someone explain to me what's going on with this horse

[Coup De Des]

http://www.equine.com/Horses/ad_details.aspx?lid=363195&search_id=e2a85b6a-a586-4176-8133-5b6b3a49be64

Anyone?

:no::eek::confused: <- that basically says it all for me. I'm bamboozled!

[onwego]

:eek: :eek: that just looks so unnatural

[lark_b]

It's a halter horse. In halter circles, this is a desirable look, except for that neck. It doesn't appeal to me, and I doubt anyone will be brave enough to defend it here on a very different kind of forum than one where she would be popular, but much like Quaterback, there are going to be some out there that find this sort of extreme type appealing.

[Coup De Des]

did you see the pasterns and the butt shot?!

Is this a result of feeding too much? breeding? Steroids? Is that healthy to have such a young horse so... developed?

[laskiblue]

I see that her HYPP status is N/H. From what I've read about HYPP, that type of heavy muscling is quite common. I'm sure someone who is more knowledgable can explain better.

Laskiblue

[PaintedCash]

Coup, did you mean gaskins? cause I see bulding gaskins/muscles for sure!
Like what was mentioned above.. halter. A lot of the build is from breeding. They just have giant body builder muscles.

[summerhorse]

I see that her HYPP status is N/H. From what I've read about HYPP, that type of heavy muscling is quite common. I'm sure someone who is more knowledgable can explain better.

Laskiblue

Yup that's her problem. But all halter horses are funky looking now regardless of their HYPP status. It's that tendency for extremes in the halter ring for stock horses. (well not limited to stock horses!) It is sad that such a distortion is considered "ideal".

[TheJenners]

By pasterns I think the poster meant how, um, upright she is.

[summerhorse]

By pasterns I think the poster meant how, um, upright she is.

Yes this is common. I was looking at a Paint Horse Journal and there was a champion winning filly in there whose hooves were UNDER her ankles. I mean there was NO angle at all. It was horrifying whether this is what judges are THINKING is good or if they are being paid off.

[Coup De Des]

yeah exactly... Is she really "prime" breeding material? ?

Do they get steriods to develop those muscles at only 2 years of age?! Are they in full work? I haven't seen anything like it before.. Why is her neck so weedy compared to the rest of her?

[Horsezee]

did you see the pasterns and the butt shot?!

Is this a result of feeding too much? breeding? Steroids? Is that healthy to have such a young horse so... developed?


Coup

No worries. Halter horses are bred to 'stand', not to 'ride'. Though some turn out to be better 'rider's' than 'stander's'.

;)

[lark_b]

Not steroids that I know of, they are bred to be muscled, they are fed specially, they are "legged up" as well. And the N/H and H/H horses do tend to be bigger as well. This is the type of thing that is getting ribbons and big money in the halter world right now. We find it horrifying, but they find us horrifying too :). We think they're caricatures of horses, but it all depends on your perspective. *shrug* They aren't made to be ridden. If, however, you happened to have glanced at the rodeo finals this past week, some of the horses they used would fit right in at our barns. Just different types within the same breed.

[goeslikestink]

you are kidding -- thats steriods no horse gets like that at 2yrs

think arnny in a horse -- or mr universe horsewise

did you hear about the man that blow up his arms tehy could take no more and they popped

this is bloomig creul and people show horses like this and make this way
by hlater - do you mean showing as in hand?
that poor horse.. and er horse if thre are more what are peole like

[Coup De Des]

yeah i think it's cruel too...

bred to be judged on how well it stands? ?

Bizarre?!

[goeslikestink]

not on coformation then as the true confomation of a horse has everything in proportion

this is sick

[goeslikestink]

got 4 tiny feet -- and hugmoust body

and they jusging on how well it stands -------- blow it and it will fall over
eventually

[acottongim]

I've boarded at an App barn and a QH barn - that did the "big shows" and won in halter.... really and truely, NO steriods, lots of feed, little turn out, lots of "prep" (and I mean work/legging up/lunging etc), and the horse's natural musceling from breeding (some of the babies are BORN tanks).

Disclaimer: I don't like the look, and don't like the practices of these barns necessarily, but did want to "stick" up for them them and reiterate that believe it or not, they rarely use steriods (never at the barns that I was around - and I worked and showed for one of them too).

[hitchinmygetalong]

(Hitch steps up onto soap box)

This look has been well-rewarded in the show ring, and now every Tom, Dick, and Harriet breeder/trainer is copycatting it and clawing over each other to produce the biggest, bestest, baddest halter horse on the planet. And leaving a trail of crippled, useless horses in their wake.

Until the judges stop pinning this kind of freakish animal, it is NOT going to stop.

I saw a 2yo halter-bred QH filly (who at first glance I would have sworn was a breeding stud) put down because of inoperable OCD damage in her stifles.

It's criminal.

But stopping it has to start at the top. Stop rewarding this and it will die out (literally).

And before all the QH/Paint/Appy folk jump all over me, I will gladly point out travesties in the show ring in other breeds, starting with my own - Morgans. I've stopped even looking at the Morgan Magazine because of all the pseudo-Morgans (aka Saddlebreds) that go trotting off with the tricolors.

Coup, welcome to the wacky world of the American Horse Show Ring. :eek:

[mintyfresh]

It's definitely not steroids. They are muscled up as tiny foals still with their dams.

http://www.mrrevelations.com/dbs/foals/details.php?horse=HOPE&who=foals

http://www.mrrevelations.com/dbs/foals/index.php?who=foals

That's just one example, any "good" halter breeder will have stock who look exactly like that.

I rather dislike the halter look as well. Whether anything is going to change I don't know, but I've been hearing a lot more grumbling among the AQHA people for the last few years so hopefully something will be done eventually. It's also been noted a couple of times in the AQHA magazine that the entries in halter classes have been dropping drastically.

They have introduced the Halter Performance Classes for this coming year. In those classes only horses who have earned their perfomance ROM (ten points in one performance class or ten points overall in a variety of classes) may compete. The winner of the performance halter class then competes against the winner of the regular halter class.

It will be interesting to see if that starts to change anything.

[Sakura]

Sorry guys... this two year old has probably never seen a drop of steroids in her life. That is just how they are bred for the QH halter ring... BIG... and ...Beefy. The tiny "baby doll" head, pencil thin neck and humongous body is very, very desirable and is what wins. Unfortunately many, if not all of these horses never go on to a performance career due to the obvious issues they have with soundness. From what I hear this type of QH (ie. those bread for halter) suffer the most from navicular problems.

[MistyBlue]

Some of the halter horses are HUGE...hubby calls them Ahh-nold Horses. :lol:
Check out this dude:
http://www.thehalterhorse.com/stallion_alley/patch06.jpg

[MNP]

I don't want this to sound as rude as it does, but what is the point of these horses? Do they ever actually do anything or is their sole purpose in life to stand? Wouldn't how well a horse holds up in competition and use prove what is good confo or not? Are these horses ever ridden? Do people who show halter horses do anything else but stand there holding the lead rope?

[hitchinmygetalong]

They have introduced the Halter Performance Classes for this coming year. In those classes only horses who have earned their perfomance ROM (ten points in one performance class or ten points overall in a variety of classes) may compete. The winner of the performance halter class then competes against the winner of the regular halter class.

It will be interesting to see if that starts to change anything.

Quoting this because it deserves to be repeated on page two.

This is most definitely a step in the right direction. Let's hope the judges can make the best judgement for the breed.

[mintyfresh]

I don't want this to sound as rude as it does, but what is the point of these horses? Do they ever actually do anything or is their sole purpose in life to stand? Wouldn't how well a horse holds up in competition and use prove what is good confo or not? Are these horses ever ridden? Do people who show halter horses do anything else but stand there holding the lead rope?


These horses are almost never ridden and only ever show in-hand.

They are introducing a Perfomance Halter Class, where a horse must have it's performance ROM to be able to show. The winner of that class will then compete against the top regular halter horse. Hopefully this will start to encourage more rideable halter horses.

[BravAddict]

Why does one breed horses that cannot be ridden?

Horses have to sing for their supper; making them unrideable denies them their means and puts them in harm's way.

[ddashaq]

I boarded at a barn where the BM had halter horses. That mare is not nearly as massive as the horses he had, many of which were younger than her. There was a two year old gelding that was on something close to 20 lbs of grain per day. And he was never turned out because running burns muscle. :confused: They would get lunged at a trot only for a short time (until they sweated, which was not long in their condition) and then they would get a neck sweat on for a while. Having been fully submersed in dressage and jumping since I was 8, it was quite an eye opener. Then I had to judge halter at the world show for the college judging team. I totally bombed it because I placed a horse in last because when his legs straightened hi hocks VANISHED. It was sick. In any case, the judges placed him first so I did not do very well. Oh, and in halter terms (at least this guys) full feed means grain in front of them 24/7. Nice, huh?

[MNP]

Glad to hear about the Performance halter class, but does that mean they are getting rid of the original halter class and replacing it with Performance or will there be both?

[War Admiral]

Speaking as an old-timer, am I the only one who remembers the day when ALL Quarter Horses had this same general body type? Give or take some weird conformational hiccups in this individual, this WAS the breed standard for foundation QH. So in all honesty I can't quite see what the fuss is all about... Am I missing something?

[caffeinated]

I dunno...

I've seen pictures of some of the foundation sires, and some of the old timey typical QHs... and they were beefy/muscley, sure, but at least had decent(er) looking legs that looked like they would make for a ridable horse that would stay sound.

Take King (http://www.freewebs.com/deercreekfarm/King1.JPG)- definitely beefy, but there's some angulation in the hind legs and not quite as straight pasterns as what's being shown today in halter...

[War Admiral]

I dunno...

I've seen pictures of some of the foundation sires, and some of the old timey typical QHs... and they were beefy/muscley, sure, but at least had decent(er) looking legs that looked like they would make for a ridable horse that would stay sound.

Take King (http://www.freewebs.com/deercreekfarm/King1.JPG)- definitely beefy, but there's some angulation in the hind legs and not quite as straight pasterns as what's being shown today in halter...

Oh I know, I don't disagree in the least about the bizarre leg angles... And I know that's an issue nowadays w/ QH halter horses. But I do think the suggestion of steroids is prolly way off base. All I was trying to get across is that the general body type of this horse, *discounting* the unfortunate leg confo, is actually pretty typical from what I recall.

Back in the 60s one farm I farm-sat regularly had a champion halter mare age 4 who was built like a Sherman Tank, she was huuuuuuuuuuge. And she was fed a perfectly normal diet like that of any other horse. 3 small feeds of grain a day and free choice hay. No weird stuff; I would have known about it b/c I had access to everything at the place. ;)

[cinder88]

..and people wonder why the Impressive line, that introduced HYPP to the QH breed, wasn't eradicated when it began to be obvious he was passing on a heritable illness to his foals?

BECAUSE HYPP makes muscle, and muscle and bulk WIN in the halter ring.

Unfortunately, HYPP also KILLS...But..HEY! Not all of them die and the ones who don't make for a great halter horse!

The breeding of HYPP positive horses should have been stopped YEARS ago. BUt, it makes money and takes ribbons, so the AQHA just let it slide.

When you've got 40 horses in the pen at the World Show, and you can SEE the muscles quiver in some of them, from HYPP....and a couple actually go DOWN in the ring. The handler stands them back up again. I was there and I saw it.

The horse in the next stall to mine also had HYPP and suffocated to death while we waited for the vet.

DON'T get me started! (Oops...too late!)

Cinder

[hitchinmygetalong]

Speaking as an old-timer, am I the only one who remembers the day when ALL Quarter Horses had this same general body type? Give or take some weird conformational hiccups in this individual, this WAS the breed standard for foundation QH. So in all honesty I can't quite see what the fuss is all about... Am I missing something?

How "old timer" are you? Pre-Impressive?

The fuss is all about the fact that for the last 30 years QH breeders have been selectively breeding for the overly-muscled, beef-cattle look. In doing this, they have created a horse that is a "one trick pony" in that it may LOOK like a strong horse, but has so many conformational and metabolic problems that it would be culled from the herd back in the day...

[Auventera Two]

Do you have proof to back up your claim that "HYPP causes muscles?" I have never heard this before at all.

I boarded with an HYPP positive mare, who actually had a couple of episodes and was eventually euthanized, but she wasn't bulked up at all. In fact she looked more like a TB, and her owner rode hunt seat and just pleasure trail riding on her.

[Auventera Two]

How "old timer" are you? Pre-Impressive?

The fuss is all about the fact that for the last 30 years QH breeders have been selectively breeding for the overly-muscled, beef-cattle look. In doing this, they have created a horse that is a "one trick pony" in that it may LOOK like a strong horse, but has so many conformational and metabolic problems that it would be culled from the herd back in the day...

Yes - you're right. This is why I love the Invester line of horses. They succeed in Halter, but they succeed in performance as well. Really good Halter judges place the horses who are heavily muscled, but properly built as well. Horses that could walk into a ring and get down on a cow. Not horses that have to be drug back to their stall because they can barely walk.

I saw a QH mare at a local show one time who was so severely, grotesquely muscled that she was muscle bound. She took itty bitty baby steps on her tiny teacup feet. She didn't even place. The judge didn't even give her a second look. Instead he placed the horses who were a complete picture - not just grotesquely huge.

[arena run]

This horse and its build have been well explained here on this thread. It's GENETICS. A different genetics than the horses in the sport horse world are used to, sure. But still genetics. It's like anything that human beings are fiddling with - especially if it makes money. There will be extremes.

I like the idea of the Performance Halter I've read about. Those In The Know understand that breeding and managing this specialized type of horse is really - umm, shall we just put the word to it? - Stupid? Shortsighted? Damaging to the breed in the long run?

Actually, I think this filly is kinda cute (not what I'd buy for riding but she does what she's bred to do, you know?). :) Big Butts and Pretty Heads. That's how one American Quarter Horse breeding farm bills itself. Ya'll are maybe used to too many Appendix bred Quarters?? :) This one is, admittedly, a bit extreme but look at her pedigree. Kid Clu. I mean, that says it all. Try googling some images of HIM if you want an eyeful. sylvia

[moonriverfarm]

I think of it as sort of like raising veal, or foie gras. To avoid a severe flaming possibility, I'll say no more.

[NoDQhere]

It's a halter horse. In halter circles, this is a desirable look, except for that neck. It doesn't appeal to me, and I doubt anyone will be brave enough to defend it here on a very different kind of forum than one where she would be popular, but much like Quaterback, there are going to be some out there that find this sort of extreme type appealing.

Of course the HUGE DIFFERENCE is that Quaterback is a RIDING HORSE. He is an athlete who is CORRECT in his movement, not extreme, just very very good. The type of QH pictured is a halter horse, good for nothing except standing. Or eating, I suppose :no:

[kellyb]

Do you have proof to back up your claim that "HYPP causes muscles?" I have never heard this before at all.

I boarded with an HYPP positive mare, who actually had a couple of episodes and was eventually euthanized, but she wasn't bulked up at all. In fact she looked more like a TB, and her owner rode hunt seat and just pleasure trail riding on her.

HYPP doesn't cause muscles, it is a disease that paralyzes them. Impressive is the sire who is influential in not only big beefy halter horses, but HYPP as well.

I believe that starting in 07 AQHA will no longer register horses that carry the gene.

"1. Rule 227 will be amended making foals of the calendar year 2006 & after ineligible for registration if they are descendants of the stallion Impressive, AQHA #0767246 & found to by HYPP Positive (H/H).

2. Additionally, Rule 227 will be amended to provide that foals of 2010 & later that are found to be HYPP positive (N/H) will only be eligible for registration as Geldings or Non-breeding mares. "

As far as the filly, I have to agree with War Admiral. QH's aren't generally thin racks of skin and bone, it's not news when you find one with big shoulders and hips.

Spend any amount of time checking out foundation sires, you will see they all have that classic Bulldog look. King, Wimpy, Leo, etc...

The mare is slightly mismatched but take into account her age...she's 2. Did your horse look like he did the rest of his life when he was 2 years old? Chances are probably not. She still has some growing to do where she will lose the 'coltish' face and gain a thicker neck.

[sidepasser]

Well danged, one topic I actually know a bunch about - lol...first off, let me say that it isn't true that all halter horses just stand around and do nothing but look beefy and brawny..many also ride once the show career is over. Not as many these days as before..but I ride a halter bred mare and she is a sweetie..she jumps too. I will see how she conditions but she wasn't jumped until age 6, no issues there, and only trail ridden and light arena work..no navicular and actually has better hooves than the TB I have. So we'll see.

Steroids - don't really need them..these horses are bred this way, they come out looking like a brick outhouse. They get conditioned in many ways, hotwalkers - longeing - ponying - etc. They are fed top quality hay and grain, and some yes, are overfed, but most are fed pretty normally with supplements, etc. (some will do that though in any discipline). Their necks are sweated to keep them thinner and they are bred to have big gaskins, forearms, butts and chests. Some do look odd, grotesque even but then again I also think that of the "muscle bound" men/woman that are in competitions..so each to his/her own in that regard.

In any breed one sees fads come and go and the overly beefy horse may go the way of the dinosaur and things may swing back to a more performance bred halter horse..I've been around them for over 30 years and have seen the penduleum (sp) swing back and forth.

But the halter bred horse can be ridden and actually this mare has a jog to die for - now to convince her that striding out is "ok"..and that she can do a hand gallop instead of just a lope..(she does not trope thank heavens as that is a bugger to fix)..she just lopes along and now must learn to pick the pace up a bit as she was a western horse first.

In many breeds there are horses that are extreme in one direction or another..I prefer to stay in the middle, have a nice looking horse that also rides.

[Auventera Two]

HYPP doesn't cause muscles, it is a disease that paralyzes them. Impressive is the sire who is influential in not only big beefy halter horses, but HYPP as well.

I believe that starting in 07 AQHA will no longer register horses that carry the gene.

"1. Rule 227 will be amended making foals of the calendar year 2006 & after ineligible for registration if they are descendants of the stallion Impressive, AQHA #0767246 & found to by HYPP Positive (H/H).

2. Additionally, Rule 227 will be amended to provide that foals of 2010 & later that are found to be HYPP positive (N/H) will only be eligible for registration as Geldings or Non-breeding mares. "

As far as the filly, I have to agree with War Admiral. QH's aren't generally thin racks of skin and bone, it's not news when you find one with big shoulders and hips.

Spend any amount of time checking out foundation sires, you will see they all have that classic Bulldog look. King, Wimpy, Leo, etc...

The mare is slightly mismatched but take into account her age...she's 2. Did your horse look like he did the rest of his life when he was 2 years old? Chances are probably not. She still has some growing to do where she will lose the 'coltish' face and gain a thicker neck.

Great post - I agree with you. And good point the horse is only 2. QHs aren't exempt from being un-finished and under-developed at 2. She is even out more as she ages. No horse looks complete and perfect at 2.

[hundredacres]

Speaking as an old-timer, am I the only one who remembers the day when ALL Quarter Horses had this same general body type? Give or take some weird conformational hiccups in this individual, this WAS the breed standard for foundation QH. So in all honesty I can't quite see what the fuss is all about... Am I missing something?

I remember when QH's looked athletic. They were heavy in the hind from working, turning and stopping - but they didn't look anything like THIS. They didn't look deformed. They were also in proportion - they had bigger heads. What happened to their head? Please don't tell me they are breeding for small heads to make the body appear even larger!

When I was at Hoosier Horse fair this year I saw a horse that looked like this and I couldn't take my eyes off of him. The owner was an ancient old cowboy......so my initial reaction was to think the poor horse was victim of some archaic horse care that never evolved. I didn't know this was a "new" thing. The horse looked depressed to me too...but thats a matter of opnion. They call that a well-behaved horse.

But this also explains the reason why my stupid SIL who shows QH's takes her horses OFF HAY for 6 weeks prior to a show. I have never had the balls to ask her because she's a total idiot and arguing with her is like slamming my head against the wall.

[War Admiral]

How "old timer" are you? Pre-Impressive?


Haha, WAYYYYYYYYY pre-Impressive, yes. And I do understand what you are talking about. Haven't stayed totally au courant but I'm pretty familiar w/ the issues you describe.

[BravAddict]

I reiterate...

Why does one breed horses that cannot be ridden?

What is the mental process there? What happens if the horse doesn't succeed? What if the horse is sold? Where do they go? What do they do for the next twenty years? Who takes care of them?

This is a question of ethics. I am thoroughly intolerant of moral relativism and saying that making horses with a diminished chance of a high quality of life is okay just because "different strokes for different folks" stinks of bad ethics.

No. It is *not* the same. The WBFSH did a survey of what 19 of the sporthorse registries include in their summarized breeding aim. Health, soundness, or durability was EXPLICITLY mentioned in the aim of over HALF of them.
When asked to rank traits by importance (jumping ability, gaits, conformation, dressage ability, behavior, etc), the BWP, FWB, NRPS, and GOV rated "Health" highest. Among all the traits and all the registries, "Health" was overall more important than competition in driving, competition in eventing, competition in dressage, temperament, and fertility.

Danish Warmbloods: "A riding horse with a big performance ability in either dressage or show jumping, able to compete at international level. The horse is noble, sizeable and subtle with good health in use and high reproductive
ability."

Bavarian Warmbloods: "Riding horse that performs well in the sport disciplines dressage, show jumping and eventing with an elegant conformation and willingness to work, a reliable temperament, a good health, a high durability and a good fertility."

Oldenburg: "A noble, generously lined, high performing sport horse with active impulsion and space gaining, elastic movements which, because of its predisposition, is permanently suitable for any type of sport (dressage,
show jumping, eventing, driving)."

http://www.wbfsh.org/docs/koenen.pdf
The survey and it's results. I compare those attitudes with those expressed by the AQHA in their mission statement. Where do they express a commitment to producing healthy horses? Where do they express a sense of responsibility? Is ANYONE here going to *really* truly tell me that the attitude of the halter world is just as ethically sound as that of the registries I just mentioned?

There is NOTHING in this world to keep a powerful, athletic horse from having the structural integrity to be sound and safe and happy his whole life (meaning USEFUL). Except, evidently, for the attitude that "This is my property and I'll do with it what I please, and because I am entitled, nobody can tell me differently."

Clarification...this is not about the work involved. I believe that there are JUST as many people out there breeding for sound, useful western riding/working horses as there are breeding for sound, useful sporthorses. Just so this doesn't become about English vs. Western or something.

Flame away.

[mintyfresh]

Glad to hear about the Performance halter class, but does that mean they are getting rid of the original halter class and replacing it with Performance or will there be both?

There will be both and at each show the winner of the Performance Halter class will compete against the winner of the regular Halter Class in a championship class.

The hope being to encourage a more all around halter horse and to get more people back into halter who have been scared off because of the extremes it has moved to. The AQHA is trying to fix what is wrong, much like the work they have done in the western pleasure classes.

Personally, I think there are still some nice halter lines. This is my guy back in his heyday http://www.metalmom.com/MT%20Congress.jpg . He's 100% halter bred, sire is Windchester (18th all time QH sire for halter and performance horses) and his dam Jodi Mac Bee is out of the same line as Jackie Bee.

My guy has his youth performance ROM with points from Hunter Hack to Reining and everything inbetween. At his best he was jumping 4' and at 18 the only soundness issue he has is heaves, which has nothing to do with the halter breeding. No halter points though as I often, lovingly, refer to him as "the mistake" (what halter bred QH comes out with a head that needs warmblood size halters and bridles? LOL).

[sidepasser]

In regards to HYPP - here's a link

http://www.vgl.ucdavis.edu/~lvmillon/hypp/hypp_facts.html

They have done a lot of research on this disease, I was around in the 80's when it was first being noticed that some Impressive breds "just weren't right" - we called it tying up syndrome, Impressive syndrome..etc. as there was not an actual name for it at that time (at least we show folks didn't know the correct name) but we knew there was something a bit odd about the number of Impressive bred babies that were "off" a bit.


Some horses are asymptomatic, never show a single symptom and yet are postive for the flaw. Others are full blown and have to euthanized. Sad to see, and I am glad that the AQHA finally stepped up to the plate and recognized that something had to be done. Now if they can just do something about the N/H horses still being bred..it makes sense to me that this can be eradicated by simply NOT breeding H/H, or N/H horses that it would be a simple thing to get rid of it in one generation..but then again, I have to remember to take off the rose colored glasses, because unfortunately..some people just want to make money. I simply could not knowingly do that to a horse.

[arena run]

"Ireiterate...

Why does one breed horses that cannot be ridden?"



Money. There is money to be made. THAT's why. sylvia

[Auventera Two]

Some people do not enjoy riding horses. Some people would rather show them in hand. Yes, I'm sure there's money involved too, as with every discipline.

I've been in and out of QH barns for a lot of years, showed them, owned them, did lessons with western trainers, and all that, and honestly I have only seen a grand sum of ONE horse that there is no way could be ridden - the mare I told you about at the local show. All the others were muscled, but well able to be ridden in performance arenas!

I personally visited this farm for 2 days and met almost every horse in the barn. http://sheriffstockfarm.com/imagined.htm

They were lovely horses who weren't grotesque and extreme. They were heavily muscled and looked like they could smash you with one eyelash, but they were lovely animals. Very gentle, sweet, curious, and I saw several of them worked in the round pen or the indoor. They asked the horses to extend their stride, and there was absolutely nothing about any of their horses that said they "couldn't be ridden" if they failed at Halter!

Sure you may find extreme grotesque horses out there. They're in EVERY discipline. Warmbloods too! But they're the exception - not the rule.

I know what HYPP is. I was responding to Cinder88's claim that the disease CAUSES heavy muscling, and thereby she was implying that halter breeders WANT HYPP in their herds to increase muscle mass. That's how I took it anyway. And if that was incorrect, then she needs to clarify.

Also - my mare was bred to The Invester, here at this site http://www.danmcwhirter.com/home/.

We spent a whole day at the farm with Dan and Carol and saw all their horses. Their horses excel at both Halter and performance disciplines. The horses were HUGE, but we saw some of them being ridden, and we saw all the trophies and ribbons on the walls and stalls from both halter and performance classes. In fact, there are photos on their site of The Invester winning in Halter classes, AND working cows!

My mother worked at the farm who stood Conclusive Lee (Impressive son.) Not sure who owns him now - anyway, he was a halter champion, as well as a performance champion. My mother showed Halter horses for the farm, and we have lots of pictures of beautiful 2 and 3 year olds winning at halter that could EASILY get tacked up and go on a trail ride or work a cow. They had good conformation and dispositions.

It's just incorrect, and not fair to assume that Halter horses are worthless because they cannot be ridden. Again, I will say that I have personally only seen one such horse who was so grotesquely muscled (and fat too) with tiny teacup feet, that she was lame.

[sidepasser]

No you aren't the only old timer that remembers that when most Qhs didn't top 15 hands and 15.2 was considered "huge"..and most were bulldoggy and very athletic with big ole heads - lol..then over the years, more and more TB blood until now there are some QHs that one can't tell the horse is EVEN a QH except on paper..look just like Tbs with the same amount of height, lean body type, and movement.

Not flaming - we don't breed QHs anymore, got out in 91 and will likely (unless we buy a mare and she happens to be foal) ever breed any mares of any breed again. But within the breed - you can have it all - beefcake to twiggy..cows to dressage, reining to racing..and they can all be registered QHs.

If you are an oldtimer - you might remember a horse called Blackburn..nice athletic horse that was foundation stock - we owned a mare that was a granddaughter of that horse, she could do everything including jump..she could also cut cows and was known to "work" them on her own out in the pasture if they were intruding on her space. Really nice old mare and yep, again, nice does not a broodmare make (exceptional yes, nice no) so she was never bred and died in her late 20's. Old mare toted many children round the ring, then the grownups in the jumpers and the teens in rodeos..just a good old all arounder that was sound till she died.

Anyway she also had that big butt, massive muscled gaskin, long neck but had a head to beat the band, personally I like the head to fit the body - in her case, it took a XL bridle..lol and she was a smallish QH at 14.2.

[Marli]

IMO- this is a product of the past 20-30 yrs. of selective breeding and genetics. I've been around some of these big, beefy horses and not one of them was given steroids. They are conditioned to make the most of their genes and although this may appeal to some it's repulsive to others, but really no different than the selective breeding that's occurred within other breeds of horses.

Personally, I like a good lookin' QH, but one that's built to perform and be athletic besides just having the muscling. And my only real qualm with this type of halter breeding is the decrease that's followed along the genes in correlation to the size of their feet. Any horse needs to have a good sized foot underneath them to carry the weight of their bodies, along with the intended use of the horse, and the decrease in the size of their hooves through the years (and this type of selective breeding) is what destines them to developing foot problems, ie; navicular syndrome.

And again, as for this type of 'look', it's all determinant on what individuals want their horses to look like. JMHO

[appaloosalady]

I've got a couple of QH mares that I bought as "dual purpose" horses - they are riding horses and will be broodmares. They are halter bred and are big girls, but they do everything - reining, pleasure, cow work, trail, etc. They are more like the foundation QH should be - big and beautiful yet extremely athletic. Not all halter horses are worthless. Wanted to add that by big I don't mean tall. The tallest of the 2 is about 15.2 : )

[FlashGordon]

The scary thing is the breeding N/H and H/H horses...... yikes.... no thanks.

It is sad, without the freakish muscling that could be a really pretty mare.

[mayhew]

No you aren't the only old timer that remembers that when most Qhs didn't top 15 hands and 15.2 was considered "huge"..and most were bulldoggy and very athletic with big ole heads - lol..then over the years, more and more TB blood until now there are some QHs that one can't tell the horse is EVEN a QH except on paper..look just like Tbs with the same amount of height, lean body type, and movement.



I'm not sure I understand--one complaint: QHs are too beefy and muscled. They used to be able to work and now just stand there looking big.

Another complaint: QHs are too much like TBs (tall and thin). They used to be able to work and now just stand there looking thin.

Which is it?

[kellyb]

I reiterate...

Why does one breed horses that cannot be ridden?

What is the mental process there? What happens if the horse doesn't succeed? What if the horse is sold? Where do they go? What do they do for the next twenty years? Who takes care of them?

This is a question of ethics. I am thoroughly intolerant of moral relativism and saying that making horses with a diminished chance of a high quality of life is okay just because "different strokes for different folks" stinks of bad ethics.

No. It is *not* the same. The WBFSH did a survey of what 19 of the sporthorse registries include in their summarized breeding aim. Health, soundness, or durability was EXPLICITLY mentioned in the aim of over HALF of them.
When asked to rank traits by importance (jumping ability, gaits, conformation, dressage ability, behavior, etc), the BWP, FWB, NRPS, and GOV rated "Health" highest. Among all the traits and all the registries, "Health" was overall more important than competition in driving, competition in eventing, competition in dressage, temperament, and fertility.

Danish Warmbloods: "A riding horse with a big performance ability in either dressage or show jumping, able to compete at international level. The horse is noble, sizeable and subtle with good health in use and high reproductive
ability."

Bavarian Warmbloods: "Riding horse that performs well in the sport disciplines dressage, show jumping and eventing with an elegant conformation and willingness to work, a reliable temperament, a good health, a high durability and a good fertility."

Oldenburg: "A noble, generously lined, high performing sport horse with active impulsion and space gaining, elastic movements which, because of its predisposition, is permanently suitable for any type of sport (dressage,
show jumping, eventing, driving)."

http://www.wbfsh.org/docs/koenen.pdf
The survey and it's results. I compare those attitudes with those expressed by the AQHA in their mission statement. Where do they express a commitment to producing healthy horses? Where do they express a sense of responsibility? Is ANYONE here going to *really* truly tell me that the attitude of the halter world is just as ethically sound as that of the registries I just mentioned?

There is NOTHING in this world to keep a powerful, athletic horse from having the structural integrity to be sound and safe and happy his whole life (meaning USEFUL). Except, evidently, for the attitude that "This is my property and I'll do with it what I please, and because I am entitled, nobody can tell me differently."

Clarification...this is not about the work involved. I believe that there are JUST as many people out there breeding for sound, useful western riding/working horses as there are breeding for sound, useful sporthorses. Just so this doesn't become about English vs. Western or something.

Flame away.


I am curious as to how much time you have spent with top QH halter trainers/barns to say that no halter horses are ever ridden?

I think you are kind of going out on a limb when you say these horses aren't bred to be ridden...just because they start out life as a halter star doesn't mean they never see a saddle. Nor are they abused or subject to any worse quality of life than any other breed that is exhibited.

The breed is very versatile...you have your leggy 16.3hh QH hunter stars, you have your fatty halter horses, you have your function over form cowhorses, etc. In my life thus far I have yet to come across a QH who was only suited to one thing and one thing only...if one discipline doesn't work out then there are 20 others to try.

So you raise a QH to be shown in halter and it doesn't work out...big deal - you find one of the many other things he is suited for - reining, western pleasure, cow horse, etc.


What is the mental process there? What happens if the horse doesn't succeed? What if the horse is sold? Where do they go? What do they do for the next twenty years? Who takes care of them?

This quote is kind of silly, it's like saying, what if your Warmblood turns out to be a puke under saddle, it moves like a sack of bricks and can't jump a foot...big deal. What do you do? You find something else for it to do - even if its just giving the horse to someone who doesn't show or doesn't care about movement/conformation...so your failed halter QH's are no different.

Here is part of the AQHA mission statement..

"To record and preserve the pedigrees of the American Quarter Horse while maintaining the integrity of the breed."

Integrity of the breed obviously has to encompass health...

[Aggie4Bar]

Here is part of the AQHA mission statement..

"To record and preserve the pedigrees of the American Quarter Horse while maintaining the integrity of the breed."The interesting thing about that statement is that there's no uniformity within the breed as you pointed out in your comment about leggy hunter types versus fatty halter types. There is certainly versatility within the breed, but many of the horses are not bred for versatility.

[kellyb]

The interesting thing about that statement is that there's no uniformity within the breed as you pointed out in your comment about leggy hunter types versus fatty halter types. There is certainly versatility within the breed, but many of the horses are not bred for versatility.

Well, just because there are different types doesn't mean that they can't do more than just one thing. Some of your stockier ranch-type horses may only be suited to western events - but there are so many things you can do within western...reining, cow, pleasure, trail, etc. The huntery type QH's may be a little too long and leggy to get around a barrel quickly, but they can double as western pleasure/riding horses, etc.

[sidepasser]

I'm not sure I understand--one complaint: QHs are too beefy and muscled. They used to be able to work and now just stand there looking big.

Another complaint: QHs are too much like TBs (tall and thin). They used to be able to work and now just stand there looking thin.

Which is it?

The breed has changed from short (13.3 to 14.3) bulldog type that was bred to work cows, do ranch work, etc. and racing at the 1/4 mile (hence the name) to tall, leggy, hunterish types that couldn't hold a cow if it had to. But because there is such diversity within the breed, and the "old style" QH was getting bred out in favor of TB body with QH brains, the NFQHA was established to preserve the old lines QHs. Many old style QH breeders have joined this new association in order to preserve the talents/abilities/bloodlines of the old QHs before it is diluted beyond redemption.

halter horses that never ride is a myth - I have a halter mare - she rode my big old butt yesterday, and we did trot sets and pole work. However, some people choose not to ride or cannot ride and handling halter horses allows them to have a horse life beyond TV and DVDs. There are some halter horses out there, just like other types and breeds, that have been ruined by bad breeding (hoof size too small, or too musclebound to move) but the majority of halter horses could be ridden if the owner wanted to ride them. Depends on the owner I suppose.

No one I don't believe said anything about the tall thin horses just standing there looking thin - what was said was those types of QHs (because they are a type within the breed) cannot do the functional work that the original QH was known for - handling cows, heavy ranch work. I suppose there are a few that could, but most at less than 1,000 lbs would get yanked off their hooves and those that are too tall, just can't get in the dirt to do the work. Kinda like asking my TB to cut cows- he might try but would be a total failure because he isn't built for the job. These tall lean types can't get down and low, don't have the muscling and weight to hold a steer. But there were people who loved the QH mind but wanted a TB look, so the horses were infused with lots of TB blood and there ya go -long, lanky, lean, hunters and dressage types within the original QH breed.

What old time QH people hate to see is the breed being one extreme (so heavily muscled it can't move) or so tall and lanky it no longer resembles a QH at all. A happy medium would be nice, but alas..it's the most popular breed registry I believe in the world..so now there is something for everyone, and those that want to preserve the old "do it all" horses now have a registry for doing so.

[mayhew]

Ah. Thanks for the explanation.

[Anselcat]

RE: whether HYPP causes big muscles ...

HYPP is associated with bigger muscling. I don't think anyone knows for sure whether the disease known as HYPP and larger muscling is caused by the SAME genetic mutation, or to mutations that tend to be inherited together. Impressive was a popular sire because he passed on the genetic tendency toward muscling. Look here for a breed of cattle (Belgian Blue) with "double muscling" due to genetics:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/7gyst

I don't know whether Belgian Blues get a HYPP-like disease, just showing that massive muscling can be inherited in a fairly simple genetic manner.

Here is a good site on HYPP: http://www.tufts.edu/vet/sports/hypp.html

[caffeinated]

I'm not sure I understand--one complaint: QHs are too beefy and muscled. They used to be able to work and now just stand there looking big.

Another complaint: QHs are too much like TBs (tall and thin). They used to be able to work and now just stand there looking thin.

Which is it?

It's both :)

My biggest problem with the big halter horses isn't really the muscle mass, but the leg conformation a lot of those horses seem to be blessed with.

The too-tall-too-thin looking QH's seem just as strange to me, honestly.

I think because the QH does so many different disciplines, and people want to do well in those disciplines, they are breeding to extremes depending on what they compete in, so different branches of the breed are reaching new extremes. So you have short, overly muscley post-legged halter horses, way too tall with oddly proportioned legs and body and skinny necked HUS horses, and a variety in between. It's almost as if they need to split the registry into sections, giving each type its own studbook or something.


Personally I like the cutting/roping bred QHs the best, but I'm wacky that way

[bugsynskeeter]

Look here for a breed of cattle (Belgian Blue) with "double muscling" due to genetics:

http://preview.tinyurl.com/7gyst

I don't know whether Belgian Blues get a HYPP-like disease, just showing that massive muscling can be inherited in a fairly simple genetic manner.


As far as I know from what I've been taught - they don't show any problems such as HYPP. But then again, most of the belgian blues don't stay around long enough to find out...

[kellyb]

HYPP is associated with bigger muscling.

Only because Impressive (the QH) was a halter sire...he was a beefy guy. He is the one who passed along HYPP.

[Anselcat]

Only because Impressive (the QH) was a halter sire...he was a beefy guy. He is the one who passed along HYPP.

Respectfully disagree that he was beefy only because he was a halter sire -- I think he also had a genetic predisposition toward 'unnaturally' big muscles that could be passed to his offspring, and which was associated in some way with HYPP.

Would love to hear from anyone with better understanding of the muscle/disease association ...


(and for the record, I am a fan of Foundation Quarter horses and ranch horses, i am not slamming the stock horse build).

[JoZ]

I know what HYPP is. I was responding to Cinder88's claim that the disease CAUSES heavy muscling, and thereby she was implying that halter breeders WANT HYPP in their herds to increase muscle mass. That's how I took it anyway. And if that was incorrect, then she needs to clarify.

From what I've heard, she is correct. The nerve misfiring that causes the twitching "exercises" the surrounding muscle and makes it larger/bulkier. The reason HYPP is lethal is that the heart is a muscle... :no:

[bugsynskeeter]

Umm...How could you forget:

Smart Chic Olena
Smart Little Lena
Dual Pep
Reminic
Greys Starlight

and as far as HYPP...HYPP doesn't cause double muscling...double muscling is a genetic mutation that causes HYPP...
The double muscling is caused by an enzyme that does not restrict muscle development. This enzyme mutation can occur in either the homozygous or heterozygous forms (that's why horses can be HYPP HH or NH). NH horses will not exhibit a total double muscling, but they will exhibit more muscling then a NN horse.

at least, that's what I've always learned...

[bugsynskeeter]

I honestly don't have any research dealing with horses...only double muscled cattle. If you want those, I can PM you links...

[philosoraptor]

I don't want this to sound as rude as it does, but what is the point of these horses? Do they ever actually do anything or is their sole purpose in life to stand?

Probably just exist to earn ribbons so the offspring can be sold for big bucks... to other people who want to breed and do the same thing. Some people have horses not to ride but to earn money & prestige.

I know most of you here aren't into heavy drafts, but this reminds me of the things seen in the heavy draft ring. Not only are they bred for ribbons, not functionality, they're cared for and shod in such a way they're not useful for anything other than the show ring. They're shod with special shoes (eg. american Scotch Bottoms) that cause the foot to spread to dinnerplate size. The result is a horse who can't be turned out because he may lose the oversized shoe or damage the hoof. Their only work is "show conditioning" which is just exercise for the purpose of building muscle (not doing any real work). Big and beefcake are the in-thing with certain breeds.

[VivaBaby]

No you aren't the only old timer that remembers that when most Qhs didn't top 15 hands and 15.2 was considered "huge"..and most were bulldoggy and very athletic with big ole heads - lol..

I own one of those!! I'm fond of saying she's quite a broad broad. Ha! 15.1 hands, gi-normous head and gi-normous butt. 98.sumthin% foundation-bred. She's got legs and feet built for work. She's almost 20 now and doesn't show a sign of arthiritis or any another problems. She's just a good, old fashioned workin horse. A stark contrast to the horse I owned before I bought her.

The first horse I ever owned was adopted from a rescue. I was much less educated then. He taught me some harsh lessons. But, honestly, I wouldn't change a thing. Despite his issues I have many wonderful memories and learned a lot of positives too. He was a 16 hand, Impressive bred beastie with tiny, tiny feet. He was beyond beautiful as long as you didn't look at his legs or feet. His personality captured everyones' affection within moments. I had to put him down before he was 7. Navicular cysts that "blew out". There was almost nothing left of the nav. bones and severe arthritis had taken over every joint in his back half. He lived in constant pain.

I too am eager for the day when horses that have no useful life beyond standing in a show ring are no longer the fashion.

[twhrider13]

First of all, let me start with this little disclaimer. I do not own or have any interest in QHs at all. If I had could only show WP or QH halter, I would probably shoot myself. (Heck, if I could only show TWH halter, I would probably shoot myself. I just don't like halter classes.) I live in a part of the world where the QH is king. I have been laughed at, ridiculed, and called crazy for having "them racking horses." (I only have one horse that's registered Racking, btw. That's just the general redneck term for all gaited horses.) I saw an ad in the newspaper for a trail ride several weeks ago. Apparently, due to all the complaints, the ride had been split: one trail ride for "racking horses" and one for "everyone else." Yes, I'm serious.

Anyway, even though most people in my area are ignorant cowboy-wannabes, I still don't begrudge them their preferences. I have met just as many nice QH people as obnoxious ones. I don't understand QH breeding and showing; therefore, I'm not going to march up to these people and tell them everything they're doing wrong. I can sympathize with them about (dare I say it?) breed prejudice because I've had it pointed in my direction any number of times. If they're taking good care of their horses, what's it to me?

I understand that most people on this board are most familiar with sporthorses. I, personally, wouldn't know a sporthorse if it fell out of the sky and landed on my doorsteps. I understand that a lot of people here have limited exposure to Western-type disciplines (and gaited disciplines as well). What I don't understand is why every time something unfamiliar comes up, it's labelled unnatural, ridiculous, or abusive. Many here are very, very quick to cry foul at something they don't understand. (Look up the never-ending Big Lick thread if you don't believe me.) It's so much easier, I suppose, to throw rocks rather than trying to educate oneself. :(

*Zips up flame suit*

[bugsynskeeter]

First of all, let me start with this little disclaimer. I do not own or have any interest in QHs at all. If I had could only show WP or QH halter, I would probably shoot myself. (Heck, if I could only show TWH halter, I would probably shoot myself. I just don't like halter classes.) I live in a part of the world where the QH is king. I have been laughed at, ridiculed, and called crazy for having "them racking horses." (I only have one horse that's registered Racking, btw. That's just the general redneck term for all gaited horses.) I saw an ad in the newspaper for a trail ride several weeks ago. Apparently, due to all the complaints, the ride had been split: one trail ride for "racking horses" and one for "everyone else." Yes, I'm serious.

Anyway, even though most people in my area are ignorant cowboy-wannabes, I still don't begrudge them their preferences. I have met just as many nice QH people as obnoxious ones. I don't understand QH breeding and showing; therefore, I'm not going to march up to these people and tell them everything they're doing wrong. I can sympathize with them about (dare I say it?) breed prejudice because I've had it pointed in my direction any number of times. If they're taking good care of their horses, what's it to me?

I understand that most people on this board are most familiar with sporthorses. I, personally, wouldn't know a sporthorse if it fell out of the sky and landed on my doorsteps. I understand that a lot of people here have limited exposure to Western-type disciplines (and gaited disciplines as well). What I don't understand is why every time something unfamiliar comes up, it's labelled unnatural, ridiculous, or abusive. Many here are very, very quick to cry foul at something they don't understand. (Look up the never-ending Big Lick thread if you don't believe me.) It's so much easier, I suppose, to throw rocks rather than trying to educate oneself. :(

*Zips up flame suit*

AMEN! If you don't like it...look away...

what part of AL are you from? Because the part of AL I'm from is HUGE walking horse area...

[twhrider13]

AMEN! If you don't like it...look away...

what part of AL are you from? Because the part of AL I'm from is HUGE walking horse area...

Bless your heart...I knew I couldn't be the only one who felt that way.

North and South AL are both full of Walking Horses. For some reason, the backwater part of East-Central AL that I'm from (Alexander City area for those who've heard of it:lol: ) is wrapped up with QH people. There are WH people, but you have to know where to look.

Sorry about the minor hijack. :)

[Ember]

Quote

"I think of it as sort of like raising veal, or foie gras. To avoid a severe flaming possibility, I'll say no more."

This is exactly what I thought, then I got a little naseous.

[twhrider13]

We have this too where I live on certain rides, and there is actually a really good reason for it. Gaited horses typically move very fast. They can gait twice as fast as a non-gaited horse can trot. And on some trail rides, there is a no canter/gallop rule, so that means you let your horse gait, or you trot. And the gaited horses end up flying around bends in the trail and running right up on the butts of horses doing a moderately slow jog trot. And that causes a problem. The gaited horses are technically going as fast as a horse would be if it were cantering. So they divide gaited from non-gaited so the pace is more uniform and therefore, safer. ;) It has nothing to do with discriminating or being ignorant, or anything else a person might think it means.

The way that you explain it makes sense. I can understand why someone would want to do it for safety purposes, but I don't understand why a person riding a gaited horse couldn't slow it down some. I know all my horses have a pretty good variation between "really slow, but still in a gait flat walk" and "hauling ass running walk," LOL. Oh, well, if that's how people want to do it, it's fine with me. :)

I know the people who are involved with this trail ride(s), though, and I know how screwy they are. I don't trail ride with large groups of people, so it doesn't matter to me. Almost all the "trail riders" around here are incredibly obnoxious, anyway, whether gaited or non-gaited. I'm betting so-and-so with gaited horses made so-and-so with QHs mad, and now we have two trail rides with ten people apiece so the two "so-and-sos" don't get drunk and fight it out on the yearly ride! :lol: (Please note, I don't think all trail riders are like this--just many of the ones I know personally!)

Ok, back to your regularly scheduled thread. I apologize yet again.

[Dazednconfused]

Why do people show halter? Or have horses that aren't ridden?

Because, like any horse 'sport' people find it fun. I show halter (not QHs, though, Arabians) and I am having way more fun showing in that than I ever did under saddle. It's exciting for me. Why? I don't really know. I just know that I'm having more fun doing this than I was showing in performance (and I showed everything - country, english, hunter, western, sidesaddle). There's more than one way to have fun with your horses after all. In my experience the horses in my breed are, in fact, broken to ride if nothing else (any horse competing at nationals in open halter has to earn a performance point to qualify). Besides that, the arabian world still has, I think, the highest number of crossover horses (I'm talking about horses who have been top ten or better in halter and then have gone on to at least Class A level or better wins in performance) of most any breed out there (I can think of about 40 horses off the top of my head who have been able to do both in just recent years, like the last 10 or 15). Horses with 'halter breeding' are frequently still chosen by performance breeders and trainers.

I firmly believe that all horses should be rideable, at least, but I have no problem with those who prefer halter, either (as I am one ;) )

Also, I don't think most arabian halter horses are 14 hands tall. The trend right now is more like 15.1+. There is one stallion who shows at the regional and national level extensively and he is about 13.3/14hh. A really gorgeous little horse but he is definitely marked down in my opinion for being that small...arabian people really do prefer much taller horses these days, Two Simple, in my experience.

Also, comparing the american halter horse to the warmblood world is difficult to do. Warmbloods are bred at state studs and have, obviously, always been bred for sport. Breeding was (is) controlled by the government. In the U.S., we have always been able to breed what and how we want - this is the american way (even if it is pretty flawed in a lot of ways). Anyone who has the money and a mare with a uterus can breed, and train that baby to do whatever they want (obviously within reason). There is no government agency here telling breeders what they can and cannot breed. I understood your point, Bravaddict, that breeders as a whole should care a lot more about the health and soundness of their breeding animals (which I happen to agree with), but you just can't compare the two entirely different outlooks on breeding, in my opinion.

[ddashaq]

Muscle is only "burned" after all fat stores in the body have been exhausted. That is called emaciation and it happens to starving horses. Turning a horse out for exercise would not "burn muscle." Instead it would burn fat and create more muscle. Most AQHA barns I've been in, have strict working schedules for their horses, and many of them have sand rings that are deeper than sporthorse people are used to seeing.[quote]



If a horse was fed grain 24/7, he would founder and/or colic and likely die. I have never heard of this extreme you speak of. In fact, halter horses "are" fed grain, supplements, and high quality hay in moderation, just like any other horse.

Do you honestly think if you threw grain at a TB 24/7, they would bulk up the size of an AQHA halter horse? Of course not. So why do you think 100 pounds of grain is going to put the muscle mass on a QH? IT WONT. Genetics will. If the genetics aren't there, neither will be the muscles. Muscle building supplements can be fed, the horses can be worked in deep sand, etc. and these things will help develop what genetics already put there. But this is why halter horses are derived from other halter horses. They don't take 2 huntseat champions, breed them together, and then feed the baby 100 pounds of grain a day to turn it into a halter champion. The genetics are different.


Right, there is no need to explain to me why I should not feed this way. The filly that was on "full" feed did indeed colic and the BM was just amazed as their family had been feeding this way for years without problems. (Supposedly.) Also, I do not need to have it explained to me how fat and muscle are burned, I was simply responding to a topic with what I had personally seen. I did not ask any questions, please do not presume to lecture me on genetics, feeding, etc. (If I read the tone of your response wrong, I apologize for being snarky.)

[Auventera Two]

ddashaq - I too apologize for lecturing. :) I didn't mean to! I read your post incorrectly, and honestly thought that you thought giving a horse grain 24/7 was good. I'm sorry for that.

twhrider - you're very right that you would think the gaited people could just slow their horses down a little. But maybe they expressed that they really like to go fast?? I don't know but you do make a really good point.

[sidepasser]

I don't think its accurate to say "the breed has changed from...." because that's just not true. Certain lines of the breed have been developed for hunters or dressage, but certainly not all. There are plenty of great working cow horse stallions out there!

Ones that immediately come to mind:

The whole Hollywood Dun It line
Shining Spark
Dash For Cash - racing lines
Lenas Gray
The whole Peppy line
The Tivio line
Poco Bueno lines

And so on.......

Yes, it's accurate to say that more english lines have been developed. But that's one sect of the breed as a whole and not the whole breed.

Within the QH breed, you could have everything from Indian Artifacts, Hunter champion extrordinairre http://www.whatiwork4.com/index.asp who looks more like a TB/warmblood cross,

to

Kid Trick http://www.lonemacfarm.com/dbs/stallions/details.php?horse=Kid%20Trick&who=studs Halter horse champion and ROM winner.

While there are some lines that are still western bred (cutting, etc.) at the beginning during the foundation of the breed, there were no specific english lines bred. So there was a shift in the breed as a whole towards the diversity of the breed by creating lines for english use. That is what has changed alot in the QH as a breed. It would be like taking the TB and saying, mmm, we want them shorter, stockier, and only able to run a certain distance but do it fast..

That is in reverse of what has taken place within the ORIGINAL breed of QH...people wanted leaner, taller, etc. So more and more original lines were bred out or diluted by use of TBs within the breed. Hence the group that got together to create the NFQHA to preserve those lines and reinforce them so they would not be lost.

I am not saying that it isn't a good thing to have the wide diversity of the QH in looks, build, and ability, I am just saying that in general, the Qh of today is not what it started out as years back. Some think that is a good thing and some don't. I don't breed anymore so don't have a dog in that fight, I just miss the old style QH - one doesn't see them much anymore unless you are looking at the foundation bred ones.

Old style meaning prior to the 60's.

[BoysNightOut]

A sincere question, as I don't really know much about a) halter horses and b) Quarter Horses.

I was always under the impression that a halter horse was to be judged on how well his conformation is suited for work. Such as being judged on how well he is bred for under saddle work. Is his conformation good enough that he can have a saddle thrown on him and do some riding without collapsing from the tiny feet I've seen in halter horses....etc. Do you know what I mean?

I took an equine judging class in college and remember getting some famous painting of a chestnut QH and was told this was the ideal conformation of a horse....it had all the correct angles, and such. This horse certainly wasn't beefed up like many QH halter horses today. And that this proper conformation was what judges kept in mind while judging a halter class.

So....1) is this true? Is this what is supposed to be the point of halter classes? How well the horse's conformation is suited for work? And 2) If so, why the change? Granted, not all halter horses are insanely beefed up, but many I have seen make me cringe, like the horse in the OP. Tiny feet, beefy muscles, it's just nothing like the ideal conformation that horse's are supposed to have for work.

So yeah, please don't flame me, I really don't bother with the QH world, but I am truly curious as to why these horses are bred like this and what halter classes are vs. what they're supposed to be judging.

Thanks!

[Murphy's Mom]

Speaking as an old-timer, am I the only one who remembers the day when ALL Quarter Horses had this same general body type? Give or take some weird conformational hiccups in this individual, this WAS the breed standard for foundation QH. So in all honesty I can't quite see what the fuss is all about... Am I missing something?

I have a 29 y.o. foundation bred QH mare (Poco Bueno/Poco Pine) and she looks NOTHING like the horse the OP posted. She went quite nicely in eventing and even place first in the conformation clinic that Practical Horseman used to have.

[alabama]

Some of the halter horses are HUGE...hubby calls them Ahh-nold Horses. :lol:
Check out this dude:
http://www.thehalterhorse.com/stallion_alley/patch06.jpg
Yep, he's an Ahh-nold horse and guess what? He's very ride-able, too. He's huge but he's very good minded and quite a gentleman. No, he's not ever going to be a dressage horse or a hunter horse, but he's a good man. I know this horse personally. His get are ride-able as well. I have a coming four year old of his in my pasture and I've been having the best time with her - trail riding her - since spring. I "broke" her myself. That in itself speaks for him passing on his good mind. I'm NOT a horse trainer. ;) Just about all his babies have his good mind. My sister is part owner of Patch so I've known many of them since birth. BTW, he's HYPP N/N.

My 16 (almost 17 - yikes) year old gelding is also halter bred. He seems to cart my ass around just fine and has for the last 11 years. :) I've team penned on him and roped (badly - my fault, not his) off him. MANY halter horses are unuseable but many do make good riding horses, too. If you don't like them, I guess the best thing to do is not breed to them. But don't say they all stand around un-useable. (This last is not pointed at you MB, just a general comment.)

[Dazednconfused]

A sincere question, as I don't really know much about a) halter horses and b) Quarter Horses.

I was always under the impression that a halter horse was to be judged on how well his conformation is suited for work. Such as being judged on how well he is bred for under saddle work. Is his conformation good enough that he can have a saddle thrown on him and do some riding without collapsing from the tiny feet I've seen in halter horses....etc. Do you know what I mean?

I took an equine judging class in college and remember getting some famous painting of a chestnut QH and was told this was the ideal conformation of a horse....it had all the correct angles, and such. This horse certainly wasn't beefed up like many QH halter horses today. And that this proper conformation was what judges kept in mind while judging a halter class.

So....1) is this true? Is this what is supposed to be the point of halter classes? How well the horse's conformation is suited for work? And 2) If so, why the change? Granted, not all halter horses are insanely beefed up, but many I have seen make me cringe, like the horse in the OP. Tiny feet, beefy muscles, it's just nothing like the ideal conformation that horse's are supposed to have for work.

So yeah, please don't flame me, I really don't bother with the QH world, but I am truly curious as to why these horses are bred like this and what halter classes are vs. what they're supposed to be judging.

Thanks!

I'm not familiar with the quarter horse rules specifically, but I will answer with what I know about my own breed in halter.

I was always under the impression that a halter horse was to be judged on how well his conformation is suited for work. Such as being judged on how well he is bred for under saddle work. - no - they are judged on conformation, breed type, movement, femininity/masculinity etc (not in that order). They do not look at whether the horse has ability for undersaddle work (although conformation and movement certainly has an impact on that - but in the rulebook for Arabians, there is nothing about "Suitability as a riding horse" or similar for breeding classes).

why the change? Granted, not all halter horses are insanely beefed up, but many I have seen make me cringe, like the horse in the OP. Tiny feet, beefy muscles, it's just nothing like the ideal conformation that horse's are supposed to have for work. - Because this is what is popular. Halter, to me, becomes the culmination of extremes. A little is good, so a lot must be better (this is the mindset, not that I actually believe this to be true). So the horses started out being muscular and 'beefy' - and those horses were placed higher - so the owners began to breed horses that were more beefy, so the offspring were too. And then you throw a disorder like HYPP into the equation which builds even more muscle - then those horses won, which made it more desireable to have an Impressive-bred horse (or, to be more exact, one that is N/H or H/H).

[chism]

Some of the halter horses are HUGE...hubby calls them Ahh-nold Horses. :lol:
Check out this dude:
http://www.thehalterhorse.com/stallion_alley/patch06.jpg

Eww! That's just gross! That's not a horse, it's a pig.

Lest you think that I'm a QH hater...the best horse I've ever owned was a foundation mare, Doc O'Lena grand-daughter. She's only 15 hands, built big, conformationally correct & proportionate, never unsound, with a fantastic mind. She's 19 now and still going strong. I believe that if you're going to breed horses you have a responsibility to better the breed. Massive horses on tiny little feet prone to navicular and genetic problems doesn't seem to be betterment.

[Huntertwo]

I see that her HYPP status is N/H. From what I've read about HYPP, that type of heavy muscling is quite common. I'm sure someone who is more knowledgable can explain better.

Laskiblue




What is the Origin of the Genetic Defect Causing HYPP?
The original genetic defect causing HYPP was a natural mutation that occurred as part of the evolutionary process. The majority of such mutations, which are constantly occurring, are not compatible with survival. However, the genetic mutation causing HYPP produced a functional, yet altered, sodium ion channel. This gene mutation is not a product of inbreeding. The gene mutation causing HYPP inadvertently became widespread when breeders sought to produce horses with heavy musculature.
Is HYPP Limited To A Particular Bloodline of Horses? HYPP is associated with horses of heavy musculature, but this does not mean that all horses with well developed musculature are afflicted with the disease. The mutant gene causing HYPP presently has been identified in the descendents of the horse "Impressive." Research has not yet been performed on other bloodlines to ascertain whether the same or similar genetic mutation existing in other bloodlines also may cause HYPP. Since "Impressive" descendants are so numerous, the genetic mutation in the bloodline is widespread. Theoretically, it is possible that other mutations causing HYPP in different bloodlines may be more difficult to identify because they are not so widespread.

[hb]

Sorry guys... this two year old has probably never seen a drop of steroids in her life. That is just how they are bred for the QH halter ring... BIG... and ...Beefy. The tiny "baby doll" head, pencil thin neck and humongous body is very, very desirable and is what wins. Unfortunately many, if not all of these horses never go on to a performance career due to the obvious issues they have with soundness. From what I hear this type of QH (ie. those bread for halter) suffer the most from navicular problems.


That's the problem. "Bred for halter". The halter class should be to assess the best conformation for performance, not an end in itself. Breeding for genetic flaws that produce lame horses makes no sense.

[TrailMenace]

*applaud*

[katarine]

Chism that PIG is owned by my friend's sister- you mind toning it down a little? Yes, Patch is a big boy. No, he's not my type of horse either, but he's a real living creature owned by a real person with a real heart. I imagine it would hurt your heart if someone called your horse a pig, wouldn't it?

Halter horses are popular b/c people like to show them. The vet that Alabama and I share is a very well respected AQHA judge and National Director for ALQHA- and he'll flat tell you he WANTS to place the prettiest horse in the pen- not the biggest or most grossly muscled. I asked him flat out. He doesn't like the over-done look either, but he's not the one leading the horse in the pen, is he?

As for what the buckskin horse can sire, he has put some pretty movers on the ground. Alabama's mare is very graceful and is going to be a nice riding mare. Even though her daddy is a pig. :confused: :no:
http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b6d631b3127cce8b9f3a0403fa00000035108AZN2TRm4Yt9

[Jennwarr84]

If you look at the QH Journal almost all the horses are specialized. You have western pleasure horses, you have english horses, you have halter horses. All are basically bred to do one thing. Sure, a lot of them compete in the same events, but everything seems to be so specialized these days. My grandfather loved halter horses, but he hated the "new" version of the halter horse. We had one mare that was huge. She didn't win in the shows because she had a bigger neck and bigger legs than most. But she looked put together right. She wasn't on tiny little legs, and she didn't have the pencil neck with the gigantic body. They should go more on what the horse looks like as a whole. Also, back in the day, halter horses were roped off of, jumped off of, etc. They should do back to that. The new halter horses are just health hazards. We took in a founder gelding back in Jan 06. He's a chronic founder & chronic ulcer. His feet were just too small for his body.

[alabama]

Eww! That's just gross! That's not a horse, it's a pig.
well, bless your heart.

[egontoast]

Why are upright pasterns and post legs acceptable, even rewarded, in a halter QH? I have never heard a good answer to that question. If there is some different standard of conformation for halter QHs, why isn't it stated anywhere? I'd like to know the answer to that.

Also, why are the hooves so often brushed out or hidden in grass in the photos? I'd really like to know.

I would think that a 'halter' type would have to excel in the conformation department since they are, presumably, not judged on athletic performance. Why do they not conform with any of the usual standards of conformation?

[[r.oo and l.ulu]]

Also, why are the hooves so often brushed out or hidden in grass in the photos? I'd really like to know.



I've got an album full of pictures of hooves from the western pleasure show horses at the barn next door if you want to know the answer to that question. :no:


As for the "they use steroids" theory...my best friend owns a halter bred gelding that she used for open western pleasure shows and I can certainly say that he was born that way. She bought him as a long yearling and the big guy has lived (mostly) outside his entire life, no steroids, etc. and is an absolute beast. VERY fun to ride. He's surprisingly supple for having such a large body mass...although he is rather earth bound. :D

I, personally, am done with the AQHA until I find a trainer that I like and admire, or the AQHA has a complete makeover. There are some good aspects to it, but too many I don't like so...no more AQHA for me.

[BoysNightOut]

That's the problem. "Bred for halter". The halter class should be to assess the best conformation for performance, not an end in itself. Breeding for genetic flaws that produce lame horses makes no sense.

See, that's exactly what I thought/think. I was always told that the whole point of a halter class was to judge the horse on how well suited his/her conformation is for performance work and how well that horse's conformation goes along with the "ideal" conformation of a horse. I really don't see the point in breeding for these beefed up muscles, and small feet either. But if that's where things have gone, then I guess that's how it is. I think it's a real shame. But alas, I'm not a halter or QH person, so all of this is just my thoughts. :-)

I know at my barn, there are a few horses that show in halter (they are Paints, not QH). These horses also ride, and I think they are very nice and well put together.

[janedoe726]

First of all, let me start with this little disclaimer. I do not own or have any interest in QHs at all. If I had could only show WP or QH halter, I would probably shoot myself. (Heck, if I could only show TWH halter, I would probably shoot myself. I just don't like halter classes.) I live in a part of the world where the QH is king. I have been laughed at, ridiculed, and called crazy for having "them racking horses." (I only have one horse that's registered Racking, btw. That's just the general redneck term for all gaited horses.) I saw an ad in the newspaper for a trail ride several weeks ago. Apparently, due to all the complaints, the ride had been split: one trail ride for "racking horses" and one for "everyone else." Yes, I'm serious.

Anyway, even though most people in my area are ignorant cowboy-wannabes, I still don't begrudge them their preferences. I have met just as many nice QH people as obnoxious ones. I don't understand QH breeding and showing; therefore, I'm not going to march up to these people and tell them everything they're doing wrong. I can sympathize with them about (dare I say it?) breed prejudice because I've had it pointed in my direction any number of times. If they're taking good care of their horses, what's it to me?

I understand that most people on this board are most familiar with sporthorses. I, personally, wouldn't know a sporthorse if it fell out of the sky and landed on my doorsteps. I understand that a lot of people here have limited exposure to Western-type disciplines (and gaited disciplines as well). What I don't understand is why every time something unfamiliar comes up, it's labelled unnatural, ridiculous, or abusive. Many here are very, very quick to cry foul at something they don't understand. (Look up the never-ending Big Lick thread if you don't believe me.) It's so much easier, I suppose, to throw rocks rather than trying to educate oneself. :(

*Zips up flame suit*

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I agree 100%!!! That horse belongs to someone, people. Think about it, OP... what if "those people" somehow find a picture of your horse online somewhere and proceed to rip it apart? How would you feel about that. To each his own...

[appaloosalady]

Eww! That's just gross! That's not a horse, it's a pig.

Lest you think that I'm a QH hater...the best horse I've ever owned was a foundation mare, Doc O'Lena grand-daughter. She's only 15 hands, built big, conformationally correct & proportionate, never unsound, with a fantastic mind. She's 19 now and still going strong. I believe that if you're going to breed horses you have a responsibility to better the breed. Massive horses on tiny little feet prone to navicular and genetic problems doesn't seem to be betterment.

I think that's about the rudest thing I've ever read on this BB, and that's saying something. :no:

[Anne FS]

<<What I don't understand is why every time something unfamiliar comes up, it's labelled unnatural, ridiculous, or abusive. >>

I disagree. I've SEEN big lick TWH and I've SEEN halter QH. Because I think both are appalling is my opinion and has nothing to do with the fact that they are 'unfamiliar' to me. POAs are unfamiliar to me; so are Appys and Nokotas. But they're just different and although not my thing, more power to 'em. They are certainly much more natural. But because I'd label a big lick horse unnatural, ridulous AND abusive just means I know that stuff when I see it. And come on, the photo posted of the super muscle-bound buckskin is rather shocking to the average horse person. Calling it a pig was a bit much, but people over-reacted to it, as though it was not a comment on the VERY round shape of the horse, but as though it meant it was sloppy or dirty or something.

[cinder88]

From what I've heard, she is correct. The nerve misfiring that causes the twitching "exercises" the surrounding muscle and makes it larger/bulkier. The reason HYPP is lethal is that the heart is a muscle... :no:

BINGO!

Watch a HYPP positive horse. There muscles MOVE under their skin, constantly. Due to this, the muscles are constantly being worked, and become bigger.

Ask a vet who is familiar with HYPP.

Cinder88

[cookie-monster]

Just because you've SEEN something, does not mean you know everything about it, like whether it is wrong, abusive, stupid, whatever. It just gives you your opinion, which is fine. But it doesn't always make you right.

For example, just an FYI, Appy shows including appy halter horses are basically the same as QH's. The halter horses are bigger and bulkier & just as "appalling" as at a QH show.

Sorry to be a bitch. I don't even show halter horses, but give it a rest, stop ridiculing and looking down on EVERYTHING that isn't familiar.

Maybe I'll begin a campaign to AQHA to stop everything they are doing and just totally change to conform to some sporthorse registry because, well of course they are better than AQHA....

A halter class is sort of like a beauty pageant. Some people like it, some don't, to each their own. But you know there are some people who can't ride or don't want to ride, they like to show halter. Big deal.

i could go on and on. And maybe i will if I get any more furious at some of the rude, ignorant comments. But that's it for now.

[arena run]

<<snip>>
But because I'd label a big lick horse unnatural, ridulous AND abusive just means I know that stuff when I see it. And come on, the photo posted of the super muscle-bound buckskin is rather shocking to the average horse person.
<<snip>>


Your post is rude. This is my opinion and it's true because I know 'rude' when I see it.

That picture is only shocking if you've never looked through The Paint Horse Journal. sylvia

[chism]

I think that's about the rudest thing I've ever read on this BB, and that's saying something. :no:

Well, if that's the rudest thing you've ever seen on this BB...then you've missed out on a lot of the postings. Been to the dressage forum lately? ;)

My apologies to the person who owns this horse, the pig comment was over the top - it was a knee jerk reaction to the pic & short sighted of me not to think that his owner could possibly read this...of course he's owned and loved by someone who finds him attractive. It's just my opinion..which I'm entitled to like everyone else... I firmly believe that a horse is not supposed to look like that.

[twotrudoc]

Good post Cookie! I'm the first one to bash AQHA and thier "style" of showing, but good lord you are right.
I won't say much on the HYPP thing, but it is nice to know that absolutely no one on this board would ever breed a horse that had any sort of physical problems or that any of you have ever even considered buying a horse that may have any sort of physical issue.

[chism]

<<What I don't understand is why every time something unfamiliar comes up, it's labelled unnatural, ridiculous, or abusive. >>

I disagree. I've SEEN big lick TWH and I've SEEN halter QH. Because I think both are appalling is my opinion and has nothing to do with the fact that they are 'unfamiliar' to me. POAs are unfamiliar to me; so are Appys and Nokotas. But they're just different and although not my thing, more power to 'em. They are certainly much more natural. But because I'd label a big lick horse unnatural, ridulous AND abusive just means I know that stuff when I see it. And come on, the photo posted of the super muscle-bound buckskin is rather shocking to the average horse person. Calling it a pig was a bit much, but people over-reacted to it, as though it was not a comment on the VERY round shape of the horse, but as though it meant it was sloppy or dirty or something.

Thank you Anne FS...that is the way I meant it, but I agree it was probably insensitive to the people who know the horse.

[alabama]

My apologies to the person who owns this horse, the pig comment was over the top - it was a knee jerk reaction to the pic & short sighted of me not to think that his owner could possibly read this...of course he's owned and loved by someone who finds him attractive. It's just my opinion..which I'm entitled to like everyone else... I firmly believe that a horse is not supposed to look like that.
I appreciate your apology. Patch looks like what he's bred for - and what he was a winner doing. He's the IBHA 2001 world champion. (He's not shown anymore.) How he looks is his breeding. I can assure you he hasn't been given steriods or been abused to make him so big. So you don't believe a horse is supposed to look like that. To each his own. Sure, he's a tank and hugely muscled, but he can move. He's quite catty for a big guy. He doesn't just stand around looking like a body builder. He is ridden. He also passes his wonderful personality on to all of his babies. Thank god, 'cause my girl is one of them. :)

My gelding, who is also of halter breeding, is by a stallion that was crazy - mean, want-to-kill-you crazy from what I hear. My guy will not try to kill you but he definitely has some screws loose. As much as I love him, I'd rather ride my Patch baby. Sometimes it's nice to ride a horse with a good mind. That's one of the things you get with that PIG's babies.

[kellyb]

Just because you've SEEN something, does not mean you know everything about it, like whether it is wrong, abusive, stupid, whatever. It just gives you your opinion, which is fine. But it doesn't always make you right.

For example, just an FYI, Appy shows including appy halter horses are basically the same as QH's. The halter horses are bigger and bulkier & just as "appalling" as at a QH show.

Sorry to be a bitch. I don't even show halter horses, but give it a rest, stop ridiculing and looking down on EVERYTHING that isn't familiar.

Maybe I'll begin a campaign to AQHA to stop everything they are doing and just totally change to conform to some sporthorse registry because, well of course they are better than AQHA....

A halter class is sort of like a beauty pageant. Some people like it, some don't, to each their own. But you know there are some people who can't ride or don't want to ride, they like to show halter. Big deal.

i could go on and on. And maybe i will if I get any more furious at some of the rude, ignorant comments. But that's it for now.


Yeah I agree. I have never seen so much QH prejudice as I have here.

[twhrider13]

<<What I don't understand is why every time something unfamiliar comes up, it's labelled unnatural, ridiculous, or abusive. >>

I disagree. I've SEEN big lick TWH and I've SEEN halter QH. Because I think both are appalling is my opinion and has nothing to do with the fact that they are 'unfamiliar' to me. POAs are unfamiliar to me; so are Appys and Nokotas. But they're just different and although not my thing, more power to 'em. They are certainly much more natural. But because I'd label a big lick horse unnatural, ridulous AND abusive just means I know that stuff when I see it. And come on, the photo posted of the super muscle-bound buckskin is rather shocking to the average horse person. Calling it a pig was a bit much, but people over-reacted to it, as though it was not a comment on the VERY round shape of the horse, but as though it meant it was sloppy or dirty or something.

One could go so many places with this, but I'll refrain. Just because you, me, or anyone else "thinks" something is unnatural, ridiculous, or abusive does not make it so. Either way, like I said before, if the horse is treated well, then it's nothing to me how someone chooses to show it. Too bad more people don't feel that way.

[katarine]

oh heavens to mergatroid- stop with the _______ bashing.

it's all so five minutes ago.

Go pet your horse. clean a saddle. go to bed. Rob a liquor store. SOMETHING different for a change.

[excowgirlie]

I had a hypp n/h colt(grandsire was Impressive) who died at 18 months! He had a seizure once and it was awful to watch...potassium builds up in their cells and they are unable to process it...the horse cramps up much like when we get calve cramps in the middle of the night (if you can remember how that feels)...I imagine it was a painful death, and I think it is wrong to breed any n/h quarter horses..anyway, you cant do much with that confirmation after the halter class days are over!..it is a sad thing...

[Coup De Des]

Can I congratulate (almost) EVERYONE who has participated in this thread for doing so in such a wonderful, positive and CONSTRUCTIVE manner...

I have learned a LOT thanks to posters backing up their opinions with solid evidence and the polite conversational tone that this thread has had over 6 pages!! LOVE IT!!

Thank you for not turning this into a TW as could easily have happened, and for staying on topic (for 6 pages!) .. I was never bashing, just genuinely curious and I appreciate everyone's responses in this thread.

Thanks

[egontoast]

Yes, but still no one answers the question of why halter QHs do not appear to be judged by the generally accepted standards of conformation. This is not to bash them at all, but it's no exaggeration to say that it's apparent from the overwhelming majority of photos of these horses, including celebrated Champions, that upright pasterns and post legs are considered acceptable. Why?

I'm not even asking about the foot issue.

Why the upright pasterns and post legs?

[Tamara in TN]

[QUOTE=egontoast;2057569]Yes, but still no one answers the question of why halter QHs do not appear to be judged by the generally accepted standards of conformation. QUOTE]


sorry to wander in late to the thread,but conformation for a halter QH is not that for a hunter hack or a hunter pony or a saddlebred or a clevland bay and on and on...and a halter QH will not look like an appendix QH or a reining QH or a hunter QH and so on...

yes she is a double ought foot on a 1400 pound body....yes she is upright and pencil legged...she actually could use a longer neck :) ....but for her world/pedigree she is pretty damned close to the ideal....

but let's remember that the halter arab does not do the tevis cup and the average hannoverian does not haul logs :winkgrin: even though the rootstock for the two says that they did/could at one point....halter horses are a big business like any other and has it's own devils...none more lor less worse than any other breed...

no one expects supermodels to do anything but wear clothers and look pretty after all :lol: :lol:

Tamara in TN

[mp]

the halter arab does not do the tevis cup

Actually, one has. Remington Steele was a Top Ten US and Canadian halter horse. And he completed the Tevis.

But ... he's the only one.

[minnie]

O.K., I'll be dating myself here, but my Father actually farmed with horses and they all had quarter horses to move stock with. These were working horses, not show horses, but they all appeared much more balanced and proportionate than the halter horses I see. They all had better ankles, angles and a good foot. They spent a lot of hours in the saddle and a horse that is too upright is NOT a comfortable ride and one that is postlegged behind is not that athletic. These horses worked over uneven ground, up and down dale and not in a groomed ring and they stayed sound forever.

[arena run]

O.K., I'll be dating myself here, but my Father actually farmed with horses and they all had quarter horses to move stock with. These were working horses, not show horses, but they all appeared much more balanced and proportionate than the halter horses I see. They all had better ankles, angles and a good foot. They spent a lot of hours in the saddle and a horse that is too upright is NOT a comfortable ride and one that is postlegged behind is not that athletic. These horses worked over uneven ground, up and down dale and not in a groomed ring and they stayed sound forever.

If you read Tamara's post she pretty much answered this already. :) The horses your father used were not halter horses. I believe it would be safe to say that the horses on your farm were BRED to BE used. Whereas a halter breeder doesn't necessarily breed to have a using horse. They breed what wins in the pen. And the very nature of keeping them in and protecting them so nary a scratch nor maring injury can befall them actually is detrimental to their usefulness even if all else is equal. And 'balance and proportion' are relative terms, open to interpretation.

I would venture to say that a small majority of halter horses would become good using horses if they were allowed to just be horses and weren't kept in up in barns and protected. But, if you're going to win you have to put what wins in the pen. Should we change what wins? Sure. WILL we be able to change what wins? Hopefuly but it will be a long haul. sylvia

[caffeinated]

As for standards of conformation, I agree different people have different tastes- but shouldn't conformation be judged on the type of work the horse is expected to perform? Historically, QH are sprinters and cattle horses, yet able to be versatile. So shouldn't the "ideal" conformation reflect that? Specifically through the legs- horses need good tough legs and feet to do those jobs well, I would think.

If people like the look of very muscley horses, that's what they like. But the basic structure underneath should be one that promotes soundness, not lameness, and one that is functional.

I've said this before, and each time someone says, "but that conformation IS functional for a halter horse's job!" I still don't get it. And again, when I talk about conformation, I'm not talking about muscling and size, but about the structure underneath.

I think any horse bred for some extreme standard that takes away from the horse's soundness is not a good thing. I knew an arabian filly that had been bred for halter, and had been bred so fine that she'd broken one of her front legs twice before she was a year and a half old. Doesn't seem related to the traditional job/function of the Arabian at all. Same thing here.

I hope no one thinks I'm bashing quarterhorses- my first horse (http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL914/489204/1721616/20309923.jpg) was a QH, out of halter lines on his sire's side. And he showed it. I loved him more than anything, but that build took its toll and he was unridable from navicular well before his time, which was an incredibly heartbreaking experience. I love quarterhorses and think a good one is worth his weight in gold- which is why it bothers me SO much to see ideals promoted that are very likely to lead to unsoundness. I don't think it's fair to the breed, honestly.

[Tamara in TN]

Eww! That's just gross! That's not a horse, it's a pig.

Lest you think that I'm a QH hater...the best horse I've ever owned was a foundation mare, Doc O'Lena grand-daughter. .

not to put too fine a point on things but Doc Bar is excluded from most "foundation" thinking as his sire was a TB....that would put Three Bars as your mares gggfather ?? of course her dam lines may calculate to a higher foundation percentage...and it is funny that many of the daughters of TB remount stallions were then considered "foundation" and yet DB was not....funny how pedigrees work that way....

Tamara in TN

[arena run]

As for standards of conformation, I agree different people have different tastes- but shouldn't conformation be judged on the type of work the horse is expected to perform? Historically, QH are sprinters and cattle horses, yet able to be versatile. So shouldn't the "ideal" conformation reflect that? Specifically through the legs- horses need good tough legs and feet to do those jobs well, I would think.

If people like the look of very muscley horses, that's what they like. But the basic structure underneath should be one that promotes soundness, not lameness, and one that is functional.

I've said this before, and each time someone says, "but that conformation IS functional for a halter horse's job!" I still don't get it. And again, when I talk about conformation, I'm not talking about muscling and size, but about the structure underneath.

I think any horse bred for some extreme standard that takes away from the horse's soundness is not a good thing. I knew an arabian filly that had been bred for halter, and had been bred so fine that she'd broken one of her front legs twice before she was a year and a half old. Doesn't seem related to the traditional job/function of the Arabian at all. Same thing here.

I hope no one thinks I'm bashing quarterhorses- my first horse (http://pic18.picturetrail.com/VOL914/489204/1721616/20309923.jpg) was a QH, out of halter lines on his sire's side. And he showed it. I loved him more than anything, but that build took its toll and he was unridable from navicular well before his time, which was an incredibly heartbreaking experience. I love quarterhorses and think a good one is worth his weight in gold- which is why it bothers me SO much to see ideals promoted that are very likely to lead to unsoundness. I don't think it's fair to the breed, honestly.


Rewrite this and back it up w/some statistics and send it in to AQHA. It IS a shame to see a horse who can barely jog/trot WIN a halter class. It has nothing to do w/their conformtion so much as the way they are raised and the fact that the halter horse fitters know that horse doesn't ever have to be ridden. The new Performance Halter class will hopefully, if not change the way halter horses are bred, at least give the ones who enjoy RIDING their horse a way to show it at halter and not be laughed out of the pen. :) sylvia

[tirnanog]

sorry if this rebuttal has already been posted since I didn't read the whole thread.
But I will say that I know first hand people who have used steroids on their halter yearlings and 2 yr. olds. So, noone can say matter of fact that the OPs filly isn't a product of a dose of steroids. It does happen.
(I know it's not the OP's personal horse - just the horse in question)

[Tamara in TN]

O.K., I'll be dating myself here, but my Father actually farmed with horses and they all had quarter horses to move stock with. .

up until the 1940's one would have NEVER kept a Tennesse Walking Horse that did not work "single or double"....some of the best "show" horses of the early 1930's worked 10-15 miles a day delivering mail :winkgrin:

early authors said it was nothing special to see teams of walking horse work mares plowing with their (then natural) "tails flipped up over their backs" (elevated and happy which the broken and set tail now tries to replicate)

and now things are not as they were then...lots of people still keep gaiteds in harness much to the turned up noses of the "driven dresssagy" bunch....:lol: :lol: :lol: but the TN and KY mountain folks never cared much about outsiders anyway :) here works "single or double" is still a sign of decent training

Tamara in TN

[caffeinated]

SYlvia- ARE there any hard statistics on it? I just know my vet told us that my horse's conformation was pretty much the root of his problem (straight shoulder, short straight pasterns, huge horse- 16.2 and massive). I've heard that in lots of places as well, but wouldn't know where to begin in looking for hard statistics on it- it seems like a "common sense" sort of thing, that "everybody knows", but I've never seen actual studies on it.

I'm off to google search, at least, after I get some actual work done, LOL

[Tamara in TN]

The new Performance Halter class will hopefully, if not change the way halter horses are bred, at least give the ones who enjoy RIDING their horse a way to show it at halter and not be laughed out of the pen. :) sylvia

could you please provide an info link to the above?? I'd be interested in seeing this

thanks
Tamara in TN

[MissBri]

I don't think its accurate to say "the breed has changed from...." because that's just not true. Certain lines of the breed have been developed for hunters or dressage, but certainly not all. There are plenty of great working cow horse stallions out there!

Ones that immediately come to mind:

The whole Hollywood Dun It line
Shining Spark
Dash For Cash - racing lines
Lenas Gray
The whole Peppy line
The Tivio line
Poco Bueno lines

And so on.......

Yes, it's accurate to say that more english lines have been developed. But that's one sect of the breed as a whole and not the whole breed.

Within the QH breed, you could have everything from Indian Artifacts, Hunter champion extrordinairre http://www.whatiwork4.com/index.asp who looks more like a TB/warmblood cross,

to

Kid Trick http://www.lonemacfarm.com/dbs/stallions/details.php?horse=Kid%20Trick&who=studs Halter horse champion and ROM winner.


The reason Indian Artifacts looks more like a TB cross is because he is 3/4 TB.

[arena run]

Tamara,
Here's the link I found googling. I read an article about it but can't find the magazine... :)
http://www.aqha.com/showing/resources/newclasses.html
One more link to an article:
http://www.massqha.com/

Caffeinated,
Have no idea where statistics could be found. It's like most things horse-related... You're SURE to find a sound, hard-working exception to the conformation-affects-soundness/longevity rule. :) Maybe, instead of looking for health reasons that affect the horse we should be looking for things that would create a greater profit? That way even those who don't care diddly-squat about the horse would have an incentive to do a selective job of breeding. sylvia

[cookie-monster]

Doesn't anyone else think it is a GOOD thing that there is such diversity within one breed association? There are all kinds of things you can do with QHs, in or out of the show pen. You can find the type of QH you need to do whatever it is you want. There is alot more to the breed than cows and quarter mile racing. They've come a long way and are able to excel at different things:

Working Hunter
Hunter Hack
Hunt Seat Eq
Hunter Under Saddle
Jumping
Calf Roping
Team Roping
Reining
Cutting
Working Cow Horse
Barrel Racing
Western Pleasure
Western Riding
Trail
Showmanship
Halter
Pleasure Driving
Team Penning

Trail riding
Dressage
H/J shows
Eventing
Racing
Fox Hunting
Driving

And those activities take different types of horses and people breed for them. Those that don't turn out quite right for their intended discipline have the chance to do something else. I think it's a great thing that one breed of horse as a whole can do so many things. My areas of interest are in Hunter Under saddle horses and calf and team roping horses. Two totally different ends of the spectrum, and i love it that way. But I don't dismiss the other classes because alot of the training is basic and applies to all, and there is always something to learn. I also love to learn more from "real" hunter people and how that does/should apply to QH hunter over fences horses. I love a personable quiet well mannered and well broke QH. I like level necks and fake tails and i love an AQHA all around horse that can excel is several different classes. I like that I am involved with roping horses, both at AQHA shows and rodeos and am familiar with how they do and do not cross over. i know the diff between the real deal and a yahoo. I don't care to show halter horses, although I like to see a good one now and again. I'm glad AQHA offers halter and pleasure driving. Those who don't ride can still enjoy competing. I guess I'm rambling, but overall I feel lucky to be involved with a breed that allows me different experiences and insight into different types of riding and showing and opportunities to keep learning. It's almost a shame that those who strongly dislike anything AQHA are missing out. Oh well!

p.s. Are we over the OP ripping on a poor halter horse that they happened to find online? I'm sure there are ALL types of horses online we could rip apart, but what's the point??

[bugsynskeeter]

Well stated Cookie!

[MissBri]

The AQHA rules for halter

448. HALTER CLASSES
(a) A halter class is defined as a class where the horse is judged based upon its conformation.
(b) The purpose of the class is to preserve American Quarter Horse type by selecting well-mannered individuals in the order of their resemblance to the breed ideal and that are the most positive combination of balance, structural correctness, and movement with appropriate breed and sex charateristics and adequate muscling.
(c) The ideal American Quarter Horse shown at halter is a horse that is generally considered to be solid in color and possesses the following characteristics: the horse should possess eye appeal that is the result of a harmonious blending of an attractive head; refined throat latch; well-proportioned, trim neck; long, sloping shoulder; deep heart girth; short back; strong loin and coupling; long hip and croup; and well-defined and muscular stifle, gaskin, forearm and chest. These characteristics should be coupled with straight and structurally correct legs and feet that are free of blemishes. The horse should be a balanced athlete that is muscled uniformly throughout
(1) One of the most important criteria in selecting a horse is conformation, or its physical appearance. While it could be assumed that most horses with several years’ seasoning and past performance have acceptable conformation, the goal in selection should always be to find the best conformed horse possible.
(2) Rating conformation depends upon objective evaluation of the following four traits: balance, structural correctness breed and sex characteristics, and degree of muscling. Of the four, balance is the single most important, and refers to the structural and aesthetic blending of body parts. Balance is influenced almost entirely by skeletal structure.
(d) HALTER EQUIPMENT
(1) Lip chains: The following horses may not be shown with any chain through the mouth including but not limited to lip chains:
(A) Mares
(B) Geldings
(C) Weanling stallions
(2) Stallions 1 year of age and older may not be shown with any chain through the mouth with the sole exception that they may be shown with lip chains with unsecured keepers so long as at least two links of the chain remain outside of halter before attachment of keeper or leather part of lead shank.

[hitchinmygetalong]

A TRULY "versatile breed" would be one that consistently produced an individual horse that could do a variety of jobs.

Not one that has a "halter" line, a "pleasure" line, a "hunter" line, a "barrel" line, a "cutting" line... As the breeding evolves, you end up with completely different breeds within a breed.

So goes American breeding.

Also, I think it very interesting that some who will attack just about any discipline for being cruel (as evidenced by recent diatribes on the Dressage forum) seem to find absolutely nothing wrong with the halter-bred Quarter Horse that was shown in the first post on this thread.

One more thing before I zip into my flamesuit - I don't see this selective-for-a-particular-discipline in just Quarter Horses. Look at Thoroughbreds - sprint vs. classic. Sales horse vs. race horse. Look at Morgans. Park vs. "pleasure". Look at so many American breeds and the short-sighted breeding practices behind them. Thank goodness there are hard-working people tucked into country corners all over the country who breed true to the breed standards, who breed because they love the animal, not the trophy or the almight dollar.

[notforyouorme]

I just have to say that the new Performance Halter is the stupidest thing that I have ever heard-the original idea behind the original halter class was to judge a useful horse-it is the judges who are judging the wrong ideal, and it's the association that has let it get out of control. I just don't know how they can rewrite the specs for the class that sound any different from the halter specs! Halter is supposed to judge a horse that is the ideal QH (stock horse model) for performance-so how in the hell is this different than the specs for the new Performance Halter? The existing halter system needs to be revamped and the judges retrained and held accountable! In the Performance Halter they are going to end up judging "names"-pinning the horses that win in the performance ring. Creating a whole new system for halter instead of fixing the old one is admitting that there is a huge problem with these non-functional horses, but they are trying not to piss off all the people who have a lot of money in there-instead of doing what's good for the breed and the horse!

Plus how do you judge a great hunter QH next to a great cutting QH? It will still come down to the preference of the judge. Perhaps they need sporthorse breeding and stock breeding classes?

It is quite a good point about the "lines" seperating the breeds into "breeds within breeds"-that is quite accurate, I think (hunter vs racehorse, anyone?)-on on hand it is silly that they let so much TB blood in, but on the other hand, variety is critical for the survival and improvement of any species/breed. It's an interesting problem.

[notforyouorme]

I just wanted to add that the "foundation" horses that the breed is based on were not a "breed," but were instead great horses with multiple "breed"/body type influences-if you've looked at some of the foundation horses, some show a large draft influence. Problems arise when the breed is "closed" to all or most outside influence and variety disappears.

It is interesting that there are not more genetic (or maybe there are?) disorders in the TB as well, as they allow no outside blood in the breed. I just don't know enough about the racing bred TBs. However, there is evidence to suggest that the racing times of TBs have peaked or will peak-due to the elimination of variety in the species (of course, there is a limit to all things, and the increasing modern technology (track surfaces, vet care, etc) will factor in, but, at some point, the genetics will suffer (barring positive mutations). Okay, I will not go on and on and on..........

[caffeinated]

TS, you keep defending yourself like it's your horse that's being attacked. I don't think it is- and I think that part of the problem people have with the halter horses is not the weight and mass they hold but the conformation that is PURPOSELY being bred that is not generally considered good for the soundness and comfort of the horse.

There are many halter bred horses out there that do fine. BUt when horses win classes with straight hind legs (not in the good way) and pasterns that have an almost 90 degree angle to the ground, those things get perpetuated. It's awfully hard to argue that those traits are bettering the breed. It's not just that they look funny, it's that they are antithetical to the idea of a sound horse.

The muscle and overall build is indeed a matter of taste, but I would put purposely breeding structural problems into a breed is right up there with overworking horses too young in terms of problems it can cause...

I shouldn't care about this so much- I think the reason I do care is because I really like quarterhorses. One of my favorite stallions (at a distance, found in net surfing) is a great reining and cow horse producer, but he looks so functional and athletic, I can picture him doing any number of things well- from jumping to driving.

I think, if I stopped rambling a minute, my whole opinion boils down to the fact that I don't think it's good for the breed as a whole to reward inherently bad structure in the show ring. Not every halter horse is horrible with awful conformation and useless- yours looks nice, for example. It would just be nice if the goal was to show a horse that is not just pretty but also suited for staying sound and useful, whether they're asked to do things or not.

[Auventera Two]

No no no, what I'm saying is that big, powerful, heavily muscled horses certainly CAN be used for various disciplines - even english disciplines - and be perfectly sound, healthy, and happy. What I keep hearing people griping about is the heavy muscles. They don't like it - think it's cruel - abuse - think the horses just break down - think they just stand around in a show pen. My mare was shown in Halter in a few shows and placed well. No grand championships or anything, but she did place well.

I'm only trying to defend the heavily muscled, older style QHs. These are STOCK HORSES who are meant to be huge. And yes, they can be huge, and still work too.

And I agree that extremist to the point the horse teeters around lame is a bad thing!

[caffeinated]

Maybe I'm mixing my threads (in fact I probably am, since I've had more conversations on this in more places than I can remember), but I think it's the combination of the weight and poor leg conformation that leads people to statements about breakdowns or lack of usefulness...

And there really are horses that just plain look too big- but I remember one website in particular where it looked like the photos were digitally manipulated to make the horse look bigger/wider than he really was.

I should post my old guy for a conformation example, that way people could talk about it without blasting an existing horse, LOL

The muscling part I'm mostly there on you with- my first horse had quite a lot of muscle, and kept very "big" looking even on minimal work (think going for walks once a week). So I don't doubt most halter horses get that way mostly on conditioning

[cookie-monster]

These horses CAN do a variety of jobs, but you can't expect all QHs to do it ALL WELL. There are some specialized horses who excel at one or two things. There are some horses who are not excellent at any one thing, but can do several things at or below average, or who excel at being a pleasure riding or trail horse.

As others have pointed out, surely there are certain WB lines that are wanted for dressage, others for jumpers, etc. I don't see how either is short sighted. What's wrong with bettering a breed by breeding stock that will produce what has the best chance at being good at what it's being bred for?

I don't think Performance Halter is stupid, i think it gives the performance horses a way to be disected conformationally in the spirit of competition. It might bring certain conformation details to light that are what have improved performance and what could further improve performance. Of course a hunter will look different from a reiner, but structurally, they should be similar like well balanced, shoulder & pastern & hip angles, etc. I think judges will be capable of judging them against each other. We'll see.



Halter horses are being judged according to Halter rules, thank you MissBri. These rules are for Horses Being SHown at HALTER.

"...(c) The ideal American Quarter Horse shown ***at halter*** is a horse that is generally considered to be solid in color and possesses the following characteristics: the horse should possess eye appeal that is the result of a harmonious blending of an attractive head; refined throat latch; well-proportioned, trim neck; long, sloping shoulder; deep heart girth; short back; strong loin and coupling; long hip and croup; and well-defined and muscular stifle, gaskin, forearm and chest. These characteristics should be coupled with straight and structurally correct legs and feet that are free of blemishes. The horse should be a balanced athlete that is muscled uniformly throughout
(1) One of the most important criteria in selecting a horse is conformation, or its physical appearance. While it could be assumed that most horses with several years’ seasoning and past performance have acceptable conformation, the goal in selection should always be to find the best conformed horse possible.
(2) Rating conformation depends upon objective evaluation of the following four traits: balance, structural correctness breed and sex characteristics, and degree of muscling. Of the four, balance is the single most important, and refers to the structural and aesthetic blending of body parts. Balance is influenced almost entirely by skeletal structure..."

The rules don't say that a Halter horse should be able to go out and work a cow as some people think that's all a QH is good for. They say that a QH "shown at Halter" should be all these things outlined in the rules. Not that a horse "shown at Halter" should leave the show pen and then go cross-country or cut a cow.

[chism]

not to put too fine a point on things but Doc Bar is excluded from most "foundation" thinking as his sire was a TB....that would put Three Bars as your mares gggfather ?? of course her dam lines may calculate to a higher foundation percentage...and it is funny that many of the daughters of TB remount stallions were then considered "foundation" and yet DB was not....funny how pedigrees work that way....

Tamara in TN

I don't know what you mean by Three bars? Doc Bar's parent's were Lightning Bar and Dandy Doll according to my info? If you're into that sort of thing...her registered name is Badger Super Kitty. In addition to Doc Bar on her sire's side... there's Poco Bueno, King & Grey Badger II..all foundation, plus Two Eyed Jack on her dam's (who I don't think is foundation but I love the lines). You can't beat a good working QH, they're smart, versatile & sound

[Auventera Two]

chism -

Three Bars is Lightning Bar's sire. All the "Bars" horses trace back to Three Bars, and Three Bars was a Thoroughbred, not a Quarter Horse.

[bugsynskeeter]

Speaking of Three Bars (AKA the single most influential sire in Quarter Horses...period) - he is on the cover of this month's AQHA Journal - awesome article...

[Auventera Two]

Really? I don't get the journal, but that would be a neat article to see! All our QHs have traced back to Three Bars in some fashion or another.

[mintyfresh]

I'm just a little confused about what you all expect the AQHA to do?

Their biggest honor is the Superhorse award, and that does require a versatile horse who can compete WELL in multiple disciplines.

They give out a Remuda award to ranches raising high quality working/showing horses.

You can get a horse's ROM for 10 points in a individual class OR 10 points in multiple performance classes (how my Jack-of-all-trades master of none horse got his).

They offer the Silver Spur award for horses that are doing something amazing outside of the show ring.

They have an amazing youth program. They offer scholarships, you can qualify to compete on teams for the World and Congress. They fund and distribute the Junior Master Horseman (http://www.juniormasterhorseman.com/) which is not breed specific.

They have a program just based on the amount of time you spent riding your QH where you can get neat little rewards.



Is the AQHA perfect? HECK NO! They still have work they need to do, and plenty of it. Are they trying? Lately it seems the answer is yes.

They are phasing out the ability to register HYPP H/H and N/H horses. They have worked hard to fix Western Pleasure and it's starting to show. They are working on tackling Halter next.

Should most of this have been done long ago? Yes, of course. At some point though you need accept that the past is the past and the current AQHA does seem to really be making strides lately.

If you don't like the way Halter is then join the AQHA (Lifetime membership is way cheaper than USEF) and work to change it.

Oh, and by the way, I looked up the winners of the AQHA world show and I didn't see any that looked as though they had bad conformation or shouldn't have been there. Overly muscled, yep, I'll agree with that, but still basic good conformation.

[Tamara in TN]

p.s. Are we over the OP ripping on a poor halter horse that they happened to find online? I'm sure there are ALL types of horses online we could rip apart, but what's the point??

last I checked there were no halter QH in Australia....it was a fair enough question from the OP....however had they been from TX I'd have been more suspicious :)

Tamara in TN

[cookie-monster]

Ok Tamara in TN, i'll go with that!

[MEP]

No no no, what I'm saying is that big, powerful, heavily muscled horses certainly CAN be used for various disciplines - even english disciplines - and be perfectly sound, healthy, and happy. What I keep hearing people griping about is the heavy muscles. They don't like it - think it's cruel - abuse - think the horses just break down - think they just stand around in a show pen. My mare was shown in Halter in a few shows and placed well. No grand championships or anything, but she did place well.

I'm only trying to defend the heavily muscled, older style QHs. These are STOCK HORSES who are meant to be huge. And yes, they can be huge, and still work too.

And I agree that extremist to the point the horse teeters around lame is a bad thing!

You still didn't get it - it's not the muscles, it's the straight up and down pasterns, tiny hooves, and post straight hind legs (in fact, all the angles that are supposed to have slope for FUNCTIONAL reasons, i.e., shock absorption and flexibility for athletic ability) aren't there. You haven't put up a strictly conformation (side view) to evaluate that - from what I can see it does look like she has some angle in her pasterns - a good thing and that's WHY she can do the various things you do with her! Not her muscling.

[egontoast]

You still didn't get it - it's not the muscles, it's the straight up and down pasterns, tiny hooves, and post straight hind legs (in fact, all the angles that are supposed to have slope for FUNCTIONAL reasons, i.e., shock absorption and flexibility for athletic ability) aren't there.

Exactly. I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why this is considered ideal . Where are these different standards of conformation set out?
Form is supposed to relate to function. All horses are supposed to move in some way.

Unless breeding for the table, why would upright pasterns , tiny hooves and post legs be considered acceptable conformation for a halter horse?
Shouldn't a halter horse have the very best conformation? If this is considered the very best conformation, why>/? and where are these different standards set out?


Still no answer to this question.


Check out Sir Cool Skip.

http://www.quarterhorsestallions.com/Halter2.htm


It puts in perspective some of those criticisms of athletic horses like Quaterback by people who think that THIS is just fine.

[HunterJumperGin]

Check out Sir Cool Skip.

http://www.quarterhorsestallions.com/Halter2.htm

Holy crap! I would just like to say that horse is a beast!! :eek:

Carry on.

[Coup De Des]

last I checked there were no halter QH in Australia....it was a fair enough question from the OP....however had they been from TX I'd have been more suspicious :)

Tamara in TN

I genuinely don't know if we do that in Australia... But I went on horsedeals.com.au which is basically the biggest horse classifieds in aus, and looked through the quarter horses... and so far haven't seen ANYTHING that looks like your Halter horses, nor any reference to halter classes.

These are OUR quarter horses
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/77951.jpg
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/77057.jpg
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/77579.jpg
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/77671.jpg
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/77675.jpg

and our australian stock horses
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/77315.jpg
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/77324.jpg
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/77350.jpg
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/77364.jpg
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/77417.jpg

Beautiful!

[Auventera Two]

NOBODY ever said post legs and upright pasterns were ideal. Read for COMPREHENSION. It is rare that very poor conformation is rewarded in the halter pen. For the most part judges do a good job of pinning horses with good conformation.

It's no different in the Sporthorse in Hand classes, or Arabian halter, or anything else. JUDGE'S PREFERENCE - like I said before. It's subjective. What does the judge like? What does he feel like placing on that day? That happens in ALL breeds and ALL disciplines - not just in the AQHA.

[Auventera Two]

Holy crap! I would just like to say that horse is a beast!! :eek:

Carry on.

There are extremes in everything. Remember when David Boggs was surgically altering Arabian Halter horses and giving them "face lifts" and throatlatch tucks? And so in the AQHA world, some people will take musculature to the extremes too. But for the most part, the main stream creates and exhibits a horse that is appealing to the eye, conformationally correct, and not extreme in any sense.

[hitchinmygetalong]

Two Simple, you are resorting to the classic defense mechanism of pointing the finger somewhere else. The thread was started by someone who does not live in the United States, and therefore is not familiar with the Quarter Horse "halter" bred horse. Innocent question.

If the post-legged, over-muscled horses are not the ideal halter horse, why are they the "World Champions"? I did a search for "world champion halter horse" and all I seem to come up with are horses like the ones in the links above.

[Paragon]

How is this any different from your Big Lick issue, Two Simple?

Don't get me wrong, I find myself 'on your side' plenty often... but didn't it get your ire up when people would get so annoyed on your Big Lick threads, pointing out that not everyone does that and not all Big Lick trainers are abusive, etc etc? Isn't this all the same thing?

Can't we be allowed to condemn the sort of practices that deliberately create conformationally effed-up horses without sweeping the brush over the entire halter industry?

[hitchinmygetalong]

And it is not fair to demand that stock horses look and move like sporthorses. And that seems to be the root of the whole argument here.

Did you look at the links Coup had of stock horses in Australia? The bore NO resemblance to the halter horses. None. They looked like tough, wiry horses to me. I didn't see any overy heavy muscling, no huge asses, no huge gaskins and forearms.

Is this because the stock in Australia is different and therefore requires a different type of horse? Perhaps they have certain "stock" horses strictly for chasing joeys over hill and dale? Somehow I suspect that Australia has its share of huge ranches and plenty of big old beefers.

Not a single one of those Australian ranch horses would make the first cut in the American Quarter Horse halter ring, and you know it. But I'll bet they can outcut, outrun, and outwork an awful lot of those champion horses.

Why? Because they haven't bred the "work" out of the workhorse. And for that, my hat's off to them.

[Anne FS]

Just because you've SEEN something, does not mean you know everything about it, like whether it is wrong, abusive, stupid, whatever. It just gives you your opinion, which is fine. But it doesn't always make you right.

For example, just an FYI, Appy shows including appy halter horses are basically the same as QH's. The halter horses are bigger and bulkier & just as "appalling" as at a QH show.

Sorry to be a bitch. I don't even show halter horses, but give it a rest, stop ridiculing and looking down on EVERYTHING that isn't familiar.

Maybe I'll begin a campaign to AQHA to stop everything they are doing and just totally change to conform to some sporthorse registry because, well of course they are better than AQHA....

A halter class is sort of like a beauty pageant. Some people like it, some don't, to each their own. But you know there are some people who can't ride or don't want to ride, they like to show halter. Big deal.

i could go on and on. And maybe i will if I get any more furious at some of the rude, ignorant comments. But that's it for now.

I'm not ignorant, so don't call me that. And I AM right that painful sweats and all the other things I have SEEN be done to walking horses are abuse. Period. You know nothing about me and where and what I've seen. I probably know a d*** sight more than you, so back off. I do NOT ridicule and look down on the unfamiliar. I look down on abuse and also on breeding HYPP positive horses with pasterns incredibly bad. That IS appalling and all the self justification of oh I LIKE ramrod straight pasterns because they win and I LIKE the trembling big lick horses won't ever change that fact. If more people called it what it is maybe it would stop.

[cookie-monster]

I did NOT call you ignorant. I do know your post is a bit dramatic. Don't tell me to back off. I did not attempt a personal attack on you. I had had enough when I wrote that post. The whole post was not directed toward you, only some of it. I was furious at comments made by others also.

You're right, I don't know you. But yeah, i'm sure you know more than me. WTF. THAT was mature. How can you justify that? Oh wait, nevermind, i don't really care.

Anne FS, I am so sorry I offended you and challenged your knowledge. I apologize. No more drama, ok? BTW, I don't breed HYPP horses. I don't like straight pasterns. BUt I did just look thru the Journal specifically looking at pasterns on top halter horses, and they were not ALL upright. And I cannot explain the post-legged horses. I would be curious to hear from a top breeder or professional showman of halter horses their explanation.

[~Freedom~]

There are plenty of great working cow horse stallions out there!

Ones that immediately come to mind:
Poco Bueno lines




Doesn't the Poco Bueno line have some sort of fatal skin problem that is passed on like the HYPP thing?

[twotrudoc]

Champion halter horse I know well Cool Dun Cruisin
http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c258/twotrudoc/goof%20off%20day/Rachelshorses004.jpg

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c258/twotrudoc/goof%20off%20day/Rachelshorses005.jpg

Never had any steroids, just built. Really built. My friend only worked him to get rid of his fat belly for show season this past year, 06.

Working QH(ranch bred)

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m17/horseygal_01/Brannaman%20Nov06/BrannamanNov06110.jpg

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m17/horseygal_01/47b6db10b3127cce89e3976134720000003.jpg

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m17/horseygal_01/47b6db11b3127cce89fb99be2c180000003.jpg

**had to add the face shot, I really loff that horse!!! Buck Brannamans bridle horse Arc. He is about 16.2, I know because I am 5'4" (16 hands) and he is a bit taller, Buck (rider) is about 6'2". Point being, both horses are very muscled, wide as anything. Cool Dun Cruisin did not have the training that Buck put on Arc.

[Tamara in TN]

Is this because the stock in Australia is different and therefore requires a different type of horse? Perhaps they have certain "stock" horses strictly for chasing joeys over hill and dale? Somehow I suspect that Australia has its share of huge ranches and plenty of big old beefers.


"Man from Snowy River " comes to mind....remember that pen of most TB looking horses crashing across country on ring snaffles and Aussie saddles....<G> while not ALL of the Down Under horses are like this I'm sure it does point out a difference here and there...

and would the OP clarify something....are there not still many enormous ranches for sheep and cattle there in climates more than a little arid ??? and it would take TB type horses to deal with this weather....thin skinned, heat tolerant and trainable...?

Tamara in TN

[Tamara in TN]

Doesn't the Poco Bueno line have some sort of fatal skin problem that is passed on like the HYPP thing?

HERDA...and on a sad note from one of my Peruvian friends it seems some suspicion that DSLD affects not only legs but the hearts as well....

Tamara in TN

[sidepasser]

Doesn't the Poco Bueno line have some sort of fatal skin problem that is passed on like the HYPP thing?

There is still research being done to trace the HERDA gene back, but it appears that it may go back to Poco Bueno. I owned a Poco bred horse, never a problem with her. My cousin owns four, and no problems with any of them. So I don't know yet if the HERDA gene is from double breds or linebreeding, etc. because it does not show up with the same regularity as the HYPP gene when breeding pos to pos or a pos to a neg.

You could google that term and see what infor. is available - I don't breed QHs anymore and have been out of the genetics loop as far as that goes since 91. I do have a QH, halter mare, and she is linebred Impressive on the dam's side and paint bred (no Impressive on the sire's side). She is a hunk of horse, but has none of the over muscling that is being discussed here, she's just a wide ride and is N/N..and is learning to jump..and moves very well for her breeding and size. No she won't ever be a FEI horse or a top jumper, but her quietness and willingness to try seem to hold her in good stead around here.

I have been involved with Qhs for years and years. Too many to even think about sometimes! I've seen the fads come and go - extreme muscle bound horses are generally NOT the norm in halter classes. Most look like the regular big chested, butted, gaskined horses and many do ride. One must also remember that pics on the net only show a small portion of the entire industry. There's a man down at the feed store, raises the old style QH and has some of the best foundation horses around..he wouldn't know how to do a website if he had to and really has no need for it, people buy his stock word of mouth and they sell for high dollars. A lot of the old timers do business this way sans the 'net.

I don't have a website, but have a waiting list for horses. People just seem to "pass the word" that I have something that they may be interested in. I do list horses on the net though for sale, but no website and none while we were showing Qhs. So one must realize that although the net is a great shopping mall of horses and websites, there are many, many QHs breeders out there breeding top quality show horses that are never put on the net.

I think too, it is a case of "more is better" with some breeders. You get a little horse that has some muscling, it places and wins ..so next year you breed to a heavier horse, get another that wins..and in a few years you end up with the ginormous heavily muscled horses and because those horses were winning over the years...it becomes fashionable. Wrong? Not for me to say, I don't have a dog in that fight. But when people stop buying..the breeders will change.

I figure it may be the same in every breed. People, being as they are, want to win and when judges place a certain "type"..well there ya go..

I personally don't like post legs or straight pasterns, who wants to ride a jackhammer? Would not like that in any breed. However ALL breeds have certain examples of poor conformation, insane mental problems or quirks, and that does not make the breed as a whole bad.

The AQHA is trying to rectify some past problems - granted they can be slower than molasses in winter..but eventually they do get the message from the members that change is needed. I'm no longer a member but still keep up with things. In 30 years we've seen a lot of changes, some good, some not so good, but it takes time to change a huge org. like that.

No need for bashing or name calling either, that certainly won't help things. This being primarily an english board, there are going to be people here that aren't familiar with the western stock horses/halter horses. The best thing in my humble opinion, is to educate - not infuriate - those that want to learn more.

[Tamara in TN]

I
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/77324.jpg
Beautiful!


now that is what I am talking about....thin skinned,clean throat,good hip,legs suitable to carry the body weight....breedy and intelligent w/o looking hard to deal with....he could live here if he needed to :winkgrin:

Tamara in TN

[Coup De Des]

CRAP! I just made the hugest post.. and lost it. I'll start again!

Can I also say - Please try to stay on topic... This isn't a big lick debate.. and I don't understand why certain poster/s are being so defensive and starting to get really nasty. There is no need for it, I am not attacking anyone or their gods... just state your case, find solid evidence and try to play nice.

Horses used on stations here in aus are Australian Stock Horses (http://www.ashs.com.au/welcome.htm) (http://www.ashs.com.au/welcome.htm%29), Quarter Horses.. Not so much full tb's just because they TEND to be poor keepers and wouldn't survive a week on a station without being on full feeds. Certainly TB crosses though.. You'll find in Aus we aren't so hung up on breeds ;) specially not for working horses.

Apparently we DO have halter here... I am not familiar in any way with the western disciplines, so this has been some really interesting research for me... Taken from the Australian Quarter Horse Association website

Halter competition is used as a measure of judging the conformation of the Quarter Horse as a breed. Halter classes are divided by age and sex. Horses are evaluated for structural correctness, balance, degree or muscling, and breed and sex characteristics. Emphasis is placed on the most desirable characteristics that enhance the horse’s ability to perform. Horses are shown with a leather halter and are travelled before the judge so soundness can be evaluated. Showmanship at halter, a class for Youth and Amateur exhibitors only, is designed to judge the showmanship skills of the exhibitor. Exhibitors perform a similar routine as if they were showing in a halter class. However, instead of the horse being judged, the exhibitor is evaluated for his/her showmanship skills. Judges evaluate the grooming and fitting of the horse and the expertise of the exhibitor in presenting the horse to the best of his/her ability.

I found some stallions... there's this boy
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/65262.jpg
and this one
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/65352.jpg
and this guy
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/69126.jpg

Still they are all in proportion and have no major confirmational FLAWS unlike the ORIGINAL filly I posted, who was toted as being PRIME breeding material... I don't understand why judges would reward such poor confirmation and horses so glaringly out of proportion. Remember according to AusQHA "Horses are evaluated for structural correctness, balance,"

[caffeinated]

And it is not fair to demand that stock horses look and move like sporthorses. And that seems to be the root of the whole argument here.

No, it's not. At least not from me. I don't care if stock horses move like sewing machines. I want them to not be prone to ringbone and navicular and all those other nasty lower leg things. Sickle hocks or posty back legs, upright pasterns, etc- not good for SOUNDNESS. Screw how the horse moves. It's about health and good husbandry, and creating horses that are built to last and be comfortable.

I just do not think it's fair that this sort of thing is encouraged. I did a search on a horse sale website for champion halter horses, and I saw a whole lot more bad leg conformation than good. One mare was so upright it actually looked as though her ankles had buckled over- And she had a foal at her side.

I don't see this as a "snobby sporthorse people don't like stock horses" issue. There *are* certain standards of conformation that relate to the health, comfort, and longevity of the horse. It's very basic stuff. In Deb Bennett's conformation books, she calls it evaluating conformation on the basis of being a horse, rather than on the basis of a specific discipline- how well suited is the animal for its job as a HORSE (not as a jumper or dressage horse, but just for doing what it has evolved to do- move around a lot, eat, and run efficiently). That's what people are talking about here, not "omigod quarter horses are weird"

[jvanrens]

Yes, but still no one answers the question of why halter QHs do not appear to be judged by the generally accepted standards of conformation. This is not to bash them at all, but it's no exaggeration to say that it's apparent from the overwhelming majority of photos of these horses, including celebrated Champions, that upright pasterns and post legs are considered acceptable. Why?

I'm not even asking about the foot issue.

Why the upright pasterns and post legs? [/quote]

Because some judges need to be re-edumacated on what is good conformation, glasses, or a good swift kick in the pants to dislodge their head from thier nether regions. :eek: ;) I have to add though, they can only judge what's in front of them, so even the judges that want better legs and feet on a horse in halter are sort of stuck placing what is in front of them and some breeders need a swift kick for putting muscles above good structure. That said, there are a lot of halter breeders who are just as frustrated with some of the horses out there winning as a lot of other people.

I sure won't bash that filly for her muscle mass, my appendix QH mare is quite similar in that regard, without any Impressive in her lines at all. I sure would like to see better legs, feet and angles on her though. If I was in the market right now, I would pass her by on that alone.

BTW Stink, since your exposure to the wonderful world of Quarter Horses is obviously limited, maybe you should do some research into the breed before insisting it's steriods. There is a reason that there are lines refered to bulldog type, and it isn't because they bark. :winkgrin:

For those of you confused why some people only breed or show halter, there are many reasons, usually they have reasons they can't ride or they choose not to ride, but showing halter is a way for them to enjoy their horses and still show. Good lord, it can't be the money, everybody knows that the only way to make a small fortune in horses is to start with a large one! :lol:

Now back to my coffee! This was too much typing on caffine deprivation. :sleepy:

Jo

[egontoast]

No, it's not. At least not from me. I don't care if stock horses move like sewing machines. I want them to not be prone to ringbone and navicular and all those other nasty lower leg things. Sickle hocks or posty back legs, upright pasterns, etc- not good for SOUNDNESS. Screw how the horse moves. It's about health and good husbandry, and creating horses that are built to last and be comfortable.

I just do not think it's fair that this sort of thing is encouraged. I did a search on a horse sale website for champion halter horses, and I saw a whole lot more bad leg conformation than good. One mare was so upright it actually looked as though her ankles had buckled over- And she had a foal at her side.

I don't see this as a "snobby sporthorse people don't like stock horses" issue. There *are* certain standards of conformation that relate to the health, comfort, and longevity of the horse. It's very basic stuff. In Deb Bennett's conformation books, she calls it evaluating conformation on the basis of being a horse, rather than on the basis of a specific discipline- how well suited is the animal for its job as a HORSE (not as a jumper or dressage horse, but just for doing what it has evolved to do- move around a lot, eat, and run efficiently). That's what people are talking about here, not "omigod quarter horses are weird"









well said, caffeinated

[Auventera Two]

How is this any different from your Big Lick issue, Two Simple?

Don't get me wrong, I find myself 'on your side' plenty often... but didn't it get your ire up when people would get so annoyed on your Big Lick threads, pointing out that not everyone does that and not all Big Lick trainers are abusive, etc etc? Isn't this all the same thing?

Can't we be allowed to condemn the sort of practices that deliberately create conformationally effed-up horses without sweeping the brush over the entire halter industry?

Absolutely! And just as with big lick - those who love big lick are free to defend it! Great freedoms we have here ain't it? ;) And personally I don't "love" AQHA Halter, but I do think it is inaccurate to say that a horse with heavy muscles cannot do anything but stand around in a show pen dead lame. That's just not true. Yes, it can and does happen and generally those horses are not pinned. In my whole life I've seen a grand sum of ONE animal that was so grotesquely huge with such tiny feet that the horse had to be drug from stall to show ring. And the judge didn't even give the horse a 2nd glance.

With big lick you have an entire sect of the breed that must be Government regulated because the abuse is so rampant. That is an entirely different issue. But if you feel it is abuse to the point that the United States Government must create a Department to deal with the abuse, as it did with big lick horses, than by all means say so! You are free to opinion, as am I.

I personally do not feel that this:

http://www.premierpub.com/finder/images/qh/e/encountered-prof.jpg

is in any form or fashion even comparable to this:

http://pic20.picturetrail.com/VOL1274/4171377/8720005/213112196.jpg

on the abuse scale. But that's just my opinion.

[Auventera Two]

Did you look at the links Coup had of stock horses in Australia? The bore NO resemblance to the halter horses. None. They looked like tough, wiry horses to me. I didn't see any overy heavy muscling, no huge asses, no huge gaskins and forearms.

Is this because the stock in Australia is different and therefore requires a different type of horse? Perhaps they have certain "stock" horses strictly for chasing joeys over hill and dale? Somehow I suspect that Australia has its share of huge ranches and plenty of big old beefers.

Not a single one of those Australian ranch horses would make the first cut in the American Quarter Horse halter ring, and you know it. But I'll bet they can outcut, outrun, and outwork an awful lot of those champion horses.

Why? Because they haven't bred the "work" out of the workhorse. And for that, my hat's off to them.

Good for them. And as I said - do a search on EQUINE.COM and you will quickly find that at least 95% of the QHs shown there look exactly like the Australian horses posted. As I've said before, heavily muscled AQHA Halter horses are but a small sect of the breed as a whole.

[Tamara in TN]

working horses.

http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/65352.jpg
and this guy
http://www.horsedeals.com.au/content/enlarged/69126.jpg

Still they are all in proportion and have no major confirmational FLAWS unlike the ORIGINAL filly I posted, who was toted as being PRIME breeding material...

wow a 3/4 shot :) that's cool just as a visual !! I've not seen that since the 1980's..I'd add on this guy above...that if he were presented full side on....the cannons would show up as far more puny as the original mare did....3/4 will also disguise shoulder and pastern angle...I'd not be happy about all that "bunch muscle" coming from the chest...makes for a stubby mover under saddle....."bulldog" is not about bunch muscle so much as width between front legs and girth/flank capacity....

my biggest "gripe" (and that is relative as in the end it is none of my affair:) ) with the "halter" horse is that they cannot cross over well into much of anything else....so a failied halter horse has really no other place to go...no "back up plan" as it were other than someones pet....

if one has a "cutter" bred animal...it has a reasonable chance to cross into reining or team penning....

a QH off the track could cross into barrel racing (Dash for Cash babies come to mind)

Roping bred horses (Hancock,Two Eyed Jack) can still ride regional level "stock" seat type classes with 4H kids....and those sires seem the Word of The Holy Writ among the foundation breeders :lol: :lol:


Hunter under saddle (Rugged Lark et all) can have a saddle change and do western pleasure...

now in all these examples no one is going to "cross over" and be a world beater...but there is a chance that it could happen....

another point not yet expounded on is that QH farriers are well known for whittling feet down two or three sizes smaller than need be to give them that "chinese lady foot" look....granted that does nothing for the cannons :lol:

Tamara in TN

[Auventera Two]

my biggest "gripe" (and that is relative as in the end it is none of my affair:) ) with the "halter" horse is that they cannot cross over well into much of anything else....so a failied halter horse has really no other place to go...no "back up plan" as it were other than someones pet....

Could be true for some (and in those cases, I totally agree with you!) but certainly isn't true for all. Or even for the majority. I've seen plenty of halter horses go on to be trail ridden, pleasure ridden, or be a kid's horse!

[Tamara in TN]

[QUOTE=Two Simple;2060126]But if you feel it is abuse to the point that the United States Government must create a Department to deal with the abuse, as it did with big lick horses, than by all means say so! You are free to opinion, as am I.
QUOTE]

just a reminder to the kind readership,that the HPA covers all breeds in the USA...and was created out of the combined abuses of the Saddleseat,Fine Harness and Walking horse worlds....unknown to most folks the USDA can come on any show grounds anytime and any place and make inspections....they are just a bit busy with the gaiteds right now :winkgrin:

Tamara in TN

[Tamara in TN]

I've seen plenty of halter horses go on to be trail ridden, pleasure ridden, or be a kid's horse!


well that is sort of my definition of "pet" :) unable to do anything else competitive...

Tamara in TN

[Pronzini]

I shouldn't care about this so much- I think the reason I do care is because I really like quarterhorses. One of my favorite stallions (at a distance, found in net surfing) is a great reining and cow horse producer, but he looks so functional and athletic, I can picture him doing any number of things well- from jumping to driving.

I think, if I stopped rambling a minute, my whole opinion boils down to the fact that I don't think it's good for the breed as a whole to reward inherently bad structure in the show ring. Not every halter horse is horrible with awful conformation and useless- yours looks nice, for example. It would just be nice if the goal was to show a horse that is not just pretty but also suited for staying sound and useful, whether they're asked to do things or not.

Breeders breed for what the market dictates. There's obviously a market for halter horses whether any of us likes it or not. But halter horses and halter bred horses are a minority of QHs just like double dilute whatevers are a minority of TBs. They take a lot of heat from purists but it seems unproductive to trash the whole breed based on them.

"Using" horses can be big and blocky. Take a look at major QH stallion Topsail Whiz. At 14.1h and 1000 lbs, he rivals some of the halter stallions for brawn but he moved like a cat in his day and he certainly sires some catty horses.

http://www.loomisranch.net/stallions/topsail-whiz.html

or Hollywood Dun It, who has a Breyer horse in his image and not for standing still.

http://stoneys.org/stallions/hollywooddunit.htm

IMO, these horses are more representative of topflight QHs than halter horses and yes, they don't look like Hanoverians.

[Tamara in TN]

[QUOTE=Two Simple;2060171]You can call it what you want, but PLENTY of horsemen and women do not compete. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having a trail, pleasure or kid's horse that isn't shown!
QUOTE]

I never said there was...did I ?? I look at horses in different catagories based in their use....it is the one way we have figured out the various ways to deal with hay buyers...feed stores/boarding barns are dealt with one way,performance horses another,breeding horses another, "pets" another and horses owned by "caretakers" another...

Calvin even gave such a speech to the Tennessee Grasslands and Forage Council in Nov...each sort of person expects a different service and price based and has a totally different outlook on their horse based on the above catagories..I'm all for "pets" they make up the majority of our hay sales after all....it is not a lower or higher grade than any other sort of horse catagory

Tamara in TN

[egontoast]

it seems unproductive to trash the whole breed based on them.


HUH? No one is doing that.

[egontoast]

I get it -

If you don't like the legitimate issues raised by other posters about the conformation of halter QHs, why not just pretend they have all said something else! or pretend that they have criticized all QHs! See, then you can be duly outraged and aghasted.


How disingenuous.

[tirnanog]

Well, that's pretty silly.


Me thinks that you are the silly one


That's like saying that you know for a fact that some backyard horse owners starve their horse, so this horse could have been starved at some point in his life.


It's not LIKE saying, I AM saying that this could have happened to the horse. And, who said anythng about "backyard"?



So, noone can say matter of fact that the OPs filly isn't a product of a dose of steroids. It does happen


How does this translate into:

And you know for a fact that lots of angry people abuse horses and so this horse might have been abused in his life.
[/QUOTE]???

Talk about silly:D

[QUOTE]
But I'm not willing to say that it's common or that its accepted


Where did I say common or accepted?



The quotes below are some of the comments I was debating.


Not steroids that I know of



It's definitely not steroids.



this two year old has probably never seen a drop of steroids in her life.

[caffeinated]

"Using" horses can be big and blocky.

I never said they couldn't be. (Assuming this is directed at me because you quoted one of my posts... )

[Auventera Two]

Ok - then we're on the same page! lol :winkgrin:

[BravAddict]

I'm revisiting this thread after being thoroughly trounced by the ACS Organic I exam. I'd rather think about this than how I get to spend extra time studying things that like to explode.

Anyhow.

I made a post on page 3 that, to my surprise, really didn't garner very much criticism. So, maybe we do agree on some things?

I think we all agree that breeding of HYPP homozygous or heterozygous horses is unethical.
I think we all agree that *if* a person were to use steroids on a horse to increase muscle mass, we would find this unethical.
I think we all agree that no one here dislikes halter *horses* themselves, though some may dislike the implied attitudes of those involved.
I think we all agree that some halter horses do become riding horses.

But we do differ...I've seen a couple viewpoints.
Some people have said that some people just want to enjoy horses from the safety of the ground, which they are entitled to do. But at what cost?
I believe that my personal pleasure and personal opinions and personal desires must be tempered with ethics. So while a person's preference to have fun handling halter horses and appreciating them aesthetically is very important, it is also equally important that they make management and breeding choices that predispose their horses to a full-length, high-quality life. This is true of anything. Take breeders of Random Contentious Dog Breed Known for Aggressive Nature...GSD, pits, rotties, whatever. A breeder may want to preserve the history and the standard by continuing to breed Dobies that are highly protective. However, that is their thing, not the dog's thing. The dogs have no control over it, and may suffer in the long run. I think it is a very responsible thing for a dog breeder to say "This trait is not practical in today's world, and needs to be changed." I take the same issue with halter breeders (of all breeds! even to some extent the stallion licensings), but the problem is compounded by the fact that horses are bigger, stronger, live much longer, and cost a great deal of money.
So it may be that some halter horses are able to do other things. But I am waiting with bated breath for someone in the halter world to say "You know what? This trait predisposes my horse to unsoundness, and because he is so specialized, the pool of potential people to care for him (if, heaven forbid, I was unable) is limited. We should change this."

I think the best thing that any horse industry can do for itself is ensure that the animals it produces have the best possible chance to have a long, healthy, happy life. Most of that comes from making each horse an economically justifiable burden for the greatest number of people. That is called taking responsibility.

[Tamara in TN]

So why not avoid all the confusion and start checking out this filly if it concerns you so much? Perhaps you should call the breeder and ask for photos of her sire and dam. !

http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/image+of+kid

foaled 1996

her daddy

http://www.allbreedpedigree.com/sierra+te

foaled 1980

her mama's daddy

Tamara in TN

[egontoast]

Must be hard to find the fart button on some of those stallions like Sir Plumber's Butt Chip

[caffeinated]

Again - people are discussing this ONE PHOTO of ONE HORSE with upright pasterns and declaring abuse on the entire industry. Sure, if you start posting hundreds of photos over and over again, then we can talk.

Oh they're out there, but I generally try to refrain from posting sale ads for commentary on this board. And I believe the other poster was, as I have been all along, referring to structure, not so much muscle. Though excess muscle + poor structure makes for a much more firey debate, because it compounds the problems that both can cause.

[hitchinmygetalong]

Also, muscle bulk diminishes as horses age.


Having just seen A.P. Indy, I can categorically state that the above statement is not true in all cases.

BravAddict, really great post. Why are you taking Organic Chem? You should be in Law School! :yes:

Oh, and Egon:
Must be hard to find the fart button on some of those stallions like Sir Plumber's Butt Chip :lol: :lol: :lol: I spit my lunch all over the keyboard. Thanks a BUNCH!

[Tamara in TN]

[QUOTE=hitchinmygetalong;2060886]Having just seen A.P. Indy, I can categorically state that the above statement is not true in all cases.
QUOTE]


on getting heavier has they age....I know my welsh cobs do but not so much the riding pony/section B types...I have seen websites of Warmblood stallions here in their teens who look nothing like their inspection pics (Habicht comes to mind) and finally,look at the TB stallions who are teenaged on the recent stallions register or what ever it was called...granted bunches of the "younger" pics are OTT but still you see what the "good life" does for these guys..."beer bellies" seem to appear in more males than humans....:winkgrin:

Tamara in TN

[jvanrens]

I genuinely don't know if we do that in Australia... But I went on horsedeals.com.au which is basically the biggest horse classifieds in aus, and looked through the quarter horses... and so far haven't seen ANYTHING that looks like your Halter horses, nor any reference to halter classes.

Guess you weren't looking too hard then. ;) I found it in one easy google, the Coles Notes description of Halter on the Australian QH Assoc. website: http://www.aqha.com.au/aboutus/disciplines_halter.asp And delving a bit deeper into the AQHA (Australia) site, I found the results of your National show, right here http://www.aqha.com.au/shows_events/national_show.asp . A complete day of halter classes from the looks of things. I don't know about you, but to me some of the horses in those pictures look a lot like North American Halter horses to me.

[Tamara in TN]

http://www.aqha.com.au/shows_events/national_show.asp[/URL] . A complete day of halter classes from the looks of things. I don't know about you, but to me some of the horses in those pictures look a lot like North American Halter horses to me.

note the seperate classes for American papered horses....do they qualify for grand and reserve ???


Tamara in TN

[jvanrens]

note the seperate classes for American papered horses....do they qualify for grand and reserve ???


Tamara in TN

Looks like the Grand Champion Stallion was the same in all the Stallion divisions, Open, American and Ammy unless there was a mistake made on the website, and I believe almost the same thing happened with the mares. I really don't know a whole lot about the show other than what I've scanned today.

Jo

[Tamara in TN]

Looks like the Grand Champion Stallion was the same in all the Stallion divisions, Open, American and Ammy

how interesting would it be if the connemaras and or welsh and fresians or <insert> ferign :) breed showed that way here in the State or Canada....?? hummmm :eek:


Tamara inTN

[YoungFilly]

Am I the only one who thinks the muscling on this 2yr old horse is grotesque to say the least? What in the world are they doing to get a 2yr old muscled this way?

I used to remember a mare that was built like this years ago. If I remember, she was a complete washup at the age of 6. I looked like she could barely move with all that bulk. She also had navicular. She was also a QH.

I have seen lots of QH's and she was the only that one ever looked like this. Please tell me this isn't the norm? This is horrible!

[MsM]

We had a couple of boarders at my boarding stable come in with two stock-horse breed horses. The gelding had been very successful at halter with the breeder (where he had been boarded) Boarders did confide that he had been on a "Secret halter horse supplement" He had bulging muscles. Very shortly after arrival he started to drop weight dramatically, in spite of anything the BO did. (He needed to lose some, but not this way!) It did make me wonder what was in that supplement as I know some illegal substances have this effect when withdrawn. He didnt lose all his muscles but did lose some and a lot of, well, bulk.

Anyway, his teenage owner wanted to ride him huntseat and jump him. (Why they bought him for this I dont know!) The h/j instructor asked that he be cleared by the vet as he looked lame to her, especially behind. The vets diagnosis: the horse just did not have the structure to move properly. He was too muscle-bound and too straight in his structure to do more than a gerbil-size stride. And his tiny feet were a bit sore and would likely be damaged by more than very ocassional jumping of small jumps. He was not a good enough mover for show WP. He felt she could do some trail riding but he would likely require some specialized shoeing for our rocky trails and she would have to be careful on hills as he had difficulty pushing uphill and balancing downhill. :sigh:

Now many horses have conformational challenges, but it is sad to think that a horse whose conformation limits him so severely could be found by many judges to possess an "ideal" conformation! It is an odd phenomenon in some breeds (not limited to stock horses!) that a "halter horse" could become a separate type within the breed with form no longer related to the breeds current or historic functions. :confused:

[sanctuary]

I have not read the whole thread, but did want to chime in. I have a 10 yo QH mare in our lesson program. She too is built like a brick $hithouse. VERY much foundation style QH, although she does have Impressive lines. She is HYPP Negative though. She does not move in a tea cup and in the last year, we have taught her (and fitted her up to) moving out properly. She's quite cute actually and bold and brave to the jumps. She is, however, as UNCOMFORTABLE as I've ever ridden. Can't canter in a straight line. I honestly don't think her body "can" move that way. Her trot is not bad, but Holy heavens, her canter is horrendous to ride. Not bad to look at (from the side anyway). But she is a bulldog with a pencil neck and decent head.

Obviously, since we don't do AQHA stuff we don't have her hyped up on steroids or anything. Just a ton of hay, some grain (6qts a day) and a hormone supplement (she is chestnut and a mare after all!). But she is SOLID.

[Coup De Des]

Jvanrens... I made that comment before I did research, I since made a later post (on page 6 or 7 maybe) that includes the links you have posted.


I am not saying it is wrong to muscle up a horse. I perfer a hard body over a wobbly one ;) Don't we all? But I find it suspect that a mere 2 year old could have this kind of muscling without a little ah... extra help. But if you say this is extremely unlikely, then I am content with that answer.

I don't think this is any different to racing 2 year old TB's.. One way or another they are mere babies and the damage done to them at such a young age comes back to bite them when they are older (and not even OLD, I'm talking 6,7, 8 etc)

I agree with Cafeinated and Bravaddict.

[sidepasser]

Any horse can be washed up by 6 or 7 if circumstances allow - i.e. jumping too soon (love those ads - jumping full 3 ft. course at age 3..duh?). My mare started her jump career at age 6, very lightly ridden at age 3 and only basic arena work and trails until age 6. She does not have a single blemish on her legs and the farrier said she had wonderful hooves although she is a bit overweight and should be on a diet (we are taking care of that..lol..and she thinks the Weight Watcher plan for horses just stinks).

But on the other hand, the tb I have..well at 7 - he looks 20..has major back problems and will likely never be completely sound to ride (he's not mine but leased). Jumped too soon, worked too hard too young in tack that did not fit correctly..poor boy..

However, bad genetics and poor structure will lead to breakdowns more quickly and I agree, putting a massive horse on tiny hooves with straight post legs is asking for trouble down the road. Maybe sooner than later. Not fair to the horse. My halter mare at six doesn't look near as bulky as she did at age 2 when she was being shown in halter, though she is still bulky, but the muscle mass has diminished a lot and actually if she were a tad taller, she would look no different that a heavy European warmblood - like a Hannovarian (Ive seen some of them built like tanks too - big old wide ride butts and heavy necks/chests and some of them too, had hooves a tad small). If the horse is structurally sound (good underpinnings as an old trainer once told me) it should be able to do other events as well as halter.

BTW - there are tests for drugs within the AQHA - steriod use is frowned upon, and most reputable breeders will not use it due to wreaking havoc on breeding stock (mares that won't conceive, stallions that can't produce sperm are worthless to a breeder). There are disreputable people in every event (even the english ones - gasp)..but the majority of halter people would not use a steroid as it plays havoc with bone density as well as breedability. Halter horses are expensive..sure the cheap ones are out there too, but the upper level futurity horses that are breeding sound and winning are just as expensive as any upper level english horse. It's not unheard of to pay 20,000 up for a well bred, winning halter mare or stallion. And to prove the point about breeding stock, look at what the stud fee is for the sire of the filly and compare a few top winning halter champion stud fees.

There is a halter horse called Lucky to be Gold - he's a paint and pretty massive. Click on the offspring tab to see what he is producing - seems his get are doing everything from hunters/jumpers to team penning. He's produced champion after champion..so even with the heavy halter breeding, his get ride and halter as well. http://www.prospecthill-farm.com/phf002.htm

It can be done, but requires careful breeding and selection for sound traits and there are breeders out there that are concerned with soundness. After one spends the kind of money to get a winning horse, advertise it for stud, show it's offspring, etc. they would like to recoup their investment. Rumours of unsoundness in the line can be devastating to a breeder and if it is proven unsoundness..well look at the Impressive line..practically destroyed the line and left that stud's name associated with a genetic disease that has caused more discussions on the net than any other. Although Impressive has thousands of offspring within many breeds, people are still scared to buy one without testing it first. All breeders should be responsible to breed soundness in with correct traits for the type of job the horse will do. Unfortunately, in the horse biz, not all breeders do that. Those are the ones I would stay away from. The horse world is small, the QH world is even smaller and word does get around.

[Tamara in TN]

[QUOTE=sanctuary;2062466] She is, however, as UNCOMFORTABLE as I've ever ridden. Can't canter in a straight line. I honestly don't think her body "can" move that way. Her trot is not bad, but Holy heavens, her canter is horrendous to ride. Not bad to look at (from the side anyway). But she is a bulldog with a pencil neck and decent head.

[QUOTE]

she is made and bred to break snow drifts in montanta high country carry you,a 50 pound saddle,20 pounds of gear and maybe a baby calf ....she is bred to stop and hold 400lb weanling calves from climbing over or under her and holding them on a line for branding and doctoring....she is bred to be easy to handle,quiet and willing...

she's not bred to do "english" things...not jump or collect or extend or "go straight" or side pass or half pass or piaffe or passage...she is not bred to wear a collar or haul logs or pull some old sister around in a meadowbrook in "driven dressage"

she is a stock horse

Tamara in TN

[egontoast]

No one is knocking a good stock horse. I'm sure, like any horse, they can benefit from a little shock absorption in the pastern angle and the joints and a good foot.

she's not bred to do "english" things...not jump or collect or extend or "go straight" or side pass or half pass or piaffe or passage...she is not bred to wear a collar or haul logs or pull some old sister around in a meadowbrook in "driven dressage"



The issue was the lope, not the piaffe.

[BelladonnaLily]

I have bought 3 yearlings from a halter breeder. I bought them before they were "blown up"...these were horses were not up to snuff with his standards so they were turned out and allowed to be horses. One was a gelding whose 2 full siblings (later, he was the first foal) turned out to be VERY successful halter horses. Both required surgery as they were knucked over as yearlings (really gross to see). They were MASSIVE by 2 years old and could barely walk. This man lunged weanlings until they were lathered, threw them in a stall hot and they never got turnout. They were fed up like feeder cattle. My gelding never took a lame step in his life. He was a big boy but NOTHING like his sisters and NOTHING like the pictures that have been shown here. It IS more than genetics, folks. My boy is now foxhunting somewhere in NoVa and these poor mares are standing in a stall somewhere (and probably reproducing more that will be destined for the same fate). I do remember hearing that they started one mare u/s but she "broke down" on her first trail ride. :no: We did go back and look at another filly there but at 5 months he was already lunging her and fitting her up so we passed her up. Poor girl...she was gorgeous.

[Tamara in TN]

The issue was the lope, not the piaffe.

yes but...is not the piaffe a variant of a "trot in place"?? if you cannot have a peachy "trot" you can never have a peachy piaffe....? correct ? :) while I take your point about the "lope", the canter is the domain of the TB/arab type horse,the trot to the carriage horses and the walk to the long distance horse..."three pure gaits" as one often sees advertised is a combintion of the three specialized gaits thru breeding over time resulting in one ridden animal....

in a stock horse you need explosive speed over a very very short distance and then back to the walk...there is no fence rider I have ever ever known in real life that wanted the horse he worked with every day to trot....

he works long days riding fence and checking calves at a walk and he wants a horse that can walk and carry him for 10 or 15 mountainous rolling hill miles....feedlot horses are the same...walking all day with the occasional burst of effort...now there are different from the open grass land texas bred animals who have more than enough effort in holding wiry bad natured range mamas together....:lol:

this is the cutting bred animal....one of the many divergent paths in the QH's...a 14hh TX cutter would never survive a MT winter much less break thru any snow or carry a load or be at all "useful"....:winkgrin:

anytime you by a "use dedicated animal" and you do not use him for his designed purpose,you and he are going to be unhappy w/t results...

Tamara in TN

[Tamara in TN]

Examples of little foals with natural muscling:
whole purpose of a BREEDING PROGRAM suited to your discipline.[/COLOR]

one of my favorite places for milk fat baby colts that are remarkably well bred:

http://www.carolrose.com/prospects.html

not offering for sale as they are not mine and no one here cares about reiners anyway :winkgrin:

Tamara in TN

[hitchinmygetalong]

Yeah hitch, but you're kind of forgetting that.....um......holding a 400 pound steer on the line is um...........really hard. It requires a big horse that the steer can't pull around. A 400 pound steer is almost HALF the weight of your average sized Morgan - if say they weigh 1,000 pounds. But if you have 1,200 pounds of solid muscle mass, it's going to be a LOT harder for that 400 pound, solid muscle, fighting steer to jerk the horse around ;)

I've watched roper competitions on tv in which people had horses barely suited for the job and the horse would skid forward on its feet every time the steer jerked. Not only is it training on locking up against the steer, but it is also about sheer brute size.

My apologies, Two Simple. I deleted my post after rereading it as I realized it wasn't pertinent to the points being made (and made well) by Tamara.

Cute babies in your other post, by the way :yes:

[egontoast]

yes but...is not the piaffe a variant of a "trot in place"?? if you cannot have a peachy "trot" you can never have a peachy piaffe....? correct ? :) while I take your point about the "lope", the canter is the domain of the TB/arab type horse,the trot to the carriage horses and the walk to the long distance horse..."three pure gaits" as one often sees advertised is a combintion of the three specialized gaits thru breeding over time resulting in one ridden animal....



Not sure I agree with those generalizations. last time I checked the arab excelled at long distance and has no problem with walk/trot or canter. I would think a stock horse would need to be able to lope. They don't need to piaffe (very few horses can do that anyway) and they may not even need to jog, but they need to lope, don't they?

I'm not talking about specialization , I'm talking about breeding for poor conformation that interferes with a horse's way of going. Standardbred trotters are specialists but their conformation complies with the general standards.

This is not about working stock horses who are able to do their specialized jobs, the issue is horses who can't do anything because they have been bred to emphasize POOR conformation. Poor conformation for movement and soundness. We've all seen them on the Champion Halter Horse pages.

I'm going to stop becasuse I'm starting to sound like a certain someone. ARGHHH. It's just difficult to discuss when the issues are constantly misconstrued. Enjoy your horses, whether they resemble aberdeen anguses (angi ? ) or gazelles.

[Tamara in TN]

egontoast;2063046]Not sure I agree with those generalizations. last time I checked the arab excelled at long distance and has no problem with walk/trot or canter. I would think a stock horse would need to be able to lope. They don't need to piaffe (very few horses can do that anyway) and they may not even need to jog, but they need to lope, don't they?

yes....but not for long (not even three laps of a good sized arena) and not with any sort of "beauty"...the early stock seat classes were obediance tests in the wonderful old romals with "movement" as we know it now being rated pretty far down the line...

when then came the "under saddle" (WP,HUS,Hunter) into the western world then more "englay" influences began to appear....it awas attempt to showcase the many appendix bred QH to the huntseat riders....

how "pretty" was the lope ? how "easy" did it look to ride...? did they have the right tights on ?? these really did not have a place so many years ago....you could be a rougher than hell trot but if you spun on the haunches with a proper pivot foot that mattered more...

This is not about working stock horses who are able to do their specialized jobs, the issue is horses who can't do anything because they have been bred to emphasize POOR conformation. Poor conformation for movement and soundness. We've all seen them on the Champion Halter Horse pages.

I think we (you and I anyway :) ) agree on this....mare that started this thread would have a hard time doing much besides what she is doing in the pic...standing there...

and I meant to add this earlier but three kids and 20 horses gets in my way some times :winkgrin: it is not only the build of the horse but it's mind...and until you have been on 100 different horses you do not get a good idea of their mind all the conformation defects in the world can be partially overcome by a good minded horse....like a shoulder or a loin of good feet,the mind is bred into them also...and it's basic work ethic is not changed by any amount of training....which is why a Trakehener Verband inspector said over a decade ago..."ridden horses come from ridden horses"....folks should always bear this in mind and it does not matter what horse you have...

I'm going to stop becasuse I'm starting to sound like a certain someone. ARGHHH. It's just difficult to discuss when the issues are constantly misconstrued. Enjoy your horses, whether they resemble aberdeen anguses (angi ? ) or gazelles.

angi? :lol: :lol: :lol: never seen a latin suffix on that word...you are pretty funny...it is angus in the singular or plural....kinda like the word "sheep"

Tamara in TN

[hitchinmygetalong]

But Two Simple, how many breeders work to produce a quick turnaround two-year-old that will get pinned (because it is the most "finished" or "mature" horse) at a young age and then they can hang that trophy on their stallion's list of "accomplishments"? They are breeding to showcase their stallion, not to improve the breed.

Said two-year-old then goes on to continue "maturing" until it has outgrown its weak skeletal conformation and ends up a less-than-useful horse for any purpose.

They're out there. And yes, you are correct. They are in every breed. That doesn't make it right.

[egontoast]

Hey Tamara. that quote is confusing. Looks like I said all that and I didn't. Maybe you could fix it,:)

Anyway I have no problem discussing this with you Tamara and I wouldn't wish to insult any of your horses. This thread was about those oddball halter types and not about working stockhorses . Not sure how it got there.

Perhaps some of the ..er..amazement comes from the fact that in sporthorse breeding, at least, the halter/ line classes relate to suitability/ function as a sporthorse and it is the same for other disciplines. Form relates to function. Horses are shown on the line before they are under saddle. It's not an end in itself .

The thought that a halter horse would not be suitable for anything else , including any kind of normal equine movement, is alien to many horse people. If that could be done without producing really poorly conformed horses, (the post legs, the tiny feet, the upright pasterns that no one wants to acknowledge) then so what. But that's not the case.

Ok I know yes I'll stop now.

[hitchinmygetalong]

I agree with Egontoast. I love a good stock horse.

[**stellar**]

Kinda reminds me of those creepy shows on TLC that show the 10 year old all muscled up. I find it creepy not matter what age the horse/person.


I guess I just like moderation.

[Auventera Two]

Kinda reminds me of those creepy shows on TLC that show the 10 year old all muscled up. I find it creepy not matter what age the horse/person.


I guess I just like moderation.

I too personally prefer a horse that's more middle of the road. Good heavy muscling, but not freak show material.

[RheinlandPfalzSaar]

Having not read the entire thread I am incredibly sad for this horse as well as the little foals that someone posted - why in the world is this desirable? What happens to these animals when they are no longer being shown in hand?

[Coup De Des]

baby making machines....
Real nice..
www.ellisquarterhorses.com/sallynew2006.htm

[egontoast]

broodmare from Sir Plumber's Butt chip's site

http://www.bertonqh.com/shanes_dam.jpg

[hitchinmygetalong]

baby making machines....
Real nice..
www.ellisquarterhorses.com/sallynew2006.htm (http://www.ellisquarterhorses.com/sallynew2006.htm)

Oh my. :eek: Click on the third thumbnail from the left and look at that picture enlarged. How can anyone say that is "normal"?

Now, before we get sidetracked with these mares, I would like to ask a question of the QH folk out there.

Is anything being done at the AQHA to address the problems that seem to be concentrated in the "show" halter horse lines? I know they are identifying HYPP carriers, but how about adjusting the judging standards to place more emphasis on correct conformation vs. muscle mass?

[YoungFilly]

That Perfect Clu has aweful conformation! I'm sorry, expecially because we don't know this breeder, and she doesn't know we are looking at this pictures, but PLEASE. This is disturbing to say the least! What the heck are these people thinking? That kind of muscling is disgusting. :no:

I'm sorry, I never get this mad, but please, that is just wrong.

[A. P.]

... of Belgium Blue cattle:
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=24998&rendertype=figure&id=F2

[sidepasser]

Have no clue whether the AQHA is addressing the conformational issues in halter horses except that I know that if the horse can't trot out, it likely won't pin no matter how big it's muscles are. I've seen judges give barely a nod to those types and go on to pin horses that do move out at the trot.

We all tend to agree that the horse should be bred to do a job, any type of job is better than no job. Otherwise the horse just goes south. Unless another halter breeder wants the horse.

I too question whether the pendulum will swing back in favor of the less heavily muscled QHs, I believe it will. If you take a look at the pic of the IDEAL QH, it is proportionate in muscling, good conformation, and suitability.

But people must stop buying babies from breeders who turn out stock that are known to become lame/crippled etc. As long as people are sucked in by "pretty pics" without a history of usability in the offspring, then the less than "reputable" breeders are allowed to continue.

I like Qhs, I like 'em all but sure do miss the old style using types and am glad to be informed via this group that there are breeders out there still producing them within the AQHA. I think that every breed evolves and it causes longing and sadness to those who were brought up with one type to see the breed evolving to many or different types. Think Halflingers..I think they are the cutest things with hooves for small draft types, but now I see there are two types..the old style drafty type and the taller, leggier "new" type. Is that good for the breed? I can't say. Is having a QH that is 7/8ths TB good for the QH breed - again, time will tell. Morgans are the same, I remember them being stout little horses about 14 hands but have seen them get larger and leggier over time and some are above 15 hands.

Just a question, your Breed - what ever it may be - have you seen such changes? Where you grew up with "the breed" being so and so and now there may be little to no resemblance or various lines within the breed? If so, does it bother you a bit or rather do you feel a loss over what you used to see/ride and find it harder to find those types?

I am truly wondering, because I started out with QHs in 1970..and have watched the breed evolve into many distinct types within the breed, and the original type (small, stocky workhorse) is getting mighty hard to find (if you CAN find them) - I think they are more prevalent out west or in the midwest?

I've heard that even the TBs no longer are the same as they once were in the 50's and 60's (smaller bone, more fragile) but I don't know if that is true because I did not grow up with them. I do know the arabs have consistently gotten taller..my goodness you can now find them at 15.2 up to 16 hands..and I remember them as being smallish horses.

Guess I'm getting old - but my kids rode Qhs and showed hunters in the open shows, dressage, x-c and yep, western pleasure all on the same horses. I got so danged tired of hauling the twins every weekend, but I did it, because I knew where my girls were..lol..but seems that those "do it all" types are getting more scarce.

Is this true or am I just an old lady who hasn't kept up very well?

BTW - this has been a very interesting discussion and though there were disagreements, I applaud everyone for not allowing it to disintegrate into a trainwreck. I am learning some new things (for one - I CANNOT afford a 10,000 stud fee, but it is nice to look) and two, it is interesting to get the "english" point of view on some very western horses.

I posted on the eventing forum about my Qh mare - since so many of you ride english/dressage/jumping - I asked about advice on how to tell if my QH (on trial) has the potential for english events. I got her on trial due to her very quiet disposition. If you have time, would you go over and give me some advice on what to look for as far as retraining from western to english (contact, trotting out instead of jogging). I would sincerely appreciate it, though I love the western horses, I am more comfortable riding english and this mare is more suited to me disposition wise than the Tbs have been. Getting old sucks..

Thanks,
Sidepasser

[cookie-monster]

Oh my. I hope that is a good natured bull, cause he scares the crap out of me just seeing him in a picture!!

I don't think the mare's muscling is disgusting, but I wouldn't want it in my riding horses. What is scary about the mare is from her knees down.

[YoungFilly]

broodmare from Sir Plumber's Butt chip's site

http://www.bertonqh.com/shanes_dam.jpg


Honestly, this one is so bad I just don't have any words to say. :sadsmile:

[Coup De Des]

IT IS NOT THE MUSCLES I AM POINTING OUT... IT IS THE TERRIBLE OVERALL CONFORMATION THAT IS BEING PROMOTED AND TOTED AS PRIME BREEDING MATERIAL!!

I wouldn't breed a dog with wonky legs, let along a poor freakin horse.

[Jumpingfool]

I can't take it anymore, Coup...

It's spelled conformation!! Geesh! If you're gonna bitch about it at least spell it right!

[hitchinmygetalong]

Just a question, your Breed - what ever it may be - have you seen such changes? Where you grew up with "the breed" being so and so and now there may be little to no resemblance or various lines within the breed? If so, does it bother you a bit or rather do you feel a loss over what you used to see/ride and find it harder to find those types?


I'm a Morgan person. Saw my first Morgan around '67 and fell in love instantly. Strong, typey, Government-bred mare. This was during or just after the AMHA came down hard on overly-long feet and gingering and pretty much banned them both.

Since then, I've watched the breed split in two. There have been a couple of well-publicized scandals involving Saddlebreds in the breeding shed, but we still see horses that are certainly more Saddlebred than Morgan pinned World Champion and now they sell the cover of the magazine to the highest bidder. The magazine is nothing but advertising. Sure, it's fatter than it used to be (it used to be the size of the Chronicle) but that's because they have so much advertising, much of it from the "top breeders" and "top trainers" showcasing their "Morgans."

BUT

Although they don't get the headlines, the old-type bloodlines are alive and well on small farms all over the country. They may not have the big ads but they are there. You just need to know where to look. I have great faith that the lines will live on.

[caffeinated]

So you don't see *anything* wrong in this picture? Nothing that you would change? Nothing that could be a problem for a horse's soundness and maybe shouldn't be passed on?

http://www.aqhathepackage.com/gallery/d/57-2/DonShugart3.jpg

Not seeing anything that might, oh, require special shoeing in order to keep a horse sound?

http://www.aqhathepackage.com/gallery/d/123-2/Zita6.jpg

He's got a lovely face- and many of the pictures are very pretty, but it would be awfully hard for me to justify breeding such an animal.

[MistyBlue]

That stallion is handsome...but those legs. :eek: That's not a trait I'd want to pass along. Those little dainty legs and those straight up and down pasterns aren't correct for an AQHA's conformation. Judges are pinning pasterns and straight as a pole hind legs like that as champs? :no:
The corrective shoeing doesn't surprise me one bit...that's a definite conformation 'don't' for soundness. :(

[Drvmb1ggl3]

So you don't see *anything* wrong in this picture? Nothing that you would change? Nothing that could be a problem for a horse's soundness and maybe shouldn't be passed on?

http://www.aqhathepackage.com/gallery/d/57-2/DonShugart3.jpg

Not seeing anything that might, oh, require special shoeing in order to keep a horse sound?

http://www.aqhathepackage.com/gallery/d/123-2/Zita6.jpg

He's got a lovely face- and many of the pictures are very pretty, but it would be awfully hard for me to justify breeding such an animal.


Are legs like that really desireable in QHs?

[caffeinated]

That's a HORRIBLE picture they put up on their site. I think the horse is foundering. That's probably the only photo they had of her to put up. People do stupid crap all the time.

Well she was "very navicular" with a "torn cervix" when turned out with a stallion to be bred. So all around, great candidate for passing on positive soundness traits.

I need to get off this thread. It's sucking at my will to live.

[hitchinmygetalong]

Are legs like that really desireable in QHs?

Excellent question. Could someone please enlighten us?

[caffeinated]

I might be crazy* but I really don't think different trimming would fix all the leg issues I see going on there.



*actually, I KNOW I'm crazy, but that's a whole other thread.

[hitchinmygetalong]

Two Simple, I've been hunting up pics of halter horses on the Internet, and those straight pasterns and post-leg hind ends seem to be the predominant trend. They aren't some freak anomaly.

I know you are standing up for your breed, and that's admirable. But there is definitely something not right when these horses are pinned - put them in a line up in front of a group of "C" Pony Club kids and they would nail them every time. It's just bad conformation. It is bad conformation whether it is a Quarter Horse, a Percheron, a Shetland Pony... Well, you get the idea.

Upright pasterns and straight angles = bad conformation.

Sorry, but that's the truth.

[lilblackhorse]

i have posted here for years, and can I just say thanks that we now have the ignore function?

Two Simple? You are annoying as all hell. People are asking basic questions---like why would you think that that stallion with little tiny hooves and legs as straight as tree trunks would be acceptable for long term function and breeding. Yet you bitch and call people names. Seems to me that you are open to all opinions that agree with yours.

Don't bother responding, see paragraph one.*G*

[mp]

Upright pasterns and straight angles = bad conformation.

Sorry, but that's the truth.

It's also true that 1300 lb horses on itty bitty feet and hind legs that look like turkey drumsticks are more the norm than the exception in QH halter. Not just in pictures. It's what you'll see in the ring, too.

But ... some people like to argue, hitch. About anything. Just FYI ... :)

[tbtrailrider]

http://www.kidsclassicstyle.com/
:eek: :eek: :eek:

From the website...
KIDS CLASSIC STYLE

1996 AQHA Buckskin Stallion
16.3 Hands - 1800 lbs - HYPP N/H

Sire: Kid Clu
Dam: Tootsy Rolls Redford

TWO TIME AQHA WORLD CHAMPION STALLION

SIRE OF 25 WORLD & RESERVE WORLD CHAMPIONS IN 2005

MULTIPLE CONGRESS CHAMPION SIRE



2006 Stallion Fee $3,500

Multiple Mare Discount

Ask about our HYPP Guarantee!





about HYPP

http://www.vgl.ucdavis.edu/service/horse/hypp.html

[mp]

But what have you actually seen in person?

QHs. In the ring. Competing in halter classes. The last AQHA show I attended was in October. It was a big one.

16.3 Hands - 1800 lbs

Looks like I was too low on the weight, though.

[LetsRide]

Just a question - how many of you have actually SEEN Halter horses in REAL LIFE versus just pictures? Pictures can be cropped, blown up, made to fit a page, etc. and often it doesn't even come close to doing the horse justice. I've seen hundreds and hundreds, if not thousands of these horses in REAL LIFE, and the pictures really don't do them justice. I hate the false backgrounds that many advertisements use. I feel it completely screws a picture up. You need to see video at the very least, and see them in person to really know what you're looking at. I've shown these horses, my mother has shown these horses, I've boarded in barns with plenty of Halter people, I've sat ringside at hundreds of shows in my life. You can't pic a couple pictures off the internet and form your conclusion.


Well, I HAVE seen the stallion, The Package, you posted links to above in person. I was looking for a AQHA riding prospect and happened to find a nice looking gelding there. I paid for a pre-purchase vetting on that horse, including some x-rays. Sadly, the findings on the young performance prospect halter bred (who was related to The Package) gelding's x-rays were as far from being normal as imaginable for a three year old. His feet looked just like The Package's. Needless to say I did not buy the gelding.

In addition, that stallion, is not exactly Mr. Nice guy disposition wise either (was handled with a baseball bat). Great halter horse? A winner? YES!

:(

[LetsRide]

Wow, that's interesting. A lady I know and used to board with saw him in person and had nothing but rave reviews. She thought he was a sweetheart and saw no out of the way behavior out of him at all!! :eek: He had to be handled with a baseball bat??? Wow, pretty dramatic. Too bad that is not the report I got.


Based upon all of what you wrote I kind of thought you actually knew the horse? Especially since you gave everyone on the board such a hard time about seeing these halter horses in person! Yes, I personally observed both the wooden baseball bat AND the stallion being handled with it. Maybe you should reserve judgement on things you do not know of yourself first hand!

:yes:

[VivaBaby]

Are legs like that really desireable in QHs?


No, not to anyone who wants a horse who will be able to do more than stand still in a show ring. I adopted my first horse who was halter bred and had the conformation to go with it. I didn't know any better then. I learned many heartbreaking lessons and lost him before he was 7 to navicular cysts and severe arthritis.

It disturbs me when I hear or read breeders showing off horses with super straight hind legs and stating the animal has "pretty" hocks. Or to hear them exclaim about popping gaskins and forearms. My least favorite is a breeder who has struggled with the soundness of a young mare all her life. Her vet has told her the mare's feet are far too small for her body. So what is she doing now? Breeding the mare to a stallion with straighter hocks and slightly larger feet and expecting to produce a sound foal. That mare's public story is like a train wreck and I can't stop looking.

There's nothing wrong with showing a horse in hand. I enjoy it with my mare at fun shows. I almost enjoy it more than undersaddle classes. But we wouldn't do well in a breed show as she's bred for function. I just wish those who chose to show in hand would show horses that could possibly be successful in the real world (ie: not the forced, false gaits as in Western Pleasure) undersaddle. But why continue trying to justify pinning an animal who clearly could not participate in any other equine discipline?

I am grateful that there are still sectors of the QH market (or Arabians, or Morgans, or, or or...) who breed and raise functional, usable horses. Granted breeding is a crap shoot. There are no guarantees that one will produce a perfectly sound horse everytime. But why continue to breed animals who are pretty much doomed to mechanical breakdown at such young ages? Why breed for such extremes?

Clearly the changes need to start with several groups all at once: breeders, judges, breed associations, etc. And there are not easy answers. Changes sure aren't gonna happen overnight. There's too much money at stake. Which is what it all boils down to, right? If a certain "style" is profitable then it gets bred, that's all that shows up in the ring and, therefore, it wins. Right or wrong, that's what's happening.

Ok...my not so humble opinion and I are retreating back into lurk mode. :cool:

[cosmos mom]

i have posted here for years, and can I just say thanks that we now have the ignore function?

Two Simple? You are annoying as all hell. People are asking basic questions---like why would you think that that stallion with little tiny hooves and legs as straight as tree trunks would be acceptable for long term function and breeding. Yet you bitch and call people names. Seems to me that you are open to all opinions that agree with yours.

Don't bother responding, see paragraph one.*G*

Unfortunately, the quote feature can override the serenity of the ignore feature at times. I for one believe that there is no higher form of abuse or cruelty to animals than that of breeding genetic misfits and calling them show horses. Having seen the severe conformation flaws of many halter bred quarter horses with my own eyes. Personally, I think that it is an abomination.

[ddashaq]

Again, I will ask - how many Halter horses have you seen in REAL LIFE? An I'll take that a step further - how many WINNERS have you seen in REAL LIFE? How many barns have you visited? How many shows have you watched?

Its real easy to find a picture on the internet you don't like and condemn a whole industry. But what have you actually seen in person?


Actually, I have been to World. I would assume that ALL of the horses that I saw in the halter classes were winners since I think (and could be wrong) that they have to qualify for World. There were some that were absolutely beautiful-- really nice conformation combined with just the right amount of muscling. Then there were the horses that were winning. Posty legged, upright pasterns, and my personal favorite, hocks that vanished when their legs straightened. They also happened to be EXTREMELY muscled. From where I was sitting (ringside, by the way) it seemed to me that they were judged on muscling and very little else. Perhaps I was missing something? This was a few years ago, maybe things have changed. I have not been to a stock breed show since, but I certainly hope that things are as you say, TS. It would be a huge improvement on what I witnessed.

[LetsRide]

Unfortunately, the quote feature can override the serenity of the ignore feature at times. I for one believe that there is not higher form of abuse or cruelty to animals than that of breeding genetic misfits and calling them show horses. Having seen the severe conformation flaws of many halter bred quater horses personally, I think that it is an abomination.


I totally agree! I went on to buy another young AQHA gelding that was also halter and performance bred (Conclusive- Skipa Star bred) but he had more normal size feet (not size 00 with a 16 hand body). Turned out to be the right choice and he is very sound!

:)

[LetsRide]

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree. ;) I know this woman very well and she was very complimentary of the farm, the owners, and the stallion himself. She is pretty discriminating, and down-to-earth. She raises good horses and doesn't breed or deal with trash. If the horse had to be beaten with a ball bat, I'm quite certain she would have mentioned it.

And I find it pretty unusual to think that a 2 time world champion has to be beaten with a bat to control him. How EXACTLY do you say this bat was used? How hard? How often? For what purpose? I just find it extremely hard to believe. Pardon me for being a little obtuse, but I know the handling and training that goes into a Halter horse to make them a winner, and they MUST MUST MUST MUST have exemplary manners in the ring or they are either excused from the ring, or not placed at all.


A little obtuse? Apparently, you cannot read and comprehend the very simple statements I wrote. I NEVER wrote that I witnessed the horse being beaten with a bat, you wrote that, not me!
:lol:

By the way, the breeders are both lovely people. But you would not know that either, first hand, would you?

:lol:

[Tamara in TN]

[QUOTE=MistyBlue;2065332]That stallion is handsome...but those legs. :eek: That's not a trait I'd want to pass along. Those little dainty legs and those straight up and down pasterns aren't correct for an AQHA's conformation. QUOTE]

a basic rule I like to follow (and I've never seen it written anywhere) is that the front cannons must be balanced to the hip....short itty hip...tiny cannons no problem...."three full sized pigs under a blanket" hip ?? then the cannons must be able to carry them at least visually....the angles mean far less to me than the lack of suitable bone mass...as w/o the bone there is no need to look on to the angles :winkgrin:

Tamara in TN

[Auventera Two]

A little obtuse? Apparently, you cannot read and comprehend the very simple statements I wrote. I NEVER wrote that I witnessed the horse being beaten with a bat, you wrote that, not me!
:lol:

By the way, the breeders are both lovely people. But you would not know that either, first hand, would you?

:lol:

Then please DO tell exactly what the bat was used for, how it was used, under what circumstances, how the stallion reacted to it, what he did to warrant getting a bad, etc. etc. etc.

You threw a statement out there willy nilly about having to use a wooden baseball bat on a stallion, so in all fairness, you need to tell the whole story. Also preceeding the wooden baseball bat comment you said he wasn't exactly "Mr. Nice Guy." This was your quote:

Yes, I personally observed both the wooden baseball bat AND the stallion being handled with it.
So he WASN'T beaten with it? Good! How exactly was the handled with it? Please tell the rest of the story.

[MistyBlue]

One can handle a horse with a bat...I've done it numerous times. Not a wooden one...a whiffle bat. Sometimes a bendy whip or a loopy chain doesn't cut it with bad mannered nasty tempered horses. Sometimes one needs a long solid object to hold the ***-head off a bit. :winkgrin:
Handling with a bat, whip or chain just means they're being handled with it, not beaten with it. If I hear someone has handled a horse with a dressage whip, I don't assume the handler is beating the animal silly with the whip...just using the whip as a correction device. Handling with a bat usually means the handler needs a safety device to keep the nasty animal from running them over and the whip no longer works keeping the horse out of your space. The bat isn't commonly used to hit the horse with, but to poke it away.
I've seen my share of QH shows and halter classes in my lifetime...and have seen them degenerate from nicely performance bred animals being judged on their breed ideal *for performance* to basically a body-builder contest for judges pinning the horse least likely able to stay sound or get the heck out of it's own way as top horse.
And one doesn't need to hit every AQHA show to see the trend...if the stallions and mares being advertised on the websites have their show stats with them...we *know* what's winning when we see World Champ stats next to an ungainly bulldog on sticks of a horse.
The Partner horse is a walking conformation "don't" for any animal of any breed expected to be athletic or stay sound. The judges obviously prefer this type of build since it has a double world champ and is commanding such high breeding fees...so I'd lay the blame on the judges rewarding this type of genetic mishap. :no:

[Auventera Two]

Thanks MB for the clarification! :) I'll wait for a response from LetsRide as to how this stallion was handled with the wooden bat. My main concern is that she threw these comments out leisurely and implied that the horse had to be beaten into submission because he wasn't exactly "Mr. Nice Guy" as she put it. I just don't like those kind of implications. That's how nasty gossip rumors get started. When she said the horse had to be handled with a wooden baseball bat because he was nasty, the thought immediately entered my mind that he had to be beaten in order to be controlled. I've never seen a baseball bat used on a horse as an aid like a whip is.

[LetsRide]

Then please DO tell exactly what the bat was used for, how it was used, under what circumstances, how the stallion reacted to it, what he did to warrant getting a bad, etc. etc. etc.

You threw a statement out there willy nilly about having to use a wooden baseball bat on a stallion, so in all fairness, you need to tell the whole story. Also preceeding the wooden baseball bat comment you said he wasn't exactly "Mr. Nice Guy." This was your quote:


So he WASN'T beaten with it? Good! How exactly was the handled with it? Please tell the rest of the story.


Willy Nilly? You are the queen of Willy Nilly! :lol:

You get all of your information second hand and then accuse other posters of the same thing you yourself do. You in reality do not know this horse from Adam. Oh; your friend boarded there. So all you think you know is whatever your friend reported to you SECONDHAND.

Since I have in real life visited the ranch in Sanger, CA that bred and stands The Package, my information is first hand unlike yours. My opinion is based upon my own experience, unlike yours. I do not agree with what your friend told you based upon MY experience.

This particular stallion does not have a great disposition. He is not the only stallion in the world that is rather difficult to handle. Some experienced handlers choose to keep a baseball bat in hand when handling rank stallions. These breeders made NO secret of about any of this when I was there. Yes; I saw the wooden bat being stored outside the stall AND the bat being carried inside the stall while the horse was being haltered and while he was brought out. The end.

[Auventera Two]

So, now the rest of the story........ :rolleyes:

Glad you cleared that up. The bat was never needed in order to control or handle the stallion. It was just there "in case." That's a diferent story than what you eluded to the first time around! :eek:

And actually, I've been involved in the AQHA, and also specifically the Halter division first hand so I do actually know a thing or two from first-hand. :winkgrin:

And no offense, but I will tend to take the word of my friend over somebody (you) posting on the internet whom I have never met before and have no connection to at all. My friend says the stallion was just fine - she loved him. He was a good guy, no problems. But hey - maybe the day you saw him, he was having a bad day. *shrug* I guess all horses can have bad days. I know mine sure can. But I'm just not willing to bite you line about this horse being some rank beast that can't be handled unless a ball bat is present. When she came back from visiting the farm, she was very complimentary and rather liked him. She made no mention at all of bad behavior but she did instead say he was a real sweetie. So I guess it shows you that two people can see two different things on two different days.

Hey - weren't we talking about that earlier in regard to judge's opinions?!? LOL!

[LetsRide]

So, now the rest of the story........ :rolleyes:

Glad you cleared that up. The bat was never needed in order to control or handle the stallion. It was just there "in case." That's a diferent story than what you eluded to the first time around! :eek:

And actually, I've been involved in the AQHA, and also specifically the Halter division first hand so I do actually know a thing or two from first-hand. :winkgrin:

And no offense, but I will tend to take the word of my friend over somebody (you) posting on the internet whom I have never met before and have no connection to at all. My friend says the stallion was just fine - she loved him. He was a good guy, no problems. But hey - maybe the day you saw him, he was having a bad day. *shrug* I guess all horses can have bad days. I know mine sure can. But I'm just not willing to bite you line about this horse being some rank beast that can't be handled unless a ball bat is present. When she came back from visiting the farm, she was very complimentary and rather liked him. She made no mention at all of bad behavior but she did instead say he was a real sweetie. So I guess it shows you that two people can see two different things on two different days.

Hey - weren't we talking about that earlier in regard to judge's opinions?!? LOL!


I thought you wrote your friend boarded there? Now you write 'she came back from visiting the farm'? Which is it?

By the way, in CA they call it a ranch not a farm. Oh, yeah, some people might just choose to always handle particular horses with a baseball bat just in case they might someday need it. In case of what? An earthquake?

:lol:

[Auventera Two]

I thought you wrote your friend boarded there? Now you write 'she came back from visiting the farm'? Which is it?

I said that *I* used to board with the lady. I never said she boarded THERE with the stallion.

Post #270 - Page 14 - Just slow down - relax - and read it again. Geeze.

By the way, in CA they call it a ranch not a farm. Oh, yeah, some people might just choose to always handle particular horses with a baseball bat just in case they might someday need it. In case of what? An earthquake?

:lol:

Hey - you're the one that said he had to be handled with a wooden baseball bat. Nobody else said it. And now you say they never had to actually USE it on him. So obviously they were holding it "just in case." You said it - nobody else did.

[MeredithTX]

It would certainly seem that if they feel the need to carry a bat "just in case," the stallion might have a history of behavioral issues. I have worked closely with six stallions in the last few years, including my current horse, and it has never even crossed my mind that I might need a baseball bat.

[LetsRide]

I said that *I* used to board with the lady. I never said she boarded THERE with the stallion.

Post #270 - Page 14 - Just slow down - relax - and read it again. Geeze.



Hey - you're the one that said he had to be handled with a wooden baseball bat. Nobody else said it. And now you say they never had to actually USE it on him. So obviously they were holding it "just in case." You said it - nobody else did.


I never wrote the words 'never had to actually use it'. Did I?

Here's a friendly hint. Quit writing words that I never wrote and then writing that I wrote them. No one but you is impressed by that kind of immature behavior.

:lol:

[catknsn]

I have not read the whole thread, but we do have halter horses here, and it's not necessarily true that a big built halter horse can't move. We turned our stallion out in the big outdoor this weekend and I'd like to share some pictures. He's 12, placed third at AQHA world and has haltered all his life, and is perfectly sound without any medications or supplements. He is HYPP N/N and we would not breed a horse who was not N/N.

http://www.pretzelkitty.com/images/horses/floyd121006c.jpg
http://www.pretzelkitty.com/images/horses/floyd121006d.jpg
http://www.pretzelkitty.com/images/horses/floyd121006f.jpg

(I looked for a trot picture but all I have is galloping and rollbacks!)

I hate people who give steroids or feed up horses to the point of lameness, but it is not true of all halter competitors, and it is not true that halter horses cannot ride. I myself have been riding one of our old broodmares who was a halter point earner in her youth. She is 20 and sound with a lovely flat trot. It's not bulk that makes a lot of these horses move horribly, it's usually a bad shoulder/upright pasterns. If you breed specifically for a good shoulder and good pastern angle, you're going to get a halter horse that moves well.

I've had a 2 year old filly in my barn, many years ago, that had navicular and wasn't even broke yet, but you know what, it wasn't really a surprise! Her sire was a great big palomino with an upright shoulder and upright pasterns. So, surprise, he kept siring the same thing, and those morons who owned him just kept on breeding him because he was a pretty color. If you breed crap to crap, you get crap - in any breed.

[MistyBlue]

If you breed specifically for a good shoulder and good pastern angle, you're going to get a halter horse that moves well.

Exactly...I agree wholeheartedly. I personally don't have a preferrence either way on amount of muscle/bulk on a horse...the only thing that confuses me about halter AQHA's is the amount of stallions I see in photos all over the place or at shows that are winning left and right with spindly and underboned legs, teeny feet, hind legs straight as a post and upright pasterns. I can't think of a single breed where those attributes would be either desirable or functional.
The amount of muscle doesn't seem to inhibit them in any way really...that's conditioning and breeding I'd assume.
May I ask what, exactly, are halter classes in AQHA judged on? Is it conformation or presence?
That Pretzel Kitty looks cute in those photos...hard to tell how he's built from the shots but I love that name. :yes:

[catknsn]

LOL! Pretzelkitty is my personal domain. His name is Sierras Super Star. :D

We got a nice compliment from the new farrier. She said she stocked up on 0's and 00's because she knew she had a new client with AQHA halter horses. Then she got here and realized we didn't have any with feet that small!

I told her to save them for ponies. :D

[MSP]

I like the old fashion QH!
http://www.nfqha.com/breedstan.html

Conformation - The National Foundation Quarter Horse should possess the Quarter Horse Conformation described by Robert Denhardt in 1940 – the Foundation Quarter Horse is a medium sized, balanced horse, heavily muscled, with sturdy bone and foot to support his weight, and carry heavy loads during long days of work. The length of leg does not exceed the depth of the heart-girth. The large eyes are set far apart on a short head with a large jaw, and the neck is of medium length and thickness in keeping with his heavily muscled frame. All parts of his conformation are geared to allowing a horse to work hard for long hours in rough terrain, and still have the lightning burst of speed necessary to catch a cow, and the agility required to turn that cow on a dime.

[MistyBlue]

LMAO...sorry catknsn...I thought Pretzel Kitty was the horses name! :lol: :lol: :lol:
I like Sierra's Super Star better as a horse name...although Pretzel Kitty would be one definitely different horse name. :yes: I had even thought to myself..."Hmmm, it's nice to see an AQHA with only two names instead of three." :winkgrin:

[[r.oo and l.ulu]]

Sooo...baseball bats are an appropriate training tool? :eek:

[MistyBlue]

No, they aren't an appropriate training tool at all.
But...they can be a lifesaver for handling certain animals who would just as happily crush you to soup as look at you.
Now I personally would never keep any animal that was bad enough to require me to carry a wood bat on my person in order to survive moving that animal around. :no: I'd rather use the bat on the moron who never taught the thing respect and ground manners.
However...there are some (*very* few, and no, not all previously abused either) horses that are just bad eggs. Having a level headed handler (one not given to temper tantrums) who carries a bat to move that animal around is for safety purposes and the bat is used strictly as a thick, blunt and unbendable tool to keep the horse bat's length from the person handling it. It's not used to hit the horses with...it's just that a bat is a decent length, strong and blunt enough to use more as a prod.
I've seen a few horses over the years that the handlers have kept a bat close by just in case only to keep the animal from charging or running them over.
I personally used to keep a whiffle bat in the barn for a similar reason. A whiffle bat is the same size as a wood baseball bat, but it's hollow plastic. Pretty much impossible to hurt anything with unless you poke it's eye out with it. :winkgrin: However it does make an impressive sound when tapped against a really, really nasty tempered animal that's trying it's hardest to kill me. :D Now I have a 3' piece of foam pipe insulation I keep right inside my barn door for about the same reason. It's soft and flexible like those Noodle floating pool toys. It can be used to whack the tuckus end of a kicking horse without the horse really feeling it...it's more of the sound it makes. Or used to thump against the chest of a pushy horse. It has better reach than my hand/arm and makes a better sound without causing the sting of a slap for a fresh horse.
But hearing someone carrying a bat around a horse usually means (if the handlers aren't idiots of course) that the horse has given them reason to need a few life saving seconds to fend a really nasty tempered animal off. It can be used to prod ot hold against their chest or haunches if they're coming at you kicking or charging...just enough time to spin out of the way and save your own hide...it's never used as a discipline.

[alabama]

I'm just going to stick my head in here for a second to say that there are very good reasons to show halter. I showed my three year old last spring/summer at some dinky, dinky local open shows. She got to learn how to be handled all over - clipping, washing, tieing, etc. She also got to find out she could stand bored at the trailer at the show before classes and that me messing with her feet to make her stand up correctly was ok. Oh and look, girly, there are other horses are out there and no, they don't want to talk to you. :D She needed to learn all of that and showing her made ME get off my ass and try to teach her (with help from a good friend :)). I've never shown anything. I've roped and team penned but that's not the same (to me anyway).

So anyway, there are good reasons to show halter. I couldn't ride her yet and I wanted to a) show her off and b) let her see some of the world. I know that all of that was off point but I just wanted to say it anyway.

That said, I don't like a lot of the trends in the halter world. I hear that AQHA is VERY political - who the owner/trainer/shower is means almost as much as what the horse looks like. (I say that from what I hear, not what I know for fact. But then I've heard that about showing in a lot of different breeds.) I don't like the toothpick legs, tiny feet, etc.

My horses are both halter bred and they both move fine. They'd be useless to me if they didn't. I'm not naive enough, however, to think that there aren't greedy breeders out there who don't care and just follow the winning trends. Just don't lump all breeders in together. There are some who try to do it right.

[Tilly]

eew!

[cookie-monster]

Someone said, on pg 13 maybe, or asked is the straight pastern, hock, spindly leg thing what is wanted in a QH. Well, no. Not for the "riders" (the non-halter horses). I've always said that halter horses aren't judged from the knees (or hocks) down. i don't think that conformation is necessarily preferred by halter horse people, but maybe the word would be more like "overlooked" (?). But those are the halter horses & that's my opinion. The riding horses are NOT wanted like that. At least I don't, in my HUS & roping horses.

[mp]

I ride with a whip, therefore, I beat the snot out my horse with it while riding. This lesson in logic brought to you by Two Simp. :lol:


Since I have in real life visited the ranch in Sanger, CA that bred and stands The Package, my information is first hand unlike yours. My opinion is based upon my own experience, unlike yours. I do not agree with what your friend told you based upon MY experience.

This particular stallion does not have a great disposition. He is not the only stallion in the world that is rather difficult to handle. Some experienced handlers choose to keep a baseball bat in hand when handling rank stallions. These breeders made NO secret of about any of this when I was there. Yes; I saw the wooden bat being stored outside the stall AND the bat being carried inside the stall while the horse was being haltered and while he was brought out. The end.

Good point about the 2nd hand info. And please note what happens when you answer the question "JUST WHAT HAVE YOU SEEN IN PERSON???????" with what you have actually seen. ;)

[LetsRide]

I ride with a whip, therefore, I beat the snot out my horse with it while riding. This lesson in logic brought to you by Two Simp. :lol:



Good point about the 2nd hand info. And please note what happens when you answer the question "JUST WHAT HAVE YOU SEEN IN PERSON???????" with what you have actually seen. ;)


:lol:

I am a quick study, MP! Yes, it became quite apparent that certain details are better left 'unwritten'. This is especially true considering there are certain experts in secondhand knowledge that will re-write what someone else has actually written and then question what they wrote themselves.

:yes: