Coat Color Studies Aid Health Research, Breeding C

[happyappygirl]

I know when I had standardbreds that were retired from the track, I really enjoyed some of their really smooth gaits.

YouTube - Soulcrusher-Standardbred Speed Racking Singlefooter Stallion

this video is neat

At speed that's wonderfully smooth because he's a singlefooter (one foot on the ground at a time when in gait). In some of the stills in that (VERY cool ) video you can actually see that. In the moving ones you can see the side to side action, which when going so fast, makes it smooth. There is a gaited registry for singlefooters too.

The average Standardbred who paces does a true 2 beat pace (lateral), that rattles your fillings loose. The Amish don't really care for them either because they rattle the buggy side to side too.

 

[CountryLady]

Yes, I see that you can still Google but, did you have a point?

YES, if you would have examined the links more carefully you would have noted Breed standards.

And, if you would have read up on the breed standards of each of the mentioned breeds, you would have seen my point. But let me see if I can help you SEE my point.

Point # 1
COLOR IS ONE OF THE FIRST REQUIREMENTS (IF NOT THE MAIN REQUIREMENT) IN THE BREED STANDARD FOR THE BREED(S)

American Cream Draft Horse
Listing in the requirements lineage first, color, and must be draft third. As stated in the link: The American Cream Draft Horse is exactly as the name describes.

Cleveland Bays
Cleveland Bays must be bay with black points, i.e. black legs, black mane and black tail. The color is second only to height requirement.

Um, no. American Cream Drafts are not a color breed. Sorry.

I believe you are incorrect. Read the Breed standards of each of the breeds and you would see that American cream drafts and Cleveland Bays lend themselves to be “color breeds” of a specific origin.

American Cream Drafts are a specific genetic breed.

Most Breeds are genetic!

If you cross an American Cream with another draft breed if that horse is cream it can be registered as Appendix but, that is only because the breed is endangered. Off spring of that appendix can only be registered if bred back to a full American Cream Draft. ALL registered horses MUST be DNA tested. After passing DNA testing they are color and JEB tested.

Who cares about the cross at this point, we are discussing “color in breeds” not Appendix or possible registry if cross bred with acceptable breed for appendix.

Cleveland Bay is just one name for the oldest horse breed in Britain.

While that may or may not be true, it doesn’t attest to breed standards.

They used to have markings similar to duns with dorsal stripes and zebra stripes. As with other breeds (example height of white markings on QH legs) some color preferences have been noted. For example bright bay is more desirable than dark bay.

Fuzzy breed standards?

And, in case it's not obvious yet I research everything.

Maybe you need utilize some research tools such as GOOGLE :shrug:

 

[happyappygirl]

Too easy.

Wasn't worth my time to point those things out, but they're exactly why i mentioned those particular breeds.

 

[appendixqh]

Too easy.

Wasn't worth my time to point those things out, but they're exactly why i mentioned those particular breeds.

I beg to differ...this conversation is about breeding FOR color. Those are breed registries that just happen to come in a certain color.
Just like: Haflingers

http://www.haflingerhorse.com/ahr_breed_standards.htm

have a color standard.
Just like: Norwegian Fjords are some variation of dun, and once is a great while express grey.
The color is a breed norm, just like in cleveland bays, but the breeding is set to that breed of horse...you cant cross and arrive at those breeds.

When breeding for color, it is more reffering to when Color is a breed standard it is more referring to something like PHBA where a quarter horse can compete against a TB because they are both palominos. So there you have a color being bred FOR, not just the breed norm.

 

[appendixqh]

Quote from The American Creme Draft website: "The roots of this rare breed go back to the early 1900’s and “Old Granny”, a mare of draft breeding with a cream-colored coat, pink skin, and amber eyes, three defining traits resulting from the Champagne gene. Those traits were passed on to her offspring, which were sought after for their beauty."

If that's not breeding FOR color, I don't know what is.....the breed was identified as a separate breed BECAUSE of the color.

Given the fact that the DNA color test for the Champagne Gene is new just this year they had no way of knowing exactly what made that color, so many of them carry the creme gene in addition to Champagne which gives a false double dilute appearance.

Ok...so is breeding FOR color a good thing or a bad one since you by admission, do it, and Phyx's 'breed' was founded on a "popular" beautiful color?

I assume you breed Appendix QHs (first generation TB crossed with QHs) is that correct? Do you have a website?

Oh wait...I get it....its being said that I breed my Dual Registered/Dual Certified Rockies for color FIRST....

....would that be first AFTER they meet qualifications for registration and then subsequent breed suitability certification according to THREE indpendent Breed Examiners - since ALL of my breeding stock is double registered and double certified meaning they've already proven themselves worthy of being bred before they're ever bred at all?

Why are you getting all fresh with me? I've always been nice to you, and never picked a fight...now you are trying to pick a fight with me? My point was this thread is about breeding for color...if you have a distinct breed that does not outcross, that is established and just happens to have been founded on a color...then that isn't a current "breeding for color" practice. No chance is behind your outcome...they come in specified colors and you can't cross one breed with another to get it and still have it registered as that breed.

I started this thing by saying I breed for color. I breed AQHA, and color is part of our program. I just happen to be very selective on the crosses I use to get that color. How you got all defensive in this discussion I will never know. I think the only time anyone questioned your breeding practice is when it was brought up that you bred a rocky to an App. You do what ever it is that you do and have fun...but to think that your animals are superior and lash out at everyone that asks anything about them just doesn't make sense. And yes...my prefered ride is an appendix.

 

[CountryLady]

I beg to differ...this conversation is about breeding FOR color. Those are breed registries that just happen to come in a certain color.
Just like: Haflingers

http://www.haflingerhorse.com/ahr_breed_standards.htm

have a color standard.
Just like: Norwegian Fjords are some variation of dun, and once is a great while express grey.
The color is a breed norm, just like in cleveland bays, but the breeding is set to that breed of horse...you cant cross and arrive at those breeds.

When breeding for color, it is more reffering to when Color is a breed standard it is more referring to something like PHBA where a quarter horse can compete against a TB because they are both palominos. So there you have a color being bred FOR, not just the breed norm.

Yes, but happyappy isn't the only one that seems to think they are a color first breed. They consider that themselves, hence the reason the color is part of the breed name, as she and the web links I posted pointed out.

Haflinger is not a color, is it? Not the same thing we are talking about. While the Haflinger and Norwegian Fjords have a preferred color, and the color window is limited, they are a true “breed” that happen to be known for a desire specific color.

TRUE BREEDS THAT ALSO HAVE COLOR- these breeds typically pass on their color to their offspring, otherwise known as true breeds that are said to have “color preference.” THEY ARE NOT COLOR BREEDS.

Friesian Horse -(must be black for mainstream registration)
Appaloosa -(leopard or other small spotting patterns)
American Paint Horse

Other breeds that might be considered by some color breeds are technically pedigree-based breeds.

Norwegian Fjord Horses
Haflinger

In some breeds, though not all, offspring of animals registered in these stud books can also be registered, sometimes with restrictions, even if they do not have the desired color.
******************************************************
There are Breed registries which admit any animal fitting a given set of physical characteristics, even if there is minimal or no evidence of the trait being a true-breeding characteristic. Some may even recognize horses from multiple breeds, thus, such animals are classified as a "type" rather than a "breed."

Correct me if I am wrong, but COLOR BREEDS would fall under “type” rather than “breed.”

ABRA -Buckskin,
PHA- Palomino,
ICHR- champagne
American White and American Creme Horse Registry- Cremello And Perlino

Cremello And Perlino (double dilutes) and champagne are not breeds but wonderful colors that are present in many breeds. Theses colors have existed for a long long time but only recently in the past decade, due to COLOR DNA testing were truly understood.

Pearl is another color that has recently been defined by COLOR DNA testing.
Seal Brown yet another color recently defined by COLOR DNA testing.

COLOR BREED REGISTRIES typically accepts horses (and sometimes ponies and mules) of almost any breed or type. Registries have opened that accept horses (and sometimes ponies and mules) of almost any breed or type, with color either the only requirement for registration or the primary criterion.

And as I have said, even the QH industry have what they deem “acceptable colors” (there is a color standard, they just have more than one) and for years excluded certain colors from their registries, even if they were offspring from two fully registered parents, due to lack of knowledge about color. Now that the COLOR DNA testing has started to become the norm for many breeds, those once excluded colors are now acceptable in the registry.

 

[Phyxius]

Quote from The American Creme Draft website: "The roots of this rare breed go back to the early 1900’s and “Old Granny”, a mare of draft breeding with a cream-colored coat, pink skin, and amber eyes, three defining traits resulting from the Champagne gene. Those traits were passed on to her offspring, which were sought after for their beauty."

If that's not breeding FOR color, I don't know what is.....the breed was identified as a separate breed BECAUSE of the color.

Given the fact that the DNA color test for the Champagne Gene is new just this year they had no way of knowing exactly what made that color, so many of them carry the creme gene in addition to Champagne which gives a false double dilute appearance.



Ok...so is breeding FOR color a good thing or a bad one since you by admission, do it, and Phyx's 'breed' was founded on a "popular" beautiful color?

I assume you breed Appendix QHs (first generation TB crossed with QHs) is that correct? Do you have a website?

Oh wait...I get it....its being said that I breed my Dual Registered/Dual Certified Rockies for color FIRST....

....would that be first AFTER they meet qualifications for registration and then subsequent breed suitability certification according to THREE indpendent Breed Examiners - since ALL of my breeding stock is double registered and double certified meaning they've already proven themselves worthy of being bred before they're ever bred at all?

I don't have time to reply to all of this as I'm on vacation and I'm just stopping in on my iphone. But, as Appendix said it's very different to breed for color and then to have a breed that only is one color. It's like breeding zebras. Every zebra has stripes. If it doesn't...it's not a zebra. I don't see how that's confusion? Every draft horse with cream and/or champagne is not an american cream draft.

I also can't understand why you seem to erroneously think that the American Cream Draft is "my" breed. I own four horses, each of them is a different breed. I try not to stereotype a breed and I choose my animals based on individual temperament and ability as well as what I intend to use them for. I do not have a breeding program. The mare I bought in Canada came in foal. She was bred too close to when I bought her (1 week) for us to know if she was in foal...so it was a 2-in-1. So far the yearling is brilliant and I do plan to keep him. If I do not the breeder would like him and, they own his half brother, too.

I'm not in the least impressed by the certification that you stand so stalwartly behind. Many breeds have inspections. Kuerings are done as weanlings and then they can go for ster ratings as three year olds or older. Frieisans are much more select in their breeding programs and most other breeds. Then, for stallions there is a much more stringent process. There are only about 100 approved stallions worldwide. (FPS)

Then, most warmblood registries require a horse to actually prove themselves either in competition or through the 100 day stallion test. Here's a terrific article that you can read: 100 Day Test for Sport Horse Stallion Approval

Then, some of the registries only offer temporary breeding licenses and then the stallions have to be inspected again. So, hop off of the high horse and educate yourself a bit more before you start throwing around "only". I'll be home next week and will be happy to answer any questions.

Oh, and my request was for you to post photos...think of them as diagrams, of your horses versus other rockies to let us know what confirmation points are great in yours. And, video to show us what gait is most desired since yours are wonderful. But, I suppose if your foals, mares, and stallions aren't on par with the rest of the rockies I can understand why you'd be hesitant to show them.

 

[CountryLady]

"foundation SHUFFLING pedigreed appaloosa " ???

Yeah!

I think the term is "peanut pusher".

I think you mean peanut roller! Has nothing to do with shuffling appaloosas. Has everything to do with how showing horses can really take a turn for the worse. Let’s torture our horse with running reins, draw reins and tie-downs and unnecessary crap. People try to make these peanut roller Quarter Horses with their heads dragging down on the ground instead of having their head alert and looking like they know what they're doing. No horse can travel with his head down between his legs. THIS IS ONE OF THE NEGATIVE INFLUENCES OF SHOWING!!!!!!!!!! Not to mention if you have ever been to a Susan Harris or Peggy Brown clinic they would tell you that you are tearing the horse up if you practice this forced technique. I am assuming by you comment, you were a bit confused as to the definition of “Peanut roller”.

Why would you want a horse who shuffles bred to a horse who has a 'move out' gait? Are you attempting to dampen down the hot-ness of the Rocky? Just wondering.

Again it doesn’t appear that you are familiar with Gait or Rocky Mountain horses. That is ok, although you comment is a bit out of place, READ BELOW. HOT ROCKIES, :shrug: Maybe Hot looking!!!!

The movement of the "indian shuffle" is lateral not diagonal like the trot but it's a four beat gait so it's not really a pace. When the Spanish came to American they brought the horse flesh including the gaited precursors to the Paso Fino, Peruvian Paso, Mangalarga Marchador and other *spanish* gaited breeds. So, the gait was bred into the Appaloosa breed. Just like crossing any breed with a gaited breed you're likely to get a bastardized version of the gait with a possibility of getting a good gait.
(Not arguing with anyone. Just giving some more information. My first horse was an Appaloosa. And, in case it's not obvious yet I research everything.)

Gaited Appaloosa
THE APPALOOSA SHUFFLE - (Also known as the INDIAN SHUFFLE)
For those of you who have never come across the term 'Indian shuffle' before, here is the explanation.....read on
as published by Appaloosa News, June 1978 Issue

Gaited Appaloosa
http://www.leopardappaloosa.com/Documents/Gaitedness-in-Appaloosa.pdf

DATA POINTS:
Many people associate the Appaloosa with the old west and certain Indian tribes, but their relationship with man dates back to a much earlier time. Spotted horses roamed the earth since before prehistoric times, when man lived in caves during the ice age.
In ancient Persia, Appaloosas were worshipped as the sacred horses of Nisca, the great hero of Persian literature.
Spotted horses also could be found in China as early as 206 B.C. and before.
The Spanish explorers introduced the spotted horse to North America.
History of the Appaloosa

Appaloosas have been around much longer than any breed registries. Although their true history may not have been written down, much of it existed in ancient art. I think it is a judgment call on whether the Gait was bred out of or into the Appaloosa breed.

But my 5 year old gelding shuffles with ease, and some time prefers that over a trot or lope. It is definitely a MOVE OUT GAIT. Others on this forum have seen him in action, and I will tell you it is a wonderful ride.

 

[Cowgirl]

: <----Think he was bred for color?

 

[Chasey_Lane]

: <----Think he was bred for color?

I think he was bred for soup.

 

[CountryLady]

: <----Think he was bred for color?

YEAH, ..... BROWN

I just want to make a comment about the showing aspect. I don't raise or show horses, but I do raise (and used to show) sheep. Showing a breed of animal tends to exploit the breed and you can end up with the "same" breed of animal that has totally different characteristics than what you started out with. Take sheep for example. Many market breeds of sheep have been totally changed for the worse in order to win in the show ring. If you take a ribbon-winning Suffolk and try to put it out on pasture it would waste away to nothing. They've been bred to look tubey (long and lean) so their bodies cannot even handle living on forage like sheep are meant to do. No commercial sheep producer (or even someone wanting to raise sheep for their own use) would want sheep like that.

Some other breeds have been cross bred so much because judges starting placing taller animals. Some champion show breeds (like Romneys) are so totally crossbred it's not even funny.

Judges rule the breeding/showing world, and that's pathetic to me. Look at quarter horses. Some of the champion halter winners look ridiculous!

I don't give a darn if someone wins in the show ring. The proof is in the pudding. If you raise an animal that performs well for what you want, that's all that matters. Of course, conformation is very important still.

Also, your comments in refrence to showing were very good points. I am not sure why people that show, privledge them selves over people that don't ("greater than thou"). I cannot believe that people are so shallow as to believe that horses are not useful unless they show. I don't know many real working cow ponies or ranch horses that show.

Showing is not for everyone or every horse. I know a lot of people that most of there riding life was in the ring, how boring is that. I am not saying showing is wrong. It has its good points. BUT IT IS NOT THE END ALL, BE ALL OF EVERYTHING. But lets face it, it also has its very bad points.

 

[CountryLady]

I think he was bred for soup.

 

[highnote]

I'm not in the least impressed by the certification that you stand so stalwartly behind. Many breeds have inspections. Kuerings are done as weanlings and then they can go for ster ratings as three year olds or older. Frieisans are much more select in their breeding programs and most other breeds. Then, for stallions there is a much more stringent process. There are only about 100 approved stallions worldwide. (FPS)

Then, most warmblood registries require a horse to actually prove themselves either in competition or through the 100 day stallion test. Here's a terrific article that you can read: 100 Day Test for Sport Horse Stallion Approval

Then, some of the registries only offer temporary breeding licenses and then the stallions have to be inspected again. So, hop off of the high horse and educate yourself a bit more before you start throwing around "only".

Exactly what I was thinking. That "certification" to breed for rockies does not require a live inspection. I believe most can be done from a videotape/photos. If one of the requirements for certification is temperament (as stated previously on this thread) how in the world can you accurately tell a horses temperament by a photo or video? Thats like me deciding to buy a horse JUST from their online ad- no way! Nothing replaces an in-person visit (or live inspection, in this case).

Horse bites the handler, kicks, bolts, bucks, or rears up while you are taking the video? No problem, just scrap that video and shoot another one. Can't do that in a live inspection! You can hide SO MUCH in photos or a short video clip.

I can't believe that any registry would grant any sort of "certification" without a live inspection. Photos & video can never provide enough information to provide a true/complete certification for breeding.

And in comparison to breeds that don't have or require ANY certification to breed...I think the rockies' breeding certification probably does more harm than good, because it gives the buyer/client a false impression that the horse has actually gone through a rigid inspection process. Sending a video and having the horse declared "certified" from that is a joke.

The video has to be 6 minutes long (2 minutes haltered, 2 minutes left circle, 2 minutes right circle). How the heck can you "certify" or "approve" a horse from a 6 minute video? I guess it all depends on the standard for certification... lower standards equal a weak certification. I know most high end breeds (Friesians, Oldenburgs, Trakehners, Rheinlander, etc) require a live inspection, as Phyxius said, where you know they have actually had to go through a long rigorous testing process before they are given any sort of certification.

But for rockies, send your $, a short video (6 minutes), some photos, and a vet certificate and BAM- your horse is CERTIFIED! Heck I could be an inspection judge too, I could do that in my PJ's in front of the TV.

I'd be interested to find out the statistics for the # of applications for certification that are actually rejected in a given year (ex. 99% accepted and 1% denied).

 

[fredsaid2]

Yeah!

I think you mean peanut roller! ... I am assuming by you comment, you were a bit confused as to the definition of “Peanut roller”.

Again it doesn’t appear that you are familiar with Gait or Rocky Mountain horses. That is ok, although you comment is a bit out of place, READ BELOW. HOT ROCKIES, :shrug: Maybe Hot looking!!!!

Not confused, 'peanut pusher', 'peanut roller' - slightly different term, same concept. You pick which one suits you best. I don't care.

As for Rocky's, no not terribly familiar. What I've seen locally does not impress me. On that alone I would likely not pursue them. Besides there's just something about adults riding ponies...ehh. And before you throw out the certifications, pics that have been posted show adults mounted on Rockys that appear to be pony sized.

 

[appendixqh]

Yes, but happyappy isn't the only one that seems to think they are a color first breed. They consider that themselves, hence the reason the color is part of the breed name, as she and the web links I posted pointed out.:

I am beginning to think that Happy just takes opposing position to argue and attack, as she is argumentative even with me when I have not attacked her. Not impressed as I think forums are a great place for discussion, not defensive or attacking conversation.

[/QUOTE]
Haflinger is not a color, is it? Not the same thing we are talking about. While the Haflinger and Norwegian Fjords have a preferred color, and the color window is limited, they are a true “breed” that happen to be known for a desire specific color. :[/QUOTE] Exactly, that is my point. Even though a color is stated in a breed name, like Phyx said, it comes down to the breed that just happens to be of a certain color.
[/QUOTE]
TRUE BREEDS THAT ALSO HAVE COLOR- these breeds typically pass on their color to their offspring, otherwise known as true breeds that are said to have “color preference.” THEY ARE NOT COLOR BREEDS.

Friesian Horse -(must be black for mainstream registration)
Appaloosa -(leopard or other small spotting patterns)
American Paint Horse

Other breeds that might be considered by some color breeds are technically pedigree-based breeds.

Norwegian Fjord Horses
Haflinger
:[/QUOTE] Exactly, I think we are on the same page and saying the same thing..
[/QUOTE]

Correct me if I am wrong, but COLOR BREEDS would fall under “type” rather than “breed.”
[/QUOTE]

Yes...finally we are getting back to the article...breeding for color. People breeding for a certain color ie Jockey club horses breeding for the creme gene. Or AQHA breeding for the creme gene (such as I do) . Again, my debate in all this was to point out that the article states it is ok to do so if quality is kept in mind and color is a bonus. As someone who breeds for color, oftentimes a stigma is associated with the practice, while really the breeding program should not be discounted because color is a desired trait. The whole program needs to be assesed.
[/QUOTE]
Cremello And Perlino (double dilutes) and champagne are not breeds but wonderful colors that are present in many breeds. Theses colors have existed for a long long time but only recently in the past decade, due to COLOR DNA testing were truly understood.

And as I have said, even the QH industry have what they deem “acceptable colors” (there is a color standard, they just have more than one) and for years excluded certain colors from their registries, even if they were offspring from two fully registered parents, due to lack of knowledge about color. Now that the COLOR DNA testing has started to become the norm for many breeds, those once excluded colors are now acceptable in the registry.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, you are correct...I am pretty up to date on the dilute debate within AQHA, I found it rather interesting. Here is a great article http://www.apha.com/breed/pdf/Perlino0201.pdf Hopefully, you can persuade Happy to be more discussion oriented. Phyx is also pretty knowlegable on draft breed history...I would have to disagree that the draft breeds such as her creme horse, fall into the scope of what this article is discussing.

 

[CountryLady]

Exactly, that is my point. Even though a color is stated in a breed name, like Phyx said, it comes down to the breed that just happens to be of a certain color.

I agree, but not because Phyx said it, but because simply defining what a “COLOR BREED” is vs. PEDIGREE-BASED BREED vs. FUNCTION-BASED BREED (i.e. such as a sport horse, appendix). There are a lot of misconceptions out there due to lack of knowledge. I believe, some of us have learned a bit more about the Rocky Mountain Horse Breed. There are a lot of misconceptions here on this forum with respect to that breed. I read a lot of childish comments degrading the breed, so silly. But considering the source(s) eh…. well. :shrug:
So have we ALL learned that the Rocky Mountain Breed is NOT a COLOR BREED but a PEDIGREE-BASED BREED that happens to come in so many different lovely colors?

Exactly, I think we are on the same page and saying the same thing..

Yes!

Yes...finally we are getting back to the article...breeding for color. People breeding for a certain color ie Jockey club horses breeding for the creme gene. Or AQHA breeding for the creme gene (such as I do) . Again, my debate in all this was to point out that the article states it is ok to do so if quality is kept in mind and color is a bonus. As someone who breeds for color, oftentimes a stigma is associated with the practice, while really the breeding program should not be discounted because color is a desired trait. The whole program needs to be assesed.

AMEN TO THAT! In fact as I have said before, if your breeding program includes color, that is a bonus.

Yes, you are correct...I am pretty up to date on the dilute debate within AQHA, I found it rather interesting. Here is a great article http://www.apha.com/breed/pdf/Perlino0201.pdf Hopefully, you can persuade Happy to be more discussion oriented. Phyx is also pretty knowlegable on draft breed history...I would have to disagree that the draft breeds such as her creme horse, fall into the scope of what this article is discussing.

It seems to be a very good article, although I haven’t read it in its entirety, I look forward to.

 

[partyhard]

• "I think you mean peanut roller! Has nothing to do with shuffling appaloosas. Has everything to do with how showing horses can really take a turn for the worse. Let’s torture our horse with running reins, draw reins and tie-downs and unnecessary crap. People try to make these peanut roller Quarter Horses with their heads dragging down on the ground instead of having their head alert and looking like they know what they're doing. No horse can travel with his head down between his legs. THIS IS ONE OF THE NEGATIVE INFLUENCES OF SHOWING!!!!!!!!!! Not to mention if you have ever been to a Susan Harris or Peggy Brown clinic they would tell you that you are tearing the horse up if you practice this forced technique. I am assuming by you comment, you were a bit confused as to the definition of “Peanut roller”."

Are you suggesting that showing equals a horse having his head down? The shows expect and want the horse using their bodies correctly (pushing off his back end, using his core, etc.). This is done through ring work such as dressage...NOT tie downs, draw reins, etc. Shows do not want horses on the forehand, so show horses actually end up learning to use their bodies CORRECTLY. How is this bad?

• "I am not sure why people that show, privledge them selves over people that don't ("greater than thou"). I cannot believe that people are so shallow as to believe that horses are not useful unless they show. I don't know many real working cow ponies or ranch horses that show. Showing is not for everyone or every horse. I know a lot of people that most of there riding life was in the ring, how boring is that. I am not saying showing is wrong. It has its good points. BUT IT IS NOT THE END ALL, BE ALL OF EVERYTHING. But lets face it, it also has its very bad points."

Everyone's definition of boring is different. If you are really doing true ring work it's not boring. If a horse rounds up under you and really powers from behind I can't understand how that could be boring. Or perhaps the feeling of being completely in sync with a horse is lost on some???
Regardless, even if you choose trail riding as your ideal riding situation I'd imagine that you'd want your horse balanced and using its body correctly. I most certainly would not want to be on a trail ride with a horse that "has his head up and is alert" IF that horse has its head up because it’s inverted. Tripping is not fun, and the more correctly a horse uses their body the more safe a trail ride will be. Again, this comes form RING work.
Of course showing isn't for everyone and of course it's not the end all be all. BUT, to get back to the POINT of this post...whether you're breeding for showing or trail riding, quality of horse is important. Breeding just to breed, certified or not, color or whatever else, will not produce a horse that will be suitable for either. It's rare to find a person who wants to show a horse as Devine described with such serious conformation problems, and I can't believe someone would want to trail ride a horse like that either. Regardless of temperament, a horse needs to 1) have a body that allows them to use it correctly and 2) know how to use it correctly. Individuals who choose to breed below this quality, for whatever reason, are only creating a dangerous and unfair situation for the horse and the unfortunate soul who is uneducated enough to buy it.

 

[CountryLady]

THE PURPOSE OF THE ARTICLE was to show that while sticking to breed standards, you can add a little color to your breeding program, and increase that value of your animals. I believe that in today’s economy it is a smart thing to consider when breeding your animals.

I am beginning to think that Happy just takes opposing position to argue and attack, as she is argumentative even with me when I have not attacked her. Not impressed as I think forums are a great place for discussion, not defensive or attacking conversation.

I disagree, what I see is that HappyAppy defends what she knows to be true and advocates and tries to teach people that really don’t what the knowledge. That is unfortunate. She spent a lot of time on this thread trying to educate about her breed while many folks said stuff left and right with the purpose to degrade.


As I read the post here and many other threads in the past, there seem to be present in conversation, this cliquish mentality, that tend to like too,……. to “attack” ( by making degrading, slighting type comments) towards some selects folks. Although you didn’t directly comment this way toward her, you kinda got drug into (the heat of) it, I guess. I think there was a point to her comments and it wasn’t to attack (at least not as I saw it). I saw it as showing the others on this forum how ridiculous it was to degrade her breeding program while condoning/accepting yours. WHY, because they have firsthand knowledge of yours, but not of hers, yet somehow in their minds that justifies their comments.

AS FAR AS THE ATTACKING GOES, it is comments like these that are what started the animosity.

Its a breeding and gene issue
the bump if you read it was taken over by a color breeder

I fully believe that you are a color *first* breeder.

I've met AppendixQH's stallion, some of her mares, and I've ridden one of her babies. They are VERY nice horses. She didn't buy the stallion as a weanling because of his color and start breeding him as soon as he was physically able. She bought a well experienced, proven stallion and has bred him to her lovely mares.

PHYX has Blessed your breeding program.

i'd have to agree with phyx when the first thing you say about your stallion is that there is no silver dapple genehttp://www.briesrottweilers.com/horses/hondo.pdf

COLOR BREEDER Mentality

On the contrary, not pinging on breeders of any type color based or pedigree based or function based. It seems as though others here do that. I think that there are a lot of misconceptions out there with regard to breeds that also have color. As I said as soon as you mention color,....people flip. My purpose is to educate, and show that there is nothing wrong with haveing conformation and color. But some of the folks on here all ready know it all. Hard to educate closed minded folks.

blah blah blah = its about color and the fact he has balls.......

just letting you know what it looks like from an outsider checking you out..........

Same goes with perceptions of American Creme Draft and Cleveland Bay

so the purpose of breeding a rockie to an appaloosa is??......are your rockies trail quality or show quality?.......isn't going to competitions with your horses a way to compare quality within the breed?.......how have your horses done in competition?

Kinda lends to the thinking if they haven't done competition/shows they are not useful or worthy of breeding

"foundation SHUFFLING pedigreed appaloosa " ???
I think the term is "peanut pusher".
Why would you want a horse who shuffles bred to a horse who has a 'move out' gait? Are you attempting to dampen down the hot-ness of the Rocky? Just wondering.

Sarcastic and simply silly comments comming from someone that is not knowledegable about the breed.

Yeah, 9.9 out of 10 people believe, correctly, that the shuffle is a fault. There are breed standards for a reason. Just like with the aqha halter horses. No 1100+ pd horse should wear 00 shoes but people are idiots.

The nine on this fourm? I have not come across any evidence about what you say to be true. Quite the contrary though, People tend to pay more money for foundation shuffling appaloosas. Hmmm. More valuable.

I always thought that horses that could not perform 100% in show or competition were deamed back yard family or trail horses.

Or are ruined to the point of companion horses???? AGAIN If you don't show you are (horse and rider) not worthy!

Gee I know some breeders like that....

I have and you were on the ground..... I have nothing against you or your breeding practices. But hearing through the grapevine..Your just a back yard type breeder....I have seen your horses out on public rides and if I were looking at the breed to buy. I would run. You do not present your horses in the manner you speak of them...jmo...

I'm interested in one of those shuffling horses, or maybe even one that can tap dance...now that would be entertaining (and worth reproducing even).

Robin, I am in defense mode because every single comment that has been fired at me is as though I do something horrible, or underhanded or somehow detrimental. It's just plain silly that pack mentality kicks in with you people. For what?? We are all adults who share a common interest...the pure enjoyment of horses.

I agree.

As for Rocky's, no not terribly familiar. What I've seen locally does not impress me. On that alone I would likely not pursue them. Besides there's just something about adults riding ponies...ehh. And before you throw out the certifications, pics that have been posted show adults mounted on Rockys that appear to be pony sized.

What about the paso fino breed? got any nice things to say about them?
JFYI, most of happy appys breeding stock are very nice sized horses. They are NOT TB size, but they are not TB's.

*********************************************************

All of these comments were made by people to degrade the person and or the breed(or breeding practices). I have seen no apologies. What I see is that is has become the norm for some folks on here to do that, and I dont understand the purpose. But everyone jumps on the band wagon. Sheesh! We are not in high school people, all though some of us are closer than others.

 

[CountryLady]

Are you suggesting that showing equals a horse having his head down? The shows expect and want the horse using their bodies correctly (pushing off his back end, using his core, etc.). This is done through ring work such as dressage...NOT tie downs, draw reins, etc. Shows do not want horses on the forehand, so show horses actually end up learning to use their bodies CORRECTLY. How is this bad?

I am not sure how old you are or when you started showing, but it doesn’t really matter.

A lot of younger folks have heard of the term but apparently don’t truly understand the definition/implications of it. Readers digest version: back in the day judges had such an influence in shows that they gave points to those who rode there horse with its head carried low because it gave the APEARANCE of a horse that was relaxed and a pleasure to ride. However as people learned this, they began to train their horses (sometimes artificially) to carry its head as low as possible.


"Headset" trends
The sport of western pleasure was criticized in the past on account of an extremely low head position many judges were favoring in the stock horse breeds, known as the "peanut roller." In this head set, horses would carry their heads with the poll far below the level of their withers. This was a problem because it also forced the horse to travel at an extremely slow pace on the "forehand" (carrying too much weight on their front legs instead of rocking it correctly back onto their hind legs). Over long periods of time, moving in this highly artificial frame could cause soundness problems in some horses, and even a sound horse could not properly bring its hindquarters under its body when traveling forward.
This fad and its problems created a poor view of the discipline as a whole, especially by competitors in other equestrian sports.
The industry has since been praised on its actions to change the "peanut roller" fad. In the USEF, this constituted implementing specific rules, including a strict requirement that a horse must have its poll no lower than the height of its withers, or, in the case of the AQHA, a rule stating that the ideal gait shall be performed with a "level topline." Additional rules make an extreme headset impossible by asking exhibitors to extend their horse's jog during a class. In the case of the AQHA, which took particularly strong action to reverse the trend, videos were sent out to all licensed judges to demonstrate what was and was not correct, and the materials also made available to the general public.

Everyone's definition of boring is different. If you are really doing true ring work it's not boring. If a horse rounds up under you and really powers from behind I can't understand how that could be boring. Or perhaps the feeling of being completely in sync with a horse is lost on some???
Regardless, even if you choose trail riding as your ideal riding situation I'd imagine that you'd want your horse balanced and using its body correctly. I most certainly would not want to be on a trail ride with a horse that "has his head up and is alert" IF that horse has its head up because it’s inverted. Tripping is not fun, and the more correctly a horse uses their body the more safe a trail ride will be. Again, this comes form RING work.
Of course showing isn't for everyone and of course it's not the end all be all. BUT, to get back to the POINT of this post...whether you're breeding for showing or trail riding, quality of horse is important. Breeding just to breed, certified or not, color or whatever else, will not produce a horse that will be suitable for either. It's rare to find a person who wants to show a horse as Devine described with such serious conformation problems, and I can't believe someone would want to trail ride a horse like that either. Regardless of temperament, a horse needs to 1) have a body that allows them to use it correctly and 2) know how to use it correctly. Individuals who choose to breed below this quality, for whatever reason, are only creating a dangerous and unfair situation for the horse and the unfortunate soul who is uneducated enough to buy it.

Meaning ring only riding is boring. A lot of folks I know have never or are not comfortable riding out side of the arena /ring. What is the point of doing all that ring work if you don’t get out and use it?

Everyone wants to privilege their style of riding, their breed of horse, their select choice stallions, their breeding practices, etc…. It is kinda like the “my country” right or wrong mentality. It is a shallow and very narrow minded way of thinking with no room to learn new things. It stunts your growth as a human being, or in this case, a horseperson.

 

[Robin]

Or are ruined to the point of companion horses???? AGAIN If you don't show you are (horse and rider) not worthy!

where are you getting this from? Where did I say this?