AMHA members poll

[Buckskin gal]

With all the talk about AMHA possibly adding a new registry for the over horses how many would like to see

the Standard of Perfection changed and a B class added like AMHR has?

 

[Jill]

I am a member of both registries and voted. I for one do really appreciate the taller minis, and the taller looking small minis (if that makes sense? the leggy ones!).

At this time, I really only have 2 B's and 15 or so A's. I've got my B division BTU gelding son and a B division leopard mare, however, I see so many more tallish minis that make me go wow than the "little" ones.

I think it would be good to let the taller ones in and if the mini buying public truly wants tiny ones, then they will still exist and will bring a higher price. I like a variety

PS one "bad" thing about polls is that each vote doesn't bump it back up, so we should bump this up periodically if it's not bumped up by replies on its onw.

 

[JWC sr.]

We are members of both registries and 98% of our horses are double registried. I perosnally think AMHA needs to make two changes, allow horse up to and incuding 38", but measure all of them at the top of the withers like the rest of the horse world. Most new people want te little guys, but eventually recognize the beauty of the taller horses.

 

[Capall Beag IRL]

As a new member to AMHA and living in Ireland, your minis are already taller than the Irish ones because of the way you measure height to last hair of the mane.

American minis are already 1"-2" taller because of this as we measure to the withers always eg if you have a mini thats 33" if it was imported to Ireland it would be too tall for our breeding programme as this would make it approx 35".

just my opinion

 

[Kim~Crayonboxminiatures]

I would like to see taller horses included, I have several "B" horses that I would consider showing, if I had the opportunity, but now the majority of shows that I could get to in the East are AMHA.

 

[anita]

I voted for NOT adding the taller horses.

Because my goal as a breeder is to breed smallest, correct and perfect MINIATURE horse.

In my herd are 32 horses and not one over sized or produced an oversized horse.

1. Breeding technic

2. What's behind the horse, pedigree knowledge is a must in these days

3. The most importend: good breeding stock, nare are 75% the asset of the breeding!!!

I overheard a sales conversation. The seller said: The horse is not too tall his legs are too long

Always persuing the perfect smallest horse

Anita

Sorry I made a misstake it should say mares are 75% the asset

Thanks

Anita

 

[JMS Miniatures]

I am not for adding a new registry. However, I think if AMHA wants to do this, they just simply just need to become like AMHR and just have a B divison for 34" & over horses. Same rules like AMHA has done before. Simply those horses who get over 34" are now in the B divison. Obviously no one is trying for the B size miniature in AMHA before, so now people can start hardshipping their B size horses in the new B division.

I really would like to see AMHA currently fix whatever issues there are first before adding a potential problem in the future.

 

[LaVern]

Love this Forum. I have always felt that the name miniatures was the problem. Alot of AMHA miniature breeders don't feel that a 38 inch horse looks very miniature. I don't either.

But the Justa B horse has made AMHR rich.

My idea would have been for the AMHA to give them a new name like Maxiatures or Justa B horses and run the books and take the money. However, I think that it is too late. AMHR has pretty much got it sewed up.

 

[miniwhinny]

The "B's" have movement and grace that it's hard to reproduce in very small minis, A and B people need to see there's no competition here on who's horse is the more graceful/beautiful/small/tall whatever. To me it's simply a case of MINIATURE being "miniature". Apples aren't oranges and mini's are a HIGHT breed. Before long the A shows will be dominated by the B's simply because of their grace.

But I'm in mini's to produce and own the smallest perfect horse.

Anyone out there want to start a MINIATURE horse registry. Measured correctly. Under 34" PERIOD. You'd get my dollars and my support. A's and B's shouldn't have to compete like TB's and Belgians and Arabs and whatever don't compete. If I produce an oversized mini...too bad, every horse out there doesn't need a registry or papers to make it legit.

If we're in MINI's and not trying to breed the smallest most perfect horse then what are we doing?

 

[Loess Hills]

We're members of both registries, all our horses are double registered, and I emphatically do not want to see over 34" horses added to AMHA. Leave the standard of perfection as is. AMHA is noted for their standards in height, quality, and registration records. That is what standards are for..............they need to be maintained.

AMHR can handle 34-38" horses. AMHA does not need to open up a whole new can of worms!

 

[Bluerocket]

I don't want a whole separate registry for them - just a status as "breeding stock" - I don't care to show a mini (AMHA) that goes OVER - but believe they still carry the "small gene" - and if they are truly nice enough to breed - would like to continue doing so.

 

[Yaddax3]

My family has four double-registered minis (AMHR and AMHA), and half a dozen B-sized AMHR minis. I'm not that well-informed in how AMHA is operated, but I have heard from several folks that AMHA is in financial trouble and may not exist in a few years.

Is this just a piece of gossip being passed around?

For those of you in the know, what is the real story?

Is it in danger is disappearing?

Does AMHA need to expand and have a B-division to survive?

Please enlighten me, and perhaps a few others, too.

 

[Draggin Tails Minis]

I think that if they do allow the B sized minis, it should be for pedigree and identification purposes only. I do not think they should be allowed to be shown. Simply because they do not fit the breed standard. At least that way, there won't be a bunch of grade minis running around.

However I do think, if any B sized minis produce an A sized foal, the foal should be eligible for the A division.

We can all agree that papers have nothing to do with the horse, but hypothetically, if we were looking at two horses 100% equal, only one had papers and the other without, we would pick the papered one.

 

[Jess P]

The whole idea behind "miniature horses" are that they are SMALLER. I like how AMHA promotes the SMALLER horses, not the B sized minis. We don't need any more registries or any more exceptions. Plus, measuring will be a headache as well.

Sorry if I offended anyone but this is my opinion.

 

[_minihorses4ever_]

I voted no. I want to see the most correct MINIATURE horse being bred.

 

[Nathan Luszcz]

I'll stick to the color registries. I've had nothing but trouble with the mini registries and the mini people, as far as descriminating against taller horses. If they insist that only under 34" is a mini, that's fine, I'm perfectly happy with my pony.

 

[Boinky]

unfortunatly i dont' think this is going to boil down to what you feel is the "perfection" standard for mini's in the AMHA.... From what i'm seeing this is going to have very little to do with it.. Honestly i'm in favor of having some sort of "appendix" (not a differnt registry) that will allow oversized to be breeding stock.. again it's A HEIGHT registry..if hte offspring of these horses are small.. it should be accepted..if not it would be int he appendix. by doing this it would maintain more accurate records of which horses were truly oversized and you could breed accordingly. if you don't mind breeding from oversized and getting an occational tall throwback..then you'd know there was that oversized in the pedigree.. if not you could avoid it... just a preference and more KNOWLEGE for the breeder.

What it all boils down to though i think is..... If the AMHA doesn't do SOMETHING they are going to fold..they've GOT to do something financially to maintain that registry.. If you don't like the thought of adding on bigger in ANY way which would indeed rake in alot of dough for the registry (i for one have several horses i'd hardship in if it were A. cheaper and B. they allowed larger at least as breeding stock) ... then why don't you all as a group of members come up withv a better option for bringing it back up or your NOT GOING TO HAVE A REGISTRY TO WORRY ABOUT! it's plain and simple..cut and dried.. if you don't do something you wont have a registry. .... and will probably all be AMHR anyhow where there is A/B which your fighting against now.

 

[Sunraye Miniatures]

I think AMHA needs too question themselves why they aren't doing as well in the financial department, and what they can do to change this.

Is this new registry they want to create suppose to help them financially?

I see AMHA as a registry that accepts the best of the best 34" and under miniature horse. 34" is the standard of perfection to AMHA and thats the way it should be. They have done well in promoting the 34" and under horses, but perhaps more can be done. Something is going right with AMHR, perhaps see what they are doing, but adding B size horses isn't the answer.

What needs to change, what can be done to improve the registry? I don't think adding B size horses isn't the answer, if it is so beat it. But please don't make a new registry.

Also for horses that grew over its AMHA papers perhaps they might not be breedable for AMHA foals, but perhaps make special classes for those oversize horses. Let people have fun with their horse, no matter what size it is.

 

[Buckskin gal]

I want to thank all of you who voted and for your comments. This was for my interest in how the AMHA members felt on this matter. It was not about AMHR in any way shape or form so I hope no one thought otherwise. I don't have an opportunity to speak with a lot of AMHA people but I can see the work they have done and hope their registry will be able to be successful in the future. I will support AMHA by staying a member as long as I see it worthwhile to be a member. I love their magazine and the articles. I will say that I have bought from AMHA people and they have been wonderful. Very honest and certainly concerned about the future of Miniature horses. Now this is not saying anything against AMHR people...I am one of them also but the discussion of late is about AMHA and therefore this is what I am relating to. Nobody needs to get their panties in a wad just because this isn't all about AMHR because they have their days of discussion also. Again, I thank you and it has been a pleasure to read about others thoughts on this matter.

: Mary

 

[ThreeCFarm]

I don't want to see oversized horses added to the "regular" registry, but if they want to add a "breeding stock" division in which those particular horses were not able to show, I wouldn't have a problem with it. If the resulting foal ended up 34" or under, it should be allowed to have "regular" papers.