There’s fat, but there’s also obese. Don’t you think it’d be nice to see what the horse’s lines are, instead of having them so puffed up by fat that you can’t tell where his croup is, much less how it slopes. (I’m not talking about Popeye here necessarily-- “a” horse, not “this” horse.) It’s like the western head set controversy–it got too extreme, so AQHA not only rewrote the rules to prohibit it, they penalized judges who placed it. Same with the kind of weight hunters are carrying these days, including in the breeding division. We all know that fat an cover a wealth of sins, as well as cause a lot of problems. And yet all that would be necessary would be to do something like mandate a certain body score–that’s a widely enough known standard that any judge could pick up in a heartbeat. There are levels of the score in which you can see no ribs but you can see definition around the withers, shoulders and rump. Why not use it?
[QUOTE=tom;1867032]
Fish, I agree completely with hunters must meet rational standards and their training has some different elements. What I am unclear about is why you think they are not residuals of breeding programs focused on showjumping or dressage.
Again, almost all of the top “hunter sires” and “hunter breeding sires” are classically-bred showjumping or dressage sires. Where are the “hunter sires”? Where are the dams that produce hunters but not progeny that can compete with some measure of success in other disciplines? Where is your empirical evidence? Is there a genetic pool of hunter sires and broodmares that consistently produce progeny that compete successfully in the hunter ring but rarely are successful in showjumping or dressage? I think not.
The goal of these arguments is not to “disrespect” hunters or hunter breeders. But we need clarity on the genetic propensity of sires and dams to produce for this sport/discipline. If we cannot differentiate “hunter sires” and “hunter dams” from showjumping and dressage sires then what do we have except residuals? And why is the KWPN approving sires that lack world-class jumping ability/potential or world-class dressage ability/potential?
Tom[/QUOTE]
Where is the organized, objective database necessary to provide empirical evidence on the genetics of ANY American-based sporthorses?? Many hunter-jumper people DO try darned hard-- and have for a long time-- to keep track of what stallions and mares consistently produce good hunters and jumper. Gem Twist and The Wizard (and his siblings out of BiCoastal), for example, were no accidents. People like the Chapots, Julie Werther at Warioto farm, etc., etc. have long recognized the value of certain lines-- like Bon Nuit, Good Twist for jumping, and done their darnedest to discover them them and then keep them going. Unfortunately, many of the best lines (e.g. Bon Nuit and Good Twist) have died out because unlike the Europeans, etc., we’ve never had a horse show organization which has kept any kind of track even of the competing animals’ identities, let alone their pedigrees, or, until very recently, given breeders and breeding even so much as the minimal recognition of listing them in programs. What the WB registries have done so far is to notice that a lot of hunter people DO notice what “residuals” produce good hunters. What they don’t seem to notice is that far from all of them are “residuals” of European WB program-- or even “residuals” at all. Sure, we have the kind you mention like Voltaire and his son, Popeye K, but then there are also “residuals” of the JC racehorse program like Absolute, Rock Point, Minister General, and those which are not really “residuals” at all, but TB’s deliberately bred to be hunters like Castle Cove (by the fine hunter sire, Castle Magic, from the well-known good jumping line of Clavier), and WB’s and WB crosses coming from All the Gold (Approved) and Zarr (not) which have likewise been deliberately selected to produce hunters and seem to be pretty good at it. Sure would be nice if someone WERE connecting pedigree to performance in this country over lifetimes and generations the way the futurities do for the young horses-- and Europe apparently does for all show horses-- but it hasn’t happened. Until it does, Tom, I don’t think anyone can provide the answers to your questions about “genetic propensities,” and the fault does not lie with the horses, the breeders who produce them, and certainly not with the people who breed, buy and campaign hunters.
[QUOTE=Justbay1;1866906]
Here is the IBOP test and how it is scored below. It looks to be a Training Level test to me…
(chop…chop…chop…)
IBOP Test (flat-work portion) for Riding Horses
MBFA working trot
A, serpentine three loops finishing at C
C track right. From M to K change rein at medium trot
K working trot
Between A and F walk
F to H change rein at free walk
H medium walk. C working trot
B working canter -circle right 20 diameter
BFAK working canter
K to H medium canter
(chop…chop…chop…)
The IBOP test will be scored as follows:
Dressage
a. quality of the walk
b. quality of the trot
c. quality of the canter
d. talent as a dressage horse (2x)[/QUOTE]
If it has medium paces, it is NOWHERE NEAR a training level test, and I don’t see how the horse shown, ridden in the manner shown, could possibly get decent marks for “quality of trot” or “quality of canter”, let alone talent as dressage horse.
Also surprised (and disappointed) that dressage training has no value for this top hunter. So, what wins in the ring, from the top down, can be accomplished without dressage basics? What great news for our up and coming young riders. Long live the crest release! Perchers, unite!
Re: fat horses - I know I have posted this before, but I will post it again - it has been PROVEN via long term study in dogs that dogs with body condition score even slightly above ideal develop osteochondrosis at an earlier age than age matched / litter matched control animals on same feeding regime. The “lean” animals in this study were quite lean, and the “fat” animals were NOT huge at all - they were 5-6 on 9 point body condition score chart (dogs use a similar 9 point scale to the one you may have seen for horses).
http://purina.com/science/research/CalorieRestriction.aspx
I realize these are dogs, not horses, but there are similar findings in other animals as well. For comparison, local feed rep in my area is promoting 6.5 for show ring…
There are NO - ZERO - ZILCH - NONE - studies ANYWHERE saying that 5 is an unhealthy BCS for animals (any animals). But show up at a show with a horse with a shadow of a rib, and get ready for the whispers to start (oh my god - get that horse some food!)
How could an organization track bloodlines of hunters if the people who compete in the hunters don’t register their horses?
I’m missing something here.
Maybe this is changing, but for years I have read that to sell to the hunter market, the horse has to have flying changes and be able to jump a small course. And who the sire and dam are doesn’t matter.
I’ve stayed clear of breeding for hunters for that reason.
I hope Popeye K is approved for the hunter book of the KWPN NA. It’s highly unlikely that mare owners targeting the dressage market will choose him.
Probably true for the jumpers too though his pedigree says jumper, at least to me.
So approval will get PopeyeK the mares he would get anyway without approval, but there will be some tracking of year-end results, which is a good thing.
Just an opinion from the sidelines.
[QUOTE=Drvmb1ggl3;1867171]
Not quite.
http://www.pedigreequery.com/last+news[/QUOTE]
That you-- I’m sorry, “not quite” is precisely correct: which is why this horse is called “Last News,” and there’s been talk of cloning Gem, right?
Oh-- and excuse, I believe it’s “Joni”, not “Julie” Werther-- my brain and typing really flub up on autopilot sometimes 
Tom,
In response to the comment about top hunters not having the ablity to be compete as international jumpers what about the great horses like Abdullah pretty sure he started as a eventer and was discovered. Jonny’s Pockett or the Great Snowbound they all double dutied as hunters then as international caliber jumpers. I can write a book there are that many more.
I understand the concern about breeding down or allowing sub par into stud books but some individuals deserve their place.
[QUOTE=Oakstable;1867182]
How could an organization track bloodlines of hunters if the people who compete in the hunters don’t register their horses?
I’m missing something"
The kind of “registration” I’d like to see would be WITH the same organization collecting and organizing the data from the shows-- and also be REQUIRED in order TO show-- just as JC registration is required to enter JC sanctioned races. The reason hunter people don’t register their horses now is that there’s no reason to. Those of us who have papers on their horses (as I do mine) never have reason to take them out of the drawers-- including when we sell.
I’m gathering (rightly or not I don’t know) that this is kind of the way it is in Europe: horses not in a registry are shown as belonging to some kind of “Book II” (from a post by aurum??)
“Maybe this is changing, but for years I have read that to sell to the hunter market, the horse has to have flying changes and be able to jump a small course. And who the sire and dam are doesn’t matter.”
Not so. #1, there are hunter people out there buying young horses-- I was fielding offers for my Cunningham colt from hunter people when he was still a suckling; #2. if a hunter person does NOT like the horse it’s quite true that s/he won’t care what or who produced it. If s/he DOES like the horse, however, “who’s s/he by?” will generally be a very early question, followed by “who’s the mare and what has she done?”
“I’ve stayed clear of breeding for hunters for that reason.”
If you still want to steer clear of the hunter market despite, that’s your decision to make.
His Canadian Warmblood testing scores are here:
http://72.14.207.104/search?sourceid=navclient-menuext&q=cache:http%3A//www.canadianwarmbloods.com/spt2001_scores.html
He occasionally won the hack in the green conformation division, but was mostly in the top five somewhere, not on top. He doesn’t have a world-beating trot. It has gotten better since he was younger, but it’s not a daisy-cutting trot, just an athletic one. His canter is great.
I really didn’t think you could just a dressage test on a few stills anymore than you can judge how well a horse moves for the hunter ring from a few stills. You can make any horse look like a good or bad mover, depending on the timing of the shot.
I am curious about the testing itself. Rachel said they didn’t free jump him all that high, only about 4’, and the under tack jumps are very small in the pictures. What is the general procedure for testing jumping?
I also notice that Nairobi, a nice but less successful hunter, is already approved as a regular stallion by the KWPN.
Looking at the top 20 ,I don’t think so .
http://www.usef.org/content/pointsAwards/leadingSirePoints.php?year=2006&viewCat=HunterBreeding
2,3,4,19, 20 are TB’s
17 is a QH
6 is an unapproved Trak ( subject of another thread, great record in IHF production)
Hunter Breeding Sires: 14 of top 20 are traditional warmbloods.
Hunter Sires: 18 of 20 are traditional warmbloods.
Both showjumping and dressage lines are represented.
To answer the questions, here are the stats -
It looks there are 78 Regular Conformation Hunters in the US with points for 2006. Popeye K is number 2 by about 174 points. On average, it appears that there are typically 3 to 9 horses entered in the class with 118 classes and average entry of 6 horses.
http://www.usef.org/content/pointsAwards/pointsDisplay.php?year=2006&zone=0§ion=2301
Nairobi was approved at Ermelo, 2 out of 13, and imported in 2001 and shown successfuly on the hunter circuit.
He was shown as a jumper and in dressage in Holland, and has a jumping index of 134.
So, a classically bred Dutch horse can be shown in the hunters if that’s where the owner’s interests lie.
I think so much of what a horse with above average talent does is what the owner wants to do.
Be forewarned, long rant…
“Hunters have been extremely fat for decades. They are also the horses that are maintained on bute, sometimes even 2 different drugs to keep them going, and I am NOT talking about performance horses in their early twenties. LOTS of Hunters horses are maintained on drugs before they are 10. The weight can’t NOT have a large impact on their longterm soundness. Just ask any overweight person. We are NOT athletes! Combine that weight with the hours of longeing done to calm them down, and it is just not fair to the horse. I bet if the Hunter drug committee ruled that Hunters could only be shown on a dose of 1 gram of bute a day, and NO other drugs - esp banamine that can pretty much cover up severe ringbone, I bet you would have a mutiny - even amoungst the committee members.”
I’ve had PLENTY of hunters who were fat and happy, only ONE had soundness issues and was given bute. That was due to a conformation flaw and navicular, not his weight. And only ONE was ever longed, only when he first came off the track and if he was a little stupid at a show ground. He would be longed for 20 mins, max, just to save me from some spectacularly scary airs-above-ground.
My retired jumper mare has ALWAYS been an extremely easy keeper and a little overweight. She never took a lame step and has always been full of fire, not quiet & lazy. She has never, ever been on any drug or joint supplement in her life, and she wouldn’t know what a longeline was because she’s never seen one.
All of my friends hunters are naturally quiet, are not longed to death (if at all), are not drugged, living on bute or anything else, and are as sound as can be with the weight they carry. We’re talking A-rated horses of various breeds, not backyard local circuit animals. Maybe you shouldn’t lay a blanket statement like that on the hunter industy.
I’ve seen many, many more QH’s and breed show horses drugged beyond belief to mask lameness and hotness. Visit behind the scenes as a “dumb spectator” at any fair or stock show and you’ll see what I mean.
And there’s a few BN dressage horses looking a little chunky these days, which I personally like. First in mind is Brettina.
As for hunters being “residual” rejects of jumper or dressage breeding? Yeah, that offends me as a hunter and jumper rider. Sure, some of those showing as hunters are doing so because they couldn’t cut it as jumpers or dressage horses, but there’s a flip-side. There are at least as many jumpers and dressage horses who’d be too comletely insane, have too much knee and hock movement, certainly not jump well enough or safe enough (mainly dressage here) because they hang knees or shoulders & don’t round at all to attemp being a hunter. And a rather huge number who were bred specifically for the hunter ring & haven’t seen anything else.
Not to mention a good number of horses who started as (at least fairly) successful hunters. Gem Twist is the first to come to mind.
It’s no wonder hunter peoople don’t want to participate in inspections for their studs, seeing how Popeye has been lambasted here. He’s not my favorite, but he certainly appears to be MUCH more level-headed and talented (over fences) than the other 2 presented. And, yes, I not only watch dressage, but have taken quite a few lessons (when I was younger) to help me with my eq classes.
[QUOTE=ise@ssl;1866871]
…So to somehow say that because Popeye K is a fabulous hunter but being ridden in by a dressage rider in a dressage frame would ruin him - doesn’t hold water for me.
…[/QUOTE]
Thank you for saying this! In the dressage barn I train at we have a Hunter (by Art Deco) that shows in the Hunters AND Dressage (Training & 1st). He does quite well in both and doesn’t get the least bit confused or risk being ruined. In fact, the dressage training has helped his elasticity immensely. Correct dressage is ridden back to front NOT front to back. The more the horse steps up from behind and work over their topline, the more open they can become in their gaits.
As for the weight issue being discussed, it’s well documented how extra weight can be detrimental to joints of horses. The horse does not have to exhibit any lameness either with the weight for it to take it’s toll on those joints. To each their own, and in the end it’s what the judges want, I suppose. But if the horse has a good mind, good work ethic, and good disposition… you don’t need the extra weight to make it lazy or quiet.
All in all though, I’m glad that Popeye is being presented. Definitely a nice thing to see!
Were the other two for the hunter book or both?
Those are pretty good scores in his Canadian stallion approval.
Oh for crap’s sake, I wonder if Popeye’s owner would have sent him to the damn inspection if she knew that people would just use it as a way to trash the horse.
Those of us that know and appreciate a top caliber hunter, do just that. Doesn’t mean we spew forth negativity about dressage horses that move differently, or could not keep their brains together (or their knees up) to jump around a course.
Cheers to Rachel and Tommy and the team for continuing to compete a lovely stallion that could easily retire to a full book based on his past accomplishments.
I didn’t see him being lambasted at all. I heard him being called fat, and his dressage test looked huntery. That’s not such a big thing. Not a big deal. He is a competing hunter.
Nothing wrong with people hashing out their likes and dislikes, it wasn’t at the expense of Popeye K it was about the industries standards. Big difference. He is successful and will continue to be and will get lots of breedings and make lots of babies.
I think there is extra interest in this approval because of the KWPN NA’s history of not approving stallions.
With all the hoopla in this thread, it would be interesting to know how many Dutch foals are being registered in the hunter book. I suspect not many. It is VERY new.
CBoylen, thanks so much for posting that link to the scores … since our major upgrade of the CWHBA web site, the archived pages are not available right now and you have saved me having to do a quick upload. 
There is a great article that goes with these results with super photos that I will try to reload over the next day or so. Given that the CWHBA stallion performance test was tied with the Hanoverian verband for the first couple of years, and some of the senior judges for that testing were from Europe Verbands, any stallion achieving a 141+ index on jumping gets rave reviews and kudo’s from me … he did a GREAT job!
[QUOTE=cherham;1866991]To answer a question posted about two pages ago Popeke K was foaled in Canada and registered and approved for breeding with both the Canadian Sport Horse Association and the Canadian Warmblood Horse Breeders Association. Both of these organizations are full members of the WBFSH.
The owners of the stallion had no desire to register with a European registry (including a North American counterpart) and so chose to retain his Canadian citizenship by registering and approving Popeye with the two Canadian sport horse breeding associations instead.
I might also add that one of the breeders and past owners of Popeke K is the National President of the Canadian Sport Horse Association.[/QUOTE]
I do have to correct some of the very incorrect information given by Cheram and answer Riva’s question … Popeye K is indeed registered with the KWPN #1826297 (actually I guess it is NA/WPN). His breeder was Pater Karneef of Karneef Equestrian Farms, hence the ‘K’ suffix to his name. Paul Morgan does have some business dealings with Techno Foal and Peter Karneef, but his name does not appear as breeder. Cheram, if you check the CLRC database for CSHA, Peter’s is the only name listed.
Hope that helps some of the technical issues … as one who has waded into the stallion testing arena with several boys over the years, I am distressed reading some of the comments here from those who have never owned a stallion, have probably never prepared one for an SPT or licensing, are unlikely to ever do so, and basically only drool over the pictures in the magazines and then proceed to make comments about other people’s much loved business and horses.
Marilyn, Interim web master CWHBA
