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

[ontherisefarm]

Mona makes a very good point. The more I think about this new measuring thing the more disappointed I get. This could have a total snowball affect that was not thought of before. What if AMHR decides to now require all horses from AMHA to now be inspected before registering them due to the new way of measuring.Which could cost alot more money than it does now to register them R. I enjoy both registries and would like to have all of my horses double registered some day. IMO if someone wants to cheat bad enough they will end of story. I really dont think this will solve anything. Like quite a few said top of the withers wouldve been better.

 

[Mona]

IMO if someone wants to cheat bad enough they will end of story.

EXACTLY!!! Changing the method of measuring will never end the discrepancies in measuring at shows or at home! If someone wants to squeeze under or even over for that matter, all it will take is a little constructive thinking to find a way to get away with it!

 

[wpsellwood]

Here is an upside to changing where to measure. I saw a new person at a show and they were very unhappy as they couldnt get their horse in to the class they were told that horse had been showing in. Well I look at the horse and this person had shaved off the base part of the mane actually went up the neck a bit. The rule book says last part of the mane, the person measuring had to follow the rules. So the horse got bumped up. This new rule will help the new person that doesnt know to leave the mane trail. Or the accidently clip sine off in ones of those oooppss. There is now a spot that no one can pretend to make longer or accidently make shorter. Try to look at the positive side

 

[Jean_B]

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..

FINALLY - someone has the guts (and knowledge) to make the INFORMED statement that the backbone of AMHA ..... just one or two generations back on the papers in MANY cases .... is the shetland!! No flames here!

And I have to agree - if the books are closed and if the miniature is ever to be considered a breed - there MUST NOT BE ANY PULLING OF PAPERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They maybe cannot show, but if an animal is the result of breeding 2 registered animals from the so-called "breed"....the resulting offspring is and MUST be registerable as part of the breed no matter how tall they grow ..... or it is not a breed and never will be.

One thing that would help - to some degree - is if AMHA required that anyone measuring at a show had to take a class and be approved by the home office!! Right now, any schmuck off the street can measure at a show....they don't even have to know one end of the horse from another. Believe me I KNOW!! I announced at an AMHA show which shall remain nameless a couple years ago. The person who was supposed to do the measuring was quite late, people were standing in line waiting....still no "measuring person". I had my stick with me and the show manager asked me to do it. Eventually the person who was supposed to do it showed up but because I had started measuring no one else could....and asked all kinds of STUPID questions....didn't even know it was supposed to be at the last hairs!! And I think some shows do this on purpose....hiring people who don't have a clue BECAUSE THEY CAN, and they can buffalo (or bully) this poor unsuspecting and uninformed schmuck into doing their cheating for them!!!

Ok - now I'm off MY soapbox!

 

[StarRidgeAcres]

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..

FINALLY - someone has the guts (and knowledge) to make the INFORMED statement that the backbone of AMHA ..... just one or two generations back on the papers in MANY cases .... is the shetland!! No flames here!

And I have to agree - if the books are closed and if the miniature is ever to be considered a breed - there MUST NOT BE ANY PULLING OF PAPERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They maybe cannot show, but if they an animal is the result of breeding 2 registered animals from the so-called "breed"....the resulting offspring is and MUST be registerable as part of the breed ..... or it is not a breed and never will be.

Even my little under 30" horses have shetland not that far back, several of them right on the papers! Someone please feel free to correct me, but aren't they ALL originally from shetlands?

I personally don't care HOW we measure, the horse is what it is. I ALWAYS make a point of saying that to the measurer. They always (both at A and R shows) will measure one of my horses and then say something like "29.5 how does that sound?" And I ALWAYS say "it is what it is!" Then they look at me like I'm from another planet because I don't care what the horse measures at!

And yes, I'm always in a class where I know my horse is right at the height limit and there's always one or more an inch taller! It's going to happen, we can't get so stressed out over it. I personally believe what goes around comes around. All each of us can do is worry about our own horse and let the rules (and karma) take care of the cheaters.

 

[Heart L Ranch]

AMHA is trying to implement licencing measuring stewards. I am signed up to attend a AMHA measuring clinic at the end of this month. I believe (do not quote me on this...LOL) that this is the first one being offered and it is being hosted by the Northwest Miniature Horse Club. From my understanding we attend the clinic and will have to pass a test at the end and will be carded. Now I am wondering if this clinic will still be held and if we will be taught to find that "special" place to measure.....

 

[ClickMini]

Interestingly enough, Lori, someone was at my house a couple of weeks ago and was showing me this technique, which I had never seen nor heard of! So apparently this is not "new." At any rate, that person will be at the measuring clinic, as will I. I think it is something that anyone who shows should at least audit. Then you know the correct way to measure at home, and also will be familiar with the process at the show. That is my reason for going at any rate. And yes, I am signing up to be "certified."

 

[maestoso]

Eliminating hardshipping won't make the miniature horse any more of a breed than it is with the hardshipping. It can't change what already is, it only shortens the spectrum. To me it sounds like the point of this is to try and make the registry more prestigious........ I see nothing wrong with hardshipping. What difference does it make? There are plenty of crap horses with papers, with records that go way back. Personally I'd rather see a NICE horse hardshipped in and be an asset to quality breeding. Next thing you know, our horses will have to be evaluated as weanlings for someone to decide weather or not they are worthy or papers. I just don't see the point of this.

As for the measuring thing, call me a pessimist, but I agree with those who say that no matter what rule you make, someone will find a way to cheat it.

 

[Feather]

Listening to the online voting several discussions were running as the voting was processing; much discussion had already developed from the committee's meetings.

Closed registry: One discussion was to slow the "pet quality" production down.

Measuring at top of withers drew a "Down" vote as several groups were concerned about losing

too many performance horses. Measuring at the base of the withers voted in with little opposed.

91(?) people were registered at National Meeting & 94 were logged in by internet today.

A point was made that they were not trying to copy ANY registry but to choose the best route for AMHA.

They also voted to ONLY REGISTER a horse w/both parents from North America.

Etc, Etc, Etc.

No rule or by-law can please everyone. But they have to start somewhere when a problem arises & is pursued by some part of the membership going through required proceedures. The meeting are open to all members & for now it is what it is. On-line voting is down the road but at least now on the radar screen.

My but it does start some lively discussions, don't these annual meetings!!!

 

[R3]

The vote to only register horses with parents in North America had to do with the current HARDSHIP rule, not with regular registrations, and it does not prevent hardshipping of horses in any country if the foal can be parent qualified as an offspring of two already registered AMHA parents.

 

[Jill]

I don't think AMHA and AMHR horses look different NOW. I mean, most of mine are BOTH. They look like minis. But, I can imagine given more time, it could be that the AMHA's don't look nearly as refined as the (under) AMHR's with the bigger selection of breeding animals and lines.

Since most of my breeding horses are both, it won't effect me at this time but it does tip my favor even further towards AMHR and sets the stage for that to be so on into the future as well.

 

[Irish Hills Farm]

Closed registry: One discussion was to slow the "pet quality" production down.

This makes no sense to me. If you are into "pet quality" horses, you surely are NOT going to spend the money to hardship a horse in. As to slowing down the pet quality, you just locked those horses in once the registery is closed. And I certainly don't see those breeders slowing down at all. OH!

It would only make sense to me to continue hardshipping horses in, especially if they can improve the breed. Maybe a smart thing to do,would've been to increase the criteria for hardshipping.

 

[Jill]

How many people have paid $600 and $1,200 to hardship "pet quality" horses and isn't there an inspection process? (said sarcastically as I know there is an inspection).

And, you know... it almost makes me wonder if it's worth it to hardship the ONE AMHR only breeding animal I own... If what I can imagine about preferring the future look of AMHR over AMHA holds true. BUT, "whatever".

Okay I really could care less about the AMHA/AMHR arguing BUT...

Here is a horse skeleton. I am currently studying horse and animal anatomy because it's my current art class.

Now, the "withers" are those tall dorsal vertebrae that stick way up, the tallest part is where most horses are measured. You can feel most of those dorsal vertebrae... Between WHICH one of those vertebrae are the AMHA horses to be measured between? As you can see, there is no distinct bones that make a divot.

Andrea

Excellent addition to the discussion. Looking at the skelton, I can see that people can SINCERELY and HONESTLY debate where to correctly measure with the new rule.

I almost can feel it... my AMHA horses all just shrunk.

 

[BLACKWATER FARMS]

I'm following this thread with interest.

For me I see the issue with the height--where to measure--is certainly an issue but in order for the "miniature" horse to be a breed there needs to be a TYPE standard otherwise it's still just a HEIGHT REGISTRY--whether it's at the last mane hairs, top or bottom of the withers.

JMHO

Linda

 

[Yaddax3]

It's all about money, isn't it?

AMHA breeders, particularly AMHA-only breeders, put much higher pricetags on their minis. There must have been sheer and utter panic at the AMHA Worlds when some folks realized their high-priced minis would plummet in value if measuring was done by the book.

So, they changed the book.

If it is true, as stated on this post and another one, that this so-called notch could mean a 35-inch mini can now measure in at 34 inches than this rule change will now validate minis that had their papers pulled or were at risk of losing them.

And if that is the case, it was a selfish and transparent vote. Imagine how thrilled the AMHA-only breeder must be to have a 35-inch mini whose price just went up several thousand dollars.

I'm not knocking it. Matter of fact, I'd like to be just as selfish and transparent. I'd like to see AMHR adopt this rule if it means a 39-inch horse can now measure in at 38. We have a two-year-old that may go over a half-inch or so, making him nothing more than a pet mini. He's a stunning-looking horse with a better trot than some of our national champions.

Let's go AMHR. Let's be selfish and transparent, too.

 

[nightflight]

IMO

The registry almost has to pull papers from horses that do measure a million miles oversize. Why? Because we the breeders won't do it. If a horse falls so far from standard that it can't even be considered a miniature horse (as stated by our standard of perfection) we don't want to be held to the rules - we want to breed it breed it breed it and not loose that almighty dollar.

A breed can have a disqualifying fault - in this case height.

If we the breeders step up and measure our horses as they are (instead of sliding under the bar and griping because someone may pull our papers), well will pull those papers ourselves before the registry ever measures those horses. There you go. If we apply words like ethical, and terms like follow the rules, or breed to the standard to ourselves, the whole thing becomes a non-issue, doesn't it?

 

[LaVern]

Wow, Does this mean Ol' Reb (NFC's Rowdys Rebel) is back in? I have been a promotor of becoming our own Blood Breed for along time, but this seems like it came up pretty fast and perhaps was not given enough people a chance to have some input. When visiting with some of our AMHR leaders about closing the Registry, the response has usually been the same. "We have to think this through" What we do now will affect generations of people and horses. Very wise in my opinion.

It is my personal opinion that this Forum is like a big old fashion dinner table. Where we all get a chance to sit down and say what we want and listen to the other members of our Big Old Family. I don't know how many times my opinon has been changed by what someone else has said.

I used to grumble about the makeup of the AMHR board of directors having the ablity to okay or not what was voted on at the general meeting, now I see the wisdom of it. They can say hey," We had better study on this alittle bit."

I so want our miniatures to be their own blood breed with their own look some day, but I think it has to be hashed over for perhaps years, so that we don't mess up. Renee LaBarre Reiten

 

[Shortpig]

I think it's great they have chosen one way or the other. I guess my question here after reading several posts is this, how many horses have you seen where the back is higher than the withers? If your horse was measured at the last hair of the mane and that was below wither height then it should never measure over with the new measurement. Now I could agree it would be an issue if they chose to measure at butt height.

Some horses being butt high. But the dip is probably at the lowest point possible on most horses. Some horses have more of a rise from back to withers than others. So this will allow those horses to be registered.

If you have a horse carrying a little too much back flab that can and will increase height of the withers also.

I think one issue I haven't seen mentioned here is what about the people who own the larger horses, letting their heels grow so they measure taller. The minis is the reverse of that. Cut those heels down real short and keep their feet trimmed back to the nubbins so they measure under the mark if only by a hair. If you really want a true measurement on a horse. Top of hoof to top of withers. Eliminate the hoof totally and you will get the true honest height of a horse. I must say though that with the new measurement I now have 3 A

horses. The difference comes from where their mane hairs stop upon the withers. Measured at the dip my

stallion JPF Jimmy Dolittle is now an A horse and probably will measure a little under the 34" mark with no problem. As will son Koda and my mare Ariel. Amazing I still have Jimmy's A papers because he is so

borderline depending on his feet being trimmed. Not sure how I feel about the whole thing at this moment

whether right or wrong. Just how I feel about where to measure.

 

[Boinky]

geesh at this rate i think they should reinstate the horses that's papers have been pulled for being over automatically if they measure within the height requirements and not charge for hardshipping. it's a big joke They are just losing more and more credibility the more foolish stupid things they do. Basically the way horses are already measured (last hair) is a way to dupe the public into thinking our horses are smaller than they technically should be..this is only making it less creditable by shaving off even MORE size.

 

[Leeana]

IMO having two different registrys for one "breed" has always been interesting

. My biggest issue is that the miniature horse is one "breed" (be it height or blood w/e) and we have two different registrys describing the same "breed" as something completely different. Imagine the new comers confusion when they first get into the breed. You wonder why people lean more one way toward one registry then the other BECAUSE they are both so very different, now even more so.

Now it looks like when i meaure my horses im going to have to get two measurements just like to do for my shetlands. An amha measurement and amhr measurement.

I guess we will see how amha stands 2 or 3 years after closing their books. I dont think this was "needed" imo.