Quote:
Which I think is a good thing on one hand, and perhaps a not so good thing on another. Because of this, many feel is one reason the gene pool is tightening so much. More locally or regionally located horses are not being utalized because now you can be in opposite ends of the continent and transportation is not an issue.


Why would you feel it will limit the gene pool further? If anything, I think it would broaden it, where before, most mare owners were limited to their local stallions. I would definitely breed to a local horse if it was the best horse I could find, and I would breed to one clear across the country if he was the best I could find. But I'm not into breeding to the leading sires for the sake of that, either.

Quote:
As far as embryo transferes go, I think it's a good thing, but I also think a mare should be limited on number of registerable offspring per year. This is another thing that can also lead to the tightening of the gene pool, and it cheapens the foals out of the super mares because now there isnt just one yearling each year.


Why would you limit the number of foals a mare can have per year, but not the stallion? What difference would it make? For example, at Los Alamitos, there are races where every horse running is by the same stallion; what difference would it make if they were all out of the same mare? (Highly unlikely, but possible).

Quote:
As far as cloning, I'm against it.


I am on one hand, and for it on another. Not for the increase of numbers of a certain horse or bloodline, but for the wonder of being able to do that. I would certainly clone my 16yo cats if I could.