Charro: Confronting Prejudice to Save Tradition III

Charro: Confronting Prejudice to Save Tradition I
Charro: Confronting Prejudice to Save Tradition II
Charro: Confronting Prejudice to Save Tradition IV

Singling out the Charreada vs Protecting the Rodeo: Nebraska's Case

A similar case to the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors has just happened in Nebraska. It began in July, 2007, when the Nebraska Humane Society NHS showed up at a two-acre site in North Omaha and confiscated five horses who, according to The Reader, a weekly newspaper, presented rope burns across their legs and backs.

The NHS cited nine members of the Asociación de Charros La Amistad, which is not registered with the US FMdeCh, and fined each of them $900 plus $200 for veterinary care.

Mr. Armando Pliego, treasurer of the charro team, said to me in a phone interview that he suspects he was framed by the NHS, because on Wednesday 5th, December 2007, he received a call from a reporter asking him what he thought about the Omaha City Council plan to discuss on Tuesday, December 11th, banning manganas, colas and piales, a suerte in which wild mares are roped by the back legs until they're gradually stopped, but never tripped.

"This is an issue that took us totally by surprise," Mr. Pliego affirmed. "I was speechless. It didn't occur to me that the Humane Society had actually used me to build a case against the entire Charrería. Their attack was based on one incident that I already thought forgotten. Theirs was a quemarropa cowardly action."

The issue was not forgotten because the horses' lacerations, the NHS claimed, were caused by manganas and piales, hence the need to create a law that would exclusively target the charro's "cruel events." Enter city Councilman Mr. Chuck Sigerson Jr., who agreed to sponsor the ordinance.

Instead of working together with the charros to come up with a compromise, the NHS and Mr. Sigerson Jr. put into practice their it's my-way-or-the-highway credo.

"I want to make something very clear: we only used one of those horses for manganas, and, though we're not federated with the Mexican Federation of Charrería, we abide by its Rulebook, one of which says that we are not allowed to trip any horse", stated Mr. Pliego. "We are horse lovers and we know very well that the Federation prohibits and sanctions rigorously the mistreatment of animals."

When they bought the horses at a public action, they were already wounded, he recalled. Then came a month of rain. The horses got a little thiner. One of them, said Mr. Pliego, tried to get out of the corral, got stuck in the wire and hurt itself a bit. No charreadas had been recently performed, as trying to hold one was like asking Mother Nature to re-schedule her weather conditions.

Officers from the NHS showed up. Mud dominated the scene. Mr. Pliego remembered that they told him, on the spot, that the facility was not the most appropriate for horses and took them away.

On December 11th, 2007, all seven City Councilmen, Mr. Chuck Sigerson Jr., Mr. Jim Suttle, Mr. Frank Brown, Mr. Jim Vokal, Mr. Garry Gernandt, Mr. Dan Welch, and Mr. Franklin Thompson heard arguments concerning the charreada events of manganas, colas and piales.

The anti-charreada team included NHS lead investigator, Ms. Kristie Biodrowski, who under cross-examination admitted she had never attended in person a rodeo or a charreada; veterinarian Mr. Steve White, who apparently became a charreada expert after he witnessed a total number of one; and NHS vice president of field operations, Mr. Mark Langan, among others.

The pro-charreada team was integrated by Mr. Armando Pliego and two of his offsprings: Armando, 14, and Xochitl, 12.

A representative from the PRCA was also present to make sure the exemption status of typical recognized rodeo events in Nebraska was not altered, but said nothing to enlighten the public servants about how the rodeo evolved from the charreada, which is at least three centuries older.

Arguments against the charreada were literally taken from the usual stereotyped and standardized propaganda by pro-animal rights advocates: in Mexican charreadas, accidents "could, might, probably, likely, would" happen resulting in broken bones, fractured necks, legs, shoulders, backs, teeth, tails...

Even in piales, claimed veterinarian Mr. White, the horses are exposed to the “unnatural hyper-extension” of their back legs.

"I immediately thought of horses frolicking when turned out to pasture in the morning, their hoofs exploding towards the stars, and the playful or envious kicking that goes on in fields all over the world, and bucking stock, and the Lipizzaner Stallions at the Vienna Spanish Riding School performing the capriole —all stretching their hindquarters," said charro writer Mr. Lalo Ramírez. "Are these movements any more unnatural than those seen during a pial? Of course not! Then he referred to Mexican steer wrestling saying that pulling a steer by the tail, because it is connected to the spinal cord, can cause all kinds of injuries. Well, in cowboy calf roping, which the medical expert says is less inhumane than 'horse tripping,' the calves' neck, which the last time I looked is also connected to the spinal cord that is connected to the medulla oblongata, is hyper-extended to the limit when stopped abruptly —jerked down— while traveling at breakneck speed by a nylon rope connected to a 1500-pound quarter horse. Why do you think this portion of 'tie down' is bleeped from broadcast coverage?"

By then, all of the easily corroborated information the Pliego family said or could say about the charreada had less than cero meaning before the Honorable City Councilmen.

In limbo fell the fact that most charreadas are free to the public because they are family-oriented and charros love having lots of guests; that charro organizers lack financial support provided to the cowboy rodeo by mega million dollar corporations; that most charros pay for their own equestrian gear, fee entrance, travel and personal expenses and sponsor their own events, all in the name of keeping alive their cultural heritage; and that above all, the charro takes exceptionally good care of his animals for one straight reason: it is the right thing to do.

The charro knows he needs strong, healthy animals to practice his charreada events with success. Once in a while he gets a working saddle, a stainless steal buckle or some cash as prize, but in general, his biggest reward involves a resounding applause synchronized with cheers, hats and boots thrown around him.

Why is it that none of this information was relevant or had any weight to even raise an honest reasonable doubt when the City of Omaha politicians made their decision?

Mainly, I would argue, because the NHS paid employees, Ms. Kristie Biodrowski and Mr. Mark Langan, openly stated that they did not oppose in any way the cowboy rodeo, thus giving the impression that animal cruelty happens exclusively in the charreada.

On December 18, 2007, all seven City Councilmen approved the mandate. Their resolution reiterated, one more time, that it is positively legal for a cowboy to rodeo but illegal for a charro to charrear.

"What is so disconcerting with the ordinance passed is that it specifies that horse catching is defined as 'roping a horse by the legs' rather than the general definition of 'horse tripping,' which reads: '…to cause a horse to fall or lose its balance with the use of a wire, pole, rope or other object,'" Mr. Ramírez analyzed. "By pinpointing the limbs, the new interpretation excludes the Wild Horse Race, in which equines are caused to fall and lose their balance, practiced at Nebraska’s Big Rodeo since 1921. You can square-dance around the issue all you want, but it is clear that laws for some are not applicable for others."

In effect, particularly when it comes to judging the Mexican and Mexican American charro, who, for some politicians, like Councilman Mr. Sigerson Jr., need to be taught an "American" lesson on animal welfare.

"Other cultures can do whatever they want to in other countries," he told The Reader. "But this is America. We have laws about taking care of animals."

It's perceptible that Mr. Sigerson Jr. thinks the Mexican American charreada is not an American tradition.

But, as professor Olga Nájera Ramírez, from UC Santa Cruz, reports in her scholarly article entitled Haciendo Patria: La Charreada and Mexican Transnational Identity, "even a cursory examination of its historical roots confirms that the charreada has been a part of Mexican culture since at least the colonial period, a time when most of the Southwestern Unites States belonged to México."

This factual truth, somehow overlooked by politicians like Mr. Sigerson Jr. and animal rights activists, is of capital relevance for the Mexican American charro, since according to the League of United Latin American Citizens LULAC, the Treaty of Guadalupe, signed on February 2, 1848, "guaranteed to protect lands, culture (including the speaking of the Spanish language,) religion and civil rights of wartime residents, who had been Mexican citizens and their descendants."

It is no secret that, officially and unofficially, the Mexican American's cultural and property rights have been partially or entirely ignored, either intentionally or unintentionally.

The charreada has certainly experienced this trait, and it is time that Mexican American grass roots organizations like the National Council of La Raza, the Mexican-American Legal Defense & Education Fund MALDEF, the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán MEChA and the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials NALEO step in and take immediate action.

"In the City of Omaha, we Mexicans and Mexican Americans do not have the right to practice the suertes of colas, manganas or piales, but the whites have every right to rope calves by the neck, twist their neck and wrestle them to the ground, in short, their rodeo is protected by the law," declared Mr. Pliego. "Is this racism? When politicians tell you, right to your face, that they created a measure that's only going to affect you, because you're Mexican and practice a Mexican tradition, what else is there to think?"

What's puzzling, to me, is that the NHS anti-charro move seems to have been carefully premeditated, for when Mr. Langan heard the Councilmen's decision, he said to a reporter from the World Herald newspaper: "We're very pleased that the City Council decided to step in, especially on a 7-0 vote. Now we have our work cut out for us at the state level."

Absolutely. They had to convince the Omaha Councilmen to pass the ordinance, so it would serve them as their basis for the continuation of the character assassination of the charro.

Meet now State Senator Ms. Abbie Cornett, of Bellevue, District 45, who, along with Ms. Biodrowski and Mr. Langan, had been hard at work machinating a plan to promulgate their anti-charro propaganda.

Earlier this year, she introduced to the Nebraska's Legislature LB 764, an almost exact copy of Omaha's ordinance. Since it excluded, too, professionally sanctioned rodeos from the restrictions, its rationale was quite favorable.

It's unlikely any of the LB 764 authors know, either from sincere ignorance of the subject, disregard for truth or bare malice, that the charreada has been a professionally sanctioned sport since 1933. It has a comprehensive Reglamento General de Competencias General Competitions Rulebook and an impressive Code of Ethics.

What is Ms. Cornett's response to the charro accusations of racial discrimination?

"If they, [charreadas], were being singled out, all of their events would be in the bill," she told The Reader.

I gather, from her clear remarks, that she wants the charro to be grateful, since well-informed politicians, like her, are allowing him to at least practice some charreada events.

Sadly, for the charro, on April 16, 2008, LB 764 was signed into law by Nebraska's Governor Mr. Dave Heineman. No charro is allowed to intentionally trip or cause to fall, or even rope or lasso the legs of any horse. No charro can trip, cause to fall or drag any bovine by its tail.

Violating the law is a Class I misdemeanor, which means that any person, if convicted, shall not own, possess, or reside with any animal for not less than five years from the date of conviction.

Arizona's Case

Among the kind of politicians who share Nebraska's anti-charro campaign is Haight, Phoenix City Councilwoman Ms. Thelda Williams, and Arizona State Representative Ms. Kyrsten Sinema.

On January 4, 2008, Ms. Williams said that as newly-elected public servant her number priority was to make the "Mexican sport of horse tripping" illegal. She falsely accused the charro of practicing the activity clandestinely and using "wires" instead of reatas natural fiber ropes when practicing manganas.

When the city did not take action on her proposed ordinance, she joined forces with Ms. Sinema so they can both give birth to HB 2539.

The initiative, currently in the Senate, would make it a Class 1 misdemeanor to trip deliberately any horse, donkey, mule, pony, hinnie or llama. It'd be punishable by up to six months in jail and a $2,500 fine.

Not surprisingly, HB 2539 would not apply to any "traditional" Western show events including the cowboy rodeo, jumping, steeplechase, racing and branding, among others.

Paste and copy rhetoric against "Mexican horse tripping," amassed by Dr. Patricia Haight, president of the Conquistador Equine Rescue & Advocacy Program, claims that animals, when "fall to the ground," could end up dead or with broken bones, teeth, fractured skulls...

The expert even ventures to compare the practice to "dog-fighting" and asserts that it occurs at small rodeos in neighborhood backyards and ranches throughout the state.

Again, the US FMdeCh Rulebook prohibits and sanctions any "horse tripping" involved in any charreada that takes place in any part of the nation. No federated charro is exempt from it. And her dishonest comparison is only a mirror of either her limited knowledge about the charreada or her well-defined intention to damage the charro's reputation.

It poses, too, legitimate questions: given Ms. Haight's credentials, if she knows about an illicit activity where animal mistreatment is supposedly occurring, why doesn't she report it immediately to the proper authorities? Is she basing her allegations on first hand, empirical evidence or reliable sources or is she just throwing out hypotheticals?

It's easy to say one thing, but far more difficult to substantiate it.

As far as her "broken bones" claim, well, unfortunately unintentional accidents "occur during lazy laid-back trail rides on dude ranches, on the polo field, at steeplechases, at the racetrack and in the outback with no human intervention," rebutted charro writer Mr. Lalo Ramírez. "Although I do not bet on horses and my fanaticism for horse racing manifests itself only once a year while viewing the Kentucky Derby, emotions erupted recently when the thoroughbred Barbaro had to be put down because of a broken leg that could not be corrected after extensive intervention by the most renowned veterinarians in the world... Broken bones at rodeos and charreadas are accidents and as the word is defined, 'an unexpected, unforeseen, undesirable event.' Neither cowboys ni mucho menos charros wake-up with the desire to break the legs of their USD5,000 or USD50,000 investment or cause unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain to their livestock, livelihood culture."

A Question of Fairness

It's been decades since the anti-charro activists, most of them members of the dominant culture, began to launch their arbitrary attacks. Some latinos unfamiliar with their own heritage or still caught up in their self-identity crisis have indeed supported them. But, in general, the clan has been white.

I remember when I first heard the arguments against the US charro in 1993. I had just started going to college and working as a reporter intern for a Los Angeles newspaper.

Ms. Cathleen Doyle, president of the California Equine Council, was busy spreading in both, the print and visual media, that "thousands of American horses" were "severely injured and killed at Mexican-style rodeos each year," thus creating the illusion in the collective mind that the equine species would soon become extinct.

"Let's put this in perspective: in the 1940s, there were no officially registered charro associations in the US, though charro and vaquero families had been practicing the charreada and rodeo for generations," recalled Mr. Ramírez. "In the 50s, two associations decided to register, one in Illinois and one in Texas. In the 60s, a dozen, 70s, 25, 80s, 50, and 84 groups by 1999. Taking into account that many charro associations, because of inclement weather, snow, only have a 5 month window to hold their fiestas, it's hard to imagine all these corpses lying around and even harder to believe that no activist, no animal control official or just a concerned citizen, wouldn’t have reported this unlawful activity to the proper authorities, especially when anyone could attend a charreada."

Absurdly and fallacious as the activists' arguments may have sounded, they captured the attention of then Assemblyman Mr. John Lowell Burton, D-San Francisco, a rehabilitated cocaine addict who currently faces a $10 million sexual harassment suit.

Soon he became the activists' voice in government politics. He turned their anti-charro propaganda into AB 49x, submitted to the Sacramento Capitol on February 7, 1994, a time when Governor Pete Wilson also unveiled his Save Our State plan, or Prop 187, which goal was to deny necessary social services, such as health care and education, to illegal immigrants and their children.

The AB 49x measure aimed at outlawing manganas. It made it a misdemeanor to intentionally trip or fell an equine by the legs by any means whatsoever for the purposes of šentertainment or sport, punishable by up to six months in the šcounty jail and a fine up to $1,000.

Within the section describing the "need" for the bill, proponents claimed that "horse tripping has no legitimate ranching or agricultural application. It is solely in the name of 'entertainment' that horses running at full gallop have their legs lassoed and yanked out from under them."

Did the charro established manganas as a legitimate, traditional Californian skill needed in ranches to catch wild horses for branding and doctoring and that no information or indictment had ever been filled alleging that the event subjected any animal to needless suffering?

It's imperative to understand that no charro had any political experience nor did he ever imagine than one day he would have to pay a lobbyist to help him fight to keep his tradition alive for the next generation of charros.

He never expected, either, to hear and see members of his own ethnic group betraying him, like the Mexican American Chamber of Commerce & Industry of Southern California, the Mexican American Political Association, Los Angeles KMEX-TV Channel 34, Mr. Arturo Rodríguez, president of César E. Chávez United Farm Workers, as well as Mr. César E. Chávez, a vegetarian.

Three years before his death on April 23, 1993, Mr. Chávez had sent a letter to radical activist Mr. Eric Mills —a letter which he's been using to this day—, saying that "racism, economic deprival, dog fighting and cock fighting, bullfighting and rodeos are cut from the same fabric: violence. Only when we have become nonviolent towards all life will we have learned to live well ourselves."

By definition, a vegetarian, like an animal rights activist, would always try to promote or impose his views. Mr. Chávez had every liberty to defend his principles, but he did not have the right to finger point the rodeo or the charreada, simply because he did not approve of it. His comparisons were totally unfair and misleading.

There is no intentional killing involved in the charreada or the rodeo, as it is in the annual live coyote shooting contest held in Baker, Montana, or the live pigeon shooting competitions in some Sportsmen's clubs in Pennsylvania.

There is no intentional animal cruelty in the charreada or the rodeo as it is in rattlesnake roundups or the catch-and-release fishing technique practiced all over the United States.

The charreada, duélale a quien le duela, despite anyone's beliefs, is an authentic Mexican and Mexican American tradition, which has none of that.

Either for political purposes or personal gains or beliefs, I would dispute that the attitude adopted by some latinos against the charreada, which charros saw as typical of a traidor vendido sell-out traitor, had much to do with the ill-informed, biased portrait painted about the charro by pro-animal rights advocates and mainstream media, like KABC.

For example, in November 1993, Los Angeles KABC Channel 7 anchor woman, Ms. Christine Lund, reported Renegade Rodeo, which supposedly took her six months to investigate.

In it, she characterized the charro as "violent, cruel, heartless," in short, as Mr. Pedro Vaca, then president of Federación de Charros USA Inc., said to me in a personal interview, "she painted the charro as a horse killer."

"It's totally denigrating," he complained. "We love horses, we deal with horses, yet people are starting to see us as horse killers. If that's what this reporter had in mind, well, she accomplished it. Thanks to her prejudiced, sensationalist anti-charro campaign, our reputation has been seriously tarnished."

Charro Mr. Luciano de la Hoya, now a distinguished member of a Los Angeles mounted law enforcement unit, said to me that days before the program was released, he and other charros and charritos had a three-hour meeting with Ms. Lund, who promised them equal air time.

Of course the charritos, little sons of the charros, were very happy to be in the offices of a TV station. For them, it was a fantastic opportunity to demonstrate their awesome roping skills and be seen on television by their relatives and friends. Adolescent charros also explained how being involved in the tradition kept them busy and away from the danger and temptations of the streets.

"But the public only heard two or three brief comments," remembered Mr. de la Hoya. "She practically interpreted Charrería as something bad and horrendous that has been happening since its origin."

When the program aired, the charritos had to be told by their parents they could not see it because it was inadequate for them.

"How were the parents going to allow their charritos to see them grotesquely painted as horse killers?" asked Mr. Vaca. "It was heartbreaking and upsetting."

During the program, Ms. Lund kept saying "this is not Mexico," thus instilling the notion that the charreada was not an "American" tradition, and concluded that, "like toys, the animals are used until they break and can't be used anymore."

"What I had in mind was to show what happens to the horses in the event", she told me when I interviewed her for the Los Angeles Spanish newspaper La Opinión. "I was not interested in the tradition of the Charrería... I found these people [charros] to be lovely, charming and interesting; people who you would like very much. I found them also to be people who really, honestly, did not see what happens to the horses... They seem to have respect for their own riding horses, but no feelings, no sensitivity, no caring for the horses that they use in the arena. Those horses, to them, seem to be worthless, like trash. What happens to them is not important. What is important is that the game goes on... I think that if these horses were going to choose what rodeo they wanted to be in, they would choose the American rodeo because it is less harsh."

In her news segment, Ms. Lund claimed she had to disguise herself so as to blend in and avoid being confronted with violence while documenting her investigation "in remote fields, river bottoms and industrial areas."

What she said to me, however, was that in the beginning she simply tried to go to a charreada and watch.

"It became very clear, quickly, that these events were not carried through their outcome if I were around," Ms. Lund described. "One can only conclude that they're controlled to be that way. They go one way if [charros] think there are only people who are friendly to these events and they're organized to go different if there is a belief that someone who is unfriendly to the event is watching."

In other words, she had to see what she wanted to see. As anyone knows, rotten apples can be found anywhere and at all levels of society. And he who seeks finds. But, for Ms. Lund to give the false image that animal cruelty was the "rule" in the charreada rather than the "exception" was an over-exaggeration.

"Abuses occur, of course, but they directly violate the ideals and tenets of charro horsemanship and are rare; mistreatment is severely criticized by other charros when it is observed," wrote professor Kathleen Mullen Sands in her book Charrería Mexicana. "A rich tradition of proverbs and adages supports and reinforces the ideals of gentle training in charrería. Such sayings as 'Man cannot tame a horse if he cannot tame himself,' and 'Movements not requested should be punished, but with kindness,' emphasize the self-control required for training."

I know for a fact that charros were willing to compromise. They wanted to work closely with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the Humane Society of the United States in every possible way, such as having them inspect the animals before any charreada were to take place or allowing them to police every event. After all, it would've been a great way for these non-profit groups to truly justify its existence.

"We want them to have the last word," said Mr. Pedro Vaca. "If they think an animal is not in good shape or it does not meet their standards, we will replace it with another one. We're not going to argue or disrespect their decision. They're the Humane Society for a reason. But trying to take away one of our suertes charras the arbitrary way, is simply unfair. What's next?"

Neither group nor the author's bill, Ms. Cathleen Doyle, backed up by Mr. Eric Mills, from Action for Animals, showed any interest in negotiating. They specifically asked for "horse tripping" to be "completely outlawed, not regulated."

An expanded version of Ms. Lund's Renegade Rodeo report was aired nationwide by Ms. Catherine Crier in 20/20, under the sentimental name Pity the Horses. The segment, released on Friday, April 29, 1994, blatantly accused the charro of practicing a "clandestine" sport where animals were "disposable."

Ms. Lund, who was one of the key interviewees and apparently an animal rights activist herself, even alleged to have received a number of death threats by the charros.

Why did she forget to mention, as pointed out by Dr. Olga Nájera Ramírez in her compelling analysis The Racialization of a Debate: The Charreada as Tradition or Torture, that pro-animal rights oppose all forms of rodeo, but, as one of their leaders summed it up in a newspaper interview, firing off attacks against the charro was "a fight that's winnable?"

"In a time of heightened intolerance, fear, and suspicion of others, the charreada —a transnational cultural practice involving predominantly working-class Mexicans— finds little support or justification among the general American public," she wrote. "Instead, the charreada becomes one more social problem brought to the United States by Mexican immigrants... The recent media attention that labels the charreadas as renegade rodeos and clandestine events reinforces stereotyped notions of the conniving, violent nature of Mexicans. By evoking the well-worn stereotypes that provoke or intensify feelings of fear, hatred, or distrust, such media reports villainize Mexicans as a group."

Dr. Mullen Sands also had some thoughts on the matter.

"People do not get upset when they see a cowboy grabbing a steer by the neck and wrestling it to the ground. Why? Because what they see is an association between the steer and their steak on the table," she explained to me. "If you want me to make a comparison between the American rodeo and the charreada, I definitely think there is less harsh treatment on animals in the charreada. In fact, I've been to hundreds of charreadas and I've never seen a horse hurt. If a charro damages an animal that he's gotten from a livestock provider, he has to pay full price for it. He does not want to do this... I personally find charreadas more fascinating than rodeos. They're a folk tradition that have a lot of aesthetic elements. Their emphasis is on style instead of speed, so everything is done with elegance... Only the best charros execute manganas. You don't walk out of the streets and do a mangana. The charreada is a beautiful way for Mexicans and Mexican Americans to contribute to their ethnic pride."

On Monday, September 19, 1994, governor Mr. Wilson signed AB 49x into law, despite being denounced by then Assemblyman Mr. Richard G. Polanco, D-Los Angeles, as an initiative that fostered a double standard: it outlawed some charreada events, but protected the right of the cowboys to continue roping calves and wrestling steers in the arena.

"Tripping and roping of a horse is no different than what is done to steers and calves in the Anglo rodeo," he stated. "It's a double standard. The same standard should apply to all."

A position that I think contributed as well to the approval of AB 49x in California was that of the PRCA. On Monday, April 18, 1994, Los Angeles Times staff writer, Mr. Miguel Bustillo, quoted in his article, A Question of Culture or Cruelty, an executive from the PRCA, one Mr. T. J. Walters, as saying that he felt "no kinship with charros and" saw "no reason to look after the interests of Charrería."

I'm not going to criticize the PRCA for turning the prophesy, Before the rooster crows this day, you will deny me three times, into one of their realities. They had to protect their own "cowboy tradition" by denying any link or association from the one who kindly gave it to them.

Typically, the Anglo cowboy, as member of the dominant culture, has been more inclined to remember his contributions than practicing solidarity or remembering the period when the charro and the vaquero received him con el corazón abierto with an open heart and taught him all about the art of traditional horsemanship.

I know it's a different generation, but didn't Mr. T. J. Walters ever notice, even for a moment, how the ways in which the cowboy rodeo and the charreada differ are not nearly as conspicuous as the features they share?

One evolved from the other. It's a typical case of maestro charro teaching and alumno cowboy learning.

In the Spring of 1985, vaquero author, Mr. Arnold El Jefe R. Rojas, gave a personal interview to writer Gerald W. Haslam. Born on September 25, 1896, in Pasadena, El Jefe moved in his youth to the San Joaquín Valley to get a job as a vaquero.

Back then, "the white respected the non-white because of the latter's skill, and wanted to be like him," he told Mr. Haslam. "The white who adopted the vaquero culture was a higher class than the 'bindle stiff.' The gringo vaquero was usually of Irish extraction."

By Mexican vaquero, Mr. Rojas wrote in These Were the Vaqueros, "I mean the man who brought the cattle to the West and herded them for a hundred years or more before the United States took possession of half of México's territory."

One distinction he notes between both horsemen is that vaqueros ride a la Jineta style, using the body to direct their mount, while cowboys employ the rains to control their horse.

To date, when cowboys are called to defend their tradition, as it was the case in the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors audience, they arm themselves with paid lobbyists and experts in the rodeo field.

They passionately state that theirs is an American tradition inherited from their ancestors, though not a word about its charro and vaquero origins is mentioned, and would like very much to preserve it just the way it is.

"These activists do not speak for the majority of the American public," testified one cowboy at the audience. "They don't have to come to the rodeo if they don't like it. I've never been to one of their demonstrations. But we love our rodeo tradition. It's our livelihood. Please don't take it away from us."

His words resonated in my mind until a question popped: If politicians were to indeed take away the rodeo, what other truly American traditions would these folks have left to treasure as much?

Like the charros, not all of them are into baseball, football or basketball. Like the charros, not all of them enjoy crowded, hyper-synthetic consumer-oriented malls or red carpet places to show off their expensive plumage.

You see, the rodeo and the charreada are not just a sport, they mean tradition, especially for the charro, who's willing to travel long distances and make sacrifices, such as saving money for retirement, just to be a part of the Fiesta Charra.

He does it de todo corazón with all his heart, because his entire family supports and follows him around. Besides, he knows his charro sons will gladly take care of him and his wife when the time comes.

But, unlike the cowboy, the charro does not have much political representation nor paid lobbyists. Add the silence or betrayal of the cowboy and he's practically on his own.

Before politicians' eyes, his rich charro and vaquero history means little or nothing compared to that of the cowboy. It is the rodeo which seems to be the only one worthy of the word "tradition," thus the absolute need to save it.

Respecting the Principle of Equal Protection Under the Law

In California, Section 597g of the Penal Code, part (b) reads as follows: It is a misdemeanor for any person to intentionally trip or fell an equine by the legs by any means whatsoever for the purposes of entertainment or sport.

Part (c) reads: This section does not apply to the lawful laying of a horse for medical or identification purposes, nor shall the section be construed as condemning or limiting any cultural or historical activities, except those prohibited herein.

The charreada is a Southwestern US cultural, historical activity. It is connected directly to the original Mission, hacienda and ranching cattle system of América. Yet, it has been condemned time and again by both legislators and animal rights activists. What is the problem?

"The problem is that the legal system often appears to be more concerned with the unacceptable practices of minority groups than with those of the dominant culture," writes professor Ms. Alison Dundes Renteln in her book The Cultural Defense. "This appearance of a double standard calls into question the fairness of the system for groups that lack political power... If a principle of maximum accommodation is to be applied, it would require judges to take cultural and religious claims more seriously in this area... It is a common rhetorical move to deny that traditions which are objectionable are, in fact, traditions. Refusal to designate the practices as traditional implies that if they were, they might be worthy of some respect."

América's first horseman, the charro, is, gústele a quien le guste o pésele a quién le pese, despite anyone's liking or disliking, the forefather of the North American cowboy. As such, the dominant culture must learn to respect his centuries old equestrian tradition, which we Mexican and Mexican Americans proudly call Charrería.

Charro: Confronting Prejudice to Save Tradition I
Charro: Confronting Prejudice to Save Tradition II
Charro: Confronting Prejudice to Save Tradition IV