AMHA is CLosing Their Books!! As well as a new Height rule change!!

[dali1111]

I for one do not feel that 160,000 horses is that limited of a gene pool.

That may be so but look at how many of those horses are very closely related? How many horses can you think of with this breeding or that breeding...a son or grandson of whoever? ...And how is this going to change cheating at all? people will always find a way to cheat no matter what..at least with the last hair we just had people adding hair etc. now we will have people breeding badly comformed horses to get that "dip" down real low. Not to mention that minis have always been a height breed..our numbers are increasing so why change that? How many of "the greats" can you think of with shetland breeding?

 

[RockRiverTiff]

now we will have people breeding badly comformed horses to get that "dip" down real low. Not to mention that minis have always been a height breed..our numbers are increasing so why change that? How many of "the greats" can you think of with shetland breeding?

What good does it do to get a horse measured in if it's badly conformed in the first place? I do not genuinely believe there is going to be a large contingent of people breeding for hideous horses just so they can get them papers. And minis have never been a breed. We are a height registry. Closing the studbook is the first step toward actually becoming a breed. Furthermore, I in no way consider our numbers increasing so quickly a good thing. As many people at the convention said, we are having a serious supply and demand issue. Numbers are increasing and prices are decreasing. It's time we become proactive about the legitimacy of our horses AND our practices.

As for the greats with Shetland breeding, yes, we all accept that they are a large part of the gene pool. Nevertheless, if you're talking about ASPC registered ancestors, in most modern AMHA champions you're going to have to look several generations back to find one.

If I'm not mistaken, the ASPC's studbook is not much larger than 160,000 is it? And yet they are a breed and have made impressive changes in quality and type over the last couple decades. Why is it so hard to accept the same may be possible for our minis? Especially if they are carrying much of the same genetics?

(Edited to say: I don't mind hearing the facts if I'm wrong, but I'd rather this not turn into AMHA vs. AMHR again. I am a member of both.)

 

[Mona]

AMHA feels that they have a large enough gene pool. They want to focus on creating a breed registration rather then just a height registration.

I feel that the Miniature Horse will NEVER be a TRUE BREED, because even though the bloodlines have not been added to with outside blood, being a height registry, they will never be a pure BREED registry.

If they wer a true BREED, then oversized horses would never lose their registration.

I just keep wondering where all this concern about a small gene pool is coming from?

I think a big part of the concern in the size of the gene pool may be due to the number of dwarf producing/dwarf gene carrying horses today. If and when a test becomes available to isolate and identify these genes, with horses being tested, we may all be surprised at what we find, and maybe then, they will find the gene pool should still be open to allow others in that test free of dwarfism.

 

[Minimor]

I do believe that people will always find a way to cheat. What's to stop them from standing the horses stretched, or splayed? So it's against the rules to stand them that way, so what? It was also against the rules to press down on the back, & yet that was still being done. Only an idiot would believe that a horse's mane ends half way down the back, and yet measurement people were agreeably allowing "fake" hair to be used to measure horses at the lowest point of the back... If rules were enforced there wouldn't have been such problem with measuring, even at the last mane hair.

As for closing the book, I'd point out that it takes more than a closed book to create a real breed. You've got to have a type--a "look" that sets the breed apart from every other breed. I'm curious to know what is that ideal type for AMHA?

My first thought was that AMHA was worried about all the talk about how more and more AMHR/ASPC horses were going to be hardshipped into AMHA as time goes on, and they feel closing the books will stop that from happening?

For my part I'd like to see AMHR close their books too. Perhaps leave it open for ASPC ponies, since ASPC and AMHR are under the same club, but close it to AMHA horses and falabellas.

 

[MountainViewMiniatures]

To have a "breed" with a height restriction is still just a height registry regardless of a closed registry or not. Something needs to be done about the over horses like APHA and ApHC did for their solid color horses and the AQHA did allowing cremello/perlino and excessive white. A breed is by blood- breeding one registered horse to another registered horse - you still have your ideal but you don't pull the papers if they aren't ideal (otherwise you should pull their papers if they don't pass a conformation test!)- I've seen 2 very tall horses have small offspring and 2 very small have tall. I will probably never buy another foal because you can spend a fortune in purchase price, training,upkeep only to have it stripped away in 5 years and wind up with a grade pony.

 

[Heart L Ranch]

I totally agree with Mona. If AMHA wants to truly be a breed, then you need to still register anything (that is of course out of 2 AMHA parents) that goes over into a breeding stock classification. They cannot be shown but they can continue to produce. If this is not done, they really are not a "breed"

 

[Yaddax3]

A few things:

We show mostly AMHR but have shown AMHA. A few years ago, we hardshipped a mini gelding into AMHA. He always has measured from 33 1/2 to 34 -- never over. However, if this new way of measuring puts him over, will AMHA give me a refund for the $500 I paid to hardship him?

I ask that somewhat facetiously -- I know I'd never get a refund.

However ...

I am serious when I ask this:

Would this even be an issue if some of the people who have been measuring for AMHA did it correctly and didn't succumb to peer pressure or worry about straining friendships if a horse went over?

I believe Riverdance noted that some trainers/exhibitors try duping measurers. Unless the person measuring is legally blind, lacks morals or not paying attention, they should be able to tell when someone is trying to pull a fast one.

One last thing, and this question is not meant to offend, just to be educated and either support or strike down a belief I've heard from others: Do some AMHA-only exhibitors fear that horses coming over via hardship from AMHR will start taking blue ribbons and world titles away from them?

 

[ruffian]

I feel that the Miniature Horse will NEVER be a TRUE BREED, because even though the bloodlines have not been added to with outside blood, being a height registry, they will never be a pure BREED registry. no.gif If they wer a true BREED, then oversized horses would never lose their registration.

There are very few "Pure" breed registry - Look at quarter horses, thoroughbreds, and POA's. National Show Horse. So why can't Miniatures become a breed?

As I understand it - a POA must be under a certain height, or they loose their papers. I wouldn't tell those folks they're not a breed. If a Quarter Horse has too much white in the wrong part of their body, they loose their papers, I'm not telling those folks they're not a breed, and they certainly are not purebreds, if you are saying purebreds such as Arabian or Lippizan. If a mini goes over height, or has dwarf characteristics, I wouldn't have a problem with them not being a miniature. I breed for miniatures under 34", and am very careful in my stock. I bought a mare that was supposed to be AMHA/AMHR, but outgrew her papers. So that's why I am breeding AMHR also. I happen to believe that if horses that go oversize are depapered (is that a word??

), then it would help reduce the foal of 2 32" parents grown to 37. Eventually.

I would have liked to see them go to measuring at the withers, and adding 2" to the AMHA. I would think that most true 34" horses would still measure in, and there's little chance of being in the wrong place to measure, and people from the sidelines can see where the stick is.

 

[Riverdance]

I totally agree with Mona. If AMHA wants to truly be a breed, then you need to still register anything (that is of course out of 2 AMHA parents) that goes over into a breeding stock classification. They cannot be shown but they can continue to produce. If this is not done, they really are not a "breed"

Yes, this would be the way to go and perhaps in the future they will go that way.

In dogs, if a breed standard requires a dog to be no more than a certain height and they go over, they still keep their papers, but can no longer be shown. The ones that go over end up, for the most part, not being bred, because their offspring stands a chance of going over too. Thus would be the same in AMHA Miniature horses.

If AMHA goes the way of creating a breed, they will have to look at this in the future. For now, it was a sucess to get them to close the registry.

For AMHR to close their registry from AMHA horses is to cut their nose off to spite their face. AMHA is not trying to keep out AMHR horses, but to stop so many grade horses being registered and then sold as AMHA horses, when they really have no pedigree at all. This includes the ponys, as a pony is its own registered breed. At some point you have to stop adding other breed bloodlines.

They feel that there is an over abundance of AMHA horses and it is killing the market. This is not to spite AMHR, they are not in a contest with AMHR, and AMHR should try to stop being in a contest with AMHA. For the most part, AMHR has a diffferet look to their horses than the AMHA horses and most times one will prevail at one show over the other. Once in a while a really good horse will be liked by both clubs.

Both clubs have good and bad points. The AMHR horse tends to look more like pony's, the AMHA horse different. This does not make one better than another, and I am not putting down the pony. After all that is what makes horse races.

This fighting by both clubs is ridicules, it would be like Morgans and Saddlebreds fighting over whos horse was better. After all, Saddlebreds came down from Morgans. Morgans used to mix Arabians and Saddlebreds,(as well as some other breeds) but eventually closed their books too. They did not do this to get back at the other breeds, but to start creating a breed that said Morgan.

AMHA wants to do that too.

Just so that you do not think I hate AMHR, I myself am a member of both clubs, but feel that my horses go more with the AMHA look rather than the AMHR look. This does not mean to say that AMHA is better. But I am also tired of the nasty competitive comments between the two clubs.

.

A few things:

We show mostly AMHR but have shown AMHA. A few years ago, we hardshipped a mini gelding into AMHA. He always has measured from 33 1/2 to 34 -- never over. However, if this new way of measuring puts him over, will AMHA give me a refund for the $500 I paid to hardship him?

I ask that somewhat facetiously -- I know I'd never get a refund.

However ...

I am serious when I ask this:

Would this even be an issue if some of the people who have been measuring for AMHA did it correctly and didn't succumb to peer pressure or worry about straining friendships if a horse went over?

I believe Riverdance noted that some trainers/exhibitors try duping measurers. Unless the person measuring is legally blind, lacks morals or not paying attention, they should be able to tell when someone is trying to pull a fast one.

One last thing, and this question is not meant to offend, just to be educated and either support or strike down a belief I've heard from others: Do some AMHA-only exhibitors fear that horses coming over via hardship from AMHR will start taking blue ribbons and world titles away from them?

First, your gelding would be grandfathered in as was said several times before.

Second, Again with the negative comments with AMHR. AMHA is not worried about AMHR horses beating them. If they are a good horse, great, let them win. My horses are double registered. Does that mean if I win in AMHR, my horse is considered a AMHA horse that beat the AMHR horse, or if I win in AMHA, is it then considered a AMHR horse that beat a AMHA horse,. Come on!! OH!

 

[Belinda]

This is not to spite AMHR, they are not in a contest with AMHR, and AMHR should try to stop being in a contest with AMHA.
The AMHR horse tends to look more like pony's, the AMHA horse different

But I am also tired of the nasty competitive comments between the two clubs.

Sue,

I first would like to say AMHR has Never been in a Contest with AMHA ! ! Not sure why or what makes you think that. And next the "Nasty Competitive comments you are tired of , you just put several in your post

Or it seemed so to me the way I read it.

AND why would AMHR closing their Reg. being cutting off their nose to spite their face , but yet it was OK for AMHA to do OH! Not sure where the logic is there.. ??

Next can I ask when You refer to the AMHR HORSE LOOKING ONE WAY AND THE AMHA HORSE BEING DIFFERENT ,, Tell me the two horses below where do they belong ?? Are they what type according to your post... As both have been reg. with both Assoc. for many years, And they are only one generation away from Shetland Pony.. Just trying to understand your statement above..

Buckeroo picture posted with Marianne's permission..

And I also am a member of both Assoc.. SINCE THE EARLY 1980'S !!!!!! SO I also enjoy and reg. horse with both.. ANd I also show at both National shows.. I would love someday to see both Registry's work together.. Ok now I am off my box and JUMPING WITH BOTH FEET in my FLAME SUIT..

 

[Songcatcher]

One last thing, and this question is not meant to offend, just to be educated and either support or strike down a belief I've heard from others: Do some AMHA-only exhibitors fear that horses coming over via hardship from AMHR will start taking blue ribbons and world titles away from them?

I am not an exhibitor in either A or R, but the statement DOES offend in that it portrays the attitude I see all too often from R only owners that they are superior.

I am a member of BOTH AMHA and AMHR and every horse I own is registered in BOTH registries. I have no hard fast facts, but I would suspect that there are more horses that are double registered than horses in only one or the other. Why do some people insist on pitting one against the other at every opportunity?

 

[Riverdance]

This is not to spite AMHR, they are not in a contest with AMHR, and AMHR should try to stop being in a contest with AMHA.
The AMHR horse tends to look more like pony's, the AMHA horse different

But I am also tired of the nasty competitive comments between the two clubs.

Sue,

I first would like to say AMHR has Never been in a Contest with AMHA ! ! Not sure why or what makes you think that. And next the "Nasty Competitive comments you are tired of , you just put several in your post

Or it seemed so to me the way I read it.

AND why would AMHR closing their Reg. being cutting off their nose to spite their face , but yet it was OK for AMHA to do OH! Not sure where the logic is there.. ??

Next can I ask when You refer to the AMHR HORSE LOOKING ONE WAY AND THE AMHA HORSE BEING DIFFERENT ,, Tell me the two horses below where do they belong ?? Are they what type according to your post... As both have been reg. with both Assoc. for many years, And they are only one generation away from Shetland Pony.. Just trying to understand your statement above..

Buckeroo picture posted with Marianne's permission..

And I also am a member of both Assoc.. SINCE THE EARLY 1980'S !!!!!! SO I also enjoy and reg. horse with both.. ANd I also show at both National shows.. I would love someday to see both Registry's work together.. Ok now I am off my box and JUMPING WITH BOTH FEET in my FLAME SUIT..

Belinda,

I am sorry that you are reading into what I have to say as a negative. I am not trying to be negative. But one person posted that AMHA must be closing their books to spite AMHR and perhaps AMHR should close their books to AMHA. I was trying to say that AMHA is closing their books because they would like to produce a breed rather than just a height breed. AMHR is still a height breed. Another post that perhaps AMHA was afraid of the AMHR horses beating them (which I have read on many posts). yet, I never read these kind of posts from an AMHA person against a AMHR person.

I did not imply that the AMHR horses are ugly or poor or anything else. In many cases the winning horses from AMHR and AMHA have a different look. This is NOT to say one is better than the other. Again, I said that is what makes horse races.

I will AGAIN, say that my horses are also double registered and have done well in both registrys when I showed both. But I find that they do a little better with AMHA amd my taste leads more to the AMHA horses. As did my taste lead to preferring Morgans to Saddlebreds when I bred Morgans. That does not mean I hate Saddlebreds. I find that AMHR leans a little bit more towards the pony/shetland look, Again, nothing wrong with it, but I like the more refined Arabian, Morgan look that seems to do better at the AMHA shows.

One of the reasons why I stopped going to AMHR shows was all of the competative negativeness regarding AMHA and their horses. I got tired of hearing it over and over again. At the AMHA shows, I never hear this negativeness from AMHA members. Both clubs will only get along better when each club quits saying negative things or competative things against the other.

I too would love to see both registrys work together and neither one of them say something negative about the other, or think that one is better than the other. Again, they both have pros and cons.

 

[Yaddax3]

First, your gelding would be grandfathered in as was said several times before.

I noticed the term "grandfathered in" used in several other posts, but I don't recall seeing an explanation of exactly what that meant. So now I ask for the sake of clarity: How will AMHA define grandfathered in? Does it mean my horse and others will be measured the "old way" or does it mean they will get a one-inch or so height allowance?

Second, Again with the negative comments with AMHR. AMHA is not worried about AMHR horses beating them. If they are a good horse, great, let them win. My horses are double registered. Does that mean if I win in AMHR, my horse is considered a AMHA horse that beat the AMHR horse, or if I win in AMHA, is it then considered a AMHR horse that beat a AMHA horse,. Come on!!

As I said, I wasn't looking to offend, but apparently I did.

Sorry if I ruffled a feather or two, but, Sue, you've done some ruffling of your own by saying AMHR horses look different than AMHA horses. As someone once said to me: Come on! OH!

...the statement DOES offend in that it portrays the attitude I see all too often from R only owners that they are superior.

Funny. I have found it to be the other way around.

To clarify: I'm not an R-only owner. Half a dozen of our horses are double registered. I came into this miniature horse world with no preconceived notions about AMHR or AMHA. I have met many wonderful people who exhibit both AMHA and AMHR and many wonderful people who exhibit AMHA-only or AMHR-only.

But I have encountered far more arrogance and smugness among some AMHA-only exhibitors. Quick example: More than one of them told me that any equine that measured over 34 inches was a pony, not a miniature horse. In other words, my AMHR B horses aren't worthy of being called miniature horses.

I wonder what these folks will think now if the so-called "pony" that has been measuring 35 inches will, under the new system, measure 34 inches and suddenly be eligible to show in AMHA. Is it suddenly worthy of the "miniature horse" designation?

I'll shut up now.

 

[Sharron]

I haven't read all the posts, so don't know if someone has already thought of this or not...to me in order for the AMHA to be considered a breed...I feel you should be able to breed a 32" stallion to a 32" mare and know without a shadow of a doubt you will get a 32" & under foal when mature... Just my thoughts. And with today's gene pool this isn't going to happen...

On another note....which AMHR show did you attend Sue that was so negative about the AMHA individuals and their animals showing there? You see our North TX club puts on the largest ASPC/AMHR show at Glen Rose every spring and fall...The only negativity that I hear about the AMHA people coming to our shows is "They want to CHANGE everything" to be like AMHA, with how we show in our classes, etc, they want to change our rules to suit themselves, instead of following the AMHR rulebook, and abiding by THOSE rules. If that is the negativity you have been experiencing, then maybe the reasons put forth here, are why you have heard the comments. After all you came to play in our court, so follow the rules set forth by our association, we are expected to follow AMHA rules when we show at AMHA shows, and those of us that do, DON'T TRY TO CHANGE the rules to suit ourselves, nor talk bad about the association. I have been a member of both associations since the early 1980's, and have seen many changes come and go with both associations. Some good and Some bad...it will remain to be seen if the things voted on at the AMHA convention are for the good or detriment of the association. Only time will tell on that score...

I too wish those naysayers on BOTH sides would still their wagging tongues and work as hard FOR EACH ASSOCIATION as they are working to tear them both down.

I will go back to lurking...and maybe some of what I have written will make those naysayers, stop and rethink their actions.

Sharron

 

[Riverdance]

I haven't read all the posts, so don't know if someone has already thought of this or not...to me in order for the AMHA to be considered a breed...I feel you should be able to breed a 32" stallion to a 32" mare and know without a shadow of a doubt you will get a 32" & under foal when mature... Just my thoughts. And with today's gene pool this isn't going to happen...

On another note....which AMHR show did you attend Sue that was so negative about the AMHA individuals and their animals showing there? You see our North TX club puts on the largest ASPC/AMHR show at Glen Rose every spring and fall...The only negativity that I hear about the AMHA people coming to our shows is "They want to CHANGE everything" to be like AMHA, with how we show in our classes, etc, they want to change our rules to suit themselves, instead of following the AMHR rulebook, and abiding by THOSE rules. If that is the negativity you have been experiencing, then maybe the reasons put forth here, are why you have heard the comments. After all you came to play in our court, so follow the rules set forth by our association, we are expected to follow AMHA rules when we show at AMHA shows, and those of us that do, DON'T TRY TO CHANGE the rules to suit ourselves, nor talk bad about the association. I have been a member of both associations since the early 1980's, and have seen many changes come and go with both associations. Some good and Some bad...it will remain to be seen if the things voted on at the AMHA convention are for the good or detriment of the association. Only time will tell on that score...

I too wish those naysayers on BOTH sides would still their wagging tongues and work as hard FOR EACH ASSOCIATION as they are working to tear them both down.

I will go back to lurking...and maybe some of what I have written will make those naysayers, stop and rethink their actions.

Sharron

Sharron,

I attended AMHR shows for several years. For the first 5 years I was in Minis I did only AMHR, both locally and at the Nationals. The negativeness was at all of the shows, especially the Nationals. It was not about AMHA not liking the way AMHR was running their shows, but comments more like AMHR is so much better than AMHA, or AMHA is going to go under, did you hear, with oh so big a smile on their face. on and on along those lines. When I went to my fist AMHA shw I was pleasantly surprised with the difference.

You are right that no one from AMHA should go to your shows and complain that they are not run like AMHA shows. They are at fault for doing that. You have your shows and you run them your way. If they do not like it, they do not have to show. with you.

As I have said over and over, it sure would be nice if the competativeness and negativeness would go away. If you had read through all of these posts you would have seen posts like AMHA was closing their books to spite AMHR. Or "what are AMHA people afraid that the AMHR horses will beat them" This is all unnessessary!

 

[Sanny]

One of the reasons why I stopped going to AMHR shows was all of the competative negativeness regarding AMHA and their horses. I got tired of hearing it over and over again. At the AMHA shows, I never hear this negativeness from AMHA members. Both clubs will only get along better when each club quits saying negative things or competative things against the other.

I've been following this post and had decided not to get involved in it because of the negative direction the post was taking but after reading this comment I had to say something. I have a great deal of respect for Sue and her horses and like her a lot, but I have had the opposite experience.

Let me share a story:

We went to eight or nine shows last year and attended most of the miniature horse-related functions in our area so we were around a lot of AMHA and AMHR people. The only time last year that I heard this sort of negativity about one organization versus the other was from an AMHA-only exhibitor. I was looking at horses this exhibitor had for sale at an auction and the exhibitor asked me how our horses did at AMHR Nationals.

I started to tell them and was cut off by the AMHA-only exhibitor, who went off on a tangent about how much better AMHA horses were than AMHR horses. She told me that I would have gotten my butt kicked if I had showed the same horses we won with at AMHR Nationals at AMHA Worlds and that a top ten horse at AMHA Worlds would beat any AMHR National Champion.

I was pretty much speechless and wasn't about to get into an argument about AMHA versus AMHR so I kept my mouth shut and just stood there and listened as she made her sales pitch. (I guess this was her way of trying to persuade me to bid on her horses.)

We went to the Minnesota State Fair two years ago and our double-registered horses that mostly show AMHR managed to do very well under the AMHA judges. We took just three horses and won $1,300 in prize money, beating this AMHA-only exhibitor's horses along the way. Our biggest winner was the gelding we hardshipped into AMHA. By the way, the only negativity we heard was from AMHA-only exhibitors bashing AMHR.

It's not the entire AMHA membership or AMHR membership sniping at one another. As with most things, it's only a few people here and there who feel a need to climb on their soapbox and prattle on.

Speaking of prattling on, I've said enough. Besides "Ghost Whisperer" is about to start.

 

[Riverdance]

First, your gelding would be grandfathered in as was said several times before.

I noticed the term "grandfathered in" used in several other posts, but I don't recall seeing an explanation of exactly what that meant. So now I ask for the sake of clarity: How will AMHA define grandfathered in? Does it mean my horse and others will be measured the "old way" or does it mean they will get a one-inch or so height allowance?

Second, Again with the negative comments with AMHR. AMHA is not worried about AMHR horses beating them. If they are a good horse, great, let them win. My horses are double registered. Does that mean if I win in AMHR, my horse is considered a AMHA horse that beat the AMHR horse, or if I win in AMHA, is it then considered a AMHR horse that beat a AMHA horse,. Come on!!

As I said, I wasn't looking to offend, but apparently I did.

Sorry if I ruffled a feather or two, but, Sue, you've done some ruffling of your own by saying AMHR horses look different than AMHA horses. As someone once said to me: Come on! OH!

...the statement DOES offend in that it portrays the attitude I see all too often from R only owners that they are superior.

Funny. I have found it to be the other way around.

To clarify: I'm not an R-only owner. Half a dozen of our horses are double registered. I came into this miniature horse world with no preconceived notions about AMHR or AMHA. I have met many wonderful people who exhibit both AMHA and AMHR and many wonderful people who exhibit AMHA-only or AMHR-only.

But I have encountered far more arrogance and smugness among some AMHA-only exhibitors. Quick example: More than one of them told me that any equine that measured over 34 inches was a pony, not a miniature horse. In other words, my AMHR B horses aren't worthy of being called miniature horses.

I wonder what these folks will think now if the so-called "pony" that has been measuring 35 inches will, under the new system, measure 34 inches and suddenly be eligible to show in AMHA. Is it suddenly worthy of the "miniature horse" designation?

I'll shut up now.

I am not trying to ruffel any feathers by saying that the WINNING AMHR horses look somewhat different then the WINNING AMHA horses. They usually do.. That is not implying that AMHA is better or AMHR is better, please stop trying to read into something that is not there!! How many AMHA/AMHR horses have won both registries? Very few.

I will say it again. Morgans look different than Saddlebreds, yet they both come down from the same breed. That is not saying that a Morgan is any better than a Saddlebred. I just liked the Morgan look better, but I do not dislike the Saddlebred.

I like the look of the AMHA horses better and what usually wins with AMHA, verses the look of the AMHR horses and what usually wins in AMHR. THAT DOES NOT MAKE ONE BETTER THAN THE OTHER, IT IS JUST MY OPINION. And I am NOT trying to be negative. So stop taking it that way!!

Should I be upset because you like the look of the AMHR horses better or the AMHR registry better. Who cares, enjoy, they are a good club!!

 

[Boinky]

We've had the same experience. We showed AMHA our first show season since it was the closest show (and that isn't so close..lol). the first show didn't have much attendance and the people were fairly friendly and introduced themselves. The consecutive show's were aweful. the people were NOT AT ALL friendly. May just be our "area" people but it seems to be the same attitude i've seen with many AMHA only competitors.

I guess i don't get where the statement that AMHA has more arabian looking ones comes from. Quite frankly i've seen more "shetlands" that look as much like arabians as almost any "pure" mini..... and i suspect that's probably why they do so well in a world that wants their mini's to look like shetlands (not to mention many have correct conformation that has been completely disreguarded and bred away from for the small size) They are refined, leggy, necky, hooky ears ect. I"m not saying AMHA is bad .... i just haven't been impressed with the reception we got from it. It does not do the registry justice nor the clubs that behave this way. I can tell you i'm not the only one that has shown AMHR almost primarily now because of it. Our second year showing mini's we showed the AMHR circuit and it was VERY VERY friendly. even the big name trainers said hello and were friendly and they had no idea who we were from anyone else. no one gave us the cold shoulder because we were new ect. They were all very helpful and encouraging. to me just the fact that it was more friendly was a BIG BIG thing that draws me to that registry over the other.

 

[muffntuf]

To have a "breed" with a height restriction is still just a height registry regardless of a closed registry or not. Something needs to be done about the over horses like APHA and ApHC did for their solid color horses and the AQHA did allowing cremello/perlino and excessive white. A breed is by blood- breeding one registered horse to another registered horse - you still have your ideal but you don't pull the papers if they aren't ideal (otherwise you should pull their papers if they don't pass a conformation test!)- I've seen 2 very tall horses have small offspring and 2 very small have tall. I will probably never buy another foal because you can spend a fortune in purchase price, training,upkeep only to have it stripped away in 5 years and wind up with a grade pony.

APHA and AQHA have made the new rules that they will recognize outcrops of each other's regsitry, which opens them to more registered horses, and they can now compete into their breed stock classes. Which by the way is growing in leaps and bounds, the breed stock classes.

I feel that the Miniature Horse will NEVER be a TRUE BREED, because even though the bloodlines have not been added to with outside blood, being a height registry, they will never be a pure BREED registry. no.gif If they wer a true BREED, then oversized horses would never lose their registration.

There are very few "Pure" breed registry - Look at quarter horses, thoroughbreds, and POA's. National Show Horse. So why can't Miniatures become a breed?

As I understand it - a POA must be under a certain height, or they loose their papers. I wouldn't tell those folks they're not a breed. If a Quarter Horse has too much white in the wrong part of their body, they loose their papers, I'm not telling those folks they're not a breed, and they certainly are not purebreds, if you are saying purebreds such as Arabian or Lippizan. If a mini goes over height, or has dwarf characteristics, I wouldn't have a problem with them not being a miniature. I breed for miniatures under 34", and am very careful in my stock. I bought a mare that was supposed to be AMHA/AMHR, but outgrew her papers. So that's why I am breeding AMHR also. I happen to believe that if horses that go oversize are depapered (is that a word??

), then it would help reduce the foal of 2 32" parents grown to 37. Eventually.

I would have liked to see them go to measuring at the withers, and adding 2" to the AMHA. I would think that most true 34" horses would still measure in, and there's little chance of being in the wrong place to measure, and people from the sidelines can see where the stick is.

Again, please keep in mind the ever changing world of horses - the stock horse registries, etc. have a way of dealing with horses that have cropped out - breed stock, but they have developed breed stock classes. AQHA and APHA have been a fore leaderin this and have now started accepting each others crop outs, but only in the breed stock classes.

 

[Fred]

I may be wrong but my feeling is that they don't want to hardship in any more small shetlands. When the R registry upped the fees a LOT of amha breeders jumped in and double registered their stock. At the time I heard a lot of "thats not fair" but heck the shetlands that were registered in were paying a hefty fee to do so why not the other mini registry. I for one prefer the AMHR and I'll tell you why. I worked for a pretty well known farm for many years and they were pretty much strictly amha. The rotten snobby attitude that you were socially inferior UNLESS you showed amha was how it was and even today in this area with some people still is. I am not joking and it is STILL prevelant today, I live in Boinky's area and she is not kidding. I know the prime insult when I beat the farm owners stallion was your "shetland" isn't as good as my miniature or the other one was " he's too big" heck he's 34 inches, last I knew that was the height requirement. My horse is reg amha and goes back quite a few generations but they think shetland is an insult, THEY ALL GO BACK TO SHETLANDS ANYWAY. There are many good people in amha but the real snobs stand out. I do know some fantastic people in the amha organization and I do plan on doing some shows this year but I am only going where I know I will have a good time.