AMHR Stud Book

[LaVern]

How about this? What if we could just start with the horses and ponies that we already have voluntarily DN'd and PQ'd. Because of the Sweepstakes there are some done already . Maybe there are lots that have already done it. I have only done a few. I am not quite sure how they handle it in office. I think it just goes back to office, which is fine with me.

But if we could get it put on the papers that it is done that would be wonderful. I just love those AMHA parent qualified papers, I love to touch them.

If that is more work for office, maybe they could just have a list with a big star by the names on the website saying DN'd or PQ'd. Or one of those little yellow guys like Mary Lou has.

Wouldn't it look cool to have your horses name on the list. It would be a start. At least acknowledge those that do it. But not make anyone do it. Then when times are better we would already have a system in place.

 

[MiLo Minis]

How about this? What if we could just start with the horses and ponies that we already have voluntarily DN'd and PQ'd. Because of the Sweepstakes there are some done already . Maybe there are lots that have already done it. I have only done a few. I am not quite sure how they handle it in office. I think it just goes back to office, which is fine with me.

But if we could get it put on the papers that it is done that would be wonderful. I just love those AMHA parent qualified papers, I love to touch them.

If that is more work for office, maybe they could just have a list with a big star by the names on the website saying DN'd or PQ'd. Or one of those little yellow guys like Mary Lou has.

Wouldn't it look cool to have your horses name on the list. It would be a start. At least acknowledge those that do it. But not make anyone do it. Then when times are better we would already have a system in place.

I think that would create a bit of an unfair advantage in the market for those than can afford to just go out and DNA everyone and/or already has as opposed to those that could use a gradual phase in of DNA-ing. The first people would run out and do it NOW just to able to get that little yellow guy.

I don't breed 30 or 40 foals per year but I am very proud of the few that I do breed. I have a filly from this year that has been shown twice and taken Reserve Grand Champion Mare both times and that is with good competition. I have heard things like "the most exquisite thing in Miniature I have seen in a long time", "WOW! She's gorgeous!", and more. She has not sold yet - does that mean I should stop breeding foals like her? I have worked long and hard on limited funds to reach the point I have and the market is not great right now. Should I give up everything I have put my life into for the last 20 years because of a downturn in the market? It has been my experience that all bad times are followed by good.

I do agree that we should initiate DNA-ing but think it should be phased in to allow those of us that need some time to be able to comply.

I also agree with NOT allowing hardshipping of grade geldings. I have to ask "WHY allow grade GELDINGS in who can have no effect on our registry other than to devalue our already registered stock? Of course they are cheaper! No one has spent any money selecting the best breeding stock they can afford to create them. No one has spent any money raising and showing and marketing their parents so that they can have a NAME. The ones that do that are the ones that truly put money into this registry so why is it that we should even consider allowing grade geldings in? I can't think of a single good reason.

 

[LaVern]

MiLo, Isn't that kind of like saying those that can afford to advertise in the Journal have an unfair market advantage. Or those that can afford to travel to shows have an unfair market advantage?

 

[JMS Miniatures]

I think AMHR should allow for it to be put on papers that they are DNA'd and also in the studbook.

 

[kaykay]

I agree with Lavern its no more an unfair advantage than being able to show or advertise. Honestly DNA costs about the same as a couple bags of feed. I cant afford to do my whole herd at once but if you just do them one by one and phase yourself in its not that bad.

I do think it should be put on hold until the economy recovers but definitely think its needed.

And I also agree that it should be put on their papers that there is DNA on file.

Registrations and memberships are already down right now but I think its due to the economy.

 

[Sue_C.]

It doesn't necessarily have to cost a huge amount upon implimentation at all. Very simply...the AMHR can take the same route that AMHA did. They set a date by which all BREEDING horses must be done, and any horses born before that date did not have to be DNA'd. From there on it is simply testing the foals as they are registered.

Also...unless you feel the need to PQ, there is absolutely no need to spend the money to DNA a gelding...so there is a huge percentage that need not be done.

 

[JMS Miniatures]

It doesn't necessarily have to cost a huge amount upon implimentation at all. Very simply...the AMHR can take the same route that AMHA did. They set a date by which all BREEDING horses must be done, and any horses born before that date did not have to be DNA'd. From there on it is simply testing the foals as they are registered.

Also...unless you feel the need to PQ, there is absolutely no need to spend the money to DNA a gelding...so there is a huge percentage that need not be done.

I agree that this is the route that we need to take.

 

[Louise]

Question Do you think that AMHR would except our DNA from our AMHA horses or would we have to DNA them again?

 

[stormy]

Dna is DNA, tests are not owned by AMHA but by UCDavis...perhaps this is a way to begin, transfer DNA info on double registered horses to AMHR...would be a fee to do that I am sure but would get a start on things!

 

[JMS Miniatures]

Question Do you think that AMHR would except our DNA from our AMHA horses or would we have to DNA them again?

I know atleast in the AMHR Stallion Sweepstakes they did accept DNA from UC Davis. You just had to send a copy and they would file it over at Kentucky. So I'm sure they would, atleast at first.

 

[MiLo Minis]

MiLo, Isn't that kind of like saying those that can afford to advertise in the Journal have an unfair market advantage. Or those that can afford to travel to shows have an unfair market advantage?

Yes but Journal advertising, or any advertising for that matter, as well as showing is a voluntary thing that should already be budgeted for - I know I do. DNA testing would be a new expense not previously budgeted in and would be compulsory. As long as it is phased in as Sue C. suggests below that would be fine but to give certain members the advantage of advertising for them that their horses are already DNA tested seems to me to be a bit unfair.

 

[JMS Miniatures]

Yes but Journal advertising, or any advertising for that matter, as well as showing is a voluntary thing that should already be budgeted for - I know I do. DNA testing would be a new expense not previously budgeted in and would be compulsory. As long as it is phased in as Sue C. suggests below that would be fine but to give certain members the advantage of advertising for them that their horses are already DNA tested seems to me to be a bit unfair.

I don't see a reason why members that do DNA can't put on their own websites saying "We DNA" or advertise listing a horse for sale and say "Huge plus this horse is DNAd". What I would be against is having a website saying these members DNA. I guess I don't see the HUGE highlight in creating a own page just to show members who DNAs. If you personally feel that you can sell a bunch of horses just because they are DNA'd then by all means adversitse on your own terms.

 

[stormy]

The arguement that DNA testing would give an unfair advantage to some just does not make sense! I could already advertise that my horses are DNA tested as the majority are AMHA/AMHR but then anyone looking at my horses would already know they are DNA'd because they are AMHA also...is that an unfair advatage???

Yes phase it in but lets get on it! This breed getting a bad name because of unscrupulous breeders sure doesn't help sell horses either.

 

[sdmini]

I do not think the DNA is owned by UC Davis but rather AMHA contracts UC Davis to run the testing. The test themselves are owned by AMHA. I doubt that the AMHA results will be co-shared.

 

[Jean_B]

I do not think the DNA is owned by UC Davis but rather AMHA contracts UC Davis to run the testing. The test themselves are owned by AMHA. I doubt that the AMHA results will be co-shared.

As a member of the AMHR Stallion Sweepstakes committee and involved in the collection of AMHA DNA for the purposes of the Sweepstakes - perhaps I can shed a little light on this.

AMHA has arranged for it's dna to be run by UC-Davis. Under the terms of the contract - the DNA markers are sent to both the AMHA office, as well as the horse owner.

AMHR has arranged for its dna to be run by the U of Kentucky and under the terms of that contract - the DNA markers are sent to the AMHR office....they are NOT sent to the owner, nor is there any notice to the owner that it has been run. The price for running the DNA at Kentucky under the terms of the contract is $31. If you as an individual do NOT use the contract form.....it will cost you $40 and the marker report is sent to you, the owner....NOT to the office. The only way the office would even know you had a horse DNA tested is if you sent a copy of the marker report to them.

The reason that the U of KY does not release the markers to the owner is that is how it is spelled out in the contract. If they were to release those marker reports or parentage qualified reports to the owner or anyone else (i.e., the sweepstakes committee), they would jeoparize their international standing....and they run dna for much bigger breed organizations than ASPC/AMHR.

Now....we (the AMHR Stallion Sweepstakes Committee) have been able to make arrangements to have AMHA dna markers accepted by Kentucky....but only under very strict circumstances. The U of KY gave me a spreadsheet - and persons involved in the sweepstakes with AMHA-registered horses can send me a copy of their marker report. I then enter those markers on the spreadsheet. UC-Davis doesn't run for all of the same markers as KY does - but there are enough of the same ones that they can successfully do a Parentage Qualified decision. The U of KY will not accept marker reports from individual breeders/owners to be entered into their data base, but because I was given a very specific spreadsheet to enter the data into - they will accept that....for the purpose of parentage qualifying winning foals.

So....the short answer is - unless your AMHA horse is a sire or dam in the AMHR Stallion Sweepstakes, and if you wish to have DNA on file also with the U of KY - you will need to submit a hair sample to them.

NOW PAY ATTENTION: The form on the AMHR site is currently incorrect - it is the generic "anyone can use" form and is not the one to be used under the terms of the ASPC/AMHR contract. It has been brought to everyone's attention - but so far they are saying....."Oh - just tell everyone to pencil in "ASPC/AMHR Contract" and that the fee is $31, not $40. GRRR.

 

[stormy]

I would say if we are going to have to double DNA AMHA/AMHR horses that would not be a good thing. Hopefully both will be accepted by AMHR and parent qualified horses in AMHA will be qualified in R also.

 

[LaVern]

Jean, Whaaaaaaaaaat? I haven't got a clue to what you said. I know that someone sent me sent me a copy of the DNA on Express from Kentucky. I don't know who sent me it though.

I reread it and think I get, it. So if you do it as an individual you pay the 40 bucks and send the results to the office. If you do it under AMHR contract, you get it for 31, but you don't get a copy it goes straight to office. Right?

Why in the heck would it jeopardize internal standing to release results.

I think you are getting me mixed up. Is there separate rules for the Sweepstakes?

Why would the Sweepstakes get to do something that we can't? That doesn't seem right.

Slept on this and I think I get it now. These Sweepstakes horse have to be checked after they won. Right?

 

[Jean_B]

LaVern - the results would have been sent to you by the AMHR office because you requested a copy from them.

DO NOT quote me on this, but I believe Kentucky will accept dna from UC-Davis....BUT they will charge a small fee....BECAUSE it requires staff time to enter the data into their system--and unlike me volunteering my time for this....their staff have to be paid. Again, don't quote me on this, but I believe this to be the case.

For the Sweepstakes, it did not take any staff time because I was the one that did all of the data entry onto a spreadsheet, and they were able to simply do a "dump" of that data from the spreadsheet into their data base.

As far as why they might lose their accreditation - I don't know all of the legal ramifications, but under the terms of their contract with AMHR - if it is submitted under the contract price, KY MUST abide by the terms of the contract, which requires the DNA be sent to the office, not to the owner. A contract is a LEGALLY BINDING DOCUMENT and if they break a contract with one contract holder, their results could be "suspect" with other contract holders, and they run test results for MUCH MUCH bigger organizations than ours. They are not going to jeopardize their "standing" because an owner is having a snit over the fact that the results do not come to them. The owner can get the results from the office. (Personally I don't care if I see the marker report as long as I know it's on file both in KY and AMHR.) This is directly from the KY Director's mouth when I contacted her regarding how to go about finding out if the winning foals were in fact parentage qualified.

And it was a very simple matter....I submitted a list of the foals that I was wanting the results of the parentage qualification tests to the AMHR office. When the results came in they contacted me to let me know that all of the top tens were "legal". Now....if I had had to depend on the owners to get results of whether or not the foals were in fact legal....well, it's safe to say it would take a WHOLE lot longer to get everything on the sweepstakes "put to bed," and no one would want to wait any longer than necessary to get those pay-outs.

And yes - the top ten foals had to be parentage qualified before we pay out a dime of their winnings. That is why they were not allowed to leave the arena area until we pulled hair on all of the top tens. (We pulled to 10th, even though we pay to 8th, just in case one did not parent qualify.)

 

[Sandee]

As a member of the AMHR Stallion Sweepstakes committee and involved in the collection of AMHA DNA for the purposes of the Sweepstakes - perhaps I can shed a little light on this.

AMHA has arranged for it's dna to be run by UC-Davis. Under the terms of the contract - the DNA markers are sent to both the AMHA office, as well as the horse owner.

.........................................

Ahhh, you might want to check that! I had my mare DNA'd and PQ'd when I had her AMHA papers brought permanent. That was this past year. I never received any information on her DNA. I wouldn't even know if they got it except her papers now read Parent Qualified. I had to request it from the office for my stallion 2 years ago. Personally, the left hand very often doesn't know what the right hand is doing at the offices.

 

[Jean_B]

Hmmmm.....I have ALWAYS gotten a copy of my AMHA dna markers. Not sure but maybe I put a "standing" order in at the AMHA office to have them sent to me?!? It's been so long that I set all of that up with my first AMHA dna that I cannot remember (translation..."senior moment").

But I have to add - the key to a successful relationship with both associations is to keep the lines of communication open rather than pointing fingers (most often I've found that when I point a finger, I realize later on that there are three fingers pointing back at ME!)