Where is the breed going?

[Margo_C-T]

This is a very serious subject, and absolutely SHOULD be being discussed,openly and a LOT...I have been "seriously into horses" for 55 of my 64 years. I bred my first registered QH when THAT organization was only about 15 years old(if memory serves, the King Ranch's "Wimpy" won Gr.Ch. Stallion at the Ft.Worth Stock Show in '41, and was rewarded with the designation of "P-1" in the then-fledgling American Quarter Horse Assoc.; my "Misty Question" was foaled in 1956.) I have watched QH, APHA(which exists only because AQHA was too "stiff-necked" to accept spotted horses...and which I have had horses registered with since the early '70s), and even Arabian(as a kid, I loved the "Western Horseman" articles on the Kellogg, and other, Arabians, dreamt for awhile of owning one-and actually DID own one, around the early '90s-)--go about breeding AWAY from the very qualities which not only 'made' them what they were, but actually LESSENED their soundness and/or athletic ability!!! How STUPID and SHORTSIGHTED is THAT???!! Now I see the same 'trend'-to fixate on a single or only a couple of characteristics, and COMPLETELY 'forget about' the whole- is indeed occuring in Miniatures, and it, quite honestly, sickens me.(And,although I understand that Dr. Pam had her tongue firmly in cheek with her first response here-

- I fear her "solution" might turn out to be all too true....)

Has there been improvement in the overall quality of conformation(with part of that improvement being in genuine 'refinement'-which I think VERY few people really understand the meaning of) in the 21 years that I have been involved in Miniature horses? Yes, of course....but, 'refinement' has its limits--and in the quest for "improvement", the OVERALL quality of conformation MUST always be at the forefront--and based on what I am seeing, very often, it is NOT. Why is this? IMO--much lack of genuine knowledge about what, OVERALL, constitutes quality of conformation; the aforementioned tendency to 'follow the fad', and with a "if a little is good, more must be better" philosophy--which, usually, so ISN'T the case--and perhaps, worst--the notion that within a breed, horses 'should' be bred to halter, or to perform--but perish the thought that a single horse might do BOTH, well. I recall a link-I *think*it was on here-awhile back, about a "world class" QH Halter stallion--this horse,to me, was PITIFUL-musclebound, with tiny feet and no-slope pasterns, he could hardly get across the paddock.... you couldn't run after me fast enough to GIVE me such an animal-yet this horse had been winning BIG in 'Halter'! Lord help us, if we have no better sense than to deliberately create such creatures.....

I agree about the "three year" thing-show for three years(doesn't hurt the future income to win BIG all or a couple of those three years at Nationals with one of those, I'd bet...)-then the horse is never seen publically again,but IS 'cranking out' offspring((I have a personal theory about HEIGHT in some of those instances, too-but that's a whole 'nother subject.)

Anyone with a grain of sense should know that physically lacking in proper weight--in other words, THIN-doesn't equate to "refined"; what many also don't seem to realize is that slab-sided/narrow/lacking in lung and heart capacity and overall substance doesn't equal "refined" , either-no matter how LONG(and "swanlike"(???)the neck is. Just as yearlings SHOULDN'T look like mature horses(if they do, can you say"coarse"/TOO heavy-bodied, as adults-or, perhaps, steroids?) Neither should mature horses EVER look like yearlings! I agree that I, personally, have seen more "overmature looking" young stock than over-"refined" mature horses--but I also see 'weediness'-which is what you are likely to get when you do not understand the limits, and true parameters of, "refinement"-as becoming more common. Some would say it is the judges who dictate how horse types evolve; however, they can only judge what they are presented with. When the majority are following the fad as fast as they can, what are they(judges)to do? On the other side of the coin--it distresses me GREATLY to see an animal with a SERIOUS conformational fault win a National Championship-something I have personally observed at least twice.What does THAT say about the quality and integrity of the judging, at that level??

This is a subject of VERY strong interest to me; I could go on and on, and not repeat myself! However, I will end THIS post by wondering if the poster who mentioned striving for a "2/3 leg, 1/3 body" proportion REALLY meant that?? I have to say, I believe a horse of any size with those proportions would be woefully lacking in lung and heart(i.e., breathing!)capacity....actually, a heart girth proportion to leg length of near equal is A-OK, IF the horse is well-balanced/proportionate in all of the other ways it should be.

Oh-and as to photos(especially in magazines/ads)--I wouldn't believe much,if any, of what you see nowadays. Most are being taken from such strange angles/views, you can't really tell ANYTHING about what that horse genuinely looks like-AND, photos can be so "doctored", they are, to me, essentially meaningless. The not-so-skillful can make a horse look more like a greyhound....I recall laughing over the first really noticable one in a mini magazine, several years ago--I thought then, and still do, that it was laughable-IF it weren't such a sad example of the way things are turning.

Oh-my experience is virtually 100% with AMHA; I find it doubly sad to hear from someone whose is AMHR, reporting their perception of the same phenomenon.

 

[Danielle_E.]

Margo, I applaud you for your post. Very well said.

 

[horsehug]

Excellent excellent post, Margo!

You touched on so many different ideas I agree with!

Susan O.

 

[Laura]

I agree with WCR in that there is a definate separation of halter horses and performance horses occuring.  And I find this very unfortunate.  IMHO, it is sad when there are whole lines of horses that are shown til they are three, then retired to breeding stock to produce foals that will be shown til three, and so forth.  We are ending up with those who can (performance horses) and those who can't (halter horses).  What happened to actually enjoying the horses and really USING them?  Is money the big reason people do this now?  I got into horses because I just love the darn things.  I have decided not to breed minis now, though, because I don't want to see them end up as little statues to make more little statues, or be abused under a harness (another issue totally.  I show only AMHR, so I cannot speak for what is happening with AMHA.  But the direction that AMHR is heading really disheartens me.  I know that money can be the only factor for breeding and showing horses, in any breed, for some people.
As with any statement, I know there are exceptions.  There are still plenty of people breed versatile horses (right now) and I hope those numbers will increase, not continue to decrease.

455649[/snapback]

​

Then there are breeders like me who don't WANT to do performance. I can't run/walk fast and keep up in jumper or obstacle and even driving puts too much stress on my ankle after that cart wreck

I prefer to show young halter stock then retire them for breeding or as pets...BUT, I do sell quite a few horses for performance AND halter use. It's just not *my* thing. Dana finally bullied me into admitting I like to drive at shows, but not for hours at home. So now she keeps my driving horses and I get to play lady of the manor and usually only drive occasionally at her house, never at my home and often at shows.

Some of my kids doing something beside stand still and looking pretty..all horses were trained exclusively by Dana Bryan, Dreamweaver Farm.

Flying A's Maybe A Rowdy Night, winning halter gelding that went on to drive beautifully.

"Blue"

Flying A's Maybe A Rendezvous, winning halter gelding that is now winning in harness too...Jamie at the whip when she owned him, before she gave in to my begging to let us buy him back for Mia

Desi

Flying A Black Magic's Superstition, multiple National & Reserve National Champion at halter and multiple performance divisions.

Bali harness

Bali halter

 

[SunQuest]

I couldn't have said it better Margo!

 

[bucksfizz]

I agree with WCR in that there is a definate separation of halter horses and performance horses occuring.  And I find this very unfortunate.  IMHO, it is sad when there are whole lines of horses that are shown til they are three, then retired to breeding stock to produce foals that will be shown til three, and so forth.  We are ending up with those who can (performance horses) and those who can't (halter horses).  What happened to actually enjoying the horses and really USING them?  Is money the big reason people do this now?  I got into horses because I just love the darn things.  I have decided not to breed minis now, though, because I don't want to see them end up as little statues to make more little statues, or be abused under a harness (another issue totally.  I show only AMHR, so I cannot speak for what is happening with AMHA.  But the direction that AMHR is heading really disheartens me.  I know that money can be the only factor for breeding and showing horses, in any breed, for some people.
As with any statement, I know there are exceptions.  There are still plenty of people breed versatile horses (right now) and I hope those numbers will increase, not continue to decrease.

455649[/snapback]

​

Then there are breeders like me who don't WANT to do performance. I can't run/walk fast and keep up in jumper or obstacle and even driving puts too much stress on my ankle after that cart wreck

I prefer to show young halter stock then retire them for breeding or as pets...BUT, I do sell quite a few horses for performance AND halter use. It's just not *my* thing. Dana finally bullied me into admitting I like to drive at shows, but not for hours at home. So now she keeps my driving horses and I get to play lady of the manor and usually only drive occasionally at her house, never at my home and often at shows.

Some of my kids doing something beside stand still and looking pretty..all horses were trained exclusively by Dana Bryan, Dreamweaver Farm.

Flying A's Maybe A Rowdy Night, winning halter gelding that went on to drive beautifully.

"Blue"

Flying A's Maybe A Rendezvous, winning halter gelding that is now winning in harness too...Jamie at the whip when she owned him, before she gave in to my begging to let us buy him back for Mia

Desi

Flying A Black Magic's Superstition, multiple National & Reserve National Champion at halter and multiple performance divisions.

Bali harness

Bali halter

455763[/snapback]

​

Yes, very well said margo.

I am afraid that in time the miniature world will breed itself out. There are too many faults in the miniature already, and trying to breed ultra refined teeny weenys is not going to last.

IMO...as a judge and as a breeder, I have seen it all...some absolutely exquisite animlas to look at from a profile, then when you see them move oh dear what a shame, patellas that should be culled without a doubt. it is rife....

Where will the miniature breed be in 20 years from now?

I think that many will have to go back to go forward and look to the bigger better conformed minis above 34".

...these move better IMO...and have not been messed about with ..yet.

But these bigger minis are not so valuable...yet are far more uselful as performance beasties....

Why do they not get as much publicity?..or the credibility they deserve?...afterall, I think we are going to have to look to our laurles in the future and utilise them in our breeding programme to get the quality and correctness back.

Not slamming any one flks...just saying it as I see it.

 

[_minihorses4ever_]

This is a very serious subject, and absolutely SHOULD be being discussed,openly and a LOT...I have been "seriously into horses" for 55 of my 64 years. I bred my first registered QH when THAT organization was only about 15 years old(if memory serves, the King Ranch's "Wimpy" won Gr.Ch. Stallion at the Ft.Worth Stock Show in '41, and was rewarded with the designation of "P-1" in the then-fledgling American Quarter Horse Assoc.; my "Misty Question" was foaled in 1956.) I have watched QH, APHA(which exists only because AQHA was too "stiff-necked" to accept spotted horses...and which I have had horses registered with since the early '70s), and even Arabian(as a kid, I loved the "Western Horseman" articles on the Kellogg, and other, Arabians, dreamt for awhile of owning one-and actually DID own one, around the early '90s-)--go about breeding AWAY from the very qualities which not only 'made' them what they were, but actually LESSENED their soundness and/or athletic ability!!! How STUPID and SHORTSIGHTED is THAT???!! Now I see the same 'trend'-to fixate on a single or only a couple of characteristics, and COMPLETELY 'forget about' the whole- is indeed occuring in Miniatures, and it, quite honestly, sickens me.(And,although I understand that Dr. Pam had her tongue firmly in cheek with her first response here- 

- I fear her "solution" might turn out to be all too true....)   Has there been improvement in the overall quality of conformation(with part of that improvement being in genuine 'refinement'-which I think VERY few people really understand the meaning of) in the 21 years that I have been involved in Miniature horses? Yes, of course....but, 'refinement' has its limits--and in the quest for "improvement", the OVERALL quality of conformation MUST always be at the forefront--and based on what I am seeing, very often, it is NOT. Why is this? IMO--much lack of genuine knowledge about what, OVERALL, constitutes quality of conformation; the aforementioned tendency to 'follow the fad', and with a "if a little is good, more must be better" philosophy--which, usually, so ISN'T the case--and perhaps, worst--the notion that within a breed, horses 'should' be bred to halter, or to perform--but perish the thought that a single horse might do BOTH, well. I recall a link-I *think*it was on here-awhile back, about a "world class" QH Halter stallion--this horse,to me, was PITIFUL-musclebound, with tiny feet and no-slope pasterns, he could hardly get across the paddock....  you couldn't run after me fast enough to GIVE me such an animal-yet this horse had been winning BIG in 'Halter'! Lord help us, if we have no better sense than to deliberately create such creatures.....

   I agree about the "three year" thing-show for three years(doesn't hurt the future income to win BIG all or a couple of those three years at Nationals with one of those, I'd bet...)-then the horse is never seen publically again,but IS 'cranking out' offspring((I have a personal theory about HEIGHT in some of those instances, too-but that's a whole 'nother subject.)

  Anyone with a grain of sense should know that physically lacking in proper weight--in other words, THIN-doesn't equate to "refined"; what many also don't seem to realize is that slab-sided/narrow/lacking in lung and heart capacity and overall substance doesn't equal "refined" , either-no matter how LONG(and "swanlike"(???)the neck is. Just as yearlings SHOULDN'T look like mature horses(if they do, can you say"coarse"/TOO heavy-bodied, as adults-or, perhaps, steroids?) Neither should mature horses EVER look like yearlings! I agree that I, personally, have seen more "overmature looking" young stock than over-"refined" mature horses--but I also see 'weediness'-which is what you are likely to get when you do not understand the limits, and true parameters of, "refinement"-as becoming more common. Some would say it is the judges who dictate how horse types evolve; however, they can only judge what they are presented with. When the majority are following the fad as fast as they can, what are they(judges)to do? On the other side of the coin--it distresses me GREATLY to see an animal with a SERIOUS conformational fault win a National Championship-something I have personally observed at least twice.What does THAT say about the quality and integrity of the judging, at that level??

  This is a subject of VERY strong interest to me; I could go on and on, and not repeat myself! However, I will end THIS post by wondering if the poster who mentioned striving for a "2/3 leg, 1/3 body" proportion REALLY meant that?? I have to say, I believe a horse of any size with those proportions would be woefully lacking in lung and heart(i.e., breathing!)capacity....actually, a heart girth proportion to leg length of near equal is A-OK, IF the horse is well-balanced/proportionate in all of the other ways it should be.

  Oh-and as to photos(especially in magazines/ads)--I wouldn't believe much,if any, of what you see nowadays. Most are being taken from such strange angles/views, you can't really tell ANYTHING about what that horse genuinely looks like-AND, photos can be so "doctored", they are, to me, essentially meaningless. The not-so-skillful can make a horse look more like a greyhound....I recall laughing over the first really noticable one in a mini magazine, several years ago--I thought then, and still do, that it was laughable-IF it weren't such a sad example of the way things are turning.

  Oh-my experience is virtually 100% with AMHA; I find it doubly sad to hear from someone whose is AMHR, reporting their perception of the same phenomenon.

455714[/snapback]

​

WOW, very well said!

I too, am scared as to what the mini world is coming too. This has crossed my mind alot lately. When I start breeding, I will never ever breed for the ultra refined type. The more boned, but still refined look is what I will always strive for. I think all horses should be bred for halter AND peformance. But, my opinion doesn't really matter.. Hopefully I won't be in the minority to not breed for the "ultra refined look". Because I would really hate minis to turn into that..

 

[susanne]

I do believe the increased popularity of driving AND of taller B-sized minis (and they are becoming more popular, bucksfizz) will help with this concern -- especially with the growing number of CDE events. Buyers will be demanding horses that can do it all.

I see no problem with refinement per se, so long as breeders aim for both performance and halter. Perhaps the registries need to place additional emphasis on all-around horses that win at both. Money talks, so perhaps a cash incentive?

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

wow i must be looking at very different horses then some of you are

I dont see the conformation and general over all apperance of minis going backwards or downhill in fact in the past 15-20 + years heck even 5+ years I have seen HUGE improvements in the breed all the way around.

bringing more balanced, better moving horses allone has to do is go to say Nationals to see horses from all over the country in one place and look at the quality of horses there those that are well balanced, correct with great temperments belive me there are many I think this breed is really doing well as far as improvements go.

I still say the issues in our breed are not the people who are what some say making and or going with trends ( I am not sure I see it that way) but with those that are not culling there herds or are not seeing what is in front of them or are getting 2 cute little pets but want to breed-

The issue with our horses is the same thing that makes them wonderful that they are a horse for everyone that can be kept in smaller property and for less amounts of money for daily feed ect..

but that is JMO

 

[runamuk]

wOW GREAT INPUT FROM MANY......

I at no time said the current advances are detrimental I am focusing more on the overall trend towad a refinement that in itself is lovely...however there are those who think if a little is good a whole lot is better....it is regularly stated on here how you should breed to refined stallions ...of we regularly debate what exactly refinement is........

I enjoy discussing these subjects they have some meat and substance....I also enjoy pondering where this breed is going based on current trends........I am not talking of horses seen only in pics ....many of the horses that I am referring to as my basis I have seen in person many would never be bred to each other but to think wow "what if this one bred that one" and on the surface it appears grand but the reality is it could take refined to a different level.........

I don't show I don't play politics I am really a nobody but I love these horses and enjoy a good conversation about the breed it's direction where it has been and where it's going............

 

[Boinky]

although relatively new to the mini world (which i think tends to give one a clearer prespective on a situation in some cases than if you have been in it for a long time), i too have noticed that the "breed' is going the way of many breeds. following trends and allowing the breed to become too populated and bred for too specific charachteristics without forethought to the future or thought to other parts of the horse as a whole. I love the fact that within the mini world you can find various "breeds" of mini's. I have a miniature Arabian, a miniature morgan, a miniature QH and a miniature "mutt"(...she's beautiful..but not real "breed" specific type..)in my back yard! why do people all seem to think they need to breed for an ultra refined arabian?? I would love to see more people breed for the variety that exists in mini's!

Being involved in horses and dogs and showing them i've often heard "the judge has to judge whats infront of them" Ok.. granted i do understand this.. and i do understand that judges do not rule completely how the horse industry runs..but they play a HUGE role in it........but WHY wont a judge either A.) refuse to pin a class and state the obvious as to why.. or B.) pin the class but state very bluntly and clearly that it is a SHAME what was presented to her and people need to straighten up their breeding programs? Infact i know of some show's that will place even a "first place" ride as a 2nd or 3rd place and leave the first place open if they don't feel that ride or group of riders deserved it........ If judges and the registry cracked down on it all by allowing/encouraging judges to intercept i think many fads would never get started.

I think many times fads get started primarly because someone see's this one particular horse winning..and see's a certain characteristic that they THINK it's winning for (when infact it probably isn't that in truth). I would love to see registry's encourage judges to voice their objections IN (show) classes and the registry magazines when they see something they feeling isn't right or IS right. Make it known that the registry and judges are not going to allow it to continue even if it means NOT pinning the class....i really feel this could make a differnce.

perhaps i sound unrealistic...i don't know..but some food for thought and why should we settle for crappy breeding all for a fad or show ring politics when we all know that show placings can very well affect trends!?

 

[coopermini]

Margo that was very well stated!!!!!!!!

Although I am fairly new to minis we have been in livestock industry for most of my life and the trend to ultra refinement is well under way in minis. Some refinement is needed no doubt. If you put on a scale of 1-10 with 1 extremely coarse and 10 ultra refined. The average would be a 5. maybe 6 or 7 looks good to most but the trends I have seen and others have as well would put a 7 as way to coarse and a 9 as a start but a 12 would be better. when any breed follows one trait to far it usually reaches the end of the rope hanging a great many "unsuspecting people".

As far as the arabians go I saw a couple last weekend at a show that were so narrow they would fit nicely in a mini trailer stall. must have felt like riding on a rail fence.

Mark

 

[Ferrah]

I too am new to the world of miniature horses, having been involved with the stock breeds (mostly QHs) since I was 11 (I am now 18). I noticed the direction the miniature breed was taking by flipping through my friends AMHA and AMHR magazines. I could have literally taken a Arabian Horse World and seen a mirror image, in fact in some of the pictures I couldn't even tell without close scrutiny if it was a miniature or an Arabian!

I fear for the miniature what happened to QHs, Paints and to a lesser extent the Appaloosa. A HUGE difference in the conformation of halter and performance horses. I do not, any way I try to rationalize it, understand why a breed association would promote a kind of horse (namely the halter QH style or Arabian) that cannot be used in all the performance classes we are telling people they are good for. I cannot in a million years imagine getting on one of those huge, bulky halter QH's and going out and cutting a few cows, it just wouldn't happen. I also know that i wouldn't dream of getting on a halter Arabian either (I'd love to ride a reining Arab though), they look too slight to carry a rider (it would be like riding a picket fence!)...and I know the Arabian people call it "expression", but I call it crazy! I know that judges can only judge what is being put in front of them and the breed is influenced by trends, but I think this body building contest that has been going on with the stock breeds should have been discouraged ages ago. Most of the halter horses you see winning at AQHA worlds are nothing more than an equine version of a body builder.

I don't think miniature horses are coming close to what we have seen take place in other breeds. From an outside perspective I think the miniature horse world is still awhile away from coming to the extremes other breeds have. But by going to a miniature horse show in our area I was a little discouraged to see about half the horses looking gorgeous from profile with lots of depth, and then seeing them from the front looking like a norrow little fish, but maybe thats just in our locale.

Anyway what I'm trying to say is I don't think it is at that extreme yet, but I don't see it changing any time soon either. The intense specialization in other breeds is something that is taking place in most of the popular breeds of horses. I miss the old days...before I was even born (ha ha), when the halter horse didn't just do halter..he did everything, and he did it well too.

 

[runamuk]

OK back again

First an foremost I love arabians and prefer the most extreme head and body possible they should in my opinion look like a fine porcelaine sculpture......I also love saddlebreds and they in my opinion again should be lean mean upright trotting machines

I personally do not mind extremes SO LONG AS IT DOESN'T PHYSICALLY HARM THE HORSE yes in q-horses, paints, apps I have seen the absolute far end of the scale where a horse who is in pain due to too small of feet is kept alive for sperm because he won in the ring(and his sperm is worth booko bucks).......that is at one end of the scale.......at the other is the coarse cannot guess its breed bred in a backyard(because it had some bloodlines that once were famous) salebarn destined creature.....I do believe in the middle are the rest of the breeders who do it as a hobby or for the love of a breed...

The miniature horse is an odd duck to start with......it essentially was created as a marketing ploy for shetland pony breeders who saw their sales falling.......and because the basis of this breed is not to cut cows, or go days in the desert with little food or water, or to perform high school dressage, or run the fastest, or trot the most animated, or....you get the idea? .....the miniature was and still to some degree is purely a novelty so the fact that as the breed matures it splits really isn't a surprise or in my eyes a bad thing ......I just wondered if others had seen a trend toward too much refinement/wispyness/wiaflike/....however you desribe it an extreme that very well may end up self limiting

I also think because the miniature was never created to fulfill a specific job it is that much harder to say we have strayed from the original intent......after all the original intent was "the SMALLEST horse possible"....they even left type out of it so SMALLEST is all we have to go on

leaves alot of room for interpratation don't ya think?

 

[starminis]

Are we a hight breed or a type breed?

Yes... I know the answer... I just want some to answer it for themself.

 

[Stacy Score]

I applaud all of those who have jumped on board this topic - I agree with Margo almost completely -- however, I for one, DO believe that the trends that the miniatures have been going thru are generally FOR THE BETTER - vs the breeding practices of the past.

Over the last 25 years our breed has gone thru dramatic changes - the one that has had THE MOST far reaching and derogatory (in MY opinion) was to make them SMALLER -- we bred out the wither - which as all true performance breeders know is extremely important to free movement in the shoulder. We lowered the neckset - again to help make them smaller - again - it inhibits movement.

We have trended toward a more refined animal - in my opinion a good move vs going toward a smaller, smaller and smaller HORSE. I believe the that the FUTURE of the miniature breed is in the PERFORMANCE arena - those who are entering from the large horse breeds are usually looking for something the can DO with their horses - ie, drive, jump, etc. By the very nature of competition this will eventually cause the horses that are TOO refined to be left out of the breeding programs of many - not that I do not love a truly refined horse, but it must have enough muscle and substance to be able to withstand the rigors of the performance arena. I see the miniature breed as exploding in the B/Over division as more and more people strive for miniatures who CAN perform like full size Morgans/Saddlebreds/Arabs and who can do so WITHOUT being harmed from overwork, drugs, incorrect use of training aids etc .

For me, a horse HAS TO MOVE BEAUTIFULLY - to me that is what a horse IS. I am looking forward to the next 25 years of breeding miniatures - I feel we are on the cusp of one of the most exciting breeds ever known, and I am proud to be a breeder and look forward to the challenges being presented to breed not only a "statue perfect" beautiful halter horse, but also a horse with breathtaking, free movement that makes the hairs on the back of your neck stand up.

Here's to the future!

Stacy

 

[Buckskin gal]

Margo, You have really hit the nail on the head with what you have said and I hope you will continue to offer more of your insight of the miniature horse. I too hate to see these "trends" and seeing how the overall horse is forgotten just to achieve a neck or that table top back which is really a fault according to the standard. I have to laugh at some of them because if a big horse was like that, I see no way for a saddle to even stay on let alone fit.

I see from year to year how some will buy what ever " type" is winning and selling what they bought the previous year or the year before, that which they thought was their ideal, at that time. I think it would be wonderful if the judges would really look at everything in the ring that is conformationally corrct and stop putting up those who really lack balance. Hope we hear more of your thoughts on minis because they really are needed. Mary

This is a very serious subject, and absolutely SHOULD be being discussed,openly and a LOT...I have been "seriously into horses" for 55 of my 64 years. I bred my first registered QH when THAT organization was only about 15 years old(if memory serves, the King Ranch's "Wimpy" won Gr.Ch. Stallion at the Ft.Worth Stock Show in '41, and was rewarded with the designation of "P-1" in the then-fledgling American Quarter Horse Assoc.; my "Misty Question" was foaled in 1956.) I have watched QH, APHA(which exists only because AQHA was too "stiff-necked" to accept spotted horses...and which I have had horses registered with since the early '70s), and even Arabian(as a kid, I loved the "Western Horseman" articles on the Kellogg, and other, Arabians, dreamt for awhile of owning one-and actually DID own one, around the early '90s-)--go about breeding AWAY from the very qualities which not only 'made' them what they were, but actually LESSENED their soundness and/or athletic ability!!! How STUPID and SHORTSIGHTED is THAT???!! Now I see the same 'trend'-to fixate on a single or only a couple of characteristics, and COMPLETELY 'forget about' the whole- is indeed occuring in Miniatures, and it, quite honestly, sickens me.(And,although I understand that Dr. Pam had her tongue firmly in cheek with her first response here- 

- I fear her "solution" might turn out to be all too true....)   Has there been improvement in the overall quality of conformation(with part of that improvement being in genuine 'refinement'-which I think VERY few people really understand the meaning of) in the 21 years that I have been involved in Miniature horses? Yes, of course....but, 'refinement' has its limits--and in the quest for "improvement", the OVERALL quality of conformation MUST always be at the forefront--and based on what I am seeing, very often, it is NOT. Why is this? IMO--much lack of genuine knowledge about what, OVERALL, constitutes quality of conformation; the aforementioned tendency to 'follow the fad', and with a "if a little is good, more must be better" philosophy--which, usually, so ISN'T the case--and perhaps, worst--the notion that within a breed, horses 'should' be bred to halter, or to perform--but perish the thought that a single horse might do BOTH, well. I recall a link-I *think*it was on here-awhile back, about a "world class" QH Halter stallion--this horse,to me, was PITIFUL-musclebound, with tiny feet and no-slope pasterns, he could hardly get across the paddock....  you couldn't run after me fast enough to GIVE me such an animal-yet this horse had been winning BIG in 'Halter'! Lord help us, if we have no better sense than to deliberately create such creatures.....

  I agree about the "three year" thing-show for three years(doesn't hurt the future income to win BIG all or a couple of those three years at Nationals with one of those, I'd bet...)-then the horse is never seen publically again,but IS 'cranking out' offspring((I have a personal theory about HEIGHT in some of those instances, too-but that's a whole 'nother subject.)

  Anyone with a grain of sense should know that physically lacking in proper weight--in other words, THIN-doesn't equate to "refined"; what many also don't seem to realize is that slab-sided/narrow/lacking in lung and heart capacity and overall substance doesn't equal "refined" , either-no matter how LONG(and "swanlike"(???)the neck is. Just as yearlings SHOULDN'T look like mature horses(if they do, can you say"coarse"/TOO heavy-bodied, as adults-or, perhaps, steroids?) Neither should mature horses EVER look like yearlings! I agree that I, personally, have seen more "overmature looking" young stock than over-"refined" mature horses--but I also see 'weediness'-which is what you are likely to get when you do not understand the limits, and true parameters of, "refinement"-as becoming more common. Some would say it is the judges who dictate how horse types evolve; however, they can only judge what they are presented with. When the majority are following the fad as fast as they can, what are they(judges)to do? On the other side of the coin--it distresses me GREATLY to see an animal with a SERIOUS conformational fault win a National Championship-something I have personally observed at least twice.What does THAT say about the quality and integrity of the judging, at that level??

  This is a subject of VERY strong interest to me; I could go on and on, and not repeat myself! However, I will end THIS post by wondering if the poster who mentioned striving for a "2/3 leg, 1/3 body" proportion REALLY meant that?? I have to say, I believe a horse of any size with those proportions would be woefully lacking in lung and heart(i.e., breathing!)capacity....actually, a heart girth proportion to leg length of near equal is A-OK, IF the horse is well-balanced/proportionate in all of the other ways it should be.

  Oh-and as to photos(especially in magazines/ads)--I wouldn't believe much,if any, of what you see nowadays. Most are being taken from such strange angles/views, you can't really tell ANYTHING about what that horse genuinely looks like-AND, photos can be so "doctored", they are, to me, essentially meaningless. The not-so-skillful can make a horse look more like a greyhound....I recall laughing over the first really noticable one in a mini magazine, several years ago--I thought then, and still do, that it was laughable-IF it weren't such a sad example of the way things are turning.

  Oh-my experience is virtually 100% with AMHA; I find it doubly sad to hear from someone whose is AMHR, reporting their perception of the same phenomenon.

455714[/snapback]

​

 

[Michelle@wescofarms]

What a great discussion!

I would agree with most everyone as I do believe the current trend has been improving the overall look of minis. The squatty dumplings of the past are being phased out and I think that is great.

I'm not against smaller though, and although I wouldn't do what breeders did in the past to get minis, I do appreciate their efforts in starting this breed and setting some standards.

As I do breed the under 30" minis (as well as the taller up to the B's), I'm breeding for and want to see the overall conformation of minis - all heights - to continue to be improved. The 2/3 leg 1/3 body look, with movement is wonderful in all heights.

As for the term refinement - to me it means cleaning up the conformation faults, improving the overall look, not necessarily producing a frail, thin or weedy horse.

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

Hmmm again I keep hearing over and over how the judges are placing horses that are unbalanced and that are the death of our breed, how our national champions are no better then the horses in our backyards or worse.

I am not saying that you are not entitled to your opinions but I do think that one of the largest issues in our breed is that there is such a huge difference in what many breeders call balanced and correct and how type gets confused in there as well.

I for one as a breeder strive to always see the negative in my horses- I know far to many that don't see it or think there horses are by far the best in the country- I love my horses and have seen improvement in my own herd over the years but if I don't see their faults for what they are how can I personally improve what I am breeding and producing in my own program.

All one had to do was go to Nationals last year (AMHR) and see the many different types winning from the Michigan bred ponies to LTD horses and everything in between... many very nice well balanced well moving horses in all different types - I am not in denial that there are issues in our breed but I think there are many (not all of course so dont get panties in a bunch here) who havent seen horses outside of there local area( a great example of that is my state where many dont get out of the area to see what else is out there in other parts of the country).

I personally dont see it as a huge downfall that there are horses being bred for halter, some for performance and some that cross over every horse has a job and that is what htey are bred for not every QH is bred to cut cows some are now doing great in the hunter ring which was just not thought of or tried for not so long ago, just like not every T/B is being bred to just be a racer or a hunter/jumper and every arab isnt being bred to go and go and go in the desert and different breeds are being used in endurance.

The beauty of horses is that there isnt just one type or breed for one job they have many.

LIke someone said our minis were made smaller and smaller for novelty pets so there isnt even a specific job they were bred for to break out of so to speak. I for one am proud of the changes being made in the past even 5 years and have seen this breed come along way. Will there always be those that some feel are to extreme yep of course not just in halter. Some will tell you that our minis shouldnt be able to do open pleasure either that they should be CP in type and mannerism and that adding the movement into this breed is going to be its downfall in fact it has been said on here before by many. Yet others will firmly disagree.

Bottom line for me is that these horses are no longer a rare novelty but that to get those large horse people to take notice to show our breed is atheltic, pretty, easy going and all of those things there needs to be diversity in the breed just like in any other will some take things to the extreme you bet- even those that refuse to see that the past may not have been the best for these horses either and yet will choose to be stuck there- but the majority will continue to improve the breed within there own herd, there own interests and likes and dislikes and this breed will have many choices just like the modern QH or T/B which no longer is stuck in just one catagory.

 

[CNC MINIS]

I have to agree with Lisa, I think miniature horses have improved over the last 5 years. Sure I have seen some horses win that should have never placed but that is a single judges opinion. I know that here in the northwest I love the way the horses are going they aren't the fat little pony looking things that were here 5-10 years ago. I also see a lot of people moving towards driving after their halter horses turn 3 they are driving them. And as far as crossing the shetland in to the minis where do you think the minis came from, I personally think the movement and refinement of the shelands makes for a better all around mini.