Picking a HUS AQHA stud to breed with an HYPP N/H mare - Page 12
   

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

Picking a HUS AQHA stud to breed with an HYPP N/H mare

This is a discussion on Picking a HUS AQHA stud to breed with an HYPP N/H mare within the Horse Breeding forums, part of the Horse Breeds, Breeding, and Genetics category
  • Aqha hypp
  • Hypp aqha for stud

Like Tree72Likes

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
    11-29-2011, 03:50 PM
  #111
Banned
I actually understood Po's questions. I did not get what Frank was trying to say until it was clarified.
     
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
    11-29-2011, 04:07 PM
  #112
Banned
Quote:
Originally Posted by franknbeans    
Not sure how to be more clear. As I said-use the energy to work for change and education. It would seem to me a more productive use than to continue to pick apart Farmpony.
It has already been mentioned that many of us have fought and are still fighting the battle against ApHC. How involved have you been in YOUR registry? I have been involved in ApHC's poor registration policies since the early 80's when they caved in to the money breeders and changed to permitting outcrossing with Arabs, Quarterhorses, and Thoroughbreds instead of closing the stud books as they should have.

Please be reminded that discussing these kinds of issues in a public forum such as this is in itself a form of education and information dissemination. In earlier posts, you have seen people say they were only vaguely aware of HYPP until joining and participating in this forum. Many young people are probably not aware of the struggles all the registries have gone through over the years, whether AQHA's HYPP, HERDA, and color policies, or APHA's struggle to transition from a color registry to a "breed" registry, or ApHC's destruction of the Appaloosa, or AHA's monumental decision on SCID. There were no forums - no internet for that matter - to get information when I was young...they are an excellent venue to learn and to keep up with issues, and participating in discussions and debates on them is certainly not a waste of energy. I have certainly found them excellent vehicles over the years to present my opinions and further my agenda, as have others. Remember that for every reader of a forum that posts, there are scores, if not hundreds, of people that read but don't post. I rarely debate on a forum to try and sway another poster to my side - that is a prime example of a waste of time - the real target (and beneficiary) of our opinions and the information we pass on is the much larger universe of people that are readers rather than posters...they are the ones that are in the process of forming their opinions and the more information they have, the more informed opinions they will have.

Whew, I am a long winded old codger. The bottom line is discussing an issue here is no less important than discussing it with registry directors, and is not a waste of energy. Besides - it is cold where NDAppy lives, and she needs some way to keep warm...
     
    11-29-2011, 04:29 PM
  #113
Trained
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faceman    
...I have been involved in ApHC's poor registration policies since the early 80's when they caved in to the money breeders and changed to permitting outcrossing with Arabs, Quarterhorses, and Thoroughbreds instead of closing the stud books as they should have...
OT, but...

I thought that prior to that time, the ApHC allowed outbreeding to MORE breeds:

"A significant crossbreeding influence used to revitalize the Appaloosa was the Arabian horse, as evidenced by early registration lists that show Arabian-Appaloosa crossbreeds as ten of the first fifteen horses registered with the ApHC. For example, one of Claude Thompson's major herd sires was Ferras, an Arabian stallion bred by W.K. Kellogg from horses imported from the Crabbet Arabian Stud of England. Ferras then sired Red Eagle, a prominent Appaloosa stallion, who was added to the Appaloosa Hall of Fame in 1988. Later, Thoroughbred and Quarter Horse lines were added, as well as crosses from other breeds, including Morgans and Standardbreds. In 1983 the ApHC reduced the number of allowable outcrosses to three main breeds: the Arabian horse, the American Quarter Horse and the Thoroughbred."

Appaloosa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How does reducing the number of outbreeds allowed constitute "changed to permitting outcrossing"?

If the guy credited with saving the Appy in the 1930s used a Crabbet Arabian stallion, then why is it wrong now?

BTW - I looked it up, and the horse mentioned in Wiki (Red Eagle, F209, born in 1946) has a great grandmother who was also in my purebred Arabian mare's lineage (Ferda). Not unexpected, really, since Mia comes from CMK lines.
     
    11-29-2011, 05:12 PM
  #114
Banned
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsms    
OT, but...

I thought that prior to that time, the ApHC allowed outbreeding to MORE breeds:
They were. The decision to be made at the time, dictated by the fact that there was then more than a sufficient population of Appys, was whether to close the registry to all outcrossing or to leave it open to some. The decision, which was bitterly fought, was to leave it open to Arabs, Quarterhorses, and Thoroughbreds.

There was no logical reason for that decision - as I said, there was a sufficient population that the registry could have been closed. The decision that was made was made to insure the maximum number of registrations, generating the maximum revenue. ApHC basically bailed out of the breed business to follow their agenda, which was to become a major registry. They have accomplished that, but sadly at the expense of the breed. Only the dedication of hardline Appy X Appy breeders is keeping the actual breed going - in spite of ApHC's policies. ApHC doesn't know what an Appy is - they can and do register horses with no more than minimal Appy blood as Appys.

The origin of the Appy as you describe it is not relevant. All breeds have origins. Do you think the AQHA should permit outcrossing with all the horses, like mustangs for example, that went into their creation just because they were part of their development? How about Thoroughbreds? Should the JC permit outcrossing with Arabs and/or Arab-like horses that they arose from? How about Morgans? Haffies? Why try to justify outcrossing with Appys and not other breeds? If it is suitable for one, it is suitable for all, and if it is not suitable for one it is not suitable for all.

Appys are a substantially older breed than Quarterhorses, and there is, and has been, a large breeding population - there was no reason in the early 80's, and there is no reason now,m to permit outcrossing.

Perhaps you don't understand the rammifications of outcrossing. By permitting unrestricrted outcrossing with certain breeds, you end up with almost no Appy blood at all...

Take an ApHC registered Appy/QH cross, and cross it with another Quarterhorse. The resulting foal is only 25% Appy, yet is registered by ApHC. Now take that foal and cross it with a Quarterhorse, and the resulting foal is only 12.5% Appy, yet is registered by ApHC. Then another generation - 6.25% Appy - registered as an Appy by ApHC. Then another generation - 3.125% Appy...then another - 1.56 % Appy.

Now, do you think a horse that is 1.5% Appy and 98.5% Quarterhorse is actually an Appy? You are a reasonable person, and I'm sure you don't. But ApHC does, and will register that horse as an Appy...
     
    11-29-2011, 05:42 PM
  #115
Yearling
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faceman    

Now, do you think a horse that is 1.5% Appy and 98.5% Quarterhorse is actually an Appy? You are a reasonable person, and I'm sure you don't. But ApHC does, and will register that horse as an Appy...

See...political bull$%^& doesn't just come from the "politicians".

Stuff like that makes no sense, *if* as you say, there was a sufficient population of individuals to maintain a viable genetic pool.

Unless there were other reasons for their decisions, which, sadly with most odd decisions tends to be money...whether directly, or through bowing to pressure with someone who has it, in order to get more of it.
     
    11-29-2011, 06:03 PM
  #116
Trained
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faceman    
...Now, do you think a horse that is 1.5% Appy and 98.5% Quarterhorse is actually an Appy? You are a reasonable person, and I'm sure you don't. But ApHC does, and will register that horse as an Appy...
As they would have done so in the 40s...with full approval of Claude Thompson.

But it is well off-topic, so we can save the discussion for a different thread. I do understand your argument, and also understand why there are other Appy registries.
     
    11-29-2011, 06:25 PM
  #117
Banned
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsms    
As they would have done so in the 40s...with full approval of Claude Thompson.

But it is well off-topic, so we can save the discussion for a different thread. I do understand your argument, and also understand why there are other Appy registries.
True...we, er I, am a bit off topic, but let me just say this in summary...the 40's is not the 80's, nor is it 2011. By your exact same logic, it would be OK for AQHA to permit outcrossing to mustangs because it was done when the breed was formed. However, in both cases what happened in the formation (or in the Appy's case reformation) of the breed is not relevant. Once a breeding population is established, there is no need for outcrossing. If every registry did as ApHC, there would be no Arabs, no Morgans, no Paints, no Friesians, no Tennessee Walkers. There would only be one breed to select from - Quartethorses. Thank goodness most registries are proud of their breed and seek to preserve them...
     
    11-29-2011, 07:03 PM
  #118
Super Moderator
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faceman    
True...we, er I, am a bit off topic, but let me just say this in summary...the 40's is not the 80's, nor is it 2011. By your exact same logic, it would be OK for AQHA to permit outcrossing to mustangs because it was done when the breed was formed. However, in both cases what happened in the formation (or in the Appy's case reformation) of the breed is not relevant. Once a breeding population is established, there is no need for outcrossing. If every registry did as ApHC, there would be no Arabs, no Morgans, no Paints, no Friesians, no Tennessee Walkers. There would only be one breed to select from - Quartethorses. Thank goodness most registries are proud of their breed and seek to preserve them...
I love the old QH style appies. I remember back in the 90's they were heavily breeding to the TBs to get taller lankier horses. I formed the opinion (based on the few appy's that I knew at the time) that they were crazy. The ones I knew were pretty to look at and really tall but they were flighty and high strung. Then I met an older Appy that was actually mixed with arab that was my absolute dream horse. I begged my parents to buy him but they were big meanie heads and said no. I don't like the new TB looking QH's and I don't like the TB looking appys. I like the old style and wow... did I fall off the page on topics here or what? Sorry....
     
    11-29-2011, 07:46 PM
  #119
Banned
Quote:
Originally Posted by farmpony84    
I love the old QH style appies. I remember back in the 90's they were heavily breeding to the TBs to get taller lankier horses. I formed the opinion (based on the few appy's that I knew at the time) that they were crazy. The ones I knew were pretty to look at and really tall but they were flighty and high strung. Then I met an older Appy that was actually mixed with arab that was my absolute dream horse. I begged my parents to buy him but they were big meanie heads and said no. I don't like the new TB looking QH's and I don't like the TB looking appys. I like the old style and wow... did I fall off the page on topics here or what? Sorry....
That's the thing...a lot of people like QH-styled Appys - one of the reasons ApHC has gone in the direction they have. But the reality is that the original Appys were not built like a Quarterhorse. They were light and rangey - designed for both endurance and performance, with an emphasis on endurance. Now when people began bringing horses west, a heavier conformation for work was also developed by introducing a draft influence, which you see in a lot of the thick necked, stocky foundation Appys. But in either case, the original Appy breed, at least here in North America, was distinctly NOT a stock horse type. They arose from Spanish stock, which accounted for their gaited shuffle, and their desert influence...by today's standards, they were most like an Arab/Appy cross, or Araloosa, which is what I raised for so many years. That is what the Appy breed is - or at least was. Why make it something it is not to be more popular? Would we want to make Haffies, for example, like Quarterhorses to make them more popular? Perhaps, but I prefer preserving breeds as they were originally intended. I like all the different breeds with their different abilities and different purposes, and would hate to see all horses the same...that would be like having only one kind of car or one breed of dog to choose from.

I'll stop now...I'm old, and you know how old people are - thread drift is the story of my life. Appys are close to my heart and it is hard not to get carried away. I raised them for 20 years, my father raised them, and his father before him - long before ApHC was ever thought of...
Ray MacDonald likes this.
     

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Which stud to breed my mare to? KateS Horse Breeding 33 12-10-2009 04:00 PM
At Stud: Res World Champion All-Around, AQHA/ABRA Dunskin suncolorsranch Tack and Equipment Classifieds 4 03-31-2009 04:14 PM
AQHA HUS Stud prospects Movin Artfully Horse Breeding 5 01-09-2009 05:34 PM
AQHA And Shetland pony stading at stud nybarrelracer Tack and Equipment Classifieds 0 06-10-2008 06:36 AM
Dillon, AQHA Stud colt. FGRanch Horse Pictures 8 03-12-2008 07:06 PM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:58 AM.


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