote for a USE Director-damn right I would if I felt they were the best person for the job.

101 Responses to SHOW vs. USE (Revisited)

  1. Flmorgan says:

    I am voting no on #3 because this proposal is no way to solve the problems that need to be addressed by AMHA. I can see changes need to be made to unify the club. As Morgan supporters we cannot live in the past. 41 years ago is along time ago. The world has progressed and so must we if we want to survive in a new economy which will have a far more reaching effect on our breed than USE or SHOW. Shows are getting smaller and smaller . People are not showing like they used to 10 years ago. We have to revamp our shows to include more people with less cost. $70.00 is a steep membership dues for an average person and if you have 3 people in a family that show its expensive. It is becoming less expensive not to join and show at a few shows and pay the non member fees. This is not the economic times to raise membership dues and Reg. fees. In the upcoming years we may see more USE and less SHOW. Our breed magazine becoming thinner because of less breeding and showing. The US has a surplus of horses and Hundreds are sent to slaughter everyday including nice Morgans, people [ Breeders, Families, etc. ]can’t even give away. We have to make our horses marketable to a vast majority of new buyers. We have every type of Morgan at our Farm from Park to Sport and train them for the disaplines they are best suited for. Point being I am Pro Show but understand the sport horse point of view. As a Assoc. promoting the MOrgan ,we have to move forward and get out of the past or we will be left in the dust. How do we fix this?
    Appoint a steering committee to investigate and research all memberships and their interests.
    Appoint steering committees for each disapline including Trail Riding, and speed events ie: Barrel Racing etc. and have them report to the BOD. Each BOD would be in charge of reporting on a displine they are assigned to.
    More Benefits to the $70.00 membership or have a family membership and farm membership.
    I think TMH magazine has great stories and is well diversified in their journalism. They need to understand there will be less advertising in the future due to less breeding and less money, so they need to run Club Specials on Ad rates and super savers.
    Many of our membership are very wealthy but we have to remember that the majority are not. These people need to be represented and I think that offends some of the powers that be in the AMHA.[ a Morgan Idol ruling was mentioned to me by a friend and a comment made on this site about horses of lesser quality being brought to shows that she didn't want to watch] I know personally people who are pro Proposal #3 because they feel they were left behind by big money and that AMHA and judges don’t like their horses they have bred for 50 years. They do advertise in TMH and sell their horses to many people for show and pleasure. I think if we really think about some of our diffences and problems they are more wide spread than what is mentioned here on this forum and sometimes we aren’t reading between the lines.
    Let’s come together and move forward as this is 2011 and we are heading into different times .
    A little different look at some of our issures.
    Looking forward to the 2011 show season.
    Fl Morgan

Leave a Reply