Conference noted::equitation

    I myself, would love to see something like this happen in the
    quarterhorse world.  I'm tired of seeing people trying to breed
    a horse just for a halter trademark.  In the quarterhorse industry,
    so many of the halter horses come out with leg and hoof ailments,
    most of them can't perform past the age of 5.  Maybe if they have
    the requirement to win in performance also, they'll go back to breeding
    for long term soundness!  I would also like to see Stallion
    requirements, before they can be used for Stud purposes.
    

    As someone who used to show Appaloosa halter and performance horses,
    I think that it would be great if a breed organization required
    halter horses to prove they can do more than stand there and look
    pretty.  In the Appaloosa shows (Anne, please let me know if you
    agree or not), there are many instances of horses taking halter
    championships who couldn't move out of there own way if they tried.
    There will be stallions who have great bodies and short, straight
    pasterns, teeny little brittle feet and are straight shoulders.
    Many of these horses are also unfit and some even just plain fat.
    I have even seen horses which are lame and yet still pin (and sometimes
    even win!) in halter classes.  I have also found it to be very rare
    that an Appaloosa which does well at halter will also do well in
    performance (and vice versa).  Of course, there are exceptions but
    not many!  There do seem to be a fair amount of horses which race
    as youngsters and do well and then go on to be good halter horses.
    
    Well, that's my 2 cents.  I hope I have given you something a little
    useful!
    
    How much would the IAHA determine a horse's performance ability
    as youngsters?  Would that change also?
    

    	I used to enjoy going to horse shows to "see the pretty horses".
     	As I grew however, I got to know some large breeders/farms and
    	started following horses' show careers...  I noticed that many
    	of the halter horses couldn't do much of anything else.  So,
    	when the interest in that horse wasn't as keen.... the horse
    	was sold - onward the next batch.
    
    	You very rarely see a distance horse that would do well in a
    	halter class because they aren't "walking tubs" or they don't
    	fit the current rage - (bulging eyes, little feet etc..)
    
    	PERFORMANCE IS THE PROOF OF THE PUDDING!  In the long run -
    	that baby that someone rushed to build those muscles breaks
    	down at a young age, or the horse is just too heavy and blockey
    	later and is not a "good all 'round" horse.  
    
    	I think, alot of the time some folks forget that the horse is
    	an athlete and we should remember that....  and not get hung
    	up in STYLE.  How will this effect the breed in the LONG run?
    
    	The problems that we now have in horses and dogs are mostly
    	BREEDER brought about for STYLE.  So many things can be traced
    	back to a line that was used too much.
    
    	I really think that there should be some guidelines/test that
    	a breeding stallion would have to pass to be certified.  Time
    	has proven that a breeder will beed what they really shouldn't 
    	and this should go for mares too.
    
    	I know that we will still get faults.... but maybe not "unsound"
    	ones.
    
    	Not all folks will agree...  I know!  But this is JUST my 2
   	cents worth.  When I buy a horse, I want that nag to be mine
    	for a long, healthy life.  So far, I have been lucky.  I have
    	run-of-the-mill old type morgan (30yrs) and I have a SUPERIOR
    	bred Appy and I see things in the Appy that shouldn't be but
    	are due to breeding horses that shouldn't of been.  Anything
    	in the Morgan that is a fault - is just that - but not an 
    	unsoundness or start of one.
    
    	I have never owned a mare and I had my stallion cut.  He has
    	sired three foals that have a close resemblance to him and have
    	carried what I think is a bad fault, little feet.  So maybe I 
    	am out of line but someone has to stop a fault somewhere ignoring
    	it won't make it go away.
    
    	Susan
    
    	

    Bob, Did anything come out off that meeting that you attended
    recently?  As I told you before, all the warmblod breeds that
    I know of have strict requirements about a stallion establishing
    a good performance background before being considered for stud.
    Most of those horses are dressage, eventing or jumping champions
    before they are approved.  I think it's a good rule for all breeds
    to follow, because sometimes what looks good on paper, doesn't
    always perform well.  Do you think that the increase in Arabian
    racing will have any effect on this new ruling?

    Regarding .2
    
    You beat me to the keyboard!!!!!!!!!
    
    I'd LOVE to see a ruling such as has been proposed, further I'd
    love to see it instated for EVERY breed!  I agree with the majority,
    I'm so sick to death of judging halter horses who are pretty to
    look at but were bred without regard to form to function.
    
    Appy's (my primary breed) areparticularly annoying to me.  Haven't
    these breeders learned from the quarterhorse people's mistakes?
    Here we go again, 1500 pounds on 00 shoes.  Then they wonder why
    these animals come up with navicular and mechanical founder so much
    more often than "in the old days".  They traded junk heads and rat
    tails for much more complicated problems.
    
    Further more, if these halter horses (which are often used by
    perspective buyers as a visual guideline) are so wonderful to breed
    to, then why are they only shown in the halter ring and NOT in the
    performance ring as well.  I think that such a proposale would slow
    down some of the indescriminate breeders out there.
    
    Sorry I got so wild, I really am not a hothead, just a subject that
    hits home with me.
    
    Ann

    Regarding .2
    
    Young horses (under 4) would be excluded from the performance
    requirement at this time.  The objective here is to limit the top
    (National and Regional Champion) breeding horses to those who can
    actually do something.  As time goes on you would find that the
    ideal horse would look different than today and the problem would
    no longer be there.
    
    
    Regarding .4
    
    Julie, the meeting was a board of directors meeting and only addressed
    how we would handle information for delegates to attend the convention
    with.  For too long we have sent a delegate who has no contact with
    the constituency and therefore votes for their own issues.  My
    intention for writing this note was to add fuel to the fire and
    show that people of all breed disciplines are aware of the problem.
    
    
    If you haven't guessed by now, I am strongly in favor of the resolution
    being proposed.  Horses are athletes and should be bred as such.
    I really believe that they are unhappy when not worked and we certainly
    don't need any living monuments.  So if people are happier riding
    horses, and horses are happier working, why would we want to breed
    a population of non-workable horses?  If there is an answer today
    for the Arabian breed it is in the Investment community.  They have
    done more to destroy the breed singlehandedly than centuries of
    breeders.  Most of the reason is that they are non-riders and this
    is just another investment like Pork-bellies, or Wheat futures,
    or stocks and bonds.  Sorry I didn't mean to get so worked up but
    I was in the business before the investment folks showed up and
    I'll be here when they leave.  I just don't want my breed of horses
    to be set back several generations so someone can stuff their bank
    account.
    
    

    Bob, your note and several of the replies bring up many questions.
     Aren't the Nationals for horses age 3 and up?  How would the
    performance ruling affect the 3-year-olds?  Perhaps the solution
    would be to change the age to 4.  I would be concerned about people
    pushing their horses under saddle before their time in order to
    meet the rule.
    
    Understand, I wholeheartedly agree with you about beauty vs
    performance.  Have you thought about WHO it is who set the style?
     Is it the trainers, the judges?  One trainer I know said my very
    athletic filly would never sell because her cannons were shorter
    than her upper leg bones (the name of which escapes me right now)!
     Funny, that's how I thought it was supposed to be.  He contends
    that the tall Arabian is more marketable -- maybe to some people,
    but Arabians aren't supposed to be giants.  My feeling about the
    15.2-16h Arabians is that, for that kind of height, cross-breed
    your Arabian to a Thoroughbred or warmblood.  Leave the "true" Arabian
    at or under 15 hands where he belongs.
    
    Maybe what International needs to do is educate all the owners via
    their magazine and prospective owners via the new IAHA marketing
    brochure:  define an Arabian, its purpose for being, its great
    athletic ability.  Make it stylish to breed for performance as well
    as for grace and beauty.  There's no reason why an athletic horse
    has to, by virtue of its ability, look ugly!!
    
    My farrier told me that one reason why halter horses may not become
    performance horses -- even with correct breeding -- is that the
    hooves are filed too long and narrow.  Even after the horse stops
    showing at halter, the foot is often beyond sufficient repair to
    allow the horse to perform.  Has anyone heard differently?
    
  Are you related to Nick Nickerson in North Carolina?  He's going to
    judge our Eastern Amateur Arabian Horse Show Circuit futurity Sept.
    27 at Prince George Equestrian Center in Upper Marlboro, MD.
    
    Glad to see this notesfile!!!
    Merrie Aiken  NEWVAX::AIKEN    

    Since everybody is offering their 2 cents worth this subject is
    one that has brought up my ire on more than one occasion.
    
    First let me say that we have shown on the Arab, Pinto and local
    circuits here in Colorado.  Second that for the most part I agree
    completely with the notes that argue performance.
    
    So many of the horses that I see shown here fall into the looney
    tune bucket.  Sure these horses have 'show' appeal.  They come
    into the ring fire breathing dragons.  The handler is lucky if
    they can get the horse to set up for the class.  Usually though
    if they can and the horse is large enough they will win.  When you
    talk to the trainers they seem to all have horror stories(how many
    people has the horse hurt).  This sure isn't the stud that I want
    to breed my mares to for my kids horse.  I 'had' a mare that was
    very typey and made the mistake of breeding her to a stallion that
    was also very typey.  The foal looked great, but it was a rodeo
    every time we wanted to catch it to work it.
    
    So I what we decided in our breeding program was that the tractability
    of the offspring had to be the first concern.  Second was the foal's
    way of going. Third was the conformation of the foal.  And lastly
    since we do breed pintos color.  If the foal doesn't doesn't meet
    all of the above it goes down the road.  I won't even care if it
    does beat me in the show ring.  I will know that what I keep is
    safe!
    
    Some people out here think that they really took me to the cleaners
    on some of the horses that they bought.  But I did warn them on
    what I saw as fault's and that was why the horse was priced the
    way that it was.
                    
    -John-

    The Nationals are for horses 3 and older, but typically the only
    three year olds in halter are the national futurity classes which
    would be exempt.  Even so at the state level, we are showing three
    year olds in the snaffle bit futurity classes.  I have some
    reservations about showing 3 year olds under saddle because of the
    stress while they are still growing.  Arabs as you probably know
    are late bloomers, and my decision to put a horse under saddle is
    based on how developed I think it is.  The problem, however, is
    with getting a four or five year old to the Nationals, since it
    takes at least two years to finish a horse to the point where it
    can compete at that level.  I know that this is a drawback with
    the proposal especially since it may give more incentive to use
    conditioning programs that include steriods to give the illusion
    of maturity.  I guess if the same unscrupulous (sp?) people that
    are dilating eyes, injecting air in croups subcutaneously, or blowing
    baby power imported from Columbia in nostrils, are doing the training
    there will be more abuses anyway.  In the end we'll have to do the
    right thing for the breed despite those folks.
    
    I think the issue of long and narrow feet is a result of people
    who are correcting for conformational problems or just increasing
    action by shoeing a young horse.  Maybe the solution here is to
    not show youngsters (below the age of three).
    
    I'm not related to Nick Nickerson.  To the best of my knowlege I
    am the only one in my family that is involved in the horse industry.
    I'll bet that somewhere not too far back, we are related, since
    most of the Nickersons started out on Cape Cod.  We're thick as
    flies down there.
    
    

    If an ignorant non-horseman may voice an opinion...
    
    I got the impression that there is a subset of horse breeders who
    (probably unintentionally) have been breeding horses whose main
    value is for photographers. Such horses LOOK very pretty, but are
    below average at DOING things (such as riding or driving), and are
    also below average with respect to health and soundness of body.
    (Sounds like a clone of Marilyn Monroe -- with 20% off her IQ, and
    diabetes.)
    
    If I were to expend the time, work, and money to own a horse, I
    would try to avoid such an animal, in favor of one which I would
    expect to stay healthy and be ridable. If you'll pardon the analogy,
    it's like choosing a 3-year-old but sound pickup truck, instead
    of a brand-new Fiat two-seater (picking on Fiat because I've heard
    that they're fun for 2 years, and then you trade them or run up
    a tab at your garage).
    
    This may be a bad attitude, but mine is that a horse whose main
    merits are its looks is a horse whose future contributions to the
    gene pool ought to be carefully weighed.
    
    Dick
    

    Bob, I wonder if you could get an equine publication such as
    Equus to do an article on the subject.  They may even include
    some type of questionnaire or poll as part of the article.
    
    Did you find the article in the Express paper, or would you
    like me to send it to you?

    I did find that article in the Express after you told me about it.
    Magazine articles do work because even though I had known about
    the resolution before I read the article, it is really what got
    me going on the issue.  Show Horse would have probably been the
    ideal publication to write an article (maybe they are planning to).
    The problem is that the convention is in November so any articles
    need to be published in October, but they have already gone to press
    with that issue.  None the less, I'll bring it up with Stephen Kinney
    (he's the publisher) next time I see him.  I might also run across
    Bill or Margie Lexton both of who write for Show Horse.  Alas, I
    live the life of a procrastinator and should have started this months
    ago.

    Bob, I wouldn't abandon the plan.  You could still submit a
    request to as many equine publications as you can, and even
    if they don't publish the article before the convention, when
    they do get around to it, it may spark interest in readers who
    will do something about it, like sending letters to people
    in charge of creating such rules, etc.  The magazine 'Arabians'
    has been having bankruptucy & organizational problems, but I
    think they have been resolved, and I know they have a large
    number of subscribers, and might consider working on an article
    like this,  I also think they are still working on their Nov
    issue which should come out at the end of Oct/beg. of Nov.
    
    It's worth a try.......

    Hi!
    
    I would like to find out what it takes (in your opinion) to win
    an Arab Halter class?  I have been told that the horse with the 
    best confirmation should win, how true is this? What are some
    of the "key" assets every Halter horse should have? 
    
    Do you think that a Taller horse has a better chance of winning? 
    How about a pretty face...does it count for much? Can you describe 
    what is ment by a horse having "Presence"?
            
    What beyond Confirmation, are the judges looking for? What kinds
    of things can you do to give your horse the best advantage possible
    in the Show ring?
    			Thanks, Nancy
                                                          

    Here is what I think is important in Arabian Halter Classes.
    (note:  The opinions I express are not necessarily the opinions
    of all halter judges)
    
    In order of priority I look for the following:
    
               Conformation
               Type
               Disposition
               Athletic Ability
               Presence
               Size
    
    This does not imply that any one of the items listed are so important
    that it can stand alone.  What you have to judge for is an individual
    who is the best representation of the breed in all of these areas.
    
    Conformation:
    
    The physical makeup of the animal.  For example, no poor parts such
    as ewe necks, long backs, poorly developed bone or muscle structure,
    and certainly no cow hocks (this is not an `allowable' arab trait
    as some would lead you to believe).  The bottom line is that this
    is an area which you would judge any good horse on.
    
    Type:
    
    This is the representation of the type established by the Arabian
    Horse Registry.  Quite simply it is the resemblance of this animal
    to the breed standard specified by the registry and pictured by
    the Gladys Brown Edwards drawing.
                                     
    The other areas are pretty much self explainatory but since you
    asked about Presence, to me it is the picture that you get from
    the horse's expression and carriage.
    
    There are some good explainations in the Golden Book of Horse Showing
    if you can find a copy (they are out of print).  Or an alternate
    source is the Youth Judging guide from IAHA.
    
    
    

    To me, PRESENCE personified is Khemosabi!
    
    Mary Jo
    

    Nancy,
    
    There is a discussion in note 132 that compliments this one,
    readers should also refer to it.  Bob's list covers the 'key'
    points that should be looked at, however, different people may put
    them in a different order.  Basically, conformation and performance
    kind of go hand in hand, and should be at the top of the list along
    with type (since you are judging a particular breed which has a
    standard associated with it).  
    
    Re: 'presence' - this is also something that is defined differently
    by different people, but it should be distinguished from the look
    in a horse that was brought about by fear.  An example of presence
    might be 'Cass Ole' - the Black Stallion.  I think people will agree
    upon the definition, even if they don't agree upon the individual.
   
    It can be defined as the look/feeling you get from a particular horse 
    that says "I'm special - look at me!".  It's the horse that stands out
    from a crowd on his own (doesn't need to be hyped up by a trainer).