[JWC sr.]

How does everyone feel about the closing of the AMHA registry in light of the research and presentation John Eberth gave at the annual meeting last year on dwarfism and the genetics of AMHA horses.

Are we being short sighted and setting ourselves up for problems in the future?

[kaykay]

I definitely think its a huge mistake. For the reason you posted and financially.

I dont really think they will do it though. But I guess time will tell.


Kay

[Becky]

I can't say that I'm really for it or against it at this point. I've hardshipped in some great horses; all were well under 34". Some were shown AMHA after that and won and the others went on to produce show winners.

I strongly disagree with the thought that if we close the registry we will increase dwarfism or have more genetic problems. Breeders need to look outside the box.

[JWC sr.]

Can you explain for me what you mean by outside the box? If Eberth is right then a large percentage of the backbone of the prominent bloodlines of all of our horses are carriers. Which scares the heck out of me, to tell the truth. We have been lucky and never produced one and don't want to buy into all that heartache etc, in the future.

By the way, Hi Becky. LOL

Thanks,

[Sue_C.]

I think that they should wait until there is a proper test for dwarfism.

Let us have the opportunity to KNOW if our horses carry the harmful genes or not. If they come out with a mandatory test, and all horses which carry the gene taken from the gene pool, and/or lose their registration...it would be a good idea to allow hardshipping for several more years.

If it is found that there are not as many carriers as first thought to be, and they are FINALLY, and TOTALLY removed from the genepool...I cannot see that it would affect the breed by closing the books within a decade of this testing and subsequent culling.

A lot of this would be "easily" repaired by the breeders themselves, if those who KNOW their breeding stock produces dwarves would just STOP BREEDING THEM.

[targetsmom]

I think we MAY be setting ourselves up for problems in the future, but of course, only time will tell. I see the idea behind closing the registry, and agree that long term, it needs to happen. I am just not sure that the gene pool is large enough at this point. I wonder how the size of the gene pool in AMHA compares with other registries that decided to close - not that that should be used to decide anything. The other breeds don't have the problem with dwarfism that plagues miniatures, and until there is a test for that, I think closing the AMHA registry is premature.

I also think when the test for dwarfism is available that education is needed, not a knee jerk reaction to eliminate all carriers immediately. This would provide the opportunity to identify carriers and remove the gene gradually through selective breeding to non-carriers.

[Becky]

John, to quote you,

Can you explain for me what you mean by outside the box? If Eberth is right then a large percentage of the backbone of the prominent bloodlines of all of our horses are carriers. Which scares the heck out of me, to tell the truth. We have been lucky and never produced one and don't want to buy into all that heartache etc, in the future.

I think you just answered your own question. If a large percentage of the prominent bloodlines are carriers of dwarfism, yet your farm has never produced one (assuming you are using prominent bloodlines), then perhaps genetic dwarfism isn't quite as rampant as has been thought previously? Certainly, there are genetic defects in every living plant and animal. I do hope in the future that tests will become available for miniature horse breeders to utilize in their breeding programs to lessen the chance of continuing any genetic defects that are hereditary. But, there are environmental issues that breeders need to be aware of that will produce defective fetuses/foals as well.

I don't see how closing the studbooks will increase the chances of producing genetic flaws?

Though this topic has been discussed on here previously, I think it makes for great discussion and I am glad you brought it up again. As breeders, we need to be aware of all possibilities that may occur when we commit to breeding!

[hobbyhorse23]

It hadn't even occurred to me to worry about the size of the mini gene pool yet. Most of my concern was focused on what happens to the individual horses who now have no chance of papers regardless of their quality. Some very nice would-be B minis are out of luck since AMHR closed their doors and once AMHA closes the books there's going to be a lot of horses left out in the cold. At least as things currently stand someone could be interested in buying that unpapered horse because it could be hardshipped into AMHA and shown. Without that option, what's left? Child's leadline horse, lawn ornament, unpapered "foal mill" breeder, or if they're lucky participation in some sort of open event like 4-H, local saddleclub shows or the American Driving Society. Why would anyone limit their options that way when they can do the same things with a papered mini? I'm not saying unpapered minis are worthless- the opposite in fact, and the careers I mention are honorable ones with the exception of the foal mill. But I see that possibility of registration as a potential lifeline for an under 34" horse, something that may make someone go ahead and buy him instead of passing him over. Why take away that chance when so many of our horses are already being given away in this economy? Our minis deserve every opportunity we can give them for a happy life and just because the breeder was too lazy doesn't mean the next owner shouldn't be able to rectify that mistake.

I also think when the test for dwarfism is available that education is needed, not a knee jerk reaction to eliminate all carriers immediately. This would provide the opportunity to identify carriers and remove the gene gradually through selective breeding to non-carriers.

Agreed!

Leia

P.S.- Forgive me if any of the above doesn't make sense, I'm more than a bit muzzy-headed this morning.

[Charlotte]

I have a couple of thoughts here….and a couple of questions……..


1. In the 90s, when AMHA was researching DNA testing, Frank served on the Genetics Committee and accepted the task of investigating a number of genetic testing laboratories. (this because of his job/experience within the animal health industry). During that time Frank mentioned that the geneticists at these laboratories commented as to the AMHA miniature horse having the most diverse genetic make up of any modern day horse breed.

So my question is……..Has something happened in the last 10-15 years to change that diversity? (I find it hard to imagine how that could occur in such a short time span)

2. Since it is well agreed that the miniature derived much of it’s genetics from the Shetland Pony, how would it benefit the genetics of the AMHA miniature horse to ad back in the Shetland genes which may very well be where some of the dwarf genetics originated in the first place? (To clarify, I have been told by a number of people that the reason some don’t want the registry closed is so that they can bring in more Shetland Pony blood and when I look at web sites and advertising I do see some farms having Shetland Pony breeding programs as well as AMHA Miniature Horse programs…Stands to reason they might want to cross the two breeds they like and use)


I find this subject very interesting and hope we have a lot of replies with differing opinions. Something may be brought forward that is new to me……I love LB for these opportunities to brainstorm!

And now I’ll throw in my opinion here……. you know I am ‘The Opinionated One’.

I would like to see the AMHA registry closed. I see the AMHA miniature horse evolving into its’ own breed type which is unique within modern day horse breeds. They are truly heading toward a balanced and correct under 34” horse that breeds true, but the infusion of characteristics of other breeds would dilute and retard that progress. I don’t want to see the progress lost. I don’t want to take a step backwards.


Charlotte

[Becky]

I want to add another thought here. Aside from the dwarfism issue, is the issue of height. A number of years ago, when AMHA was young, it had a division for Foundation Oversize horses. Because of the rarity of under 34" horses, those over that height could be registered and their offspring were eligible for registration as well. Initially, this was good for AMHA. But over time, with the numbers of under 34" horses increasing, AMHA voted to close the division for over size horses. Was that a bad thing for AMHA? I don't think so.

Those that are wanting to bring in horses now with taller backgrounds, need to be aware it will only cause the overall height of the AMHA gene pool to increase. That is a fact. I for one, choose to breed under 34" horses and the farther away from over 34" horses I can keep in my pedigrees, the more likely the horses I produce here will stay under 34" at maturity. That is what the AMHA was founded on and that is where I hope it continues to stay and grow.

Just some food for thought......