AMHA is CLosing Their Books!! As well as a new Height rule change!!
- Thread starter Riverdance
- Start date
Help Support Miniature Horse Talk Forums:
faithfarm
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2005
- Messages
- 156
- Reaction score
- 0
The way I see it, the new way of measuring has more consistency than measuring at the last mane hair. No longer will the measurer have to guess where the real mane stops and fake mane starts. I personally don't care if a horse that is 1/2 inch over gets measured into a class, as long as the 1 1/2 inch taller horses don't.
Many have tried to make this an AMHA vs AMHR issue; it is an accuracy issue. Whether we measure at the base of the withers or the top of the withers makes no difference as long as we are measuring on a bone. And, yes, I agree that overheight AMHA horses should be allowed to keep their papers and used for breeding but not allowed to show.
By the way, if you're selling a horse overseas, measure at the top of the withers and let the buyer know the height, but put the official height on the transfer papers.
Many have tried to make this an AMHA vs AMHR issue; it is an accuracy issue. Whether we measure at the base of the withers or the top of the withers makes no difference as long as we are measuring on a bone. And, yes, I agree that overheight AMHA horses should be allowed to keep their papers and used for breeding but not allowed to show.
By the way, if you're selling a horse overseas, measure at the top of the withers and let the buyer know the height, but put the official height on the transfer papers.
wpsellwood
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2004
- Messages
- 1,513
- Reaction score
- 8
Im just wondering if any of you would of attended the meeting had you known about the measuring change? Or is it just giving you something to complain and argue about? Whats the difference last hair (which is the dumbest thing I had ever heard about coming from large equine) or base of the withers. Talk about beating a dead horse, thats what this topic is.
I"m not sure how many people would have ended up going.. but i think there should be a push to include ALL of the membership in voting not just the priviledged few that can afford to take the time off or the traveling expenses to go. the MEMBERSHIP should be decided on a whole how THEIR club runs not just the very small minority. Almost every other horse (or even dog club) club i've ever been a member of sends out ballots via mail and every member has the right to vote. It's rediculous that it's run the way it is in my own personal opinion and i think you'll see it's going to end up losing members because they are just not satisfied with how it's being run, managed and that they DONT' truly have a say in what is going on in their club because of a foolish rule that you only have a say if you have enough time and money to travel to make a vote.
Quite frankly i think the membership needs to push for proxy voting and or perhaps push this issue legally. IT IS NOT YOUR CLUB anymore when your not allowed to vote (which in effect is how this works).
Quite frankly i think the membership needs to push for proxy voting and or perhaps push this issue legally. IT IS NOT YOUR CLUB anymore when your not allowed to vote (which in effect is how this works).
bingo
Well-Known Member
In my experience and those I have spoken with the difference is simple up to and over 1 inch.
wpsellwood
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2004
- Messages
- 1,513
- Reaction score
- 8
Base of withers or last mane is still not the top of the withers, still subjective so between the two choices I see no difference and cant figure out whats the fuss. I went to the barn and only one of my horses will be smaller. Thats because he has high withers with very little mane running down his neck maybe an 1/2 inch but if I leave of trail of fake mane and hairspray magic marker etc hes probably the same. So arguing about it to me I find funny because they are both stupid places to measure. Supposedly end of mane or base of withers. So now the A measures at one stupid place and the R measures at another stupid place.
McBunz
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2004
- Messages
- 401
- Reaction score
- 0
I am not fond of either of the AMHA rule changes.. My suggestion would be to send out a ballot with proposed changes to all members along with their renewal of membership each yr. This way we would all have a voice in what comes down.
Mona
Well-Known Member
YES! THAT would be the only FAIR way to ensure EVERYONE gets to vote on what they believe in!!I am not fond of either of the AMHA rule changes.. My suggestion would be to send out a ballot with proposed changes to all members along with their renewal of membership each yr. This way we would all have a voice in what comes down.
They never "measured" the same before! As I have stated here I have a filly that "grew" an inch in one month going from an A to an R show because the requirements are that she had to be under 32" at A for her age and under 33" at R. So according to the stewards at those shows she was under 32 at the A show and a month later just under 33 for the R show! It's all going to rely on who's doing the measuring and the pressure that's put on them!
Last edited by a moderator:
I just want to applaud Jodi for her thankless job of always trying to answer AMHA questions when these threads come up!!! Not many people step up to the plate like Jodi does in trying her best to answer peoples questions on LB.
Thanks jodi!
Kay
Thanks jodi!
Kay
I will have to correct your statement , as AMHR did and still does measure at the "" OTHER STUPID PLACE"" THE LAST HAIR OF THE MANE.They never "measured" the same before! As I have stated here I have a filly that "grew" an inch in one month going from an A to an R show because the requirements are that she had to be under 32" at A for her age and under 33" at R. So according to the stewards at those shows she was under 32 at the A show and a month later just under 33 for the R show! It's all going to rely on who's doing the measuring and the pressure that's put on them!
AND also the Yearling under class is 32" & under --- and the over Yearling class is 32 -36" Now it is not uncommon for people to measure at the last hair of the mane and have big difference , and I think but NOT sure
It was my understanding that the orginal proposal was to Measure at the """ drum roll "" you got it .
"TOP OF THE WITHER " But they ones there did not want that because of the reasons mentioned many times already
OH! OH!Ok I must stop , sorry I just seem to start typing on this subject and just can not stop..
AND I agree Thank You Jodi,
As I sit here and prepare for our Spring Board Meeting for AMHR/ASPC..
S
StarRidgeAcres
Guest
Agreed! Thanks Jodi!I just want to applaud Jodi for her thankless job of always trying to answer AMHA questions when these threads come up!!! Not many people step up to the plate like Jodi does in trying her best to answer peoples questions on LB.
Thanks jodi!
Kay
Yes, but what about those horses who win AMHA Championships and then go on to win AMHR OVER Championships? That doesn't make sense to me, but it happens.The notion of AMHA being afraid that the AMHR horses will beat them is ridiculous. We have had the same horses do well - Championships etc. in AMHA - and then do equally as well in AMHR Under... Championships again. HORRORS!
Field-of-Dreams
Well-Known Member
Yes, but what about those horses who win AMHA Championships and then go on to win AMHR OVER Championships? That doesn't make sense to me, but it happens.The notion of AMHA being afraid that the AMHR horses will beat them is ridiculous. We have had the same horses do well - Championships etc. in AMHA - and then do equally as well in AMHR Under... Championships again. HORRORS!
Looks like it's gonna happen a LOT more frequently now!
Lucy
wpsellwood
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2004
- Messages
- 1,513
- Reaction score
- 8
I dont get what you are correcting???
I too would like to thank Jodi for always coming forward to answer questions...
However, like I said before, this is nothing more than a 'smoke screen' to allow already oversized horses keep their papers and continue showing, when in fact, they should not have been in the first place! Yes, feet can still be spread out, horses stretched and backs 'shrunk' to still fit into measuring. This just means that even bigger ones can now be shrunk in to fit..
Being 'grandfathered in' is only showing that folks are choosing to ignore the illegally registered horses out there and are making excuses to allow them to keep their papers that they should not have!
The top of the withers is much less able to be dropped than the rest of the back, and a much more consistant measuring spot, and less flexible with less 'shrinkage'. The official size could have been changed to 35" to accomidate the change.
I personally would have liked to have seen the current rules ENFORCED CORRECTLY, not changed to create another fiasco.
I also would like a picture to show where this measurement is supposed to take place.. so future horses going permanent can be measured in correctly.
A will now measure in one place, R another, and Europe another-
In regards to many of us not attending the meetings/conventions, etc.. sorry but many of us would love to, however cannot get the time off work, nor have the finances to do so- it is not that we dont want to!! I think that major rule changes like this should be by mailed ballot to the entire membership, not the decision of the few that consistantly run things to suit themselves.
I dont see how this is for the 'betterment' of anything except to create even more strife and hard feelings among those within the organization.
However, like I said before, this is nothing more than a 'smoke screen' to allow already oversized horses keep their papers and continue showing, when in fact, they should not have been in the first place! Yes, feet can still be spread out, horses stretched and backs 'shrunk' to still fit into measuring. This just means that even bigger ones can now be shrunk in to fit..
Being 'grandfathered in' is only showing that folks are choosing to ignore the illegally registered horses out there and are making excuses to allow them to keep their papers that they should not have!
The top of the withers is much less able to be dropped than the rest of the back, and a much more consistant measuring spot, and less flexible with less 'shrinkage'. The official size could have been changed to 35" to accomidate the change.
I personally would have liked to have seen the current rules ENFORCED CORRECTLY, not changed to create another fiasco.
I also would like a picture to show where this measurement is supposed to take place.. so future horses going permanent can be measured in correctly.
A will now measure in one place, R another, and Europe another-
In regards to many of us not attending the meetings/conventions, etc.. sorry but many of us would love to, however cannot get the time off work, nor have the finances to do so- it is not that we dont want to!! I think that major rule changes like this should be by mailed ballot to the entire membership, not the decision of the few that consistantly run things to suit themselves.
I dont see how this is for the 'betterment' of anything except to create even more strife and hard feelings among those within the organization.
sfmini
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2002
- Messages
- 3,088
- Reaction score
- 136
I know I unsubscribed from this thread, but I do need to correct one thing that I had said. I had said the rule proposals were published on the website and this is not the case. I apologize for that, they were only published in the Miniature Horse World.
Ok, re-unsubscribing....
Ok, re-unsubscribing....
