AMHR/ASPC Cross Enter at SAME SHOW Proposal

Miniature Horse Talk Forums

Help Support Miniature Horse Talk Forums:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
It is far more beneficial to the ASPC than to the AMHR. The ASPC needs more entrants and more $$$$. Most on this thread talk about needing increased entries and more money for the ASPC. I haven't heard much at all from people owning these double registered horses coming on this thread saying "yes we want this and I can't wait to show Shetland and Mini at the same show, we are prepared to spend extra $$$" If they so avidly want it where are their voices? Surely at least some must belong to this forum.
Believe what you want Kim but it is not the big bad much detested Shetland camp that wants it. I know some of

The people pushing for it and no, many if them do not post on the forum. Hard to believe perhaps but there are many who do not post on here!
I agree Minimor, I have yet to see this topic brought up on the shetland forum.

As for me, I would have only one (1) dual registered pony that I would show both of given the chance.

Can we get a head count of those owning dual registered ponies and how many on your showstring you would show in both divisions if given the chance.

So right now the count starts at one.
I have owned a few AMHR/ASPC horses and would definitely have shown in both!!!
Right you are Minimor. You don't get many "Heavys" on the Forum, and oh, how they do make fun of us that are. Most run like the wind when they see me coming or pretend they don't see me.
I have no problem showing AMHA/ AMHR horses in both on the same weekend, I sure don't have a problem being able to show my AMHR/ASPC horses in both on the same weekend.
Topics like these is good for discussion but at the same time it's like beating a dead horse. It's not going to change peoples minds, just like political arguments. You can keep talking but you won't get me to change my mind. It'll be interesting to hear these discussions at Convention and even more so how it will go down in the votes. Many people in the past have voiced their opinions against the dual shetlands but I think many have given up and moved on, sell out, or just plain get into the craze. For me I've accepted it. I don't even despise the shetlands showing in AMHR. I think they have brought something new to the registry that was needed. But at the same time we cannot forget the breeders who continue to breed for quality AMHR only miniatures because they are not into the shetlands.

IMO we give too much emphasis on height. Not saying do away with the Under and Over division. In driving we offer different driving divisions. In 2007 the Western Country Pleasure Driving class was introduced because those horses were being pushed out of Country Pleasure, they had no place to go. There was mixed feelings about this class. Now this class is as big as the Country Pleasure class. If we can do that then why can we not do the same for halter and those that don't have the shetland influence or as extreme have a place to go. Like it has been said in the Standard is so vague all you need is a good horse. AMHR has all types of horses. Instead of just be known for as a height registry lets start having type division halter classes and start getting serious. Lets do away with the height divisions, that way we can hear people stop saying "oh this horse was so much bigger it didn't belong in this class", etc...




The Draft type halter classes were already introduced for the first time at Nationals this year and had 14 exhibitors combined, which IMO was great considering it was short notice and you had to drive in a draft driving class. I say to not make it mandatory that you have to drive in a draft driving class other wise you are limiting your entries, plus I would like to see junior classes for the draft division. Still have divided by Under and Over. Also people want to have movement as part of the judging for halter classes well having type halter classes would help achieve that. And you will not be adding more classes then we currently have now if we take away those height divisions. This way not only is there a place for the Shetlands to continue to show but also for those who cannot compete with the Shetlands in halter. I still think many do not care for the look of the Shetlands that win in todays AMHR halter classes so lets give a clear winner on the type they prefer to breed for. In our club AMHR is the money earner of the family and you have to keep the members of AMHR happy and we can all work together for ideas to keep this organization big and strong.
I actually wish someone who currently runs and manage AMHR/ASPC shows would come on here and voice their opinions about how this ruling would affect the shows. We need to support the shows, if this will help tremendously for local clubs then perhaps it should pass. I still think that it could affect AMHR long term tho as a business stand point to many AMHR only breeders.
I'm the Secretary/Treasurer for an AMHR/AMHA club, we put on 3 shows a year and some offer ASPC classes, some AMHR and some AMHA so we have an interest in all 3 major small equine clubs. This rule change would have very little impact on our club, we would continue to offer the classes our members want, some of our shows might have ASPC classes but some still won't as there is nothing in the current rule or this proposed rule that would force a club to offer any division they do not want to.

We would charge an entry fee for every horse/pony so if your AMHR/ASPC horse pays our $40.00 unlimited fee and shows in AMHR classes that would be your total but if you also wanted to show it in ASPC classes you would owe an additional $40.00 unlimited fee to show in those classes. We do not charge office fees so I have no comment on if a show would charge 1 or 2 of those.

Although I don't support this proposed rule change for many reasons, my feelings about the club's treatment of AMHR only horses are in line with LaVern's, I also don't think it would have much impact on our shows. It is being promoted as a way to increase ASPC entries which are small in comparison to AMHR entries, will they increase because of this rule? I'm not sure. I am sure that it is another move that has the potential to alienate some AMHR breeders and exhibitors in an attempt to prop up ASPC entries. This is not a risk I'd be willing to take to increase ASPC entries by the few I expect to take advantage of this at most shows..

Jacki Loomis

[email protected]
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm one of those terrible people who own a double reg. ASPC/AMHR. The rest of my string is AMHR/AMHA double reg. Oh, wait triple reg. counting Pinto. I don't show AMHA because there are no shows up here in the frozen north (Wisconsin). I quit Pinto because they got too expensive.

At present I have to travel to two shows in different places to show my ASPC and then to another to show him AMHR. At the first show I can't take any other horses because they're not Shetland. And the way it is now if we go to a show with both types showing I have to decide which way to show him. Well, most often he gets shown AMHR since the Nationals has to be qualified for. Then he only shows Shetland a couple of times before Congress.

It's not going to make a BIG difference to me which way the vote goes but I, personally, would like to be able to show him under both papers at the same show. Save me travel time and trainer fees and stall fees just to name a few.
Believe what you want Kim but it is not the big bad much detested Shetland camp that wants it. I know some of

The people pushing for it and no, many if them do not post on the forum. Hard to believe perhaps but there are many who do not post on here!
I DO NOT detest Shetlands, first of all. How many times have I admired yours??? I may not necessarily like Shetlands in the AMHR but I can admire them as a breed. But that does not mean I want to own and show Shetland just as I love draft horses I don't want to own one. I love minis and I want them to continue as such.

Yes Holly I can believe what I want just the same as you can. The vote will go the way the vote will go. But who stands to gain the most from this rule change???
Last edited by a moderator:
The people currently showing AMHR who will then also get to show their horses as Shetlands. That is who will gain the most.

Then the ASPC for increased entries. Should be interesting to see how the competition shakes down. LOL Do I hear a new division in the offing? LOL

Won't matter to me, I am pretty much done with AMHR. The experiences from this show year have left a bitter taste. I am going to just enjoy my horses and pursue activities I can enjoy with them.

Holly, I would like to think we are still friends, as none of this is personal and I would rather just agree to disagree on our opinions. We each are passionate about our breeds.
Crabtree Farm,

I don't believe I know you or your animals. Some of the horses/ponies/miniatures in the Journal were indeed 'horrible' I looked thru the Journal and was saddened by some of the participants. However, I didn't look to see who had what horse and/or what it had won. Sorry if I offened you, but you know the old saying, 'if the shoe fits....'

Also, there is someone registered as Horsefeathers, using the H as a capital letter. I am just plain 'horsefeather'.
Actually--second in line for who gains would be the local shows, who will see some increased revenue if this cross entry is allowed.

It matters not to me if this passes or fails. If it fails I am not out anything; our local shows are not out a lot because we don't have big numbers of dual registered horses showing (and don't have the selection of classes that Karen's earlier example had. We have unlisted entry fees so at most we'd get $45 per horse plus a $5 office fee) But, if it passes I won't be angry and can certainly see the reason for passing it .

And of course we are still friends Kim!! There is nothing personal here and I am not at all angry with you (or at all)! I am sorry to hear you are disenchanted with AMHR.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok (h)orsefeathers, the shoe does not fit. But do pray tell which page or pages these horrible horses and ponies are on, so we all can see.
What is the difference between showing AMHR/ASPC at the same show and showing AMHR/AMHA at the same 'show'?

Or is there no difference, so if this doesn't pass then should we tell local clubs they can no longer sponsor an AMHR/AMHA show on the same weekend??

Dr. Taylor
Crabtree Farm,

Just for the record, I don't hate shetlands, just would rather not have them in the AMHR classes. They already have an advantage of being able to go to the Congress and Nationals.

And please, please, please don't tell me that since minis are "a height registry so any shetland that fits the height can show in AMHR." I have heard it a million times. I get it.

Sorry, won't name anyone or any pages. If people can't see the 'extreme' shetlands themselves, then all it would do is provide a HOT, HOT topic for people to argue on. :)

I didn't mean to sound snotty about the name. Just have had some folks tell me it doesn't sound like me when posting, and it wasn't.

This is a little off topic, but I think what bugs me the most is the double reg. weaners and yearlings that show. I think most of them are adorable and they almost always win over a true mini. However, I wonder how many of these same winners will be showing in AMHR after they mature?

What is the difference between showing AMHR/ASPC at the same show and showing AMHR/AMHA at the same 'show'?

Or is there no difference, so if this doesn't pass then should we tell local clubs they can no longer sponsor an AMHR/AMHA show on the same weekend??

Dr. Taylor
Dr. Taylor,

The difference to me is that ASPC is a pony and AMHA is a miniature horse. I've heard a zillion times about AMHR being only a height registry but this is where many of us miniature horse fans would argue that after breeding miniature horse to miniature horse for some 50 years or so there really is a distinct animal that is different from a pony. I don't believe miniatue horses are only small Shetlands now, I think there is more to it than that after all of these years of breeding. Many will disagree with me and I appreciate all points of view on this. For me the Arabian is a good illustration...Arabians were used to create the modern day Thoroughbred horse over many generations and yet we don't say a Thoroughbred is really just a faster Arabian. We understand that years of selective breeding can and has created a different animal all together.

Jacki Loomis

[email protected]
(Pam) so now the extreme ponies are the horrible ones.

So how would you feel if I guessed that it was ok for me to publically say that these miniature horses look like they were bred to somthing this side of a jackass. But as it was pointed out earlier that there are both poorly bred minis and shetlands.

But you lumped my ponies, my friends ponies, and many others in that statement that you posted earlier.
Last edited by a moderator:
But there are a lot of beautiful "straight" miniatures that can be not only as competitive as the duals ones, and can beat them.

So what do you think of my miniature, not too bad as a "straight" miniature? No shetland at all. This is an AMHA/AMHR miniature, but ooops he outgrew the A papers.
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest posts