“End Breedism in the Show Ring.”
And here I thought green hunters always lost their papers when they went to their new owners…
(jk…in case it’s not obvious)
[QUOTE=SillyHorse;8201725]
From where are you getting this “definition?”[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=SmartAlex;8201737]The old one: hot blood (TB or Arab) x cold blood (native, draft, pony)
QH originated in the colonies when the American population consisted of small pony types (i.e. Jennets, Palfries) and they were bred up with later imports (Thoroughbreds) The QH got it’s big influx of TB with remount breeding among other things.
Other American Warm Bloods: Saddlebreds, Morgans, TWH, Standardbreds, Missouri Fox Trotters. They all have foundation stock in common with each other and with the QH.
They all have some draft. They all have some harness types. They all have some Spanish/Iberian/English gaited horses. They were improved with Thoroughbreds. For generations. Just like the European warmbloods were improved and purpose bred for generations[/QUOTE]
In other words, the "definition: is off the top of your head. I was hoping for a legitimate source that had a definition of “warmblood horse,” not something you believe to be true.
[QUOTE=Alagirl;8201791]
Explain the difference, if you please…[/QUOTE]
A landrace is a regional type adapted by evolution to the conditions in its homeland. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landrace Most of what we call breeds began with refinement of the local horses by selectively breeding the local stock. As people began to see more of the world, that refinement began to include infusing blood that originated elsewhere. As we have seen from some of the above, even pinning down what constitutes a “breed” can be difficult.
[QUOTE=Bombproof;8201806]
A landrace is a regional type adapted by evolution to the conditions in its homeland. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landrace Most of what we call breeds began with refinement of the local horses by selectively breeding the local stock. As people began to see more of the world, that refinement began to include infusing blood that originated elsewhere. As we have seen from some of the above, even pinning down what constitutes a “breed” can be difficult.[/QUOTE]
With horses being used extensively for transportation, very few equine landraces remained isolated. With the exception of island types such as Icelandics.
[QUOTE=SmartAlex;8201812]
With horses being used extensively for transportation, very few equine landraces remained isolated. With the exception of island types such as Icelandics.[/QUOTE]
and those are a breed. 
[QUOTE=SillyHorse;8201803]
In other words, the "definition: is off the top of your head. I was hoping for a legitimate source that had a definition of “warmblood horse,” not something you believe to be true.[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately, there is no single scientific agency with the authority to issue the “true” definition of warmblood, but there is some degree of consensus among the scientists who study horses.
http://www.horses-and-horse-information.com/articles/horses-warmbloods.shtml
http://www.horsetopia.com/articles/breeds/warmblood-horse.html
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-warm-blooded-horse.htm
http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/horses/quarter/index.html
[QUOTE=zipperfoot;8201491]
So if you have a foal by a warmblood stallion approved by multiple registries out of a TB mare approved by one of those registries, is the foal a warmblood or a warmblood/TB cross? What if the mare is NOT approved?[/QUOTE]
Depends on who you ask. :lol:
I sent my (highly regarded registry) young prospect to my trainer to be sold. He is by an approved imported stallion and out of an inspected, high scoring TB mare. Imagine my surprise when I noticed him listed on her sales page as a TB/WB cross… no mention of his registration or the logo on his butt.
The response when I questioned it, “Well he is a TB/WB cross”.
Now when I read complaints that H/J trainers lie about sales horses breeding/ registration to raise the prices I :lol: :lol: :lol:
[QUOTE=SillyHorse;8201803]
In other words, the "definition: is off the top of your head. I was hoping for a legitimate source that had a definition of “warmblood horse,” not something you believe to be true.[/QUOTE]
The old definition is difficult to cite from the internet since it has been so over written with the definition referring to European warmbloods, but you can search this book: The Horse by Isaac Phillips Roberts 1906 for references to warm blood breeding to read about breeding with usage of the old definition of “warm blood”.
Or this book:
[URL=“https://books.google.com/books?id=yhQ4AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA234&dq=“warm+blood”+horse+american+definition&hl=en&sa=X&ei=a2qIVaesKs2yogTvoo54&ved=0CDMQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false”]Or A Handbook of Agriculture: Bulletin … A Report of the … Annual …, Issue 22
By Wisconsin Farmers’ Institutes 1908
[QUOTE=Alagirl;8201817]
and those are a breed. :)[/QUOTE] They are now. A breed is a refinement of a landrace. A landrace would have a wider genetic pool than a breed. And then someone starts keeping a book. And it’s official.
[QUOTE=skykingismybaby1;8199125]
I ride a cross bred horse. Both parents were well bred (meaning bred for generations with a purpose in mind and significant performance on each side).
He ended up with the best parts of each breed, his full sister however ended up with the worst bits of each breed.
First generation cross breds are a crap shoot.
Oh and I call him a warmer bred. Cross Dutch WB with Arab mare.[/QUOTE]
LOL. I have an Araloosa. His sire was a Trahener-approved Arabian, his dam a foundation bred Appy with a dash of TB, I.e., not a Quarterloosa. He’s closer to being a WB than any draft/TB cross and is a very nice mover. I’ve seen some nice draft crosses, but most are one-off and are NOT warlords ($#=(autocorrect keep changing WB.) in th e sense of the European registries.
I get annoyed when I help friend’s look for horses and find draft crosses - including such things as QH or Fjord (!)crosses advertised “warmbloods.”
[QUOTE=FatCatFarm;8201669]
I never said they are a breed. I agree they are “type” and the current type subjectively is not what the author is riding. I do think she has a valid concern but that is only my opinion and your mileage may vary.[/QUOTE]
Except her horse’s type has never been the preferred type for a show hunter. There was certainly more of that type showing when I was a kid, because there were almost no purpose bred show hunters then. We learned on grade horses and ‘graduated’ to TBs when we learned to sit chilly. That was all there was. She is correct that her horse is not going to be the winner, and it sounds like she is fine with that. But she should know it’s not because she walks into the ring with a sign that says, ‘Draft cross.’ She is entering with a sign that says, ‘Wrong ring.’
She also seems to want to embrace the ‘breedism’ when she talks about the trainer winning on the horse no one wanted because he was an App. But there were several very successful Apps showing at that time. As in, winning at Devon and Indoors successful.
[QUOTE=tuckawayfarm;8201832]
Depends on who you ask. :lol:
I sent my (highly regarded registry) young prospect to my trainer to be sold. He is by an approved imported stallion and out of an inspected, high scoring TB mare. Imagine my surprise when I noticed him listed on her sales page as a TB/WB cross… no mention of his registration or the logo on his butt.
The response when I questioned it, “Well he is a TB/WB cross”.
Now when I read complaints that H/J trainers lie about sales horses breeding/ registration to raise the prices I :lol: :lol: :lol:[/QUOTE]
Your horse has papers from that registry, right?
I bred a KWPN colt using parents who had the same status as your foal’s sire and dam. He went to his 3 year old inspection, passed muster, and was admitted to the main stud book and branded. To me, he was a KWPN horse. That is to say, if the KWPN** decided this horse was their breed, then he was…. not matter how much TB blood was in his lineage.
** Back when this happened, there was only the KWPN, no North American branch. The Keuring juries were sent from Holland, complete with translator.
Unless someone thought it would add value to your horse to call him a WB/TB cross, I don’t see why they wouldn’t accept the breed or registry status accord to him by the damn registry!
[QUOTE=zipperfoot;8201491]
So if you have a foal by a warmblood stallion approved by multiple registries out of a TB mare approved by one of those registries, is the foal a warmblood or a warmblood/TB cross? What if the mare is NOT approved?[/QUOTE]
Anyone else have any input on this? I’m in this situation with an unapproved TB mare, trying to decide if it’s worth getting her and her foal (filly) inspected.
^^^
I’d say that you need to go to the one registry that approved the TB mare. If that registry approves the foal (and gives it something more than a certificate of pedigree), I’d say that foal was admitted to that WB breed.
I don’t think it makes sense to call a foal by an approved WB sire and unapproved/uninspected TB mare and WB. Rather, it is a WB/TB cross. That’s because the mare never was considered for her ability to meet breed standards. Or she did not meet those when presented. The point is that with registries that have open books and also maintain a name such that they seem distinct like a breed, you have to figure out some other way of creating a boundary that isn’t purely by blood (as would work with a closed book). An “outside” mare having been formally inspected and approved for breeding seems like the right criterion to me.
[QUOTE=zipperfoot;8201892]
Anyone else have any input on this? I’m in this situation with an unapproved TB mare, trying to decide if it’s worth getting her and her foal (filly) inspected.[/QUOTE]
considering that the inspections are few and far between, I have been told that some registries will look at a mare with foal already on the ground.
Worth looking into
[QUOTE=Hobbs;8198925]
Are you suggesting that you find it insulting when your dog is referred to as a Labradoodle? Some people appreciate dogs for their intelligence and trainability and I have little doubt that most Labradoodles, a cross between a Poodle (breed intelligence ranking #2) and a Labrador Retriever (breed intelligence ranking #7) is generally a more intelligent, trainable dog than your Curly Coated Retriever ( breed intelligence ranking #41). So maybe you should take it as a compliment.
http://thehydrantblog.com/2011/05/03/the-intelligence-of-dogs-the-list/[/QUOTE]
I don’t blame her for being insulted. Despite the relative intelligence of the parent breeds, most labradoodles and goldendoodles I meet as a veterinarian or that my SIL sees as a groomer are hyperactive, unpleasant creatures. There are, of course, exceptions. My dog trainer friends are also not fans
I didn’t read all the replies, but would point OP to The Making of the Modern Warmblood if nobody else did.
The Germans have had separate riding and cart/work lines since the 1700s. Calling a warmblood a draft cross shows a lack of understanding and a complete disregard of hundreds of years of careful selective breeding and refinement.
While the “best” horse will always depend on what job you would like it to do, in dressage /jumpers/hunter competition, the warmblood has no peer.
[QUOTE=mvp;8200071]
You mean “ever” or after the foundation periods of those WB societies?[/QUOTE]
“Ever.” Check out my earlier post on this thread if you wish, or read horse history books.
ETA: I’m just glad no one has brought the Spotted Saddle Horse into the mix on this thread! Talk about a train wreck! :lol:
Landraces are bred for type. Breeds are bred by bloodline. Landraces are not concerned as much about “pure blood” as they are about type breeding true to purpose.
[QUOTE=Bombproof;8201823]
Unfortunately, there is no single scientific agency with the authority to issue the “true” definition of warmblood, but there is some degree of consensus among the scientists who study horses.
http://www.horses-and-horse-information.com/articles/horses-warmbloods.shtml
http://www.horsetopia.com/articles/breeds/warmblood-horse.html
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-warm-blooded-horse.htm
http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/horses/quarter/index.html[/QUOTE]
I’m not even opposed to the point you’re trying to make, but seriously? The sources you link are hardly SCIENTISTS coming to a consensus. They aren’t even reputable horse sites (WiseGeek? Really?).
The only link that could possibly be argued as such is the OK State site, and they are talking about Quarter Horses, not warmbloods.
You might as well have linked a Wikipedia article.
