Reasons for Rule Change

[Leeana]

First off i just wanted to say THANK YOU, i now know why we have been measuring at the last hairs rather then the withers, it makes sense to me anyhow. I guess i am the only one that doesnt have a big problem with our horses being measured at the last hairs, i really do not think all that many people go to the extreme's to subtract 1/2 an inch from their horses. Yes im sure some do go to that extreme of glueing mane but i cant imagine that many. I just dont have that big of a problem with it i guess. If you bump it up to measuring at the withers some horses will measure over (unless some other rule is added), obviously if you bump it down to measuring at the bottom of the withers we all get upset so why not just leave well enough alone???

But, i just cannot find it in me to support this rule change, i admit i have never been a real active AMHA member but i do attempt to keep up to date with the registry and the world show and what is going on for the most part, so i guess i really shouldnt complain as this wont affect me that much as most my horses are amhr / aspc. I believe in leaving "well enough" alone

.

 

[Laura]

Measuring at the top of the withers will certainly make our horses taller, I don't think that is what we want.

I think that in the long run this rule will hurt the registry, especially overseas. If another registry were to come up with a rule change that has their breed of Minis measuring at the top of the wither--I see that creating a lot of interest in an alternative to AMHA in the overseas market. I could be wrong, but that is what I'm getting from what I'm hearing from various people.

AMEN!! It comes across as "lets make up another rule no one else in the equine world will be able to understand". Has anything been clarified as to what happens to previously oversize horses, or are we supposed to believe that it "will be worked out". @@

Here's the deal, and it's been this way for years with me & AMHA, I send in my paperwork for the stallions in case someone wants to register a foal they buy from me, because I certainly won't do it....

 

[Margo_C-T]

Although no AMHA membership directory has been published in the past couple or so years, the membership number I recall was in the neighborhood of twelve THOUSAND, so the apparently UNDER 100 members who signed in for last week's AMHA national meeting was considerably LESS than 10% of the eligible-to-vote membership; it is more like less than ONE PERCENT, who are setting policy for all of us. (If anyone knows how to obtain valid current AMHA membership numbers, please, share the information!)

Does anyone else believe it is PAST time for the membership to insist upon a viable form of absentee/online voting on registry issues??

Margo

 

[Shari]

Minimor,

In the Icelandic and fjord world...they can get a bit more money if they are taller. So that statement,, in that context is correct.

I do not think it is easy, no matter how the measurement is done. At least it was nice of Toni to come on here and explain, because AMHA sure did not have too. Know a few Registeries that wouldn't.

If they did the top of the withers... Maggie would be out. Why you may ask?

She is the same Maggie but she has some wicked tall withers for a mini.

Here's some interesting numbers...

Back height just about 32 1/2"

Last hair 33 1/2"

On Withers -very close to 35"

Using the offical measuring stick from AMHA.

I do not show..and never plan on breeding Maggie again...just could not face taking that kind of chance loosing her.

Hope those that are opened minded, see what I am trying to say.

 

[Cathy_H]

because they like taller (Big) horses. We like the smaller ones and we are different, we are a height registry.

...... Thus being a HEIGHT registry we can change the official height to accomodate our breeding practices.

What will be proposed when someone wants the even taller horses in down the road?

We need measurers with integrity

........... That is what was needed to solve the problem all along. If there are no honest measurers now where are you going to get them later?

You may have a horse that will need to be reinstated.

. I certainly hope these owners are not required to pay for this.

Measuring at the top of the withers will certainly make our horses taller, I don't think that is what we want.

......... 36 inches or 34 inches - the horse IS the same height!

...................................... We can then call our horses "designer miniature horses" because they are the same height/ size as before but will then be wearing a smaller size!

........................................... FYI - We've been AMHA members since 1985 & showed AMHA shows until about 2000 and I feel this is going to hurt AMHA.

 

[Laura]

Minimor,

In the Icelandic and fjord world...they can get a bit more money if they are taller. So that statement,, in that context is correct.

I do not think it is easy, no matter how the measurement is done. At least it was nice of Toni to come on here and explain, because AMHA sure did not have too. Know a few Registeries that wouldn't.

If they did the top of the withers... Maggie would be out. Why you may ask?

She is the same Maggie but she has some wicked tall withers for a mini.

Here's some interesting numbers...

Back height just about 32 1/2"

Last hair 33 1/2"

On Withers -very close to 35"

Using the offical measuring stick from AMHA.

I do not show..and never plan on breeding Maggie again...just could not face taking that kind of chance loosing her.

Hope those that are opened minded, see what I am trying to say.

But how could they pull papers on a horse that was eligible when she was registered ? Talk about the HUGE potential for lawsuits! The whole idea of changing the method of measurement without making accomodations for the horses currently registered and those previously ineligible, makes NO sense to me.

*If* measurement was changed to the withers, they would HAVE to raise the maximum height. I personally don't think that's a big deal, but I'm probably in the minority. It's a huge mess, no matter how you look at it.

 

[Warpony]

*If* measurement was changed to the withers, they would HAVE to raise the maximum height. I personally don't think that's a big deal, but I'm probably in the minority. It's a huge mess, no matter how you look at it.

Exactly!! And I don't see why this is such a big deal. The horses are STILL THE SAME SIZE! The ONLY difference is that we are finally admitting that according to the horse people in the entire horse industry the world over they are an inch or two taller than we have been saying they are! This "changing the way we measure will make them taller" is ridiculous. It is NOT going to "make our horses taller" it is simply going to accurately reflect the size they ARE and ALWAYS HAVE BEEN.

A couple of years ago I had a crazy internet stalker who got all riled up over me calling my mini's "ponies". her favorite line was "As long as we keep calling them ponies the horse industry will never take us seriously." Well, I think she was full of crap... THIS kind of foolishness is why the "horse industry" will never take us seriously.

 

[kaykay]

This quote kinda shocks me

As far as European horse, if they want to have AMHA sanctioned Shows they need to measure like we do. I don't think we need to measure they way they do. Measuring at the top of the withers will certainly make our horses taller, I don't think that is what we want. Measuring at the Base will keep the measuring about the same or depending on how high the wither is. may make them a little shorter, but it will allow for the withers.

People overseas have invested so much money in AMHA horses and to tell them they cant measure the way they have measured forever and force them to measure such a silly (and unacceptable) way...........well just doesnt seem right to me. Kinda like kicking your best customer

Im curious to know what our overseas friends think of this?

 

[Warpony]

This quote kinda shocks me

As far as European horse, if they want to have AMHA sanctioned Shows they need to measure like we do. I don't think we need to measure they way they do. Measuring at the top of the withers will certainly make our horses taller, I don't think that is what we want. Measuring at the Base will keep the measuring about the same or depending on how high the wither is. may make them a little shorter, but it will allow for the withers.

People overseas have invested so much money in AMHA horses and to tell them they cant measure the way they have measured forever and force them to measure such a silly (and unacceptable) way...........well just doesnt seem right to me. Kinda like kicking your best customer

Im curious to know what our overseas friends think of this?

Same here. I don't understand the logic. They measure in the normal, usual, acceptable fashion for every other breed of horse on the planet but they have to change to accommodate US? With our weird, non-standard measuring method?? It boggles my mind as much as the "it will make our horses taller" comment.

You know what my overseas friends said? "Typical American arrogance and foolishness."

 

[SHANA]

I am not a member of AMHA but a few years ago I bought a AMHR filly whose dam used to be AMHA registered as she went over 34" and her papers were turned in. Needless to say my filly could not be registered AMHA due to this. She is now a beautiful 3 year old and only 31.5" at this time. Kind of unfair to that filly to lose being allowed AMHA papers due to her dam being over. Her dam should have gotten AMHA papers saying breeding stock oversize. They use to do this as my stallion, Booker well his dams' dam was foundation oversized as was his sires' dam. He is only 33.5' and produces small foals.

 

[BLACKWATER FARMS]

Thanks Toni for giving us some of the reasoning behind the new measurement change--

I understand that people are not happy about this--but please don't shoot the messanger!

suggestion--where the AMHA obviously needs a change is in how votes are taken. Many clubs require a certain percentage of the membership to be present to vote on a change/proposal --having only about 100 members there and that is certainly not representative of the entire membership.

I can think of several other clubs that I have/am associated with and they require a vote by at least 65% of the membership --they do email or paper mail ballots so those not able to be present are able to voice their opinion

shouldn't be too difficult to do.

AMHA members if they/we want better representation proposals need to start with how many people need to vote on something. that goes back to basic club guidelines and rules

JMHO-

Linda

 

[Laura]

Thanks Toni for giving us some of the reasoning behind the new measurement change--

I understand that people are not happy about this--but please don't shoot the messanger!

suggestion--where the AMHA obviously needs a change is in how votes are taken. Many clubs require a certain percentage of the membership to be present to vote on a change/proposal --having only about 100 members there and that is certainly not representative of the entire membership.

I can think of several other clubs that I have/am associated with and they require a vote by at least 65% of the membership --they do email or paper mail ballots so those not able to be present are able to voice their opinion

shouldn't be too difficult to do.

AMHA members if they/we want better representation proposals need to start with how many people need to vote on something. that goes back to basic club guidelines and rules

JMHO-

Linda

Why can't an account be set up by each individual (like paying a bill on a website), by member number and allow voting by a simple click yes or no for each proposal? I guess because it WOULD let the real majority choose...

 

[Nathan Luszcz]

I think the person who mentioned how this new rule makes minis TALLER hit the nail on the head. Heck, if you measured from the knee they'd become even shorter! But a 34" knee is pretty dang tall. Is that making the breed smaller, or larger? As mentioned, it makes the breed BIGGER over time, which is the opposite of what the person who started this thread tried to do. Making the measurements LOOK smaller is (not only unethical when talking to any non-mini person in the world, since you would be misrepresenting the animal in the other person's eyes) just something to make you feel better about yourself. But if I had a 36" horse measure 34" at the base of his withers, all of a sudden he's an A class again. That makes the breed bigger, not smaller!

If the mini organizations want any respect from any other breed associations they need to have the same basic horsemanship rules everyone else has, and that's measuring at the top of the withers.

You want to eliminate cheating? Have the horses stand square and lower their heads. You can't move the top of their withers!

 

[wantminimore]

I'm not a member of AMHA but i do agree with some that have mentioned that there needs to be a way for more members to vote.

Leslie

 

[Shari]

Minimor,

In the Icelandic and fjord world...they can get a bit more money if they are taller. So that statement,, in that context is correct.

I do not think it is easy, no matter how the measurement is done. At least it was nice of Toni to come on here and explain, because AMHA sure did not have too. Know a few Registeries that wouldn't.

If they did the top of the withers... Maggie would be out. Why you may ask?

She is the same Maggie but she has some wicked tall withers for a mini.

Here's some interesting numbers...

Back height just about 32 1/2"

Last hair 33 1/2"

On Withers -very close to 35"

Using the offical measuring stick from AMHA.

I do not show..and never plan on breeding Maggie again...just could not face taking that kind of chance loosing her.

Hope those that are opened minded, see what I am trying to say.

But how could they pull papers on a horse that was eligible when she was registered ? Talk about the HUGE potential for lawsuits! The whole idea of changing the method of measurement without making accomodations for the horses currently registered and those previously ineligible, makes NO sense to me.

*If* measurement was changed to the withers, they would HAVE to raise the maximum height. I personally don't think that's a big deal, but I'm probably in the minority. It's a huge mess, no matter how you look at it.

I feel the same way.

 

[Songcatcher]

Thanks Toni for giving us some of the reasoning behind the new measurement change--

I understand that people are not happy about this--but please don't shoot the messanger!

I too am glad to know where this came from, but if you will notice the original post, Toni is not only the messenger, but the perpetrator.

 

[Aimee005]

LOL! Great read!!

 

[Sunny]

2. Another reason choosing base rather then top of withers - I know all other breeds use the top of the withers, why because they like taller (Big) horses. We like the smaller ones and we are different, we are a height registry.

Or maybe it's because it was the one logical, unequivocal, easy to find spot??

Pony breeds like the Welsh use the withers too and they certainly aren't breeding for taller animals than the breed standard allows.

Measuring at the top of the withers will certainly make our horses taller, I don't think that is what we want. Measuring at the Base will keep the measuring about the same or depending on how high the wither is. may make them a little shorter, but it will allow for the withers.

You can call a sheep's tail a leg if you want to but the fact is the sheep still has four legs and a tail. Measuring an animal differently does NOT make them taller or shorter!!

I'm sorry, this is just not logical and that drives me insane. Bingo is right- all AMHA is doing is redefining "34 inches" to be larger than it was so you (AMHA) can sneak in horses you want that don't qualify. Give me a break! Either breed them legitimately smaller or raise the height limit, don't try to make tall horses fit the existing height rules. Keep the books open so their smaller offspring will be eligible in the future if you're that concerned about losing the bloodlines.

I do appreciate that you took the time to share your reasoning with us and thank you sincerely for all your hard work on behalf of the breed. You are completely right that if we want to make a change it is our job as members to step forward and take action.

I personally will save some money by not rejoining the AMHA, continue to show my miniature with the big guys at driving events and avoid all this nonsense like the plague.

It's no wonder serious horsemen think we're insane.

Leia

Leia, I think you're brilliant! I could NOT have said it better myself, and you expressed my own opinions exactly! Thank you!

I also agree with this point that Nathan made: "Making the measurements LOOK smaller is (not only unethical when talking to any non-mini person in the world, since you would be misrepresenting the animal in the other person's eyes) just something to make you feel better about yourself." AND this point: "If the mini organizations want any respect from any other breed associations they need to have the same basic horsemanship rules everyone else has, and that's measuring at the top of the withers.

You want to eliminate cheating? Have the horses stand square and lower their heads. You can't move the top of their withers!"

Right on, Nathan!

 

[eastminis]

WOW!!!! All I did was give you my opinion, no one elses - Just Mine.

This rule was taken through the proper channels. It was to be voted on in 2007, but it wasn't published right, and Show Rules did reccomend it. I withdrew the rule, rewrote it, it was published and went through the proper channels again, and it was passed at the 2008 meeting. So it has taken 3 years to go through and if you cared or were interested enough to know whats going on in the Association, you could have read about it in the magazine or on the web site. It took two thirds of the members voting and present and over two thirds voted yes. Measuring at the top of the withers was also voted on and it did not pass, only a few memebers voted yes, the majority voted no.

This rule will also make it easier for the measured to do a better job, because the base of the withers is easier to find, then the last mane hair. The measurement from the last mane hair to the base may be the difference of a 1/4 inch, but more if your horse has a high wither.

European buyers need to do the same as they do now, (to be safe) don't import an adult horse thats over 32 inches. Allow for measuring at the top of the withers, its no different. Then they will measure under 34 inches at there Shows.

When I said we like smaller horses, I meant that we are a height registry and it will always be 34 inches and under.(unless that is changed and I don't see that happening). I have seen this rule change come up for a vote by the memembership many times and it hasn't passed. (almost every year).

How can we measure our horses on top of the withers? That would make a 33 inch horse over 34 inches. Then what would we do, go around pulling papers, or not allowing your 34 inch horse into the registry, because now hes 35 inches. Bet you all would have something to say about that!

We will lose what makes us unique and different if we measure at 36 inches. You can call it whatever you want, a horse is a horse, but a AMHA horse is under 34 inches. If big horse people think we are crazy, they must have always thought that, whats different?

Toni Reece

Reece Family Miniatures

 

[SweetOpal]

thank you for the break down, I can see that you have put alot of time and energy into your proposal. I am with you, where were all the complainers to vote it out at the meeting, pretty pathetic only 100 or so people show up to vote!

I on the other hand am excited......Geshan can now be an AMHA horse as well as an AMHR/ASPC, imagine how much more valuable that will make him!!!

Will be good to get some good pony blood in there to really bring out that full size horse look!