Rule Change Proposals

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.

kaykay

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2008
Messages
4,390
Reaction score
4
Location
ohio
Since convention is coming soon thought we could talk about some of the rule change proposals. Remember if you cant be there at least let your director know what you think. I tried to only copy and paste the ones that affect miniatures. If I made a mistake then I apologize in advance.

My comments in bold just so its not confusing

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section III Part 17A PG 65

Add or Delete: Add

RULE CHANGE: The horse or pony used in a PMC class shall be owned or leased by

the PMC exhibitor or a family member.

The horse or pony shall not be “solicited” for at the gate or while at a show by the PMC

exhibitor or a family member for showing in a PMC class.

Effective Date: 01/01/2

I agree with this one! Will totally vote for this if I go.

Section AMHR Part 31;C.2 PG 292-293

Add or Delete: Add

RULE CHANGE: Horses shown in multiple hitch classes must have at least one horse in

the team qualified as specified above for the National Show. Horses participating in

multiple hitch classes without meeting the stipulated qualifications may NOT participate

in any halter or performance classes except multiple hitch classes and ONLY when

hitched with the qualified horse.

NOTE: The current economy and fuel prices make the qualification of multiple teams

(heavy harness) (light harness) (fine harness) which are all different styles and types of

AMHR horses very difficult. This necessitates traveling to multiple shows and long

distances with up to 12 to 16 horses to get all qualified to participate. With economic

Recovery, this amended rule can be deleted.

No deletions to the current rule. The proposed paragraph would be added to the rule.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred:

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section XII Part I Paragraph I.4 PG 321

Add or Delete: Change + Add

RULE CHANGE: Show facilities: area shows must be held under a covered facility

with lights and with adequate number and size of stalls designed and safe for equine. A

facility that is not covered may be considered only if no acceptable covered facility is

proposed.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred:

Totally agree with this too!

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section III Part 3 PG 39

Add or Delete: ADD where appropriate

RULE CHANGE: If a mare is exposed or bred to one stallion, 30 days must elapse

before she can be exposed or bred to a different stallion. If 30 days does not elapse

between exposures or breedings, DNA parentage verification will be required before the

foal can be registered.

NOTE: This rule would apply to all registries. If this rule had been in place in 2011, it

would have prevented two ASPC foals and one AMHR foal from being incorrectly

registered as there was less than 30 days between exposures on the stallion reports their

dams were listed on.

NOTE: This would replace number 8 on the back of the Stallion Service Report and also

be included in the Rule Book.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Board of Directors

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section III Part 3 – new paragraph PG 39

Add or Delete: Add where appropriate

RULE CHANGE: The stallion owner must provide a Stallion Service Certificate for any

mare they sell that is listed on the Stallion Service Report. Stallion Service Certificates

for mares not owned by the stallion owner are to be issued solely at the stallion owner’s

discretion. Stallion Service Certificate disputes arising between the stallion owner and

the mare owner are considered a civil matter and will not involve ASPC/AMHR/ASPR.

Note: The current #5 on the back of the Stallion Service Report reads “The stallion

owner must give a completed, signed stallion service certificate, giving the dates of

service to the owner of each mare bred. If the mare is sold, the Stallion Service

Certificate should be given to the new owner.” This rule violates a stallion owner’s

legal right to withhold a Stallion Service Certificate for a breeding transaction that is

incomplete and gives mare owners an opening to drag ASPC/AMHR/ASPR into a

civil matter between the mare owner and the stallion owner. The proposed change

Would prevent ASPC/AMHR/ASPR from being drug into such civil matters.

Note: This rule would not replace language currently in the Rule Book , but would

replace #5 on the back of the Stallion Service Report and should also be included in the

Rule Book.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Board of Directors

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section Part PG

Add or Delete: Add

All registration rules are to be printed in the Rule Book. This includes all rules that:

currently appear in the Rule Book; appear on various forms including but not limited to

registration applications, stallion service reports, customer work orders, applications for

transfer, height verifications; appear in any office manual; or that are elsewhere recorded.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Board of Directors

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section X Part 2E PG 242

Add or Delete: DELETE OLD: ADD NEW

RULE CHANGE: “Youth” an individual who has not attained eighteen (18) as of

December 1st of the current competition year (example: For 2009 a youth must not have

attained by December 1, 2008). A youth 13 – 17 may show senior stallions (3 years or

older) in Youth or Open Hunter, Jumper, Obstacle and Versatility. Youth 13 – 17 years

of age may show stallions in Open Halter and Performance classes. Youth are not

allowed to show a stallion in any Youth Halter or Youth Showmanship class with the

exception of 13 – 17 year olds in the Junior Stallion class at Nationals. Youth 13 – 17

may show senior stallions (3 years and older) in Youth or Open Driving classes.

A: Youth under 13 may not show yearling or 2 year old stallions.

B. Stallion foals of current year may be shown by any age youth.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: AMHR, Rules, Youth

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section III Part 1 PG 35

Add or Delete: Add

Rule Change: “HALTER CLASS”: Horses to be shown in hand with the lead in the

exhibitor’s hands. If not, the exhibitor will be asked to collect the lead or leave the arena

and the horse will be DQ from the class. This will pertain to ALL divisions of Shetlands

and Miniatures.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Rules, Stewards, Classic, Foundation, Modern, Modern Pleasure,

ASPR, Miniature

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR

A lot of us know why this one was submitted which cracks me up. I think the trainer showing the horse without holding the lead was brilliant but I get why they dont want more doing this.

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section V Part 6 PG 102

Add or Delete: Add

13

ADD: A: After horse/pony has been set up for measuring by the handler, said handler

may not touch the horse, i.e. stretching or pulling the head upward and/or up and forward,

moving the feet once set, touching any part of the animal’s body including the back by

pressing down on any part of the back causing horse/pony to drop it’s shoulder or back.

Handler’s hands must be in full view at all times to the Steward while measuring said

horse/pony. If handler does touch horse/pony, then Steward will refrain from measuring

and ask handler to not touch the horse/pony. If handler doesn’t comply, then said horse

will not be measured or allowed to show. This will pertain to ALL divisions of Shetlands

And Miniatures.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Miniatures, Classics, Foundations, Moderns, Modern Pleasures,

ASPR, Rules, Stewards

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section III Part 1 PG 37 & 38

Add or Delete: Add

Any member not in good standing and/or suspended with any other equine association

15

(i.e. horses, donkeys, mules, zebras) will be denied membership with the

ASPC/AMHR/ASPR for the duration of the disciplinary action and any horses/ponies

registered to member not in good standing and/or suspended may not be shown and

earn awards.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Rules, Office, BOD & any other committees

I am so glad someone proposed this one. Would definitely vote for this!

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section XII Part 5, A,B,C PG 329

Add or Delete: Delete

Part 5 – The Modern, Modern Pleasure, Classic, Foundation, Show Pony and Miniature

Horse of the Year in Halter, Driving, and Performance.

A. Purpose: To honor the top pony or horse showing the halter, driving, and

Performance division.

B. Method: When Hall of Fame results are tabulated up to and including the entire

year (November 1st thru October 31st) horses and ponies will receive credit in the

following manner: Points to be awarded in the same method as Hall of Fame

Point system. Using the total Hall of Fame (from current show year) points from

The ASPC/AMHR Computer System.

Halter Horse: “A” and “B” Division, Halter Pony: Modern, Modern Pleasure, Classic

Foundation, and Show Pony. (HOF points earned from the appropriate Age Class,

Secondary Championship In Hand, Grand Championship in Hand, Reserve Grand

Championship in Hand).

Driving Horse: “A” and “B” Division, Driving Pony: Modern, Modern Pleasure, Classic,

Foundation, and Show Pony. (HOF points earned from the Open and Stakes classes that

Horse or Pony participated).

Performance Horse: “A” and “B” Division, Performance Pony: Modern, Modern

Pleasure, Classic, Foundation, and Show Pony. (HOF points earned through participation

In Hunter, Jumper, Obstacle, Liberty and Versatility).

ADD:

Miniature Horse………..Driving Horse of the Year Under

Miniature Horse………..Driving Horse of the Year Over

One class from the following divisions: Pleasure, country pleasure, western country

pleasure, roadster or park harness) and the Championship class for that division. May be

a height (within the over or under division), amateur, youth, ladies/gentlemen or stallion/

mares/geldings class. Horse must exhibit at an Area National show and place and at the AMHR Nationals and place.

Not sure how I feel on this but lots of controversy over it

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section X AMHR Part 2A PG 241

Add or Delete: Add

RULE CHANGE: All horses shown at the AMHR National Show must be registered by

the opening date of the AMHR Nationals. Registration to be verified by show

management.

Effective Date: immediately for 2012

Committees Referred: AMHR

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section III Part 17

Add or Delete:

1) Any new class added to the Open division of the AMHR must also have a

corresponding class added in the PMC division. (For example, if a new driving division,

“black horse driving” is added to the Open division, then “black horse driving” must also

be added in both the Adult and Youth PMC divisions.)

2) I have worked with a team of physicians as well as looking at the National database

for classifications of “disability”. I am proposing that each person who chooses to

exhibit in the PMC division, be given a form (to be signed by their primary doctor) which

answers 5 –10 questions and acknowledges the person as being disabled. Also, this has a

checklist. The link below is from the World Health Organization and is their

International Classification of Function worksheet. I am hoping to adapt something

along those lines, again with only 10 or so questions.

http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/training/icfchecklist.pdf

3) The PMC Youth Division will be changed to the Youth PMC division. This sounds

really petty, but unless the word “youth” is listed first, these classes are treated as OPEN

classes, thus allowing horse changes, etc….that are not allowed in the Youth classes.

22

4)4) Finally, I want to propose a judging criteria to be used for all PMC classes. My

proposal is this: 50% - type, conformation, and turnout of the animal. 30% - how the

animal is handled, degree of handling by the PMC exhibitor. 20% - rules of the class

(like turning the right way, etc….). This would still allow EVERY PMC exhibitor to

show, with help if needed, but those requiring help would be penalized so that people

who are attempting to show their own animal without any assistance will not be placed

below a PMC exhibitor who “never held the lead on their horse”.

I hope that this helps, I think that focusing on these four areas will not overwhelm the

Board, but will bring the PMC division into check again and allow for fair and equal

exhibiting for our PMC exhibitors.

Effective Date:

Committees Referred:

I cant agree with this one at all

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section IX, Part 14; Section X, Part 32

Add or Delete: Delete: ASPC/AMHR FUTURITY GUIDELINES Fact Sheet as posted

on the website and/or distributed from the office

ADD:

In order for a horse/pony to be eligible for sustaining in the Futurity, all horses/ponies

must be registered with the ASPC/AMHR by December 31st of their foaling year. A

registration number must be on file with the office and listed in the Stud Books by

December 31st of the foaling year. Paperwork in the office by the close of December 31st

does not constitute a registration, and therefore the horse/pony is not eligible for the

Futurity Program.

All future sustaining fees will be due by March 1st and must include a registration number

to continue to be eligible for the Futurity. Any time a sustaining fee is not paid, that

horse/pony is no longer eligible for the Futurity.

Effective Date: January 1, 2012

Committees Referred to: Classic, Foundation, Modern, Modern Pleasure, Show Pony,

Miniature A/B, Rules Office, Futurity Program
 
PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGESection III Part 1 PG 37 & 38

Add or Delete: Add

Any member not in good standing and/or suspended with any other equine association

15

(i.e. horses, donkeys, mules, zebras) will be denied membership with the

ASPC/AMHR/ASPR for the duration of the disciplinary action and any horses/ponies

registered to member not in good standing and/or suspended may not be shown and

earn awards.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Rules, Office, BOD & any other committees

I am so glad someone proposed this one. Would definitely vote for this!
We've been down this road before - it cannot legally be done.
 
Since convention is coming soon thought we could talk about some of the rule change proposals. Remember if you cant be there at least let your director know what you think. I tried to only copy and paste the ones that affect miniatures. If I made a mistake then I apologize in advance.

My comments in bold just so its not confusing

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section III Part 17A PG 65

Add or Delete: Add

RULE CHANGE: The horse or pony used in a PMC class shall be owned or leased by

the PMC exhibitor or a family member.

The horse or pony shall not be solicited for at the gate or while at a show by the PMC

exhibitor or a family member for showing in a PMC class.

Effective Date: 01/01/2

Totally agree with this

Section AMHR Part 31;C.2 PG 292-293

Add or Delete: Add

RULE CHANGE: Horses shown in multiple hitch classes must have at least one horse in

the team qualified as specified above for the National Show. Horses participating in

multiple hitch classes without meeting the stipulated qualifications may NOT participate

in any halter or performance classes except multiple hitch classes and ONLY when

hitched with the qualified horse.

NOTE: The current economy and fuel prices make the qualification of multiple teams

(heavy harness) (light harness) (fine harness) which are all different styles and types of

AMHR horses very difficult. This necessitates traveling to multiple shows and long

distances with up to 12 to 16 horses to get all qualified to participate. With economic

Recovery, this amended rule can be deleted.

No deletions to the current rule. The proposed paragraph would be added to the rule.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred:

I do not agree with this. You do not need to even qualify for the class, so you can show the whole team for example in a color class at 2 shows and your qualified. Plus who will record who all can't go and show in other classes at Nationals, etc... I think we are already lax as it is when it comes to qualifying.

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section XII Part I Paragraph I.4 PG 321

Add or Delete: Change + Add

RULE CHANGE: Show facilities: area shows must be held under a covered facility

with lights and with adequate number and size of stalls designed and safe for equine. A

facility that is not covered may be considered only if no acceptable covered facility is

proposed.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred:

Agree with this as well

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section III Part 3 PG 39

Add or Delete: ADD where appropriate

RULE CHANGE: If a mare is exposed or bred to one stallion, 30 days must elapse

before she can be exposed or bred to a different stallion. If 30 days does not elapse

between exposures or breedings, DNA parentage verification will be required before the

foal can be registered.

NOTE: This rule would apply to all registries. If this rule had been in place in 2011, it

would have prevented two ASPC foals and one AMHR foal from being incorrectly

registered as there was less than 30 days between exposures on the stallion reports their

dams were listed on.

NOTE: This would replace number 8 on the back of the Stallion Service Report and also

be included in the Rule Book.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Board of Directors

I thought this was already a rule.

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section III Part 3 new paragraph PG 39

Add or Delete: Add where appropriate

RULE CHANGE: The stallion owner must provide a Stallion Service Certificate for any

mare they sell that is listed on the Stallion Service Report. Stallion Service Certificates

for mares not owned by the stallion owner are to be issued solely at the stallion owners

discretion. Stallion Service Certificate disputes arising between the stallion owner and

the mare owner are considered a civil matter and will not involve ASPC/AMHR/ASPR.

Note: The current #5 on the back of the Stallion Service Report reads The stallion

owner must give a completed, signed stallion service certificate, giving the dates of

service to the owner of each mare bred. If the mare is sold, the Stallion Service

Certificate should be given to the new owner. This rule violates a stallion owners

legal right to withhold a Stallion Service Certificate for a breeding transaction that is

incomplete and gives mare owners an opening to drag ASPC/AMHR/ASPR into a

civil matter between the mare owner and the stallion owner. The proposed change

Would prevent ASPC/AMHR/ASPR from being drug into such civil matters.

Note: This rule would not replace language currently in the Rule Book , but would

replace #5 on the back of the Stallion Service Report and should also be included in the

Rule Book.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Board of Directors

Agree

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section Part PG

Add or Delete: Add

All registration rules are to be printed in the Rule Book. This includes all rules that:

currently appear in the Rule Book; appear on various forms including but not limited to

registration applications, stallion service reports, customer work orders, applications for

transfer, height verifications; appear in any office manual; or that are elsewhere recorded.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Board of Directors

Agree

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section X Part 2E PG 242

Add or Delete: DELETE OLD: ADD NEW

RULE CHANGE: Youth an individual who has not attained eighteen (18) as of

December 1st of the current competition year (example: For 2009 a youth must not have

attained by December 1, 2008). A youth 13 17 may show senior stallions (3 years or

older) in Youth or Open Hunter, Jumper, Obstacle and Versatility. Youth 13 17 years

of age may show stallions in Open Halter and Performance classes. Youth are not

allowed to show a stallion in any Youth Halter or Youth Showmanship class with the

exception of 13 17 year olds in the Junior Stallion class at Nationals. Youth 13 17

may show senior stallions (3 years and older) in Youth or Open Driving classes.

A: Youth under 13 may not show yearling or 2 year old stallions.

B. Stallion foals of current year may be shown by any age youth.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: AMHR, Rules, Youth

I do not agree.

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section III Part 1 PG 35

Add or Delete: Add

Rule Change: HALTER CLASS: Horses to be shown in hand with the lead in the

exhibitors hands. If not, the exhibitor will be asked to collect the lead or leave the arena

and the horse will be DQ from the class. This will pertain to ALL divisions of Shetlands

and Miniatures.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Rules, Stewards, Classic, Foundation, Modern, Modern Pleasure,

ASPR, Miniature

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR

A lot of us know why this one was submitted which cracks me up. I think the trainer showing the horse without holding the lead was brilliant but I get why they dont want more doing this.

I loved that video. I think it would be a shame that we have to make a rule that considers excellent training by the trainer to be such a bad thing. Don't agree

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section V Part 6 PG 102

Add or Delete: Add

13

ADD: A: After horse/pony has been set up for measuring by the handler, said handler

may not touch the horse, i.e. stretching or pulling the head upward and/or up and forward,

moving the feet once set, touching any part of the animals body including the back by

pressing down on any part of the back causing horse/pony to drop its shoulder or back.

Handlers hands must be in full view at all times to the Steward while measuring said

horse/pony. If handler does touch horse/pony, then Steward will refrain from measuring

and ask handler to not touch the horse/pony. If handler doesnt comply, then said horse

will not be measured or allowed to show. This will pertain to ALL divisions of Shetlands

And Miniatures.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Miniatures, Classics, Foundations, Moderns, Modern Pleasures,

ASPR, Rules, Stewards

Agree

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section III Part 1 PG 37 & 38

Add or Delete: Add

Any member not in good standing and/or suspended with any other equine association

15

(i.e. horses, donkeys, mules, zebras) will be denied membership with the

ASPC/AMHR/ASPR for the duration of the disciplinary action and any horses/ponies

registered to member not in good standing and/or suspended may not be shown and

earn awards.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Rules, Office, BOD & any other committees

Agree!

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section XII Part 5, A,B,C PG 329

Add or Delete: Delete

Part 5 The Modern, Modern Pleasure, Classic, Foundation, Show Pony and Miniature

Horse of the Year in Halter, Driving, and Performance.

A. Purpose: To honor the top pony or horse showing the halter, driving, and

Performance division.

B. Method: When Hall of Fame results are tabulated up to and including the entire

year (November 1st thru October 31st) horses and ponies will receive credit in the

following manner: Points to be awarded in the same method as Hall of Fame

Point system. Using the total Hall of Fame (from current show year) points from

The ASPC/AMHR Computer System.

Halter Horse: A and B Division, Halter Pony: Modern, Modern Pleasure, Classic

Foundation, and Show Pony. (HOF points earned from the appropriate Age Class,

Secondary Championship In Hand, Grand Championship in Hand, Reserve Grand

Championship in Hand).

Driving Horse: A and B Division, Driving Pony: Modern, Modern Pleasure, Classic,

Foundation, and Show Pony. (HOF points earned from the Open and Stakes classes that

Horse or Pony participated).

Performance Horse: A and B Division, Performance Pony: Modern, Modern

Pleasure, Classic, Foundation, and Show Pony. (HOF points earned through participation

In Hunter, Jumper, Obstacle, Liberty and Versatility).

ADD:

Miniature Horse………..Driving Horse of the Year Under

Miniature Horse………..Driving Horse of the Year Over

One class from the following divisions: Pleasure, country pleasure, western country

pleasure, roadster or park harness) and the Championship class for that division. May be

a height (within the over or under division), amateur, youth, ladies/gentlemen or stallion/

mares/geldings class. Horse must exhibit at an Area National show and place and at the AMHR Nationals and place.

I don't understand why the horse has to be shown at Area and National shows. I always go to Nationals every year but probably less than a handful I have gone to area shows. Not because I don't go, but because there aren't any close for me to go. I agree we need to change how its tabulated but would not vote for it when its written this way.

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section X AMHR Part 2A PG 241

Add or Delete: Add

RULE CHANGE: All horses shown at the AMHR National Show must be registered by

the opening date of the AMHR Nationals. Registration to be verified by show

management.

Effective Date: immediately for 2012

Committees Referred: AMHR

I thought this was already taken place.

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section III Part 17

Add or Delete:

1) Any new class added to the Open division of the AMHR must also have a

corresponding class added in the PMC division. (For example, if a new driving division,

black horse driving is added to the Open division, then black horse driving must also

be added in both the Adult and Youth PMC divisions.)

2) I have worked with a team of physicians as well as looking at the National database

for classifications of disability. I am proposing that each person who chooses to

exhibit in the PMC division, be given a form (to be signed by their primary doctor) which

answers 5 10 questions and acknowledges the person as being disabled. Also, this has a

checklist. The link below is from the World Health Organization and is their

International Classification of Function worksheet. I am hoping to adapt something

along those lines, again with only 10 or so questions.

http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/training/icfchecklist.pdf

3) The PMC Youth Division will be changed to the Youth PMC division. This sounds

really petty, but unless the word youth is listed first, these classes are treated as OPEN

classes, thus allowing horse changes, etc….that are not allowed in the Youth classes.

22

4)4) Finally, I want to propose a judging criteria to be used for all PMC classes. My

proposal is this: 50% - type, conformation, and turnout of the animal. 30% - how the

animal is handled, degree of handling by the PMC exhibitor. 20% - rules of the class

(like turning the right way, etc….). This would still allow EVERY PMC exhibitor to

show, with help if needed, but those requiring help would be penalized so that people

who are attempting to show their own animal without any assistance will not be placed

below a PMC exhibitor who never held the lead on their horse.

I hope that this helps, I think that focusing on these four areas will not overwhelm the

Board, but will bring the PMC division into check again and allow for fair and equal

exhibiting for our PMC exhibitors.

Effective Date:

Committees Referred:

I agree with this in a way, I really question #4. Still unsure about that one.

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section IX, Part 14; Section X, Part 32

Add or Delete: Delete: ASPC/AMHR FUTURITY GUIDELINES Fact Sheet as posted

on the website and/or distributed from the office

ADD:

In order for a horse/pony to be eligible for sustaining in the Futurity, all horses/ponies

must be registered with the ASPC/AMHR by December 31st of their foaling year. A

registration number must be on file with the office and listed in the Stud Books by

December 31st of the foaling year. Paperwork in the office by the close of December 31st

does not constitute a registration, and therefore the horse/pony is not eligible for the

Futurity Program.

All future sustaining fees will be due by March 1st and must include a registration number

to continue to be eligible for the Futurity. Any time a sustaining fee is not paid, that

horse/pony is no longer eligible for the Futurity.

Effective Date: January 1, 2012

Committees Referred to: Classic, Foundation, Modern, Modern Pleasure, Show Pony,

Miniature A/B, Rules Office, Futurity Program

Agree

Won't be attending, hopefully no crazy votes will happen lol
 
Last edited by a moderator:
PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGESection III Part 3 PG 39

Add or Delete: ADD where appropriate

RULE CHANGE: If a mare is exposed or bred to one stallion, 30 days must elapse

before she can be exposed or bred to a different stallion. If 30 days does not elapse

between exposures or breedings, DNA parentage verification will be required before the

foal can be registered.

NOTE: This rule would apply to all registries. If this rule had been in place in 2011, it

would have prevented two ASPC foals and one AMHR foal from being incorrectly

registered as there was less than 30 days between exposures on the stallion reports their

dams were listed on.

NOTE: This would replace number 8 on the back of the Stallion Service Report and also

be included in the Rule Book.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Board of Directors

I thought this was already a rule.
AMHA has a 45 day rule - ASPC/AMHR/ASPR has no such rule.
 
Here are some more I found

Section XII Part 4C PG 327 & 328

Add or Delete: Add

RULE CHANGE: Exception: A horse shown in a performance category for which there

are no championships must earn 70 points in that performance category and show record

must include 5 wins with competition.

Exception: A horse shown only as a hunter and wins a total of 70 Hall of Fame points in

hunter classes, but because no hunter championship is offered, at the recommendation of

the National Office, he can achieve Hall of Fame status in that division..

Effective Date:

Committees Referred: Modern, Modern Pleasure, ASPR, Classic, Foundation, AMHR,

Agree

Section XII Part 4 PG 328 & 329

Add or Delete: Add: Section XII Part 4I

RULE CHANGE: No Hall of Fame points will be given to a horse in any halter or

performance class or performance stake/championship class where there is no

competition.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Modern, Modern Pleasure, ASPR, Classic, Foundation, AMHR

Don't Agree

2008 Rule Book Section IX Part 10 #20 PG 213 and 2011 Supplement PG 14

Add or Delete: Add

RULE CHANGE: Insert the following “Martingales and overchecks are prohibited for

All vehicles. Side checks, Breeching or thimbles are optional. Failure to comply will

3

Incur elimination.” Insert after this sentence in Paragraph (a) “Snaffle, liverpools or

acceptable driving bit and blinkers appropriate to type of harness.”

Effective Date: 2012 (Extraordinary)

Committees Referred: Rules, Classics, Amateur, Foundation and Youth

I think this proposal has been gone over too many times and its time to let it die. Reword it to where checks are to be used but not snug, if a judge feels the check is tight for the horse shall be severely penalized.
 
Lewella I do think that was not written correctly. I am for something more simpler such as "if you have been banned from any other horse association you cannot become an ASPC/AMHR member"

We seem to get quite a few members that have been banned from other associations come to ours.

JMS I thought the same as you on the having a hand on the rein until I talked to someone on the phone. What if some people who are not as skilled try to do this and the horse runs off? What if you had 3 people in one class doing this and one takes off so the others take off? Could cause some chaos. I think not many would attempt it but others think "monkey see monkey do" I guess AMHA already has a rule for it as they did have several people doing it. But again I thought the video was priceless LOL.

As for PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section X AMHR Part 2A PG 241---PMC classes are not big enough to have to worry about having dr notes signed etc. I hate to see us make it hard to show in PMC.

I do not know who submitted the PMC proposal but know in the future not to lump proposals together. Because all of these are together members have to either pass it all or fail it all.
 
Kay, I TOTALLY disagree with the PMC person being required to own or lease the horse they are using. I had a wonderful young lady show two of my horses in the PMC driving classes this year. She is a joy to be around and work with. She helps me and wants to learn everything she can about driving. And does a wonderful job with the horses. If this rule was in place this young lady would not have had the opportunity to show my horses. She had to qualify to show these horses just like every other youth. So why add the "own or Lease" to the equation?????
 
2008 Rule Book Section IX Part 10 #20 PG 213 and 2011 Supplement PG 14

Add or Delete: Add

RULE CHANGE: Insert the following "Martingales and overchecks are prohibited for

All vehicles. Side checks, Breeching or thimbles are optional. Failure to comply will

3

Incur elimination." Insert after this sentence in Paragraph (a) "Snaffle, liverpools or

acceptable driving bit and blinkers appropriate to type of harness."

Effective Date: 2012 (Extraordinary)

Committees Referred: Rules, Classics, Amateur, Foundation and Youth

I think this proposal has been gone over too many times and its time to let it die. Reword it to where checks are to be used but not snug, if a judge feels the check is tight for the horse shall be severely penalized.
how about checks and martingales optional? Why are we trying to turn show driving into ADS driving? There is room for both. I've said before, neither is inherently "right" or "wrong" they are DIFFERENT styles, and should be allowed to both remain as viable alternatives for those who wish to drive in either one. If there's a problem, let's work with our judges, but just to make sweeping prohibitions on equipment does not stop the misuse of it.
 
Kay, I TOTALLY disagree with the PMC person being required to own or lease the horse they are using. I had a wonderful young lady show two of my horses in the PMC driving classes this year. She is a joy to be around and work with. She helps me and wants to learn everything she can about driving. And does a wonderful job with the horses. If this rule was in place this young lady would not have had the opportunity to show my horses. She had to qualify to show these horses just like every other youth. So why add the "own or Lease" to the equation?????
Because the other PMC youth are using horses they have worked with all year and own. They are not going to a show and being handed a horse minutes before the class. This year there were several people showing horses in PMC that they had never seen until that day/show. Is that fair to the PMC youth that shows their own horse and works their butt off all year to be beat by someone being handed a horse a couple hours before the class?

I know so many people threw a fit when the youth had to start qualifying with a horse. But I was totally for that rule. Too many times I saw youth working their butts off all year only to be beat by kids being handed professionally trained horses minutes before the class that they had never seen.

If she is someone you know well and works with you often just put her down as a leasee. Leases are only good for a year so you are not stuck with that forever. For sure if I had a youth helping here on our farm and attending shows with me I would put them down as a leasee for the horse they want to show.
 
I am with Lewella on the legality issue with banning people from membership if they have been banned from another club/registry. No way that would hold up in court no matter how it is written.

I do know that one of the biggies in AMHR who used to be biggies in AMHA were kicked out of several different breeds and registries over the years.

This is asking AMHR to put themselves out on a limb legally and I am guessing that if they have a lawyer review that proposal it will have to be killed on the spot.

I understand the frustration with the PMC being handed a horse at the gate, it happened at AMHA this year in halter and the person won the class. Owned by our greediest member who has horses in just about every class and can afford to buy up anything that might beat his own horses so he can continue to win. We are hoping he will get bored with it and move on to something else!

Sticky subject though, this person also works her butt off with her own horse all year. I could support having to qualify with the horse but that is as far as I would take it. JMHO.
 
I am with Lewella on the legality issue with banning people from membership if they have been banned from another club/registry. No way that would hold up in court no matter how it is written.I do know that one of the biggies in AMHR who used to be biggies in AMHA were kicked out of several different breeds and registries over the years.
Hmm I just do not understand why a club cannot have rules on who can be a member? But I for sure am not an attorney LOL. Just seems like we get a lot of people that have been kicked out of other associations and then they do the same thing in our club that they were kicked out of other clubs for. Its a viscous circle.

I also want to point out to everyone that the bylaw rewrite is also coming up for vote again at Convention. Last years rewrite was tabled. The BOD did rewrite some portions of the rewrite (ugh) and will also be submitting that one. So probably the old tabled one will be voted down and this one presented. My issue is that even the one that was tweaked is not at all appropriate. Please read it carefully and vote it down or let your director know how you feel. There are so many typing errors in it that its shocking to me this would even be presented to members as is. Also there are paragraphs that are very poorly worded and impossible to decipher their intent.

Pay close attention to the membership paragraphs. I know many people like myself have been late paying membership dues so really read that over. Memberships are down right now so why we would add even more mumbo jumbo on expired memberships is beyond me. People are struggling and paying membership dues by Jan 1 just isn't always possible. Heck we have directors that have paid late.

I agree that our Bylaws needs some parts rewritten but they need to be done by an attorney that has non profit experience in Illinois. I have to think that our current attorney approved this rewrite which is shocking to me given the amount of typos. This stuff is just too important to push through.

To read the bylaw rewrite go to the site, then go to membership area, then go to BOD/committees, scroll down to the bottom to open up the Bylaw rewrite.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
.

PROPOSED ASPC/AMHR RULE CHANGE

Section V Part 6 PG 102

Add or Delete: Add

13

ADD: A: After horse/pony has been set up for measuring by the handler, said handler

may not touch the horse, i.e. stretching or pulling the head upward and/or up and forward,

moving the feet once set, touching any part of the animal's body including the back by

pressing down on any part of the back causing horse/pony to drop it's shoulder or back.

Handler's hands must be in full view at all times to the Steward while measuring said

horse/pony. If handler does touch horse/pony, then Steward will refrain from measuring

and ask handler to not touch the horse/pony. If handler doesn't comply, then said horse

will not be measured or allowed to show. This will pertain to ALL divisions of Shetlands

And Miniatures.

Effective Date: 01/01/2012

Committees Referred: Miniatures, Classics, Foundations, Moderns, Modern Pleasures,

ASPR, Rules, Stewards

I disagree with this proposal. Many times the handler needs to put his hand on the horse to quiet the horse down as a stranger puts the measuring stick on the horse. Especially with younger horses that are nervous. Also many times the steward will have the handler move a foot out if the horse is standing under itself. As far as touching the horses back, some horses need their backs rubbed to relax a little.

We don't need to make the measuring a bigger issue. Our stewards are doing a great job and dont need more things to worry about like where a handler's hands are.
 
I disagree with the measuring proposal as well. I had two horses that were very nervous for measuring so I would get down and rub their necks during the process. I do agree that the handler should not touch the horses back-it is unneccesary. There are other ways and places to calm the horse down, you do not need to touch its back. I also agree with the pulling of the head and neck to drop the back issue too-but, I would really like to be able to touch my horses face or neck to calm them during measuring.
 
I don't disagreee with qualifying to show at Nationals, but why would you make more stringent rules for PMC people than for regular qualifying or youth qualifying?? She still had to qualify to show my horses, just not own or lease them. Why make it harder for a PMC youth than a "youth" to qualify? Sorry I just don't get the need to own or lease.
 
Honestly I think this proposal concerning the PMC more for the adults since the youth does need to qualify with the horse. IMO I think its a good rule, I think its more of a saftey factor then anything, and I think its more fair for everyone if they had this rule put into place.

If I was there I would still vote for it. I think tho we must change the rules for PMC. Like they do for the youth they must qualify with that horse in at least 1 show. Something like that.
 
Honestly I think this proposal concerning the PMC more for the adults since the youth does need to qualify with the horse. IMO I think its a good rule, I think its more of a saftey factor then anything, and I think its more fair for everyone if they had this rule put into place.
After reading it again I think you are right. I do think this rule is probably for "open" PMC which would make more sense since youth already have to qualify. Whoever put the proposal in should probably amend it to clarify that.

Again this is why it is so important to really think these over before you submit them and have other people read them over.
 
I show "adult pmc" and the easy fix for this is to change the classes to "amateur adult pmc". Then the amateur rules apply and everyone has to show their own horses. I would personally be in favor of this..

Danny
 
If I wanted to talk to someone about how they came about wanting a change and I might not understand it, how can I find out who submitted it. I have found that talking it out with someone who sees it in a different light might change my mind as well.
 
Hmm I just do not understand why a club cannot have rules on who can be a member? But I for sure am not an attorney LOL. Just seems like we get a lot of people that have been kicked out of other associations and then they do the same thing in our club that they were kicked out of other clubs for. Its a viscous circle.

I also want to point out to everyone that the bylaw rewrite is also coming up for vote again at Convention. Last years rewrite was tabled. The BOD did rewrite some portions of the rewrite (ugh) and will also be submitting that one. So probably the old tabled one will be voted down and this one presented. My issue is that even the one that was tweaked is not at all appropriate. Please read it carefully and vote it down or let your director know how you feel. There are so many typing errors in it that its shocking to me this would even be presented to members as is. Also there are paragraphs that are very poorly worded and impossible to decipher their intent.

Pay close attention to the membership paragraphs. I know many people like myself have been late paying membership dues so really read that over. Memberships are down right now so why we would add even more mumbo jumbo on expired memberships is beyond me. People are struggling and paying membership dues by Jan 1 just isn't always possible. Heck we have directors that have paid late.

I agree that our Bylaws needs some parts rewritten but they need to be done by an attorney that has non profit experience in Illinois. I have to think that our current attorney approved this rewrite which is shocking to me given the amount of typos. This stuff is just too important to push through.

To read the bylaw rewrite go to the site, then go to membership area, then go to BOD/committees, scroll down to the bottom to open up the Bylaw rewrite.
This "Mumbo Jumbo" was included into the bylaws ( on advice of our legal consul) to address a specific problem which is created by and due to other sections of our rules and bylaw which require certain actions by "a member in good standing" without defining a member in good standing we are open to potential legal issues given certain circumstances. A member not paying their due for extreme periods is not the intent of a member in good standing thus it was defined and made specific.

AS a FYI our PRESENT bylaws require a member to be reinstated by vote of the BOD if they are a former member and in the absents of definition any member failing to pay their dues on time would technically be a former member requiring to be reinstated by BOD action.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top