Anyone else get an email from Martha Hickham

[Boinky]

honestly i don't think anyone can or is deluding themselves that it's not a problem with AMHR as well. I think the reason it's being discussed as AMHA pretty much exclusively in this post is because the letter is from an AMHA member to try to clean up AMHA rules right now. AMHR needs it just as much, but no one has written that letter for AMHR yet either! I think it's well past time it starts getting cleaned up in BOTH registries! To me there's very little subjective about measuring. yes you might get some MINOR variations depending on who is measuring but 1.5-2" + is just rediculous and obviously measuring incorrectly. everyone keeps saying they just don't know how to measure..that's BULL. they should not be measuring if they dont' know how to. If that were the case they could get any tom dick or harry off the street to d it instead of HIRING our stewards that were TRAINED to do it correctly.

I also can tell you i don't show A very often but the few times i have, at least ONE of those show's we were told "oh we can get your horse in don't worry" before even seeing the horse when we said "well he might be over we aren't sure". At ALL of the A show's i've been to they ask "how tall is he? and what class do you WANT him in?" "ok we'll get him in that height don't worry". I usually don't care what size mine are in..what they are they are.... well they'd always say "well are you SURE you want your horse there? we can make it smaller". give me a break!

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

well first off AMHR wouldnt be "little congress" it would be "big congress" if it were a "congress" at all

simply cause it is a bigger show but... it isnt congress it is Nationals and as far as pure bred minis you cant have pure bred horses when it is based on height alone and any breed that meets the height (or combonation of breeds) can be allowed in to the breeding pool.

I never understand this statement "purebred miniature horses" I can take purebred poodles and call them noodles.. I can breed generation after generation of "noodles" for 10-20 years but bottom line... no matter what I choose to call them they are indeed purebred "poodles" that I opted to call "noodles"

That said measuring will always be an issue even if done at the withers since some will say they are not sure where the withers are

It happens at both registries I am not sure what the answers are IMO trainers are not the "bad guys" I dont know who is or if anyone is or is it just a bad system all the way around set up to allow some to take the fall out depending on the luck of the draw?

 

[runamuk]

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.

Margo

Maybe that rule needs to be changed??

After all the judge is supposed to be judging the horses to the standard and if they see an exhibit that does not seem to meet the standard....well......

Do what they do with dogs and rabbits.

With dogs a judge can call for a wicket and measure right then and there any suspect exhibit.

In rabbits a judge can call for a scale and weigh the exhibit.

In both these species yes people still push the envelope but not near as much because on any given day their exhibit could be called out and DQ'd right there in the class.

 

[Buckskin gal]

Good for you for doing what you think is the best thing. I think in the long run we will be doing the miniatures justice by working on what we like rather thangoing with the fad of the year.

Mary

I agree with you Margot. It is pretty hard for our 35-36 inch minis to compete with the ponies at Nationals,(Little Congress) but I have decided to let the size thing go. I'm going to just raise what I like, that breeds true and promote that.

I love going to Nationals ( Little Congress). I'll continue to take and, show what I like to see presented from my farm and maybe someone else will like it too. My customers do not want to have to worry about size and I don't want to have to return money because a horse went over 38 inches. Renee -Lucky Hart Ranch

 

[Reble]

I agree the size is most important & conformation.

Titles are going to mean nothing, if this keeps up.

Miniature horses are to do with size not a breed.

The rule book does state, if equal the smallest one should come first.

Read the rule book again, instead of the farm name? oops did I say that.

I am always learning and this is what everyone tells us.

Hubby and I want to go to the AMHA and AMHR shows someday in the States, not to show but just to see the best of the best. Or are they

 

[miniwhinny]

Bravo ED!!!

Since now the measuring is being videotaped and stretching is being called, I noticed a "new" phenomenon. I saw numerous horses being measured while at the World that were with their front legs spred so wide that it was a wonder they could stand. It doesn't show on camera, but I guarantee that a person would NEVER set up the horse in the ring like that. One I saw had almost eighteen inches between his front legs, and it WASN'T because of a big broad chest! It was because a cheater was at the lead.

All horse being measured should have to stand with their legs square. Any horse measured over should loose their registration on the spot. We are a HEIGHT breed. Expecting anything less makes it all a joke.

 

[Mona]

Even THIS is kind of crazy?? It might be better if it was set to stary a certain length of time after the CLASS and not the show?? Some shows run over several days, and for those only showing in a few classes on a certain day should not have to stay until the end of the show. That would be NUTS!!

If the "New Rule" goes into effect, and we can be protested up to two hours AFTER a show, does this mean we all must stay for two extra hours AFTER the show is finished, just in case?

I know that that BOD is working now to resolve this problem. It has been suggested that the time be shortened to 15 minutes (?) after a show instead of 2 hours.

 

[sfmini]

I believe the proposed rule stated 2 hours after the last class the horse shows in. That would usually include the supreme horses (if supreme is at the end of the show), and the horses that showed in classes that were held during the final 2 hours of the show..... That could be a lot of horses.

As for closing hardshipping, I am supportive of it, but only if we stage it in a way that would allow horses that are purchased/bred in the hopes of hardshipping when they are old enough to be hardshipped in before the doors are totally closed. Every time the subject of closing hardshipping comes up, most who support the closure support this stance so I do anticipate that those horses you have that you will want to hardship will be hardshipped as you plan even if we do vote to close the books and finally come a step closer to being a breed.

I have stated (and this is only my personal opinion) that I would like to see a day come when an AMHA registered horse bred to an AMHA registered horse begets an AMHA registered horse regardless of height. The shows will limit the height to 34", but if you want to breed 50" AMHA horses, have a great time, they can never be shown, thus limiting their value as AMHA horses, but hey, let's go ahead and take the money for memberships and registrations. We all know there are some beautiful horses that went a tad over, that could have foals that mature under and could be great contributors to the AMHA gene pool.

ok, off to get my flame suit on!

Oh, and John, I look forward to seeing your rule change proposals at the next annual meeting.

 

[Miniequine]

All horse being measured should have to stand with their legs square. Any horse measured over should loose their registration on the spot.

What if YOUR horse was exactly 34". Would YOU show it if you

were risking its papers every time you showed it???

Nobody seems to know how to measure, so who's to say which

direction the error would go? and there are errors in EVERY measurement.

If I owned a very valuable horse that was actually 34",,, I'm not

sure I would take that risk.

~Sandy

 

[stormy]

I have mentioned this before when height comes up and I am sure I am not the only one who ever experianced this. I have an AMHR B gelding, his papers have him at 35.5". He has measured in to shows at anywhere from 34" to 35.5", he has NEVER been measured the same height at two dofferant shows even when measured only a few weeks apart.

So now you want to pull papers on the spot if a horse measures 34.25?! I know of no way you can standardize measuring to the point were two differant people on differant days will get exactly the same height! I don't care if you are measuring withers, last hair of the mane or top of the ear...height depends on condition, the last trim job, how tired the horse is or how wired that day. Be fair, but also be reasonable!

 

[Field-of-Dreams]

I have stated (and this is only my personal opinion) that I would like to see a day come when an AMHA registered horse bred to an AMHA registered horse begets an AMHA registered horse regardless of height. The shows will limit the height to 34", but if you want to breed 50" AMHA horses, have a great time, they can never be shown, thus limiting their value as AMHA horses, but hey, let's go ahead and take the money for memberships and registrations. We all know there are some beautiful horses that went a tad over, that could have foals that mature under and could be great contributors to the AMHA gene pool.

ok, off to get my flame suit on!

No flames here! I would LOVE to see BOTH registries do that! THEN close the registry and we will become a BREED registry and not a HEIGHT one!

Lucy

 

[minie812]

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!

 

[wildoak]

I have stated (and this is only my personal opinion) that I would like to see a day come when an AMHA registered horse bred to an AMHA registered horse begets an AMHA registered horse regardless of height. The shows will limit the height to 34", but if you want to breed 50" AMHA horses, have a great time, they can never be shown, thus limiting their value as AMHA horses, but hey, let's go ahead and take the money for memberships and registrations. We all know there are some beautiful horses that went a tad over, that could have foals that mature under and could be great contributors to the AMHA gene pool.

Absolutely! I would love to see this happen.

If I owned a very valuable horse that was actually 34",,, I'm notsure I would take that risk.

Agreed. I have no desire to scrunch my tall horses into a smaller height class, but for those borderline 34" horses it is a big risk.

Nationals/World is where this always comes to a head, but a big part of the problem as I see it is that these horses are allowed to show and measure in all year at local shows. Standards for measurement need to be consistent, from the local show all the way to nationals so we have no surprises and no one who has invested a year of training, showing and hauling only to be turned away at World.

The other side of the coin - and we've all seen it - is the senior horse who has shown and won in a particular height class, only to come to World and incredibly has shrunk!! A senior horse, with height on his papers should NOT be allowed to measure down. Period.

Jan

 

[HGFarm]

I see the problems occur not only with AMHA, but R and other bigger pony breeds as well...

Unless the rule is stated SPECIFICALLY to something like this, and spelled out for some, it is not going to change.

'The horse shall be measured while standing squarely on a level surface. The toe of the front feet shall not be placed past the point of the shoulder, nor shall they be spread wider than the shoulder from the front. The heel of the rear feet shall not exceed past the point of the rear end and shall not be stretched wider than the hips. Neither the front nor the back legs shall be tucked under past the angle that the horse would normally stand'

That isnt perfect but you get the idea that unless it is spelled out exactly- it is going to continue, and then I am sure that someone will find a way to get one in. Just like the little old lady who sued McDonalds when she dumped hot coffee on herself and it burned- it was McDonalds fault cause they didnt TELL HER it was hot. Everything has to be spelled out now!!

 

[faithfarm]

I remember Ed and Wade Burns calling the exhibitors together in 2001 at the show in Ocala to address the problem of measuring. This has been a problem for a long time.

As far as worrying about a 34" horse measuring wrong and having his papers pulled; if it is a legitimate 34" horse, you can protest your own horse and have it remeasured. Everyone knows how tall their horse is and my horses have never measured taller than they really were.

You can't blame the trainers, it is their job to take your horse and present them to their best ability and the upper-hand usually goes to the taller horses in a class. The measurers have got to do the job they are paid to do; measure the horse accurately. As far as protest goes, they are a good thing and AMHA gets more money. Problem is: someone in a class protests the horse they think will win, only to get beat by another horse that is too tall.

 

[backwoodsnanny]

Well it would seem from reading all of this that the real issue isnt measuring per se but as in all competiton these days it boils down to MONEY. I too believe that horses should be AMHA or AMHR or both based on them being miniature horses as a breed not just based in height but am sure that is years from now if ever.

I do have a question though as it applies to measurement AMHA has an upper level of 34inches and AMHR has an upper level of 38 inches and ASPC starts the pony height at 40 inches what happens to the 39inch horse? off topic I know but I was curious.

 

[ClickMini]

Well one thing is that Shetland is a breed, so any pony of that heritage is registerable ASPC. And as far as pony show classes go, they measure at the wither rather than the last mane hair. Probably would take up that inch difference.

 

[targetsmom]

We don't show much AMHA and have never shown AMHR, but we show PtHA a lot. Here is what Pinto does with measuring minis and ponies: The miniature/pony is measured at the first show of the year AND THAT IS THEIR HEIGHT FOR THE WHOLE YEAR. A form gets signed by the measurer , sent in to PtHA and the member receives a measurement card they use for that show season. For mature animals, they can get a permanent card once they have measured the same for 3 (I think) years in a row. We find it interesting that our 5 year old gelding has measured the exact same height in Pinto (without even trying) for 3 years in a row, but our yearling stallion once SHRANK 2 inches from one AMHA show to the next (different handlers). Oh, did I mention that at our Pinto shows the mini classes are not divided by height - there is JUST ONE HALTER CLASS. (Also, almost everyone shows in the performance classes and the shows seem to be getting more and more popular all the time).

 

[JWC sr.]

I got an interesting e-mail form Marianne Ebreth of Little King Farms this afternoon. I thought it was well written and also had some good thoughts in it. I ask her via email if I could post it and she said yes, but I had to be responsible for any heat it brought on me. OH! LOL Not sure I can handle that, but here it is anyway.

It seems that not only the little farms are concerned about the way things are going. Which is not how things are percieved by some. Thanks Marianne for a great e-mail.

Email of 11/01/2007 sent to Cherryville Farms by Little King Farms

When are the members of AMHA going to realize that they do not have a true genetic or true type "breed registry"? We have ONLY a height registry and not even a type to breed for. When are the members of AMHA going to realize that there is no other TRUE horse breed that measures from the base of the mane- last hair? Our forefathers decided as a compromise to make the base of the mane the measuring point and that the maximum is 34”. This is totally arbitrary and has no real conformational meaning when compared to ALL other true horse breeds. They ALL measure at the withers. Why do other breed registries measure at the withers? Answer-- Consistency and anatomical reference.

When are the members of AMHA going to realize that a miniature horse that measures 34.5" by and out of two 34" parents is still a miniature horse genetically? Or that two 29" horses can produce a 35" horse, two 35" horses can produce a 27"horse at maturity. Does eliminating these horrid oversized creatures make us a more credible association or a breed? Does measuring a horse at the base of the mane make our horses more valuable or are we just fooling ourselves into thinking our horses are smaller than they really are? A 30" horse just may be 31.5" and your 33.5 mare might be a 35" mare when properly measured. Why have we continued a tradition that has only complicated measuring and made it more difficult to control?

Measuring is a problem but it has been even more complicated by where we measure -- at some last hair- dyed or whatever. Universal measuring accepted by all other breeds has proven merit and can be part of the answer. Why does AMHA always think it knows better than ALL of the other breeds in the world? You can't dye a wither or change the bone where it is anatomically.

When are the members of AMHA going to realize that a very large percentage of their miniature horses under 30" and over 30" are carrying a dwarf gene and when you breed these two carriers they have a 25% chance of producing a dwarf. Therefore if we close the registry and eliminate our over 34" offspring that potentially are less likely to carry these genes, we will breed ourselves into “Dwarf-dom” very quickly- all horses could end up possibly carrying these genes. Now, you all don't like that thought at all-- but if this continues it is highly likely to happen. How do you think we got most of these very small horses? Open up your high school biology books and read about recessive genes.

Furthermore:

Why do owners and trainers cheat the current measuring system? To win--- no other reason- plain and simple. There are AMHA officers measuring AMHA officers’ horses even at the World show--- should that be allowed? I also recall a certain black and white stallion, permanently registered at 29.5" being shown and won in the 28 and under class at Worlds -- he was advertised in the World magazine as a 28-30" multiple Grand Champion and was Honor Roll in 28 to 30". That was a couple of years ago, how quickly certain trainers forget. How did that happen? The trainer either had another horse in the class or felt the horse had a better chance in the smaller class--- to win--- plain and simple. How did it happen? -- Well, we all know how that happens. Why do they video tape the measuring? Has anyone ever looked at it after the fact?

Why are AMHA members leaving AMHA and going to other associations? I am told, first hand, they are sick of the officers and directors of AMHA displaying and allowing blatant misconduct and rule violations, they all are tired of having to disclaim the over 34" offspring or hide the fact that they exist, they are tired of not having a steward system, and exasperated with the lack of professionalism of many trainers and directors.

About supply and demand: Breeding small horses with undesirably poor conformation and abnormalities is far more dangerous to the "breed" than breeding taller horses with better conformation and form to function genetics. Who said that a 35" or 36” horse is not as valuable as a 30" horse? Who said that a 35"+ horse isn't an asset to a breeding program? Who has not bred an over 34" horse and produced a very acceptable under 34” offspring? Are we breeding for quality or just small size? I can tell you for fact that our forefathers were just breeding for small size! The original name of the first miniature horse organization was the Midget Pony Association; ask Bud Soat or any those original breeders. Having been involved with "miniature horses" since 1976, I have seen the evolution from only breeding for small size to where we are now. Regardless of what our forefathers set forth, today is today and small is not our main objective now- so why should we think that 34" is an "untouchable or an unchangeable” limit.

Many of our registry’s founding forefathers of the 60’s and 70’s are the ones who bred for very small oddly conformed dwarf type creatures. Most of the miniatures of today came from this breeding stock. Without the Shetland pony genetics later brought into these original Midget Ponies, our "Miniature Horse" genetic pool would be very very small and certainly undesirable to a horseman.

I am appalled that even today there are those who denounce the Shetland blood in our "miniature horses". How do you think the American Quarter Horse breed was “made” in the late 1800’s, or the thoroughbred breed was “made”, or for that matter the Modern Shetland? One of the most successful breeds in the world openly promotes the progression and evolution needed to make a better breed, the Arabian horse. It openly shows it understands by allowing half-breeds to be registered, shown and bred, irregardless of “ideal” type for the pure-bred Arabian type that was desired.

Supply and demand is more relative to quality than numbers of horses on the market. Try breeding for quality, not size, and you will be amazed at how marketable your horses will be because basically the true horsemen is looking to improve genetics not just conform to a size limit and breed mediocrity.

Respectfully,

Marianne Eberth

Little King Farm

 

[lvponies]