# Stupid Old AMHR Breeder



## LaVern (Nov 16, 2012)

Just found out from my director that it is true that the 100 fee to hardship into AMMR is to be continued for 2013. Guess that is what majority want.

So I have some advise for beginner miniature horse enthusiasts. (My advise, not my directors)

Whatever you do when you are buying or raising miniature horses, is be sure they are AMHA registered. Be sure that the stud reports for any bred mare have been filed. Don't worry about the AMHR. You can always slap them into AMHR for 100.00.

Keep your AMHA paperwork up to snuff. AMHA stands strongly behind it's breeders.

If you have one that looks show worthy then you may want to slap them in, because AMHR is the place to show, but otherwise there is no use doing the other stuff.


----------



## eagles ring farm (Nov 16, 2012)

If I understand what your director meant I strongly disagree with them. We have shown AMHR in the past but are now concentrating on* AMHA*.

*We prefer AMHA* now because we have no interest in showing against or breeding Shetlands.

(nothing IMO wrong with them they are gorgeous also, but our interest lies in the miniature horses)

So for our interests we would be sure they are AMHA registered and would take advantage of the AMHR hardship as of now to have our horses doubled registered. But will be more interested in AMHA for our breeding program even though there are no shows within a reasonable distance to where we live now. We can place them with a trainer who will get them there for us as traveling over night to show is not a real option for us right now.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 16, 2012)

Personally I would be careful with taking that advice. As I understand it this is still only a sale, there isn't anything saying you will be able to get R papers for $100 even two years from now. It might go back up to $100/$400 for 2014.

What if-- and I've heard a few people talking about this--what if in the not too distant future the hardship fees go higher than $200/$400. What if AMHA horses then have to be inspected prior to hardshipping? Then I think people would wish they never took Lavern's advice!

Just something to consider. The possibility is always there!

Edited to add--I am glad Lewella posted her clarification; I knew that thr OP was Renee's opinion, but had started wondering if everyone else understood that.


----------



## Lewella (Nov 16, 2012)

I am Renee's director and I quote the exact wording of my email response to her question as to if the Hardship sale was continuing for 2013: "Yes the hardship sale was extended through the end of 2013." The rest is strictly Renee speaking HER opinion!


----------



## Field-of-Dreams (Nov 16, 2012)

LaVern said:


> Don't worry about the AMHR. You can always slap them into AMHR for 100.00.


Yeah, but if I keep up my paperwork I can register that foal for TWENTY dollars, no charge for a stallion report. And he keeps his pedigree, unlike a hardship, where he'll lose it.

You know, you never have anything nice to say about AMHR anymore. It's getting old.


----------



## 2minis4us (Nov 16, 2012)

LaVern, have you had your morning coffee yet ? Please don't call yourself a fool !


----------



## disneyhorse (Nov 16, 2012)

Field-of-Dreams said:


> Yeah, but if I keep up my paperwork I can register that foal for TWENTY dollars, no charge for a stallion report. And he keeps his pedigree, unlike a hardship, where he'll lose it.
> 
> You know, you never have anything nice to say about AMHR anymore. It's getting old.


I'm with Field Of Dreams here. Staying on top of registration in AMHR is cheaper than hard shipping everything. And this is a SALE not normal fees. And, negativity gets you nowhere. I would rather buy a horse from a breeder that promotes the registries and is positive rather than one that continually says "the registries think my horses are worthless so, so do I"... And others may also feel the same way.


----------



## chandab (Nov 16, 2012)

That sale does nothing for those lovely B-size horses. I love my Bs, so buying an AMHA registered horse and hardshipping isn't likely to happen.

You gotta keep up with that AMHR paperwork, its so much easier to register them as foals.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 16, 2012)

I am sorry if I didn't state that clearly. The post is my advise, not my directors. Sorry if I was not clear.

But I have to repeat, that I think I am one of, if not the biggest fools in the history of AMHR breeders. I have tried to fight for the straight AMHR registered horse for too long. Sadly, I have to finally admit AMHR, is in my opinion, a hundred dollar flop house for Fabella breeders, Shetland Pony breeders and AMHA breeders.

I should have listened to Lowell. He said,

"Tall for show

Little for Doe"

"AMHR for Show

AMHA for Doe"

Added - Yes, Field of Dreams, It is getting old and so am I. But maybe there does come some wisdom with age. You gotta know when to fold em. I have fought a loosing battle, They are "only amhr horses and no amount of my shooting my mouth off is going to change that.


----------



## chandab (Nov 16, 2012)

Keep fighting, I love my straight AMHR miniatures. I'd have more, if hubby would let me, but he says a dozen is enough. [What does he know about how many minis is enough.




]


----------



## HGFarm (Nov 16, 2012)

I like both registries and I too, dont feel that negativity gets anybody anything but more sour grapes.

The sale doesnt benefit B sized horses? Really? What about all the large A sized horses that outgrow their papers? And there are a lot. Hmmmm.

I like A's and B's. I prefer to keep my herd 34 or less and double registered. If I am adding something, I am first and foremost going to add something that is double registered so I dont have to hardship into one or the other. I have had to a couple of times in past years, but only because I liked the horse enough to do so.

In MY opinion, having an under 34" horse that is only A or only R is limiting your market value to HALF of what it could be as a breeder - as many people like different things- some show only R, some only A and some both. Why not cater to as much as you can??


----------



## Riverrose28 (Nov 16, 2012)

Sad fact of life, the AMHA breeders are breeding for a tall horse to win in the show ring, they see that said young horse is going to go over, so they sell. They don't bother to register into AMHR so the cost is passed on to the buyer! Another Sad fact of life, the "B" miniature can't compete in the show ring against the ASPC/AMHR miniature, so many new people become discouraged and give up. Now on the bright side, you can buy an AMHA registered mini, hardship it inot AMHR and breed it to an ASPC/AMHR horse and possable result in a show stopper! Just something to think about!


----------



## chandab (Nov 16, 2012)

HGFarm said:


> The sale doesnt benefit B sized horses? Really? What about all the large A sized horses that outgrow their papers? And there are a lot. Hmmmm.


If you're an honest buyer and seller...	The new owner of an AMHA over horse wouldn't be able to honestly transfer AMHA papers to hardship AMHR, as being over papers should be turned in. If the horse is a youngster, before going permanent, you would be able to transfer AMHA and then hardship AMHR, true.

But, if you like B-size minis to start with; how many really want to pay membership to AMHA for a transfer of ownership just to be able to hardship to AMHR. If the horse is already registered AMHR, there is only one membership to deal with.


----------



## HGFarm (Nov 16, 2012)

Well I would consider myself an AMHA breeder, since all mine are AMHA, and I do HOPE they dont go over, but it's also a 'sad fact of life' that they do, LOL

But there ya go Riverrose- that's some food for thought.

Every breed I have ever been involved in seems to go through different 'fads' or styles every few years. The problem with keeping straight R as they are, and I personally see nothing wrong with them, so I am NOT bashing them in any way, is that they apparently are not the 'fad' lately, so are not 'winning'. Here's another sad fact of life though - nothing would ever improve if it wasn't changed in some way. If you are willing to stay the same all your life, you are going to 'fall behind' and just be stagnant. Nobody is showing horses that looked like they did in the 70's, or the 80's or the 90's. Things are constantly changing. Shucks, look at the styles of clothing and hair on people during each of those decades of showing, lol

Do I think AMHR's should look like a Shetland? No, because if I wanted a Shetland I would buy one, but things still change anyhow. We may not agree, but unless you are willing to 'keep up' with the 'latest' then ..........??

If having Shetlands beating out the R's in an R show is upsetting all the R breeders/showing people, then close the books and dont any more Shetlands to cross register.

I liked the original look of the 1965 Ford Mustang, and by doggies, they have gone and changed it a bunch of times!

If an A horse goes over, yes the papers should be canceled, however to hardship that horse into R, you must send in a copy of those A papers, as well all know. So you make a copy, send that off to R, do your hardship and then you cancel the A papers. It's a pretty simple procedure. However if your horses are already double registered, you simply cancel the A papers and continue on with the R that you already have.


----------



## vvf (Nov 16, 2012)

JMO

I love my AMHR "only" horses.... I love the AMHR registry.. I am happy they are doing this for another year, I just wish they had done it a few years ago when I hardshipped an AMHA "only" stallion into AMHR.. Sure would have saved me some money.. Oh well..

If i happen to run across a horse this year that is worthy of AMHR hardship, you can bet I will be happy to save the money... Yeah AMHR !!


----------



## LaVern (Nov 16, 2012)

I can see that I am in minority, and that is the way it works. Majority rules. I guess I just will have to figure out what to do and which way to go.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 16, 2012)

Hi, Diane, You are so right in my opinion. Yours are very wonderful marketable miniature horses. Mine are not, as they are just old B horses that can never be anything but that. I was so foolish to ever think they were worth anything.

And yes it is getting old, but I don't give a hoot.


----------



## chandab (Nov 16, 2012)

LaVern said:


> Hi, Diane, You are so right in my opinion. Yours are very wonderful marketable miniature horses. Mine are not, as they are just old B horses that can never be anything but that. I was so foolish to ever think they were worth anything.
> 
> And yes it is getting old, but I don't give a hoot.


Stop it, you have some of the nicest horses out there. And, those of us who love those B miniatures, love exactly what you have. I have no shows anywhere near me, so showing isn't an issue for my preference, but size is... I love the Bs and make my straight miniature.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Nov 16, 2012)

I know your frustrated but everything you are saying is going against your breeding program. It's a shame really. I was for this hardshipping sale this year (2012) but to extend it out I think is asking a lil much. I still wish they would give members relief by lowering their membership fee. We need more members! This sale will do nothing for me, didn't this year, nor next year.

I wish the members had a voice in this at Convention, I wonder how this vote would go. I also think after this sale the hardship fee needs to up, like a lot. AMHA will be closed, AMHR will be the only miniature registry allowing hardshipping, so no more sales, must go up in price. I agree with LaVern's feeling in a way, perhaps not in those exact same words lol. But with AMHA closing it's really limiting my choices and it's just a lil too late. I will continue to stay with AMHR depsite the direction it has taken and enjoy with what matters to me the most.

Now lets just enjoy our minis no matter how they are papered.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 16, 2012)

Thanks Chandab. I love those old B girls too.

I'll just add one more time and then shut up for the night, the kids tell everyone I've had a stroke so they aren't so embarrassed when I go on.

I just want to say, that the cheap hardshipping doesn't do anything for the AMHR miniature horse, it in fact devalues it. It seem that we should do all we can to make our AMHR horses seem valuable.

It does add value to the AMHA horse. 100 your in.

It does add value to the ASPC pony. 100 your in.

It does add value to the Falabella. 100 your in.

I helps everyone except the AMHR only breeder.


----------



## Relic (Nov 16, 2012)

Living in a province that is mainly AMHA l am glad that AMHR had this sale..as of Nov 12 l've hardshipped 14 mares and 1 stallion into the AMHR which saved me a lot. Now that l see this sale continues through 2013 l might still do the rest of the broodmares making whats left after cutting back to half the minis all double registered...crazy in a way but who knows what the future holds up this way the day might come when all AMHA have a better chance of selling as double registered..l remember when l went ahead and did both of my farm prefix at 50 bucks a pop and then within months without much warning the price went what l now consider pretty high.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 17, 2012)

Good Morning, I got a call, and I don't think the person is very reliable, but she said that she heard that they were talking about dropping it to 50.00 next year, so maybe you should wait. Course maybe it will be free the year after that.


----------



## Devon (Nov 17, 2012)

A Miniatute Horse is a horse under 38" it's not really a breed yet and really it doesn't make sense to not call a horse under 38" a miniature


----------



## LaVern (Nov 17, 2012)

Oh, another word to the wise. Be aware that if you do hardship your horses into from AMHA to AMHR, you are perhaps cutting your own throat. Once you do it, you have to keep it up. AMHA horse can be hardshipped any time, but AMHR horses can't come back in if the proper paperworkd has not been done. They must have stud reports sent in and all the other stuff.

Keep the AMHA stuff up and knock 100.00 off to clients.


----------



## Make A Wish Miniatures (Nov 17, 2012)

Lavern, I purchased two mares from Dakota miniatures,they are both your breeding. I was thrilled to get these R only mares( I have always admired your horses) One is bred to an AMHA/AMHR stallion the other to an AMHR/ASPC stallion I can't wait to see the foals from these mares they will be R foals I don't think it hurts AMHR only breeders that the hardship price has been droppped. In todays economy a lot of people have put off registering their AMHA horses into R and now they will be able to. If a horse goes a little over 34 inches it should not be treated as if it was worthless ,now people will find it easier to turn to AMHR for breeding or showing that horse.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 17, 2012)

This is inaccurate....you can file late stallion reports, there is no age limit on registering Miniatures, horses not made permanent by the end of their 3 year old year can be brought permanent later for a mere $5 extra.

In any case a responsible breeder DOES keep up with paperwork. If they don't, and for whatever reason they then cannot get things brought up to date and obtain registration papers for their horses they have only themselves to blame--that's the case for anyone breeding the B size horses (no option there to register with AMHA and hardship in) and so there is no reason why people with A size horses cannot live within the same parameters.

Bitterness...especially when it is expressed to potential buyers and the general public...will cost you more in business than this hardshipping sale will!

With memberships having dropped off so much in the past few years (from 11000 at the peak to just 4500 this year is what I heard somewhere) anything that brings in membership and registration revenue is a good thing for the registry! It is good business sense.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 17, 2012)

Got you on this one Minimor It is very accuate. AMHA horses don't need a stud report. AMHR horses do.

25 years of trying to do everything. It is my biggest fear that I would ever do anything wrong.

Bitterness sort of, Saddness for sure.

How can you compete with your own registry?

These horses are nothing without there registration papers, and if our registry says that they will sell them for 100.00. that tells me what they think of the AMHR breeder.

I can't figure out for the life of my why our AMHR officials like AMHA breeders and ASPC breeders and Falabella breeders more than me and other AMHR breeders. Guess that is the way it is.

Another one bits the dust. Renee LaBarre Reiten Lucky Hart Ranch Petesburg N.D.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 17, 2012)

Yes, I am well aware that AMHR requires a stallion report. But, if you miss sending one in this year you can still do it next year. No big deal, just $25 extra....I know this because I had to pay it once when a mare I didn't know got bred (loose stallion) turned up in foal. <and yes, since then if a stallion gets out, or the mare gets in with the stallion, I send in a stallion report just in case>

Honestly--if a stallion report is too difficult for a breeder to cope with then that breeder shouldn't be one.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 17, 2012)

Thanks for the advise, I should not be a breeder of AMHR horses. I'm sick of doing stuff that AMHR says is not important for my competition to do.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Nov 17, 2012)

Am I missing something here? AMHA does make you fill out a stallion breeding report and you have to pay for it! AMHR yes you also require to fill out a stallion breeding report and its FREE! As long as you get it within the time period other wise you must also pay. I don't understand what you are saying? AMHA you have to pay higher fees to do any registration work. AMHR is more reasonable with their prices.


----------



## minih (Nov 17, 2012)

AMHR is a height registry. I think a lot of people forget this fact and try to make more out of it than there is. What the person taking advantage of the lower hardship fees is doing is increasing the value of that horse for possible use of that horse that was not possible before. I took advantage of the lower fee this year to hardship into AMHR, had plans to do this anyway, it was just icing on the cake. I really do not see myself looking for a horse this year just so I can hardship it cheaper now.


----------



## RayVik (Nov 17, 2012)

There are certainly many points being made regarding the philosophical aspects of this decision and many carry some degree of merit. Their is however something that in my opinion is fundamental to this decission and that is the impact and justification. The original decission should of been made with certain specific goals ie. increase income , increase membership, enhance marketability, some considerations for improvement other then just sounding good at the time. Now it has been in effect for 1 year and has been renewed for another year. So where is this documentation or spread sheet or financial report broken down to explain and justify the continuance. Perhaps I am alone but given the facts and understanding of what has been accomplished by this " sale" I might better accept any negitive impact that I might perceive.

I was at convention and saw or recieved no such information and I do feel its important enough that the general membership should have access to it

The solice of knowing the organization I support operates with sound management principles that enhances its longevity can go a long way toward accepting things that impact my involvement.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 17, 2012)

I remember AMHA did require stallion reports--wasn't there a fee for the report plus $10 per mare? I don't keep up with AMHA now so perhaps that has changed? And yes, the R report is free as long as you send it in by the deadline for the current year. Nothing difficult about that.

Ordinary registration is still cheap compared to hardshipping--free stallion report and $20 to register a foal. That is still a good deal compared to $100 + $20 to hardship an AMHA filly or gelding foal, or $200 + $20 if it is a colt....or make that +$60 if it is a mature horse.

Truth is there are a good many people who already have horses they like that they want to register R--if the cost to register R were prohibitive there is a very good chance they would just stick with what they have--it wouldn't guarantee that they would go out and buy another horse that has R registration. In the grand scheme if things I would be surprised if any R breeder suffers any financial loss because of this sale.

.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 17, 2012)

Make a Wish. What two mares did you get? Did you get Bally? If you did and ever want to sell her please let me know. Please let me know what they have.

Rayvik you have got to be the smartest guy out there. Man, you can say stuff good.

I don't know about all the economics talk, but it down here on the farm it ain't good for the long run, if your company says you ain't worth anthing.

Gotta go buy a new fridge and stove, and maybe a dishwasher with the money I am saving.


----------



## Lloydyne (Nov 17, 2012)

Obviously I'm not a breeder, I registered my little AMHA guy with AMHR and PINTO just to have more shows to go to. Have no intention of winning anything but I'm sure I will have fun.


----------



## JennyB (Nov 17, 2012)

As we have been seeing that taller ponies are winning across the country and at the AMHR Nationals..there is nothing you can do about that. AMHR is part of the ASPC, and ASPC started AMHR. I don't like the fact that AMHA horses and Falabella get in basically for FREE, because $100. is not much and they are not inspected. I have nothing against the AMHR and AMHA horses who are not ASPC registered, I use to have some myself. But It makes no sense to me why AMHA and Falabella horses(really Shetland ponies) even want to be AMHR registered as they have a hard time winning anymore and it's only going to get worse. For those of you who remember the Shetland boom days when a Shetland couldn't win if it didn't have close Hackney lines, most of the time kept secret is similar to what is happening now in the AMHR shows and Nationals. The Shetland pony is reigning at the shows and I for one like this trend. A taller, more refined pony has more movement and better looks IMO...What I don't like is the ASPC Congress ponies winning who look "again" like Hackney's with no reguard to a true Classic and an even truer Foundation pony. They made a big mistake by taking off the A and B designations on pony papers...and if you didn't know this there "are" tiny Hackney ponies showing at the AMHR Nationals!

If you don't like what I say that's too bad

Blessings,

Jenny


----------



## Make A Wish Miniatures (Nov 17, 2012)

Lavern I have Ballet on Broadway by George I bred her to Establo Maximo.( OMG can this mare trot.) I have Arctic Maid by George and bred her to HCM Bucks Fast Trac.Both mares due first part of March.I'll let you know what they have.


----------



## Magic (Nov 17, 2012)

I have both AMHA/AMHR horses, and AMHR-only B size horses. I love them both.	This year I bought two AMHA-only registered horses that I otherwise would not have purchased, simply because AMHR has the half-price from-AMHA hardship sale going on, and it made it more affordable for me to register them AMHR. Every horse I have is, or ends up being, registered in AMHR, that is the registry that I show in, and if breeding an AMHA/AMHR horse to an AMHR horse, then the horse can be registered. In the future I won't be buying any AMHA-only registered horses, regardless of how nice they may be. 

 I don't see this sale on hardshipping as a devaluing of AMHR horses. I see it as an opportunity for AMHR to get as many otherwise not yet AMHR registered horses into the registry, which will help finances for the registry now, and also in the future. 

 Harshipping a horse into AMHR with this sale at $100 doesn't make those horses "only worth" that $100, any more than the normal hardship price of $200 made them "worth only" $200. 

 I realize that the economy and bottoming-out market of horses is depressing, but I'm not giving up. I do this for the love of the horses, not to make a buck (good thing, since it's a big money losing proposition). Things change, and are always changing, that's life. How we deal with it is what determines our happiness and our futures. *shrug*


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Nov 17, 2012)

RayVik said:


> There are certainly many points being made regarding the philosophical aspects of this decision and many carry some degree of merit. Their is however something that in my opinion is fundamental to this decission and that is the impact and justification. The original decission should of been made with certain specific goals ie. increase income , increase membership, enhance marketability, some considerations for improvement other then just sounding good at the time. Now it has been in effect for 1 year and has been renewed for another year. So where is this documentation or spread sheet or financial report broken down to explain and justify the continuance. Perhaps I am alone but given the facts and understanding of what has been accomplished by this " sale" I might better accept any negitive impact that I might perceive.
> 
> I was at convention and saw or recieved no such information and I do feel its important enough that the general membership should have access to it
> 
> The solice of knowing the organization I support operates with sound management principles that enhances its longevity can go a long way toward accepting things that impact my involvement.


I heard it was a success, but haven't heard numbers or anything. I got the financial reports that they handed out at Convention and someone on here said that membership numbers were up, and you would think with this sale that would be true. Compared to 2011 we gained new members by around $2,500. Renewed members went down from 2011 and lost over $7,500. Secondary membership is also down compared to 2011 and you can't tell with youth membership because its free and doesn't give actual numbers. You also got to remember that in 2012 you had to become a member to do any paperwork in 2011 that wasn't necessary. So I'm not sure if the sale is really bringing in new members to recover the ones that aren't renewing and we must find out why. It also says we gained slightly in miniature registrations by almost $12,500. That may include the new hardship registrations but does not include the actual hardship money and for some reason that was left off the sheet.



Minimor said:


> I remember AMHA did require stallion reports--wasn't there a fee for the report plus $10 per mare? I don't keep up with AMHA now so perhaps that has changed? And yes, the R report is free as long as you send it in by the deadline for the current year. Nothing difficult about that.
> 
> Ordinary registration is still cheap compared to hardshipping--free stallion report and $20 to register a foal. That is still a good deal compared to $100 + $20 to hardship an AMHA filly or gelding foal, or $200 + $20 if it is a colt....or make that +$60 if it is a mature horse.
> 
> ...


If you make it by the deadline it's just $10. If you go past the deadline then its $25 plus $10 per mare that's listed. If the foal is born and the report is not filed then you must go thru the DNA process. So if anyone thinks AMHR is unkind think again, and be more stressful and more expensive if you forget in AMHA and it's not very forgiving. You can't blame the registries if you forget paperwork.


----------



## horsehug (Nov 17, 2012)

For the record, I think your straight AMHR B size horses are GORGEOUS, Renee! I have admired your program for many years!

I "personally" love the tiny ones best of all, maybe partly because I only have 2 acres, and partly because they are easier for me to handle. (I am OLD!).

But most of mine are double AMHA and AMHR, while a couple are straight AMHR. And I love them all!




The two straight AMHR ones are two of my very favorites





Susan O.


----------



## Margo_C-T (Nov 17, 2012)

I was around and into miniatures before AMHR instituted the B(now 'over")division, and will say that I then, and still now, felt that the primary reason for that was to increase revenue(to support the Shetlands). That said, I have come to appreciate that size range, and to believe it is the 'best' one if you are seriously into 'real world' driving(as opposed to breed show ring). And, several years ago, BEFORE any special-price sales, I registered all of my remaining AMHA horses (except the now-30 YO mare, who was never going to be shown, be bred, or leave my ownership ever again), because I realized that doing so made them MORE, not less, valuable and saleable! I currently own an unregistered 37" gelding to drive; I recently paid a goodly sum to register him in PtHA, and would have been happy to hardship him into AMHR if I still could. I have NO interest in breed showing, which is why I was willing to buy unregistered(horse had extensive ground driving/prep work under a knowledgable driver; that was a major attraction); however, I'd have been prepared to put him into AMHR if I could have, because I do believe it appreciates their value, NOT depreciates it.My 'over' horse IS a gelding, and while not a halter horse by any means, he can hold his own in the movement department, while not in any way 'threatening' or lessening the value of already-registered AMHR horses.

Renee, I have seen pics of your horses and think you have EXCELLENT quality animals(and I am very critical regarding quality!); IMO, you are being WAY too hard on yourself and your proveably excellent breeding program!

Best wishes, no matter what!

Margo


----------



## tagalong (Nov 17, 2012)

> AMHA horses don't need a stud report.


LaVern - as others have pointed out that ^ is simply not true. Gee, I wonder what I have been filling out all these years....






It seems you are unhappy about a lot of things that are not factual... I am sorry that you are so frustrated.

Everything here is double-registered AMHA/AMHR or AMHR/ASPC. Except for the Shetlands who would not measure in for R...


----------



## LaVern (Nov 17, 2012)

You misunderstood - you do not have to send a stud report into AMHR when you want to hardship the horse to AMHR. Of course you have to do your AMHA stud reports. Do all the AMHA stuff and flop them over.

All you need is a copy of their AMHA papers.

I had to hardship a stallion in a couple years ago. The breeder is one of the biggest, winningest AMHR trainers and a AMHR judge. He had not even bothered to send a AMHR stud report in on him. His mother was not AMHR and he would not register her even when I offered to pay to register her, so I could get some pedigree on the stallion. He had not sent any AMHR stud reports in. It was like why bother, just hardship him in. I was mad then, now I think he was smart.


----------



## Lewella (Nov 17, 2012)

This is what I have in my notes from the open Board meeting on Saturday at Convention regarding the hardship sale:

Summary - 517 AMHA horses, 103 Shetlands - increased revenue by $14,000

So far in 2012 the hardship sale has resulted in over twice as many hardship registrations as there were in 2011.

If you get the ASPC/AMHR e-newsletter you should start seeing e-blasts in mid summer to remind everyone that the hardship sale will end December 31, 2013.


----------



## kaykay (Nov 17, 2012)

Hey LaVern

Okay do not have a stroke but I agree with you!! This post isn't going to make me any friends for sure.

This continuing sale certainly devalues all AMHR horses. I think most could live with a one year "sale" but two years? And wow if it goes to 50.00?

I went to convention and stood up and talked against letting geldings of unknown breeding hardship into AMHR. Why? Because it would have totally taken away any value for people that breed and sell AMHR registered geldings. Why would anyone pay decent money for an AMHR gelding if they could go to the local auction and pick one up for 20.00 and hardship it in for 100.00. Thankfully it didn't pass.

I am starting to feel the same way about this "sale"

Back when I did hardship some of my ASPC ponies (keep in mind though that ASPC ponies were never supposed to have to hardship into the very registry they created) I had to pay a higher price and I did that willingly because those ponies were well worth it. I also had to pay a judge and a steward to come and measure them (or take them to a show). Back then the theory was keep a higher price to harship so that people don't just hardship in every horse/pony out there. Theory was only the better quality horses would pay the high (ish) fee and hardship in.

Now you can just send your 100.00 and talk a couple people into signing the papers and skip all that hassle of having them actually measured. They don't even have to measure 38" or under anymore. Yes this is tongue in cheek. Well kinda.

When I hardshipped mine they truly were 38" or under. And they really were measured by a judge and a steward. Now its just about anything goes. Its all who you know and who you can get (or pay) to sign the hardship paper.

I never agreed when people used to argue that hardshipping would make the size of the AMHR miniature go up. I thought people were like me and really had 38" and under ponies. Now I see 43 and up ponies hardshipping in as AMHR. Yep the size is definitely going to go up.

And this is such a true statement but many here are skipping over it or do not understand the impact it has had on both ASPC and AMHR.



> They made a big mistake by taking off the A and B designations on pony papers.


I am selling out my herd because of hubbys health issues etc. But I have to say I was already thinking about it due to the problems ever since the A's and B's were dropped off the Shetland papers. IMO this was the biggest mistake the registry ever made. This stuff slips through by the BOD and members don't even really know what is going on. Minature members felt it didn't impact them so who cares? Now you are seeing the impact. Initially the horses that hardshipped AMHR were foundation ponies with no hackney outcrosses, they had A papers. With the dropping of the A's and B's its anything goes now and the true foundation pony is being lost. And the classic Shetland pony. It all trickles down and ends with the AMHR miniature.

It makes me sad when I see where its all going. I put my heart and soul in my herd and fought for this association for almost 12 years. I felt much as Lavern does (and I know its worse for you Renee as you have a lot more years in than I did) of maybe its time to stop fighting and throw in the towel. Want to know where all those missing members went? They threw in the towel and gave up.

If you are a member of ASPC/AMHR you better start taking notice of what is going on and try to make a difference.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Nov 17, 2012)

Well said Kay. Totally agree something has to be done, and it has to be further then talking about it then on this forum.


----------



## Lewella (Nov 17, 2012)

If a Shetland or Falabella is found to be hardshipped without the Judge and the Steward present at the same time for the measurement and inspection the Board takes disciplinary action against the judge and the steward that sign off on the paperwork and pulls the registration papers on the animal that did not follow correct hardship procedure.

There is absolutely no plan at this point to extend the hardship sale beyond the end of 2013 OR to lower the hardship fee.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 17, 2012)

kaykay said:


> ... this was the biggest mistake the registry ever made. This stuff slips through by the BOD and members don't even really know what is going on. Minature members felt it didn't impact them so who cares? Now you are seeing the impact. Initially the horses that hardshipped AMHR were foundation ponies with no hackney outcrosses, they had A papers. .


Supposedly. But surely you know as well as I

do that there are A papered ponies that are pretty much full Hackney--just because they don't show the Hackney on the papers doesn't mean it isn't there. In view of that I can't agree that dropping the A and B designation has had any impact. Yes, in a few cases it has made a difference to some ponies that wouldn't have been able to show had they had the B designation....because they wouldn't have been allowed to show Classic and didn't have the movement for Modern...but I don't see that it has any effect on AMHR (I didn't know there was a rule that said B papered ponies couldn't hardship? In fact I specifically remember a thread in here a long time ago about some B papered ponies that were hardshipped into. AMHR.)


----------



## Riverdance (Nov 17, 2012)

LaVern there are some things you need to know about AMHA. First, hard shipping into AMHA is no longer allowed in 2013.(they are protecting their breeders and trying to make sure that not too much of the Modern Shetland blood(and Hackney pony blood) drastically change the look and temperament of the Miniature horse) Second, AMHA DOES require stallion reports and has so for the 16 years I have been a breeder. Frankly, i am glad that AMHR is extending their hardshipping sale. Keeping up with two registries is very expensive. I bought two horses that are AMHA only and need to be hardshipped into AMHR. One a mare, one a stud. It is hard to come up with all of the money to be members of two registries, pay registration to two registries, bring horses permanent in two registries, etc. I just do not have the money this year to pay the hardship fees. I am an AMHA person, showed AMHR for the first few years, but realized that they were leaning towards the Shetland way back then. Even more so now. I find many people are starting to abandon AMHR for AMHA because if your horses are on the smaller side, they just do not do well in AMHR. Also, if they do not look like a Modern Shetland they do not do well either. All of my breeding horses are double registered and sale horses AMHA registered and AMHR eligible. But, the prices that we are getting for many of our horses today just do not justify the cost of registering them in two registries. If AMHR continues to go the way they are, they will soon be just a pony registry and AMHA will be for Miniature horses only. Then I only have to worry about one registry, frankly, that would be nice. Especially since my horses are small and do not look like tiny shetlands, but like the Miniature horse I fell in love with. I have always said, if I wanted to raise Shetlands, I would have bought Shetlands. I just prefer the smaller horse and temperament of the Miniature horse.


----------



## iowa (Nov 17, 2012)

> I should have listened to Lowell. He said,"Tall for show
> 
> Little for Doe"
> 
> ...


I'm stuck on this one! Does Doe really mean dough as in money?


----------



## horsehug (Nov 17, 2012)

Hardshipping into AMHA does not close until the end of 2013.

Susan O.


----------



## Yaddax3 (Nov 18, 2012)

Renee:

You're right. It sucks to be stuck with your horses. When can I come up with a trailer to take a bunch of them off your hands? I'll take my chances in the show ring with them.

Seriously, though, I've seen how impressive your minis and breeding program has been. Your minis are far, far, far from obsolete.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 18, 2012)

Riverdance I can't spell, but I know that AMHA requires Stallion reports, I have sent them in for 20 years. What I am saying is that inorder to hardship them into AMHR all you need is a copy of their AMHA papers.

I have sent both AMHA and AMHR stallion reports in. About 1/3 of my horses are both.

I don't know if closing the association is good for the development of the AMHA horse, but I am very proud to be a member of an association that values the papers of its member's horses.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 18, 2012)

ASPC - priceless

AMHA - 600.00 to 1200.00 with inspection - soon to be priceless

AMHR- 100.00

I feel that the mare hardship fee should be 300.00, and stallions should be 600.00. No geldings come in. And they should have to be three years of age and inspected like the Shetlands have to be. I think that any AMHR registered mare should be worth 300.00 and any AMHR registered stallion should be worth 600.00.

I can't blame the board or the members that spent the money and took the time to go to convention to vote on this. I can only blame myself for not shooting my mouth off before convention and for not going to convention and voting.

But, even if I had done that I don't think the majority would have agreed with me.


----------



## MiLo Minis (Nov 18, 2012)

The ones that don't agree with you Renee are the ones that are looking for a quick 'in' - they haven't spent years trying to develop the closest they can get to their ideal Mini only to have it thrown in their face that Minis in the AMHR are valueless unless they hold papers in some other registry as well. Why would anyone pay a decent dollar for our horses when they can pay $100 for one? Sign me "another disappointed EX B Mini breeder"


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Nov 18, 2012)

LaVern said:


> I can't blame the board or the members that spent the money and took the time to go to convention to vote on this. I can only blame myself for not shooting my mouth off before convention and for not going to convention and voting.
> 
> But, even if I had done that I don't think the majority would have agreed with me.


Sadly the members did NOT have a say on this, it wasn't even mentioned. Thats why I said I wonder what the members would have said down at Convention if it was brought to the table to be voted on. I know I would have said NO.

I feel after 2013 they should double the hardship fees. Mares/Geldings $400 and Stallions $800, I wouldn't be upset if they kept just the geldings at $200, but I certainly don't think they should just come in for free or without papers like some say, but I rather see more people geld and let the registry still be more accepting of hardshipping in geldings with the acceptable papers.

It seems like this is set in stone, but I advise anyone who wants to voice their opinion to go to Convention.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 18, 2012)

MiLo, we gotta find a new hobby. How about that ice fishing? There has got to be something to it with all the people that seem to love it. We could get one of those portable little houses with a heater in it and play checkers.


----------



## Magic (Nov 18, 2012)

MiLo Minis said:


> The ones that don't agree with you Renee are the ones that are looking for a quick 'in' - they haven't spent years trying to develop the closest they can get to their ideal Mini only to have it thrown in their face that Minis in the AMHR are valueless unless they hold papers in some other registry as well. Why would anyone pay a decent dollar for our horses when they can pay $100 for one? Sign me "another disappointed EX B Mini breeder"



I've owned and been breeding minis for twenty years, and my first minis were B size AMHR registered, so I don't agree with your statement, sorry. I'm not looking for a "quick in". I happen to continually purchase additional horses that I believe will cross well with the horses I currently have, in an effort to constantly improve. Two of the horses that I bought this year were AMHA-only registered, and because I liked the horses so much, and because of the hardshipping sale, I bought the horses and am getting them AMHR registered. One is stallion, one is a mare. This brings in more revenue to AMHR now (I would NOT have bought these horses without the sale since I won't have any horse here that is not AMHR registered) and will bring in more revenue in the future from their foals. Both horses are, IMO, very high quality.

What I personally see AMHR doing, and I could be wrong, is having a sale now so that people can more easily get AMHR papers on their horses, because in the near future the prices will be going back to normal prices or even higher prices, and in the not-too-distant future I think that hardshipping will be closed completely. This is likely the one chance we all have to get AMHR papers on horses not already AMHR registered. I don't see this as a bad thing. I do understand the negativity felt toward this, to some degree, but I see it as a part of a process.


----------



## HGFarm (Nov 18, 2012)

Havent read all the posts here but LaVern I do not know where you are getting your AMHA info from. Yes, you do have to fill in a stallion report and to register your horses any time? I dont know what you are refering to? Hardshipping? No, the books close next year. AMHA has rules too, perhaps more than AMHR, so I dont understand what you are trying to say. Taking it even a step further, if they are not registered by a certain time, they need to be DNA'd. AMHR does not even require DNA so any one could slap papers on anything and say it's anything.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Nov 18, 2012)

She was saying that in order to hardship into AMHR all you have to use is their AMHA papers, which doesn't really make much of a argument, stallion reports are not much to go by, DNA is the answer but its hard to enforce DNA when AMHR doesn't enforce DNA on it's own.

I hope prices do increase after 2013, not sure if we are ready to close but I do feel we are definitively ready for a price increase especially after 2013 and I think that all registries should require inspection.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 18, 2012)

Gee, HGF Farm I don't know how I can say it more clearly.

I have a horse that is AMHA registered. (That is the outfit in Fort Worth, Texas).

I want to hardship it into AMHR (that is the outfit in IIllinois)

All I have to do is send a copy of the AMHA( the outfit in Fort Worth Texas) papers to AMHR (the outfit in Illinois) and pay the reg. fee and the 100.00 hardship fee.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 18, 2012)

I still fail to see why you would ever think it preferable to skip doing AMHR stallion reports (they aren't that hard, and they are free) and refuse to pay a $20 registration fee and have (or sell) an AMHA horse only that someday you (or some buyer) then have to pay $100 PLUS $60 registration (if the horse is 3+ years old). Really? What kind of sense does that make?

Yep, it makes a lot of sense to hang on to those AMHA only horses, just keep right on refusing to pay AMHR registration fees and then discover a year & more from now that you're losing out on some sales because buyers want horses to have AMHR papers and they don't want to have to pay $460/$260 to hardship in those horses.....or maybe even more than that in the event that hardshipping fees go higher than the current regular rate. If you cannot see that it is YOU, not AMHR, who is hurting your program then I truly feel sorry for you.


----------



## Field-of-Dreams (Nov 19, 2012)

Minimor said:


> I still fail to see why you would ever think it preferable to skip doing AMHR stallion reports (they aren't that hard, and they are free) and refuse to pay a $20 registration fee and have (or sell) an AMHA horse only that someday you (or some buyer) then have to pay $100 PLUS $60 registration (if the horse is 3+ years old). Really? What kind of sense does that make?
> 
> Yep, it makes a lot of sense to hang on to those AMHA only horses, just keep right on refusing to pay AMHR registration fees and then discover a year & more from now that you're losing out on some sales because buyers want horses to have AMHR papers and they don't want to have to pay $460/$260 to hardship in those horses.....or maybe even more than that in the event that hardshipping fees go higher than the current regular rate. If you cannot see that it is YOU, not AMHR, who is hurting your program then I truly feel sorry for you.


^^^^^^ LIKE!!!


----------



## Sandee (Nov 19, 2012)

Kaykay "Initially the horses that hardshipped AMHR were foundation ponies with no hackney outcrosses, they had A papers. "

Excuse me? My (ex)stallion is AMHA & AMHR. He's under 32". He also has bloodlines (big ones including Orion / Gold Melody Boy) that I can trace back to Shetlands and Hackneys in Europe from before AMHR started.

Come one people. These little horses didn't just appear on the planet. They were bred down and if you can't believe it I can post the whole lineage (for mine anyway).

As for MiLo and LaVern, get a grip. I have kept up the AMHA papers on my horses when there are no shows in my state and only 1 or 2 in the surrounding states. AMHA is a big bust for me but I don't get on here and run it down. Pinto is another dissapointment for me as their show fees here in Wisconsin are not in line with many other states but WAAAAY high! So a beef is a beef. I don't like this one. You don't like that one. Get over it.

And as for all the money you were making breeding AMHR/AMHA.....hmmmmm, I don't think so. Those days are LONG gone. Obama will have us all in the poor house house soon. At least we'll have lots of company.

There now that's a GRIPE!


----------



## REO (Nov 19, 2012)

Please stay on track and don't make your replies argumentative or personal. What Lavern is trying to say is her opinion and as a long time breeder and supporter of the registry she is entitled to it.

Please be nice


----------



## dreaminmini (Nov 19, 2012)

I think this, unfortunately, is an argument that will never be solved. My own opinion is that the AMHR is after more AMHA horses to boost it's numbers. It is not necessarily a bad thing, allowing for new bloodlines, new members and new horses into our registry. Unfortunately, I think they were wrong in allowing the $100 hardshipping a second year. It does cause a strain for the straight AMHR breeder. But,interestingly enough, it is amazing news for the ASPC pony breeders. It couldn't get much better for them. Why don't we just call it like it is and just ditch the AMHR miniature horse and have the MSPR (Miniature Shetland Pony Registry). There would be no need for hardshipping, heck, don't even bother to measure, not that they do it all that honestly now. You would boost numbers at Congress by quite a bit and we wouldn't have to worry about the rule allowing cross entering of ASPC and AMHR at the same show. Since we are reminded every two seconds that Miniature Horses are just really ponies anyway we can just throw out all of those people who dedicated themselves to creating what we know as the miniature horse,(they must have been hallucinating) and the people who enjoy owning and showing them, they were smoking something too. Give all that money to the pony people because they are the only ones who count anyway. I will take my little figments of my imagination and enjoy them, love on them, do carriage driving, horse agility and therapy work hopefully away for the cheats, liars and abusers. Maybe we need a straight miniature horse registry for us people that think the miniature horse has value and has after years of careful breeding has become it's own entity. Something that can take this further and get a breed standard and put value back into this lovely breed because it is endangered and soon to become extinct. Scoff if you want but I love my miniature horses and I want them to continue.

As I write this I have been thinking more on this subject...bear with me...honestly think about this...dig deep...

Actually, I don't think the miniature horse people in reality would even be against the double registered pony itself *IF* it truly fits the criteria and standard such as it is. It is PEOPLE, the problems that people have created that accompanies that pony in the AMHR registry. It is the oversized ponies that get measured in when they are 40" and are winning, the judges that can't see for themselves that the horses are oversized and shouldn't be placed or not placed well, it's the yearlings and two year olds that just get measured in at the top height and everyone knows full well they won't be back next year as 2 or 3 yr olds but they are winning everything now, The same ones that will go to the breed shed and quite probably breed another oversized pony for an unsuspecting buyer to purchase. The driving ones with the lovely PLEASURE action that go to Nationals and compete in Country Pleasure and win even though they should not be in the class in the first place forcing the true country pleasure horses into the Western Country Pleasure class (they were massive this year). the judges for not recognizing this and still placing them very high. The pony breeders that sell double registerable ponies for good money with no height guarantee so some poor schmuck that wanted a miniature horse ends up with a horse that can only be shown Shetland and what if that is not what he/she wanted??? Now they are stuck with this pony or stuck trying to sell it or finding out where they can take it to get it measured in as a mini still. Maybe we need to look closer at our judges and stewards and see what agenda they have and what they are projecting to have. Maybe we need more people to stand up and protest the wrongs they see. Maybe we need more stringent guidelines on our judges and more education. Is it possible to achieve some sort of balance here??


----------



## Jean_B (Nov 19, 2012)

REO said:


> Please stay on track and don't make your replies argumentative or personal. What Lavern is trying to say is her opinion and as a long time breeder and supporter of the registry she is entitled to it.
> 
> Please be nice


----------



## Jean_B (Nov 19, 2012)

Minimor said:


> I still fail to see why you would ever think it preferable to skip doing AMHR stallion reports (they aren't that hard, and they are free) and refuse to pay a $20 registration fee and have (or sell) an AMHA horse only that someday you (or some buyer) then have to pay $100 PLUS $60 registration (if the horse is 3+ years old). Really? What kind of sense does that make?
> 
> Yep, it makes a lot of sense to hang on to those AMHA only horses, just keep right on refusing to pay AMHR registration fees and then discover a year & more from now that you're losing out on some sales because buyers want horses to have AMHR papers and they don't want to have to pay $460/$260 to hardship in those horses.....or maybe even more than that in the event that hardshipping fees go higher than the current regular rate. If you cannot see that it is YOU, not AMHR, who is hurting your program then I truly feel sorry for you.


Snippity snide snarky remarks are not necessary in order to make a point in this discussion. Everyone is entitled to an opinion as long as it is POLITELY stated. And no, I don't see myself as the 'polite police'. Hateful word just get my dander up, that's all and in my old age, I'm getting less tolerant of intolerance.

But to the point about registering - as long as the stud reports are filed - you can go back many years and get a horse AMHR registered and you don't have to worry about the possibility of large hardship fees. Have done it with a mare that was 4 years old that I bought on application. Piece of cake if you trust the person you are buying from.

And Yes, I feel the lower hardship fee is de-valuing the AMHR horse. When the fees were higher, people had to give some serious consideration to whether or not that pony or AMHA animal was worth the cost. Now, with it being so low, and because of the latest fad being the double registered ASPC/AMHR animal - some people are hardshipping in (in my opinion which I am totally allowed to have here in the old U.S. of A.) some marginal quality animals because it's cheap to do so. I am NOT saying all are marginal....just a few. But you cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

Ah.....and so the pendulum will swing....I've been at this for over 20 years and have seen HUGE changes in what people want, and believe it or not, I've noticed a HUGE comeback for the under 30" animal. You know why? So many moved to the B division, that the class sizes were small for the "littles" - so more and more are showing in that arena again because "HEY! Maybe I can bring home a National ribbon with such small classes!" And the pendulum swings...and swings....and swings.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 19, 2012)

If you thought there was anything snippy or snide in that quoted post then you haven't seen much snippy or snide..because it certainly wasn't written as such--and no worries, I would never assume you to be the polite police.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 19, 2012)

Thanks Jean for backing me up on this one. We don't always agree, but I love it that I always know exactly how you feel. I also appreciate any one that feels sorry for me too. Right now me and anyone else that raises only amhr horses needs all the sympathy that we can get.

Went over to talk things over with Swigg this morning. He sort of puts a different slant on things.

After listening he said, " It sounds like you don't mind being a used lady, you just want to be a high price used lady."


----------



## MiLo Minis (Nov 20, 2012)

LaVern said:


> MiLo, we gotta find a new hobby. How about that ice fishing? There has got to be something to it with all the people that seem to love it. We could get one of those portable little houses with a heater in it and play checkers.


We could hang our lines down there and gab about the good old days when Minis were Minis :0) There is something to be said about the peace and quiet of an icehut in the middle of a lake far from civilization....


----------



## LaVern (Nov 20, 2012)

Yeah MiLo, as much as I gripe, I have to admit that the last 25 years of raising these 100.00 horses has been a hoot. Man, for some fun times. Some awfully expensive fun times, but Golly, I bet we have enough good memories to last the rest of our lives.

After talking to Swigg and Gina yesterday, I have kind of put this into perspective.

Vanity is a terrible thing. I think I was just getting too proud of myself and my horses. I was just getting too uppity and got put in my place real quick. The label Straight AMHR Miniatures was just too pretentious. "Only", is what we are and maybe humility is what will get us to our great reward in the sky.


----------



## Margo_C-T (Nov 20, 2012)

You know, reading this entire thread, and thinking about it, has changed my mind. I mentioned in my earlier post that I would have hardshipped my unregistered-but-size-eligible gelding into AMHR, but I now see how that really might not be fair to those breeding for up-to-and-including 38" MINIATURE HORSES

I always had a hard time w/ the 'set-up' of AMHR...to my eyes, being used for all the years since its inception, basically just to support the parent registry financially. All those years that you had to own Shetlands in order to be on the Board of Directors, even though BOTH registries were 'supposed' to count? I could never believe how the APSC 'got away with' what I saw as blatant discrimination against those they 'created' in the first place....

Now it seems to be coming full-circle; the very group who originally had the (great, I'd admit)marketing idea to call their smaller individuals "miniature horses', to set a 'new' measurement site that would make the horses seem even SMALLER, and BTW, set the *original* height limit at 34"; only years later was that changed to take the height limit to 38".(One wonders if that was simply the first step in swinging the emphasis back to the Shetland??) has steered the current 'trend' that the 'preferred' animal is AMHR *and ASPC*...In my view, this means that again, being registered with ASPC is seen as being 'more important'than being 'simply' AMHR.

I have nothing against Shetlands; heck, I fell hard for a lovely bay registered Shetland 45"+ mare some years ago, seeing her for sale online in a neighboring state-but though very young, she was both in foal and untrained...NOT what I wanted or needed. Recently Fate brought me again into 'proximity' with her, and I still LOVE her...but, again, she is not what I need at this time of my life.

I got into miniature horses because I LIKE MINIATURE HORSES, and have come to appreciate the 'larger' end of THEIR size spectrum for driving. I have NO interest in breed showing anymore...partly due to the kind of concerns I've seen others express in this thread, such as demonstrable 'welshing' on height, and on the quality of the judging compared to the published rules,esp. in driving classes...things that are VERY frustrating to those who believe that qualifications/specifications are written to be FOLLOWED. What bothers me above nearly all else is seeing Miniature horses heading in the direction of such registries as AQHA, where IMO, the unique QH 'type' has been lost, with conformation all over the board, and quite often, only the WORST features 'preserved'.

It seems to me that the registries are at times too inclined to first serve their own perceived financial 'needs', without first thinking through the possible consequences to some/all of their members. I am not against hardshipping, but it is a privilege that should require close adherence to strict rules of inspection and enough cost to weed out all but extremely well-qualified candidates. I can very well appreciate Renee's position now, after reflection upon of all aspects of this issue.

Margo


----------



## TMR (Nov 20, 2012)

As I read through all of this topic, I can't help but laugh. I have been with AMHR for 20 years, so have watched the registry through its changes. I have yet to understand this dislike of Shetlands and the want of "straight" miniature. Lets face the fact the majority of miniatures are shetlands. Just because you threw away the ASPC papers years ago does not make them suddenly "not shetland" and lets be honest that is what happened years ago. The marketing that Margo talks about, many breeders threw away the ASPC papers and stated no these are "miniature horses". Now it come full circle and all of a sudden many want those papers back. Most all of the big named miniature horses are mostly, if not all "Shetland". The heritage has not fallen away when the papers were tossed. As for harshipping, it is unfortunate that it is again so cheap, but do you really want to lose your heritage of the ponies (oops mini horses) by hardshipping. When I hardshipped some in years ago I hated the unknown status that was put in for sire and dam and never hardshipped another one. I worked hard for many years for my pedigrees and dang it I want it on the papers. Plus, many of us buyers do look at the papers and look for certain pedigrees.

Now don't get your panties in a wad, over my stating about the mainly shetland blood in your miniatures. All of you miniature horse breeders, should be proud of the fact that you took shetlands and through selective breeding have given the offspring a different look and personality in just 3 or 4 generations.

Renee, although I know you don't like admitting your horses have alot of shetland blood in their heritage, you should embrace the specific lines that you have used and instead be proud of what you have produced. You have specifically bred horses that have given you what you wanted and that does not come easy. You have spent years doing it and you cannot get what you breed through AMHA papered horses hardshipped or not.


----------



## RayVik (Nov 20, 2012)

To demonstrate another perspective of the constant and age old comment that minis are Shetlands....

I would quickly and adamantly state that if that is a fact and it is a fact anyone embraces then I contend that the mini's are the purest form of Shetland remaining. No hackney blood was introduced no outcrossing has occured so what remains is only those little Shetlands whom had their papers thrown away. Further if this is such a common and well know and established fact that mini's are in fact little Shetlands then perhaps it's time to reverse the order of things and give all these pure mini Shetlands the Shetland papers they truly deserve and take these Shetlands with shetland papers and make them show ponies

Maybe it's time the minis just accept the fact they are Shetlands and being the largest segment of the small equine industry make it official. If the mini cannot have there own identity then just make them what they are


----------



## LaVern (Nov 20, 2012)

Not like Shetland blood? Are you kidding?. Why would I spefically buy and use 5 tall Rowdy sons and 5 tall Buckeroo sons? It was because I liked their look better than some of the AMHA horses of that day. They were the only miniature lines I could find then that had somewhat of a documented pedigree. It wasn't so easy to get information before the internet. But, I tried to find out all I could about those Shetland lines. Cresent Largo Kewpie and others that I can't remember anymore. I sudied those little old magazines. And called and wrote old Shetland breeders. And then Larry gave me piles to study.

I also love the Welsh and used what I liked of them.

I used them to try to produce a new miniature horse, 34-36 inches that I liked. It was to be called the AMHR miniature horse and some of us were very excited about it.

It is still an on going process and some of us were still very excited about it until we were told the papers on our horses were only worth 100.00.


----------



## minih (Nov 20, 2012)

> To demonstrate another perspective of the constant and age old comment that minis are Shetlands....I would quickly and adamantly state that if that is a fact and it is a fact anyone embraces then I contend that the mini's are the purest form of Shetland remaining. No hackney blood was introduced no outcrossing has occured so what remains is only those little Shetlands whom had their papers thrown away. Further if this is such a common and well know and established fact that mini's are in fact little Shetlands then perhaps it's time to reverse the order of things and give all these pure mini Shetlands the Shetland papers they truly deserve and take these Shetlands with shetland papers and make them show ponies


Very interesting and unique thought.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 20, 2012)

You would have to first weed out any and all Appaloosas--either those with appy coloring or characteristics or those with known Appaloosa in their pedigreed...because Shetlands cannot be Appaloosa--Appaloosa means there is some other pony breeding mixed in there.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Nov 20, 2012)

RayVik said:


> To demonstrate another perspective of the constant and age old comment that minis are Shetlands....
> 
> I would quickly and adamantly state that if that is a fact and it is a fact anyone embraces then I contend that the mini's are the purest form of Shetland remaining. No hackney blood was introduced no outcrossing has occured so what remains is only those little Shetlands whom had their papers thrown away. Further if this is such a common and well know and established fact that mini's are in fact little Shetlands then perhaps it's time to reverse the order of things and give all these pure mini Shetlands the Shetland papers they truly deserve and take these Shetlands with shetland papers and make them show ponies
> 
> Maybe it's time the minis just accept the fact they are Shetlands and being the largest segment of the small equine industry make it official. If the mini cannot have there own identity then just make them what they are


LOL you know I was actually thinking the same thing. I wonder how big Congress would be if our "mini shetlands" that don't have ASPC papers because generations back were thrown away if were accepted back into ASPC if we were allowed to show both AMHR and ASPC. Seems like that could help solve the problem concerning low entries and lack of profit.


----------



## iowa (Nov 20, 2012)

This is the same debate that has been going on since the AMHA split from the AMHR in the 70's. From reading the old magazines, I gather that the AMHA did not want to compete with Shetlands which is why many did not want a Shetland on the pedigree. Yes, we all know there WERE Shetlands in the pedigrees - Gold Melody Boy, Kewpie, etc., but I think they wanted to establish a real breed of thier own. I wish we could come up with a standard for a miniature. So far we've had stock type, Arabian type and now Shetland type. I guess the debate will never end and I don't think we will ever have a standard because too many people have their own opinions of what a miniature should look like. Is there anyone out there that was there when the AMHA split off and perhaps shed some light on what their vision was? Just curious.


----------



## Jean_B (Nov 20, 2012)

LaVern said:


> Thanks Jean for backing me up on this one. We don't always agree, but I love it that I always know exactly how you feel. I also appreciate any one that feels sorry for me too. Right now me and anyone else that raises only amhr horses needs all the sympathy that we can get.
> 
> Went over to talk things over with Swigg this morning. He sort of puts a different slant on things.
> 
> After listening he said, " It sounds like you don't mind being a used lady, you just want to be a high price used lady."


Yeah, we could always iron out our differences after a cup (or 5) of coffee....or sitting on the floor with a bunch of other Ol' Broodmares near the elevators in Devils Lake (while you were nervous as a cat in a room full of rocking chairs because the casino hotel is "dry" and several of us had brought some hard libations), chatting and arguing and laughing until 2:00 AM....and back at it again the next morning at 7:00 AM. DANG those were good times!! I think we ran into Swigg in the hallway.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 21, 2012)

Until we get a Lincoln in office, I don't think that the masters up in the big plantation house are going to sell their legitimate children down the river for 100.00, when they need something.


----------



## Lewella (Nov 21, 2012)

RayVik said:


> To demonstrate another perspective of the constant and age old comment that minis are Shetlands....
> 
> I would quickly and adamantly state that if that is a fact and it is a fact anyone embraces then I contend that the mini's are the purest form of Shetland remaining. No hackney blood was introduced no outcrossing has occured so what remains is only those little Shetlands whom had their papers thrown away. Further if this is such a common and well know and established fact that mini's are in fact little Shetlands then perhaps it's time to reverse the order of things and give all these pure mini Shetlands the Shetland papers they truly deserve and take these Shetlands with shetland papers and make them show ponies
> 
> Maybe it's time the minis just accept the fact they are Shetlands and being the largest segment of the small equine industry make it official. If the mini cannot have there own identity then just make them what they are


Ah but Ray...there is this teensy weensy problem called Revalidation. In the late 60's and early 70's all ASPC papers had to be revalidated (it was staggered - each owner was sent a letter with instructions and the date that their animals had to be revalidated by in order to remain registered ASPC Shetlands). If a ponies papers were not sent back in to be revalidated and have the revalidation sticker affixed to the back of the papers those papers became null and void. Many of the first herds registered AMHR were non-revalidated Shetland herds.

Don't kid yourself that these non-revalidated herds were "pure" either - cross breeding started "behind the barn" much earlier than cross breeding was legal.


----------



## RayVik (Nov 21, 2012)

Double post


----------



## RayVik (Nov 21, 2012)

That was and is exactly my point in the demonstration. I cannot think of a polite context if telling a mini owner that their animal are just unwanted Shetlands yet far too often that comment comes out so my point was and is always remember the are 2 side of a window to look thru and if anyone wants to go down that road and in some way shape or form think that telling someone their mini is just a small unwanted Shetland is a compliment then they should understand and think about what they are saying

Just to add and not to argue but your comment just furthers my demonstration as if this behind the barn activity was or was not going on the revalidation by virtue of a " stamp" did not make any pony more or less "pure" so the conjecture remains in that the purity of a mini was as pure as the breed was a the time of revalidation and hackney breeding was added after

And I have always wondered why the hackneys were needed to expand the Shetland bloodline yet the mini which was a small subset of the Shetlands overall meaning a smaller gene pool has never had influx of anything other the mini. I am sure anyone can say a few small animals of other breeds happened but never a entire breed such as hackney

Finally just as revalidation and allowing in hackneys only required 8 people saying yes changing the order of minis and their papers can be done in the same way so it becomes a matter of semantics and not a absolute


----------



## Lewella (Nov 21, 2012)

I definitely wouldn't say they were unwanted Shetlands. You have to understand, the Shetland industry had went through a market correction during the mid 1960's the likes of which few breeds ever see. After the crash the ASPC had to know where it was and just how many animals were left - they couldn't plan for the future without that information, thus the Revalidation. Breeders had to pay a small fee to revalidate their ponies papers. Some breeders choose not to revalidate. Some of those same breeders approached the ASPC and asked them to create the AMHR. Those same breeders had teenagers in Iowa going to every sale and farm and buying them any pony that would fit under a 36" wicket and there were a lot of them!

Outcrossing wasn't to bring blood in and in reality very few Hackney bloodlines - there were very few Hackney's that could produce an animal that could stay under 46" inches with up to 3 inches of extra show foot - and even fewer Welsh and Americana contributed to the Shetland today (Hackney, Welsh, Americana and Harness Show Pony were all acceptable crosses - off the top of my head I can think of no bloodline still existing that trace to a Harness Show Pony). It may seem like a strange concept but outcrossing was legalized to bring the cheating out into the open and add some integrity back to the pedigrees. All the way back to the 1920's I can give you examples of Shetland herds that were not just Shetland...like the major breeder who ran Shetland and Welsh mares together and registered the little foals as Shetlands and the bigger foals as Welsh; or the influential early breeder who was a major importer of Hackney's into the US. L. Frank Bedell illudes to the cross breeding that was going on in his book "The Shetland Pony" published in 1959. I've been told by several old breeders that by the 1950's the "ideal" cross for the Shetland show ring was 1/2 Shetland, 1/4 Welsh, and 1/4 Hackney.

As to purity...there are a couple of colors fairly common in the miniature today that have never existed in the ASPC - Appaloosa and Champagne. Champagne comes in several different times so one has to assume several animals were bred down. We know appaloosa has come in through the Falabella and the Van't Huttenest horses from Belgium. We know of AMHR lines with known Welsh. There are AMHR lines with known Hackney. A West Coast breeder added Arabian. One line is known to have Standardbred blood. So to say the AMHR is as pure today as it was when many founding lines diverged from the ASPC in the late 1960's and early 1970's is probably not very accurate.


----------



## RayVik (Nov 21, 2012)

I rest my case as you have explained the American Shetland Pony is not defined as "pure bloodline" or put another way has had it's share of issues and regardless is deserving of its name and heritage much the same the Miniature Horse has also had its many generations bringing it to what it is today and is just as deserving of its name it is no more a little Shetland then a Shetland is a big Mini. There is no purpose served in the inevitable dig that a mini is just a little Shetland then there would be in someone saying people from the south had slaves.

Having said that yes there are double registered animals and they ARE Shetland ponies both technically and legally and hard shipping is what makes that possible and therein is what or why it's not as simple as just having a "Sale" and expecting everyone to be happy about it. Did the sale help the " miniature horse " in its essence I would say no but did it expand the ranks of the AMHR and as proffered bring in needed income perhaps yes

So here we are and there is nothing served by trying to justify it helped the Miniature horse by say its just a little Shetland.


----------



## JennyB (Nov 21, 2012)

Lewella said:


> Ah but Ray...there is this teensy weensy problem called Revalidation. In the late 60's and early 70's all ASPC papers had to be revalidated (it was staggered - each owner was sent a letter with instructions and the date that their animals had to be revalidated by in order to remain registered ASPC Shetlands). If a ponies papers were not sent back in to be revalidated and have the revalidation sticker affixed to the back of the papers those papers became null and void. Many of the first herds registered AMHR were non-revalidated Shetland herds.
> 
> Don't kid yourself that these non-revalidated herds were "pure" either - cross breeding started "behind the barn" much earlier than cross breeding was legal.


Lewella






You people don't have a clue! The small shetland ponies that the early breeders of "miniature horses" used were first called Midget ponies. A couple of breeders bred the smallest to the smallest to the smallest. So then other wanna be breeders with $$ decided lets take all these small midget ponies and start a registry. We will re-name them Miniatures horses. This must be done because we need them to be worth more $$$ so they are considered EXOTIC animals. They had their hands into something that for a very long time brought BIG prices and yeah those Shetland papers were dumped in the garbage because a Shetland pony itself is NOT what the Miniature Horses are, and they have NONE of those nasty, wicked ponies in them. I have heard they came from a long lost canyon and were breeding themselves down for centuries, they were bred down by the Queen of England, they trace their lines specifically to Percheron Draft horses and they come from Thoroughbreds...give me a break. .....this conversing about Mini's not being Shetland's has gone on forever!, and I can't believe there are still breeders out there who believe their Miniature Horses have no Shetland pony lines....If it were not for the lying original breeders trying to fool the public, which they did very well, then you folks who whine about, "why can't my mini have Shetland papers too!" ...you would have your papers.

Like Lewella said, there have been behind the barns hanky panky going on before most all of us were born and if you think there is NOT hanky panky still going on with ASPC, AMHR and AMHA animals then you have blinders on. Hackney ponies are already in both AMHR and AMHA Miniature Horses.

If it were not for the Shetland pony and ASPC none of you would have the wonderful Miniature Horses that you have, be they under 34" or under 38" tall. Grant it none of the registries are without their faults and shady dealings, but quit blaming the Shetland Pony for all the problems with Miniature Horses! Let us work together to live with what we have, God given, and continue to work on issues we are so passionate about. Nothing is perfect, not even the "American" Shetland Pony" because believe you me, so many were/are Hackney-Welsh influenced. Many very early importers of Shetland's from the island's wanted a taller more refined carriage pony and not the shorter thelwell type that is still being successfully bred and shown in Europe today....Many island ponies were crossed with Arabians and other island ponies. These taller ponies that the American breeders wanted were called "ridden" (tall cross-breds) and the islander's were all to happy to take the American's $$ paid for them. Then it was an easy next step to cross then with Hackney's. If you read, you read that many very early and successful Shetland pony breeders were also Hackney's breeders and the didn't hide it, it's in the advertisements!! .......sneak a little Hackney here and here in early day, now a day Shetland ponies, AMHR and AMHA Miniature Horses wouldn't hurt a thing...would it!?!

I am sorry that I got off the original topic, but I am paaaionate about all this and I guess we all can't agree that Miniature Horses are either registered Shetland or are grade Shetland ponies??? Why is that so hard to grasp? I adore Miniature Horses and love how they have changed into a more refined equine.... Look what I just said!...this is the same thing breeders have been saying about all equines since they started raising them here in America. They have changed the breeds of ponies(except the Icelandics), the Arabian Horses, Quarter Horses, Morgans and Thoroughbreds all making them prettier, but weaker animals. Arabian horses are just pretty equines that have a hard time working, Quarter horses have evolved to have tiny hooves and show with their heads almost touching the dirt, mind you Arabians too, Morgans look nothing like the used to and have ya ever wondered why we can't have anymore Triple Crown winners? They are breeding weak studs to weak mares and you get colts and fillies that have that bred-in-them desire to run as fast as they can, but their legs break down! There are exceptions to all breeds.

I could go on and on....the bottom line here is that we "humans" really like to change things to our liking, this then comes with consequences. People will always do what they want, especially if money is involved. You need to continue to own and breed what you want, that is your right. ...and I guess it's your right too to say your Miniature Horses have no Shetland breeding too! Last time I checked this was a free country with free speech...IMO going right down the tubes, but if you want ASPC, AMHR, AMHA to make changes then go to the Convention meetings and bring up the things you would like to be changed, but quit beating up the very pony who has given you what you have in the first place...!


----------



## RayVik (Nov 21, 2012)

Lewella already pointed out that the miniature horse has shetland and hackney and welsh background and perhaps a few unknowns and that was when they were still called midget ponies ... I think everyone has to agree with that

So no argument here ...


----------



## Sandee (Nov 21, 2012)

JennyB ------


----------



## disneyhorse (Nov 21, 2012)

I think quarter horses allowed thoroughbred breeding, making them appendix quarter horses.... But that doesn't mean they should be allowed to get thoroughbred papers.

The important thing is to move forward.


----------



## dreaminmini (Nov 21, 2012)

JennyB said:


> Lewella
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not sure anyone is arguing that the Miniature Horse did not evolve from the Shetland Pony. But they were created to be their own entity by this registry. Breeders spent many years evolving the miniature horse into what it is today. That fact must be recognized. There are many horse breeds that become diluted but as Disneyhorse said the Appendix Quarterhorse does not get to have both Quarter horse and Thoroughbred papers. Nor the Arab crosses or the Morgan crosses. Now us Miniature horse people are just expected to sit back and let the ponies come in and take over and since most of the judges are pony people just take a guess who is winning in the ring??? But us mini people are just supposed to shut up and play nice because minis came from Shetlands dontcha know. We were created to be something different and we were hugely popular but all the effort these mini breeders put in don't count for anything now. Why can't the miniature evolve into it's own breed in it's own right. Thoroughbreds evolved from the Arab way back when but is a Thoroughbred an Arab? No. Does it hold papers to both registries??? No. Do the Hackney/Shetlands hold papers in both registries??? It just seems the ASPC wants it all its own way. Those that create also take it away.

I am not bashing Shetlands, I admire them, I watch Congress and enjoy watching when they are at the same show. Some are very beautiful, regal, and exciting to watch. But cannot I not admire and respect them but also admire and respect what the miniature horse has become. We love our miniature horse like you love your Shetlands. Like I mentioned in my previous post, I firmly believe it is not the pony itself that is the problem but the issues that are created when cross registering.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 22, 2012)

I don't see that the minis have taken a different direction so much as they just haven't changed a whole bunch from

the small ponies they came from. There are many, many minis who are still very like the small ponies I rode and drive as a kid.

In any case, I has to point out that stopping the hardshipping...or raising the hardshipping fee...is not going to stop people from showing oversize horses. It isn't only the ponies that grow taller, there are plenty of AMHR-only horses (who don't have a single registered Shetland anywhere near their pedigrees) who are taller than AMHR technically allows. Give me 24 hours or less and I could come up with quite a number if them more or less "locally". Most of them aren't even bred to be tall--they are off smaller parents, but they just growed!

Given how people have sneaked other breeding into certain breeds over the years...it would be very easy for someone, anyone, to sneak a pony into their mini breeding program--I don't know anyone that has done it, but unwound bet someone somewhere has done it and will do it in future.

With or without the ponies, people will cheat.


----------



## disneyhorse (Nov 22, 2012)

dreaminmini said:


> Not sure anyone is arguing that the Miniature Horse did not evolve from the Shetland Pony. But they were created to be their own entity by this registry. Breeders spent many years evolving the miniature horse into what it is today. That fact must be recognized. There are many horse breeds that become diluted but as Disneyhorse said the Appendix Quarterhorse does not get to have both Quarter horse and Thoroughbred papers. Nor the Arab crosses or the Morgan crosses. Now us Miniature horse people are just expected to sit back and let the ponies come in and take over and since most of the judges are pony people just take a guess who is winning in the ring??? But us mini people are just supposed to shut up and play nice because minis came from Shetlands dontcha know. We were created to be something different and we were hugely popular but all the effort these mini breeders put in don't count for anything now. Why can't the miniature evolve into it's own breed in it's own right. Thoroughbreds evolved from the Arab way back when but is a Thoroughbred an Arab? No. Does it hold papers to both registries??? No. Do the Hackney/Shetlands hold papers in both registries???


Actually, yes... There ARE some ponies that hold ASPC and AHHS (hackney) papers. These ponies are pretty hard to find and are generally pretty valuable.

Papers don't guarantee quality. I've seen AMHR only horses that are nicer and have placed better than double registered ponies. Those who are so "against the ponies" just seem so close minded to me.


----------



## disneyhorse (Nov 22, 2012)

I see the resurgence back to the Shetlands as sort of a renaissance and a "resetting" of the mini breed. Minis started with ponies, but the original intent was to just breed lots of the SMALLEST, with little regard to quality. That is why the breed is plagued with dwarfism, weak hips, low set necks, and a myriad of other conformational challenges.

The Shetlands improve conformation and movement, which is so desired now, and that is why there is a shift back towards the original American shetland. People are now breeding the ASPC to be under 34" but more cautiously than decades before.


----------



## RayVik (Nov 22, 2012)

Unfortunately someone who might be pro mini is to often labeled anti Shetland. I don't think that is the case at all at least for my part as I am quickly approaching owning more Shetlands then minis or should I say double registered animals. Just because someone wants respect and recognition that the miniature horse is in the AMHR under 38" and not 42" with a 3" heel with the beauty and grace of a modern pony does not make that 38" " grade" or " midget" or any less loved or having less pride by the owner

Perhaps many people were deceived or lied to when they bought there first mini and as has be once again explain the miniature horse was s huge market deception and that is something those naive buyers of yesteryear cannot deny nor should they want to as that can be harnessed and direct toward making the best of what they have.

Why some people find it self serving to hinder any efforts toward pride or passion toward that naive mistake made by those who bought into the deception by constantly reminding those of it as well as doing so as if they somehow by there ownership of Shetlands rather then minis have some innate right to do so. I for one am very proud they were too smart to be deceived but I did not buy horses from them so they did me no wrong but how they can find such pride in a deception neither they perpetuated or had party too is a mystery. Sometimes it comes off like kids all rallying behind the bully that is picking on the little kid at school.

Even the friendliest of dogs will snap at you of picked at long enough and then when it does snap at you and you say something about it your called anti dog


----------



## LaVern (Nov 22, 2012)

Got the Turkey in, so back to the Forum.

Just wondering what a lawyer would say about half price hardship sale and not half price on only AMHR breeders fees. ( Guess I'll ask that old ambulance chaser relative)

I want to pay 10 bucks to register a baby,instead of 20.

Maybe it should just cost 1/2 price to advertise an only AMHR horse in Journal.

Maybe trainers should just charge 1/2 price to train and show an only AMHR horse.

Maybe judges that judge only AMHR horses should have to cut their fees in half.

Maybe entry fees at Nationals should be 1/2 price at Nationals or other shows for the only AMHR horse.

I wonder how they would feel about cutting the price they get for what they provide in half?

It's all about the money and the devaluing of the AMHR horse to me.


----------



## RayVik (Nov 22, 2012)

Lavern

In the strangest of ways it was about the money but I don't believe in the way you might think

I sat in the BOD meeting when this decision was made and let me offer what I saw as to how it went

It began with the idea that ALL hardship fees should be increased to the same as the AMHR as there is a segment of our organization who pays much less to get papers. What followed was a debate about if this particular "fee" was even a hardship fee or not and progressed into the idea that raising this fee would stifle the growth and participation and even make it prohibitive cost wise to people who might otherwise join this particular segment. Mind you the original intent was to raise that fee. After about 10 mins of the debate and the idea having shifted toward the raising of this initial fee would or might inhibit growth of that segment a director had the brain storm to LOWER the hardship fee for AMHR or as it called have a "sale" the focus having turned toward what could be done to increase revenue and membership this idea of a " sale" was quickly embraced and passed. Not a single utterance was offered regarding any impact or other ramifications regarding its application other then if its cheap people will buy. So the quick thinking and tunnel vision of the matter of doing something to improve our numbers won out that day and brought us the "sale"

So as I saw it I would say yes it was about the money but did not end the way it started.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 22, 2012)

That's the craziest thing. So there really wasn't any thought given to the breeder of the AMHR only horse at all. Just to make a buck for the club.

Well, I wonder what I will find out when I ask if we have any right to demand half of our last year and this year regular AMHR only registration money be refuned.

Really, I hate sue crazy people and would never do that, but would like to find out.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 22, 2012)

Now that you mention it perhaps everyone who has ever paid more than $100 for an AMHR horse should ask for a refund of the difference? Paid $1000? Should now get $900 refunded...since you are determined that AMHR horses are worth only $100. Just sayin!!


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Nov 22, 2012)

I applaud the BOD for making the decision of this sale for 2012. I think it was a great way to gain new members to be involved with AMHR, and in a way it did work by gaining over $10,000 in revenue this year compared to last year with new members. BUT, we also lost over $7,000 in renewed memberships compared to last year. We also made a loss on Secondary memberships of just $400 but it is still a loss. So really we should be concerned as to why members aren't renewing? Also this year they changed it back to where you had to be a member to do any paperwork whereas 2011 you did not. So really what is going on? So are we really gaining new members because of this sale, possibly, but $2,500 profit doesn't scream success too me. Especially when we are close to loosing members over shadows the new ones we get.

I am glad to hear that hardship money received doubled but without members we have no registry. IMO repeating this sale for another year will not solve the problem of loss of renewed memberships.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 22, 2012)

I'd have a terrible time coming up with the cash refund, but I could give them 10 hundred dollar mares.




I just found that smoking smiley face.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Nov 22, 2012)

Another thing too look at is registrations, transfers, and temp to perm.

Total registrations on ASPC shetlands loss of $440.

Total registration updates from temp to perm in AMHR loss of $3,300

Total of AMHR geldings registered, profit of $620

AMHR Temp. Registered loss of $123

Total of Under Miniature Registrations a outstanding profit of $15,600, just shows the under division is still strong in AMHR

Total of Over Miniature Registrations a loss of $360

So in 2012 we gained $12,497 in registrations and people were saying things were looking bleak in registrations for AMHR

The one thing that is also troubling is we lost $15,780 in AMHR transfers.

ASPC transfers actually made a profit of $275

So why the huge loss of transfers in AMHR?


----------



## Lewella (Nov 22, 2012)

JMS several years ago then President Glenn Nicolls did an analysis of membership turnover and it was determined then that a pretty significant percentage of members don't renew from year to year - I want to say it was close to 20% but I'd have to look through some old Convention notes (this was a decade ago). In the past the new memberships have always outnumbered the non-renewals so knowing why people were not renewing wasn't a major concern. This year we did do a survey and I don't have that right in front of me right now (not at home) but common responses were "not breeding", "the member died", "sold all my horses", "didn't have any paperwork to do" and so on. The survey covered people who hadn't renewed the previous two years. We did gain renewals from that survey. If I remember correctly, membership numbers for 2012 were improved over 2011 (again, not at home so don't have the numbers in front of me). Renewals for 2013 were far outpacing previous years as of Convention - I'm sure the 500 free books had something to do with that!


----------



## Lewella (Nov 22, 2012)

When I get home I'll post some previous years transaction data. AMHR transfers numbers are historically not great. ASPC generally transfers more ponies per year than it registers per year. ASPC registrations were above average the previous two years so I'm not too worried at the point by them being off a little last year.


----------



## Crabtree Farm (Nov 22, 2012)

If there is no club, who wants to buy anything registered to a defunct club/registry.


----------



## Reignmaker Miniatures (Nov 22, 2012)

I would be one of the people not renewing my membership and it is because I don't breed AMHR horses and have no paperwork to do on the ones I own. I would still have renewed my membership except that last year when I sent in paperwork to change a horse from stallion to gelding I was forced to renew to do so. that made a 'free' thing not so free (Canadian membership) at a time when I was financially strapped (had been unemployed for several months) and wouldn't have bothered to update the papers at all (unless I decided to do a breed show or sell the horse) if I had been aware of the cost since it wasn't changing anything for me. It has left a 'bad taste in my mouth' as they say and I am doubtful if I will ever be a member again. I am moving away from the registries and on to other ways to enjoy my horses now that I no longer breed I don't need to register. It seems likely to me that by making everyone who wants to do a transfer or update papers in any way buy a membership they are getting less and less accurate records on horses. JMO


----------



## LaVern (Nov 22, 2012)

I need a registry that wants to makes money for me not off me. Tell me what you have to offer me. Why should I stay? I don't care if you made a million dollars hardshipping. What good is that to me. It only hurts me.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 22, 2012)

Now seriously--how many sales have you lost due to this sale? How many lookers have told you they won't buy after all because they are hardshipping something instead?


----------



## dreaminmini (Nov 22, 2012)

ROFL...are you serious Disneyhorse??? The Miniature horses of today on the whole after people's selective breeding programs have come beyond that. Sure there are badly conformed minis just as there are badly conformed Shetlands. What about the skinny Shetlands, all the ones with no heart girth, with no substance or bady that would be useless performance horses?? All the double registered ponies that are so skinny that look like a good wind would blow them over...this is what wins and that is supposed to be what is preferred? LOL I may as well throw in the towel and stay out for the AMHR show ring.


----------



## disneyhorse (Nov 22, 2012)

dreaminmini said:


> ROFL...are you serious Disneyhorse??? The Miniature horses of today on the whole after people's selective breeding programs have come beyond that. Sure there are badly conformed minis just as there are badly conformed Shetlands. What about the skinny Shetlands, all the ones with no heart girth, with no substance or bady that would be useless performance horses?? All the double registered ponies that are so skinny that look like a good wind would blow them over...this is what wins and that is supposed to be what is preferred? LOL I may as well throw in the towel and stay out for the AMHR show ring.


Please look at my post before the one, to understand further context. I stated that papers do NOT guarantee quality. No one can automatically say that just because a horse has ASPC papers that it is quality over an AMHR horse.

However, there is no denying that the ASPC ponies have brought some qualities lacking overall (look in old Journal and MH World mags) that are generally highly desired such as long upright necks, long leg-to-body proportions, and big movement.


----------



## Deb O. (Nov 22, 2012)

yes amhr has a cheap sale on hardshipping last year and the coming year. but in my mind it doesn't devalue the horse at all because unlike amha,who by the way is closing its books in 2013 i hear, to hardship your horse into amhr it must first be registered in an approved registry i.e. amha or aspc. So how does that devalue your current amhr horses??? Maybe i'm still naive but this mess seems like people crying wolf who really have nothing to cry wolf about like the boy in the fairy tale. Be careful crying wolf because like the boy people won't listen when you are talking about something important


----------



## Jean_B (Nov 22, 2012)

Lewella said:


> I'm sure the 500 free books had something to do with that!


ROFLMAO !! That was the only way you could get that J. R. piece of drivel out of the office where it was taking up space, since no one was willing to shell out the ridiculous amount of $$ that was being charged for it when it came out.


----------



## Jean_B (Nov 22, 2012)

Minimor said:


> Now seriously--how many sales have you lost due to this sale? How many lookers have told you they won't buy after all because they are hardshipping something instead?


Again, this thread was started because - in LaVern's OPINION (which we are allowed to have - at least here in the USA...but maybe not elsewhere???) - the CHEAP hardshipping - in her OPINION (which by the way, I share with her) DE-VALUES the BREEDING program (and if you don't have a breeding program, why care or get your underwear in a twist?????) of her and anyone else breeding "straight" AMHR horses. It's an opinion, folks. Now let's everyone that is celebrating Thanksgiving today, go have another piece of turkey and some more pumpkin pie.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 22, 2012)

Thank you jean I do know what an opinion is.  It just gives one more credibility if the opinion is backed up with facts--otherwise it comes across something like chicken little and the falling sky. So, it is a seriously interested question that I asked.


----------



## Jean_B (Nov 22, 2012)

Oh for pete's sake.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Nov 22, 2012)

I'm sorry I guess I would think the registry would be more concerned about trying to find a way too keep its members. I do know that not every member is going to continue to become a member every year. The only reason I become a member every year is because I do show every year. But when the registry looses over $7,600 of renewed memberships I guess that would send a red flag too me. New memberships are important perhaps if not more so, as we need new members, but too me that would be a big loss of members not returning to AMHR. I would think there has to be a way for AMHR/ASPC have a incentive for you to renew your membership year after year. Even just $10 less to renew your membership vs new memberships would be a nice incentive. I know this year when they had that $20 credit if you apply for membership before a certain date was sure nice.

As far as transfers being so low why is that? It seems to me more people bought horses this year then last year. Are they just not transferring them?


----------



## LaVern (Nov 22, 2012)

I have loved only AMHR and my only AMHR horses for so long. I have been beyond passionate, about them. Crazy I think is the word.

I need a outfit that is as passionate about them as I am. I need an outfit that will do all they can to protect their breeders and their breeders all important papers. I need directors that just don't see them as money for the outfit. I need to belong to an organization of people that feel as strongly as I do, and that will give their all to promote these horses.

I don't think that the directors mean to stab us in the back, they just don't think about us as anything but a meal ticket.

I need directors that say, Our Miniature Horses are the Best Miniature Horses in the World. Our MIniature Horses Are better than any horse or Pony that has ever walked the face of the earth. No other Horse or Pony can come close to being half as smart or half as talanted or half as pretty. Don't waste your money on any other Pony or Horse. I need directors that would say to someone that wanted to hardship into our outfit. Maybe you can, but it won't come cheap and you have to prove you are worthy of us. WE ARE THAT GOOD

But our directors don't feel that way, and rightly so, they are directors for another breed.


----------



## Lewella (Nov 22, 2012)

I'm missing a few years data but here are some AMHR numbers:

FY 1998 - Registrations 9927, Transfers 7843

FY 1999 - Registrations 12063, Transfers 8154

FY 2000 - Registrations 9997, Transfers 8924

FY 2001 - Registrations 9977, Transfers 9099

FY 2002 - Registrations 10311, Transfers 9221

FY 2003 - Registrations 9928, Transfers 9429

FY 2004 - don't have

FY 2005 - don't have

FY 2006 - don't have

FY 2007 - don't have

FY 2008 - don't have

FY 2009 - Registrations 7458, Transfers 7508

FY 2010 - Registrations 6191, Transfers 6320

FY 2011 - Registrations 5663, Transfers 6033

Same periods for ASPC:

FY 1998 - Registrations 922, Transfers 908

FY 1999 - Registrations 1034, Transfers 954

FY 2000 - Registrations 1163, Transfers 1158

FY 2001 - Registrations 1139, Transfers 1276

FY 2002 - Registrations 1221, Transfers 1256

FY 2003 - Registrations 1177, Transfers 1311

FY 2009 - Registrations 1175, Transfers 1108

FY 2010 - Registrations 1125, Transfers 1161

FY 2011 - Registrations 1094, Transfers 1282


----------



## LaVern (Nov 23, 2012)

Last Post for me. I just have to decide if I am going to sort of throw in the towel or keep fighting for the AMHR only horse.


----------



## 2minis4us (Nov 23, 2012)

I think you should throw in the towel, seems like you have not been happy for a long time. JMO. AMHR... it is what it is. Just because you don't agree with the hardship, it makes some people really happy to be able to register for less $$. Lots of us don't have as much money as we used to.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Nov 23, 2012)

If you were to stay in AMHR and want to fight for the "straight" miniature then fight. This forum is only good for so much. Submit proposals to help protect them. Attend Conventions. Unless if you feel you have put up a good fight and can't do anymore then leave. Too me I also agree it seems like you have been unhappy with AMHR for a long time, but with that being said both registries have problems. But AMHR as you know is going towards the shetland route and IMO a trend that won't go away anytime soon. I still think the under division will remain strong, as numbers have shown. But I think the B size AMHR only breeder is going to have a hard time competing against a breeder who raises AMHR/ASPC ponies.


----------



## RayVik (Nov 23, 2012)

Lavern

I feel your frustration and if nationals has a HUGE increase and the market skyrockets in 2013 because of the increase in hard-shipped AMHR horses then we will have to eat our words and forever face the reducible of believing the miniature horse could be something more then a commodity. Regardless I know I will seek my quality in flesh ind blood not in paper and ink.

Edit to add: It would be a fitting and ironic twist for this thread to end on " Black Friday "


----------



## Riverrose28 (Nov 23, 2012)

QUESTION for those more knowledgable....would it make the AMHR only horse more marketable to also have the ASPC attached to the registration, then if yes, can the registry reverse the hardship to AMHR only breeders so they can hardship into ASPC for a reduced price. Or is that impossable?

Reason I ask is this, I'm having a difficult time marketing my AMHR only "B" size horses as to show at the National level they need that ASPC and don't want to add any more horses, no matter what they are registered in.


----------



## Lewella (Nov 23, 2012)

ASPC is a closed pedigree breed, you cannot hardship into ASPC.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Nov 23, 2012)

ASPC is a closed breeding registry. It no longer accepts registration of outside horses. AMHR is a semi-closed height registry. It's closed too all outside registration except for certain registries like AMHA, ASPC, and Fabella registration.

I'm in the same boat. I'm selling a B size AMHR only mare and had someone that was greatly interested in her but she didn't realize that she was only AMHR and she thought she was double. So even tho she was ready to buy but because she is only AMHR and even tho she is half Shetland and still would not buy her because of no ASPC papers. I think the BOD can think of a way to have a incentive for having these AMHR only horses. Everyone says we cannot have a new division, like Foundation. Say 4 generations back of no Shetland papered horses in the bloodlines. Has to be a way.

The easiest solution by far is for AMHR to completely close to outside registration, no hardships, start having Breeding Stock papers to those who do go over, and start implementing DNA. Start writing up a better Standard of Perfection for the AMHR miniature and I guarantee the closest we will get is the same standard of a Classic. And then maybe we can get past the stigma of just being a height registry.


----------



## chandab (Nov 23, 2012)

JMS Miniatures said:


> The easiest solution by far is for AMHR to completely close to outside registration, no hardships, start having Breeding Stock papers to those who do go over, and start implementing DNA. Start writing up a better Standard of Perfection for the AMHR miniature and I guarantee the closest we will get is the same standard of a Classic. And then maybe we can get past the stigma of just being a height registry.


I think we should close the registry, make a place for oversize (no showing, but not losing papers either), and I could get on board with DNA as long as they do it slowly so as to not overwhelm current owners/breeders. Let's get noticed as a "real" breed.


----------



## dreaminmini (Nov 23, 2012)

Isn't it interesting that since the pony people all say minis are really Shetlands, we keep getting reminded of that *every time* this argument comes up, why can't we get our ASPC papers for them? The minis are Shetlands, dontcha know, just a minor technicality of what 4 letters are in front of their name. So ASPC let's make 'em all double registered...unless...well...dare I say it...you are just trying to kill off the miniature horse altogether?? Because that is what is happening. They want the AMHR money, nothing more, nothing less. The AMHR becomes really just the miniature Shetland division. ASPC egos maybe a little hurt over where the popularity lies. You cannot even speak up for the straight AMHR horse, they just call sour grapes, we get told they are just Shetlands anyway, they say minis are ill-conformed, us AMHR only people are not allowed to have a thought unless it is how superior the Shetland pony is to the Miniature Horse. Great brainwashing almost cultish in it's behavior. I give them credit, create an animal that is very popular, let it grow, makes lots of money for them, then take it back over, God forbid it should actually become it's own entity. Let's just negate all the breeders hard work to bring about the wonderful little horses that we have today. They *ARE DIFFERENT* from their pony counterparts. Not sure what part of "if I wanted to buy a Shetland I would just go buy a Shetland" the ASPC doesn't understand?? But you get those Shetland judges to judge at the mini shows they place the double registereds first at every opportunity not taking true conformation regardless of type except on the rarest of occasions, making all the sheep members want double registered ponies so they can win too thereby increasing the value of the ASPC pony. The double registered isn't a trend it is a fact. It's called having your cake and eating it too. Actually, IMO the registry is cutting it's own throat, the minis are their money maker and they are making it obsolete. What happens when people wake up and realize minis aren't ponies and ponies aren't minis? When those wonderful little horses with their wonderful calm temperaments are all gone and the popularity of the Shetland wanes, what animal are you going to invent next to save yourselves in 20 years??? LOL Because ponies do not have the same popularity. Not exactly very bright, people...LOL Biting the hand that feeds you.


----------



## Barnmother (Nov 23, 2012)

Just wanted to echo the sentiments of a couple of people who have posted. And, add my 2cents worth!Q

A little background: I got into miniatures in 2007 after my husband had a major heart attack and we decided that we really preferred the little guys over their full size counterparts and breeding miniatures was on my bucket list. I had previouly bred, raised, trained and shown Arabians and Saddlebreds when I lived in Washington. I had also owned a couple of miniatures.

I decided that I wanted quality and was not concerned about size. I ended up with a couple of double registered (AMHA and AMHR) horses and a couple of AMHR only horses (I now only have one AMHA the other outgrew the registry). I joined both registries and transfered papers. Skipped a few years I the joined the registry when one of the horses needed to go from Temporary to Permanent. So my membership was not consistent.

Last year we were ready to head out to some shows (we did only two last year) so I joined again in 2012. I will be joining again in 2013 to show my little group again. I have also bred a couple of mares. My two smallest horses also produced my second largest, she is an AMHR Over at as a two year old.

I am going with AMHR overs and I plan to stick with doing that. I like the overs, while I still love my unders the overs are best for me, I am not looking for ASPC I like my mini's. I have two unders at this point and four overs.

I will continue to join the registry as needed to show or register/transfer papers, it might not be every year. It is a lot of money to spend when you aren't actively needing the registry to work for you. Heck I didn't have enough paperwork to do last year to even use my $20 credit!

That said I really believe the economy has had a big effect on what folks are doing. You say that transfers are down, I bet sales are down as well, no need to transfer if you haven't purchased something. New registrations down, well I would bet that folks are breeding as many as they were in the past due to limited resources to purchase additional feed, bedding etc. to keep more mouths. I know that we have been very selective here.

My veterinarian told me the last time he was out, he thought I really had something going here. Lots of horsey folks, like myself, are getting older. They don't want to give up their equine hobbies however they arent as confident as they were around the big horses, they can't always ride anymore and miniatures like mine were going to start coming into their own to fill the niche. They are less expensive to feed, require less space to maintain and even if you can't climb into a saddle anymore you can get one broke to drive an ez entry cart and still enjoy an outing.

I am sticking with enjoying, breeding and showing my AMHR kiddos. Everything has a cycle and a time. Let's get the economy back so people have expendible income again before we throw in the towel. A lot of boarding stables ended up owning horses (large and small) on unpaid board bills in the last couple of years. Horses no matter the size are a luxury that some just can't afford right now.


----------



## disneyhorse (Nov 23, 2012)

How, exactly, does a judge know who all the minis in the show ring are registered also with ASPC?


----------



## dreaminmini (Nov 23, 2012)

Ummm...by look for the most part (if I can pick em out a judge sure can), handlers/trainers - the judges can recognize them, the lovely internet and everyones farm pages,

You can't tell me that in most cases you can't tell the difference between a pony and a mini? You look for the badly conformed, short necked and heavy body animals and they are the minis right? The beautiful ones with the long swan-like beautiful necks, the wonderful movement and the no substance are the Shetlands. LOL


----------



## disneyhorse (Nov 23, 2012)

dreaminmini said:


> Ummm...by look for the most part (if I can pick em out a judge sure can), handlers/trainers - the judges can recognize them, the lovely internet and everyones farm pages,
> 
> You can't tell me that in most cases you can't tell the difference between a pony and a mini? You look for the badly conformed, short necked and heavy body animals and they are the minis right? The beautiful ones with the long swan-like beautiful necks, the wonderful movement and the no substance are the Shetlands. LOL


No, I don't think that you can always tell the AMHR only from those who have ASPC papers. For instance, the McCarthy Lakeside Stables has both AMHR only as well as double registered and I think they are equally successful with both. They seem to breed for quality regardless of papers. Same with the Michigan horses, Buckeye WCF, and others. They do have some ASPC in their herd but not exclusively so.

I don't think that papers or ASPC breeding equal quality, but no one should deny that many small ASPC individuals bring a lot to the AMHR gene pool.


----------



## Riverrose28 (Nov 23, 2012)

I have a solution to this whole problem and to give an incentive to the AMHR only breeder, problem is it won't fly because of money. Let the ASPC/AMHR horses show at pony Congress, will increase there entries. Let the only AMHR horses show at Nationals, after all it is the AMHR Nationals, no ponies. How's that! Problem is the pony people will have a fit, cause they want to win at both events, and Nationals will lose money. It is an incentive for the AMHR only breeder.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Nov 23, 2012)

I will tell you that won't even fly with anybody. Many breeders would argue saying why bother hardshipping into AMHR period for their ponies.

The closest you can try with what you are saying is to take the current rule a step further. A AMHR/ASPC pony cannot cross enter at the same show. Write in a proposal and make that include the National shows, you cannot show in both, you must pick one or the other. But many will still show at Nationals and more entries will be lost at Congress. But I can still see this not be passed by many people and even myself would have a hard time voting for this. I'm just glad that the cross entering rule this year was not passed.


----------



## Lewella (Nov 23, 2012)

Riverrose28 if it has AMHR papers, it is an American Miniature Horse registered with the American Miniature Horse Registry. There are AMHR/AMHA, AMHR/PtHA, AMHR/Harnessbred, AMHR/Falabella, AMHR/WCMHR, etc. all showing at AMHR Nationals as well as ASPC/AMHR. If you eliminate the ASPC/AMHR you have to eliminate all of them too and when you do that you won't have a Nationals left.


----------



## Riverrose28 (Nov 23, 2012)

I so appreciate the insight and education, I personally have purchased several AMHA only horses only to hardship them into AMHR as I knew they would go over, so they lose their AMHA papers and are now only registered AMHR. These horses have won in the show ring, both in AMHA and AMHR even to the point of Champion of Champions in halter and ammy. Seriously they are only now AMHR registered. What is their future? ONe was 10th at Nationals in Model, but did place in performance, but not well at all against the ASPC/AMHR horses in halter. I so can understand were REnee is coming from breeding AMHR only horses that are 35 to 38"s. Do they sereiously have a future in this registry? Or are as someone else brought up, only money makers?


----------



## Riverrose28 (Nov 23, 2012)

Please disregard my previous post, after having a discussion wiht someone, I got it now!


----------



## Silver City Heritage Farmstead (Nov 28, 2012)

I can't wait to get into town with the laptop so I can post a decent reply to this topic! I'm making notes as I'm reading through thread, already have one steno page full! LOL

I will say though, THANK YOU. Thank you to experienced breeders for sharing your desires, dreams and insights. Thank you to those with differing opinions, who make an honest effort to state those opinions in a non-confrontational manner. Thank you to the mods who gently guide us back to the fact that we ALL love miniatures and we're each entitled to our opinion as to what that is and remind us to state those opinions respectfully. Lastly, thank you (in advance) for allowing newcomers to learn from you and for allowing us (me specifically) to post our observations and thoughts as well. Doing so helps me to refine my goals as a partipant in the Wonderful World of the Miniature Horse....in ALL of it's manifestations....Julie

ETA: LaVern, I sent you a pm.


----------



## Belinda (Nov 29, 2012)

Hi 



 I have stayed off this topic, but just wanted to share a little insight to how this reduced fee came into play !!! 



 We had many request from YOUR buyers from other countries to reduce the fee for them to come into our Registry ! As when most of them bought their Miniature Horses they were only AMHA registered ! As AMHR /ASPC had not even had a International Committee or Marketing program in place until about 4 years ago, When I insisted that we needed to explore that area ... 



 So after great thought and discussion the Board said , well it would not be fair to our old and faithful members to reduce fees for New folks and not our regular members .. And we really wanted to give those who were buying or had bought Mini's from other countries a chance to be part of our Registry .. 





 And by doing that we had to open it up to the reduced hardshipping fee for everyone , Not just Mini's , Not just other countries , BUT FOR EVERYONE ! And Like I said to some before , the number of Mini's hardshiped in from AMHA is double the number of Shetlands !! Actually I am not sure the number of shetlands is that much more than what we were getting with the higher fees !!! 



 Your board did not do this to lower the value of your Miniatures , but to help with those that wanted to bring their Miniatures into this Registry and let it continue to grow !! 




 :yes


----------



## LaVern (Nov 29, 2012)

Thanks Belinda for your take on how it went down. I must be missing something here. Why would anyone one come to me to buy an only amhr horse when they can slap papers on their own cheap?

And I suppose it was very nice of the board to give all those New People and Over Seas People and Shetland People and AMHA people and Falabella People people a break and make our registry bigger.


----------



## Lewella (Nov 29, 2012)

Belinda said:


> And by doing that we had to open it up to the reduced hardshipping fee for everyone , Not just Mini's , Not just other countries , BUT FOR EVERYONE ! And Like I said to some before , the number of Mini's hardshiped in from AMHA is double the number of Shetlands !! Actually I am not sure the number of shetlands is that much more than what we were getting with the higher fees !!!


More like 5 AMHA horses for every 1 Shetland.




There were 517 AMHA horses hardshipped with the Hardship sale between Jan 1 and the end of October vs. 103 Shetlands hardshipped in the same time period. I'm with Belinda, I don't think there was a significant increase in the number of Shetlands hardshipped with the sale this year, I don't think there will be a significant increase next year either.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 29, 2012)

Look at it this way...how many of those people --especially those in Europe--would come and buy from you or anyone else if there wasn't a sale on hardshipping? These days in this economy I would bet that the majority of them wouldn't be buying AMHR anyway--they would just sit tight with what they have and would simply not be a part of AMHR. Some, not all, would still choose to hardship , because even $400 is far cheaper than buying and importing another horse.

I agree with Belinda, we do need promotion in Europe--if there isn't promotion there then 'you' are never likely to have AMHR sales to Europe--if there is nothing AMHR there why would anyone want AMHR horses there? More R horses mean more interest in R events and then maybe more interest in buying AMHR. Our BOD did what was good for AMHR


----------



## LaVern (Nov 29, 2012)

I totally agree with Belinda. Promotion up the wazoo. The AMHR horse is the most wonderful horse there is. You must have AMHR. Our registry will back its breeders. Our directors will stand behind you as a breeder of AMHR horses. They are the only horses in the world worth having. We love out AMHR horses.

And once you start raising and trying to sell them we will not sell you out.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 29, 2012)

> In the strangest of ways it was about the money but I don't believe in the way you might thinkI sat in the BOD meeting when this decision was made and let me offer what I saw as to how it went
> 
> It began with the idea that ALL hardship fees should be increased to the same as the AMHR as there is a segment of our organization who pays much less to get papers. What followed was a debate about if this particular "fee" was even a hardship fee or not and progressed into the idea that raising this fee would stifle the growth and participation and even make it prohibitive cost wise to people who might otherwise join this particular segment. Mind you the original intent was to raise that fee. After about 10 mins of the debate and the idea having shifted toward the raising of this initial fee would or might inhibit growth of that segment a director had the brain storm to LOWER the hardship fee for AMHR or as it called have a "sale" the focus having turned toward what could be done to increase revenue and membership this idea of a " sale" was quickly embraced and passed. Not a single utterance was offered regarding any impact or other ramifications regarding its application other then if its cheap people will buy. So the quick thinking and tunnel vision of the matter of doing something to improve our numbers won out that day and brought us the "sale"
> 
> So as I saw it I would say yes it was about the money but did not end the way it started.


This is how one person that sat in on the meeting remembers what happened.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 29, 2012)

And I have been told that there are things missing from that particular account...that parts of that account actually pertain to ASPR rather than to hardshipping ...


----------



## LaVern (Nov 29, 2012)

And I have been told that is the way it went down. Who has the best "tellers" is the question I guess.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 29, 2012)

And perhaps all in what you prefer to believe or who one chooses to believe is reliable...and if you prefer to believe s single version or several matching ones.


----------



## Belinda (Nov 29, 2012)

Minimor said:


> And I have been told that there are things missing from that particular account...that parts of that account actually pertain to ASPR rather than to hardshipping ...


That is correct Holley ! I guess LaVern you and whoever reads this can believe Directors that were involved or on lookers who only have half the facts ..

Sorry I tried to explain what actually went down !! I guess you will just have to believe what you want . Once again it was not done to hurt anyone , I for one sure would not have gone for it , sitting here with over 125 head of AMHR only horse if I thought it was going to kill our market ... Have a great Holiday season ..


----------



## wpsellwood (Nov 29, 2012)

I didnt go back and read all of the post, but I wonder if they close the registery would it increase the value of the AMHR horse? If brought sorry for repeating.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 29, 2012)

I guess I shouldn't base everything on hearsay. And if I had wanted to know, I should have been there myself and sat in on the meeting. But was wondering if everything was recorded or every word copied down.


----------



## sdmini (Nov 29, 2012)

Belinda said:


> We had many request from YOUR buyers from other countries to reduce the fee for them to come into our Registry !


We still only have half the data. This is the second year in a row of the reduced price. How many of the hardshipped horses were overseas horses? I have such a hard time wrapping my head around people paying thousands for the horse, thousands for quarantine and thousands for shipping but quibbling over the $200 to hardship a mare into AMHR. I have to say of the few overseas buyers that have contacted me (generally speaking overseas buyers want that "big name" on their imported horses) no one has cared if they were AMHR registered or not but AMHA was a must. Makes one wonder if it's because of the premium AMHA set a long time ago on their scrap of paper.



Lewella said:


> More like 5 AMHA horses for every 1 Shetland.
> 
> 
> 
> There were 517 AMHA horses hardshipped with the Hardship sale between Jan 1 and the end of October vs. 103 Shetlands hardshipped in the same time period. I'm with Belinda, I don't think there was a significant increase in the number of Shetlands hardshipped with the sale this year, I don't think there will be a significant increase next year either.


Considering the few shetlands there are compared to miniatures that is no surprising figure but I think your missing the point. Why do people double register be they ASPC or AMHA? To appeal to a broader market. While the 1/2 off sale will help with the appeal of the AMHA horse and the ASPC horse it further diminishes AMHR "only" horse. Buyers don't want limitations and, in my opinion, AMHR is happy to oblige at the cost of their AMHR only horse.

All and all the half off sale doesn't affect me, most of mine are AMHA/AMHR but that doesn't mean I'm incapable of seeing that there are two side to every issue. It wasn't that long ago that it cost $60 to register a AMHA horse into AMHR I can't help but wonder why they didn't then and why they don't think AMHR is worth $200 now? This coming from a ranch wife of three, driving beat up vehicles yet still has deemed it beneficial to my program to hardship horses into both AMHR and AMHA.


----------



## LaVern (Nov 29, 2012)

> Makes one wonder if it's because of the premium AMHA set a long time ago on their scrap of paper.


I say yes, and they have done an extremely good job of demanding accountalbilty from their breeders and then backing them up. It is a two way street, with AMHA, those papers are all.

It is just a scrap of paper yes, but so is the title and the pin number to your car or a deed to your land. With out those papers you have nothing.

Maybe that is why the board voted to let them in for sale prices. Because they are so much better than, the old amhr only b horses.


----------



## Minimor (Nov 29, 2012)

I would say it is due to the fact that AMHA has been so active in promoting their horses in Europe for do many years now. ASPC/AMHR has not been doing any promotion across the pond--not until very recently. People haven't cared about AMHR papers over there because there has been nothing over there for AMHR horses!

Eeeesh! Like I said , people see what they want to see, and sometimes that means they cannot see the forest for the trees!


----------

