Welcome to the NFQHA – Riders not required!
Aug 17 2007
I have been complaining for years about the bad riding I see at many stock breed shows. The hunt seat looks like western with posting, with stirrups too long, loose legs and “puppy paw” hands all too common. A step in the right direction would have been a QH show association that put more emphasis on riding and let the hunters move and carry their heads like hunters. Instead, we got a QH show association where, if you can hang on to the horn and stay upright, you can apparently win a class.
I’m talking, of course, about the National Foundation Quarter Horse Association. I like to rip on the NFQHA anyway, because when I think of “foundation” Quarter Horses, I think of 1300 lbs on eentsy little size 00 feet, thick short necks, and a crappy little knee popping trot stride. (See illustration, at left!) For those of you who keep asking what “nest” is, it’s when the neck runs into the chest with no definition between the two. Like you see right here on your left!
Most QH breeders realized these things were problems, and started crossing these horses on Thoroughbreds and taller, more elegant Quarter Horses to get today’s modern and more athletic Quarter Horse.
This appalled some folks, who think it’s just not a Quarter Horse if it doesn’t look more musclebound that Arnold Schwarzenegger in his prime and move like a fat girl wearing a too-tight miniskirt. So they up and started the NFQHA to “preserve” everything about Quarter Horses that most of the world was saying good riddance to. And I have to say, they have succeeded. Witness these lovely examples of “foundation” breeding.
No, I do not know what is going on with the sorrel mare’s hocks, either. Suffice it to say we’ve taken “cowhocked” to a whole new level!
The palomino is a stallion. Are you scared? I am!
It doesn’t stop there, though. Now they have their own horse shows. They have a page on their site talking about how their shows are “different.” Well, that is one word for it.
ONLY THE HORSE IS JUDGED – Our judges are instructed to judge only the horse, and not the handler, or rider.
We don’t need no stinkin’ riding lessons!
NO SILVER – In the interest of equality for competitors, no silver plate is allowed.
OMG political correctness hits the show ring – fight silverism!
WORKING WESTERN WEAR FOR EXHIBITORS – Exhibitors are encouraged to dress in plain, neat, western clothing suitable for working, or riding. Hats, boots, jeans, and long sleeve shirts are required. Sequins, glitter, and other “fancy” dress are to be avoided.
Well, hell, that just removes the only reason I EVER wanted to show in western pleasure…the clothes!
NO BANDED MANES, NO HOOF POLISH, NO SHAVING OF EARS – To promote versatility, NFQHA expects the conformation horse to look like the performance horse, and vice versa. Also, NFQHA cannot condone practices which limit the horse’s natural protection against dust and insects, such as shaving the inside of the ears, and nostrils. Horses are required to be shown with natural length tails. A bridle path the length of the ear is acceptable, as is clipping excessive facial hair, hair outside the ears, and excessive leg hair.
OK, none of this really bothers me although I am not sure how banded manes are a problem? But then again, it’s good to know there is a show out there willing to welcome my mare whose mane grows on both sides. Oops, she’s half Thoroughbred so she’s not allowed…another hope dashed.
EXCESSIVELY SLOW GAITS TO BE PENALIZED – Horses are to be shown at natural gaits, suitable for a working horse. Excessively slow gaits, depression or dejected expression, and poll lower than withers, will disqualify the horse from the class.
I do agree with this. I wish this was the rule everywhere.
BREED AND COLOR CLASSES – New in 2006 are classes celebrating the various colors of the Foundation Quarter Horse and the Bulldog breed standard. The color classes for Duns/Grullos, Palominos, and Roans judge not only the color but also the horse’s conformation. The Breed classes judge the Bulldog traits and working condition. Horses must also enter a performance class.
Dear God, let’s just encourage the color breeders even more! And WTF is the Bulldog standard? I guess we are back to muscles like Schwarzenegger and moves like a fat girl in a too tight skirt again…
SNAFFLE OR RAWHIDE BOSAL – Horses of any age may be ridden in a snaffle, or rawhide bosal. Some restrictions will apply as to when one or two hands can be used. (No twisted wire snaffles.)
This only makes sense. If you are going to have a show ring full of people who cannot ride, you are less likely to have wrecks if you let them direct rein.
NO WEANLING CONFORMATION, NO HORSEMANSHIP, NO ENGLISH EVENTS – In-hand trail classes will be offered for yearlings and two year olds. NFQHA encourages members to let their babies be babies to develop important social skills. We greatly discourage isolation and overfeeding of babies.
Um, if you guys set the conformation standard and you don’t want to place the overfed okapi types, why is it necessary to ban the showing of weanlings? It seems to me that you’re missing your great opportunity here to give a championship trophy to someone’s shaggy weanling with a bite mark on his ear from his buddy and make a point!
As for no horsemanship, well, I think we’ve already established the NFQHA is going its part not to discriminate against people whose riding sucks. In fact, you have thrown the doors open wide to those people…and that is fine with me…as that way they will not come out to try to buy any of my or my friends’ horses. We prefer our horses not be traumatized by flapping, bouncing sacks of potatoes, if at all avoidable.
As for no English…what happened to you goal of promoting versatility? Maybe that should read “versatility as long as it does not involve doing somethin’ hard like postin’ or ridin’ in one of them saddles that ain’t got no horn to hang on to.”
Yes, come show with the NFQHA – the lazy man’s horseshow association!
249 comments to “Welcome to the NFQHA – Riders not required!”
« Previous 1 2 3 Next »
« Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment. Not a member? Registering is free, and you do it here!
OHIOSTATFAN – Yeah, that’s pretty cool that you have an exception to the rule. There’s a little bit of running blood there behind Silky Fox (Rapid Bar, Custus Rastus TB), so it doesn’t surprise me the mare is versatile. Lots of the same blood as my stallion, Blondy’s Dude, Sugar Bars, Grey Badger II, Three Bars TB, Skipper W, Joe Reed, King, Poco Bueno, Bill Cody, etc. It’s all in what you do with them. It’s too bad more folks don’t do something else with their good horses besides what someone bred them for specifically. Congratulations.
Forthefutureofthebreed said:
A QH is supposed to be able to run, work a cow, pack the kids around, and look good doing it. Those reiners (and cutters) you’re referring to can only do one thing. They are no different than the specialized halter horses, or the specialized WP horses you are putting down. Most of those little cowhorses look like mustangs to me, so whatever you’re breeding to bring back the “original QH” isn’t working too well.
I agree with this. They DO look like mutangs save a better head. Small, narrow built and no lower end hip.
I have a couple of mares that are bred for all around. They are full sisters to a horse with more than 2,000 AQHA points in everything from halter to barrels, WP to Hunter Hack, Pole bending and Reining, working cow horse and horsemanship etc. He was AQHA’s versatility horse of the year in 2001. His show summary alone takes 3 pages to print out. THAT is what the versatile AQHA is all about.
Futureofthebreed-
Thank you
I have NO use for a critter that cant do SOMETHING. Its nice that hubby comes from a reining background and I grew up riding hunter/jumpers, lol gives us both an eye for SOMETHING!
I have a friend who breeds Morgans and Morabs. She’s got some babies from time to time that just DONT look like Morabs or Morgans…and dont have the knee action, etc. LOL they make pretty nifty hunter ponies too
forthrfutureofthebreed….quite a combo of proven pedigrees there.. how close are all the listed AQHA stat bloodlines to your stallion?
Is he OWLS tested also.. being a paint breeder you are well informed that tobies can also carry the OWLS also.. as the QH also can..
I did see the post with this foals.. he likes to throw alot of white on his foals that’s something I noticed they were geting away from in the APHA world when I left it about eight years ago almost all the horses showing & winning in WP, Halter & English were min overos, very disapointing to a tobi breeder.. about the only tobies placing & showing well were reining & cow horses. I haven’t followed APHA since so I may be off base now.. I hope so as I always looked at the paint as a loud colored horse.. not a QH with a few spots..
Another thing about APHA I personally did not like was you did not have to qualify to enter the world show.. so if any Joe Smoe wanted to waste a ton of $$$$ he could enter his fine steed.. not that he’d place of course.. but he sure could say he was goin’ to the APHA World!! Has that changed..?
And dontridenofuglyhorses and Futureofthebreed
That filly is only ONE example…. I’d take cowbred horses everyday over appendix bred ones…
All the people who want a foundation QH that’s winning?
This horse is 100% foundation, was born in 1984 and showed and WON from 1989 to 2004. There are actually quite a few more like this out there if people bother to look.
I’ll post if you need the proof.
WINDCHESTERS BABY 2259522 Gray Mare 03/30/1984 Incentive Fund Foal; Genetic Typed; Horse Embryo Enrolled
Dam- MISS NELL MCCUE 0792937 Damsire- IDAHO BRANDY 0058407
Show: 03/2004 Open- H- .0 P- 213.5 Amateur- H- .0 P- 192.0 Youth- H- 1.0 P- 323.5
Novice Amateur- P- 49.5 Novice Youth- P- .5 Eq w/ Disabilities- P- .0
AQHA Incentive Fund: $ 13,838.15
Achievement: 2004 AMATEUR QUALI WESTERN HORSEMANSHP SEL WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 2004 AMATEUR QUALIF HUNT SEAT EQUIT SEL WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 2003 AMATEUR LIMITED RIDER PLEASURE DRIVING 10th PLACE
Achievement: 2003 AMATEUR QUALIF WESTERN HORSEMANSHIP WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 2003 AMATEUR QUALI WESTERN HORSEMANSHP SEL WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 2003 AMATEUR QUALI HUNTER UNDER SADDLE SEL WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 2003 AMATEUR QUALIF HUNT SEAT EQUIT SEL WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 2003 AMATEUR PERFORMANCE REGISTER OF MERIT
Achievement: 1998 AMATEUR QUALIFIED WORKING HUNTER WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1998 AMATEUR QUALIF EQUITATION OVER FENCES WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1997 AMATEUR QUALIFIED WORKING HUNTER WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1997 AMATEUR QUALIF EQUITATION OVER FENCES WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1997 OPEN QUALIFIED SR WORKING HUNTER WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1997 OPEN QUALIFIED SR HUNTER HACK WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1997 OPEN AQHA PERFORMANCE CHAMPION
Achievement: 1997 OPEN SUPERIOR HUNTER UNDER SADDLE
Achievement: 1997 AMATEUR PERFORMANCE REGISTER OF MERIT
Achievement: 1996 YOUTH QUALIF EQUITATION OVER FENCES WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1995 YOUTH HIGH POINT EQUITATION OVER FENCES 5th PLACE
Achievement: 1995 YOUTH HIGH POINT HUNTER HACK 7th PLACE
Achievement: 1995 YOUTH HIGH POINT WORKING HUNTER 3rd PLACE
Achievement: 1995 OPEN QUALIFIED SR WORKING HUNTER WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1995 YOUTH WORLD SHOW EQUITATION OVER FENCES 5th PLACE
Achievement: 1995 YOUTH QUALIFIED WORKING HUNTER WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1995 YOUTH QUALIFIED HUNTER HACK WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1995 OPEN SUPERIOR WORKING HUNTER
Achievement: 1995 YOUTH PERFORMANCE REGISTER OF MERIT
Achievement: 1994 YOUTH QUALIFIED WORKING HUNTER WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1994 YOUTH QUALIFIED HUNTER HACK WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1994 YOUTH QUALIF EQUITATION OVER FENCES WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1994 YOUTH SUPERIOR HUNT SEAT EQUITATION
Achievement: 1994 YOUTH AQHA PERFORMANCE CHAMPION
Achievement: 1993 YOUTH HIGH POINT HUNTER HACK 2nd PLACE
Achievement: 1993 YOUTH HIGH POINT JUMPING 10th PLACE
Achievement: 1993 YOUTH HIGH POINT WORKING HUNTER 2nd PLACE
Achievement: 1993 YOUTH HIGH POINT EQUITATION OVER FENCES
Achievement: 1993 YOUTH WORLD SHOW EQUITATION OVER FENCES 5th PLACE
Achievement: 1993 YOUTH WORLD SHOW JUMPING 4th PLACE
Achievement: 1993 YOUTH QUALIFIED WORKING HUNTER WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1993 YOUTH QUALIFIED HUNTER HACK WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1993 YOUTH SUPERIOR WORKING HUNTER
Achievement: 1993 YOUTH SUPERIOR HUNTER HACK
Achievement: 1993 OPEN SUPERIOR HUNTER HACK
Achievement: 1992 YOUTH HIGH POINT HUNTER HACK 3rd PLACE
Achievement: 1992 YOUTH HIGH POINT JUMPING 7th PLACE
Achievement: 1992 YOUTH HIGH POINT WORKING HUNTER 3rd PLACE
Achievement: 1992 OPEN QUALIFIED SR WORKING HUNTER WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1992 OPEN QUALIFIED SR HUNTER HACK WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1992 YOUTH QUALIFIED WORKING HUNTER WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1992 YOUTH QUALIFIED HUNTER HACK WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1991 YOUTH PERFORMANCE REGISTER OF MERIT
Achievement: 1989 OPEN PERFORMANCE REGISTER OF MERIT
STORMIE said, “It is getting to the point that the added TB blood in the AQHA horses is not doing any good.”
That is because the only TB blood you see in QHs these days are in the HUS horses (and race horses, of course). People quit using speed blood in their halter and performance horses quite a few decades ago. Not all TBs are English-type 17h horses.
“In fact some foundation horses have a bit of TB in them if you read the pedigrees.”
Most foundation Quarter Horses are from more TB blood than you could ever imagine. But one would never know it when the foundation registries lie to their members that QHs such as Leo, Joe Reed, Oklahoma Star, etc. are 100% foundation QHs. Oklahoma Star’s sire is a TB. Joe Reed’s sire is a TB. And horses you assume are old style foundation type QHs are mostly TB blood, such as Joe Cody (nearly 75% TB), Driftwood (nearly 50% TB), Great Pine (nearly 35% TB), Hired Hand (over 50% TB), Jessie James (nearly 50% TB), Joe Cody (over 40% TB), Lauro (nearly 90% TB), Mr San Peppy (nearly 50% TB), Nifty Pep (almost 40% TB), Okie Leo (nearly 40% TB), Old Sorrel (over 90% TB), Old Tom Cat (over 50$ TB), Peponita (almost 50% TB), Poco Tivio (almost 25% TB), Pretty Boy (over 30% TB), Rey Jay (over 40% TB), Showdown (over 80% TB), Wimpy (over 80% TB), and even Poco Bueno was over 20% TB blood.
forthefutureofthebreed… as far as what I know about clones they are a 100% exact DNA copy of the orig.. donor.. which means SLL is a carrier so will all 5 clones be.. now all we can hope is that AQHA sticks to their guns & WILL NOT issue papers to them!
I am already displease with AQHA on their stance with HERDA.. I called them the other day to find out if they wanted my studs results & their answer was well we are not tracking that right now & I don’t think it’s in the plans to in the near future…go figure!!!
GRULLOGAL – forthrfutureofthebreed….quite a combo of proven pedigrees there.. how close are all the listed AQHA stat bloodlines to your stallion?
Grandsires on back. His sire and dam are Paints, both unshown due to injuries; other than the Tobiano dam and granddam, the rest are QHs. The QH halter horses in his pedigree are all World Champions or Superior Halter.
Is he OWLS tested also.. being a paint breeder you are well informed that tobies can also carry the OWLS also.. as the QH also can..
Yes, he’s OLWS N/O. We do not breed OLWS to OLWS. You can’t get a decent Tovero without N/O, and it’s not a genetic defect like HYPP, where a carrier can also be symptomatic. There is nothing wrong with an OLWS carrier unless you breed them to another carrier.
I did see the post with this foals.. he likes to throw alot of white on his foals that’s something I noticed they were geting away from in the APHA world when I left it about eight years ago almost all the horses showing & winning in WP, Halter & English were min overos, very disapointing to a tobi breeder.. about the only tobies placing & showing well were reining & cow horses.
Yes, I’m aware of that. I’m not breeding for what is popular or what is winning at the World Show. And you could not give me all the Tobiano cow horses in the world.
I haven’t followed APHA since so I may be off base now.. I hope so as I always looked at the paint as a loud colored horse.. not a QH with a few spots..
Most Overos ARE colored QHs. Since AQHA can’t make Tobianos, they are a bit different in that respect.
Another thing about APHA I personally did not like was you did not have to qualify to enter the world show.. so if any Joe Smoe wanted to waste a ton of $$$$ he could enter his fine steed.. not that he’d place of course.. but he sure could say he was goin’ to the APHA World!! Has that changed..?
Unfortunately, that has not changed. And even ol’ Joe Blow can place with his crappy horse if there aren’t many entries in his class, so he can actually have a Top Five or Top Ten World Show placed horse. Sad, huh?
GRULLOGAL said, “did see the post with this foals.. he likes to throw alot of white on his foals…”
I forgot to mention that all that white comes with Tovero territory. I don’t have a problem with a lot of white on a horse, but I know others do. It’s no different than any other color, as long as it’s on a good horse.
My horse isn’t homozygous for Tobiano, so he has sired about 40% solids. He’s been bred to mostly QH mares.
Mintyfresh
That is obviously a very nice horse. It is very competetive in the AQHA shows. Why does it need its own registry? I truly do not understand. My mare’s brother was also a nice horse. He has too much TB because of Boston Mac since the dam’ side has King one step off the papers to satisfy the foundation folks. Why is it important to the Foundation folks that the two horses should be seperated when it comes to registry? They are both exemplary AQHA horses.
Wow… so many comments, in such a short time. I like a lot of the FQHs. While I admire a lot of the TBs that helped shape the breed (especially Three Bars, he’s my screen saver
), I think there has to be a time when you say “Enough is Enough” and stop adding it in. There are enough QHs that there shouldn’t be a need to add more TB blood. If you want a hunter/jumper horse, buy a TB, don’t try to contort a QH over a jump. At the point that some of them are at now, 7/8 of the gr parents are JC registered. Use what they originally accepted into the registry. The horse that looks like the one on the papers. Or on the old book I have from when I still owned QHs (none eligible for NFQHA though. They were all gr grandchildren of Three Bars.. my love). since the inception of the QH registry, TBs have changed too. My other problem with adding the TB blood is, a TB with good bloodlines, great conformation, and a nice performance record.. is expensive (heck, most of them w/o the great conformation or performance record are expensive). Not many of the best TBs are being used on QH mares.
My feelings on HERDA. I think it is a bad Recessive Genetic Trait. A horse w/ only one copy of the gene will not be affected by it. Therefore, I think that breeders (not the registry) should be held responsible for testing there breeding stock and only breeding a carrier to a clear. I feel the same way about SCID (in Arabians. though that does beg the ?, since the Arabian was instrumental in not only the TBs formulation 100s of years ago, but also in that of the Morgan and the QH.. is it possible that there are lines of these that have SCID, and should htey also be tested. SCID has been around, well as far as they can tell, since the beginning of the Arabian, and is in every single type.. Russian/Polish/Spanish/Crabbet/ Davenport/ Egyptian, etc).. so it’s possible the mares used at the times were in fact SCID carriers. You cannot tell a carrier from a clear bc it’s a recessive gene.. anyway, that’s a different tangent). A lot of nice things could be lost to the breed if you automatically rule out all carriers of HERDA, but by responsible breeding, it just becomes an inconvenience, instead of a liability. A Clear to carrier mating can’t produce an affected foal, just another carrier. Obviously a carrier to carrier mating should never be attempted as 25% of foals will be h/h for it, 50% will be affected, and only 25% would be clear, but with a carrier to clear mating, half the foals would be clear (hypothetically).
MINTYFRESH – Idaho Brandy is over 75% TB blood, so another lie from the foundation folks about the TB blood in their “foundation” horses. Nice try.
dontridenofuglyhorses-
I think many of us are saying the same thing in different ways. I see NO need for the NFQHA or their shows…its rather ridiculous, and draws in messes like posted in this blog. However there are MANY MANY AQHA registered horses that would easily QUALIFY for foundation, but dont feel the need to go play in that ‘sandbox’ since they hold their own in ‘real’ competition.
I think she, like me, is saying a “foundation bred” horse doesn’t necessarily equate w/ POS
MATTY, since you have Three Bars as your screen saver, you might know that he was only 15 hands tall. Not all TBs are HUS horses, and many TBs that helped improve the QH looked just like QHs. Not exactly the same type that is being used to produce HUS horses. Perhaps you missed the comment about speed blood being necessary for a good performance Quarter horse? Not all QHs are either halter horses or foundation horses or WP horses or HUS horses, and not all TBs are the same type.
DONTYOURIDENOFUGLYHORSE said, “They need to worry about CONFORMATION and athletic ability not the percentage of TB blood added after 1940. As you can tell I am NOT a fan of the NFQHA FQHA or any other foundation registry even though I have some horses eligible, I would NEVER register them in this stupid back yard registry.”
Absolutely. The key is the individual quality of the horse, and its contribution to the breed, not the percentage amounts of certain blood. It is a known fact that breeding by pedigree only doesn’t guarantee a quality horse.
Hi all, I have been reading all your posts with interest but as a Australian I am puzzled by what HYPP and HERDA are. Obviously, I gather they are a hereditary genetic defect but what kind? What do they do? I have never heard of them and I have a friend who breeds quarter horses for cutting and campdrafting (also, I’ve never heard of foundation or non-foundation; in Oz we only seem to have 1 kind – quarterhorses!) Could somebody please explain (briefly) what HYPP and HERDA are? Thank you
MATTY said, “My feelings on HERDA. I think it is a bad Recessive Genetic Trait. A horse w/ only one copy of the gene will not be affected by it.”
It has not yet been proven by the researchers that a HERDA carrier has zero symptoms. I personally think some do. Why do you suppose many of the big name/big performing cutting stallions are HERDA carriers, while at the same time, HERDA hasn’t affected the high-percentage Poco Bueno foundation breeders as much?
CBZ – Here you go:
http://www.vgl.ucdavis.edu/
service/horse/index.html
“MINTYFRESH – Idaho Brandy is over 75% TB blood, so another lie from the foundation folks about the TB blood in their “foundation” horses. Nice try.
Actually that’s not the NFQHAs fault, that was my mistake. I confused two horses.
Here is the one I meant to put…
BO JACK DANDY 2105176 Gray Gelding 04/06/1983 1987 Breeding Season Incentive Fund Stallion
Dam- PEEK A BOO JACKIE 1040469 Damsire- TWO EYED JACK 0178246
Show: 10/2002 Open- H- 1.5 P- 562.5 Amateur- H- 6.0 P- 345.5 Youth- H- 5.5 P- 591.5
Novice Amateur- P- 14.0 Novice Youth- P- 29.5 Eq w/ Disabilities- P- .0
AQHA World Championship Show: $ 1,201.28 Earned thru 11/31/1999
Achievement: 2002 AMATEUR PERFORMANCE REGISTER OF MERIT
Achievement: 1999 OPEN QUALIFIED SR WESTERN RIDING WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1999 YOUTH PERFORMANCE REGISTER OF MERIT
Achievement: 1998 OPEN QUALIFIED SR WESTERN RIDING WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1998 OPEN QUALIFIED SR TRAIL HORSE WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1998 YOUTH QUALIFIED WESTERN RIDING WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1998 YOUTH QUALIFIED TRAIL HORSE WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1998 YOUTH SUPERIOR TRAIL HORSE
Achievement: 1998 YOUTH SUPERIOR WESTERN RIDING
Achievement: 1997 OPEN HIGH POINT WESTERN RIDING 4th PLACE
Achievement: 1997 OPEN HIGH POINT SR WESTERN RIDING 4th PLACE
Achievement: 1997 YOUTH HIGH POINT WESTERN RIDING 5th PLACE
Achievement: 1997 OPEN WORLD SHOW SR WESTERN RIDING 7th PLACE
Achievement: 1997 OPEN QUALIFIED SR TRAIL HORSE WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1997 YOUTH QUALIFIED WESTERN RIDING WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1997 YOUTH QUALIFIED TRAIL HORSE WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1996 OPEN QUALIFIED SR TRAIL HORSE WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1996 YOUTH PERFORMANCE REGISTER OF MERIT
Achievement: 1996 AMATEUR PERFORMANCE REGISTER OF MERIT
Achievement: 1995 OPEN HIGH POINT TRAIL HORSE 3rd PLACE
Achievement: 1995 OPEN HIGH POINT SR TRAIL HORSE 3rd PLACE
Achievement: 1995 OPEN HIGH POINT WESTERN RIDING 7th PLACE
Achievement: 1995 OPEN HIGH POINT SR WESTERN RIDING 4th PLACE
Achievement: 1995 YOUTH HIGH POINT WESTERN RIDING 3rd PLACE
Achievement: 1995 OPEN QUALIFIED SR WESTERN RIDING WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1995 OPEN QUALIFIED SR TRAIL HORSE WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1995 YOUTH QUALIFIED WESTERN RIDING WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1995 YOUTH QUALIFIED TRAIL HORSE WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1995 YOUTH SUPERIOR TRAIL HORSE
Achievement: 1995 YOUTH AQHA PERFORMANCE CHAMPION
Achievement: 1995 YOUTH SUPERIOR WESTERN RIDING
Achievement: 1994 OPEN HIGH POINT WESTERN RIDING
Achievement: 1994 OPEN HIGH POINT SR WESTERN RIDING
Achievement: 1994 OPEN WORLD SHOW SR WESTERN RIDING 9th PLACE
Achievement: 1994 OPEN QUALIFIED SR TRAIL HORSE WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1994 YOUTH QUALIFIED WESTERN RIDING WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1994 OPEN SUPERIOR TRAIL HORSE
Achievement: 1994 YOUTH SUPERIOR WESTERN HORSEMANSHIP
Achievement: 1993 OPEN HIGH POINT WESTERN RIDING 8th PLACE
Achievement: 1993 OPEN HIGH POINT SR WESTERN RIDING 7th PLACE
Achievement: 1993 YOUTH HIGH POINT WESTERN RIDING 6th PLACE
Achievement: 1993 OPEN QUALIFIED SR WESTERN RIDING WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1993 OPEN QUALIFIED SR TRAIL HORSE WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1993 OPEN SUPERIOR WESTERN RIDING
Achievement: 1993 YOUTH QUALIFIED WESTERN RIDING WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1993 YOUTH PERFORMANCE REGISTER OF MERIT
Achievement: 1992 AMATEUR QUALIFIED TRAIL HORSE WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1992 AMATEUR QUALIF WESTERN HORSEMANSHIP WORLD SHOW
Achievement: 1991 AMATEUR HIGH POINT WESTERN HORSEMANSHIP 5th PLACE
Achievement: 1991 AMATEUR SUPERIOR WESTERN HORSEMANSHIP
Achievement: 1991 AMATEUR SUPERIOR WESTERN PLEASURE
Achievement: 1990 AMATEUR PERFORMANCE REGISTER OF MERIT
Achievement: 1990 OPEN PERFORMANCE REGISTER OF MERIT
The only TB in there is from Two Eyed Jack’s grand-dam, so this horses great-grand dam.
I actually didn’t look up anything on the NFQHA registry and to be honest I have no strong feelings about a specific registry for foundation QHs.
I’m just sick of all the TB being added in to the QH today. I’m fine with the true appendix, 1/2 QH and 1/2 TB, it’s when it gets to 7/8th TB that I just don’t get it.
Like others have said, if you want a TB then buy one.
I also believe that a well bred foundation QH can still be competitive and does not necessarily need any TB influence.
dontridenofuglyhorses-
I think many of us are saying the same thing in different ways. I see NO need for the NFQHA or their shows…its rather ridiculous, and draws in messes like posted in this blog. However there are MANY MANY AQHA registered horses that would easily QUALIFY for foundation, but dont feel the need to go play in that ‘sandbox’ since they hold their own in ‘real’ competition.
I think she, like me, is saying a “foundation bred” horse doesn’t necessarily equate w/ POS
EXACTLY!
Matty.. you say that breeding a HERDA carrier is OKAY to a NON – CARRIER.. because there is only a 50% chance of passing it on ward as a carrier…. if all breeders WERE responsible that would be ideal HUM maybe not.. let me ask you, HOW would you have control over the 50% of the offspring who are carriers & are sold maybe several times and now it’s 8 years down the road are they are bred to another carrier who lets say was never tested (because we know all breeders are respectable & would NEVER cross a carrier to a carrier on purpose RIGHT… NOT) & there you go 25% chance & guess whay we have a HERDA + foal….. how will we stop this if we don’t just STOP right now breeding the carriers!!!!
“I think she, like me, is saying a “foundation bred” horse doesn’t necessarily equate w/ POS “
I would agree. I ALSO agree that a horse with only 25% 50% or 77% “foundation blood” doesn’t equate to a POS either. Like the foundation fans believe. The value of an animal is more than a pedigree, it is conformation, ability and disposition. The myth that a foundation AQHA horse is better than a non “foundation” horse is silly. I do not understand how adding TB blood has “ruined” the breed. It is plain SILY.
MINTYFRESH said, “I’m just sick of all the TB being added in to the QH today. I’m fine with the true appendix, 1/2 QH and 1/2 TB, it’s when it gets to 7/8th TB that I just don’t get it.”
So you feel that great sires like Peponita, Showdown, Wimpy, Old Sorrel, etc. (who were over 75% TB blood) were junk?
And, the horse you posted might be a performing fool, but he lacked the class to gather an admirable amount of halter points or WP points. Class and elegance comes from the TB and from speed blood. All those points and titles in Western Riding and Trail just tells me someone did a helluva job training this horse. That can be done with almost any horse who has the mind to accept that, and an owner with the money and fortitude to haul the horse down the road.
grullogal said…
Matty.. you say that breeding a HERDA carrier is OKAY to a NON – CARRIER.. because there is only a 50% chance of passing it on ward as a carrier…. if all breeders WERE responsible that would be ideal HUM maybe not.. let me ask you, HOW would you have control over the 50% of the offspring who are carriers & are sold maybe several times and now it’s 8 years down the road are they are bred to another carrier who lets say was never tested (because we know all breeders are respectable & would NEVER cross a carrier to a carrier on purpose RIGHT… NOT) & there you go 25% chance & guess whay we have a HERDA + foal….. how will we stop this if we don’t just STOP right now breeding the carriers!!!!
Great point! You just never know where the horses will end up, and the defect will be bred on by someone, you can count on it. Just like HYPP, where horses were dumped without papers at the local sales, and because the horse might have been a decent looking horse, someone bred them, or some kid got hurt because the horse had an attack while the kid was riding the horse.
GRULLOGAL – I have a feeling that many will not refrain from breeding HERDA carriers, especially if the carriers do exhibit “extra” sensitivity and are superior performers. Those with those big name cutting stallions who are carriers are not gelding their horses, that’s for sure. There is too much money in them, and they are willing to take the chance of getting a few afflicted foals. The ones who are just N/Hr will go on as usual.
“”I think she, like me, is saying a “foundation bred” horse doesn’t necessarily equate w/ POS “
I would agree. I ALSO agree that a horse with only 25% 50% or 77% “foundation blood” doesn’t equate to a POS either. Like the foundation fans believe. The value of an animal is more than a pedigree, it is conformation, ability and disposition. The myth that a foundation AQHA horse is better than a non “foundation” horse is silly. I do not understand how adding TB blood has “ruined” the breed. It is plain SILY.”
For myself, 25% and I don’t really care, heck even 50% is fine with me. It is crazy to me that you can take a 50% horse who has 10 points (which in reality is NOT that hard to get) and breed that horse to a full TB and then get a 75% foal and then you can get 10 points on that foal and breed it to another full TB, and so on and so on.
While AQHA rules say that horse is a QH as far as I’m concerned it’s a TB who gets to go to the QH shows. Where is there any true QH blood in a horse like that?
If people want a horse that is almost 100% TB with a tiny bit of QH somewhere way back, then fine, have fun, go show it in USEF shows. I just don’t want that horse to be held up as a standard that a QH should meet and that is exactly what is happening.
I’m not pro “foundation” registries. I really am fine with up to 50% horses added in here and there (heck, worked in Two Eyed Jack’s pedigree). I just don’t like the trend where most QHs are over 50%. That’s a TB with some QH, not a QH with some TB.
forthefutureofthebreed… Sad fact is I know this.. that is why my heart was crushed with my colts results..I worked long & hard to find a colt that was going to excel in MANY events and as FHOTD stated in another post if you don’t spend at least 5K for a prospect as a weanling it’s not a prospect.. believe me I had much more in Junior then that.. and I’m not even thinking about my lost $$ on him.. but knowing fully well those big time stallion owners will continue on like nothings wrong..just erks me to no end..but at least I will be able to sleep with myself for my choice!
Geesh!!! I havent even been able to comment because I have to keep catching up on posts! lol
First, GrulloGal, nice to see you here! I am a FAN of your horses!! Also, I am sorry about Junior’s HERDA test results, but KUDOS to you for doing the RIGHT thing!
Forthefutureofthebreed– I have seen your horse advertised before somewhere, but cant seem to find him again. I wish more people would post their web addresses. (Mine is Freewebs.com/brushfirefarms)
I do NOT own any FQHA horses, but I do really like the breed type that they try for. I prefer my Qhs to be smaller and stockier than the HUS and WP QHs. Its just my personal opinion, and I DO NOT criticize others with differing opinions. It IS nice to see all of you who feel that the peanut rollers/crazy “gaits” in the WP and HUS AQHA world is disgusting though! Maybe we should all write to AQHA and let them in on what we already know? lol
Unfortunately, I think that MANY breeds have slowly been ruined. For instance, I was IN LOVE with Morgans about 20 years ago. I even had an OLD Govt Morgan gelding. I can look for days on end at Morgan Breeder Websites and not find ONE that looks like he did or even close to what Morgans originally looked like. WAY too much Saddlebred and Arabian have been added to them. IMO, they all just look like Quarabs that have been crossed on Saddlebreds to me.. lol Its such a shame.
I think one of the biggest problems in todays registries is that ALL of them have become class specific. You have your WP/HUS QHs, your running QHs, your reining QHs, cutting QHs, etc. You have running TBs and then you have the larger boned Dressage/eventing/jumping TBs. There are saddleseat Arabs, western Arabs, HUS Arabs, etc. There are Western Morgans, Saddleseat Morgans, driving Morgans, etc. The list goes on and on.
Unfortunately, the show people and the breed registries themselves, IMO, are the very base of all of the problems. If the breed registries would stay TRUE to their original standards, instead of following suit with what the masses find attractive, there would be a lot less fodder for FHD’s blog in the first place.
I guess its left to those of us who BELIEVE in our particular breeds and dont give a flying rats ass if our horses never WIN BIG in a breed show class that is corrupt with what is in style as opposed to attempting to uphold the breed standards.
As far as NFQH goes, I really appreciate what they are trying to do for horse showing. I firmly believe that many of the breed shows are WAY too caught up in glitz and glammer. I am a big person and could in NO WAY go up against the skinny rails with the face paint and bright metallic shirts in an AQHA WP class and win. Even though I am an excellent rider. I just wouldnt place because I dont fit into the “whats in” craze.
I think the NFQH offers family horse owners a way to have fun showing and not be concerned if their tack isnt up to par, or they choose to put their extra money into family vacations as opposed to show clothing and a fancy rig. Personally, I would rather see someone spend their money on purchasing a quality horse than purchasing expensive tack and clothing. I think the NFQH is attempting to promote that, and I commend them. Of course, like ANY registry, NFQH has room for improvement.
The ONLY reason I disagree with FHD for choosing the NFQH as her rant for the day is that, unlike a few of the other registries that have been mentioned, the horses accepted into the NFQH MUST be registered with the AQHA already. So, unlike the BEHA, the NFQH ONLY accepts purebred horses. At least people cant go breeding their $50 auction find to the neighbors bucking horse stud and register the resulting foal with NFQH and attempt to use that as a marketing ploy. Essentially, the Fuglies that belong to the MFQH are Fuglies that the AQHA are already responsible for.
If you are a responsible breeder, you screen your buyers thoroughly. I still know where all the foals I bred (all 13) when my family bred QHs are. It’s been 12 years since our last foal crop… 2 died, 9 are with the original owners, and 2 went to better owners. We did have a buy back clause though, and we expected feed back from the buyers. If you screen your buyers thoroughly, it shouldn’t be a problem. But not all people do unfortuantley, and buy back clauses aren’t fool proof. I am in favor of breed registries requiring micro chipping for this reason, and auctions being required to check for a microchip. That way there will be a trail for the horse, hopefully someone can be found for him, etc. I am also in favor of it being mandatory for it to be disclosed (on reg papers) and for testing to be a requirement for all registration (except geldings or spays). I am in favor of this happening for the SCID in Arabians too. It hasn’t happened yet, but Hopefully soon.
I still think about 98% of colts should be gelded.. but I don’t think Herda is necessarily the reason to geld an otherwise outstanding horse. I know if the Arabian breed had lost some of the lovely SCID carriers, the breed would be much different (i.e. Nariadni, Tornado, Versace, Ravlon Elijah, quite a few of the CMK stallions actually, as well as quite a few Spanish stallions), and it probably wouldn’t be for the better. I’d hate for the AQHA to cut off it’s nose to spite it’s face.
“So you feel that great sires like Peponita, Showdown, Wimpy, Old Sorrel, etc. (who were over 75% TB blood) were junk?
And, the horse you posted might be a performing fool, but he lacked the class to gather an admirable amount of halter points or WP points. Class and elegance comes from the TB and from speed blood. All those points and titles in Western Riding and Trail just tells me someone did a helluva job training this horse. That can be done with almost any horse who has the mind to accept that, and an owner with the money and fortitude to haul the horse down the road.
“
How are you seeing 75% TB blood in Peponita, Wimpy, Showdown, and Old Sorrel? By the time you get to them (well, minus Old Sorrel) they were breeding registered QH to registered QH. The breed had already been developed.
The breed had to come from somewhere, I’m not going to deny that! My issue is the breed has been developed. It doesn’t need another huge infusion of TB blood. Some TB here and there is a good thing. The amount that is being infused right now? My opinion is that it’s not such a positive.
As to the horse I posted… He has 169 western pleasure points not counting novice division points. 32.5 of those are in Open Western Pleasure, 111 are in Amateur, and 25.5 in youth. Apparently you can have a horse do well in western pleasure and not need “speed blood”.
And now I am off to bed. It’s really been a fun discussion but it’s 3am here and I need to ride in the morning
Matty.. your a better person then I then..I have placed many a buy back clause on my sold horses.. but you know there is no way you can enforce it.. if you have had total control of the foals through their life.. KUDOS to you.. are you talking with these owners or just going off AQHA ownership records..? If the later of the two.. you may have a big suprise coming..
Another question would be how would you screen your outside mares foals buyers?? I think if you got involved with the sale of their foals you’d STEP on some toes!!
As I stated to forthefutureofthebreed before.. AQHA had NO interest in my stallions results….so in a perfect world papers marked would be nice.. but for HERDA I don’t see that coming ANY time soon..
so why for the sake of many breeds not just AQHA but APHA , ApHA, the many 1/2 quarter arabs out there would any breeder have a reason to extend this genetic mutation….OH I’m sorry…I forgot GREED!
Nope, still talk to all of them. One of them is actually moving to my area soon (to go to college) and will be boarding Mister where I board my horses now (I’m getting too old to do all that work myself
, well, that and my neighbors would not believe that the horses are just “really, really big dogs that don’t woof”.. lol). I’ve never looked up an owner on AQHA, I didn’t keep my membership up. But, mainly, I think it’s because my family (my parents and I) became friends with the owners of our horses. As for outside mares, I’m not sure. We never stood to outside mares unless they were friends of ours (still know where both those babies are too, they are still at the breeder’s home, he bred for and got his replacement fillies.. lol..). Perhaps, by making it so the foal isn’t registerable until they’ve been tested. But, really, it’s not the registries job. There job is to record parentage of the animals and to promote the breed. It’s up to the breeders to accept responsibility for the foals they produce. IF you have a carrier stallion, it may be by not standing him to outside mares and altering all carrier foals.
I know the reason that Breeders of Arabians still use SCID carriers(much more responsibly now that there is a test) is because some of the carriers are dang nice animals with a lot to offer the breed (Versace, Tornado, Nariadni are some of the top sires in the breed. Nariadni and Tornado produced excellent mares. Versace is the stallion to go to for WP horses). Herda (or SCID) should be considered a fault to look for when determining the breeding, but I’d rather have 10 horses that are great w/ HERDA (or SCID) and breed them to non carriers than try to breed out bad feet, or legs or something like that. At least with HERDA, you have a chance of the foal not carrying it.
cbz – google those phrases and uh.. brace yourself. preferably dont do it directly after lunch.
the de-emphasis on ridden classes turns every other class into a blatant shopping competition. who can buy the prettiest horse and pay the most to present it. whoopdefarkingdoo. what exactly have you achieved, besides being rich?
at least the ‘no bling’ rule of dress wipes out the ‘quarter-whore’ class
Ok, I got bored and stopped reading, so maybe someone already said this, but my issue with foundation QH breeding is this: If you don’t like the extremely Thoroughbred-y body type that is appearing in QHs, fine. But if it’s a body type that you are after, wouldn’t it be better to inspect and score potential horses for registration regardless of breeding, rather than boasting about who has the most inbred horse?
First let me say our blog is hysterical, brutally honest and I love it!!!!
Now, I agree with your description of the AQHA hunter riders, I have moved into AQHA from the “A” show hunters and could not believe when my trainer would say to post higher, it is impossible to post that high and not pound on your horses back, and it is not attractive. You know we have a fugly aqha baby at the barn, to bad she is not foundation bred, this would be her calling!!!
Missy-”I just like a nice, old-fashioned Quarter Horse, medium build, 14.2 to 15.2 hands, and intelligent. “
Agree, I do like foundation QH’s the old style and like Stormie said, some of them DO have good conformation, I also don’t care for the TB in QH’s either. Some of them are nice, but it’s not my cup of tea. To each their own. I don’t show, so I don’t care what the rules are, but overall the ones you listed seem ok to me, except the not judging the rider part, that’s just wrong IMHO. If the rider can’t ride then they hinder the horse.
Anyway… my .02
I had to comment on Dayle’s comment . . .”My guess on the weanling exclusion is they don’t want people forcing horses to grow up too quickly. A weanling should be having fun in the pasture with other weanlings, not being dragged around to show after show.”
Here is an excerpt from Feeding Young Horses for Sound Development by Pete G. Gibbs and Gary D. Potter (both Texas A & M professors) “. . . but the adage that young horses are being grown too fast is not necessarily true. Two studies involving over 1400 young horses showed no relationship between rate of growth and incidence of developmental
problems.” Full article at . . .
http://animalscience.tamu.edu
/main/academics/equine/B-5043_feedingyoung.pdf
(you will have to copy and paste and take out the spaces).
Rapid growth when done properly is actually more healthy for the young horse. Individuals that practice this process know the risks and prevention of those risks through nutrition.
As far as the comment of a weanling should be having fun with other weanlings and not being draged from show to show. Well I have to disagree. My weanling is currently being shown, with 3 shows under his belt and one more today. Through showing he has learned to trailer and more importantly not stress in the trailer, he loads at a snap of a finger – how many weanlings you know do that? He also stands tied, clips, bathes, longes, squares up and stands still, and has been exposed to multiple conditions outside his safety zone.
I am also getting him ready for the Yearling In Hand classes for early next year and crosses briges, tarps, poles, serpintines through cones, backs, opens gates and sidepasses. He also line drives.
He’s still having fun, just differently and learning a good foundation.
Well enough talk, gotta go clip him for this afternoon’s show. BTW, I feel the NFQHA’s statement on clipping ears is a cope-out, I think the founders just didn’t want to take the time to train their horses to clip – not an easy task if the horse doesn’t want to do it. To each thier own I always say.
Minty-
Your thoughts on Appendix breeding have come right out of my own mouth!
I say let ‘em make Appendix horses until the cows come home, but not let them advance.
To the others, ALL breeds came from somewhere, typically Arabians. Should we continue to allow Arabian crossbreeding into AQHA, Morgan, Thoroughbred, etc registries and just call it “pure”?
MINTYFRESH said, “How are you seeing 75% TB blood in Peponita, Wimpy, Showdown, and Old Sorrel? By the time you get to them (well, minus Old Sorrel) they were breeding registered QH to registered QH. The breed had already been developed.
It can be calculated if you have a complete pedigree on these horses, and have a pedigree program that goes back an infinite number of generations, and you know how to figure blood percentages.
The breed had to come from somewhere, I’m not going to deny that! My issue is the breed has been developed. It doesn’t need another huge infusion of TB blood. Some TB here and there is a good thing. The amount that is being infused right now? My opinion is that it’s not such a positive.
I don’t think anyone is recommeding a HUGE infusion of TB blood. These specialized horses have been linebred to the hilt, and are in dire need of an outcross. That perfect outcross is the right kind of TB blood (not your typical 17h HUS type TB). If you have done your homework, or have been around through all the trends and changes at AQHA, you could see where things have started to go downhill – as soon as QH breeders quit using the good QH race blood and TB blood.
As to the horse I posted… He has 169 western pleasure points not counting novice division points. 32.5 of those are in Open Western Pleasure, 111 are in Amateur, and 25.5 in youth. Apparently you can have a horse do well in western pleasure and not need “speed blood”.
I didn’t see the WP points. But I still stand by my opinion on a horse such as that. And that horse has speed blood in his pedigree. It’s back a little further than most people want to give those generations credit for, although this one has less than the other one you posted. The limited classes he’s done well in are proof of that. While those horses have great show records, they still lack in the areas needed for a truly versatile horse that can perform and have enough class to represent their breed as an outstanding example.
Also, AQHA has set it up where you can’t just have any ol’ 7/8 TB Quarter Horse without the horse proving itself. You cannot breed an appendix QH to a TB and get a registered QH foal. That appendix horse must earn at least an ROM in order to be bred to a TB. I would imagine that “proven” is good enough for most folks. It’s not like people are creating a bunch of high percentage TB Quarter Horses and not doing anything with them.
And, yes, speed blood is required for optimum performance. Most of the stock horses from the early days (60s, 70s, etc.) were of mostly TB blood, and they won a lot. Many of the cowhorse trainers preferred these high percentage TB Quarter Horses. There are a million articles on such horses, many from the west coast where the stock seat and hackamore horses were king. The majority of the AQHA Supreme Champions were of very high percentage TB blood. They were the ultimate in versatile performance horses, and that is the kind of horse AQHA needs to return to. Can’t do it without speed blood. Everyone is talking about getting back to the versatile horse the QH once was, where the performers could halter and the halter horses could perform. The problems arising today (unsoundness, lack of substance, etc.) are partly due to the lack of speed blood in these extreme specialized horses. Spend 42 years studying pedigrees and the breeds we’re talking about, and you will come to the same conclusion I have.
The majority of the “foundation” horses that QH breeders are breeding look like that buckskin mare on the blog page. Most of their yearlings look like weanlings, and their 2yos look like yearlings. And many resemble a mustang more than a QH. I’ve seen far too many horses that the ranch and foundation breeders are churning out, and they are not anything close to being excellent examples of what a QH is supposed to be. I agree with what was said – if you want to preserve the original QH, that horse was a RACEHORSE. All this linebreeding to horses such as Poco Bueno is futile. You are linebreeding to what would be considered the weakest blood of the breed, and it shows in the stock being produced.
Throughout time, horses have been a flight animal, and they have needed speed to survive. That speed blood (also translates into performance and athletic ability) has created horses whose conformation has allowed them to survive via form to function. Along comes “foundation” breeders, thinking they can eliminate the strongest component of a horse by breeding to the weaker members of the gene pool (horses who lack speed blood), all in the name of “preservation”.
I realize that what is winning at today’s AQHA shows are NOT the ideal QH. But these foundation horses wouldn’t be competitive by YESTERDAY’S standards, either, during the time before all the fads and strange extremes appeared on the scene.
*COVERING EARS* “la,la,la,la,la,la, I hear crazy people”
laugh
On a more serious note, this Foundation bred vs. Regular AQHA registry fight is a circular one, around and around we all go. You all were given a set of eyes, use them to find a horse that FITS YOUR NEEDS not the IDEALS of someone else. I have no issue with handing out praise to good horse, no matter WHAT the breed is.
“Also, AQHA has set it up where you can’t just have any ol’ 7/8 TB Quarter Horse without the horse proving itself. You cannot breed an appendix QH to a TB and get a registered QH foal. That appendix horse must earn at least an ROM in order to be bred to a TB. I would imagine that “proven” is good enough for most folks. It’s not like people are creating a bunch of high percentage TB Quarter Horses and not doing anything with them.
I really think we are agreeing more than it seems because I do think some TB is a good thing. Unlike what the foundation registries seem to want I do NOT want a AQHA book closed to all TBs. That would just be silly.
I do think it would be better to be viewed more as the warmblood registries view adding TB blood though. You put a little in here and there from certain stallions. Only ones that will definitely add to the breeding and not produce those 17h HUS types that are becoming so prevelant.
My real sticking point is that I don’t think getting a ROM proves anything. My fugly horse has his ROM with points in Western Pleasure, HUS, Hunt Seat Eq, Western Riding, Hunter Hack, Showmanship, Reining, and Horsemanship.
Now granted that pic was taken when he was 18 and out of shape so his overall body condition and top line looked much better way back when, but his legs certainly weren’t any prettier.
As far as I’m concerned if my horse can get his ROM than any well trained horse can get a ROM and therefore it doesn’t mean enough to allow that horse full QH papers and to be bred to another TB.
You also said “I realize that what is winning at today’s AQHA shows are NOT the ideal QH.”
So if that’s true than how can it be that getting a ROM is enough to prove that the horse should have full papers and be allowed to be bred back to another TB?
Adding TB in the first place is NOT an issue for me. Breeding two appendix horses is not an issue for me. It’s the breeding of an appendix to a full TB that gets me. I just don’t think a ROM proves enough to allow that horse full papers.
forthefutureofthebreed said…
“Most foundation Quarter Horses are from more TB blood than you could ever imagine. But one would never know it when the foundation registries lie to their members that QHs such as Leo, Joe Reed, Oklahoma Star, etc. are 100%”
Sorry but I have never seen where they have lied about it. They are very up front about it. Lists of 50%, and 100%(TB’s) are listed in their magazines and I believe on some of the websites. They explain why some TB’s are counted as Foundation even though they are TB and that is because of what they have done for the breed. They are not trying to lie to the members at all. It might seem like it to someone if they haven’t really read up on the topic.
The point is that they got this good horses they wanted to….fix that type so they closed their books to the TB blood. I don’t see what the problem with that is since 100′s of other breeds have done the same thing. You don’t see the Jockey Club letting in outside blood anymore do you? When you keep mixing in outside blood the breed is not a breed until you quit and then work with that gene pool. It really doesn’t matter what other breeds where used in the starting of it. And I don’t feel this way just about QH’s either. I think that APHA is large enough to stop mixing in QH and TB lines. That mixed breeds like Quarabs would do a lot better if they actually work at making it a breed instead of a cross breed. Take the good Quarabs and start crossing them instead of crossing a QH and an Arab and getting a dud. The whole gene, crossbreeding and breed thing is not as simple as tossing back in some TB blood or breeding QH’s that end up being nearly all TB…..thinking about it I think that it’s more lying to reg a horse now that is 80%+ TB as an AQHA horse then a foundation group counting one way back as a foundation sire.
lifelike001 said…
“the de-emphasis on ridden classes turns every other class into a blatant shopping competition. who can buy the prettiest horse and pay the most to present it. whoopdefarkingdoo. what exactly have you achieved, besides being rich? at least the ‘no bling’ rule of dress wipes out the ‘quarter-whore’ class”
Boy is that a falicy! Many individuals show on a budget and win. Some make their own show clothes, others buy their outfits at Goodwill or on Ebay. You don’t need to pay thousands or even hundreds for a good working show outfit. Sequins and silver isn’t even a requirement at the Quarter Horse shows, just a long sleeve shirt (w/ collar), pants, hat and boots. Silver on tack isn’t required just needs to be cleaned and well cared for.
However, if you go into the ring with out a clean appearence – horse ungroomed, unclipped, tack dirty and in ill-repair – well don’t expect to be placed
Personally I show on a budget. I don’t have much but do try to look like a million bucks in the show ring – me, my horse and my equipment. You’d be suprized on how little money that can get by with!
forthebetterofthebreed.. your question to me last night was why don’t foundation horse owners show NRHA, NCHA & NRCHA.. there are tons of NFQHA horses showing & winning at these events.. High Brow Cat is 85% NFQHA (Just regristered with NFQHA in March of this year) he retired for the cutting pen with LTE $125,252 which $110,000 was NCHA earnings alone.. Mr. San O’Lena NFQHA 88% NCHA LTE $37,306 & AQHA Champion AQHA sire of 472.5 point earners..Hollywood Dun It NFQHA 88%.. NRHA LTE $65,808, NRHA Hall of fame, NRHA sire excess of 4 million.. AQHA Sire 8617.5 point earners & including 2 Halter ROM earner, Matt Dillion Dun It.. 86% NFQHA.. NRHA & NRCHA Champion, AQHA World Show Champion, Jaz Silver Comet 100% NFQHA..an AQHA Reining ROM earner & NRHA money earner, Jaz Poco Goldun Blue..95% NFQHA..an AQHA ROM earner & NRHA money earner… and there are MANY more who have & are showing and winning in these events..
Stomie said. . .
Sorry but I have never seen where they have lied about it. They are very up front about it. Lists of 50%, and 100%(TB’s) are listed in their magazines and I believe on some of the websites.
Stormie-
Leo’s sire’s sire was a TB, as was his sire’s dam’s sire. On the bottom side his dam’s sire was TB as well as his dam’s dam’s sire.
So just how does that make him 100% foundation QH with out lieing? Or at least baseing it on untruths? By stateing “for calculation purposes Leo is 100% foundation?”
Personally I want TB blood in my pedigrees – without it you lack refinement, speed and athletisim.
forthefutureofthebreed said…
“It can be calculated if you have a complete pedigree on these horses, and have a pedigree program that goes back an infinite number of generations, and you know how to figure blood percentages.”
LOL If you take any old QH and do that they aren’t going to be that high of QH because…well there has to be a point where there is no QH to count. If you go back far enough you will find a TB that isn’t that high TB to so maybe we should take this one step back and see just how much TB is really in these TB QH’s when you go way back. Sorry I just found that comment funny.
It’s been awhile but isn’t there also something that if the Appx horse has foals and x number of them get their reg. papers then that parent can also. Or if the parent gets it then the foal does. If that is how it still goes then not every Appx horse is proving themself in the show ring. Another thing is that the Appx papers don’t really limit these horses. They can breed, they can show in any class. There is nothing that is forcing these owners or breeders to even try for getting reg. papers and there should be. They should be limited to non breeding and to limited classes until the horse proves itself. Once it has reg papers then it can show in anyclass and breed if the owner wants. That way no Appx that can’t hold up to that side of the standard doesn’t get in.
The trouble with picking the right TB to cross with QH’s is that most don’t do it or don’t know. I do think that ALL breed groups need to address the standard. I think it would be good for AQHA to address this with all QH but they could start first with the Appx horses. If they don’t fit the standard they don’t get reg papers and can’t be used in breeding.
MINTYFRESH said, “So if that’s true than how can it be that getting a ROM is enough to prove that the horse should have full papers and be allowed to be bred back to another TB?”
An ROM is not all that hard to achieve, but what it does mean is that the horse at least beat out others to earn that. It’s not limited to HUS, as you know. It can be racing, too. It means that the horse is capable of doing something, unlike most of the foundation QHs who do nothing at AQHA.
GRULLOGAL said, “your question to me last night was why don’t foundation horse owners show NRHA, NCHA & NRCHA.. there are tons of NFQHA horses showing & winning at these events.. High Brow Cat is 85% NFQHA (Just regristered with NFQHA in March of this year) he retired for the cutting pen with LTE $125,252 which $110,000 was NCHA earnings alone.. Mr. San O’Lena NFQHA 88% NCHA LTE $37,306 & AQHA Champion AQHA sire of 472.5 point earners..Hollywood Dun It NFQHA 88%.. NRHA LTE $65,808, NRHA Hall of fame, NRHA sire excess of 4 million.. AQHA Sire 8617.5 point earners & including 2 Halter ROM earner, Matt Dillion Dun It.. 86% NFQHA.. NRHA & NRCHA Champion, AQHA World Show Champion, Jaz Silver Comet 100% NFQHA..an AQHA Reining ROM earner & NRHA money earner, Jaz Poco Goldun Blue..95% NFQHA..an AQHA ROM earner & NRHA money earner… and there are MANY more who have & are showing and winning in these events..”
Those people are not promoting “foundation” horses in huge numbers, as in NFQHA, FQHR, etc. I’m not sure why they are even registering those horses with the foundation registries. They are already successful AQHA and NRHA, NCHA horses.
Nat said…
Because they don’t say that Leo doesn’t have TB blood in him. They do not claim that he really is 100% QH blood but that they count him as such in the pedigrees of the horses now because of what Leo did for the breed. Because of what he did for the breed they want his lines and make it 100% so that the horse’s of his line will still add up to high enough. Does that make sense?
I’m not against TB blood totally. I just hate to see a horse that is 80+% called a Quarter Horse. I have also seen horses listed as 80+% Three Bars….okay that is just wrong.
Hold on I’m looking something up.
STORMIE said, “LOL If you take any old QH and do that they aren’t going to be that high of QH because…well there has to be a point where there is no QH to count. If you go back far enough you will find a TB that isn’t that high TB to so maybe we should take this one step back and see just how much TB is really in these TB QH’s when you go way back. Sorry I just found that comment funny.”
You are obviously missing the point here. The foundation associations ARE lying to their members. I have ALL of their printed material here from day one, and some of it they wouldn’t want to read. “Foundation” QHs who are high percentage TB are NOT 100% “foundation” QHs, yet a horse today that has the same amount of TB blood is denied registration in their associations. It’s a matter of using blood percentages to promote their agenda, while eliminating otherwise excellent same percentage TB blood QHs that would contribute to their “cause”. It’s as simple as that.
Sorry, that should read, “I have ALL of their printed material here from day one, and some of it they wouldn’t want YOU to read.”
forthefutureofthebreed
ya….so first you say there are no foundation horses showing in those groups but proven wrong you are saying that it’s okay because they are promoting Foundation Groups….but wait I thought that the whole point was that foundation QH’s with their lack of TB blood where no good. That was part of the org. topic and here is proof that they can and are winning in other groups even if they don’t carry the foundation papers or if the owners aren’t promoting(which you really don’t know that for sure) the foundation groups. Bottom line that this one is that AQHA horses that are foundation by the foundation groups are winning in non foundation shows.
So, I’m commenting without reading all of the comments. Bad Drile!
There are just a few things I would like to say.
Faster does not equal forward.
I thought versatility included both English and Western disciplines? Or is their idea of versital being able to go slow in a WP class and fast in a barrel class?
I’ve ridden ranch horses that were versatile – they could barrel race, western pleasure, trail, HUS, Jump, dressage, cutting, and do it WELL while still being a good ranch horse. Some competed and did well, others did not compete. Mind you, they usually had one thing they were GREAT at, but were still GOOD at other things. And by jumping, I don’t mean just cowhopping over a log.
There are a few VERY nice Foundation Quarter Horses – whether they’re atcually registered with NFQHA or FQHR or not. There are great Appendix QHs. Yet, there are terrible ones in both breeds.
Some like the bulldog look – decent muscled onese who are conformed and balanced correctly, yet still cute. The type of horse that will do its job well. Not the type that looks like Arnold on steriods with twisted feet with poor balance and downhill conformation.
As for adding in more Thoroughbred – I am glad that AQHA does register QH x TB as Appendix and not full blooded QH. However, I think an Appendix can qualify as a full QH if it’s approved? Can someone tell me a bit more about that?
One more thing to add – I hate AQHA’s HUS classes. The horses appear to be Western Pleasure horses but with different tack. Often the horses are also on the forehand – but that head is set!
STORMIE, I will repeat this again.
Most foundation Quarter Horses are from more TB blood than you could ever imagine. But one would never know it when the foundation registries lie to their members that QHs such as Leo, Joe Reed, Oklahoma Star, etc. are 100% foundation QHs. Oklahoma Star’s sire is a TB. Joe Reed’s sire is a TB. And horses you assume are old style foundation type QHs are mostly TB blood, such as Joe Cody (nearly 75% TB), Driftwood (nearly 50% TB), Great Pine (nearly 35% TB), Hired Hand (over 50% TB), Jessie James (nearly 50% TB), Joe Cody (over 40% TB), Lauro (nearly 90% TB), Mr San Peppy (nearly 50% TB), Nifty Pep (almost 40% TB), Okie Leo (nearly 40% TB), Old Sorrel (over 90% TB), Old Tom Cat (over 50$ TB), Peponita (almost 50% TB), Poco Tivio (almost 25% TB), Pretty Boy (over 30% TB), Rey Jay (over 40% TB), Showdown (over 80% TB), Wimpy (over 80% TB), and even Poco Bueno was over 20% TB blood.
So, why on earth would anyone hellbent on “preserving” the original Quarter Horse want to disallow the blood that created these horses in the first place? It is so obvious to me that the elimination of close-up TB blood is what is creating these common, average, grade-looking “foundation” QHs today.
The “bulldog” men and the “race” men of the early days of AQHA have always disagreed on which type of horse best represented AQHA. It’s obvious who won out, so the folks who weren’t competitive decided to start their own registries. Why do they require their horses to be AQHA registered if they don’t agree with them? I know why! Because quality, class and conformation aren’t the priorities with the foundation registries. Pedigrees and blood percentages are. And, I will say it again: Mass producing horses by pedigree alone has never created a quality horse. Breeding QUALITY horses creates other QUALITY horses!
forthefutureofthebreed
You aren’t the only one ‘with their printed material’, so?
I’m not saying that the foundation group is 100% truthful. No breed group is…man just look at the whole double Creme thing of AQHA, Fire N Ice with the PHBA, Sabino in Arabians.(yes I know all color things!
). But I have read this stuff and I can see there point in the easy of math and figuring it out(not that I agree with how the figure it out) that marking some early QH’s as 100% is a good thing for the group. You should be happy that they allowed these horses in, at least early on they had the brains to see that it was not just blood but what the horse could do for the breed.
STORMIE said, “ya….so first you say there are no foundation horses showing in those groups but proven wrong you are saying that it’s okay because they are promoting Foundation Groups….but wait I thought that the whole point was that foundation QH’s with their lack of TB blood where no good. That was part of the org. topic and here is proof that they can and are winning in other groups even if they don’t carry the foundation papers or if the owners aren’t promoting(which you really don’t know that for sure) the foundation groups. Bottom line that this one is that AQHA horses that are foundation by the foundation groups are winning in non foundation shows.”
stormie, you just don’t understand. I’m trying real hard to explain. Please go back and read my posts on this topic.
STORMIE said, You should be happy that they allowed these horses in, at least early on they had the brains to see that it was not just blood but what the horse could do for the breed.”
Now you are making me laugh! LOL. They sure aren’t doing that NOW, are they? LOL.
Stormie said…
Because they don’t say that Leo doesn’t have TB blood in him. They do not claim that he really is 100% QH blood but that they count him as such in the pedigrees of the horses now because of what Leo did for the breed. Because of what he did for the breed they want his lines and make it 100% so that the horse’s of his line will still add up to high enough. Does that make sense?
Nat: Yes it makes sense in the respect as I understand what you are saying. Just doesn’t make sense in stating this TB blood is acceptable and this one is not – make sense?
Stormie: Three Bars….okay that is just wrong.
Nat: Wrong in what respect? Three Bars is my personal favorite foundation (foundation as in the true sense of the word) sires of the quarter horse breed.
STORMIE said, “You aren’t the only one ‘with their printed material’, so?”
You need to read your Vol. 2 FQHR Directory, for example. Then spend the next 40 years or so researching the real facts about the origins of the Quarter Horse and Thoroughbred. You might not have this book because it was taken out of circulation pretty early on and is extremely difficult to find because of that.
forthefutureofthebreed
No need to repeat your dear, there is a lot of stuff that we agree on. For one, get off your high Appx horse and remember this. I am smart enough to read a dam pedigree and anyone that is smart enough to can see that many of these horses have TB blood in them. The foundation groups are not altering that. Anyone that takes the time to research it can see for their self…and if they have a little common sense they can see that it’s not that the founation groups are lying about this but that they are counting the good blood in. Grow up dear you aren’t the only way that can send out for information or research pedigrees.
All you are doing by quoting all those horses over again is making it dang hard to get to the bottom of the page.
“So, why on earth would anyone hellbent on “preserving” the original Quarter Horse want to disallow the blood that created these horses in the first place? It is so obvious to me that the elimination of close-up TB blood is what is creating these common, average, grade-looking “foundation” QHs today.”
So what you are saying is that to preserve the TB we need to go back a number of years and start crossing Arabs into them?
And as far as where the ‘average, grade looking foundation QH’s come from…it’s the same place that the avg. looking TB’s, Arabs, Morgans or any other breed comes from and that is not weeding out certin breeds from crossing with them but breeding the avg looking horses of the breed itself. IF they would have controled their standard better the horses we see today would have looked like the horses back then. That is a fact that is true in ANY class of QH and ANY breed of horse. It isn’t crossing in of more TB blood because by gods the QH you see in WP classes does not look like many of those old great horses either.
As far was who won out….it had little to do with which one was better and more to do with which one tossed the more money into the ring.
Well a QUOTE for the owner of Matt Dillion Dun It aka Simon..reads like this in the January 2007 NFQHA journal page 16 under NEW HORIZONS..”We had several cutting trainers on our place at the time & we thought we’d go ahead & try him at cutting” So Simon went into cutting training at 3 Peaks Ranch and, IN TRUE VERSATILE FOUNDATION QUATER HORSE style, was successful, winning NCHA money….
What Simons well known trainer Todd Crawford said about him was He’s just good at everything” when asked what was the horses strongest event was “He’s the whole package”….I think those quotes & many others I could find with more time looking.. explains why some of the big named horses like Hollywood Dun It & High Brow Cat are regristered with NFQHA…
Nat
I love Three bars that is not what I meant. What I said was that I know horses that are avt. as 80+% Three Bars. Not TB but THREE BARS. Basicly what that is saying is that the horse is very inbreed Three Bars. It would be like saying my horse is 85% Leo, king or any other SINGLE horse. Just think of the crosses that horse has to be that high of one SINGLE horse.
forthefutureofthebreed
hehe actually I don’t have any of it here at work!
Three Bars (TB) blood is counted against a horse if he appears in the pedigree close enough to bring the “foundation” percentage low. How stupid is it to disallow the blood of a horse like Three Bars that contributed to the Quarter Horse breed in such a big way whose blood dominated every single discipline for many years?
THAT is the hypocrisy that IS the foundation QH registries. I have THOUSANDS of photos of TB horses that no one would be able to tell them apart from the ideal QH that the foundation associations are describing. But since that blood is not allowed, so is the quality that the blood of those horses created. If someone came up with a horse that fit the exact ideal of the foundation QH registries, but it didn’t qualify for registration there, then that horse is not allowed to be used within that association. How idiotic is that? I can guarantee you that if Three Bars had been given QH papers within in the magic 1-27,000 section of the AQHA stud book, he would be considered “100% Foundation Quarter Horse” by every foundation registry out there. How many are there, by the way? Last time I counted, there were five.
I think one closest down or went in with one of the others.
For a minute lets step back and take out the show rules, any avg. or ugly foundation horses we know and focus on just one thing. “No future added TB blood”.
Now how is that any different the closed stud books of say the Jockey Clue, Arabs, or any other breed that has a closed book. Why is it okay for them but not for QH’s?
STORMIE, you have no credibility with me (or many others) if you cannot spell well. I know you don’t know who I am, and I guess that’s a good thing. I can guarantee you that I have spent more time than anyone here on pedigrees, research, etc. and I can guarantee you that I have more research material on this subject (all the way back to the 1700s) than anyone in the country. Many of the foundation organizations are my CLIENTS. So please don’t cop an attitude with me. You really don’t know what you’re talking about, although I’m sure you think you do. And that’s fine, you have the right. Talk to someone else.
Stormie said, “Now how is that any different the closed stud books of say the Jockey Clue, Arabs, or any other breed that has a closed book. Why is it okay for them but not for QH’s?”
Because the Jockey Club has about 300 years of history and a proven gene pool to draw from. Quarter Horses do not. Why do you think that just because AQHA is 67 years old that their gene pool is good enough to close the books to allowable outcross blood?
Stormie said: As far was who won out….it had little to do with which one was better and more to do with which one tossed the more money into the ring.
Typical response from a foundation person. >heavy sigh< It takes more than money to win.
Take for example the AQHA Supreme Champions. In order to earn that title a horse needs have at least have earned two Speed Index Ratings of 90 or greater (AAA), 40 points in recognized AQHA halter and performance classes. A minimum of 15 points earned in halter with at least 2 Grand Championship. A minimum of 20 points in performance, with at least 8 being earned in cattle events (calf roping, team roping, cutting). Now that’s versitility something the QH is known for.
Then how come none of the AQHA Supreme Champions would of been eligable for foundation registries?
Yep, it takes more than money to show – it takes a good horse with style, class and eye appeal, athletisim and conformation that enhances rather than hinders, and a dab of speed.
Right on the money, Nat!
Spelling has little to do with typos, yes I’m not taking the time to go back and proof read. And just for your information, not every great mind is good at spelling. Not saying I’m a great mind just that being good at spell or not doesn’t say anything about how smart or talented someone is. Spelling has never been my strong area, I admit that. I’m more art or math then spelling or grammer. I do have to say that I love it when someone pulls that (U spel bad) card in the middle of a fight. It is a low card and shows a lot about the person that uses it.
Yes I got snotty because you clearly judged me to not know anything about pedigrees based on what I have said. I disagree with you(and agree with you too but you don’t see that) and that is all you needed to know to judge me.
I do hope you answer my question about closed stud books because that is really what is the at the heart of what this topic has become. It’s not QH blood vs TB blood but if a group should close it’s stud book. I left out my perosnal thoughts on the matter until you answered. I have a feeling we well agree on parts of it.
STORMIE, I did answer your question about closed stud books. And yes, spelling is important, especially when dealing with pedigrees. Details are ever so important. If someone has a hard time with the details of spelling, they certainly would have a difficult time researching pedigree records accurately, and understanding the intricacies of it all in the way it needs to be documented. But I’m not holding that against you at all. It just takes away someone’s perceived credibility if they cannot spell well.
Nat
First I’m not just a foundation person. I am a QH person. There is a difference.
As for the money you didn’t understand what I was saying. It’s not the money that someone has to pay to win. The fancy tack, etc(Hay I like a lot of silver!) No I’m talking about the money into AQHA and how that changes the breed. If more money was put into AQHA through…say trail riders then AQHA would alter itself to support that group of owners more then other groups. Right now AQHA makes money on the main base of showing so they have focused highly on that part of the horse world. This has changed the QH. How many halter/WP/English/Reining horses could win at racing? QH’s started as racing horses and yet more QH are breed for non racing then for racining. Racing brings in a huge amount of money to but the show ring is a larger group of owners. AQHA has been able to hold up both groups and so far the differences are not always that big. If for somereason racing ended today the AQHA horse of the future would be more like what we see in the show ring and more then likely the Pleasure type.
So sorry, my computer fizzled out on me, I’ve been without internet (still am, actually), but my intention was never to let forthefutureofthebreed field all of this on her own, though I have to say, you’ve done a fantastic job thus far.
NOW…
“Foundation Bred” has become an absolute JOKE among serious competitors in almost any discipline. This is true in almost every circle.
And the problem is NOT that foundation-bred horses are bad – they’re not.
The problem is that people who breed them figure that, since they’re foundation, they are worthy of breeding. Because they either don’t know enough, don’t care enough or are totally naive in thinking that what they have is great when it is in fact NOT.
I have posted several breeders websites as an example of this on the Blue Eyed Horse blog and probably other ones as well. They are EVERYWHERE, and they have completely ruined the foundation quarter horse for me.
The common faults that everyone sees in almost ALL foundation quarter horses available today is being too far out behind, long backed, short and thick necked and ugly headed. Plain and simple.
As another person put it, that is ‘propagation’ and not ‘selection’ as far as breeding goes, and I see it all the time.
And serious cutting trainers won’t deal with them.
This is on Larry Trocha’s website (www.horsetrainingvideos.com): From the top 5 cutting horse Myths-
Myth #3. My colt should make a great cutter. He is 99% foundation bred. His bloodlines trace back to Wimpy P1 five times on the top side and three times on the bottom. Those old foundation horses were real cow ponies.
Now, if you own a foundation bred horse, don’t take what I’m about to say the wrong way. Our topic here is modern-day “competition” cutting. I’ve ridden plenty of foundation bred horses that would definitely work a cow. But…
If you go to any of the top cutting trainers and ask them to describe what it’s like to try to get one of these old-time “foundation bred†horses to cut, here is the answer you’ll get 9 out of 10 times:
Most don’t have enough cow or intensity to make it in modern-day cutting competition.
They’re difficult to train for today’s type of cutting. For example, they either learn too slow to be ready for the futurity or they want to argue too much.
If you manage to overcome A and B, it’s still tough to win because many of them don’t have the athletic ability and style of modern-day cutting horses.
If you want your colt to be a good cutter, the least you can do is make sure he comes from bloodlines that produce good cutters. And yes, there are horses that are exceptions to the rule, but they are few and far between
I think that just about says it all.
People have bred them based solely on their BLOODLINES, much like idiots have bred double dilute/homozygous paints have done with color, and the result is a market flooded with junk horses.
Personally, and I am speaking from a very broad demographic of people here, a horse with any sort of show record in any foundation registry might as well have points at a local open ‘County Fair’ show. I think it’s a ‘soft option’ for people who have inferior stock to show them on a playing field with far less competition.
If you look at any issue of the QH Journal, you will find that AQHA caters to the ranch horse breeders, in a big way. They probably register more horses with them than any other group of breeders out there.
Yes, money is root of many evils, including at AQHA. But you must realize that “trail riders” don’t contribute much to AQHA other than the fees to register/transfer their horses. There is no venue to showcase or promote their horses, which otherwise would add to the economy in many ways. When is the last time you heard of a “Trail Horse Breeder”? What qualities does a trail horse need to possess to contribute to the breed in a positive way? The shows highlight the performance abilities of a particular type of horse, gives breeders something to breed FOR, while creating an industry that supports many people.
OH FOR CRYING OUT LOUD – There you are! Thank you for putting that so eloquently! You are 100% correct. I tend to be so statistical and factual in my writing (which offends many), and you put it so well that it is easily understood. Good job!
Forthefutureofthebreed
At the time I had posted you had not answered. We are posting at the sametime almost.
Spelling is important but one’s spelling on a blog like this is not to used to judge. My spelling is not so bad that it is going to make it hard for me to research pedigrees or anything else. If it was I would be spelling like that the owner of that poor stud a few weeks back. Many people can’t spell and as far as being creditable, we aren’t writing a book here and even if we were do you really think all of those books are 100% correct when sent in. Trust me when needed I proof read and correct, I just don’t see the point here when by the errors of others on here I’m not that bad.
I do not think that AQHA should close the book fully. (see we do agree on some points) But I don’t think that breeding high % TB and then breeding those together gets you to where the breed needs to be.
No for the best of the breed I think they need to control the standard better. Many of today’s Top horses don’t even fit it. They should be re setting up the group so that it works for the best of the breed. From the breeding to the showing. They are trying to clean up some of the bad points in the showing and that is good but they could do more…or maybe faster. Really make Appx horses prove that they belong. I did look it up and they do not need to show and win to get normal papers. If both parents get there normal papers then the Appx foal can. That means that as long as the parents(or grandparents) can do it they don’t care if that horse.
LOL I was not meaning that AQHA should cater to the trail rider I was just using that as an exp. of my point. I could have said English vs Western. If the English classes and breeders brought in more money then the group would cater to them.
Sadly I do know a few ‘trail horse breeders’. Never really thought of it and maybe they use that term but that is basicly what they are. Fugly breeders is more like it but I do have to give credit to the one guy I know. He uses Reg. stock, solid QH and paint horses. He has a goal of a well rounded, solid horse. Solid in conformation and mind. He doesn’t breed a lot of horses but the ones he does are good trail horses. Many are used for hunting out west. They may not win a WP or hunt Breed class but they can hold their own in open shows and are worth their weight as a trail/work horse. They don’t go cheap either. He sells as 3 yr olds but kepts some until 5 or 6 yrs old. He has a waiting list even.
Thanks futureofthebreed.
It’s something I have done a lot of research on, and it’s something I know a fair bit about.
To be very blunt, the quarter horse NEEDS and THRIVES off of Thoroughbred blood. Nothing wrong with that. The ammount of AMAZING quarter horses with a lot of thoroughbred blood FAR FAR FAR SURPASSES the amount of high percentage foundation horses.
The NFQHA also mentions old time foundation horses being good harness and driving horses…
So why don’t they have some driving classes in their mish-mash of patheticness?
because that would require the buying of more costly tack.
Stormie, the AQHA registers more horses than any other registry in the US.
You cannot expect them to cater to the extremely small groups of people who spend NO money within the organization and who do not even consider showing their animals on a breed level. They are simply too big for that.
STORMIE, we agree and disagree on several points. No matter.
Regarding fugly horse “breeders” – A breeder of any particular breed of horse (or dog or whatever) should have the goal to breed for the improvement of the breed. That is not what I see out there today, especially among foundation breeders. Breeding for the improvement of a breed isn’t called “mass producing under the guise of preservation”. Like someone said, there are a few exceptions. The poor quality foundation QH is the rule, not the exception. So where is the “breeding for the improvement of the breed”?
AQHA saw fit to allow TB blood in as outcross blood. It has been proven to work well. QHs and TBs are very close in type and origin, so it was logical to allow this. Breeders who take things to the extreme are not what I call responsible breeders anyway. Those 17h HUS horses are not QHs to me, either. But that was totally beside the point when I was referring to TB and “speed blood”. Nat hit the nail on the head when she wrote about the Supreme Champions. Those are the true all-around, versatile QHs, not the “foundation” QHs. And those true athletes were full of TB blood, even some as high as 100%.
And to those who don’t believe TB speed blood belongs in the cowhorse, here are some facts for you. These are NCHA cutting horses sired or produced by winning racehorses. These are only some of the major NCHA title holders.
Miss N Cash, 1987 NCHA Derby Champion, sired by World Champion Quarter racehorse, Dash For Cash.
Squeak Toy, 1988 NCHA Non-Pro Derby Champion. Out of the winning TB mare, Sculptor’s Whim.
Little Joe Jones, 1968 NCHA Futurity Res Champion. Out of the AAA QH racemare, Fickle Fortune (by Red Jones TB).
Sam Superstar, 1975 NCHA Futurity Res Champion. Sired by Supreme Champion Goodbye Sam.
Chickasha Anita, 1974 NCHA Non-Pro Fut Res Ch; 1975 Derby Res Ch; 1975 Non-Pro Derby Co-Ch; Sired by Leo Bingo, AAA race horse.
Chickasha Bingo, 1969 NCHA Non-Pro Futurity Champion; sired by Leo Bingo, AAA race horse.
Wee Darlin, 1975 NCHA Non-Pro Futurity Champion. Sired by the stakes winning TB sire, Wee Folk.
Beats All, 1972 NCHA Non-Pro Futurity Res Champion. Sired by Champion Quarter Running Stallion, Pasamonte Paul (by Suggested TB).
Osprey, 1973 NCHA Derby Res Champion. Sired by AA racehorse Brigand.
Cee Bars Joan, 1969 NCHA Futurity Champion. Sired by AAA racehorse Cee Bars.
Delta Decoy, 1975 NCHA Derby Champion. Sired by AA racehorse Delta Leo.
So much for foundation-eligible cutting horses…
Shortie: First I’m not just a foundation person. I am a QH person. There is a difference.
Nat: I’m a QH person (and Paint), don’t deal with any foundation registries. So you are dealing with a bigger difference with me.
Stormie: As for the money you didn’t understand what I was saying. It’s not the money that someone has to pay to win. The fancy tack, etc(Hay I like a lot of silver!) No I’m talking about the money into AQHA and how that changes the breed. If more money was put into AQHA through…say trail riders then AQHA would alter itself to support that group of owners more then other groups.
Nat: Actually the AQHA does cater well and spends lots of money promoting the groups other than showing. AQHA was the first organization to have programs for individuals that enjoyed trail riding. I was there when the current AQHA president was announcing it. AQHA recognized that there was a huge amount of members that simply enjoyed recretional riding. However, to encourge betterment and interity of the breed horse shows and races are necessary.
Stormie: Right now AQHA makes money on the main base of showing so they have focused highly on that part of the horse world.
Nat: Yes, the AQHA does focus on shows and races, it is necessary for the betterment and integrity of the breed. What breed organization doesn’t?
Stormie: This has changed the QH. How many halter/WP/English/Reining horses could win at racing?
Nat: Actually you would be suprized. However with the advent of the Incetive Fund, specialization has come to play, and there isn’t much cross overs as there used to be.
Stormie: QH’s started as racing horses and yet more QH are breed for non racing then for racining. Racing brings in a huge amount of money to but the show ring is a larger group of owners.
Nat: AQHA supports racing greatly. There are huge purses avaliable in QH racing these days due to the AQHAs support and programs. With the show ring numbers off course there would be more money – do the math. But AQHA supprorts both disaplines.
Stormie: If for some reason racing ended today the AQHA horse of the future would be more like what we see in the show ring and more then likely the Pleasure type.
Nat: Racing will never go away – it is been part of human culture from the begining of our association with the horse. Realisticly, all disaplines will remain – the phenotype may change, but the race horses, halter horses, pleasure horses, HUS horses, ect will never go away.
August 18, 2007 10:21 AM
oh_for_crying_out_loud said..
“The problem is that people who breed them figure that, since they’re foundation, they are worthy of breeding. Because they either don’t know enough, don’t care enough or are totally naive in thinking that what they have is great when it is in fact NOT.”
You have to admit that is is statement TRUE with EVERY breed not just with the foundation horse breeders…. that is why FHOTD created this blog..
I will say that there are truly alot of foundation horses out there being bred just because they are colored.. I really don’t think it’s only because they have a higher % of foundation they are..
you also said:
“Personally, and I am speaking from a very broad demographic of people here, a horse with any sort of show record in any foundation registry might as well have points at a local open ‘County Fair’ show. I think it’s a ‘soft option’ for people who have inferior stock to show them on a playing field with far less competition.”
This quote should go then for all the off the wall ones color associations like buckskins, pinto, palomino, cream, champagne…& the many more I know I’m forgetting… not just the foundation assocs…. correct?
I don’t think many would have a problem with the foundation QH registries, the breeders, and the horses, if they didn’t represent horses from the largest breed association in the world, and if they didn’t propagate thousands of mediocre to poor quality horses. Even the best of the foundation breeders aren’t creating spectacular horses who are going to change the breed or AQHA. And if anyone could change anything, it would be these huge ranch horse and foundation QH breeders, through sheer numbers alone. Why aren’t there any standout horses coming from any of these programs?
sigh
I was not wanting them to spend the money on a small group that puts little back into them. Please if you didn’t read it go back and read it. I was using trail riders as an example to show how a breed group would focus on one group of it’s members and how that can alter the horse the are bred. Like I said I could have used any group but I used that one because it’s so different then the main groups that are in control.
Forthefutureofthebreed
We agree more then you think or see on here. I am not totally against the adding of TB blood to AQHA. I’m against adding it with no thought of what it does.
I think that the foundation groups where on to something to went of course somewhere. I think that if it would have been done right from the start we would have a forming side line of the QH breed. One that has the looks and talent of what they wanted along with a solid blood line. They didn’t stick to that. I never said I agree 100% with the foundation groups. I like the horses like Leo and to me a horse that is more like that is more of a foundation QH then..yes what many of today’s “foundations” are. It takes years to set a standard within a group of horses. Maybe in 300 yrs the foundation groups will have it worked out. Maybe not. Neither one of us is putting money into their group…..maybe that is part of the problem. They need more people higer up in the group that really do believe in a solid standard and know how to get it.
STORMIE said, “I am not totally against the adding of TB blood to AQHA. I’m against adding it with no thought of what it does.”
And I am against propagating foundation QHs by pedigree only, with no thought of what that does.
Foundation Quarter horses will still be riding and asking what are we going to do next when the hunter or proverbial show horse is ready to to the barn. I rainse foundation quarter horses and they have confirmation as well as wonderful dispositions and no pole straight back legs. You can say what you want about them but I guarantee they would out work anything you have any day of the week. My horses can work cattle, trail ride, show with the best of them, and still take junior and teach him to ride and that is just my 3 year old stallion who by the way has never bucked or been hard to handle whether riding with mares or riding alone or breeding. So take your negative words about the foundation quarter horses and rethink your choice of horses. All breeds have the positives but I think the foundation horse that is bred to work is the most versatile breed out there.
“I rainse foundation quarter horses and they have confirmation as well as wonderful dispositions and no pole straight back legs.”
What is “rainse”?
And what do your “foundation quarter horses” have “confirmation” of?
Just curious.
Yes, all breeds have their positives, yet you are choosing to poke fun at the negatives of show horses. So why can’t we poke fun at the negatives of “foundation” Quarter Horses? There are so many!
BOLTQTRHORSES – Is this your website?
http://www.rboltpaintnquarterhorses.com/
What exactly do you breed FOR?
Forthefutureofthebreed said:
“What exactly do you breed FOR?”
Duh! her Sorry FUGLY stallion is “red dun roan”. Her pedigrees are foundation. She is breeding for colored foundation horses obviously! Hey wait a minute. Isn’t that stallion the one that was pictured a while back on the Fugly horse blog? June 30th. It sure looks like the same horse to me. http://bp1.blogger.com/_uT-i4wrm9Ec/RodPRhxedDI/AAAAAAAAAH0/W-y0jR17vdg/s1600-h/yak.jpg
DONYOURIDENOFUGLYHORSE – I didn’t even look at the photos, but I can see that they don’t think much of their stallion. His stud fee is $200. Gosh, it wouldn’t be worth it to breed to outside mares (I’m guessing it’s live cover) for a lousy $200!
forthefutureofthebreed said…
“And I am against propagating foundation QHs by pedigree only, with no thought of what that does. “
And are you finally getting the point that I feel the same way. I have had to repeat it enough.
To me it doesn’t matter if it is a Foundation QH, an Appx QH, Arab, TB, Morgan, Appy or any other breed or cross bred it all has to be done with careful planning without to much focus on just one single point. In today’s world(talking about AQHA here) there are more then enough of a gene pool to really have everything you want in a breeding program, yes even color. I do think that far to many people bred for just color but I also believe that one can breed for color and do it smartly. Or breed for foundation lines, race lines, Appx, or anything else they want as long as they do it right.
nat – though this may shake the foundations of your world – i wasnt talking about fucking quarter horses. not everyone is. in fact, i like to pretend that they dont even exist, that cows are for milking and tassels are for stripper tits.
“NOW WE’VE GOT A CLIQUE OF FUGLY FOLLOWERS WHO WOULDN’T KNOW A GOOD HORSE FROM A CAROUSEL HORSE, WHO ARE NOW ARMED WITH ALL SORTS OF MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT ENTIRE BREEDS. ”
Methinks that we’re all resonably intelligent people who can form opinions ourselfs from independent information. I know that lots of people would look down their nose at my horse just because she’s a saddlebred, but I also know most of those who have gotten to know her changed their minds. More information about something can lead to a change in opinion.’
Besides, conformational flaws surpass breed types. I know cow hocks on any horse isn’t a good leg type and doesn’t help any of them do any sort of job. There are some things that aren’t desireable in some breeds, but are wonderful in others (example: a quarterhorse neck on a saddlebred isn’t going to get it anywhere). But thats why people developed different breeds to do different things.
STORMIE said, “And are you finally getting the point that I feel the same way. I have had to repeat it enough.”
I’ve had to repeat myself quite a bit because it seems from your comments that you didn’t get what I wrote. And yes, I am aware that we agree on a few things. I’ve said that, too. You keep saying we don’t need more TB, and there is a strong enough gene pool already. And I stated why this isn’t so. But it’s like going in one side and out the other…
colorisnteverything said…
Those of you who are FQHA supporters and poo-pooing the AQHA, you are full of it. THIS video proves it:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=T9SG4tGW9fU
OMG, FQHA is FLORIDA QUARTER HORSE ASSOCIATION, the Florida state affiliate of AQHA, you moron. Why don’t you figure out WHAT you’re talking about before you open your mouth?
forthefutureofthebreed said…
“I’ve had to repeat myself quite a bit because it seems from your comments that you didn’t get what I wrote. And yes, I am aware that we agree on a few things. I’ve said that, too. You keep saying we don’t need more TB, and there is a strong enough gene pool already. And I stated why this isn’t so. But it’s like going in one side and out the other… “
You really like to be rude don’t you. I know I have said it’s the adding of TB blood with a plan or close the books if you can’t control your breeders. Maybe I didn’t put it in that short and sweet of a way. I am agains the high % of TB’s breeding Appx to TB and then that to a TB is getting far to much TB in that one line.
“OMG, FQHA is FLORIDA QUARTER HORSE ASSOCIATION, the Florida state affiliate of AQHA, you moron. Why don’t you figure out WHAT you’re talking about before you open your mouth?”
Must be because I am a western whore. I actually don’t own lowrise breeches. And FYI… there ARE FQHA shows… as in THIS registry:
http://www.fqha.com/
Take a look at it. And FYI, how many great bits of info have you added to discussion. All you do is put people down. At least I am here to discuss things.
This is SO high school.