# How do you look for Dwarfs in Pedigree?



## Dandy (Jan 2, 2006)

I have tried to read through the other posting on breeding dwarves. I am relatively new to this and many have mentioned in that posting, bloodlines that have known dwarves. I saw the pic of Lord of the Isles which is way back in one of my mini's pedigree. So now I'm scared. Is there a list somewhere of these "known dwarves" that were bred? Well known, popular bloodlines keep being mentioned, but nothing specific. I know about tiny tim from previous postings. I would like to do research on mine, but don't know where to start. Not trying to start a "hooplah" just want to get some info.


----------



## Margaret (Jan 2, 2006)

Dandy, In my opinion, the more generations between your horse and the "horse in question", on your pedigree, without incident of genetic dwarf,..the more likely your horse may have escaped the dwarf gene. In any event if you get no awnsers to this quest of yours, you may pm me, and I have a friend that has studied this subject extensively, that can help inform you.




Being educated on the subject of dwarf producers, will help one make more informed decisions, when it comes to the selection of new additions, as well as safer breeding choices.


----------



## HGFarm (Jan 2, 2006)

I think you will just have to study old pics of horses in past pedigrees and talk to folks a lot who are familiar with some of the 'old timers' and what they looked like, etc....


----------



## bevann (Jan 2, 2006)

I have never seen a photo, but I would almost bet that BOND BULLDOG was a dwarf.Look at a bulldog face&then look at a dwarf face.Does anybody know about him?I have had more than my share of dwarf foals&from some parents you would never even think by looking at them.


----------



## Joyce (Jan 2, 2006)

I have been in minis since 1985 and no of no place that there is a list of dwarves.

And it does not say dwarf in any of the pedigrees either. If you talk to a lot of mini folks, they can give you names probably that they know of. It does crop up every now and then in conversation.


----------



## Margo_C-T (Jan 2, 2006)

I have owned miniature horses since '84, interested and 'looking into' the subject for several years before that--and believe me, finding out much of ANYTHING about what horses(whether male or female)were dwarves would be next to impossible!! It has pretty much ALWAYS,in most quarters, been a 'dirty little secret', as some have called it. You are very unlikely to be able to find out much of ANYTHING that you can count on to be accurate/true, even today, about earlier times. It is my opinion that even most "old-timers" who might be 'in the know' about what horses were in reality, dwarves, or what breeders were using them for breeding, would be unlikely to share the truth with you. Added to the strong likelihood that some, if not many, of the earlier horses were NOT bred as they were registered to be-for a variety of reasons-means that being sure about who any Miniature horse's progenitors REALLY were is very uncertain, to say the least.

HGFarms' suggestion is probably your best bet; however, since there are either NO, or only very poor quality, photos available of many of the early stallions, and almost NONE of early mares(in the long-standing horsey tradition of the stallion being SOOO much more important than the mare--



), you may still not be able to make much of a judgement...sad, but true, IMO.


----------



## lyn_j (Jan 2, 2006)

[SIZE=14pt]Bond Tiny Tim and Bond Bull Dog I would bet my whole farm were dwarves. I avoid these names at all costs.[/SIZE]

Lyn


----------



## Tony (Jan 2, 2006)

[SIZE=14pt]Well, Lyn., send me the deed to your farm, because I saw Bond Bulldog, and he was NOT a dwarf. Thanks and Happy New Year,[/SIZE]

Tony


----------



## Minimor (Jan 2, 2006)

One should never make assumptions based on names; there are some total misnomers out there!!


----------



## kaykay (Jan 2, 2006)

i was just going to say no way can you tell who was a dwarf just by their name. who knows maybe mr bond had a favorite breed of dog and it was a bulldog??


----------



## lyn_j (Jan 2, 2006)

[SIZE=14pt]I was just going by a pic I saw of him.... It is my opinion, an I kno w Tony has lots more experience than me with the tiny ones but The pic I saw of him showed a long bodied short legged horse with a big head. Not as dwarfy as Tiny Tim I grant you..... but, in my opinion still showed characteristics.[/SIZE]

Lyn


----------



## Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis (Jan 2, 2006)

Well i have never even seen a pic of bond bulldog but I do think that everyone has a different definition of dwarf and what is even a minimal dwarf or a horse that has "just"charecteristics...


----------



## tagalong (Jan 2, 2006)

> I was just going by a pic I saw of him.... It is my opinion, an I kno w Tony has lots more experience than me with the tiny ones but The pic I saw of him showed a long bodied short legged horse with a big head. Not as dwarfy as Tiny Tim I grant you..... but, in my opinion still showed characteristics.Lyn


Yes - he did. *Tony *- you have also assured us that Komokos Little Husseler was not a dwarf. I saw him in person after he moved to Canada. His photos made him look _good_. VERY short on leg... wide prominent forehead and pug-nosed look... clubby feet... and a few dwarf foals that followed... uh huh. Including an aborted dwarf fetus from a yearling (then) filly of ours he was shipped LOOSE IN THE TRAILER WITH from the sale. _I would say No Doubt About It - but let's settle for Highly Suspect_. Of course he was not as severe an example as Tiny Tim - more minimally expressed... but we can't keep "protecting" some of these horses who are in many bloodlines... what is the point of that?? Now that we are all more aware of the problem, there is no point in NOT examining some of the bloodlines more closely. It is also not a slam on those involved with some of the less severe horses - as such things were "okay" then and many characteristics went unrecognised...

Husseler...


----------



## wewindwalker (Jan 2, 2006)

> I was just going by a pic I saw of him.... It is my opinion, an I kno w Tony has lots more experience than me with the tiny ones but The pic I saw of him showed a long bodied short legged horse with a big head. Not as dwarfy as Tiny Tim I grant you..... but, in my opinion still showed characteristics.Lyn


[SIZE=14pt]I would love to see this pic of Bond Bulldog, can you post it for us?[/SIZE]


----------



## promise (Jan 2, 2006)

WOW! I have a Hussler grandson, and in his head shots, I always thought Hussler had a very thick neck, but didn't really think of him as a dwarf.

I know my colts sire (hussler son) is absolutely georgous and extremely well proportioned, and my little guy isn't half bad, if I may say so. I have seen lots half-siblings to my guy, and they are GEORGOUS. My boy has great legs, good confirmation, a nice head, and perfectly proportioned teeth (even my equine dentist has commented on his great teeth).

I hate to say this, and while I do question the proportions in the full body shot shown of Hussler shown above (meaning he looks a little rough, thick, and overall, not his best shot) sometimes I think alot of these "professional pics" that are done of these horses are done with smoke and mirrors. It is amazing what the correct angle and lighting can do for an animal.

I just think that there are alot of horses that could be in question when they not clipped, and spit shined.

Just a personal comment. I totaly agree with the view point, the more you are aware of a horses unfavorable traits, the more likely you are to either not breed them or breed them with a horse that will improve the breed as a whole.

It is unfortunate that I have seen several horses at sales this past year, that were proclaimed dwarfs, go for higher money than correct minis, just goes to show you, there are people that are not moving forward, but are still holding the breed back.

And as aweful as it sounds, I am sure that they are fudging R papers, being that there aren't any DNA requirements.

Promise


----------



## tagalong (Jan 3, 2006)

Here is a different picture of Husseler - he looks better here... but in person he looked coarser - and built more like the other pic.... JMHO remember - but my first impression of him was.... _oh my_. He was trotting awkwardly in the paddock being all studly (all 26.5" of him) - and well - I liked his _colour_ - dun. He was 19 when I saw him first. And 20 the next couple of times.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 3, 2006)

Here is a photo of Bond Bulldog from I believe 1992 at the Bond sale. He was born 1969ish so in his 20's in this photo. (I can't get it to post here - sorry)

Bond Bulldog

I don't see dwarf in this photo, but I didn't see him in person either. He looks like an old style mini to me. As for Husseler, I never saw him in person either. As for coarseness - I'm sorry we all get a bit rough around the edges as we age.

As for researching and educating yourself on dwarfism - that is wonderful and really necessary as is learning about any of the many quirks and isses with minis - reactions to Moxidectin and Bute, stifle problems, etc. But please keep in mind that a dwarf many generations in the past shouldn't be as bit of concern as the conformation of the recent three, four or five generations.


----------



## Tony (Jan 3, 2006)

I am certainly not the expert that many of you seem to be, but if anyone is interested in a little "history", Husseler broke two world records for miniature sales in his heyday. He sold for $12,500, topping the Komoko's first production sale and setting a World Record price at that time. He was the much sought after headliner of the sale. He later sold to NFC Farms for an unprecedented $25,000 at the time. He is the grandsire of Glenn's General Patton and the sire of one of my mares, whose first foal sold for $50,000. You may not like "short legged, thick necked miniatures" as some have described some of them, but they were, and still are in much demand. If a horse is 26" tall, his legs are NOT going to be 30" long! And YES he has sired a dwarf, or more, and has also sired some great get as well, far surpassing the lesser quality foals, I might add.

Here are some of my horses that the "dwarf police" will relish in criticizing, I am sure. However, they are in my breeding program, and will continue to be. And some of them have had dwarfs, and I haven't gelded them, but if you can get me to sell them, you can do it for yourself.

For those of you interested in tiny, correct, miniatures, I welcome your questions, visits, and comments. For those of you who prefer larger horses, congratulations; there are many of them from which you can choose.






Little America's 007 Rowdy Tornado 27"






Little America's Orion Mr It 28.5"






Little America Silver Tornado 26"






Little America's Sterling Fantastic 27.75"






Melton's Tornado's Whirling Thunder 28.5"






Little America's Too Incredible 25.75"

And I could post sixty or so mares that you wouldn't like, too.

I know that I should delete this post, but I have been urged by several friends to post to this thread.


----------



## Tony (Jan 3, 2006)

Main Entry: 1dwarf

Pronunciation: 'dwo(&)rf

Function: noun

Inflected Form: plural dwarfs /'dwo(&)rfs/ also dwarves /'dwo(&)rvz/

often attributive 1 : a person of unusually small stature; especially : one whose bodily proportions are abnormal

*2 : an animal much below normal size *

Source: Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, Â© 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

Well, according to Webster, guess ALL animals miniature could be considered dwarf, but that is not the definition AMHA uses for determination of disqualification.. Click to read article.


----------



## horsehug (Jan 3, 2006)

Tony,

Your tiny horses are BEAUTIFUL!

And they do NOT look like dwarfs!

You know I love that picture of your Orion son, Mr It, and sire to my Partytime!

And what an INCREDIBLE picture of Too incredible that I had not seen before!! He is ADORABLE and SO correct looking for 25.75"......... WOW!!!

And I so much agree with you that we should not only take into consideration if dwarfs are born but also if the horse produces



> great get as well, far surpassing the lesser quality foals, I might add.


before gelding or taking it out of our breeding programs, since they are ALSO contributing to the Betterment of the breed.

Susan O.


----------



## Dandy (Jan 3, 2006)

I really didn't mean to start a "Hullaballo" with my question. I think many folks on this forum are into taller minis. I agree with Tony, a 26" mini is not going to have long legs. Personally, I like small minis, but have added some taller mares to my farm mainly hoping to prevent problems with foaling. When my first foal was born I was paranoid I had a dwarf because to me he looked like he had a domed forhead and he was back on his pasterns. I went to many websites checking out pictures of foals and realized that they all appeared to have the same forehead!That all changed, he looks great to me now. I had another colt this year who was 17" at birth and the little guy is now 8 months old and still extremely tiny. Now I'm worried about him. There were no dwarf characteristics at birth or within the first few months. He just isn't getting taller. I appreciate all the information everyone has posted. I sure don't plan on going on a "witch hunt" for dwarves in my pedigree's, I just want to be a little more informed.


----------



## wewindwalker (Jan 3, 2006)

Thank you for posting Bulldogs pic. I hope you don't mind me saving it.

I'm no expert, but I think that any of our miniatures could produce a dwarf, after all isn't all in the genetics and how they line up in the makeup of the foal? JMO

And you can't always go by a pic cause lets face it it's hard to take a good pic sometimes.









But it is good to be informed but remember to look at all the info. JMO


----------



## Robin1 (Jan 3, 2006)

Tony, your horses are beautiful, if Sterling Fantastic wants to visit Arizona he's more than welcome to stay here.

We all know that there were dwarfs used for breeding in the early days.

Lets just take a look at Bond Tiny Tim for a moment. There is no question that he was a dwarf. I know from pictures that he produced more than one dwarf, however he also produced:

Bond Jocko who produced Bond Dynamo who when crossed with the Orion lines are known for putting some of the best horses on the ground.

Bond Dynamo also is the sire of Rhonten's Little Dandy. Now how many people are no longer interested in Dandy knowing Tiny Tim is in his background?

I am blessed to own a Bond Dynamo son out of an Orion daughter. If I ever end up living on the streets (God Forbid) you will find me sharing my cardboard box with him.

Robin


----------



## RobinRTrueJoy (Jan 3, 2006)

I think we need to remember that tiny does not equal dwarf. I prefer the tinies myself, heck, that's what drew me to the minis. Nothing wrond with the taller minis, I just prefer the smaller ones.


----------



## promise (Jan 3, 2006)

I agree, tiny does not mean dwarf. I would be far more concerned with the common practice of "this horse has 12 crosses back to such and such", rather than this horse had a grandsire that looked like it had some dwarf characteristics.

I think when a mini has an extensive amount of crosses back to a specific horse, you are fine tuning genetic defects as well as good traits.

In the wild, animal populations plumet when there are genetic diseases and small populations. It is the same genetic back grounds breeding over and over, without any new breeding stock introduced.

would you buy a dog whose back ground was this interbred? I wouldn't!

Promise


----------



## kaykay (Jan 3, 2006)

dandy

there is nothing wrong with being informed! dont be sorry you asked questions. dwarfism is just a very emotional topic and can get heated.

also keep in mind that a lot of dwarfs are also born to to two completely normal looking normal size miniatures. this is why it makes it so hard to predict who will produce a dwarf.


----------



## Southern_Heart (Jan 3, 2006)

Tony, I saw your Little America's Too Incredible at a show and I might add he is an awesome lil guy. Very loveable too!!! Such a pretty lil man!!!





I like your Silver Tornado in the picture. Wow! what a butt on him and very stocky.

He is really cute!!





Joyce


----------



## lyn_j (Jan 3, 2006)

[SIZE=14pt]Tony I think that this is a hot issue for you...as it is for many of us... I along with many others have said that Too Incredible was just that .... Incredible and the Tornado horse and 007 also...... Your little horses dont bear any resemblence to those horses mentioned. [/SIZE]

Lyn


----------



## Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis (Jan 3, 2006)

again it i what someone opts to call a dwarf... some dont call it a dwarf unless it is what they percieve to be full blown- very off bite, very crooked legs ect... others see a dwarf when it has very short legs in relation to body size no matter what the height,


----------



## tracyCCF (Jan 3, 2006)

Isnt Husseler, King Supremes Sire? And wouldnt it be a shame, if he were never bred, look at the amount OF GREAT offspring, he has thrown. I always admired him, and although , never saw him in person, never considered him dwarfy.

I also got the pleasure of seeing Bond Bulldog later in his life, and thought he was a nice, quarter type mini. I never considered him dwarfy body typed.

Although, I dont actually breed for tiny minis, I love them. I love to look at Tonys site, and drool over so many of his tiny overos.


----------



## HGFarm (Jan 3, 2006)

I was always told the horses should be at least proportionate. They should still be 'square' and balanced - not stubby legs, on a long fat body with a head that looks a bit too big. Sometimes this is accompanied by clubby feet. This is not to be confused with the chunkier old type Mini. I think balanced is the key word.

Tony, your photos of Mr It and Sterling certainly show good balance and length of leg, in addition to pretty heads that 'fit the body'.

I personally dont care for the 'Smurf' or 'Snausage' type horse, but prefer one with some leg, refinement and most of all movement is important to me with balance. JMO


----------



## Happy (Jan 3, 2006)

l find a lot of people will find fault with any horse under 30 to be faulty on the other hand there are just as many taller over sized ones who show with the same faults but having longer legs going for them people seem to overlook the long bodies short necks and bulky heads on the end.


----------



## Sue_C. (Jan 3, 2006)

> I think many folks on this forum are into taller minis. I agree with Tony, a 26" mini is not going to have long legs.


No, of _course_ they aren't...but like it has already been stated several times...the *proportion*, is what is important.

I only hope that if there ever _is_ a test, that then, the positive horses will be gelded and or removed from the breeding sheds. We can all "duke" this out forever, but without a test to determine for us in black and white...it is only our consciences that will help control the problem. IMHO, all the "perfect" foals from these dwarf-producing horses, are _potentially_ passing this gene on to future generations.

Granted, I too feel that the further those "old-timers" are in our horse's pedigrees, the more chance there is that the gene hasn't made it this far. We can only hope and do what we, in our hearts...is the right thing.


----------



## tagalong (Jan 3, 2006)

> I am certainly not the expert that many of you seem to be


Um.... you know what - that sneering is inappropriate.

I suspected when I mentioned Husseler that I would get jumped.

*So we better keep the dirty little secret Unspoken as always.*





I am not An Important Breeder like *Tony* - but I know what I saw. I have worked with a variety of breeds and disciplines for many many years - so yes - I do know what I am looking at. I was working with a 26" mini stallion at the time that I had some concerns about... and seeing Husseler over that next year (more than once, remember) ...made me worry a bit more.

High prices? - well, the market has always had its peaks and valleys and trends... a horse that looked like *Husseler* today... would _not_ sell for that kind of money. And he _would_ have been gelded. Times change....



> You may not like "short legged, thick necked miniatures" as some have described some of them, but they were, and still are in much demand. If a horse is 26" tall, his legs are NOT going to be 30" long! And YES he has sired a dwarf, or more, and has also sired some great get as well, far surpassing the lesser quality foals, I might add.


Kindly stop implying that I am STUPID. I know a 26" horse is not going to be leggy. DUH. Geeeeeez. But they SHOULD be somewhat* proportionate *.... as many of yours are, *Tony. *

Husseler - WAS *NOT*. And _siring a dwarf - or "more"_ ... _many_ more I fear - is what this thread is about... just another marker to look for as we seek to improve the breed and slowly eliminate the dwarf gene...

I also know that some stallions get coarser and bulkier as they age. What I saw was not age-related.... _but conformation and structure._

And many of us have said REPEATEDLY that horses many generations back may have little _direct_ influence on the foals born now. But to say that this line or that line bred here does _not_ have the dwarf influence/gene in it.... is short-sighted. They say the mark of a good stallion is that his get are an _improvement_ over him... thus Husseler has done well - when you look at it that way.

Never mind. I should know better. I am off to the barn to clean some more and let my adopted little dwarf buddy, Cowboy, trail along behind me and snuffle and talk and ask for scratches... he does not care who contributed to his plight (stallion gelded, mare no longer bred) - he thinks he is just about _perfect_....


----------



## Songcatcher (Jan 3, 2006)

Sue_C. said:


> [i only hope that if there ever _is_ a test, that then, the positive horses will be gelded and or removed from the breeding sheds.
> 534824[/snapback]
> ​


*IF* there ever is a test to prove a dwarf gene and *IF* it is proven that the gene *MUST* come from *BOTH* parents, it would not be necessary to geld or remove horses from the breeding programs as a CARRIER bred to a NON-CARRIER _MIGHT_ produce a CARRIER, but never a DWARF.

Lots of "_IFS_". I certainly wish there were a test. I would certainly test mine.


----------



## Margaret (Jan 3, 2006)

If we are to ever reduce/eliminate the dwarf gene we must start by making wise decisions, and choose to not cross breed the possible dwarf carriers- (not visually evident), to the more visually evident carriers. And one must use the visual structure of the mini to access this. The short legged ones, with the disproportinate body parts, most likely are the minimal expressed, that have one gene. I believe we can all attest to at least seeing one horse showing these charactistics on this post. This is what is paramount..in order to lessen the likelyhood of creating another dwarf, it is good to avoid the breeding with these types, as it is likely that most like that, will carry one dwarf gene.


----------



## Sue_C. (Jan 3, 2006)

> IF there ever is a test to prove a dwarf gene and IF it is proven that the gene MUST come from BOTH parents, it would not be necessary to geld or remove horses from the breeding programs as a CARRIER bred to a NON-CARRIER MIGHT produce a CARRIER, but never a DWARF.


If it is say, like the testing for HYPP; then a horse can be P/P, N/P, or N/N. The horses that are P/P, are not allowed to be bred, as they will positively pass on the Hypp, whereas the P/N's, as long as they are bred to N/N horses...will not. So, yes, it is perfectly reasonable that some horses will be gelded , spayed or somehow removed from the gene-pool.

I too will test, when and if, this test ever becomes available.


----------



## horsehug (Jan 3, 2006)

If I understand it correctly, yes the P/P would be comparable to D/D If the dwarf genes work the same way, and it would be a True dwarf as opposed to just a carrier of one copy of the gene.

And yes I totally agree that dwarfs need to be gelded or removed from the gene pool. I definitely had my little Hal gelded.

Susan O.


----------



## Minimor (Jan 3, 2006)

Tag--I thought you were very brave to speak up about Husseler on this thread. I've thought the same things you've said, only of course I never saw him in person, only in 2 different photos. I've thought his head was overly large & his legs overly short--dwarf characteristics if not an actual dwarf. Just because he sold for a huge price (at least at the time it would have been considered a huge price) doesn't make him a shining example of the perfect Mini. And of course what was acceptable back then isn't exactly what is desirable now. I do have a couple horses that go back to Husseler, quite a few generations back. Perhaps the dwarf gene is hiding in them, perhaps not--they are well proportioned horses, nothing at all dwarfy about them. So, I can only hope...

I think in some cases there is a very fine line between horses which actually show dwarf characteristics and those that simply have bad conformation. When I look at the photos of Bond Tiny Tim I do see the dwarf people say that he was. When I look at the posted photo of Bond Bulldog I don't see dwarf--in my opinion he was just poorly conformed.

Small or tall has nothing to do with what I find acceptable--whether it's 29" or 36" tall, I have no use for a horse that is short legged, short necked, big headed & long bodied. Obviously a 26" horse cannot have 30" legs, but his legs should still be in proportion to his body; disproportionately (sp??) long heads are an issue with many minis, but there's a difference IMO between a longer than ideal head that is refined & well shaped and a big long, coarse head that's much too big & heavy for the size of the horse.

Obviously there are breeders who feel a certain percentage of dwarves is an acceptable risk. While a test would certainly enable them to breed carriers to only non-carriers, that does still produce a certain percentage of carriers. Other breeders would like to eliminate carriers. The lovely thing about having a test available, it would allow people to choose--if you wish to breed carriers, you'd be able to do it carefully, without risk of producing a full blown dwarf (working on the assumption that it does take both parents to create a dwarf). If you wish to breed only non-carriers, then you would have that option available.


----------



## kaykay (Jan 3, 2006)

i was so relieved that we could all discuss dwarfism on the other thread and no one got personal and the thread stayed very civilized. So it makes me sad to see this one take such a bad turn and get so personal. I know we are all passionate about it but this bickering just wont help a thing. I really wish instead of debating the issues we could put this much energy into getting research done so we can have a test. Many people have come on this forum and said they would get it done and even asked for donations but as of yet it still isnt even close to being organized or done. If we could all just band together this research and test could be a reality. but if we keep just debating it and wishing for a test it WILL NEVER get done!!


----------



## Minimor (Jan 3, 2006)

I expect you're right kaykay, it will never get done, or at least it will be many, many years down the road, simply because there are so many money people that don't want it to happen. I figured that one out some time ago!


----------



## tagalong (Jan 3, 2006)

kaykay said:


> i was so relieved that we could all discuss dwarfism on the other thread and no one got personal and the thread stayed very civilized.  So it makes me sad to see this one take such a bad turn and get so personal.  I know we are all passionate about it but this bickering just wont help a thing.


I don't really see _bickering_, *kaykay *- just opinions being shared. Trust me - on many message boards this thread would not even be seen as a ripple. I have only seen a few over the top threads on this forum in all the time I have been here - and this is not one of them. I think all sides of the dwarf issue should be addressed - and that includes discussing the past. OPENLY. And honestly. Sharing our views and concerns. Contrary to what some feel, that is not a bad thing. We all need to examine such things - without implying that people are ignorant - as a PM I received about this thread was only too glad to inform me I was. But that's okay - others have said GO! How sad that they feel they cannot speak up.... not that I blame them. It only gets you a sh.... _errrm_... stuffload of trouble....

And if we could get a test - and determine the carriers - and breed them_ only _to non-carriers and thus weed out the gene slowly without removing quality horses from the gene pool... I know the little herd I care for would be happily jumping into line to be tested...


----------



## Sue_C. (Jan 3, 2006)

> I expect you're right kaykay, it will never get done, or at least it will be many, many years down the road, simply because there are so many money people that don't want it to happen.


Well, isn't there testing under-way in the Freisian breed Association? A horse is a horse...why not donate $$ to help with _THEIR_ testing? Once it is found, it will be available to all, I would assume; not just that one breed alone.


----------



## Vertical Limit (Jan 3, 2006)

tagalong said:


> I think all sides of the dwarf issue should be addressed - and that includes discussing the past. OPENLY. And honestly. Sharing our views and concerns.  Contrary to what some feel, that is not a bad thing. We all need to examine such things - without implying that people are ignorant - as a PM I received about this thread was only too glad to inform me I was. But that's okay - others have said GO! How sad that they feel they cannot speak up.... not that I blame them. It only gets you a sh.... _errrm_... stuffload of trouble....
> 
> 535033[/snapback]
> ​


The IGNORANT one is the one doing the PMing. The other ignorant ones are the ones that do not want to ATLEAST TRY TO FIND OUT.



> I expect you're right kaykay, it will never get done, or at least it will be many, many years down the road, simply because there are so many money people that don't want it to happen. I figured that one out some time ago!


Well, I kind of feel the same way. I just cannot imagine people being this close minded and not wanting to ATLEAST KNOW! It's AMAZING!!!!! So don't test if you don't want to, but atleast get educated. That is about all I can stomach to say.

It's way below the mentality I am use to.


----------



## kaykay (Jan 3, 2006)

just want to clarify what i said for those not paging back. here is the whole quote

If we could all just band together this research and test could be a reality. but if we keep just debating it and wishing for a test it WILL NEVER get done!!

We have to stop just talking and do something!! thats my point


----------



## lyn_j (Jan 3, 2006)

[SIZE=14pt]I have been good for several posts....lol, While I say that Tony has more experience with the Tiny ones than I do ...... I still stick to my initial post about these two stallions and a few others. Some of the Tinys that Tony and Charlotte have are VERY balanced for their short stature and show not even the remotest hint of dwarfism..... That said. I totally agree with Tagalong and Minimor. I have learned over the years what bloodlines to steer clear of.... While I do agree that Bond horses for the most part have pretty heads.... I find a majority of them to show characteristics that I am not wanting. Pm ing people that you dont agree with calling them ignorant is an ignorant thing to do![/SIZE]

Lyn


----------



## Vertical Limit (Jan 3, 2006)

kaykay said:


> just want to clarify what i said for those not paging back.Â  here is the whole quote
> If we could all just band together this research and test could be a reality. but if we keep just debating it and wishing for a test it WILL NEVER get done!!
> 
> We have to stop just talking and do something!! thats my point
> ...


*EXACTLY KAY!*

But this goes hand in hand with most anything! Talking about it is great. * Doing something about it is much greater!* I guess I am just not very good at watching people talk about the same thing year after year and never doing anything. So where do you go from here? More talk? (Bla, Bla, Bla and a lot of chatter



) or a lot more ACTION?

And BTW......this isn't about who likes the small or tall. All sizes can produce dwarves.


----------



## tagalong (Jan 3, 2006)

> * Doing something about it is much greater!*  I guess I am just not very good at watching people talk about the same thing year after year and never doing anything.  So where do you go from here?  More talk? (Bla, Bla, Bla and a lot of chatter
> 
> 
> 
> ) or a lot more ACTION?


This is the kind of thing that _should_ be brought up and dealt with at the General Meetings. But no - money talks. I fear that certain big breeders who swear up and down and back and forth that they have never produced a dwarf (uh huh...) would not go along with such a thing. It's the *NIMBY* syndrome.

*Not In My Barn Yard....*


----------



## JennyB (Jan 3, 2006)

[SIZE=12pt]I don't post often here, but I wanted to say that I firmly believe that MANY miniature lines carry the dwarf gene. A test would be a wonderful thing...many believing it will open a can of worms and others wanting to test their own miniatures. [/SIZE]

The point here is do you as breeders of the fine Miniature horses want to continue to breed and produce TOP QUAILITY individuals? Well, yes you say! The genetic markers will always be there if you don't know and don't cull...






and I know that sounds scary..it IS





The reason I think the public should know who was a dwarf like Bond Tiny Tim, a minimal dwarf and/or produced a dwarf/dwarfs are for the new folks out there who really want to know. Isn't it their *right* to know what the past has produced!?! It's very sad to get a dwarf foal and even though none may know when it will really happen, at least breeders can be informed of who they want in their pedigree's. *Don't you think that is fair ?*





I agree with Tagalong and some others too, to quit hiding your heads in the sand. Tony you have been breeding along time, and a very respected breeder I might add with a wonderful group of Miniatures. Even though you gain great deals of dollars for your stock, don't you think that by telling *everyone *which ponies/minis were/are at risk you are only going to improve them when they do close all books and they become a true breed? Or would this hurt yours and others businesses too much?

Take for instances if the AMHA and AMHR were to truely close their books and not allow any others into the registries even for a high fee, then the genetic test would come out. The findings would show that 50+% of all Miniature horses are positive for producing dwarfs. That leaves -50% who are negative for dwarfism...that gene pool would be reduced by a lot if people really did their homework and truly wanted to improve the Miniature horses by culling. Not many to work on, but a better start.





Instead why don't breeders give other breeders the* chance *to make that opinion *NOW* before hand. Even though without the gene test they wouldn't be able to know for sure. It is true that getting further away from a dwarf in pedigree lessens the chances, but when I see pedigree's who are dotted with the same individuals who might be in question that is when the troubles can start. Line-breedings and in-breeding for many years for certain characteristics is a good thing, but can also be bad, by hiding genetic problems. It is this way with all breeds. They all have their boogie-lines to watch out for...

When the QH folks finally realized who was responsible for HYPP that being, Impressive- at first I am sure breeders were stunned that such a great stallion could be causing such a terrible problem, but the QHR dealt with the problem in the right way, they having testing now and a breeder can choose to include Impressive in their lines or not. They have also recently exposed that some sons of King are carriers of another problem with a hide(skin). The Arabian breeders for years fought to understand SIDs and also got a test to expose those Arabians carrying the bad gene. They even post the names of carriers to the breeders, so it's THEIR choice to breed or not to breed. Those are *Responsible* Registries! Now these organizations have been in existance for a much longer period than the Miniature horses and the funding was there for the research. This then takes us back to what many here have said...do the research and find a test! This will take time and money, but well worth it I believe





In the meantime breeders think about starting a list of indivduals who are suspect of the dwarfism gene, not to de-mean them as many have produced excellent foals, but to let breeders make the decisions themselves of who they really want in their bloodlines right now...



Start building this list and I don't think that chatting about this issue(which is pretty important in my opinion) is a bad thing...sure tempers might flare for time to time, probably more so with this issue than any others. We need to learn, learn and learn more so we can make correct judgements in future years of breeding the wonderful Miniature horses that we all own and LOVE





Don't you think?





Maybe we need a special area like the pony chat for just this subject because I don't think the discussion about dwarfism and it's subjects should EVER stop!

Yours truly, and if I offended anyone I am sorry, but you can't make all the people happy all the time. If you are breeding any kind of animals responsibly and learning to take some HEAT for what you LOVE and believe in are all part of LIFE!






Jenny


----------



## Joyce (Jan 3, 2006)

I'm another "tiny" lover and proud of it. Though I always admire a taller mini, my favorites are the little ones and my breeding program was based on "small." And I will add that I do admire Tony's breeding program and others who also breed the smaller ones.


----------



## slaneyrose (Jan 3, 2006)

Joyce said:


> I'm another "tiny" lover and proud of it.  Though I always admire a taller mini, my favorites are the little ones and my breeding program was based on "small."  And I will add that I do admire Tony's breeding program and others who also breed the smaller ones.
> 535114[/snapback]
> ​


Well obviously we all love the tiny ones......we all have miniatures....but personally I would rather have a 34" miniature horse that looks like a horse....with a horses proportions than a 28" teeny that doesnt!! This isnt about tall or tiny minis is it? Its about responsible breeding to avoid those poor little souls who end up suffering because breeders are putting size before confirmation. I couldnt read the link Tony put in his comment but would love to know do either of the american registries have what and how many dwarf characteristics are allowable either to register or when showing??? I havent been able to find any so far and would think it to be of great importance. I think people who think its ok to use horses that are, or produce dwarfs however minimal have their priorities wrong and are not putting the welfare of this breed first...in my opinion, that is wrong!!!


----------



## Songcatcher (Jan 3, 2006)

slaneyrose said:


> Well obviously we all love the tiny ones......we all have miniatures....but personally I would rather have a 34" miniature horse that looks like a horse....with a horses proportions than a 28" teeny that doesnt!! 535122[/snapback]
> ​


Welcome to the Forum slaneyrose. There is a tremendous amount of truth in what you have said, but it "seems" to imply that a 28" horse CANNOT have the correct proportions that a 34" horse can. I and many others do not believe that is true. I know that may not be what you meant to imply, but there are several who do insinuate that small equals incorrect. Personally, I would prefer an 18" horse with CORRECT proportions. However, I don't see that happening in my lifetime.


----------



## wwminis (Jan 3, 2006)

[SIZE=14pt]Well, Folks here's my take on this subject! Having been a small breeder for several years and breeding the tinnies, as you call them! I have posted my little dwarf Angel many, many times on the forum! Angel is the product of a 32.5" National Champion mare that was breed when I bought her to a 31" National Champion Stallion![/SIZE]

So see, you can get a dwarf from any size horse. And any bloodline!

Bill


----------



## slaneyrose (Jan 3, 2006)

wwminis said:


> [SIZE=14pt]Well, Folks here's my take on this subject! Having been a small breeder for several years and breeding the tinnies, as you call them! I have posted my little dwarf Angel many, many times on the forum! Angel is the product of a 32.5" National Champion mare that was breed when I bought her to a 31" National Champion Stallion![/SIZE]So see, you can get a dwarf from any size horse. And any bloodline!
> 
> Bill
> 
> ...


wwminis This is the point being made here isnt it? A reason for knowing which horses produce dwarfs and having the right to be told and decide whether to buy from this line for your own breeding line???

Songdancer, thanks for the welcome  And of course I wasnt saying tiny ones cant be in proportion....I have a 28" who is perfectly proportioned but I also have a 34" mare who has teeny tiny foals (also in proportion) my point is that the proportion comes first......not the size. I too think it would be great to have perfect horses that were only 20" high but seriously doubt that will ever happen, nature has a way of putting limits on things.


----------



## Buckskin gal (Jan 3, 2006)

Thank you for saying this. I so wish that we all had the right, which you mention so we could make the best choices possible for producing the finest miniatures we can. I would like to avoid ever producing a dwarf but without information, there is a more of a possibility of producing one. True, not every dwarf may come about because of it's genes [maybe there are dwarfs produced by invironmental factors]

but we need as much information as possible so we can do the best we can.

There is a standard of perfection we need to breed by and that standard does not call for dwarfy traits. Thanks to everyone who will share information which may keep the rest of us from ever having to see a dwarf born from our mares. I would welcome any pm's if you don't want to put it on the forum. Mary



JennyS said:


> [SIZE=12pt]I [/SIZE]The point here is do you as breeders of the fine Miniature horses want to continue to breed and produce TOP QUAILITY individuals? Well, yes you say! The genetic markers will always be there if you don't know and don't cull...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## attwoode (Jan 3, 2006)

I generally don't post on controversial subjects for a couple of different reasons, but here is my take on the subject of dwarves:

It is clear that dwarf horses and those carrying the genes have been used in the development of the miniature horse in the past. Those genes are now pretty much found throughout the breed and can pop up out of just about any breeding. I hope that nobody is knowingly breeding dwarves anymore, but I think that is a thing of the past. As we continue to learn more, I suspect that we can all continue to make more educated decisions on the subject and some currently accepted practices may change. The truth is that we don't know what horses carry these genes or even how these genes work. Until we know more about the genetics of dwarfism and can make these educated decisions, I don't feel there are any right answers to this debate.

Some of the bloodlines that have produced dwarves have also produced some of the breed's nicest specimens of proportion and conformation. Still, it is equally important to improve the breed in ways that are not visible with the eye. Prevention of general health problems, dwarfism, and the economic loss of aborted dwarf foals or other infertility associated with dwarfism, should be a major concern for improvement of the breed as well as general appearance.

I would hope that we all agree that it is an important goal for the future to find ways to identify and isolate these genes so that we can all continue to improve the breed in many different ways.

In the meanwhile, we should all make our decisions based on the best information we have available to us. This is a business for some and hobby for others. We each need to make the best choices for ourselves.

I also would like to offer my opinion that smaller horses tend to have proportions that look more dwarf-like. These features or "dwarfism characteristics" may indicate that the horse carries dwarf genes or it may just be caused by proportional distortion that occurs with a reduced size. Anyway, what I'm saying is that a horse that appears to have some faults that appear dwarf-like may just simply appear that way and gorgeous horses can and do produce dwarves. We all have to make our on individual decisions on the matter since we have so few answers.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 4, 2006)

Dandy's original post was about researching 'known dwarves'. Well, we can see

what a hot button topic this is for everyone! I do honestly believe we all have the same goal of producing the best possible miniature horses (regardless of size), and regardless how we all chose to approach this subject.

I personally do not deny the less than perfect minis in the backgrounds of my minis and/or miniature horses at a breed. I've cringed at some of the photos I've seen of some of the foundation stock that were used back in the late 60's/early 70's. But I don't believe the breeding was planned with malice or intent to harm - it was to create a smaller breed of horse. Good or bad decision - it's done. We need to move on from there.

So, Dandy, first - good for you for wanting to educate yourself, second - if you want to truly get an education there are plenty of photos and information available online about the early minis and lots of good websites too. (do a google search!) The online studbooks are available from both registries as well. These are a great tool and you can trace the lines out, down, back, etc.

You can then formulate your own opinion based on your own independent research. Please take everyone's opinion for just that - opinion. Don't lump any farm name's breeding program (Breeder ABC only bred . . .) into one group. There are some dwarves, dwarfy, average, good and stellar lines from many of the early breeders. It's just not that black and white of an issue.

As for those chickens that PM negative statements to people - sorry that is mean spirited, poor taste and just plain bad manners. We all have the right to our own opinion and we should be able to state it without fear of reprisals. If you stand up for what you believe - sign your name on your message and put it out there for everyone - no sneak attacks!


----------



## kaykay (Jan 4, 2006)

i think there is a lot in john eberths letter that gets missed because people just skim over it and dont read the entire thing. Lets just take out a couple key points

There has been some research done, pretty much all done by UC Davis Genetics Lab and University of Kentucky Equine Genetics Lab. Both have preliminary information but there is nothing that I know of as of now that is anything other than speculative and no formal articles or definitive results. This is because of lack of *public funding from AMHA or any other donator. *

My research is *privately funded by me*, so it is taking much more time than normal. I am not doing this as an ego trip, but on the contrary, my business and my life has been in this breed, so that said, I am looking to better the breed not for me, but for it as a whole. This has nothing to do with bloodlines or farm names, but of breeding a better horse, and making it easier for everyone to do so. Because believe me, there are lots of horses of all bloodlines that are carriers, but there are some statistically that are definitely not carriers, so it is just a matter of time and money to find the mutated gene and develop a marker for a test for it.

So there you have it. *One *person trying to find and do a study with very little help from anyone.

I would think that if someone got in contact with John and asked if we all donated to his study etc how far could we get then?? IMO it is better to start with John as he has studied this probably more then any other living person to date. Since he worked with Ann Bowling (whose dwarf research was lost)and several universities this seems the best place to start.


----------



## beaminewbie (Jan 4, 2006)

How do you get ahold of John? What about setting up a fund so people can put their money where their mouth is!! If AMHA and AMHR don't want to fund it then why can't we as mini owners do it ourselves, instead of just talking about it? There has to be a way to have John set something up to fund his research or to get one of the Universities involved. If we as owners put as much effort into trying to get a fund set up as we do in discussing it then we can get it done. Is anyone interested in finding out how to do it or can someone tell me how to get ahold of John and I will get the ball rolling.


----------



## Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis (Jan 4, 2006)

kaykay said:


> i
> There has been some research done, pretty much all done by UC Davis Genetics Lab and University of Kentucky Equine Genetics Lab. Both have preliminary information but there is nothing that I know of as of now that is anything other than speculative and no formal articles or definitive results. This is because of lack of *public funding from AMHA or any other donator. *
> 
> So
> ...


I agree that something needs to be done and the first thing is us as a group really putting pressure on the registries OUR registries to do something and worry about donor mares and AI later

Even something as simple as adding a check box on a work order form to pay for DWARF research only and of course a way to track that so the money went where it should would be a great start.


----------



## kaykay (Jan 4, 2006)

the thing is lisa we cant keep waiting for the registry to do it. Its just not going to happen anytime soon if we wait on AMHA AMHR. if we as breeders really want this done we have to take the bull by the horns and do it without the registries.

If we could get John Eberth to set up a fund to donate to i would absolutely trust him to use the money. Heck he could even set up a board to oversee it but then you are really complicating things. The easiest quickest way to get this research ahead would be to have him set up a fund at a bank and anyone interested can donate to it.

My suggestion would be for someone who knows John Eberth to contact him and find out the following:

How much money is needed

If we can raise enough money what is the time frame?

Is he still working with the University of Kentucky?

etc etc


----------



## HGFarm (Jan 4, 2006)

Many very excellent points here.

I think some folks are assuming though, and that some are confusing 'tiny' and 'dwarfy' as all one. Not so. However, dwarfs are noted for not growing very big, as in people with the gene. So they are all pretty much considered 'tiny'. There are two distinct groups- small horses that exhibit dwarf genes, and small horses that do not. Tiny does NOT mean it is being lumped into the 'dwarf' category.

I personally, prefer the larger size for other reasons. I like to drive, and I personally dont find very many tiny ones that have the strength or movement than one a little bigger will have- that I desire. Not saying there are not exceptions in the movement department, but I am saying as a general thing that I have noticed.

Please dont get confused that folks are lumping TINY ones in with dwarfy ones. They are just saying that folks are more concerned about correct conformation than size at this point, which is as it should be, to me.


----------



## horsehug (Jan 4, 2006)

John Eberth's website is http://www.doubledestiny.com

But he is incredibly busy and might take a while to get back to you.

Anyone who can make it to the AMHA National Meeting next month could talk to him there.

He co-chairs the AMHA Genetics Committee, so he will for sure be there.

Susan O.


----------



## Arion Mgmt (Jan 4, 2006)

Well hello,

This has been another interesting and somewhat entertaining thread about dwarfism in our minis. I learned through the grapevine that my name was involved so I thought it would be good to help in any way I can and I am interested in everyones input and interests. To answer some of the questions posed somewhat towards me, I feel it is prudent of me to show you how much this means to me. I have been doing my research off and on since 1993, due to money, time or life restraints I have not as much done as I would have liked by now but I am recently getting more unidirectional in my quest. I will try to answer some questions as short and simple as possible, this subject is quite involved genetically so I will try not to make it complicated when I am answering some of these questions posed.

There is not a "list" per se of dwarfs or dwarf producers. That being said I have witnessed dwarfs from *ALL* pedigrees. The problem is that it is showing classic statistical numbers as a autosomal recessive disease gene that involves *BOTH* parents of a dwarf foal. Autosomal means it is not sex linked, meaning there are colts and filly dwarfs. If two non dwarf characteristic parents are carriers of the diseased gene, they have a 25% chance of producing a dwarf foal everytime they concieve a pregnancy. THere are also multiple types within our breed which could mean that each type is a differnet type of dwarfism involving a different gene. In fact there is a new one now that I have seen and have samples, it is unlike ANY seen before. I will be discussing this at the Natl. meeting, yes I am co-chair of the genetics committe and Tony I need your help on this. There is one type that is most prevalent, it looks very similar to the dwarfism that was seen in the angus and hereford cattle breeds years ago. Having multiple types has tremendously slowed the process because blood samples that have been sent to labs without pictures does not help, because the lab does not know what it loks like and if it is the same as other samples, for that matter I have the largest collection of dwarf DNA of many dwarfs that I know of that display the same traits in the country. I also collect any dwarf sample I can to try to track the differnet types. The only way these samples are worth using in research is to have the whole body, or blood from the dwarf and pics AND blood and pics from the parents. It is very hard for people to understand the reasons why the pics and blood from the parents are needed, it is also ideal to get the pedigrees on the dwarfs or parents so it would make it possible to trace the inheritance of the gene(s) if and when it is found. These "political issues" is what have made it hard for me or any lab to get anywhere with this research. THe only reason I have an extensive collection is because of my being within the industry, and the ability to get samples and know the "who what and when" of the parents of the dwarf from my knowledge of the breed.

There is an account set up at UK and at Texas A&M, I am at UK and Gus Cothran, my advisor is moving to Texas A&M, I am waiting on the address info to give to everyone interested in donating money or samples for the research. It will be available shortly, and yes they are university accounts that will be specifically earmarked for this research that are controlled by research committees NOT ME.

Also Susan (horsehug) I will email soon about what I have been doing on the digital xrays of the dwarfs but it will all be spelled out at the Natl. meeting in my committee meeting.

John Eberth


----------



## Frankie (Jan 4, 2006)

Thanks John for your time and explanation, knowledge.

It is very much appreciated.

Carolyn


----------



## Vertical Limit (Jan 4, 2006)

Thanks John. I really hope people actually take the time to REALLY READ what you posted.

Carol


----------



## horsehug (Jan 4, 2006)

Thanks John,

for sharing your info on the Forum. I have always appreciated you sharing your knowledge on this with me.

I'll be sure to contribute what I can also to the fund when you give us the address.

Susan O.


----------



## Songcatcher (Jan 4, 2006)

Thanks also and one more question to John. Does this mean that AMHA may actually become involved in and financially support the research?


----------



## Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis (Jan 4, 2006)

Is this the same person that was working (not you John I mean who you are working with) at one university and had to move to a different one?

I did send all my samples including blood and tons of pictures of our Dwarf and her sire and dam to a university - I know a few others here did as well. I am hoping somehow they are all connected to what you are discussing.


----------



## Tony (Jan 4, 2006)

Thanks John for chiming in. I had started a couple of other posts, then decided to not post again on this thread.


----------



## horsehug (Jan 4, 2006)

Lisa,

I am pretty sure that place was in Colorado and was a study by the Shriners possibly?

I remember that you and Tony and I all sent blood and pictures and a few other people did too, but not a huge number for sure. It seems we were emailed that they never got enough to study or something like that.

It was not Gus Cothran or UK or Texas A&M.

Susan O.


----------



## Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis (Jan 4, 2006)

I dont remember susan but yes that could be right I just remember they were moving to a different university and that was the last I heard from them :-(


----------



## angelridge (Jan 4, 2006)

Wow! What an interesting and informative thread! I do not post much, but this has prompted me to put in my 2 cents worth.

I do think that research is important so we can have the choice NOT to breed together two dwarf gene carrying adults, just like the LWO gene.

What about even tacking on $1 per class in every horse show to go towards dwarf gene research? It would really ad up by the end of the year, as long as it wasnt "gouged" to badly for "office or handling" fees.

Angie


----------



## littlearab (Jan 4, 2006)

YES!!

So glad to see we are getting some where at least thinking about it.






I think that adding a small fee the show classes to help fund research is a very good idea!





I would have no problem with that at all.

Or even if a small fee were added to the cost of registering a foal would also work. Then the breeders are helping to pay for much this needed resreach.


----------



## Margo_C-T (Jan 4, 2006)

This is the most heartening news I have heard in quite awhile(John Eberth's post). A question - John, would a complete pedigree and history, but without blood and other samples, be of any help in research? My dwarf was foaled around 10 years ago, and was euthanized at several months of age; I gave away both her parents to a program that works with youngsters; they are no longer available, to me at least, for blood sampling, etc. I *think* I might still have photos-I know I have one or two of the foal. I would be happy to compile and send the written and pictorial information and send it to you for entry into the research database, if it would be of any help.

I was not surprised to read that it was looking as if it may indeed be a gene contributed by each parent--if only because so much of genetic inheritance seems to work that exact way. Again, as I in my earlier post, and since then, others have alluded to-with a proper test, it should be entirely possible to MANAGE breeding so that actual genetic dwarves are not produced-in the manner that HYPP and CIDS are being "MANAGED" in the breeds where they occur(believe me, the QH organization drug their feet, big time, before finally dealing with it--but at least, they FINALLY did-and if memory serves, the annnouncement came at a nat'l. convention held right here in NM). KNOWLEDGE and EDUCATION, as Carol and others have pointed out, IS the key to dealing with this! It would NOT necessarily require that a high percentage of animals be totally removed from the gene pool-which is one of the 'bugaboos' often cited...

For now, and until there IS a definitive test developed, I would STILL remove from breeding, ANY stallion who has sired even a single dwarf-if only for the reason that a stallion has the potential to 'spread' the carriers much more widely through the breed than ANY mare.(When talking of stallions that sired several dwarves, , or several in one season, people should realize that this does NOT mean that horse is any more likely to produce more dwarves than the horse that has sired ONE---statistical probability ISN'T exact-it's like tossing a coin, with the statistical probability that it will land heads up, 50% of the time, and tails up, 50% of the time. The larger the sample, the more likely it is that what actually occurs will come closer to matching the statistical probability--but the fact that it doesn't does not change the probability. )I really don't think most people are aware of this.

In one of the earlier discussions on this subject, I stated that I would be donating if and when a viable research project were ever a reality. You can believe that I will do just that, to the limits I am able, when John Eberth notifies us of when and where we can send it. I must add, though, that I strongly feel that this research SHOULD BE the province of the breed registries-who might try cooperating(for ONCE!)on this VERY important subject as a service to both the horses AND the members....but, dream on, right??

BTW, tagalong-you'll notice that I didn't jump on you for your post! I agree with those who have said that the past cannot be changed; however, I think the future of the breed is better served by being able to honestly and seriously examine what was, and what went on, in the past(and for that matter, the present-but, that's for another thread!). I WAS around when the horse in question sold for the "big money"--those were what I call the 'glory days', when LOTS of horses were being sold for inflated prices,IMO. If I had HAD that kind of money to spend, I can assure you that it wouldn't have been on that particular horse! I have a LOT of years of experience in the evaluation of conformation-and that would not have suited what I want to see in a horse of ANY size.

I have to ask-how, and why, was Dr. Bowling's research on dwarfism in miniature horses, LOST? What a travesty--did NO ONE think to retrieve it?

(Edited because I also meant to include: a HUGE "YES!" to Ruff n Tuff's observation that THIS research should be up front; let AI and embryo transplant wait!! Hear, hear!!!!!!!!!!!! I have recently been seeing op/eds about how embryo transplant in QHs is having its downside(surprise, surprise, surprise!!)-and BTW, consider the potential to create CARRIERS through such technologies... For the ultimate good of the breed--FIRST THINGS FIRST, for common sense' sake!!!)


----------



## tagalong (Jan 4, 2006)

Thank you *Margot C-T*.... I feel like the villain in this thread. Imagine that - for expressing my genuine concern. I saw Husseler. I know what I saw. I am also -_ alas _- apparently too _stupid_ to differentiate between "little" and "dwarf".

I know the difference. Most of us do.

And when we trace the genetics, _history IS important_. It should not be swept under the carpet as we look the other way. Again. And again.

*John* - [SIZE=21pt]*THANK YOU*[/SIZE]. I hope this project comes together and proceeds. ANY breeder who does NOT get behind it 100% is not working to improve the Miniature Horse in any way, shape or form. But then... money talks, in this as in all things...


----------



## Dandy (Jan 4, 2006)

Well, this has really proven to be very interesting and informational. So....from what John has stated he has seen dwarfism in *all* pedigrees. As I am just really starting out, this whole issue was "frightning" to me, especially when I looked back and saw "Hussler" and "Lord of the Isles" in some of my pedigrees. They were several generations back, however. These horses I have all have registered foals so I can only go on the information I have until they produce a dwarf. Thanks for everyone's response.


----------



## Vertical Limit (Jan 4, 2006)

I am also not surprised that it may indeed be a gene contributed by both parents.

But I have never responded either way as I don't know. Posting what you "think" causes dwarfism without any basis for you reasons is totally non productive. Discussion is always good but when you have no basis for what you are saying it is better to say nothing.



> Again, as I in my earlier post, and since then, others have alluded to-with a proper test, it should be entirely possible to MANAGE breeding so that actual genetic dwarves are not produced-in the manner that HYPP and CIDS are being "MANAGED" in the breeds where they occur


That is what it is all about......management. It's just not going to disappear. Again KNOWLEDGE AND EDUCATION. And not from just people that show.....from every single person who has a thought of breeding a miniature horse.



> For now, and until there IS a definitive testÂ  developed, I would STILL remove from breeding, ANY stallion who has sired even a single dwarf-if only for the reason that a stallion has the potential to 'spread' the carriers much more widely through the breed than ANY mare.(


Well, that certainly would help, but I know too many people out there that just have $$$$$$$$$ on theirs minds and to be quite honest, just don't give a darn.

I am totally amazed at the "stupid" reasons for breeding these horses over and over.  And unfortunately the offspring get sold to unsuspecting individuals who just perpetuate the problem. Total dishonesty and lack of integrity on the breeders part.

And, I know this won't be popular, but there is also too much ignorance and people thinking this has got nothing to do with them. This concerns everyone. And if you don't think it does than you need to get out of the business. Infact I am sure the majority won't even take the time to read this thread.......doesn't concern them.

IMHO EVERY SINGLE PERSON who owns or breeds a miniature horse should have equal responsibility for seeing that this gets proper funding.



> ANY breeder who does NOT get behind it 100% is not working to improve the Miniature Horse in any way, shape or form. But then... money talks, in this as in all things...


----------



## slaneyrose (Jan 4, 2006)

Hear Hear!!!!!!!


----------



## kaykay (Jan 4, 2006)

John

Im so glad you came and posted! I was going to email you but I was afraid since you have no idea who I am you would think I was crazy.

Okay for everyone who has wanted this research done so we can develop a test here is finally your chance to do something positive to make it happen!!

Once we have the address to donate to I will gladly have this put on the CMHR website. And I urge every breeder to also put it on their site. If we all get behind this we can get it done.

Kay


----------



## runamuk (Jan 4, 2006)

John.....I appreciate your dedication to continued study........now if you wish to PM or email me.......I would be interested in sending you samples/photo's/pedigrees of my colt who I truly believe is a form of dwarf and his sire and dam if it will help the research along. they will be getting gelded in the spring so samples could be taken then.

there I said it outloud to the world...turtle my 25" horse in my eyes is a form of dwarf....wow I feel better.....


----------



## Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis (Jan 4, 2006)

Runamuk I know you feel better and have been sort of battling with going public for a while. I respect you for that. I think until breeders can admit yes this has happened here, this is how I feel and this is my stance whatever it is- it will always be a dirty little secret.


----------



## HGFarm (Jan 4, 2006)

THANK YOU JOHN!!






And AMEN Vertical Limit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Arion Mgmt (Jan 4, 2006)

I wanted to add somethings to help people better understand a few assumptions I made. Because all of the different types of dwarfs have shown to involve dwarfs with both sexes, it is automatic that this is an autosomal recessive disease(s), no matter which type. This has been known scientifically in other dwarf diseases in other organisms. This is because dwarfism is a growth disease of the bones not related to a sex, in humans there are about 200 different types of dwarfism, and none that I know of are only sex related. Autosomal recessive diseases that are not life ending in utero are the types of diseases that pervade a breed quickly (inutero fatal diseases pervade even faster) and unknowningly due to it being recessive and when a diseased animal is born and it does not die and that is the only way to know a disease even exists, so therefore this is why a disease like dwarfism can be throughout the breed. I will say that definitely not all miniatures are carriers, people need to realize that, this is why you do not see 25% of all foals born in a year to be dwarfs, infact it is a small proportion to the total numbers born a year that are actual dwarfs. Also I know for scientific fact by statistical calculations that there are horses, only stallions, because these have had more than 100 foals, that have never had a dwarf, even when bred to carriers, calculations show though only to 99+%, because we are using statistics based on millions of possibilities of crosses.

John


----------



## Mercysmom (Jan 4, 2006)

Tony said:


> I am certainly not the expert that many of you seem to be, but if anyone is interested in a little "history", Husseler broke two world records for miniature sales in his heyday.  He sold for $12,500, topping the Komoko's first production sale and setting a World Record price at that time.  He was the much sought after headliner of the sale.  He later sold to NFC Farms for an unprecedented $25,000 at the time.  He is the grandsire of Glenn's General Patton and the sire of one of my mares, whose first foal sold for $50,000.  You may not like "short legged, thick necked miniatures" as some have described some of them, but they were, and still are in much demand.  If a horse is 26" tall, his legs are NOT going to be 30" long!  And YES he has sired a dwarf, or more, and has also sired some great get as well, far surpassing the lesser quality foals, I might add.
> Here are some of my horses that the "dwarf police" will relish in criticizing, I am sure.  However, they are in my breeding program, and will continue to be.  And some of them have had dwarfs, and I haven't gelded them, but if you can get me to sell them, you can do it for yourself.
> 
> For those of you interested in tiny, correct, miniatures, I welcome your questions, visits, and comments.  For those of you who prefer larger horses, congratulations; there are many of them from which you can choose.
> ...


Tony:

I applaud your openness regarding horses that have produced or sired dwarf offspring...let me join you by saying I have one mare who has produced both very refined, balanced, offspring and dwarf offspring...and I have a mare that is a half-sister to our former stallion that sired the dwarf offspring (I did geld and sell him but retained the mares).

Dwarves may be a "dirty little secret" but I was told by a veterinarian at Cornell University that every time we as a collective unit breed miniatures, we run a 50% shot of getting a dwarf horse. I know mentioning that fact will not make me popular but in working with dwarf rabbit breeds like the Holland Lop, one needs a "normal" gene and a "dwarf" gene to get the 4 lb or under show weight and type. There are rabbits that get 2 normal genes and end up "oversized" (not registerable or showable according to the breed standard but certainly can be used as breeding stock under ARBA rules) and then there are rabbits that get 2 dwarf genes and are not viable past 1 week of age - they are called "peanuts" in the Holland Lop circle and are a sad fact of breeding this diminutive, pudgy-cheeked breed of lop eared rabbit. Their healthy, normal littermates rapidly surpass them in growth rates in a day or so. Since our dwarf horses often suffer health problems, my uneducated guess is that a similar thing must be happening in our miniatures. It is "unpredictable" and a fact in breeding Holland Lops that one will have peanuts born... unfortunately in breeding minis we invest a lot more time and money and the sad result is if there is a dwarf born, the mare's reproductive year has been financially lost and stallions' records suffer and there is one unhealthy foal to show for it all.

My mare that produced the 2 dwarf horses had a dam that was a good 37" tall and a sire that was 30" and she was a winning show horse. The stallion I owned and gelded had nationally known bloodlines and an AMHA National Reserve Champion in his pedigree. Another mare had AMHR Halter Hall of Fame and AMHA National Champion Halter bloodlines and produced a dwarf. All of their parents had NOT produced dwarf horses to my knowledge and research.

My mini farm was small to begin with and I am not sure whether I will ever breed miniatures again as having two dwarf horses in one year was a big set back - not that I do this as a business but the veterinary bills to care for dwarf horses alone can be quite expensive, plus the loss of a well-conformed breeding stallion (refined, long necked, straight legs, good bite, excellent flat topline and a good mover) was heartbreaking.

Just my humble 2 cents worth....and count me in on any research to be done - PM me if interested.

Denise

Silversong Farm


----------



## Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis (Jan 4, 2006)

Arion Mgmt said:


> I will say that definitely not all miniatures are carriers, people need to realize that, this is why you do not see 25% of all foals born in a year to be dwarfs, infact it is a small proportion to the total numbers born a year that are actual dwarfs.    John
> 
> 535753[/snapback]
> ​


Thanks for saying that... I know that it is an excuse a way for many to defend what theyare doing (or feel they need to defend) by using the every mini is a carrier thing JMO

I dont obviously have Sadie anymore but will help you in any way I can


----------



## runamuk (Jan 4, 2006)

Arion Mgmt said:


> I wanted to add somethings to help people better understand a few assumptions I made.  Because all of the different types of dwarfs have shown to involve dwarfs with both sexes, it is automatic that this is an autosomal recessive disease(s), no matter which type.  This has been known scientifically in other dwarf diseases in other organisms.  This is because dwarfism is a growth disease of the bones not related to a sex, in humans there are about 200 different types of dwarfism, and none that I know of are only sex related.  Autosomal recessive diseases that are not life ending in utero are the types of diseases that pervade a breed quickly (inutero fatal diseases pervade even faster) and unknowningly due to it being recessive and when a diseased animal is born and it does not die and that is the only way to know a disease even exists, so therefore this is why a disease like dwarfism can be throughout the breed.  I will say that definitely not all miniatures are carriers, people need to realize that, this is why you do not see 25% of all foals born in a year to be dwarfs, infact it is a small proportion to the total numbers born a year that are actual dwarfs.  Also I know for scientific fact by statistical calculations that there are horses, only stallions, because these have had more than 100 foals, that have never had a dwarf, even when bred to carriers, calculations show though only to 99+%, because we are using statistics based on millions of possibilities of crosses.  John
> 
> 535753[/snapback]
> ​


Actually John there is one sex related form of dwarfism that exists as a spinal issue and only has been found in men.......I can find you the info if you wish...I studied it intensely trying to find an answer for my own back and my families back issues..sadly I am a girl so that was not it..although My condition fit 90% of the profile until it said ONLY in males.


----------



## runamuk (Jan 4, 2006)

Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis said:


> Runamuk I know you feel better and have been sort of battling with going public for a while. I respect you for that. I think until breeders can admit yes this has happened here, this is how I feel and this is my stance whatever it is-  it will always be a dirty little secret.
> 535665[/snapback]
> ​


OK no more bravo to me .....I am being corrected by many...there is no way turtle is a dwarf...maybe a carrier but not a dwarf......tada here is the problem....he looks so much like so many other 26 and unders that are proclaimed not dwarfs...that I don't even know what to say here except I know he is different..whether he looks anything like any other dwarf ....I think the issue is unless it is full blown life threatening and very deformed..the pervasive attitude is still it isn't a dwarf....well I am still here saying it could very much so be like rabbits....my champion buck was a dwarf....he had to be to make weight (or lack thereof) he never produced a peanut (which is a full blown dwarf in bunnies) he did reduce size on my does......and he had an excellent conformation..wouldn't have won all those best of breeds if he hadn't......

I am just happy to see forward progress.......


----------



## Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis (Jan 4, 2006)

runamuk said:


> OK no more bravo to me .....I am being corrected by many...there is no way turtle is a dwarf...maybe a carrier but not a dwarf......tada here is the problem....535857[/snapback]
> ​



Welll I Know you have had concerns from day one with him.. and I totally understand what you see in him. I think you are right though the issue does like in what one calls a dwarf... how many charateristics does it take to make a dwarf? 1, 3, 5, 10 ? that answer will be different for everyone until there is a test to show otherwise


----------



## HGFarm (Jan 5, 2006)

Thank you John for such informative info. VERY interesting.


----------



## Firefall (Jan 5, 2006)

I'm just a little peon here, but I am very fascinated and willing to help with what I can................. if anything...........

I want to learn as much as possible.

Thank you John and everyone else........


----------



## ClickMini (Jan 5, 2006)

Runamuk, I went and looked at the photos of your little Turtle, and I do not see the characteristics that I would normally expect in a dwarf. However I am in a learning mode, and am interested in hearing what your thoughts are with regard to him, what makes you say he may be a form of dwarf? He has a lovely long neck, pretty face in the photos... although legs are short in comparison to body length, they do not seem to have the typical dwarf traits either. So I am not sure what you are seeing here?


----------



## Stacy Score (Jan 5, 2006)

John,

Your research and commentary is invaluable to many of us who are breeders - I sincerely hope that in the future we DO find a DNA link that can be traced -- HOWEVER, that said, I strongly suspect that in many, many of our pedigrees that the true parentage of the animal is not as written on the registration certificate and that it would be a crushing blow to start "identifying" an an animal as a proven carrier without legitimate PQ'd DNA to absolutely prove the parentage of said horse - that means that most of the horses born prior to 1996 and even many, many born since cannot be "trusted" to have accurate paperwork. In my humble opionion the research needs to start NOW with animals that are PQ'd accurately and then we can TRUTHFULLY weed out the true carriers while not assigning blame to those who may not be, but who show up in a horses registration paperwork. I have a mare and stallion who produced a dwarf over 10 years ago and would be very happy to provide their blood for DNA purposes, but to have THEIR parent's linked to this study would not be fair since I cannot PROVE who their sire and dam actually were. Needlesstosay, these two horses were never bred together again - both have been National Champion producers in their individual own right and none of their offspring have gone on to produce any dwarves (yet . . . )

Stacy


----------



## runamuk (Jan 5, 2006)

I have come to my conclusion based on a lifetime of reading about human dwarfism all 200 + forms....here is a link to a concise and easy to navigate website dedicated to human dwarfismFAQ

I still believe that at a certain size all miniatures become a form of dwarf...admittedly not a popular theory at all....however where that size cut off is I have no certainty. If you read that page my grandmother by definition was a dwarf add her spinal deformity and well......on the other side of my family we have alot of not very tall people and a running family line of hereditary back degeneration at early ages in particular in a certain build......anyway that is off topic...that is where my extreme interest in studying dwarfism and its causes and its various forms comes from. I do not see dwarfism in miniatures a negative I believe it may be a very neccessary component to creating truly tiny correct horses...again a very unpopular opinion.



ClickMini said:


> Runamuk, I went and looked at the photos of your little Turtle, and I do not see the characteristics that I would normally expect in a dwarf. However I am in a learning mode, and am interested in hearing what your thoughts are with regard to him, what makes you say he may be a form of dwarf? He has a lovely long neck, pretty face in the photos... although legs are short in comparison to body length, they do not seem to have the typical dwarf traits either. So I am not sure what you are seeing here?


----------



## Dandy (Jan 5, 2006)

Runamuk: I sure don't see dwarf either. Is his bite bad? He looks fine for a horse his height. JMO


----------



## Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis (Jan 5, 2006)

Runamuk I appreciate what you are trying to say.

Again I ask is it a opinion as to how many characteristics it takes till someone defines it a dwarf- to some it is simply legs being very very short compared to body , for others it is that combined with a shorter neck or extreme head, others yet wont call it a dwarf unless it has very twisted legs,

What is the right answer? it differs for everyone- I saw a picture of a friends horse a small horse 25 in or so as a 2 yr old perhaps a yearling i forget.. my first thought was this is a dwarf a bit on the long side and very short legs compared to body as well as a shorter neck- but when I explained I thought it was a dwarf in fact I was positive of it, the answer she had and believed was that it wasnt a dwarf his legs werent crooked and bite wasnt off. To me that didnt change what I saw- different for everyone


----------



## shminifancier (Jan 5, 2006)

Yes that is true so that is why some people who at one time maybe 10 years ago maybe had a dwarf, but still continue breeding the animal because it just doesn't show up that often as a full blown dwarf.. And talking everyone of those out of the line is not the answer either as then as the books close for good you will have just a minuet amount of bloodlines to draw from. So taking every individual out is not the answer either.



Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis said:


> Runamuk I appreciate what you are trying to say.
> 
> Again I ask is it a opinion as to how many characteristics it takes till someone defines it a dwarf- to some it is simply legs being very very short compared to body , for others it is that combined with a shorter neck or extreme head, others yet wont call it a dwarf unless it has very twisted legs,
> 
> What is the right answer? it differs for everyone- I saw a picture of a friends horse a small horse 25 in or so as a 2 yr old perhaps a yearling i forget.. my first thought was this is a dwarf a bit on the long side and very short legs compared to body as well as a shorter neck- but when I explained I thought it was a dwarf in fact I was positive of it, the answer she had and believed was that it wasn't a dwarf his legs weren't crooked and bite wasn't off. To me that didn't change what I saw- different for everyone


----------



## Margaret (Jan 5, 2006)

Minimal expression of a dwarf (hiding the dwarf gene) can be as Lisa said, one or more of the following, so even a large head can be indicitive of the minimal expression. A full blown dwarf shows all of the chacteractics. Many of the miniatures we have today, are showing minimum expression in one way or another, some to a greater degree than others. It is up to the discretion of the individule owner to recognise this, and choose not to continue to breed those same attributes.


----------



## tagalong (Jan 5, 2006)

Stacy Score said:


> HOWEVER, that said, I strongly suspect that in many, many of our pedigrees that the true parentage of the animal is not as written on the registration certificate and that it would be a crushing blow to start "identifying" an an animal as a proven carrier without legitimate PQ'd DNA to absolutely prove the parentage of said horse - that means that most of the horses born prior to 1996 and even many, many born since cannot be "trusted" to have accurate paperwork. In my humble opionion the research needs to start NOW with animals that are PQ'd accurately and then we can TRUTHFULLY weed out the true carriers while not assigning blame to those who may not be, but who show up in a horses registration paperwork.


*Stacy* - you are right. In the past - at some farms - many stallions ran with the mares. And as such the parentage of any foal could not be guaranteed. Or you could pick which stallion you wanted listed...



:

And with Unknown as a major contributor to many pedigrees... there will always be a hazy area. But with such a limited gene pool to draw from to start with - it does not hurt to acknowledge the obvious input - such as Tiny Tim, Lord of the Isles and others... as well as those many of us feel are more than Highly Suspect (Husseler). IMHO not suspect at all - but there you go. The gene is probably in all the early lines - Bond, Dell Tera, Komoko etc. ... and will dilute to some extent over the generations. But without testing TODAY'S stock who are PQed (and then we can go backwards to find connections)... without people being open and honest - _every breeding is a gamble. _

You could have the next Supreme Halter/Driving Champion... or... my little Cowboy.


----------



## Robin (Jan 5, 2006)

Everyone interested and watching this thread needs to know a little background about John Eberth and his interest in improving the miniature horse breed and his interest in dwarfism in our miniature horse breed. In 1994 my brother John and my mom, Marianne sat down and discussed a particular breeding problem with a certain stallion we owned. As a result, our farm donated this stallion to University of Kentucky and Dr. Swerzcek (who was the head of Equine Pathology), for research on a particular breeding project he was working on at that time. The Stallion was Komokos Wee Willie that Little King Farm had purchased from Komokos Ranch along with Komokos Little King Supreme back in 1981. This donation was a major decision that had a definite financial impact on our farm at the time. Wee Willie was Reserve National Grand Champion Senior Stallion in 1985. He had produced for us, 2 National Champions and was considered a cornerstone stallion in the LKF breeding program at that time. Although Little King Farm was not breeding the number of mares then as we are now, we were still goal oriented in producing the best horses possible.

This particular stallion was presenting not only a genetic problem but also a true loss of income problem for the farm. He was siring multiple dwarfs and foals with some of these pronounced characteristics. As the breeding years went by, John and Mom, began to study and note the occurrences of dwarfs resulting in breeding Wee Willie and some of the other smaller horses with certain distinguishable characteristics (Komokos Don Juan and Komokos Apple Jack). These initial general observations sparked and set the stage for curiosity and educational interest. From Mom's breeding interests to John's later academic interest (as he later studied in undergraduate college genetics). It became a near passion to pursue the cause and occurrence of this anomaly.

Even though eliminating this horse from our breeding program did not eliminate some of the chances of producing dwarfs, it was an initial step into the understanding of this genetic problem. And it did set a pattern of occurrence and identifying characteristics in the minds of both Mom and John.

In 1976, when Little King Farm began, most of the very high priced horses were the smallest horses of the time. At the 1st Komoko Ranch Auction in Florida, the mares with dwarfs on their sides brought the highest prices along with the very very small stallions. Mom recalls that when she and dad purchased a little herd of mares from Bob Bridges of Komoko Ranch, one group of mares he had for sale under 28" were priced 3 times higher than the package they bought of mares 30" to 34". Small was considered better in that day. However, Mom felt the smaller mares did not have the proportion and look she wanted to produce and show. She felt that they had characteristics that were unusual and possibly genetically transferable.

As time went on John would collect DNA and info from any dwarf we had or he heard of. He would also collect blood from sires and dams and note the pedigree of the horse. Mom recalls how her freezer was always full of carcasses and blood that John had saved or other people had collected for him. Finally we just bought a freezer for such specimens. Mom remembers giving John $300.00 when he was in undergraduate school to buy unsundrie lab supplies that the school ( DePaw Univ.) would not provide and that John needed to research his samples etc. When John moved from his undergraduate school to UK grad school, he moved all his samples and has moved them a multitude of times since, including bodies! He has done more studying and genetic work on miniature horse dwarfs than anyone I know. In 1994 he did an internship at UC Davis under Ann Bowling and found that there was a problem because what they were calling a dwarf was not exactly what we called a dwarf. He also found that there are many different kinds/mutations of dwarfs as there are in other species. He also said that Ann was doing alot of her dwarf research on her own, due to lack of funds, and most of what she knew was in her head. Unfortunately all her research died with her before being well documented.

John's extensive work and commitment to this is a foundation to determining a way to test for certain kinds of dwarfism. He continues to be committed to this and UK and Gus Cothran* are directing him in his interest now. John has always funded this himself. He has solely put hundreds and hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars into this on his own . UK has had no current funding to help John so he is limited hopefully until now. Mom is working on a project to help the further studying of this dwarf issue and with the ultimate goal of a testing program. We as representatives of the Heritage Sale are hoping to donate a % of the gross sales at the Heritage Sale to this Program at the University of Kentucky and she would like to challenge all other miniature horse sales to do the same.

We, at LKF, are not an advocate of eliminating the miniatures that test positive for the dwarf gene from the breeding pool. That would have more of a negative effect on the breed as it is now. Entire farms and breeding programs would go out of business if you took away their main breeding stallion or majority of their mares because they carry a gene that can or cannot be passed on to future foals. A basic understanding of how genes are passed must be considered before jumping to final conclusion and elimination of these horses that carry the dwarf gene. We need to treat this genetic trait the same as the HYPP in Quarter Horses by identifying the gene/s and guide breeding programs accordingly. A horse that carries the dwarf gene may also carry traits that are so necessary for the refinement and structure of proportion and conformation for the future of the miniature horse.

We can imagine that people are afraid that their entire herd, years of work and money could be wiped out if this gene was identified and forced to be eliminated from the gene pool. It has been estimated by many experienced breeders that as many as 50-75% of minis carry this gene. If these were all eliminated - what would we breed? There would not be a large enough gene pool to substantiate the miniature horse economy and registries as they are now. It is much more benefical for all of the breeders, associations and businesses involved to learn how to live with the genetic profile these miniatures have and work within those parameters towards a common goal. In time, a gene like dwarfism can be minimalized and in long term eliminated thru genetic selection and knowledged breeding. The idea is not to scare people away, but to recognize the situation and look toward a future that is benefical for both horse and breeder.

Robin-LKF

*E. Gus Cothran

BS - North Texas State University

MS - North Texas State University

PhD - University of Oklahoma

Research - Equine Parentage Verification and Research:

Biochemical genetic relationships and evolution of the Equidae

Population structure and the maintenance of genetic variation in horse breeds

Genetic relationship of domestic horse breeds

Genetics of wild horse populations

Conservation genetics of rare breeds

Evolution of the protease inhibitor system in equids

Relationships among genetic variation and reproductive characteristics in horses

Gene mapping in the horse


----------



## kaykay (Jan 5, 2006)

Robin

What a great post! I have long admired the work John has done in dwarf research and especially knowing the political pressures that can bring. The entire Eberth family is to be commended for having the guts to aknowledge the problem and try to do something about it.

Im so hopeful that when we get the information on where to donate, enough funds will be raised to finally answer some of these questions.

Stacey, I really admire you and your breeding program but I do disagree that knowing who is a carrier and what it takes to produce a dwarf from that carrier is a bad thing. At the end of the day it doesnt matter who the sire and dam are. What matters is knowing that a particular horse is a carrier and knowing who you can breed him or her too TO NOT produce another dwarf. Although it would be nice to be able to trace the bloodlines back. But i strongly feel that shouldnt stop the research from being done and moving forward because of inaccurate pedigrees.

Kay


----------



## horsehug (Jan 5, 2006)

Robin,

I so very much appreciate your post! It was a few years ago when someone posted that they were doing a paper on dwarfism and you suggested they write to John, that I also wrote to him....... as I had been interested in this also.

Your approach echoes so very much what both your brother John and Tony Greaves have told me for several years now when I have emailed with them about this.

We are so fortunate that your mom and your family took the interest and put the time and effort and money they did to set the ground work for studying this.

Thank you so much, all of you.

Susan O.


----------



## Buckskin gal (Jan 5, 2006)

Robin, Thank you so very much for enlightening us. It is so very good to be educated as to what has gone on and possibly will go on in the study of dwarfism. Your informtion on John is something many of us needed to know and to understand his position on dwarfism. :aktion033: :aktion033: :aktion033: More education is what we all need and benefit from. Mary



Robin said:


> Everyone interested and watching this thread needs to know a little background about John Eberth and his interest in improving the miniature horse breed and his interest in dwarfism in our miniature horse breed. In 1994 my brother John and my mom, Marianne sat down and discussed a particular breeding problem with a certain stallion we owned. As a result, our farm donated this stallion to University of Kentucky and Dr. Swerzcek (who was the head of Equine Pathology), for research on a particular breeding project he was working on at that time. The Stallion was Komokos Wee Willie that Little King Farm had purchased from Komokos Ranch along with Komokos Little King Supreme back in 1981. This donation was a major decision that had a definite financial impact on our farm at the time. Wee Willie was Reserve National Grand Champion Senior Stallion in 1985. He had produced for us, 2 National Champions and was considered a cornerstone stallion in the LKF breeding program at that time. Although Little King Farm was not breeding the number of mares then as we are now, we were still goal oriented in producing the best horses possible.
> 
> Sale are hoping to donate a % of the gross sales at the Heritage Sale to this Program at the University of Kentucky and she would like to challenge all other miniature horse sales to do the same.


----------



## lyn_j (Jan 5, 2006)

[SIZE=18pt]Robin, If your mom and John and anyone else can set up a foundation that we can donate to it would begin to solve many problems for the miniatures and also give those farms a tax exempt donation status. If there is any such thing in the works please let me know.[/SIZE]

Lyn


----------



## Stacy Score (Jan 5, 2006)

KayKay,

I think you might have misinterpreted my post - I strongly wish to identify the carriers of the dwarf gene, however I believe that it needs to start with horses that are DNA PQ'd so as to not "tarnish" the bloodlines of their parents since in many, many instances we cannot really prove that the sire and dam listed on the papers are actually that horse's sire and dam - to "broadbrush" a horse/s that are not DNA PQ'd would have the effect that Robin is afraid of and smear the entire industry and cause a collapse that many could not recover from.

Also, I believe that we as breeders are doing a very good job in culling the dwarf carrying horses from our bloodlines - we see far fewer dwarves born now than were born 20 years ago - to me that means that we are moving in the right direction, and that in time the percentage of dwarves born will go lower and lower until it is considered a rare occurrence.

Yes, there were known dwarfs being used in the breeding of our miniatures, yes, we know of many of the well-documented ones. My personal opinion is that when breeding our miniatures that there are certain bloodlines that tend to "attract" genes to one another, and if these horses are carrying the dwarf gene then there is a higher percentage of dwarfs produced than when these same animals are bred to horses with different bloodlines - but that is just my opinion.

Stacy


----------



## kaykay (Jan 5, 2006)

i agree stacey


----------



## Miniv (Jan 5, 2006)

Stacy Score said:


> I think you might have misinterpreted my post - I strongly wish to identify the carriers of the dwarf gene, however I believe that it needs to start with horses that are DNA PQ'd so as to not "tarnish" the bloodlines of their parents since in many, many instances we cannot really prove that the sire and dam listed on the papers are actually that horse's sire and dam - to "broadbrush" a horse/s that are not DNA PQ'd would have the effect that Robin is afraid of and smear the entire industry and cause a collapse that many could not recover from.
> 
> Stacy


I completely agree with that.

I would also strongly support a foundation where donations would be collected for research on the dwarf gene. I think it is long overdue.

MA


----------



## Margaret (Jan 6, 2006)

This is so good. The day will come when people will be able to make conclusive informed decisions about breeding, and what they add to their herd! :aktion033:


----------

