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