Are the Warmblood breeds all diluted into one big breed?

[horsegurl]

Debate is on, so throwing this out there. Maybe someone with breeding experience can shed some light on this:

My mare is by Redwine, approved GOV. Redwine is Hanoverian, but he’s approved for several other breedings, like Mecklenburg, Westphalian, GOV. He has Anglo-Arab in him, mom’s side. My mare has Thoroughbred on mom’s side.

How is it that she can be approved GOV? When actually she’s Hanoverian /TB. Or is she Hano? How do we know that Redwine, or any stallion, is not a mutt of several breed lines. (Actually, if you look at Redwine’s lines, he’s mostly Hano–but just as an example, how do we know he or any other stallion really is what they are registered as).

And for that matter–and my real question–aren’t the breeds diluted now? If by example, a Hano stallion can breed to a Westphalian mare, and that baby can be registered GOV…then…where did our breeds go? Nothing is pure anymore. I guess kind of like the QH world, where many are appendix, but registered Quarter Horse.

annnnnd…go!..

[beowulf]

that is because Hanoverian, Holsteiner, Westphalian, GOV etc are not breeds but Registries…

TBs, Arabs, Anglo-Arabs are breeds.

The difference is in Registries, so long as minimum requirements (which vary from registry to registry) are met, a horse is eligible to be approved by that Registry. Certain registries allow “refining” blood, like Thoroughbreds, Trakehners, Arabians, Anglo-Arabs, etc. Registries are usually performance based, meaning that they set requirements that a horse must meet, and breed for performance. (This does not mean Susie Q can try to get her mustang pony approved GOV)

A breed is a closed-studbook, which means only horses born from parents born in that breed (aka registered/pedigreed) from that breed are allowed in. AKA only TBs from two full TBs (livecover) can be registered TBs, and same with arabians - though not live cover. Breeds are usually trait or phenotype based, though that does not mean they do not breed for performance either.

As far as what is warmblood, genetically? It’s a smorgasbord; a vast amalgation of the best of the best.

To make matters more complex, certain fullbred non-WB horses can be considered approved for HAN, HOL, GOV, etc. The thoroughbreds Fragonard xx, A Fine Romance xx, Sea Accounts xx and the Trakehner Tatendrang are testament to that.

Expanding on that, genetically, HOL and Han are diverging but still somewhat indistinct; there’s a lot of HOL sires in HAN pedigrees and vice versa. KPWN is a little different, but it is not unusual to have a horse that has multiple different registries on the front page…

For instance, my filly is a Hanoverian, but her sire is Oldenburg. His sire was Oldenburg but his dam Hanoverian, then further back there is TB, French Trotter, and lots of Anglo blood… on my filly’s damside it is: Han, Hol, Trak and TB…

[horsegurl]

Hmmm…
THANKS for that explanation!! So, really, when someone asks “what breed is your horse?”, the correct answer IS “Warmblood”, not Hanoverian or Oldenburg, or…etc. etc.?

[KittyinAus]

@horsegurl

Hmmm…
THANKS for that explanation!! So, really, when someone asks “what breed is your horse?”, the correct answer IS “Warmblood”, not Hanoverian or Oldenburg, or…etc. etc.?

You can still say which registry. That’s because the registries are looking for different qualities just like beowulf said. Here in Australia, we have the Australian Riding Pony and although it’s a type and not a breed, it’s a recognisable type. If you are familiar with them, you will recognise one if you saw it.

[Katona]

I usually say, “Dobbin is a registered (or papered/passported) X Warmblood.” Unless, of course, it’s an actual closed book breed.

[clint]

And the final kicker for the OP, is Redwine was never approved for breeding the Hanoverian. He is probably registered Hanoverian, but wasn’t approved as a stallion by them so no offspring can ever be registered Hanoverian.

The major European registries all require DNA tests for registration, so pedigrees are verified. I’m comfortable that when I look at a passport for a horse, parents are who they say they are. European registries accept horses from other registries into their studbooks, so a stallion, for example, may be registered in one registry but be approved by several. It doesn’t mean the breed is diluted; in fact, there is frequently line breeding and sometimes inbreeding. It just means that there are options for foal registration. Most other breeds are never considered for inclusion into the European warmblood registries. All will include TB, and most will consider Arabs but they must be inspected and stallions go through an approval process. No offspring from them can be considered for registration unless they have been inspected and approved into the registry.

If you have a Hanoverian/TB mare and present her to one of the registries and she is accepted for breeding, as far as I’m concerned she is whatever registry accepted her. I have an Oldenburg/TB mare. Her sire was registered Hanoverian, and approved Oldenburg. The dam was registered Jockey Club TB, and was presented to the Oldenburg society and accepted. Her filly, my Oldenburg mare, is a registered and approved Oldenburg.

[JB]

@horsegurl

Hmmm…
THANKS for that explanation!! So, really, when someone asks “what breed is your horse?”, the correct answer IS “Warmblood”, not Hanoverian or Oldenburg, or…etc. etc.?

Oldenburg is still a valid answer, if that’s the registry with which he’s registered.

It’s like an Anglo-Arab - would you say he’s a crossbreed? Or a TB x Arab? If he’s registered AA, that’s what you’d say he is. It’s a little different, since the breeding of each parent is inherent, just like Quarab and Morab.

But it is still very acceptable, and even more appropriate, to call your Warmblood by how he’s registered - Old, Han, Dutch, etc.

[Cumano]

To make matters more complex, certain fullbred non-WB horses can be considered HAN, HOL, GOV, etc. The thoroughbreds Fragonard xx, A Fine Romance xx, Sea Accounts xx and the Trakehner Tatendrang are testament to that.

Just to clarify, they may be approuved for breeding at different levels in certain studbook, but are still considered, in those cases, TB. Approuval and registration in a studbook is not the same. Most of the studbook will register a foal by a TB and a WB registered parent, but will not register full TB, or at least not in their maine books.

[Bent_Hickory]

@beowulf

To make matters more complex, certain fullbred non-WB horses can be considered HAN, HOL, GOV, etc. The thoroughbreds Fragonard xx, A Fine Romance xx, Sea Accounts xx and the Trakehner Tatendrang are testament to that.

These TB stallions are NEVER considered HAN, HOL, GOV., etc. – they are ALWAYS considered TB. They may be approved for breeding by a given registry, but it is entirely inappropriate to consider them as anything but what they are: TB.

[BAY_WITH_CHROME]

@Bent Hickory

These TB stallions are NEVER considered HAN, HOL, GOV., etc. – they are ALWAYS considered TB. They may be approved for breeding by a given registry, but it is entirely inappropriate to consider them as anything but what they are: TB.

I think what the poster meant to say was that their offspring can be considered HAN, HOL, GOV and that the TB stallions can be approved HAN, OLD, HOL.

[beowulf]

@Bent Hickory

These TB stallions are NEVER considered HAN, HOL, GOV., etc. – they are ALWAYS considered TB. They may be approved for breeding by a given registry, but it is entirely inappropriate to consider them as anything but what they are: TB.

You’re right, and that is not what I was trying to say – they can be considered approved, and their offspring will be considered HAN, GOV, HOL et all.

[Shagyas_Rock]

Would it be correct, or appropriate, to refer to the warmblood horse as a type, rather than a breed? I fully understand that registries are not breeds, with the exception of the Trakhener, which I believe has a closed stud book - with the exception of allowing outcrosses to approved refining breeds such as TB, Arab or Shagya Arab.

T

[Katona]

@Shagyas Rock

Would it be correct, or appropriate, to refer to the warmblood horse as a type, rather than a breed? I fully understand that registries are not breeds, with the exception of the Trakhener, which I believe has a closed stud book - with the exception of allowing outcrosses to approved refining breeds such as TB, Arab or Shagya Arab.

T

I think this is hard sell too, because within a particular registry, you might have “types.” For instance the Dutch (KWPN) have Riding, Harness and Gelder. Then you have breeding directions to further define type (e.g. Dressage, Jumper, Hunter).

I don’t think a warmblood is a type, really. If it were, then there are draft crosses and appendix and the like that would fall into the same “types.”

A warmblood has a selection procedure for its studbook. Being the same (e.g., Dutch Warmblood x Dutch Warmblood) doesn’t mean you can get full vb registration papers. In addition to all that, a lot of registries require the foal to be inspected to be registered.

[clint]

I suppose you could refer to a warmblood as a type, but if it is a warmblood registered with one of the registries, why? Why not call it what it is, assuming that is known. I think almost all breeds have a general type. Warmbloods definitely have a general type. TBs can look like warmbloods, as can some crossbreds, and when someone says a TB or a cross bred looks like a warmblood, I think most people know what they mean. I will add that I think type within the registries, ie, Hanoverian, KWPN, Oldenburg, has become more blurred as there is more and more crossbreeding between these registries.

[Lord_Helpus]

It has always confused me. The great Voltaire was born and raised in the Oldenburg section of Germany. When he was presented at the Oldenburg inspection he did not pass (allegedly because he was too small). So his owners took him to Holland where he passed and became an approved KWPN stallion. From then on, it was assumed by most people that he was a product of Dutch breeding…

[Edgar]

and Voltaire was actually a Hanoverian

[JB]

IMHO it’s more appropriate to call a WB a type, rather than a breed. They are just a type with specific breed requirements, so don’t fall into the same category of a draft cross. It’s more similar to the AQHA (which, yes is a breed), where there are distinctly different types of horses, from WP to HUS to Reiners and Cutters, and the Foundation type. Even the racing type.

Some of the WB types are much more easily identified than others. I would say that Holsteiners have a fairly distinct type because they have been bred with a very distinct type in mind for so long. It gets a lot fuzzier with the other registries, where it more comes down to particular lines having a more distinct type.

I do think WBs have a type. If that weren’t the case, then people wouldn’t say “I can’t believe he’s a TB, he looks like a WB!”. There’s just a certain look about a horse who’s been purpose-bred for the Olympic disciplines for as long as these have. But they are a type with breed/breeding requirements.

[epowers]

@Cumano

Just to clarify, they may be approuved for breeding at different levels in certain studbook, but are still considered, in those cases, TB. Approuval and registration in a studbook is not the same. Most of the studbook will register a foal by a TB and a WB registered parent, but will not register full TB, or at least not in their maine books.

If I breed my GOV approved Thoroughbred mare to a GOV approved Thoroughbred stallion, that is a full TB that would be able to be registered as an Oldenburg. Any fully approved mare can breed to any fully approved stallion and have a registerable foal. There are no specific rules that an approved TB must be bred to a non-TB in order for the foals to be registered.

[Cumano]

epowers, I don’t know about the GOV, and I might be wrong alltogether, but I had always been certain that many studbboks have rules excluding “full TB” from there higher books. In any case, It is not clear to me why someone would want to breed a full TB and register it in a WB studbook instead of the Jokey Club.

As for the definition, I think it is not a breed in the usual sense of the term, yet I do not think it is simply a type. Not any horse that fits a certain type may be registered. Each studbook has a more or less restrictive sets of rules about which horses may be registered. They have approval systems and pedigree based requirements. A studbook shapes the breeding of the horses it registers based on its own breeding philosophy. I chose the studbook I work with because I share their breeding philosophy and I feel the decisions of their breeding commitees are leading where I feel the sport horse breeding needs to go.

[JB]

@Cumano

It is not clear to me why someone would want to breed a full TB and register it in a WB studbook instead of the Jokey Club.

Not all JC TB stallions do LC, and not all MOs are willing (or able) to ship mares across the country for LC.

As for the definition, I think it is not a breed in the usual sense of the term, yet I do not think it is simply a type. Not any horse that fits a certain type may be registered.

No, certainly the QH who looks like a WB can’t be registered as such, but there IS a reason people think he looks like a WB

When you breed horses over generations for certain qualities - height, body composition - for the same few sports, you develop a type. The sporthorse type is a thing. It’s just not a thing limited to WBs.

They are a type with specific breed/breeding limitations, just like the HUS QH is a type with specific breed limitations.