ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 645
Apr 4 08 8:52 AM
That's like saying only football players are athletes. Give me a break.
Posts: 3344
GotCow wrote: Other than being literal on the words' meaning, can you please prove wrong the point of the statement? or did you run out of arguments already? Gotcow, you are hopeless. I feel like I'm in a western version of "All in the Family" and you are Archy Bunker in a cowboy hat. I will say this, it takes a pretty fit athletic horse to jump fences, or stay at a nice slow lope all collected - so they are athletes - just like ballerina's are athletes. They just may have a different build and not be involved in something you care to watch. It doesn't make them "duds"
Posts: 3967
Apr 4 08 8:54 AM
forthefutureofthebreed wrote: "That's probably because the first century or so of Appy breeding had absolutely nothing to do with cows." The earlier Tobianos didn't work cows, either, as far as I know. But many of us today appreciate a quality horse, with correct conformation and eye appeal, capable of doing everything the superior QH can do, only with the beauty of the attractive pattern. The original types of those color breeds can't do that.
Apr 4 08 9:00 AM
Gotcow, you are hopeless. I feel like I'm in a western version of "All in the Family" and you are Archy Bunker in a cowboy hat. I will say this, it takes a pretty fit athletic horse to jump fences, or stay at a nice slow lope all collected - so they are athletes - just like ballerina's are athletes. They just may have a different build and not be involved in something you care to watch. It doesn't make them "duds"
Apr 4 08 9:05 AM
vixen of doom wrote: forthefutureofthebreed wrote: From the looks of it, they've done nothing but encourage the Appaloosa to change from a distinct breed into nothing but a new color pattern for Quarter Horse lovers to play with. And that is just sad. There is a foundation appaloosa registry and organization - just as in quarterhorses. So there are breeders who are attempting to keep the original bloodlines pure and in place and while I don't particularly like that breeding or look, I'm not gonna dis them for their program. There is a lot of discussion about improving the breeds here on this site. I think given the low numbers of Nez Perce who need horses that can outlast the cavalry versus relatively high number people who want their little girl to show in walk trot and showmanship or do freestyle reining, that crossing apps with quarters or TB is improving the breed by keeping it marketable and growing in popularity.
forthefutureofthebreed wrote: From the looks of it, they've done nothing but encourage the Appaloosa to change from a distinct breed into nothing but a new color pattern for Quarter Horse lovers to play with. And that is just sad. There is a foundation appaloosa registry and organization - just as in quarterhorses. So there are breeders who are attempting to keep the original bloodlines pure and in place and while I don't particularly like that breeding or look, I'm not gonna dis them for their program. There is a lot of discussion about improving the breeds here on this site. I think given the low numbers of Nez Perce who need horses that can outlast the cavalry versus relatively high number people who want their little girl to show in walk trot and showmanship or do freestyle reining, that crossing apps with quarters or TB is improving the breed by keeping it marketable and growing in popularity.
Posts: 1653
forthefutureofthebreed wrote: "That's probably because the first century or so of Appy breeding had absolutely nothing to do with cows." I've got to add that the first century of QHs didn't have anything to do with cows, either. They were race horses.
The first century of quarter horses?
The AQHA didn't originate until 1940. That still gives them (us) another 32 years, doesn't it? Previous to that time, they were "race and ranch horses".
Apr 4 08 9:11 AM
GotCow wrote: *sigh* And somehow you conveniently missed the part where I said "and I'm talking about the kind of skills required for an ideal Quarter Horse which are the reason the breed was created in the first place" Do you seriously believe old ranchers were looking for good fence jumpers when they started their breeding programs? never wondered why short cannon bones is supposed to be a good thing on Quarter Horses?
Posts: 2785
Apr 4 08 9:15 AM
FFV FFV FFV
Posts: 530
Apr 4 08 9:21 AM
Apr 4 08 9:23 AM
Goflipper wrote: Are there any great AQHA halter horses in this decade that aren't Impressive bred?
Apr 4 08 9:24 AM
Apr 4 08 9:25 AM
forthefutureofthebreed wrote: When I was a kid, I was always told that originally quarter horses were bred to race and were unbeatable in a quarter mile - hence the name. It was breeder's like king ranch, weiscamp etc that bred them for ranch work.
Apr 4 08 9:26 AM
Apr 4 08 9:28 AM
I found one, with an AQHA Superior in Halter:
HD Royalty
See N Spots wrote: vixen of doom wrote: forthefutureofthebreed wrote: From the looks of it, they've done nothing but encourage the Appaloosa to change from a distinct breed into nothing but a new color pattern for Quarter Horse lovers to play with. And that is just sad. There is a foundation appaloosa registry and organization - just as in quarterhorses. So there are breeders who are attempting to keep the original bloodlines pure and in place and while I don't particularly like that breeding or look, I'm not gonna dis them for their program. There is a lot of discussion about improving the breeds here on this site. I think given the low numbers of Nez Perce who need horses that can outlast the cavalry versus relatively high number people who want their little girl to show in walk trot and showmanship or do freestyle reining, that crossing apps with quarters or TB is improving the breed by keeping it marketable and growing in popularity.
Apr 4 08 9:29 AM
Apr 4 08 9:30 AM
delete
Apr 4 08 9:31 AM
Whoadammitwhoa wrote: I have a good friend who's started a registry. He has the breeding stock, but I wouldn't consider his horses a breed until his registry is formed. Until then they're non-descript broodstock of other bloodlines and heritage. Prior to the formation of a registry, they really cannot be considered a "breed" of registered animals. That sounds kind of like the "barn dog" registry LOL
Apr 4 08 9:34 AM
Whoadammitwhoa wrote: I have a good friend who's started a registry. He has the breeding stock, but I wouldn't consider his horses a breed until his registry is formed. Until then they're non-descript broodstock of other bloodlines and heritage. Prior to the formation of a registry, they really cannot be considered a "breed" of registered animals.
Share This