# Rowdy?



## Mominis (Jul 1, 2010)

Hi. I have been researching our new horse's pedigree and have had absolutely no luck finding anything on the stallion, Rowdy. I got some good information on the horse on the phone, but I'd love to see pictures or a detailed pedigree or anything. Does anyone know of a site that would have additional information on the stallion?


----------



## Lucky-C-Acres-Minis (Jul 1, 2010)

Here's his pedigree and a photo:

Rowdy


----------



## Reble (Jul 1, 2010)

Lucky-C-Acres-Minis said:


> Here's his pedigree and a photo:
> 
> Rowdy


That's fantastic information, thank you so much, my stallion has Rowdy in his bloodline..


----------



## MountainMeadows (Jul 1, 2010)

Mimi

Check with Laurie Slobody (or her daughter Kristina) - they have one of the largest herds of Rowdy blood in the country and a lot of history on the bloodline. Also Jane Macon of Alamo has a lot of Rowdy blood. I think (but then I might be wrong) that Rowdy goes back to Audrey Barret's breeding - she was the breeder of Arenosa ponies/horses.

Stacy


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Jul 1, 2010)

Wow Stacy really?I have never heard that before that is some great info


----------



## mizbeth (Jul 1, 2010)

Hello

Welcome to ROWDY! Tony Greaves, Lil America Miniature Horses has a lot of information on Rowdy as well, a nice write up on some history about him. HE is my favorite too.

I have a Rowdy son who is now 28 years old and many of his daughters, and a son in my breeding program. I do not think there are too many Rowdy sons left.


----------



## targetsmom (Jul 1, 2010)

Most of the minis in our small herd carry Rowdy blood, and we just love it!! (Yes, Max gets it from BOTH his sire and dam). Some of ours came from Sawmill River Farm (Slobody's) and also Alamos and other farms. Some of the Rowdy sons that our minis trace back to are Lazy N Redboy, Ramblin Starbuck, and Lazy N Boogerman, but there are others. Our stallion SRF Buckshot and his half brother SRF Nobility are Ramblin Starbuck grandsons. We mix it with Blue Boy and Buckeroo.

Note that while Rowdy himself was registered as a solid bay, he carried the frame overo (Lethal white - LWO+) gene which he has passed down to many pinto AND solid color minis.


----------



## Mominis (Jul 1, 2010)

Wow, this is great info!! Thanks!! I will follow up with the people you suggested, if I can find them online. You guys ROCK!


----------



## AnnaC (Jul 1, 2010)

My little American stud Dragon (Darmond Boogerman's Bravado) that we purchased a couple of years ago from Robin - Truejoy Minis - in NJ, is a Rowdy g/son, via Lazy N's Boogerman, and guess what he produced for us this year amongst his foals - a beautiful bright BAY colt with a narrow white blaze - a Rowdy lookalike!!

This colt is simply gorgeous (if I do say it myself LOL!!) but is totally unphotogenic - why does that happen with those you would really love to show off!!

Don't worry, I shall be getting this fella (and Dragon's other foals) tested for the LWO gene as Dragon is LWO+ himself.

Anna


----------



## MountainMeadows (Jul 1, 2010)

Lisa

My info on Rowdy came from Audrey Barrett herself - she was getting up there in years when we had a few of our conversations, but she seemed sharp as a tack - spent many hours on the phone with her and was privileged to learn a great deal. It was her claim that Rowdy originally came from her breeding but was sold to Vern Brewer as a young horse - Vern apparently had a lot of Audrey's smaller ponies, but remember that way back then the word "pony" wasn't popular so the true heritage of many of our horses was tossed in the trash. She also exported many ponies to Senior Fallabella and many other prominent breeders way back when.

Yep, she was a lot of fun to listen to!

Stac


----------



## Miniv (Jul 1, 2010)

MountainMeadows said:


> Lisa
> 
> My info on Rowdy came from Audrey Barrett herself - she was getting up there in years when we had a few of our conversations, but she seemed sharp as a tack - spent many hours on the phone with her and was privileged to learn a great deal. It was her claim that Rowdy originally came from her breeding but was sold to Vern Brewer as a young horse - Vern apparently had a lot of Audrey's smaller ponies, but remember that way back then the word "pony" wasn't popular so the true heritage of many of our horses was tossed in the trash. She also exported many ponies to Senior Fallabella and many other prominent breeders way back when.
> 
> ...



Stac,

What you just posted is very valuable historical information. Many of us who have followed both Vern Brewer and the Arenosa bloodline knew a bit, but you've added even more......THANK YOU.

This should be put in the "archives".


----------



## AnnaC (Jul 2, 2010)

When you say that Audrey Barrett exported minis from her bloodlines to the Falabella stud, does this mean that the LWO gene could now be running through the Falabella horses at the stud in Argentina?

Just a little concerned that maybe I should test my stallion who was bred there?

Anna


----------



## hobbyhorse23 (Jul 2, 2010)

Mominis said:


> Wow, this is great info!! Thanks!! I will follow up with the people you suggested, if I can find them online. You guys ROCK!


I sent you a link to Kristina on FB.






Leia


----------



## Sue_C. (Jul 2, 2010)

AnnaC said:


> When you say that Audrey Barrett exported minis from her bloodlines to the Falabella stud, does this mean that the LWO gene could now be running through the Falabella horses at the stud in Argentina?
> 
> Just a little concerned that maybe I should test my stallion who was bred there?Anna


Hadn't the Falabella had pintos in their genetics...always? Or were they "just" solids and appies?

I figure for the cost, any stallion with _any_ white on him _anywhere_...should be tested. It is the cheapest insurance you can get to assure you will never have to watch a LWO+ foal suffer and die.


----------



## Mulligans Run (Jul 2, 2010)

We have a rowdy daughter in our herd and we owned a rowdy son, hot shot, who we sold to Lil Pondarosa minis. He looks fantastic and is still producing!


----------



## AshleyNicole (Jul 2, 2010)

I love Rowdy, it is my favorite line. I have a daughter, a grandson from Redboy(he is the horse in my avatar) as well as two Redboy daughters. Great line for the refined minis people look for today. Probably one of the best producers out there and also so was his son Redboy(can you tell I love him too lol), a lot of well known horses come from those lines. I have a blue boy stud who I plan on keeping fillies from to mix with the Rowdy lines .....love the results I've seen from other farms





Also if you search for Rowdy miniature horse on google I'm sure you will find a lot more information


----------



## Mominis (Jul 2, 2010)

Thanks Leia!


----------



## Crabby-Chicken (Jul 2, 2010)

It is an amazing line. Gallery Originals has a Rowdy son, and such presence he has. Over 20 years old and he has such refinement. Beautiful horse. NFC's Rowdy's Champion.

I am kinda sad. I bred my perlino mare to him and she is due just about any time. The trouble is,,,, I sold her. So she will have the most wonderful buckskin or palomino filly I am sure! The new owners will be so excited!


----------



## AnnaC (Jul 2, 2010)

Sue C - thank you for your response. I asked the question quite genuinely as in all the years that I have had my Falabella stallion and been in contact with other Falabella owners and the relevant societies, I have never heard anyone mention the possibility of Falabellas from the Argentina stud carrying the LWO gene. I also have many minis here who are registered with the British Shetland Pony Stud Book Society and who are coloured and have many coloureds in their long pedigrees, but no-one has ever suggested that the Lethal Gene might be present.

Which is why I was shocked and concerned when I read Stac's post to say that Rowdy 'relatives' might have been amongst those American minis exported to the Falabella Stud.

Obviously I will be testing all offspring born here sired by Dragon, but will now be adding Falabella Anselmo to my testing 'list'. Plus I think I had better be 'spreading the word' amongst other Falabella breeders here in the UK and Europe.

Anna


----------



## Sue_C. (Jul 2, 2010)

AnnaC said:


> Sue C - thank you for your response. I asked the question quite genuinely as in all the years that I have had my Falabella stallion and been in contact with other Falabella owners and the relevant societies, I have never heard anyone mention the possibility of Falabellas from the Argentina stud carrying the LWO gene. I also have many minis here who are registered with the British Shetland Pony Stud Book Society and who are coloured and have many coloureds in their long pedigrees, but no-one has ever suggested that the Lethal Gene might be present.
> 
> Which is why I was shocked and concerned when I read Stac's post to say that Rowdy 'relatives' might have been amongst those American minis exported to the Falabella Stud.
> 
> Obviously I will be testing all offspring born here sired by Dragon, but will now be adding Falabella Anselmo to my testing 'list'. Plus I think I had better be 'spreading the word' amongst other Falabella breeders here in the UK and Europe.Anna



And I seriously never thought it was just a North American thing?? I figured the pinto gene is everywhere. Then too, blue eyes, very common in that pattern, have always been frowned upon in Europe, much moreso than here, so perhaps they simply bred it out?


----------



## ohmt (Jul 3, 2010)

AnnaC-There are many pinto falabellas. I rarely see any that aren't anything but tobiano or splash, but I suppose it might be worth testing your boy just in case.

LOVE Rowdy-beautiful horse who sired beautiful foals. I believe when AMHA did a story on him in one of the World magazines they had his lineage linked to Audrey Barrett with a lot of pictures. I think the link comes from Oracle? This is all just coming from my memory which is not that great sometimes!


----------



## mizbeth (Jul 3, 2010)

Hi

Jane has a photo of Rowdy and his sire. It is an old one and hard to see. She was always supposed to scan and send it, but never did. The photo is a rear shot of him so you cannot see if he has color or not, but appears either black or bay. I do not imagine it would scan well enough to see.

It is my understanding that Mr Allman bred Rowdy - not sure Vern Brewer ever owned him but he did have some daughters/sons of his to begin his breeding program with. Juno Norman had him and bred many horses by Rowdy and he was sold then in their dispersal sale to Bob and Sandy Erwin NFC - thus the numerous NFC Rowdy horses. I do not believe Rowdy was a part of Audreys breeding program although many of his ancestors were.

I am pulling this information from memory as six or so years ago I did a lot of research on Rowdy and only a few emails I got, did I keep.

Jenny - Tony - Lewella knows alot about Rowdy. Wished one of them would come on and give us some history on him. I love hearing about him and the different opinions from those who knew him and his circumstances. I was going to name my farm Rowdy Acres when I first got into miniature horses but heard someone else had the name. Also "nearly bought" NFC Rowdys Standing Ovation when I first got into miniature horses, but could not see paying as much for a horse and you would a house So passed on him. He is a very striking horse.


----------



## AshleyNicole (Jul 3, 2010)

Al Glass and Joe Spino who were the trainer/ manager at NFC, also know a lot about Rowdy as well as many of the horses at NFC. We bought several horses from them this past year and they gave us a brochure from NFC with Rowdy in it and some information about him and his offspring. Wish I knew as much as they do about miniature history, their number and e-mail is on their website, I bet they wouldn't mind helping you out. It was really amazing to see the actual photos of all of the legendary horses that they worked with. We have the link to their web-site on our links page.


----------



## ~Amanda~ (Jul 3, 2010)

ohmt said:


> AnnaC-There are many pinto falabellas. I rarely see any that aren't anything but tobiano or splash, but I suppose it might be worth testing your boy just in case.
> 
> LOVE Rowdy-beautiful horse who sired beautiful foals. I believe when AMHA did a story on him in one of the World magazines they had his lineage linked to Audrey Barrett with a lot of pictures. I think the link comes from Oracle? This is all just coming from my memory which is not that great sometimes!


Is there a place to look up which magazine the story was in? I'd love to read it. I've heard about Rowdy of course, but I'd love to get more details.


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Jul 3, 2010)

MountainMeadows said:


> Lisa
> 
> My info on Rowdy came from Audrey Barrett herself - she was getting up there in years when we had a few of our conversations, but she seemed sharp as a tack -
> 
> Stac


Stacy I was not doubting you at all please I hope you didnt take it that way when you saw it in type..

Iknew he was the dreaded P word




but just had no idea about Audrey... she was such a huge huge influence on the breed


----------



## Tony (Jul 3, 2010)

There is a lot of misinformation on Rowdy and quite a bit on this thread. Rowdy was bred by Mr. Allman and bought by Jno. W. Norman, Lazy N Stables, Winters, Texas, as a colt. He is a son of Kewpie's Sun who goes back to Kewpie Doll's Oracle which is an ancestor of much of Audrey Barret's breeding. Vern Brewer never owned Rowdy, but was given a Rowdy son, Rowdy's Charm, also bred by Mr. Norman. Charm was later sold and was National Grand Chamkpion later. Vern took care of the dispersal of Mr. Norman's horses and Rowdy sold in the sale, which I attended many years ago. He sold for $7,500 to Bob & Sandy Erwin of NFC Farms at that sale and died some years later on their place. When I was a child Vern was trainer for Mr. Norman and years later when Vern saw the Rowdy offspring he was impressed and Mr. Norman gave him three of his offspring and Vern bought three more - a total of six Rowdy sons and daughters. I bought a full sister, according to Mr. Norman, and although Rowdy's pedigree is unknown as far as the registry, he gave me a note testifying that he was out of Allman's Baby Doll and by Kewpie's Sun. I gave the note to AMHA, but because it could not be verified, the information was never accepted into the studbook.


----------



## mizbeth (Jul 4, 2010)

Hi

On the registration papers of Little America Rocky Rowdy (Rowdy son by the mare you bought), had in handwritten letters "Allmans Baby Doll". Not sure if you, Tony wrote that there, or if AMHA did. I still have the old gentelmen - he is a grand horse and has produced me some gorgeous daughters/sons, his grandget are awesome. He is a perfect example of what pedigree - breeding of miniature horse is all about, he definately out produces himself and puts that long hooky shetland neck on his foals.

Beth


----------



## MountainMeadows (Jul 4, 2010)

Hi Tony

Thank you for the clarification - I know that Audrey was getting up in years when we spoke and she had a lot of her facts straight, but perhaps was a bit foggy about others - it really doesn't matter tho - Rowdy was a beautiful stallion, sired some incredible foals and his lineage will continue thru miniature horses for generations to come -- sad tho, that back in the old days, the "P" word was considered heinous and all those "P" pedigrees were trashed - wouldn't it be interesting to find out where a lot of the bloodlines of todays winning miniature horses really came from?

Stac


----------



## Sue_C. (Jul 4, 2010)

> wouldn't it be interesting to find out where a lot of the bloodlines of todays winning miniature horses really came from?


I generally assume that if it says "unknown" in most cases, it was shetland or shetland/_welsh_. When I look at the heads and necks of many of the minis I definately see much more of a Welsh influence than I do Shetland. I personally do not see todays Shetland head improving the minis at all. At least, not the shetties with hackney in them...so I suppose it would be the "modern" influence I wouldn't want, more than anything; personally do not want to see the high-knee action either. Don't get me wrong, I love it, but not in a mini. If I want to see or own a hackney, I will buy or watch one...it is enough that the shetlands are trying to be mini hackneys.


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Jul 4, 2010)

> it is enough that the shetlands are trying to be mini hackneys.





Many are not trying they truly are LOL

I do agree that logic would state the Shetland didnt evolve as it has without adding new and different breeds and blood despite what papers say no different then in the minis..


----------



## Sue_C. (Jul 4, 2010)

> I do agree that logic would state the Shetland didnt evolve as it has without adding new and different breeds and blood despite what papers say no different then in the minis


EXACTLY! The Shetlands are not like the Morgan, where they go back to ONE forebearer...they are like all other breeds, including the Arabian; a bit of this, a bit of that, and VERY obviously a lot of "out behind the barn" breeding even after they became a "pure-bred".


----------



## ohmt (Jul 4, 2010)

> EXACTLY! The Shetlands are not like the Morgan, where they go back to ONE forebearer...they are like all other breeds, including the Arabian; a bit of this, a bit of that, and VERY obviously a lot of "out behind the barn" breeding even after they became a "pure-bred".


ALL breeds come from mixing and matching; morgans, shetlands, arabians, ALL OF THEM. Breeds were created by us. And where would any of them be without it? Hackneys have already had a much bigger influence on minis than most people think. I see a lot of minis who make me think of a hackney right on the spot and it's usually the head. I love what the shetlands are doing to the minis. They are adding refinement, better length of neck, and they're helping create a more athletic mini. They may not be helping the heads of the minis, but their good points far outweigh that small con. Also, stop and think about what the influx of the shetland/mini crosses will do to the mini gene pool as far as dwarfism? I think it's going to really help diminish carriers. Just a thought

NOW, back to Rowdy...


----------



## Sue_C. (Jul 4, 2010)

> Also, stop and think about what the influx of the shetland/mini crosses will do to the mini gene pool as far as dwarfism? I think it's going to really help diminish carriers. Just a thought


That is something that perplexes me...a lot. IF the mini is "nothing other than a small shetland"...with all that shetland blood...with supposidly no dwarfism in the shetland "breed"...where did it come from? You cannot just lie that on the shoulders of in-breeding and too much line breeding,(although I abhor in-breeding..see no use for it anymore AT ALL) as MANY breeds began that way, and it isn't a problem with them.


----------



## skylineminis (Jul 8, 2010)

mizbeth said:


> Hi
> 
> Jane has a photo of Rowdy and his sire. It is an old one and hard to see. She was always supposed to scan and send it, but never did.
> 
> ...


----------



## Minimor (Jul 8, 2010)

> The Shetlands are not like the Morgan, where they go back to ONE forebearer...they are like all other breeds, including the Arabian; a bit of this, a bit of that, and VERY obviously a lot of "out behind the barn" breeding even after they became a "pure-bred".


sorry to say that there was some...okay, a lot...of "out behind the barn" breeding in Morgans too! For a period of time the registry was open, allowing saddlebred (for one) to be added into the breed. But, even after the registry closed, there was still some funny stuff going on at some breeding farms. A couple breeders got caught in recent years, but there are others who didn't...
As for the dwarfism--from what I understand from breeders who have been in the small equine for awhile...dwarfism did exist in the Shetlands at some point. However, the dwarfism gene gives traits that are not desirable in the shetlands, and the dwarfs were culled. Unfortunately some of those dwarves were used in Miniature breeding programs, making the dwarf gene more firmly entrenched in the Minis. There are others who could explain that much better than I can!!


----------



## Sue_C. (Jul 8, 2010)

> sorry to say that there was some...okay, a lot...of "out behind the barn" breeding in Morgans too! For a period of time the registry was open, allowing saddlebred (for one) to be added into the breed. But, even after the registry closed, there was still some funny stuff going on at some breeding farms. A couple breeders got caught in recent years, but there are others who didn't...
> As for the dwarfism--from what I understand from breeders who have been in the small equine for awhile...dwarfism did exist in the Shetlands at some point. However, the dwarfism gene gives traits that are not desirable in the shetlands, and the dwarfs were culled. Unfortunately some of those dwarves were used in Miniature breeding programs, making the dwarf gene more firmly entrenched in the Minis. There are others who could explain that much better than I can!!


Yes, even in the Morgan breed there were those who wanted a Saddlebred or Hackney type of look, so instead of simply changing thier breed choice, they attempted (as like what is happening now, IMO) to change their original breed choice. But, they too, as the Shetlands have also had to do, have "types" within thier breed, and there is still linages that remain PURE to the original Morgan with no break.

Why IS IT, that those who like the high-gaited horses, cannot just stick with the horse and ponu breeds that already HAVE IT??








As for the dwarfism "thing"...of COURSE the gene had to come from the Shetlands and other breeds, it is pure nonsense to think it just suddenly appeared out of thin air in the miniature "breed". I have to shake my head at those who swear there was never-ever any sign of it in the Shetland breed. I have no doubt in my mind it was the dwarf-type shetlands that were used to manufacture the mini breed at the onset, at more than one breeding farm back in the day.


----------



## Mominis (Jul 8, 2010)

Sue_C. said:


> Yes, even in the Morgan breed there were those who wanted a Saddlebred or Hankney type of look, so instead of simply changing thier breed choice, they attempted (as like what is happening now, IMO) to change their original breed choice. But, they too, as the Shetlands have also had to do, have "types" within thier breed, and there is still linages that remain PURE to the original Morgan with no break.
> 
> Why IS IT, that those who like the high-gaited horses, cannot just stick with the horse and ponu breeds that already HAVE IT??
> 
> ...



AMEN, sister!


----------



## Minimor (Jul 8, 2010)

I haven’t heard anyone say that Shetlands never-ever had the dwarf gene. I haven’t talked to “everybody” but those I have talked with said the gene was in the breed at one time. I would suspect that the gene is pretty much gone from the Shetlands now though, at least from the American Shetlands. If someone did have a dwarf crop up in their Shetland breeding program now I imagine they would cull the ponies that created that dwarf—let’s be honest, no one really wants to raise ASPC ponies that show dwarf traits, that simply isn’t going to further anyone’s ASPC breeding program in any way!! In Minis…well, there is less inclination to cull in the Minis. Good breeders won’t deliberately breed for dwarfism, but many still do not cull their known dwarf producers.

I don’t think it’s a bad thing for people to want to add more action into Minis, just as I don’t think it is wrong to be breeding Minis to have longer legs, slimmer bodies and longer necks. If Minis are supposed to look like full size horses in Miniature, then these improvements need to happen. If no one bred for any improvements, Minis would always be the short legged, heavy bodied, choppy moving little pit ponies they (in most cases) started out as. If they didn’t change from that I would guess they would have continued to be popular as novelty animals, but wouldn’t be taken seriously in the equine world in general. Without the changes there have been in the breed in the past 20 or even 10 years I would bet that there would be a lot of people that wouldn’t have gotten into Miniatures.

Actually some of those supposedly “pure” lines of Morgans are not quite up to scratch when it comes to purity either. It isn’t just the show type ones that had something non-Morgan added into them. I’m not saying it was deliberate in every case, sometimes the band of purebred Morgans ran out on the same pasture as some other band of horses, and sometimes the wrong stallion got to the wrong breed of mare and suddenly that oh-so-pure line had some draft horse or whatever added into it.

To get back to Rowdy—where did his frame gene come from? From everything I’ve been told, the original Shetlands did not carry the frame gene. I know people have asked this question before but I don’t recall anyone getting a definite answer from anyone. So, many old lines of Shetlands wouldn’t have had the frame gene to pass on—I don’t think the island Shetlands have frame even now? Don’t know—I haven’t taken a lot of interest in the island Shetlands, the Falabellas or the frame gene.


----------



## Sue_C. (Jul 8, 2010)

> I dont think its a bad thing for people to want to add more action into Minis, just as I dont think it is wrong to be breeding Minis to have longer legs, slimmer bodies and longer necks. If Minis are supposed to look like full size horses in Miniature, then these improvements need to happen


But where does it say that to "improve" the miniature...(which I think is just fine thank you...that's why I chose the breed rather than a Shetland, Shackney or Hackney pony)...you "want to add more action"?? There are actually very few breeds that have naturally high action, and we have pretty much already mentioned them.

What is WRONG with a mini, looking like a MINI?? Look at many of todays miniatures, what is it you don't care for? I see LOTS nice long legged, well-proportioned horses. I see beautiful hooky necks and dainty little faces. I figure if they don't look like what you want...then go buy a pony of the breed that DOES.



> To get back to Rowdy—where did his frame gene come from? From everything I’ve been told, the original Shetlands did not carry the frame gene. I know people have asked this question before but I don’t recall anyone getting a definite answer from anyone. So, many old lines of Shetlands wouldn’t have had the frame gene to pass on—I don’t think the island Shetlands have frame even now? Don’t know—I haven’t taken a lot of interest in the island Shetlands, the Falabellas or the frame gene.


It was probably introduced the same way the high-action was in other lines...before it was an admitted act.


----------



## ohmt (Jul 8, 2010)

SueC-miniature horses are a height breed, unlike others. That means they have a lot of different ancestry and that is why there are SO many different types of minis. The reason you see the nice hooky necks and dainty heads are because breeders have incorporated different breeds and downsized. My great grandparents went out and bought backyard ponies-they were absolutely gorgeous but had zero pedigree and who knows what sort of breeding they had behind them and those horses started there miniature horse program. I absolutely loved what they did. They chose backyard ponies with qualities that they liked and downsized creating some truly stunning miniature horses. There are World Grand Champions with their breeding who can verify that.

The great thing about minis is that you CAN take those high action horses and try to downsize to be able to call the horse a miniature. You can get a drafty type, quarter type, arabian type, etc. It's all up to the breeder. YOU can breed whatever you want and others can breed whatever they want. THe minis have it all. There really should be no argument about whether or not people should breed high action into the minis. If the horse is conformationally sound and meets the miniature horse height requirements, why not?


----------



## JennyB (Jul 8, 2010)

Not sure if Shetlands have the dwarf gene-maybe, but it would seem more likey that because of the instense in-breeding using tiny Shetlands to develop Miniatures that is maybe were the dwarf gene started...just my view






As for Rowdy....I am sure that some hanky panky might have been in play here so we will probably NEVER know for sure who was his true sire and his true dam................. With that said, IF he was sired by Kewpie's Sun(which in both the ASPC and AMHR there is NO Kewpie's Sun), but Mr. Allmand was using a chestnut pinto stallion 100% Arenosa, but not bred by Mrs. Barrett, but by J.A. Stovall(whom she bought stock from). The reason he is "considered" 100% Arenosa is because of one mare who was sired by Kewpie Doll's Sun, which was Kewpie Doll's Sugar Babe-she foaled 9 foals for Mrs. Barrett who are/were 100% Arenosa....SOOOO if Rowdy was sired by Kewpie Doll's Sun and NOT Kewpie's Sun...then his sire is 100% Arenosa and 100% American Shetland Pony sired by Kewpie Doll's Oracle-black pinto out of Topper's Larigo Starlight-sorrel(Larigo's Topper-red sorrel and owned by Vern Brewer x Larigo's 2nd Starlight-red chestnut by King Larigo 2nd-black x Flora Silver-silver dapple by Silver Crescent-silver dapple x Priscilla-black by King Larigo-black)

As to Rowdy's dam....I have no idea, but if he was purchased by Mr. Norman of Lazy N Stables it may have been likely a 100% American Shetland pony mare was used. There are some lines who have sabino in them, but am not sure about the overo pattern or splash white pattern as we have NO picturers of what these so called pinto's looked like.

I imagine that maybe Rowdy's heritage was not fully explained because at the time he was purchased by NFC, the Miniature BOOM was on and the fact that they wanted NOOOO Pony Blood to be "typed down" on papers, that many, many, many Shetland pedigree's were dumped into the trash!!! I have NO DOUBTS about this... I figure there ARE folks who know but will not say, why I have no idea because it is pretty much a fact that all Miniatures come from American Shetland Ponies....

My views





yeeHaa...flame suit ON





Jenny

Lewella are you next???


----------



## Sue_C. (Jul 8, 2010)

ohmt said:


> SueC-miniature horses are a height breed, unlike others. That means they have a lot of different ancestry and that is why there are SO many different types of minis. The reason you see the nice hooky necks and dainty heads are because breeders have incorporated different breeds and downsized. My great grandparents went out and bought backyard ponies-they were absolutely gorgeous but had zero pedigree and who knows what sort of breeding they had behind them and those horses started there miniature horse program. I absolutely loved what they did. They chose backyard ponies with qualities that they liked and downsized creating some truly stunning miniature horses. There are World Grand Champions with their breeding who can verify that.
> 
> The great thing about minis is that you CAN take those high action horses and try to downsize to be able to call the horse a miniature. You can get a drafty type, quarter type, arabian type, etc. It's all up to the breeder. YOU can breed whatever you want and others can breed whatever they want. THe minis have it all. There really should be no argument about whether or not people should breed high action into the minis. If the horse is conformationally sound and meets the miniature horse height requirements, why not?


Pretty much any breed has it's types, and they all started out from many other breeds. Heck, Quarterhorses were simply a horse that could do a quarter mile at a set time limit...they still get outcroppings of appaloosa and paints out of registered quarterhorse stock, but they kept the high stepping horses out of most breeds because, well, personally I thenk like myself, they found them less athletic...not more so.

I see Appaloosas that are very old type...those big bull-doggy horses, then you have the longer leaner race types...and that goes for quarterhorses too. They have now a foundation quarterhorse, which people are trying to build up...they are horses who haven't been touched by the "improvements" brought on by outcrossing with thoroughbreds. Many breeds who allowed too much outcrossing are finding out that the originals are getting lost...I just do not want this to happen.

BUT...as there are many who do want to change what we have, rather than go onward to a breed that already does what they want...we will HAVE to go to typews in the miniatures as well. I don't think it fair for the high stepping horses to take over the entire show ring just because they are popular...TODAY... Fads have ruined more than one breed...and it takes awhile to get back on track, I would hate to see this happen and lose that nice long sweeping ground covering trot that I so love to see in my little horses. At least if we too have a foundation miniature type, we can keep that.


----------



## Minimor (Jul 9, 2010)

Sue, I think you misunderstood what I said. I meant that if breeders all took the attitude that there's nothing to improve...way back 20-30 years ago...the Mini of today would be quite different from what it is. Yes, there are now Minis with long necks and refined bodies & long legs & nice action....because breeders over the last however many years have been breeding for those things, improving their horses from what they started with, tweaking conformation to get that long legged "horse" look rather than the shorter, stocky sort of "midget ponies" that the registry started out with. 30 years ago there were a good many Minis that were miniature "horse" in name only--if they were grown up to 15 hh size they wouldn't have looked like horses, they'd have looked like overgrown pit ponies. And for movement--there's nothing wrong with long, sweeping strides, but at the same time there's a difference (at least in my view) between long sweeping strides and that stiff legged, short strided action that so many Minis have! Some Minis do still have that sort of action, but not as many now as years back--and personally I'm very glad that some breeders did improve their stock to have that better movement. I don't care if they're popping above level, but I do like to see good hock flexion and some knee action.

I don't care if my Minis aren't trotting above level, but I'd rather have that than Minis that just do the stiff legged trot. And yeah, for bigger movement I have my ponies...American Shetlands because they are generally prettier than the Hackneys, plus are smaller than the hackneys, and move good enough for my liking. I have to say the Shetlands aren't all about the high action--they can do long and sweeping very well too. <VBG>


----------



## Minimor (Jul 9, 2010)

Sorry, I missed this in my earlier post:



> At least if we too have a foundation miniature type, we can keep that.


I wouldn't be too sure about that. Type is very subjective, and not everyone is going to agree on exactly what type any horse is. Look at the American Shetlands. Yes, they have a Foundation division, but there are often complaints that certain ponies that show and win in Foundation are not truly Foundation type and should not be showing as Foundation. Others insist that those same ponies ARE exactly what Foundation type should be, and so they most certainly do belong in Foundation. Minis will be no different. If there were Foundation Mini classes, there would be complaints about how it wasn't fair that the winning pony at some show was off type and still won...and then movement...keep in mind that in the Foundation ponies, "Foundation" does not mean that the pony has lower movement than a Classic--some Foundation ponies are very good movers, complete with knee action. So, it's entirely possible that a Foundation Mini class could have some Minis that have some knee action--too much knee action for what some would like.


----------



## JennyB (Jul 9, 2010)

Minimor said:


> Sue, I think you misunderstood what I said. I meant that if breeders all took the attitude that there's nothing to improve...way back 20-30 years ago...the Mini of today would be quite different from what it is. Yes, there are now Minis with long necks and refined bodies & long legs & nice action....because breeders over the last however many years have been breeding for those things, improving their horses from what they started with, tweaking conformation to get that long legged "horse" look rather than the shorter, stocky sort of "midget ponies" that the registry started out with. 30 years ago there were a good many Minis that were miniature "horse" in name only--if they were grown up to 15 hh size they wouldn't have looked like horses, they'd have looked like overgrown pit ponies. And for movement--there's nothing wrong with long, sweeping strides, but at the same time there's a difference (at least in my view) between long sweeping strides and that stiff legged, short strided action that so many Minis have! Some Minis do still have that sort of action, but not as many now as years back--and personally I'm very glad that some breeders did improve their stock to have that better movement. I don't care if they're popping above level, but I do like to see good hock flexion and some knee action.
> 
> I don't care if my Minis aren't trotting above level, but I'd rather have that than Minis that just do the stiff legged trot. And yeah, for bigger movement I have my ponies...American Shetlands because they are generally prettier than the Hackneys, plus are smaller than the hackneys, and move good enough for my liking. I have to say the Shetlands aren't all about the high action--they can do long and sweeping very well too. <VBG>



I AGREE





Jenny


----------



## Sue_C. (Jul 9, 2010)

I know we cannot judge what type a foundation would be...that is something that cannot be changed...but we could say foundation is a mini with no outcrossing in it's pedigree since "this date", and go onward from there.

I am not saying there is nothing to improve...



> Yes, there are now Minis with long necks and refined bodies & long legs & nice action....because breeders over the last however many years have been breeding for those things, improving their horses from what they started with, tweaking conformation to get that long legged "horse" look rather than the shorter, stocky sort of "midget ponies" that the registry started out with. 30 years ago


but I DO think it posible to keep going as we have....improving within our breed. Why not? It has worked so far. 
But...like I say, if there is something good to come from outcrossing...let it be done in such a way that there is a niche for all the horses to be competative. We would need to have our horses put into catigories such as the Shetlands, Welsh and probably many others have. Give us a section A-B-C whatever, and have like compete with like. I am only afraid that the big rage for the big lick will take over the showring, and our long strided minis will be left in the dirt. They don't deserve that, just because of a fad in type.

I know that you, Minimor appreciate the horses I am speaking of, but you know as well as I do how some will follow the leader into a fad and not look back at what they are losing...it only matters that they are catching up. We need to protect the breed from that, and making sections or catagoris NOW...before it is too late, is the only way I can see to ensure it.


----------



## midnight star stables (Jul 9, 2010)

ohmt said:


> SueC-miniature horses are a height breed, unlike others. That means they have a lot of different ancestry and that is why there are SO many different types of minis. The reason you see the nice hooky necks and dainty heads are because breeders have incorporated different breeds and downsized. My great grandparents went out and bought backyard ponies-they were absolutely gorgeous but had zero pedigree and who knows what sort of breeding they had behind them and those horses started there miniature horse program. I absolutely loved what they did. They chose backyard ponies with qualities that they liked and downsized creating some truly stunning miniature horses. There are World Grand Champions with their breeding who can verify that.
> 
> The great thing about minis is that you CAN take those high action horses and try to downsize to be able to call the horse a miniature. You can get a drafty type, quarter type, arabian type, etc. It's all up to the breeder. YOU can breed whatever you want and others can breed whatever they want. THe minis have it all. There really should be no argument about whether or not people should breed high action into the minis. If the horse is conformationally sound and meets the miniature horse height requirements, why not?


Wow! What a post!



:yeah



Really, I couldn't have said it better myself!!!

Personally, I love the "extreme" minis, and that is just what *I* breed for! I have a FRAME OVERO mare being bred to a World Champion Harness Pony with "Shackney" bloodlines - because I can! How cool is that?? I can cross my two favorite things - Overo and Action - and still take pride in my registered show horse!





I also have a mini that looks just like a Thoroughbred, and another two like Morgans-(One a bit heavier style Morgan, the other more refined). And that's not it either! I have one that reminds me of a Mustang and another who is an Arabian style mare who has excelled in halter earning a HOF, National Top Tens and All-Star Top Tens. I ALSO have a 28 year old *DRAFT* type mini that was imported from Germany many many years ago! I like my herd, but what I like the most is how DIFFERENT it is! Some large breeding farms stamp their look on every horse/foal, (ex. Graham, Little Kings, Dun-Haven, Michigan, Establo, Buckeye, Rhapsody... just to name a few), however most farms have a combination of many bloodlines and have many different looks in there herd. I love how diverse our breed is!

On another note, I have a friend that has a minimal frame overo mare that is 100% pure falabella. The horse is a bay with a large star and snip, and has the classic blue eyes. This friend is all about the falabella bloodline, so has done her homework in finding good, pure falabella bloodlines.

What I don't get, coming from someone who loves frame, is why the confusion? Frame is just a colour, as any other. Both Shetlands and falabellas have pinto backgrounds, so why couldn't frame had been there from the start? Especially since frame is so very easily masked as a solid or as/with another colour. Just saying, But I think it's been there for a while, IMO.





Neat thread.


----------



## midnight star stables (Jul 9, 2010)

After re-reading some of the last few posts, I was wondering if people really realize that there are *FOUR* _"Types"_ of American Shetlands? Foundation, Classic, Modern Pleasure and Modern.

Only two of those types have horses that often break level/above level at a trot, and because they have hackney bloodlines in their past, they are usually larger in size. THESE ponies are NOT normally the Shetlands that are used to make ASPC/AMHR horses! I can only think of maybe 10, that are ASPC/AMHR and in the breeding pool. That is NOT going to kill the breed IMO.

Most ASPC/AMHR breeding farms are using Foundation and Classic lines, which I would say, on a whole, are VERY similar to our miniatures! There are a few farms that have extreme lines, but most classics are similar to minis.... And I wonder why? Somewhere, many many years ago, they all trace back to the same breeding. Classics and Foundations that I have seen, have strong movement with long strides. As a driving horse, they often have beautiful long, high set neck, which IMO makes them more "showy", however their strides are much more long then high. I really don't see much different in these Shetlands and the minis.

Also remember that not all Shetlands are "show shetlands", just as not all minis are show minis. Some of the shetlands used for breeding ASPC/AMHR look no different then AMHR/AMHA horses. And I have seen people buy ASPC/AMHR ponies that really look no different then any other plain mini. Just because it HAS ASPC papers, it doesn't make it an amazing mini.

The number of hundreds of minis that have poor conformation, glaring faults or ugly traits are out there EVERYwhere! There are many many many stallions that should be gelded. There are many mares that should not be bred. There are many unknowable people out there breeding minis, because they can. No, I'm not saying MY horses or MY type of horse is ANY better then anyone else - That is NOT what I am saying. But I love seeing the breed improve, as it does each year in huge jumps. It is so neat to see high headed minis with real movement(be it a long stride, or with knee action). I love the nice powerful hips and sloping shoulders that have a neck that ties in well. I like seeing good teeth. Whether it's from better breeding or new shetland bloodline, I don't overly care. I'm just happy to see our breed improve in Conformation!


----------



## Sue_C. (Jul 9, 2010)

> After re-reading some of the last few posts, I was wondering if people really realize that there are FOUR "Types" of American Shetlands? Foundation, Classic, Modern Pleasure and Modern.
> Only two of those types have horses that often break level/above level at a trot, and because they have hackney bloodlines in their past, they are usually larger in size. THESE ponies are NOT normally the Shetlands that are used to make ASPC/AMHR horses! I can only think of maybe 10, that are ASPC/AMHR and in the breeding pool. That is NOT going to kill the breed IMO.


Well then, you should KNOW exactly WHAT *I *am trying sooo very hard to SAY... _BECAUSE_ there are four types of Shetland that can be and are being infused into the miniature breed, WE TOO must designate types into catagories. WHY is that so difficult for me to get that across??














> Shetlands that are used to make ASPC/AMHR horses! I can only think of maybe 10, that are ASPC/AMHR and in the breeding pool. That is NOT going to kill the breed IMO.



Right...only 10 YOU personally can think of...and everyone else knows of 5-10 more...or just Take half of that 10 you know of, and breed them, and thier foals...over 10-15 years...get my drift??

Isn't it better to be pro-active, than scratch your head in ten years and say..."Gee, maybe she had a point"?


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Jul 9, 2010)

Sue_C. said:


> That is something that perplexes me...a lot. IF the mini is "nothing other than a small shetland"...with all that shetland blood...with supposidly no dwarfism in the shetland "breed"...where did it come from?



LOL I have said the same thing many a time I just do not see how it can be both ways Minis are Shetlands and have a majority of Shetland influence (which I do not deny) and love to listen to the OH NO NOT FROM OUR PONIES excuses LOL guess that dwarf gene just arrived on pixie dust sent from Queen Fairy and sprinkled on the minis

I have ponies and I love ponies but this myth that ponies are totally and only improving the breed is just that.

Sorry folks tons of crap being bred with ASPC papers simply cause they can get R papers as well.

Not every ASPC pony is wonderful and will add great things to the mini breed in fact far from it. LIke any other breed there is good and bad and the ponies are no different. There are plenty of ponies out there being bred that should not be-just like the minis so not everything will improve the breed it takes more then a set of ASPC papers to do that


----------



## Minimor (Jul 9, 2010)

> Sorry folks tons of crap being bred with ASPC papers simply cause they can get R papers as well.


Now this is so very true! So many people believe that the animal is superior just because it has that second set of papers—those ASPC papers ensure quality, and so they will spend a very large amount of money to buy that double registered horse. They figure that if they have two ASPC/AMHR horses to breed together, the resulting ASPC/AMHR foal will be worth so much money, far more than if that foal were AMHR only. They’re so busy judging papers that they apparently forget to consider the QUALITY of that double registered animal they’re paying so much money for!

Honestly, there are double registered horses out there that look exactly like many AMHR-only horses, and there are double registered horses out there that are far, far worse in conformation than a good many AMHR-only horses. An AMHR/ASPC horse with a poor croup and resulting poor movement—and yes, I could name quite a few of those!!!—is no better than an AMHR horse with that same croup and poor movement, and is certainly not as good as an AMHR-only horse with a good croup and good movement…and yet there are those who would turn down that AMHR-only horse with the good croup and good movement in favor of the ASPC/AMHR horse with the poor croup & poor movement.

I maintain that adding type divisions to Miniatures isn’t going to help anything or anyone. People complain now that it isn’t fair that their AMHR horses get beat by the AMHR/ASPC ponies. I assure you that if the type divisions were brought into AMHR, those same people would then be complaining that it’s not fair that their Foundation type AMHR horses get beat by the OFF TYPE ones that get to show Foundation because of their pedigree (the right number of generations without any “outside” blood) but don’t happen to LOOK right for Foundation type. And for sure those will exist—I’m sure there will be plenty of them!!! “outside breeding”….so Foundation would exclude all “grade” hardships, all AMHA hardships and all ASPC hardships? Yet Foundation would still include certain double registered horses that are 5th and 6th (or more) generation AMHR/ASPC…just because they have ASPC papers, they wouldn’t be excluded from Foundation because they’ve also had AMHR papers for 5+ generations back. I think that’s fair, but I’m sure others would say otherwise. Yep, I believe that making AMHR into 2 or more types would add few benefits to the breed, and would add a lot more complaining, a lot of squabbling and a whole lot more classes and expenses for shows that have to double or triple their class list to accommodate the various divisions.

I doubt there will ever be all that many Modern ponies that get AMHR registered--the Moderns do tend to be taller and most won't fit in. If some Moderns do turn out to be small enough to measure into AMHR, then I have no problem with them being registered AMHR. (As long as they are measured honestly and truly do fit into AMHR!)

What I'd really hate to see is the rule regarding no shoes allowed for AMHR. If ever that was changed so that Minis can be shown with shoes--that is something I'd be opposed to, because then you really have a playing field that isn't level. That would really be the kiss of death for showing as we know it now. I really have no worries about how "unfair" it is to show AMHR against AMHR/ASPC, and I say that as someone who has both AMHR and ASPC registered animals, but none that are AMHR/ASPC--my ponies are all too tall to be AMHR.


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Jul 9, 2010)

I agree with Minimor I do not think it is unfair to show against ASPC/R horses I do however in the long run think it is very short sighted of our breed as a whole to try and mimick or copy or turn our horses into what is now seen in the classic and or Modern world of ASpc

It seems great now for that market in ASPC that is picking up and booming compared to years past but in the long run I do believe it will hurt the bread and butter of our registry AMHR

I hope I am wrong but I do see it changing who and how many decide to stay and play in a "smaller" ASPC ring

JMO though take it for what it is worth lol


----------

