Anyone else get an email from Martha Hickham

[kaykay]

Ponies (no offense please) are a dime a dozen,

You realize of course there are way more Miniature horses then there are American Shetlands? I dont understand this sentence at all!! How could it not be taken offensively to those of us that own American Shetlands?

 

[Charlotte]

I also feel that an outside source should be doing the measuring and no trainer or owner should be allowed to handle the horse at measuring time.
I've read most all of this thread and wish I were as articulate as some of you, I'd love to be able to explain what I want to say in more depth and will try.

I would like to say (or try to so excuse non proper English)... folks, all of you so adamant about pointing out the difference in how the taller horses look and what nice genetics they can bring.. We already have a registry that allows them, it is AMHR they have a A division and a B division, why do you insist on pushing them on the AMHA registry?

AMHA has set their standard to 34 and under, according to AMHA rules yes one who is 35" is not legitimately a miniature horse (as defined in the rules). If the horse is double registered it is still considered a miniature horse B division and you know what? When you go over 38"....accept it and get a saddle.

AMHA breeders who are trying to stay within the rules are trying to slowly bring the same look you are into the registry to fit within the standards of AMHA perfection. This is what this association is about, AND it will take more years than I will live to accomplish this. These are the horses to me who are the most desirable as an AMHA registered miniature horse, the ones who are tiny and proportioned and leggy looking. Using the taller horses and weeding out the dwarfism genetics takes time.

Those of you who want instant gratification are now are trying to push your nice taller horses, who you have worked so hard to improve into a registry that would have to be changed to accommodate them, shame on you.

It is the people who have all these taller horses who are making the most noise, why do YOU not think that AMHR is not good enough for your horses to stand alone with?

People let AMHA evolve, give it a chance. One day the look of these same oversize national champions will be consistant in a under 34" horse and WOW what a day to see that happen.

Very well said Debby.

But just a note on the measuring ....no matter where you measure, what you measure with, who does the measuring....unfortunately there will always be a few who will try to cheat to win.

It's just sad, you know?

Charlotte

 

[Debby - LB]

Ponies (no offense please) are a dime a dozen,

You realize of course there are way more Miniature horses then there are American Shetlands? I dont understand this sentence at all!! How could it not be taken offensively to those of us that own American Shetlands?

Kay I wasn't in particular speaking of "registered American shetlands" and no I don't believe there are more miniatures than ponies.

It is still amazing to me how many people don't even know about miniature horses but will call a miniature a pony or even specifically a shetland pony.

Ponies are everywhere and even before I moved to Georgia one can be bought anywhere, cheap.

I'm sorry that out of all of what I tried to say you picked up on me saying they are a dime a dozen and not that I said I dearly love them and would love to one day see their stature bred consistantly in an under 34" horse.

 

[Minimor]

I at no time said a horse didn't have a wither that is ridiculous, what I was trying to say is that trying to get a correct measurement on a horses wither that is flat and buried under a mound of muscle on a neck that ties in half way down it's back is harder than getting a correct measurement from trying to find the last hair of the mane.

I'm sorry, this just sounds weird to me. If you've got a nice correct little horse, be he under 34" or over 34"....the neck isn't going to tie in half way down the back and the wither isn't going to be flat and buried under a mound of muscle.
I've got a couple little geldings here (34" and 33" that are rather fat...overly fat at the moment...and even so their necks don't tie in (or evan appear to!) half way down their backs. One has more wither than the other, but on both it's easier to find the withers....fat as they!...than it is the last mane hair, which this time of year in this climate is hard to distinguish from the rest of their fuzzy coats...

And definitely, yes, there are far more Miniatures around than there are ponies. Here in this province you will not find one single ASPC pony and otherwise the "pony" is pretty much taken to mean riding ponies 12.2 & over--Welsh crosses used for Pony Club. You don't see any of the dumpy little Shetland ponies we all grew up with--around here if you see a dumpy little "pony" if you ask about the animal you will learn that in reality "it is a Miniature Horse".

 

[wpsellwood]

Ed asked me to post this for him.

I appologize if some people were offended by my statement of legitimate miniature horses. I still stand by my statement because the letter was addressed to AMHA members. There was no reference to AMHR. AMHA's criteria to be registered in their registry is that they be 34'' and under to be a legitimate AMHA Miniature horse. I personally think it is wonderful that there are two viable registries. I just wish that they could work more in harmony and both sides lose the TUDE as one person posted.

As to the protest subject, the fact of who is guilty or not is irrelevent. I, along with many others have been guilty in the past, no question. The problem is that the association has allowed this to go on for quite some time. First it was a 1/4" and then it was 1/2'' and now it has gotten completely out of hand. If you wanted to compete, you had to cheat! When we witness one of our board members cheating, then you say to yourself, If he can do it, why shouldnt I. It has become so blatant that it is an insult to all peoples inteligence.

They can stop this very easily. Just measure the horses properly to begin with. The measurer should have the guts and the authority to refuse to measure any horse that is not stood properly according to the rule. If you do not cooperate, then take the horse back to the stall or take them home. If you want to terrorize the measuring staff, then you can and will be suspended for 6 months.

Everyone has this bad vibe about protesting. That is the only tool, you as a member has to make things right. I look at it as playing poker. I am betting $50.00 that your horse is bigger than you say he is. Either you win the bet or you lose. People take it as a personal attack, well take it for what its worth. If you played by the rules to begin with, there would be no protests. Its time to stop the insanity and put every horse where they belong, in the right class. 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.

Respectively

Ed Sisk

 

[Boinky]

humm i dont' know. i think generallys peaking that YES there are lots of ponies (of every breed) in the USA but there are tons of mini's too there are TONS under 34". just watch the saleboard. I honestly think i see more A horse for sale than B horse.s Just because they are under 34" does NOT mean they are quality well built horses. Neither does it being a B size. It's very hard to find NICE well conformed animals in ANY height. There's a handful in the A's and a handfull in the B's. everything else is pretty much pet quality. If that QUALITY A horse goes over 34" it still has "little" genes that can be passed off onto it's offspring AND it has the "pretty/well built" genes (not just little)and could be very very beneficial for the under population. I can't imagine why anyone would want to eliminate a quality animal from their breeding program and go with crappy under horses just because they are under.. makes no sence to me.

I don't think there is any disgrace to having an only AMHR horse. Infact i'd PREFER AMHR if i was going to choose. I have two AMHR only horses and i pretty much only show AMHR after having shown AMHA (which we have tons far closer than the AMHR show's that are 10+ hours away from us) and seeing the attitudes and stuff. just not what draws me in and so to me there is FAR more importance to R horses!

 

[Debby - LB]

I've got a couple little geldings here (34" and 33" that are rather fat...overly fat at the moment...and even so their necks don't tie in (or evan appear to!) half way down their backs. One has more wither than the other, but on both it's easier to find the withers....fat as they!...than it is the last mane hair, which this time of year in this climate is hard to distinguish from the rest of their fuzzy coats...

And definitely, yes, there are far more Miniatures around than there are ponies. Here in this province you will not find one single ASPC pony and otherwise the "pony" is pretty much taken to mean riding ponies 12.2 & over--Welsh crosses used for Pony Club. You don't see any of the dumpy little Shetland ponies we all grew up with--around here if you see a dumpy little "pony" if you ask about the animal you will learn that in reality "it is a Miniature Horse".

I've seen plenty of minatures that necks tie in unnaturally looking (to me) down in the middle of their backs, I'm sorry I'd have to show you what I mean.

Yes a Pony is any horse under 14 hands......

 

[RockRiverTiff]

Ugh guys! That was my gut reaction throughout the hour it took me to read this thread. I had to go back and reread the original letter/proposal in question more than once, because we have gotten so off-topic. We seem to have an issue here seeing the forest for the trees. I would love for everyone that is inspired to take up a different complaint to start their own thread; so many of these issues are relevant to the registries, but NOT to this topic!

I often feel that this is why both registries fail to make even the most obvious and neccessary of changes--we as a membership can't focus our efforts--we are so busy trying to prove that each of us as an individual is right, that we lose track of what SHOULD matter the most to EVERYONE. I would like to believe that that is what Ed's letter was addressing--that the corruption is at every level, to the point where the membership as a whole (regardless of your position or political clout within it) needs to put their foot down. Those that say they no longer participate in AMHA or have stopped trying, well that's how it got to this point. The corruption got to the top because we let it roll right over us on the way there.

So breaking this down to what I feel is the true point of the original topic--I am all in favor of this new rule that allows people to protest a horse after it's class. It seems like a very small step in the right direction. It being a very small step, we have a long way to go before we solve this problem (if we ever do), but at least it's progress. Why argue about enforcing the rules unless we intend to break them?

 

[anita]

ED, why do you need someone to post for you? Talk to folks personally and bring the confusion out of town.

They are all good folks, new starters, pure and simple all are supporters of our Miniature Horse Industry.

Without we have no industry. They want to know

A good breeder stand behind his horses and his act.

Anita

 

[Songcatcher]

I have hesitated to post on this thread because it always winds up the same thing. Basically, d**n the AMHA because they will not register a horse over 34 inches. Excuse me, but AMHR will not register a horse over 38 inches. Where is all the furor over that? And, if my understanding is correct, an AMHR horse that goes over 38 is not registerable as a Shetland unless it already has Shetland papers. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong. One little quarter inch is one little quarter inch regardless of where you draw the line.

I love horses. I hate politics. I can appreciate horses of any size, but have a passion for little horses and that is what I will breed for.

I can live with it if AMHA leaves their rules as they are. I can live with it if they change the rules to measure any height at any position. Those who feel so cheated because their horse measures one little quarter inch over the 34 inch line will feel equally cheated if their horse measures one little quarter inch over whatever line is set.

I have not yet shown (and not sure I ever will after reading threads like this). I don't breed a whole lot (I am expecting my biggest foal crop yet of 7 foals next year). But I breed with the goal of producing the best conformed, smallest horse possible. If the result of those breedings go over 34 inches, so what, they are also AMHR registered and some people seem to really like them (but they are just not my passion). If the results of those breedings were to go over 38 inches, there would be someone wanting them also, but they would not fit in my breeding program.

There are some people on here who would not be happy regardless. I think I will go brush the horses.

 

[MyBarakah]

I've been reading all of this and just have to say that I commend and totally support what Robin & Belinda has said! I show both A & R... After showing 2 years at Nationals... I personally do not want to show again at any more R shows or Nationals..... I am sticking with A and after show both A & R... I personally like the AMHA shows better...... I raise & like the "A" horses... with my own experience..... I do know that there's a HUGE size problem with measuring in both A & R..... And at Nationals..... in all the classes I showed in there was some VERY TALL horses in all my classes and the TALL horses won every time..... I don't see the heigth problem as bad at the shows compared to Nationals.... but I do notice with showing R verses A there is such a WIDE variety of horses being shown in the R shows and at Nationals.... that a shetland/R cross will win over a A horse almost always.... And especially at Nationals...... there is just too large of a variation of breeds (shetland verses miniatures) being shown and needs to be broken up..... along with they need to change some rules like they have at the A shows for R with the Amature classes... they need to make different levels!! I just think there needs to be some changes for showing R when it comes to Nationals! Just my opinion.......but that's what I see.... So I will stick with the A shows.....

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

songcatcher I agree the height limit is the height limit no matter what the registry.

For me and me only the issue is why bother with the expense of DNA and PQ when in reality it isnt a breed it is and always has been a height registry as is AMHR why bother with the pretense of being a breed when you dont follow thru is something I dont understand

how does it make anything more legitimate when any thing that is 34 or under can be registered? not that there is anything wrong with that just dont understand the opposite ends of the spectrum

 

[ruffian]

It's very hard to find NICE well conformed animals in ANY height. There's a handful in the A's and a handfull in the B's. everything else is pretty much pet quality.

Wow - you must have big hands. How many exactly are a handful? I've got 23 horses, and in My opinion, as well as some top quality judges, I have some very well conformed horses. So of the 10 that have shown and done very well, is that a handful? OK, what about my friends who have 13. Several have national champion titles, is that a hand and foot-full?

The World Magazine sure has some a nice horses, as does the Journal. I certainly don't agree with your statement!

 

[Boinky]

ok i did not mean that statement to offend or even, i guess, quite how it sounds.. i know this is a bit subjective and depends on what each individual likes and dislikes. BUT lets look at the number of horses being sold... take for example the sales board.....tell me how many do you REALLY think are top quality show and breeding candidates? truly?? when you are talking about a majority and minority type of thing. Maybe i'm just extremely picky but it's rare when i'm surfing through the saleboard and see anything that REALLY jumps out at me as WOW that is a really outstanding horse. yes it happens and usually those horses have very very large tags on them ect... but as far as how many per day or per week or even per month?? not nearly as many as i see that i either pass by without a second glance because they aren't WOW or i outright say YUCK.

definatly a minority of outstanding and even "nice" mini's out there...but then that happens in ANY breed.

 

[Charlotte]

We - at Little King Farm breed for a breed type- we do not breed for height.

But Robin, part of the 'breed type' IS height! Our whole goal as breeders should be to produce quality, correct conformation and the 'type' as spelled out in the Registries' Standards Of Perfection within the height limits set by our registering organization.

Charlotte

 

[sdmini]

Height will not always breed true, I get that however keeping the gene pool limited to those under 34" is going to increase your odds of producing a under 34" foal than those with parents 38" or more. For a miniature horse registry to promote the idea of size doesn't matter I find vastly interesting.

Why is it so outside the scope of reason that we can not be both a height registry and a breed. Our criteria is height so what. How does height criteria make a Miniature Horse Association less valid as a registry? Neither do I get the logic that if we close the books somehow overnight we will morph into a breed if we were not before. I find height more of criteria than a set of papers.

We will never have a uniform look. Never will someday people be able to look at a 42" horse and say, "look at that, a D division miniature." Miniatures are very much "Americas" horse as they are a melting pot of types, Arabian, Thourbred, Quarter Horse, Draft and even good old generic pony. Again so what? Miniatures diversity is one of their strongest points.

If a certain farm breeds for a certain look, that's fine but does that mean any horse that does not look like that is not a miniature? Of course not, so were back to no one set type, what defines us is our height.

Change is a great and vital thing for every facet of life but change just to suit the fashion of the day is not. There are repercussions to everything proposed and if one is not removed enough to see potential problems perhaps they should listen to those with opposing views just as diligently as they are asking to be heard.

I have AMHA only horses and AMHR only horses, 34" and under and 34"+, as of late I have been eyeing the ASPC ponies but have promised my husband I'll be good till I move a few horses. If I do acquire ASPC horse I do not expect the miniature associations to change the parameters of the game simply because I've acquired a new chess piece.

For fun I looked up the word breed so for the sake of the first 1/4 of the definition do we disregard the latter?

breed (n.) A group of organisms having common ancestors and certain distinguishable characteristics, especially a group within a species developed by artificial selection and maintained by controlled propagation.

 

[Becky]

Height will not always breed true, I get that however keeping the gene pool limited to those under 34" is going to increase your odds of producing a under 34" foal than those with parents 38" or more.

Exactly! I haven't yet figured out how adding horses over 34" to the AMHA gene pool is going to increase the odds of producing under 34" horses.

 

[runamuk]

Then the talk of closing the studbook should end if a miniature horse is anything under 34. I am sure there will be more under 34 specimens coming along for years that are worthy of being registered.

Lock the height for shows at 34 not a centimeter over, fix the measuring issue, and allow PQ AMHA horses over 34 to be retained in a breeders program for them to gamble with. Then and only then does closing the studbook even begin to make sense. Otherwise AMHA horses will hit a wall and the gene pool will become more of a cesspool. The breed as a whole comes from a limited genetic pool to begin with the inbreeding coeffients will skyrocket if you cut off both AMHA PQ horses and outside hardship.

I still say a change allowing judges to call for a measurement in the class would be a quick way to weed out a vast majority of cheaters, no one likes being called out in front of their peers

 

[Arion Mgmt]

I have quietly sat, and I must say, I have been intrigued with the conversation over a very touchy subject.

I will try my best to stay on Ed's subject he wrote about, since some of us have strayed a bit. I'm glad now we ALL can admit that we have measured horses in that were a little above the class they got measured into, and at the same time complain about it being done by others.

I will never say I am innocent, BUT I will never "go after" someone, "betting that their horse is over", when I am doing the same. It is not as much the fault of the trainers or the owners, it is much more the fault of the Association, why bother with the rules if you will not enforce them. Measuring in at the Worlds is flat out a free for all circus.

I go to both AMHA and AMHR Worlds/Nationals, and yes there are things done at both but AMHA is by far OUT OF CONTROL, since there is no class for the taller ones to go to if they measure out, and AMHA wants no problems. However that IS the problem.

I believe it has always been the Association's lack of testicular fortitude to make the measuring of show horses even somewhat slightly legitimate. I dont care where they get measured at, though I prefer the withers since it would stop the dying of body hair and give more consistency, since Miniatures are the ONLY horses in the world measured at the "last hairs of the mane."

AMHA is not interested in integrity with the measuring, they need to make sure the most number of horses get measured in to make everyone "happy" so there is no rocking of the boat. You all seem to forget all the entries are already paid for when you arrive there, stall, shavings, etc. If your horse doesnt measure in, your are going to be really ticked off, because you have already given AMHA all the money they wanted, you just didnt get your horse measured in to show, thats all. All AMHA wants to do is keep the members happy, be it owners or trainers, so I will tell you, by far, I think that is the over riding issue. AMHA does not want anymore people leaving AMHA for AMHR, it is that simple.

So, why do you think AMHA does NOT want a stewards program for measuring, especially at Regionals and Worlds? You get your horse in at Regionals, or your trainer does, and you think your horse is fine. Well, for the trainers who only have to travel a few hours, its really no big deal because there is less cost on the client if the horse doesnt measure, so they are going to take the ones that are close, or over. The trainers that really take the chance are the ones that travel a good 12 to 36 hrs with an over horse for whatever class they WANT to show it in. If there was a true stewards system to do the measuring you would have a lot less of a problem with taller horses in the wrong classes. It might not get all the ones within a 1/4" or less but it by all means should get the ones that are blatantly over, like 1/2" to 1 1/2", especially if they are measured at the withers.

So, I really would be in favor of a stewards program and more strick enforcement of the measuring rules when the horses are stood for measuring. I think that will really be the only workable solution that AMHA would even think about implementing. I would be really in favor of measuring at the withers too.

On a side note, For those of you that have answered the thread with regards to studying genetics whether general, plant or animal, or even Equine. If you answered yes to it, and still have the opinion that the Miniature horse is a true breed, you need to go back and reread all that you did before. Also if you think that the Miniatures will eventually be able to breed consistent heights and stay under some arbitrary height, you need to go back and reread your books, and more. Height is a KNOWN QUANTITATIVE TRAIT. It is not an either or, i.e. blue eyes or brown, height is highly variable, and is consistently shown to have a bell shaped curve result in animals no matter what the restrictions. So, you will ALWAYS have outcrops, AGAIN ALWAYS. Height will NEVER be controlled to the extent the AMHA wants given their requirements, ESPECIALLY if they are going to continue to allow hardshipping. And they better not close it because there is no reason to, no type or pedigree requirements to get in only height.

So to say a 35" horse out of A parents is not a Miniature, is WRONG, genetically it is. It is a Miniature genetically, it just did not fit into AMHA's arbitrary height limit. It just didnt all of the sudden become a Shetland did it?? Does it fit that type? (even though they go back to them) Heck Thoroughbreds go back to some Arabs but if they dont run fast enough are they Arabs now?

Now that said, since we have a curve on height, and STILL no "type" that we are to breed for, when are we ever going to be able to breed for anything remotely consistent? NEVER. PERIOD.

Some of us breeders have tried to breed for a type and not a height to see something we dream about to possibly produce somewhat consistently before we die. And yes you will HAVE to sacrifice some height issues to go anywhere to breed a true type, the ones that consistently breeds true to a type. All of you dog breeders know that when breeding dogs, and get a litter, you get a range of heights and qualities in a litter. That is how dog breeds can be made so much faster, changed faster than single birth animals. 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. Horses dont have that luxury that dogs do and height is a variable trait that can be managed to get to a true type. But again AMHA does not want that because they use judges at Worlds of all breed types, so the horses that win will be of all types, so again everyone is happy and everyone's horse has value in someone's eyes. We will never be a true breed with these issues to deal with. And this has nothing to do with color, yet. I will be happy to copy past this part to the genetics poll thread too.

Respectfully,

John Eberth

AMHA Genetics Committe Chairman

University of Kentucky Gluck Equine Research Center

Arion Management Inc.

 

[StarRidgeAcres]

I believe it has always been the Association's lack of testicular fortitude to make the measuring of show horses even somewhat slightly legitimate.
So, I really would be in favor of a stewards program and more strick enforcement of the measuring rules when the horses are stood for measuring. I think that will really be the only workable solution that AMHA would even think about implementing.

Right on the money on BOTH points!