[Tiki]

I said above, I'll say again. Some of the registries offered to port their data over to USEF, but USEF said they wanted to invent their own wheel. The problem is that so far it has come out square!

[pwynnnorman]

That's just it, though, Tiki.

Who the heck IS "USEF"?

This issue needs to be taken out of their hands, developed, and then presented not just to their inner circles, but to the entire membership as close to a "fait accompli" as possible.

It's unbelievable that "USEF" hasn't solved PHR"s problem, except that I know there are personalities and agendas involved (thanks to some insider friends I have).

As you said, "reinvent the wheel," what an utter waste when "the wheel" is rolling along quite, quite well for the larger breeds.

[ise@ssl]

Well the USAE was approached years ago and offered the software used in Europe to track horses. The WB breed registries here do use the same numbering system for horses bred here on their registration papers that Europe uses. Several of the US registries offered to "dump" all their data on horses registered here into the system (a tremendous # of horses). The USAE - with Cheryl Frank in the mix - said NO THEY'D MAKE THEIR OWN MOUSETRAP. Now we have no mice.

What's the point of trying to have the registries build the data base when the PERFORMANCE RESULTS ARE NOT ACCESSIBLE TO THEM. That's the function of the NGB - the USAE with it's little add on's the USDF AND USEA and now this new Hunter/Jumper growth. Does anyone honestly believe the USAE - the keeper of the show results is going to just turn that over or download it to a the Federation? I'm sure if they would it would have been done years ago. But I'm personally quite confident they WON'T. And as someone else pointed out - we have various HORSE I.D. numbers for each individual horse depending on the discipline - horses have been able to get more than one. Now who will verify which horse is which horse relative to their registration #'s?

Had the USAE taken the offer of the software years ago and told the USDF/USEA/ANYONE ELSE they all had to assign the USAE # to a horse and use it for life and that the assignment of that # to a horse required VERIFICATION of data submitted for that horse - well by GOSH by GOLLY tracking performance would require punching in the # and out would come all the results.

The Federation formation was to bring all the WB registries onto one page and in fact that was why they went to NO DOUBLE REGISTRY for foals produced by member organizations. The registries and the Federation are certainly forging forward but you can research and discuss this forever but if the USAE doesn't buy into it - you hit a brick wall. And that's where we are now.

[ise@ssl]

One of the reason some of these various organizatons don't want to go to a one # system is the MONEY. To get the #'s you have to pay - whether we really get anything back for that doesn't matter. Each one of those organizations has a different application form for Horse ID #'s. The Eventing groups with Denny Emerson and David O'Connor slapping us around about US bred horses - DOESN'T EVEN HAVE ANY PLACE ON THE APPLICATION TO LIST THE BREEDERS'S NAME!! Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

The NGB is just the National Governing Body - they are the keeper of the keys for performance results. The WB registries are for the most part all on the same page with horse ID#'s
XX-XXXXX-XX - the the first two digits indicating breed registry per a universal numbering system and the last two digits being year born and the other #'s in between assigned by the registry. Why oh why oh why this can't be the the same # the USAE(USEF) AND USDF AND USEA AND ANYONE ELSE uses is the $6million dollar question!

[Ashemont]

This is one thing we all absolutely agree on so it just begs the question - how do we get it to happen?

[fish]

"This is one thing we all absolutely agree on so it just begs the question - how do we get it to happen?"

THANK YOU, PAT!!!!

And I do think that the fact that this group can actually agree on an issue says a lot about how bottom-line serious it must be.

P.S. It's pretty frustrating, BTW, to be registering my colt/stallion prospect with the AWS for the sake of pedigree/parentage verification, etc., when I plan to show him initially as a hunter-- an area of performance the AWS doesn't even seem to recognize.

[Tiki]

I don't know. I remember several threads where we ALL b*tch#d and moaned about this problem and Cheryll came on and was basically extremely unhelpful. We actually talked to the 'one in charge' on those threads and it got nowhere. The registries have offered to GIVE them all their registration data and they don't want it.

I wonder if part of the problem is that the USEF is responsible for ALL breeds (as far as shows go) and not just Warmbloods. Warmbloods all have standard format numbers and a lot of the American breeds do not. However - as far as I know, ALL breeds have UELN numbers reserved for them. Why couldn't these (dare I say it) bozos just convert the number and store the other breed's number as an alternate index? For example, say a Morgan uses a registration number like 129P018658A22 (whaterve, who knows - this is just for the sake of example) and the UELN prefix number assigned for Morgans is (say) 66. Say the Morgan is born iin 1997. It's UELN number would be 66-12345-97. ANY computer system could tie that in to an alternate index so that horse number 66-12345-97 would point to Morgan registration number 129P018658A22. Stuff like that is done all the time in the 'real' world. Your driver's licence number is tied to your SSAN, etc. It's really not that hard. They just don't seem to want to listen, spend the money, do it or whatever. ALL horses would also need to be permanently identified as well so there can be NO duplicate registrations. If someone really wanted to change the horse's name, the original name could also be an alternate index field so the horse could always be tracked.

It's really funny that so many people know how to do this - everyone but the USEF!!!

[fish]

What's really kind of funny about this, Tiki, is that in Canada they're discussing tagging and tracking ALL LIVESTOCK-- including horses, because of health concerns (e.g. hoof and mouth, mad cow diseases). One would think that if this were possible, assigning permanent id's and tracking mechanisms for show horses would be, too, wouldn't it?

[NicoletteH]

Canada has a very good system in place. Every animal that is registered has to be assigned a number from the Canadian Livestock Records Corporation. When you register a foal or an adult horse, the papers have to go through the Livestock Corp. before they are legal - the registries send them in themselves before the owners get the papers back. It is a lifetime number of the animal. So far we have not gotten a performace database built off it, but it could be done very easily since they are all recorded in one spot.

The problem comes in with unregistered animals. There are so many unregistered animals competing, in fact, I would imagine they way outnumber the registered horses. How do you verify identity?

I cannot see how a performance data base could cover unregistered animals. It could only be for DNA tested, verified ones.

Otherwise how do we know Snowdrop, the 12 year old grey mare owned by Lucy Smith is not superimposed by Sparkles, the 14 year old grey mare owned by Sally Jones in order to accrue false points when it is time for Snowdrop to hit the road???

I know you guys will groan, but what does Europe do about this?? Obviously they have an incredibly developed performance system. They must only tabulate registered horses. Perhaps they don't have the plethoria of unregistered animals over there.

And at least if the registered horses are done, it would be a start.

[Oakleigh]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fish:
What's really kind of funny about this, Tiki, is that in Canada they're discussing tagging and tracking ALL LIVESTOCK-- including horses, because of health concerns (e.g. hoof and mouth, mad cow diseases). One would think that if this were possible, assigning permanent id's and tracking mechanisms for show horses would be, too, wouldn't it? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

FISH, it's not just Canada that is discussing a national ID for all livestock. This is in the works in the US also. Since I'm an officer of AHHA, I receive reports from all national committees in the US. The report on the current state of national livestock ID came across my desk several months ago. This IS going to happen in the US. Since our own NGB (USEF) couldn't seem to get this done, our federal government is stepping in and will mandate it. Now, if we could just get these national IDs tied in with some accurate and accessible performance data we would be happy as pigs in mud. It's a shame that the USEF couldn't have taken the lead in this, and felt the need to reinvent the wheel.

Oakleigh

[NicoletteH]

I should also add, that the system the CLRC (canada live. rec. corp.) has in place is EXACTLY what TIKI describes, except they also put the Province in it (those are what we call states). So for instance my horses all have BC in front (for British Columbia), then the registry number (in my case the number they assigned the Can. Warmblood), and then the CLRC number, and then year they were born.

Canada is not developing as system. They have HAD a system for a very long time.

I just want to say as well....

I think ALL references to drugs admistered, or any other inferences should be absolutely and completely stopped. Unless the people who ACTUALLY WITNESSEd it, and then are willing to SIGN their NAMES that they did, come and talk, it is merely malicious gossip.

Further, it is rather cowardly to make all these statements anonymously on a public board and then not stand behind them.

If these people are truly concerned for justice, they should take it to the Federation that conducted the testing, not cast suspicion on the entire group of Stallion Owners. Now everyone is wondering WHO drugged WHICH horse, and suspicious of the horses that did well.

That is just not right.

edited for spelling and to clarify that Canada has been leading the pack for a while now!! http://chronicleforums.com/images/cu...milies/yes.gif

[mbp]

I do think the numbering is something that we all agree on. I have to say that I am actually disappointed that Cheryll is going about this by setting up another entity to do another indpendent run at a database.

I agree that the only credible way to handle the database is through the NGB that will also be handling all the performance results. Like it or not, that is USEF. Any stab at a database that does not go through the entity that, in essence, keeps the registered competition "books & records" for results won't work well.

As to unregistered horses, the USEF already gets those results. That is not to say that there won't be fraud. Even with registered horses, there is fraud. Usually DNA is not taken at competitions, so the argument as to what horse ACTUALLY competed, will almost always be there and be something to address through possible random checking, etc.

Here's the thing. The USEF already gets all the recognized competition results. That is NEVER going to be the case for most of the wb breed registries. It is for some of the registries like Morgan and Arab, for their breed shows (although not for open shows). But sporthorses do not compete in breed registry shows. They compete in shows that have multiple wb registries, other registries (like arab and morgan and quarter horse) grade horses, unknown, etc. So USEF really has to be the one to handle this - show secretaries are not going to be convinced to send results off to mulitple registries, piecemeal info from isolated registries and/or from isolated competition areas (like USDF) all, IMO, actually divert efforts, funds and support from the real issue - getting USEF to dig in and work this system through.

IMO, one of the drawbacks is having a group of people who are both knowledgeable about the needs of the breeders, the set up of the breed registries, the operations of all the sanctioning entities, and computer programming options -capabilities - needs.

Tiki - you have some computer programming background, don't you? Doesn't Violet Jennings as well? Who are the breeders who know enough about ALL those points to really form a solid base for a group like USEF to work with? Just wondering

[fish]

I also believe there is no good alternative to having the same NGB that receives show results being the same one that assembles and maintains the database. Perhaps I'm missing something (nothin' new), but is there any reason why a scannable ID micro-chip could/should not be a pre-requisite for competing in recognized shows just as tatoos are required (and checked) for JC sanctioned racing-- and scanned at the gate of every arena? As someone else mentioned, there are already a vast number of unregistered horses competing-- and having their results recorded-- even at the highest levels. Wouldn't it be a good thing if their entire careers-- including whatever they did in the breeding shed-- were also recorded and tracked?
P.S. Thanks for the additional info., Oakleigh-- and I do think it's a shame that our Federal Gov't might well beat the USEF to getting our horses id'd-- can't help but have surrealistic nightmares when it comes to government programs throwing horses in with other livestock-- you know, visions of eartags, etc. Oh well, time to put my smilely face on and try to be a little more optimistic before bedtime.

[ahf]

Can I ask a stupid question? Didn't Ned Bonnie fork over an ungodly amount of money not that many years ago to purchase the (then) Jockey Club run PHR database so this very thing could happen? Whatever happened with that? (or am I confusing the facts...?)

[mbp]

Back in 2000 or so, then AHSA (or possibly USAEq??) did "purchase" the PHR database. I was thinking that I saw they purchased it for $1.00 and it was like a donation - but that may be me mis-remembering, or it may be that the Bonnies purchased and in essence donated.

What gripes the snot out of me (easy to do in this weather) is that everyone seems to want to handle this by having "another registry" or "another organization" e.g., another set of fees for incomplete and un-useful results. No one is really just coming forth that TRACKING IS A DUTY OF THE NGB. All this "registering" and "recording" the horse with the USEF, or Cheryll's new group, or USDF, or anyone's registry, to me is just nonsense vis a vis the requirement to track performance.

Sure, have people pay a separate fee if they want to participate in year end awards. But the results need to be competently tracked and made available to USEF members without regard to whether someone has or has not "paid" a fee to participate in awards programs. THere is some huge disconnect going on, where the perceived benefit at the USEF level is that tracking is only about year end awards. They are completely missing the issue of tracking as a means of compiling information valuable to the sporthorse community and Olympic discipline athletes, separate and apart from year end awards.

They NEED to get with the registries, dump all that info in, have a shared use database with the registries and USDF and whatever the heck USCTA is now and the new Hunter national affiliate. They need to work the system, which is already requiring ID numbers for ALL horses at USEF sanctioned competitions, to make the system work well for show/event secretaries and for journalistic and research applications. If, after entering ID numbers, secretaries could get directory printouts that would always be identical, always have breeder/breeding info, etc. - how much further along would we be? LOTS imo.

But there has to be a drastic mindset shift. They can still crank fees - there are plenty of ways to do that and expand their fee base and offer services (how about something like a DelMar pedigree database accessible by all members, but with the added feature of being able to link it to performance results?) They just are not being good administrators or having any vision, IMO.

[ahf]

Absolutely mbp. There are plenty of ways fees can be "cranked". You can't tell me no one at the USEF has never charged a BRIS or JCIF report on their credit card. Hell, the CD's from Bris used to be several hundred dollars. Don't know what they are now.

I always envisioned a system whereby an interested party could order a report (be it lifetime show report, progeny report, etc.), charge it to a credit card, and be done with it. You can't TELL me there is no money in that. The individual associations then pay a sum to have specific reports run for THEIR year-end awards. When, say, the PA TB breeders association calculates their leading PA-bred awards this is exactly what happens. One database, fee-for-service.

[ahf]

Okay. I wasn't imagining it. Here's the Bonnie link. How's this for a sad step back in time.
http://www.horsecity.com/NEWSDESK/PL..._registry.html

And mbp, even back then there was another entity creation in the works.

[ise@ssl]

Well regarding the HORSE I.D. and the AHSA/USAE/USEF!!

1. The breed registries in the U.S. that keep strict horse ID control and performance records like the Jockey Club are internationally respected and successful.

2. The European WB registries saw that maintaining pedigree information and performance information for every horse registered was absolutely mandatory to improve their breeding and competition horses.

3. The AHSA/USAE/USEF DOES NOT.

4. For some reason they seem to focus on that teeny tiny part of the pyramid which is the horse industry which includes the International Competition Horses.

5. They fail to recognize or acknowledge what ALL THE SUCCESSFUL HORSE BREEDING INDUSTRIES RECOGNIZE - that this data base of pedigree and performance is an ABSOLUTE NECESSITY. So the information on ALL competition horses is just not relevant to them.

6. They do make more money on the broken system. Horses entered multiple times PAY MORE FEES. As I read the rules there really is no significant penalty for falsifying information, entering a horse more than once, etc. etc. The USDF (as people postedhere) doesn't care if horses have more than one number either!

7. Regarding the PHR information which we paid into for several horses. Cheryl Frank represented that ALL of those records were imported into the HORSE ID system. That is completely UNTRUE.

8. It is impossible to run a tandem system WITHOUT the performance information - which the NGB has.

9. I am VERY fearful that we are going to find out the current system is ONE HUGE MESS and I think they are all running around trying to avoid owning up to this.

10. The Federation approached them years ago to work together (as I noted before) and they smugly said - NO THANKS! And then DID NOTHING that put us any closer to a system that functions.

11. Where to go to complain? All the breed registries in the Federation should send a letter to the NGB and DEMAND they work with them on this. The Federation should as well. I'm also wondering if going to the USOC and flat out saying - the NGB is failing to provide this data base which is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY TO BREED HORSES that will be available for future riders in International Competition.

12. I'm sure everyone who has fought this fight can tell you some of the absurd responses we've received from the NGB AND USDF AND USEA, ETC. on this mess. My favorite was a Board member of the NGB who stated on this BB - "Well if we make the performance records available for horses - it could affect their value and we might be sued!" Is this like some Kafka experience. Sued for what? - TELLING THE TRUTH.

As is stands now the NGB fosters a system that facilitates FRAUD. A SELLER can state anything about a horse's performance career. And unless they are on the Team or way at the top - there is no way to verify it in ALL DISCIPLINES that come under the NGB umbrella. Now - if there was any possibility of litigation for making performance records available the Jockey Club would have closed down a century ago.

13. I also think it's high time we all asked where do all these show results go when they are sent to the NGB. And HOW LONG ARE THEY KEPT??? We may have to face the horrible fact that all of these shows that have taken down all of the information on horses, riders, scores, etc. is dumped in only a few years. I was told the USDF only keeps 3 years of information!!

We can argue the details of the stallion testing which IMHO is only one piece of information but THIS HORSE ID TIED TO PEDIGREE TIED TO PERFORMANCE DATA BASE is where the big information exists.

I don't know how it works - but perhaps the Federation representing all of it's members can petition the USOC that the NGB is FAILING US and FAILING OUR SPORT.

The NGB is also missing the big picture. They should have a system for HORSE ID that required information verification with the registries (as well as ownership) and having HUGE FINES - $1000 for false information. That's the Cash Cow they should milk - not the breeders who often put their young horses in ...only to find out that they were entered again by people who buy the horses they've bred in the future with either incomplete or incorrect information.

We all need to find out if the NGB has a big black hole that this system is being dumped into as soon as possible before we pay for more numbers. WHAT ARE THE FACTS??

[Rainbow Farm Unltd.]

For those of us who are interested in a letter writing campaign (Ilona, this is an excellent post!) and making noise in general, but are swamped right now, could someone post to whom specifically at USEF, NGB, USOC and whoever else that would be useful with snail mail and e-mail addresses? I believe in a squeaky wheel, and I think letters and petitions are a super way to at least let our displeasure be known. TIA

[Tiki]

Fish, the Department of Agriculture is trying to do what Canada and Europe are doing now, that is, ALL horses will be required to have a unique ID and an implanted microchip. This will serve to track disease and it will make it much easier to track Coggins test. Anyone with a scanner - be it a Dept of Agriculture inspector, a cop checking horses travelling interstate to a show, or a show secretary - can scan the horse, get positive ID and Coggins information - at the minimum. What a lot of us horse people, the Horse Council and at least some of the breed registries are trying to do is to get the Dept of Ag to use UELN numbers so that all this information can be dumped into the USEF database for EVERY HORSE IN THE COUNTRY. This is going to be a MANDATORY program by AG so we're hoping they can do this in a way that will BENEFIT horse people and maybe kill 2 birds with one stone. This should also save costs to horseowners by already having an ID.

Yes, MBP, I work with computers. I'm not a database programmer, but a lot of the principles of indexing files, etc. are the same. Violet Jen IS, I believe, a database programmer, and I believe OMOM is. I know there are others on the board as well. USEF doesn't want our help!!!!!