2nd Measurement Proposal

[Karen S]

Good Day All,

Ok, it was asked on a prior post in the other thread that there had been another proposal presented in which their was a response of no.

Well in the mail yesterday from the ASPC/AMHR Registry I received the following proposal. I have out of respect of the author have left off the author's name. Here is another one that was presented to ALL chair persons. Again, lets have civil, no finger pointing or any accusations of ANY KIND towards the different divisions of our Registry. Discussion is good and here is another person's view that is just as good as the one being discussed in the other thread.

Karen

PS: The proposal is typed just the way it is written:

June 22, 2010

To: All ASPC/AMHR Directors and Committee Chairpersons

From:XXXXXXX

Subject: Request a rule change for positioning and measuring the AMHR Miniature and the ASPC Pony

Dear Sir/MS:

I would like to bring up for discussion at this yrs convention for the following rule change:

For Miniatures: Section 6 Part 6 Position of the animal..

1. Delete: The animal must be standing squarely on all 4 feet and not be permitted to stretch.

2. ADD: The animal should be able to stand in a natural position. (most horses and ponies do not stand square. Head not forced up too high by pulling up on the lead line or down too low by tugging at the head. He/she should his/her front legs be on a vertical line under his/her shoulder. The back of the hocks should be in a position natural for the horse/pony, not forceably stretch.

Section 6 Part 7-C

Delete: Measure from last hair of the mane

ADD: Measure Miniatures at the base of the withers.

Reason: All horse and ponies have a base of the withers where the base meets the beginning of the spine. There is a distinct indentation at that point and all Stewards would be measuring the same way across the country leaving no doubt as to the height of the horses/ponies. All horses/ponies have withers that are different in the way the horses/ponies are built..some are high, some are elongated, etc. and all mane hairs do not come down far enough on the withers that are high and therefore measuring by the last hair of the mane does not give an accurate reading of their height.

All too often, there is a difference in the measuring of a horse/pony depending on the show and who is measuring. Measuring at the base of the withers...not by the last hair of the mane offers a point of reference that cannot be disputed. It is the anatomy of the horse and not where the last hair of the mane is!!!!

All ASPC Pony Divisions/NSPR Ponies Part 7-A. B.

1. Delete: Measure Pony from the highest point of the withers.

2. ADD: Measure pony from the base of the withers.

Reason: Measuring from the highest point of the withers is subjective to the decision of the Steward as to where the highest point of the withers is located. Each pony has withers that are either high, low, elongated..depending on their conformation, but all have a base of the wither that cannot be disputed. This makes the measuring of the pony the same no matter where he/she is showing and makes the Stewards job of measuring easier without any reason for the owner/handler to question the measurement.

 

[midnight star stables]

No offense, but seeing as it worked so well for AMHA not sure why anyone would want this...

Sorry, but I would also vote down this rule as it stands.

 

[txminipinto]

I would vote this down as well. The base of the withers isn't obvious on all horses. Just for kicks last night, every horse on my property I went out and ran my hands over their withers. On each horse, you could palapte the tallest vertebrae (which is the withers) and they were all flat. So, IF we measured on the withers (IE the tallest vertebrae) it would be difficult to NOT get an accurate measurement. It is not pointed but flat and it can be easily palpated and set the stick on that surface.

Also this proposal would make a lot of horses, especially shetlands, "SHORTER"(not really, but he'd be measured at a lower point in his back than where he is now). My 45-46" stud would now be 43-44".

 

[Songcatcher]

My opinion only, but I am totally opposed to this proposal. I have never seen anyone who can agree on where the base of the withers is. Some people think it is the lowest part of the back and others think it is at the last hair of the mane. This was tried in AMHA and created an uproar and was later revoked.

Again, as I stated in the other thread, if it passes I can live with it and it will not change my breeding plans.

 

[OhHorsePee]

I wonder why there is two proposals? Either way it could/would hurt many farms.

 

[Songcatcher]

I wonder why there is two proposals? Either way it could/would hurt many farms.

Because anyone has the right to make the proposal they want. You (meaning anyone, not just you) could make a proposal to measure from the lowest point of the back or the tip of the ears if you want. Of course, I doubt that either of those would get much serious consideration.

 

[Field-of-Dreams]

Didn't we have this discussion last year for AMHA? And almost ALL agreed it is VERY difficult to distinquish the bottom of the withers? AMHA killed the rule almost as fast as they put it in...

 

[Devon]

I guesse I don't stand by any of these proposals Im so against measuring horses up 2 inches because i measured 6 horses yesterday big and small and averaged at 2 inches higher at the wither. If they were standing "naturally" I'd say more like 3 inches yikes even a 35" horse is done

 

[chandab]

Coming from big horses, of course, I know where the top of the withers are, but... The base of the withers? Where is that? Never heard of it as a point of reference, til last year's AMHA proposal was talked about.

 

[Minimor]

I'm sorry, but there's no polite way to put this. This is the worst proposal of all. It was a bad proposal when AMHA put it change through....the smartest thing they did was rescind that rule change!!...and it's just as bad now as an AMHR proposal. When AMHA tried it, NO ONE could agree on where the base of the withers is....in actual fact it is NOT as perfectly obvious as the proposal would try to make it out to be.

Measuring at the base of the withers and having the horse be no more than 38" or 38" and ASPC ponies no more than 46" (I didn't see any different maximums mentioned in the proposal, so I assume that we're to use the same height limits, just taking the measurement at a different spot?)...this will surely let in a lot more horses and ponies. Let's see....when I did some measuring back at the time of the AMHA rule change, I found that I had several 35" and 36" (last mane hair) horses that could have been hardshipped into AMHA as 34" or under. Now my 43" (top of the withers) Shetlands would surely measure 40" maximum if I were to measure at this new base of the withers spot. My 41" Shetland mare would hardship into AMHR with no problem at all. My 38" Foundation ponies would easily hardship into AMHR--and would be able to compete in the 34" to 36" division. Cool.

I guess I should be all for this proposal, as should many others--look at all the tall Shetlands it will let into AMHR!!!

But no. I would vote against this proposal.

I don't know why it's so hard for some to find the top of the withers????

 

[Magic]

It makes no sense to me to measure at the base of the withers. Why? And as others have said, the base of the withers aren't as obvious as the top of the withers or as the last hair of the mane. Seems to be it would be opening a huge can of worms and create far more problems than it would solve.

 

[kaykay]

Im kinda surprised anyone would submit this knowing that AMHA tried it and had to take it back. But I get that anyone can propose anything.

Im opposed to both proposals. IMHO neither will benefit the majority of members. Times are tough right now and we dont want to lose more members.

Kay

 

[ontherisefarm]

I have been lurking around in here and I told myself I wasn't going to reply to any of these cause I am sure I have an unpopular opinion but I really feel they should vote down both of these proposals. Minis have been measured at the base of the mane for years and I dont think now is the time to change it. Minis are height registry no matter how you look at it not a breed. I really think those who think we are just a breed are losing sight of the big picture. Size is what defines miniatures (hence the name) all of our classes are broken down with height. If they feel there is a problem with the current measuring system then they need to crack down on the offenders who are doing the illegal things to get thier mini measured in smaller. I agree that we should have measured from the TOTW from the beginning but guess what that ship has sailed years ago. If people feel making minis a "breed" will make them better then guess what I think they are wrong as there is always someone out there who will breed anything with 4 legs and a tail. If they want to improve the breed then maybe they should have breeding stock inspections like they do in other countries so they need approval to have registered foals. I really dont know what the answer is but I really feel that changing the way we measure will be way too complicated to even bring about without hurting someone in the industry.. Just my opinion I guess I will get off my soap box now...

 

[midnight star stables]

I have been lurking around in here and I told myself I wasn't going to reply to any of these cause I am sure I have an unpopular opinion but I really feel they should vote down both of these proposals. Minis have been measured at the base of the mane for years and I dont think now is the time to change it. Minis are height registry no matter how you look at it not a breed. I really think those who think we are just a breed are losing sight of the big picture. Size is what defines miniatures (hence the name) all of our classes are broken down with height. If they feel there is a problem with the current measuring system then they need to crack down on the offenders who are doing the illegal things to get thier mini measured in smaller. I agree that we should have measured from the TOTW from the beginning but guess what that ship has sailed years ago. If people feel making minis a "breed" will make them better then guess what I think they are wrong as there is always someone out there who will breed anything with 4 legs and a tail. If they want to improve the breed then maybe they should have breeding stock inspections like they do in other countries so they need approval to have registered foals. I really dont know what the answer is but I really feel that changing the way we measure will be way too complicated to even bring about without hurting someone in the industry.. Just my opinion I guess I will get off my soap box now...

:yeah