PFHA Validation Certificates

Kerry W · PFHA Validation Certificates

This is from the ATTA E-news:

PFHA CERTIFICATES OF VALIDATION FOR COMPETITION
PFHA has approved the changes to the proposal to the diagonals that was approved in January of 2009. The Certificate of Validation that PFHA approved is for purposes of competition only. This means that if a member of ATTA wants to participate in PFHA sanctioned classes for Trote y Galope, Trocha and Trocha y Galope, you must request a certificate from PFHA.

The process is to fill out an application where you will provide a copy of the registration of ATTA. The fee is $125 dollars which was determined & set by the PFHA board. The certificate will have a number for each horse. The certificate will also have the name of the registry where the horse is registered at. This certificate for the diagonals is also available to International Associations approved by PFHA. ATTA is an approved registry with PFHA. THIS IS NOT A REPLACEMENT OF YOUR ATTA REGISTRATION. PFHA has also grand fathered the horses that competed in the past Ocala, & Miami shows and the upcoming Spectrum Int'l Show. If the horses that competed in those diagonals classes or will compete at Spectrum, who wish to show at the PFHA National show, they must request the certificate before July 1, 2009, to receive the points earned in those shows. PFHA will offer the national classes based on the entries that are in by the August 31, 2009 date.

ATTA encourages you to get your certificate. Another point, if you have shown a horse in the diagonals classes without a registration in the past, you must get your horse registered with ATTA, so that you can apply for the PFHA certificate of validation.

Still have a question?....regarding the above:

How to get a horse registered with ATTA? Submit email to attainfo@earthlink.net. Questions for horses that are already registered with ATTA or other International Registries? Please contact PFHA directly. Please visit their website at www.pfha.org or call 813-719-7777.

caliber

Thank you Kerry! that is very clear.........

pasosx3

Will the diagonal paso owner be required to join PFHA?

Kerry W

I'm not sure....perhaps Lori will see this and let everyone know.

pasosx3

Thanks. I had heard several months ago when this was being discussed/voted on that the diagonal Paso Horse Owner, the Trainer and the Rider all had to be members of PFHA in order to Show the horse. This is in addition to purchasing the Validation Certificate from PFHA.

I have been waiting for an "Official" written Rule/Procedure from PFHA on all of this. So far, all we've gotten is from ATTA. I appreciate the update from ATTA, but they really are not the "Official and Final Word" on this since it is all PFHA...

Maybe the PFHA President could state, in writing, the actual Rule, Policy and Procedure????? It would be less confusing to get it "from the horse's mouth" so to speak, don't you think?

Thanks!

Kerry W

I agree....we'll see what we can find out.

Kerry W

Okay...I called PFHA just now, and found out the following:

If you show at a PFHA sanctioned show, yes...you do have to be a member of PFHA....just like if you were showing in any other class.

PFHA is keeping track of the points, including those from past shows for this show year, as long as you get your certificate from them.

In order to be eligible for Nationals, you must have all necessary paperwork/fees, etc., submitted to PFHA by August 30 or 31st (she wasn't sure which...so earlier is always better), and you have to have the 20 points to qualify for Nationals.

Hope this helps.

P.S. Thank you Carolyn and Cori for your attention!

pasosx3 · Validation Cert Rules Clarification

I spoke with Carolyn this morning at PFHA and here is what I found out:

1. Validation Certificate fee $125.00, a one-time fee.

2. What if the horse gets sold? Is there a Transfer Fee and what is it? She did not know the answer.

3. Is membership in PFHA required? Yes, the Owner and Rider will have to pay the membership fee to join PFHA. They will have to be current members to get the Validation Cert and to Show the horse each year. The membership includes full membership privileges.

4. Will there be diagonal Classes at Nationals? If 2 or more horses sign up for a Class, they will have a Class. If less than 2 horses in Class, the class will not be held. No refund on the purchase of the Validation Certificate.

5. Number of points to be eligible for Nationals? 20 show points.

6. Do non-PFHA Registered Paso Finos have to have Validation Certificates to show? (ie. a Puerto Rican registered Paso Fino that is not registered with PFHA). Yes, if the Paso Fino is not registered with PFHA, then it has to purchase a Validation Certificate and the Owner and Rider must join PFHA.

Hope this helps.

Kerry W

Oh boy! Bet Carolyn is wondering what is in the water over here! Laughing

grif

pasosx3

Thank you Cindy for the Correction.

Please, don't get Carolyn at the PFHA Office Registrations Department in trouble, she was trying to be helpful. I'm sure she was answering the questions as she understood things to be.

loriperez

More claification answers:

Yes, the certificate will have to be transfered to the new owner. First thing is the original association (in this case ATTA) records the transfer of ownership, updates the registration & mails out to new owner. New owner needs to transfer the PFHA Validation Certificate into their name. The horse is already "certified", so it is just a transfer. I would assume the fee will be relative to what PFHA charges to do this currently - which is $35.
(I don't know if that is what they will vote it to be)

Cindy - I am pretty SURE that Carolyn was referring to any Paso Fino that is not registered with PFHA that wants to compete, but is already registered with another approved Confepaso association, has to be Registered with PFHA in order to show here and get points. OR, she thought it WAS a Diagonal registered in Puerto Rico already

The forms are now available at PFHA. I was emailed one today from Mary. Any ATTA member can email me directly and I would be more than happy to email it out. I am going to try and get them uploaded to our website this week (I have to figure out how to do it or ask the webmaster Embarassed

)

Thank you,
Lori Perez
ATTA Board Member

caliber

Lori I have another question. Can a horse be PFHA registered and ATTA registered, holding both registrations? other words! Fino parents, but this horse is TROCHA but holding PFHA registry.

And if so, would this horse loose PFHA registration for only showing under PFHA (diagonal show certificate)?

I hope I explained myself........................... Question

loriperez

Hi Felix: Part of this question is for PFHA. Currently... Yes, ATTA will at the request of the owner register a PFHA registered horse as it is an accepted Confepaso registry. (The horse should have diagonal horses in it's bloodline by at least one parent.)

However, the horse must be certified prior to registration by an ATTA techinical advisor/judge to determine the horse is in the proper gait. Similar to what Peter Adrian did with his stallion at the Grand Prix. (which was not pursued).

I do know that PFHA will not issue a "Certificate of Validation" for competition purposes off of a PFHA registration.

I am going to have to check with Mary Emmons & Dr. Lauracuente if a horse is already registered with ATTA (or another Confepaso registry) if they would issue the Validation.

loriperez

Also I want to point out to all that all horses must have their certificate of validation by July 1, 2009 (Mary let me know this in an email yesterday). I had used the date of July 31th. in the ATTA e-news. Sorry for the mis print. Crying or Very sad

loriperez

Kerry W

Okay....let's say that I have a PFHA registered horse. The horse is actually a Trocha Pura, but I have it registered through PFHA, because it is eligible, as it's ancestors are PFHA registered. If I decide I want to show this horse in a Trocha Pura class, do I lose my PFHA papers, because I have now certified the horse as being a Trocha Pura (along with getting the necessary paperwork from ATTA...ie, registration)?

loriperez

Kerry that is basically the part of the question I mentioned would be for PFHA to answer. If you want I will submit this question for you. I think PFHA should void out the Paso Fino papers. Let me know if you want to contact them directly or not. Thanks, Lori

Kerry W

I'll check into it Lori...but you might be able to answer this question. If I want to show in a diagonal class...do I have to have an ATTA registration, or would a PFHA horse be eligible for that class, since PFHA is a CONFEPASO recongized registry? If no registration is required for ATTA, then no certificate should be required for a PFHA registered horse to be shown at a PFHA show, regardless of the class it participates in. Maybe?

Isn't this fun? Laughing

grif

Kerry, the PFHA does not register diagonals. Therefore a horse registered with the PFHA is not eligible to show in the diagonal classes. It must be registered with a registry that registers diagonal breeds. And then it must obtain a certificate of validation from the PFHA in order to show in the diagonal classes.

Currently there is no rule in the PFHA to rescind the PFHA registration of a horse who also has a registration with another Association as a diagonal. We register horses according to their parentage and once registered the only rules that pertain to rescinding that registration refer to the misrepresentation of the parentage of the animal. However, please be aware that if this becomes an issue, there may be rules passed in the future that would relate to the situation.

loriperez

Cindy - thank you for clarifying that. (Kerry all horses must be registered in order to compete in PFHA or any other Confepaso pointed class; including an ATTA show).

Also, another issue to consider Kerry if you were to register a Paso Fino as a Trochador

"The problem for the horse owner is that if the horse is bred and the foal is a Paso "Fino" gaited horse, technically the foal can not be registed with PFHA because in their rules a foal must have the father and mother be a registered and geneticly tested Paso Fino."

So Please make I make a suggestion. Unless your PFHA registered horse is over 60 months of age, has Trocha in his pedigree, and has always been Trocha (not Paso/Trocha, but the real Trocha gait), then don't try to change anything.

AND, people shouldn't be breeding horses with these problems.

ATTA doesn't want horses in our registry either that won't transmit the gait. And we have no way of keeping horses from being bred if the owner wants to. We do have a right to withhold registering a horse if it does not meet our criteria.

grif

Kerry W

Simple question...do the horses that wish to compete in these PFHA shows/classes, have to be registered through ATTA, or registered as a diagonal in an eligible registry?

The reason I am asking this, is because of the PFHA registered horse that won a Trocha championship at the IPHF show. Apparently, the judges didn't assume he could not trocha, simply because his papers said he was a Paso Fino. goodjob

I just wondered if he (or any other horse in the same situation) would be able to show in the diagonal classes at a PFHA show, without being registered as a diagonal somewhere. Since PFHA doesn't register diagonals. Wink

caliber

Very Interesting topic! and i will like it to continue being civil, with that said! i will like to address some wording that In my opinion I personally have a problem with.

First!
"Breeding horses with this problem" Trocha is not a problem, Paso/Trocha is not a problem, Paso/Trocha simply is a undefined/defined gait (from our rule) , WHY??? could be of many factors! and 99% that I have seen, have been MAN CREATED!

Secondly!

In my opinion, we are "AGAIN" trying to beat the nature of our COLOMBIAN CRIOLLO HORSE! WHY?? and this will fall in the "PURIST" argument, in which i personally share differences of opinion with the reference subject.

In my opinion, all organizations here in the STATES should adopt the Colombian system if they are willing to represent the Colombian Paso Fino....... until them! we will continue discriminating the breed until we reach ZERO.......

I see by your response! that we will continue to encounter what we have seen in the past 36 years in this country! CONFUSION, MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE BREED! and all defined by the word PROBLEMS!

Kerry W

Called Cori...and thank you Cori for your great answers and great attitude!

If a PFHA registered horse wishes to compete in the diagonal classes, they must relinquish their PFHA registration, get registered through an accepted registry that handles diagonals, then turn that registration in to PFHA to obtain the Validation Certificate to compete in the diagonal classes at a PFHA sanctioned show. Once you relinquish your PFHA registration, you cannot ever register that horse through PFHA again.

Cori also said that PFHA will do their best to keep members informed through e-news, and as soon as possible, will have forms available on the PFHA.org website, for people who wish to show their diagonal horses at PFHA sanctioned shows.

loriperez

Felix - I guess I used the wrong word. I was just trying to explain it so everyone would be able to follow. My point was if the horse is already five years old and is not defined any either gait, then that horse should not be bred - at least in my opinion.

grif

Kerry, yes, the horse must be registered with an Association that registers the diagonal breed.

Felix, if a horse is breed to perform a certain gait and it does NOT perform that gait, that SHOULD be a problem, shouldn't it? And other position on the subject would conclude that it is not possible to breed true to any gait and that is false. Is trocha a "problem"? No, of course not. If that is what the horse was bred to do. And what I got out of Lori's statement is that to continue to mix lateral and diagonal horses just because one or the other cannot perform it's required gait is detrimental.

loriperez

Kerry W

No problem. I just seem to come up with more questions, each time I ask another question. Laughing

Another thing I asked was "is this a rule or a policy", and for now it is a policy as far as PFHA is concerned. She said that once the new version of the rule book is published (after the 2010 rule changes), there will likely be an addendum to include anything regarding this matter, included in the rule book.

grif

Kerry W

So, how would a horse registered with PFHA compete in these classes (if said horse was of the correct modality to do so)?

caliber

You know folks! i really like this topic!

That is my point.... Thank you Lori, Kerry and Cindy for contributing to such important chapter within the Colombian Paso Horse in our country.

In my opinion we should already have needed to have the basic rules established for this type of questions that is of great concern.

In my opinion, I think we all agree that all horses don't mature until at least the age of 5 y/o, therefor I ask myself a simple question, why should i determine any modality before maturity, I don't know.

We should let breed be a breed! and determine modalities based on their natural abilities. We are seeing way too many horses within our breed being parked on a set modality with no alternatives.

I was born Blond and Green eyes, but things changed along the way! If I had in every ID today Blond with Green Eyes! WOW! would that be right? the answer is NO..............

Same way goes to our breed, Modality can be determine at birth, but will be finalized at the age of 5.....................................giving the opportunity to our breed to develop in their full capacity, not in what a paper might say their full capacity should be.

All we have to do is follow the leader.........that is Colombia, i am sure their set rules are based on years of studying this breed.......and what would be best for the same.

With all that said, The PFHA should adopt the same flexibility when determining any registration from birth till the 5th birthday anniversary, to assure the protection of our breed.

grif

Kerry W

Why would a horse registered by the sanctioning registry of the show, need to register with another registry, then get a certificate of validation from the registry it already is registered with? Isn't the certificate of validation only required to prove to PFHA, that the horse is registered with an approved registry? Or is PFHA not an approved registry with itself? Twisted Evil

I don't get it..it doesn't make any sense. dunno

caliber

Very good point Kerry! can anyone answer that Question

grif

Because the PFHA does not register the diagonal breeds.

Kerry W

I love it. So if someone tries to do this, and PFHA tells them they have to give up their PFHA papers...they should tell PFHA to get screwed. Wouldn't it be neato, if shit got worked out BEFORE payment was due for a change? Rolling Eyes

BigJ

Actually PFHA does register diagonals. The qualifications PFHA requires for a horse to be registered:

1. by two PFHA registered parents and/or
2. by a registration recognized by PFHA with associated DNA

So, trotty paso finos with PFHA registration papers certainly exist and a few have done quite well in PFHA shows.

It is Colombia not PFHA that is distinguishing the difference with modalities.

Since PFHA bases its definition of paso gait by the Puerto Rican model it assumes the only appropriate paso modality is the paso fino, which is also erroneous since the Puerto Rican Paso Fino also paced.

The inception of a horse into PFHA and APF was by accepting previously registerd horses from countries of origin that was all. The requirement was not gait or pedigree but paperwork.

There was nothing wrong with horses of "mixed" modalities until Colombia decided it would pursue developing the diagonal modalities further.

I see no sin in having a trotty paso fino or a pacey trochador. Not every horse expresses their genetic abilities in their phenotype. The sin is not providing phenotypical standards consistently to assure genetic inheritance to the next generation. This is the role of the show ring to test and measure the performance of future broodstock so that they perpetuate what we define as paso fino, trocha, andadura, etc. It is NOT to guarantee that those who do not meet those standards are NOT bred or those that do are superior breeding animals. Only offspring prove a sire or dam.

If we had defined broodstock on the way this thread is defining our breeding stock, there would be no Dan Danilo or Resorte IV as their mothers were not expressing the appropriate standards so that anything out of them would be suspect. Also these sires would not be accepted for registration.

We are expecting immediate returns on an investment we haven't yet made thereby perpetuating short-lived faddish sires based on individual profiteering instead of long-term, steady production for the general population.

grif

So how many decades should it take for a breed to breed true to it's breed standard? I don't think it is too hasty to say that they should be breeding true at this point. But that is just one opinion. We all make our own decisions in regard to brood stock and that is what makes the world go round. Some of the best specimins have been the result of "mistakes"

BigJ

I don't think we can set limits in time as the ultimate goal because tastes change; genetic combinations give different expressions, which we arbitrarily decide are "good" or "bad". We sucker into commercialistic values as the tangible measurement of a successful breeding animal.

If we said well it's been 30 years now so it's time to get this all "pure", where would we start because picking any moment in time risks culling out good producers or keeping poor ones. Also if we said well let's look at the pedigrees, who is willing to glean out the truth in that?

A breed in nothing more than a collective group of animals that provide phenotypical qualities we find attractive at that time and provide these qualities to their offspring with some degree of consistency. Now we are expecting these animals to become even more consistent with less chance of producing an offspring that never falls below certain criteria.

So what are these criteria? The constant emphasis on gait? I can't even keep a straight face on that subject considering the current place the paso world is at with breeding, producing and showing poorly gaited horses that win. Truthfully, realistically, gait is NOT one of the criterions is it? Not really or we would not have out of gait horses even trocha winning at shows over horses in the correct modality. We are reacting to this fact by insisting gait is a criterion, the only criterion that matters when discussing pasos as a breed and where the horse belongs as a breeding animal. Talk about denial. Any more than insisting that pedigree is the true measure of a horse's inherited ability to perform to breed standards.

So let's say we succeed in that goal (pure gait whatever gives pure gait offspring) say in 10 years or 3 generations. What would happen if we found out that by doing so we lost brio or size or locomotion or gentleness or color or some other more intangible quality that describes the paso we envision? Then what?

The problem is we don't know what gait is or where it comes from so we try to maintain it by insisting that the best gaited give the best chance of producing it. Yet, we ignore history that teaches this is not always true. So we choose to ignore history and pretend that since we've been doing this for almost a century we figured it out, that we have more "pure" genetics that provides assurances of success, that we have concentrated our chances into a collective bunch of animals we now call a "breed".

However, the truth of the matter is, these horses gait now not because they are "pure" in genetics. Colombia added a few Andalusians, Lusitanos, and a TB or two. Puerto Rico played with Narangansett Pacers, Morgans, and Saddlebreds. The two have traded horses with each other whether they choose to openly admit it or not. Puerto Rico's horses tend to be pacey by choice while Colombia's tend to be trotty by choice. How is it then that these two dominating countries ended up with horses so genetically similar that we can mix them and still have something we accept? How is it that a horse with a "pure" Colombian or Puerto Rican pedigree produce well with foreign blood lines or pass as the other? Andalusian, Lusitano, Morgan, etc. and all?

I think paso finos gait because they always have in some manner long before we decided to collect them up and call them Colombian Criollo or Puerto Rican Paso Fino. Other countries using other introductions also have horses displaying the same modal with different expressions. What we collected were not all of the horses that could gait, but only the ones we liked. I'm not even convinced that gait was consciously the only criterion either or pedigree or ancestry. What if gait came from pony-type horses that looked like a Shetland or the trot belonged to the Przewalski's Horse or the draft subspecies?

I believe pasos became what they are because that is what was had at the time of colonization. While Iberia took on other interests with their horses, the colonies worked with what they had. At some point they identified their horses as their culture and rightfully so. If gait were as simple to breed for as say, a red horse or a black horse, don't we believe that past breeders would have taken care of this and we would not be obsessively discussing it?

My point is where in time do we point to and say this is where our horses became "pure" and from that moment forward we no longer will accept horses of questionable ancestry or phenotype? When we begin setting higher and higher standards with less and less tolerances for individuals we risk losing the horse entirely and having none meet the criteria we set. I believe the reason we cannot obtain our goals of producing "pure" gait is because other qualities, other criteria, mitigate our ability to obtain that goal.

I believe our failure is not that we have diagonally bred horses producing an occasional lateral horse or vice versa. After all, it IS in their genetic makeup so it is unrealistic not to expect it. The horse has not failed at all. We have by insisting his parents were the perfect match based on...and we guessed wrong. If an offspring is culled should not the culprit(s) that caused it because obviously the parents are faulty are they not? That is if we are to be truly serious about purity. To get pure black horses that only produce black, you cull the red ones out and then you cull the parent(s) that cause it.

We don't because we know better. We know that a full sibling may superbly fit the breed standards and produce it. We know that the paso is too diverse to depend on one bad outcome to believe all will be the same. By doing so we have then protected and perpetuated the very thing we desire to rid ourselves of because we also know there is a very high chance that the full sibling, as great as it may be, must have some genetics in common with the really bad one. So what are we trying to really achieve when we discuss protecting the "breed" by refusing to acknowledge the errant horse or two? Perhaps our interests aren't so noble.

grif

I never said that gait should be the only criteria in judging the quality of a Paso Fino. For God's sake you SHOULD know me better than that. And you can research and theorize and blah blah blah the history. You like to do that. I find it somewhat interesting but tedious in large amounts. I prefer to look at the horse in front of me today and the evolution that I have PERSONALLY witnessed over the last 35 years. Because I KNOW that that is fact as I have seen it with my own eyes and do not have to theorize.

So this is what I see and have seen. I personally don't put a lot of emphasis on gait when I am breeding Paso Finos. Aw, shock!. Why? Because gait is a given. I breed for all of those other characteristics that I want because I KNOW that gait is already there. And I don't have a problem with horses who don't gait. In fact, the only Paso Finos that I have ever ridden that did not gait at all were older horses who had been set into non-gait by the way that they had been ridden. Now I cannot say if those handful, and it has only been literally a handful in hundreds of Paso Finos over my lifetime, would have ever gaited had they been correctly trained. But what I CAN say with all difinitiveness is that I have NEVER started a Paso Fino who did not gait. So it makes me wonder from exactly where all these gait issues come. And I have some theories.

So, breed whatever you want. I breed Paso Finos and I don't wonder if they will be Paso Finos. I know that everyone that hits the ground will be because I trust in what I do and that is all that I can really control in this world. And sometimes not even that. But one thing that that troubles me somewhat is that every time there ia a discussion on this forum about, well, ANYTHING it always eventually gets to a post that hauntingly accuses the breeders of this industry of some unwritten nefariousness. And it always leaves me a little cold and a little sorry that I was ever part of the discussion in the first place.

caliber

Cindy, I appreciate your personal comments and thoughts. Everyone is welcome at PV to write based on their own experience, and you know you and everyone else is welcome to do so!

But you mentioned on your last post something that caught my attention tremendously and I kindly will ask you to please explain yourself, apparently we both share differences of opinions as to what, when and how comments are said and most importantly the intentions that comments are posted.

Awaiting for your response, and I hope this thread will continue being civil for the most part. This is an extremely important topic and deserves clarity and harmony.

"But one thing that that troubles me somewhat is that every time there ia a discussion on this forum about, well, ANYTHING it always eventually gets to a post that hauntingly accuses the breeders of this industry of some unwritten nefariousness. And it always leaves me a little cold and a little sorry that I was ever part of the discussion in the first place".

grif

I am sorry, Felix but I do not feel that further explaination is necessary. And I, like you, would rather the discussion remain civily about the horse. Take what I said as you will.

BigJ

So sorry to provoke but imagine the hell I give myself sometimes.

Well, what I'm trying to say in my digressions is why make this whole thing so complicated?

We like what we like; it is really that simple. At least it is getting that way for me. The more I search and try to understand what makes pasos to be what they are so that I can keep it that way, the less I understand about how they came to be.

When we begin splitting hairs we end up with horses like El Imponente. He's supposedly bred from "pure" paso fino parents, yet he could compete as a "pure" trochador. We've intellectualized the whole process to the point the horse has no place to go. The pedigree says this, but his gait says that and we keep making up rules to say if he is "pure" enough. According to what has been discussed he's a poor example of a paso fino and a poor breeding potential as a trochador. Frankly, he does not meet the criterion for him to be considered part of any paso breed if the rules were really followed.

Yet...yet people LIKE the horse. Hell, I like him and I'm supposed to be all biased and everything. What I would give to filter out that trottiness and keep the rest of him. I don't care what he's labeled. If I had the confidence in my mares and my selection process, I'd breed to him in a heartbeat because there's allot to like about him. If I thought I could regain anything lost by the next generation, I wouldn't hesitate. But because I'm like everyone else, not secure in understanding what is paso, I don't; I won't. It would be a shame upon us all to lose an animal with so many fine qualities just because he does not qualify in the gait department or in the pedigree department.

I'm saying we should walk away from all this technology we have at our fingertips, all this DNA crap, all of these pedigree databases and go back to what it is we LIKE because that is how it all happened anyway. Let's think about why we like our horses, why I like El Imponente anyway, why I'd take him over another type of horse any day of the week. If I dislike trotty paso finos why not go with a TN Walker or Saddlebred or something? Why do I hang around these horses?

We can't parse out the horses; we can't separate out gait from brio or brains or style or all the other things that has to be part of the horse for us to even call the gait "paso".

"However", however we recognize that for us to protect what we like we have to come to some sort of agreement about what that is--standards. Standards, which horses must meet, like them or not, so that we keep the population intact so that the genetics that make what we like stick around for another generation or two.

We then use these standards in a formal situation to find horses that show promise as future breeding stock. And this, as I see it, is the problem. We don't stick to what we say we like, to what we have agreed as a group to look for in an animal. Worse, we say horses have to meet many criteria to be called a trochador or whatever but then we only harp about one or two or complacently watch horses only able to perform one or two and we say "good enough".

Then we say it ain't good enough that we want more that we need to raise the bar and I'm wondering like to where? We can't even trust ourselves to pick out horses out of a group that we have collected up, that we say we like, that we want around (like El Imponente) and so we start making up rules like " has to have 3 generations of XXXX to be considered for registration" or "has to be tested for gait" (like how I may ask besides that stupid strip of wood). Well there went a bunch of our recently crowned champions IF we were honest about the whole thing, which we are not.

If we were we would never see El Imponente shown and when shown he would not place when out of gait. But he has because we have to use that as the excuse for keeping him around. Maraquita certainly would have never done well as a filly. She would have been excused, but because she promised good things to come in the future, we allowed a crab tracking, head jutting, wobbly butt, out of gait filly beat the pants off of horses that were more correct. We did so because we LIKED her and wanted her to succeed right or wrong. We then construed our reasoning to others to explain why such a filly should win--like that made good sense. Thank goodness as Maraquita matured, she improved. Ironic isn't it to admit an international champion "improved".

If we were honest we would say we liked the horses anyway even if they don't meet all breed criteria. We wouldn't be trying to protect horses that we like but can't meet our collective agreed upon standards, which all countries claim to honor but do not. We would not be making up excuses as to why El Imponente wins or loses. He would be in this breed because this is where he belongs because we want him here and it doesn't matter if he ever wins or not. A horse with that phenotype, skeletal structure, demeanor, and style belongs with horses like him, with the people in charge of making sure those horses have a chance to produce more. We should be honest and say we'll figure out that gait thing because there's more to this horse besides his modality. We'd quit lying about his gait to keep him. By lying to ourselves we do not give these types of horses the opportunity to be exposed to horses that can help them because we pretend ol' wobbly butt doesn't wobble or a horse that is crooked is really straight (yeah but that pedigree is to die for ain't it?)

Instead we keep making up rules to make sure the El Imponente's stay in our breed because we like them. Rules, which again, if we were honest about it, do nothing but confuse all of us and our attraction to our great breed by trying to parse them out into smaller and smaller groups where stallions and mares aren't allowed to intermingle and maintain their complex, unequaled qualities.

grif

Wish I were up to a diatribe as so many things ran through my head while reading that post. But, alas, I am not. Confused

Kerry W

Okay...getting back to the point of the topic. Do we have a definitive answer about the process for a PFHA registered horse to compete in these classes? It's all well and good to say that Cori is incorrect, but unless you, Cindy, are issuing the certificates, people will call PFHA for instructions, and Cori was quite clear (as in...did not have to look it up, did not hem and/or haw) about that process. So if she is incorrect, has anyone called to inform her of that? I'd hate for someone to relinquish their registration, when it is not necessary to do so.

The other discussion contained in this thread is fascinating...and much food for thought, so please feel free to continue that discussion as well. It's all important.

Thank you!!

caliber

Back on track!

Yes Kerry! PFHA does register Trocha horses! Resorte Iv mother was Trocha! all Resorte horses have Trocha! Plebeyo! has Trocha! Don Danilo horses are Trocha! and so on.. I think is important to understand, comprehend and accept the breed for what the breed really is...... that is all!

We might need FEDEQUINAS to show us after 36 years what this breed is all about! maybe one day soon!!

I am not being negative! I am being real!

And! after working for 18 hours without a break! I AM GOING TO BED............. night ya'll

BigJ

To confess I'm not reading any one thing in this thread. So whatever ya'll are getting out of my comments is only a reflection of your interpretation.

This is the whole problem of having a general discussion about breed issues. As soon as someone takes the shotgun out and points it at everyone, individuals think it is a sniper bullet only aimed at them. Personal when it isn't.

This is a breed issue. If anyone with half a brain cared they would be VERY upset about current activities going on: ATTA, APF, PFHA, Fediquinas, etc. It has everything to do with paso organizations giving lip-service to their members and then not following their own rules. The actions of the officers and committees reflect just how little respect they have for their members, for their organization and the rules they make to "protect" the breed.

I've observed decades of the same people sitting in regional meetings promising "if I ever have anything to do with this there will never be diagonals in PFHA" and then do THIS! which is against the by-laws and constitution of the organization. It is shameless to watch the same people turn inside out for money. Well nice to see their real colors for a change. It is about time they came out of the closet.

If any organization wants to change, wants to modify their mission there IS a process in place! Has any followed their own legal process? Did any organizational leaders bother to put any proposed changes to their members?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

As far as the PFHA office is concerned they do what they are directed to do by the Executive Committee and Board of Directors who pretend to give service to the breed and association members. They are hired hands not the decision makers so don't blame them for telling the rest of the membership what they understand is the situation. At least they try to do their jobs as they understand it, but does the BOD?

It isn't wrong to want diagonals in PFHA what is wrong is how it is being done! And any PFHA official at any capacity should have been aware they were breaking the constitutional rules as set forth and actively done something instead of giving lip-service to members by telling us after the fact and pretending there was nothing they could do.

I attended the 2009 PFHA Judges and Stewards clinic, this right after the hammer fell to allow diagonals into the breed association. Not a word about it, nothing. This from a group that is supposed to educate our judges about our breed. It should have been mandatory attendance but it wasn't; it was the smallest group in the past 3 years. Then only one presenter discussed how to distinguish the gaits with few attending judges able to discern the difference between trocha and pasitrote or pasitrote and paso fino. They should have been seriously tested but it became a game where most were silent---actually afraid to try. This in a "friendly" group of supporters to educate.

So, to be clear here are my problems:

1. The motivation behind PFHA's decisions to rescind years of lip-service to the paso fino only.
2. The lack of respect to members at large no matter what organization.
3. The lack of seriousness in learning, discussing, and defining what the breed is to all paso owners no matter the country, culture, or years involved. A person purchasing his first paso today has equal say as one whose family has been involved for generations.

I don't care what the "breed" is or how it is defined. That is up to the general ownership to decide. My comments were aimed at trying to understand and find some logic in to why a puddle-sized organization like PFHA is playing games with this when it is in crisis. That much is obvious since it looks like a sinking ship with a bunch of rats trying to survive before it goes down to the sea floor.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

To answer Kerry's question, yes PFHA does register horses with trocha bloodlines. There is a constancy of denial. First PFHA acted like "it didn't know". Then when that excuse couldn't work, it insisted on a 3-generation pedigree that showed no trocha bloodlines. That created another round of dishonesty where pedigrees were altered and omissions made.

Some horses with trocha bloodlines or trocha breeding: (note: curiously the same people ringing the bell for purity have had no problems training, showing, judging or breeding to a few particular horses)

Coral LaCe
Juan Juan
Constancia que tal
Vitral
Rey Midas de Monteverde
Plebeyo
Resorte IV

And how could I forget my own mare: Mararichi, who carries trocha blood, but her pedigree is wrong. Where trocha belongs the papers show a different cross. Her granddam, Bambina, is a Resorte IV daughter out of a different mare. http://pasoregistry.com/db/Tree.asp?ID=76885 And yes, I researched this before breeding to Resplendor. She is as lateral as any paso fino can get and produces laterally and does not exhibit any trochador phenotype nor did her sire nor did Bambina.

How am I expected to learn about the breed I am involved in to produce the horse I like when the very association I belong to encourages and perpetuates bad information? Then we all wonder why we are where we are at as a competitor in the breed market. Quit acting like it isn't obvious to everyone.

We whisper the facts to others like it is some sort of cardinal sin when IT IS NOT. I am perfectly satisfied with my mixed up mare of Colombian, Puerto Rican, Paso Fino and Trocha bloodlines but then I KNOW what she is and how she produces because I've tested her. I have no problems telling others and educating them so they can make good decisions for the sake of my breed.

How am I to learn what gait is when we deny we have various modalities, deny they are present, deny the ancestry of our horses? By denying it, it impedes the process to market this breed to others. We invite people in on the condition they keep their dirty little secrets to themselves except to whisper it to anyone who comes close enough to hear.

Yeah it is nefarious to the core of its soul (pick any paso breed organization), which personally I doubt there is one.

caliber

Very well said Candice...................................... and i don't take pride by by saying it either.

grif

Aye, here we go again.

caliber

BigJ

And it will keep going until it stops. The way to stop is is to quit doing it.

Surely PFHA understood the potential backlash it would receive from its members for, again, making a decision that belonged to the membership and not to a handful of people in a room sequestered some where.

This should be no surprise when PFHA, which stands for Paso Fino Horse Association, leadership decided to ignore their own promises to their members, their own vows in service, to become a slave to money. Surely both the PFHA Treasurer and PFHA ED reported on how many diagonal horses were in the USA and the future economic prospects. Surely ATTA was contacted and negotiations ensued before the vote. Surely members deserved to know what these economic projections and negotiations were before a vote.

PFHA must have known most members would immediately jump to the conclusion this was all about CONFEPASO politics and see it as an attempt to maintain control of the seats.

Or did it go more like this: Gee we're broke, we need money, the paso fino registrations aren't cutting it anymore, and we've got ATTA getting ready to take a slice of our Mundial pie. Better get those diagonals in before we lose our seat and maybe get some cash into our treasury so we can keep things the way they are.

There was nothing to give the members because there was nothing done before this reactionary decision was made. I bet not one person who voted for this was reminded why ATTA exists either. As a result of PFHA not wanting to include diagonals or administrate to any other paso association, ATTA was formed to represent the diagonals in the USA. Just another one of those known facts we now try to forget. And then PFHA has the temerity to suggest that it deserves both seats in CONFEPASO and it has been representing the whole of the paso breeds in the USA? Again, I can't complete this without laughing out loud. It is ludicrous.

For the record, at my regional meeting I voted for PFHA to maintain both seats, not because I believed PFHA represents all paso breeds, but because of CONFEPASO's former president's (CJ Marcello) actions against PFHA. Now that was evil, an evil that still permeates through PFHA still. CONFEPASO has no standing to force any paso organization to represent anything except what it wants to represent. Otherwise Fedequinas would be hot soup for not advertising, promoting and having shows for the Peruvian Paso. I had hoped by voting for PFHA to flush out the dirty politics going on.

I wonder how many took advantage of that "discount" registration. I didn't. I still have mine unregistered and I'm glad I didn't give PFHA thousands of my dollars for this. But then, I've been treated to the idea that my thousands are not the ones PFHA is wanting either.

Yeah it is all speculation too because not one PFHA official has the guts to talk about it publicly. It is all about private this and private that even when the BOD meetings are open to all members. Let's spread the word through our poorly attended regional meetings and then it is all the members fault if they don't attend to learn what happened after it happened.

PFHA wants to act like a podunk, back-woods, good ol' boy, clan, then expect to stay like one. Broke, barefoot, with no money to feed the kids.

grif

No, it's not true. But it is very easy to come on the on the interenet and state that it is true with no responsibilty and no repercussions. Perhaps many don't remember, but I do, why this website was formed. It was formed by you, Felix, and Candice in order to unite the members to a common goal of change for the Association. I remember the discussions prior to ya'll forming this website. And that is a good thing. A good goal to have. But that has been quite a long time ago. And the question that permeates my thinking is, if those involved are so interested in change, so interested in the direction of the Association, why has nothing gone beyond internet postings? You guys do not even attend the meetings. Why? If you really want the truth of how the decisions are made by the BOD, why does noone attend the meetings in order to observe the discussion that goes into the decision making process? And why does noone step up to volunteer for the many positions that are required for the life of the Association? I hate to break it to you but most of us would rather be riding our horses or spending time with our families than sitting in 3 BOD meetings a year and several additional regional membership meetings. It's not fun and there is no reward unless one is a masochist and enjoys being run through the mud on the interent every other day. So if you really want to effect change, for God's sake step up to the plate and do it already.

caliber

Cindy with all due respect! I think you need to get your facts accurate in many ways!

I wont not even begin saying my involvements with the PFHA organization, but just one thing, I speak with facts and accuracy, something that your comments have lacked tremendously or you are blind!

So, do your homework, call the PFHA! and start only "IF YOU CARE" but please don't not even try to come here and question our intelligence and most importantly our integrity!

Saludos!

And by the way! It will be shameful if I had to answer to your comments in public!

Kerry W

I agree that people should volunteer. It would be nice if one could, and feel something postive in return for their efforts. That was not what happend in my case though. What I witnessed as a committee member, made me question maintaining my membership, and I even seriously considered getting rid of my horse. I didn't want any part of it anymore. I declined the invitation to retain my seat on the committee. Aside from the protectionism of the "inner circle", even at the risk of compromising the integrity and sanctity of the association, I felt things were set in place, and nothing was going to disturb them, no matter how messed up they were, and no matter how good an idea might be. So when you once again, give your usual response to any question about PFHA, "why don't you go to BOD meetings, or volunteer?", perhaps you should ask yourself why no one wants to. Our telling you why, does not satisfy you, so maybe you need to look deep within yourself, and those who surround you on committees. How many newbies volunteer and stay? How many people who don't know the ropes, can stomach it?

Don't get me wrong...I admire your commitment, but when was the last time you stood back from what you have been doing for the past (entire lifetime), and looked at it with a fresh set of eyes? That's where the newbies can help you, but no one wants to listen to them, because "they don't know anything". Doesn't matter if they're well educated, bright and enthusiastic...they need to prove themselves to PFHA and the "inner circle". Rolling Eyes

All we're trying to do here, is get information to people who might care enough to want it. I asked, did not recieve the information, so I called the office. Gave the information as was given to me, and you couldn't type fast enough to say "INCORRECT!!!", yet someone forgot to type fast enough to tell the office what was in that policy, and make sure that it was well understood.

The members got a one liner in the magazine about the addition of the diagonal classes. Now if your son was 13, walked out of the house with the keys and said "I'm taking the truck.", would you not want to have a little more information? Probably so...but as dues paying members, we're not entitled to anything more than a one sentence statement, and we'd better be happy with it, or you're going to belittle us in public for not going to the BOD meeting. Why would I go to one? So I could sit silently in a corner and wait for my head to explode? Why can't BOD do what is prescribed in the constitution and COMMUNICATE with the membership? Was that one liner the best our BOD could do? Would it be good enough for you, if you hadn't been there? Does it bother you at all, that the office doesn't seem to know any more than the rest of the membership about the details of this new policy?

As far as Felix and Candice and their goals for PasoVoice....they are similar, but have changed somewhat. I remember them speaking of wanting to help people with the rules change process. As it stands now, rules are made to be suspended, when it will expedite an agenda (especially one that is unpopular with those pesky members), so why add new ones? Why have any at all? Don't ask for permission, ask for forgiveness, and if you give us neither, we don't care, we are going to do it anyway. Great attitude for a private club....keep working, you're almost there!!

BigJ

As to regional meetings the point is the system isn't working for the members at large. There are other ways to communicate and as an organization that was structured to serve its members it is the organization's responsibility to determine why members will not attend meetings. Honestly is the lack of involvement at the regional level atypical of any type of organization? Yes, members do have some obligation to the organization they belong to to ensure success, but that does not allow the organization itself to remain uninvolved with its members.

My experience of attending regional meetings from Atlantic back in the 70s to Great Lakes to Gulf to Georgia to ones out west, etc. is there are three types of meetings, which none are attractive. The first is the clannish good ol' boy networked meeting where members are totally ignored unless they have an invite to kiss somebody's ass. I've watched members screaming, arms raised to help and volunteer but because they are not "in" they are treated like they don't exist. The second is the meeting where few attend and major issues are voted on. Even those present question the validity of 12 members voting for 160 others knowing that the delegate will then use 172 votes at the BOD. I've yet to hear anyone say that's a good thing. Everyone recognizes there will be a day that they cannot attend a meeting because of other commitments or because they had no idea such topics were on the agenda. The last type of meeting is the one where diapers, sippie cups, ba-bas should be handed out as those who think they are in charge throw tantrums, sling some insults and demand their way as the only way.

There also seems to be two types of volunteers. The one that lives by the breed financially or likes to pretend he does and the one that does not. Look at the committees and officers. If a normal person who does not breathe horse shit 24/7, who has other priorities to balance out in their daily lives, I would be figuring out a way that they could be involved to unload the burden, wouldn't you? But that is not the way is it?

Most I've talked to who want to work for PFHA, but have not been chosen tell me that they feel that the reason they are not is because they are politically incorrect in some way. That's pretty profound to hear just how deep our politics run to the point that free labor is discarded because someone doesn't like the way a person thinks. So it seems to be an undercurrent of messages sent out that to work for PFHA you have to have to be "approved". It has little to do with love for the breed, loyalty to the organization or skills offered.

I use CarolU as an example. She exudes hatred for PFHA by inciting comments such as banning horse shows, creating an organization for only certain types of paso finos, and privately inviting others to join her. Her prejudice against countries of origin, her skewed view of history even when presented with documented facts, and her bias against people of different cultures was documented time and again. Yet, she was part of the communications committee because she worked and because she was liked. Yet the only form of communication to members were articles about trail horses and how to train for pleasure. Don't you think there should have been at least some sign of loyalty to the organization she served? Then when presented with the evidence other committees wanted to ignore the issue because of personal friendships. So please tell me how any member in his right mind wants to participate when that type of way of doing business smacks him right in the face.

I think PFHA has unrealistic expectations from its members to carry the full burden of communication in this day and age with the available technology we have literally at our fingertips. For years, I would faithfully go to the PFHA web site, sign-in, and then try to find at least one BOD delegate report or one committee report. Try it today and see what you find. So is it really such a great volunteer system when those who are claiming they devote all their time to PFHA yet have not one product to show for all those freely given hours? What has PFHA the organization, not PFHA the group of volunteers, done to facilitate its organizational goals?

How can an organization allow its once profitable show event become a cash cow? If horse registrations are the main means that keeps PFHA economically afloat shouldn't there be more creative ways to get people to register their horses, to produce, and to sell?

I don't know about anyone else, but claiming to work so hard and have nothing to show for it only demonstrates not the lack of trying or integrity but that, perhaps, a need to reset our goals and expectations. Perhaps it is time to rethink the process and find other ways to get the job done. Perhaps it is time to restructure the value system used to appoint committee members and delegates.

I think there's plenty of reasons for why members aren't participating at the regional level when a system that allows disgruntled members to change regions by the mere pen and has no method to represent members that have chosen not to be regulated to a region.

Cindy the reason I respect you so much is because you have all these fine qualities of loving the horse, loyal to the death, and the ability to contribute constructively. Just because we do not see the organization in the same light should not be reason to not allow people to work how, where, and when they can; however, that is not what happens. I've watched enthusiastic, new members excited about the paso breed simply disappear. I've have spoken to first time attendees who traveled half a day to attend a meeting swear never again. So you may say the system is fine the way it is, but I'm saying it isn't based on my personal experiences. If yours is different then what we need to do is find a way to incorporate what you know is working. That can't be done unless it is shared to all who are interested not just to the inner clan or the chosen few.

Forums are attractive because it creates a safe haven to anyone wanting to contribute. If meetings could offer the same, maybe more would attend. Information has been distributed faster, more accurately than any formal channel PFHA offers currently or regional web sites. While forums get clickish at the same time they unify people who may be otherwise isolated. I go to forums before I go to org web sites for my information.

It wasn't PFHA that hosted the first live shows or even followed the town meetings with Ed Smith. So maybe it's time for PFHA as an organization to wake up to 21st century coffee.

EDIT:

To clarify about what the vision of PV was or is. Yes, we still want to facilitate rule change and rule proposals for members. However that is not the first goal. The first goal is to change the constitution of PFHA and give members back their voting rights as they are entitled and to encourage transparency at all levels.

Rule changes are ineffective as Kerry stated and until the BOD is stripped of its abusive use of membership rights, I see absolutely no reason to encourage anyone to dedicate time to a rule proposal. Rules are changed based on a whim, and around a dozen people who sadistically play with membership votes like a king over his enslaved subjects.

PFHA has yet to demonstrate the understanding between membership issues and administrative issues. Rescinding a rule that affects the entire membership and the corporate structure is a membership issue. Are not rules changed and put into place by the membership? Since when did it become acceptable to change rules without membership? When it became convenient for the few privileged handful who think they know more than the rest of us. And why may that be?

I should not be required to personally attend BOD meetings to know what is going on. That is why we have delegates, that is why minutes are printed in a national publication.

grif

Yes Kerry and Candice. I agree with all those things. And that I why I keep stating that I wish your ideas would go beyond this forum. They are good ideas. And you both have tremendous amounts to contribute.

Kerry, my head is not in the sand as you seem to have stated. I look at issues from all sides. I welcome new ideas. What I do not welcome is negativity. It makes me batty and really has no purpose toward progression.

Trust me when I tell you that I personally am about as far from any sort of politcal correctness about nearly everything in life and especially in the Association as one can be. And I would really prefer to stay out of all politics as it just makes you crazy. I hold the exact same feelings about many of theses issues that the two of you have brought up in the last two posts. But the only way that I can find to try and make some difference is to remain a small cog in the wheel. Because someone needs to be there to at least present the other side. Even if the presentation goes on deaf ears. And if you had ever sat in the meetings, you would see that. All I am saying, and I have said it before, is that just talking on the interent does not create the kind of change that I think we are all in agreement needs to happen. But every time that I suggest that it is taken the wrong way. Eventually I will quit trying and then ya'll can have your happy forum back. But for now I seem to be stuck with beating my head against the wall.

Felix, I really don't even have a response to your post. I never questioned anyones intelligence or integrity. But if that is what you prefer to read into my statements there is nothing that I can do about that.
Have a good day.

Kerry W

Point well taken Cindy, and thank you for your positive response. I know it sounded as if I were coming down on you personally, but it was really just frustration over not having information. It is a different climate "inside", and I can understand the need to defend the work, because it does need to be done. I just wish it were a more welcoming atmosphere in which to work. I realize not all situations are the same that I experienced...and I hope people who wish to volunteer will do so, with great success.

As an aside...I went to the gpfha website, and read your notes on the Jan meeting. They were awesome! That is the kind of communication I've been looking for. I just kept forgetting to look THERE to find it. Thank you for posting it there.

grif

Perhaps you should join our region. Wink

caliber

Thank you Cindy. Maybe i took it the wrong way, and if i did I apologize. I personally have sat at many BOD meetings and have been very involved with our association ever since I became a member almost if not the same time you did.

Again, I think is best to leave things there with no further response between us regarding this subject matter.

You know I appreciate your efforts!!!!!!!!!!!!

Saludos! PEACE!

grif

Saludos.

Kerry W

grif

Good luck with that one. LOL Not MY job. Not sure it's anyones. When you have the best...... fill in the rest. Twisted Evil

Kerry W

I dunno...maybe another approach? Wine and dine to keep me OUT of your region? lmao

grif

LOL. How about just come on by and I'll cook ya up a nice steak and a margarita for no reason.

Kerry W

BigJ

Gee, you get an invite...I'm jealous! Can I at least get some leftovers?

grif

Candice you know that you have an oepn invite. You just never take me up on it. Evil or Very Mad

BigJ

I do, but I can't get my slug of a butt up there. Without it, I'm not going very far. Ah, maybe my butt could be persuaded with a ride or two. Hadn't thought about that. I will see if that works.

PFHA Validation Certificates

Validation Cert Rules Clarification