# Letter to the editor



## LaVern (Jan 8, 2012)

I am sending this to the Journal today.

I would like to thank our board of directors for implementing their new and open policy and finally making it very clear as to how they feel about the value of the AMHR Miniature Horse and its' pedigree.

When I first found out about the lowering of the hardship fees, I was very hurt and felt it was a slap in the face to those of us who have been loyal for all these years. Many of us AMHR breeders have gone without, just to keep our AMHR paperwork in order. Now, to let the owners of a 100.00 not inspected - hard shipped horse enjoy the glory and reap the benefits of owning an AMHR horse is, I feel unfair. We have worked for years to give them a value.

However, I like to be told the truth and I guess I would rather have my feelings hurt than be used and patronized.

I am not totally against hard shipping horses, for a very high fee, if the quality is there and they meet strict requirements at three years old, but to do so with no inspections for 100.00, makes it pretty obvious as to what their view of the AMHR breeder is.

Again, I thank our representatives for their honesty and finally giving it to us straight.

Renee LaBarre Reiten

Lucky Hart Ranch


----------



## Minimor (Jan 8, 2012)

I still fail to see how this 1/2 price hardshipping has such a negative effect on your breeding program and the value of your AMHR horses. I just don't see it that way.

It is only $100 now to hardship a mare or gelding. It was $200 before. You have states before that this means that an AMHR horse is only worth $100 now. But--by that token, an AMHR horse was before worth only $200.

I'm quite sure that on average you have been selling your AMHR horses for much more than $200. I am quite sure that you will continue to sell those AMHR horses for much more than $200 even this year when hardshipping costs only $100.


----------



## vvf (Jan 8, 2012)

I agree with Castle Rock. I think it's a good thing what AMHR has done. I bought a stallion a couple years ago that was AMHA only registered and I hardshipped him into AMHR and paid the full price... I just wish I had waited to do it until this year and saved some money. But on that note, i will say, AMHR means so much to me, that I was willing to spend the money. On the other hand, i do have a few AMHR only mares, that I won't spend the money to register AMHA... (did it once, won't do it again) (oh BTW, the stallion that I hardshipped into AMHR was a long way from a $100 horse)


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 8, 2012)

I guess I just don't understand either. The ASPC ponies still have to be inspected in order to be hardshipped into AMHR and no for AMHA horses you don't but if you think it needs to be done send in a proposal. I would vote for that. I know its not going to affect the hardship for them this year but I don't see how they can make it mandatory for this 1/2 off sale when its never been mandatory to begin with.

I think this just benifits the registry and hopefully it will bring in new members. Especially now because you have to be a member to do any paperwork period, the registry will loose money from that choice.


----------



## ohmt (Jan 8, 2012)

I am also very sorry that you feel that way, but it is a blessing for me. My family has been breeding minis since the late 70's, and none of us feel cheated. It is for one year and during a hard time for everyone. I will personally be able to hardship quite a few which makes me very happy since I am switching to AMHR primarily.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 8, 2012)

It has no affect on my breeding program, I will do as I please. But, can't you people see beyond yourselves and down the line 20 years? This is not about me, I'm old and about done. This is about respectability and credibility of the registry.. Have we been downgraded so long that we can't get used to the fact that we are on top and that the AMHR is the one registry you have to have and they should be worth more than 100 dollars. They can be doubled or tripled or registered 20 times, but if you don't have AMHR you are in a pickle. We finally command the respect we deserve, except from our directors. What they are telling the breeders is that generation after generation of honest AMHR bookwork and timely stud reports and transfers and permanent papers were worth nothing.

Yes, AMHR is the one you have to have now, but it won't be that way for long, if enough people see this as I do, Why bother to register?

When the directors become more interested in being nice to a few people that didn't ever feel that they needed AMHR, than to their long time breeders, they had better start watching the pennies. If the association doesn't back its breeders they fold. Now, maybe there is enough of the doubles and hardship horses coming in to keep things going for a few years, I don't know. but I don't think too many years.

Another thing to think about. Within our own association we insist that the Shetland Pony be inspected and measured, but we let AMHA and Fallabellas in with out ever measuring them or inspecting them. Ah- heck give em two sets, one in case they find a horse that looks pretty close,


----------



## Performancemini (Jan 8, 2012)

I am quite sure I am going to get flamed for this; but what the Hey-it's our opinions. You'd think they were going back to hardshipping ANY mini (speaking as in 'no papers at all') with this outcry. They are simply trying IMO to give us some relief to the pocketbook in making those horses with just AMHA papers able to have AMHR papers also; FOR THOSE WHO WISH TO DO SO. If you are a breeder, this is a plus as I see it; since some people may wish to purchase dual registered horses for breeding/showing. Are you going to go to Walmart and complain betcause the they have lower prices? Sorry! MO.




.


----------



## Performancemini (Jan 8, 2012)

Bumping myself: Sorry LaVern=reread your post and realized I had taken it the wrong way! I apologize for jumping the gun



. I do feel lowering the fees helps with the economy and if one were to have purchased a nice AMHA horse and really wanted to show, etc. AMHR; then hardshipping is needed-and again-in this economy-it helps to have a "discount" of the old fee. (I must learn to read through two or three times before adding my two cents worth!



).


----------



## 2minis4us (Jan 8, 2012)

Let me get this straight, the $100 hardship fee is for horses from AMHA only or just any horse ?


----------



## LaVern (Jan 8, 2012)

You are absolutely right about going to Walmart Did you know that for many years we were called the Walmart Registry. Some people didn't like it, but I did. Walmart, with good management became the biggest. In fact they even came up with the idea that if you want to do business with Sams Club you even pay to give them your money. Brilliant.


----------



## HGFarm (Jan 8, 2012)

Sorry but I only see it as a positive. You seem to think that the only horses that will be registered through the hardship program will be 'junk'. That's a shame that you feel that way. I would have liked to have had a break on fees when I registered my A only horses with R also (and would like it visa versa, but so far no chance there).

I also disagree with the comment regarding if you dont have AMHR, you are in a pickle. I know MANY who have A horses only and do just fine. Is it nice to be double registered? Sure, but I dont find that it's a MUST for some folks, and it has not put them in any 'pickle'. To each his own.

I think it was nice that AMHR thought enough of their members, to give them a break on hardship fees, and also thought it was a smart move to attract new people to increase membership, who will get involved, due to the lower fees. Perhaps those new people with the 'junkie' horse will then get hooked and decide to purchase better horses to complete or breed with. And who are they going to purchase them from?


----------



## slv (Jan 8, 2012)

I also am very sorry that you feel this way. My entire herd is AMHA and most are also AMHR registered. I do have a handful of mares that only have AMHA papers. I have never had any trouble selling their foals as AMHA registered only, but I have intended on hardshipping them into the AMHR. The discount is sure a blessing with the economy being the way it is. Also mother nature has thrown so many horse owners a curve ball with droughts, no hay, etc. I think enough of my mares to spend the $200, but am very grateful for the discount and personally think it speaks volumes about the AMHR registry to do this at this time, in a good way I mean. If AMHA were to lower their fees, I think it would be wonderful, although I have built my herd around their registry and paid full price.


----------



## Minimor (Jan 8, 2012)

> But, can't you people see beyond yourselves and down the line 20 years?


Actually I for one am not looking at myself at all, I am speaking of what I see as the big picture, and I still say I see this half price hardshipping fee as a good thing. I see it as a good thing that 20 years from now these hardshipped horses--be they ASPC or AMHA or Falabella--will have been hardshipped into AMHR in 2012. Any way you look at it, it means more money for the registry--more transfers, more foal registrations, more revenue for the local shows & even Nationals perhaps. And yes, as I see it those horses will also bring new qualities into AMHR and those qualities will surely be good ones in many cases. Will there be some bad qualities brought too? Quite possibly, but the fact is that there are horses who have been AMHR "forever" who also have bad qualities to them--more hardshipped horses.


> It has no affect on my breeding program, I will do as I please.


I have to point out that on an earlier thread you, Renee, were the one who was complaining that this hardshipping sale meant that your AMHR horses were worth only $100, because that is what it now costs to get AMHR papers....which if that were true really does mean that up until now AMHR horses have been worth only $200. It is you who has been saying that you are no longer going to bother registering your foals unless there is some specific or good reason for doing so. That very much sounds to me that you are making this hardshipping fee "sale" have an effect on your breeding program.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 8, 2012)

I feel that it devalues our horses in the long run, even if it is only a matter of pride. How would you feel Minimor if late one night a few of the directors decided to open up the Shetland Registry for 100.00 bucks apiece out of the blue. How would you feel?

It has not affected my breeding at all, but it has affected my paperwork. Many of my registrations apps. are filed in my desk if I ever need them or anyone wants to pay for them. Stud reports have to be sent in. But, I may as well use that money as the Registry until it has to be done- if ever. Hey, maybe in 20 years they will open it up to the Lucky Hart Horse for 50 bucks.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 8, 2012)

2minis4us said:


> Let me get this straight, the $100 hardship fee is for horses from AMHA only or just any horse ?


First of all its not $100 for everybody. They are cutting the fees in half.

Mares/Geldings $200 - 2012 price $100

Stallions $400 - 2012 prce $200

Plus the cost or regular registration.

This sale is for AMHA, ASPC, and Fabella registered horses. AMHR no longer accepts unregistered stock.

The only way to solve this is to close the registry and Lavern if you feel so strongly about this submit a proposal for Convention this year, and get member signatures who feel the same way as you.


----------



## Minimor (Jan 8, 2012)

Renee, opening up the Shetland registry is entirely different from reducing fees for AMHR....ASPC is not a hardship registry...like it or not AMHR is a height registry and hardshipping has always been allowed.

I would be more sympathetic to your complaints if AMHR had now been reopened to any and all horses that measure under 38". As it is though, nothing has changed in terms of requireents for registration--just like last year the hardshipped horse must already have AMHA, ASPC or Falabella papers...the only difference is the fee has been cut in half. No horses will be added that couldn't have been added last year, or that couldn't be added next year.

Be careful that you don't get stung by not registering foals each year. For all you know there could be a rule change proposal that gets passed, making it that foals must be registered by a certain age and if they aren't they must be DNAd before they can have papers. Then you would have a lot of extra costs. Or what if they decided to close hardshipping AND pass a rule that says horses cannot be registered after age 2....and there you are with 5 years worth of foals that don't have papers & now must be registered all at once.

Breeders who do not register their foals each years generally hurt no one but themselves.

Not my problem or concern--I will have one AMHR baby in 2012 and that one will be registered before it's a year old, just like always.


----------



## vvf (Jan 8, 2012)

LaVern said:


> You are absolutely right about going to Walmart Did you know that for many years we were called the Walmart Registry. Some people didn't like it, but I did. Walmart, with good management became the biggest. In fact they even came up with the idea that if you want to do business with Sams Club you even pay to give them your money. Brilliant.



I am thinking the same thing about AMHR... They are Brilliant in doing this, It should bring in more revenue. (plus making it easier on the pocketbook of members) I like that. If I had any amha only horses right now, I would be taking advantage of it. JMHO, I would like to give a pat on the back who ever had this idea!


----------



## LaVern (Jan 8, 2012)

Minimor, I asked you how you would feel you didn't answer and it has been done before. How would you feel?

We don't have to close the registry to up the hard shipping fees in line with AMHA and ask for inspection, at least height and two balls.

Twenty head of horses went out of here in the last few weeks. No papers and good homes for fair money.

And we already have to pay a fee to give them our money, it is called our membership.


----------



## slv (Jan 8, 2012)

Renee, you have always been a highly respected breeder in this industry and I am sure you will continue to be. I wish this didn't bother you so bad, but obviously it does. It is a wonderful opportunity and savings for several people who take their breeding programs just as serious as you do. A horse is worth so much more than the set of papers that it carries, or at least they are to me. I don't really think there is any breeder out there that will hurt the registry financially or otherwise by boycotting and withholding their registrations. I truly hope that something is said or done by someone that can make you see the forest for the trees regarding this situation. That set of papers did not give your horses their conformation, brilliance and beauty. You did that with your breeding decisions. They will still be worth the same regardless of this hardship issue.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 8, 2012)

Oh, My Goodness SLV if there ever was a post that could make me change my mind on a subject that was it. I think I will start to cry. That was the nicest post I have ever read. And I agree, what I do with my little bunch will not make one bit of difference to the registry or to as how the board views straight AMHR breeders. But, I feel that I owe the little AMHR horse so much that I must make a stand for them. I too, have a few AMHA horses that I would save 3- 4 hundred dollars on. But what is that compared to having to face the girls and say well guess they still think your papers are worthless, even if you have produced National Grand Champions.


----------



## Field-of-Dreams (Jan 8, 2012)

LaVern said:


> Twenty head of horses went out of here in the last few weeks. No papers and good homes for fair money.


And this makes me sad. Twenty horses sold without papers. Sure, good homes NOW, but what about down the road? What happens if they can't keep them forever? What if the owners decide "hey, I wanna show in Mini shows now? Oops, no papers, can't show this guy, gotta get rid of him and get a registered horse to show..." IT HAPPENS.

Then said unregistered horse ends up on Craigslist, where someone like me sees him. OOOO, gorgeous horse, let me inquire about him!! Soorryy.... no papers! (Yes, I *have* bought horses from Craigslist- one is a gorgeous AMHA/AMHR Futurity nominated colt!)

You do your horses such a disservice withholding papers. And if you got "fair money" why waffle about TWENTY DOLLARS to register a weanling?? That "worthless" piece of paper _could_ save his life.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 8, 2012)

I can go visit them when I want and will see most of them next summer. Can most say that for those, they sell registered or not. If fact I got Christmas pictures from some of the not registered ones I sold 20 years ago.(same owners)

Neighbor has four up three year olds ready for next summer. I could send pictures of dozens and dozens of them all dolled up and driving and pulling.

I will stop now as I have tried hard enough to make my point. Oh, was going to add though, that the last time I brought this subject up I had a call from a former director of many years, who said I hope you don't think that I had anything to do with such stupidity, so at least I did not feel all alone.


----------



## Minimor (Jan 8, 2012)

I didn't specifically answer your question, Renee, because it is a moot point. I am quite sure that such a thing isn't going to happen...that they will open ASPC to and and all other breeds (and quite frankly if they did do that it wouldn't affect me in the slightest. I am not raising/selling ponies, and it would have no effect on me whatsoever! LOL I'm quite sure there are dozens of people who would have something to say about it but it would not affect me personally.



> But what is that compared to having to face the girls and say well guess they still think your papers are worthless, even if you have produced National Grand Champions.


 Truth is, "they" don't think the papers on AMHR horses are worthless at all--from everything that I have read here and heard from people I have talked to, there is only one person that thinks AMHR papers are worthless, and that is you.


----------



## slv (Jan 8, 2012)

I meant every word of it Renee. You have contributed so much to the breed. Don't throw in the towel now, over a registry or any other matter. Also take a deep breath and a walk through the pasture and look at all of those beautiful horses, don't let them or yourself down...now or ever!!!




They don't know or care what set of papers they have, and believe me, people will still buy them and respect your breeding program as much as they always have.


----------



## lil hoofbeats (Jan 8, 2012)

LaVern said:


> Minimor, I asked you how you would feel you didn't answer and it has been done before. How would you feel?
> 
> We don't have to close the registry to up the hard shipping fees in line with AMHA and ask for inspection, at least height and two balls.
> 
> ...


OK i always thought i was smart, and i was always told i had a high IQ, but dang!!!! i am just not getting this???

I think this will help the registry, and everyone involved, at least the way i think about it. Half price harshipping means people will take advantage and hard ship, then there will be more horses at shows, more registered, which i would think would mean more people wanting AMHR horses, and the value would increase???? That i would think would be a good thing????

As far as selling horses without papers, i only do that when i have been sold a horse that i am suspicious of parentage, or the papers just dont match. We guarentee all paper work from my farm, and guarentee all foals to parent qualify, therefore all paper work is a sure thing, if its bred and born at Lil Hoofbeats, I take pride in that.


----------



## Songcatcher (Jan 8, 2012)

I have stayed out of this debate until now as I can truely see both pros and cons to the idea. BUT, this statement is a slap in the face to every breeder who chooses to raise AMHA only registered horses:



LaVern said:


> .. Have we been downgraded so long that we can't get used to the fact that we are on top and that the AMHR is the one registry you have to have and they should be worth more than 100 dollars. They can be doubled or tripled or registered 20 times, but if you don't have AMHR you are in a pickle.


THAT is truely arrogant! All but one of my horses is double registered AMHA/AMHR, and I am on the fence as to whether or not I will hardship that BTU grand daughter in to AMHR or not. I have never had a problem with AMHR, but I do have a problem with breeders with an attitude like this that a horse is no good unless it is AMHR. It's hard to have much sympathy for your position when you so proudly insult other's horses.


----------



## bevann (Jan 8, 2012)

I so agree with Field of Dreams regarding horses being sold with no papers.IMO papers (if horses are born from registered stock)should go with the animal.Colts not to be used for breeding should be castrated etc.After reading all comments I SO wish people would stop fighting about which registry is better.We all need to work together to ensure the continued future of these amazing little creatures no matter which registry you favor.Each has it own merits and in some areas of the country 1 is better than the other.When I was actively breeding I made sure all my animals were double registered so no matter where they ended up they could be shown if the owner desired.I just hate to see the Mini with no papers and having to tell the newbie they can't show now that the kids have decided they want to show.(They bought from a breeder who neglected to give them all the facts about registries and show requirements.)Even many state fairs are now requiring that Minis be registered in AMHA or AMHR.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 8, 2012)

Songcatcher said:


> I have stayed out of this debate until now as I can truely see both pros and cons to the idea. BUT, this statement is a slap in the face to every breeder who chooses to raise AMHA only registered horses:
> 
> THAT is truely arrogant! All but one of my horses is double registered AMHA/AMHR, and I am on the fence as to whether or not I will hardship that BTU grand daughter in to AMHR or not. I have never had a problem with AMHR, but I do have a problem with breeders with an attitude like this that a horse is no good unless it is AMHR. It's hard to have much sympathy for your position when you so proudly insult other's horses.


I agree and I only do AMHR. IMO both AMHA and AMHR are just as valuable if not more so for AMHA due to them closing the registry. It may pay more to get a double registered horse but at the end I think more people will choose one or the other and I think more will go towards AMHR but not with this attitude. This topic certaintly shows that you don't want new people coming into our registry. Which is a shame because without its members AMHR wouldn't exist.

I also agree that giving away 20 unregistered horses just doesn't look positive. Unless they have problems to where they shouldn't be breeding or shown I always give papers. I think posting this topic saying that AMHR is hurting the breeders and that the AMHR horse is worthless now because of this sale and then go and sell 20 unregistered horses just doesn't make any sense. You may also need to take a step back and look at your breeding program perhaps breed for fewer horses to make it more affordable. I also don't get that you don't want to close the registry but you don't want to see the prices drop for just 1 year, whats a couple $100s going to change the value of an AMHR horse? Closing the registry would make your AMHR horse more valuable.

I just totally don't understand.


----------



## alongman (Jan 8, 2012)

I know Renee well, I own horses from Lucky Hart that have gone on to be instrumental in my own breeding program. To say it best, Renee has a strong opinion and you always know where and what she is thinking on a subject. For this, I admire you! I will admit, there are horses that are being hardshipped that do not have the conformation, pedigree, etc... to become the next great National Grand Champion. BUT, what if this "hardship" change allows one exhibitor to be cost-efficient and learn about the AMHR? I purchased one horse - one I could afford, and from that it has grown into a business for me.

Just to clarify, I do have one mare that is ASPC only registered, but I intend to register her into the AMHR and take advantage of the price cut. HOWEVER, in order for this to happen, she needs to 1) be measured and height verified by a steward and 2) be inspected by an AMHR carded judge for conformation, etc... and then the judge needs to sign saying that this animal is acceptable. I cannot simply send in my money and a piece of paper and get her AMHR papers. I do feel that the other registries should be handled the same (AMHA, Falabella) in order to preserve what breeders, like Renee, have been working to achieve.

I know I am rambling, but as a side note, I am a carded judge and have been asked to participate in the hardship inspection of horses during my career - I can honestly say that I take this as a huge job. I truly evaluate the animal and what it will contribute to the breed, it's conformation, etc... I can also honestly say that I have NOT signed every hardship inspection based on these feelings. I do not take my judging job lightly, so part of this responsiblity needs to fall on my peers (not just the AMHR/ASPC board) to hear your feelings as well so that they can make sound decision.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 8, 2012)

I was going to quit, but can't resist responding to songcatcher. I have never been accused of being arrogant, but if the shoe fits I will wear it gladly. I am so proud of where we have come with the AMHR horse that I just about burst with pride when I think back. If I sound arrogant - good - because the shoe is on the other foot now.

How many years of being put down, for our Only AMHR horses. Come on you old AMHA breeders, you remember. "Well if it goes over you can always put it in the Illinois outfit. They couldn't even say, AMHR out loud.

That is why I am so upset that our directors would do this. Why is it okay for AMHA to insist on inspecting our horses and charging 3 times as much? And then (they won't even acknowledge our pedigrees on their papers. That seems a little arrogant don't you think?

But I do think they are right about the inspections,we should do the same.


----------



## alongman (Jan 8, 2012)

LaVern said:


> Why is it okay for AMHA to insist on inspecting our horses and charging 3 times as much? And then (they won't even acknowledge our pedigrees on their papers. That seems a little arrogant don't you think?
> 
> But I do think they are right about the inspections,we should do the same.


I could be wrong, but I believe that THAT was the reason that the board decided to pursue this (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). They saw the AMHA has having some difficulties and not bringing in new faces/horses and were hoping to maybe draw in some more people to the AMHR. I would hate to think that the AMHR did this only as a quick money maker.


----------



## lil hoofbeats (Jan 8, 2012)

OK i totally do not get this thread, people are upset that the AMHR cut harshipping fees in half? right?

They are saying that that devalues the AMHR horses?

Freeland is mad because Lavern said the AMHR was the registry to be in???

The AMHR people are saying they were(past tense) the registry to be in??? but now they are not because of the hardship discount??

For some reason i am not understanding all this and why the discount to hardship your horse into AMHR is a big deal to some breeders?

Can someone clarify all this, because i have read this thread several times and i am sure i have missed something.

Can someone PM and tell me what is going on????


----------



## LaVern (Jan 8, 2012)

Yeah I'm getting confused too and I'm the one that is mad. Oh yeah, I am mad because they lowered the fees to hardship AMHR horses. And I am mad that they we don't have to inspect the AMHA and the Fallabella horses like they do the Shetland Ponies at three years old.


----------



## horsehug (Jan 8, 2012)

Lil Hoofbeats, I'd pm you if I had a clue, but I am also very confused.

Susan O.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 8, 2012)

Thank you Adam, for your explanation. It is not an easy process to bring the Shetlands into the AMHR. But I think a very good and fair way of doing it because of how it was designed. The using of Stewards and Judges makes it easier to implement and also there is the accountability factor. You just have to get to a show.


----------



## Mona (Jan 8, 2012)

Songcatcher said:


> I do have a problem with breeders with an attitude like this that a horse is no good unless it is AMHR. It's hard to have much sympathy for your position when you so proudly insult other's horses.


Songcatcher, the above quote by you is EXACTLY the way it used to be thought about AMHR horses by many AMHA supporters. They somehow felt that AMHA was the "elite" registry and the AMHR was a "trash only" registry that you would only register your horses with if they outgrew their AMHA papers. I experienced it myself first hand when I was just getting into minis about 18 years ago. Looking in from the outside, it really made me angry with those that said that to me. It was them that I felt were the very ARROGANT ones, not only to think or feel that way, but to come right out and state this to a total stranger, in trying to make a sale of one of their horses once they found out I was looking at several other farms as well.

And it was back around that same time, that I met Renee in person, for the first time. She went out of her way to welcome me to the mini horse world, and to offer help and advice on horses, but was not pushy nor belittling other breeders choices in which registry was "the" one to use. She even offered me the use of one of her stallions for a year to help me get started! I declined, but looking back now at the great success she has had, maybe I should have accepted that generous offer of hers!

Anyway, I guess I got a little off track, but my point that I wanted to make was to point out to Freeland that the way he feels reading these posts of Renee's is exactly the way we were made to feel about AMHR horses many years ago. What do they call it....KARMA???


----------



## slv (Jan 8, 2012)

LilHoofbeats....I perhaps would understand it more if it used to cost $2000 to hardship a mare and now it is $100, that is a significant difference. But honestly, if I have a horse that I think needs the AMHR registration papers, the current "full price" would NOT stop me. I think Renee is upset because she has devoted her entire program to AMHR horses and feels as though some how this devalues them. I don't understand that thought at all, but that is what I am getting from this thread. When we started in minis in 1997 the AMHR horses were only bringing about half the price of AMHA horses in our area. I have always made sure that my horses were all AMHA registered and most all of them are AMHA/AMHR. I do, however, have a few really nice mares that came from strictly AMHA breeders that I would like to add the AMHR papers to. I have never got into the politics of the registries. I am afraid if I did that I would not enjoy my horses nearly as much. I have supported both registries since our inception into the miniature horse business and will continue to do so. I have found that over the years, I personally have grown a little more partial to the AMHR registry for several reasons that I won't go into now. I also would like to see less of the "we and them" attitude and more of the us, but that is most likely "wishful thinking".


----------



## Tab (Jan 8, 2012)

I think the attempt is to help this breed during hard economic times. A double-registered horse has a higher value, and that will help many people. I think this is great if people are honest. It is just that change is so hard. People will somehow manage to corrupt a good thing.

I have mixed emotions, as minis are going back to American shetlands, and American shetlands are infused with hackney, and hackney are disappearing. It is happening, it doesn't matter how we feel, or how much we have forked over to the registries.

I really do think it will help with value though. A lot of people can't even spare $100 right now, so I'm not really seeing a problem. Especially since this is not going to be the same price or rule 20 years from now. These rules change constantly.


----------



## sfmini (Jan 8, 2012)

I am glad they are doing it, I got all but one horse registered from AMHA to AMHR before they "closed" the books by raising the price so high. Couldn't find her papers at the time, so skipped it.

While I have had many regrets at not getting her in, the price was too steep for me since we are 99% AMHA showing anyway. Now that I am trying to sell her, the lack of AMHR papers has been a headache to say the least so I am happy for the lower price and will be registering her AMHR at the new lower price for sure.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 8, 2012)

And we as AMHR members can't be the bigger person and not bash the other registeries or are we going to go down the same path that AMHA did and just lower ourselves even further?


----------



## Mona (Jan 8, 2012)

Jamie, I don't see anyone BASHING the registries, I am simply responding to Freeland's statement about being offended. All I am saying, is the way he feels about Renee and her feelings about this, is the same way many people (myself included) felt way back when. I did not say it was right nor did I say it was wrong. I said what I saw, and that now it seems to be a case of "what goes around, comes around". I am not against any registry, and was always an avid supporter of both, hardshipping into both as well on numerous occassions, BUT, like Renee said, if I had to have chosen only one registry, it would have been AMHR for me. Not because they were "better" horses, or more valuable, but because I appreciated that they did not toss out their horses papers that matured over 34" from under 34" parents, so therefore even if horses ended up maturing past th 34" they still had that to their credit. Sure, they may have matured over 38", and if that had happened, I would have lost them, but liked the 4" buffer zone between the A's and losing their papers. I was personally not too concerned as I was not breeding the taller end of the "B" division.


----------



## lil hoofbeats (Jan 8, 2012)

OK i think i have finally found the handle and can put a shovel in this dig!

Lavern, i understand why you state your anger, but i think you will be pleasantly surprised at how this might help the AMHR registry, by allowing people to get their foot in the door with a little discount. I think it will raise the popularity of the AMHR, and it will be come even more desirable for a horse to be AMHR! Thus boosting prices of AMHR horses! and your horses suddenly become _*even more*_ valuable then they were before this advertising boost done by AMHR. I can see this really working in your favor






I know i will personally take advantage of this price break and put a few of my AMHA only mares into it.

Over all i think i can see this as really good advertisement for the AMHR registry, and its breeders!

I hope you and everyone will benefit from this.

As far as i can see, i do not think there is a down side to this.


----------



## Songcatcher (Jan 8, 2012)

Mona said:


> Songcatcher, the above quote by you is EXACTLY the way it used to be thought about AMHR horses by many AMHA supporters. They somehow felt that AMHA was the "elite" registry and the AMHR was a "trash only" registry that you would only register your horses with if they outgrew their AMHA papers. I experienced it myself first hand when I was just getting into minis about 18 years ago. Looking in from the outside, it really made me angry with those that said that to me. It was them that I felt were the very ARROGANT ones, not only to think or feel that way, but to come right out and state this to a total stranger, in trying to make a sale of one of their horses once they found out I was looking at several other farms as well.
> 
> And it was back around that same time, that I met Renee in person, for the first time. She went out of her way to welcome me to the mini horse world, and to offer help and advice on horses, but was not pushy nor belittling other breeders choices in which registry was "the" one to use. She even offered me the use of one of her stallions for a year to help me get started! I declined, but looking back now at the great success she has had, maybe I should have accepted that generous offer of hers!
> 
> Anyway, I guess I got a little off track, but my point that I wanted to make was to point out to Freeland that the way he feels reading these posts of Renee's is exactly the way we were made to feel about AMHR horses many years ago. What do they call it....KARMA???


So, we now live in a world where two wrongs make a right? Too bad I didn't know Renee back when she had some dignity. Truth is, I was not into Miniatures of either breed at the time you are talking about. I don't appreciate being blamed for what someone else did years ago. I guess when you can sell 20 unregistered horses for a "good price" you don't have to worry what people on a public forum think about you.


----------



## Molly's Run Minis (Jan 8, 2012)

Field-of-Dreams said:


> And this makes me sad. Twenty horses sold without papers. Sure, good homes NOW, but what about down the road? What happens if they can't keep them forever? What if the owners decide "hey, I wanna show in Mini shows now? Oops, no papers, can't show this guy, gotta get rid of him and get a registered horse to show..." IT HAPPENS.
> 
> Then said unregistered horse ends up on Craigslist, where someone like me sees him. OOOO, gorgeous horse, let me inquire about him!! Soorryy.... no papers! (Yes, I *have* bought horses from Craigslist- one is a gorgeous AMHA/AMHR Futurity nominated colt!)
> 
> You do your horses such a disservice withholding papers. And if you got "fair money" why waffle about TWENTY DOLLARS to register a weanling?? That "worthless" piece of paper _could_ save his life.



agreed. papers could mean the difference between a horse getting a home and a horse going to slaughter. my stepdad has a friend that goes to a few horse auctions a year and he says unregistered minis are selling for an average of $50 right now. he actually outbid a kill buyer once a few yrs back for a skinny and blind black mare. she only cost him $120. and this was when the economy wasnt as bad as it is now! she ended up passing away a few months later from age. she was 25 when he bought her. he didnt even know till the vet checked her teeth! she was probably a 2 or 3 on the bcs. she was such a love, but he said he's never doin that again. he said, and i quote, "little beggers are to easy to get attached to' lol! wish i had pics to show but this was back in 04, none of us had cameras back then.


----------



## Minimor (Jan 8, 2012)

You know, I've only been in Minis for a wee bit over 10 years now. When I got my first ones I did see more than a little bit of a condescending attitude from some AMHA-only people. It didn't impress me much, but it also didn't make me feel inferior for having only AMHR horses. Honestly, I had horses I liked and I didn't want AMHA horses, I like them a little bit taller than 34". If some wanted to say that I didn't have "real miniatures" because they were over 34" and/or didn't have AMHA papers, well, that was up to them--not my problem. I bought one AMHA-only mare & transferred her papers into my name only because I wanted to use them to get her AMHR registration back in the day when that still cost only $50 extra. But, I am rambling....

What I set out to say is this: Now that AMHR is much more popular & highly regarded than it was a few years back, I see no reason why "AMHR people" should feel the need to belittle AMHA horses. If you didn't like being belittled before, why would you now turn around and do it to others--some of those others possibly never had anything to do with belittling AMHR and even those that did...well, like Freeland said, two wrongs never make a right. I rather think that it is better to be the bigger person and behave nicely toward even those who have wronged you.

I've been thinking this--anyone that believes a $100 discount on hardshipping fees will harm their breeding program or make their horses "worthless" should step back & take a good look at the situation. Please realize that what will harm a breeder the most is a bad attitude (specifically their own bad attitude) that results in a loss of respect from others in the industry. That's a very important thing to remember.


----------



## lil hoofbeats (Jan 8, 2012)

Minimor said:


> You know, I've only been in Minis for a wee bit over 10 years now. When I got my first ones I did see more than a little bit of a condescending attitude from some AMHA-only people. It didn't impress me much, but it also didn't make me feel inferior for having only AMHR horses. Honestly, I had horses I liked and I didn't want AMHA horses, I like them a little bit taller than 34". If some wanted to say that I didn't have "real miniatures" because they were over 34" and/or didn't have AMHA papers, well, that was up to them--not my problem. I bought one AMHA-only mare & transferred her papers into my name only because I wanted to use them to get her AMHR registration back in the day when that still cost only $50 extra. But, I am rambling....
> 
> What I set out to say is this: Now that AMHR is much more popular & highly regarded than it was a few years back, I see no reason why "AMHR people" should feel the need to belittle AMHA horses. If you didn't like being belittled before, why would you now turn around and do it to others--some of those others possibly never had anything to do with belittling AMHR and even those that did...well, like Freeland said, two wrongs never make a right. I rather think that it is better to be the bigger person and behave nicely toward even those who have wronged you.
> 
> I've been thinking this--anyone that believes a $100 discount on hardshipping fees will harm their breeding program or make their horses "worthless" should step back & take a good look at the situation. Please realize that what will harm a breeder the most is a bad attitude (specifically their own bad attitude) that results in a loss of respect from others in the industry. That's a very important thing to remember.


I agree!!!!! Especially about the two wrongs do not make a right part!!! Well written!


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 8, 2012)

Minimor said:


> You know, I've only been in Minis for a wee bit over 10 years now. When I got my first ones I did see more than a little bit of a condescending attitude from some AMHA-only people. It didn't impress me much, but it also didn't make me feel inferior for having only AMHR horses. Honestly, I had horses I liked and I didn't want AMHA horses, I like them a little bit taller than 34". If some wanted to say that I didn't have "real miniatures" because they were over 34" and/or didn't have AMHA papers, well, that was up to them--not my problem. I bought one AMHA-only mare & transferred her papers into my name only because I wanted to use them to get her AMHR registration back in the day when that still cost only $50 extra. But, I am rambling....
> 
> What I set out to say is this: Now that AMHR is much more popular & highly regarded than it was a few years back, I see no reason why "AMHR people" should feel the need to belittle AMHA horses. If you didn't like being belittled before, why would you now turn around and do it to others--some of those others possibly never had anything to do with belittling AMHR and even those that did...well, like Freeland said, two wrongs never make a right. I rather think that it is better to be the bigger person and behave nicely toward even those who have wronged you.
> 
> I've been thinking this--anyone that believes a $100 discount on hardshipping fees will harm their breeding program or make their horses "worthless" should step back & take a good look at the situation. Please realize that what will harm a breeder the most is a bad attitude (specifically their own bad attitude) that results in a loss of respect from others in the industry. That's a very important thing to remember.


Totally agree with you 100%.


----------



## Mona (Jan 8, 2012)

No, I am definitely NOT saying two wrongs make a right! I never have believed that about ANYTHING! I am merely trying to say that I know how it felt to be on the opposite end of that example that you shared in your post Freeland. I am not saying here that I agree with Renee, as I don't. I too think it is a wonderful opportunity for AMHR and it's members to have that available to them, but I just wanted to say, I can relate to how you said you felt in your post.


----------



## Nathan Luszcz (Jan 8, 2012)

I'm happy to own a hardshipped PtHA horse, who will never see AMHA/R papers and frankly, I don't give a dang.



Why do I need a piece of paper to show my pony is worth his weight in gold? He'll do all the shows I want with him, and I can avoid the whole drama of AMHA/R paperwork. Seems more hassle than anything else.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 8, 2012)

Holy crow, while I watched Desperate Housewives, I have taken the low road,bashed another registry, lost my dignity, and for sure sent my horses to the cannery, on top of being arrogant. Let's go ahead and add self-righteous. " It's tough being right".


----------



## Minimor (Jan 8, 2012)

Just a point of clarification - Falabella's have to go through the same inspection process as ASPC Shetlands to hardship into AMHR. AMHA is the only registry that does not have to be inspected.

I have learned this just today, from someone that is "in the know".


----------



## LaVern (Jan 8, 2012)

Really Minimor, I didn't know that. Guess, I'm not right about everything,huh.


----------



## Molly's Run Minis (Jan 8, 2012)

LaVern said:


> Holy crow, while I watched Desperate Housewives, I have taken the low road,bashed another registry, lost my dignity, and for sure sent my horses to the cannery, on top of being arrogant. Let's go ahead and add self-righteous. " It's tough being right".



LaVern, i must ask, how did you think the comment of you selling 20 unregistered minis in a seemingly short time would be taken, exactly? this forum is very passionate about whats best for the horse and, imo, you make it sound like your running a 'pony mill'. please, everyone, correct me if i'm wrong but thats how it sounds to me from what i've been reading here.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 9, 2012)

I had a phone call a minute ago, from a friend that said get off the forum, you are taking a beating, but why would I put something like this on a forum if I didn't want to stir something up. For Heaves Sake this is what we need, some passion and strong feelings.

You can only take so many pictures of Dwarfs and vulvas. We need controversy. So many have gotten scared off the Forum, because they get jumped all over by a few who think they know everything and off course it is only me that knows it all, until Minimor corrects me.

You say something like selling horses without papers and right away you are sending them to the cannery, You say something like not registering them and right away oh you will be sorry they are going to make a rule to catch you. You can't be afraid to say what you think. That used to be what the Forum was all about.


----------



## Minimor (Jan 9, 2012)

LaVern said:


> Really Minimor, I didn't know that. Guess, I'm not right about everything,huh.


Surprise, eh?

It's really very sad that you are hanging yourself here on this thread, and either you don't see it, or you simply don't care.

To correct you again...I never said that anyone would make a rule to catch you....I said you could get caught in a bind if the wrong rule change did come into effect.

I've seen it before in Morgans--when a breeder quits doing foal registrations annually, it is too often the beginning of the end. They quit registering, get years behind, and then never can get caught up again. But, that is your choice.


----------



## Molly's Run Minis (Jan 9, 2012)

LaVern said:


> I had a phone call a minute ago, from a friend that said get off the forum, you are taking a beating, but why would I put something like this on a forum if I didn't want to stir something up. For Heaves Sake this is what we need, some passion and strong feelings.
> 
> You can only take so many pictures of Dwarfs and vulvas. We need controversy. So many have gotten scared off the Forum, because they get jumped all over by a few who think they know everything and off course it is only me that knows it all, until Minimor corrects me.
> 
> You say something like selling horses without papers and right away you are sending them to the cannery, You say something like not registering them and right away oh you will be sorry they are going to make a rule to catch you. You can't be afraid to say what you think. That used to be what the Forum was all about.



you WANT this to happen? for hecks sake, why? all your doing is causing a big fight and it seems as though your also loosing your reputation. all that will happen is people will keep fighting with you and then the topic will be locked. trust me, i know this from past experiance


----------



## LaVern (Jan 9, 2012)

Molly, I guess I didn't even think about how that comment would be taken at all, just wanted to make a point that I don't need the registry to sell my horses. I have sold -horses ponies- with no papers for almost 40 years to pretty much the same people and and their friends and families. I know what they want and there is a line every fall for them. Sometimes if it doesn't work out they bring them back,in trade for another or if circumstances change I might have to board them for awhile( no charge) , they usually get past down to the next generation. I am not bragging, but I make a call and they come as soon as they can. I am pretty much the last of the old pony boys in the area.

Also I bet that there are at least 100 horses that I have registered and sold to "miniature people" that have never been transfered into there names. Maybe more than that.


----------



## chandab (Jan 9, 2012)

I will not comment, as I'd likely put my foot in my mouth, but I have read every post and find it all quite interesting. And, I learned a thing or two; like I didn't know Falabellas had to go through an inspection to be hardshipped.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 9, 2012)

Why would I not want to hear others opinions? A good discussion is not a fight. It is fun and you do learn things. Have we gotten so scared of saying the right thing, that we don't dare say anything.


----------



## Molly's Run Minis (Jan 9, 2012)

LaVern said:


> Why would I not want to hear others opinions? A good discussion is not a fight. It is fun and you do learn things. Have we gotten so scared of saying the right thing, that we don't dare say anything.


i've learned that when ML gets involved and says to cool it, that generally means its getting out of hand. which it kinda has. i would HIGHLY suggest you listen to your friend that called you. you've already lost a few 'fans' from what you've said. perhaps you should stop trying to rock the boat before you tip it....


----------



## LaVern (Jan 9, 2012)

I had turned this thing off, and was all curled up in bed when I got to thinking about loosing my reputation. I started to laugh so hard that I had to get up. I am afraid my reputation was lost years ago.


----------



## vickie gee (Jan 9, 2012)

chandab said:


> I will not comment, as I'd likely put my foot in my mouth, but I have read every post and find it all quite interesting. And, I learned a thing or two; like I didn't know Falabellas had to go through an inspection to be hardshipped.


Ditto that. Not the foot in mouth, but the reading and learning part.


----------



## kaykay (Jan 9, 2012)

What I respect about Renee is she has strong convictions and stands by them. And shes not afraid to voice her opinion no matter what.

Renee and I have got into some pretty lengthy and sometimes heated discussions, but I always learn from her and walk away better for it.

I have said for years I want to meet you in person and have coffee!

When this topic first came up from Renee, I said I totally get where shes coming from. I also totally get why the registry did it. I can clearly see both sides of this.

When I went to convention 09 I spoke out against the rule proposal to let any gelding hardship in. Why? Because that would be hugely bad for breeders that sell geldings and bad for the registry in general. It would further drive down the price of a gelding if anyone could hardship any gelding in. Bad bad bad.

This is not far off from that. Its the same but different.

I said then and I still think that there is a bigger reason this was done. AMHA is supposedly closing to hardshipping soon. Maybe AMHR did this to get all those people and then close the AMHR book? Could be a last chance sale? But I am just guessing.

Nothing wrong with a good debate but people need to stop making insulting comments to people personally and just stay on the topic.


----------



## Songcatcher (Jan 9, 2012)

Mona said:


> No, I am definitely NOT saying two wrongs make a right! I never have believed that about ANYTHING! I am merely trying to say that I know how it felt to be on the opposite end of that example that you shared in your post Freeland. I am not saying here that I agree with Renee, as I don't. I too think it is a wonderful opportunity for AMHR and it's members to have that available to them, but I just wanted to say, I can relate to how you said you felt in your post.


Sorry Mona. I mis-read you. I took it that you were defending Renee's attitude. My apologies.


----------



## alongman (Jan 9, 2012)

For those people who have attended ANY type of auction sale recently - can you tell me the prices that were seen on registered animals? I went to a public auction (not one of the highly publicized mini/shetland auctions) and saw REGISTERERED miniature horses selling for $10. TEN BUCKS!? Are you kidding me? The people sitting next to me were developing a "breeding program" based on these animals - the thing is, the animals WERE NOT bad..... I think Renee is making a decision on her spending as we all are during these economic hard times. Do I spend $20 on registration or save that money. From my knowledge of Renee and her animals, the ones who DO get registered are VERY much deserving of representing the breed, the ones who do not Renee feels need homes with other jobs (the ones who she feels won't measure easily, the ones that aren't as showy). I applaud the people on this forum who have stated the other jobs their "unregistered" horses have assumed - I too have placed an unregistered horse into a great home. He is now a pinto superstar with a young girl. I am proud of that fact and if she calls and wants another unregistered horse, then I hope that I have one for her (or I will send her to Renee). If the day comes that this girl chooses to sell her horse, what will become of him? I can't answer that, but I can say that I was careful to find him a home that will watch out for his best interest as it seems Renee has done as well.


----------



## Karen S (Jan 9, 2012)

Well, I'm one of those Shetland breeders that purchased a very nice Michigan bred mare that was small enough to be INSPECTED, MEASURED, and sign off on by the head of the ASPC/AMHR Stewards and a very well respected Judge that also raises both Miniatures and Shetlands. Unfortunately I HAD to pay the higher "Hardship" price of $200 to have that already Shetland registered mare AMHR papered. She so far was the only one that we had that met these strict requirements. I personally would have LOVED to have had the opportunity to pay the 1/2 price hardshipping fee, but I like many others, saved my money up and paid the higher fee. This mare is now bred to a AMHR National Unanimous Grand Champion Stallion and will probably throw an awsome foal that will be the next AMHR National Grand Champion when it grows up.

Karen


----------



## LaVern (Jan 9, 2012)

Good Morning, Kay Kay you have got to come for coffee. I bet we could laugh till our tummies hurt. I got a big bag of Dunkin Donut coffee for Christmas.

It says to put a heaping tablespoon per 6 oz cup. Wow, It takes me back to 67 in San Fransico.

Back to topic. I can sure see that others do not feel like I do. I don't mean to bash AMHA. I run a lot of AMHA horses. And I think they do so many things better than AMHR does. How they show them and inspections and the DNA.

But, I stand by my belief that the lowering of the hardship fee, while it may be good individually, reinforces the belief, why should I do all that AMHR paper work. Don't bother you can always slap them in later if you need to.

I was so glad to find out that the Fallaballa must be inspected. I feel all horses hard shipped in should be. Most smaller breeders that I know have already done it. But there are still a few big timers that still scoff at it. And I can imagine how they would feel if there 32 inch horses all of a sudden became a B in AMHR.


----------



## Sandee (Jan 9, 2012)

I was going to just lurk on this but here I go foot into mouth. I'm not a big, not even a "little", breeder. I SHOW because I love to show. IMO (which is worth about 2 cents), I would NEVER buy a horse that is not registered. If my mare turns out to be bred, I'll register the foal as I would never sell a horse that was not registered. That's just how much I believe in the AMHR registery. If it's not good enough to show and/or breed, then the horse has no value to me.

I paid a ton of money for a baby years back that I couldn't get 1/2 that for now even though she has HOFs and will do everything. But if I hadn't paid a lot for her, when she was very sick I might have opted to have her put down instead of paying the vet bill. I also want to be sure all my horses are trained to drive and whatever else they show a talent for be it hunter or halter as I want them to be valued beyond just the fact they can "reproduce" for money!

I was raised with unregistered riding horses that were good for little else than crawling on to ride the pasture. But we don't live that way any more. There aren't large pastures with places to explore so I've turned to showing. I love my horses. I'm passionate about my horses. I realize that not everyone has the same goals as I do as I said this is MO. Maybe we should all realize that.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 9, 2012)

I know that so many feel that a horse has no use without its papers, and that you are doing the horse a disservice not to register it. I disagree, but respect your opinions. In fact I sometimes think that we do a disservice to some horses when we paper them. A miniature horse with papers is sometimes more likely to be bred no matter what the quality.

Which brings me to someone, that many consider to be one of the premiere breeders of ASPC/AMHR

Years ago, I would visit with Audrey Barret (I don't know if I spelt her name right.) She was so nice and invited me to her home and gave me advise. The kids were little so I couldn't go, but oh, I wish I could have. One of the things I remember her telling me, was that if she wasn't satisfied with a pony she gave it away. She did not sell it to be a breeding animal she just gave it away. And did not incorporate it into her herd. Now that is breeding and that is culling. It might seem harsh, but that is how you improve. Save the best and find homes for the rest. Look at the legacy she left.

Man I wish I would have listened to her better and not put my name on half of the horses I have.


----------



## bfogg (Jan 9, 2012)

I think there is one thing we can all agree on is why we got these little loves in the first place.

We just love them!!!!!!!!!!

So maybe we can just agree to disagree on some things.But agree that we all come from the position that our horses have our heart strings, so we are all good meaning people when it comes to them. We all want to just be happy and love our horses and keep them to the best of our ability.

We have proven on this forum we are a family and like a family we will bicker now and then.

But in the end we are a family and we need to remember to be kind and play nice.






Hugs

Bonnie


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 9, 2012)

Nevermind


----------



## tagalong (Jan 9, 2012)

We have given away horses that were not to be in the breeding program and yet were still very nice individuals - but I wish they had all gone with papers. Why? Because when we are overrun with horses of all sizes as the auctions can demonstrate... at least if they have their papers with them, they have a past. They have history. They have a name. They have a reason that someone might think better of them. It showed that someone cared. IMO those papers are their best ticket for a future. WIthout them, they are just more of the terrified, nameless minis that go through the auction marts - or that you see running wild and untouched in someone's back field. If mini breeders all followed the ways of the responsible dog breeders who feel they are responsible for a pup for his entire life - and that if he is ever unwanted or needs to be rehomed, that he WILL come BACK to them.. well, if we had that approach, we would all be better off. Including the horses.

Somewhere out there is an AMHA/AMHR show gelding who also did well as a junior stallion. Once he became a gelding and the next show season was over, he and his full brother were given away. I had no idea where they went - I was not at home when they left. I have heard that they had been passed on through two other homes - and then split up... and now the trail is cold. That gelding could walk in the ring this year and still do very well. Where is he now? No way to know. Will someone look at him and see what he is? I hope so. IMO his papers should have gone with him.



> What do they call it....KARMA???


Karma? Why even go that route? Why can one not just see the good about both registries without the sneering, sniping and snapping - that got old a very long time ago.

Speaking of A Long Time Ago.... way back when, AMHA had the only decent shows in our area. R shows were rather ragtag and still stumbling along. We were in an AMHR halter class back then with our immaculately turned out AMHA/AMHR mare - and yet the horses on either side of us were poorly groomed and in bad weight. Some of the handlers were in there in dirty jeans and T shirts - and this was a "big" show. When our mare won the class, some people complained about politics (as usual) instead of considering the horses themselves and the presentation. There was a huge chasm between the two kinds of shows then - at least in our area and where friends lived and showed as well.

Slowly the R shows in our area began to catch up to the A shows... and things improved all across the board to where things stand today. But I confess I get sick and tired of the R is Better - no - A is better crap that so many of these threads dissolve into.


----------



## bluerogue (Jan 9, 2012)

LaVern said:


> I know that so many feel that a horse has no use without its papers, and that you are doing the horse a disservice not to register it.


Renee, I don't respond to a lot of threads here for varying reasons (usually time related), but I felt it important enough to respond here. First, I LOVE your program, and what you produce. Your program is outstanding not only for the consistant quality of your horses, but also for the ideals you stand by with your program. I wish I had more space and money so I would be able to add some of your success to my own program.

In some ways I'm on the fence about papers, as you can't breed them, you can't love them, and you can't spend time with them. However, they do help raise value on horses, prove ancestry, and allow showing in various venues. I think papers are important, but it's also an individuals choice whether or not to take advantage of them. So many people don't update the papers it makes it difficult. I've sold horses on applications before, but I've always supplied the apps with the horse. If they choose not to send it in because they just want a pet, and papers aren't important, they can change their mind at a later date (provided they don't lose the app!).

As far as the fighting versus discussion issue, I think it comes from a matter of perspective. You are a strong minded person, and some people tend to take statements more seriously than you meant them. I've run into this myself, and it can cause chaos if left alone long enough. I'm a pretty sensitive person, so this kind of thing hits me hard sometimes. I have to admit, when I first read some of the posts in this thread, it very much did come off as fighting. It has started to settle into discussion now, which is a good thing. People are passionate about their horses, and no one wants to be "insulted" (quoted because I saw a number of people make comments that implied they felt this way).


----------



## LaVern (Jan 9, 2012)

Yes, that is true. Some people are very sensitive and I am not. I love when people tell me exactly how they feel.


----------



## disneyhorse (Jan 9, 2012)

I don't understand where all the animosity is coming from, from a simple discount in fees? There is also something called tact, which is hard enough to convey with the written word and thats why people get flustered often.

I just fail to see why a horse is magically worth something if a handful of people can pay $200, but automatically worth nothing if that handful of people pay $100 less. $100 in the grand scheme of things is chump change, it's a tank of gasoline.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 9, 2012)

There is no animosity, on my part anyway. If so many people think that it is good thing to drop the fee, than I had better accept it as the wishes of the whole. I don't have to agree, but you don't always get what you want. Thats life. But I think it is a good thing to let people know where you stand,if you feel strongly about something.


----------



## slv (Jan 9, 2012)

This is a little off topic, but not really. It justifies registration to me in any case, with the exception of dwarfs, of course. I purchased a bred mare in 2000 and in 2001 she foaled a pet quality stud colt. I sold that colt to a good home on application, they gelded him and he is their pet. Same mare, colt in 2002 that was better quality than the other, but still just a colt. The same people bought him, gelded him and he is their third miniature. Long story short and four "unregistered" colts later I decided to offer the mare for sale. I had a very difficult time selling this very pretty "Blue Boy" granddaughter because the studbook showed NO foals for the past five years. I didn't take a lot of photos back then and it was really just my "word"....I have found that people really want to see proof and some buyers put a lot of emphasis on the Studbook. I finally got the mare sold, but for less than I gave, of course...LOL..But I always register my foals. I try to get photos by at the very latest one week of age and send them on in, because it is so worth that $20 to me to prove that this mare can produce foals. Just my thoughts and what I learned from my experience.


----------



## HGFarm (Jan 9, 2012)

I didnt know about the Falabellas and hardshipping but AMHA does require inspection to hardship, along with DOUBLE DNA, photos, etc....

I just dont understand how my AMHA horse, who was hardshipped AMHR, would become less valued whether I paid $100 or $200 to get her AMHR papers? She is still double registered. Did it change her conformation? Her show records? Make her a better broodmare? She is still the same horse. Since I paid $200 to get her hardshipped, she must be of MUCH greater value now than if I had gotten a discount on her registration fee?





I just don't get all the hoopla about the discounted fee and making horses 'worthless'. How about increasing the value of the nice horse that was just hardshipped in from another registry? Are people afraid of more competition?

I just don't see how it's a negative thing or making anyone else's horses worth less- unless they are sold without papers period. Now there's something that makes them worth a lot less. Since it's only a few bucks to register a foal, does that mean the foal is only worth a few bucks? LOL


----------



## Mona (Jan 10, 2012)

Songcatcher said:


> Sorry Mona. I mis-read you. I took it that you were defending Renee's attitude. My apologies.


No problem.



I wasn't agreeing with Renee's opinion, but I do respect her right to feel so strongly about it.



tagalong said:


> Karma? Why even go that route? Why can one not just see the good about both registries without the sneering, sniping and snapping - that got old a very long time ago.


Since you quoted me, I am assuming you are referring to me as being "one" that you mentioned in your post, so with that in mind, I will respond as if it were so.

I most certainly DO see the good in BOTH registries! I always have. You are basing that statement on my past involvement regarding CARE, but you obviously didn't know enough about me, my thoughts or preferences if you feel that I do not see the good in both registries! I have ALWAYS supported both. I have spent thousands of $$ in AMHA....far more than I ever spent in AMHR. If I was so dead set against them, as you seem to think I was/am, they certainly would not have gotten my money, and THAT you can be sure of.


----------



## Riverrose28 (Jan 10, 2012)

I've read the orginal post three times and it seems to me that you are upset because the AMHA horses are being hardshipped in without inspection, is this correct? Maybe I'm confused, so correct me if I'm wrong. I am also one of those old time AMHR breeders and have bought many AMHA only horses then turned around and hardshipped them into AMHR, because I seem to like the 35 to 36" minis and they therefore lose their AMHA papers. So what does that leave me with AMHR registered straight up minis. Are you saying that they are now going to go down in value? I also know I haven't kept up with all the latest trends as far as showing goes, and the horse that the judges are now looking for in the ring, but hope to in the future if I live long enough. Help me out here, do I sell all my AMHR horses as pets, even they are Champions. PLease let me know so I don't spend any more of our hard earned money cause I was planning on hardshipping two AMHA mares that I have now into AMHR.


----------



## kaykay (Jan 10, 2012)

> Years ago, I would visit with Audrey Barret (I don't know if I spelt her name right.) She was so nice and invited me to her home and gave me advise. The kids were little so I couldn't go, but oh, I wish I could have. One of the things I remember her telling me, was that if she wasn't satisfied with a pony she gave it away. She did not sell it to be a breeding animal she just gave it away. And did not incorporate it into her herd. Now that is breeding and that is culling. It might seem harsh, but that is how you improve.


So wish I had met her. I have always heard she was ruthless in her culling which is why her ponies were so wanted.

I LOVE Dunkin Doughnuts coffee! Yep we would for sure laugh until our stomach hurt. But you know first we would have to have a nice debate.

I agree it hurts that to hardship in my ASPC Shetland (that was never supposed to have to hardship) I have to jump through the hoops of having a judge and steward but an AMHA horse just goes right in. Heck I have my last AMHA mare still here. First mini I ever bought and she went over 34" Just because a horse is AMHA doesnt mean it will stay under.

I still feel the solution to all of this is to close the book and stop all hardshipping. Hmm wonder how that would go over? Surely if AMHA really closes (which I think is crazy for them) We will at least close our studbook to AMHA horses.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 10, 2012)

I guess I have to learn to me more tactful as to how I say things. Someone called and said I should have said, it like this. From a business point, if you have a wonderful proven, product that everyone wants, why lower the price? Most business would have said, "Get em now before the price goes up".

I have a feeling that this post will bring in more registrations, as I think they said it is for just one year. So I'll say it," Get em now before the price goes up", unless the drop it next year.


----------



## kaykay (Jan 10, 2012)

Keep in mind though in a down economy everyone is doing what they can to survive.

I think a lot of people do not realize how down registrations etc are at the home office. Hours of office personnel have been cut back, positions not filled etc due to the lack of work.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 10, 2012)

kay kay. I didn't know that, but feared it was coming. And my pile of papers sitting in my file, don't help. But I guess it is the only way, I can make a stand. I don't think it is only the economy though, I think that so many AMHR breeders feel that they can't compete show wise or market wise unless they have the Shetland influence, so they have sort of given up.

I go back and forth about closing it up, though.

Maybe one thing that I think would help, would be to show the doubles ASPC/AMHR at Congress.


----------



## Riverrose28 (Jan 10, 2012)

LaVern said:


> kay kay. I didn't know that, but feared it was coming. And my pile of papers sitting in my file, don't help. But I guess it is the only way, I can make a stand. I don't think it is only the economy though, I think that so many AMHR breeders feel that they can't compete show wise or market wise unless they have the Shetland influence, so they have sort of given up.
> 
> I go back and forth about closing it up, though.
> 
> Maybe one thing that I think would help, would be to show the doubles ASPC/AMHR at Congress.


That's a great idea, and I've said that before, problem is AMHR is a pony registry and won't go for it. Just my opinion, and it has been discussed on this forum before.

You are right about those of us with straight minis making a decision on giving up, I've thought about it lots the last 10 years since we can't compete halter wise against the ASPC/AMHR horses, but havn't done it yet. I do have a plan put together if the economy gets better and my health holds up.


----------



## Minimor (Jan 10, 2012)

I posted a little while back about how much the registration numbers are down...don't remember what they are offhand, but seems to me they're down 5000/year as compared to a few years ago...would have to go back & look up that post to have the exact numbers.

I would suspect (or at least hope) that much of that reduction is due to breeders realizing that they have been producing far more horses than the market can support and so have cut back on their numbers. If you're raising 50 foals per year and can sell only 20 of those, then you have 2 choices--keep the remaining 30 or give them away. The first choice means the breeder will have an awful lot of horses on his hands at the end of 5 years; the second choice must surely seem rather pointless after a time (what is the point of raising foals merely for the purpose of giving them away year after year?)--and so people cut back on the numbers of foals they are producing.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 10, 2012)

Either the plus side of fewer registrations is possibly more people are breeding less, which is not a bad thing. But the reality is probably people just aren't registring those foals. More people are reducing their herds, more people have stopped breeding, simply because they can't afford it. I know for myself I only have 3 geldings, I no longer breed and the most paperwork I did was send in 1 paper to get updated to pernament, recieved my membership and amateur card. Thats it. For 2012 I have nothing to pay for except membership and amateur card unless I buy another horse which probably won't happen for this year. I used to be a member of both AMHA and AMHR but paying for both membership fees and doing paperwork in both it gets too expensive so I chose AMHR cause thats what I show in. I still think the shows are strong which is a good thing. I think more people are choosing showing over breeding which is great.

2 of my geldings are AMHR only. Do I see them as any less because they aren't AMHA registered, no. One is a National Champion and multi National Top 10 and the other is a multi National Top 10 winner. My other gelding he was only AMHA registered when I bought him and I hardshipped him into AMHR back when it was $50 and I showed him in AMHR. Does that mean he has less value because he was hardshipped into AMHR. Lets see he is a Reserve National Champion, National Top 5, and Hall of Fame in Obstacle. No I don't think so. Instead of looking at what piece of paper they have we need to see what they can bring to the registry.


----------



## tagalong (Jan 10, 2012)

> I most certainly DO see the good in BOTH registries! I always have. You are basing that statement on my past involvement regarding CARE, but you obviously didn't know enough about me, my thoughts or preferences if you feel that I do not see the good in both registries! I have ALWAYS supported both. I have spent thousands of $$ in AMHA....far more than I ever spent in AMHR. If I was so dead set against them, as you seem to think I was/am, they certainly would not have gotten my money, and THAT you can be sure of


*Mona* - I was not referring to you or any specific person or topic - just the general AMHA vs. AMHR arguments and sneering that have gone on here. Those arguments are tiresome, pointless and go nowhere... and yet they persist.

It is often lame things like how some have crowed about there being more horses at Nationals than Worlds so that means AMHR is better than AMHA... well, it would make sense seeing as AMHR has both Under and Over divisions - thus more horses can enter.

It just gets really old.


----------



## ahrobertspony (Jan 10, 2012)

LaVern said:


> Maybe one thing that I think would help, would be to show the doubles ASPC/AMHR at Congress.



Ummm ... this is already happening. There are already Miniature-registered ponies that go to both shows each year. After all, they do carry both sets of papers. As long as they meet the qualifications for showing, then it is within their right to do so.

Or, is this in terms of offering special classes? Sorry ... there is a whole list of pony classes already missing from the Congress and the schedule is tight. Long-time option pony classes need to go in at the pony championship first. If we are talking about special "mini" classes for double registered, then those need to happen at Mini Nationals.

Some of this conversation reminds me of old-time breeder conversations I've heard over the years debating the size of breeding programs. Some breeders take the position that they MUST have a very large breeding program in hopes of breeding one or two good ones a year. In that case, then there are often many, many other foals that have to be dealt with every year. Selling them off to friends, family or at sales with no papers is nothing new. However, it is laughable to anyone who takes the OTHER side of that debate about the size of the breeding program. There are some breeders out there who have raised champion after champion NEVER having raised more than 5 - 7 foals max any year and often raising even fewer than that. Seems like sticking w/ the excellent but small theory would be the way to go ... you'd never have to dump many unregistered animals ... you'd never have several have to save up to hardship if there wasn't a sale ... and you'd still have as many champions on the historical champions list as the more-is-better folks.


----------



## Minimor (Jan 10, 2012)

> Some breeders take the position that they MUST have a very large breeding program in hopes of breeding one or two good ones a year.


Do people really call that a breeding program?


----------



## LaVern (Jan 10, 2012)

Okay, guess that was not a good idea. No room for more ponies at Congress.

Let's see raise only 3-4 all champion horses a year. Darn I'm trying, but it has taken a long time to figure out which lines give me those winners. Not a long time in the grand scope, but a long time for me. Most of the miniatures have not been around long enough to give me that constancy. Buckeroo better than most, I feel. I know that there are people that say that all of theirs are winners but it doesn't happen for me. Most could do okay if they only had to compete with a few horses, but not when they have to beat 40-50 of the top.

So we are supposed to cut back, and only have a few good ones, but that is not good for the office,they need money.

How about this. Now, that we have about broke the miniatures back,by breeding her too often and by ridding her too hard, lets give her a rest and come up with a new pony to ride. Lets take that Show Pony the one that you just have to have one parent be a Miniature or Shetland and let them be breedable and have classes at Nationals. They could be like the Half Bloods. Can you picture some of those little Arab Welsh Crosses, crossed with the B miniatures or Shetlands. Whoa.

I'm just being silly.


----------



## disneyhorse (Jan 10, 2012)

La Vern... I strongly suggest you pay attention to the AMHR registry as a whole... If you check out the ASPC, aspr, nspr.... You will see that some of these "ideas" you have are actually already in progress. You CAN show ASPC/amhr horses at congress. There IS a registry for half blood mini or Shetland ponies.


----------



## kaykay (Jan 10, 2012)

Dang it Renee just when we are getting a long for once you have to go and bring Shetlands into it LOL.



> I think that so many AMHR breeders feel that they can't compete show wise or market wise unless they have the Shetland influence, so they have sort of given up.


I don't think that is a big reason of why transfers, registrations, memberships etc are down. I definitely think its the economy and member dissatisfaction. That dissatisfaction could be politics, prices, policies etc.

Any horse with AMHR papers is a miniature horse and entitled to compete. If you cannot beat what is winning you must breed something that can beat what is winning. Whether the background of that horse is Shetland, (wait they all have that dont they?) Falabella or AMHA, makes no difference. I have seen horses of all different "backgrounds" win.

As to Congress, well they did stick a classic under under class (some referred to this as the "mini" Congres class) in there but it didn't get a lot of entries. So I guess they can stick classes in there when they want to. (they being the Board)


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Jan 10, 2012)

I see what you are trying to say Renee and have not read this whole thread yet but I can say believe me inspections do not mean much.

There are quite a few ASPC now AMHR registered horses that many would question are even close to 38 inches. And they were inspected

I have always felt that the influx of Shetlands (which by the way I own and love) would change AMHR and not for the better.

While this interest is a benefit to ASPC breeders at the moment and perhaps the immediate future I am sure it will take it's toll on them as well as AMHR breeders.

We have not been a registry to think solidly with plans for the future. And that does not seem to be changing much

Like it or not the facts are the facts and there is a reason why the Shetland market crashed and call them a mini and it flourished. Right or not, logical or not - based in fact or not.. the general public does not want Shetlands if they did that registry would be as big as AMHR and to become a registry of minis that everyone believes (again correctly or not- - realizing they are all one and the same or not) is Shetland will take its toll and I feel it has already started. Perhaps not in that small percentage that show but that small percentage has and will never be the bread and butter of ASPC/AMHR


----------



## LaVern (Jan 10, 2012)

Oh Kay Kay, I didn't mean to bring the Shetlands into it, in a bad way. they have proven that they are what many people and the judges like. I'll keep plugging along, but many I know are not willing to flip flop and so have dropped out and just keep a few minis around for fun.

I love my new look, and pretty much will go with one line, but I don't think the judges will,be crazy about them. (Not for awhile anyway) And Disneyhorse I will try to become more informed before I shoot my mouth off.

This has been a hoot, but must go do my stud reports.


----------



## Minimor (Jan 10, 2012)

> Like it or not the facts are the facts and there is a reason why the Shetland market crashed and call them a mini and it flourished. Right or not, logical or not - based in fact or not.. the general public does not want Shetlands if they did that registry would be as big as AMHR and to become a registry of minis that everyone believes (again correctly or not- - realizing they are all one and the same or not) is Shetland will take its toll and I feel it has already started.


Have you considered this: That the decrease in registrations the past year or two is in no way related to the increased popularity of the Shetland/Mini? Perhaps it is just that the Miniature horse is a fad that has reached its zenith and is now starting to wane?
Yes, a fad. When the Shetland market crashed, the breeders renamed their ponies and marketed them as Miniature Horses. Those small ponies became an exotic animal--a novelty--a fad. A rose by any other name is still a rose....and Miniature horses were still ponies, even if it were taboo to actually say that. In the past 10 years Miniature horses have lost their status as an exotic animal, and they too have been dropping in price. Is that because of the sheer numbers of them that are available? (Probably that has a lot to do with it.) Is it now due to the poor economy? (No doubt that does also have a major effect.) Is it because they are becoming ponies again? (For some that is probably a factor.) Or is it just that the Miniature Horse was a fad that is fading away? (Good possibility of that too--mood rings, bell bottom pants and sideburns have all had their day...and then disappeared. Okay, so some of those are styles not really fads, but they work about the same!




Bell bottom pants did try a come back a little while back but they never really got hold the 2nd time around.

Here are the numbers I posted awhile back about declining registrations for AMHR:



> Of real interest is comparing FY 2002 to FY 2011 - in FY 2002 there were 10311 new AMHR registrations and only 5663 in FY 2011. If my math is right that is a decrease of 45.1%.


ASPC registrations in FY 2011 - 1094. The ASPC is 20% of the registrations for, which is a vast improvement over 2002 when they were 11.4% of registrations. (Mind you, the ASPC numbers haven't really varied much in 20 years....I think I've been told that ASPC registrations were around 1000 per year 20 and 10 years ago, and they are still right around 1000--or almost 1100--in 2011.)


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 10, 2012)

~Lisa~ said:


> I see what you are trying to say Renee and have not read this whole thread yet but I can say believe me inspections do not mean much.
> 
> There are quite a few ASPC now AMHR registered horses that many would question are even close to 38 inches. And they were inspected
> 
> ...


I agree with what you are saying Lisa. I feel like we have lost members because of such a high influence of the AMHR/ASPC ponies. Perhaps cutting the hardship fees in half is a way to try and bring back those members who went to AMHA because they were not liking the way AMHR was becoming.

I personally did not like it, but the quality of miniatures has improved so much for the past few years I think for the better. Until AMHR decides to close the registry we have to stop looking at AMHR as a breed registry and look at it like a height registry, and just like my comment before about accepting AMHA horses is just a piece of paper doesn't prove what that horse will bring to the registry can be said the same about the ASPC papers. I would love to see AMHR close its books and decide to become a breed, should it be done right now, no, lots more planning needs to happen and decide which route the AMHR horse is going. I'm still young so I hope to see it some day lol.

Some say how would those ASPC breeders would feel if they decide to open up their books and accept other shetlands. It just doesn't work that way, the ASPC is a recgonized breed. AMHR is just a height registry. They have worked towards closing it when they closed it to unregistered horses that aren't registered with AMHA, ASPC, and Fabella so new horses coming in is limited but I just don't see much difference between a height registry vs a color registry. Pinto accepts many horses that have the required pinto coloring and they even have breeding papers who aren't pinto.


----------



## sdmini (Jan 10, 2012)

My issue with this is pretty simple. We have such a glut of AMHR horses currently how can cheapening the hardship fee be good for any body in the long run. I opposed the lesser gelding fee for the same reason. What drive is there to buy a already AMHR horse when you can get one into AMHR for so cheap? On the flip side from a AMHR business stand point it makes sense. All associations are seeing a drop in foals registered, every horse AMHR hardships not only has that $$ but the money from any foals registration as well. This is a money drive nothing else for AMHR, not saying it's a bad thing but let be real here. If AMHR wanted to give it's members a break because of the economy it would be better done in the form of $5 off foal registrations, $10 off renewals etc. I've discussed it with people that believe it was done to lure new members into AMHR. In the ten pages I have not read one post that said that they have never had anything to do with AMHR before but because of this incentive they now planned on registering their herd AMHR or start showing AMHR so I think that avenue is quite limited at best. For those select people that have not had _anything_ to do with AMHR up until this point I don't think it's the hardship cost that has stopped them. It wasn't that long ago that for $60 you could get ANY horse a set of AMHR papers.

I recently hardshipped a horse into AMHR, she is five and lets give a conservative five foals from her in her life span, at $200 that is only that I expect a return of $40 more a foal. Considering how little $40 gets you with horses I have never thought that AMHR's hardship fee was outrageous. I have hardshipped into AMHA as well, at that same five foal figure I need a return of $120+ a foal and I still thought it was worth doing.

Individually, short term, yes I think it's great for the bottom line; AMHR business aspect yes again good idea; as an industry on whole no I don't think it's a good idea.


----------



## kaykay (Jan 10, 2012)

> Oh Kay Kay, I didn't mean to bring the Shetlands into it, in a bad way. they have proven that they are what many people and the judges like. I'll keep plugging along, but many I know are not willing to flip flop and so have dropped out and just keep a few minis around for fun.I love my new look, and pretty much will go with one line, but I don't think the judges will,be crazy about them. (Not for awhile anyway) And Disneyhorse I will try to become more informed before I shoot my mouth off.
> 
> This has been a hoot, but must go do my stud reports.


Okay now I am really confused I thought you bought some ASPC/AMHR horses?

I don't know it seems like an easy whipping post to blame all issues on Shetland ponies. For sure it keeps people from trying to see what other issues there are. And it keeps us all divided which I think is the way many Board members like it. We keep playing right into their hands.

Anyway, I have always been shocked that members do not try to get the AMHR book closed. Really I do mean shocked. All this talk of stopping the Shetlands etc etc. Close the book!

But you never see anyone try to get that accomplished? So strange to me. Honestly I thought about 5 years ago the AMHR book would be closed by now if for no other reason than to stop the Shetlands from hardshipping in.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 10, 2012)

Oh, yeah I forgot about them. Ah- I sort of gave them away. They just didn't fit in. Very Very Very Good Show People Homes and with Papers.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 10, 2012)

How would you begin to close it Kay?


----------



## Karen S (Jan 11, 2012)

Pretty Easy really...

January 1, 2018, books will closed to ALL hardshipping of miniatures coming from ASPC, AMHA & Falaballa.

This gives ALL breeders time to do what they need or want to and then after that day, zoom, no more. Books closed period. Six years out to prepare and no one can say they were caught with their pants down!

Karen


----------



## kaykay (Jan 11, 2012)

I would add one more thing to what Karen said. You would probably need a real breed standard instead of the vague one given right now for AMHR miniatures.


----------



## Minimor (Jan 11, 2012)

I'm not sure what a more detailed standard of perfection will accomplish. The existing one already describes good conformation without giving a specific type...and if it becomes more detailed to describe an exact type there are going to be many unhappy people--because any specific description will leave out a good many horses.

However, you could have a more specific description, even describing a very specific type, and no one will recognize it for what it is anyway...

Here is the Morgan standard of perfection: Morgan Standard It is very specific, and perfectly describes the diagram on the page. So, we have a detailed description and a diagram....and do you know how many Morgans--show ring champions!--there are that do not resemble this description?


----------



## disneyhorse (Jan 11, 2012)

Just find it interesting that people don't want an "extreme looking/moving Shetland type" yet when I tell people I have Shetlands, even horse people, they all immediately picture a fat, hairy, stumpy kid's pony. They are always shocked when they see them and say in photos they look to be Arab sized.

So it's no wonder people in the show ring want more refinement and movement. The American Shetland bloodlines easily contribute these qualities through a gene pool that's a little older and a bit more free from the period of time when minis were bred for small size only with less regard to movement or conformation.

To me, the "foundation type" mini was simply a transition between the phases of small-at-any-cost and the current animal we have now through more decades of selective breeding.

That said, I have no problem with the foundation halter class idea, except that minis already have a rediculous amount of classes already.

Andrea


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 11, 2012)

I'm for one that wishes to see the halter classes be presented by type. No more divided by height except for Under and Over. Over the past couple of years I'm seeing the halter entries dwindle but the performance is rising. I think if you broke it down by type you will see more entries. I agree I just don't see how we can have much of a detailed standard when there are so many types.

Also another thing to consider is would AMHR have to accept horses that go over 38" cause would it be a legal matter if they don't? So would those that go over be given breeding papers instead if they are out of AMHR registered stock?


----------



## Minimor (Jan 11, 2012)

> And by the way -- I LOVE ALL the different types, but I prefer the ones that "newbies or non-horse people" don't first identify as a Shetland!


Here's the thing--and actually Andrea does cover this already...

I have Shetlands and Minis....and when people here--be they newbies, non-horse people, or horse people--see my Shetlands they say WHAT ARE THOSE? They are shocked when I say Shetlands, because when they think Shetlands they are thinking the little dumpy ponies that everyone knew as kids.

My minis--I've got a number of Minis that are up in that 37-38" range and I've had people come here & look at them and ask if those are Minis....or ponies? They apparently think that Minis are supposed to be only a couple of feet tall, and the 36 to 38" ones must be ponies. Now please realize that this tall B Minis of mine are not Shetland (well, not Shetland unless you count the fact that some of them are, for example, BOB grandsons, and BOB of course has shetland parentage....if I suggest that BOB is a shetland I'm sure some here will have a cow--and so I repeat my Minis are not Shetlands. Nor are they all dumpy little "pit pony" types, though I do have some shorties that have that tendency! They are "straight Miniatures"...and yet people think they are ponies because they don't realize that Minis come in sizes up to 38".

Now my Shetlands--and they are not Hackneys--unless some have hackney way back where in their pedigrees--most of mine do qualify for their Foundation seals though at least one of my sealed ponies is too tall to show in Foundation...I have one that looks like a miniature Saddlebred, a couple that look like miniature Arabs, a couple that move like warmbloods. So....my Shetlands look like horses, and my Minis look like ponies.

If minis are supposed to look like horses in miniature, what is the problem in their looking like Shetlands....who look like horses....meaning the Minis would then look like small horses...as opposed to a "real Mini" who looks like a "pony" meaning it looks like the ponies of yesteryear...

Morgans have a very exact breed standard--a standard which describes type as well as good conformation, because Morgans have always been expected to look like Justin Morgan, their one & only official founding father. Miniatures--have never had a specific type. So how is everyone ever going to agree on what they should look like? As said above--QH? Arab? Morgan? Draft? TB? Welsh? You want it to look like a miniature horse--but which horse is it to be a miniature of? The only uniform thing about miniatures is their smaller size. Which means they are a height breed. Can they ever be more than a height breed? I'm not sure.

If you close the registry...will you then allow all offspring of two AMHR parents to be registered and to retain their papers no matter how tall they end up at maturity? A breed can specify a size range or height limit for showing, but can a breed take away papers of a horse that grows too tall? I don't think so--I think a real breed means the horse is that breed no matter what.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 11, 2012)

Minimor said:


> Here's the thing--and actually Andrea does cover this already...
> 
> I have Shetlands and Minis....and when people here--be they newbies, non-horse people, or horse people--see my Shetlands they say WHAT ARE THOSE? They are shocked when I say Shetlands, because when they think Shetlands they are thinking the little dumpy ponies that everyone knew as kids.
> 
> ...


Sadly I agree with you lol.

I still would like to see them add a type halter class I think it can be as popular when they added the western class but will it happen who knows.

Its just not that simple to say we will close the registry in 5 or 10 years and no more hardshipping. It has to be planned out. Like I said before and what Minimor has said what happens to those who go over once we become a breed? Will they be given breeding papers? What happens to those who had to turn in papers will they be given back if it happens? Just not that simple, too many legal matter. Like I said do I see us becoming a breed, yes, but I'm still young so who knows when lol. I guess we will see if AMHA closes how it will play out.


----------



## JennyB (Jan 11, 2012)

Okay I DON'T think it's fair that AMHA horses/ponies whatever you want to call them as most of you know how I feel about the subject.. don't need to be inspected by a judge and steward if they want their animals to be reg. with AMHR and that is wrong!. I am glad that Falabella's need to be inspected and I am NOT against the $100.fee(the economy bites right now!) to hardship an ASPC, AMHA or Falabella into AMHR. All the rules that AMHA has with their HIGH hardship fees(which are now defunct) and DNA testing, AMHR could bite us if we are not careful with the same rules! That doesn't make me any less disappointed with AMHR for not putting into effect the inspecting of AMHA animals! ...Thats the bottom line!...... If they don't it, it doesn't devalue ASPC or AMHR animals, but the only thing it does do is allow people with 34"+ animals into the R registry and with no inspection and if their AMHA animal comes in a 1/4 or 3/4 inches over 34", then hey they can show in the B classes. BUT if a judge and steward rated the AMHA animal after inspected those animals could only show in the A classes and that would be fair....

 

I have also heard many times a lot of conplaints about 34+" AMHR animals breaking the rules also and staying in the A classes and for that matter 38"+ too, but no one seems to want to put the $50. up to protest!

 

With the economy sucking like it does now, I feel that it's a good thing for a year, but like I said they need to inspect AMHA's just as they do Falabella's. I don't think in the long run though it will hurt anything. They(AMHR)will eventually close the books when they feel they have enough stock to go with.

 

Also what Renee said about Audrey Barrett(yes you got her name wrong)...she did cull more than most people. When she found a pony that she didn't like she would either sell it or she would give them anyway to hundreds of children who couldn't afford a pony, with a saddle and bridle for them to learn to take care of the ponies, learn to ride, show, parade and mostly to learn resposibility for the future as an adult. She received wayyy more pleasure from the children because of that, than any awards she ever got for her ponies. That didn't mean she didn't strive very hard to breed the pony "she" liked and what other breeders would also want.... To be honest she really didn't like the Miniature horses or as she called them Midget ponies and was sure they would be a fad and fade away, not like the Shetland pony who has solid roots into the 1800's. She did however support AMHR when they first started by registering a few of her small ponies, but beyond that she loved her American Shetland ponies 100% all the way!

 

In the Shetland pony boom many breeders offered Midget ponies because quite honestly like I have said before 90% of Miniatures are Shetland ponies as they bred them and got midget ponies! After the boom and revlaidation you couldn't give away a pony for pennies! So all those ponies that were the rage and sold for $50,00 minus or plus were worthless. Many, many were small and under 38" and thru selective breeding became under 34" tall. I know I am way off the subject here, but am very passionate about the word's "Miniature Horse"!

 

We had 5 Arenosa ponies that we had to hardship and pay the high price for into AMHR. We also had a judge and steward inspect them. We would be happy to pay only $100. or $200. for this year only if we had any, but all of ours are already double registered. If we get another Arenosa pony in the future who needs it's R papers, we will pay the higher fee, but it DOESN'T devalue our Arenosa Miniature Ponies...heavens NO...if anything it has helped their value tremendously so owners can show either ASPC or AMHR. Will it help AMHA, yes because it will give owners the ability to show their animals at AMHA and AMHR shows...if they are inspected!!! ...if that doesn't happen ..well what are ya really gonna to do?...I would like to vote for every issue that comes along with ASPC/AMHR especially in this electronic age, but will it happen...probably not...I would like my own person vote for what President is elected to the USA, but our electorial votes prevent that from happening and ironically the electorial votes were started to help the votes come in when the country people could not get to a voting post, now it is abused to hilt and that is sad..

 

Off my soapbox!

Jenny


----------



## Minimor (Jan 11, 2012)

Jenny--the protest fee for AMHR is $100, not $50.

As for AMHA horses not being inspected....I believe that the assumption is that an AMHA horse will be under 38 inches and that by virtue of having AMHA papers it probably isn't a dwarf or anything else likely to be rejected. It is my understanding that ASPC and Falabella are inspected mainly for height...more than anything the judge obseerves while the steward measures, just to verify that the height noted on the hardship application is correct...


----------



## JennyB (Jan 12, 2012)

Minimor said:


> Jenny--the protest fee for AMHR is $100, not $50.
> 
> As for AMHA horses not being inspected....I believe that the assumption is that an AMHA horse will be under 38 inches and that by virtue of having AMHA papers it probably isn't a dwarf or anything else likely to be rejected. It is my understanding that ASPC and Falabella are inspected mainly for height...more than anything the judge obseerves while the steward measures, just to verify that the height noted on the hardship application is correct...


The $50.00 for the protest fee for any protests at shows. Yes I know that the AMHR fees for 2012 will be $100. for mares and $200. for stallions. Well I do get your point, but don't ya think that the owners of AMHA animals are going to reg. with AMHR so their 34.25" er's will be able to show once again?

 

The point behind the A & B section to begin with was to keep them in their proper size divisions and when their permanent card came up as a 3-year-old and they measured 34 1/4" the were bumped up to the B divison. I believe if ASPC and Falabella's are measured so must the AMHA animals...JMO

 

Jenny


----------



## Minimor (Jan 12, 2012)

> The $50.00 for the protest fee for any protests at shows.


No, the protest fee for anything at a show is $100, not $50. That changed awhile ago...2 or 3 years ago anyway? I believe the $100 is in the 2008 rulebook so I guess it's been that for at least 4 years now.

AMHA horses can be hardshipped into AMHR at any age. Falabellas and ASPC have to be at least 3 years old--


----------



## kaykay (Jan 12, 2012)

> Just a question, my friend, Kay!!!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well I guess if no one wants a set type (which is extremely odd for a breed) then at least add in movement to the standard and rule book. Right now miniature horses are never judged on movement. They only trot to show they are not lame. Which for years was a huge disservice to the miniature horse.

The whole reason we have so many types is because there is no set type. Its a viscous circle.

Just because a horse has AMHA papers in no way means you can assume its 34" just like you cannot assume a falabella or aspc is 38" or under. My lone AMHA mare is 36" the same height as most of my ASPC/AMHR. I revoked her AMHA papers but we all know that many never do.

For years I have watched people say there can be no more classes added. There are too many now. Yet notice how new classes do get added.

Showing by type doesn't always work. Just look at the Shetland classes. They added Classic because they were getting too extreme. Then they added Foundation because the Classics were too extreme. Now Foundation is getting too extreme. Until you have judges that stop this it doesn't matter how many types you add.

Now having said that I have always been in favor of a foundation mini class. But I know its not a cure all. Then again if AMHR is not a breed then the foundation class is to preserve what? Normally it is to preserve the type the BREED started with.

And yes if AMHR were a breed then horses cannot lose their papers for going over height. Big deal. They cannot show but they never lose their papers. This is how most horse breeds handle it. Why would that be a deal breaker? Makes no sense to me.

I guess until members can clearly show what they want -- AMHR will stay a height only registry?


----------



## Sue_C. (Jan 12, 2012)

> They are shocked when I say Shetlands, because when they think Shetlands they are thinking the little dumpy ponies that everyone knew as kids.


Well, truthfully, they are not "technically" Shetlands anymore...there still is a registered TRUE Shetland Pony, with no outside influence, that is still that same well-loved fuzzy, dumpy little pony from the UK. What you/we are talking about is the AMERICAN Shetland...not the same critter at all.


----------



## ruffian (Jan 12, 2012)

"Morgans have a very exact breed standard--a standard which describes type as well as good conformation, because Morgans have always been expected to look like Justin Morgan, their one & only official founding father"

Interesting that you bring up the Morgans as it's almost impossible nowadays to find a "Justin Morgan" looking Morgan. Many look like Saddlebreds, 16+ hands and huge movement. Last Morgan show I went to I couldn't find more than 3 original looking Morgans.

Going back to Mary Lou's comment "If they print it", the Journal absolutely should. If it's a signed letter from a member, there should be no reason NOT to print it unless they are censoring their membership's point of view.


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Jan 12, 2012)

Adding movement to description of class rules could change everything. Do you feel that minis should not break level or have excessive movement in a pleasure class then right up a rule proposal to say so.

Once that rule is passed judges can have something to go to.

Want to get even further make sure you describe what you want to be seen as excessive movement be specific and send in a rule proposal.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 12, 2012)

I have heard people wanting to add movement to be judged in AMHR halter class like they present the shetlands. Yet again I think that will just make it more harder to show in a halter class. I would not be near competitive if I showed my western horse in halter against a pleasure horse cause we know judges like movement. Again its more about type.

As far as the inspection goes for AMHA one point has been brought up ASPC and Fabella horses are inspected but they can only be 3 or older to be hardshipped in. Whereas AMHA horses can be any age to be hardshipped. We all know height doesn't always play by the rules. I would be for inspection of AMHA horses but perhaps in order for them to get their pernament papers they must be inspected and measured. Or change it to where AMHA horses must be 3 years of age.

Kay I agree with most of everything you have said, and I agree about the breeding papers but what about those who have turned in the papers in the past will they be able to get those back?


----------



## kaykay (Jan 12, 2012)

Lisa I agree it would have to be written very carefully with a lot of thought. I do think by never having movement addressed for miniatures it really hurt them. Especially back in the beginning because again it put all the emphasis on small. We are still paying for that today with minis with tiny hips, locking stifle etc.

JMS I think a movement paragraph similiar to what is written for foundation (or maybe classic?) Shetlands would work well. I wanted to copy and paste it but cant get it off the online rule book.

Right now in MY opinion our miniatures are shown way too much like a dog. Lets show them like horses! A horses way of going is so important and to not even address it in halter classes is crazy to me.



> Kay I agree with most of everything you have said, and I agree about the breeding papers but what about those who have turned in the papers in the past will they be able to get those back?


I thought about that last night and I really think you could only go forward from the date of the rule passage. It would be a paperwork nightmare for the office to try and go backwards. One thing I know is it a rule proposal makes it too hard for the office; it won't pass.

But at least there would not be anymore miniatures losing their papers due to height. We may even find that without that horses might get measured better at shows. Its a lot of pressure for a steward to measure a horse out completely knowing the horse will lose its papers. Not a lot have the guts to do it even when they know they should.

Im not sure even now what that number or percentage would be. I think its probably very low.


----------



## TomEHawk (Jan 12, 2012)

Added a line in our standard of perfection, (or any where in the rulebook), that excessive movement to be penalized or undesired is pointless. That is a very grey area as well. The ASPC has that line in a few different areas of the rulebook, (modern pleasure, classic & foundation), and there are always someone complaining that the pony that has won in any division as moving too much. I can tell you that within my clients there are many different ideas of what movement is "too extreme" or what is "just right" for whatever division they are showing in.

As for type, there are the same problems there. The ASPC offers three different types, moderns, classics & foundations. Many times I hear complaints that there isn't much difference between them, (which I do agree with). There is always complaints that classics look & move too much like a modern and that there are foundations that look and move too much like a classic. heck, there is complaints that some moderns look & move too much like classics, of course the complaint is mainly in the modern pleasure classes. But the modern pleasure is a grey are division to begin with.

So, I guess what I'm trying to get at is that the AMHR, (or any other miniature registry), cannot really have a standard of perfection that tries to exclude or limit movement & different types when for so many years it has been open to register anything that would meet the hieght restrictions.


----------



## Sandee (Jan 12, 2012)

Maybe I'm dense but I don't understand the argument about AMHA having to be measured or age 3. If they have AMHA papers they are born of parents 34" and under so. If they go over the 34 so what in AMHR. Every horse is measured at shows; at least at the beginning of the season and go in classes to fit the height. What am I not seeing here?


----------



## kaykay (Jan 12, 2012)

Jason I just want movement in miniatures to be judged. The whole excessive motion thing isn't my beef but I know it is with a lot of others. Lets at least make it part of the standard.

Where the heck did Lavern go? Lavern I figured you would be all for closing the AMHR atudbook?


----------



## stormy (Jan 12, 2012)

So a couple of comments, have just been reading and absorbing this thread

1) Do Shetlands look more like standard size breeds then Miniatures....I can not agree with this. I have pictures of my minis up at work and often get comments of "did you get a riding horse?" "If that mini were 16 hands he'd be an amazing dressage horse" etc. Shetlands look like some breeds of horses, miniatures also look like some breeds of horses.....the issue that keeps getting put aside is there are many breeds so many looks.

2) Movement, is the extreme movement of the shetland better then the movement seen in the miniature horse? I have seen shetlands that can move and shetlands that can't...being a shetland does not mean "better" movement....and what is better? A thoroughbred moves differant then an arab, differant then a saddle bred or a percheron, is one better then the other? Is a western horse a worse mover then a park horse or is it talented in its own specific area? A standard of movement acceptable for each division, Western, Country, Pleasure, Park and Roadster (and actually roadster is now representing two types of movement as well) needs to be defined and ADHERED TOO.

3) and to refer back to the original question, does the registry value the single registered horse. In this I agree with LaVern, focus is on the double registered shetland/mini to the exclusion of all others and I think in time the registry is going to feel it as the majority of the registry consists of single registered animals (I am not including AMHA registered here as that is a seperate registry). Not promoting the single registered AMHR or ASPC animals within the registry just does not make good business sense. Diversity ALWAYS brings growth.

Just my opinion for whatever it is worth...


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Jan 12, 2012)

You are correct Jason but adding a horse MAY NOT BREAK LEVEL in a pleasure class gives a judge a specific movement to look for and penalize if need be

assuming that is what people are wanting to stop


----------



## Field-of-Dreams (Jan 12, 2012)

stormy said:


> ...... A standard of movement acceptable for each division, Western, Country, Pleasure, Park and Roadster (and actually roadster is now representing two types of movement as well) needs to be defined and ADHERED TOO.
> 
> ...........


We can't even get the judges to judge the different pleasure classes correctly many times, how are they gonna judge movement in a halter class???




Country horses winning Western classes, Single horses winning Country, Park winning single........





*sigh*


----------



## ruffian (Jan 12, 2012)

Sandee said:


> Maybe I'm dense but I don't understand the argument about AMHA having to be measured or age 3. If they have AMHA papers they are born of parents 34" and under so. If they go over the 34 so what in AMHR. Every horse is measured at shows; at least at the beginning of the season and go in classes to fit the height. What am I not seeing here?


Not every horse is measured because not every horse is shown. Many many horses born to parents registered as 34" and under are way over. I know because I have 2 in my barn that are out of AMHA/AMHR parents (2 different sets) and both are about 36". There are folks out there that KNOW their mares or stallions are over 34" so don't show them but sell the offspring as AMHA.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 12, 2012)

I was going to lay off for a while, but since we kind of went off on a different direction. That is what I like about the Forum, kind of like the old cafe in town.

Finished stud reports and am helping Pa(Hart) with his cause, State Legislature (It's a good one, if anyone wants to hear about it)

Kay Kay, I kind of changed my mind a few years back. One summer day, we were out in the hay field picking bales and I was grumbling away to myself, saying stuff like - "We gotta close this thing up. The ponies are gonna kill us".

Our son got that grin on his face and started goose stepping around and said. "Who do ya think you are Ma? This is America." They dare say anything when they are haying for me.

But it sort of made think. What right do I have to help make rules that tell anyone else how to breed.

Americans mix it up. The Shetland breeders did it with their ponies, outcrossed and created something different.

What if we had made rules that would have excluded Buckeroo because his mother was a Shetland. Or some of the Arenosa or Rocky because he is Shetland and some of the others. I don't know if we can change in midstream, just because we are scared. So many love them.

I know that it would make it easier for us to have a type, but who's type? I am breeding for a look I like, but the next guy might not like it. So I think that exspony is right. If we had started this thing off with a certain type, but we didn't. So our breed is pretty much dictated by the whims, that year of a few people - that perhaps have never owned a miniature horse- called judges. For a few years, you had to have a doll head, now it is movement, who knows what's next.

I guess I now feel that it should not be easy or cheap to get into our little exclusive club, but in American one guys money is a good as the next guy. What if we don't let in that elusive perfect horse? Wouldn't that be a shame.


----------



## Riverrose28 (Jan 12, 2012)

This question may be crazy, but does this $100 fee go in reverse, lets say can I hardship my "B" geldings, mares & stallions into foundation shetland or is it just for the shetlands, AMHA and fellabella to transfer into AMHR?


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 12, 2012)

Riverrose28 said:


> This question may be crazy, but does this $100 fee go in reverse, lets say can I hardship my "B" geldings, mares & stallions into foundation shetland or is it just for the shetlands, AMHA and fellabella to transfer into AMHR?


You cannot hardship anything into ASPC, the foundation are part of the ASPC. ASPC is a recgonized breed. AMHR is not.

I really think its going to be alot harder then people realize for AMHR to become a breed. Our standard of perfection is so vague there is really no way to rule out which type should AMHR breeders should be breeding for and there is no perfect way in changing it, we are too far into it I think we would only loose members if we change it to a specific type and the way AMHR is leaning towards right now is AMHR/ASPC. There are still really good breeders out there that continue to breed quality AMHR minis and AMHA/AMHR minis. I think we'll see more AMHA members coming back into AMHR and we'll see fewer AMHA/AMHR minis because its so expensive to do both.

AMHR's Standard of Perfection:

General Impression: A small, sound, well-balanced horse which gives the impression of strength, agility, and alterness. The diposition should be eager and friendly and not skittish.

Size: The American Miniature Horse must measure not more than 34 inches at the base of the last hair on the mane for the Under division, and not more than 38 inches for Over division. Since the breed objective is the smallest possible perfect horse prefernce in judging shall be given to the smallest, all other factors being equal. In no case shall a smaller horse be placed over a larger horse with better conformation.

Priority in juding shall be in this order:

1. Soundness

2. Balance, and conformity to the standard of perfection

3. Size

Of course it goes into more detail, but all it asks for is a small well balanced sound horse. So with that being the case we continue to breed for what we want and it is our responsibility as breeders to continue that and breed for quality small horses that don't go over 38".

As far as adding movement to the halter classes I really think its just going to open up a big can of worms. I don't mind making sure they move out and have a clear consistent gait but not be judged based on who can come out with bigger movement. We have classes for that for those who want to present movement and that would be your liberty and driving classes.

As far is inspecting for AMHA horses I have seen a 40+" mini out of AMHA stock. Now who's to say if she was really out of those horses but thats where DNA comes into play and at this time AMHR doesn't require DNA. So the owner who has that 40" mini can very easily hardship her in this year and get AMHR papers and breed for AMHR foals. I'm sure it rarely happens with AMHA horses to go over 38" but who's to say it doesn't happen.

People said why don't AMHR charge as much as AMHA when it comes to hardshipping in horses. Well AMHA still accepts unregistered miniatures while AMHR is limiting the horses they bring in. I wouldn't be so much against AMHR allowing hardship of unregistered miniatures again at the prices AMHA asks if not double. Especially when the looks of AMHR becoming a recgonized breed looks so far away. If we want to continue to keep the books open and stay a height registry open the books competely by accepting unregistered miniatures and asking double the fees that AMHA asks or if we want to become a breed close the books competely, keep the standard to what we have as its obvious we have too many types of minis, allow breeding papers for those who go over 38" and those who were honest and returned their papers to the office will be allowed to get breeding papers back of those horses cause I think legally it would have to be done. Also DNA needs to be done for breeding horses.

I'm just typing thoughts out I'm positive not everyone will agree with me and won't be surprised if no one agrees with me lol.


----------



## kaykay (Jan 12, 2012)

> he fabellas are part of the ASPC


NO NO NO! LOL. Falabellas have nothing to do with ASPC! Appy color is not even allowed in Shetlands. This is why I always wondered why they were allowed to hardship in.

Everyone is getting caught up in excessive movement. Thats not at all what I am saying. Its so hard to put it in type. It doesnt have to be big or excessive but correct movement. A halter horse should be judged on more than just "not being lame"


----------



## Riverrose28 (Jan 12, 2012)

OK somebody help me out here! I have a few show horses that are only registered AMHR as they are over, they don't have any ASPC in their recent pedigree, two have been hardshipped in from AMHA, one I bred. Used to be the judges liked them and placed them, but when going to Nationals the best we could do was 10 because we didn't have ASPC look. What am I supposed to do with these guys? It's obvious from this thread that no one wants to buy them cause they are no longer show worthy, and unless I get a ASPC/AMHR stallion or mare to bred too I can forget showing at the National Level, is that right? What about my Grandsons gelding that we paid a fortune for and hardshipped into AMHR for him to show, he's 34.50" and now can no longer win at the breed level because he is not what the judges are looking for. Someone please tell me, if mini's were a fad as someone else said, what are we to do? I'll attach a picture of my grandsons gelding, and if you want I can also post pictures of a couple of mares. I'm about to cry as we are too old to change much now.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 12, 2012)

kaykay said:


> NO NO NO! LOL. Falabellas have nothing to do with ASPC! Appy color is not even allowed in Shetlands. This is why I always wondered why they were allowed to hardship in.
> 
> Everyone is getting caught up in excessive movement. Thats not at all what I am saying. Its so hard to put it in type. It doesnt have to be big or excessive but correct movement. A halter horse should be judged on more than just "not being lame"


Opps didn't meant to put fabellas, sorry I meant foundation.

I think I understand what you mean Kay but how would it be any different then the current way now? The judges are already watching them trot on and see the movement of the horse and make sure they are sound, and soundness is suppose to be #1 of priority according to the standard. So how would they judge it differently without juding how much movement the horse has?


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 12, 2012)

Riverrose28 said:


> OK somebody help me out here! I have a few show horses that are only registered AMHR as they are over, they don't have any ASPC in their recent pedigree, two have been hardshipped in from AMHA, one I bred. Used to be the judges liked them and placed them, but when going to Nationals the best we could do was 10 because we didn't have ASPC look. What am I supposed to do with these guys? It's obvious from this thread that no one wants to buy them cause they are no longer show worthy, and unless I get a ASPC/AMHR stallion or mare to bred too I can forget showing at the National Level, is that right? What about my Grandsons gelding that we paid a fortune for and hardshipped into AMHR for him to show, he's 34.50" and now can no longer win at the breed level because he is not what the judges are looking for. Someone please tell me, if mini's were a fad as someone else said, what are we to do? I'll attach a picture of my grandsons gelding, and if you want I can also post pictures of a couple of mares. I'm about to cry as we are too old to change much now.


I couldn't tell you all I know is I think he is nice and would like to have him in my barn. The thing to remember is quality always improves. What may be what the judges like last year there may be something even better this year. It is very hard for a horse to continue to win year after year at Nationals and the few that do are just that good. You ask what you can do with him now what about performance?


----------



## Minimor (Jan 12, 2012)

I agree that movement should be part of the judging criteria. I do know that there are some judges, not sure how many but there are a few, who already DO judge movement when they are judging AMHR. I would say that they are not so concerned with height of action--what they want to see is freedom of movement; they want to see a stride that comes from the shoulder, with good balance front and back--they don't want to see high action, but they sure don't want to see a horse that is stilted in front with no shoulder movement and that is dragging his hocks. There is much more to good movement than height of action.


----------



## kaykay (Jan 13, 2012)

Riverrose, a lot of showing also has to do with the handler. And no I don't mean politics. But a handler that has show ring presence and can get the best out of that horse. A great handler downplays the horses faults and shows off their best assets. I have no idea what you or your grandsons showing experience level is? Or even who showed the horse. But remember especially at a National show that makes a huge difference. Also every horse has a bad day. We hope that day isnt at Nationals but sometimes it is.

You could go back the following year to Nationals under different judges, have the horse have a better day and place higher. You just never know!

Theres no way to tell that is was because your horse didn't have an "ASPC" look.

I think your gelding is awesome. Remember a 10th at NATIONALS is a HUGE ACCOMPLISHMENT!! That is nothing to sneeze at.



> So how would they judge it differently without juding how much movement the horse has?


Now see its not HOW MUCH movement a horse has - its HOW it moves. How many times do you see a mini doing the bunny hop trot? This is poor poor movement. The horse should be placed down but according to our rules, as long as the horse is not lame there should be no deduction by the judge. Now granted the horse probably has some faults that lead to the poor movement - but I have seen way too many poorly moving horses place.

I have talked to a lot of judges to pick their brains on this subject. Most agreed they wish that movement would be put in. Most said they must judge according to the rules and disregard movement (poor or great) A few said they still take it into consideration because its the right thing to do.

Like Minimor said its that length of stride, the free reaching movement. The ability to get up under themselves and propel forward. The use of the hocks etc etc.


----------



## dreaminmini (Jan 13, 2012)

I think your horse is very nice. I also think with the amount of horses that show at Nationals that a top ten result is awesome. You can always look for a new challenge with them. There is driving, jumping, halter obstacle. They are more fun as far as I am concerned and I like the fat that it is also based in teamwork. My horse and I together. Keep showing them in halter, good comfirmation is good confirmation and you will get your share of ribbons. But also find another class you like and enjoy.



JMS Miniatures said:


> I couldn't tell you all I know is I think he is nice and would like to have him in my barn. The thing to remember is quality always improves. What may be what the judges like last year there may be something even better this year. It is very hard for a horse to continue to win year after year at Nationals and the few that do are just that good. You ask what you can do with him now what about performance?


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 13, 2012)

See IMO judges should already be doing that because if the horse can't move out then the horse itself isn't structurally sound. Also it talks about movement in the standard. I understand what you are saying but I don't understand why judges aren't all ready doing that.

Body: Well-muscled with good bone and substance, well sprung ribs, level topline, as nearly as possible of equal height in withers and rump, fore and hind quarters well angulated, so that the horse in movement shows a smooth gait.

Shoulder: Long, sloping and well-angulated, allowing a free swinging stride and alert head/neck carriage. Well muscled forearm.


----------



## dreaminmini (Jan 13, 2012)

Well, if that was the case why are the halter horses and performance horses for the most part different. Specifically the very straight almost square croup of the halter horses that move very bouncy and primly but you get the performance horses with a rounder croup for getting more under themselves for more power and a smoother gait and they are virtually ignored in the halter ring? But the "halter horses" don't exactly follow the form and function idea, IMO.


----------



## Getitia (Jan 13, 2012)

> Well, if that was the case why are the halter horses and performance horses for the most part different. Specifically the very straight almost square croup of the halter horses that move very bouncy and primly but you get the performance horses with a rounder croup for getting more under themselves for more power and a smoother gait and they are virtually ignored in the halter ring? But the "halter horses" don't exactly follow the form and function idea, IMO


Just a little different perspective - for the past 15+ years, we have been showing horses in halter pretty successfully at the National level and then taking these same halter horses and showing them pretty successfully in performance -year after year, after year - some of these horses are registered amha/amhr, others amhr and yet others are aspc/amhr. From a breeder perspective, we always select our breeding stock with form to function in mind ( with just a touch of brains as an added measure)



. The type or number of registration papers does not make the horse great. JMHO


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Jan 13, 2012)

A judge can only judge by the rules we the membership set forth in our rule book. Judging is very subjective we all know that however if there is nothing specific in the rule book you can expect them to either hold that missing something against them or to a higher level.


----------



## dreaminmini (Jan 13, 2012)

Getitia said:


> Just a little different perspective - for the past 15+ years, we have been showing horses in halter pretty successfully at the National level and then taking these same halter horses and showing them pretty successfully in performance -year after year, after year - some of these horses are registered amha/amhr, others amhr and yet others are aspc/amhr. From a breeder perspective, we always select our breeding stock with form to function in mind ( with just a touch of brains as an added measure)
> 
> 
> 
> . The type or number of registration papers does not make the horse great. JMHO


Getitia,

You have very beautiful horses and this was in no way directed at your horses or anyone specifically for that matter. That is what we should all be striving for to produce a horse of good conformation that allows it to be successful in all facets of it's life. But IMO there is still a different look to alot of the halter horse than the performance horse and have heard a big name trainer deem a horse "not a halter horse" but a fantastic performance prospect.


----------



## disneyhorse (Jan 13, 2012)

I don't agree that performance horses look vastly different from halter horses. But, competition is so fierce that it just takes a really really good horse to excel in both.

Obviously there are plenty of individuals who place at Nationals or HOF in both. It is like this with almost every breed of dog, horse, or what have you.

Remember, too... Some people only breed for a specific discipline. A fancy-moving, easily-trained stallion might have good conformation but a big clunky head. That head might not catch the eye of a Nationals judge in the halter ring, but be overlooked in the driving ring.


----------



## disneyhorse (Jan 13, 2012)

I don't agree that performance horses look vastly different from halter horses. But, competition is so fierce that it just takes a really really good horse to excel in both.

Obviously there are plenty of individuals who place at Nationals or HOF in both. It is like this with almost every breed of dog, horse, or what have you.

Remember, too... Some people only breed for a specific discipline. A fancy-moving, easily-trained stallion might have good conformation but a big clunky head. That head might not catch the eye of a Nationals judge in the halter ring, but be overlooked in the driving ring.


----------



## Minimor (Jan 13, 2012)

Things to consider--many people who show in halter do not drive. It is not that their horses cannot drive/cannot move, it is simply that since the owner doesn't drive, the horse never gets shown in driving.

--a certain number of horses being shown in driving are showing in driving only just because the owner knows the horse won't be competitive in halter. It is true that a horse with a rounded and/or dropped off rear end is probably not going to do well in halter.

If you're seeing halter horses that appear to not move well consider this--how often do you see a handler really trotting their horse out in AMHR halter? Not often--the horses are mincing along because the handler is just shuffling along. When the horse is presented that way, you cannot tell if the horse can move or not!


----------



## noblebrook (Jan 14, 2012)

Not sure when this topic took a different direction but here goes--when my boy Establo Radiant (avatar) was with a trainer, I was told by him that it wasn't his confirmation that deemed weather he would be a halter horse or a preformance horse. While being shown in halter he did start to drive but I was told that it was throwing off his muscle build for him to do well in halter. So maybe more than confirmation it is that the halter horse needs to be presented in a different way than cannot usually be acheived by them doing both classes at once. IMO my boy does not have that totally flat croup mentioned but he did very well in halter




Now that he has acheived that he is being trained for driving and I have every hope that he will do well in that area as well!


----------



## kaykay (Jan 14, 2012)

> What if we had made rules that would have excluded Buckeroo because his mother was a Shetland. Or some of the Arenosa or Rocky because he is Shetland and some of the others. I don't know if we can change in midstream, just because we are scared. So many love them.I know that it would make it easier for us to have a type, but who's type? I am breeding for a look I like, but the next guy might not like it. So I think that exspony is right. If we had started this thing off with a certain type, but we didn't. So our breed is pretty much dictated by the whims, that year of a few people - that perhaps have never owned a miniature horse- called judges. For a few years, you had to have a doll head, now it is movement, who knows what's next.


This is just so odd to me. And lavern your not alone as shown in this thread.

Everyday we see people post that AMHR is a breed and someone will correct them that AMHR is not a breed "just" a height registry. And you can feel the anger over it. And then someone will post wanting to hardship their mini into ASPC. And they are told they can't because ASPC is a breed and the book is closed. More anger.

Then you see all the "we don't want all of our horses to have Shetland influence" posts. And the "only Shetland type minis win"

But then when the subject of closing the book and making AMHR minis a breed comes up; no one wants it. Then no one wants a set type. Although I guess you could close it and use the same standard. It has to be the biggest oxymoron I have seen.

There are no long range goals for the AMHR mini. Where do people see the AMHR miniature in 10 years? Still a height registry? Twenty years - height registry?

What does it take to make our AMHR papers have value? Which is why this whole thread started. To allow hardshipping but only at a big cost? Or to close the book? Or to run half price sales on hardshipping.

Im not even sure we are at the point where the book should be closed. But it always shocks me that there is no long range plan for it.

It will be interesting to see if AMHA really does close their book. And if they do; where will AMHA go from there? Will they create a "breed"? And if they do become a breed, what affect will that have on AMHR registered horses?

Okay I will stop rambling. This is just the stuff that floats through my mind. Its a scary place LOL.


----------



## LaVern (Jan 14, 2012)

I have never heard anyone sum it up better Kay Kay.

It is such a dilemma. We don't have a plan. I can't even make up my own mind.

I think that this closing of the AMHA is having more of an affect on me than I thought it would have. Do I hardship 8 - 10 mares that I really like, into AMHA or not? At 600.00 a head (6,000-7,000,by the time I am done) There is only so much money.

So is it better to give them the money than AMHR? I had pretty much decided that I would not. But then I think what if after they close it up they decide to let their Overs be breeding stock. Then I would be sorry.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Jan 14, 2012)

With no planning AMHR has no future. We will still continue to be a height registry and we might as well just open the books up competely. It's not something I personally want to see, I want to see us close the books, keep to our current standard, DNA, and breeding papers. I think excluding a certain type will loose members, who's to say what type AMHR wants after all these years, draft, stock, hunter, pleasure, you have them all. I rather we continue to breed for better quality miniature horses of all types that each breeder desires.

As far as I know AMHA doesn't have much of a plan concerning closing its books. I think things will pop up that will hurt them in the long run. The registry itself is younger altho I think its more developed then AMHR as they are the only ones that require DNA on breeding horses and first to use pictures on their registration papers and I like their championship driving classes vs AMHR's stakes classes. But I continue to do AMHR as I feel it has more to offer and would hope to see AMHR's future bright and become a recgonized breed, but we defintelly need a plan starting now, I feel like the registry is kind of stuck. The quality of horses are improving but the registry is going no where in long term goals.


----------

