# AMHR Stud Book



## LaVern (Oct 23, 2010)

The AMHR Stud Book is everything to me. It will be all that is left of what I have done for thirty years, when I am gone.

I know that there have been a few glitches but for the most part, we did it right, by trying to get as much information as possible recorded.

While AMHA tries to hide any pedigree on hard-shipped horses, we demanded that a copy at least of their papers came with, before allowing them in. And at least the sire and the dam were recorded.

Although we have not added DN ing and Parent Qualifying yet, I feel it will come in time. I hope first voluntarily and perhaps in 10-12 years becoming mandatory. I hope it is done slowly and with lots of thought.

I feel that when we allow a horse to be hard shipped into AMHR, we as members have a right to ask that party to prove parentage into our Registry. It is not too much to as for all that AMHR has to offer them.

The benefits of having AMHR papers far out weigh a little inconvenience of having to pull a little hair.

I don't feel that this should be done over night, but a notice of a year or two or perhaps three because of the ASPC horses having to be three to be hard shipped would be workable I feel.

I know that in these tough times, we have look for ways to save and make money, but I hope we don't use our precious stud book as a way to do so.


----------



## kaykay (Oct 24, 2010)

I agree Lavern and I do think we are headed tword requiring DNA on ASPC and AMHR horses. My goal next year is to get quite a few of mine dna'd and then start PQing my foals on my own. I do think it could be a strong selling point.

I will always say that opening hardshipping to any gelding will set us back. Most of us want AMHR to become a breed and allowing geldings of unknown lineage in will not get us closer to that goal.

IMO too why would we want to give people that breed unregistered horses an avenue to get papers? I know in this area they will use it as a selling point. I can already see the Craigslist ads "buy this colt for 100.00, geld it and hardship into AMHR for 50.00! No way can I compete with that.

Unfortunately I also live very close to several auctions that sell a lot of unregistered miniatures. If people can go there and buy a mini colt for 20.00 and pay 50.00 to hardship where is their incentive to buy from a breeder that registers their horses?

Lisa I know you have pointed out that people can do it anyway through AMHA so this only affects B colts but I dont think there is at all a shortage of B geldings. Also I dont think the number of geldings being hardshipped AMHA to get into AMHR is a large number. Right now its a lot of money and time to get a horse hardshipped AMHA and then AMHR. If this passes its just way too easy and cheap to do it.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Oct 24, 2010)

Kay agree with you 100%. I want to see AMHR become a breed and allowing unregistered geldings back in won't let us do that. I also think we will see DNA as a requirement on future foals before they can have any registered foals in both AMHR and ASPC.


----------



## Minimor (Oct 24, 2010)

I think foals should have to be DNA'd at time of registration. Registration fee includes the cost of DNA, and once you get to where foals are being born to horses that are DNA'd, then the DNA on those foals automatically includes PQ

Or, it should be done similar to the way some other breeds have done it. Require ALL breeding stallions to be DNA'd, and then all foals get DNA'd (and automatically PQ'd to their sire) at time of registration. At some point mares born after a certain date get DNA'd before their foals can be registered. Or maybe all mares, whichever....

I think it is very important for foals to be DNAd at time of registration. Why? Because then the onus is on the breeder to have the pedigree right. There is nothing worse than someone buying a foal, then 5 years down the road they want to breed that horse so they do DNA, only to find out that the foal is not of the parentage it is supposed to be. Maybe by that point the horse has had 3 different owners since the breeder sold it. Chances of getting the breeder to admit that he sold a foal with incorrect papers is slim to none--he will say one of the later owners switched the horse out. If foal gets DNAd at time of registration it is the breeder's problem if the parentage comes up wrong.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Oct 24, 2010)

The only reason I don't think requiring foals be DNA'd for registration is a good idea is I can see the number of registrations drop but perhaps not the number of foals but guess who has to do the paperwork, it will be the future buyers of those foals.

Thats why I think it should be before mares or stallions have registered foals they first need to be DNA'd. Right now I just don't see the reason on DNA geldings. Geldings aren't hugely popular right now and if we require them to be DNA'd its not going to get better. If we require it on stallions then maybe people would be more willing to geld their colts.

I don't know, sure in a perfect world I would like to see it every foal for registration has to be PQd but right now I just see it for mares or stallions to have registered foals.


----------



## Minimor (Oct 24, 2010)

Well, you know what? If there are breeders who don't figure it is worth the price to DNA their foals at time of registration, then they shouldn't be raising those foals. It tells me something when a breeder says it isn't worth it to pay the extra cost of DNA!

And to be perfectly honest, if a buyer is stupid enough to buy an unregistered foal "on application" then he/she deserves to get stuck with the cost of filing the registration. He/she also deserves it if it turns out the foal cannot be registered after all because DNA proves that the parentage isn't what the paperwork claims that it is. Buyers that want to have a registered horse need to insist on having a horse come with up to date registration papers. If buyers refuse to buy on application then breeders will be forced to quit selling on application.

Likewise, I don't feel too sorry for someone that raises a foal without getting the sire & dam DNAd prior to the birth of that foal....they "wait and see if the foal is worth registering" before they bother with DNA. Then when something happens and after the birth of the foal the sire or dam dies prior to being DNAd and for whatever reason no one pulls hair on that horse prior to disposing of the body they squall because it's not fair they cannot get papers on the foal because one parent doesn't have DNA. I have always figured that if there is any doubt about the quality of foal a horse will produce, then that horse isn't worth breeding! ....and yes, any cross can produce disappointing results....but in spite of that I have never bred any horse that I thought was likely to produce a foal not worth registering! I've had some that I didn't figure would make a good breeding animal because of some trait that I wouldn't like to see passed on....those are called *GELDINGS* and *non-breeding mares*!

Coming from Morgans, where our foals did have to be DNA'd at time of registration (and in Morgans DNA means automatic PQ, with papers being denied if parentage wasn't right), with registration being something like $60 or $80 for the registration and DNA....I have never understood the Miniature breeder's mentality of "wait and see if the foal is good enough to register before I DNA the parents". For goodness sakes, believe in the horses you have selected for your breeding program!


----------



## Sue_C. (Oct 24, 2010)

> And to be perfectly honest, if a buyer is stupid enough to buy an unregistered foal "on application" then he/she deserves to get stuck with the cost of filing the registration. He/she also deserves it if it turns out the foal cannot be registered after all because DNA proves that the parentage isn't what the paperwork claims that it is. Buyers that want to have a registered horse need to insist on having a horse come with up to date registration papers.


With so many miniature foals being bought by people new to horses, or to registered horses, I certainly wouldn't call them "stupid" simply because they were trusting enough to believe a seller who is a liar, and a crook. Ignorance of the rules is NOT stupidity...and not many buyers new to the breed have fully read the rulebook prior to buying their first horses. For once...I would like to see the sellers who rooked these pepple into buying unregisterable horses, being the ones who are punished...not just tell the poor ignorant shmuck who just bought the horse from that crook, that he/she is stupid for having done so, and that they DESERVED it. Come on...SERIOUSLY...ya THINK??

Personally, I get pretty weary of this "buyer beware, it is ALL YOUR FAULT if you are robbed of your money by an unreputable buyer, because you are stupid". I would like to see names in the Journal and MHW of disreputable sellers. If you are banned or suspended, and IMO, ripping of an ususpecting buyer is worthy of such punishment...then we the public deserve to know who you are.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Oct 24, 2010)

Sue_C. said:


> With so many miniature foals being bought by people new to horses, or to registered horses, I certainly wouldn't call them "stupid" simply because they were trusting enough to believe a seller who is a liar, and a crook. Ignorance of the rules is NOT stupidity...and not many buyers new to the breed have fully read the rulebook prior to buying their first horses. For once...I would like to see the sellers who rooked these pepple into buying unregisterable horses, being the ones who are punished...not just tell the poor ignorant shmuck who just bought the horse from that crook, that he/she is stupid for having done so, and that they DESERVED it. Come on...SERIOUSLY...ya THINK??
> 
> Personally, I get pretty weary of this "buyer beware, it is ALL YOUR FAULT if you are robbed of your money by an unreputable buyer, because you are stupid". I would like to see names in the Journal and MHW of disreputable sellers. If you are banned or suspended, and IMO, ripping of an ususpecting buyer is worthy of such punishment...then we the public deserve to know who you are.


Thank you. And for reasons like these and other things really do make people very leary about buying horses. IMO if a breeder has done wrong to you bring it up to the registry. Thats what they are there for. They may not do anything right then and there but I'm sure they listen.


----------



## Minimor (Oct 25, 2010)

Sue, most of the people that I hear complain about paperwork problems on horses they have bought are not newcomers to the breed, they are people who have had Minis for awhile and should know what to look for in terms of paperwork when purchasing a registered horse. They buy a horse because they like the low price and figure that the application is no big deal, then they complain when actually getting papers becomes an ordeal.

Yes, it's unfortunate when a newcomer buys a horse and gets "took" on paperwork by the seller. I'm not defending those sellers that do this to people. But at the same time, if you're a first time buyer that knows nothing about the breed or the paperwork....common sense should tell you to do a bit of research and find out a few things before buying. if you want to buy a registered horse for showing or breeding, do your homework and then you will know what registration requirements are and if the horse you are looking at to buy is or isn't already registered. It truly isn't that hard. It really does pay to look after oneself and not expect the seller to do it for you.


----------



## Davie (Oct 25, 2010)

I've tried to stay out of the debate on allowing hardshipping of geldings into the Registry but I would like to look at the other side of the coin. I've been a past breeder (have not bred anything the last 2 years) and always prided myself on keeping my paperwork current and up to date BUTT....

I have a good example of why gelding should to be allowed to hardship.

I have a friend who bought an 8 horse hitch, all AT ONE TIME had been AMHA & AMHR registered but the person owning them when she bought them had lost their papers over the years--they did not have a need for their papers. The people never showed in sanctioned shows only parades etc and were now retiring, so they wanted to sell the geldings as a team.

The bottom line was she spend over $4,000 to get them hardshipped back into both registeries. By the time she had taken them to a AMHA director for measuring, then to an AMHR steward and judge for measuring and verification, haveing a vet come certify they were indeed geldings, plus the fees and everything else.

Had the previous owner been requried to keep up their paperwork then there would have been no reason to hardship these gelding back into a registry they already had been registered into at some point. They are now just horse a, b, c, d etc with her farm name on them as the previous owner just called them whatever barn name they wanted--these 8 beautiful gelding LOST their heritage because of someone's negelict in keeping up their paperwork and then someone came along and bought them that wanted to show them again. You can't dictate the requirement to keep registrations up to date.

She nor I are in favor of the $50.00 fee for the reason everyone has stated before but since they are non-breeding animals should she have had to pay that much, I personally don't think so--of course she had to hardship them into AMHA and then into AMHR. If the horses paperwork had been kept up to date it would have only cost her the regular transfer fees for each horse into each registry.

I have sold several of my colts over the years at auctions that included everything the person needed to get them registered--application, breeders certificates, registry worksheet, and even checks made out to the registry so they could registered their new horse--but only 2 have every taken the time to take the photos and mail the paperwork it. Most of the time when I have done this it was a last minute decision to put the colt in the auction and the paperwork would not have time to get to the registry and back into my possession before the sale--yes, not good on my part but it happens.

You can't make people keep up with their paperwork but we should not penalize those gelding that at one point in time may have been registered horses. I would not hesitate to hardship a unregisted or unknown gelding into AMHR if I thought he was a good enough specimen to go out into the ring and compete. Don't we all say that good gelding with our youth and amateur exhibitors are the back bone of our future shows???

Another good example--someone who owned a reputable farm suddenly died, they had no family that was part of the business end of the farm. Th family was now left with taking care of selling the horses--they just wanted them gone--they more than likely don't know who was who, who was bred to who or anything else. I know personally of this instance where this happened--I even went over to try and help match 4 solid chestnut gelding to their papers--it was a crap shoot--so instead of selling them with the wrong papers they sold them with none--these had been top winning horses but no longer--unless someone bought them saw their potential as show horses and hardshipped them back into the registry as an UNKNOWN.

This would also be the case of the 8 horse hitch--I help harness them on ocassions and if I was to go to the farm and try and tell you who was who I would probably get 3 or 4 wrong since most hitch horses live together in paddock situations.

I personally try to be sure that my personal representative for my estate knows what horses are here (individual folders with photos) and who has been breed to whom at least on an annual or semi annual basis, but that still does not guarantee that if I suddenly died walking out in the parking lot leaving work that they would take care of things like I would want done. I know they would try their best but that doesn't mean if would be done like I would want if I was still here and I do have a very detailed will.

DNA will help with the situation--especially like the situation of the hitch horses or the solid chestnut as you could pull hairs and then have the DNA run through the database but that is going to take years to establish and you will have long delays in having the datebase researched for matches.

Not sure there is an easy answer to this question, no matter which side of the coin you look at. This is just my opinion and another avenue for discussion.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 25, 2010)

Situations like this are so sad, for both the horses and the people, but it only goes to prove that you must buy from a reputable breeder and be sure you have the paperwork in hand when you buy the horse. Do the homework before you buy.

Also, I think, and maybe I am wrong, that DNA ing or even Parent Qualifying won't help in cases like this. For example say you find a horse that you think you know who it is, and the parents are both DNA ed. With out the last recorded owners transfer, you can't do anything even if you can prove that the horse is who you think it is. I may be wrong about that. Anyone know?


----------



## Davie (Oct 25, 2010)

What happens to that horse after he/she leaves that reputable breeder. These gelding were all older horses. It was probably long after the breeder had registered the horses that they lost their papers due to the one or more of the previous owners not seeing a reason to keep them current.

Having DNA would allow the horses to come back into the registery with their correct heritage intack even if they had to be hardshipped back in.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 26, 2010)

I don't think that it works that way. Say, I as a breeder did not register a foal that was the result of breeding two of my

dN'd horses for some reason. And you knew who the foal was and who the parents were, so you bought it at some time. You could not register that foal even if you pulled hair and proved who that horse was. This protects the breeders and the recorded owners. The correct paperwork must go with the horse. I think at least I hope this is the case. There perhaps was a reason why I did not register that horse.

I think it would be the same case, even if I did register the foal and then decided not to sell it with the papers. Or if Joe Blow, the last recorded owner decided that he did not want to do anything with the papers, it is his call. That transfer is like a bill of sale and you can't register someone else's horse even if you know who it is.


----------



## Davie (Oct 26, 2010)

LaVern you have missed my point entirely. I'm not talking about taking a horse/foal that was never registered and pulling mane hairs and matching those hairs to that horse's sire and dam and then registering it in--as you said there was a reason the breeder did not registered the foal in the first place. That I would not even agree with.

My example was IF AND WHEN a DNA database was established (all horses were included in that database) and IF THERE WAS A MATURE GELDING that had lost his papers somewhere down the line then that animal's hairs could be pulled and sent through the database (just like criminal DNA is done now) and if a match was found for THAT HORSE and that horse only, then why can't that horse then be re-established in the registry with his heritage intact with HARDSHIPPING and a note on his papers that states he was HARDSHIPPED back into the registry under his current owners name.

If no matching DNA was found then it would be up to the registry to decide if the horse meet the criteria to be hardshipped as an UNKNOWN.

I'm talking GELDINGS ONLY--not breeding stock.

There are going to be as many opinions on this matter as there are owners out there and not everyone is going to agree.

But for ME -- if there is a gelding out there that I felt could be a top contender in the show ring and he meets the requirements to be hardshipped into the R Registry as long as it is still an "Open Registry" and I wanted to spend the money, then you would see that horse in the ring competiting with all the other geldings.

If and when I find that gelding--it hasn't yet but there might be one somewhere out there.

The issue of establishing the DNA datebase is another issue and until a line is drawn in the sand and from that date forward all foal that are to eligible for registration must be DNA tested before their papers are issued (such as the Arabians and Morgans and probably several others)then we will have to live with the rule the Registry has in place currently.

Now I'll quite beating this dead horse.




and that is my two cents for the "Other Side of the Coin". Will get off my soapbox and be at Convention to see what does come of this issue.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 26, 2010)

I get your point, Davie, but my point is that with out the last owners signature the office cannot do it.. Perhaps this horse kicked this guys wife in the head and he said I will never allow that horse to have papers. He has the last say. Especially if it is know through DNA that he is still the owner. The office can not take the horse out of his hands. It still belongs to the last owner.

An AMHR is not an open registry like AMHA is for a few more years. We only take smaller ASPC registered horses and registered AMHA horses.


----------



## stormy (Oct 26, 2010)

I too believe DNA is essential to the registry... would gain more credibility that way then changing measuring or any other change you can think of. Should start now, not 10 yrs from now!

Two years ago a friend from a full size horse background gave shetlads a try, moderns specifically. She leased a gelding and showed all the way thru Congress. When I asked her afterwards if she was going to continue with shetlands her response was...why would I do that, there is no such thing as a purebred Shetland, people just cross whatever they want and register it as a Shetland!

Have also been to mini farms where more then one stud is running with the same group of mares at the same time, the response to my question...oh I can tell which foals belong to which stallion when they are born!?!?

If we want to be taken seriously in the horse world we need to seriously stop these kinds of activities by breeders! DNA won't stop all of it, but will make it harder to cheat.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 26, 2010)

I know I should let this go, but it intrigues me so.

Try this one on Please.

Okay I have a parent Qualified AMHA mare and a parent AMHA Qualified Stallion ( which I do).I mate them and send in AMHA Stallion Report. They produce a colt which I don't think will stay under 34 ( most of mine don't). So I registered it Little Brownie AMHR and loose track of where he went..

Then one day I am watching The World Show and their is Little Brownie(he stayed small enough and was hardshipped into AMHA) winning The Supreme horse. Well I guess I will pay the late fees and register little Brownie AMHA because he did not go over 34. What is going to happen when AMHA finds out that Dream Lands Divine Debonaire is really little Brownie. The people that have possession of course own the horse, but who gets the papers? This hard-shipping stuff with DNA is tricky.


----------



## Relic (Oct 26, 2010)

To me you'd be SOL on this one...if you bred 2 typed parents and didn't register the foal in the A but did stick R papers on him and he sold..then l went and bought this so call Little Brownie and after the required time for hardshipping the fees involved the typing paid and he measured well under the 34" in height to get him into the A registry and thats what l did along with his new name..then decided to show him got lucky at Worlds where lo and behold you saw him winning a supreme. l don't think at this point you can just go ahead and register him on your own you'd still need his hairs for typing current pictures and a height all dated and signed by you and you don't really have the horse or had him for years...l did. Did any of that make sense.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 26, 2010)

You are right I forgot about the hair but I could have pulled the when he was a baby as I do some DNAing with Kentucky I know far fetched, but things that have to be thought about, it is enough to cause trouble and involve lawyers in this crazy world. Now I know that AMHA doesn't not accept Kentucky, but I think the law does. One more reason I don't think the AMHR ought to open up something that could be trouble.


----------



## Relic (Oct 26, 2010)

Well that was just my opinion on what you asked...not saying it's right just to my way of thinking as having once owned or bred the resulting hardshipped in mini l would have to think that you gave away all rights and have no business paying the late fees etc without the horse in your actual hands whether you kept hairs on him or not. Now if the same guy who was hardshipped in his new owner the one who won a supreme with him



got in touch with you or you with him and it was decided a pedigree on the paperwork would benefit both parties...okay l have no clue how that would be handled.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 26, 2010)

I don't think I have a clue what I am talking about, but I find it very interesting.




But what if I had already registered little Brownie in AMHA and just not given papers? When he was to be hard-shipped AMHA would they say no you can't as there is already a horse with that DNA?


----------



## fourluckyhorseshoes (Oct 26, 2010)

I don't know a lot about this topic and I'm not trying to start anything but here is one side to consider:

What about people who don't have a lot of money and want a cheap mini- get it from an auction, geld it (get it out of the breeding pool) and hardship it? This way they can take the mini to nice shows and enjoy it. Also showing the mini adds value to it- a unregistered mini that has won halter and performance classes is more valuable than one who has not. And the more valuable the mini is the less likely it is to end up in a bad home or sent to slaughter.

If I am wrong on anything I said feel free to KINDLY correct me.


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Oct 26, 2010)

Lavern I am confused..(not to difficult for me lately)





Are you for or against DNA?


----------



## Relic (Oct 26, 2010)

That has already happened to us here over a filly l didn't want bred so sold with that understanding and thats why l was keeping her paperwork. Now l know for a fact that doesn't stop the next guy from breeding her as soon as she's out of my sight but to my way of thinking it's out of my hands can't do much about it..but l'm not having a paper trail follow her that leads to me. The person in question a year later came back wanting her registration papers because she was in foal now and l still refused so he got a lawyer to write me a letter saying l sold a registered mini and the new owner had the right to the paperwork. But remember l sold a filly a one year old and my bill of sale said clearly no registration went with her she was just pet. AMHA was contacted and l told them l didn't want her sold on as registered and sold her as pet though the buyer knew l had papers. This was my choice and felt my right and l was asked to just sent back the paperwork on her. She never did get papers after that or if she did she was hardshipped in. And just thinking of it now l'm still mad some jerk would breed a 2 year old who swore nope not him he wouldn't do that. She wasn't a dwarf per sa but in my eyes had at least 2 faults that could fall that way my reason for selling with no papers on her. You know sometimes they start out fine then things just don't appear right on some of them. l feel as the person that bred and registered her then pulled papers the new owner l guess if he wants can hardship at his cost but l have the right not to hand over what l don't want out there. SORRY l have no idea what this has to do with DNA anymore.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 26, 2010)

Relic, I am for DNAing and Parent Qualifying, but I hope we go very slowly, and think things through as it is very confusing. I think there will be a lot of ramifications and a big mess, if it is not implemented by much smarter people than me.

I am against letting horses with out ASPC or AMHA papers be hard shipped into AMHR.


----------



## ruffian (Oct 26, 2010)

LaVern said:


> I know I should let this go, but it intrigues me so.
> 
> Try this one on Please.
> 
> ...


You've sold the colt. End of story.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 26, 2010)

But no one has answered my question. What happens if when someone hardships a horse into AMHA and they DNA it and there is already a horse with that DNA? That is what I am getting at.


----------



## Sue_C. (Oct 26, 2010)

> But no one has answered my question. What happens if when someone hardships a horse into AMHA and they DNA it and there is already a horse with that DNA? That is what I am getting at.


In such a case, the person who was the registered owner of the horse with that DNA would have to either give the papers over to the new owner, or turn them into the registry...which would in fact "unregister" the horse...allowing the people who were hardshipping the horse, to get on with it. Actually...if you have sold a horse without papers...IMO, you should HAVE to return them, the same as when a horse has died. To keep them can be construed as dishonest...as they can be used to register a "ringer".


----------



## Minimor (Oct 26, 2010)

Davie—I disagree that DNA should be used in the fashion you are suggesting. Like LaVern says, the registry cannot/should not be able to just re-issue papers to some gelding that used to have them when Joe owned him but no longer has them now that Mary owns him. Because what if…

What if this gelding, we’ll call him “Red”, was stolen from Joe’s pasture one night 5 years ago. The thief sold him through the auction and Dixie bought him, and then when Dixie’s kids didn’t like him, she sold Red on to Mary. So now Mary tries to get his papers, based on his DNA, and the registry comes up with Red being Registered Red, belonging to Joe. Why should Mary be able to get papers on Red in her name when Joe never voluntarily signed him over to anyone? Maybe his papers are flagged at the registry, so registry officials get Mary’s DNA and registration request, and they notify Joe that Mary has his horse. Joe loved that horse and wants him back, and contacts police who then go & talk to Mary. In this case DNA is good for Joe, not quite what Mary wanted though!

Or what if Joe sold Red to Dixie on payments…Joe let the horse go to his new home after receiving a down payments, thinking he would get the rest of his money in installments as he & Dixie agreed. But, when Red arrived at Dixie’s place Dixie decided she wasn’t going to pay any more money to Joe—instead she just resold the horse to someone else and told Joe that Red had died and she wasn’t going to pay him any more money. So instead of $1500 for Show Quality Red, Joe has a mere $300 and Red’s registration papers. Now that Red has been sold on a couple of times and Mary has him, why should she be able to send in DNA, find out that her gelding is Show Quality Red who is just 5 points away from his HOF, and have the registry take Red’s papers away from Joe and give them to her??? At most she should be able to use that DNA to find out that yes, Red is registered, that Joe is his registered owner, and contact info for Joe….so that she can call Joe and find out that he will send Red’s papers to her if she pays the balance that is owing on Red.


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Oct 27, 2010)

> I am against letting horses with out ASPC or AMHA papers be hard shipped into AMHR




I do not see why you think this makes such a huge difference?? AMHA papers what if that horse was hardshipped into AMHA so he has papers that say pretty much nothing but his new name how does that make him better then or more pedigreed then?

There is just as much funny business going on with ASPC horses as there is with AMHR so again how does that paperwork mean more then the fact a horse has papers? It does not insure pedigree until such a point that all horses and ponies are DNA and PQ'd papers are well honestly in some cases not worth more then the paper they are printed on when it comes to accuracy


----------



## LaVern (Oct 27, 2010)

Lisa I am for only allowing ASPC AMHA , because it is what we do already and it is at least a start. And it works. Who ever it was ( And I think it was back When Glenn was president) was very smart to insist that the current owner or a signed transfer came with the AMHA paperwork before we allowed AMHA horses to be hardshipped in. VERY smart move. The ASPC are already in the clubs studbook. To let unknowns in is going backward.

Sure there are goof ups- unintentionally and intentionally, but I don't think nearly as much as there were years ago.

I would like to see perhaps 4 years from now all hard shipped ASPC- AMHA horses be parent qualified to come in.

Perhaps some time table like AMHA used to implement their program toward Parent Qualifying all AMHR horses down the line. We will have to get over the fact that some things might not jive. And let that go.

But there still are lots of "what ifs" that have to be explained to me before I want to see it become final law. Like Davie's question. How could or would DNA and Parent Qualifiying be used in AMHR.


----------



## minimomNC (Oct 27, 2010)

Why do Shetlands have to be hardshipped into AMHR if they are already in the studbook? If they measure for their age why shouldn't they just be allowed to be registered. If its all about height why should horses that are already in the Registries Studbooks have to wait three years and pay more?


----------



## LaVern (Oct 27, 2010)

Because they are a breed like the Arab, Quarter Horse, Welsh, Morgan and we are a just a registry. But at least we have our own stud book. And we do not allow just anyone anymore.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 27, 2010)

How quickly I forget. I think I said that a few years ago- and here came the Fallabellas.


----------



## minimomNC (Oct 27, 2010)

But if all rules, regulations and guidelines are decided, voted upon and enforced by the same people for the both registries, why hardship into the same organization. I agree Shetlands are a breed just like Arabians, Quarter Horses and Saddlebreds, but they are not governed by the same people in their own breed and say the Pinto Association which can also register horses from those breeds. To me they are not separate, when I bought shetlands that already had papers, I wasn't given the choice to only transfer them to my name in AMHR, that transfer wouldn't be completed until I also sent in the transfer for ASPC, so if I can't do one without the other, why should I have to pay to hardship a shetland that is within the height limits of AMHR.

And just for the record, I don't have any Shetlands that need to be hardshipped, all of mine are already AMHR/ASPC.


----------



## stormy (Oct 27, 2010)

Though the two registries are run out of the same office they are seperate registries. Shetlands are not automatically Miniatures, only offspring of AMHR registered parents can be registered AMHR without hardshipping just like any other registry. Running them out of the same office does not make them the same registry.


----------



## minimomNC (Oct 27, 2010)

If they are so separate then why do I have to transfer both sets of papers at the same time? It can't be both ways, if I don't want to update shetland papers on my AMHR horse, I shouldn't have to if they are truly different registries. I had AMHR papers held up until I sent in the ASPC paperwork. So separate or the same? Seems its not really that clear.


----------



## sdmini (Oct 27, 2010)

AMHR is still letting "anyone" join. As long as a horse is under 34" they can hardship into AMHA and from there jump ship to AMHR. The cost that is associated in doing it this way I would doubt that happens often but I'm sure it does somewhat. The only horse that could not be eligible for AMHR papers is the horse that measures over 34"-38".

As I understand it with other breeds that currently do have DNA testing, DNA is for parentage qualifying. The labs are not set up to test a individual sample against the entire data base, DNA would not help with recovery of lost papers.

As someone who just sent a little over a $1,000 in various association fees (A & R) I don't know my wishes for DNA. AMHR is drifting away from my goals so I don't know if I would stand a separate DNA charge. DNA without parentage qualification means very little, paper swapping can and still does happen.

Tranfers are required for hardshipping, just like AMHA into AMHR, because they are proof that you own the horse.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 27, 2010)

Marlee I just called the AMHA office and they told me what I already thought - it would come back that their is already a horse with that DNA. I kind of figured that was the case as it happened to me. Tried to get an old one I bought straighten out and they said sorry we already have a horse with that DNA.

And yes you can still sneak in the AMHA hardship back door through to get into AMHR.


----------



## alphahorses (Oct 27, 2010)

Does everyone understand what it costs to DNA a horse? I'm not talking about the occasional horse that is 3 and hasn't been registered yet or the sweepstakes horse where there is a lot of money at stake. There are always cases where DNA testing is needed. I'm talking about DNA'ing every horse in your herd. I see dispersal sales on a daily basis on the sale board, and you want to add another burden to people who are already struggling to keep their horses?

If you want to DNA your horses and offer a parentage guarantee, do it! If you want to require that a seller proove parentage before you buy, you have that right to. But why put that burden on other people? You are dreaming if you think that it will increase the value of the horse. Look at how many AMHA horses are being sold for next to nothing. It only adds costs. If I don't trust you to be honest enough with your paperwork or to manage your farm and breeding program well enough to know who the parents are, then I'm probably not going to be interested in buying from you in the first place. I buy almost everything from reputable farms whose owners I TRUST. And people who buy from me know that the parents on my foal's papers are the real parents.

Please people - there are enough problems in this registry right now and people are struggling enough to pay their bills and give proper care to their horses. Let's stop thinking of ways to spend other people's money. That $50 is better spent making sure that my horse is well fed and cared for than in the pockets of a lab.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 27, 2010)

i think that your feelings would be the ones that the majority of AMHR would also believe, Alpha. But I think this stuff is good to talk about. I would rather things stay the way they are then have something rammed through too fast. But I do think that some day it will come.

The only thing I am strongly in favor in the near future is DNAing to be hard shipped into AMHR horses. AMHA does that and no one complains. The other will come someday,maybe.


----------



## Minimor (Oct 27, 2010)

LaVern said:


> i think that your feelings would be the ones that the majority of AMHR would also believe, Alpha. But I think this stuff is good to talk about. I would rather things stay the way they are then have something rammed through too fast. But I do think that some day it will come.
> 
> The only thing I am strongly in favor in the near future is DNAing to be hard shipped into AMHR horses. AMHA does that and no one complains. The other will come someday,maybe.


I have to point out that AMHA also has a DNA program going otherwise, so it is not only the hardshipped horses that end up having to have DNA done. AMHA also does not require that those hardshipped horses be PQ'd.

Until AMHR has a general DNA program in place I don't believe that they can or should require that any hardshipped horses be DNA'd before they are given AMHR papers. it's pointless.

And if you are suggesting that the AMHA horses or ASPC ponies may not really be who they are supposed to be, well, why would anyone question those when they don't question that any AMHR horses are who they are supposed to be? Are you suggesting that AMHR breeders are more honest than AMHA or ASPC breeders????


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Oct 27, 2010)

I think we would all be (well ok not all but many) would be surprised at how many behind the barn breedings their are still in both AMHR and ASPC- AMHA had the same issue and DNA and PQ is while not fullproof a help in stopping those issues.

Until we get our paperwork straightened out and truly can say horse A is really the horse that goes with horse A it is silly to get so worked up about letting grade horses in the registry. There are grade or non AMHR or ASPC horses being used in breeding programs

Personally my feelings are when it comes to hardshipping it needs to be yes or no- we allow anything in that meets the height or we allow nothing in without having AMHR papers on both parents.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 27, 2010)

Lisa I disagree so strongly with you on this one that I bet I won't sleep tonight. If they do let the grade geldings in, they will not get many more boys registered with me. I will pull the hair on all of them label it and put it in the freezer and boy if I ever see one of those boys in the show ring I will cause a stink. I will hold the ones I think might make studs- not many- until they are older to register. And the heck with Futurity. No big deal for 20 -30 head a year, but I will do all I can to discourage all I know not to bother either.

About the DNA ing thing, was talking it over with our youngest daughter and she told me not to get my underwear in bundle as soon the states or government will require DNa ing for crossing state lines anyway. I think she just said that to make me mad, but I know that more and more identification is becoming a hot topic with some breeds of animals.

And I do realize that things are changing so fast.


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Oct 27, 2010)

I am not saying I agree with the 50 buck hardship propsoal so no worries there I also do not put tons of stock in the actual pedigree on many AMHR or ASPC papers

So make sure and get some sleep lol do not let this keep you up all night- all any of us can do is voice our opinions, vote when we can and let the chips fall where they may

I am all for implementing DNA and PQ in both ASPC and AMHR although I am very aware the easiest time for anyone to cheat.. is right at the beginning of a new DNA or PQ program


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Oct 27, 2010)

What is the difference between AMHR and ASPC? They are different. ASPC is a breed and has its own studbook. AMHR is a height registry and has its own studbook. No one can get into ASPC without having 2 registered ASPC parents. No one can get into AMHR without having 2 registered AMHR parents unless they meet the height standard and are registered in AMHA, ASPC, and Fabella. ASPC has its own Futurity program, its own Sweepstakes, and its own National show. AMHR has its own Futurity program, its own Sweepstakes, and its own National show.

If you don't see the difference then why are we continuing to separate them? We might as well combine the National show, the studbook and IMO doesn't make ASPC a breed anymore, and just combine it as 1 big height registry. Your a miniature if your 38" and under, any taller then that your considered a shetland. Thats just the way I see it.

So yes they need to be seperated, you need to do seperate paperwork and yes you need to hardship into AMHR if your ASPC. Cause as long as AMHR isn't opened to everybody you have to have ASPC papers and thats considered hardship. If anything maybe double the registration fees or something.


----------



## Minimor (Oct 27, 2010)

LaVern, is that really the way to handle it? If you don't register your colts and sell them off (cheap or not) without any papers and without them ever having been registered, then they are to all intents and purposes "grade" horses, be they geldings or stallions. If AMHR starts allowing grade geldings to be hardshipped in and somewhere down the road the owner of one of those grade colts you sold (whether it is the person you sold it to or someone that it was sold on to after that initial sale) decided to hardship that gelding of theirs into AMHR, quite frankly I don't think there's a thing you could do about it, no matter how much hair you may have stored in your freezer. Where is the problem? The owner has no papers, the horse never had any papers, as a grade gelding it would be eligible to be hardshipped. What are you going to do? Say that you never sold the horse and the DNA results from testing that hair out of your freezer proves that the hardshipped gelding is actually "your" horse that someone else had no business hardshipping? That is hardly kosher, since you did sell the horse, and without papers at that.

Personally I would be inclined to say that it would be better to register all your colts and make sure that you sell them for a good price even if you sell them as geldings. That way they are already registered when you sell them; you are giving them their best chance of making it to the show ring without having to be hardshipped in. Yes, I know that many horses don't have their papers kept up but this is still the best chance of having them keep their papers (far better chance than if those horses never had papers in the first place!)


----------



## LaVern (Oct 28, 2010)

Minimor, Well, I am going to jump up on the stump one more time and I hope I don't sound too sappy.

I was there when we had no Stud Book. I was there when we as a small club all chipped in to send Gary Sauer to Califorina convention maybe twenty years ago, to plead our case. We had no record of even "if" our paper work was being documented. I was there at Convention when Angie begged for a Stud Book. She was patted on the head and as much to say, yes little girl just wait a little longer we are working on it. I was there when Angie finally stood up and demanded a Stud Book. I was at the celebration when we finally got one.

Now some of you may make fun of our Stud Book and say that a lot of what is in it is not correct, but it is all we have.

We are not a breed, We are owned by another breed, who does not want us to be a breed.

That Stud Book is all we have. So if you all think that I am a little protective and sentimental about it, you are right. Okay, it is not perfect, but it is a beginning.

I know that most feel that AMHR is all about promotion of the horses and the showing of our horses so we can brag or sell them and I too love that part. But the documentation of what we have done as breeders--right or wrong -- is what I care about most.

We have come a long way and I do not want to see us go backwards, by letting grades in. That would be like going back 20 years and saying that AMHR horse and our Stud book is nothing. And if our Stud Book is nothing then I as a breeder am also nothing.


----------



## Minimor (Oct 28, 2010)

Yes, I get that you don't want grades to be let in again, and I don't even disagree with you on that.

I just don't see that 'boycotting' the registry by not registering your geldings or gelding prospects is going to help anything. I'm just saying that if you don't register your geldings, you aren't hurting anyone but yourself, and maybe those geldings, or at least some of them.

If grade geldings do get allowed to hardship into AMHR, your refusal to register your geldings isn't going to change that.


----------



## Lisa Strass (Oct 28, 2010)

Since this thread has turned into a lot of DNA discussion...

I get really tired of the argument that it is too expensive, and that our horses just aren't worth it. I get tired of hearing it's too expensive for the "little guy". We are talking about $31 a horse. If the horses you are breeding aren't worth that... then maybe you should slow down on the breeding or at least not breed the ones that aren't worth $31! The market is way saturated, and isn't going to get any better anytime soon, but we still have people churning out horses right and left because they can't leave a broodmare open.

I have slowly been DNA'ing my horses over the last couple of years. Now, I'm not saying we should make it mandatory for DNA right now for everyone... I do think we should take it into consideration when implementing the plan for DNA, but to never do it because it is too expensive is a lame excuse IMO.

Ok, flame suit on, fire away.

Oh, and I love the ASPC/AMHR studbook!


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Oct 28, 2010)

Lisa I agree I think AMHR/ASPC should beable to DNA. Yes DNA cost some, but so is everything else when it comes to owning horses. If DNA cost you too much then don't breed as much, or don't breed at all. If you can't afford to DNA then you can't afford to breed, thats JMO.

I




to those who have already DNA'd their herd. Makes me want to jump on the bandwagon too. Altho I only have geldings right now but if I ever decide to breed again I'll do it.


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Oct 28, 2010)

I agree Lisa and I also understand it can be a financial burden at first.

off topic a bit but I have always felt the same way about the futurity. A futurity is not meant to nominate every single foal you have it is meant to nominate your best of the best- the gamble on your best horses to end up with a amazing foal. I have never understood why it is so cheap to nomimate our horses for the futurities either. I have heard no that would cost to much - well isnt that the whole point of taking a gamble and betting your horse is going to rise above the rest?


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Oct 28, 2010)

The problem is Lisa with the Futurities is the payout is too low. Raise the payouts and raise the fees.


----------



## disneyhorse (Oct 28, 2010)

I don't think adding DNA would make the cost too high. Compared with a lot of big-horse registries, ours is pretty darn cheap to register, show, and nominate for Futurities.

I would be happy to pay DNA fees. DNA can only benefit the breeds.

Andrea


----------



## alphahorses (Oct 28, 2010)

Lisa Strass said:


> Since this thread has turned into a lot of DNA discussion...
> 
> I get really tired of the argument that it is too expensive, and that our horses just aren't worth it. I get tired of hearing it's too expensive for the "little guy". We are talking about $31 a horse. If the horses you are breeding aren't worth that... then maybe you should slow down on the breeding or at least not breed the ones that aren't worth $31!


That was really uncalled for. I didn't say they were not worth - don't put words in people's mouths. I can afford to DNA my horses - I just see no value in it. But there are a lot of people for whom it would be a hardship, and your statement is a slap to those people who are struggling financially right now.

We all need to think outside of our own socio-economic circles once in a while and think about our these decisions impact everyone - rich or poor - not just ourselves.


----------



## Minimor (Oct 28, 2010)

There are those who think that it just "isn't worth it" to pay the extra money for DNA and there are those who believe that it is a good thing but simply cannot afford to DNA a bunch of horses, especially now with the economy as it is.

I sure do think there is value in DNA--it takes awhile to get to that point, but eventually when every horse being used for breeding and every foal that is registered is DNA'd (and to me DNA means PQ) then there is definitely value in it. That way there is no cheating, no accidentally putting the wrong parentage on any papers...and I think that is a good thing for any breed. Like I said, it does take a number of years to get to that point and in the meantime there can still be cheating if someone wants to cheat. If horses are going to be DNA'd without being PQ'd at the same time, then there is no value in it--and if a horse doesn't match up to his listed parents when he is PQ'd but a registry just lets him keep the papers without being shown as being PQ'd--I see no value in that.

Once breeding stock is DNA'd and new foals are required to be DNA'd in order to get their papers, if someone says they cannot afford to DNA their foals then I would have to suggest that they should rethink their breeding program. If a horse isn't worth a $50 or $60 registration fee then I don't see the point in raising that horse. For myself, money is tight. If I want to raise a registered foal but cannot afford the necessary fee to register that foal, whether it does or does not include DNA, I'm not going to raise that foal. If I were breeding with the goal of selling my foals, if I couldn't sell my foals for enough to make the $50 or $60 registration fee worthwhile, I wouldn't bother. In today's economy, with the excess of horses we see in all breeds, is it really worthwhile for any breeder to be raising 30 or 40 foals a year?

And I do agree with Lisa about the futurity. From my experience with other breeds, breeders don't usually nominate every foal to the futurity. They choose which mares they feel are likely to produce the best futurity prospect and nominate those mares only. Fees are much higher in those breeds. Higher fees mean higher payouts. I have never seen the reason why Mini breeders feel it is necessary to nominate every foal on the place--for me that just isn't what the futurity is all about. But, in Mini circles I know that opinion isn't a popular one.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 28, 2010)

I can't afford to do everything I would like to do immediately but I could step by step. My bigger problem is that I am at the age where I physically can't take care of as many babies every year. And I have always said when the day comes that I can not care for them then it is the day to stop.

Well, the old mares are not hard to take care of, but the foals are. They must be handled. And that gets tougher every year for me. So I have decided that the way for me not to have so many is not to breed every mare every year. Or the older ones never again. They can just hang around and live out there lives. They have paid their way.

But here lies the problem. If we all get responsible and decide to perhaps only breed half as many. There goes the HALF of the registries MONEY.

So are we going to lay off half of the staff? Are we going to have the directors pay half of the expenses to go to convention or where ever else they go? Is our office manager going to go only half as much? Are the incentive programs going to be cut in half? Are the ribbons for the area show going to be half as pretty? Is the Congress going to get only half as much as it usually gets?

Will there be only have half as much to spend to heat the office building or half as much to pay our insurance or our lawyer? It goes on and on.

So the dilemma will be how do we keep doing things including things like DNA which will also involve more work for our office staff which will be only half as big, and burrrrrrrrrrrrr, kind of cold if they only get half the heat. Many hard issues for us all. It isn't just the individuals members of AMHR it is the whole registry that we have to consider.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Oct 28, 2010)

The way I see it people are breeding too much as it is, it needs to be cut down so yes that means fewer registrations. Registrations are already dropping and they need to find out why. Is it because the breeders aren't registering them? Is it because there are fewer horses bred, I highly doubt that? Are we losing members as well?


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Oct 28, 2010)

Another thing I was thinking about when it comes to this whole DNAing conversation is whats going on with the Dwarf gene test? Is it getting any closer? Also does anyone know if it would come out like if you were DNA a horse could you at the same time see if its a Dwarf carrier? Or is it something more like when you do a color test? Just something I was wondering. We were hearing about it and thought it was getting closer to finding out to an actual test but I haven't heard much more about it.


----------



## OhHorsePee (Oct 29, 2010)

IMHO nothing that cost money should be passed when the economy is as bad as it is. As always we need to think of the whole registry members not just a few. If a hardship is placed on farms then the horses/ponies are the ones going to suffer.

As for DNA being passed.... You know there are those that cheat. We all have heard several issues on here multiple times. Some think this will stop the cheating. So lets say a person pulls hair from a hackney and claims it is the hairs of an ASPC/AMHR stallion. The resulting foals will pass a DNA parentage test because the hair that the lab has on file for the sire is from the hackney. That same person that cheats will dump that horse/pony that they have their papers for as grades at your local auction house. The cheaters will cheat no matter what cost you place on all of the members.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 29, 2010)

How about this? What if we could just start with the horses and ponies that we already have voluntarily DN'd and PQ'd. Because of the Sweepstakes there are some done already . Maybe there are lots that have already done it. I have only done a few. I am not quite sure how they handle it in office. I think it just goes back to office, which is fine with me.

But if we could get it put on the papers that it is done that would be wonderful. I just love those AMHA parent qualified papers, I love to touch them.

If that is more work for office, maybe they could just have a list with a big star by the names on the website saying DN'd or PQ'd. Or one of those little yellow guys like Mary Lou has.

Wouldn't it look cool to have your horses name on the list. It would be a start. At least acknowledge those that do it. But not make anyone do it. Then when times are better we would already have a system in place.


----------



## MiLo Minis (Oct 29, 2010)

LaVern said:


> How about this? What if we could just start with the horses and ponies that we already have voluntarily DN'd and PQ'd. Because of the Sweepstakes there are some done already . Maybe there are lots that have already done it. I have only done a few. I am not quite sure how they handle it in office. I think it just goes back to office, which is fine with me.
> 
> But if we could get it put on the papers that it is done that would be wonderful. I just love those AMHA parent qualified papers, I love to touch them.
> 
> ...


I think that would create a bit of an unfair advantage in the market for those than can afford to just go out and DNA everyone and/or already has as opposed to those that could use a gradual phase in of DNA-ing. The first people would run out and do it NOW just to able to get that little yellow guy.

I don't breed 30 or 40 foals per year but I am very proud of the few that I do breed. I have a filly from this year that has been shown twice and taken Reserve Grand Champion Mare both times and that is with good competition. I have heard things like "the most exquisite thing in Miniature I have seen in a long time", "WOW! She's gorgeous!", and more. She has not sold yet - does that mean I should stop breeding foals like her? I have worked long and hard on limited funds to reach the point I have and the market is not great right now. Should I give up everything I have put my life into for the last 20 years because of a downturn in the market? It has been my experience that all bad times are followed by good.

I do agree that we should initiate DNA-ing but think it should be phased in to allow those of us that need some time to be able to comply.

I also agree with NOT allowing hardshipping of grade geldings. I have to ask "WHY allow grade GELDINGS in who can have no effect on our registry other than to devalue our already registered stock? Of course they are cheaper! No one has spent any money selecting the best breeding stock they can afford to create them. No one has spent any money raising and showing and marketing their parents so that they can have a NAME. The ones that do that are the ones that truly put money into this registry so why is it that we should even consider allowing grade geldings in? I can't think of a single good reason.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 29, 2010)

MiLo, Isn't that kind of like saying those that can afford to advertise in the Journal have an unfair market advantage. Or those that can afford to travel to shows have an unfair market advantage?


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Oct 29, 2010)

I think AMHR should allow for it to be put on papers that they are DNA'd and also in the studbook.


----------



## kaykay (Oct 30, 2010)

I agree with Lavern its no more an unfair advantage than being able to show or advertise. Honestly DNA costs about the same as a couple bags of feed. I cant afford to do my whole herd at once but if you just do them one by one and phase yourself in its not that bad.

I do think it should be put on hold until the economy recovers but definitely think its needed.

And I also agree that it should be put on their papers that there is DNA on file.

Registrations and memberships are already down right now but I think its due to the economy.


----------



## Sue_C. (Oct 30, 2010)

It doesn't necessarily have to cost a huge amount upon implimentation at all. Very simply...the AMHR can take the same route that AMHA did. They set a date by which all BREEDING horses must be done, and any horses born before that date did not have to be DNA'd. From there on it is simply testing the foals as they are registered.

Also...unless you feel the need to PQ, there is absolutely no need to spend the money to DNA a gelding...so there is a huge percentage that need not be done.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Oct 30, 2010)

Sue_C. said:


> It doesn't necessarily have to cost a huge amount upon implimentation at all. Very simply...the AMHR can take the same route that AMHA did. They set a date by which all BREEDING horses must be done, and any horses born before that date did not have to be DNA'd. From there on it is simply testing the foals as they are registered.
> 
> Also...unless you feel the need to PQ, there is absolutely no need to spend the money to DNA a gelding...so there is a huge percentage that need not be done.


I agree that this is the route that we need to take.


----------



## Louise (Oct 30, 2010)

Question Do you think that AMHR would except our DNA from our AMHA horses or would we have to DNA them again?


----------



## stormy (Oct 30, 2010)

Dna is DNA, tests are not owned by AMHA but by UCDavis...perhaps this is a way to begin, transfer DNA info on double registered horses to AMHR...would be a fee to do that I am sure but would get a start on things!


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Oct 30, 2010)

Louise said:


> Question Do you think that AMHR would except our DNA from our AMHA horses or would we have to DNA them again?


I know atleast in the AMHR Stallion Sweepstakes they did accept DNA from UC Davis. You just had to send a copy and they would file it over at Kentucky. So I'm sure they would, atleast at first.


----------



## MiLo Minis (Oct 30, 2010)

LaVern said:


> MiLo, Isn't that kind of like saying those that can afford to advertise in the Journal have an unfair market advantage. Or those that can afford to travel to shows have an unfair market advantage?


Yes but Journal advertising, or any advertising for that matter, as well as showing is a voluntary thing that should already be budgeted for - I know I do. DNA testing would be a new expense not previously budgeted in and would be compulsory. As long as it is phased in as Sue C. suggests below that would be fine but to give certain members the advantage of advertising for them that their horses are already DNA tested seems to me to be a bit unfair.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Oct 30, 2010)

MiLo Minis said:


> Yes but Journal advertising, or any advertising for that matter, as well as showing is a voluntary thing that should already be budgeted for - I know I do. DNA testing would be a new expense not previously budgeted in and would be compulsory. As long as it is phased in as Sue C. suggests below that would be fine but to give certain members the advantage of advertising for them that their horses are already DNA tested seems to me to be a bit unfair.


I don't see a reason why members that do DNA can't put on their own websites saying "We DNA" or advertise listing a horse for sale and say "Huge plus this horse is DNAd". What I would be against is having a website saying these members DNA. I guess I don't see the HUGE highlight in creating a own page just to show members who DNAs. If you personally feel that you can sell a bunch of horses just because they are DNA'd then by all means adversitse on your own terms.


----------



## stormy (Oct 30, 2010)

The arguement that DNA testing would give an unfair advantage to some just does not make sense! I could already advertise that my horses are DNA tested as the majority are AMHA/AMHR but then anyone looking at my horses would already know they are DNA'd because they are AMHA also...is that an unfair advatage???

Yes phase it in but lets get on it! This breed getting a bad name because of unscrupulous breeders sure doesn't help sell horses either.


----------



## sdmini (Oct 30, 2010)

I do not think the DNA is owned by UC Davis but rather AMHA contracts UC Davis to run the testing. The test themselves are owned by AMHA. I doubt that the AMHA results will be co-shared.


----------



## Jean_B (Oct 30, 2010)

sdmini said:


> I do not think the DNA is owned by UC Davis but rather AMHA contracts UC Davis to run the testing. The test themselves are owned by AMHA. I doubt that the AMHA results will be co-shared.


As a member of the AMHR Stallion Sweepstakes committee and involved in the collection of AMHA DNA for the purposes of the Sweepstakes - perhaps I can shed a little light on this.

AMHA has arranged for it's dna to be run by UC-Davis. Under the terms of the contract - the DNA markers are sent to both the AMHA office, as well as the horse owner.

AMHR has arranged for its dna to be run by the U of Kentucky and under the terms of that contract - the DNA markers are sent to the AMHR office....they are NOT sent to the owner, nor is there any notice to the owner that it has been run. The price for running the DNA at Kentucky under the terms of the contract is $31. If you as an individual do NOT use the contract form.....it will cost you $40 and the marker report is sent to you, the owner....NOT to the office. The only way the office would even know you had a horse DNA tested is if you sent a copy of the marker report to them.

The reason that the U of KY does not release the markers to the owner is that is how it is spelled out in the contract. If they were to release those marker reports or parentage qualified reports to the owner or anyone else (i.e., the sweepstakes committee), they would jeoparize their international standing....and they run dna for much bigger breed organizations than ASPC/AMHR.

Now....we (the AMHR Stallion Sweepstakes Committee) have been able to make arrangements to have AMHA dna markers accepted by Kentucky....but only under very strict circumstances. The U of KY gave me a spreadsheet - and persons involved in the sweepstakes with AMHA-registered horses can send me a copy of their marker report. I then enter those markers on the spreadsheet. UC-Davis doesn't run for all of the same markers as KY does - but there are enough of the same ones that they can successfully do a Parentage Qualified decision. The U of KY will not accept marker reports from individual breeders/owners to be entered into their data base, but because I was given a very specific spreadsheet to enter the data into - they will accept that....for the purpose of parentage qualifying winning foals.

So....the short answer is - unless your AMHA horse is a sire or dam in the AMHR Stallion Sweepstakes, and if you wish to have DNA on file also with the U of KY - you will need to submit a hair sample to them.

NOW PAY ATTENTION: The form on the AMHR site is currently incorrect - it is the generic "anyone can use" form and is not the one to be used under the terms of the ASPC/AMHR contract. It has been brought to everyone's attention - but so far they are saying....."Oh - just tell everyone to pencil in "ASPC/AMHR Contract" and that the fee is $31, not $40. GRRR.


----------



## stormy (Oct 30, 2010)

I would say if we are going to have to double DNA AMHA/AMHR horses that would not be a good thing. Hopefully both will be accepted by AMHR and parent qualified horses in AMHA will be qualified in R also.


----------



## LaVern (Oct 30, 2010)

Jean, Whaaaaaaaaaat? I haven't got a clue to what you said. I know that someone sent me sent me a copy of the DNA on Express from Kentucky. I don't know who sent me it though.

I reread it and think I get, it. So if you do it as an individual you pay the 40 bucks and send the results to the office. If you do it under AMHR contract, you get it for 31, but you don't get a copy it goes straight to office. Right?

Why in the heck would it jeopardize internal standing to release results.

I think you are getting me mixed up. Is there separate rules for the Sweepstakes?

Why would the Sweepstakes get to do something that we can't? That doesn't seem right.

Slept on this and I think I get it now. These Sweepstakes horse have to be checked after they won. Right?


----------



## Jean_B (Oct 31, 2010)

LaVern - the results would have been sent to you by the AMHR office because you requested a copy from them.

DO NOT quote me on this, but I believe Kentucky will accept dna from UC-Davis....BUT they will charge a small fee....BECAUSE it requires staff time to enter the data into their system--and unlike me volunteering my time for this....their staff have to be paid. Again, don't quote me on this, but I believe this to be the case.

For the Sweepstakes, it did not take any staff time because I was the one that did all of the data entry onto a spreadsheet, and they were able to simply do a "dump" of that data from the spreadsheet into their data base.

As far as why they might lose their accreditation - I don't know all of the legal ramifications, but under the terms of their contract with AMHR - if it is submitted under the contract price, KY MUST abide by the terms of the contract, which requires the DNA be sent to the office, not to the owner. A contract is a LEGALLY BINDING DOCUMENT and if they break a contract with one contract holder, their results could be "suspect" with other contract holders, and they run test results for MUCH MUCH bigger organizations than ours. They are not going to jeopardize their "standing" because an owner is having a snit over the fact that the results do not come to them. The owner can get the results from the office. (Personally I don't care if I see the marker report as long as I know it's on file both in KY and AMHR.) This is directly from the KY Director's mouth when I contacted her regarding how to go about finding out if the winning foals were in fact parentage qualified.

And it was a very simple matter....I submitted a list of the foals that I was wanting the results of the parentage qualification tests to the AMHR office. When the results came in they contacted me to let me know that all of the top tens were "legal". Now....if I had had to depend on the owners to get results of whether or not the foals were in fact legal....well, it's safe to say it would take a WHOLE lot longer to get everything on the sweepstakes "put to bed," and no one would want to wait any longer than necessary to get those pay-outs.

And yes - the top ten foals had to be parentage qualified before we pay out a dime of their winnings. That is why they were not allowed to leave the arena area until we pulled hair on all of the top tens. (We pulled to 10th, even though we pay to 8th, just in case one did not parent qualify.)


----------



## Sandee (Oct 31, 2010)

Jean_B said:


> As a member of the AMHR Stallion Sweepstakes committee and involved in the collection of AMHA DNA for the purposes of the Sweepstakes - perhaps I can shed a little light on this.
> 
> AMHA has arranged for it's dna to be run by UC-Davis. Under the terms of the contract - the DNA markers are sent to both the AMHA office, as well as the horse owner.
> 
> .........................................


Ahhh, you might want to check that! I had my mare DNA'd and PQ'd when I had her AMHA papers brought permanent. That was this past year. I never received any information on her DNA. I wouldn't even know if they got it except her papers now read Parent Qualified. I had to request it from the office for my stallion 2 years ago. Personally, the left hand very often doesn't know what the right hand is doing at the offices.


----------



## Jean_B (Oct 31, 2010)

Hmmmm.....I have ALWAYS gotten a copy of my AMHA dna markers. Not sure but maybe I put a "standing" order in at the AMHA office to have them sent to me?!? It's been so long that I set all of that up with my first AMHA dna that I cannot remember (translation..."senior moment").

But I have to add - the key to a successful relationship with both associations is to keep the lines of communication open rather than pointing fingers (most often I've found that when I point a finger, I realize later on that there are three fingers pointing back at ME!)


----------



## Lisa Strass (Nov 1, 2010)

alphahorses said:


> That was really uncalled for. I didn't say they were not worth - don't put words in people's mouths. I can afford to DNA my horses - I just see no value in it. But there are a lot of people for whom it would be a hardship, and your statement is a slap to those people who are struggling financially right now.
> 
> We all need to think outside of our own socio-economic circles once in a while and think about our these decisions impact everyone - rich or poor - not just ourselves.



I didn't respond directly to any one person's post, so I'm sorry you feel the need to defend yourself. However, you did respond directly to my post, and I guess you have a better feel for my wallet than I do!

I am thinking about everyone (including the horses), and I will stand by my statement. *Regardless of socio-economic status, if a person can't afford $31 as a one time fee for DNA for a horse, how can that person afford to feed the horse, give it proper farrier care or veterninary care for the 30 years of its life?*

I have no problem with the opinion that you don't think DNA is worth anything. That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. Support that argument. The whole point of my post was that using the argument that DNA is too expensive is weak. And again, just so it isn't taken out of context... if DNA is going to be implemented, it will need to be phased in because DNA'ing an entire herd of horses at one time would be a significant hit to face unexpectedly.

Personally, I do see value in DNA. I don't care if the registry requires it or not, and I don't care if they make it mandatory. But for those that don't want to see it mandatory, use an agrument other than it is too expensive if you want to make a strong case.

And really all of this is just a hypothetical discussion... there aren't any proposals to require mandatory DNA for this years convention anyway.


----------



## disneyhorse (Nov 1, 2010)

Lisa Strass said:


> I didn't respond directly to any one person's post, so I'm sorry you feel the need to defend yourself. However, you did respond directly to my post, and I guess you have a better feel for my wallet than I do!
> 
> I am thinking about everyone (including the horses), and I will stand by my statement. *Regardless of socio-economic status, if a person can't afford $31 as a one time fee for DNA for a horse, how can that person afford to feed the horse, give it proper farrier care or veterninary care for the 30 years of its life?*


I agree! A one-time fee of thirty bucks is NOTHING in the long run of horse care! I spend more than that on a single hoof trim every six weeks.

Andrea


----------



## ruffian (Nov 1, 2010)

I wanted to give a different perspective of DNA. My daughter bought a dog - paid $800 for a Newfoundland. Why - I don't know - but that's a different story!






As the dog grew the countour of his head and the curliness of his coat made them question his background. DNA testing proved that he was only 1/2 Nefooie - and 1/2 Golden Retriever!!!

This at this point isn't viable as a breed identifications for miniatures. Maybe for Shetlands, but not sure there either, but it is great for proving parentage.


----------

