Where Did We, as Breeders, Go Wrong? Or, Did We?

[Michelle@wescofarms]

Another great topic!

I do agree with you that the 'breed standard' has either shifted or needs to be re-evaluated. There are dedicated individuals and groups working to promote and breed the smaller mini as the standard states, unfortunately they do not fair well in most showrings or under most judges. It doesn't help either that so many people work to get their horse in the smaller height class although the horses are obviously taller. This new measuring system is not going to help that.

But the need for useablity is also understandable - especially with the increase in pleasure driving, CDE, etc., often people do need to justify the purchase of a truly for fun animal! That to me though is no reason to start allowing or approving with a new 'measuring system' taller horses into the registry. What happens if AMHR adopts this system - no one in the B division is going to like having this open to taller horses that are over 38" to compete against.

What a mess!

 

[JMS Miniatures]

What I want to know is when has the breed standard been "officially" changed by AMHA or AMHR? Or has it ever changed? I seriously think they need to consider changing it because not alot of people these days are buying the real tiny, extremely refined horses anymore. Yes I'm sure there are still some out there who wants to keep it to the breed standard and just wants to show in halter and and I

for it. Cause thats what we ARE supposely trying to breed for in both registries. But now these miniatures are getting real popular in the driving/performance divisions and you do need more taller and more stout minis for that (not talking about lil draft horses here). I know in AMHR alot of breeders are switching over to AMHR/ASPC so that means letting more taller horses in, and yes even some that are over 38" unfortuantlly. However with this new way of measurment when it comes to AMHA I really think AMHA needs to look at their breed standard and chang it cause this way of measurment does not follow suit to that at all.

I think we as breeders should not at all be focousing on the size (of course we don't want our minis to be the same size as ponies) but the conformation of the horse. Isn't that whats most important?

I think AMHR should learn from AMHA's mistake, and yes I do see it as a mistake, and go off from it. Don't change to measuring at the base, measure from the withers, I think that is what the majority of you all on this forum agrees with according to the latest poll, not saying everybody likes it but the majority. There were even people liking the idea of just keeping it like it is and that got more votes then this new way of measuring. Measuring at the last hair of the mane is all fine and good. BUT, AMHR needs to step up and make measuring as a rule. You set up your horse square like you would in a halter class, no judge wants to see your horse all streched out. The stewards also needs to judge how your horse is standing, and where the last hair of the mane is or is suppose to be. Also once that horse is squared and set up the handler (the person on the lead) cannot touch that horse and just hold the lead, plan and simple. If the horse acts up have another offical come in to calm the horse. Also we must get better stewards at Nationals, I am sorry but to be honest I feel like they don't even want to be there and they just measure the horse and thats it. Our stewards at Nationals needs to be more official then that, this is Nationals for crying out loud. Also AMHR needs to have voting available to ALL of its members. Not just the 100 or so there. The rest of us who could not go that have very good reasons they can't go should not be left in the dark and each of us has a voice too. I am very fortionate that this year I will beable to attend my very first AMHR Convention and I am very excited about it.

Now I think what everyone should do is to calm down, take a deep breath, get away from the computer, and go hug your horse.

 

[ruffian]

This whole thing seems to be based on a whim. Where's the scientific reasoning behind it?

[*]People think there's issues with measuring at the last hair

[*]Folks are saying that they can't find the new measuring spot

[*]Supposedly horses that are way over the class limit are being entered and apparently winning

[*]Every other breed in the world is measuring at the top of the withers

[*]Horses are going to measure bigger -- or smaller ---

[*]We can't change the limit for AMHA because it would let the "bigger" horses in!!!

[*]We need to change the standard!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[*]People want to have more useful horses!!!

Don't throw popcorn seeds at a fire!!!

If there's an problem with how horses are being measured - FIX THE MEASURING PROBLEM. I for one think it's ENTIRELY possible that the horses at Nationals ARE being measured correctly, and the show manager's brother's friends cousin at the LOCAL QUALIFYING show may NOT have measured them correctly there. POSSIBLE?????? So the horse you saw measured at your local show as 32 may actually BE 30".

A horse measured at the withers, last hair, or niche, is the same size, just different location.

I've driven lots of 30" horses (Measured at the last hair) and they were a lot of fun, and extremely competitive. If you want a bigger horse to do CDE - Get a Pony - or a Percheron. I don't want my mini to have 30" legs so he can do better going through the mud, thank you very much.

Now for the scientific part - what if the AMHA directors were given a list of 100 horses in their District, and they, along with a trained staff, go do those horses and measure at both places.

1. Last mane of the hair
2. top of the withers

The horses to be stood square and on level cement.

Then we would KNOW what the differences are, and go from there. An informed decision could be made on what do to with the height limit. If at the withers the majority of the horses are 36", make it 36" and grandfather existing horses who are over than, but that measure legally at the last hair. However, their offspring would have to measure in under the new system.

Now we have a proven reason for change, and a system for measuring that is easier to monitor and a place to measure that's easier to find.

 

[RockRiverTiff]

What I want to know is when has the breed standard been "officially" changed by AMHA or AMHR? Or has it ever changed? I seriously think they need to consider changing it because not alot of people these days are buying the real tiny, extremely refined horses anymore.

I respect your opinion, and do see how the driving minis have gained in popularity, but I have to disagree with this statement. We have sold minis ranging in size from 28"-36", and I have certainly never had trouble finding a buyer for the smallest ones. I have been looking for the right super correct, tiny stallion for two years now, and while the stallion market is flooded, those "real tiny, extremely refined" ones seem to have the highest prices. Furthermore, I have been beaten to the mark twice this year--so plenty of people are buying them. On another thread, someone said that even with the low auction prices, people seem most attracted to the small and colorful. I'm not saying that's always a great thing, but I still think new people coming to minis are coming to them for the size factor. If they strictly wanted to drive, they'd get a Hackney. (Heck, I want a Hackney!) Most international buyers want a horse that is under 32" also. I think the standard is fine the way it is--we just need to start reinforcing it.

 

[HGFarm]

"If there's a problem with measuring....FIX THE PROBLEM"

Ha, they think they just did. I encourage everyone to write to your regional director on how you feel about this subject... and perhaps this could be squashed before it takes effect?

I have said all along, punishment for those who cheat while playing is the way to go. If the rule book is clear, and they are caught, they can try to sue, but how are they going to win?

For those of you who think it's ok to cheat, get a smaller horse and you wont have to worry about it, or show R also and you have another way of showing your fine horses without having to bend over backwards to break the rules.

 

[JMS Miniatures]

What I want to know is when has the breed standard been "officially" changed by AMHA or AMHR? Or has it ever changed? I seriously think they need to consider changing it because not alot of people these days are buying the real tiny, extremely refined horses anymore.

I respect your opinion, and do see how the driving minis have gained in popularity, but I have to disagree with this statement. We have sold minis ranging in size from 28"-36", and I have certainly never had trouble finding a buyer for the smallest ones. I have been looking for the right super correct, tiny stallion for two years now, and while the stallion market is flooded, those "real tiny, extremely refined" ones seem to have the highest prices. Furthermore, I have been beaten to the mark twice this year--so plenty of people are buying them. On another thread, someone said that even with the low auction prices, people seem most attracted to the small and colorful. I'm not saying that's always a great thing, but I still think new people coming to minis are coming to them for the size factor. If they strictly wanted to drive, they'd get a Hackney. (Heck, I want a Hackney!) Most international buyers want a horse that is under 32" also. I think the standard is fine the way it is--we just need to start reinforcing it.

I know there is a market out there for the tiny, refined horses, and IMO thats great. Like I said before we need to keep up with the breed standard and horses that are like 30" and under and that are conformationally correct defintelly fits the standard, I'm not cutting out the 30"-34" but I'm sure its hard to produce those really small minis that are conformationally correct. Those who do follow with the breed standard good job

I'm all for keeping the standard like what we have today, but if AMHA does decide to go on with this new measurment I don't see them following that at all.

As far as driving is concerned I had a 29.75" mini that could drive...he had alot of movement on him, so defintelly not counting the little ones out, I just like the taller 33"-34" minis to drive, or the Bs are even more fun, but thats just my taste.