# miniature vs. shetland debate



## JMS Miniatures (Aug 13, 2010)

This whole debate miniature vs. shetland has been going on alot lately right here on this forum. Its a silly debate. For some reason those that have to defend the shetlands feel like they can poke jokes about tossing away shetland papers or dissing certain miniature horse people here on this forum, yes you can look at the post on the pony forum and its VERY RUDE. Saying we are the bad guys when your the ones trying to start it. Not saying we are innocent either BUT anytime there is a friendly discussion about the miniature horses and what we would like to improve turns into this miniature vs. shetland debate.

It has gone bad to the point where I don't even want to show or be part of AMHR anymore. How fun is it when you are getting made fun of. Yeah I know I'm just one person, who cares right. If AMHR/ASPC wants to continue to grow this needs to stop, and I'm not talking about stopping the AMHR/ASPC ponies, I'm talking about fighting amongst ourselves. Cause how are we suppose to move forward if we keep arguing about the same thing over and over again. Instead of fighting about it perhaps we can all work together and finding a positive solution.


----------



## midnight star stables (Aug 13, 2010)

I don't understand how a mini holding ASPC paper is better then one without?




I mean I just don't understand. I own and love AMHR horses but I also love AMHR/ASPC and only ASPC horses. I don't understand the instant love or hate towards AMHR/ASPC horses.





I'm sorry you feel that you don't "fit". I show in a popular AMHR/ASPC area but I have never really felt out of place.


----------



## MountainMeadows (Aug 13, 2010)

I believe that what you are talking about is "R E S P E C T" - from both sides and being afforded to both sides. The best way to earn RESPECT is to go out there and compete & WIN. If your horse is AMHR only and it WINS against an ASPC/AMHR loaded class, then I think that those ASPC/AMHR breeders should have enough decency to acknowledge the win by the AMHR only horse, embrace the win for the animal that it is, and move on. Same holds true for the AMHR/AMHA people who don't seem to appreciate the wins of the ASPC/AMHR horses -- folks a beautiful small equine deserves to be accorded RESPECT no matter what set of papers it holds.

I truly believe that as we march forward, that there will be more and more blending going on and ultimately folks will acknowledge the winning horse for just the fact that it won - NOT for what set of papers it holds -- at least I hope so!

I am all about blending in case you haven't figured it out yet!

Stacy


----------



## JWC sr. (Aug 13, 2010)

I agree with you completely in that it is really silly. People get so jazzed up on either side of the debate it would be funny if it weren't so silly. It seems some folks try to tear apart each other and/or hurt each others feelings just for fun. I for one do not like mean spirited people or those that have no respect for the opinions of others, even if I disagree with those opinions.





Personally I keep what I like, I don't keep, breed or show what I don't like. This is still America where we are all free to do that.





Hopefully that remains one of the best things about this industry, versatility. Each to his own and each with the respect and dignity in the opinions they have about any given subject.





To agree to disagree is an okay thing and should not cause anyone to be chastised or picked on in any venue, much less one such as this forum where the passing of ideas and previous experience is so important for the flow of ideas and information.





My two cents worth, take that a two dollars and you MIGHT be able to buy a cup of coffee.


----------



## txminipinto (Aug 13, 2010)

I don't know, I guess I'm confused. Not exactly sure which topic/post you are referring to regarding "jokes" about throwing shetland papers away. Any reference to that action is actually not a joke but fact that happened many years ago. As an ASPC breeder and an ASPC/AMHR trainer, I generally find those that are AMHR only are far more angry and disrespectful than the shetland breeders. But that's my own opinion and how I take some of the posts I've read.

As a shetland breeder (in fact, a breeder that strives to produces shetlands in the 42-46" range), I pay little attention to what the ASPC/AMHR and AMHR breeders are doing. As a trainer in both arenas I do look out for better horses for my clients to add to their programs. And many times those horses are ASPC/AMHR for the reasons I've stated a hundred times in previous topics.

I do what I like and I raise what I like. I prefer pintos but I'm not going to disrespect a solid horse of the same value just because I don't like solids (actually I do like solids but that's not the point). I like a nice horse be it ASPC or AMHR, but I realize that in our industry the ASPC/AMHR horse is highly valued and highly successful.

Life's short. Raise what you like, accept the punches in the ring as they fall (my pintos didn't fair as well as I thought they should at Congress compared to similar solid horses), and enjoy it for what it is.......a rich man's hobby.


----------



## Jill (Aug 13, 2010)

I also couldn't figure out what topic you're talking about Jamie, or what members were rude to others? I totally missed it. What jumped out at me, though, is that if you're sick of a debate, why start it again?


----------



## Miniv (Aug 13, 2010)

MountainMeadows said:


> ....a beautiful small equine deserves to be accorded RESPECT no matter what set of papers it holds.
> 
> I truly believe that as we march forward, that there will be more and more blending going on and ultimately folks will acknowledge the winning horse for just the fact that it won - NOT for what set of papers it holds -- at least I hope so!
> 
> ...


Stacy said it.......A QUALITY animal (who hopefully begets quality) will in the end earn RESPECT and in the end ADMIRATION. The registration should be secondary.

I also agree with Stacy in regard to BLENDING. Our shorter equine (ponies) obviously need to be blended just a bit more or there wouldn't be this squabbling!


----------



## HGFarm (Aug 13, 2010)

Hey, I myself appreciate a nice horse, I dont care what the papers (if any) are! I am not sure either, what the big deal is with some folks. As to being 'better' -that is up to the individual horse and a judges opinion that day.

I still laugh about the folks that still dont want to admit there is any Shetland breeding to a Miniature at all, and act like they are aliens when it is even suggested to cross them.

Yep, dont take stuff personally, and let it roll off. Everyone has their own opinions.


----------



## kaykay (Aug 13, 2010)

I was the one that made the comment on throwing away Shetland papers. It was said tongue in cheek to make a point NOT to be rude. If you took it as rudeness I apologize. It really was to make a very valid point. I would never throw away any of my ponies ASPC papers and I think everyone knows that.

I own AMHA/AMHR/ASPC/ horses and love them all equally.

I have said over and over that a horse having ASPC/AMHR doesnt make them better than any other horse. But it is what I prefer to own, show and breed.

I really think some are taking these discussions way too personally when they really arent meant in a personal way at all.

And I agree with Jill in that if a person is tired of these discussions why bring it up again? Just confusing to me.

Kay


----------



## Minimor (Aug 13, 2010)

I'm afraid I don't quite understand the problem. You were one that was initially posting about wanting to have new divisions in AMHR, so that you wouldn't have to compete against the ASPC/AMHR ponies. Ever since then I have wondered how such a division would even work, simply because if a horse is required to have so many generations of AMHR parentage...many ASPC/AMHR do have those generations of AMHR parentage, in spite of the fact that they also have their ASPC papers. I also wondered why people couldn't just lose their ASPC papers and keep the AMHR ones--and then who is to say that they aren't straight AMHR horses? You'd be left with researching and protesting every horse you show against! I don't think anyone that suggested throwing away ASPC papers was being rude or disrespectful--they were simply considering one possibility that would circumvent the prejudice against ASPC/AMHR horses!

I for one see much more disrespect from the anti-ASPC people than I do from those that are pro-ASPC.


----------



## ruffian (Aug 13, 2010)

txminipinto said:


> Life's short. Raise what you like, accept the punches in the ring as they fall (my pintos didn't fair as well as I thought they should at Congress compared to similar solid horses), and enjoy it for what it is.......a rich man's hobby.



HAH - I TOTALLY DISAGREE -



It's a "poor Woman's Hobby" TOO!!!


----------



## txminipinto (Aug 13, 2010)

ruffian said:


> HAH - I TOTALLY DISAGREE -
> 
> 
> 
> It's a "poor Woman's Hobby" TOO!!!



Ok, you're right........you know how you make a small fortune in the horse industry? Start with a large one! LOL!!


----------



## Mellis815 (Aug 13, 2010)

I agree with the whole respect thing, but remember, this forum is full of intelligent minds of those that have been in the business (amhr or aspc) for some time, so heated debates are going to take place. But yes, the rude comments...(something about getting big girl panties on??) probably should find a new home, because apparently they aren't welcome anymore. Other then that, I think the discussion that took place was just fine, we are horse people, we ALL stand our grounds for what we believe in and rightfully so!


----------



## muffntuf (Aug 13, 2010)

I have thought long and hard for week after coming back from ASPC Congress. The threads have been talking about how heavy the influence of Shetlands are having on the miniature industry. I see it differently now - I think the miniatures have had a heavy influence on the Shetland industry. Seriously.

I breed and raise shetlands in the 42"-46". In my yearling futurity class (over) my pony was the second tallest - everything else looked like a miniature in conformation, just a tall miniature, not like a shetland.

Again in the yearling mare classes (over) it was full of tall miniatures.

And they were winning the top spots.

Okay - so I waited a week to think this over. Who has more influence over our registry right now? Shetlands influencing miniatures or miniatures influencing shetlands? I don't know but I was pretty surprised.....

So I have to make a decision - do I jump on the band wagon or do I raise what I like. Well for now, I like my shetland shetlands.


----------



## MountainMeadows (Aug 13, 2010)

Muff Tuff, I believe you experienced what I am trying to express when I talk about "blending" - yes, there will be influences from both spectrums - all in the effort create a more beautiful individual - I truly believe you will see more and more of this "style" pervading the showring -- granted, at Congress the ponies were ASPC/AMHR - but the LOOK that was winning was heavily slanted toward a pony that had more of the AMHA/AMHR look to it - ie, small dished head, slender hooky neck, short back, flat croup, and yes, unbelieveable movement -- it is all good - it is called evolution ! !


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Aug 13, 2010)

Jamie I do understand what you are saying and I know the previous topics you are talking about it seems to me I hear the same few people screaming do not divide and yet they seem to be stirring the pot any time the subject comes up. I found it almost funny how quickly that thread slanted to the horrible pony hating mini people on the fourm simply due to the fact a topic on ponies was moved to the pony forum.

You are not alone many people feel the way you do and I think it is sad.

Trace I agree in watching Congress and hearing how much refinement the Shetland brings to the AMHR horse I found it ironic that it appears the miniature tends to be more refined then a majority of Classics. Glad to see I was not the only one with that observation





The reality is no one is going to change anyones minds the threads can go on for 200 pages. Guess it is best for everyone*(including myself I have been guilty more then once)* if people just dont "bite" and let those threads die out sometimes I think some just want to bring it back and the us vs them despite their claims to hate it - I guess everyone likes to be "right" and sometimes we do not accept there is no way to convert everyone to either side. Sometimes we all need to accept it is ok to agree to disagree and leave it at that. And not allow the us -vs them debate to be debated over and over again with the same thing and "digs" thrown back and forth. What is really the point?? Other then perhaps trying to convert more to one side or the other by crying foul?


----------



## muffntuf (Aug 13, 2010)

Well it just surprised me. I expected it to be in the under division, but in the over division??? I am beginning to wonder what will happen to all the wonderful shetlands that to me are true looking shetlands. Not as many as all the miniatures who are now considered not able to compete in halter because they just can't against what is in the arena now. But the shetland side???

It'll be interesting the next couple of years.


----------



## MindyLee (Aug 13, 2010)

I hope this is'nt because of my topic I started BECAUSE it was'nt about minis vrs shetlands. I was just wondering if they have different body types like minis and wanted to learn more about the shetlands WHICH I learned a whole lot from that post.

I was'nt trying to start a fight or peeve any one off.


----------



## Jill (Aug 14, 2010)

MindyLee, I don't think anyone is upset with you


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Aug 14, 2010)

MindyLee said:


> I hope this is'nt because of my topic I started BECAUSE it was'nt about minis vrs shetlands. I was just wondering if they have different body types like minis and wanted to learn more about the shetlands WHICH I learned a whole lot from that post.
> 
> I was'nt trying to start a fight or peeve any one off.


MindLee there is nothing wrong about learning something. I don't even think it was your post I can't remember.

It was a certain post on the pony forum that according to some we need to get out big girl panties on and we are just a bunch of sour grapes just because we do care about our miniatures. No body was dissing any shetland breeders, so saying something like that just makes it look bad on you.

I realize this is a public forum, I realize that we are all going to have disagreements about something, no body is going to agree with everything that happens, BUT, comments like these what good does it do to anyone? It just divides people more.

As far as throwing shetland papers away I took it as a joke cause everyone was laughing about it. I just took it as a insult. Yes makes you only a miniature horse there solves everything right.

This post wasn't meant to start anything. It showed that feelings were hurt and it does show how we are a registry AMHR/ASPC needs to come together. If no body can see that then they are blind. This post was not at all atended to show to me look at the good things AMHR/ASPC horse can contribuite.

I still want to be a part of AMHR but if we are going to be thrown into the gutter then I'll go somewhere else. It is just not fun anymore, but yet when I look at my horses thats what its all about enjoying your horse not the politics or the showing of it all. But yet also my horses can go and show some where else as well.


----------



## txminipinto (Aug 14, 2010)

MountainMeadows said:


> Muff Tuff, I believe you experienced what I am trying to express when I talk about "blending" - yes, there will be influences from both spectrums - all in the effort create a more beautiful individual - I truly believe you will see more and more of this "style" pervading the showring -- granted, at Congress the ponies were ASPC/AMHR - but the LOOK that was winning was heavily slanted toward a pony that had more of the AMHA/AMHR look to it - ie, small dished head, slender hooky neck, short back, flat croup, and yes, unbelieveable movement -- it is all good - it is called evolution ! !



Ok, I don't mean to be rude but I kind of think this is funny. ASPC slanting towards AMHA/AMHR? I wouldn't call that evolution! Since the ASPC pony was here FIRST, then surely AMHA/AMHR is becoming more like the ASPC pony with all the ASPC influence that everyone is so upset about. At least I hope so because if I end up with giant minis I will not be a happy breeder!

I agree that in the under division a lot of "mini looking" shetlands placed high and many of those were AMHR registered. But the over shetlands that won still retained their shetland look - chiseled, elegant heads, long hooky necks, beautiful top lines and wonderful movement.

To clarify, you can not "blend" an AMHA or AMHR horse with an ASPC pony and show at Congress or as a shetland. Only if both parents have ASPC papers and then it's still a shetland no matter where you choose to show it based on its height.


----------



## Leeana (Aug 14, 2010)

I think why this debate gets heated is because of the amount of passion we all have for our breed(s). I cannot even put into words the amount of passion I have for the American Shetland Pony - So when I or someone else reads something negative regarding the breed that I and others are so passionate about, its normal to be offended. Vice versa, with the miniature breed.

Basically, Just because I have a passion for straight ASPC ponies that are taller does not mean I expect you to, just because I do, nore do I expect you to run out and buy a 42" Classic Mare just because that is what I like and I say is beautiful. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Just like I do not intend to go out and buy a 28" AMHA mini mare and start showing amha...Its sort of like the political debates on tv....no matter what each side says or feels, its not going to change the others personal view's and perspective. But there is a difference between facts and feelings....and the spin stops here!! (sorry - I just could not resist throwing that in - I bet Jill will love that...).

I decided a long while back that there was really no need for me to defend my shetlands - I love them...I don't expect everyone else to.


----------



## Watcheye (Aug 14, 2010)

Its hard for me to know just what to say. I know that I got into minis because I liked the small araby looking horses. I love fun movement. I am not as excited about the larger shetland size and SOME of the shetland heads. I do like the movement so I am trying to keep an open mind.

I was a little upset when I was told by someone before my very first show that I would not do well in the ring unless I had a shetland horse. That put a bit of a bad taste in my mouth. I really like my horses and feel badly thinking that I may as well not even compete with them if I dont have a shetland.

I did recently see the post on the different types of shetlands which I found very informative and I think that if I were to bring any into my life it would have to be the classics (I think that was the type) - to me they have the looks and the moves I like *BUT* I dont want to feel as though Id have to give up the AMHR/AMHA horses I already have. Seeing as there are people that still like and have those, I hope there is always a place for them too.


----------



## Jill (Aug 14, 2010)

It just seems to me that if a person is going to be so upset by other people's opinions and take offense so easily, showing horses is probably not the hobby that will bring the most contentment.

A big part of showing horses is about acclimating the opinions of others (the judges') into what you pursue. Whether that means changing some of what you do or re-aligning your expectations for wins is completely up to the individual.

Besides, so what if someone said people need to put on big girl panties? If that's the worst thing someone said or thought about me all day, I'd have to figure I probably didn't run my mouth as much as usual


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Aug 14, 2010)

I'm not expecting anyone to follow what I love or me following anyone else. This wasn't about I don't agree what you are breeding for and I'm upset about it. No, this was about the division that is happening between our registry AMHR/ASPC.

I don't own any shetlands, but I do respect them. I think they are very pretty, I love how they move. I'm not negative when it comes to shetlands, I personally just don't want to see them in my miniatures but thats my opinion. Now they are saying the miniatures influence is coming into the shetlands, I think thats not good either. Like txminipinto said, I think the shetland breed itself would take a step backwards if that happens. Now you kind of have too see that in the under division since there is so many AMHR/ASPC horses now, but I don't think the way the shetlands look should change.


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Aug 14, 2010)

Jill said:


> It just seems to me that if a person is going to be so upset by other people's opinions and take offense so easily, showing horses is probably not the hobby that will bring the most contentment.
> 
> A big part of showing horses is about acclimating the opinions of others (the judges') into what you pursue. Whether that means changing some of what you do or re-aligning your expectations for wins is completely up to the individual.
> 
> Besides, so what if someone said people need to put on big girl panties? If that's the worst thing someone said or thought about me all day, I'd have to figure I probably didn't run my mouth as much as usual


Well maybe I took it too personally but apparently I don't see my post going anywhere and sounds like we will always be divided so I guess I'll go some where else.


----------



## Minimor (Aug 14, 2010)

> This post wasn't meant to start anything. It showed that feelings were hurt and it does show how we are a registry AMHR/ASPC needs to come together.


Not sure how it is to come together--the anti-shetland people apparently figure it can all be solved by taking Shetlands out of AMHR. Sue C. made some comment on another thread about how it could all be easily solved....and I forget her exact words & don't have time to go look them up...but it amounted to it would all be solved if everyone went along with her way of thinking.

Those who don't see a problem with ASPC/AMHR showing AMHR no doubt think that it would be easily solved if others would accept ASPC/AMHR as being as AMHR as any other AMHR horse.

What's reasonable to one is not reasonable to another.

And I love the big girl panties, always have since I first saw the smiley on another board.


----------



## wpsellwood (Aug 14, 2010)

This is what I thought was funny, I was showing Doors at Worlds my husband was in the stands and he overheard another exhibitor complaining how they (us) hardship a shetland in to the AMHA and was winning. LOL He is 6 generations in the amha. I took it as a compliment.


----------



## Jill (Aug 14, 2010)

JMS Miniatures said:


> Well maybe I took it too personally but apparently I don't see my post going anywhere and sounds like we will always be divided so I guess I'll go some where else.


Why would you expect the conversation to go anywhere that it hasn't already gone? Your own topic title reads "miniature vs. shetland debate -- Had just about enough".


----------



## Songcatcher (Aug 14, 2010)

JMS Miniatures said:


> It was a certain post on the pony forum that according to some we need to get out big girl panties on and we are just a bunch of sour grapes just because we do care about our miniatures. ....


You mean there is an actual PONY FORUM for people to talk about their Shetlands? 



Of course, I'm joking. I know there is a Pony Forum, I just don't go there because I'm not personally interested in Shetland ponies. That is in no way a put down of Shetlands. I'm not interested in Saddlebreds, QHs, or TBs either. For those who like them, that's great! Go for it! I just can't figure out why SOME feel the need to come on the MINIATURE Forum and put down Miniatures and that their Shetlands are so superior. If you feel that way, fine, but go to the Pony Forum with it.



> I was a little upset when I was told by someone before my very first show that I would not do well in the ring unless I had a shetland horse. That put a bit of a bad taste in my mouth. I really like my horses and feel badly thinking that I may as well not even compete with them if I dont have a shetland.



This is the attitude of arrogance that turns me off. I can admire anyone who is diversified into multiple fields, but have no respect for anyone who feels it necessary to promote their own by putting others down.


----------



## Minimor (Aug 14, 2010)

Arrogance? Sorry, but from what I've read on these forums, and from what I've heard people saying at various events--it is not the SHETLAND people who are saying you need Shetlands in order to win. The people that are frequently saying that are the MINI people. As I can recall, I've heard only one Shetland person actually say that. Many who do say it are Mini people who have changed their program from Mini to Shetland/Mini because they felt it was the best way for them to be more competitive. They generally aren't saying it to put anyone down, they are saying it because it is what they observed themselves--it's their reason for changing their herd. They are more sharing their observations, not building themselves up nor putting anyone else down.


----------



## Mini Gaits Farm (Aug 14, 2010)

I put up a post earlier because I was excited about being able to watch the Congress show and I was asking a few questions....I posted it on the mini forum....I really wasn't even aware that there was a pony forum....stupid...maybe it was...but an honest mistake...very quickly it was moved....not a problem....I currently own 55 head of "miniature" horses....no shetlands....but will not hesitate to tell you that I felt "welcomed" on the pony forum...so if you don't want all of the drama....come on over to that forum....I find it to be more friendly....don't get me wrong....there are some "wonderful" mini people out there and on this forum....but others won't hesitate to put you in your place if your topic is in any way pertaining to shetlands. I am surprised this and another post about "types" of shetlands (which by the way is a wonderful thread and "most" informative) have made it this long on this forum. I love my minis and am going to stay with them...but perhaps my personality is more in line with the pony people....who knows.


----------



## txminipinto (Aug 14, 2010)

Sherri, any time you or anyone else, wants to candidly and politely talk shetlands you are more than welcome on ANY of the pony forums (yes there's more than one). Shetland folk are actually pretty nice people. We welcome new comers and I don't know a single shetland person who won't take a newbie under their wing and help guide them along.


----------



## JWC sr. (Aug 14, 2010)

Folks, as a mini person that also now owns Shetlands, (cause I like them)I hope we can all to just do what we enjoy, each in their own way. This hobby, industry or whatever this expensive habit we all have is supposed to be just that FUN.

I personally do not feel the need to defend my horses or my approach to the breeding side of things. That is what Cindy and I enjoy the most, planing, waiting, getting results and constantly evaluating where our herd is heading.

For those that disagree with what I do and how we go about it, all I can say is "Oh Well" and see you in the show ring where we will see what is what. (at least on that day and in that judges eyes anyway)

I wish we could all just understand this forum is a great place to exchange experience and information, but when we make it uncomfortable for new folks or anyone for that matter to express their feeling we all lose.

I for one am making an effort to keep my posts positive and hopefully informative, except when I just want to get others opinions or thought on any given subject which hopefully is just fun for everyone.

As I have said before, I do not like mean people. No matter how many horses they own or don't own, how much money they have or don't have or how grandiose or important they may think they are. We all deserve respect and dignity in my view and I expect nothing less than that when dealing with anyone in this industry and also expect to provide that to those I cross paths with.

Now I will go back in to my dream world, where I enjoy my horses and everyone gets along for the most part. We have some good friends coming out today to look at for a show horse in a few minutes anyway.

Vaya Con Dios my friends!!!


----------



## HGFarm (Aug 14, 2010)

We will always be divided?

Variety is the spice of life... if every one had the same likes and opinions, what a dull and boring world we would live in.

I prefer Appaloosas over QH's, I prefer Arabians over TB's. I prefer them all over many other breeds.

I guess I am confused as to why we are all expected to think the same?? What type of horse is Jill's favorite horse is probably different than mine, which is different than Kaykay's, which is different than Minimors, and Songcatchers..... Hey more power to you all!

I like Shetlands for being Shetlands and Minis for being Minis. And I like different types. All big Appaloosas dont look the same- some look very QH type, some are suited for hunter jumper and some are racing stock. Doesnt mean they arent a good horse for what they are. If a small Shetland happens to fit into Mini size I dont care what it is, if it's a beautiful horse that's fine by me. It doesnt make it any less a Shetland or any more a Mini, since a Mini is merely a size breed. If I found a Morgan that was under 38, well I guess it would be a Mini too....

I dont think being rude is very nice either- people can get a point across without name calling or belittling someone else- or telling them their ideas are not ok because they are not the same as their own.


----------



## LaVern (Aug 14, 2010)

I think things are changing and I think that is what is bothering some so much, the fact that we can not ride on which registry or how many registries anymore. People are caring about what the horse or pony looks like. The days when we used to be able to sell a horse or pony because it was registered this or that or double this or that are gone. It is now all about the pedigree and the look and the size.

Straight Mini or Mini Shetland or The Mini Shetland Cross it really doesn't make any difference if it is good and not too tall.

We get defensive when we feel threatened and I think that some have hidden behind the papers they have, for so long, that this is getting scary for them. In my case, just because I raise Straight Miniatures, doesn't make them good.


----------



## txminipinto (Aug 14, 2010)

Lavern,

I believe you've nailed it on the head!


----------



## RockRiverTiff (Aug 14, 2010)

All right, I've read everyone's comments but I'm going to go back to the original post and try to reply directly to that. So here, in all its glory, is my oh-so humble opinion...

We are never going to "fix" the Mini vs Shetland debate because if something is done to please one side it will displease the other side. There are so many people in our registries, and they are pursuing so many different things, that I don't honestly believe there is a solution to this debate, though respect would go a really long way. It's funny because when I read these threads I get the feeling that the big squawkers on both sides really have the same concerns - we all know we have the freedom to breed/show what pleases us, but simultaneously I think many people aren't happy unless they're getting widespread recognition/validation. This is nothing new - I talk to Arab people, QH people, even 4Hers on a fairly regular basis and even the ones that are winning are always concerned that someone else is trying to undermine them with something new or different.

In that regard, here's what I think about showing and the Shetland influence on AMHR. First and foremost as others have pointed out there wouldn't be an AMHR without ASPC, and since so much of R is and has always been Shetland blood, I think it's ludicrous to try to exclude the Shetlands from registering AMHR unless AMHR wants to become its own breed. That said, I don't fully understand why some Shetland breeders are fighting so hard to show AMHR while neglecting to support their own breed shows. There's so much history and heritage behind the breed that I think it's kind of sad that we have so many ASPC/AMHR horses out there competing in a height registry while so few are representing the standards of the breed at the actual ASPC shows.

Which brings me to my opinion on why Shetlands are winning in AMHR. Are there some beautiful ASPC/AMHR horses? Absolutely, but I've also seen some jaw-dropping AMHR and AMHA horses. Because the mini standards are so general, the judges can only determine what's desired in each registry by looking at what's in the ring and what's in our registry magazines. A lot of the ASPC/AMHR breeders are really putting their money where their mouth is and are campaigning/promoting their horses aggressively. Any beginner that opens the Journal or goes to a big AMHR show is going to get the impression that that's the direction we're going in. So the mini-only people that say they're going to stay home because they can't win are really undermining themselves and the type they like. I will say one point that's been ignored in this debate is the fact that a lot of the popular judges are ASPC people, so I do feel they're going to have a clear preference for the Shetland minis, perhaps moreso than an AMHR judge that's also got a stock background. But beyond that, if people that don't like the Shetland type want to protect their type's future in the ring, then they need to get it out there.


----------



## MindyLee (Aug 14, 2010)

I might peeve some folks off but...

All Im going to add to folks like me who only show miniatures is that at a recient "R" show I had attended. There was both minis and shetland/mini mixes and yes shetland/minis where winning. BUT there was lots of just straight minis that where winning left and right also.

I'll will be the 1st and most likely the only one to admitt that at first I thought that shetlands are taking over and minis dont have hardly a chance and its just a waste of time and money. Then I opened my eyes and came to reality. I defently suck in the ring and need lots more practice and thats why I dont win. BUT some of the other competers that I showed against who had minis that dedicate everything to doing their best, That clearly spend WAY more time then I do at practicing and training where placing and placing well over shetland/minis. I then realized that I was pointing my fingers at the wrong folks and needed to point at myself. Now Im not saying that Im so terriable and not ever going to show again BUT if I want to win I need to do what other mini AND shetland-shetland/mini owners are doing and work harded at trying to win in the ring. I have some very beautiful horses and know that if I applied myself more to praticing more then complaining, then I could win more then last or not placing at all just like everyone else who do!

Also I'm not saying that other mini owners here on the fourm dont apply/train/practice very hard... but like I always said to my employees at work who always watch everyone else doing their job... "If you stop paying attention to everyone else and whats going on around you, you might get your job done better and a lot faster." I guess what Im saying is if you spend so much time/energy worring about whats going on in the mini equine world: minis or shetlands, and focuse on all the "what you think is so bad or what others are saying (negitive stuff), then you are wasting your energy that could be going towards what you do love and support and can give that all you have to keep it going as good as you want it or even make it better." No matter what you see, read, or hear someone always will point a finger and blame someone for something. We all need to just get along and learn from each other and think positive about the future of the mini equines both minis and ponies.

Sorry if I upset anyone and I hope I worded eveything I was thinking and folks could understand what my point is.

Also you can do what I do whan I see a topic that bugs me... I just ignore it and go to the photo fourm and look at all the great pictures!


----------



## muffntuf (Aug 14, 2010)

I don't feel threatened. I like what my farm is producing as far as shetlands go. It is not a mix of AMHR/ASPC, it is ASPC or ASPR. But I did notice that what was winning at Congress did look more miniature than shetland.

With that said, I am sure my ASPR ponies are going to make a mark on that division. Synergy TAP is a gorgeous pony - but definitely not 100% hackney, nor incredibly hackney looking.

I do realize we have growing pains right now as a registry - but I also hope we do not loose sight of either the AMHR straight, or the ASPC straight animals.


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 14, 2010)

> I think the shetland breed itself would take a step backwards if that happens.


I disagree... The hackney influence has brought some bad with it, along with the "good"(?). I am not all all fond of the over-thin neck, and convex heads of many of the modern shetlands. I do not see breeding back to the miniature a bad thing, if it gets that concave head back, and a bit more substance to the ponies front end.



> Now you kind of have too see that in the under division since there is so many AMHR/ASPC horses now, but _I don't think the way the shetlands look should change_.


But that is the point...the shetland has ALREADY CHANGED... It isn't the shetland influence I abhor...it is the HACKNEY influence I do not want to see in the miniatures. It is not because I don't like hackneys either...I love watching them...but if I wanted one, by golly...I would buy one.


----------



## txminipinto (Aug 14, 2010)

UGH Sue, you've obviously not met a lot of shetlands. First, a mini can not be bred back to a shetland and improve the shetland. The resulting cross would not be a shetland but half shetland. 2nd, I've seen just as many ugly headed and narrow chested minis. Please take any opportunity you can and visit a farm or go to a show. NONE of my shetlands have roman noses and all have chests and hips a quarter horse would respect.

And finally, hackneys have been apart of the American Shetland since the beginning of the American Shetland.


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 14, 2010)

> First, a mini can not be bred back to a shetland and improve the shetland. The resulting cross would not be a shetland but half shetland.


Ummm, yeah, I know that, but it doesn't mean it wouldn't help if it COULD be, hypothetically speaking, be done.




I mean of COURSE you wouldn't dream of mixing _mini_ blood with all those _PUREBRED _SHETLANDS now would you?



> And finally, hackneys have been apart of the American Shetland since the beginning of the American Shetland.


And that means what, besides the fact that although the shetland is constantly refgered to as the "pure breed", whilst the miniature is constantly touted as the lesser animal because it is "only" a height breed? There are as many, if not more, other breeds infused into the American shetland, as in the miniature, but has "hidden" it under the umbrella of a "pure bred registry". Now we CONSTANTLY hear how it will miraculaously make the miniature horse a better animal. When talking about the moderns, I beg to differ...and I have that right.


----------



## txminipinto (Aug 14, 2010)

Sue_C. said:


> Ummm, yeah, I know that, but it doesn't mean it wouldn't help if it COULD be, hypothetically speaking, be done.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well, you got me there Sue. Because you are right. I would never cross a mini onto my shetlands. First, because at best a mini is 38" tall and my shetlands are 43-46" tall. 2nd, because I raise over ASPC shetlands. And 3rd, because it would have to wait until its 3rd birthday to be registered AMHR IF it stayed under, but because I raise Overs it probably wouldn't.

Regardless, the ASPC shetland is as pure as any other american breed of horse. In reality the only PUREBRED horse would be the arabian.

I'm sorry you have such a distaste for the shetland and what it offers to the small equine industry. I like them all. I just breed the shetlands.


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 15, 2010)

> I'm sorry you have such a distaste for the shetland and what it offers to the small equine industry. I like them all. I just breed the shetlands.


And there ya have it...again. Just because I do not want the hackney influence brought into my breed of choice, I MUST hate Shetlands.





I WILL SAY AGAIN...I-DO-NOT-DISLIKE-SHETLAND-PONIES...I just want the hackney influencing them, to stay where it is, and if it MUST ber brought into the miniature breed, KEEP IT IN IT'S OWN DIVISION.

Do I need to walk around with a placard.














_Why is it_ that anyone who wishes to keep the "park-type" gait separate in the miniatures, *AS IT ALREADY IS in the Shetland breed*...is looked upon as a "pony-hating pariah"?


----------



## Songcatcher (Aug 15, 2010)

Sue_C. said:


> And there ya have it...again. Just because I do not want the hackney influence brought into my breed of choice, I MUST hate Shetlands.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sue_C, this is what I was referring to regarding the arrogance of some Shetland breeders. They claim they like all horses, but come here on the Miniature Forum and demand that their Shetlands are superior to any Mini. If anyone makes a statement that they like other breeds, but prefer Minis, they are automatically labled a "Shetland hater".



I think my point has been prooven.


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 15, 2010)

> Sue_C, this is what I was referring to regarding the arrogance of some Shetland breeders. They claim they like all horses, but come here on the Miniature Forum and demand that their Shetlands are superior to any Mini. If anyone makes a statement that they like other breeds, but prefer Minis, they are automatically labled a "Shetland hater". I think my point has been prooven.


Absolutely right, from what I have been seeing here lately. I keep telling myself..."Don't get sucked into replying to these types of posts", but I can only bite my tongue for so long... I do not understand how it is that what I say, is too hard to be comprehended by some? It has to be because they don't care to read into what I say...as I meant it, it is more controversial to make it into something else. And all I do by trying to "defend" my point of veiw, is give them more "air time".


----------



## HGFarm (Aug 15, 2010)

You know, I have seen different body types and movement in the Arabians. I see it also in the QH, Appies and pretty much all the breeds that are fairly popular, and I am sure it occurs in breeds that I am not so familiar with. Why would anyone question different body types and movement in a Shetland or a Mini for that matter? It is what it is, just appreciate the horse for what it is. I breed Minis of Appaloosa breeding only- that does not mean or even imply that I hate others that are not of my favorite type.... I like horses- period.

Once again it seems a conversation has been boiled down to a finger pointing assumption of what others may think, or even better, assuming what others should think. <sigh>


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 15, 2010)

HGFarm said:


> You know, I have seen different body types and movement in the Arabians. I see it also in the QH, Appies and pretty much all the breeds that are fairly popular, and I am sure it occurs in breeds that I am not so familiar with. Why would anyone question different body types and movement in a Shetland or a Mini for that matter? It is what it is, just appreciate the horse for what it is. I breed Minis of Appaloosa breeding only- that does not mean or even imply that I hate others that are not of my favorite type.... I like horses- period.
> 
> Once again it seems a conversation has been boiled down to a finger pointing assumption of what others may think, or even better, assuming what others should think. <sigh>


It is nothing so simple as a "body type", _it is a totally different way of going_. Yes, in other breeds you have it as well, but you don't show them in the same classes as the same type...that would be unfair to both. Morgans, Arabians, and yes...even the Shetlands...have Park-type classes for the more extreme movers. Such movement, as has been obtained in the modern DIVISION of the Shetland Pony, does not belong in the regular miniature horse pleasure class.

You mention QH, and Appy...try to see just how far you go with a park horse trotting along in one of their pleasure classes...LOLOL!

And it isn't the miniature horse that SHOULD be "penalized" for not having this movement...in the non-park classes available at this time, the extreme action is what should be marked down. For example, a freind of mine never does well with her registered Hackney ponies in open pleasure classes; yet will place highly in Hackney classes, or open park classes. This is the only place I have seen park horse tuype of action being placed over good long-reaching regular gaits in non-park classes. It isn't making sense to me that anyone wants it there.

There is a time and a place for everything, and everything has it's place.


----------



## midnight star stables (Aug 15, 2010)

Sue_C. said:


> It is nothing so simple as a "body type", _it is a totally different way of going_. Yes, in other breeds you have it as well, but you don't show them in the same classes as the same type...that would be unfair to both. Morgans, Arabians, and yes...even the Shetlands...have Park-type classes for the more extreme movers. Such movement, as has been obtained in the modern DIVISION of the Shetland Pony, does not belong in the regular miniature horse pleasure class.


Then make them a Park driving class - Oh wait we have one. I am missing your point Sue.





Pleasure driving is for horses that break level at a trot. I have not seen many, if any that compete in Pleasure that break above level. I have seen horses that break level at a trot shown in Country. And guess what? They didn't place, or didn't place well. Judges have a a good way of putting people in their place. IMO, let the ribbons do the taking. If they aren't winning, they won't be staying in that class/division.


----------



## Minimor (Aug 15, 2010)

Been to any Morgan shows in the last 20 years Sue? Yes, the various types do all show together in halter--so your western type horses don't have much hope of placing in the in hand classes--those are dominated by the park and pleasure horses. Sure, some of the bigger shows offer "hunter type in hand" or "sport type in hand" but the smaller shows do not--one in hand division is what you get. Yes, they offer Park, Pleasure, Classic Pleasure, but you still get very high moving horses in the Pleasure classes. There's a very fine line between the Park & Pleasure divisions--a line so fine you often can't see it.

Minis also offer Park, Pleasure and Country Pleasure--and sorry, just because a pony shows Modern with his shoes on doesn't mean he will be an ideal park horse with his shoes off when he's showing AMHR. And YES, shoes do make that much difference. I've seen some of the best Morgan Park horses trot without their shoes and they move very different barefoot than they do all shod up. I've seen a top Park horse throw a shoe part way through a class--not only the shoe was lost but also 2 inches of his hoof--it just broke off with the shoe--and that horse had very lopsided action until his rider pulled him up. Shoe and extra hoof length makes a huge difference in action.

Did you watch the Congress Modern Liberty class on line? I very much doubt that you are seeing that kind of action on ANY of the AMHR pleasure driving entries at any of the shows!


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 15, 2010)

> Then make them a Park driving class - Oh wait we have one. I am missing your point Sue.
> Pleasure driving is for horses that break level at a trot.


And no, you are certainly NOT mising my point at all...what point I AM TRYING TO MAKE, is that these level breaking, and above horses, _belong_ in the park classes...but they are not there...are they?

A REGULAR pleasure horse should NOT "break level at a trot", nope, you just take your lil self down and watch some open driving classes.



> Been to any Morgan shows in the last 20 years Sue?


Matter of fact, I don't show Morgans anymore...most of them now a days are too big and ugly for me with too much Saddlebred influence.










> (Morgans) Yes, they offer Park, Pleasure, Classic Pleasure, but *you still get very high moving horses in the Pleasure classes. There's a very fine line between the Park & Pleasure divisions--a line so fine you often can't see it. *


Thanks! *You just made my case FOR ME*



...this is exactly what I am afraid will happen with the miniatures, if we do not have separate DIVISIONS for the modern crosses.


----------



## Sandee (Aug 15, 2010)

Sue C. someone once said, "The Miniature Horse is a unique breed which comes in all shapes and colours. They range in looks and build from Draft type, Quarter horse type, to the very refined Arabian type of horse. Actually, just about any breed of horse you prefer can be found "minimized" into this wonderful breed. In our opinion..."

Oh, wait, that's not just "someone" --- that's your web page. So you have, or enjoy, all these types but, God forbid, a "Shetland type"? Some of us like to show AMHR and yet most, as you have said, of the minis cannot step high because of their short legs. So what's wrong with trying to breed more action into the "b" minis? I don't want to show Shetland - well, at least not from what I've seen this year. However, I LOVE the action in those longer legged horses and if a Shetland measures into the B size then he should be able to show there.

Yep, it's a difference of opinion.

By the way if you look up most any of your horses beyond the 1970s you will find not only did they come from Shetlands but also Hackneys. I have traced lineage back into the the 50s, 40s, even the 1800s.


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 15, 2010)

> Oh, wait, that's not just "someone" --- that's your web page. So you have, or enjoy, all these types but, God forbid, a "Shetland type"? Some of us like to show AMHR and yet most, as you have said, of the minis cannot step high because of their short legs. So what's wrong with trying to breed more action into the "b" minis? I don't want to show Shetland - well, at least not from what I've seen this year. However, I LOVE the action in those longer legged horses and if a Shetland measures into the B size then he should be able to show there.


Nice to see you visited my site.








Are you guys PURPOSLY mis-reading my posts??? Is it a consiracy?











_Surely_, SOMEBODY MUST KNOW HOW TO R-E-A-D...??

Okay, f-o-r t-h-e l-a-s-t t-i-m-e...and I will type slooooowwwwlllyyyyy so everyone can understand... This has NOTHING to do with most of the shetland breed...it is THE FREAKING HACKNEY influence I dislike. Okay...GOT IT YET??














One of the best foals I ever raised/trained/showed was a "Big-boy", and let me tell you, there were legs "up to there" on that boy...but you also didn't see any park-type action in him either. Nope, he wis a long-walking, smooth trotting, ground covering kind of horse. The type of horse that belongs in any regular miniature or open pleasure class except park type classes. Longer legs do not necessarily mean higher action, nope, it certainly does not.


----------



## Minimor (Aug 15, 2010)

Sorry, Sue, but it's all in one's perspective. IMO a pleasure driving horse SHOULD be trotting level. Park horses should trot above level. Well above level. Country pleasure, not quite level but not too far below either....because I like a good moving horse. And for me, good moving means the horse has lift as well as extension.

I absolutely LOATHE the minis that have little knee flexion, the ones that simply fling their feet out in front of them without first bringing their knees up in a nice round stride. Of course I don't want to see them just going up and down like a sewing machine, but then that's not how most Shetlands move either. If you see a pony that is moving with sewing machine action then it's almost certain that it's shod up and is being reined in so that it is animated with little forward movement. Let 'em trot on more freely and maybe pull the shoes and you will have a nice forward moving pony that has some lift along with a good length of stride. They also have a fluidity to their movement that most Minis do not have.

I've got some Minis that can and will trot level or just about level--put 'em in harness & pick them up a little and they'll be moving very nicely. And if they trot level I would put them into the pleasure driving division...because they are not Park horses and will never be park horses.

And yes, I have watched some pleasure driving classes....and when it comes to Minis, I have to say that there are some Pleasure Driving entries that belong in the Country Pleasure division. They just don't have the action and they don't have the elegance that I want to see in Pleasure Driving. I wouldn't move the best moving Pleasure horses up into Park, I'd move the poorest moving Pleasure horses down into Country.

At least we do agree on one thing--Morgans today are rather too big & ugly for my liking too, though I don't even see them as Saddlebred type so much any more. I like Saddlebreds, I do not like a good many of the Morgans that I see. Not sure what breed they resemble now.


----------



## midnight star stables (Aug 15, 2010)

Sue, I do not show in open shows. I only show in AMHR breed shows. This year was a very busy show year of only showing in driving for me, and I can tell you it's been fun. I have been able to see many great horses is their prime, most showing in the right division. Many AMHR and ASPC/AMHR horses; yet in most of the driving classes I have seen a strong victory for AMHR only horses. My over gelding went Country Pleasure Stake Champion once and 7 times Reserve; this including the Area 2 National show too. We have also gone third three times in the stakes class. Together my gelding and I have shown against many Shetlands, and I hate to "brag", but I am only trying to make a point.

As far as I can see, the "modern minis" are only going to effect AMHR Park and Pleasure driving in the over division. Why is that such a problem? It is not going to affect a large population. And as I see it, the people who really really want a ASB or Modern mini, can have it. And those two driving classes give those horses a place to go.

I love the look of a Hackney, but I would never own one. To do a different show circuit, buy a new cart, harness, trailer - no. Not worth it to me. If I did have a chance to get a mini hackney though, I would likely jump on the chance. Does that make me wrong? I think I'd have a lot of fun showing in a Park driving class.





Oh and Sue



I still think you are a nice person, we just can't seem to see eye to eye on these Mini Hackenys, huh?


----------



## Sandee (Aug 15, 2010)

Sue_C. said:


> Nice to see you visited my site.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Now who's misreading.

I wrote: By the way if you look up most any of your horses beyond the 1970s you will find not only did they come from Shetlands but also Hackneys. I have traced lineage back into the the 50s, 40s, even the 1800s.

The Hackneys have been there from 100+ years ago. So I really don't understand the problem. The Hackneys give them the eye popping trots and some of us LIKE that.


----------



## sdmini (Aug 16, 2010)

I always feel I need to add a disclaimer to my post. I've always stated that I like the ASPC horses and would own some, especially a particular line, if those that I liked were in my price range. Everything I type isn't 100% my opinion, yet is the general tone of the small breeder I come in contact with.

This all boils down to value. When you don't feel valued in your association it becomes harder to support it. Those that do not want the Shetland influence are called barn blind and not forward thinking. Those that want to keep only "minis" in their horses pedigree are sneered at because there already is shetlands in their horses background. It's a hard pill to swallow when you are continually told Shetlands are the past, present and future of the miniature association. Where is a miniature breeder suppose to feel but left out in the cold?

There is nothing wrong with the Shetland breed I just don't see why the miniature halter/performance horse needs to look/move like one. I guess I misspoke, according to a previous post it's ok because the miniature horse still could compete in color and country pleasure.





I am a little breeder, those that I talk to are the little breeder, there is a growing consensus to switch associations to show in. Shetland influence is only part of the reasoning. AOTE could have been a huge draw for AMHR but instead the last class added to the roster was a class more designed for what...ASPC type of action. The AMHR only horse does not have to luxury of "choosing" not to show ASPC because of distance, class size or desire to do so.


----------



## disneyhorse (Aug 16, 2010)

I happen to LOVE hackneys. I don't see why "shetland" is "okay" but "hackney" is the worst-ugliest-too-extreme-beast-even-if-it-was-small.

I would give my right arm for a Hackney pony that measured under 38".

And I don't understand the "if you like Hackneys so much, just get one. Don't pollute the miniature breed with them."

Well, if you like Arabians so much, why don't you just get one of THEM? If you like Quarter horse types, why don't you get one of THEM?

Honestly, miniature sized animals are cheaper and more convenient to show and care for. I can fit a 54" shaft cart in my trailer dressing room, but I can't fit a 72" shaft cart in my dressing room. I would love a tiny Hackney that could fit in a miniature size cart.

I can drive miniature sized vehicles on my local horse trails, but I can't drive anything larger.

I don't see why it's okay to let "shetland blood" creep in but the minute anything "Hackney like" creeps in people flip out. Why are Hackneys the devil? If horses are that talented and athletic to move naturally, why can't a miniature horse do it, too? If we can breed miniature horses that look like Percherons and look adorable in the draft harness classes, why can't we breed miniature horses that look like Hackneys that look stunning in the Park Harness classes?

And why does the halter have to be limited to a certain "type?" Can't judges be allowed to pick decently conformed horses that they like? I've been to shows where they pick Quarter Horse types, and I've been to shows where they like the most refined, extreme horses. I have a friend who had an AMHR/ASPC stallion... well at one local show the horse placed 4th to more Quarter Horse types, but then that year went National Grand Champion Stallion in halter. So you see, one judge out there felt he was 4th place and another judge felt he was the best in the nation that year. Halter is not an exact science, just go show your horses and have fun!

I looooooove hackneys and would kill to have one that's under 38". I do think that Modern Shetlands will be a major player in the miniature driving classes (Roadster, Pleasure, Park) in the future no matter what big-motion-haters will whine.

However, I also feel that AMHR-only horses are not to be put down. A nice horse is a nice horse. There are THOUSANDS of beautiful AMHR or AMHA or AMHA/AMHR horses out there. And let's face it... not matter how hard someone tried, a Hackney type horse could never try for National Grand Champion Western Pleasure horse. There is nothing WRONG with horses that have dressage type or Hunter type or Western type motion, any more than there is anything WRONG with a horse that has Park or Pleasure type motion. They are DIFFERENT. It is when you say something is "good" VERSUS something different being "bad" that it becomes a point of contention. I happen to PREFER a Park type horse, but that doesn't mean that someone's National Grand Western Pleasure horse is ugly-moving or untalented. I think that AMHR's greatest strength is the pure VARIETY it offers. If you like Quarter horses, they have those! Show in Western Pleasure. Like draft horses? They have those too! Show them in the draft harness complete with scotch collars and tail buns. Like pretty little model horses? Show in halter, it's a beauty pageant! Like Saddlebreds? Show in Park Harness with a viceroy! Like to go fast? Show in Roadster, both big movers and flat movers can really show off their speed.

When I go to shows, I see teeeny tiny minis that are just so small and perfect. I see flashy ASPC/AMHR horses. I see stunning AMHR only horses. Most horses have something they can bring to the table.

The Shetlands are major players now, get over it. If you don't like 'em, don't buy/breed/show them. Show what makes YOU happy and get over it



Chances are there are judges who also love what you love.

Andrea


----------



## ruffian (Aug 16, 2010)

After 30+ years of being a "Breed", why is it IMPORTANT now to get a Shetland or Hackney into the miniature horse?

If you like a Hackney, then SHOW THE HACKNEY in HACKNEY shows

If you like a Shetland, then SHOW THE SHETLAND IN SHETLAND SHOWS

If you like an Arabian, then SHOW THE ARABIAN

The miniature horse is not a HUGE MOVING HORSE. That's right. it's not. Why does it have to be? A nice moving horse that can get along the rail is great. I don't need anything that knocks it's knees into it's chin. A Quarter Horse has it's head level with it's withers, or thereabouts. WAIT - LET'S CROSS EM WITH ARABIANS TO GET THAT HEAD UP!! Just because folks like it that way better doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do.

If Shetland folks want to show - support the shetland shows!!!!!! Why can't the shetland shows support themselves? Why can't hackney shows support themselves?? Why do you have to do everything possible to get under 38" to get into miniature shows?


----------



## disneyhorse (Aug 16, 2010)

ruffian said:


> After 30+ years of being a "Breed", why is it IMPORTANT now to get a Shetland or Hackney into the miniature horse?
> 
> If you like a Hackney, then SHOW THE HACKNEY in HACKNEY shows
> 
> ...


As stated before... Why would I want a Huge Moving Miniature Horse? I'd rather buy miniature sized tack and equipment because it's easier to store and transport. I have five local AMHR shows here I'd love to show in. I have ZERO Hackney shows locally I could show in. If I had a full size Hackney, I'd have nowhere to show it. If I had a miniature Hackney, I'd have tons of venues to show it.

Miniature horses have an appeal because they are TINY. That's what they ARE. SMALL horses. And I just love that! That's the sole reason I switched from Draft horses to Small Equine. Because of the SIZE. And my tastes are for the big moving horses. Not that a dressage horse isn't AMAZING... my friend here raises Andalusians that have the most amazing dressage extended trots... but it is different motion.

I think people are now nuts about the bigger moving horses NOW (rather than 30 years ago) is because dedicated breeders through the decades have been able to improve the breed. It's no longer about "the tiniest", it's now "the prettiest" and "the best moving" and I think it's wonderful that breeders have the ability to diversify! And I think that's what people need to do... embrace the DIVERSITY. I hate the "us versus them" that is going on here. Those who don't like Shetlands and Hackneys are venomous. Those who have the Shetlands try to defend them and say "well they're winning, so how can they be that bad?"

Just breed what you like and show what you like.

Andrea


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Aug 16, 2010)

Marlee..... you have said what I have heard from many many mini breeders some who are opting to leave association due to it.

You said it with class and I really hope rather then defend how the whole world really should want Shetlands many will truly take the time to actually read and understand your post.

Yep the mini breeders could easily get over it and play or leave.. I am simply saying be careful what you all ask for.. without the minis you would not have any money for your ASPC Congress or pretty much anything else. This is a buisness and one has to appreciate that which brings in the money not make them feel useless- stupid- poor sports - ignorant and tell them hey our way or the highway.. When the majority of money is brought in by one division how does it make any sense to tell that division do it this way or see ya???

The fact that I personally love my ponies- that I personally do not mind Shetlands or Hackneys makes no difference.

The fact that if I were to start breeding again it would be ASPC ponies not minis doesnt matter

The fact that I personally do not believe there are enough ASPC breeders out there who have managed to master their own breed enough to start worrying about fixing minis doesnt matter.

Who was here first doesnt matter- who is the better breed doesnt matter- the reality is where would ASPC be at this moment and time without the minis and the dollars they bring in. And while looking at history lets look at what actually brought that money in the first place- TAKING THE ASPC PAPERS AWAY- does it make sense maybe not- is it logical? Maybe not- does it change the fact that mins do have lots of Shetland blood? Maybe not -but that doesnt change the facts and the facts are once Shetland was off the papers the dollars came tumbling in. Why would we force that to change without knowing that the dollars will still come tumbling in? It seems pretty obvious that they wont.... so yes some could insist on being right.. but really in the long run..where would righteousness be getting the entire association as a whole? What are the long term implications?

There is a division for everyone in ASPC heck now for ponies who go over height for show reasons can still hadd another 2 inches and show ASPR... Why this horrible outrage at the mini division asking for another division for them?


----------



## Sandee (Aug 16, 2010)

Andrea, Lisa, I agree with you both. Finally you've both said what I've been trying to say. Yes, the minis are needed. Yes, the minis are fun and easy to care for and $$ a better deal than big(ger) horses. So the fact that someone loves QH, or Draft, or Arabs and would like to see minis that have that "look" is no different than someone that loves the action of Shetland or Hackney or Saddlebred. If it's possible to get a mini that has action and can drive with "style", then why not do it? I like the fact that minis are cheaper to have. I just want a bit more to them than they are now. I don't think that's a crime and we shouldn't have to constantly defend our preferences.


----------



## LaVern (Aug 16, 2010)

As usual Marlee you nailed it, in my opinion. Now I have just one guestion? Do those of you that love the high steppers and and the hackney influence actually drive them or are you just watchers and talkers like me? I would love to see pictures of those that do.

I remember so clearly my

Dad saying to my uncle in the early 60's," A bunch of old Fudds hanging on the rail looking for some action wrecked a breed". Now that was his opinion, not necessarily mine. So each to their own.


----------



## Lewella (Aug 16, 2010)

sdmini said:


> AOTE could have been a huge draw for AMHR but instead the last class added to the roster was a class more designed for what...ASPC type of action.


Just a point of clarification - the last AMHR driving classes added were the Western Country Pleasure classes - not the Park Harness classes.


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 16, 2010)

> There is a division for everyone in ASPC heck now for ponies who go over height for show reasons can still hadd another 2 inches and show ASPR... *Why this horrible outrage at the mini division asking for another division for them?*


Thank you Lisa, that is the question that everyone but ourselves have danced around. I am clearly labled as a Shetland/Hackney hater, when I am niether, simply because I want this.








> Dad saying to my uncle in the early 60's," A bunch of old Fudds hanging on the rail looking for some action wrecked a breed".


I think I would love to know your Dad...love his sense of humour.

Good thing I wear "big girl panties".


----------



## sdmini (Aug 16, 2010)

Lewella said:


> Just a point of clarification - the last AMHR driving classes added were the Western Country Pleasure classes - not the Park Harness classes.


I was referring to Roadster in hand but perhaps my time line is not right and if it's off I apologize.


----------



## Minimor (Aug 16, 2010)

> Why this horrible outrage at the mini division asking for another division for them?


 You know what, I for one could care less if they add 6 divisions into AMHR as long as they make those divisions optional and not required for the local shows. Im quite sure that the shows here would not see a need to add any new divisions if they were available to be added…because we dont have that many Shetlands being shown AMHR, and of those that are being shown, none are Moderns.
What amazes me is that people seem to believe that if another division or two (or three or four or whatever) were added to AMHR, that would fix all their problems and complaints. If they truly believe that and cannot see that it would just open the way for a whole new set of problems and complaints, then they are fooling themselves. People cannot agree now on what should be Pleasure and what should be Park or Country Pleasure. They think its cut and dried what would be a Foundation Minibut I dont see it being cut & dried at all. Theyd find that there were those Minis that qualify for Foundation by virtue of registration, and yet they still have the refined look of a Shetlandand yes, there are some Minis out there that people would take to be Shetland or half Shetland if they didnt know the breeding or see the papers, just as there are ASPC/AMHR horses out there that you wouldnt recognize as Shetland if you didnt know they had that 2nd set of papers. So, then youll have people moaning about the fact that Foundation wasnt meant for that type of Miniature. Theyll complain that certain Minis should be showing open rather than foundation. Then again, maybe if that will make them happy, give them the division and when they complain about how unfair it still is because there are the wrong type of horses getting into that division they can listen to people saying I told you so.

One only has to look at the dissatisfaction a number of people have with the Foundation division in Shetlands to realize that it isn't going to work any better in Minis.

I would go along with a Foundation divisioneven though I dont believe in itbut I would not go along with taking the Shetlands or even just the Modern type Shetlands out of the regular AMHR classes & forcing them to show only in Modern Park…because IMO some of them arent park horses, they belong in pleasure. Add the Foundation division if you must, and then let everyone that wants to show in the regular AMHR division. And I say that as someone who has only straight AMHR horses, no ASPC/AMHR horses.



> Yep the mini breeders could easily get over it and play or leave.. I am simply saying be careful what you all ask for.. without the minis you would not have any money for your ASPC Congress or pretty much anything else. This is a buisness and one has to appreciate that which brings in the money not make them feel useless- stupid- poor sports - ignorant and tell them hey our way or the highway.. When the majority of money is brought in by one division how does it make any sense to tell that division do it this way or see ya???


 And I say that there is no way we should all bow down to what that one division wants just because they believe they are the money makers in the registry. I say that if they want to leave, let them leave. I do not believe that all Mini owners will leaveIm sure some will. But Im also sure that there will be many who stay. The ASPC/AMHR Minis are growing more and more popular, and as long as their owners want to show AMHR, there will be AMHR, and there will be money coming into AMHR as well as ASPC. Even if ASPC/AMHR is left smaller than it currently is, I believe it will be big enough to survive and even thrive.


> The miniature horse is not a HUGE MOVING HORSE. That's right. it's not. Why does it have to be? A nice moving horse that can get along the rail is great. I don't need anything that knocks it's knees into it's chin.


But why shouldn’t it be? Just because “you” don’t want it to be? For that matter, why shouldn’t it be a good moving horse that is more fluid moving than what it is now? Adding pony doesn’t mean that only up/down movement will be added—it will add fluidity and extension as well. Many people like that! 


> A Quarter Horse has it's head level with it's withers, or thereabouts. WAIT - LET'S CROSS EM WITH ARABIANS TO GET THAT HEAD UP!! Just because folks like it that way better doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do.


 Quarter Horse is its own breed, and Arabians are their own breed, so you’d hardly cross them to get one or the other. Miniature horses are small size equines that are 38” or less, so if you can find a Shetland that fits into that size, adding it into the breed sure isn’t the wrong thing to do! 
I am curious….why is it okay if someone has a 6th generation Mini that came from Shetland stock, only 6 generations back someone threw away the Shetland papers, thereby making their horses “Miniature” only. But, if someone else kept the Shetland papers 6 generations back, making their horses ASPC/AMHR for those 6 generations….and of course that makes their current horse ASPC/AMHR now!....that is not so okay—people complain because that horse is winning in AMHR when it should be showing Shetland instead? Maybe some of those other AMHR horses shouldn’t be showing AMHR either, they should have had ASPC papers all these generations and then they could show ASPC “where they belong” too! They’re really AMHR because the Shetland was so far back? How do you know? Might not a Shetland without papers be every bit as much Shetland as one that has papers? Or does it really make it not Shetland any more if you don’t know by the papers that it is Shetland?


----------



## Crabtree Farm (Aug 16, 2010)

Minimor said:


> You know what, I for one could care less if they add 6 divisions into AMHR as long as they make those divisions optional and not required for the local shows. I’m quite sure that the shows here would not see a need to add any new divisions if they were available to be added…because we don’t have that many Shetlands being shown AMHR, and of those that are being shown, none are Moderns.
> 
> What amazes me is that people seem to believe that if another division or two (or three or four or whatever) were added to AMHR, that would fix all their problems and complaints. If they truly believe that and cannot see that it would just open the way for a whole new set of problems and complaints, then they are fooling themselves. People cannot agree now on what should be Pleasure and what should be Park or Country Pleasure. They think it’s cut and dried what would be a Foundation Mini—but I don’t see it being cut & dried at all. They’d find that there were those Minis that qualify for Foundation by virtue of registration, and yet they still have the refined look of a Shetland—and yes, there are some Minis out there that people would take to be Shetland or half Shetland if they didn’t know the breeding or see the papers, just as there are ASPC/AMHR horses out there that you wouldn’t recognize as Shetland if you didn’t know they had that 2nd set of papers. So, then you’ll have people moaning about the fact that Foundation wasn’t meant for “that” type of Miniature. They’ll complain that certain Minis should be showing “open” rather than “foundation”. Then again, maybe if that will make them happy, give them the division and when they complain about how unfair it still is because there are the wrong type of horses getting into that division they can listen to people saying “I told you so”.
> 
> ...


Maybe a thread should be started and let people guess what the animal may be. Like a multiple choice quiz. A - mini, B - AMHR/ASPC, C - ASPC.


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Aug 16, 2010)

Minimor said:


> And I say that there is no way we should all bow down to what that one division wants just because they believe they are the money makers in the registry. I say that if they want to leave, let them leave.
> 
> Quarter Horse is its own breed, and Arabians are their own breed, so you’d hardly cross them to get one or the other. Miniature horses are small size equines that are 38” or less, so if you can find a Shetland that fits into that size, adding it into the breed sure isn’t the wrong thing to do!


In these times it is best for any buisness to remember that every customer is important and it is always best to try and meet the needs of the majority not brush them under the rug and say to bad so sad.


----------



## midnight star stables (Aug 16, 2010)

Tina, I like that idea





I was at a show last weekend, and again, I was very happy to see many AMHR horses holding there own, even though there were many AMHR/ASPC horses there. IMO, it all comes down to a good horse. Also, the top three Country horses were AMHR only. I also think the Pleasure horse was AMHR only. A couple of Grand and Reserve Champion halter horses were AMHR only or AMHR/AMHA.

I don't see what is wrong with a wanting and having a mini hackney. I can hardly wait to drive one myself.



And I'll keep enjoying my Western driving mare too.



I don't see why it has to be such a divided line.


----------



## wpsellwood (Aug 16, 2010)

~Lisa~ said:


> Marlee..... you have said what I have heard from many many mini breeders some who are opting to leave association due to it.
> 
> You said it with class and I really hope rather then defend how the whole world really should want Shetlands many will truly take the time to actually read and understand your post.
> 
> ...


Wow Lisa you said what I always wanted too, you hit the nail on the head.


----------



## Minimor (Aug 17, 2010)

> In these times it is best for any buisness to remember that every customer is important and it is always best to try and meet the needs of the majority not brush them under the rug and say to bad so sad.


But what really is the majority? Mini owners are the majority, yes, but what do the majority of those want? Those showing and breeding for the show ring are the ones complaining, and as has been said many times, the show people are not the majority.
I suspect that the majority are those that own a few Minis for fun, maybe show in 4-H or some local shows, many don't show at all and they don't breed for the show ring--they're breeding pets and selling to their own little market.  Shetlands in AMHR don't affect them at all, because there aren't any Shetlands in their area, and their market isn't interested in Shetlands. Many of those that I know wouldn't be likely to leave AMHR because of Shetlands or because of a lack of new divisions for Minis.

Yes, every customer/member is important, but when it comes to meeting the needs of the majority, one first has to determine what the majority really is.


----------

