No more show names? WTF??

[War Admiral]

Ladies and gentlemen, your attention is directed to USEF Rule Change Proposals 024-08 (http://www.usef.org/documents/ruleChanges/024-08.pdf) and 278-08 (http://www.usef.org/documents/ruleChanges/278-08.pdf), both of which would REQUIRE all horses registered with breed associations showing at USEF shows to be shown under their registered names.

One proposal makes an exception for Hunters. The other does not. There is NO exception for other disciplines such as Jumpers, Eventing, Dressage, and Driving.

The purpose of these proposals is, of course, to make it easier for breeders to track their produce.

BUT what it effectively does is FORCE an AWFUL lot of horse owners into HAVING to show their horses under names that are simply not acceptable. MOST breed organizations will permit a name change or two over the course of a horse's lifetime, albeit they certainly make you pay for the privilege...

BUT what of JC registered Thoroughbreds?? The Jockey Club DOES NOT PERMIT a horse's name to be changed after its racing career is over. JC Rules, Section 6(d) (http://www.jockeyclub.com/registry.asp?section=3#six).

I don't see any exception for TBs in either proposal. This, quite honestly, makes my blood boil. :mad:

So, John and David, are you going to meet w/ the Jockey Club officials to see if you can bring them onside and let us change our OTTBs' names? And may I please, pretty please, be a fly on the wall when you try? :lol: :rolleyes:

Alternatively, can these rule change proposals be amended to permit TBs to compete under recorded names in *any* USEF discipline SO LONG AS those names are cross-referenced in the USEF database to their JC Registered Names?

Or could we REALLY just do away with both of these rule change proposals. Breeders, I'm sorry, but if you want to track your produce, then YOU pay the $200 for the lifetime recording fee to USEF, and write it off on your taxes as part of YOUR cost of doing business. How DARE you try to pass it off onto innocent bystanders who aren't even BUYING from you! :mad:

Folks, the sport horse breeders are a really tough, noisy lobby, and could very easily get one or the other of these proposals passed if we don't make our voices heard.

I truly believe with all my heart that neither of these proposals is in the best interest of the MAJORITY of USEF members.

Especially in view of the fact that I don't see any provision in either proposal "grandfathering" in horses who are already correctly recorded under show names that are correctly cross-referenced back in the USEF databases to their registered names.

Do we have to re-record these horses come January?? Are we to be held in violation of the rules if we don't?

Do I really, really, really have to be sitting here stressing out about the possibility of being FORCED by my own Federation to show a horse under a registered name like Chicken Lips (http://www.pedigreequery.com/chicken+lips)?

Come on, USEF, cut us some slack. DEFEAT this proposal. It is just plain crap. :mad:

[danosaur]

or quarter horse names like EZ peppy san dun bar dude.

[War Admiral]

or quarter horse names like EZ peppy san dun bar dude.

That, too - the green QH I'm working with, I'm not even sure his registered name would fit on the USEF recording card! :lol: I don't think there's enough room! BUT at least AQHA does permit a couple of name changes over the horse's lifetime (you best believe I checked before I even started working with him), so it's *possible* to do (albeit pricey). With the TBs, it is not. :no:

[seeuatx]

It'll be a cold day in Hades when I show my horse as Mr. Stan Man....

Or how about my old horse who showed as Wishful Thinking.... you're telling me I'd have needed to show him as Tooties Boy... yeah, let's make the nice horse sound like a fart :no:.

USEF... if this passes I think you will have a revolution on your hands and this amongst other reasons will have me signing my John Hancock against you.

[findeight]

It's a PROPOSAL. Most of which die, many for good reason.

Let them and your representitives know how to vote on it.

Personally, I have a problem with the foreign names like L'essence du Garbaaje, registries/books that require the registered name to start with a specific letter each year and, of course, the Germanic, Dutch and Scandanavian tongue twisters.

Doubt this is going anywhere.

[CHF]

Yuck... that would mean my junior hunter (an OTTB) would have had the show name... "He's an Arlo".... what the heck does that mean anyway??

I really hope that this doesn't pass as there are some HIDEOUS registered names out there and I would be very unhappy if my horse of a lifetime ended up with some jacked up ridiculous name... :no:

[findeight]

:lol:

Second career for Deweycheatemandhow?

[Jsalem]

My old children's hunter: Wheelaway Roach- nice. Or how about this large pony who happens to be a QH: Bo's Leather and Lace- really nice. How would that sound in the Short Stirrup ring?

[whbar158]

There are other problems with this too, as if the horse is registered and you don't have their papers and have no idea what their registered name is. If I didn't have my QH's papers I would have no way of knowing what his name is, or an OTTB that you can't read the tattoo, or haven't paid to get the registration. I get the feeling a lot of people would end up just saying they lost the papers and don't know the horses name, or just say they never had the papers. I think it would backfire on the breeders who want to follow their horses. I agree if you want to follow your horse you register it with the USEF and follow it by its number.

[pattnic]

I saw this too, when I was looking over the proposals, etc yesterday. Not surprisingly (to me, anyway), the Morgan Committee is the big proponent of the change (Loretta Brown is a Morgan person, unless there is more than one Loretta Brown with a vested interest). I think it's about them wanting to track what Morgans are doing in open competition, more so than breeders (of other breeds) wanting to track their produce. Blame the Morgan Committee. Normally I love any sort of Morgan promotion, but not this.

I'm NOT a fan... I love my Morgans, but I really don't want to show my mare as "Reverence Astarte" when I can avoid it, as it is invariably pronounced wrong. So I intend to submit a name change to USEF to show her at open shows under a different name (but would still be required to use her registered Morgan name at Morgan shows, as AMHA doesn't allow name changes after a certain point).

I wonder if there would be any sort of grandfather clause, allowing horses that are currently not registered with USEF under their breed registry name to keep their current USEF name?

Regardless, it sucks. "Zip's Heza Kool Kowboy" isn't nearly as dignified sounding as "Loose Change," nor would I want to be the announcer who has to figure out "Deweycheatumnhowe."

[War Admiral]

Sorry, Jsalem, but Wheelaway Roach made me LOL.

HRH Avery, of course, rather notoriously has an ancestor called Grey Bloody Buttocks (http://www.pedigreequery.com/grey+bloody+buttocks)!! :eek: He's long gone, of course, but how loffly would THAT look in the show programs...

Still - while it is validly a subject for levity, I think it's also important for everyone reading this to shoot off a quick e-mail to Bill Moroney & your other representatives & make sure USEF knows you're not happy about this.

[Janet]

024 is proposed by an individual, not a committee, so is less likely to be taken seriously.

248 is proposed by the Morgan comittee, so will be taken more seriously.

But my bet is that it will be revised to be a Morgan-specific rule (for instance the Connemara division already says that Connemaras must be shown- in the Connemara division- under thier full registered name).

Send in your comments on the official comments link.

Also send emails to the committees for YOUR disciplines, asking them to block it, which they can.

If Hunter/Jumper, Dressage, Eventing, Driving, etc all register objections, it is highly unlikely it will pass.

[pattnic]

024 is proposed by an individual, not a committee, so is less likely to be taken seriously.

248 is proposed by the Morgan comittee, so will be taken more seriously.

But my bet is that it will be revised to be a Morgan-specific rule (for instance the Connemara division already says that Connemaras must be shown- in the Connemara division- under thier full registered name).

Send in your comments on the official comments link.

Also send emails to the committees for YOUR disciplines, asking them to block it, which they can.

If Hunter/Jumper, Dressage, Eventing, Driving, etc all register objections, it is highly unlikely it will pass.


Just did some checking, and edited my post above. Loretta Brown (the individual for 024) is a Morgan person.

Morgans are already required in the Morgan division to compete under their registered names.

[findeight]

Well, we do forget USEF is a large umbrella and there are lots of us under it besides Hunters and Jumpers. American Saddlebreds, Arabians, Morgans for example, all trying to track their produce and promote it to a larger market.

So I can see some logic in terms of less conventional breeds showing open.

But I disagree this is the way to go. How about just tying the registered name to the USEF number as well as the show name so both would track? It's just another line on the form.

[War Admiral]

I think you're probably right, Janet (ASBs already have a similar rule as well - which is, of course, why Saddlebred Rescue has such a difficult time placing unpapered rescues, even though they might be nice heese. They can't be shown. :no:)

BUT I've also read enough support from sport horse breeders for proposals *like* this over the years that I think it's really worth getting to your reps with your Just Say No hats on!

[War Admiral]

How about just tying the registered name to the USEF number as well as the show name so both would track? It's just another line on the form.

I haven't had to record one for a few years, Findeight, but when I did, this was how it was done. I don't know if it's still like that given the regime change... Anyone?

[Janet]

Just did some checking, and edited my post above. Loretta Brown (the individual for 024) is a Morgan person.

Morgans are already required in the Morgan division to compete under their registered names.
OK, so the Morgan people want to be able to track what Morgan horses do in other disciplines.

A better solution would be to require evereyone to PROVIDE to USEF the breed registered name (if known), and allow results lookup based on the breed registered name as well as the "show name".

I think they DO already ask for the breed registered name- so it would just be a question up updating the lookup procedure.

But if people are not also showing in the breed restricted classes (requiring papers), it becomes unenforcable, no matter how they structure it.

[findeight]

About 8 years ago when I got a lifetime number on my TB mare, there was a place on the form for registered and show names...I use the registered for both anyway.

No idea whether they ever kept track of these double names or not but I swear there was a spot on the form for it.

[HuntrJumpr]

I'm with Findeight -- cross reference the names if you must by tying both into the same USEF number, but please, please, please don't make us show under some of those registered names! I swear breeders give their really bad name ideas to the ones they are going to sell. (Purely joking folks, promise.) And honestly, I don't want to show my Childs/Adult sale horse as "Lethal" anything and I certainly would hate to be trying to sell this guy: http://www.pedigreequery.com/dangerous+pet

[Bobthehorse]

or quarter horse names like EZ peppy san dun bar dude.

Yeah, mine is Palleo Shawn!!

Shown under Honour Roll.

But other breeds can have silly names too, my new one is CWHBA and his registered name is All That Jazz IV. Yeah....

But this is in Canada. I assume we still get to change the names, even if we come to compete in the US?

[findeight]

But if people are not also showing in the breed restricted classes (requiring papers), it becomes unenforcable, no matter how they structure it.

Good point...the show office would have to check the papers of EVERY registered horse to verify it. That is fine at your average Morgan or other breed show with 250 horses.

Try that at WEF with 2700+ back numbers out there every week:eek:. Even the KHP shows can get close to 1000.

Law of unintended consequences at work here. Understand the idea but it is a bad proposal as it stands. Penalizes the horse show office.

[pattnic]

There is still a place for both on the USEF form. There is also a place for the horse's registry number.

According to both USEF and AMHA, it is currently perfectly legal to show the same horse under two different names (if you do both open and breed shows). However, AMHA "strongly encourages" that Morgans be shown under their registered names, as breed promotion.

Everything is linked - USEF has the breed registry number and the breed registry name. Pretty sure AMHA has the USEF number.

Really, it's all about breed promotion. Because EVERYONE will recognize Cabot French Pepper or Reverence Astarte as being distinctly "Morgan" names, the way everyone recognizes "Zippo Pine Chex" as a QH name. :rolleyes:

PS - There is often in the neighborhood of 1000 horses at Morgan Nationals

[horsesarelikepotatochips]

Ha... hopefully it won't pass, cause I'd hate to have to show our morgan pony under Battersea Oconee...

[War Admiral]

and allow results lookup based on the breed registered name as well as the "show name".


Janet, as usual, I think you have hit on the "win" here! :yes: That could work really well!!

The last time I recorded one, I did put the JC name, sire and dam down, and the USEF horse recording person was able to tell me all kinds of interesting stuff about my horse and its siblings just by tracking back the sire. So obviously the technology exists already for the USEF staff to do this. All that would seem to be needed would be to make it possible for the membership to do this.

Pattnic: I suddenly realise that while we've not met, I know you by sight - seen you at the ASB/Morgan shows w/ your loffly mare! :yes:

[sixpoundfarm]

I think its a fantastic idea, and about time. Its only a name for pete's sake.

Its already done in europe, and it certainly helps folks over there make good breeding decision, to produce horses people want to own and show.

[RiddleMeThis]

Ok even if this DOES pass....how are they going to know if your horse is actually registered or not? I could have a papered TB in my backyard and go show at HITS and just say he isnt papered and have my show name whatever I would like it to be couldnt I?

If that does pass I could see that happening all the time. Is there anything to prevent this?

[Smiles]

I think/hope this ones dead in the water. I'm not walking into the show ring with my paint horses registered name... Plus you would think this would open up more show ring discrimination because we all know what breed of horse was walking into the ring with there names. Some judges don't like q.h., t.b., w.b. and ect. And some horses are easly identifiable with their breed names.

[Fairview Horse Center]

I am a breeder, and I think it is one of the worst ideas to help breeders I have ever seen. We will lose them all. Every horse will become unregistered. There is no way a person should have to show a horse with a name they don't love.

Help us get the "one number" system in this country, and use THAT number. The names can change, and we can still track performance to bloodlines using their number.

To enforce the "one number" rule, registered horses should have to produce papers when first applying. Unregistered horses should have to produce some paperwork to prove who they are - bill of sale along with a vet statement. Recordings with the USEF without proof should only be made with a higher fee as a deterrent for cheating.

Breeders are given a discounted rate of $35 to lifetime record their babies within the first year. This is wonderful, but USELESS if it costs more to change the name, and owner than it does to get a new USEF number.

We DO need to stop people from easily "losing" their horse's history as it promotes fraud, but this proposal is not going to help.

[Keltic Kross]

What do people do w/ registered horses w/ no name so-to-speak? My TB is JC registered but in the name section it is literally says "********* bay colt" - and then of course has the physical description. So do I call him ********* bay colt?? lol

And if I take my horse to Fld in the winter (I'm from Canada) can I show him in Canada as whatever I like but then go to his registered name to show at USEF sanctioned shows? Poor guy would have a personality crisis, lol.

[Tamara in TN]

Ha... hopefully it won't pass, cause I'd hate to have to show our morgan pony under Battersea Oconee...

when something totally ignorant like pony dot com is so much better ? :)

best

[War Admiral]

What do people do w/ registered horses w/ no name so-to-speak? My TB is JC registered but in the name section it is literally says "********* bay colt" - and then of course has the physical description. So do I call him ********* bay colt?? lol

And if I take my horse to Fld in the winter (I'm from Canada) can I show him in Canada as whatever I like but then go to his registered name to show at USEF sanctioned shows? Poor guy would have a personality crisis, lol.

Two excellent points here, Keltic Kross!

[beeblebrox]

"Fairview Horse Center
Schoolmaster
with a name they don't love.

Help us get the "one number" system in this country, and use THAT number. The names can change, and we can still track performance to bloodlines using their number."

THIS MAKES MORE SENSE TO ME. Like with you drivers license if you marry you keep the same number just like with your social security card. WHY NOT purpose this to them? SEEMS simple. I know this may require a seller or breeder to register them in the first place with the "god given or breeder name" but if you want to track your breeding program it would be worth it!

Lastly yes I would find it hard to show some of my previous horses under names given: HeadVerTexas, OrangeCrush, Uranius (yea dutch), Little Hank, Stick Lady, King Of hearts (which of course over any PA sound like the king of farts), etc etc

[dani0303]

Why do I get the feeling that if this passes we're going to have an announcers strike on our hands!!

[sixpoundfarm]

Help us get the "one number" system in this country, and use THAT number. The names can change, and we can still track performance to bloodlines using their number.

Ok, I will concede this is a better idea. Having a way to track a horse through its lifetime is appealing to breeders, but it is beneficial to all that want to know what lines produce good sporthorses. I think more and more people are starting to want to know this information.

A name is just a name, doesn't make the horse its given to any better or worse.

[AdAblurr02]

I am a breeder, and I think it is one of the worst ideas to help breeders I have ever seen. We will lose them all. Every horse will become unregistered. There is no way a person should have to show a horse with a name they don't love.

Help us get the "one number" system in this country, and use THAT number. The names can change, and we can still track performance to bloodlines using their number.

Darlyn,
You make sense. As breeders, we do pay up front to put LIFETIME numbers on our kids when they are first registered as foals, for both USEF and USDF, using their registered names - in hopes that something close to recognition will carry forward with them. We also try to give them decent names, but of course that's a matter of opinion :)

This assumes, though that future owner(s) give a damn about where the talent and ability came from....

[Mel0309]

Or could we REALLY just do away with both of these rule change proposals. Breeders, I'm sorry, but if you want to track your produce, then YOU pay the $200 for the lifetime recording fee to USEF, and write it off on your taxes as part of YOUR cost of doing business. How DARE you try to pass it off onto innocent bystanders who aren't even BUYING from you!


Many of us do (in fact I pay the $35 the year they are born) but what is keeping the buyer from discarding that and getting a new name and number. I don't care if they change the name, we don't all like the same things, but I wish there was a way to keep the number without the $75 name change plus the transfer fee. IIRC it costs more for that than to just get a new name and number.

I am a breeder, and I think it is one of the worst ideas to help breeders I have ever seen. We will lose them all. Every horse will become unregistered. There is no way a person should have to show a horse with a name they don't love.

Help us get the "one number" system in this country, and use THAT number. The names can change, and we can still track performance to bloodlines using their number.

This I can definitely agree with! Why can't we do this? We already have a number from USEF why can't this happen.

[sixpoundfarm]

I know this may require a seller or breeder to register them in the first place with the "god given or breeder name" but if you want to track your breeding program it would be worth it!



It is absolutely worth the $35 the USEF charges to lifetime register a foal at present. I started doing it a couple years ago, and hopefully more breeders do it. It would be great if the other governing bodies requiring horse ID's would do the same.

[War Admiral]

So are y'all breeders telling me that if you lifetime record a foal w/ USEF, the lifetime recording number does NOT follow the horse if the horse's name gets changed? :confused: I thought that was what the numbers were for??

[Janet]

Good point...the show office would have to check the papers of EVERY registered horse to verify it. That is fine at your average Morgan or other breed show with 250 horses.

Try that at WEF with 2700+ back numbers out there every week:eek:. Even the KHP shows can get close to 1000.

Law of unintended consequences at work here. Understand the idea but it is a bad proposal as it stands. Penalizes the horse show office. Even more to the point, if people say "he isn't registered" or "I don't have the papers" there isn't much you can do in a discipine that doesn't require "papers".

[Fairview Horse Center]

So are y'all breeders telling me that if you lifetime record a foal w/ USEF, the lifetime recording number does NOT follow the horse if the horse's name gets changed? :confused: I thought that was what the numbers were for??

Nope, not when it is cheaper to pay for a new number than to change owner and name.

Trainers don't want to be bothered producing paperwork, so they get to a show, and just sign up for a new number - no proof needed.

It also has the added advantage of allowing a sales horse to lose a questionable show or lameness record. :mad:

This kind of cheating has not been good for the industry.

Require proof, or a much higher fee.

ONE number, ONE horse, for a lifetime.

[Mel0309]

It is $75 to get a new name for the year (or free if they just get an ID #).

It is $120 to transfer and get a new name ($60 for each). While in the long run this would be the cheaper option you would (or maybe wouldn't) be suprised at how many just pay the $75 for a new name and number.

Agree with Fairview also - paperwork is also an issue with the trainers or uneducated buyers who just do what the trainers say.

[sixpoundfarm]

Nope, not when it is cheaper to pay for a new number than to change owner and name.

Trainers don't want to be bothered producing paperwork, so they get to a show, and just sign up for a new number - no proof needed.

It also has the added advantage of allowing a sales horse to lose a questionable show or lameness record. :mad:

This kind of cheating has not been good for the industry.

Require proof, or a much higher fee.

ONE number, ONE horse, for a lifetime.

Or the ability to change the eligibility status of a horse. Not eligible for those green classes? Eh, just get a new name and number, and you're all set.

[War Admiral]

Thanks for the clarification - I don't breed obviously so I didn't know that!

I did know, of course, that there is all manner of skullduggery afoot with horse recording generally, and even a good bit with registration papers. I'm not sure that it can ever be cleaned up completely, but yes, one-horse-one-number would seem to be a better way to go.

Just as an FYI from someone who does show at the ASB shows on occasion - it's pretty rare that an owner will be asked to produce the actual papers. The ASHA number usually will suffice.

[Ophelia123]

Ok this would just be baaaadddddd I have one that's an OTTB that is named....get this DISTINCT DISABILITIES you mean I'd have to freakin show under that....good god.

[Fairview Horse Center]

I don't think they should have to produce papers at each show, just when they apply for a USEF number.

The people that want to protect their nice little safety valve for fraud are the ones that have fought the "one number" system HARD, and many times, they are some of the most influential people in the top of our industry. We need to fight back hard for what we need.

ENOUGH of cheating people running things their way. Haven't we learned enough from the insurance - horse killing fiasco? Why can't we set this up to help clean up our industry AND help breeders to track what they are producing?

ALL of the European breeders have one number tracking, and a GREAT system for finding results - even from local shows. We need this to improve breeding in the USA, and be competitive.

Let's stop encouraging lost horses in the system. No more enabling fraud.

[Tamara in TN]

So are y'all breeders telling me that if you lifetime record a foal w/ USEF, the lifetime recording number does NOT follow the horse if the horse's name gets changed? :confused: I thought that was what the numbers were for??

nope...papers get "lost" all the time...no matter what a breeders has to say about it...

best

[War Admiral]

Ok this would just be baaaadddddd I have one that's an OTTB that is named....get this DISTINCT DISABILITIES you mean I'd have to freakin show under that....good god.

Hear ya, girlfriend!

Fairview, thanks for info. I'd have no problem getting behind a one-horse-one-number initiative... I just wanna make SURE we're still able to change their names, but without losing the data tracking.

Really, this shouldn't be this hard, should it? :confused:

[Hillside H Ranch]

Nope, not when it is cheaper to pay for a new number than to change owner and name.

Trainers don't want to be bothered producing paperwork, so they get to a show, and just sign up for a new number - no proof needed.

It also has the added advantage of allowing a sales horse to lose a questionable show or lameness record. :mad:

This kind of cheating has not been good for the industry.

Require proof, or a much higher fee.

ONE number, ONE horse, for a lifetime.


PLEASE ONE number, ONE horse for a lifetime! Why is this so difficult?! I, too, am a breeder that pays for the USEF lifetime number for every foal that I produce. And it doesn't seem to help one bit. Names get changed, new numbers get assigned etc. I would really like to see some sort of solution that makes sense!

[horsey nurse]

so my Junior horse would have been named "Road Scraper"!

[War Admiral]

so my Junior horse would have been named "Road Scraper"!

You know, sometimes you just HAVE to laugh, otherwise you'd cry. :no:

Have a word w/ your USEF reps, people...

[findeight]

ONE number, ONE horse, for a lifetime.

I'll go along with that-but allow two lines for a registered name and a show name in Open divisions.

Sadly, you will still get the not so Pre Greens skipping regions. But it would go a ways towards reducing the worst of the frauds...on paper anyway.

[pattnic]

For the "One Horse - One Number"...to avoid the "new number for the same horse (for whatever reason, name change, fraud)" would it be possible that to institute this, DNA testing was used? If there was a DNA match already registered, then that horse could not be granted a new number.

WA - Where have you seen us?

ETA - Agree with Findeight on the registered name and show name.

[War Admiral]

For the "One Horse - One Number"...to avoid the "new number for the same horse (for whatever reason, name change, fraud)" would it be possible that to institute this, DNA testing was used? If there was a DNA match already registered, then that horse could not be granted a new number.

I've always thought this would be an excellent idea, too, and frankly am surprised it has never come up.

...And Dixie Cup, if memory serves!

[findeight]

How much would you be willing to pay for the DNA testing and would you accept there would be more staff needed to administer this part of the program?

[grayfox]

I'm also a breeder who thinks it's a bad idea to force people to use names they don't want. The one number is so much better. I also get the USEF card when they are weanlings. I usually have the baby sold and ask what the new owner what they want to name the foal. But if not I try to make it a name people will like but if they don't they shouldn't be forced to use it or make the horse unregistered. I think that people are going to have to be forced to not list horses as unregistered. I know that many trainers bringing in horses from other countries list the horses as unknown pedigree . I know they bought the horse with papers because they all have passports in other countries that follow the horse. It should be really, really hard to list a horse as unregistered. It's better for the consumer also, to know what your buying. DNA testing is cheap, like 25.00.

[War Admiral]

How much would you be willing to pay for the DNA testing and would you accept there would be more staff needed to administer this part of the program?

Well, DNA testing to get 'em registered w/ ASHA only costs $50. How much over that d'you reckon USEF would try to get away with charging...? I have my own thoughts on that. :rolleyes:

I'm just trying to find a solution to the data tracking problem that works for EVERYBODY, without forcing some folks to go into the ring with names like "Road Scraper" and "Distinct Disabilities". :D

[equest]

for the sake of the poor QH and TB owners stuck with reprehensible breed names, this is a terrible idea.

Poor QHs are saddled with inappropriate names like "Sheza Hot Mama"

Jockey club TBs can end up with some strange names too!

[pattnic]

How much would you be willing to pay for the DNA testing and would you accept there would be more staff needed to administer this part of the program?

DNA testing of breeding animals is already required by AMHA in order to register the offspring as Morgans (don't remember how much off-hand... I want to say $250, maybe)... so yes, I would be willing to pay for it, and accept the fact that more staff would be required. Hell, maybe I could be part of that staff! (Science nerd here who loves PCR, etc)

The fee in and of itself would help to serve someone trying to skirt around by submitting the DNA of a non-registered horse (for fraudulent purposes, like third year pre-green).

WA - :( I think you may have me confused with someone else. We have never been to Dixie Cup. We are fairly recent transplants to the South; before moving down here, we showed at North Star, Circle J, and Jubilee Morgan shows and Morgan Nationals. We haven't done any Morgan shows down here yet. But I will still thank you for the compliment on my mare! :yes:

[Ghazzu]

Ladies and gentlemen, your attention is directed to USEF Rule Change Proposals 024-08 (http://www.usef.org/documents/ruleChanges/024-08.pdf) and 278-08 (http://www.usef.org/documents/ruleChanges/278-08.pdf), both of which would REQUIRE all horses registered with breed associations showing at USEF shows to be shown under their registered names.

:mad:
Goodness, from the anguish and exclamation points being spent on this topic, one would think it actually had an impact on horse welfare.
So you can't use the latest cute name you thought up.
Big hairy deal.
Many of us in other breeds than TB have done this for years.

You might want to take the advice you give in your sig line.


ETA: I could get behind the one number idea, with the name changes tracked on it...

[pattnic]

From AMHA:
As of January 01, 2001, all foals being registered must have parentage verified by DNA, which means that the sire and dam have to have DNA established. Therefore, if you plan to use this horse as a breeding animal, a DNA record must be established for the horse.

The lab has been saving frozen serum from blood samples collected for blood typing since late 1988. If your horse was blood typed and has frozen serum on file (and it is viable for testing), it will cost $100.00 per horse for the conversion from blood typing to DNA.

If your horse was not previously blood typed when it was registered or was blood typed before the lab started saving samples, then the horse must be blood typed and DNA typed (Combo Kit), which is $250.00.

If both the sire and dam of your horse have a DNA type on file, you can request a DNA kit for $50.00.

For parentage verification, DNA is used. For most Morgan foals born today, it is a simple procedure that requires pulling a few hairs (with roots) from the mane or tail and placing the hairs in a kit that is sent to the owner after a Registration Application has been submitted to the Registry. The hairs are sent to a laboratory for processing to match up the DNA with that on file for the recorded dam and sire.

[War Admiral]

Many of us in other breeds than TB have done this for years.

No, you haven't, Ghazzu, you are missing the point. If memory serves, you are an Arab person, correct? The Arabian Horse Association DOES provide for name changes. Arabian Horse Rules, Article 1031 (http://www.arabianhorses.org/registration/reg_rules.asp#1031).

The JC, on the other hand, does NOT PERMIT a horse's name to be changed after it is done racing. (Rules cited in OP.)

Do you seriously think this isn't a horse welfare issue? Ya wanna try to get a TB named Chicken Lips adopted if he has to SHOW under that?!

[SaddlersRow]

I don't like this for the reason that people might actually decide whether or not to BUY a horse based on their name. For example, can you imagine how many OTTBs would not find new homes because of discrimination against their names? People really are that shallow about things like that sometimes...

[Ophelia123]

HHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
chicken lips, thats great!:lol:

[CHS]

My daughter (13) would be showing "The Keilbasa Queen" LOL
How disgusting is that?

[Kementari]

I grew up around people who did breed shows. I didn't, but still it never occurred to me that one would show a horse under something other than it's registered name, assuming you know what that is (my TB is my exception, because I didn't know his JC name until I'd had him for a year, and by that time his new name had stuck - but if you made me show him under the JC name, I really wouldn't care). It's not like you are required to call them that at home...

If it's truly offensive, you may well be able to "protest" it with your registry (they don't want horses with offensive names running around representing them any more than you do). If you just don't like it, well, such is life. Deal.

Of course, I'm also with the crowd that thinks it's bad luck to change a horse's name (so long as you know the old one), anyway. :winkgrin:

ETA: The AHA rule is essentially the same as the JC rule:

AHA

ARTICLE 1031. NAME CHANGE
The recorded owner may request a change of the horse's name provided the horse has no registered progeny, is not an imported animal, has never been exported, has not received any points in previous IAHA or AHA programs, has not been issued a Certificate of Registration for Racing and does not have any recorded results in the OEIP Program or Arabian Community Shows (ACS). The Certificate of Registration must be submitted, along with a written request including the signature of the recorded owner, and the name change fee. Upon approval by the AHA Registry, an amended Certificate of Registration will be issued to the recorded owner of the horse.
This name change rule applies only to domestic horses (Article 1031.) or horses imported in utero. (Article 1004., 1006.)
JC
D. A foal's name may be changed at any time prior to starting in its first race. Ordinarily, no name change will be permitted after a horse has started in its first race or has been used for breeding purposes. However, in the event a name must be changed after a horse has started in its first race, both the old and new names must be used until the horse has raced three times following the name change. The prescribed fee (see Fee Schedule) and the Certificate of Foal Registration must accompany any request to the Registry Office for a change of name.

(Emphasis mine, of course.)

So, actually, the AHA rule, as written, is more strict than the JC rule. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean plenty of people haven't been living with it for years without having a fit.

[Ghazzu]

No, you haven't, Ghazzu, you are missing the point. If memory serves, you are an Arab person, correct? The Arabian Horse Association DOES provide for name changes. Arabian Horse Rules, Article 1031 (http://www.arabianhorses.org/registration/reg_rules.asp#1031).

The JC, on the other hand, does NOT PERMIT a horse's name to be changed after it is done racing. (Rules cited in OP.)

Do you seriously think this isn't a horse welfare issue? Ya wanna try to get a TB named Chicken Lips adopted if he has to SHOW under that?!
Yes. We. Have.
The name change rule was of recent vintage, *and*, as someone has already pointed out, has a number of restrictions--if the horse has any recorded points, the name stays.

Are you saying that the h/j crowd is so shallow that they'd turn down a Grand Prix horse or a 4' hunter who snapped his knees to his nose and cracked his back over every fence because they couldn't name him something cute and trendy like "Jack Sparrow" ? Because he came with the name "Pharturlunder"?

Hell, I'd laugh all the way to the trophy desk if my otherwise perfect horse had a stupid name.

[ef80]

Yes. We. Have.
Are you saying that the h/j crowd is so shallow that they'd turn down a Grand Prix horse or a 4' hunter who snapped his knees to his nose and cracked his back over every fence because they couldn't name him something cute and trendy like "Jack Sparrow" ? Because he came with the name "Pharturlunder"?

Hell, I'd laugh all the way to the trophy desk if my otherwise perfect horse had a stupid name.

Sadly, yes. People ARE often that shallow. There's also the percieved issue of breed-discrimination/breed-bias in the Hunter ring. Plenty of Appendix Quarters and Quarters on the A-Circuit "passing" as warmbloods because they don't use their super dumb QH name like HezaZipChipSexySkippaScootaBar.

While this may be great for breed-circuit people, it isn't for people who have zero interest in that part of the show world. This means more "lost papers", more "I dunno, we found him in a backyard", more horses in divisions they don't belong in, more breeders unable to track their offspring and more fraud. Plenty of people out there would quietly turn a blind-eye to someone losing papers if the horse has a terrible name.

One number with DNA verification and crossreferenced names is a much better solution than forcing people to use a registered name.

[Two Black Cats]

Um yeah -- the registered name of my way-back-when children's hunter was Cecil Wopper. Try showing with that one...

[flshgordon]

Breeders, I'm sorry, but if you want to track your produce, then YOU pay the $200 for the lifetime recording fee to USEF, and write it off on your taxes as part of YOUR cost of doing business. How DARE you try to pass it off onto innocent bystanders who aren't even BUYING from you! :mad:

Folks, the sport horse breeders are a really tough, noisy lobby, and could very easily get one or the other of these proposals passed if we don't make our voices heard.


Yikes--now that you have single handedly insulted the entire sporthorse breeding industry:no:.....how about some rational thought?

I do see SOME merit in the reason the system was brought up....and no I'm not a breeder and this doesn't have jack to do with being able to track a stallion's offspring. BUT.....for the people that invoke name changes for the mere reason of misrepresenting a horse or "resetting" its eligibility, this does have some merit. As submitted, this will never pass so your nasty remarks about breeders should fall by the wayside, but I don't see anything wrong in trying to "unclog" the system somehow with horses that have been recorded 7 times with 7 different names so that they can show in whatever division the owner chooses and circumvent the rules.

And as a side note, anyone who decides not to buy a horse strictly because of the name??? Well I'll keep to myself the thoughts on them being allowed to own a horse in the first place.....:rolleyes:

[Equino]

[QUOTE=War Admiral;3650203 BUT at least AQHA does permit a couple of name changes over the horse's lifetime (you best believe I checked before I even started working with him), so it's *possible* to do (albeit pricey). With the TBs, it is not. :no:[/QUOTE]

Only until they start showing in QH shows. I wish I found that out before I started showing my guy,"Pleasure Circle," in QH shows. I would've changed it!

[MajMeadowMorgans]

The name of a horse I showed back in the '90s : Sheza's Sexy Strutter. Um, no. A 12 yr old girl on this horse... IIRC we just showed her as Strutter.

[Fairview Horse Center]

DNA is $40, FORTY BUCKS if you send it in to Davis yourself. Breeders already pay the lifetime $35 for USEF recording, and most already have DNA done at their expense for their registry.

For those unregistered horses, they just need to be required to pay enough of a deterrent to stop encouraging them to lose horses. Folks, most of the people against this are paying $1000 + a week for showing. They CAN easily afford to pay for an extra fee to show their unregistered horse, or go to the file cabinet, get their papers, and send in a copy. OR copy their bill of sale, AND get their vet to sign off at their annual Coggins Test appontment that the said horse is the one described on the bill of sale tp the best of their knowledge. OR pay $40 for DNA.

It is not going to stop all fraud, but it will be a deterrent, and keep honest but lazy people from just getting a new number.

We have been suggesting this for well over 5 years!

[Melelio]

Darlyn, I agree with you. I've been out of the showing loop for quite awhile, but hung with some of those folks that would swap horses, or swap names so often so that you didn't know that the chestnut gelding they had for sale now was the one named "Loopy Sloopy" that flipped over in the ring last year with Suzy Q. Just change the name, maybe change the discipline, or now you could say "Eligible Green" because he had a new name, and no one (or alot of people) would know the diff, esp. if it wasn't a high dollar horse that had high visibility.

Maybe you'd all like to go the route of a microchip (read NAIS) to keep track of who the horse REALLY is? I don't think I'd like that, myself....but maybe there is enough cheating in shows to warrant something like that anymore.

Shows are supposed to be enjoyable, not one big political nightmare That's why I quit showing....

[War Admiral]

Again, you miss the point.

In most breed registries, you have a vote, a voice and a choice. If you don't like the rules, you can lobby to get them changed. Even the AQHA has recently opened the floor to the membership to put forward rule change proposals.

We can't even JOIN the Jockey Club, let alone lobby them for anything. They don't listen, because their oft-stated position is that they only concern themselves with racing Thoroughbreds. The rules may *look* less onerous, but the reality is that if you pick up the phone and call the JC *right now*, you will be told a TB's name cannot be changed once it is done racing, and you will be directed to (sigh) the PHR. :rolleyes:

Now, over here on Planet USEF, we all know the PHR has been dead in the water as a viable "breed" registry for quite some time. But there is such a complete disconnect between what the JC thinks is appropriate management and what we OTTB owners need as owners and competitors that the JC actually still believes the PHR is a viable alternative! This set of proposals places a burden on TB owners that we really, truly cannot bear.

Moreover, YOUR rights are affected here, too. As things stand right now, if you don't like the rules imposed by your breed registry on name changes (or anything else for that matter), you can always simply opt out of the breed shows and only show USEF, where the rules have traditionally always been broader. That option would be taken away from everybody under this set of proposals.

The proposed rule changes benefit nobody, in my opinion.

I think there's got to be a better solution out there, one which will give the breeders (and the owners - let's face it, I'm as big a pedigree geek as anybody) the trackback data they need without restricting the owner's ability to change a horse's name from something inappropriate to something more in keeping with show ring standards.

Plus - to reiterate this point - I see NO grandfather clause in either of these proposals or any mechanism in place to ensure that those of us who correctly recorded our horse's show names in the first place aren't going to be placed in double jeopardy if this set of proposals passes.

[trubandloki]

For those unregistered horses, they just need to be required to pay enough of a deterrent to stop encouraging them to lose horses. Folks, most of the people against this are paying $1000 + a week for showing. They CAN easily afford to pay for an extra fee to show their unregistered horse, or go to the file cabinet, get their papers, and send in a copy. OR copy their bill of sale, AND get their vet to sign off at their annual Coggins Test appontment that the said horse is the one described on the bill of sale tp the best of their knowledge.

:eek:

Um, wow!

And what about the truly not registered hunter type horses? They are pretty common. Not everyone can afford to purchase a registered horse or afford to pay huge 'fines' at their once per year rated horse show because they happen to own an unregistered horse.

I realize your theory is to penalize people who claim their horse has no registration papers when it really does, but you are really penalizing the small guy who happens to have a mutt horse.

[Phaxxton]

:eek:

Um, wow!

And what about the truly not registered hunter type horses? They are pretty common. Not everyone can afford to purchase a registered horse or afford to pay huge 'fines' at their once per year rated horse show because they happen to own an unregistered horse.

I realize your theory is to penalize people who claim their horse has no registration papers when it really does, but you are really penalizing the small guy who happens to have a mutt horse.
And what about those of us who adopted OTTBs and OTSTBs who, while registered, did not come with their papers for whatever reason? Where would that leave us?

[tabula rashah]

I don't show anymore, but I think this proposal is a very good idea. We spend a lot of work hours tracking offspring and points at my job and it is a major PITA when people have shown a horse under 12 different names. Also as someone who specifically puts a prefix on my horses, I don't really want people going and taking if off.

[War Admiral]

:eek:

Um, wow!

And what about the truly not registered hunter type horses? They are pretty common. Not everyone can afford to purchase a registered horse or afford to pay huge 'fines' at their once per year rated horse show because they happen to own an unregistered horse.

I realize your theory is to penalize people who claim their horse has no registration papers when it really does, but you are really penalizing the small guy who happens to have a mutt horse.

I see your point, and it crossed my mind too.

A possible alternative might be to offer FREE transfers of ownership IF the horse keeps the same Horse I.D. number (though not necessarily name). I'm thinking that might have the same effect without penalizing anybody...??

[Kementari]

Again, you miss the point.

In most breed registries, you have a vote, a voice and a choice. If you don't like the rules, you can lobby to get them changed. Even the AQHA has recently opened the floor to the membership to put forward rule change proposals.

We can't even JOIN the Jockey Club, let alone lobby them for anything. They don't listen, because their oft-stated position is that they only concern themselves with racing Thoroughbreds. The rules may *look* less onerous, but the reality is that if you pick up the phone and call the JC *right now*, you will be told a TB's name cannot be changed once it is done racing, and you will be directed to (sigh) the PHR. :rolleyes:

And if I pick up the phone and call AHA *right now*, I will be told that my Arab's name cannot be changed because she has recorded points with the OEIP, and I will be directed to no one, because that is the answer, period.

The fact that the members of breed associations are not up in arms to demand easier name changes should do something to show that it's really just not that big a deal to show under your horse's registered name.

I do agree that provision needs to be made for OTTBs who come without papers (or any horse who may have been registered at some point but whose papers & name have been lost). And I think that requiring a number to follow a horse regardless of name is the only logical way to do it, anyway (USEF doubtless doesn't do this already precisely because it is logical... :winkgrin:). DNA testing may have merit, though it's yet another fee and quite frankly I'm about fee-ed to death, thanks.

But none of that changes the fact that not being able to choose your own cutesy name to show your horse under is not the end of the world.

[Jesse'sMom]

being a breeder- i too think this is BS- i have horses other than my foals, if i want my foals to be recorded, i do it before t12/31 of their foaling year &Lifetime is only 35.00- so for those breeders like me who care & who want to know- i agree, pay for it like I did.
I just bought a filly, named on paper O'Hara- i bought ehr last week. I just sent in her USEF paperwork naming her Oy Vei. they accepted it.
I DO agree there are serveral horses I woudl **NEVER** use their track names that i own in the show ring
for example

Hometown hoofer
Senator Quagmire
Dreamin' your jeans
dr ran and v- this is my kids horse who is shown as Mr. Brightside
and some i know whos names are
Drink or die- who the hell would want to have the name drink of die announced? or hometown hooker? or yeah- DREAMIN your jeans~ come on...
i feel if the breeder didnt do it- OH WELL... and what is gonna happen is you watch, everyone is gonna show their horses & be like- nope- no papers here- I know i would for my OTTB- USEF needs to remember that about 95% of horses in the world are named for what they are doing- not for shows.. and keep in mind, the JC throws out your first choice, and so on- so alot of TB's are named whatever the hell the JC will accept.
Yewah- this rule gets my *ss too...
so what happens if your already recorded????

[Jesse'sMom]

also to add, watch how many duplicates we end up with..

[War Admiral]

also to add, watch how many duplicates we end up with..

Little known factlet: USEF actually has lots of duplicates *now*, partly because they don't always check or cross-reference, and partly too b/c what's a unique name in Breed Registry A or in Breed Registry B and so on ends up with a conflict when it comes to USEF, which records all breeds...

My own horse came to me from the feedlot auction with the name "O'Malley" on his Coggins - turned out there were six O'Malleys recorded with USEF, and NONE of them was my horse! :eek::lol:

[Jesse'sMom]

no i know they do- but it will really get crazy-
I can name 7 foals with 7 different registries all colts all born the same year the same thing..
thats what i mean- i think it would get nuts
do you have any idea how many buzz lightyears there are?~LOL~Little known factlet: USEF actually has lots of duplicates *now*, partly because they don't always check or cross-reference, and partly too b/c what's a unique name in Breed Registry A or in Breed Registry B and so on ends up with a conflict when it comes to USEF, which records all breeds...

My own horse came to me from the feedlot auction with the name "O'Malley" on his Coggins - turned out there were six O'Malleys recorded with USEF, and NONE of them was my horse! :eek::lol:

[Seal Harbor]

Well, DNA testing to get 'em registered w/ ASHA only costs $50. How much over that d'you reckon USEF would try to get away with charging...? I have my own thoughts on that. :rolleyes:

I'm just trying to find a solution to the data tracking problem that works for EVERYBODY, without forcing some folks to go into the ring with names like "Road Scraper" and "Distinct Disabilities". :D

PHR already does this for $50. If one registers with PHR as well as USEF and it is breeding stock they will do a DNA test.

[Fairview Horse Center]

:eek:

Um, wow!

And what about the truly not registered hunter type horses? They are pretty common. Not everyone can afford to purchase a registered horse or afford to pay huge 'fines' at their once per year rated horse show because they happen to own an unregistered horse.

I realize your theory is to penalize people who claim their horse has no registration papers when it really does, but you are really penalizing the small guy who happens to have a mutt horse.

You would not have to "pay fines once a year", you would only have to pay extra ONCE, IF you choose to not provide a copy of your bill of sale and have your vet sign saying that this horse with the name change is the one that was vetted with the old name.

OR pay $40 for DNA

IF you provide acceptable paperwork to prove who the horse is, there would be NO extra fee.

[Fairview Horse Center]

no i know they do- but it will really get crazy-
I can name 7 foals with 7 different registries all colts all born the same year the same thing..
thats what i mean- i think it would get nuts
do you have any idea how many buzz lightyears there are?~LOL~

Actually you can register 7 foals with the SAME European registry all with the same name.

The duplicates that will happen if this proposal becomes fact is that MANY more horses will have multiple USEF numbers and names, losing all of their history.

[Pat]

:lol:

Second career for Deweycheatemandhow?

Well, I just spewed Coke.

I LOFF Dewey. Bestest trotin' horse ever!

We had a filly at the STB farm this year, "Perfect Penny". Which is fine, and it came from the momma name, "Armbro Penelope". Ok, as a joke, the trainer wanted to change it to "ArmPenArt" (she's by Art Major). NO, no, no. YOU KNOW it somehow would morph into ArmPITart.

Sigh.

I've *tried* to get my SO to let me change Beamer's show name from his registered name, nope... But he did change Scenerys Luck to Nonchalant. I mean really, what the heck does that name mean?? Oh, right, it's a combo of the sire and dam name...

And what about the mutts out there?? Then what?? My Shire cross is UREGISTERED. Not that he'll be showing much, but geez, he's a crossbred from a BYB. And NOBODY here knows for sure what breed The Red Horse is! He looks like a TB, but he could be an Appendix QH for all I know. His name is the one *I* gave him, not the breeder.

Dumb. It'll die.

[bascher]

So what if there was a wonderful pony that parents wanted to buy for their little kid to do short stirrup on it and it had a very inappropriate name. Would they still discriminate against the pony and not buy it just because of the name? I do think that there are parents that would do this...but because I'm not a parent, I'm not going to judge. I was just wondering what everyone thought about this, because someone said that it is stupid to discriminate based on a show name. But what if it is this situation and now just a situation where you don't like the name "just because?" Any thoughts?

[quietly]

I called the USEF office. The newest draft has a Hunter Jumper exception.

[Kementari]

So what if there was a wonderful pony that parents wanted to buy for their little kid to do short stirrup on it and it had a very inappropriate name. Would they still discriminate against the pony and not buy it just because of the name? I do think that there are parents that would do this...but because I'm not a parent, I'm not going to judge. I was just wondering what everyone thought about this, because someone said that it is stupid to discriminate based on a show name. But what if it is this situation and now just a situation where you don't like the name "just because?" Any thoughts?

I know/have known many people who do the breed circuits, and I have never heard of anyone not buying a horse because of its name - whether for the children's divisions or not.

[Coreene]

Well, showing Oliver as Loewenherz, which is his registered name is fine, but my old mare came with the rather unfortunate registered name of My Sassy Snowflake, and boy oh boy you'd better believe that one was changed before she hit the show ring.

[War Admiral]

I called the USEF office. The newest draft has a Hunter Jumper exception.

Hunters *and* Jumpers, or just Hunters? Because the draft that's online has an exception for Hunters but NOT for Jumpers.

Anyway, I'm still of the opinion that the proposal needs to be rejected across the board by ALL disciplines.

And to answer Bascher, I'm not a parent either, but there have definitely been names brought up here and elsewhere that I would feel really morally queasy about presenting at a horse show. A good example would be Autistic Girl (http://www.pedigreequery.com/autistic+girl). :no:

[see u at x]

Wait, so am I understanding it correctly that those of us who have unregistered or grade horses would have to pay an extra fee at every single show just to show our horses??? :eek: :mad:

[Fairview Horse Center]

Wait, so am I understanding it correctly that those of us who have unregistered or grade horses would have to pay an extra fee at every single show just to show our horses??? :eek: :mad:

Only if you don't want to send in a copy of your bill of sale showing who you purchased him from, along with a vet statement that your horse with the new name is the same horse that used to be xyz when you purchased him from his previous owner. If you are the breeder, just send in your stallion service certificate.

If you lost all of your paperwork, then you can pay $40 to do DNA.

[Fairview Horse Center]

Anyway, I'm still of the opinion that the proposal needs to be rejected across the board by ALL disciplines.

I totally agree. We need the one number system, not this proposal.

[see u at x]

Only if you don't want to send in a copy of your bill of sale showing who you purchased him from, along with a vet statement that your horse with the new name is the same horse that used to be xyz when you purchased him from his previous owner. If you are the breeder, just send in your stallion service certificate.

If you lost all of your paperwork, then you can pay $40 to do DNA.

Whew....thank you for clarifying that! Hopefully this will not go anywhere, but if it does, at least getting/submitting a bill of sale or doing DNA would be simple enough. But what a mess this could turn into...

[Beau Cheval]

I I really don't want to show my mare as "Reverence Astarte" when I can avoid it, as it is invariably pronounced wrong.


I was eating an icecream cone while i was reading this, and in the process of LOLing i managed to spew it all over my living room. Thanks. :lol::lol::lol:

[CBoylen]

This means more "lost papers", more "I dunno, we found him in a backyard", more horses in divisions they don't belong in, more breeders unable to track their offspring and more fraud. Plenty of people out there would quietly turn a blind-eye to someone losing papers if the horse has a terrible name.

Absolutely. Most people would chuck the papers rather than show under an ugly name. In the recent past many more people have been willing to include pedigree information when USEF registering a horse, but if identifying the breeding means they have to show under the registered name people will stop doing so.

[pattnic]

I was eating an icecream cone while i was reading this, and in the process of LOLing i managed to spew it all over my living room. Thanks. :lol::lol::lol:

You are TOTALLY welcome! :cool:

Does this mean that you *actually* know who Astarte was?

[Ride'emCO]

So here's my question, and forgive me if it's already been answered, as I didn't read every page: What about the NA Oldenburg registered horses? Reese doesn't have a name on his papers, just a number. So, do they get out of the rule?

[GollyGee]

So the poor Jr rider who just bought an OTTB w/ a nice new USEF name will have to show him under his re name Slambamthankyamam??? LOL some of these names are atrocious and inappropriate for sure.

[War Admiral]

So here's my question, and forgive me if it's already been answered, as I didn't read every page: What about the NA Oldenburg registered horses? Reese doesn't have a name on his papers, just a number. So, do they get out of the rule?

I don't think we know the answer to that yet, sorry. Someone else raised it as to a JC Registered TB with asterisks on the papers where the name is supposed to go.

Fairview Horse Center - I agree w/ you and would totally support the one horse, one number scheme. Ideally, married into the UELN system that already exists (someone else posted about it on SHB)... I have a hard time thinking this would be THAT difficult for USEF to pull off, given the database they already have and the databases they could pull in from their affiliates...

I totally support the breeders in wanting their pedigree data and their produce's show record easily available. I just don't think the proposed method is the one that's going to yield the best results.

[veebug22]

That sucks. With rules like this I would have had to show horses under names such as Eagle's Choice, Gang's Star Fire, Going Bayou Boldly.... uck!!! One of the nice things about NOT showing breed is that I can choose my horse's name without having to pay ridiculously expensive costs to change it. It's much more expensive to change names through breed orgs than the USEF.

[brummelhorsefarm]

My TB's name is "Chance to Dance". Ew.

[ShannonH93]

Yeah, okay. My mare's name is "Roundy" no joke, thats her JC registered name. Who would ever name a horse that? lol

[gubbyz]

I dunno, if I ended up with the race horse "Hoof Hearted" for a second career, you bet I would keep that name! I would love to hear the announcers with that one! :lol:

[Clarion]

Folks, the sport horse breeders are a really tough, noisy lobby, and could very easily get one or the other of these proposals passed if we don't make our voices heard.


Well, WA--
I'm one of those tough, noisy sporthorse breeders I guess :rolleyes:, but I'd just like to point out that I DO Lifetime Register every one of my foals before they are sold, but that really doesn't help a breeder. USEF absolutely does need to take seriously helping breeders be recognized and to be able to track their offspring. BUT... this is not the way to do it. I worked for several years at a TB breeding farm and, geez, I certainly wouldn't want to have to show a horse under most of those names. And I've personally never met a sporthorse breeder who was suggesting forcing people to show under registered names as a realistic method of serving our needs. I mean, I do try to name my youngsters names that I hope people will like, so maybe they will keep them, but I certainly wouldn't want it to be a USEF rule that they had to. So, I think it is a bit of a stretch blaming this idea on us as a group.

[YankeeLawyer]

I find the rule proposal ironic because the only reason I have not changed some of my horse's registered (i.e. breed registry) names is out of respect for their breeders -- and I do provide the USEF with their breeder info, so they can keep track regardless of the fact I have given them different show names. If the proposed rule were implemented, I would have no choice but to change their registered names, too, and all that would do is make it harder for the breeder to keep track of them and cost a fair amount to do (I think it is a few hundred dollars to change a horse's name with the AHS).

[horsegirl888]

:lol:

Took me a while, but that's FUNNY. Thanks for the laugh!

Yes, my sense of humor is rather sadly immature. I apologize.

:lol:

[gabriellemg]

For the Cleveland Bay Horse Society of NA awards program, year end results are listed in the horse's CB registered name and the show name if different. Members are encouraged by not required to compete using the CB registered name. In the results we list breeder, stallion, dam, etc. Many CBs and CB partbreds/sport horses are "lost" because they are not registered, registration not transferred upon sale, and name changes. It is a shame since the gene pool for CBs is so low, and as they "disappear" it does not help the breed profile and valuable genetic stock is lost.

I don't know how to fairly track horses like Clevelands who's genetic variability is decreasing, credit to breeders is lost, fraud and insurance issues. There are many registered names that are terrible. I have a mare that first name is difficult to pronounce and the second name is
"Wilful". Who wants to compete a huge "Wilful" mare?

Perhaps studying some of the European tracking systems might help.

GMG
Texas USA

[Jumphigh83]

Go Nikki Go
Sues Kool Breeze
Handcock Grey Bars
Olsens Beggar Deck
Guns Last Flash
Dreamers Disease.........
PRAY that THIS rule change proposal makes the circular file!!!

[zagafi]

Only if you don't want to send in a copy of your bill of sale showing who you purchased him from, along with a vet statement that your horse with the new name is the same horse that used to be xyz when you purchased him from his previous owner. If you are the breeder, just send in your stallion service certificate.

If you lost all of your paperwork, then you can pay $40 to do DNA.

I don't have a bill of sale, nor did I get my OTTB vetted when I bought him. Paid cash, had an inside track with the track vet to get the scoop on him--so folks like me are just SOL? Oh, I don't have his JC papers, either.

It just seems like this proposal raises too many issues for an awful lot of folks.

[skiddiepony]

I hope so ... my OTTB's registered name is Nobodybeatsbubba. Except everyone did, which is why he does hunters now lol.

[Kementari]

Crystal Gaiz
Incredible Bert
Alpha Cindar

I competed all under their registered names, and no animals or small children were harmed. The world did not explode. The showgrounds where we competed have not, to the best of my knowledge, been demolished in some sort of divine tornado - though it has been many years, so I couldn't swear to it.

At the moment I have "Move Over Moon" (renamed before I found out his JC name, but if I did have to show him as that I'd live, even though I think it's a dumb name - but some people really like it) and "Kementari Jauhara," which makes people's eyes bug out but isn't really fair to consider since I'm the one who named her (I bought her as a not-yet-registered foal). :lol:

[quietly]

I'm not sure if it's Hunters and Jumpers or just Hunters, I talked to the Hunter person. But I imagine that if Hunters got it, Jumpers aren't far behind.

Apparently it seems that the rule was first proposed by the Morgan Committee, apparently a number of the Breeds organizations have issues and want it that way. So it probably won't be rejected by all of the groups because some of them requested it. Any group that doesn't want it will probably have their liaison add an exception.

[okggo]

One number different names. I don't think some registries would really care, I doubt JC will care that I'm showing my mare "Mean Irene" under anything different. I swear some times I think people are sitting around smoking pot when they think up some of these names.

Years ago I rode a JC horse named "Retarded Earthworm" and boy that would be a name I'd be proud to hear over a loud speaker, lol. I'd have to wear a sign that said "Don't blame me, I didn't name him!"

[Janet]

Only if you don't want to send in a copy of your bill of sale showing who you purchased him from, along with a vet statement that your horse with the new name is the same horse that used to be xyz when you purchased him from his previous owner.
How on earth would the vet know what name the previous owner used?
They MIGHT know what name was on the coggins, but I would not count on it. especially for horses bought at auction.

[bascher]

Years ago I rode a JC horse named "Retarded Earthworm" and boy that would be a name I'd be proud to hear over a loud speaker, lol. I'd have to wear a sign that said "Don't blame me, I didn't name him!"

Oh wow, I almost spit out my water all over my laptop...you might have owed me a new computer haha

[SquishTheBunny]

I actually LIKE one of my TB's registered names: Rainbow Bay .. kind of fruity...but so is he!

The other TB has a tattoo...but I dont know how to track down his name (no papers)...think he is canadian TB but not sure.

[firelizardfarm]

I can't wait to hear how the HJ announcers will mangle Schzarad Thundor. I thought I was being kind when I renamed him Sher Khan. Since I lifetime recorded him that way, what will happen under the new rule? Thank god I didn't end up buying Get the Pig.

[Jesse'sMom]

So here's my question, and forgive me if it's already been answered, as I didn't read every page: What about the NA Oldenburg registered horses? Reese doesn't have a name on his papers, just a number. So, do they get out of the rule?

Oldenburg NA changed their rules this year- as of 2008 all horses names are on hte papers & it's 100 to change a name

[TQ]

This specific question has not come up in USHJA Breeders Committee meetings. When we look at the proprosed rule changes we will certainly take all of these discussions into consideration. I think it would be very unlikely that the USHJA Breeders Committee would approve this one.

Remember Breeders are your friends. All those horses you love are the result of somebody's hard work in their breeding program. If you know the breeder of your horse, they would probably love to hear from you and know how "their baby" is doing.

[wolfatbay2002]

If it goes threw oh what a nightmare:eek: A frirend of mine in another state just bought a OTTB whose reg. name is "Justeatme", the horse is for her daughter to show. Imagine the looks and rude remarks, not good. Why do some people pick such nasty or silly names?

[poltroon]

The Jockey Club has such strict naming rules, and some owners have so many foals, that I think they must just start getting punchy when they're trying to come up with the third, fourth, fifth try for a name that TJC will accept.

I don't know if this is the good or the bad on this proposal, but what about horses picking up sponsor prefixes at the Olympic level?

I agree that there are some horses who would not get second careers if they had to be shown under a really awful name. In most of the breed registries, a horse might get a name you don't care for, but it's not like the QH and TB registries where they end up with suggestive and creepy names. You might be able to live with "Quiglui Sureshot" but I think you'd have a hard time selling a junior hunter named "Lets Talk Trash".

And then you might have conflicts within a small area. "Robbi Sue's Mr. Alert" is not likely to be duplicated in your local area, but you could easily end up with a couple of horses on the same circuit with the same registered warmblood name like "Sapphire".

[Blonde Filly]

[QUOTE=War Admiral;3650182]
BUT what of JC registered Thoroughbreds?? The Jockey Club DOES NOT PERMIT a horse's name to be changed after its racing career is over. JC Rules, Section 6(d) (http://www.jockeyclub.com/registry.asp?section=3#six).

I don't see any exception for TBs in either proposal. This, quite honestly, makes my blood boil. :mad:

So, John and David, are you going to meet w/ the Jockey Club officials to see if you can bring them onside and let us change our OTTBs' names? And may I please, pretty please, be a fly on the wall when you try? :lol: :rolleyes:QUOTE]
I'd like to see that one too!!! I'll fly around the room with you for that proposal. If the JC will not accept their own colors and change them..they are not going to change their name rule!!! :lol::lol::lol:

[DancingQueen]

I just can't get that upset about it.
I think making it easier to track horses makes sence, and what is in a name anyways? In the end of the day it's your trip that counts. The fact that your horse is named Perfect Score won't help one bit if you blow out a distance. Lol!
You can always call him whatever you want at home in any case.

[quietly]

BlondeFilly,

I don't think they will have to fight with the Jockey Club. A) it says "breed registered", and as not all TBs are registered with the JC, I'm not sure that that counts.

B) there is already an exception built in for the hunters which says to me that anyone else who as a group wants one, eventers, dressage, jumpers, etc.... can get it.

I really think that everyone is getting hyped up over nothing. At the end of the day I think it will only apply to the Morgans, Arabians, Pasos, etc... those groups that asked for it and just didn't know to include the exceptions when they wrote it. If you're really concerned, fill in a comment thing on the website. Those are reviewed. I know, I've made some and heard back from committee members that they were discussed.

[hunterjumpereqrider62]

i didnt read all the posts. but i dont think showing my TB under the name "cruel son" would be cool.

[Timex]

BlondeFilly,

I don't think they will have to fight with the Jockey Club. A) it says "breed registered", and as not all TBs are registered with the JC, I'm not sure that that counts.

if a TB is not registered with the jockey club, then it's not registered with anyone, and has no papers. it's the same as having a QH cross with no papers, or a grade...whatever. no registered name, so you get to call it whatever you'd like.

(and yes, i know that a tb without papers can be accepted into the books of some of the WB registries for breeding purposes, but that doesn't change the fact that it's not a registered TB.)

[Cat's Afternoon Tea]

My R judge trainer, who has to deal with all of these rule changes, got a big laugh when she saw my that my horse was registered as Who Wrote That Rule on her papers. Now I know why.

[evenstar]

Gosh, just staying home and doing the occaisional schooling show is looking more and more attractive.

[ilaria]

I am just dying laughing over "Dangerous Pet"
brilliant!

[Just My Style]

Glad I never bought Big Brown Beaver or Let's Talk Turkey or Goose Egg.
Yikes. :lol:

[JprAO]

I'll start by saying I don't think we should take this too seriously, but also, I agree with almost everthing above... If breeders want offspring tracked (which I understand) they should be the ones to bear the cost. Practically, if the horse is a gelding and you don't buy it from the breeder, you often don't even get papers and it's hard to take much of a stand on that with a gelding. Also, in the case of some (not all) US 'warmblood' breeders, be careful what you ask for, I'll leave it there.
The TB and QH names are, if nothing else, usually too unwieldy to be practical for show announcers. People don't mind the foreign names so much, since they have some "cache" and sometimes go with a real deal show record.
Not to go off topic, but has anybody seen Deweycheatemnhowe (not sure if I got the spelling right)? He looks like one athletic boy with a great mind, and they do ride him some. I'd take him in a minute to retrain, but I'd shorten his name to "Dewey" and cross-reference!

[IndysMom]

You guys are funny. AQHA has had this rule for years and somehow we've all managed to cope. Yes, you can change your AQHA registered name provided no AQHA points have been earned. It cost me $50.42. The .42 was for the stamp to send a letter.

BTW, I had an OTTB whose name was Satanic Flush (Crimson Satan out of Miss Fourflusher). If I'd had to use his registered name, I would have. On a bad day, I referred to him as the demonic toilet...

[grandprixjump]

There will be a whole lot more GRADE horses showing in the future, till it's time to sell them, then the papers will MIRACULOUSLY be found.

[wolfatbay2002]

I agree with Grandprixjump, my Friend says that if this rule does pass for all "Justeatme" will become just another grade back yard TB and will gladly give up on any points he may have earned.

[RiddleMeThis]

You guys are funny. AQHA has had this rule for years and somehow we've all managed to cope. Yes, you can change your AQHA registered name provided no AQHA points have been earned. It cost me $50.42. The .42 was for the stamp to send a letter.

But that is actually ENFORCEABLE. To show in an AQHA you HAVE to have AQHA papers. You dont need ANY papers to show in a H/J show, so if you dont like the registered name **POOF** horse is not longer registered at all.

[M.K.Smith]

I don't show anymore, but I think this proposal is a very good idea. We spend a lot of work hours tracking offspring and points at my job and it is a major PITA when people have shown a horse under 12 different names. Also as someone who specifically puts a prefix on my horses, I don't really want people going and taking if off.

I have to agree... I think if a horse was registered with a name then that name should be used as its show name. I have an AQHA mare named Light My Redford... I think her name is stupid, but her breeder named her that and if she does well in the show ring or somebody likes her that the breeder deserves some credit and that she should be traceable back to her breeders.

As a breeder myself, I also think that offspring should be traceable back to their breeders. It is so unfortunate that often breeders are producing great youngstock and they get sold on to trainers and are succssful on the show circuit, but nobody knows the bloodlines or the breeder that produced the animal because the horse/pony no longer has any resemblance to it's original name! Also, it makes it next to impossible for breeders to keep track of horses/ponies they have produced and also makes it very difficult to trace back a horse (to its breeders) as well.