Owners who change horses names.....

[S_A_McKee]

[QUOTE=Tapperjockey;6129658]
How is it free advertising if no one knows the horse is of my breeding, results don’t show me as breeder, etc.

It’s not.[/QUOTE]

If the owner fills out the proper USEF paperwork you would still be listed as the breeder.
No matter what the registry rules are USEF won’t care. They will record the horse or pony with whatever name the owner puts on the paperwork. Of course this would be an issue if you are showing in a breed restricted division but most of the posters are showing in divisions that do not require registry papers.

[Tapperjockey]

[QUOTE=S A McKee;6129674]
If the owner fills out the proper USEF paperwork you would still be listed as the breeder.
No matter what the registry rules are USEF won’t care. They will record the horse or pony with whatever name the owner puts on the paperwork. Of course this would be an issue if you are showing in a breed restricted division but most of the posters are showing in divisions that do not require registry papers.[/QUOTE]

It amazes me that buyers/trainers are okay with this system!! Especially when purchasing a performance horse that I may want to sell eventually. While having familial performance data won’t necessarily make the horse more sellable, it certainly can help!!

And fwiw, I don’t have an issue (and neither does OP it sounds like) with a name being changed. I just think that the breeder designation (prefix, suffix, etc) should be retained if you change the name. Certainly some horses are named as young foals and the name isn’t suitable for them. But I like knowing that ISF is an Iron Springs horse, GS is a Galten Farms Trakehner, Clanfair and Eyarth and Downland and Pendock and Rosmel and Brookside and Land’s End are ponies… and generally upon seeing a name, I will already know if I’ll like the pony (w/o seeing them) because I’ve seen other ponies of the the breeding programs, and I know which ones I like, and which programs don’t suit my tastes. There are a few oddballs that come out of the programs I like, where I don’t like the horse… and maybe twice I’ve liked a pony but I generally don’t like the breeding he has. But it’s very rare that that happens.

[Tamara_in_TN]

[QUOTE=winsmorefarm;6129673]
BUT does this mean that Marabet Farm will be adding “JSF” to the end of Balt’Amour’s name to all of the advertisements, shows, etc? The lovely stallion that was bred by Jump Start Farm?
.[/QUOTE]

there is an old notion among horsemen to NEVER promote any animals but your own…so if you own the stallion you “just kinda” mention the mares only by their sires names…

and if you don’t own either you are a vague as possible until your babies are born from them…

Tamara

[3Dogs]

Just tell me folks - I have a lovely TB mare about to foal in a few months and her TB registered name is:

“Flying Mountain”

Now will I be cursed forEVER for changing this name - which I think would apply to a Ninja Warrior - to

“Lady Gregory” ??? She of the Irish theater???

Just to lighten the mood

[MaggieF]

Some very interesting posts since I have been gone. Let me just clear a few things up for the people who only seem to be able to focus on my emotional state when I found out about the name change. First, may I say I just love the way some people like to add their own twist to what I said!!! I DID NOT send an angry or threatening text. Simply, what’s going on, I thought we had an understanding, type of text. Second, I was not blubbering or crying hysterically when I called and left a message. I was already mildly crying because I had had a really bad day (neighbor called me at 6 am to ask me to come help her because her foal wasn’t nursing yet cuz the mare wouldn’t let her. Went over immediately with a shot of banamine for the mare and got the filly nursing in about five minutes. Then found out that the filly had been born 13 hours earlier. I was furious because she had waited too long before calling me or her vet. This filly really wanted to live, but she ended up dieing even though her vets did all they could.) and then this. The reaction to my very non-threatening text was so out there I was shocked. It came out of no where. When I wrote the first post I was still upset but never expected anyone to dwell on my emotions, for God’s sake. I posted this because I would like to see some changes made and wondered how everyone else felt. I was also curious about how everyone else felt about this issue in general and if it had been done to them.

I really don’t think I am crazy, but those of you who know me personally can be the judge of that!!! Making a comment about me definitely being crazy or wackadoodle when you don’t know me, never met me, never talked to me is just…well…crazy!!!:lol::lol::lol: Get a life people. Sad.

As far as Balt’Amour goes, I HATE his name but would never change it. I do not use the JSF because of a law suit between some other people that did not really involve me, but involved my horse, that I cannot elaborate on. Enough said. Please don’t even bother to ask about this because there will be no other comment on this matter.

Those of you who wrote well thought comments regarding the breeders role in naming, and suffix’s, farm names, etc. thank you. Very enlightening. Those of you from across the pond, very interesting to understand the rules over there. Owners who wrote some things about not caring about knowing who your horse came from or it’s bloodlines…let me remind you that if you have a MARE who gets injured or is ready to be retired from sport the only option for you is to pay to have her stand around OR you can give/sell her to a breeder as a broodmare. But no one will want her her if no one knows her bloodlines!!! Many other really good reasons to know bloodlines, breeder, etc that were already mentioned.

May I also remind the people who said things like, I would only keep the suffix, etc if it were prestigious…everyone of those prestigious farms were once new breeders too. They only became prestigious because they made sure people knew who their horses were. Everyone has to start somewhere.

I also think it is very important to be able to track horses through all their owners if for no other reason than - fairness. Who wants to compete against a seasoned horse in the Baby Greens???

A few of you also mentioned changing names AFTER to speaking to the breeder. If I had been called with a good reason for the name change I would have probably been OK with it. Communication is everything.

Maggie

[DMK]

So in a nutshell, you dropped the suffix of the sire, and there’s more to the story, but if you told us, you’d have to kill us? Got it.

As a devil’s advocate I’d probably wonder if there might be some additional explanation from the perspective of the new legal owner, but I suspect we will never know if there is. But all I have concluded from this bizarre thread is:

a) the thought put into breeding two exceptional animals is not in any way related to the name assigned to said animal even if you want your farm name as prefix/suffix with all your heart’s desire. Dedicated lovers of the sport people pay attention to the actual bloodlines, not the MFers.

b) If you don’t want to update your website with the new name because there was a verbal agreement (stamps feet, sends text), may I introduce your nose to the knife you are holding?

c) all this energy would be better directed to getting a viable system to track offspring by bloodlines (you know, like the rest of the breeding world). Then it wouldn’t really matter who was in charge of naming your offspring, we’d have some idea of what ALL of them have done, not just the MFers.

[Unfforgettable]

Having been on both sides of the fence…both as a breeder and as a buyer…

I always tried to give a horse I bred a name that wouldn’t be “weird” to anyone else, and would sound good when an announcer said it.

And as for initials…breeders need to really step out from behind the rose colored glasses and see the initials from the outside in. I mean, who wants to show a horse with the first initials B.M.? (yeah, I know it stood for Bay Meadows…but to the general public listening to an announcer or jsut reading it, it’s Bowel Movement) Or how about B.R.A.? Supposed to be Brook Ridge Arabians…but Bra? Really?

and then there’s the website address for O’Neill Arabians…only without the punctuation it comes out oneillarabians…who wants One Ill Arabian?

[ynl063w]

[QUOTE=DMK;6130051]
So in a nutshell, you dropped the suffix of the sire, and there’s more to the story, but if you told us, you’d have to kill us? Got it.

As a devil’s advocate I’d probably wonder if there might be some additional explanation from the perspective of the new legal owner, but I suspect we will never know if there is. But all I have concluded from this bizarre thread is:

a) the thought put into breeding two exceptional animals is not in any way related to the name assigned to said animal even if you want your farm name as prefix/suffix with all your heart’s desire. Dedicated lovers of the sport people pay attention to the actual bloodlines, not the MFers.

b) If you don’t want to update your website with the new name because there was a verbal agreement (stamps feet, sends text), may I introduce your nose to the knife you are holding?

c) all this energy would be better directed to getting a viable system to track offspring by bloodlines (you know, like the rest of the breeding world). Then it wouldn’t really matter who was in charge of naming your offspring, we’d have some idea of what ALL of them have done, not just the MFers.[/QUOTE]

^All of this. Bravo DMK.

Really, if your breeding program is all that, people will ask about the offspring you produce once they make it to the show ring, and you won’t need to insist that they all carry your prefixes/suffixes in their names.

This whole prefix/suffix thing has really gotten out of hand, in my opinion. A few decades ago, there were a handful of pony prefixes that really meant something, but plenty of winning ponies didn’t have them (those by Cusop Sparklet, anyone?). Now there are hundreds of them, and the whole concept has been diluted to the point where most really aren’t that prestigious anyway.

It seems unrealistic to expect that the name a breeder gives to a foal is always going to be embraced by all the people who become OWNERS of said foal throughout its lifetime (and hopefully career). Why not concentrate on ways to ensure that you, as breeders, continue to be LISTED as the breeder throughout the animal’s lifetime, no matter how many times the name changes (and evidently the OP is still listed in the USEF database as the breeder of the subject horse)? That seems really the best way all of you breeders will reap the benefits of your hard work.

To me, this is just another example of why American breeders can’t compete with the Europeans (someone upthread mentioned this too). You cry (figuratively, not literally - MaggieF, I’m not directing this at you in a literal sense) when someone doesn’t like the name you picked? If you can’t handle that, maybe you should look into a career change.

[Snowflake]

@Unfforgettable;6130082

Having been on both sides of the fence…both as a breeder and as a buyer…

I always tried to give a horse I bred a name that wouldn’t be “weird” to anyone else, and would sound good when an announcer said it.

And as for initials…breeders need to really step out from behind the rose colored glasses and see the initials from the outside in. I mean, who wants to show a horse with the first initials B.M.? (yeah, I know it stood for Bay Meadows…but to the general public listening to an announcer or jsut reading it, it’s Bowel Movement) Or how about B.R.A.? Supposed to be Brook Ridge Arabians…but Bra? Really?

and then there’s the website address for O’Neill Arabians…only without the punctuation it comes out oneillarabians…who wants One Ill Arabian?

This!! I mean just Urban Dictionary “Backstage” and you’ll understand why Backstage MF may have been a major issue for the buyer.

[Tapperjockey]

@ynl063w;6130129

^All of this. Bravo DMK.

Really, if your breeding program is all that, people will ask about the offspring you produce once they make it to the show ring, and you won’t need to insist that they all carry your prefixes/suffixes in their names.

This whole prefix/suffix thing has really gotten out of hand, in my opinion. A few decades ago, there were a handful of pony prefixes that really meant something, but plenty of winning ponies didn’t have them (those by Cusop Sparklet, anyone?). Now there are hundreds of them, and the whole concept has been diluted to the point where most really aren’t that prestigious anyway.

Sure it’s the Americans who are to blame. I suppose you are going to go tell Millcroft, Eyarth, Wedderlie, Waxwing, Bronheulog, Hilin, Kenwood, Hoekhorst, Cusop, Coed Coch, Weston, etc Studs, that they are all being very American about this issue? (please do… I really want to hear how that goes).

(and you do realize the pony you used as an example… Cusop Sparklet, carried a breed prefix, right?)

[WarDance]

[QUOTE=Somermist;6129268]
It was very considerate of you to contact the breeder. I don’t think many people would have done that.[/QUOTE]

Well I wanted to make sure that these names weren’t picked by her and really had some great meaning. I mean I’d feel horrible if some 6 year old with cancer or something picked the names out and then I went and changed it! Plus I would be upset if I bred a horse, raised it and then didn’t recognize it in the results because the new owner changed the name.

However, it turns out this breeder seems to like my taste in naming and she hated the others so we are all happy! I’m also glad to know a little about my new horse while she was still a baby. It changed the story to know she was the last baby for the sire and dam and the only baby for that sire that year.

[ynl063w]

[QUOTE=Tapperjockey;6130137]
Sure it’s the Americans who are to blame. I suppose you are going to go tell Millcroft, Eyarth, Wedderlie, Waxwing, Bronheulog, Hilin, Kenwood, Hoekhorst, Cusop, Coed Coch, Weston, etc Studs, that they are all being very American about this issue? (please do… I really want to hear how that goes).

(and you do realize the pony you used as an example… Cusop Sparklet, carried a breed prefix, right?)[/QUOTE]

You completely missed my point. Cusop Sparklet’s get that showed in the pony hunters (and there were tons of them) didn’t carry the Cusop prefix, but everyone knew exactly who they were because they were winning. I owned a pony and rode another in the late 1970s by Coed Coch Grey Cloud, neither of whom had a prefix in their names at all. Anyone who asked was informed of the pedigree. The actual name didn’t matter.

Really, my example does not completely apply here because the ponies I’ve referred to were not bred by the farms owning those prefixes, but the idea behind my thought DOES apply - produce something worthwhile and you won’t have to rely on what you decide to call it. It will speak for itself.

[Tapperjockey]

[QUOTE=ynl063w;6130151]
You completely missed my point. Cusop Sparklet’s get that showed in the pony hunters (and there were tons of them) didn’t carry the Cusop prefix, but everyone knew exactly who they were because they were winning. I owned a pony and rode another in the late 1970s by Coed Coch Grey Cloud who had no prefix in their names at all. Anyone who asked was informed of the pedigree. The actual name didn’t matter.[/QUOTE]

Sure. And I’m sure by the 6th or 7th owner change, everyone still knew the pony or horse’s breeding and was giving it. Especially since most of the time names are changed so that horses can show in divisions they aren’t eligible for… makes a ton of sense then to give credit to the breeder, who would know when the horse was born or had shown.

Transparency is desperately needed in many ways in the horse world. It’s gotten better in some ways, but in others it hasn’t. Insisting upon a tracking system for horses would help a lot.

[ynl063w]

[QUOTE=Tapperjockey;6130157]
Sure. And I’m sure by the 6th or 7th owner change, everyone still knew the pony or horse’s breeding and was giving it. Especially since most of the time names are changed so that horses can show in divisions they aren’t eligible for… makes a ton of sense then to give credit to the breeder, who would know when the horse was born or had shown.

Transparency is desperately needed in many ways in the horse world. It’s gotten better in some ways, but in others it hasn’t. Insisting upon a tracking system for horses would help a lot.[/QUOTE]

I can’t speak for any owners of my ponies after I sold them (the ponies changed ownership and I no longer had control over anything regarding said ponies. It happens. Frequently. Especially with ponies, who inevitably become outgrown or who have owners who age out.), but I didn’t ever change any of their names while they were under my ownership.

As far as changing names in an effort to be deceitful, that seems to be a topic for another thread. This topic (per the OP) seems to be about new owners changing names just because they want to, based on personal preference.

[Tapperjockey]

[QUOTE=ynl063w;6130151]
You completely missed my point.

Really, my example does not completely apply here because the ponies I’ve referred to were not bred by the farms owning those prefixes, but the idea behind my thought DOES apply - produce something worthwhile and you won’t have to rely on what you decide to call it. It will speak for itself.[/QUOTE]

Actually… you kind of just made the opposite apply. You yourself stated it. No one knew who the ponies were bred by. They knew the sire… but that’s not the same thing as knowing who bred the horse by a long shot.

[Bentley]

[QUOTE=DMK;6130051]
So in a nutshell, you dropped the suffix of the sire, and there’s more to the story, but if you told us, you’d have to kill us? Got it.

As a devil’s advocate I’d probably wonder if there might be some additional explanation from the perspective of the new legal owner, but I suspect we will never know if there is. But all I have concluded from this bizarre thread is:

a) the thought put into breeding two exceptional animals is not in any way related to the name assigned to said animal even if you want your farm name as prefix/suffix with all your heart’s desire. Dedicated lovers of the sport people pay attention to the actual bloodlines, not the MFers.

b) If you don’t want to update your website with the new name because there was a verbal agreement (stamps feet, sends text), may I introduce your nose to the knife you are holding?

c) all this energy would be better directed to getting a viable system to track offspring by bloodlines (you know, like the rest of the breeding world). Then it wouldn’t really matter who was in charge of naming your offspring, we’d have some idea of what ALL of them have done, not just the MFers.[/QUOTE]

And that is the summary of what I am thinking after reading through this entire thread. Thanks for putting it so eloquently DMK

I think I do understand both sides, and having personal breeding experience of n=1 I’m still stuck on the fact that if the horse is sold, the entire horse, name, mane, tail, hooves and all, are sold along with him/her. I fully admit to changing Visa’s name from her registered name (She was Celeste - I’ve known a couple of human Celeste’s that I haven’t enjoyed the company of), so the person’s comment of “if you don’t like the name, don’t buy the horse” would have cost her breeder my full price / good home (even 10 years later) purchase. Sure someone else might have come along, but what if no one did? All for the want (or lack thereof) of a name? Seems a bit extreme.

Also, as a spinoff question. What about all the 3rd party foals sired by your stallions? They’re just as much, (if not more depending on how many outside bookings he had), of a representation of your stallion as your own breeding stock and the fact that they don’t have the prefix or suffix does’t seem to hurt or cause the same degree of angst.

I just don’t get the histronics about a name change. If it matters that much to keep that control, never sell anything and just lease your horses out. I’m sure that would be an extremely profitable breeding business.

[Tapperjockey]

@Bentley;6130184

Also, as a spinoff question. What about all the 3rd party foals sired by your stallions? They’re just as much, (if not more depending on how many outside bookings he had), of a representation of your stallion as your own breeding stock and the fact that they don’t have the prefix or suffix does’t seem to hurt or cause the same degree of angst.

Well some farms do have that in the contract. The famous Jack Tone Ranch for instance requires (and has a damage amount in the contract) that all foals sired by their stallions, out of mares leased by them, etc… carry the Fad, Jur, or Mar in the name somewhere.

But in most cases, I find that different. If I stood a stallion (never have, never will, but if i did)… and someone approached me to breed to him, that’s creating their vision… not mine. My breeding program is my vision.

[ynl063w]

[QUOTE=Tapperjockey;6130183]
Actually… you kind of just made the opposite apply. You yourself stated it. No one knew who the ponies were bred by. They knew the sire… but that’s not the same thing as knowing who bred the horse by a long shot.[/QUOTE]

No you have still missed my point, which is this: If you are standing a stallion and he is producing offspring that are worth notice, those offspring (and by proxy, your stallion) will get that notice. It doesn’t matter if the offspring are shown under XXX Bertha YYY or simply Bertha; if Bertha is winning enough, people will ask about her pedigree. And if Bertha really is all that, subsequent owners will be proud to pass along that information for as long as her career lasts, and be sure that it remains in the USEF database (yes, there will be exceptions, just like anything in life).

I am basing this on the assumption that foals born to mares not owned by the stallion owner are not supposed to carry the stallion owner’s prefix/suffix (which is the basis of my argument above regarding the ponies), since they were bred by the mare owner, not the stallion owner. This has been another source of contention here - when people use the prefix/suffix when they shouldn’t have done so.

You might be missing my point that a truly successful stallion’s offspring mostly won’t be bred by the stallion owner himself (i.e. the stallion owner will get more outside breedings than those he can produce with his own mares), and therefore SHOULDN’T include the stallion owner’s prefix/suffix in the name. Which was certainly the case regarding my example for Cusop Sparklet.

[Tapperjockey]

[QUOTE=ynl063w;6130225]
No you have still missed my point, which is this: If you are standing a stallion and he is producing offspring that are worth notice, those offspring (and by proxy, your stallion) will get that notice. It doesn’t matter if the offspring are shown under XXX Bertha YYY or simply Bertha; if Bertha is winning enough, people will ask about her pedigree. And if Bertha really is all that, subsequent owners will be proud to pass along that information for as long as her career lasts, and be sure that it remains in the USEF database (yes, there will be exceptions, just like anything in life).

I am basing this on the assumption that foals born to mares not owned by the stallion owner are not supposed to carry the stallion owner’s prefix/suffix (which is the basis of my argument above regarding the ponies), since they were bred by the mare owner, not the stallion owner. This has been another source of contention here - when people use the prefix/suffix when they shouldn’t have done so.

You might be missing my point that a truly successful stallion’s offspring mostly won’t be bred by the stallion owner himself (i.e. the stallion owner will get more outside breedings than those he can produce with his own mares), and therefore SHOULDN’T include the stallion owner’s prefix/suffix in the name. Which was certainly the case regarding my example for Cusop Sparklet.[/QUOTE]

That’s basing things on one stallion though. Only a very short-sighted breeder would use one stallion. We are discussing breeding programs, not individual offspring of a stallion. A breeding program is not just one stallion. It’s a vision of one person, usually incorporating many stallions and mares, and going for several generations (horse wise, possibly people wise).

Take the Eyarth Stud. They stood Eyarth Celebration (may he RIP). They also used Carwed Charmer, Hilin Caradus, Carrwood Orpheus, Cottrel Artiste, Eyarth Rio, Hilin Etifedd, Eyarth Tacoma, Eyarth Tayma, Heniarth Wood-Wind…and soon Rhoson Shem (by Eyarth Sama) (all those are recent… sires of their youngstock and mares, or the current stallion they are using). Each of those foals are “branded” with the Eyarth name. And are the result of the breeder’s vision. They aren’t the result of someone coming up and saying I have “miss uterus” and want to breed to your stallion to create my ideal (in this case Welsh) pony. Those are the result of the breeder’s vision. They have leased out and sold many stallions to other programs. Telynau stud has a lovely stallion named Eyarth Rio for instance. The telynau stud does not name their foals Eyarth… they name them with the Telynau prefix. If you buy Telynau Royal Dictator or Telynau Elgar or Telynau Anthem (etc) you are not buying the vision of Eyarth Rio’s breeder… you are buying the vision/goal/dream of the owner of the Telynau Stud. Eyarth Rio has a lovely son, Holyoake Fire Sprite. The Holyoake Stud stands him. His foals are branded with the Holyoake prefix (i.e Holyoake Tamzin, Holyoake Copper Field, Holyoake Fantasia, Holyoake Kantara, etc). When you buy a Holyoake bred horse, you are buying the same bloodlines perhaps that the Telynau stud uses, or the Eyarth Stud uses… but you aren’t buying their vision on how they will work… you are getting the vision of the owner of Telynau stud.

edit to add: Maybe this just baffles me so much as I started in the dog show world… and people would sooner goose the Queen than change the kennel name of a dog that is showing/at stud.

[RunningwaterWBs]

IMHO, comparing prefixes to suffixes is like apples and oranges. Morgans, ponies, etc, are allowed to use an entire word, which is much more memorable than an acronym. With most warmblood registries, the convention dictates the first letter of the horse’s name, so those breeders are forced to use a suffix and most everyone I’ve seen uses an acronym. Considering the fact that many warmblood breeders put fewer than four foals on the ground each year – and many only breed one or two – it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know your suffix isn’t going down in history. Better to focus on good customer relations and word of mouth to promote your breeding program.

Very few warmblood breeders have circumvented this problem. In fact, I think you could argue that Mo Swanson, who puts an “h” after the first letter of each foal’s name, is the only American breeder to do so. For the record, I do put my farm initials after my foal’s names, but mostly to guarantee that I’ll get the name I submit to the registry. If a buyer drops it, I can live with that.

And DMK, that was gorgeous.