2007 ASPC /AMHR Board of Directors

[LaVern]

Go John. One person and one horse comes to mind. Ah, to breed true to type.

Justin Morgan had a horse. So do the Eberth family.

 

[Buckskin gal]

Renee, I totally understand your thoughts and feelings. Just my opinion from what I have been reading and hearing is the Shetland people don't want to see AMHR closed because it would prohibit them from getting the Shetlands into AMHR. Now, is this bad? I think not if you are wanting to promote Shetlands but not good if there is ever to be a type set. [but maybe there are those who want type set form the smaller of the American Shetland] The way it looks to me is we may as well get used to having the American Shetland Pony set type for the Miniature horse in AMHR. Of course it has always been a problem for the Miniature horse to be truly represented by Shetalnd breeders as it is in AMHR...this is my opinion from experiences and I am sure others have their own opinions on this matter. A lot of this is about more money for the Shetland registry...AMHR is owned by them and it will always reflect that. So many seem to imply that AMHR horses are nothing more than Shetlands and so the name should be changed to "Miniature Shetlands" instead of Miniature horses. Well we know what happened to the Shetland market some time ago and this could happen again if there are to be "Miniature Shetlands" instead of " Miniature Horses." I think breeders will be making some serious choices before long as to which direction they choose. I happen to love the disposition of the Miniature horse in comarprison to the American Shetland but to each his own for the purposes used. I think AMHA will be much more serious about making the Miniature horse a breed because there is getting to be so much a look in that registry amongst it's horses. Renee, if you start a new registry for type in the Miniature horse I am sure you will have a good response, but on the other hand I hope you are able to get what is important to you with one or the other of the registries that are already available. Now, please, people don't tear my words apart for they are my opinions ...you do have the right to give your own. Mary

 

[buckonranch]

Hi, I think this topic is excellent..

I remember discussing this in the ASPC board meeting years ago concerning the harshipping of Shetlands...My concern at the time as a representative of the miniature members was the size of the height backgrounds that would be introduced again into the miniature gene pool. But also we use to have a PICTURE of a Miniature Standard of Perfection in our rule books and a written STANDARD OF PERFECTION, I asked the board if the Shetland Ponies(Classic & Modern) that they were considering hardshipping in, met with our same Miniature Standard of Perfection.??? My concern was this.... I did think back then....that we had a type we were working for!!!!! I wanted my horses to look like the Miniature horse in the picture in our RULE BOOK. I ASSUMED that picture was put there for a reason!!!!!!. heck I thought that picture was probably adopted as our goal...... I never use to feel AMHR was only a height registry.. yes I know we limited the heights, but I think just the words.. its only a height registery and anyone the can get under the stick can qualify.. does lessen all the hard work I have done for 20 years to meet our Standard of Perfection.. I learned very quickly breeding was about the quality first not the stick. I think this is also where Lavern is coming from... When you are trying to improve the breed and you are competing against that measuring stick mentality it becomes disheartening... I never hear anyone.. mention our standard of perfection any more.. do you???? Have any of you ever read it??????? What ever are the judges using to judge our horses????

I think the different types could evolve, but from what I have witnessed in the Shetland show world the big argument has always been.. what type is it.????.. Until last year I thought the Shetlands show'd modern or Classic according to the pedigree on the papers. I found out I have been wrong about that all these years also...I found out they go by the visual look of the horse... does it look Modern.. Classic..?? but in whose opinion??? I think it looks Modern.. You think it looks Classic the judge he judges it as???? This floored me... Belinda?? Lewella.?? Maybe I still am confused on how you do it???? I am still hoping I misunderstand this... I can understand now why there is so much discussion on Shetands crossing into the wrong classes if its up to each individuals opinion of the type!!!! Can you imagine us trying to type the miniatures???? I hope I am dead by then... LOL>>> Anyway.. this is the Standard of Perfection I grabbed from my old Rule book.. There is no picture.. I havent seen one in years.. Angie/buckonranch

AMHR Rule Book 2003

Part 10 Standard of Perfection

A. General Impression.. A small , sound, well-blanced horse which give the impression of strength, agility and alertness. The dispostion should be eager and freindly NOT skittish.

B. Size criteria.. I think we all know the info on this

C. Head In proportion to the body, neither excessively LONG nor short. the eyes should be large, alert and prominent. with no discrimination in color. The ears, open toward the front and carried erect.. The teeth should show no signs of parrot mouth or undershot jaw

D. Neck.. Strong and muscular, proportionate to the body and the type of the horse represented.

E. body Well muscled with good bone and substance, well sprung ribs, level topline, as nearly as possible of equal height in withers and rump, fore and hindquarters well angulated, so that the horse in movement shows a smooth gait.

R. Legs Straight, clean and sound

G. Hooves Round and compact, trimmed as short as practical for the un shod horse, and in good condition.

H.Color Any color, eye color and/or marking pattern is equally aceptable

I. Throat-Latch: Clean and well defined allowing ample flexation at the poll.

J. Shoulder Long sloping and well-angulated, allowing a free swinging stride and alert head/neck carriage. Well muscled forearm.

K. Hindquarters. Long, well-muscled hip, thigh and gaskin. Highest point of croup to be the same height as withers. Tail set neither high nor low, but smoothly ROUNDING OFF RUMP.

l. DISQUALIFICATIONS Height in excess of 34 inches for A division and 38 for B Division . Dwarfism, blindness, unnsoundness and cryptorchidism in aged stallions.

 

[kaykay]

Angie i think part D of the standard is where the problem is

Neck.. Strong and muscular, proportionate to the body and the type of the horse represented.

someone posted here the old pictures the registries used to use to show the different "types" of miniatures, ie arabian, quarter horse etc.

I agree with John that until there is a set "type" in the standard you cannot be a breed. But I can only imagine the screams if there was one set type for everyone to adhere to. And honestly i enjoy all the different types of miniatures.

I still dont know why Shetlands get the blame for everything people dont like in AMHR. There are miniature breeder seats on the board and they should be representing the miniature breeders.

Lewella explained once how shetlands were never supposed to have to hardship into amhr. Apparently something was written wrong long ago in the bylaws? Maybe she will come explain.

 

[HGFarm]

Thank you very much Belinda for the update!

I have never felt the Shetlands were 'competition' in any way. They are Shetlands and the others are Miniatures and no, they do not look the same nor are they the same type. If they were, there would be no need to differentiate. If I wanted a Shetland, I would go buy one. I have Miniatures, and am proud to own them.

I appreciate the Shetlands for what they are, as I appreciate MANY horses for what they are and what they offer their particular breeds.

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

Well I have always found personally the basic standard of perfection ... well just that basic and general stating nothing really about type (short of the height) but a well conformed horse. That still leaves it very open to interpretation when one is discussing "type" or what to breed for other then correct.. that should be although I realize always isnt.. a given... breed for a well balanced correct horse.

There is no"type" defined IMO on our standard other then correct and well balanced and really again short of height that could apply to almost any breed. Of course most of us strive to breed for a well balanced correct horse - honestly I dont see how that applies at all in any way to the Shetlands coming into AMHR any more so then OVERSIZE or in size AMHA horses.

For me the a standard of perfection is seen. I see it in many programs I see it improve and become better and better every year at Nationals.. there are many horses there that do consistenly well many programs that the past couple of years do consistently well and that is what I use visually as my standard more so then a very basic drawing.

Yes the horses winning now are different then those winning even 3-4-5 years ago.. but I am not sure why that is a bad thing, or why that is being blamed on shetlands by many?

I currently don't own any double reg sheltands although my stallion is 75 percent arenosa... so really even though he doesnt have the papers he is certainly of the "type" does that make him part of the problem? or the solution?

Personally I don't see why a set of papers has to be thought of as one or the other ...

 

[Robin]

Well Well- Ms Bagby look what you got started all with a generic recap of your meeting! Isn't it amazing? However- since the topic was brought up and it appears to be a sore subject with a few, I thought I might comment.

There is one simple fact here- A horse, is a horse, is a horse. All people- inculding you Laverne- need to understand that Rowdy, Buckeroo and all the other miniature horses in this industry came from Shetland ponies- a horse. That is nothing to be ashamed of. Why are you refusing to use the history for your benefit? I love it that I can go to a show and see the history promote the new and vice versa. This entire "breed" as you want to call it is based on years and generations of horses all going back to the shetland and hackney ponies with a little Welsh in there too. This is what makes your (and our) breeding program so consistent and dependable. You and I can look back in the early Pony magazines (Thank You Jackie Tyler for letting me druel thru them in your kitchen!) and see exactly where Rowdy and Buckeroo came from. I saw horses I only new by name. I could see why we get what we get out of our line breeding because I could see the characterisitcs go from the beginning to now.

Instead of moaning and groaning over other horse "breeds" gaining business and growing, we should be using them to grow- copy what they are doing to succeed.

The worse thing the AMHA and AMHR could do is close their registry. There are not enough bloodlines in this "breed" to stray away from bad deformities and dwarfism. I think everyone will be able to comprehend this fact when the new stud book is in working order. You will be able to do a pedigree breakdown of the percentages of one or different lines in your horse/s. I am most excited about doing this research myself.

Renee- you have done what so many other people in this industry need to do. You have bred a horse that you like-- regardless of wins, fades, highs and lows. You, in your own fields, do have a "breed". You are looking for a specific type and height in one. John commented on the fact that AMHA and AMHR do not have a type- and that is correct. If you go to the Color Breed Council (where many judges and apprentices test for all breed cards (not just color)) you will see what other standard of perfections are and they have very clear conformational characteristics with pictures to show what to choose for each breed. That, IMO, is the problem with this industry. There are not enough knowledgeable breeders. The associations do not put on breeder seminars to educate what is good or bad conformation and form to function. We trust that the people sitting in the stands can see why a horse was chosen over another. Our associations do not require judges give reasons (such as in other animal species shows for example) for their choice. You and I know that breeding 2 National Champions is not going to ensure you get a National Champion- heck you might just get a dead dwarf and have a torn up mare!!!

Needless to say- there is a lot more to closing a registry than many people think. Most are worried about numbers. And they should be- the number of bad horses is sickening and the number of very good horses is pathetic when you look at the overall industry. I think we are reaching the point that many dog breeds are- there are pets and exceptional show quality and many, many in between.

Remember--- a horse, is a horse, is a horse.

 

[kaykay]

:aktion033: robin

 

[LaVern]

Oh, boy this is going to be a tuff one. It is hard to argue with people that I respect so much. And perhaps I have to do some rethinking on certain points. But here goes some of my thoughts.

First of all I used to brag that I went with Rowdy and Buckeroo because at least you could find out something about their ancestors through the Shetland stud books. Now, I deny it. When people say they are really Shetlands I say," okay let us in your Club, you let the Hackney and Welsh in." Ya, that goes over real well.

Next what I resent is that the Shetland Pony people have been fighting for years over what a Shetland Pony is supposed to look like and now they want to influence what are miniature horses are supposed to look like. The B mare that won at Nationals last year sure did not look like the picture of the pretty little horse on my papers.

Up until a few years ago the B horse was about the only honest one around. Who was going to fib about a B horse.

I've heard so many times" anything for the improvement of the breed" (smirk smirk) while at the late night pony sessions and now that mentality is moving into my B's and I can't stand it. You know how I am about rules, Robin. I turned my own mother in for trying to sneak a soda on to the airplane years ago. The sign said don't do it and she would not listen.

But maybe the gene pool is not big enough yet, and maybe we do need more research on particular lines before we close things up though. When people like John are spending all their time anod energy trying to find out stuff for the good of us all, it makes me think that we should not do anything to fast.

 

[Minimor]

what all are overlooking is that no matter how detailed the description of the "ideal" Miniature--the perfect standard of perfection--whether it is a written description or an actual picture/drawing--is that people still see what they want to see.

Look at the Morgans. AMHA (the Morgan version) has prints of paintings of the ideal stallion, mare and gelding. There is a woodcut of Justin Morgan (Figure himself!) that is supposed to be the ideal Morgan. You ask various breeders to show you a photo of their ideal Morgan--an actual existing horse, or at least one that existed, maybe deceased by now--the one horse that they think matches the woodcut or one of the AMHA prints--and you will see an amazing variety of horses! Some people will bring out their Lippitts, others will bring out their In Commands, some will show you a son of Upwey Ben Don, or maybe a Waer horse. All nice horses, but very different types! Some people will show you some very nice horses of whatever line they feel most closely matches the woodcut....some people will show you photos of some very badly put-together horses. I look at some of the horses & wonder how on earth anyone can think THAT matches the standard of perfection that I am reading. Others will look at the horse that I would put up as my ideal & say that he is all wrong for what they read the standard to be.

Miniatures are going to be exactly the same. One standard, 10 different visions!

 

[Reble]

I don't usually like to get into these differences.

To Us: American Miniature Horse Registry: means a paper for a horse under 38" who's parents are registered AMHR

Hubby and I believe it starts with the judges and how they have learned what to look for?

Grand champion is ?

Reserve Champion is?

Supreme Champion is?

 

[Arion Mgmt]

This thread has obviously progressed to an interesting subject, one that if asked, everyone would have their own answer and opinion, unfortunately that IS what this is all about, everyone has their own opinion of type, including the judges, and so there WILL be variations of type, the goal is to try to minimze those variations, just like Renee with the gene pool, BUT we do not have enough quality ideal horses in this "breed" that are examples of what we are breeding for TODAY, not 10 or 20 yrs ago.

Some breeders of horses have realized that if the gene pool does not have what they want already in it, it isnt going to appear out of thin air one day, you have to go find it , mold it, combine it with what you already have, and refine it to what you want to make, that is the joy and frustration of breeding horses. The resulting ones that are what you want that are ideal type are the ones to continue to use, all others need to be culled, and that is where horse breeders live or die.

Where we as a breed have run into a problem is getting together to agree that no matter what is brought into this gene pool, there needs to be a strict ideal type to breed FOR and to strive towards, and to teach that strict type to the judges to bring consistency into the ring, therefore bringing true value to true breeding horses of IDEAL TYPE.

A good example is the Arabian, the performance Arabians have been getting cross bred with Dutch Harness horses, Saddlebreds, etc. and those half-breeds that have extreme performance AND ideal type for the Arabian breed have not only won in the ring but are commanding maximum values. These Arabians breeders have been shunned by some and praised by others, but what has happened is that the Arabian is becoming a more sound and powerful horse in performance areas.

I was told by a flawed but very horse savy man that "a horse is worth ten cents a pound, and everything else above that is marketing." That phylosophy is cold hearted but very true. I also know that a horse's value is whatever a person is willing pay, whether its $500 or $500,000. If you think about those two ideas, they are very much connected. How you market your horses or how someone markets your breeding program (i.e. foals ) has a big influence on how valuable your horses are to the breeders within the industry. That is why we (my family) feel it helps us AND our clients that have invested in our breeding program, work together to promote our premiere quality horses that are produced from all of our breeding programs.

All of this has as much to do with where these horses have come from, as to where these horses are going (the big picture of the progression of our "breed"). Because any premiere horse must be the "TYPE" that is not only desired within the industry but the type that is winning in the ring, and that horse that has a pedigree that breeds true to a desired type, to any degree, commands even more attention.

I went on this tangent to hopefully have you all that read this then stop and see where this "breed" is going........towards a type. NOT a bloodline, but a type, a look,

a specific head type (length of head compared to length of neck, nostril and muzzle size, eye size, ear size and shape and how they are set on the head, shape of forehead),

a specific muscle build,

a specific bone structure and thickness,

specific length of leg to barrel depth,

a specific neck (cleanliness, length compared to body size, size of crest, smallness of throat latch, shape and shoulder angle),

a specific length of body to hip length,

and movement, lots of it.

Minimor is very intuitive in seeing the one major flaw we all have to some degree, in just about every show horse breed, we all think at least one of our horses is of the ideal type. That is what makes a show horse breed so frustrating and determining ideal type the most fought over subject, everyone wants to have and produce the ideal type. I only wish I had more in my fields!!!!!! HAHAHA

John

 

[LaVern]

Oh, my it was a restless night. I love this forum. What I think I am hearing, John is that if we put a box around these guys we will limited in our ability to improve them.

I have been hoping that within my life time I would see a miniature "breed". I think there lies the problem with alot of us breeders. Our own mortality. And our own vanity. I want something to leave behind.

You are looking at things from a scientist point of view. My life time is but a speck in time.

Also I thought and thought about what Robin had to say. A horse is a horse is a horse. At first all I could think of was Mr. Ed. Then it came to me- I think. (they all came from the same place)and it took along time. Right?

I guess my bean soup will have to be my epitaph, They say it can't be improved on. When you have your soup cook off I will have to send the reciept. Renee

 

[Gene]

Hey LaVern,

I thought Hart already signed over all rights to your bean soup recipe to the ETHANOL plant.

:

 

[Buckskin gal]

Robin, Renee, Angie, I do so appreciate you gals sharing your thoughts with the rest of us. It not only helps us understand your positions on Miniature Horses, but gives us a lot to think about. I really admire you gals for the work you have put into your programs and most of all how you have always had in mind what you were striving for rather than just going with the fad of the day. This, I feel, is what makes for breed type. Some people would like us to believe that Miniature horses are no more than American Shetlands but if that were so then why wouldn't they be allowed into the Shetland registry. I do see how some people are offended in having the Shetlands allowed into the Miniature registry because it does give competion for sales.... more Shetlands to sell as Miniature horses which seem to have had more of a demand. I do see how those of you who have worked hard to create type in your programs are now feeling offended. I do believe a "breed" registry would be useful to the Miniature horse breeders who strive for quality and a certain look, along with maintaining the small size.....which has made the Miniature horse so special. Thanks gals for sharing with us. Know we would love to hear more from you about your thoughts on Miniature Horses. Mary

 

[LaVern]

Thanks Buckskingal. I know this is getting way off track. But so fun as it reminds me so much of the good old days when a bunch would get together after a show, or around someones kitchen and shoot the bull,and decide how things really should be, until wee hours of the morning. Your mind would probably change three times. You never wanted to miss any of those sessions as you just knew you would be the topic if you weren't in on it.

It's alittle different putting things down in writing, it can come back to haunt you.

Oh and Gene, Hart says to tell you that things were looking promising with the soup recipe(spelled it riight this time) until they had some problems with the pressure on the valves.