# What gives??



## Mominis (Aug 5, 2010)

You guys all know I'm new here and new to minis in general, so please understand that I'm not trying in any way to be insulting by this post, I'm trying to learn.

Recently, there was a big to-do about how minis were becoming little moderns and what a problem that is. I just was looking at the recent AMHA World link and I've been reading my Journals as well. Here's my question...so many people make a big thing about how their horses look like mini Arabians. The tack is Arabian show horse-like, the presentation is Arabian-ish and the horses seem to be bred that way. Why is it preferred that a mini look like an Arabian, but it is a no-no if they look "mini moderns" (which, to my uneducated eye, look like little Saddlebreds). Why isn't it okay to breed for a different type, like the Saddlebred or modern Morgan look and have it not be as accepted or encouraged as breeding for an Arabian type?

Again, not trying to start anything here, just trying to understand the market.


----------



## targetsmom (Aug 5, 2010)

I find this interesting too, because my recent background is with Pintos (a color breed of course) which has 4 conformation TYPES. Well they don't have types yet for minis, but the 4 types for big horses are stock, hunter, saddle, and pleasure. Stock and hunter are BY FAR the more popular types, with the pleasure type - which includes Arabians - much less popular, at least as far as I can tell (local show entries, Horse of the Year results).

I doubt I will live long enough to see it, but I bet some registry (Pinto maybe) will some day include "type" on the papers of minis.

BTW, I think I prefer the hunter (or Warmblood type) of mini myself.


----------



## disneyhorse (Aug 5, 2010)

I don't know. It's a weird bias. Somewhere lots of people jumped on the "Arabian type" bandwagon, but now that people are jumping on the "Shetland" bandwagon people are freaking out.

Arabians are very beautiful horses, though, so it's easy to see why people would want to try for those traits.

Andrea


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Aug 5, 2010)

I don't show in AMHA or even a member of it anymore so I can't really say. The arabian look has been in for a while. I'm not too fond with how refined they are, except I do like the dishy head look. AMHA however does give awards too The best all around horse and they have to do well in halter and other performance events to beable to win that award. Also I know there was talks that AMHA was thinking about adding a performance halter division, but not sure how that is going or not.


----------



## Minimor (Aug 5, 2010)

I think--from what people are saying--the "mini moderns" are unacceptable because the trend in the show ring--particularly in the driving classes--is the "mini moderns" are winning over the other types, be they Arabian, Welsh or QH types. The mini moderns tend to have higher withers and better shoulders and with that--better movement. Because owners of these other types of Mini do not wish to be getting beat by bigger moving horses, they are protesting against that type of horse.

I've been told (haven't seen it for myself because we do not have Modern Shetlands showing in the Mini division in this area) that the Modern Shetland type of Mini doesn't do as well in halter, because Modern Shetlands have heads that are less refined and not so pretty--they are most likely to excel in the park harness class. However, the Classic Shetland type of Mini--which is what some people are wanting to have taken out of the "regular" Mini divisions--does tend to do very well in halter because that type of Mini tends to have longer legs, longer, finer neck and a slimmer body than the average "Arabian type" Mini.

If someone started coming out with Minis that were truly Arabian in type--honestly, while the Mini world uses Mini type halters and brags about the Arabian type of their horses, IMO those horses are much more Welsh pony in type than they are Arabian--if someone did come out with true "Arabian in miniature" horses, there are many who would complain about it being unfair, and they would want to keep those out of the Mini show rings too.


----------



## AnnaC (Aug 5, 2010)

Many many years ago (back in the dark ages well before most of you were born) there was a programme on tv (and I think it might have been from the USA) about miniature horses. And by golly they were miniature HORSES - there was a mini Clydesdale with its unusual colouring pattern, a mini Shire with all its leg feathers, a mini Percheron a real dapple grey heavyweight, plus a sturdy hunter looking type and one or two others. It amazed all of us watching it, we had never seen horses that were the perfet miniature versions of their counterparts.

Of course time has moved on and so have miniature horses, and we now have some very beautiful little horses throughout the world today. The Arabian type may be popular at the moment, but I see no reason why other types/builds/styles of minis should not get a 'look in' at the shows. Surely a well conformed mini is a well conformed mini no matter whether it is lightweight or of a heavier type?

Here in the UK we are lucky to have classes at the major mini shows (and a lot of the minor shows) divided into Hunter (heavy), Cob, Thoroughbred etc which gives everyone an equal chance - the Champion of the show is then judged from the winners of all these classes, and may well turn out to be the heavyweight - depending upon its conformation and the movement it displays!

I like my minis to have a good deal of 'substance' - particularly my mares - with nice chiselled heads, not too much of a dish as I seriously think that a lot of the 'tooth' trouble that today's minis seem to be suffering from, comes from having a head that is too 'refined/dished'.

Just my opinion folks, so dont jump on me LOL!! I shall be reading the other responses with interest!






Anna


----------



## kaykay (Aug 6, 2010)

I think a lot of this Arabian type stuff started because we have a high number of trainers that came to miniature showing from showing Arabians. I used to giggle when I first started years back that that everyone you met "used to show Arabians".

Unfortunately to some the word "Shetland" is a negative term and its very hard to get them to see the big picture. It doesnt help that every grad pony is a "Shetland". That about drives me nuts. So many people dont understand that American Shetlands are a breed, so if you have a pony with no papers it is not a "Shetland" its a grade pony.

I strongly agree that a lot of the tooth problems we see are caused in part to trying to breed extreme heads. Goes a long with years ago when everyone started to breed for straight legs and then some got too straight and they forgot to look at hips and then we got the influx of miniatures with locked stifle issues.


----------



## stormy (Aug 6, 2010)

So I will try to explain from my point of view as a "straight" mini breeder. First of all my background includes arabs, dressage and standardbreds. I have also owned and bred shetlands in the past. The Miniature horse breed was moving towards a "arab type" with the pretty head and long neck, flatter croup but also a good shoulder and a way of movement more like I so love in the dressage arena, long, flowing, with elevation but not the extreme action seen in the modern type shetland (which is more extreme even then the Park division in arabs). The roadster horse was indeed a road horse, like a standardbred in many ways, again long stride, ground covering movement.

This is not about winning in the ring, it is about two registrys that were going in differant directions.

Though I find moderns pretty to watch I do not consider the extreme and hot movement an improvement or better way of going then the dressage type movement that used to be Pleasure, infact I find it insulting when so many scorn the beautiful movement of the minis as if it was inferior and only the extreme action of the Shetland should be considered acceptable. What to me is Park type movement should not be showing against Pleasure type movement. They are not levels of the same thing but differant types of movement just as western, hunt seat, dressage and saddleseat are judged differantly.

My constant question is why should the miniature horse breed consider shetland style movement the standard? Minis have become extremely popular pursueing their own path of development, I do not see the trend towards hotter and higher as a benefit to the breed as a whole.

Why if a miniature shetland is desirable to the shetland breeders does the registry not just add height divisions to the shetland registry to include the smaller shetland and allow both breeds to evolve in there unique way, offering more options to more potential owners....growing the breeds as seperate registries?

Why should we want AMHR to becme AMSR??


----------



## Mominis (Aug 6, 2010)

While I'll agree that Arabians are beautiful horses, I like the look of a Saddlebred, personally. The biggest drawback with the ASB's, to me anyway, is keeping one up in a tailset all the time and never allowing the horse to be a horse. The minis of that type don't seem to have those drawbacks.

I'd like to see, like Target mentioned, type divisions. I think that may just be the key to keeping the breeders that Andrea mentioned happy and still have something for the people who like the type Stormy does (Warmblood like), etc. etc. happy.

Has it ever been proposed to do a saddle type, a pleasure type, a sport type and a stock type division?


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Aug 6, 2010)

Like I said in my post eariler there were talks that AMHA was going to add another halter division for more of your stock type horses(aka: performance halter). As far as I know there are no talks in AMHR having added divisions. Like people have said adding more divisions is just going to make our National show longer. So having my idea of a foundation division may not be such a good idea. But I also think something needs to be done, but don't know what. Is having AMHR/ASPC horses taking charge in the AMHR ring going to be the norm I don't know? I don't see them leaving, and I feel like they should have there place.

When I started with the miniatures almost 10 years now the type of horses being shown in AMHA was the norm. They just have got more refined and more extreme heads which is not my taste but the type is still the same. Yes more and more shetlands are going into AMHA but I feel like when they get down that small they more look like miniatures, just maybe with a lil more edge.

For me personally perhaps I should switch over. Show and breed AMHA instead of R which their route is going towards the shetlands. However there are no AMHA shows around here, showing and breeding in AMHA is more expensive and I feel AMHR has more to offer. I have always showed in AMHR and I don't want to leave. But with the way things are going I feel like I hit a barrier and can't go forward.


----------



## CharlesFamily (Aug 6, 2010)

Good question, and one I have been wondering myself!

Personally, while I find Arabians beautiful to look at, I have never been fond of them. I am a through and through stock horse lover. I have always owned Quarter Horses. I love their look, and especially the old-time QH look, not the new Appendix look. I love big round hips, a huge jaw, huge eye and sturdy legs.

Even when I moved to minis, while I can appreciate the beauty of the delicate looking arab-styled minis, when I go to purchase I always find myself drawn to the stock horse types of good conformation. I still want them to have the nice open shoulder so they can move well because I love performance, but I love the more muscled look.

I wish that minis would get divided up into different categories now, too, since there seem to be more "types" than say 10 years ago which was the last time I showed minis. My girls and I are preparing for our first show with the boys and as I have been teaching them the ins and outs of halter and showmanship, I am not having them "stretch" them in a halter stance as I just don't think it is as becoming to them as they are not the "arab/morgan/ASB" type. It would look as silly as having a QH stand that way.

I can't say if that will hurt us in the show ring, but that is why we are starting in an open show instead of a rated show. We will see!

Barbara


----------



## rabbitsfizz (Aug 6, 2010)

Well, I came from Arabs and I can tell you I have never, ever seen a Mini (Adult) that looked like a Arab. I have seen horses that had that an Arab look about them, and I certainly breed for it, but most end up looking like tiny little Sec A Welsh.

So, the AmShet, I think , is a very good way to go if you want a refined animal that is horse like.

Once you have everything else right it is not a hard job to get an Araby head, if you so wish.

I am not sure what all the fuss is about, frankly, I would give my right arm for some of those AmShets!!!


----------



## Matt73 (Aug 6, 2010)

stormy said:


> So I will try to explain from my point of view as a "straight" mini breeder. First of all my background includes arabs, dressage and standardbreds. I have also owned and bred shetlands in the past. The Miniature horse breed was moving towards a "arab type" with the pretty head and long neck, flatter croup but also a good shoulder and a way of movement more like I so love in the dressage arena, long, flowing, with elevation but not the extreme action seen in the modern type shetland (which is more extreme even then the Park division in arabs). The roadster horse was indeed a road horse, like a standardbred in many ways, again long stride, ground covering movement.
> 
> This is not about winning in the ring, it is about two registrys that were going in differant directions.
> 
> ...



I totally agree



The Modern Shetland, IMHO, is more of a smaller version of a Hackney Pony and, obviously, has a huge amount of blood from that breed (movement, head, etc.). Beautiful animals, but...should be totally separate from a "mini".


----------



## Minimor (Aug 6, 2010)

I have to say to anyone that believes the Shetland influence adds only up and down movement without extension—if that is what you think, then you are NOT paying a whole lot of attention to the Shetlands and how they move!!

The majority of Shetlands that are in AMHR—and the majority of Classic and Foundation Shetlands that are too tall for AMHR—have more extension than up & down in their movement. Modern Shetlands, yes, you’ll see more up & down there, often because of how they are trained & shod. Pull their shoes & move ‘em out & you’ll see some awesome extension there too, though perhaps with more lift. Truly, horses can have lift as well as extension, and for me that’s not a bad thing. (I had Morgans before and one thing I love about the Morgans is their nice round action).

My ponies—and I currently have 7 of them—all have lovely extension. My oldest gelding would go Modern Pleasure, possibly even Modern, if he were shod up for it. I have him barefoot and yes, he still has some lift, but he also extends beautifully. When I watch him trot at liberty, he looks like a dressage horse—a good one! (And yes, I was into dressage at one time, classical dressage) He lifts up in front, gets his rear end under him, and just flows along, looking very much like a good dressage horse—a slim, small sized warmblood even! Dora, one of my fillies, has a lovely long floating trot—she’d be super as a road horse as she can “float” at very high speed—and I figure she would compete in country pleasure, because she doesn’t have high action. Even without high action she can out move any Mini I’ve ever seen, and I’ve seen some good moving Minis. The Shetlands can surely lend some fluidity to the Miniatures' movement.

And Arabian type—my yearling filly Reva (Shetland) looks like an Arabian—if you saw her out in the pasture & didn’t know who she was, I’ll bet that you would take her for an Arabian. So please don’t tell me that Shetlands are ruining the Arabian type of the Miniatures—some of them would actually add to that type!!

And you know what? Yes, it is all about winning and losing. If the Shetlands weren’t winning in the AMHR show ring—if they were LOSING every time out, or even 9 out of 10 times, no one would care. If they were LOSING, the straight AMHR exhibitors would say let people breed them if they want, let people show them, because our straight AMHR horses are beating them all the time anyway, so it doesn’t matter.

As it is, it matters because the Shetlands are WINNING. It is because they are winning that people don’t want them in the registry (or at the very least it is the reason why people want them to be put into their own little division away from the straight AMHR horses)


----------



## Matt73 (Aug 6, 2010)

Modern Shetlands (or any American Shetland, for that matter)competing in the ring against minis is like having Grand Prix trained Dutch Warmbloods, Hanoverians etc. compete against a Quarter Horse in the dressage ring. It doesn't make any sense to me.


----------



## midnight star stables (Aug 6, 2010)

Minimor said:


> I have to say to anyone that believes the Shetland influence adds only up and down movement without extension—if that is what you think, then you are NOT paying a whole lot of attention to the Shetlands and how they move!!
> 
> The majority of Shetlands that are in AMHR—and the majority of Classic and Foundation Shetlands that are too tall for AMHR—have more extension than up & down in their movement. Modern Shetlands, yes, you’ll see more up & down there, often because of how they are trained & shod. Pull their shoes & move ‘em out & you’ll see some awesome extension there too, though perhaps with more lift. Truly, horses can have lift as well as extension, and for me that’s not a bad thing. (I had Morgans before and one thing I love about the Morgans is their nice round action).
> 
> ...



I love your posts





And I agree 100% too. To be honest, I can't think of a AMHR mini that has won a National Grand Championship in Halter, from the past few years. Other then Prince, who Stacy mentioned that he does have some Shetland back in his pedigree. I also think JC's Jenga is a neat horse, winning National Grand Championship Over Stallion in AMHR Halter in 1998 and again in 2008. It was also cool to see him in Congress this year, still holding his own (Reserve Champion Senior Stallion I think.



)Is this a bad thing? I'm not sure, depends on where you stand. IMO, there are some STUNNING horses in our AMHR show ring.

And I also agree with the training. Most AMHR/ASPC horses I know are not "modern" and do not show Pleasure or Park. Most are beautiful Country pleasure moving type horses. Now I'm sure if you shod them and put some elastics on their feet, they'll start moving with more lift. Heck, so does a mini.

I'd love to own a true modern mini to cross to my AMHR only horses because of the beautiful trot I'd get - both lift and extension.

On a side note, watching Shetland Congress this week was amazing! And I can say, had they had it online LAST year, I would have now been the proud owner of a stunning pony! Oh well.


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 6, 2010)

Matt73 said:


> I totally agree
> 
> 
> 
> The Modern Shetland, IMHO, is more of a smaller version of a Hackney Pony and, obviously, has a huge amount of blood from that breed (movement, head, etc.). Beautiful animals, but...should be totally separate from a "mini".


DITTO-DITTO-DITTO!!!!!!!!!!



> Modern Shetlands (or any American Shetland, for that matter)competing in the ring against minis is like having Grand Prix trained Dutch Warmbloods, Hanoverians etc. compete against a Quarter Horse in the dressage ring. It doesn't make any sense to me.Minimor


AND AGAIN...DITTO........

The only ones who think this is a good idea...are the ones who HAVE THEM...and say the rest of us are just whining "sour grapes". I say no, that is not it...and no...it is NOT all about WINNING that almighty #@$%^&$# ribbon. It IS all about changing the entire form/type of an animal for a FAD...that too shall pass...but not before it (IMO) harms the breed.

I-just-don't-GET-IT. Whay IS IT, that the park horse lover doesn't STICK to a park horse breed. I love the look too, really...I DO. but if I want a Hackney, I will buy one. If I WANT a modern Shetland, I will BUY one... Instead...I bought miniature horses, and LOVE the long, low sweeping gait that I have personally looked for, and bred for.

And don't go trying to hand me that, "it is how they are shod"...I have friends with registered Hackneys...and barefoot, they move like sewing machines compared to the dressage type movement of my minis.


----------



## Leeana (Aug 6, 2010)

The nice thing about miniatures right now..if you like the smaller QH type horses, "modern" miniatures, classic shetland type miniatures, arabian type,.....is that you can own, breed and show whatever kind or "type" of horse that you like. But at some point you have to stop and take a look at your program and make changes as you go to stay competitive if showing and breeding show animals is your "cup of tea". I think a lot of people just do not understand the shetland and types....

Own the type of horse you enjoy and own the BEST of that type if you are showing....be happy with that....

I think a lot of people have come to just blaim their loss in the show ring on the fact being that the winning horses/ponies were shetlands.....that is just not true.

I do not think the amhr/aspc or shetland influence is at all a "fad", if so this is a long time fad.......where would the breed be if it could not move forward?? All breeds are moving forward - Could you imagine if the miniatures still looked like they did back in the 60's...70's...80's (and well before that)....do you think when the miniatures started to first become leggy and refined that was considered a "fad"????

I think the breed is beautiful now but there is always room for improvement. I cannot wait to see the breed in 30..40..50 years from now. I only wish I could see it 100 years from now and on..

But what do I know and its only my opinion that I feel strong enough about to share.


----------



## gvpalominominis (Aug 6, 2010)

I think you hit it right on the head there... I'd like to "cross" this with that to get a better result.


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 6, 2010)

:arg!


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Aug 6, 2010)

Sue_C. said:


> The only ones who think this is a good idea...are the ones who HAVE THEM...and say the rest of us are just whining "sour grapes". I say no, that is not it...and no...it is NOT all about WINNING that almighty #@$%^&$# ribbon. It IS all about changing the entire form/type of an animal for a FAD...that too shall pass...but not before it (IMO) harms the breed.
> 
> I


Of course those with ASPC horses will and are very happy about this huge jump in their sales. Many people believe you must have a ASPC/R papered horse to win. While that is not true why on earth would the people marketing them keep telling buyer that? They are simply doing what they feel needs to be done to market their horses. It is our fault if we as a breed believe them.

I will say this again we have been told that the MAJORITY makes the decisions in this registry not anyone else and that would be the MAJORITY who go to Convention like it or not that is how i tworks now-

Remember with 1600 to 1700 minis at Nationals and lets just say we double that as a guess as to how many show thruout the year... 3000 even 4000 minis is NOT THE MAJOROITY

Those who show are the MINORITY if you do not like the rules or what is happening in and with the breed write a rule proposal for 2011 to close hardship to ASPC or whatever you feel will solve the issue... then have enough people to pass the vote.

It just so happens that those that show tend to be the same ones who are involved in the registry and go to Convention year after year. Therefore they have a say as in how things are run.

They are not taking any power away- or anything of the sort. The majority is simply choosing to give their power away


----------



## Minimor (Aug 6, 2010)

> The only ones who think this is a good idea...are the ones who HAVE THEM...and say the rest of us are just whining "sour grapes".


This statement is SO not true. I for one do not have any ASPC/AMHR horses. I have ASPC ponies, all of which are too tall to be AMHR, and I have AMHR horses. I probably won’t ever have any ASPC/AMHR horses. I’m not planning to buy any of the double registered ones, and any ponies I buy probably aren’t going to be small enough to register AMHR. When I show AMHR it will be with “straight AMHR” minis and I don’t have a problem taking them out against any ASPC/AMHR horses that may be showing…and there are getting to be more of those showing here all the time….we might win sometimes, and certainly we’re going to lose sometimes…but I’m not going to squawk that it’s unfair that I’m having to show my Minis against Shetlands. The Minis I will show are of a quality that I believe can be competitive against the ponies with some judges.

It matters not to me personally if AMHR gets closed to ASPC ponies; if that were to happen I would lose nothing. I gain nothing by having AMHR stay open to ASPC ponies. As an interested bystander I just don’t believe that discrimination against ASPC is a good thing for AMHR in the long run.


----------



## ruffian (Aug 6, 2010)

stormy said:


> So I will try to explain from my point of view as a "straight" mini breeder. First of all my background includes arabs, dressage and standardbreds. I have also owned and bred shetlands in the past. The Miniature horse breed was moving towards a "arab type" with the pretty head and long neck, flatter croup but also a good shoulder and a way of movement more like I so love in the dressage arena, long, flowing, with elevation but not the extreme action seen in the modern type shetland (which is more extreme even then the Park division in arabs). The roadster horse was indeed a road horse, like a standardbred in many ways, again long stride, ground covering movement.
> 
> This is not about winning in the ring, it is about two registrys that were going in differant directions.
> 
> ...


I so agree!

Someone posted that the miniature horse has changed so much since the 60's, 70', 80's. Yes, and one of the best, if not THE best MINIATURE HORSE is 32 this year. His "type" is STILL winning in the show ring. If that doesn't say that there is a 'TYPE" in the miniature horse world, I don't know what would? One of his grandsons won Grand Champion Sr Stallion at Worlds, AND 4th Place Sr Stallions at Nationals last year. So a true miniature horse can compete at both venues.

I was told at a judge's clinic that there is NEVER too extreme action in a pleasure class. So the Modern/Hackney crosses are going to dominate in the pleasure driving when in reality they should be in Park. I love to watch them. It's like watching a movie lots of speed and action. But I DON'T want my grandkids to be around them. I don't want them in my barn. not because of their "Type" but because of their temperment. OK OK - no flames please! The Moderns I've been around - and I've been around plenty - are not for the novice or inexperienced handler. When it takes 6 people 30 minutes to harness a pony, that's not a miniature horse, no matter what size it is.

So that's why, in my rambling manner, I've hopefully made it clear why I like the miniature horse as it was 5 and 25 years ago. Yep, an Arabian type, with a beautiful temperment.


----------



## horsefeather (Aug 6, 2010)

Yep, I SO agree with Sue_C, Stormy and Ruffian!!!! It wasn't so very long ago that it was HORRIBLE if you actually had shetland in your breeding. I have an AMHR/ASPC mare. She has 1 name on her Shetland papers and another, totally different name on her AMHR papers. That, my friends, was because back then you just didn't want to let anyone know about the 'dreaded' shetland background. But now, if you DON'T have shetland close in background, your horse isn't worth *&$#! I also have minis and straight shetlands (NO moderns) and I am a little tired of some who dare say the shetland has a great temperment, just like the older minis. NOT SO! There are some, yes, but the majority I've seen sure don't have that temperment. Now, granted, I only see those at shows (and I work a lot of shows), but I've only seen a handful that I would let a child around, much less myself! Approx. 14 yrs. ago, I had a great 36" mini (oh, my gosh, no shetland blood, at least if so, was so far back it wasn't on his papers) and he did it ALL. He won halter, in fact, he won in every event except lead line and costume. I didn't have a small child and I can't sew.




And he was a driving dream!!



In today's arena, he wouldn't even be looked at, that is what I find unfortunate. I miss those 'type' of minis.

Oh well, you're right Sue_C......it's :arg!






and, of course, as always, just my opinion.

Pam


----------



## Minimor (Aug 7, 2010)

> It wasn't so very long ago that it was HORRIBLE if you actually had shetland in your breeding.


So, are you suggesting that because it was horrible back then, it should still be horrible now?? That's kind of how it sounds. By the same token then, may I point out that back then it was quite acceptable to use an obvious dwarf for breeding. I guess by that standard it should still be acceptable now to use an obvious dwarf for breeding?

I think many times we see what we want to see. It’s easy to notice the hot, hard-to-manage Moderns at a show, and easy to miss the nice quiet Shetlands that are behaving well and not doing anything to draw attention to themselves. It’s easy to go to a Morgan show & watch the Park class and see some of the horses being bounced off the wall in order to get them to pick up their correct canter lead and then walk away shaking your head over “those crazy Morgans” and not wait around to see the youth classes and their perfectly mannered entries. And truly, many times it IS all in the handling/training. When I was a kid my friends boarded their horses at a place where another lady had a big homely appaloosa barrel horse. Everyone called that horse crazy, because he was a menace for his owner to ride. Being a kid, that didn’t worry me—on more than one occasion I wrapped a twine over his nose & slipped it over his neck like a round rein, climbed on bareback & rode him around the pasture. One day I put a halter & rope on him & rode him up & down the long lane—there was nothing crazy about him, it was all in the way he was handled. Hackneys look and act kind of wired in the show ring, but I’ve always found them to be pleasant, agreeable ponies. I know several that have been used as childrens ponies.

Some Shetlands are every bit as good natured and agreeable as the best tempered Mini. There are also some of the “old” Minis that would knock a child over & keep on going (and be smug with themselves for doing so!) There are ponies and minis that are simply too smart for the people that are trying to handle them, but overall I believe that ponies are smarter than Minis—which is why there are more people that cannot get along with ponies.


----------



## Mominis (Aug 7, 2010)

Sue_C. said:


> DITTO-DITTO-DITTO!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> AND AGAIN...DITTO........
> 
> I-just-don't-GET-IT. Whay IS IT, that the park horse lover doesn't STICK to a park horse breed. I love the look too, really...I DO. but if I want a Hackney, I will buy one. If I WANT a modern Shetland, I will BUY one... Instead...I bought miniature horses, and LOVE the long, low sweeping gait that I have personally looked for, and bred for.


See...now here is a big difference. I bought a miniature horse because I wanted to try something different from the saddle type horses that I grew up with. I came to the breed due to the size factor. I do love a good park horse and I like a good Hackney, but I bought a miniature horse because that's what I wanted...a horse in miniature.

How many new people, and I mean totally new to the breed and first time buyer people, not pony people buying into the mini market, actually come to the AMHR horses for movement? I can only speak for myself. The only minis I had seen before buying one were at horse expos, fairs, and one ancient lesson mare that we used for beginner drivers to learn with before moving up to their big horse. None of them had the motion that I've come to discover the breed has to offer. I'm not trying to be sarcastic at all, but do you think that people know about the movement these horses can have when investing in their first mini? I sure didn't.

It's a very exciting thing to learn about a new breed and I am enjoying every minute of it. But I am still having trouble understanding why it was such a great thing to look like one particular breed but it was a (to quote a post on this thread) HORRIBLE thing to look/move like any other breed than the Arabian-type.



Minimor said:


> Some Shetlands are every bit as good natured and agreeable as the best tempered Mini. There are also some of the “old” Minis that would knock a child over & keep on going (and be smug with themselves for doing so!) There are ponies and minis that are simply too smart for the people that are trying to handle them, but overall I believe that ponies are smarter than Minis—which is why there are more people that cannot get along with ponies.


I'm going to have to say that Shake, who is ASPC/AMHR is one of the kindest horses that you could ever hope to meet. He will do anything for a scratch on the belly or a big gulp of tea. He's done everything I've asked of him in training without hesitation, he is easily one of the smartest horses I've ever had the pleasure of owning, and he is smaaaaaaart!!! I think that so much of the 'good natured' and 'agreeable' traits are in the handling of the horse. Shake could be very hot, unreasonably so if he were to be handled to briskly or not given time to think his way through things. I can see how a Shetland wouldn't be the type of horse to rush throguh training. But even then, I have a problem with blanket statements about a breed based on the behavior of some, including the statement I made in the last sentence. Horses aren't inherently mean, hot, or crazy...some are just more sensitive than others, IMHO. I so agree with the words of the great Mary Twelveponies, "There are no problem horses, only problem riders." (or in this case, handlers)

Thanks for giving me such great answers, I am really enjoying watching your posts, hearing your personal stories, and listening with both ears to your opinions. This is really helping me to see the many different viewpoints on the "Arabian type is good, Shetland type is bad" debate.


----------



## Ellen (Aug 7, 2010)

I can only speak for myself, and all of you giggle if you will, but I come from Arabs. Bask bloodlines to be exact. The stockier hunter/endurance types. And I try to emulate that in my herd simply because that is what I like. Form and Function. I love a long neck, dishy head and flowing movement, but I want a hip. It is all give and take. We must improve the breed always as breeders. But will have times when our attempts to improve falter. Flame me if you want. But look down the lines of any type of light horse. You see form and function go out the window and then you see common sense prevail. And quite farnkly, a good horse will always be a good horse. But minis and shetlands need to be compared to light horse breed, but that is JMO. They are not stock types, although some old school types are stockish. And good for brood stock when paired with the right mate. As I said. JMHO. Most good horses have a place.

And Mominis I 110% agree that shetlands are not hot. but VERY SMART! Just like my Arabs. And maybe at times get the reputation of being hot because they outsmart their human counter parts. Which I must admit has happened to me over the last 30 years more then I care to admit. But with kindness and gentle nature, they have ALWAYS returned it. Even rescues. Or unhandled broodstock.


----------



## kaykay (Aug 7, 2010)

If ASPC/AMHR horses are fad its sure been a long one



They have been around FOREVER. Heck when I started showing 10 or 11 years ago there were tons of ASPC/AMHR horses showing. For something to be a "fad" its usually popular then gone in a couple years.

Maybe you all should take a peek at the Modern Liberty video and see how dangerous that mare is





Sue I dont think anyone is accusing you of sour grapes, but many have pointed out to you over and over that if you dont like ASPC/AMHR thats fine! You dont HAVE to breed them or own them. To each their own.

And actually my jump in sales have been ASPC registered horses. More people are finding out what great ponies they are and that they arent mean and nasty. I love it when people come here and are just amazed by how sweet all of our ponies are. I will never forget Congress last year when an Amish family wanted to see Dale our jr stallion. The whole family with about 4 or 5 kids went in a petted him. When I told them he was a stallion they were just amazed at how sweet and well behaved he is.

Kay


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Aug 7, 2010)

They way I see it each registry is just trying to breed for something different. AMHA leans more towards the arabian look in halter, but when it comes to driving just about anyone has a chance. When it comes to AMHR its more leaning towards the shetland look in both halter and driving. They have more of an edge. Perhaps I just need to accept that. Those that are in betweeners just don't have that competitor edge over the shetlands. Yes miniature horse breeders do try and breed better and better and its going postiviley but those shetlands just take it up a notch. I think thats the frusterating part. I'm thinking this is what AMHR's route is going to take and the AMHR/ASPC horses are just going to get more popular.

As far as who is hotter I don't care what anybody says shetlands are IMO naturally hotter animals. BUT, before anybody chews my head off, with the right training you can bring that hottness in. Make them enjoyable animals to be around. I had a shetland as a yearling that was competely hard to handle. I had to take him to a trainer to even get him to lead, he was terrible, and was a lil better with training. As a 2 year old I worked with him and lets just say he competely turned around and he was enjoyable to work with. Again the right training does help. However there are miniatures out there thats the same way but there are more IMO that are just more friendly natured.


----------



## ruffian (Aug 7, 2010)

JMS Miniatures said:


> They way I see it each registry is just trying to breed for something different. AMHA leans more towards the arabian look in halter, but when it comes to driving just about anyone has a chance. When it comes to AMHR its more leaning towards the shetland look in both halter and driving. They have more of an edge. Perhaps I just need to accept that. Those that are in betweeners just don't have that competitor edge over the shetlands. Yes miniature horse breeders do try and breed better and better and its going postiviley but those shetlands just take it up a notch. I think thats the frusterating part. I'm thinking this is what AMHR's route is going to take and the AMHR/ASPC horses are just going to get more popular.
> 
> As far as who is hotter I don't care what anybody says shetlands are IMO naturally hotter animals. BUT, before anybody chews my head off, with the right training you can bring that hottness in. Make them enjoyable animals to be around. I had a shetland as a yearling that was competely hard to handle. I had to take him to a trainer to even get him to lead, he was terrible, and was a lil better with training. As a 2 year old I worked with him and lets just say he competely turned around and he was enjoyable to work with. Again the right training does help. However there are miniatures out there thats the same way but there are more IMO that are just more friendly natured.


I agree with you totally! It took me a while to figure out what else I wanted to say. Ok Ok - I'm old! I'm entitled to a little density at times





IMOO the Arabian style miniature horse is what I want to breed and what I want to have around my grandkids. I like their 'type", I like their disposition, and I like their style and movement. I love to watch the ASPC ponies perform, but I don't want them against my miniature horse type. NOT MY MINIATURE HORSE SIZE - my miniature horse type. Fine boned, slightly dished, short face, good, but not excessive action. Good tailset, but not broken. Comes up nicely in front, but not straight up. Sure a neck that goes on forever, but maybe not possible with this breed. Quiet temperment. Willing attitude. Maybe not the smartest animal on the planet, but not cunning either. This is what I want. This is what I breed for.

This is no different than a Quarter Horse person expressing their wants in their breed. They want a pretty head, but certainly not an Arabian one. Arabian owners want fire and dash and a pretty arched neck. Appaloosa owners would cringe! Morgans have been changed so much from the original that they can be, and HAVE BEEN duped by Saddlebred owners.

So what's wrong with wanting to keep the Miniature Horse BREED as it is? Yes there were Shetlands and dwarfs used to create the breed. Does that mean we have to transformt he Miniature Horse breed into Miniature Modern Shetlands because we can?? Arabians were used to create the modern Thoroughbred. Should we allow Arabian stallions to sire foals and register them as Thoroughbreds? Can a Saddlebred mare be illegally registered as a Morgan? Sure can, but it was found out and caused all kinds of havoc in the Morgan breed.

Flame away - I like my miniature horses and will continue to have and enjoy them. I will continue to enjoy watching the Shetlands too.


----------



## Mominis (Aug 8, 2010)

ruffian said:


> I agree with you totally! It took me a while to figure out what else I wanted to say. Ok Ok - I'm old! I'm entitled to a little density at times
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Mominis (Aug 8, 2010)

ruffian said:


> I agree with you totally! It took me a while to figure out what else I wanted to say. Ok Ok - I'm old! I'm entitled to a little density at times
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I am really tring to understand where you are coming from here. What is it that you mean by the line, "*I love to watch the ASPC ponies perform, but I don't want them against my miniature horse type. NOT MY MINIATURE HORSE SIZE - my miniature horse type.*"

I'd also like a little clarification on the line, "*So what's wrong with wanting to keep the Miniature Horse BREED as it is? Yes there were Shetlands and dwarfs used to create the breed.*"

Just trying to figure out what exactly you mean, thanks.


----------



## Minimor (Aug 8, 2010)

> Fine boned, slightly dished, short face, good, but not excessive action. Good tailset, but not broken. Comes up nicely in front, but not straight up. Sure a neck that goes on forever,


 You have pretty much described a Classic Shetland, so I don’t know how you can protest against showing against the Classic Shetlands that fit into your size division…sounds like they would fit very well into your type division too.


----------



## Jacki Loomis (Aug 8, 2010)

Some have commented that the resistance to Shetlands and Shetland type stems only from the fact that they are "WINNING". I think this view does not fully take in the feelings of miniature horse breeders and exhibitors.

Speaking only for myself and as one who shows AMHR with horses/ponies papered AMHR & ASPC I don't believe the resistance to shetlands being brought into AMHR or crossed in is solely due to the fact that they are currently doing some winning in the show ring. I believe some resistance comes from miniture horse breeders who are very happy with their horses size, type and temperment. They are happy with what they have, that is what brought them into miniature horses and they don't want that to change.

I hope that we, as an association, can move forward in a way that is respectful of the type of miniature horse that first drew many of us to showing and breeding these wonderful little horses.

Jacki Loomis

[email protected]


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Aug 9, 2010)

Jacki Loomis said:


> Some have commented that the resistance to Shetlands and Shetland type stems only from the fact that they are "WINNING". I think this view does not fully take in the feelings of miniature horse breeders and exhibitors.
> 
> Speaking only for myself and as one who shows AMHR with horses/ponies papered AMHR & ASPC I don't believe the resistance to shetlands being brought into AMHR or crossed in is solely due to the fact that they are currently doing some winning in the show ring. I believe some resistance comes from miniture horse breeders who are very happy with their horses size, type and temperment. They are happy with what they have, that is what brought them into miniature horses and they don't want that to change.
> 
> ...


Well I had a big long post but it got deleted but anyways I agree with you. Its not about just showing its also the breeding. How many farms that have sold all of their minis just to get AMHR/ASPC stock? We miniature horse breeders can continue breeding or showing like nothing happened but if no one wants your horses then why should we. I don't care if you have a good horse if you don't have a certain papers or certain bloodlines they won't buy from you.

Going back to showing I have friends that don't want to show anymore. Because its not fun anymore and trying to compete against these shetlands is not fun. Its sad but if they stop showing I may go with them.

Thats why I asked my post a couple of weeks ago what is AMHR's direction? Are they wanting to be AMHR/ASPC fine, but these miniatures just don't have a fair fight if we don't do something.

I had something totally better then this I just competely don't remeber what I wrote the first time lol sorry.


----------



## ruffian (Aug 9, 2010)

Jacki Loomis said:


> Some have commented that the resistance to Shetlands and Shetland type stems only from the fact that they are "WINNING". I think this view does not fully take in the feelings of miniature horse breeders and exhibitors.
> 
> Speaking only for myself and as one who shows AMHR with horses/ponies papered AMHR & ASPC I don't believe the resistance to shetlands being brought into AMHR or crossed in is solely due to the fact that they are currently doing some winning in the show ring. I believe some resistance comes from miniture horse breeders who are very happy with their horses size, type and temperment. They are happy with what they have, that is what brought them into miniature horses and they don't want that to change.
> 
> ...


Well said Jacki! This is exactly what I am trying to say also. It's like this:

I make Chex party mix. It's my favorite food and when I make it, it's all I eat until it's gone. I use Cereal, pretzels, and peanuts in my recipe.

My sister also loves Chex party mix. She uses mixed nuts with peanuts and doesn't like pretzels in hers.

Mom, who started all this, loves pretzels and no peanut mixed nuts.

So which is right?? Who's in the best? Obviously mine!!





No, the point is they are all good to those who like them!! Does that mean I have to change my recipe to match Sis or Mom? Nope, and not going to. Does that mean I'm being disrespectful? No, just have my own preference. How would I feel if someone came along and told me that my recipe wasn't any good any more and I had to change. Right ticked off! Would I react? - very strongly!!

Mominis questioned: "So what's wrong with wanting to keep the Miniature Horse BREED as it is? Yes there were Shetlands and dwarfs used to create the breed"

The original intent of the miniature horse creators were to develop the smallest horse possible. Some of those were dwarfs, or had dwarf characteristics. Thankfully, most reputable breeders don't use dwarfs or those with the characteristics. Many of the original "mini" horses were unregistered tiny ponies. Some were Shetlands whose breeders dropped their ASPC papers. But that was 30+ years ago. We now have a beautiful little horse that, like any other breed, has good horses and bad ones, but when you go to a show you see numerous horses that have a similar type - refined conformation and temperament. That's the miniature horse BREED I am talking about.

She also questioned: ""I love to watch the ASPC ponies perform, but I don't want them against my miniature horse type. NOT MY MINIATURE HORSE SIZE - my miniature horse type."

I guess I should have specified the Modern ASPC pony. They have the extreme action, extreme upright neck and a more thoroughbred type head. If they come in a 34 or 36" size, that's great, but why compete against a miniature type horse? Why not compete as a Shetland pony and be happy with that? It's like taking a quarter horse to an Arabian show and expecting everybody to accept the fact that a quarter horse judge was hired, he likes quarters better than Arabs, and places the QH first. Does that make it right? When the Arab owners get angry does it mean they are damaging the breed or should they just accept it? Maybe put their "Big Girl" panties on??

The Shetland Pony has a long history of quality and performance. Why not show them as the wonderful and talented breed that they are?? They have a huge cheering section and deserve it. Let those

who love and breed them take them to their shows and support their industry.

So I'm keeping my miniatures. I'm respecting the fact that the Shetland is part of the background. I'm enjoying watching the Modern ponies show. I think the Classic Shetland is a beautiful animal. My miniatures are competitive in the show ring, and can be around my grandchildren. Life is good. I apologize to anyone I've offended in this thread, it was not my intention. Just expressing my good ol' American right of free speech.


----------



## Crabtree Farm (Aug 9, 2010)

Can I ask a question?

Say I have a shetland that is 38 inches or less. And in my area, there are no shetland shows. Only AMHR and AMHA shows that are held in all the states around me and not even in my own state. And to show shetland I would have to travel at least three states away to show.

Now I would make the decision to show and only want to travel one state away instead of three. I show up at a AMHR show with this animal. So is someone going to tell me I need to travel to another show further away to show because I have a dual registered shetland and they don't want to show against this animal because it is a shetland.

How fair is this scenario?


----------



## Crabtree Farm (Aug 9, 2010)

ruffian said:


> Well said Jacki! This is exactly what I am trying to say also. It's like this:
> 
> I make Chex party mix. It's my favorite food and when I make it, it's all I eat until it's gone. I use Cereal, pretzels, and peanuts in my recipe.
> 
> ...


Ruffian, how come you can express your American right of free speech, yet for several other people that attempt that on this forum, they are not given the right.


----------



## Jacki Loomis (Aug 9, 2010)

Crabtree Farm said:


> Can I ask a question?
> 
> Say I have a shetland that is 38 inches or less. And in my area, there are no shetland shows. Only AMHR and AMHA shows that are held in all the states around me and not even in my own state. And to show shetland I would have to travel at least three states away to show.
> 
> ...



Hi Tina,

If your 38 inches or less Shetland Pony also has AMHR and/or AMHA registration papers it would always be welcome to show at a Miniature Horse show. It is too bad for folks who have limited shows in their area, we are so lucky here in Area VI as we have plenty of show options. We can go to AMHR & ASPC shows, AMHR only shows and AMHA only shows.

Jacki Loomis

[email protected]


----------



## Sandee (Aug 9, 2010)

ruffian said:


> ..........
> 
> .....................
> 
> ...


Why not compete as a Shetland???? Well, these "odd" guy out mini-Shetlands don't seem to fit anywhere. If you show them as Shetlands, they are criticized for being too small for a Modern or too high headed for a Classic etc. If you show them as Minis, because as a height based registry - they are minis, then everyone crys foul, "they're not a 'real' mini"!

I have nice minis that compete very well but I bought one these double registered guys because I love to drive and I love their action. I happen to like AMHR shows. And yes I've been to Shetland and still prefer the AMHR show.

SO I want to know just where everyone would like these (god forbid but somehow allowed them to be bred) Small Moderns or Classics to fit?


----------



## Crabtree Farm (Aug 9, 2010)

Jacki Loomis said:


> Hi Tina,
> 
> If your 38 inches or less Shetland Pony also has AMHR and/or AMHA registration papers it would always be welcome to show at a Miniature Horse show. It is too bad for folks who have limited shows in their area, we are so lucky here in Area VI as we have plenty of show options. We can go to AMHR & ASPC shows, AMHR only shows and AMHA only shows.
> 
> ...


Thank you Jacki.

But what if I was to say I wanted to take my horse with AMHA/ASPC papers to mini nationals. Would I be welcomed there?

And let's go as far as saying I wanted to show my AMHR/ASPC in driving? Would I still be welcomed? From the many threads on this topic, I don't think I would be welcomed. I guess as long as I don't beat anyone I would be welcomed.


----------



## Sandee (Aug 9, 2010)

Crabtree Farm said:


> Thank you Jacki.
> 
> But what if I was to say I wanted to take my horse with AMHA/ASPC papers to mini nationals. Would I be welcomed there?
> 
> And let's go as far as saying I wanted to show my AMHR/ASPC in driving? Would I still be welcomed? From the many threads on this topic, I don't think I would be welcomed. I guess as long as I don't beat anyone I would be welcomed.


AHhhhh......now you've got the picture! And I'm sorry but I believe you're right!


----------



## stormy (Aug 9, 2010)

Sandee said:


> Why not compete as a Shetland???? Well, these "odd" guy out mini-Shetlands don't seem to fit anywhere. If you show them as Shetlands, they are criticized for being too small for a Modern or too high headed for a Classic etc. If you show them as Minis, because as a height based registry - they are minis, then everyone crys foul, "they're not a 'real' mini"!
> 
> I have nice minis that compete very well but I bought one these double registered guys because I love to drive and I love their action. I happen to like AMHR shows. And yes I've been to Shetland and still prefer the AMHR show.
> 
> SO I want to know just where everyone would like these (god forbid but somehow allowed them to be bred) Small Moderns or Classics to fit?


My question has always been if small shetlands can not compete why not add height divisions to the shetland registry/shows instead of trying to make AMHR into the miniature shetland registry. In shetland shows you would be showing by type also, not all lumped together like is being done right now in AMHR.

Show shetlands as Shetlands and expand the shetland registry to accomadate the new smaller ponys, promote shetlands as a breed!


----------



## Jacki Loomis (Aug 9, 2010)

Crabtree Farm said:


> Thank you Jacki.
> 
> But what if I was to say I wanted to take my horse with AMHA/ASPC papers to mini nationals. Would I be welcomed there?
> 
> And let's go as far as saying I wanted to show my AMHR/ASPC in driving? Would I still be welcomed? From the many threads on this topic, I don't think I would be welcomed. I guess as long as I don't beat anyone I would be welcomed.


Tina,

I show and our club puts on AMHR and AMHA shows and so I can say from first hand experience that when you enter a show all you submit are the set of papers for the division you are entering, no one even knows if a particular horse/pony has another set because they never see them. If you are entering your under 38" Shetland and it also has AMHR registration papers then of course it is welcome at AMHR Miniature Nationals!

My horses that also have ASPC papers show at AMHR shows all the time, the Shetland papers stay home in the book since I don't show shetland they just never come out to the shows.

I don't see or hear much about this issue at our shows in Area VI but I think finding sone consensus is one of the challenges facing our organization in the coming years. My hope is that better minds than mine are thinking of solutions and sharing them with their directors.Jacki Loomis

[email protected]


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Aug 9, 2010)

What a boost it would be to ASPC and the numbers they have at local shows if those smaller Shetlands actually showed ASPC...


----------



## Crabtree Farm (Aug 9, 2010)

Sandee said:


> AHhhhh......now you've got the picture! And I'm sorry but I believe you're right!


Sandy, nobody has come out and stated for me not to show this horse I described. Jacki has come out and welcomed me. But what if "I" had the extreme shetland that people don't believe should be shown as a mini, against mini types?

And I wonder it is not just because a certain horse won due to the type or conformation, or could it be because certain people own them and certain people handle them? Then the prejudice is not against the equine, but the owner/handler/trainer perhaps.


----------



## Jacki Loomis (Aug 9, 2010)

~Lisa~ said:


> What a boost it would be to ASPC and the numbers they have at local shows if those smaller Shetlands actually showed ASPC...



You are right, what keeps us out of the Shetland show arena is the small amount of competition. The last 2 times we were getting Shetlands ready for a show they would have been without competition so we just showed one of them AMHR and left the other one at home (only ASPC Papers). From our point of view it is just too much work to get any horse or pony ready to show to go through it and not have any competition.

It is the same thing with AMHR Park Harness, my viceroy has not been out in 4 years. My National Grand Champion Park Harness horse shows pleasure and roadster because I don't want to go through all the work of hauling the viceroy to find that I'm the only one in the class.

Jacki Loomis

[email protected]


----------



## Crabtree Farm (Aug 9, 2010)

~Lisa~ said:


> What a boost it would be to ASPC and the numbers they have at local shows if those smaller Shetlands actually showed ASPC...


Lisa, there are not as many shetland shows to go to as there are AMHR or AMHA. And people are going to take those horses first to be able to qualify for the corresponding Nationals or World.

Granted as Jacki said it is not a problem in his area, but not are so lucky. I have to wait until our Area show each year to show. When there are AMHR shows at least one to twice a month in my area.


----------



## Jacki Loomis (Aug 9, 2010)

~Lisa~ said:


> What a boost it would be to ASPC and the numbers they have at local shows if those smaller Shetlands actually showed ASPC...



This verges on being off topic for the miniature forum but I'll throw this comment out in response and if it needs shut down then I'll accept my fate willingly!!

Along the same lines as you mention I've always thought it would be a big boost to the Shetland entries at the local ASPC/AMHR shows if Shetlands had to meet the qualifying standards to attend their Congress like Miniatures have to to attend Miniature Nationals. I think that would really help the entries and also make it feel more equitable. What do you think?

Jacki Loomis

[email protected]


----------



## Crabtree Farm (Aug 9, 2010)

Jacki Loomis said:


> You are right, what keeps us out of the Shetland show arena is the small amount of competition. The last 2 times we were getting Shetlands ready for a show they would have been without competition so we just showed one of them AMHR and left the other one at home (only ASPC Papers). From our point of view it is just too much work to get any horse or pony ready to show to go through it and not have any competition.
> 
> It is the same thing with AMHR Park Harness, my viceroy has not been out in 4 years. My National Grand Champion Park Harness horse shows pleasure and roadster because I don't want to go through all the work of hauling the viceroy to find that I'm the only one in the class.
> 
> ...


Jacki,

I had the same problem this year. Traveled all the way to the area show and there were no other MP's. Luckily I showed gelding incentive to help offset cost involved in showing. Didn't even show regular class since the Grand Champ would not count towards HOF. He would have been only one.


----------



## Charlotte (Aug 9, 2010)

> Recently, there was a big to-do about how minis were becoming little moderns and what a problem that is. I just was looking at the recent AMHA World link and I've been reading my Journals as well. Here's my question...so many people make a big thing about how their horses look like mini Arabians. The tack is Arabian show horse-like, the presentation is Arabian-ish and the horses seem to be bred that way. Why is it preferred that a mini look like an Arabian, but it is a no-no if they look "mini moderns" (which, to my uneducated eye, look like little Saddlebreds). Why isn't it okay to breed for a different type, like the Saddlebred or modern Morgan look and have it not be as accepted or encouraged as breeding for an Arabian type?


Coming into this topic kind of late, I'd like to try to answer Mominis with my opinion so I'll go back to what I see in the show ring today. (We probably mostly agree that what we see in the show ring sets the breeding standard for our breed)

I'm just fresh from the AMHA Central Championship Show in Wichita KS. What I see in AMHA is a distinctive 'type' developing. I know many people like to say their miniatures are 'Arabian type', but in truth I see only limited resemblence to an arabian horse. Instead what I see is a very well balanced horse that is correct in body structure with that body structure (conformation) allowing for an atheletic individual. (and by atheletic I am not meaning the one with the highest knee/hock action at the trot) Fortunately, within our breed, we have a wide variety of performance venues in which to exhibit the atheletic prowess of our horses. I saw a number of halter horses with nice atheletic movement and I saw performance horses that can also stand in the halter ring.

Now as to why the miniature halter horses tend to use Arabian styled show halters....I do think those types of show halters are better suited to the very small heads of our miniatures. Yes, a western type show halter is used in some classes, but no matter how finly made, that type halter does cover up quite a bit of a 30" mini's head.

I, for one, am just very proud of the direction we are going with our little horses. They are beautiful to look at, they are little atheletes, and they have wonderful minds and temperaments that allow us to enjoy our association with them whether we are showing or just loving on them.

There may come a time when the membership decides to change the Standard Of Perfection and the breed heads off in another direction, but right now the AMHA Standard Of Perfection doesn't have different sections in it for different 'types' of horses. I don't know if that would be a good thing or a bad thing.

Charlotte


----------



## Sandee (Aug 9, 2010)

Jacki Loomis said:


> This verges on being off topic for the miniature forum but I'll throw this comment out in response and if it needs shut down then I'll accept my fate willingly!!
> 
> Along the same lines as you mention I've always thought it would be a big boost to the Shetland entries at the local ASPC/AMHR shows if Shetlands had to meet the qualifying standards to attend their Congress like Miniatures have to to attend Miniature Nationals. I think that would really help the entries and also make it feel more equitable. What do you think?
> 
> ...


If Shetlands had to qualify then, IMHO, there would be even less at Congress. I just came from Congress and while the halter classes were well represented, the driving classes had between 0 and 5 in the class. To me that wasn't a "National" competetion but then I've only been to 3 or 4 Shetland shows and the only one with a fair amount (compared to an AMHR show)of Shetlands attending was Ohio St Fair. I don't know if there aren't as many Shetlands as there are Minis or if Shetland people don't want to compete or what the difference is.


----------



## allaboutminis (Aug 9, 2010)

Crabtree Farm said:


> Can I ask a question?
> 
> Say I have a shetland that is 38 inches or less. And in my area, there are no shetland shows. Only AMHR and AMHA shows that are held in all the states around me and not even in my own state. And to show shetland I would have to travel at least three states away to show.
> 
> ...



If you have a 38 inch horse then why are you not showing it????

No you can not take it to a show and show in both.....

And in area 3 there is a lot shows that you can go to.

If you have to travel that is part of showing horses right. I dont think someone will tell you to leave a show.

You have NC that has sheltlands classes and you have Tn and Fl too. so what is the big deal if you have to travel.. we all do it sometimes.

Tina you was at the NC show... YOu should of showed the horse then. why not...

I have to travel from Fl to that show to show you can do the same


----------



## Jacki Loomis (Aug 9, 2010)

Sandee said:


> If Shetlands had to qualify then, IMHO, there would be even less at Congress. I just came from Congress and while the halter classes were well represented, the driving classes had between 0 and 5 in the class. To me that wasn't a "National" competetion but then I've only been to 3 or 4 Shetland shows and the only one with a fair amount (compared to an AMHR show)of Shetlands attending was Ohio St Fair. I don't know if there aren't as many Shetlands as there are Minis or if Shetland people don't want to compete or what the difference is.



Interesting, so if Miniatures did not have to qualify I wonder if AMHR National and AMHA World shows would get even bigger?

Jacki Loomis

[email protected]


----------



## Mominis (Aug 9, 2010)

Ruffian, if you were referring to me, I was certainly not offended by your reply. I asked because I wanted to know.






As an uneducated observer, and having never seen the AMHR Nationals (until this September....can hardly wait!!), it's really hard to have an opinion either way on what many of you have said. I have only been to one show since getting the mini (and now mini*S*...lol) and that was an AMHR/ASPC show back in June.

With that said, I wonder why there is such an internal stuggle with the mini/pony thing. I mean, we are governed by the same association as each other. Frankly, I think it's silly not to be able to show in both ASPC and AMHR classes at the same show, if the horse is eligible. I also don't see why they don't combine the Nationals, both the Ponies and the Minis and save the registry itself a TON of money from having to put on two separate shows. I'm sure I'll need my Kevlar suit for saying that, but having watched the Congress online, it didn't seem to me that there were so many entries that it would be time prohibitive, but as I said, I haven't seen AMHR Nationals yet. Again, as the unedcuated observer, I would think that there would be more of an issue about the AMHA/AMHR horses cross showing into the ASPC/AMHR registry shows than horses of the same governing registry.

I really wasn't trying to start up the mini v pony debate again. All I was trying to get to was why it is okay to promote a horse if they are of a certain (Arabian) type and not if they are more of another (ASB or Modern Shetland) type.

Wow, this is so confusing for a newcomer. Please bear with me as I am trying to figure all of this out.

PS Jacki, if your viceroy needs a new home, drop me a PM LOL!


----------



## Crabtree Farm (Aug 9, 2010)

allaboutminis said:


> If you have a 38 inch horse then why are you not showing it????
> 
> No you can not take it to a show and show in both.....
> 
> ...


Yes I do have a 37 inch horse that is not showing right now and that is due to certain reasons. And of this horse I was told to not show it in my area and definitely not to beat anyone.

Yes, I was at the NC show and did you know that I was not welcomed. In fact I was escorted off the showgrounds, in fact I was escorted to my vehicle by the judge and told to leave so they could start the show.

And was told it was in the best interest of the show as a spectator. And no I did not break any rules that are set forth by AMHR as to why an exhibitor can be removed, but again I was a spectator. So wonder why I don't attend certain shows, because I would be asked to leave.


----------



## Jacki Loomis (Aug 9, 2010)

Mominis, You are going to LOVE AMHR Nationals!! You will likely be amazed at just how big it is, how many wonderful horses there are, and how long of a show day it is. We all have horror stories about showing very late into the night, waking up kids to show, etc. I do think it has been much better scheduled since it expanded and we moved to Tulsa but get ready for a long, wonderful week!

My husband got out of ponies back in the 70s and sold his original viceroy, he still regrets it so I expect I'll hang on to my mini size one and someday I'll bring another Park Harness horse out just for fun.

Jacki Loomis

[email protected]


----------



## Minimor (Aug 9, 2010)

Maybe instead of saying the problem is the winning done by the ASPC/AMHR horses-- I should have said the problem is fear, as “fear” can cover both showing and breeding/selling. Exhibitors fear that their straight AMHR horses cannot compete against the Shetlands. Breeders of straight AMHR horses fear that no one will buy their horses because buyers prefer the ASPC/AMHR horses. (Why? Because those buyers apparently might presume that they will do better in the showring if they have ASPC/AMHR and/or their future clients will prefer to purchase ASPC/AMHR horses.

If show people didn’t fear that their AMHR horses will get beat by the Shetlands, and if breeders didn’t fear that they will lose their market to the Shetlands—then none of these people would have a problem with Shetlands being in the registry. If Shetlands were short legged, stumble footed, stumpy, dumpy and just plain UGLY with mean personalities, no one would care if there were some poor souls out there trying to show the wretched creatures, nor would anyone care of there were some breeders that were misguided enough to be breeding those same wretched creatures!! Just because someone else was breeding such a creature wouldn’t mean that they would have to give up their straight AMHR horses and turn to breeding those same creatures themselves! In fact, I’ll bet they would feel very smug because their straight AMHR horses were so far superior to those Shetlands. The attitude would be “yeah, some people are breeding and showing them but we always beat them so they are of no consequence…as long as they are of no consequence, let them pay their money to support us and our superiority”

I have heard that sentiment expressed in too many groups too many times to not know how it goes.



> Interesting, so if Miniatures did not have to qualify I wonder if AMHR National and AMHA World shows would get even bigger?


I can’t say for sure about that, but I’ll bet that if qualifying wasn’t required for Nationals the local shows would get smaller. Some people haul 9+ hours to a show because they have to in order to qualify. If they could they would likely just not bother with that drive, and just go to Nationals to show. Some people that have local shows would likely not bring as many horses to those shows if they didn’t need to in order to get all their horses qualified.



> I mean, we are governed by the same association as each other.


 And that, I think, is a big part of the problem. The straight Mini people feel that because the Minis have the largest numbers in the registry, and bring in the most money, that the Mini people should be able to control the registry. They feel they are supporting the Shetlands, and they don’t want to do that.
In actual fact, the club is the American Shetland Pony Club. AMHR is a part of that, but is not THE club. Read the very first page of the Rule book—Section 1, Article 1—the name of the Corporation shall be THE AMERICAN SHETLAND PONY CLUB. What it amounts to is this Shetland Pony Club is including Miniatures under its umbrella, but it is first and foremost the Shetland Pony Club. No matter how much money AMHR horses bring in, owners are paying for the Shetland Pony Club to keep registration records on their Miniature Horses, but that money doesn’t automatically give AMHR owners control of ASPC.

I was talking with someone several days ago and she had an interesting analogy—and I hope she won’t mind that I repeat it here. If someone goes and spends $1.5 million (or whatever huge amount) at Wal-Mart to buy a bunch of merchandise, that doesn’t give that person part ownership of Wal-Mart—no, that person is simply a customer who spends money in that store. That’s kind of how it is with ASPC—ASPC is the big store, and Miniature Horse owners are the customer that buys things (or rather services) from it. (I hope I worded that all right…nothing worse than taking someone else’s words & getting them all messed up!!!) I’m sure this post isn’t going to win me any Mini friends but that’s okay!

As for the suggestion that ASPC/AMHR horses should be shown ASPC—that’s not so easy for a lot of people. Depending on area, some people don’t even have any ASPC sanctioned shows unless they do drive for hours. If they’ve got AMHR shows right close, and their horses are ASPC/AMHR registered, why on earth shouldn’t they show those horses AMHR? In some cases those ASPC/AMHR have as many generations of AMHR ancestors as do the straight AMHR horses—just because the double registered ones come from stock that retained their ASPC papers, how are they any less AMHR than those horses that might be just as much Shetland, except their ancestors happened to belong to someone who didn’t bother paying to keep up with the ASPC papers???


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Aug 9, 2010)

Crabtree Farm said:


> Yes I do have a 37 inch horse that is not showing right now and that is due to certain reasons. And of this horse I was told to not show it in my area and definitely not to beat anyone.
> 
> Yes, I was at the NC show and did you know that I was not welcomed. In fact I was escorted off the showgrounds, in fact I was escorted to my vehicle by the judge and told to leave so they could start the show.
> 
> And was told it was in the best interest of the show as a spectator. And no I did not break any rules that are set forth by AMHR as to why an exhibitor can be removed, but again I was a spectator. So wonder why I don't attend certain shows, because I would be asked to leave.


Of course I was not there..but one would have to assume as with anything there is 3 sides to every story....

as far as not being enough ASPC shows well it is the chicken and the egg. Many small clubs do not want to put in all those extra classes for a couple of ponies..I would think in a lot of areas if more of those ponies showing minis started showing as ponies and the numbers went up for the ASPC portion of a show it would be easier for show managers to justify fighting to have those classes

I have never seen mini people wanting to control the registry LOL what I do see is a huge fear from a few pony people that somehow this is the agenda however I can honestly say I really see NO TRUTH IN THAT AT ALL


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 9, 2010)

> Ruffian, how come you can express your American right of free speech, yet for several other people that attempt that on this forum, they are not given the right.


Just because some people don't agree with your opinion, doesn't mean you are not given the right to express it...not one person has said that.



> Why not compete as a Shetland???? Well, these "odd" guy out mini-Shetlands don't seem to fit anywhere. If you show them as Shetlands, they are criticized for being too small for a Modern or too high headed for a Classic etc. If you show them as Minis, because as a height based registry - they are minis, then everyone crys foul, "they're not a 'real' mini"!


So, because their REAL REGISTRY doesn't want them, you simply "turn them into something else", and expect THAT registry to accept them? How fair is THAT, I ask??? Why not go to the SHETLAND REGISTRY which has several divisions already...and very simply ask for another?



> I have nice minis that compete very well but I bought one these double registered guys because I love to drive and I love their action. I happen to like AMHR shows. And yes I've been to Shetland and still prefer the AMHR show.SO I want to know just where everyone would like these (god forbid but somehow allowed them to be bred) Small Moderns or Classics to fit?


In a division made for them within their *(and this is where my computer died...so now I will finish my post)* OWN REGISTRY... good Grief, why on earth should the miniatures change their ways because the pony folks cannot get on with each other??








That said...I have said a dozen times before. I do not think it a big deal for the moderns to come to the AMHR if fitting the standard, but we NEED to have them *in-their-own-division*.


----------



## Minimor (Aug 9, 2010)

Another division in a registry that already has 4, 5 if you count ASPR.

Why shouldn't they show AMHR when they are AMHR registered? Just because "you" don't want them there? They don't need another ASPC division when they already have AMHR papers, maybe even an AMHR pedigree in many cases. And Lisa says the Mini people don't want to control the registry...this is a perfect example! Don't like ponies being AMHR registered, so let's get rid of them. Rule them right out...

And actually I haven't heard anyone specifically say that "we the Mini people want control of the registry" but I do have to say that from things I have heard from various people I would very much fear for the ponies and the ASPC side of things if by chance the "Mini people" did get to have control of the registry. I think the rules as they stand now are the best ones for the registry. As someone who has both Shetlands and Minis--and keeps them each seperate from each other, LOL--I think that the organizatin runs much more smoothly now, it is more balanced I suppose I'd say, than it would if the BOD seats were all opened up and Mini people were to make up a majority of the seats.

I have never, ever heard the pony people saying that they want to take anything away from the Minis. On the other hand, Mini people quite obviously have a dislike for anything pony in anything that is AMHR & I suspect that they would prefer to see $$$ cut from the pony side of the budget (Congress, etc) as well.


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Aug 9, 2010)

Minimor said:


> I have never, ever heard the pony people saying that they want to take anything away from the Minis. On the other hand, Mini people quite obviously have a dislike for anything pony in anything that is AMHR & I suspect that they would prefer to see $$$ cut from the pony side of the budget (Congress, etc) as well.


Holly you know I really respect and like you..

That said I am not sure where this is even coming from-

Why now would anyone think or say mini people are wanting to cut money from Congress when year after year after year... Congress has lost money and in some years lost more money in a year then ASPC registrations has brought in .. no one is taking away or trying to take away anything from ASPC seems to me many mini people are just trying to preserve what they consider to be their breed nothing different then the Shetland people do- that doesnt make either side sinister- evil or thoughts of taking over the world (or in this case registry) I am not sure why when mini people speak out about preserving what they worked hard for what they funded a registry they put huge amounts of dollars into they are looked at as mean people, poor sports, un educated and barn blind- They are doing nothing different then what is happening and has happened on the ASPC side

None of this will ever be ironed out on a forum. Everyone has their minds made up and there is no changing it this thread could go on for 200 pages no minds will be changed in fact I think it is just seeming to make everyone more firm and closed in their beliefs.

Bottom line is rule proposals can be sent in by anyone- majority rules at Convention everyone has a chance to partipate in the process. It might not always turn out like we want but we all have the choice to be part of it or not..


----------



## MountainMeadows (Aug 9, 2010)

Well folks, I guess I am just as dumb as a box of rocks, because I am pretty happy with the way things are right now - AMHA has their "thing" and their rules, AMHR has their "thing" and their rules, and ASPC/ASPR has their "thing" -- for ME - this is like a kid in a candy store -- I am a BREEDER -- I want to breed the very best that I can, I want the beautiful head, long slender neck with a flexy throatlatch, I want the short back, I want the long hip, I want the trim barrel, I want the fine bone, I want the straight legs, and I want that motion that gives ME goosebumps when I see it ---- As a BREEDER the time has never been better - look at all the BLENDING I have available to me -- the only thing that I am trying to restrict is height - for ME, the height needs to be around 36" or smaller (if it meets MY criteria) - mainly because I don't want to completely redo my barn and fences (guess I am just lazy LOL). I love what is happening in our breed - and the showring is where I put MY breeding program up against all the others in the country -- if I need tweeking - you can be sure that it will come out in my placings - will I always agree with the "tweeking" that is needed, maybe not because after all this is MY program - not anyone else's and if I don't breed for what I like then why breed at all. Again, I am really excited about the future, whether it be AMHA, AMHR, ASPC/ASPR - all are beautiful animals in their own right - and let those breed what they want to breed, and let them compete - if your ONLY goal is to win, then I fear that you will never truly be happy - there is really sooooo much more.


----------



## Crabtree Farm (Aug 9, 2010)

allaboutminis said:


> If you have a 38 inch horse then why are you not showing it????
> 
> No you can not take it to a show and show in both.....
> 
> ...


My reason for not showing that particular horse will be publicly addressed soon enough. And if I am not allowed to post anything, my website will cover everything.

Until then I can not discuss the matter in any other detail.

And my other shetlands are modern pleasure, ASPR and NSPR which were not offerred.


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 9, 2010)

> And Lisa says the Mini people don't want to control the registry...this is a perfect example! Don't like ponies being AMHR registered, so let's get rid of them. Rule them right out...
> And actually I haven't heard anyone specifically say that "we the Mini people want control of the registry" but I do have to say that from things I have heard from various people I would very much fear for the ponies and the ASPC side of things if by chance the "Mini people" did get to have control of the registry.


Maybe they should be glad the miniatures haven't tried to separate and make their own way...now THERE'S a thought...


----------



## Minimor (Aug 10, 2010)

Lisa, that very thing was mentioned last year when that premature financial report was posted for the 2 National shows. Initially it was said that Nationals made money (and then later it turned out there was actually a loss) and Congress lost quite a large amount--it was suggested on this very forum that such losses shouldn't be tolerated, that ASPC/AMHR shouldn't be covering the loss, however it was worded exactly--and that amounts to the same thing as cutting funding...and yes, it would be nice if Congress broke even, but even if it doesn't, I would say that funding for that should continue. I'd rather see the money spent on that rather than some of the promotional things $$$ has been wasted on the last couple years. So, that thread last year is one place "that came from".

sue--I guess anyone would be able to try that. Perhaps a group effort would go over better than the World Class Registry has?


----------



## JMS Miniatures (Aug 10, 2010)

Sue_C. said:


> Maybe they should be glad the miniatures haven't tried to separate and make their own way...now THERE'S a thought...


They did, a long time ago, the registry we know today as AMHA.

You know I see so much diversion as it is creating a whole nother registry is not going to solve anything. We need to get united where we need to accept the AMHR/ASPC horses but try and find common ground and try to preserve a place for the miniatures. Instead of arguing about the problem lets try and solve it.


----------



## Mominis (Aug 10, 2010)

Another brainstorm from the newbie....LOL!

What about having just a straight AMHR division, like the Classic Morgan disivion? Make all of the classes that exsist now stay as they are, open to any horse registered with AMHR, be they double registered with ASPC or not. Then have a divison set up that is restricted to the AMHR only horse? That would give the 'purists' (I'm not using that term in a negative way, I just can't think of a better way to put it) a place to be while the breed evolves.


----------



## Jacki Loomis (Aug 10, 2010)

Mominis said:


> Another brainstorm from the newbie....LOL!
> 
> What about having just a straight AMHR division, like the Classic Morgan disivion? Make all of the classes that exsist now stay as they are, open to any horse registered with AMHR, be they double registered with ASPC or not. Then have a divison set up that is restricted to the AMHR only horse? That would give the 'purists' (I'm not using that term in a negative way, I just can't think of a better way to put it) a place to be while the breed evolves.


Hey Mominis, I just read your signature line, saw you owned Michigan's Steak-N-Shake, and realized you will be at our show this coming Thursday & Friday. The Lancaster County Super Fair hosted by the Bluestem Miniature Horse Club in Lincoln, NE. Let me know (by email) if you need any directions or have other questions. Just so you know, we'll be stalling and showing in Pavilion 2, the event center is a large place but when you come to the gate just ask where Pavilion 2 is. Have a safe trip up.

Jacki Loomis

[email protected]


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 10, 2010)

JMS Miniatures said:


> They did, a long time ago, the registry we know today as AMHA.
> 
> You know I see so much diversion as it is creating a whole nother registry is not going to solve anything. We need to get united where we need to accept the AMHR/ASPC horses but try and find common ground and try to preserve a place for the miniatures. Instead of arguing about the problem lets try and solve it.


I said that "tongue in cheek", but if the ENTIRE REGISTRY moved, it wouldn't be anything like the World Class.

*I think it could be EASILY solved...if we **must **accept them, **they** must accept they stay within their own division. *

This is just a case of wanting their cake and eating it too...and I for one get so tired of hearing how WE must accept it and shut the He** up about it, 'cause the ASPC was here first...our minis are Shetland anyways...


----------



## Crabtree Farm (Aug 10, 2010)

~Lisa~ said:


> Of course I was not there..but one would have to assume as with anything there is 3 sides to every story....
> 
> as far as not being enough ASPC shows well it is the chicken and the egg. Many small clubs do not want to put in all those extra classes for a couple of ponies..I would think in a lot of areas if more of those ponies showing minis started showing as ponies and the numbers went up for the ASPC portion of a show it would be easier for show managers to justify fighting to have those classes
> 
> I have never seen mini people wanting to control the registry LOL what I do see is a huge fear from a few pony people that somehow this is the agenda however I can honestly say I really see NO TRUTH IN THAT AT ALL


I never complained about traveling to show my straight shetlands, just the fact that I didn't get any competition at the show. I can't get upset because the farm that was bringing MP's had something come up and could not attend.

I have a problem being told where not to show a horse and told not to beat anyone.


----------



## ruffian (Aug 10, 2010)

Crabtree Farm said:


> Lisa, there are not as many shetland shows to go to as there are AMHR or AMHA. And people are going to take those horses first to be able to qualify for the corresponding Nationals or World.
> 
> Granted as Jacki said it is not a problem in his area, but not are so lucky. I have to wait until our Area show each year to show. When there are AMHR shows at least one to twice a month in my area.


Several shows here in MI originally had ASPC classes as part of their showbill. But after many years of few if any ponies showing up, they were dropped. At a show last year there were 60 pony classes offered and only 1 pony showed up. Went into the class, and walked out with the 2 class ribbons, 2 Sr Champion Ribbons, and 2 Grand Champion Ribbons. Probably about $25 worth of ribbons. In that case, the show is losing money. The shows have to have ribbons etc for every class, and when they put in 50-60 classes and ONE pony shows up, it's pretty hard to keep those classes in. Shetlands have been around much longer than miniatures (registered). So why can't they keep their numbers up in the show ring?

IMO if ponies had to qualify for Congress, that local shows would increase entries. Why pay entrie fees, hotel costs, gas, etc when you don't have to?

The AMHR Nationals had over 1,000 horses enter last year (could have been over 1,500 but not sure) The qualification for AMHR Nationals is to SHOW at one local show. Don't even had to place. AMHA had over 1,000 horses also. Their qualification is tougher - have to have points.

Maybe what was mentioned earlier would help - make a size class for the smaller Moderns and Classics. Maybe having to qualify for Congress would help entries at the local level.

But if folks are ready to "pony up" to show at an AMHR show, then why don't they "pony up" to get their entries up so Pony classes can be maintained at the local shows?

I also don't see where anybody was told they could not speak freely on this or any other LB forum, as long as they kept to the rules.


----------



## Crabtree Farm (Aug 10, 2010)

Not every class has to be offered at a show to carry a shetland designation or rating. Shows can offer an abbreviated list and I believe as few as 11 classes would still give it a C rating. None the less if you don't expect to fill all the classes, don't offer all of them. The have an A B C rating system. A show manager should be aware of the rating system and use that for the show's advantage.


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Aug 10, 2010)

ruffian said:


> But if folks are ready to "pony up" to show at an AMHR show, then why don't they "pony up" to get their entries up so Pony classes can be maintained at the local shows?


Interesting point...


----------



## Mominis (Aug 10, 2010)

Jacki Loomis said:


> Hey Mominis, I just read your signature line, saw you owned Michigan's Steak-N-Shake, and realized you will be at our show this coming Thursday & Friday. The Lancaster County Super Fair hosted by the Bluestem Miniature Horse Club in Lincoln, NE. Let me know (by email) if you need any directions or have other questions. Just so you know, we'll be stalling and showing in Pavilion 2, the event center is a large place but when you come to the gate just ask where Pavilion 2 is. Have a safe trip up.
> 
> Jacki Loomis
> 
> [email protected]



Thanks, Jacki! How nice of you! We are really looking forward to the trip, in fact getting our last minute running done to be ready to pull out early Thursday morning and beat the heat. Do you think it would be possible that you will have some time to chat with me a little about this topic up there? It sounds like you've been showing a long time. I'd love to be able to talk with someone face-to-face about my original question. Then again, as show secretary, you may not have time. I totally understad that. lol


----------



## allaboutminis (Aug 10, 2010)

Crabtree Farm said:


> Yes I do have a 37 inch horse that is not showing right now and that is due to certain reasons. And of this horse I was told to not show it in my area and definitely not to beat anyone.
> 
> Yes, I was at the NC show and did you know that I was not welcomed. In fact I was escorted off the showgrounds, in fact I was escorted to my vehicle by the judge and told to leave so they could start the show.
> 
> And was told it was in the best interest of the show as a spectator. And no I did not break any rules that are set forth by AMHR as to why an exhibitor can be removed, but again I was a spectator. So wonder why I don't attend certain shows, because I would be asked to leave.



Tina

I was at that show too and the Tn show You was there talking alot of stuff. I did not know that you was escorted off the show grounds. But in the same token what you was talking and what you have going against the show staff I would of not been there.( it was not hear say I was one of them that you was talking too) You was making things look bad for you....I can recall you posting stuff on here about that show and what happen to you.

I can not answer to why you was removed, but you did have a lot of us ( exhibtors) feeling uncomfortable about the stuff that you was talking. again I will not go into any details on here.

the def. to uncomfortable is: 1: causing discomfort or annoyance 2: feeling discomfort.

It was the same thing in Tn. Why would you show up at a show where you knew that person would be there??????????????

I am sorry But I think you need to stop what you are doing before you start hurting your ownself..


----------



## Mominis (Aug 10, 2010)




----------



## Lewella (Aug 10, 2010)

ruffian said:


> Shetlands have been around much longer than miniatures (registered). So why can't they keep their numbers up in the show ring?


There is a VERY simple answer to that question - POPULATION. There are only about 1000 ASPC Shetlands registered PER YEAR. There are 8000+ AMHR miniatures registered per year (AMHR new registration numbers have been in the 12,000 range in the last decade whereas ASPC numbers in the last decade have never even been close to 1500).

A qualification requirement for Shetlands would probably have very little effect on local show attendance. Most Shetlands are already showing at two or more shows prior to Congress each year.


----------



## jeniemac (Aug 10, 2010)

allaboutminis said:


> Tina
> 
> I was at that show too and the Tn show You was there talking alot of stuff. I did not know that you was escorted off the show grounds. But in the same token what you was talking and what you have going against the show staff I would of not been there.( it was not hear say I was one of them that you was talking too) You was making things look bad for you....I can recall you posting stuff on here about that show and what happen to you.
> 
> ...


----------



## jeniemac (Aug 10, 2010)

Mary Lou - LB said:


> I and many here do not know what is going/went on BUT PLEASE... keep personal matters off this forum..


----------



## allaboutminis (Aug 10, 2010)

jeniemac said:


>



I will not go into any details on here. But things needs to stop


----------



## jeniemac (Aug 10, 2010)

allaboutminis said:


> I will not go into any details on here. But things needs to stop


----------



## Jacki Loomis (Aug 10, 2010)

Mominis said:


> Thanks, Jacki! How nice of you! We are really looking forward to the trip, in fact getting our last minute running done to be ready to pull out early Thursday morning and beat the heat. Do you think it would be possible that you will have some time to chat with me a little about this topic up there? It sounds like you've been showing a long time. I'd love to be able to talk with someone face-to-face about my original question. Then again, as show secretary, you may not have time. I totally understad that. lol



I'm looking forward to meeting you at the show and will be glad to visit. I'm not the show secretary, just the secretary of the club hosting the show so I'll only be busy with my own horses and helping with a few things. Have a safe trip up to Lincoln. Just ask around at the show for Ed & Jacki Loomis, most people know us around there.

Jacki Loomis

[email protected]


----------



## Mominis (Aug 10, 2010)

Oh sheesh....I was just teasing with the "Jerry, Jerry, Jerry" post. Sorry. Didn't mean to throw fuel on a fire.


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 10, 2010)

These past few "posts" have gone right over MY head...good thing, I think


----------



## Mominis (Aug 10, 2010)

Lewella said:


> There is a VERY simple answer to that question - POPULATION. There are only about 1000 ASPC Shetlands registered PER YEAR. There are 8000+ AMHR miniatures registered per year (AMHR new registration numbers have been in the 12,000 range in the last decade whereas ASPC numbers in the last decade have never even been close to 1500).
> 
> A qualification requirement for Shetlands would probably have very little effect on local show attendance. Most Shetlands are already showing at two or more shows prior to Congress each year.



Going back to the topic that Jacki brought up and Lewella replied to...wouldn't having qualifications for Nationals for Shetlands help the local clubs, like she mentioned? Even if they are just a requirement to show under x-and so many judges, I can see how it may help stimulate breeders to produce more to get the registration numbers up.


----------



## Lewella (Aug 10, 2010)

Mominis said:


> Going back to the topic that Jacki brought up and Lewella replied to...wouldn't having qualifications for Nationals for Shetlands help the local clubs, like she mentioned? Even if they are just a requirement to show under x-and so many judges, I can see how it may help stimulate breeders to produce more to get the registration numbers up.


The horse market as a whole does not currently support a larger population for any breed. The breeding population of Shetlands does not support larger production of quality animals either. As I mentioned, the vast majority of Shetlands that showed at Congress had attended two or more local shows this year, many having shown in half a dozen or more. I really don't see a qualification requirement for Shetlands increasing entries since the Shetlands that are going to show are going to show and show a lot all year working towards their Hall of Fames.


----------



## Mellis815 (Aug 10, 2010)

Sue_C. said:


> Maybe they should be glad the miniatures haven't tried to separate and make their own way...now THERE'S a thought...



Umm...maybe I am reading this wrong, but yea, we did the AMHA and the AMHR those were the mini registries, and the ponies had ASPC...so what were you trying to say here? Just trying to clarify


----------



## Mellis815 (Aug 10, 2010)

Sue_C. said:


> I said that "tongue in cheek", but if the ENTIRE REGISTRY moved, it wouldn't be anything like the World Class.
> 
> *I think it could be EASILY solved...if we **must **accept them, **they** must accept they stay within their own division. *
> 
> This is just a case of wanting their cake and eating it too...and I for one get so tired of hearing how WE must accept it and shut the He** up about it, 'cause the ASPC was here first...our minis are Shetland anyways...



if the ASPC was here first....Then why, might I ask, is the miniature horse registry carrying the shetlands!?? and why isn't the shetland shows more prominent and money making?? and why aren't there more registered shetlands every year vs the minis?? I am not going to shut the He** up about it when there are more of us that are showing and promoting the miniature breed vs the shetlands, and we support the ponies financially! How about this...why don't YOU start showing at your own shows, at your own level and let us see who does better at the end of the year? Then we can all sit down and eat cake together!


----------



## midnight star stables (Aug 11, 2010)

Mary Lou, why do we even have this emoticon?



LOL I think we should get the "big girl panties" one... Hehehe.

Sorry, of topic.

You know what? After reading and sitting on this post for a while, I have a desire to buy a ASPC/AMHR pony.



I'm thinking, wouldn't it be neat to show my mini as a mini, but also show as a shetland the next weekend if there are ASPC classes? Now I love my minis and that IS all I own. But I would be open to the right ASPC/AMHR, and I really do think it is neat that I have new shows open to me. I'd also love to show in Park harness someday too.

I think it is bizarre how the word "Shetland" can cause SO many strong feelings when placed beside the word "Miniature". I'm not saying either is right or wrong, as both have stunning horses, I simply find it odd.

And good or bad, (Prince aside) I can not think of a recent Grand champion in halter at Nationals(These past few years) that wasn't of Shetland breeding. I don't know of them all, but many. Thoughts on this?


----------



## kaykay (Aug 11, 2010)

The ASPC has been a breed club since the 1800's. Some marketing geniuses decided to start marketing their small SHETLANDS as "Miniature horses". Brilliant people if you ask me. Some of theses breeders even made up wonderful stories to add to the mystique of where these Miniature horses came from. To keep up the mystery many even threw out the ASPC papers on these small Shetlands. To do this they created a height registry called AMHR. When these people created AMHR they made sure to write in certain bylaws so that ASPC could never be overtaken by its own creation--AMHR. This is common practice in any business that creates another business.

Later some breeders broke off from AMHR and created AMHA.

So without the ASPC there would be no AMHR OR AMHA.

Kinda like saying Coke created Diet Coke but Coke will always own Diet Coke.

Lastly if you really look you will find that most people own ASPC, ASPC/AMHR, AND AMHR horses. So there is no us and them its just us.

I pay for my AMHR papers just like everyone else does. Every time I register one of our ASPC/AMHR foals I pay double fees.

I think we can all agree that for years Miniature horses were way over bred. They are small and dont take a lot of room. In their heyday when they were bringing in 20,000.00 just because they were small, it was not uncommon to see farms with 200 miniatures. Now we see even larger farms scaling back.

I think overall that is a good thing as the numbers go down I do believe the quality is going up.

Kay


----------



## RayVik (Aug 11, 2010)

kaykay said:


> When these people created AMHR they made sure to write in certain bylaws so that ASPC could never be overtaken by its own creation--AMHR.


As a point of clarification,

Not exactly sure what you are meaning by this statement but the bylaws can be changed by the membership at any annual meeting as they see fit...The Articles of Incorporation which supersede the bylaws clearly define this action...these apply to the organization as a whole nothing specific regarding any "take over" is in anyway addressed. If you are referring to Board seats and how they are determined as presently established by the bylaws as to reflect to 50% of the board members must own a majority of Shetland pony's then that as any other bylaw can be changed by the membership if they desire. The organization is not founded on one against the other or as separate entities rather for the purposes of " small equine". Although it often seems some do think it is separate but equal... it is not ... it is for the good of all and/or the what is best for the organization as a whole not any subsection thereof.

Not intended to rob thread or create an issue ...just a point of clarification...


----------



## Mominis (Aug 11, 2010)

What a wonderfully easy to understand explanation, Kay. Thanks for that.


----------



## kaykay (Aug 11, 2010)

I agree Ray they can be changed. But currently that is how it is. I didnt make those bylaws, just showing why things were done the way there are/were back when AMHR was created. It has changed a lot over the years and I suspect there will be more changes. I am also going by what I was told at peoples kitchen tables on the creation of AMHR. I was lucky to be able to visit with Lowell (and others that were there) many times and was fascinated by his stories on how AMHR and AMHA were created.



> The organization is not founded on one against the other or as separate entities rather for the purposes of " small equine".


I never meant to imply anyone was one against the other as anyone who reads my post knows I hate that mind set. Its just business practices--but I think some take it as a personal insult.

This is from the registry website:



> The American Shetland Pony Club was founded in 1888 as a registry to keep the pedigrees for all the Shetlands that were being imported from Europe at that time.
> It has expanded to four separate breeds under one club: The Classic American Shetland Pony, The Modern American Shetland Pony, The American Miniature Horse Registry and The American Show Pony Registry.


Kay


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Aug 11, 2010)

Kay while your history is correct that does nothing but prove the fact that the Shetlands in and of themselves could not support themselves and there was not a lot of interest even now many years later take the word Shetland out and use Miniature and guess what people want them. Put the word Shetland back in and guess what the majority still does not want them.

Miniatures are overbreed and poorly breed guess what so are Shetlands they to are small to the big horse owner.

This is not about right or wrong no one will change the other sides mind it is about not forcing something down the majorities throat cause we now want it to be. I hear so many saying we have to run our registry like a business on this and other forums. Well if the customers (masses) wants pink and blue you better stock pink and blue you can not stock yellow and say sorry this is really what you want and it is so much better then anything pink or blue you have ever bought before. Only yellow can truly be what you want even if you dont like it.

I have said many times I love my ponies in fact I prefer ponies but that doesnt change the historical fact that the masses do not want Shetlands and have not wanted Shetlands. It does not change the fact that the miniatures do have the majority in funding or the fact that some seem to be so afraid of the power this majority AMHR truly holds (that most AMHR members do not even realize yet) That those same people cry so hard why is it a us vs them in trying to prove some sort of point and do not realize they are the ones truly making it a us vs them arguement and not looking at the financial side of this whole thing


----------



## hunterridgefarm (Aug 11, 2010)

Mary Lou - LB said:


> I and many here do not know what is going/went on BUT PLEASE... keep personal matters off this forum..




*THANK YOU MARY LOU*


----------



## kaykay (Aug 11, 2010)

> Kay while your history is correct that does nothing but prove the fact that the Shetlands in and of themselves could not support themselves


Since the majority were shetlands they did support themselves, but just with a different name and a different paper.

I am not trying to argue with anyone because people either love the American Shetland or not and that is fine. Again this is what is so great about ASPC/AMHR. There is a horse for everyone in about every size!

But how this all came about is the history of our club. I didnt do it, I didnt write the bylaws. But I will always say those breeders back then were brilliant. No disputing that.

I think there are quite a few people that really dont know the history and how this all started. I know when people new to the American Shetland ask me about it they are always amazed that this is how it all began.


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Aug 11, 2010)

Kay I was just pointing out the market was not there for the ASPC ponies which is why a few very smart marketing minds decided to rename them Minis and that market truly took off. For whatever reason the majority of the public prefers the miniature over the Shetland and prefers not to acknowledge any of the Shetland breeding be it then or now they want Miniatures.

Again right or wrong, logical or not- agree with it or not it is simply the way it is


----------



## midnight star stables (Aug 11, 2010)

Mary Lou - LB said:


> I found them!!!!


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 11, 2010)

> Some of theses breeders even made up wonderful stories to add to the mystique of where these Miniature horses came from. To keep up the mystery many even threw out the ASPC papers on these small Shetlands. To do this they created a height registry called AMHR.


But, you are also forgetting the Falabella influence, the Welsh, the British Spotted Pony, and the Internationaly registered horses brought over from Europe, and whatever else there was small enough to be bred down...it isn't just the American Shetland that "made" the Miniature horse of today...although a lot would like to think so.


----------



## kaykay (Aug 11, 2010)

Sue for sure there were other breed influences but theres no doubt that Shetlands were the main breed used.

It is what it is. Its the history of our club ie American Shetlands and American Miniature horses.


----------



## chandab (Aug 12, 2010)

Mary Lou - LB said:


> I found them!!!!



OMG! That is too cute. As that saying seems to be used frequently enough on here, its only fitting that we have the emoticon to go with it.


----------



## GypsyMoonMinis (Aug 12, 2010)

in Regards to Falabella, I was under the impression that Falabella is not a breed (even though there is a registry) but rather a line of mini horses from the falabella ranch of argentina? Just as we have Buckaroo horses and Arenosa horses. These are "types" that these farms bred for. regardless, it is a type that has influenced the breed. I like Arenosa myself, and I know there is alot of shetland influence in it.

From the falabella site:





> What is a Falabella? The Falabella is the Original miniature horse. It has been bred on the Falabella ranch in Argentina for over 150 years and it’s story began in 1845 when an Irish man named Patrick Newtall discovered that the tribes of pampas Indians had some unusually small horses along with their larger riding horses. He managed to obtain some and by 1853 he had created a herd of small, perfectly built little horses of around 102cms.In 1879 he transferred his findings, herd and knowledge to his son-in-law, Juan Falabella. Juan continued the experiment by using other breeds to develop this small horse – the smallest English thoroughbreds he could find, *Shetland ponie*s and Criollo – the Argentine horse of the pampas.


----------



## kaykay (Aug 12, 2010)

A good friend emailed me this morning and gave me such a giggle. She said I guess we could throw away the ASPC papers on our ASPC/AMHR horses and then they would become "pure miniatures". It worked 30 years ago so I guess it could still work now. After all once you throw the ASPC papers away they are no longer Shetland right?

Way too funny

Kay


----------



## ~Lisa~ (Aug 12, 2010)

kaykay said:


> AAfter all once you throw the ASPC papers away they are no longer Shetland right?
> 
> Way too funny
> 
> Kay


Well 30 years ago they did become more marketable once those papers were gone.... perhaps the same can be said today for the general mini population and it's buyers ?


----------



## Sue_C. (Aug 12, 2010)

kaykay said:


> A good friend emailed me this morning and gave me such a giggle. She said I guess we could throw away the ASPC papers on our ASPC/AMHR horses and then they would become "pure miniatures". It worked 30 years ago so I guess it could still work now. After all once you throw the ASPC papers away they are no longer Shetland right? Way too funnyKay


I guess that would work, but only if you consider the 30+ years of selective breeding that has turned them into an animal that even the Shetland owners have to agree has evolved into another animal...otherwise why the "need" to "inprove" them?


----------



## Sandee (Aug 12, 2010)

kaykay said:


> A good friend emailed me this morning and gave me such a giggle. She said I guess we could throw away the ASPC papers on our ASPC/AMHR horses and then they would become "pure miniatures". It worked 30 years ago so I guess it could still work now. After all once you throw the ASPC papers away they are no longer Shetland right?
> 
> Way too funny
> 
> Kay


OMG, Kay. That never occured to me.



That could be the answer to all of this fuss! Now we need a "burning the bra - I mean papers" emoticon!


----------

