# Better the Breed



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

I keep hearing that term used and wonder how many of you have bred a horse that made its breed better? I've bred 100's of QH's have bred NCHA , NRHA, money earners also AQHA and APHA point earners. I've sold colts from coast to coast and Europe, Mex. , and Can. Had horses place in the Top 10 at the AQHA World Show but I've yet to breed one that made the QH breed better. The breed would be exactly the same now as if I had never bred one horse in my life.

I think theres certainly lots of horses that have made breeds better but there rare and very few. I think The TB stallion Three Bars made the QH breed better. I think horses like Doc Bar and Poco Lena made the QH better certainly the Cutting QH much better. Theres a number of them that did but they are an exception by far.

What have you bred that made an entire breed better and how did the horse do it?


----------



## twogeldings (Aug 11, 2008)

The term 'Better the Breed' to me means breeding a top quality horse that sets a prime example for that breed, henceforth better the breeds image and peoples respect for the breed. Also by breeding a quality horse, lets say a mare, there are chances that the horse will then be bred again. But, by already being very well bred, there is a high chance for a foal just as good or even better.

As a horseperson, I always get kind of a sense of pride when I see breeders who advertise something like '17 World Champions'. They have bettered the breed by producing horses good enough to make it to the top. They worked hard and bred careful. 

Of course it doesn't take a World Champion to better a breed. Anyone can produce a foal thats good in, lets say, trail riding. Others then see this nice, calm, well rounded horse and think 'Oh wow, what a wonderful QH/Appy/Arab/TWH/MTF/Shire'. 

You better the breed by breeding foals with a good lines, temperament and conformation. All it takes is one mean horse with crooked legs and no papers to ruin the image of a breed in someone elses eyes.


----------



## weefoal (Apr 4, 2009)

Twogeldings what a wonderful way of saying it! 

Kay


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

By your definition twogeldings I then have Bettered the QH Breed and I've had foals with poor conformation so I've destroyed the breed. I don't know one breeder thats bred a number of horses that hasn't done the exact same thing. Breeding the best in no way gurentees a good foal.


----------



## Spyder (Jul 27, 2008)

twogeldings said:


> As a horseperson, I always get kind of a sense of pride when I see breeders who advertise something like '17 World Champions'. They have bettered the breed by producing horses good enough to make it to the top. They worked hard and bred careful.


I would like to point out that the majority of breeders are NOT out to "better the breed". They ARE out to make a profit and hope that the buyer is someone that has the qualifications to ensure _THEIR_ foals are trained to the highest level so that they can sell more foals.

Breeding is a business. A breeder can breed a potential world beater but because of a different set of circumstances never made it to the top of their game. Breeding can be frustrating and when a breeder breeds a really really good foal they have two options.

1) Hold on to it and spend a ton of money they may not have to "prove its worth". 

2)Sell for top dollar and HOPE the person does right by it.

There are breeders out there that have that type of clientelle but it takes time to get that sort of reputation and it is usually based on their foals being bought by the "right" buyers. Then there are breeders producing top quality foals being bought by average people that either don't know what they have or do know but are unable to show the full potential of that purchase due to circumstances.

So who gets labeled as " I guess with no world beaters out there by your stud, he can't be that good".................and then potential people will go to the "world beater" foal producer's stud that in the end may not be suitable for that particular person.

I see this so much lately especially in the high end internationally known studs. Everyone wants to breed to the high ranking stud but fails to take into accout their own level of riding ability that would be incompatable in handling a "hot" animated baby that was bred for international competition.


----------



## wild_spot (Jan 30, 2008)

I definately agree with twogeldings, wonderful post!


----------



## wild_spot (Jan 30, 2008)

Breeding the best doesn't guarantee a good foal, but it sure does improve the odds. If I had to choose which foal to buy before it was born, I would pick the foal out of well built, proven horses than badly conformed, unproven horses. Everytime.


----------



## twogeldings (Aug 11, 2008)

county said:


> By your definition twogeldings I then have Bettered the QH Breed and I've had foals with poor conformation so I've destroyed the breed. I don't know one breeder thats bred a number of horses that hasn't done the exact same thing. Breeding the best in no way gurentees a good foal.


With every breeding there is ALWAYS a chance of poorer conformation. There is no horse with a 'perfect' conformation. Every single horse has it's faults. I completely see your point, but, by breeding Good + Good you have a higher chance of breeding _better_. Not always best, or biggest, or most perfect. But breeding good. Breeding WISELY. 


Take in for example my two Missouri Fox Trotter geldings. They have a naturally beautiful gait, good conformation, nice papers. But Loki is bossy and can be pushy and Red doesn't understand people yet and can henceforth seem stand-offish and grouchy. If I didn't know better I would probably walk away thinking that Foxtrotters are a bunch of arses that are just a waste of time. 
They're fault is there temperament (being a bunch of arses a lot of the time) but they better there breed by representing it well with there gait, and conformation.

Loki's full brother, another example. Parents are fantastic horses, but he has a big head and a roman nose. He just came out that way. Nothing you can do about it. He makes up for it with his personality, conformation, and linage. They bred good and got an ugly duckling with a big heart.


A Quarter Horse from great parents may have a bad conformation, but betters it's breed with it's wonderful personality and gentle nature. Another with a mean temperment and good conformation may better it's breed for being top notch in barrels, or sorting, or even English riding.



Spyder; Unfortunately yes, there are people out there who just breed JUST for profit. It is not a practice I like to see at all, but it is done. Thoroughbreds are unfortunately a breed were this is done quite a lot it seems. It really saddens me, especially when you read how many end up after just a few races in the meat pens.


"So who gets labeled as " I guess with no world beaters out there by your stud, he can't be that good".................and then potential people will go to the "world beater" foal producer's stud that in the end may not be suitable for that particular person."

Excellent point. 
My geldings sire has produced many good foals, but most have been sold as trail, pleasure or family horses, even though many of them would do great in the show ring. He isn't well known and has been met with skepticism by some. Especially with a low stud fee of $250. 
He's about 16-17 years old now, never been shown, his only job is really breeding and relaxing. But he has no stud-like vices, no aggression, no nothing. I have two of his foals, certainly not the best examples of what he can produce but I am happy with both of them. I absolutely adore a weanling black colt of his. I haven't met a foal of his I haven't liked, honestly. Cross or not. 



There are, of course, faults in my argument and general definition of 'bettering the breed', which I do hope are pointed out and corrected by other members. The simplest definition I would say would probably be 'Breed Smart'.

Like Spyder pointed out with the high ranking studs. Bigger and better doesn't always really _mean_ better. So breed smart, breed careful, and enjoy what you do.


Big and small, every horse has a chance to better the breed if bred right, trained right, and loved.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

I totally agree I want to breed smart and wise but IMO a horse has to be and do something exceptional to change an entire breed for the better. Be a World champion? Theres lots of them every year in the AQHA and while its a huge accomplisment and should be noted very very rarely has one made the breed any better. Had that horse not been there another would have been World Champion and that one would rarely change the breed in any way. We had a horse that finished second in a class at the World Show while he and the horse that was first IMO were outstanding had neiher one been there the breed would be no better or worse and two other horses would have been first and second.


----------



## Kentucky (Aug 2, 2008)

wild_spot said:


> Breeding the best doesn't guarantee a good foal, but it sure does improve the odds. If I had to choose which foal to buy before it was born, I would pick the foal out of well built, proven horses than badly conformed, unproven horses. Everytime.


This is always true, training and how they are raised make up the rest. 

Mustangs have a reputation of being a tough breed in relation to health issues. 300 to 500 years of living in the wild have created this breed, with little to no human contect. 

a ranch raised QH (pasture born and raised until 2 to 3 years old, with minimum human handling), will be tougher than a patlock (small field) raised mustang. 

training speaks for itself.


----------



## weefoal (Apr 4, 2009)

Of course there is no way every foal is going to be a grand champion. If it was that easy we would all have a pasture full of them. 

The thing is though if I do produce a foal on the lesser end of my goal then I DO NOT REPEAT THAT CROSS. 

I think there is a semantics issue here too. Better the breed is not the same as *change* the entire breed. 

I breed small equine (miniature horses, shetland ponies and mini/shetland crosses) My goal was to get better necks and heads along with a nice big hip as I feel those are some of the biggest issues with small equine. I do feel that we are slowly accomplishing that goal. Its not something that happens overnight and takes years of hard work. I feel that last year was the best foals we have ever produced and hoping this year is even better.

Over the years I have taken a lot of heat form stricly mini breeders for doing the shetland/miniature cross. But I am doing what I think is best and it doesnt matter to me if I hear the grumblings. 

Here are a some of what we have produced 

Baxters Just Teasin Ya Miniature horse/Shetland pony










Baxters Silver Sensation Miniature Horse/Shetland Pony









Baxters Black Intimidator Shetland pony


----------



## close2prfct (Mar 9, 2009)

I agree with you weefoal if a breeding does not turn out the desired foal then it wouldn't be right to repeat it. I also would like to add you mentioned what you feel is the biggest challenge in minis/small ponies I think that is the key to it all. Everyone has opinions and what one person strives for may not always be what someone else is looking for if it were you wouldn't catch heat from other breeders. It by far doesn't make it wrong what you do, in fact those are some stunning pictures 
So I see it as it isn't a problem with what you do, it is a problem with others not being able to accept anything that doesn't meet their idea of what a horse should look like etc. If a horse can do the job in which it was intended and excel at it then you have done your job.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

close2prt thats always been my contention why should anyone care if they don't like what another person breeds? If the breeder is happy with it thats all that matters.


----------



## mls (Nov 28, 2006)

twogeldings said:


> As a horseperson, I always get kind of a sense of pride when I see breeders who advertise something like '17 World Champions'. They have bettered the breed by producing horses good enough to make it to the top. They worked hard and bred careful.


BUT - it also takes money and time to campaign a horse. When you don't have to take vacation time to head to a show three states over to try and get points on your horse and eat mac and cheese for a month, it's much easier to get points on a horse to qualify to make a world champion.

I am not faulting those who have money and time. Merely pointing out a fact.


----------



## Spyder (Jul 27, 2008)

mls said:


> BUT - it also takes money and time to campaign a horse.


 
Exactly one of my points. Either the buyer or breeder needs to take that good foal and actually be in a position to show it to its full potential. This does not happen as often as people think it does and many good foals go unrecognized and therefore do not help the reputation of the stallion or breeder.

And what about those people that change the name of the foal (esp in those that carry a part of the breeders farm name).:evil:

Then there are events that NEVER state the breeding of a winning horse. Go to Spruce Meadows and while they say what breed it is you haven't a clue who the sire/dam is. It is a shame that they couldn't take the time to put in at least who sired the winner (in case someone wanted to breed).:evil:

I could go on as this is a pet peeve of mine.:twisted:


----------



## kitten_Val (Apr 25, 2007)

weefoal said:


> Here are a some of what we have produced


Wow, weefoal! They are lovely! If I decide to get a mini I'll get one from you!


----------



## weefoal (Apr 4, 2009)

Thank you so much Kittenval!! That means a lot to me. Its been a lot of years of hard work and heartbreaking decisions to get to this point. 

It does cost a lot of money to promote and show horses we have produced. We are just a very small farm but we feel its important to get ours out there and make sure that the judges agree that we are producing superior horses. Believe me we have made a lot of sacrifices to be able to show our horses. But in the end its worth it

As to the miniature breeders that grumble about mine being shetland/miniature. Do you think for one minute if I was not able to beat them in the show ring they would care what I breed??? You only hear grumbles if you are winning. Please dont take that as me being egotistical but its the truth. If my shetland/minis were losing they wouldnt waste their time grumbling about them

The thing is (at least for miniatures and shetlands) they are constantly evolving. Years ago all that mattered was that you bred the smallest horse possible and conformation was thrown out the window. Now we known better and are constantly trying to improve on the conformation and take the emphasis off small size. So if you cant evolve and keep your mind open you end up at a stand still producing horses that people no longer want


----------



## close2prfct (Mar 9, 2009)

I agree with kitten if i was to ever get a mini..I'd get one from weefoal


----------



## kitten_Val (Apr 25, 2007)

weefoal said:


> It does cost a lot of money to promote and show horses we have produced. We are just a very small farm but we feel its important to get ours out there and make sure that the judges agree that we are producing superior horses. Believe me we have made a lot of sacrifices to be able to show our horses. But in the end its worth it


I'm sure you are taking all ribbons in ring!  All of them (especially the grey one) are very elegant looking!


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

For me, bettering the breed doesn't really have to do with CHANGING the breed. I think the opening post was taking it a bit literally. Maybe instead of saying "bettering the breed" we should say "keep the breed alive" for me, you want to breed your foals to be good representations of the breed. 

Take for example thoroughbreds. They are not being bred to stay sound right now. They are getting bred to go faster but not to hold up under the conditions they run in. Sure, there are tons of other variables, but for the sake of this conversations, that is the one I would like to focus on. Instead of breeding for this, I would rather sacrifice a bit of speed to start breeding for long term sound horses. 

When you cross a stallion and mare that do not compliment each other, you run a larger risk of having a poorly put together foal. So to avoid this, I would say you are "bettering" the breed if you try and get a well put together horse. This way, regardless of if you jump, pleasure ride, cut cows, whatever, it will remain sound. 

Obviously, you are not going to want the same thing in an arabian than in a quarter horse...but you can still try and better even your discipline by breeding for well put together foals. 

I kind of rambled..but hopefully that makes sense.


----------



## Kentucky (Aug 2, 2008)

I understand that Spastic_Dove and I agreewith some of what you said.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

Does anyone have any actual proof that TB race horse breeders breed for speed only and that TB racers break down more? Just read an article that said only .5% of TB's that raced last year in the U.S. suffered any injury at the tracks. Thats the lowest incidence of injury on record.


----------



## wild_spot (Jan 30, 2008)

> close2prt thats always been my contention why should anyone care if they don't like what another person breeds? If the breeder is happy with it thats all that matters.


Not if they are then promoting that horse as an example of the particular breed. If they are using it as a personal riding horse, sure. There are breed standards for a reason.



> Does anyone have any actual proof that TB race horse breeders breed for speed only and that TB racers break down more? Just read an article that said only .5% of TB's that raced last year in the U.S. suffered any injury *at the tracks.* Thats the lowest incidence of injury on record.


At the tracks isn't the biggest issue. Spastic was talking about LONG TERM soundness. Show me a study that shows only .5% of TB that had racing careers having soundness problems later in life, and i'll be convinced :]


----------



## Kentucky (Aug 2, 2008)

The question also is caused by the number of horses turned to stud or broom mare as young 3 and 4 years old. True, this is usually champion of major races, but injured horses like Big Brown was turned to stud soon after he lost the Belmount Stakes.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

If anyone thinks TB race horses are the only ones with soundness problems later in life their turning a blind eye. Theres 1000's of jumpers, barrel racers, cutters, reiners, pretty much every discipline that starts horses at a young age.


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

I was just using TBs as an example -- They're not the only horses that break down and they don't all break down.


----------



## wild_spot (Jan 30, 2008)

I have never said otherwise. However _there aren't many who do it on the massive scale of the TB racing industry_, and none who do it so publicly. Hence, it is the most known about, and the most protested against.


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

I wasn't referring to your post -- More to countys

And as far as your wanting proof, I don't have any statistics or tables to give you. I can just give you what I know from being around the track...Horses that are fast but not built for long time soundness are often put out to stud just because they were fast. If this is right or wrong is not the question, but it does bring faults into a line of horses.


----------



## wild_spot (Jan 30, 2008)

Halter QH are another, just as valid example. They are bred for looks, NOT performance or even basic soundness. Problems such as Navicular are more prevalent in the heavily halter bred QH than in other QH and other breeds. It happens everywhere. The fact that diseases (not sure if that is the right word...) such as Hypp and Herda are still prevalent is proof that there are far too many people out there breeding that do not care about the horses they are producing, or the impact their choices may have on the breed or individual horse.


----------



## wild_spot (Jan 30, 2008)

Yeah i didn't see yours until I already posted, lol!


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

wild_spot said:


> Halter QH are another, just as valid example. They are bred for looks, NOT performance or even basic soundness. Problems such as Navicular are more prevalent in the heavily halter bred QH than in other QH and other breeds. It happens everywhere. The fact that diseases (not sure if that is the right word...) such as Hypp and Herda are still prevalent is proof that there are far too many people out there breeding that do not care about the horses they are producing, or the impact their choices may have on the breed or individual horse.


Exactly. I guess the problem is we are so worried about winning at all costs, that a lot of time,the horse horse loses priority to the placing.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

Herda is easy to avoid same as a Lethal White no reason not to breed a carrier just don't breed two carriers and you have no problems.


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

True, but people still breed two carriers together. Most genetic diseases like that are easily avoidable.


----------



## Kentucky (Aug 2, 2008)

If you don't breed a carrier period then the gentric diseases go away. any of them.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

True but I can't think of a logical reason to eleminate entire blood lines when its very easy to avoid producing any horses with those problems.


----------



## wild_spot (Jan 30, 2008)

I can. As long as carriers exist irresponsible people will breed them and poor horses die in agony that is preventable. If you don't see that as a logical reason then there won't be much reasoning. 

There are plenty of good bloodlines in any field, just use another. You have said so yourself in other posts, that if the top sires were never there, others would simply take their place.


----------



## wild_spot (Jan 30, 2008)

I posted before but it didn't come up.

County, that is true. But it is the breeders who care about trying to 'better the breed' or breed to the ideals of the breed standard that follow good breeding practise like that. It's the irresponsible breeders who don't care for the horses welfare that breed carriers together. And there are plenty of them.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

I agree their are some but I see no reason I should not do something based on what someone else may do. I just don't get into control over others as long as what they do with their animals is legal. Doesn't make me a bad breeder, doesn't make me irresponsabe, in fact making sure I don't breed two carriers makes me a responsable breeder.


----------



## Kentucky (Aug 2, 2008)

in fact making sure I don't breed two carriers makes me a responsable breeder. 

that is true

However I would prefer to breed a noncarrier than a carrier and not have to deal with it, there are Impressive bred QH that are N/N for HYPP


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

If thats what you prefer by all means thats what you should do. HYPP isn't the same as HERDA or Lethal White. With HYPP one carrier can pass it on with the others it takes two as long as you breed just one theres no problem. Theres people that abuse children and do a very poor job with them but I still bred to have them also. Just because theres some people that do something irrespobsable theres no reason the world should stop doing that if we did we'd be able to do nothing.


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

If I could eliminate "breeding" people who were abusive like I could eliminate HYPP, I would.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

I'd sure go along with that.


----------



## wild_spot (Jan 30, 2008)

Not a valid example in the slightest! We aren't talking about stopping all breeding. We are talking about stopping breeding of carriers of a genetic disease. Child abuse can be intervened in, and is a result of human nature and choices. Horses have no voice and no choice. Breeding more carriers WILL result in more horses being born with the disease, wether you breed them or someone else does. 

I have relatives who carry a rare genetic disease. Only ones in Australia. It has manifested in a close relative, and result in her children dying without cure by the time they are 4. One has already died and her remaining child is not doing well. I can tell you even if they could prevent that from happening, she would NOT be having any kids, as it is a terrible thing to pass even a dormant gene on to someone who MAY end up matched with another gene or a complimenting gene that will bring it into the forefront.

Yes, an extremem example, and mods, feel free to remove if you feel appropriate. But it's all I could think of to really demonstrate my point without talking about sex...


----------



## wild_spot (Jan 30, 2008)

county said:


> I'd sure go along with that.


Then shouldn't you go along with eliminating hypp? :?


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

I've never once said I think HYPP should be bred in any way. Theres a HUGE differance between HYPP and HERDA and Lethal Whites. One can be spread from 1 positive horse the other two can't.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

BTW not having one horse say in a show is much different then eleminating entire blood lines. If that one horse isn't there yes another one will be. And very good chance from the same blood line.


----------



## wild_spot (Jan 30, 2008)

Thats not what I meant, I don't think what you meant in the post I was referring to. Sure, Poco Bueno and Impressive were great horses. Yes, their get is achieving and has a achieved great things. But there are plenty of other great sires out there who don't carry those bloodlines, and can give roughly the same results.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

Yes there are other blood lines but those two already exist why would you want to eleminate them because someone might be irresponsable in their breeding practices? I suppose if you want to base your breeding program around what someone else might do you certainly can but count me out.


----------



## Kentucky (Aug 2, 2008)

Perhaps using HYPP was a bad example, it was the only one I could link to a single bloodline of horse. However, I still prefer avoiding a carrier if possible.

I personally agree that the beeders should have allot of freedom, when it comes to, what they breed and their breeding program. But all freedoms come at aprice, responsibility: to their customers (in providing the product that is what they claim it is), to themselves in that keeping costs down (avoiding health issues like), to the breed (to bring out the best virtures of that and getting rid of the worst traits of that breed when possible), and to the people that depend on them (by be albe to stay in business)


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

I totally agree except about breeding a carrier. My wife has two paint mares both carrier for Lethal White no reason not to breed them as long as its not to another carrier. Theres no way they can produce one any other way.


----------



## Kentucky (Aug 2, 2008)

that is your choice, however I hope you tell a buyer of those foals that any foal may be a carrier.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

Always do and people should understand any horse can be a carrier even solids.


----------



## Kentucky (Aug 2, 2008)

Then it would be the responsible thing to do to have all paint horses tested for that diseasem or all stock horses for that matter.


----------



## weefoal (Apr 4, 2009)

LW is NOT A DISEASE! It is a mutation that only occurs if you breed LW to Lw and then only 25 percent of the time. Now having said that I NEVER breed LW to LW. No way is that worth it to me. 

The LW or Frame gene is what causes the unusual frame markings like my stallion. He is a visual frame overo but he also carries many other pinto genes such as tobiano and splash

You cannot lump Frame and HYPP in the same sentence because they are not at all the same. 

As long as you do not breed Frame to Frame there is no problem. If you do produce a lethal white foal it will only live a day or two at the most. Because it will not be able to pass manure due to a defect in the digestive system. 

Another myth is that all LW foals are solid white. That is blatantly not true. Many of them do have a bit of color here and there. 

I have owned a solid white gelding that was solid white because he was maximum overo meaning he carried every pinto gene (splash, frame, sabino & Tobiano) Thankfully his breeder was knowledgeable enough not to put him down when he was born. Some people that are not well educated on pinto genetics immediately put down white foals. big mistake!


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

I suppose if you want to test every horse you breed you can personally I'm only going to test the ones with Overos in their pedigree.


----------



## wild_spot (Jan 30, 2008)

county said:


> I suppose if you want to test every horse you breed you can personally I'm only going to test the ones with Overos in their pedigree.


 
But even you stated that it can be present in solids, so wouldn't that be a bit irresponsible?


----------



## Kentucky (Aug 2, 2008)

I take it the same way, Wild_Spot. 

In Country's mind he is only doing the test on horses that it is most common in. Or that is the way I am understanding him. To me it seems like he is playing the odds.


----------



## close2prfct (Mar 9, 2009)

Although this is getting off topic I do want to post this because it does affect horse breeding. This was taken from the APHA Website.


Following are nine common myths regarding lethal white syndrome. The correct information is provided by the University of Minnesota Equine Genetics Group.

Myth #1: All overo horses are carriers of the lethal allele.

Fact: There are many overos that do not carry the lethal allele.

Myth #2: Twenty-five percent of foals from two overo parents will be lethal whites.

Fact: Because there are overos that do not carry the allele, the incidence of lethal white syndrome is less than 25 percent in overo-to-overo matings.

Myth #3: Registered tobianos, Solid-colored Horses, or Paint crosses cannot carry the lethal allele.

Fact: There are tobianos that have overo bloodlines, and these horses can be carriers of the lethal allele. Solid-colored Horses and Paint crosses can carry the lethal allele.

Myth #4: Totally white Paints are not carriers of the lethal allele.

Fact: These white horses are often carriers of the lethal allele.

Myth #5: All totally white foals born to two overo parents are lethal whites.

Fact: There are totally white Paints that are not affected by the lethal white syndrome.

Myth #6: Mares cannot produce lethal foals in consecutive years.

Fact: The genetic make-up of one foal does not affect subsequent births.

Myth #7: Only one parent determines if a foal will be a lethal white.

Fact: Both sire and dam contribute a copy of the lethal allele.

Myth #8: Crop-out Quarter Horses cannot carry the lethal allele.

Fact: A small number of crop-outs have been tested and found to be carriers of the lethal allele.

Myth #9: You can reliably tell the carrier status of a Paint by their color pattern.

Fact: This is false.

So to sum it up IMO any and all breeding horses should be tested for LW gene expensive? yes but compared to the cost of mare care, stud fees, and the loss of a foal it's a very cheap price to pay to guarantee it does not happen


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

There are 1000's of solids that come from Overos I in no way shape or form said only test Overos. I said I test horses that have overos in their blood lines.

And Kentucky you don't have any idea whats in my mind.


----------



## Kentucky (Aug 2, 2008)

No, I don't but I was merely adding up what you had said and tried to find a reasonfor that, that made sence to me.

Coiuntry there is no need to take it personal.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

I didn't take it personal, if my testing horses with overo in their blood lines for Lethal White doesn't make sense to you thats fine it doesn't have to. If you don't want to test thats your business I really don't see the problem here. I want to not breed a lethal white foal if you do then do so.


----------



## Kentucky (Aug 2, 2008)

It makes perfect sense to me, I started saying this is why or at least why I thought you didn't test the other paint colors.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

I think for what ever reason some people just seem to have a problem if they can't control what the rest of the world does. I think maybe some just need to accept the fact not everyones the same. And thats a good thing not bad, as long as people aren't breaking the law, they take care of their horses one should just maybe step back, take a deep breath and say " you know those are good things not bad and I have no control over them.


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

But there are no laws concerning breeding two lethal whites or anything else like that...
Again...Just because there is no law to break, doesn't mean they are taking care of their horses.


----------



## close2prfct (Mar 9, 2009)

My thoughts on HYPP, HERDA and LWO if you breed a carrier you are knowingly and willfully passing that gene along. The next person comes along and breeds that offspring to another all the while knowing it to is a carrier or maybe the original breeder failed to tell them to another carrier guess what your chances of producing a foal with any 3 of those is multiplied so although there are some awesome horses out there that have produced many winners in various disciplines I do not agree that they should continue to be bred if they in fact are carrying the defective gene. 
Whether you do or whether you don't is entirely up to the person doing the breeding but I would not even consider breeding a carrier regardless of how well their conformation, soundness, temperament and intelligence was.


----------



## weefoal (Apr 4, 2009)

Close I really enjoy your posts but I have to strongly disagree with this



> My thoughts on HYPP, HERDA and LWO if you breed a carrier you are knowingly and willfully passing that gene along.


Again you cannot lump LWO in with HYPP and HERDA. Lethal white is not a disease! Should a LW foal be produced it will die usually within hours. It will not live to pass on any defect etc. (again i never ever breed LW to LW) 

I breed LW horses and will continue to breed them. I am a big believer in testing and the breeding farms that buy from me are reputable farms that also test. But to say that I shouldnt breed them because someone might do something stupid 20 years down the road is just going too far. 

We all see poorly conformed horses bred every single day that are doomed to a life of pain etc due to severe conformation faults. IMO that is way more devastating then breeding a LW horse.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

Spastic Dove please explain how we aren't taken care of our Olws pos horses.

Close so your saying people should build and base their breeding program on what someone else might do? Leave me out I base mine on being responsable.


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

I never said you had POS horses.

I read your statement as "As long as you dont break the law, you are taking care of your horse" I see it now was probably meant as "As long as you dont break the law and take care of your horses..."

My mis-read. 


My statement about "just because you are not breaking the law doesnt mean you are taking care of your horses" still stands.

I think it is obvious that when I use the term "you" I am not talking about YOU, county. 

But if you knowingly breed two Lethal Whites together, you are going to end up with a dead foal. That is the type of thing I was talking about. No one is going to arrest you, but it doesnt mean it's ok


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

" If you breed two Lethal Whites your going to end up with a dead foal "

Actually you will have a 25% chance not 100%.


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

You may end up with a dead foal* 

Sorry about that. It's been a long day.


----------



## close2prfct (Mar 9, 2009)

No county I'm saying the end result is the same most generally. HYPP is a result of a genetic mutation that can produce muscle tremors and other problems so severe they can result in death, HERDA another genetic disease that although doesn't display itself until the foal is in training usually, shows severe lesions and the separation of skin from the deeper epidermal layers which results in the affected horse not being able to ever be ridden and as a result many are euthanized. LWO another genetic issue while not a disease it does result in the death of a foal.
If you are responsible and do the testing then you know what you can and cannot breed to in order to prevent something like this but not everyone is. 
Major conformation issues is just as bad as weefoal said. I personally know of a filly(2yr old) that was bred who had the most deformed front legs she could barely stand let alone walk it took her a good 10 min to walk from one side of a 40ft paddock to the other, the owner a so called reputable breeder here in OK did not think twice about breeding this young girl with no consideration whatsoever that 1. she was entirely too young and 2. her legs could barely support her weight how much more damage would be done with her being in foal? Why did he do it? because her lineage was in high demand and it didn't matter to him if she only produced 1 foal that was money in his pocket. I know this because I was there when she was bred. He also has an H/H Stallion that he breeds knowingly and willfully not to mention the horses temperament leaves a lot to be desired the horse is down right nuts.
My point is there are people out there who will do it for the same reason that this guy did they simply don't care. I did not mean to imply that county, weefoal or anyone else here doesn't but I do know that those type of people exist and those people I do have problems with, not the people that will go the extra mile to ensure those problems don't crop up or honestly care about their horses offspring rather than just making a buck. 
So if I offended any of you who do go the extra mile I apologize, you are not the people that I was referring to it's the others that simply don't give a crap those are the people that I have had experience with (sighs)


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

Close pretty much just summed up what I was trying to say but too out of it to pull off.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

I'm very aware of what both HERDA and OLW is and what happens to affected horses. I don't breed for either one to happen. Do others? I'm 100% sure that some do. I don't base my breeding program on the actions of other people. But I certainly have no problem if others base theirs on it.


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

I guess that is just where you and I differ then. 
Though I do respect you for your apparently responsible breeding practices.


----------



## county (Nov 29, 2008)

I think if you want to stay in business and pay your bills long term theres no other way


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

What works for you works for you.


----------



## coastal123 (Apr 25, 2009)

*How is the Breeding Business?*

A little off topic, but-how is the breeding business with the economic drop off? I see lots of horses being dumped at sales and dirt cheap in classifieds. I know that top end sales, and probably top end studs, are staying busy-but how about the ones with good conformation and bloodlines but no performance history of their own(meaning they are good studs but not great. you wouldnt say that they bring anything to the breed that is not already there). I see lots of ads for $300-$600 studs and wonder if the casual mare owner is still investing in breeding their mares. And at what point is it better to purchase a decent stud than to pay stud fees(how many mares)?


----------

