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!!
_________________ They are not here for us...we are here for them.
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
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.
_________________ Be the change you want to see in the world. Gandhi
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.
_________________ Be the change you want to see in the world. Gandhi
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.
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!
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".
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!!
_________________ They are not here for us...we are here for them.
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.
Last edited by BigJ on Sun May 03, 2009 3:56 pm; edited 1 time in total _________________ Be the change you want to see in the world. Gandhi
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.
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.
_________________ They are not here for us...we are here for them.
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 cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Page 4 of 5Page Previous1, 2, 3, 4, 5Next
