Appaloosa Horses: Breed standards gone too far? - Page 13
 
 

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

Appaloosa Horses: Breed standards gone too far?

This is a discussion on Appaloosa Horses: Breed standards gone too far? within the Horse Breeds forums, part of the Horse Breeds, Breeding, and Genetics category
  • Sheldak horse
  • Appaloosa horse standards

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
    06-08-2011, 04:34 PM
  #121
Trained
MM - Some of the Sheldak horses are Impressive bred, but they are all HYPP N/N.

Anndankev - look around the site instead of jumping to conclusions and you would have seen the above for yourself. The Sheldak Ranch produces horses that are highly sought after around the world and produce many, many winners, not just in halter classes but in performance classes as well.
     
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
    06-10-2011, 01:06 PM
  #122
Banned
I'm all for improving a breed, but not turning an Appy into a QH with appy spots. I prefer the old type QHs, the bulldog built ones like King. I think everybody has their own preferences when it comes to what they like but those people who don't like the looks shouldn't try to change it to suit them. I hate Saddlebreds, I think they just look awkward and have psychotic personalities, but that is my opinion. I would never try to add a QH bloodline to mellow the personality or make it look less like a giraffe, I'd just not own one.
Chanti is a Pintaloosa. Her sire is a black registered Appaloosa with a gorgeous blanket. He does have some QHs in his pedigree and he was built like a modern Appy, from what I remember of him. I only saw him once. She has a few great horses, World Champion Halter horses and such in her bloodline. Her dam is a chestnut sabino Paint and I know nothing of her bloodlines.
Chanti seems to have gotten the Paint tail, high leg white and a few other characteristics of Paints but her personality has been more like an Appy. She has been a one person type horse ever since I got her. She isn't mean, unpredictable, or ornery. She's smart, willing, awesome with small kids and inherited her daddy's blanket lol.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 100_0074.jpg (61.2 KB, 203 views)
     
    06-10-2011, 01:49 PM
  #123
Foal
Is there anyone here who can intelligently discuss breed type, its history and bloodlines, breed standards and ideals, etc., instead of just what you (collective you) personally like or dislike? There aren't even any reasons given - just that you don't like a particular type of horse. Sure, everyone has their likes and dislikes. Aside from that, in order for your opinions about breed standards and ideals to be credible, they should be presented with logical, rational theories, along with ideas of how breeding for the integrity of a breed can be achieved. I haven't seen any of that so far. Maybe no one really cares enough, or doesn't know enough about the subject to discuss it at a higher level. Is there anyone here that is a knowledgeable breeder with decades of educated experience and knowledge? Where is the presentation beyond "I don't like that kind of horse and look at my pretty horsey I used to own"?

The original question was, "Appaloosa Horses: Breed standards gone too far?"

Is there (or was there) ever a breed standard? If so, what was it? Was that horse superior to what we have today, and if so, how? What was the original Appaloosa bred for that is different that what other stock horse breeds are bred for? I think many of these breeds (QHs, Paints, Appaloosas) reached their highest level of versatility and excellent type before specialization took hold (late 70s).
     
    06-10-2011, 06:29 PM
  #124
Foal
I personally like Foundation Appaloosas that are NOT QH/TB with spots. I'm glad they still allow Arabian blood.

I consider ApHC a studbook, not a pure breed. I consider AQHA, APHA and all European Warmblood STUDBOOKS, too (and not breeds)

They have an open book , even though it's limited....it still is open. For ApHC, that means you can have a spotted (or non spotted for that matter) QH, TB, or Arabian.

I just like the type and hardiness and build of the old-school Appies that don't look like a modern stock horse (aka - QH/PAINT/TB)

It's more and more rare to use the Arab blood that is still allowed in the registry, too. The ApHC circuit is basically AQHA/APHA with spots (or as mentioned...without :)
     
    06-10-2011, 07:08 PM
  #125
Foal
FTFOTB's responses below in bold:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fancy That    
I personally like Foundation Appaloosas that are NOT QH/TB with spots. I'm glad they still allow Arabian blood.

I don't understand this part ^. You don't want to turn Appaloosas into QHs and TBs w/spots, but it's okay to turn them into Arabians w/spots? Arabians and Appaloosas couldn't be further apart in type.

I consider ApHC a studbook, not a pure breed. I consider AQHA, APHA and all European Warmblood STUDBOOKS, too (and not breeds)

I agree with this ^. Types aren't necessarily a breed.

They have an open book , even though it's limited....it still is open. For ApHC, that means you can have a spotted (or non spotted for that matter) QH, TB, or Arabian.

I just like the type and hardiness and build of the old-school Appies that don't look like a modern stock horse (aka - QH/PAINT/TB)

The 'old school' Appaloosas didn't look like Arabians, either. And none of the 'old school' Appaloosas would be competitive on the same level with the best of the stock horses today. They never were, either. I asked what their specialty was that was different than what stock horses did, but no one has an answer.

When you cross Appaloosas with endurance Arabians, then you get Appaloosas that are excellent at endurance racing. Lots of people do just that.

When you cross Appaloosas with TBs and QHs, you have Appaloosas that are versatile performers; QHs and TBs are the ultimate in versatile performers.

When you cross Paints with TBs and QHs, you get Paints that are versatile performers.

It's more and more rare to use the Arab blood that is still allowed in the registry, too. The ApHC circuit is basically AQHA/APHA with spots (or as mentioned...without :)

So, you think the ApHC circuit should be Arabians with spots? I don't understand your point at all. Please explain.
     
    06-10-2011, 07:48 PM
  #126
Foal
I didn't mean that Appies should look like Arabians. I just feel like they have turned 100% into a stock horse breed (basically QH/TB)......I think Arabians have nice big round feet, good gone, short backs, high-set necks and some of the curvier more baroque type that you COULD see a trace of in the old Appies.

I think a drop of Arabian blood can provide some good qualities in the hoof, bone, leg, soundness department and also add a touch of compactness, curves and just a different "type" than a Pure QH/TB type.

I really just like the TYPE of the old Appies that almost look like chunky Morgans with jug heads and thick necks and smooth toplines, round butts, tons of bone and big feet. It's more of a nostalgic thing with me, that's all :)

I agree with you - there is no good argument about form/function and performance. A QH/TB type stock horse can excel in all kinds of disciplines just fine. To me, it's just a "type" thing, and I tend to like "old type" with more of a substantial, round, smooth-bodied, bigger boned, bigger hoofed type with curvy necks..... IN GENERAL :)

So really - I don't have a good arguement. Just stating my opinion

Quote:
Originally Posted by FTFOTB    
FTFOTB's responses below in bold:
     
    06-10-2011, 08:01 PM
  #127
Foal
Thanks, Fancy That. Well, I think it's probably okay for Appaloosas to resemble stock horses if they are used in stock horse events. The most logical place to look when breeding for a horse that is suited for that is to the QHs and TBs. :)
     
    06-10-2011, 08:12 PM
  #128
Foal
Fancy That said, "I just feel like they have turned 100% into a stock horse breed (basically QH/TB)"

I want to respond to this separately. Yes, they have turned into a stock horse breed. It was logical for that to happen since Appaloosa breeders wanted their horses to do cutting, reining, working cowhorse, halter, pleasure, racing, any and all of that. In order to improve the performance of their horses, it was logical to turn to the allowed outcross blood that allows for Appaloosa horses that could excel at those things. They wanted the quality as well as the spots. :)

As long as they still have the Appaloosa characteristics and pattern, they are still Appaloosas.

If you go backwards, eliminating all outcross blood, and try to create horses that you believe were the foundation, you are going to lose that versatility, conformation, and ability. The problem with doing that is, there was never a 'foundation' type to begin with. The only glimpse of a foundation Appaloosa has been what a few people have put forth, most of which is only theory, not based on historical fact. There is a lot of misinformation and 'embellishments' out there, based on the biased agendas of a few.


     
    06-10-2011, 08:23 PM
  #129
Foal
I hear you :) And it makes logical sense.

For me, I'm older, so I just have a nostalgic memory from childhood of Appaloosas with big crested necks, thick round huge barrels, big bone, big feet and the sparse mane and tail (and yes, not the prettiest heads)

Those types of Appies aren't "purpose-bred" for specific disciplines...they are more all arounders.

And yes, the TB and QH blood obviously did IMPROVE the breed in many ways, but also turned it into a 100% stock breed. I know - that's what they are used for (stock disciplines)



Quote:
Originally Posted by FTFOTB    
Fancy That said, "I just feel like they have turned 100% into a stock horse breed (basically QH/TB)"

I want to respond to this separately. Yes, they have turned into a stock horse breed. It was logical for that to happen since Appaloosa breeders wanted their horses to do cutting, reining, working cowhorse, halter, pleasure, racing, any and all of that. In order to improve the performance of their horses, it was logical to turn to the allowed outcross blood that allows for Appaloosa horses that could excel at those things. They wanted the quality as well as the spots. :)

As long as they still have the Appaloosa characteristics and pattern, they are still Appaloosas.

If you go backwards, eliminating all outcross blood, and try to create horses that you believe were the foundation, you are going to lose that versatility, conformation, and ability. The problem with doing that is, there was never a 'foundation' type to begin with. The only glimpse of a foundation Appaloosa has been what a few people have put forth, most of which is only theory, not based on historical fact. There is a lot of misinformation and 'embellishments' out there, based on the biased agendas of a few.


     
    06-10-2011, 08:42 PM
  #130
Foal
Ok, I think we're getting somewhere, now.

I have a question: If Appaloosas aren't supposed to be a stock horse breed, then what are they?

If you tell me 'all around horses', then I will just tell you that the QH blood improved upon that. The QH was the ultimate in versatility. Up to the late 1970s, that is.

I agree with many that these stock horse breeds have become much too specialized, but that's a subject for a thread of its own. Right now, we're talking about a breed standard, if there is one.
     

Quick Reply
Please help keep the Horse Forum enjoyable by reporting rude posts.
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the The Horse Forum forums, you must first register.

Already have a Horse Forum account?
Members are allowed only one account per person at the Horse Forum, so if you've made an account here in the past you'll need to continue using that account. Please do not create a new account or you may lose access to the Horse Forum. If you need help recovering your existing account, please Contact Us. We'll be glad to help!

New to the Horse Forum?
Please choose a username you will be satisfied with using for the duration of your membership at the Horse Forum. We do not change members' usernames upon request because that would make it difficult for everyone to keep track of who is who on the forum. For that reason, please do not incorporate your horse's name into your username so that you are not stuck with a username related to a horse you may no longer have some day, or use any other username you may no longer identify with or care for in the future.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Old Thread Warning
This thread is more than 90 days old. When a thread is this old, it is often better to start a new thread rather than post to it. However, If you feel you have something of value to add to this particular thread, you can do so by checking the box below before submitting your post.

Thread Tools



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:21 AM.


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