Anyone else get an email from Martha Hickham

[Amy]

I haven't read the most recent AMHA Rulebook cover to cover lately, but it at least USED to make clear that judges are NOT allowed to question height; if the horse appears in a class, it is 'supposed to' be there, and its height may not be publically questioned by a judge. I do believe that is how it should be, all things considered. It is for the registry and its management, from the top down, to SEE THAT the RULES, which have been agreed to/set by the MEMBERS, ARE FOLLOWED AND ENFORCED!

I have very limited experience with AMHR, but from what I do have, I would say they have pretty much the SAME issues as AMHA--like it or not.

Margo

Yes, this is correct == however, at a dog show -- IF the judge thinks the dog is oversized - he stops the show class -- puts the stick on the dog in question in the middle of the class & measures him -- if it is over the dog & handler are excused from the class. One judge in particular checks many dogs so obviously many handlers will not go to a show where he is judging -- the same would happen with AMHA -- the fellow that pulled the stick in public would soon not get hired to judge at many shows -- perhaps this is why the horse judges are not allowed to question the height when they are judging- you have to assume they were ALL measured properly by the "official" in charge of measuring.

However, AMHA is in bad need of a "WHAA AMBULANCE" as they are always crying about something-- begging for more dollars to bail them out of whatever latest financial crisis they are in.

When we first started showing we had ALL AMHA horses & showed only AMHA -- later double registered ALL of them into AMHR -- Last year, we dropped our AMHA membership when the latest hue & cry was to have a division for "oversized" horses to BREED with but NOT to SHOW with -- that did it-- we did not renew our membership or send in an AMHA stallion report -- so again -- more member dollars they turned away -- one

can still have "A" sized horses & show with AMHR.

We have "many" under 34" horses & some under 30" horses -- we also have some ASPC/AMHR over 34"

now as well. THey all have their place -- one does need to be "better" than the other -- but YES--- definetely AMHR was The original registry -- Thanks Belinda for the dates.

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

I. A Jack Ruussel that does not fit breed height requirements but is a quality Jack Russel is stiil a Jack Russel, it just cant be shown, it isnt all of the sudden a Collie on crack. Respectfully,

John Eberth

AMHA Genetics Committe Chairman

University of Kentucky Gluck Equine Research Center

Arion Management Inc.

Sorry I tried so hard to stay with you here and was doing pretty good ( I do sometimes have a short attention span) but you lost me with the collie on crack thing OMG I am still laughing.. guess it is so funny to me cause I have a Chihuahua on crack... so I do actually totally get where youare going... bred 6 lb and a 4 1/2 lb and ended up with I kid you not one 18 lb dog..

So yes it totally makes sense to me. And for the record that giant circus freak of a chi (who I love dearly) had a litter of pups all were smaller then her... one of the pups then had a litter and they are pretty close to normal (meaning the size of the grandparents at 5-6 lbs) so the genetics thing can be all over the place as my smallest dogs producest the largest pup and then the size seems to have worked its way back to normal from there.

Having a judge be able to measure would not work either.. poor judges are already accused of favors for there friends ect (it may be true on occasion but not at the rate those that get the gate feel it is)

i think that would open up a whole new can of worms but JMO

 

[wpsellwood]

JMO, having a measuring steward just cost the clubs more money to put one. As I show both A/R the stewards are no better then you or I at measuring. The last time I went to the R nationals and this is the gods honest truth. A big AMHR trainer was measuring next to me. Pushing down on the back while the steward was measuring the horse. No joke. Their hands was on this stretched out huge pony trying to get into the under class. Low and behold it did. So alot of post are we just quit going to A shows, why? Same thing happens in R. I still do both I guess Im just a sucker.

I agree with John on this it would be a big cluster,

Having a judge be able to measure would not work either.. poor judges are already accused of favors for there friends ect (it may be true on occasion but not at the rate those that get the gate feel it is)i think that would open up a whole new can of worms but JMO

 

[miniwhinny]

I pull the AMHA papers on my horses who go oversize and I don't whine about it, not that you are whinning Robin I'm talking in general here, but several are....and trying to change the rules to suit them. I'm just not quite seeing the point of grown people in such an uproar about measuring a little horse.

You SO hit the nail on the head here. The AMHA is for MINIATURE horses. Itty bitty teenie weenie ltttle MINIATURE horses measuring UNDER 34 inches...If breeding true mini's is so hard (to get them under 34 inches) then think about how valuable a true MINI is. Breeders of 34 and under horses should be OUTRAGED that there are people out there who can't breed under 34's, trying to change the rules of OUR registry to get over sized horses in. I do agree we need to measure differntly...absolutly...But IMO anyone with a true mini...UNDER 34 " should fight like heck to keep THEM the true miniature of the AMHA. Wake up, breeders of "A" sized mini's and smell the roses...OUR's are the hardest to breed for in size and perfection...I'm striving for that and I'm fighting like heck to keep them as important as they are.

If I bred an over with my 29 inch stallion I'd hardship AMHR, not whine and pout and cheat and try to get the rules changes for me...I stopped (not sure I ever started) that way back in preschool

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

You SO hit the nail on the head here. The AMHA is for MINIATURE horses. Itty bitty teenie weenie ltttle MINIATURE horses measuring UNDER 34 inches...If breeding true mini's is so hard (to get them under 34 inches) then think about how valuable a true MINI is. should fight like heck to keep THEM the true miniature

Well not to pick on you but that is the whole crux of the issue. breeding true minis isnt hard at all (what is a true mini anyway) lets be honest they are all ponies now matter what cutsey little name you want to call them.

All your DNA and PQ doesnt mean anything since it isnt a breed it is a height registry period - but come on now there are thousands of under 34 in horses heck thousands of under 31 in horses and plenty under 30 in horses so really that doesnt make them valuable by any means.. it takes more then size to keep them worth anything that is the whole issue for so many years AMHA used that argument to try and pull themselves away and make themselves different then the original AMHR

but doesnt seem in the long run to have worked very well for them with all the financial issues they have had over the years

Is it rules they set forth yes.. can they lose people by being unwilling to change yes.. that will be there choice

however that statement always gets me a true mini what on earth does that mean if a registry started tomorrow and decided that 30 was the height limit does that make your 32 in not a true mini????

Seems to me miniature horse (which will always be a pony by definition) is just that a small horse- compare my 37 in mini to a 15 hand horse and guess what he is a small horse therefore a miniature horse not a fake mini, not a wantabe mini but a actual miniature horse

I have to say calling Robin or John whiners and or cheaters is a bit silly really they have been a HUGE part of AMHA for years HUGE part and a huge supporter along with other farms but really now.. doesnt seem like a tantrum by any means it seems like people who have life long experience trying to get an organization to see that sometimes change is good and necessary when you have some of the founding families saying hey this is a problem an issue that needs to be looked at seems logical to me that- they are right. I would never say I know more or better then them I didnt grow up in the royal family of TRUE MINIATURES so to speak so how could I simply laugh off there suggestions and opinions as whining and trying to cheat when the reality is they have much more true knowledge of the industry then I could ever hope to have in a lifetime????

 

[miniwhinny]

I have to say calling Robin or John whiners and or cheaters is a bit silly really they have been a HUGE part of AMHA for years

I think if you read Debby's post again you'll see she made a piont of saying that she didn't think Robin was whining

But I still think that if we aren't a breed but a height registry then the smallest horse is perfection of the breed..like a pyramid..the smallest should be on top and the biggest at the bottom.

 

[JWC sr.]

John You make very valid points as far as the genetics are concerned. As you know height is not something that you can deal with as a simple recsessive or dominate trait that is predictable in any shape, form or fashion. Anyone that says it is needs to go back to the biology books and work up from there, as they are only fooling themselves. OH!

But with that said, I really do not understand why folks are all over the page on this subject and also why they get so bent out of shape about it. To me it is pretty simple. Both of our registries have drawn a line in the sand so to speak. AMHA is 34" or Less, AMHR is 38" or less, simple enough to understand and acceptable to me if that is where they want to be as a collective membership of each.

If either one wants to allow horses fro breeding purposes only that are over those heights is okay by me also. And is probally something they should both look at to keep the horses produced in either association in that respective association. As far as DNA and PQ is concerned it is a good idea also, if we truly want to be able to become a breed at some point in the future.

As far as the measuring is concerned, personally I would love to see them start to measure at the withers as I think it would be easier for stewarts etc. to understand and consistently be as correct as possible. Unfortunately I don't think you will ever get that done without some variance to the respective heigths that are acceptable. In our experience in dealing with our Europen friends measuring at the withers adds up to 1 1/2" to any horse of normal conformation. It would be pretty simple for the registries to simply add that much in measurement to the height requirements for both registries. IE: A would go to 35 1/2" and R would go to 39 1/2" or so.

But that will not do away with the problem that started this entire thread, the lack of proper and consistent measurement of show horses. That will not correct itself untill there is consistent montoring and enforcement of whatever the rules are.

That does not fall into the realm of something that the individual member can deal with and requires the input and attention of the powers that be in each registry. What is needed in my opinion is pretty simple, require the measurers to be licensed, paid and BONDED for any and all sanctioned shows for either registry. Then provide periodic monitoring by a third party paid & also bonded. If the parties doing the show managment are found to be incorrect, they need to be pulled up for review and ultimately if it is a gross or repetitive situation that persons bond would be pulled. Having a bond pulled is a major problem for folks that try to get real day jobs from any governmental entity or large company.

I guarantee you that if a few bonds are pulled and/or people are worried about that consequence the bull corn will reduce itself overnight to a point where it will be a very small problem. And before anyone goes there, there was a case where in a certain dog registry that a steward was being paid by a handler to fudge the height on a couple of beagles. The stewart and the handler were filed on for RICO act violations and also for fraud, my inderstanding is that they finally negociated out a settlement where they were removed from all respective membership functions for a period of three years . I doubt anyone in their right mind want that kind of problem, again though enforcement is the key.

Bottom line to me is that Cindy & I believe there is a place for every miniature horse and something to do with that miniature horse. Be that as a pet, performance horse, halter horse or whatever. We need to as members of both or either registries need to encourange breeders to find places and people for each of those horses they produce. If not we are doomed to remain a small portion of the overall equine community.

Will there always be people willing to press the envelope to try and win in the show ring? Of course there will be, in my mind it is the job of our registires is to make it so uncomfortable and costly to the individuals that do attempt to take advantage of the rules that most will hesitate to do so.

On a final note, I sure wish folks would stop bashing AMHA and AMHR, I am a lifetime member of AMHA and have been a member of AMHR for over 20 years and am proud to be a member of both. Do they have some problems, of course they do. But nothing that is so bad I would ever give up my membership in either. Hopefully with a little long term work we as members can make them better, I know it is frustrating and seems to take forever to get anything to change, but then again I always see the glass half full. LOL

 

[Minimor]

But I still think that if we aren't a breed but a height registry then the smallest horse is perfection of the breed..like a pyramid..the smallest should be on top and the biggest at the bottom.

And there, I think, is the real crux of the problem. Miniature horses are a height breed, nothing more, which means there are far too many people breeding only for height. If the horse is small, it is desirable. If it is a little less small, it is worthless. So many will throw out a nearly perfect 34.25" horse and keep one that is 32" and not quite so close to perfect...even far from perfect...small size is put ahead of good conformation (and yes of course I know there are some nicely conformed horses that are also very small--I am NOT saying that every small horse is poorly conformed). But the honest to goodness truth is that many, many people do value small size over good conformation.

 

[user 488]

QUOTE(Arion Mgmt @ Nov 2 2007, 11:11 PM)
I. A Jack Ruussel that does not fit breed height requirements but is a quality Jack Russel is stiil a Jack Russel, it just cant be shown, it isnt all of the sudden a Collie on crack. Respectfully,

John Eberth

AMHA Genetics Committe Chairman

University of Kentucky Gluck Equine Research Center

Arion Management Inc.

Nothing like a great sense of humor......THANKS........BTW.........I think I have one of those. OH!

 

[miniwhinny]

But the honest to goodness truth is that many, many people do value small size over good conformation.

and many MANY of us value size AND perfection in conformation

.

 

[Michelle@wescofarms]

Great posts all - lots of things to consider and think about.

Regarding Ed's letter - I'm glad he's at least stepping up to the plate and wanting to see things cleaned up. I've always found it funny how people can say "My horse ALWAYS measures 32 1/4" sorry I cant measure me exactly the same. I could be 1/4" on/off depending on posture, but the very blatent misuse of the 'last mane hair' by forcing horses to learn to do swan dives, fake mane hair glued in (heard this from a trainer!), dye jobs, not squared up for measuring, etc., that allows the horses 1-2" taller in a class is abuse.

And yes from the TOP down of our voted in officals and judges. The same people that go to the Conventions and whine about not ruining our breed by allowing horses over as breeding stock in AMHA. You can't get me to show AMHA and I really like AMHA as a registry, but the crap you see - it's not worth it. I always figure any trainer is going to beat the pants off me anyway just on skill alone so why cheat?

It really fills you with disgust. And no I'm not AMHA bashing, I see problems with AMHR too, the same stuff just maybe not as high profile as the AMHA Nationals the past few years.

I know there is a monetary incentive to winning as you just raised the perceived value of your horses get with those wins, but come on at what price?

Perhaps we should have a rule that the handler/owner/trainer cannot be within 10 feet of the horse being measured. Set it up and walk away let someone else hold the lead and the steward measure. It wouldn't stop the attempted cheaters with the trained swan dive or dyed/fake mane but would stop the spread eagle rockiing horse measured horses!! That would keep any pushing on the back, reposition, etc. Heck these are show horses and can stand squared for measuring right?

As for Minis ever being a breed - I'd love that, but their are too many breeders/trainers that don't want that they want it kep a height registry. I've argued that point with some as they're concerned with the double registered AMHR/ASPC (Sorry to digress here) wouldn't really be valid - you can't be two 'BREEDS' but you can be a Shetland and a height qualified Mini. They don't want to limit the 'value' on their horses - look at the prices on Shetlands the past few years versus 5 years ago and why 'minis' where created.

Kudos to the breeders breeding for a 'type' and everyone working towards minis being a BREED some day.

Great thoughts all!

 

[rabbitsfizz]

It always amazes me that the guilty always want to be portrayed as the victim. Lets just try to fix the problem and move on to the next one. We all know there are many more to tackle.

John Thank you also for this- and for what will now be burned on the back of my mind- the quote about a Jack Russell not suddenly becoming a collie on crack- that is priceless and much needed humour.

It is also very very true.

Because of EU rulings (and do not think this cannot happen to YOU!!!) we here have to accept ANYTHING that is be two registered parents into a registry.

Therefore a 12.2hh pony, if it were by two registered Miniature Horses (and I have one at the moment, by a 32" o/o a 32" that is trying for 12.2hh

) HAS to be accepted for registration and I think The AMHA might also find, were someone to take them to court on this, that they also would have to accept such an animal.

You can stop them showing, and no-one in their right mind would breed from them, but you cannot stop them being registered.

Far better that the AMHA (and AMHR) make a set up voluntarily, whilst they are in full control of the matter, to house these "gone over" animals for the sake of the gene pool.

Lisa makes a very good point with her Chihuahua- a dog bred for small size for CENTURIES yet still able to throw out the odd "Jackhuahua" throw back- I also know of one exactly the same.

These animals still carry the genetics though, and, if carefully bred can, as has been proven, be useful.

Personally I do not care who someone is or how far they have come, if their horse is over it would be marked as such.

I am available to measure at Nationals and Worlds, BTW- just pay my plane fare and give me somewhere to sleep.

I would be fearless.

There are plenty of Americans who would also be- so what exactly is the problem??

 

[Robin]

Well- I have to say- I am surprised at some of the ways this topic has been taken and turned.

I believe John hit the nail on the head when he said AMHA just wants to make everyone happy. AMHA has to make their participants happy in order to stay in business- financially.

What are all the breeders of the "truly under 34"" horses going to do when there is no AMHA and they did not support or participate in AMHR because they do accept an over 34" horse? For those of us who have been in this business since it's beginning- the majority of the market and business is going somewhere other than the under 30" horse. Unlike in the late 70s and early 80s when a 30" mare with a deformed dwarf on her side would bring $25,000 at auction (Joel Bridges sale 1981), I can hardly sell a small horse- even a very very good one for any decent amount of money. People come to us wanting to buy something that can win or produce winners. Winners tend to be the taller horses in the class- as many of you have stated. The taller horses in the class- is what started this whole topic. Therefore- in order to stay in business, we breed for winners- we hope what ever size it is- it is the tallest in it's class. Then we hope to sell to people who show or have trainers that show- then we are back to the subject at hand- they want to win and they want the tallest horse in the class or division.

So- as John said - we all are dealing with a bell curve when it comes to height- we all have produced over 34" horses- if you haven't yet- you will- if you breed horses that is. It is the fact that AMHA knows this- they rake in the money and give you nothing back when it happens. They want to declare that the product horse is no longer a miniature horse worthy of their recognition. It isn't that we are whining and crying about what we have produced because there is a place for it that retains it's value- AMHR. What is so disturbing is that AMHA wants us to give money to them and constantly bail them out, they want us to support the shows and give more money to them, they want us to be sponsors and give more money, they want us to advertise and give more money, they want us to DNA, Parent Qualify and give more money- for what? So we can see the corrupt politcs at the shows and measuring or so they can hang us out to dry when a horse out of 2 AMHA National Champions under 34" has produced a slightly taller one? Darn- all I did was breed what they want us to breed, give them the money prior to it being born to show that we bred the right 2 horses as far as their rules go (stallion reports), and then register the foal when it is born, DNA and PQ and then in 5 years make the papers illegitimant and take all that money. Oh and on top of that- they allow us to breed and transfer horses prior to being premanently registered and take the money for those foals, transfers, stallion reports, DNA, etc...again raking in the $ but not worrying about the members.

I have no problem with playing by the rules and going elsewhere if need be to retain value to my animals. The point is.... If AMHA is a "height registry" then don't close the registry and get some "testicular fortitude" and measure horses as they should be. If it is going to be a "breed registry" as they want us to all prove and pay we are doing, then make it a breed registry and anything that is produced out of 2 AMHA horses is still an AMHA horse.

We, like a lot of other people who have been in this for over 30 years, have invested a tremendous amount of time and money with AMHA and would prefer to stay with AMHA and support both registries unless it becomes a financial decision to go predominantly with one registry in order to stay business and continue with our goals. AMHA right now lives because people feel they have to have AMHA registered horses due to the years of people putting down AMHR as a substandard registry. People realize now that AMHR pleases its members, offers equal or better opportunites for it's members and has made wise business decisions for the promotion of the miniature horse.

Quality is Quality regardless of height and I will say- if height is all that matters to AMHA- then I forsee me continuing to support AMHR more. And the comments about "What am I going to do when I get something over 38""- Well it better have ASPC or ASPR papers then shouldn't it? There is a huge difference in 34" and 38" as there is a huge difference in 28" and 32". Ask those who struggle to stay in that under 28" group what they do when they have an over 32" foal? Do they consider their foal not worthy of being registered? I would think not.

I would like to thank everyone who can see the light at the end of the tunnel- as in all business- there are politcs and there is the desire to win- - win at something- someway. I do not feel this is the end of the road so to speak with the miniature horse- in any way. It is people with morals, ethics and smart decisions that perpetuate healthy business and will continue to support the miniature horse industry. But, staying in any business also takes the ability to forsee what has changed or what will change- economically, environmentally, and socially in order to continue forward. I know these are very basic and broad concepts, but they are also very well proven.

Robin Mingione-LKF

 

[HGFarm]

Great post John, and yes, I am STILL laughing over the 'collie on crack' comment. Unfortunately I have a very vivid imagination so really got a visual on that!! hahahahahahaha

Some of this has gotten so off topic....

Anyone who thinks that breeding two horses under 34" is going to guarantee you a foal that matures under that size is, well........ living in a distant land far from reality. That is part of the fun of breeding Miniatures.

I try to breed quality Minis under 34 with color. Just because I breed two loud colored horses certainly does not guarantee that I will get a foal with color! Again, part of the quest to breed the best. Other breeds of other sizes and types have requirements and limitations too, size minimums, color restrictions or requirements, etc.... Every registry has rules, people just need to enforce and follow them.

The problem here is measuring at the shows and not following and UPHOLDING the rules already written.

I can guarantee that for folks that get the over horses measured in somehow to even qualify for Nationals deserve to be ticked when they get to Nationals and dont measure in because they KNOW what they have had to do to get measured in at the shows prior to that. They KNOW darned good and well exactly how big those horses are.

So it isnt just happening at Nationals- it is all over, no matter WHAT association you show with.

For those that comment that an over 34 horse that is a quarter inch over gets 'thrown away' by AMHA and suddenly becomes worthless, though it is nicer than the 32" horse- uh, no, then you have a really nice AMHR horse. So what about the horse that measures 38.25" and cant show AMHR? Then OH WELL. It's part of the whole mystery in breeding Minis!! Shall we extend their height to 40" to allow that then, because that horse is nicer than the 37" one? And then when they start going over 40"...... Why have a height breed at all? AMHA has set 34" as the limit - why can't people follow that?

 

[kaykay]

great posts

I have always been told by mentors to look ahead at least 5 years. When I do that I see an AMHR that could be closed to AMHA hardshipping.

Then what will happen to all of those over 34" horses? Right now I feel AMHA is using AMHR has a crutch because their answer to the over 34" horse is always REGISTER IT AMHR. When that option is no longer available it will be really interesting to see what happens.

*on a side note I find it so odd that AMHA willingly hands over all that money and customers to their competition?

 

[miniwhinny]

Personally I do not care who someone is or how far they have come, if their horse is over it would be marked as such.

I am available to measure at Nationals and Worlds, BTW- just pay my plane fare and give me somewhere to sleep.

I would be fearless.

There are plenty of Americans who would also be- so what exactly is the problem??

Political correctness is what wrong in America..AKA kiss-butt

Way too many people here don't step up to the plate because here..the big well known farm names often think they have more rights than the "one foal" producing farm. I'd LOVE to have you measure. I KNOW you don't kiss-butt

and I know you'd be honest with it

great posts

Right now I feel AMHA is using AMHR has a crutch because their answer to the over 34" horse is always REGISTER IT AMHR. When that option is no longer available it will be really interesting to see what happens.

Of course they are..which is why R to many is a second rate registry (I'M not saying it is) because it's looked upon as a place for the "left-overs"..the A rejects ! If R is closed and A's over 34's have no where to be registered...they will instantly become worthless in regards to being used for breeding/showing programs no matter what their show record. Then R will be the registry to be in

 

[joylee123]

Well, I had THOUGHT about showing nx year but after reading about WHO scratches WHO's back at the shows I think I will have second thoughts. Why waste the money. Pardon the phrase...The good ole' boy network rides again!

[SIZE=12pt]It always has

[/SIZE] and I've been watching since 89

 

[Reble]

great posts

Right now I feel AMHA is using AMHR has a crutch because their answer to the over 34" horse is always REGISTER IT AMHR. When that option is no longer available it will be really interesting to see what happens.

Who says this will be. and so what if it happens.

As everyone says we have too many breeding now... OH!

Anything is possible, life is too short to worry about tomorrow and what IF

Just to add, double register now if you are worried about those over horses for your breeding program?

The voters are what will matter, so go vote if you want change or not want change.

 

[Buckskin gal]

Very interesting topic and a lot to think about. I will say I belong to both A and R and know neither is perfect. I think the size measuring in both need to be dealt with so there isn't cheating. I sure can see where the ones who want to keep the 34" as top for the Standard are coming from...after all the Standard does say the smallest most perfect is the goal in breeding Miniature Horses. I also believe it is much more of a challenge to get the smallest most perfect horse than it is to get a taller more perfect Miniature Horse. I don't care if AMHA did go to having a "breeding only" class for those who go over 34" if it will help everyone or at least the majority but where is the cut off for size going to be for that breeding class? A suggestion for AMHA would be to consider a class as AMHR did for the over size horses so they can keep bringing in money for the organization. I do understand the position of those who are with AMHA and love to strive for the most perfect miniature horse, who don't want the taller horses in the association...the goal, as been stated for a long time, is the smallest most perfect and now it is the taller ones who are winning...must be frustrating for you. [ I do not understand the judges favoring the taller in the class but it has led to cheating] I do hope the problems are solved for all involved with AMHA for there is such a great need for them, along with R. JMHO Mary

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

For all of those who say AMHR has throw away horses at 38.25... just to be clear that is not correct. It was an issue that was thought about in trying to breed horses and keep in a height (those without ASPC horses) and they have the NSPR registry

That said it is not meant to be a breeding registry but a performance registry and... any horse who has at least one parent ASPC or AMHR can be registered into NSPR no matter what the height up to 14.2 I believe-

so while it isnt something people try and breed for of course it is a option os that those horses suddenly dont become worthless throw aways.