AMHA Changed their Color Policy!

[ThreeCFarm]

AMHA used to register silver bays, but they "aren't allowed to anymore," according to the person in the office working my filly's papers. So, my options are sorrel/chestnut or bay. Bay is much more accurate, but I'm afraid I'll run into problems at shows with my filly that way. At least if she was registered as a silver bay and the show staff didn't know what that was, they'd know it was something "different." What horse person doesn't know what a bay or red horse is? She has distintive markings on her face, which should help...

So, bay or chestnut?

Talk about a step backwards!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Jill]

URGH!

That stinks, Stephanie!!!!

When I read the subject line, I was hoping for good news and not a step backwards.

Last year, I registered my SILVER buckskin filly and my options were dapple buckskin (and there are non silver based, but dappled, buckskins....) or just buckskin. I went with "buckskin" but waivered back and forth as to which was best.

Really stinks, especially now that there is an actual genetic test for silver, to keep on seeing sorrels and chestnuts on papers of silver bays.

It seems like the education of the membership has made leaps and bounds when it comes to the proper identification of colors, along with ways to now KNOW exactly what color the horse is through testing, so it's really assinine that the registries regress vs. progress in this department.

 

[Songcatcher]

Were the papers retured to you? Did you talk to the person in the office on the phone? Did you talk to more than one person? I WOULD NOT accept such a decision without talking to more than one person. Good help is so hard to find. :no:

 

[Cathy_H]

When did they change this? My show mare was registered as a chestnut with flaxen mane & tail in 2003. Right now her mane has a lot of light to medium gray hairs in it & is not flaxen. Her tail is only light at the bottom now also.

 

[Dona]

:ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

Well.....who made THAT assinine decision!?

Color testing has made dramatic steps forward....and now AMHA is taking HUGE steps backwards! Makes no sense at all! :no:

And Cathy....your mare is a gorgeous SILVER BAY.

 

[rabbitsfizz]

Get it changed back- that has to be the stupidest thing I have ever heard!!

The horse is NOT Chestnut- therefore you cannot register it as Chestnut.

This is how they came to be in the mess they are in (colour wise) in the first place.

Mind you, I would check this before I went crazy.

If it is true, they can't do it- they cannot ask you to be privy to a legal misrepresentation, which is what basically registering an animal as something you know it is not, is.

So it would be OK to register a Cryptorchid colt as a gelding??

See what I mean??

Well....it looks like a gelding!!!

 

[Buckskin gal]

I am beginning to wonder if the registeries will have to be dragged into a lawsuit before we are allowed to register our horses colors CORRECTLY. If we can't register them for the color they truly are then they are asking that we misrepresent our horses to buyers...not good! Something really needs to be set straight. JMHO Mary

 

[Shari]

It is so easy to tell between a silver bay and a chestnut. Lordy.... think they need to hire a color expert.

But I too had that problem back when I was breeding... even took pictures of the foals eyes when born and the undercoat color just to prove the point. Did not go any good. :no:

Hopefully you can get them to see reason. To bad we can't trust the colors on our horses papers to be correct. Sigh ~~

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

Well a simple phone call to AMHA and speaking to more then one person there did confirm that indeed they will no longer recognize the color "silver bay" even if you have DNA color genetics testing behind it

both the color committee and the genetics committee voted to take that option out according to the reg person I spoke with along with her supervisor and that they are suggesting or that most people are opting to register there horses as chestnut

 

[chandab]

Who do we write or call to complain about this decision?

 

[Charlotte]

Ooooh Boy! :ugh: I think I need to sic Frank on this one!

: Let me see if I can get any information for us.

Charlotte

 

[Mona]

Did anyone happen to ask why on earth they came up with this decision?? So is it only silver bays that are no longer allowed? What about silver buckskin, silver dapple etc.? Are they still allowing that?

 

[Dona]

Well.......& just e-mailed my AMHA Director & told them just how I feel about this! I pulled no punches....wanted them to know exactly how upset I am about this! :ugh: I highly recommend you all do the same!

What the heck is wrong with AMHA? I see no responsible reasons whatsoever, why they felt they had to do this!

 

[rabbitsfizz]

They CANNOT do this, even if they have!!

They are asking the members who register their horses to be party to a legal misrepresentation- I think it probably will take someone sueing them over this to make them wake up as they seem to go from bad to worse BUT the last time I said this- which it would appear people are now agreeing with- I got jumped all over- remember??????

 

[Miniv]

DEFINITELY a step BACKWARD! :ugh:

The silver gene VERY strong with the miniature horse color pedigree. How can they DENY it???? And their reason for dropping Silver Bay is just plain idiotic!!!!

Don't know if suing would do it, but it would certainly get their attention. (But who's going to?)

MA

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

I am not sure suing them is the answer and I guess they sort of can do this if they choose to but people can also choose to participate or not

But that said I think there must be a reason they chose to do this at this time so maybe they can explain and it will help solve some of the issues and concerns

 

[rabbitsfizz]

I am not sure any one person would have to do it.

Over here we have a Trading Standards section of government and it is to them that you would report a breach of ethics such as this.

Attempting to force members of an organization to misrepresent their "goods" (sorry but legally horses are merchandise) is illegal.

I am certain you must have an equivalent body??

All you need to do is report the AMHA- you can do it anonymously if it worries you- and leave it in their hands.

BUT has anyone checked to see if this is accurate??

Is Tony around??

 

[Songcatcher]

I am really afraid people are jumping to conclusions on this. Not that the original poster misrepresented the problem. I feel sure it must just be a miscommunication in the office.

PLEASE be careful about jumping all over directors. They often do a lot of work for very little appreciation and a lot of getting jumped on. If it turns out that this is indeed the case, then is the time to start jumping. :new_2gunsfiring_v1: :xbud: :xreiter:

 

[Margo_C-T]

Well, I am virtually SPEECHLESS(and you all should know that is NOT common for me...) Unless I misread Ruff n Tuff's post, she DID call AMHA and spoke to more than one person, and this WAS confirmed!

WHAT is it about the 21st century that the AMHA(and members of the genetics and the color committees!) don't understand??? Here I was thinking that the miniature breed registries were FINALLY accepting some of the increasingly-understood, researched, and verified facets of colors and color inheritance--and now they take a quantum leap BACKWARDS??? For crying out LOUD!!!

There is no question in my mind that phenotypeal vs. genotypeal color is still often challenging to be 'certain' of in some horses, and, I would say, especially in miniatures,and even MORE especially, when they are immature--even so, this does NOT mean that a registry should just 'throw up its hands' and not even TRY to properly identify color! Silver bay finally has become a well-documented and well-accepted color, now--yet it is 'thrown out'??? The fact that for so long, so many miniature horses were so TOTALLY misidentified by color is one reason why you can't count on what two horses may produce, colorwise...now, I am the first to say that color is NOT the primary ' ingredient' of a good horse, but veracity IS SO important, and also, a good and helpful possible predictor!!

Here is a case in point: my now 25 yr. old mare was registered as a 'chestnut'; in my naivete, back in '85 when I got her, I didn't question that, because then, never having encountered silver bay in a full-sized horse, I did not know better. Now I do-she is a silver bay. Bred to a palomino(Landrys Cowboy Del, definitely a true palomino), she foaled a straightforward BAY for me--which I now know would not have been POSSIBLE had she been a chestnut/sorrel(out here in the West, we call 'em 'sorrel'!)I also now know that this bay cannot be carrying the SILVER gene.

My regional director totally ignores my state and the region in general, as far as I can tell-once, after prodding, he sent some info about one Board meeting/action--but in several years now, only that once. However, as this 'develops', I will most certainly consider emailing him with my concerns--as well as the AMHA office and committee reps.

Makes me just as glad I do little 'business' with them anymore....I still can hardly BELIEVE this development!!(BTW, I am not a 'litigious'-thinking person, but maybe it IS something to at least investigate..?)

Sign me 'frustrated',

Margo

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

I did call the office today and spoke with 2 people both in registration and one was a supervisor I didnt get there names- she did tell me that (the supervisor) it was a decision made by the genetics and hmm I think she said color committee for now.

I am not sure what the for now means maybe they are going to restructure how it is done? She also told me most were opting to list them as chestnut

I did explain to them that is was all over the internet about the change and that is why I was wanting to make sure it was correct.

I don't know that is just what I was told today over the phone exactly like the OP I guess everyone can call and find out and see what more info they can get but maybe there is a reason that will become clear later on