Appaloosa Horses: Breed standards gone too far? - Page 15
   

       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

     
    LinkBack Thread Tools
        06-13-2011, 01:35 PM
      #141
    Weanling
    I used it as an example. Pintaloosa is a commonly used term. If it bothers you that much, I think you'll need to grow a thicker skin.
    While I 100% agree that pintaloosas are not a breed, I don't think it matters that people what to tack that term onto their grade horses. It gives them an easier way to describe the cross.
    Posted via Mobile Device
         
    Sponsored Links
    Advertisement
     
        06-13-2011, 01:38 PM
      #142
    Banned
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by reiningfan    
    I used it as an example. Pintaloosa is a commonly used term. If it bothers you that much, I think you'll need to grow a thicker skin.
    While I 100% agree that pintaloosas are not a breed, I don't think it matters that people what to tack that term onto their grade horses. It gives them an easier way to describe the cross.
    Posted via Mobile Device
    Laugh!

    You are the one who got their panties bunched. I just commented. You got upset for me commenting.
    Maybe you should consider a thicker skin.

    Not sure why you have yourself all worked up about a comment I made to someone else.
         
        06-13-2011, 01:40 PM
      #143
    Banned
    *ducks head out from under table*

    I use the term Pintaloosa as a descriptor all the time. It's sort of an easy way to describe a cross and a color pattern. I think it may even be recognized in some registries, like miniatures. And how else would you describe GoldenHorse's Appy G the PITAloosa?
         
        06-13-2011, 01:41 PM
      #144
    Green Broke
    I don't object to the term "pintaloosa" being used as a description of coloring, since there isn't another singular term out there to describe a horse that has both paint/pinto and appaloosa markings. (Which, for the record, Chanti does not exhibit IMO - she has standard appaloosa markings. High socks and chrome etc are not LIMITED to the paint world.)

    I strongly object, however, to people using it as a breed term, as a phrase coined to delude themselves their horse is something other than what it is - a cross bred mutt. It's like the same kind of ignorance exhibited by those who think any draft cross horse is a "warmblood".

    I personally have a horse that could be technically classed as exhibiting "pintaloosa" markings. But he's a cross bred mutt, and I adore my crossbred mutt. I don't need made up names, or to pretend that "Pintaloosa" is suddenly a breed of his own, or that he is anything else other than exactly what he is.

    So although I don't object to the term pintaloosa per say, 90% of the time I object to how it's used. It ain't a breed and it never will be.
         
        06-13-2011, 01:42 PM
      #145
    Weanling
    I'm not worked up. I just thought you could have worded things differently. I could really care less what people want to call their horses. I just don't like to see people be rude because someone labels their horse in a way they don't agree with.

    Back to the originally scheduled programming...
    Posted via Mobile Device
         
        06-13-2011, 01:47 PM
      #146
    Weanling
    AppyG a has been a PITAloosa for so long that it has definitely stuck.
    Posted via Mobile Device
         
        06-13-2011, 01:59 PM
      #147
    Green Broke
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by reiningfan    
    I'm not worked up. I just thought you could have worded things differently. I could really care less what people want to call their horses. I just don't like to see people be rude because someone labels their horse in a way they don't agree with.
    I do. I care very much, and this is a very big pet peeve of mine as well. I think it's incredibly rude and presumptuous of people to call their crossbred whatever by some made up name. It is both offensive and extremely self indulgent to place yourself on the same level as people who invested serious time, effort, money, and research into carefully creating horses bred with a specific style, type, and job or discipline in mind. Horses that live up to an expected breed standard set by many people over many decades, horses that breed true to type and are therefore a positive reflection of their breeder's judgement and choices. If you did not breed this way, frankly you don't have the right to pretend your horse is anything other than a "mutt", or a crossbreed or a grade, if you object to the term mutt. Throwing two random whatevers together in the pasture, breeding your grade QH to the Amish guy's Belgian stallion up the road, is not making a new breed. Making up new breed names, with no breed standard, governing body, or outside inspections and inputs, does not give your horse any higher purpose or class. Stop trying to fudge it with fake names.
         
        06-13-2011, 03:10 PM
      #148
    Green Broke
    I have never in my life heard of someone using the term Pintaloosa to describe a breed. For one thing, a pinto is not a breed, it never has been a breed, it's nothing but color so right off the bat the term basically refers only to color. If you call it a Paintaloosa, you may be able to use it as a fudged up breed name. Pintaloosa has always been used to describe color. For example, saying "I own a 4 year old pintaloosa Miniature stallion."

    I agree with IndyHorse wholeheartedly. It's just a pet peeve but it drives me nuts how people slap a silly name on a crossbreed and automatically think it's somehow a purebred or worth more money. My biggest pet peeve right now is the use of the terms "sporthorse" and/or "warmblood" to describe ANY idiotic mix of Draft blood. A Draft X Miniature is not a friggin sporthorse people!
         
        06-13-2011, 03:18 PM
      #149
    Green Broke
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GhostwindAppaloosa    
    She is ribby because at the same time she foundered on grass in the pasture and when she came bakc to me was extremely lame from the founder.
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GhostwindAppaloosa    
    SHe did not founder on grass she foundered on a dumb barn owner feeding an 800-900 lb horse a giant coffee can of grain 2x a day.
    Is it THAT difficult to keep your story straight as to why your horses are thin and unkempt looking? :roll:

    And FYI, it doesn't matter if she foundered on grass or grain, both are a reaction to the sugar which means BOTH are most likely to cause a reaction regardless of weight since according to you she WASN'T overweight when the grain feeding began.
         
        06-17-2011, 01:27 AM
      #150
    Jax
    Foal
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by farmpony84    
    several years ago TB's were heavily introduced into the apps to give them more height, I remember when that was happening the "new" apps were really starting to get hot headed in nature and that's not what that breed is supposed to be, so then I think they started adding the QH's into the bloodline to bring them back to their original demeanors and body types... is that true?
    Those could be potential reasons, but from my understanding TB's were added for appaloosa racing primarily. The QH has been added in many show arenas for the show quality of a QH and the color of appaloosas. I'm sure many had there own reasons for mixing those breeds, but Im not so sure it all turned out well. Anyways, don't forget that the breed almost went extinct and for a while mixing was a way to keep the breed alive.
         

    Thread Tools



    All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:51 AM.


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