$2000 Dwarf!!!!

[StarRidgeAcres]

Eohippus' I can't speak for anyone else,but yes that is exactly how far I will go. 4 years ago I cut a stallion and his two sons for producing a smaller testicle in each of his sons. I had paid 13,500 for him and it hurt. But he is now a great driving gelding for a good friend of ours. Unless we police ourselves, no one else will!!

John, you are my hero!

This is the ONLY way we're ever going to eliminate this horrible problem. You are EXACTLY the type of breeder we should all hope to 1) buy from and 2) model ourselves after!

 

[StarRidgeAcres]

If we stopped the use of breeding EVERY miniature horse that was a suspected dwarf carrier, yes, we would eliminate dwarfs from the breed. However, we would also likely eliminate well more than half of our breeding stock.

Yes Matt, that may well be the result. Are you saying that would be a bad thing? If what you are culling is the most undesirable trait in the history of our breed, is that bad? What if the hundreds (probably thousands) of horses that were born of known producers (even those producers that had world champion titles to their credit) were born of other seemingly non-dwarf producing horses replaced them in demand? Where might we be today? I have no crystal ball so I don't know, but I wonder.

 

[Sue_C.]

If we stopped the use of breeding EVERY miniature horse that was a suspected dwarf carrier, yes, we would eliminate dwarfs from the breed. However, we would also likely eliminate well more than half of our breeding stock.

No, I say cull the ones that are KNOWN carriers. How can that be a bad thing?? If there is ever a test for dwarfism, it will make it easier...we could possibly breed a carrier to a non carrier, and geld the resultant carrier colts and issue non-breeding papers on the carrier fillies, should there be any. The non-carrying foals would get regular papers, free to breed. This would mean testing would have to be done on ALL breeding miniatures in the beginning, but once tested, non-carriers bred to non-carriers would have no need for foals to be tested. A hardship in the beginning for sure, but I think it would be worth the $$. I think this would eventually prevent people from breeding to the carriers because of the financial burden if nothing else. Seems it was the pocketbook that caused this mess, so it could be the pocketbook that gets us out of it.

 

[disneyhorse]

There is NO reason to breed a horse that has a bad bite, locking stifle (even if they "grow out of it"), slow-to-descend testicles (even if they "eventually drop"), dwarfism, or any other undesirable characteristic. There are PLENTY of horses out there that don't have those issues.

People always have some sort of reason to breed (They only have club feet or toe out because of a bad farrier... the bite may have been "on" if a dentist had seen the horse as a youngster and both parents had good bites... locking stifle only because of "mineral deficiencies"... ) but is that the right thing to do to perpetuate the breed?

I appreciate all the ethical breeders out there who geld otherwise fantastic stallions. Nothing wrong with a fantastic gelding!

Andrea

 

[targetsmom]

I agree with Sue_C - things could get a lot better if/when there is a test for dwarfism and the test results are used responsibly and correctly. Unlike some other undesirable traits (locking stifle, bad bite) where, as far as I know the genetics aren't understood, you can only produce a dwarf from TWO carriers. Think of it like LWO+ - all you need to do to avoid a lethal white foal is TEST, and not breed a mare and stallion that are both LWO+. It does NOT mean that you have to destroy every frame overo on the planet to eliminate lethal white foals. Same thing could work for dwarfism if people understood the genetics and tested. Just test and don't breed two dwarf carriers together.

For some perspective on how common the dwarf gene may be, I ran a poll on here a few years ago and over 40% of the respondents admitted they had had a dwarf foal or fetus produced on their farm. I suspect this may be why there aren't more people pushing for the development of the test for dwarfism - they don't need a test if they already know the sire/dam have produced a dwarf.

 

[Tony]

Having been around miniatures since before they were called miniatures, I have seen lots and lots of history, including applications of many dwarves that were sent in seeking registration before many people knew what a dwarf was. I was on the AMHA board in some capacity for almost thirteen years, including almost six years as executive secretary, so during much of that time I literally saw hundreds of questionable applications and inspected quite a few in person. I can tell you positively, had the idea of eliminating every dwarf producer from the registry been the rule from the beginning, our history and especially our World Champions would be a very different group of horses because many of our very top of the line horses would have been relegated to gelding or non breeding status. I personally think that would have been a shame. To eliminate them after one mistake, or even more, when they may have produced from one to a hundred excellent offspring is not the route that I would take, then or now. If a pairing results in a dwarf, I do not repeat it, and try to make sure that two known carriers are never bred together. Sometimes with young horses that is difficult and I would welcome a test for the gene to take the guesswork out of it.

 

[horsehug]

Thanks so much, Tony, for giving your input! You know I have admired and respected your breeding program for my 22 years in minis! In my opinion You have come closer to breeding tinier and tinier VERY correct and beautiful little horses on a large scale than anyone else.

You certainly have more experience in your lifetime with little horses than anyone else I have ever met and I agree with your opinion on this! I also welcome a test for dwarfism and have been waiting for it so that I CAN test my minis to avoid ever again breeding a carrier to a carrier.

Susan O.

 

[JWC sr.]

Tony,

You and I have known each other for a long time and like you we are very passionate about our horses. But on this subject we differ on what is best for the breed as it is, the heartbreak of a dwarf and all the trappings that go with it is pretty driving force for me when it comes to breeding stock.

Heck I have culled some pretty great horses in the past for a lot less reason and will again in the future I am sure.

I can agree though that I will be glad when the final test is added to the batter of genome's that are needed to have a conclusive test for all the different types of dwarfism. It will take a lot of guess work out of the part of the industry and both of us enjoy the most. Breeding beautiful and sound horses.

Vaya Con Dios my friend,

 

[rabbitsfizz]

Tony, I understand what you are trying to say but your argument is flawed.

If we had chosen to eradicate all the defective horses, right back at the beginning, we would not have the problems we have now and we would never have known what we might have hadtherefore it would never have bothered us!

I have heard this "but what if Buckeroo had been gelded" argument before....so what if he had?

It would not matter to us, now, as we would never have known what he could have done.

Eradicating all those potential mine fields of horses, right back at the beginning, would only , ever, have been a good thing, as far as I am concerned.

The whole thing would have found it's own, different, level, and I am pretty sure we would still be exactly where we are today with one significant difference.

We would not have the problem with dwarfism we have now.

One strike and out, as far as I am concerned, it is working for the Friesans and it would work for us.

I also think that once a test is available it should be mandatory for all breeding animals.

 

[ohmt]

I also think that once a test is available it should be mandatory for all breeding animals.

I very much agree! I think a horse should be tested before it's registered though and then the result should be put onto the registration papers. That way there won't be any testing done AFTER a horse has been bred (like with having a horse DNA'd. Sometimes I forget to have it done until I go to register the foal).

 

[targetsmom]

I will probably be in the minority on this one, but I don't think the testing should be mandatory. Why not, you ask? Why make someone test an animal that they KNOW is a carrier because it already produced a dwarf? So my suggestion is that the "default" would be that the horse IS a carrier, and if you want the papers to show that he/she is NOT a carrier, then you submit the results of the dwarf test (with the DNA) to prove it.

Once the test for the dwarf gene is available any requirements by the registries will need to be carefully thought out and phased in but I think this should be considered.

 

[tagalong]

No, I say cull the ones that are KNOWN carriers.

And in the meantime, the stallion in the next pen is also a carrier.... but the percentages have always worked his way and a dwarf has yet to show up. And may never show up. So the carrier is still there - and you do not know it. And yet he will be bred to a mare that may also be a carrier, and you roll the dice and take your chances. And yet said breeder will proudly say they know they will never have a dwarf on their place. Only, you do not know.

I agree with those who say that more than half of all the minis out there - maybe even 60% - are likely carriers. If you simply culled all of them, you would be left with a very deficient gene pool. I would like there to be a test by which ALL carriers can be IDed - and then with careful and responsible breeding, the dwarf gene could slowly be eradicated while good qualities of stellar horses are maintained. Otherwise, it may be throwing the baby out with the bathwater or cutting off your nose to spite your face. I think the whole process needs to be handled carefully and responsibly. Careful, selective breeding would have a far better outcome and maintain desireable characteristics while eliminating the dwarf genetics. And we do not know how complicated those genetics may be. Meh - I am probably not explaining my thought/concerns very well...

JMO - which ain't worth a hill of beans. And as sweet and funny as Cowboy, the resident dwarf here is (sire is now a driving gelding and dam is a pet), in the future we may be able to ensure that there are no more Cowboys out there. We need testing... ASAP. But there may also be genetic combinations that any one test would not reveal...

...IMHO it is not as simple and cut & dried as many seem to think it is....

 

[Reignmaker Miniatures]

I haven't read all the posts on this thread so maybe this has already been mentioned but I'm wondering if having a test is going to prove to be a problem in itself. With there being some people out there who think dwarfs are "sooo cute" it is always possible (even probable) that this will set some one up as a dwarf breeder. Now they would know positively which horses would produce a dwarf foal and breed intentionally for that result charging a large sum of money because the breeding of them is likely to increase vet costs. Don't think this is likely? Check out the dog world where an average bulldog puppy will run between $1500 and $2500 partly because the dams must have a cesarean delivery. I'm not picking on Bulldogs here, there are other breeds with genetic faults that need vet care too that we as the ones in control of their destiny have been responsible for creating and perpetuating. JM thoughts on the subject.

 

[rabbitsfizz]

I will probably be in the minority on this one, but I don't think the testing should be mandatory. Why not, you ask? Why make someone test an animal that they KNOW is a carrier because it already produced a dwarf? So my suggestion is that the "default" would be that the horse IS a carrier, and if you want the papers to show that he/she is NOT a carrier, then you submit the results of the dwarf test (with the DNA) to prove it.

Once the test for the dwarf gene is available any requirements by the registries will need to be carefully thought out and phased in but I think this should be considered.

I really meant that horses should be tested before registration, and before any foals are registered to it. That way the result would be on the papers. I

am not suggesting, at this point that anything except out and out dwarfs should be denied registration, but the results should be there for all to see, so if your animal also is a carrier, you know not to breed to the carrier stallion.

This would be, I feel, a diplomatic first step.

 

[~Lisa~]

Yes Matt, that may well be the result. Are you saying that would be a bad thing? If what you are culling is the most undesirable trait in the history of our breed, is that bad?

I have to agree while it would hurt in the short run I think it would be one of the best things in the long run.

 

[Raine Ranch Minis]

PM me the link please

 

[mydaddysjag]

Could someone PM me a link?

 

[Sue_C.]

I can tell you positively, had the idea of eliminating every dwarf producer from the registry been the rule from the beginning, our history and especially our World Champions would be a very different group of horses because many of our very top of the line horses would have been relegated to gelding or non breeding status. I personally think that would have been a shame.

As far as I am concerned, a Grand Champion which has produced ONE dwarf foal, is NOT a desirable breeding horse...period. I wouldn't continue to breed a horse which I KNEW carried flawed genes...no matter what ones they were.

What is the difference in continuing to breed Mr beautiful-to-look-at-Grand Champion dwarf gene carrier, and some knock-kneed, stifle-sticking, jug-headed conformational disaster...that is NOT a dwarf carrier?? IMO...NOTHING...

 

[uwharrie]

Do we know that it is just one gene responsible for dwarfism? and if so how it is inherited? Coming from the perspective of being a long time dog breeder I can tell you if the miniature horse world is lucky enough that it is a single gene and that gene is recessive, throwing the baby out with the bath water is not a good option long term. ( just ask Basengi breeders when they culled all the Falconi carriers)

If it is a simple recessive and IF there is a test the smart thing to do would be test everything and only breed carriers to clear, within a couple of generations you should be able to reduce the number of carriers by only breeding the clear ofspring down the line.

For the most part the Quarter Horse folks have done that with HYPP.

It takes a huge amount of money to develop a test for specific gene as they must first find the gene responsible. In my own Breed (Italian Greyhounds) we have been looking for the PRA gene for almost 20 yrs and they still do not have an answer that will lead to a test. In Dobes they have developed a test for VwD but still no test for Cardio ( though they are close). Breeders and the industry have to be willing to not only fork out the funds for research but to provide honest samples and data to researchers.

 

[targetsmom]

John Eberth has done a lot of research in this area: see the Dwarfism Forum from 2007 where he answered LB forum members questions.

Although there at least 4 types of dwarfism, it appears that a recessive gene is responsible. Otherwise at least one parent of all dwarfs would be a dwarf, and that is clearly not the case. I definitely agree with your analogy of throwing the baby out with the bathwater - not the solution I would recommend either. A test (or more than one) should be available soon, and in my mind that will be a huge benefit. To me, the best comparison would be to lethal white overo (LWO), which is also inherited as a simple recessive. Lethal white foals can be totally avoided (read "dwarfs") by testing the mare and stallion and never breeding carriers together. Yes, you will still have the gene in the population, but if in its recessive state it has no adverse effects, what is the issue? In the case of LWO, the gene is responsible for the very popular frame overo coat pattern. In the case of dwarfism there don't seem to be any adverse effects either, since an estimated 25-40% of all minis are carriers.