but Folks some of this is out of control with the size of these B Horses, I get calls daily From Folks about how much 38" has grown !! Now we can blame lots of things, from the people measuring , the folks owning them , the trainers , and on and on, I just feel like if we measured like the rest of the Equine world measures we would be better off.
Well, I guess it could also be commented on how much 34" has grown. There are small ponies competing as Minis, and there are 36" Minis competing in the under 34" division. For some reason, though, that seems to be okay....perhaps because those ones are not so likely to be registered Shetlands?
If there is suddenly this major concern about doing something about oversize horses being shown then the concern should be about both size divisions, Over and Under, not just the Over division. So, if you want to clean this up, why not crack down on measuring practices--enforcing the rules regarding stance of horse, actions of handler, pressing down on the measure stick etc etc etc instead of coming up with a rule that will eliminate the 37" to 38" at-the-last-mane-hair horses. Even with measuring at the withers, if someone wants to take an oversize horse and stand him spraddle legged and all stretched out, chances are they're going to fit him into the size limit too. You're going to be surprised at how tall 38" at-the-withers is too.
Folks these double reg. horses can still be shown as Shetlands , just as several have pointed out , We are not taking anything away from anyone .. Is it really that bad to have to show your pony as Shetland instead of a Mini.. ?
Well, in the first place you are taking Mini papers away from foals that would normally be able to have them under the current rules....foals that are born to parents that are registered AMHR as well as ASPC....foals from several generations of ASPC/AMHR horses. Is a horse that is registered both AMHR and ASPC more Shetland than Miniature if it comes from 4 or 5 generations of registered ASPC/AMHR horses? The 40" ponies that would be AMHR registered may be competitive as a pony, but that does depend on the pony--truth is there are quite a number of ASPC/AMHR horses that are much more competitive as a Mini than as a pony. Some of them look much more Mini than pony, and some of them would be lacking the style and/or movement that it takes to win in good pony competition. (And I am NOT saying that Minis lack style or movement, but judges as a rule do count movement a lot less in Minis than they do in ponies.)
This rule change will in no way affect me--I am not going to be breeding any Minis and probably won't even be showing many of them, so whichever way it goes it makes no difference to me personally. But, if I were able to go to Convention and vote on this rule I would vote AGAINST it. I am totally opposed to it as it stands. I am all for measuring at the top of the wither, but totally opposed to the height limit not being adjusted to allow for withers on the horse.
I too think it is unfair if a new rule just instantly eliminates the breeding programs of some farms (and I believe this one would do that very thing). What concerns me is the fact that similar things have been done before—such as the closing of hardshipping to unregistered horses; that was done with so little notice it left some people with crossbred horses that couldn’t be registered because they weren’t yet old enough to be hardshipped in—very disappointing, I’m sure, when people were purposefully breeding these horses to add into the registry. At least with AMHA, plenty of notice has been given so breeders know that beyond a certain date their unregistered foals won’t be able to get into the registry. And I agree with Fran—if certain people want this rule to pass, it will pass. I wouldn’t say this rule favors AMHA exactly, but it does favor those who want to shut ASPC out of the AMHR registry.
Add several classes to the miniature shows to accomidate the m/s crosses. Call it OPEN MODERN MINIATURE OVER AND UNDER. As it seems that our miniatures are destain to move forward with the cross breeding.
jeniemac--they are not "crosses" in many cases--they are Shetlands that happen to be the right size to also be registered as Miniatures. They are double registered, not "crosses", though of course there are people that are breeding an AMHR horse to an AMHR/ASPC horse, so the resulting foal is AMHR as well as half Shetland.
Honestly, if this rule passes as is, there are going to be a lot of hard feelings in the registry--I can see that coming. I will be deeply disappointed, and feel really bad for those who will actually be affected by this rule change.
