Ah, Undesirable Studs..
   

       The Horse Forum > Horse Breeds, Breeding, and Genetics > Horse Breeding

Ah, Undesirable Studs..

This is a discussion on Ah, Undesirable Studs.. within the Horse Breeding forums, part of the Horse Breeds, Breeding, and Genetics category

     
    LinkBack Thread Tools
        05-13-2010, 10:32 AM
      #1
    Green Broke
    Exclamation Ah, Undesirable Studs..

    Yes, this was my reply in the BYB thread..

    " Originally Posted by Spyder
    Quote:
    A grade mare with good conformation I can live with but never ever should there be grade stallions.
    I have a question- and not that I don't disagree, I totally do! But I think we need to clear up WHY grade stallions are bad. My question- Why do we bash grade stallion 'more' than we get on grade mares?

    Is it because..?
    1. Stallions can produce more offspring than mares?
    2. Stallions can become dangerous and be a hazard to people who "don't know what their doing"?
    3. It is easier, and cheaper, to end a stallion's breeding carrier? (AKA gelding)
    4. People just stink stallions are more of a 'risk' than mares..(Goes with hazardous but..)
    5. It's simpler to bash a un-castrated male horse rather than an a female horse with working reproductive organs?
    6. Or all of the above."


    Read more: Backyard breeding... It bugs me.


    Just wanna see people's opinions and hopefully clear up some confusion (to other horse-owners). Please do not turn this into a bashing thread.. Although there may be a few fights.. As soon as one stirs up, I will have this thread closed. Thanks(: .
         
    Sponsored Links
    Advertisement
     
        05-13-2010, 10:40 AM
      #2
    Yearling
    Why is it assumed that just because someone doesn't agree with something, they are bashing it? I am against breeding grade stallions (and mares) but I don't think I've ever bashed them.

    I just do not see the point in breeding something that may or may not produce a desirable (profitable, well conformed, etc) offspring. Save up your money and purchase or breed to something with papers so that you can know the history 100%. The risk of things like HYPP are enough for me not to take the chance. Horses are expensive, and "oopses" are horrendous.
         
        05-13-2010, 10:52 AM
      #3
    Green Broke
    Don't you know, Goldi, disagreeing is bashing and attacking (well, more specifically it is to about 90% of the www-population)
         
        05-13-2010, 10:54 AM
      #4
    Yearling
    Ok... this is how I feel on the subject:
    First I want to start off by saying... Papers don't make a horse. But:

    If I have a registered mare (which I do), and I am goin to breed her... (which I am when she is old enough), I will not breed her to an unregistered stud. I don't know his bloodlines, how he has been shown, how he has placed, how he performs, if he has any babies on the ground... so on and so forth. I can go by what the owner states. But lets face it... not every horse owner is honest.

    Now... on the other hand... I have an unregistered mare (which I don't). And if I liked her well enough to get a baby from her I would know where she's been, how she performs, what her flaws are physically and mentally (for exampe if she's a hot head and I want a calm baby, Im not going to breed her to a hot stud), what problems she needs corrected. And so I can go on and look for a stud that can hopefully "fix" these problems on the foal. I can call up the the registry and track down his current foals and see how they are doing, what they look like, their dispostion.

    That's my opinion on the subject.
         
        05-13-2010, 10:56 AM
      #5
    Green Broke
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by goldilockz    
    Why is it assumed that just because someone doesn't agree with something, they are bashing it? I am against breeding grade stallions (and mares) but I don't think I've ever bashed them.
    I just want this to be a friendly thread. I didn't mean to impose that everyone is nasty on the subject, just the outcome may come off as either rude, or hostile. Sorry for the confusion, and the wrongful accusations, if my post was interpreted that way :).
         
        05-13-2010, 10:58 AM
      #6
    Green Broke
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by themacpack    
    Don't you know, Goldi, disagreeing is bashing and attacking (well, more specifically it is to about 90% of the www-population)
    Not necessarily. It's how everything is comprehended as. Words on a screen may be different then how the poster is 'saying' them. You cannot 100% detect the tone in text.
         
        05-13-2010, 11:01 AM
      #7
    Green Broke
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Cowgirl140ty    
    Ok... this is how I feel on the subject:
    First I want to start off by saying... Papers don't make a horse. But:

    If I have a registered mare (which I do), and I am goin to breed her... (which I am when she is old enough), I will not breed her to an unregistered stud. I don't know his bloodlines, how he has been shown, how he has placed, how he performs, if he has any babies on the ground... so on and so forth. I can go by what the owner states. But lets face it... not every horse owner is honest.

    Now... on the other hand... I have an unregistered mare (which I don't). And if I liked her well enough to get a baby from her I would know where she's been, how she performs, what her flaws are physically and mentally (for exampe if she's a hot head and I want a calm baby, Im not going to breed her to a hot stud), what problems she needs corrected. And so I can go on and look for a stud that can hopefully "fix" these problems on the foal. I can call up the the registry and track down his current foals and see how they are doing, what they look like, their dispostion.

    That's my opinion on the subject.
    I actually almost 100% agree with this post..
         
        05-13-2010, 11:27 AM
      #8
    Banned
    It's about 60 - 75% 1.) and 25 - 40% 2.)

    Quote:
    Stallions can produce more offspring than mares?
    Stallions can become dangerous and be a hazard to people who "don't know what their doing"?
    Consider the math - a stallion can cover 30 - 50 mares per year for 15 years or more. The very best producing broodmares produce 15 - 18 foals in their entire lifetime.

    Also consider the mechanics - you get to see at least on foal on the ground before rebreeding the mare. If the foal is horrendous, or has a defect inherited from the dam, you can make the choice not to rebreed.

    While responsible breeders test breed new stallions to a few of their own mares and evaluate the offspring before standing him at stud; theoretically, a stallion can get a *lot* of mares in foal before you have a chance to evaluate one.

    If you wanted to maintain a breed's quality and standards, you should only breed the top 10% of the colts and the top 50% of the mares. If you actually want to *improve* the quality of the breed, it's more like the top 3% of the colts and 20% of the mares. Some folks will quibble about the exact percentages, but the underlying principle is sound.

    A poor quality stallion does a lot more damage to the gene pool than a poor quality mare.
         
        05-13-2010, 11:38 AM
      #9
    Green Broke
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by maura    
    It's about 60 - 75% 1.) and 25 - 40% 2.)



    Consider the math - a stallion can cover 30 - 50 mares per year for 15 years or more. The very best producing broodmares produce 15 - 18 foals in their entire lifetime.

    Also consider the mechanics - you get to see at least on foal on the ground before rebreeding the mare. If the foal is horrendous, or has a defect inherited from the dam, you can make the choice not to rebreed.

    While responsible breeders test breed new stallions to a few of their own mares and evaluate the offspring before standing him at stud; theoretically, a stallion can get a *lot* of mares in foal before you have a chance to evaluate one.

    If you wanted to maintain a breed's quality and standards, you should only breed the top 10% of the colts and the top 50% of the mares. If you actually want to *improve* the quality of the breed, it's more like the top 3% of the colts and 20% of the mares. Some folks will quibble about the exact percentages, but the underlying principle is sound.

    A poor quality stallion does a lot more damage to the gene pool than a poor quality mare.
    Excellent, excellent post - as always, Maura!
         
        05-13-2010, 04:14 PM
      #10
    Trained
    I'm mostly of the opinion that anything grade shouldn't be bred. There's already hundreds of them out there that have no one to love them, so why produce more?

    Especially stallions. I tell you, I've seen some god-awful looking studs that I wouldn't breed too if he were the last stallion on Earth. Registered and unregistered. Why do these stallions get to keep their nuts? Unfortantely I think they sometimes end up as "ego" animals and they get to stay intact because it's cool for someone to say "I own a stallion" when really, they hardly know the a$$ end of a horse from the front and probably shouldn't own a donkey.

    And, of course, these fugly stallions get the low price of $200 breeding fee special!! And no, it's not because he's special. It's because that's the MARKET they are targeting (ie/ the meat market) because no one in their right mind is going to pay $1000 for a fugly foal.
    And then, of course, this mare owner gets a colt and it doesn't matter if it's legs are more crooked then a politician or it's back is six inches too long, because he's got NUTS, therefore he's a stallion prospect. And it goes on. And on.

    And you can't even blame the poor horses, the but selfish, uneducated people that continue to breed these grade/poor quality stallions for grade/poor quality foals. Unfortnately, I think most of these people do it for the money (no buyers for your $200 foal? That's alright, send it to auction. Should get at least $75 for meat) and don't have a care/idea about what they are actually doing to the horses.
         

    Thread Tools

    Similar Threads
    Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
    Which Studs is better? Kentucky Horse Breeding 5 01-26-2010 02:43 PM
    Studs for 2010 Crimsonhorse01 Horse Breeding 13 01-06-2010 03:35 PM
    Studs for moo :) moomoo Horse Breeding 1 04-09-2008 07:08 PM
    Studs? ox-tuff_rider-xo Horse Breeding 16 01-29-2008 06:55 PM



    All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:44 AM.


    Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
    Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
    Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0