Anyone else get an email from Martha Hickham

[kaykay]

thank you so much Marianne, finally the voice of reason!

Kay

 

[twelveoaks]

othic Medium]i just wonder if any of this would happen if it had been a "little person" with a horse that did not threaten any one

 

[Reble]

 

[MountainMeadows]

Well said Marianne - as a breeder who truly believes in FORM & FUNCTION, I also believe that with our current trend of our horses being USED rather than just lawn art, that the height of the horse is going to be a continued point of contention -- a horse CANNOT be truly functional - at the top of it's game WITHOUT a whither. Those breeders of the past who also bred a horse with basically a neck that tied into the back with hardly a whither at all, also doomed that animal to moving with virtually NO reach - as the performance classes continue to grow by leaps and bounds the competition will naturally be drawn to horses that can perform - and those animals WILL have a whither - and that whither will add height.

 

[Hosscrazy]

A voice of reason! How wonderfully refreshing!!!!!

Liz R.

 

[user 488]

I AGREE....THANK YOU MARIANNE... and hope others "really read" what Marianne has taken the time to write.

And from some other posts...........

To those stewards or measurers who don't know where the withers are? I suggest you find another job because I find that incredibly ______!

(fill in the blank)

Gee.......can a shoe salesman find a foot?

 

[sfmini]

I got that email from Marianne as well. My response back to her will basically say, yes, I agree with what you are saying, but it cannot happen until someone sits down and writes up a correct and comprehensive set of rule change proposals. It has been tried before, but the submitter, Robin Mingione did not include changes to ALL rules and bylaws that speak of the 34" horse. The proposal died in committee and went no further and can't until the bylaw changes as well as all other references to the 34" limit are addressed.

You know, it is great, all of these ideas, but the changes cannot happen until one of the members submits the proposed changes. You can get the forms from the AMHA website, so get them, and send them in so they can be discussed at the annual meeting.

The board cannot just willy nilly change rules, that is to protect the membership from a small group of people controlling the entire organization. YOU, the members control what will happen, and you can talk all you want, but unless someone gets off their behind and puts the proposal in writing and submits it, nothing can happen.

 

[user 488]

YOU, the members control what will happen, and you can talk all you want, but unless someone gets off their behind and puts the proposal in writing and submits it, nothing can happen.

Bless you Jody......I can only imagine how tired you are of posting the same thing time and time again. Year after year the same old "stuff". It just gets old.

 

[sfmini]

Thank you for that, it is very dis-heartening at times. OH!

 

[Dontworrybeappy]

Yaay Marianne! My thoughts exactly!

 

[Millstone Farm]

You can't tell me that all trainers don't know exactly how tall the horses in their barns really are, regardless of what they measure at shows. If they don't, they aren't doing their jobs very well.

Trust me, I know how arbitrary measuring can be -- that's why I measure all the horses on my show string constantly. One horse might measure small at one show, only to be as much as an inch taller at the next (nerves, cold temps, etc.). Before my entries are sent in, I measure my horses.

I can't imagine what it would be like to send a horse with a trainer, pay entries and training fees all year, only to discover at the World show that your horse is too tall to measure.

I wouldn't blame the measurer --- i'd place blame at the person who was hired to present my horse - my trainer. If the trainer didn't know exactly how tall my horse is, I'd have some serious issues with all the money I had spent all year.

Yes, games are played at the local shows -- horses are stretched or front legs are splayed. It even happens at the World Show, that is until someone said ENOUGH.

I can only wonder how many new owners are turned off after spending thousands and thousands in training fees and entries (not to mention the cost of buying a fancy show horse) only to have that horse trucked all the way to Ft.Worth for nothing!

I watched a little of the measuring of protested horses. There were so many people there watching, i can'timagine any horse was relaxed to measure properly. But then again, if they were where they belonged, they wouldn't have been protested.

And yes, I'm tired of having my horses measure tall and just make whatever height class they are in, only to see othe rhorses TOWER over them. My little 28" yearling just made 28" this year. I think he was one of the smallest in his height class. Go figure!

 

[miniwhinny]

ughhh i guess i am not being understood.

How can AMHA say nothing over 34" is a Miniature Horse and yet NAME NATIONAL CHAMPIONS THAT ARE OVER 34"!!!

I dont know how much simpler I can make it. According to amha it is not a miniature horse yet their own champions are clearly over 34!!!

thats my only point not which registry is right or wrong regarding height.

Are you serious ? ! The more I learn about the politics of registries and showing...the more I LOVE not wanting to be a big wheel in mini's

Could you please let me know who these horses are. Thank you, It's not that I care about the size..it's the hypocracy

 

[Kitty]

If any of you haven't had the pleasure of a serious conversation with the Eberths you should. There isn't a one that is not a wealth of knowledge regarding the Miniature horse and horses in general. AW heck about alot of things.

Very interesting letter, Marianne and I am glad you took the time to write it. I have saved all information that I have been lucky enough to gather from them thru the years. I often mentioned they should write a book and they should

. I would be the first in line to buy it.

I am happy that our breed is progressing for the better. I as a breeder am constantly working toward a more beautiful and athletic animal. I welcome the infusion of Shetlands as they add that beautiful movement and refinement that many Miniatures need and heck ever try to bred your QH stud to a miniature. (OK joking there

)

I hope that AMHA will take a look with open eyes at what is being said about measuring and those who do the measuring. We need to have consistency with ALL members and better yet with both registeries. And not a leaching mob with certain horses, owners or trainers. And certain people need to remember their past and not toss rocks as those rocks have a way of coming back and hitting you in between the eyes.

I have no problem measuring my horses at the withers and nicely squared up. My thoughts are a beautiful horse is a beautiful horse and heck that is why we have AMHR for those horses that are alittle taller. Too bad AMHA can't do the same thing.

 

[nootka]

When are the members of AMHA going to realize that a very large percentage of their miniature horses under 30" and over 30" are carrying a dwarf gene

Interesting thoughts on this letter as a whole.

I wonder, though, will the dishonest people who are promoting these horses truly tell us what the heights are, if the stakes (a/k/a the height restrictions) are taken away?

It would be nice if people could be honest about the true heights, but it seems to be a matter of greed as well as some type of power trip with some people.

Enough about blackballing the "little guy" how about we all just blackball these losers that are trying to run the show?

It's really interesting to me how certain people have a real following and fan club even though they are clearly manipulating the rules for their own gain, regardless of what it costs the people who are playing BY the rules. It's like they are trying to say to all of us that no matter what rules we try to make, they will break them just because they can.

Don't buy their horses, don't use their (trainers) services, etc. ??

It's not THAT big of an industry/world.

While I might agree that some of these horses being forced down into smaller height divisions to give them an edge or just make them legal, what I am completely angered about is the level of lying, the affront they seem to want to keep after, when they are called on their bluff. I would far rather see most of these horses (the protested ones) being used for breeding than the little squashed dwarfy things that people think are perfectly fine to sell to uninformed people, or just perpetuationg a misconception.

I would love to see us measure at the withers. Even if it meant all my horses lost their A and Under papers.

I may just quit doing certain aspects of the registries' activities, as it would be a huge loss to me, even at just 6 horses. What would make me feel good is to see them pursue a legitimate measuring point before we start to go after the cheaters.

There ARE a few rules in place, but without the measure to the withers, we are fighting an unwinnable war.

Liz M.

 

[rabbitsfizz]

There is NO reason for measuring at the withers to mean loss of standing papers- permanent or temporary.

It is quiet simple, it is called an "Amnesty" and would apply, if it were implemented now- ie tomorrow, until 2012, that would take in all horses already registered.

An upper height limit of say 36" would be put in place for these horses and they would be allowed to be registered and shown, in their own height classes, until another cut off date, at which time the "overheight" classes would cease.

Their height would be put on their papers.

If the AMHA and AMHR are going to have temporary papers they need to actually DO something for the fee they charge for upgrading, like for example measuring all the horses so people do not just quietly put 33" on the papers and retire the horse to the breeding paddock at three years old- we are not stupid that happens time and time again and we all KNOW it!!!

We do have problems measuring over here which is exactly why all but The BMHS have opted out of measuring altogether- and consequently have 36" horses in the 34" classes- but measuring to the withers is the way forward if we want to be accepted by the rest of the horse world.

At the moment we are "those little dwarf freaks that measure to the dip in the back to make them smaller"

We can cope with the "dwarf freaks" bit just by proving them wrong- the more they see of good sound horses the more they support us.

We have no answer to the measuring problem until it is sorted out.

But, you all KNOW, it never will be whilst the registries are run by people with a vested interest in horses staying "in the book" at a certain height.

Basically, until you get politics out of government.

Good Luck with that one!!!

 

[Debby - LB]

I don't see the current problem going away by changing the measuring from the last hair of the mane to the withers; it's not going to happen.

BUT measuring at the top of the withers really should be phased in, eons ago the miniature horse didn't have a visible or palpable wither...why do you think this way of measuring was put into place to start with?

I do highly agree with Jody about this and also the solution for AMHA oversize horses.

In todays electronic age actually a computer generated measuring solution could become a reality.

I also feel that an outside source should be doing the measuring and no trainer or owner should be allowed to handle the horse at measuring time.

I've read most all of this thread and wish I were as articulate as some of you, I'd love to be able to explain what I want to say in more depth and will try.

I would like to say (or try to so excuse non proper English)... folks, all of you so adamant about pointing out the difference in how the taller horses look and what nice genetics they can bring.. We already have a registry that allows them, it is AMHR they have a A division and a B division, why do you insist on pushing them on the AMHA registry?

AMHA has set their standard to 34 and under, according to AMHA rules yes one who is 35" is not legitimately a miniature horse (as defined in the rules). If the horse is double registered it is still considered a miniature horse B division and you know what? When you go over 38"....accept it and get a saddle.

AMHA breeders who are trying to stay within the rules are trying to slowly bring the same look you are into the registry to fit within the standards of AMHA perfection. This is what this association is about, AND it will take more years than I will live to accomplish this. These are the horses to me who are the most desirable as an AMHA registered miniature horse, the ones who are tiny and proportioned and leggy looking. Using the taller horses and weeding out the dwarfism genetics takes time.

Those of you who want instant gratification are now are trying to push your nice taller horses, who you have worked so hard to improve into a registry that would have to be changed to accommodate them, shame on you.

It is the people who have all these taller horses who are making the most noise, why do YOU not think that AMHR is not good enough for your horses to stand alone with?

People let AMHA evolve, give it a chance. One day the look of these same oversize national champions will be consistant in a under 34" horse and WOW what a day to see that happen.

 

[Boinky]

it is NOT ok for an over 34 AMHA horse to win at worlds..... not sure why you feel that it is ok to cheat to get that larger blood? that is not the proper way to infuse the more refined or horsier looking blood. why don't they just open the books for X amount of time to allow that larger blood with that nice looks to infuse the bloodlines?? at least that's a LEGAL way of doing it. Instead they are allowing horses that are over 34 to be WORLD CHAMPIONS!??! how is that right? it's NOT !! They are LIEING AND CHEATING to get that blood then saying we are wrong in trying to get the AMHA to allow over horses in? shame on AMHA management who allows it and seems to even promote it and shame on the trainers and measurers who participate! it's NOT JUST amha though that has problems.. but i don't agree with leaving AMHA alone to lie and cheat to get the larger blood but the larger horses aren't allowed to be legally registered by people that are honest.

 

[runamuk]

Jody,

Is there a way that Robin's original proposal could be reworked to address the other issues? or Would an entirely new proposal need to be written?

As for the legitamicy of over horses, I agree that if AMHA wants to legitimize the REGISTRY they need to have a place for these horses. With DNA and PQ it makes no sense to say "just because of height" this horse doesn't count. The bloodlines are AMHA, the DNA is AMHA but the horse is not?

there is no credibility. Either AMHA is a BREED registry or it is a HEIGHT association, if it is height then hardshipping cannot be closed because supposedly any horse under 34 qualifies.

Maybe that is another area to address does the membership actually want to become a BREED registry?

 

[Robin]

"I got that email from Marianne as well. My response back to her will basically say, yes, I agree with what you are saying, but it cannot happen until someone sits down and writes up a correct and comprehensive set of rule change proposals. It has been tried before, but the submitter, Robin Mingione did not include changes to ALL rules and bylaws that speak of the 34" horse. The proposal died in committee and went no further and can't until the bylaw changes as well as all other references to the 34" limit are addressed.

You know, it is great, all of these ideas, but the changes cannot happen until one of the members submits the proposed changes. You can get the forms from the AMHA website, so get them, and send them in so they can be discussed at the annual meeting.

The board cannot just willy nilly change rules, that is to protect the membership from a small group of people controlling the entire organization. YOU, the members control what will happen, and you can talk all you want, but unless someone gets off their behind and puts the proposal in writing and submits it, nothing can happen."

Dear Ms. Director- as per your quote above.... Why do we have Directors? Are we not supposed to be voting in people as Directors who understand the channels of the association and how to properly submit and debate the interests of their constituents? Yes- I banged my head up against the wall 2 years in a row with my proposal - with no help from my directors. When I found out that the AMHA had misprinted my proposal in the World- I proceeded to sit with each committee at the National Meeting in Florida and discuss, correct and add all the amendments that needed to change in order to add a breeding stock of over 34" horses to the AMHA. I never sat with you or nor did you ask if I needed any help nor did any of my other Directors. It isn't like I was the only one for it. I went with hundreds of letters and e-mails agreeing with the need and want for the proposal. The committess can only help in AMHA to a degree- they are not allowed to change the proposal - they either say yes it can be voted on as read or no it is not possible or correct in all the necessary rules that it applies and they kick it out and it is not heard by the members at the meeting.

Jody- were you in Florida at the National Meeting? My proposal was heard by the members in Florida- I stood up and discussed why I felt as many others the need for it. Mr. Ed Sisk and Ron Scheuring stood up and disagreed. It did not pass. I was shocked to see many people change their votes once they had an audience looking at them from when it was discussed in e-mails and letters that they were in agreement with the proposal. It was very simple and to the point- basically... "Any foal born that matures over 34" but is out of 2 AMHA registered horses under 34", can keep their registration papers- however - be deemed for breeding purposes only." AMHA was in a financial slump at the time- we sure could have used those permanent registration $$$ in stead of them going to AMHR. We sure could use the registration $$$ out of the foals that they can produce- that can just as likely be under 34" at maturity as they can be over. We sure could use the $$$ when these horses are transferred. We sure could use the genetics of the taller horses so we don't breed ourselves into "Dwarf-dom"!

Anyway- my point is...... I am tired of banging my head against the wall with the politics of AMHA. I am tired of Directors not doing anything to help the members and make proposals for what their constituents want. It isn't just you Jody- it appears to be almost all of them when you talk to the members who are not politically involved themselves. They feel they have no voice. And I am sorry- but going to the National meeting doesn't fix it- you only get to vote on what the committees want to get thru- they dont help the members make their proposals correct in the fashion they want it to be- they don't take the time prior to the National Meeting to discuss with the people who submit them to be sure they are correct according to the rules and bylaws. I am not the only one who has tried to make changes that have been unsuccessful.

As my Mother has always said- "Let them make the rules and just play the game." My father was the AMHA President and a Director. My parents have been involved with the politics and they are tired of it. I thought being young and with a lot of history behind me, I could try. I learned quickly why my parents said to heck with the politics. You know- I think AMHR is the answer- But it is unfortunate to see AMHA dwindle into Drawf-dom after 30 years of supporting it. We have produced and won many, many National and World Champion AMHA horses- including the smallest to date National Grand Champion Senior Stallion- Little Kings Buck Echo- 28.25". At least AMHR appreciates the 30+ years my mom has put into her breeding program and doesn't de-value it completely for a 1/4" measured by some unqualified or unliscensed measurer.

Robin Mingione -LKF

 

[Buckskin gal]

Debby, I think you said it very well

This is pretty much how I feel about the situation also. The ones who have been working hard at breeding for small AND good conformation are to be commended. They have come a long way in producing some gorgeous small minis. The choice is needed....either breed for the tall ones or breed for the small ones. The small ones may be more of a challenge but all the more reason for giving credit to the ones who work so hard at it. Personally, I love both for different reasons, as long as they have nice conformation and great dispositions. I do hope both registeries get their acts together and do a better job of measuring and doing business for they both need improvement. Mary

I don't see the current problem going away by changing the measuring from the last hair of the mane to the withers; it's not going to happen.

BUT measuring at the top of the withers really should be phased in, eons ago the miniature horse didn't have a visible or palpable wither...why do you think this way of measuring was put into place to start with?

I do highly agree with Jody about this and also the solution for AMHA oversize horses.

In todays electronic age actually a computer generated measuring solution could become a reality.

I also feel that an outside source should be doing the measuring and no trainer or owner should be allowed to handle the horse at measuring time.

I've read most all of this thread and wish I were as articulate as some of you, I'd love to be able to explain what I want to say in more depth and will try.

I would like to say (or try to so excuse non proper English)... folks, all of you so adamant about pointing out the difference in how the taller horses look and what nice genetics they can bring.. We already have a registry that allows them, it is AMHR they have a A division and a B division, why do you insist on pushing them on the AMHA registry?

AMHA has set their standard to 34 and under, according to AMHA rules yes one who is 35" is not legitimately a miniature horse (as defined in the rules). If the horse is double registered it is still considered a miniature horse B division and you know what? When you go over 38"....accept it and get a saddle.

AMHA breeders who are trying to stay within the rules are trying to slowly bring the same look you are into the registry to fit within the standards of AMHA perfection. This is what this association is about, AND it will take more years than I will live to accomplish this. These are the horses to me who are the most desirable as an AMHA registered miniature horse, the ones who are tiny and proportioned and leggy looking. Using the taller horses and weeding out the dwarfism genetics takes time.

Those of you who want instant gratification are now are trying to push your nice taller horses, who you have worked so hard to improve into a registry that would have to be changed to accommodate them, shame on you.

It is the people who have all these taller horses who are making the most noise, why do YOU not think that AMHR is not good enough for your horses to stand alone with?

People let AMHA evolve, give it a chance. One day the look of these same oversize national champions will be consistant in a under 34" horse and WOW what a day to see that happen.