AMHA is CLosing Their Books!! As well as a new Height rule change!!

[razzy3d]

I don't think that everyone realizes that AMHA studbook is the largest in the world. Therefore, our gene pool is quite large.

 

[rabbitsfizz]

I had cause to measure two horses today- I can assure you there is NO groove at the base of the whithers so I have no idea what the AMHA is talking about but there you go!!

There is no way any horse needs to be "lost" by measuring properly, you just have to do it sensibly and allow a long enough time gap- 2013 would be ample time to get everything in order, I really can see no problems whatsoever.

The horses I measured were 30" to the whithers (ie measured properly in accordance with every single breed and registration society in the world!!) and 271/2" to the base (NO "groove") of the whithers, and the mare was 33" to the whithers and 31 1/2" to the base of the whithers- makes quite a difference, IMO.

Which, of course, is why it is being done.......

 

[Field-of-Dreams]

I don't think that everyone realizes that AMHA studbook is the largest in the world. Therefore, our gene pool is quite large.

Actually, I think the Quarter Horse people can claim that. There are over one MILLION QHs registered, and Minis are at about 3-400,000....

That said, as I fed today I felt for that "ridge". I checked my fat mares. Nope. I checked my thin mares. Nope. I checked my weanlings. Nope. I checked my geldings. Nope. I must have checked 20 horses and I couldn't find it. I DID find the ridge at the TOP of the withers quite easily, though.

Just measure at the TOP of the withers like the rest of the world and be done with it!!

Lucy

 

[Riverdance]

I don't think that everyone realizes that AMHA studbook is the largest in the world. Therefore, our gene pool is quite large.

Actually, I think the Quarter Horse people can claim that. There are over one MILLION QHs registered, and Minis are at about 3-400,000....

That said, as I fed today I felt for that "ridge". I checked my fat mares. Nope. I checked my thin mares. Nope. I checked my weanlings. Nope. I checked my geldings. Nope. I must have checked 20 horses and I couldn't find it. I DID find the ridge at the TOP of the withers quite easily, though.

Just measure at the TOP of the withers like the rest of the world and be done with it!!

Lucy

It is not a grove or an edge or a dip, it is the bottom of the withers. Follow the withers down to the back. Many horses drop off a little, it is in that drop off.

AMHA chose the bottom of the withers because they wanted to measure on a bony area, like the top of the withers. BUT, by choosing the top of the withers would kick out many horses and create quite an uproar with the AMHA horse members. So, it was voted to do the measuring at the last bone of the withers. Still on a bone, but more within keeping of the size our horses are. It does mean that some horses that did not measure in before, will now measure in but that is less than kicking out hundreds of horses that would now be over if measured on the withers. It certainly was not done to allow more of the taller horses in as some people have said.

 

[Irish Hills Farm]

I measured four horses after feeding everyone this morning. I also could not find any groove, dip, dent, yaddah, yaddah. Actually is was quite confusing where I was to actually measured but finally gave in and figured it most be this area here.....

Anyway, of the four I measured this morning, they are any where from 1/2" to 1 1/2" shorter........... OH!

 

[Jean_B]

It is not a grove or an edge or a dip, it is the bottom of the withers. Follow the withers down to the back. Many horses drop off a little, it is in that drop off.

AMHA chose the bottom of the withers because they wanted to measure on a bony area, like the top of the withers. BUT, by choosing the top of the withers would kick out many horses and create quite an uproar with the AMHA horse members. So, it was voted to do the measuring at the last bone of the withers. Still on a bone, but more within keeping of the size our horses are. It does mean that some horses that did not measure in before, will now measure in but that is less than kicking out hundreds of horses that would now be over if measured on the withers. It certainly was not done to allow more of the taller horses in as some people have said.

Apparently some here - as well as on the Board - do not understand the concept of "grandfathering" - a term you yourself used earlier in justifying this move....saying some horses would be grandfathered!!! So doesn't it stand to reason that if they would have made a move to measuring at the withers, that horses currently measuring "in" that would measure "out" if at the withers would be grandfathered?????

Personally I don't give a rat's behind about the change. I'll just keep on a-doing what I've been a-doing all along....breeding horses that I like, regardless of whether they are Under or Over that - IN MY OPINION are conformationally correct with the motion I want. If we get a "breed" as a result - fine....and if we don't.... it's not going to change anything I do. Nothing...Nadda....Zip.

Personally - and again this is JUST MY OPINION - I think this was a panic move on the part of some the AMHA "purists" that are in a panic because there are now some Modern Shetlands that are starting to measure under 34" and some of the AMHA purists are afraid of getting their hinies whipped in the driving arena and has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with making this a breed! Like I said -- JUST MY OPINION.

OK - Flame Away!!

 

[Sandee]

By the way AMHR recognizes and lets AMHA horses in their registry will AMHA now let AMHR horses in when the hardship is closed? That is an interesting question to think about seeing as some people think the R is bashing the A, but AMHR recognises AMHA horses but AMHA does not recognise AMHR horses.

GOOD POINT! AND, also, will they (AMHR) go with the measurement as provided on the AMHA papers, as now, there may be a discrepency with the way that AMHR measures vs the way that AMHA measures. One more question...this new method of AMHA measuring...is this effective immediately?

You are joking, right! In my book A and R have always "measured" different. Last spring I took a filly to and A show. The cut off for 2 yr olds in A is 32" so she measured UNDER 32. A month later I was at an R show with their "cut off" for 2 yr olds is 33" and she measured just under 33". I DON'T think she grew and 1" in one month so you tell me what happened. I don't mess with the horse at measuring time - I just put them on the line and let the steward do the measuring!!!

 

[targetsmom]

OK, I am confused - if the new measuring rule isn't going to stop the cheating and doesn't agree with how the rest of the world measures horses (top of withers), but will change the measurement of 35" and 35 1/2" horses so they are now 34" ---- was that the point of the new rule all along?

 

[Riverdance]

It is not a grove or an edge or a dip, it is the bottom of the withers. Follow the withers down to the back. Many horses drop off a little, it is in that drop off.

AMHA chose the bottom of the withers because they wanted to measure on a bony area, like the top of the withers. BUT, by choosing the top of the withers would kick out many horses and create quite an uproar with the AMHA horse members. So, it was voted to do the measuring at the last bone of the withers. Still on a bone, but more within keeping of the size our horses are. It does mean that some horses that did not measure in before, will now measure in but that is less than kicking out hundreds of horses that would now be over if measured on the withers. It certainly was not done to allow more of the taller horses in as some people have said.

Apparently some here - as well as on the Board - do not understand the concept of "grandfathering" - a term you yourself used earlier in justifying this move....saying some horses would be grandfathered!!! So doesn't it stand to reason that if they would have made a move to measuring at the withers, that horses currently measuring "in" that would measure "out" if at the withers would be grandfathered?????

Personally I don't give a rat's behind about the change. I'll just keep on a-doing what I've been a-doing all along....breeding horses that I like, regardless of whether they are Under or Over that - IN MY OPINION are conformationally correct with the motion I want. If we get a "breed" as a result - fine....and if we don't.... it's not going to change anything I do. Nothing...Nadda....Zip.

Jean,

I am not quite sure what more I can say to make you understand. If AMHA decided to go to the top of the withers, there would have been MANY horses that would no longer measure in and many more horses that would have to be grandfathered in. Even if they were grandfathered in, they could and would be producing many horses that would not be within the new height measurment. (this is OK with AMHR as they have a B division, it is not alright with AMHA) With this in mind, AMHA decided to go to the bottom of the wither so not as many horses will be now oversized. In some cases some horses will now measure in.

(for clarification on what grandfathering is, if a rule is changed, say you live in an area where you are allowed horses on 3 acres, but the county has decided to change that rule to 10 acres, they can not kick your horses off your property, so you and your property would be grandfathered in and allowed to continue to have your horses. But, if sopmeone buys a 3 acre parcil near you and wanted horses, the would not be allowed to have them, since they bought the property after the 10 acre law went into effect)

Hopefully now you understand it all.

You certainly have the right to do what ever you would like with your horses, as does everyone else who is breeding their horses. As each club has a right to do what they feel is necessary to improve the breed. AMHA has chosen in the past to DNA their horses because it was the only way to be sure the right stallion was credited with the right foal. Even the top breeding facilities have had accidents and did not know who daddy was. Stallions have been known to get out or even breed through the fence. AMHA has chosen to make sure that the senior stallions shown at AMHA rated shows have two testicles to eliminate that problem in breeding horses in the future, they have chosen to check the bites of all horses in the show so that poor bites are not perpetuated and now they have chosen to close their books to try and breed the perfect Miniatuture Horse.

They did NOT do this (even though you would like to believe they did) to get back at AMHR. AMHR was never even brought up!!!!!

This is what AMHA wants for what they feel is the betterment of THEIR club.

 

[Irish Hills Farm]

AMHA has chosen in the past to DNA their horses because it was the only way to be sure the right stallion was credited with the right foal.

AMHA's DNA means nothing unless the resulting foal is/was Parent Qualified. Than, and only than was the DNA worth anything.

 

[wpsellwood]

all foals are now parented qualified automatically if both parents are dna. Which they are all required to be dna from a certain year that escapes me 1995 and forward?? If Im not mistaken that change took place last year.

 

[Irish Hills Farm]

all foals are now parented qualified automatically if both parents are dna. Which they are all required to be dna from a certain year that escapes me 1995 and forward?? If Im not mistaken that change took place last year.

Yes, so for the past 12 years DNA has meant basically nothing unless the resulting foal was PQ'd. IT's about TIME that AMHA automatically PQ's the foals!!!

 

[wpsellwood]

I guess better late then never

 

[tagalong]

AMHA breeders, particularly AMHA-only breeders, put much higher pricetags on their minis. There must have been sheer and utter panic at the AMHA Worlds when some folks realized their high-priced minis would plummet in value if measuring was done by the book.

Huh? The value of a horse is determined by the quality of the horse itself - not by it simply being shorter. And that goes for AMHR as well. Our minis - registered both A & R - are the same price for whichever registry. Go figure. So much for that ^^^ theory. I do not personally know of ANYONE who has AMHA registered minis who sells them for higher prices simply because they are AMHA. I guess I am still

at the notion that this was a OMG!!! PANIC!!! EEEEEE!!!! Get back at AMHR!! We are so very skeeerd of Shetlands and AMHR horses!!! moment. That is nonsense - when so many of the horses are cross-registered anyway. It goes back to my original post in this thread about the AMHA vs. AMHR wars that some love to engage in at every opportunity. BOTH registries should measure from the top of the withers - but that is not going to happen. Does AMHR have any such plans? No. And pointing fingers at one registry while measuring nonsense occurs in the other one as well dumbfounds me....

I really need to stay out of this thread....

so it is back to watching the live feed from the Scottsdale Arabian Show...

 

[Jean_B]

Jean,

I am not quite sure what more I can say to make you understand. If AMHA decided to go to the top of the withers, there would have been MANY horses that would no longer measure in and many more horses that would have to be grandfathered in. Even if they were grandfathered in, they could and would be producing many horses that would not be within the new height measurment. (this is OK with AMHR as they have a B division, it is not alright with AMHA) With this in mind, AMHA decided to go to the bottom of the wither so not as many horses will be now oversized. In some cases some horses will now measure in.

(for clarification on what grandfathering is, if a rule is changed, say you live in an area where you are allowed horses on 3 acres, but the county has decided to change that rule to 10 acres, they can not kick your horses off your property, so you and your property would be grandfathered in and allowed to continue to have your horses. But, if sopmeone buys a 3 acre parcil near you and wanted horses, the would not be allowed to have them, since they bought the property after the 10 acre law went into effect)

Hopefully now you understand it all.

You certainly have the right to do what ever you would like with your horses, as does everyone else who is breeding their horses. As each club has a right to do what they feel is necessary to improve the breed. AMHA has chosen in the past to DNA their horses because it was the only way to be sure the right stallion was credited with the right foal. Even the top breeding facilities have had accidents and did not know who daddy was. Stallions have been known to get out or even breed through the fence. AMHA has chosen to make sure that the senior stallions shown at AMHA rated shows have two testicles to eliminate that problem in breeding horses in the future, they have chosen to check the bites of all horses in the show so that poor bites are not perpetuated and now they have chosen to close their books to try and breed the perfect Miniatuture Horse.

They did NOT do this (even though you would like to believe they did) to get back at AMHR. AMHR was never even brought up!!!!!

This is what AMHA wants for what they feel is the betterment of THEIR club.

Oh believe me - I FULLY comprehend the concept of grandfathering - (no need to get SNIDE and BELITTLING) ....having been member of and president of a School Board for many years, as well as having worked for the Legislature for 24 years!! So YES - I understand the concept. But the logic of your argument escapes me.

So.....we are going to lower the measure point so that our currently-registered AMHA horses that are actually oversize using today's measurement will measure in....hence no need for grandfathering, right? And of course .... knowing how things go in the show-world....everyone will breed to get the tallest horse they can possibly legally show...RIGHT?

So.....what's going to happen when those 34" horses (meaning 34" at the low point of the withers) produce 35" or 36" horses?

Don't know why I even entered this discussion in the first place. I don't show on the AMHA circuit - probably never will. Went to a couple of their shows and definitely more fun showing on the Brand X circuit. Guess I'll just sit on my hands and watch...and laugh.

 

[Riverdance]

AMHA has chosen in the past to DNA their horses because it was the only way to be sure the right stallion was credited with the right foal.

AMHA's DNA means nothing unless the resulting foal is/was Parent Qualified. Than, and only than was the DNA worth anything.

It is if I go to register a foal out of my mare. That mare and the father of the foal have been DNA'd and their DNA must match their parents.

 

[Belinda]

. BOTH registries should measure from the top of the withers - but that is not going to happen. Does AMHR have any such plans? No. And pointing fingers at one registry while measuring nonsense occurs in the other one as well dumbfounds me....

I really need to stay out of this thread....

so it is back to watching the live feed from the Scottsdale Arabian Show...

Tagalong,

As a matter of Fact there is a proposal put in for 2008 Convention by ME , to measure the AMHR at the top of the withers as we do our counter part the Shetland Pony.. However NOW with AMHA measuring at the Botom of the wither ??? OH! OH! OH! this might not work with the matter of HOW MANY INCHES different there will be, and I do not think we would ever change to the Bottom of the wither ,

, so not sure how to approach this now..

So guess now I am totally confused , as I thought the last hair of the mane was strange , but came to live with it over the last 40 some odd years... Now here we go with this.. I will also live with this one as I went to the barn and measured some of mine this morning , LOL !! Got several that can hardship now !!

, It never out of 10 horses made them measure bigger than the last hair of the mane. OUT of 10 all measured at least 1/4 to 1 inch smaller..

 

[wpsellwood]

I will also live with this one as I went to the barn and measured some of mine this morning , LOL !! Got several that can hardship now !! , It never out of 10 horses made them measure bigger than the last hair of the mane. OUT of 10 all measured at least 1/4 to 1 inch smaller..

Woooohoooo a positive thing now you can get some of those nice horses in that couldnt before I knew there was a bright side to this new measuring. Everyone was complaining!!! As long as they are measured the same who cares how it is done.

 

[Riverdance]

Jean,

I am not quite sure what more I can say to make you understand. If AMHA decided to go to the top of the withers, there would have been MANY horses that would no longer measure in and many more horses that would have to be grandfathered in. Even if they were grandfathered in, they could and would be producing many horses that would not be within the new height measurment. (this is OK with AMHR as they have a B division, it is not alright with AMHA) With this in mind, AMHA decided to go to the bottom of the wither so not as many horses will be now oversized. In some cases some horses will now measure in.

(for clarification on what grandfathering is, if a rule is changed, say you live in an area where you are allowed horses on 3 acres, but the county has decided to change that rule to 10 acres, they can not kick your horses off your property, so you and your property would be grandfathered in and allowed to continue to have your horses. But, if sopmeone buys a 3 acre parcil near you and wanted horses, the would not be allowed to have them, since they bought the property after the 10 acre law went into effect)

Hopefully now you understand it all.

You certainly have the right to do what ever you would like with your horses, as does everyone else who is breeding their horses. As each club has a right to do what they feel is necessary to improve the breed. AMHA has chosen in the past to DNA their horses because it was the only way to be sure the right stallion was credited with the right foal. Even the top breeding facilities have had accidents and did not know who daddy was. Stallions have been known to get out or even breed through the fence. AMHA has chosen to make sure that the senior stallions shown at AMHA rated shows have two testicles to eliminate that problem in breeding horses in the future, they have chosen to check the bites of all horses in the show so that poor bites are not perpetuated and now they have chosen to close their books to try and breed the perfect Miniatuture Horse.

They did NOT do this (even though you would like to believe they did) to get back at AMHR. AMHR was never even brought up!!!!!

This is what AMHA wants for what they feel is the betterment of THEIR club.

Oh believe me - I FULLY comprehend the concept of grandfathering - (no need to get SNIDE and BELITTLING) ....having been member of and president of a School Board for many years, as well as having worked for the Legislature for 24 years!! So YES - I understand the concept. But the logic of your argument escapes me.

So.....we are going to lower the measure point so that our currently-registered AMHA horses that are actually oversize using today's measurement will measure in....hence no need for grandfathering, right? And of course .... knowing how things go in the show-world....everyone will breed to get the tallest horse they can possibly legally show...RIGHT?

So.....what's going to happen when those 34" horses (meaning 34" at the low point of the withers) produce 35" or 36" horses?

Don't know why I even entered this discussion in the first place. I don't show on the AMHA circuit - probably never will. Went to a couple of their shows and definitely more fun showing on the Brand X circuit. Guess I'll just sit on my hands and watch...and laugh.

Jean,

I gave the meaning of the Grandfather clause so that everyone reading would understand, as some people do not know what the grandfather clause is. I did not PM you to give you that deffinition, so I do not see why you feel I was belittling you.

 

[Kitty]

It seems to me that we need some actual "officials" on here explaining this.

Any volunteers?