warmbloods and registries

[Blume_Farm]

I was sent this question via PM and thought it might be best to respond as a new thread because if this person has this question certainly others do as well:

Why is it a hanoverian/tb cross is considered an oldenburg ? The crossing of breeds is something that has always confused me and I don’t understand how that combination produces an oldenburg one time, and a hanoverian the next time. Or say a hanoverian and a dutch warmblood. I understand it is what they sire and dam are approved to but the inconsistency as to what breed the foal actual is I find very confusing. Is it because it is a registry and not a breed as others have stated a warmblood is not a breed ?

The warmblood horse was developed in different regions of Europe originally for the purpose of farm work, military and pleasure. Over time as their need for farm work and military “equipment” reduced their use for pleasure/ sport increased. Due to this change of need breeding objectives changed from a heavier horse to a lighter athletic type.

In Germany the different regions developed their own individual registries for their horses. For example, there are the Oldenburgs, the Hanoverians, the Westfalens, the Holsteiners, etc. Each registry was responsible for managing their own parameters set up to determine mare inspections, stallion inspections, approvals, breed books, etc. Historically there were differences of the “type” of horse between these registries as each one had their own purpose. For example, the Oldenburgs tended towards a heavier horse, the Holsteiners towards more jumping ability. However, over time the registries have all somewhat “melded” in wanting to produce a similar type of sport horse. Each registry has a little bit different philosophy on how to achieve this…the Oldenburgs are a very open registry while the Hanoverians are more selective (although this is changing as well). Certain registries such as the Holsteiners were traditionally a very closed registry. Lastly, the Trakehner has an amazing history that is too long to write here and absolutely worth reading about. They are considered to be a true independent breed.

In general a mare is approved into a certain registry. The stallion is approved in that same registry. A foal is born, branded and papered into that same registry. Where confusion starts is wehn a certain horse is registered into a certain registry (i.e.; have papers with that registry) but is later approved into other registries.

Some stallions that were very well regarded and prepotent for particular qualities were approved into many different registries. For example, Donnerhall, one the most important stallions to producing todays dressage horse, was a branded/ papered Oldenburg. However, many other registries understood his qualities and importance and “accepted” him into their registries as well. Hence, Donnherall is an Oldenburg stallion approved for use in Hanoverian breeding, Westfalen breeding, Dutch breeding, etc. It is through the “sharing” of these stallions that many of these different registries have all sort of become to look like each other.

Another stallion to mention since you bring up the Tb is the recently deceased Laurie’s Crusader (LC). He was probably the most used Tb in modern Hanoverian breeding directly through him and through his sons (notably Londonderry). LC and his sons were also used in many other German registries, including the Trakehner.

Similar things happen with mares. For example, I have a Hanoverian broodmare. I have considered having her “approved” into the Oldenburg registry so I can breed her to a stallion that is approved Oldenburg but not approved Hanoverian. Therefore, the resulting offspring would be branded and approved Oldenburg. Ironically, the stallion I am interested in is a branded Dutch stallion approved for Oldenburg breeding. So in this scenario if my mare was approved Oldenburg it would look like this…a Hanoverian mare bred to a Dutch stallion with the resulting foal branded Oldenburg:)

Does that clear things up or make the mud even thicker!!! Anyone that reads anything incorrect please correct me! Or add to clarify anything that does not make sense…

[MysticOakRanch]

I think what many Americans don’t understand is registry does not equal breed. Most Warmbloods are not a specific breed, they are a type, and most Warmblood registries are studbooks to track bloodlines and set breeding standards to achieve that type of horse. I say “most” because a few (such as Trakehner) may be considered a breed - they are a pretty closed registry.

So yes, a Hanoverian/Tbred cross may end up Oldenburg. I tried to explain that a few years ago with a Trakehner/Oldenburg cross (who went RPSI) - and I have to admit, it is a little confusing;)

[WildandWickedWarmblo]

Americans “could” read both on the internet and in european warmbloods books how the warmbloods are bred in europe to be both dressage and jumping horse in one. And how to breed to get that combination. And how a stallion can be approved in more than one registry. The idea is to breed the best performance horses to one another, and improve conformation and performance. And TB studs are used to do a little refinement as well.

American WBs are a totally different thing. Breeding any old free TB mare to any other breed a warmblood makes in the USA, and the breeders can, and do call their horses anything, like a “dutch warmblood breed” or anything else. Or even “1/2 warmblood,” LOL. A totally different world in the USA.

[not_again]

For those of us proud to breed American Warmbloods, the typical oversimplification shows real lack of respect as well as ignorance of our breeding standards. We are breeding a horse from a place, and every generation is graded, inspected and DNA typed before being accepted. I respect those in Europe breeding their local stock, and would hope that it would work both ways.

[Hippolyta]

As others said above.

I think the best explanation is short & simply states that WB registries are just that: registries, not breeds. Further details on Euro vs US may be warranted, depending on the situation, but always start there.

[stoicfish]

[QUOTE=MysticOakRanch;7273014]
I think what many Americans don’t understand is registry does not equal breed. Most Warmbloods are not a specific breed, they are a type, and most Warmblood registries are studbooks to track bloodlines and set breeding standards to achieve that type of horse. I say “most” because a few (such as Trakehner) may be considered a breed - they are a pretty closed registry.

So yes, a Hanoverian/Tbred cross may end up Oldenburg. I tried to explain that a few years ago with a Trakehner/Oldenburg cross (who went RPSI) - and I have to admit, it is a little confusing;)[/QUOTE]

I find this to be both true and false.
Overall, Wb’s are very similar to a breed. There is definitely a population of horses that they draw from and that most Wb horses are related to. It isn’t a type as that implies that any horse is eligible with the right type and that isn’t true, they are a genetically unique group. Look at a European Wb’s pedigree and you see it goes back almost 200 years with most horses being identified as belonging to a registry.
I did a very little bit (compared to the huge amount of time of the other people) pedigree work for Canadian Warmblood. The Canadian gov required Wb’s to be held accountable to the same standards as any other “breed” in Canada to be under the federal pedigree act. I looked at over 3000 pedigrees, mostly older horse. You tend to see the same horses over and over again. The original population was not that big and they did not add many horses in the last 100 years beyond the original group. (The Qh’s breed was established in 1940)
Think of it this way. The US and Canada are very large area’s and the QH is considered a breed from this very large area. Before horses traveled so much and AI, most regions had their own “style” and group of QH’s/crosses that shared genetics (this is even true of people). The Europeans did the same in a smaller space and they had separate registries but did share horses, especially stallions. Qh’s could have done the same by having a state registry instead of a national one, the out come would have been similar, you would still have a regional “type” and even now you have racing, barrel, cutting, halter, western pleasure, ranch … and so on. Very different types. And because they allow any two “Qh’s” to have a registered offspring by mail, you have to wonder about the reality of how many “other” breeds had influence on the two pasture horses that had and offspring (might have been the neighbors Morgan?) Plus they only officially closed the books in 1940. Not a knock but a reality of the process. But no one doubts that a QH is a breed, even though I would bet money that if you did genetic testing, there is as much genetic diversity in Qh’s that there is in WB’s over all.
When NA registries allowed “crosses” into their book to increase the population when they first started out, this was a bit of a change compared to the tight group that traditionally existed in Europe, and blurs the lines. But the European Wb is definitely a distinct population of horses that is very similar to a breed by most proper definitions of a breed.

[MysticOakRanch]

[QUOTE=not again;7273102]
For those of us proud to breed American Warmbloods, the typical oversimplification shows real lack of respect as well as ignorance of our breeding standards. We are breeding a horse from a place, and every generation is graded, inspected and DNA typed before being accepted. I respect those in Europe breeding their local stock, and would hope that it would work both ways.[/QUOTE]

I agree - there are low quality horses in every registry. AWS has some very high quality horses, and their inspection process is pretty strong. They’ve come a long ways from their original roots and their quality is really improving. I’ve hosted a few inspections for them, and the vast majority of the horses have been at least half European Warmblood breeding. And I’ve attended plenty of inspections for RPSI and Old NA and seen a wide variety of mares (including grade mares, stock breeds, etc) accepted into the mare books. I do wish people wouldn’t be so quick to comment negatively about AWS then turn around and hold up Old NA as a model of quality.

Back to the original comment - a breed displays homogeneous appearance and behavior developed through generations of selective breeding, ultimately of the same breed to the same breed. Because Warmblood registries are “open”, they aren’t really a breed, but they are most definitely a type. Most Warmblood registries do not consider themselves a “breed” - while they do consider Tbreds a breed.

If you compare it to the dog world - a Queensland Heeler is a breed, but if you look at them, Border Collies, and other similar types, they are grouped into “Working Dogs” or “Herding Dogs”, and that is kind of like the Warmblood registries - they are a similarly grouped type of horse, a “Sport Horse” type (or a Warmblood type). However, if you cross a Queensland to a Border Collie, it is no longer eligible for either registry because it is no longer a purebred - even though it is still a very valid Working type.

[siegi_b]

not again … while I completely understand where you’re coming from and respect your reasoning, I would have a hard time fighting this uphill battle year after year. There’s no doubt in my mind that you have done a very good job of breeding AND showing your horses - something very few breeders can say - I’m not sure I would have to fortitude to face all these nay-sayers year after year.

I initially started with breeding Trakehners and imported some very nice youngster the first 3 to 4 years, and then even acquired a colt that was one of two stallions approved in 1992 (out of 24 I believe). It didn’t take me long to realize that trying to convince horse buyers that Trakehners were good horses was a losing battle, and so I changed to Dutch Warmbloods and have had a pretty good and successful time with it!

Good for you for sticking to your guns!!

[Lord_Helpus]

How does RPSI fit into this discussion? I understand that for most registires, stallions have to be accepted into certain registries in order to have their offspring registered a Hanoverian/Oldenburg/Dutch, etc.

But does RPSI accept horses that pass its inspection criteria, without regard for the background/registry approval of the sire and dam?

Are there other registries out there which, like RPSI, accept any WB’s which pass inspection?

If a mare is by a Holsteiner stallion and out of a dam which is also registered Holsteiner, but has been approved by RPSI, can she ever have an offspring which can be registered as Holsteiner?

[JWB]

An RPSI registered mare (book I) can be inspected by AHHA. My BWP registered mare (of Holsteiner and TB lines) produced two AHHA registered foals.

She has NO Belgian lines but they registered her because that’s where her AHHA registered sire was approved. He was AHHA but was not approved with that registry. Meanwhile her TB dam (many generations of US breeding) was approved with several registries, including BWP and AHHA.

Regarding the American registries, I would happily support them IF they would close their books enough to have reciprocity with other registries. That is what keeps me paying my dues to European registries. I would hate to register a filly with a registry that would be a dead end as far as her being able to be accepted by other registries… Because yes, the registries should be regional to clear up the registry/breed confusion.

[Blume_Farm]

@MysticOakRanch;7273014

I think what many Americans don’t understand is registry does not equal breed. Most Warmbloods are not a specific breed, they are a type, and most Warmblood registries are studbooks to track bloodlines and set breeding standards to achieve that type of horse. I say “most” because a few (such as Trakehner) may be considered a breed - they are a pretty closed registry.

I am not saying this to be argumentative, but then what is a breed? My understanding is “a stock of animals or plants within a species having a distinctive appearance and typically having been developed by deliberate selection”.

So isn’t a WB a breed then? Certainly has a specific type (ie; distinctive appearance) and developed by deliberate selection. Or is the discussion, yes a WB is a breed, but Hanoverian, Oldenburg, etc just registries WITHIN that breed? I would think today that is more the case. However, in years past I think you could tell the difference between an Oldenburg, a Hanoverian, a Holsteiner and hence why some would call each on a specific breed. Today the goal, ie; the type, is pretty much the same amoungst the registries and therefore less variation between the registries/ breeds.

[stoicfish]

[QUOTE=Blume Farm;7276615]
I am not saying this to be argumentative, but then what is a breed? My understanding is “a stock of animals or plants within a species having a distinctive appearance and typically having been developed by deliberate selection”.

So isn’t a WB a breed then? Certainly has a specific type (ie; distinctive appearance) and developed by deliberate selection. Or is the discussion, yes a WB is a breed, but Hanoverian, Oldenburg, etc just registries WITHIN that breed? I would think today that is more the case. However, in years past I think you could tell the difference between an Oldenburg, a Hanoverian, a Holsteiner and hence why some would call each on a specific breed. Today the goal, ie; the type, is pretty much the same amoungst the registries and therefore less variation between the registries/ breeds.[/QUOTE]

That is exactly it. You identify a breed by it’s genetic similarities and continued selection process (only certain horses are eligible). What people forget is that all breeds have a development stage and many have “improvement” blood. And you cannot go on phenotype alone as the Qh has a huge range within the breed. Arabs have very different types also and purposes. Germany is a really small county and even before the registries came to be the horses in the country were similar genetically.
As a group, there are still very similar and the only exception is the NA registries that allow a Morgan cross into the books is not an uncommon thing. So to look at the NA version and say the European Wb is not a distinct group because of how we are approaching it, or there is different “names” in Europe is not accurate.

Tb’s started in the late 1700’s and didn’t close their books till when? I have a Tb mare with a trotter in her pedigree in the last 60 years. Only when you have a large enough population that you can shut the door. I actually think it is a good strategy to always allow improvement blood as long as the improvements are “improvements” like Ladykiller .

ps- nothing against Morgan’s as they are a very good horse but at some point the door needs to close here to. There is always room for a Sport Horse Registry that allows crosses.

[stoicfish]

[QUOTE=stoicfish;7276660]
That is exactly it. You identify a breed by it’s genetic similarities and continued selection process (only certain horses are eligible). What people forget is that all breeds have a development stage and many have “improvement” blood. And you cannot go on phenotype alone as the Qh has a huge range within the breed. Arabs have very different types also and purposes. Germany is a really small county and even before the registries came to be the horses in the country were similar genetically.
As a group, there are still very similar and the only exception is the NA registries that allow a Morgan cross into the books is not an uncommon thing. So to look at the NA version and say the European Wb is not a distinct group because of how we are approaching it, or there is different “names” in Europe is not accurate.

Tb’s started in the late 1700’s and didn’t close their books till when? I have a Tb mare with a trotter in her pedigree in the last 60 years. Only when you have a large enough population that you can shut the door. I actually think it is a good strategy to always allow improvement blood as long as the improvements are “improvements” like Ladykiller .[/QUOTE]

ps- nothing against Morgan’s as they are a very good horse but at some point the door needs to close here to. There is always room for a Sport Horse Registry that allows crosses.

[Blume_Farm]

[QUOTE=stoicfish;7276660]
That is exactly it. You identify a breed by it’s genetic similarities and continued selection process (only certain horses are eligible). What people forget is that all breeds have a development stage and many have “improvement” blood. And you cannot go on phenotype alone as the Qh has a huge range within the breed. Arabs have very different types also and purposes. [/QUOTE]

But in reality is should be phenotype that distinguishes the breed (backed up/ confirmed by genotype). Variation within the breed can still be there, but there should be somewhat of a phenotype. I always use dogs as examples:

There is huge size variation in a poodle from a miniature to a standard. But you still know a poodle is a poodle.

There is huge color variation within Great Dane, but you still know a Great Dane whether it be black, tan or harlequin.

So even if there is some variation within, say the Arab horse, you should still be able to know an Arab is an Arab.

If not it should go the way of the JRT. Just recently the JRT and the Parson Russell Terrier were split into two distinct breeds with the AKC as their phenotype was quite different.

[stoicfish]

[QUOTE=Blume Farm;7276870]
But in reality is should be phenotype that distinguishes the breed (backed up/ confirmed by genotype). Variation within the breed can still be there, but there should be somewhat of a phenotype. I always use dogs as examples:

There is huge size variation in a poodle from a miniature to a standard. But you still know a poodle is a poodle.

There is huge color variation within Great Dane, but you still know a Great Dane whether it be black, tan or harlequin.

So even if there is some variation within, say the Arab horse, you should still be able to know an Arab is an Arab.

If not it should go the way of the JRT. Just recently the JRT and the Parson Russell Terrier were split into two distinct breeds with the AKC as their phenotype was quite different.[/QUOTE]

Interesting discussion.
I can see how why people are drawn to phenotypes, because they are visually identifiable. A “breed” is a human creation or segregation and typically we like to organize things based on characteristics that we identify with easily.
But it doesn’t HAVE to be all phenotype (it can be) it can be performance based also. I think of the Boarder Collie dog trials I saw in Wales and the huge variation in types but all talented. Qh’s can have as much variation in size and type as WB’s. I usually can pick the Wb out of a pasture, regardless of registry and sometimes the discipline even.
You hear “my Qh or Tb is a Wb type” so there is already a type out there.
Performance lends itself to slightly different types but overall, they are similar and recognizable.
We tend to notice the difference between the Wb registries, sometimes, but we generally always know the difference between a Wb and another breed.

[Dressagelvr]

I think it is also critical to look at the standards of the inspections and grading of breeding stock and even the registration process itself. Some registries are quite rigorous, others will accept anything with 4 legs, still others fall somewhere in between.

One other thing I’ll add is that when folks hear about TBs in the European registries, they don’t always realize that those TBs weren’t/aren’t American TBs.

[TrotTrotPumpkn]

[QUOTE=Lord Helpus;7276127]
How does RPSI fit into this discussion? I understand that for most registires, stallions have to be accepted into certain registries in order to have their offspring registered a Hanoverian/Oldenburg/Dutch, etc.

But does RPSI accept horses that pass its inspection criteria, without regard for the background/registry approval of the sire and dam?

Are there other registries out there which, like RPSI, accept any WB’s which pass inspection?

If a mare is by a Holsteiner stallion and out of a dam which is also registered Holsteiner, but has been approved by RPSI, can she ever have an offspring which can be registered as Holsteiner?[/QUOTE]

No. Bloodlines and score both matter. The sire and dam must be approved to go into book I. Same as in Germany. They will accept non-RPSI sires that have been approved in their warmblood registry (KWPN for example) and will inspect thoroughbreds, Arabians and anglo-arabs as potential stallions. That’s it. They are “open” in that they will let a breeder use a GOV stallion, or will inspect a Selle Francais registered mare (as some of the other studbooks have started moving towards as well–not saying good or bad, but I see a trend). That foal will still need to be approved for breeding at age 3 or thereafter and entered into studbook I to produce eligible offspring.

They have a lower book and perhaps there they will take a non-approved warmblood cross…I am not as sure (not really my focus) if they will take a 1/2 QH or whatever for book II? But not for book I. “Approved” horses are in book I. “Recorded” horses are in book II. These are not approved for breeding.

http://www.rhpsi.com/stallions/stallionapprovevsrecord.asp

I know GOV has no problem with an RPSI (book I) mare, and as JWP said, AHHA doesn’t either.

You have to watch what book the mare or stallion is in. I have seen people say their horse is “approved stud book II” and that’s not accurate.

I bred to a GOV stallion and had a Selle Francais registered mare that I needed to take for approval along with her foal. I was intending to go to GOV, but RPSI was our only option, as there was no GOV inspection in 2010 in a 10 hour radius, so I did a lot of looking into what that would mean to my upset plans. I ended up there by default, but honestly, having attended quite a few different registries inspections, and seeing their current efforts with things like the foal auction, etc., I’m currently leaning towards using them again when I breed next year. But I’m getting off topic.

[TrotTrotPumpkn]

The thing is that breeding is dynamic. The goals of the breeder and rider will change and that will influence the type. Look at the large number of weekend warriors in the US, for example. There are breeders who are breeding for the top of sport, regardless of temperament and then their are breeders who are breeding for athletes, but rank temperament #1. They can still use the same registry. Their horses may even look similar.

Using dogs again, I look at my Dobermans. Pretty distinctive dog (i.e. recognizable). It was the first breed of dog created for the express purpose of personal protection. Yet today, as a result of backlash against the original mental type, most of the Dobermans you meet on the street are golden retrievers in a Doberman colored wrapper who are happy to meet you. Some are shy, as the reversal in trend went to far (imho). You have a new division amongst breeders and fanciers in physical type, one is breeding for heavy bone and size and the other is a more refined, medium dog. But the evolution from working dog to family companion is interesting. It makes sense–few people want to own a true military/working dog (I mean everyone likes the idea of their dog protecting their family from an intruder, but I really don’t think most people want to deal with a high drive, energetic, strong dog that distrusts strangers naturally and will do something about it, so you better train and work the dog). So the change suits, say, 90% of the population of owners, but it is almost a total reversal from the original dogs recognized as Dobermanns.

I think the warm blood will continue to evolve, but there are some set types by the registries regarding size, etc. There will be trends and backlashes against the trend (remember when everyone wanted to have a 17’+ warmblood? or the trend for a dark dressage horse?). But overall I agree warmbloods are probably a breed with different registries. Some registries are specialists (I think of Holsteiners and BWP as jumping specialists–whether that’s right or wrong) in their focus and some are creating specialists recognized by “jumper program” designations, so I think the result of that trend is an interesting thing to follow. But even amongst top jumpers, you will see a variety of types and sizes.

Personally, I am more interested in performance and mind than type, except as form relates to function and soundness. I think breeds of anything go astray when they focus too much on one aspect to the exclusion of others (performance, mind, extremes in type). Look at halter horses. To get back to the original question, buyers (particularly of foals) need to educate themselves about the program of the breeder, more than just looking at the registry a breeder used for that foal.

[Blume_Farm]

Interesting you bring up the dobermwn. In 12 years as a vet I have never met an ill tempered dobie. Hyper yes, aggressive no. There are breeds that I see many variations of for either form or function. The lab is a good example as well. There is what I call the show lab and the american working lab. The show lab is of english stock, short and thick with quiet temperament. The american lab is tall lean and hyper. Yet both are easily recognized by anyone as a lab! Even though very different in type. Although I doubt a show lab would do well in any hunting trial versus a working lab.

I do agree if type is all someone breeds for without thought of function things tend to go very poorly for the breer. Halter horses are always used for this example.

I too tend to t hink one that knows the their horse breeds can pick out a wb versus qh versus tb. There is a general type to the wb.