The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    43,108

    Default AQHA is threatened with lawsuit over clone registrations:

    Seems that the AQHA may be sued over the rule that clones can't be registered:

    http://quarterhorsenews.com/index.ph...#ixzz1suSr5gN0



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul. 21, 2011
    Location
    Co
    Posts
    4,826

    Default

    Very interesting..

    They claim "the rule violates anti trust laws that prohibit any entity from monopolizing commerce ,WITHOUT A LEGITIMATE REASON".
    Science will come crashing in on this argument. This will be fascinating if both sides bring their best reasoning forward.

    Bluey, could you post this on the Sporthorse breeders forum? We've had some good cloning debates there..



  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb. 9, 2000
    Posts
    2,498

    Default

    Dejavu all over again.

    Same thing happened when they wouldn't register multiple foals from the same mare via ET. (Same argument, too. Didn't read the article, wonder if it's the same people suing?)

    Got sued, changed the rules.



  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul. 21, 2011
    Location
    Co
    Posts
    4,826

    Default

    "Same thing" as in lawsuit, but very different science involved and thus a very different argument.



  5. #5
    Join Date
    May. 19, 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    535

    Default

    I really hope AQHA doesnt loose this..I may be weird, but I dont agree with cloning..period..so certainly dont think the offspring should be registered either.



  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct. 18, 2000
    Posts
    22,455

    Default

    The Clone War has begun... (cue Star Wars soundtrack).....


    Aw come on - you knew someone was going to post that!
    Brothers and sisters, I bid you beware
    Of giving your heart to a dog to tear.
    -Rudyard Kipling



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct. 26, 2010
    Location
    Orygun
    Posts
    2,947

    Default

    I'm putting this out there...the AQHA will cave. Just like on the markings and the multiple foals. Might as well save the money from the legal fight and put it towards abandoned QH horses or QH rescues, if there are any.

    *I haven't a dog in this fight, just going by what I've read in the past*
    GR24's Musing #19 - Save the tatas!!



  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan. 26, 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    782

    Default

    I have no dog in this fight either. But if you're going to play in my sand box you need to play by my rules. Breeders know ahead of time that cloning is not accepted.

    I would think that most people wouldn't want cloning to be accepted by the AQHA. The average breeder doesn't have the funding for such specialties. I think the Quarter horse is a diverse breed that needs to be diverse and not narrowed down to a few horses that are successful in the show ring. Let mother nature pick the genetics and not have carbon copies.



  9. #9
    Bluey is offline Schoolmaster Premium Member
    Original Poster
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    43,108

    Default

    Just like with any other such lawsuit, they have to cave in, because the ones protesting that rule are right, the horses in question ARE AQHA horses.
    It will be very hard to deny that.

    I would suggest that, like with appendix horses, that have an X before their registration number, they make a special part of the registry for clones and use a C in front of their registration number.

    I don't think clones will really be but a drop in the bucket, too expensive and who needs one more horse anyway to spend that kind of money in them, other than a few individuals that have $100,000 laying around for a clone.

    On the other hand, yes, the association members in the conventions have been voting on that rule repeatedly and it has been voted down time and again.

    Why would anyone want to get that rule changed thru the courts, when the association and most members don't want it, even if they are "right" in principle, the clones ARE indisputably AQHA horses, just as the one they were cloned from?

    THAT is what the courts will have to decide, I think, unless they settle somehow.
    The vet and the breeder named in the suit have been trying to work with the AQHA for years and didn't get anywhere.
    I think that this is their last resort and, knowing them and all they do, I see their point also.
    The AQHA is a very big sandbox and the ones cloning a very small part of it.
    They want in to be let play too and I think they have the right to, if the rest like it or not.
    The clones ARE AQHA horses.
    I don't like that this finally is coming down to a lawsuit.



  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb. 6, 2003
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    14,935

    Default

    Of particular concern was the fact that, in nearly every case, the offspring of a male clone is indistinguishable from the offspring of the original. (Because of the mitochondrial DNA contributed by the mare’s oocyte, the sperm of a cloned stallion is not identical to his “parent.” In the breeding process, however, the stallion’s mitochondrial DNA is not passed on. Therefore, a foal by the original would possess the exact same DNA as a foal by a clone.)

    AQHA statement;
    http://www.aqha.com/News/News-Articl...statement.aspx
    ... _. ._ .._. .._



  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul. 5, 2007
    Location
    Beside Myself ~ Western NY
    Posts
    7,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    Just like with any other such lawsuit, they have to cave in, because the ones protesting that rule are right, the horses in question ARE AQHA horses.
    It will be very hard to deny that.
    But, devil's advocate here, there are plenty of horses who ARE AQHA horses, but are NOT eligible for registry under the rules for whatever reason. Heck, maybe even because they have too much white hair or too few testicles on them. There will always be horse's whose identity is known who are unable to get papers with their breed registry because some rule or other has been violated.
    Why is it that a woman will forgive homicidal behavior in a horse, yet be highly critical of a man for leaving the toilet seat up?
    ~ Dave Barry



  12. #12
    Bluey is offline Schoolmaster Premium Member
    Original Poster
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    43,108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmartAlex View Post
    But, devil's advocate here, there are plenty of horses who ARE AQHA horses, but are NOT eligible for registry under the rules for whatever reason. Heck, maybe even because they have too much WHITE HAIR on them. There will always be horse's whose identity is known who are unable to get papers with their breed registry because some rule or other has been violated.
    Exactly, remember Melvin Hatley and the white rule, that the AQHA fought thru the courts and lost, at a very high cost to them?

    Rules have to abide by rules too and if a horse has two duly registered parents, the offspring should be able to get registration papers.
    ANY rule to say no, you don't, can be contested in the conventions and if you still think you are very right and everyone else wrong, go the legal route, as others before have done.

    Let the courts decide, if it gets there, but we kind of already know common sense will win this one again, that states "the offspring of two registered parents of the same breed IS of the same breed" and a clone by default is too.

    The vet and the breeder are right, now they will get to prove that in court, as others have done before.
    Remember, there is a precedent already with other similar lawsuits, the white rule one of them.
    I don't see how the AQHA can win this one either, if they like it or not.

    The australian JC I have heard is looking at that same situation with AI not being permitted in their registry.
    All it takes is for someone to contest such restrictive rules and they will fall.
    They stand now only because no one cares, but when some does care enough about what is not right, well, hard to lose when you are right.

    Those two named in the lawsuit are not hotheads on an ego trip, but AQHA members that have worked for many years with the association, trying to get their point across and this is their last resort.
    Someone else may have given up and let this go, evidently they choose to follow thru to the end, whatever that may be.



  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul. 5, 2007
    Location
    Beside Myself ~ Western NY
    Posts
    7,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bluey View Post
    Rules have to abide by rules too and if a horse has two duly registered parents, the offspring should be able to get registration papers.

    The australian JC I have heard is looking at that same situation with AI not being permitted in their registry.
    All it takes is for someone to contest such restrictive rules and they will fall.
    I was going to the Jockey Club AI rule next... foiled again.

    Well played Bluey. Yes, the future brings us such anomalies as spotted Arabians, solid Appaloosas, bald faced QHs, palomino TBs, airborn sperm, and clones. What IS this world coming to?
    Why is it that a woman will forgive homicidal behavior in a horse, yet be highly critical of a man for leaving the toilet seat up?
    ~ Dave Barry



  14. #14
    Bluey is offline Schoolmaster Premium Member
    Original Poster
    Join Date
    Jan. 4, 2007
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    43,108

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmartAlex View Post
    I was going to the Jockey Club AI rule next... foiled again.

    Well played Bluey. Yes, the future brings us such anomalies as spotted Arabians, solid Appaloosas, bald faced QHs, palomino TBs, airborn sperm, and clones. What IS this world coming to?
    Well, we would not be discussing these topics on our computers and IPhones, the world would still supposedly be flat, if someone had not braved the inquisition and kept being hardheaded about what it is, is, no matter if others are not seeing it, even if their heads will fall for it.

    Don't kid yourself, the majority is against clones being registered and practically all against lawsuits to force hands.
    There will be a personal fallout for that vet and breeder and those supporting them too, if nothing else for bringing this to a lawsuit.



  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec. 13, 2005
    Location
    Strasburg, PA "Just west of Paradise"
    Posts
    3,969

    Default

    We own two Qhs, both foundation Qhs and I am an AQHA member. I would not be opposed to allowing a horse to be registered that was a result of cloning. However I would want their registraion to reflect that as well as the offspring of the cloned horses. Cloning has gotten better but we cannot be sure of long term effects to the breed by intoducing cloned horses.



  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan. 26, 2006
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Posts
    4,737

    Default

    I wonder just how they would go about filing a stallion breeding report if they are going mix the thing up in a test tube



Similar Threads

  1. AQHA lawsuit
    By MyssMyst in forum Western
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: Dec. 29, 2012, 11:45 PM
  2. Am I the only procrastinator? Registrations!
    By nls in forum Sport Horse Breeding
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Dec. 31, 2011, 06:23 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: Apr. 18, 2011, 04:19 PM
  4. Ever been threatened or attacked when riding?
    By Appsolute in forum Off Course
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: Feb. 27, 2010, 05:54 PM
  5. Trainers' are you threatened?
    By Carol O in forum Dressage
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: May. 5, 2008, 03:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness