My AMHA Registration Proposal

[kaykay]

I think its a great idea! needs some tweaking like michelle pointed out but still a great idea.

so lets use my mare as an example. she went over 34 so i never brought her permenant. so i could bring her back in as perm in the appendix registery for 50.00??

thanks so much ronnie

 

[jlh]

Ronnie

what a wonderful, carefully thought out proposal.

where I would have just cross-hardshipped maybe two horses, now my girls who came from mares who were originally AMHA oversized, by AMHA 30" stallions now could go back to their whole pedigree, and her 32" adult offspring (by an AMHA stallion) can be back in the AMHA pool.

thanks!

 

[sfmini]

This BOD member is reading with great interest. Like Ronnie I have nothing to gain from this as my horses are all under 34", any horse I produced that went over sold with AMHR only papers.

Below is an email I sent to the entire AMHA BOD with a few additions:

I have always said that we won't really be a breed until an AMHA horse bred to an AMHA horse produces an AMHA horse.

Allow any horse that goes over 34" to keep its papers as a breeding stock horse. No need for a new registry, just something similar to what was done with the foundation/oversized breeding stock horses many years ago.

I think as long as the shows continue to be 34 and under the heights will be pretty much under control, and it would be nice for the ones that do go over to be able to continue to contribute to the gene pool. By continuing to limit the shows to 34" and under we continue to remain true to our bylaws and goals by rewarding and promoting only the 34" and under miniatures.

Maybe a restriction that only a first generation oversized horse keeps papers and any oversized offspring do not.

I do not agree with hardshipping in ANY over 34" horse as the goal of AMHA per our bylaws is 34" and under.

Another thought would be that an oversized horse must only be bred to a permanantly registered under 34".

I think we are in for some interesting and lively conversations on this topic in the future.

We need to keep in mind that the goal of the founders of the AMHA was to produce miniature horses 34" and under and I would like to see us remain true to that goal.

Lisa (R3) has made some very eloquent points in her well thought out and written proposal in another thread.

 

[R3]

I guess I have a couple of questions about the whole Appendix/Breeding Stock issue. The real 'solution' will only be found if we have defined the 'problem' it is trying to correct. That is REALLY what this is about, and once the 'problem' we are trying to fix is agreed on, then the 'answer' will be more clear.

WHY are we addressing this issue? Is it because ...?

1. AMHA needs to expand to welcome the 34-38 horse and be more like AMHR?

2. AMHA needs to address the issue of AMHA horses that grow over 34"?

3. AMHA needs income and this is a way to provide it?

I personally think we need to address #2 first. Fixing that problem will help with the finances, and then if the need for additional revenue is still an issue, AMHA can consider other options later on.

 

[Songcatcher]

Ronnie,I like this proposal much better than the AMHS idea. I have read both your proposal and Julie's (R3). Both have some valid points. Some people will favor one and some the other. I could accept either one. It would be nice if heads could get together and compromise between the two. Like you, neither one will benefit me personally at this point as all of mine are under 34 inches.

Again I would like to emphasize that my biggest concern is measuring at the withers.

 

[ChrystalPaths]

I like it and I think with time and fine tuning it could work and help generate the revenue the AMHA sorely needs and I am "not" a member currently. A concise well thought out effort and I applaud your efforts! :aktion033:

 

[brookhaven]

First, Thank you Ronnie for addressing this and presenting to the BOD. I also very much appreciate that you are going to print the responses and deliver them to the BOD at the meeting. This is as close to my voice being heard at the convention since I am unable to attend, and therefore have no vote in anything that goes on.

I have read both proposals presented here and the AMHS proposal as well. I think yours more closely comes to what is needed, however, I agree it needs some tweaking and maybe compromising with R3's Breeding Stock proposal. In your outline, I disagree with #2 and 4 as I do think this will encourage and enable people to breed horses over 34 which is not what AMHA's goal is. No.2, as I read it, opens up the registry to allow importation of all AMHR-B horses which would saturate the over 34 gene pool and No. 4, which would allow Appendix (over 34) and AMHR-B horses offspring to be registered which will certainly increase the likelihood of 34 and over horses. But I do see the need to retain AMHA papers on horses that have gone over 34 and keep them as breeding stock and don't see how that will ultimately have an impact on AMHA's goal of 34 and under.

On the other side of all this, I too, would like to see measurement from the top of the withers, which would make all present 34" AMHA horses need to be Appendix registered. So, lots of ironing to do but certainly a good starting place.

I also propose that this new Appendix registry be referred to as AMHA[SIZE=14pt]A[/SIZE]! Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

[targetsmom]

First, I want to say I appreciate the effort that has gone into this proposal (and the one by R3) and especially the opportunity to offer comments. I would also like to add that these proposals will have no immediate effect on any of our miniatures, which are all 34" or under and AMHA/AMHR and PtHA registered.

I fully support the idea of an Appendix or breeding stock registry within AMHA for horses that go over 34". I do believe some tweaking or compromise between this and the proposal made by R3 would be in order. For example, I do not believe it is necessary to add classes at AMHA shows for these Appendix or breeding stock horses. I also believe that the Appendix registry should be for AMHA registered miniatures that go over 34", not for taller miniatures of unknown parentage. In order for progeny to get back into the regular AMHA registry (assuming they mature at or under 34"), I think they should be limited to crosses between Appendix and regular AMHA registered horses, and not include crosses between two Appendix registered horses. All of these suggestions are in keeping with the goal of AMHA of producing miniature horses of 34" or under.

Again, thanks for the opportunity to comment.

Mary Adams

 

[kaykay]

maybe someone can help me out. I really dont understand why its such a big deal to allow taller horses to show amha?? Obviously if you dont want to breed and show taller horses you dont have to. It wont affect anyones program that wants to striclty breed and show 34 and under. The taller horses have really gained in popularity. So instead of letting amhr be the only registry to benefit from that why would it be a bad thing for amha to benefit too? I do think there are alot out there that breed both small 34 and under miniatures and the taller 34-38 miniatures.

also as been brought up time and time again breeding small to small is no guarantee that you will get small. and breeding big to big is also no guarantee of big. my amha oversize mare still has never thrown a foal over 31.5" and shes all small amha breeding so who knows why she got so tall. I suspect the measurements on her papers are not accurate. Maybe if we allow the 34-38 people will stop lying on the papers and we will know the true heights in the background.

please dont flame i just really want to know why this seems so objectionable

 

[McBunz]

I like the proposal for a few reasons. Anyone being a AMHA member only will have a place to reg. those

horses that do go over. The blood lines are not lost to the AMHA. And including AMHA shows for the taller

horses. In our area we have AMHA shows only. So some very nice horses are not seen at all.

 

[JMS Miniatures]

I like this proporsal. Much better then that other registration idea.

Although I agree with the few on here, I think AMHA should focous on their own AMHA horses, and take care of their oversized ones, and not worry too much about AMHR. And your talking to the person here that has just mostly AMHR horses and a couple of B size minis (I got a couple AMHA/AMHR horses). Unless AMHA desperatly needs the B size horses of AMHR.

If you want to bring the 34" & under AMHR horses into it, then here is what I want to see. I got a couple that I would love to hardship into AMHA but its just impossible with those high fees. I would love to see AMHA do a lower hardshipping fee for horses that are already AMHR registered into AMHA. Just like AMHR does it with AMHA papered horses getting hardshipped into AMHR.

 

[MyBarakah]

:saludando: Hi!

I really like this new proposal! And I also agree with JMS Miniatures...... I have 2 R mares that are 30 and 32" and would like to hardship them into A. I want to (goal) is to breed for 34" and under.

I like the idea of the Appendix deal. I think too that it should only be for A horses that have gone over and not so much for brining R horses in (for the one's that are 34" and taller).....

I think the appendix classes would be ok also if they just kept it for the A horses that went over 34". Because there are some GORGEOUS outstanding horses that have gone over 34". I think the ones that are trying to stay in the 34" and under will if they open this new idea. I think it's a GREAT thing Ronnie has come up with! Sure.... there's always room for improvement..... people just need to be open minded in this and think about what's best for AMHA (and what will work best with brining money into AMHA).... !!

 

[Field-of-Dreams]

Add me to the ones that love this idea.

Thanks, Ronnie.

Lucy

 

[sfmini]

Kay, our bylaws state the following:

Section 6, Breed Name and Size

Horses registered by The American Miniature Horse

Association, Inc., shall be a breed of horses known as the

American Miniature Horse. The American Miniature Horse

shall not exceed thirty-four (34) inches in height when meas-

ured according to Article XI, Sec. 4 of these Bylaws. The registration

of any horse exceeding thirty-four (34) inches shall be

void and such horse shall not be considered or designated as

an American Miniature Horse. All new certificates issued by

The American Miniature Horse Association, Inc. shall bear a

prominent legend reflecting the content of this Bylaw.

Foundation stock registered pursuant to General Rule 184H

shall be exempt from this Bylaw.

The goal of the AMHA is the 34 and under horse. We should remain true to that goal.

 

[_minihorses4ever_]

I LOVE this idea! It is so much better than the first. I support this one 110%.

 

[kaykay]

jody thank you i didnt know it was an actual by law. how pathetic is that since i have been a member for years lol.

but in all fairness this by law is not held up or adhered to by the majority of the members. Its not even held to at the shows. So maybe it needs to be changed? there are just way too many farms with over 34" horses that still have amha papers to think that this by law is realistic. And we have all seen the horses win that were clearly over 34" win at the shows. So in reality those horses should have had their papers revoked immediately and instead were given show titles.

I guess to be a true 34 and under registry you would have to really start enforcing your own bylaws.

I think any business or registry needs to be able to change and evolve.

 

[Darkstar]

Here are my comments/ideas on the proposals. I believe these will be beneficial without comprimising the goals of the AMHA.

1- This a great idea however all fees except late fees should apply to bring the horses permanent.

2- Change to 34" and under and charge half the hardship fee for a limited time - say one year.

3- Only horses from AMHA or the proposed new registry (amha-B/AMHS?) are eligible for registration. All normal fees apply.

4- Should not be allowed. See #3.

I addition to the above:

5- change the measuring standard to measure at the withers.

6- Set up a shared database for DNA tracking between the registries. Sharing costs and eliminating redundacy will save both registries and members money.

 

[HGFarm]

Thank you so much Ronnie for taking the time to put this idea together. You are on the ball!

AMHA is just that and AMHR is just that. If I have a horse that goes over (all mine are double registered) that I really wanted to show, I have the opportunity to do that with AMHR.

Why would we want to make AMHA a twin of AMHR?

I do agree that the oversized horses from A parents should have breeding stock papers only. That will encourage the owners to breed back to a small stallion for a nice horse that remains in the under 34 category. I dont see the need for them to be shown under an AMHA show. I dont know that I would like to see them up to 38" either. Perhaps 36".

I dont believe in changing the AMHA completely from what it is. It is 34 and under. Who is to say that by allowing the oversized in, you are not going to continue having 'measuring problems' or folks lying about what they are on the papers? AMHR has that problem already... how many R horses are listed as B horses out there that are probably 40"??

I would hope that some folks have some integrity when it comes to putting the correct size of a horse on their papers.

I think that by allowing breeding stock, there are many wins there:

*AMHA will not lose the revenue from the lack of registration of the offspring of these horses.

*The pedigrees and bloodlines are not lost to AMHA.

*There would be much better marketability for these horses, as they would still be valuable in a breeding program.

I also think that the hardship fees- say bringing a horse into AMHA from AMHR that qualifies for the current height requirements are ridiculous. It is made me really think twice about adding an R only mare to my herd,(mine are all double registered) and I have seen many that are outstanding.

I cannot see that we would need to bring in current R B sized horses into a breeding stock for AMHA, as many of them have a larger background, which seems it would contribute to more oversized foals.

I dont think we need another registry, nor do we need another AMHR- we just need to tweak AMHA a little.

I am more concerned about the voting for membership and other things than I am allowing an oversized horse to keep it's A papers in some way, but I do think that some type of breeding stock would certainly benefit the registry, breeders and the market all the way around.

:

Just my 2 cents worth...

 

[mini-horses]

[SIZE=12pt]I also like the appendix idea. [/SIZE]

I own an appendix AQHA(which are yellow papered) and a regular papered AQHA(which are white papered). So I could see the appendix idea working.

Now the way AQHA does there appendix papered horses is that two appendix AQHA horses can not be bred together if they want to register the foal. The Appendix QH must be bred to a whiite papered QH to get the foal registered. This has to do with the percentage of QH blood in the foal. In my appendix QH case she has thoughbred blood in her bloodlines and breeding her to another appendix QH with thoughbred bloodlines would put to much thoughbred breeding in her foal so it would not be consider a QH breed but a thoughbred breed.

I also agree with jms that if they reduced there hardshipping fees this would get more 34" and under minis in their registry. I have several minis that had parents that where AMHA registered, but the breeders did not want to pay the fees for one reason or another, or just did not like AMHA and did not keep the papers.

I have a stallion that is 31" tall and both parents where AMHA registered at one time, but because the owners did not bring the parents papers to permanent status he can not have AMHA papers unless I hardship him in to AMHA. Which is $1200, I could purchase another AMHA/AMHR stallion for that price.

I would like to see there fees be a little more reasonable.

 

[Heart L Ranch]

I like this proposal with minor changes. I have thought we have needed for some time the return of something similar to the old "Foundation Oversize" division, Appendix or Breeding Stock is a much better term. Many of us breeders who have been striving for the 34" and under mark know that we always have the chance for a foal that may out grow his/her AMHA papers.... What a shame we have to throw away their heritiage. My horses are double registered so I do have another venue but some people do not. It saddens me that we treat these horses as throw-aways..... I have a AMHA mare that went over, she no longer has her AMHA papers and she is 34 1/2". I have bred her 6 times and all 6 foals matured UNDER 34". It was stated before, if we truely want to be a breed then bloodlines (pedigree) should be the defining line, not just height. I also agree that at this time we do not need to be adding classes at the shows for the Appendix horses.

Thank You Ronnie for your time and effort in this proposal.