| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Vygoda
Platinum Member
United Arab Emirates
1627 Posts |
 Posted - 27 Nov 2005 : 07:39:30 AM
|
This is not a quiz but one I would love to get serious answers on. Moderators, please feel free to move it to the correct forum if necessary.
The question is quite simply: is preservation breeding about bloodlines or the type of horse?
Jane
|
|
Report to moderator
|
|
|
Anfi
Gold Member
Denmark
1195 Posts |
Posted - 27 Nov 2005 : 09:27:33 AM
|
I'd say the blood lines were the means and the type of horse the end.
I don't know if you can put it that simply though. Looking forward to hearing what others have to say
Anne |
     
I Do What I Can and I Am What I Am - Fay Weldon |
Report to Moderator  |
|
|
LYNDILOU
Platinum Member
United Kingdom
13976 Posts |
Posted - 27 Nov 2005 : 10:18:13 AM
|
| I would say its a tough one Jane, yes peserving bloodlines is an ideal, but if you just preserve the lines and the type is lost where are you? a balance could be reached over generations I think as the origional crabbet horses while being good in the body seemed to be lacking in the head department, a point Lady wentworth made herself! and why she so valued skowronek to give more beauty of head, neck, and over all type |
   
www.dreamfield-arabians.com |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Nick
Gold Member
United Kingdom
887 Posts |
Posted - 27 Nov 2005 : 2:25:42 PM
|
Hi Jane put the cat among the pigeons if a bloodline needs preservation, Something was lacking and not worth preserving,And then preservation is a backward step,
Just a thought Dragon |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Mike
Platinum Member
Eire
1872 Posts |
Posted - 27 Nov 2005 : 2:49:16 PM
|
Nick,
Think about it this way, whilst there are still Babson Egyptian horses around, there aren't any asil "Old English" ones. So if one wanted to breed another Shahpoor, one simply couldn't, since one half of the equation no longer exists. Would you consider Shahpoor as "lacking"?
Mike |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Nick
Gold Member
United Kingdom
887 Posts |
Posted - 27 Nov 2005 : 3:48:26 PM
|
Yes Mike i would he never produced no where near as good as himself
not even close,He mainly bred back to his mother,not his Babson side,
If he had re produced himself he would not need preserving,
Great Horse i loved him but breeding is not his legacy some leave
a Dynasty, Shapoor left me great memories
Dragon |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Vygoda
Platinum Member
United Arab Emirates
1627 Posts |
Posted - 27 Nov 2005 : 4:46:04 PM
|
IMO Shahpoor was a horse before his time - he was too different from what stallions we had then in the UK - from the database, it appears he had only 13 foals so was very underused. OK, I agree with Nick that he didn't leave anything as good as himself and suspect therefore it wasn't easy to find the right 'nick' with him but he didn't seem to have much chance, did he? And i wonder if he had been around today, would things be different when our minds are much more open to imports and a different looking horse? Too, Shahpoor really only became a showring star and came to prominence when the Jones owned him at a late stage in his life. If he were alive today, what bloodlines would you breed him to Mike or what kind of mare phenotypically?
Jane
|
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Jingo
Platinum Member
United Kingdom
3632 Posts |
Posted - 27 Nov 2005 : 7:46:22 PM
|
"Preservation Breeding"
Certain bloodlines go with a certain "type"of horse. Some are preserved by their popularity, some need a little more thought and understanding.
The use of "popular/fashionable" stallions will naturally "preserve" their bloodlines.
BUT as concientious breeders, it sometimes takes a little "foresight" (if only we all had crystal balls) or "patience" to give certain bloodlines a few generations to "prove themselves".
Is it part of this modern age that we want it all NOW and are not prepared to "wait" and see the outcome of our original "plan"!!!!! 
|
Jude
www.auchmillanarabians.org.uk
      
photos:Anthony Reynolds,Sweet,Deano,Real Time Imaging |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Mike
Platinum Member
Eire
1872 Posts |
Posted - 28 Nov 2005 : 02:30:48 AM
|
Shahpoor, certainly was I agreea horse ahead of his time. Nothing quite like him had been bred in the UK before and it is equally true that he never came close to reproducing himself either One thing is also certain, from his pedigree he was never, ever going to be a dominant sire! He was the product of two equally inbred, and different parents and was not what either of them usually produced. Somehow in the mix that neither side could dominate,what came out was the extreme Fay El Dine type from the Babson side in combination with the movement and athletism from the "Old English" side His bloodlines then were if you like in anextremely delicate "balance". It is also worth noting that Shahpoor's dam Mikoletta was one of the very few asil English mares still around at the time. This I feel is significant, not because of any "purity" issues but because Lady Wentworth herself had great difficulty in combining the bloodlines of the tall athletic Nureddin, with the smaller "typier" Skowronek. Usually the "cross" didn't work at all, ie the results were in general not the desired combination of tall, athletic and typey! Therefore pedigree-wise Shahpoor was a very tricky horse to breed to, if what one wanted was a Shahpoor "look alike". If you bred to the Babson side of his pedigree, then the result would be the masculine Fa-Serr look, that his sire usually produced, and if the mare was of English breeding then you would probably hit the Nureddin/Skowronek problem since there were very few mares available that didn't have at least one line(and usually several)to Skowronek. Either way the delicate pedigree balance would have been lost, through no fault of the breeder. I think, that the best chance of success would come from trying to maintain the "Egyptian/English" balance of the pedigree but with different Egyptian lines, given the bloodlines available in the UK at the time I would like to have tried a Saab daughter such as Kazaba or maybe a Fakhr El Kheil daughter or a Melchior daughter. There was another intriguing possiblity during the '80's in the mare Crystal Rose 1967 (Oran X Comforts Caravel). She had two foals by The Shah, one of which was exported,and her last foal was born in 1988. Since Crystal Rose was a granddaughter of the mare Extra Special (Oran X Sharfina) that I mentioned in the "20 Questions" thread a little while back, she was at least by definition 3/4 "egyptian" and also inbred to Oran another horse who was and produced "tall & elegant" his sire Riffal being over 16 hands!Of course I can't be certain that such a mating would "work" but I'm fairly sure that the height, hindquarters and neck-set/shoulder would come out right. Here's a photo of Extra Special's half brother Shafreyn (Royal Diamond X Sharfina)whose bloodlines are essentially the same as those of Crystal Rose
On the other hand one could always have used an egyptian mare, AK Radia springs to mind, tall, refined, elegant and bay One would have had to part with more than a few pennies to get hold of her twenty years ago though!!
Mike |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
LYNDILOU
Platinum Member
United Kingdom
13976 Posts |
|
|
Nick
Gold Member
United Kingdom
887 Posts |
Posted - 28 Nov 2005 : 5:38:15 PM
|
Mike one Mare i would have liked to use with Shapoor was Lady D!esprit
Satin Ladies dam, She had the uncanny gift of breeding to the Stallions almost like a incubator,Satin Lady is like her sire Fawor,
and really Desprit was like her sire Blacklord Caesareo so her dam Regal Lady was the same,
But like all breedings nothing is certain Satin Ladies filly is the moral of her so she as brokeen the chain,
But back to preservation two Stallions who pop up in horses i tend to like are Argos and Silver Scenario, time and again i like a horse and they are there,And the Estopa female line does the same but with such a dynasty you can expect that but these lines seem to preserve themselves maybe that is the way it should be
Dragon |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Basilisk
Gold Member
United Kingdom
521 Posts |
|
|
Basilisk
Gold Member
United Kingdom
521 Posts |
Posted - 30 Nov 2005 : 9:40:58 PM
|
Regarding Shahpoor - I spent a lot of time looking at Shah offspring, and IMO, he was not the best of the Shah's sons. Like many of the Shah/Mikeno cross, he inherited the 'Rissalix' back.
Sharaza and Heather Wibaut's two Shah sons were better horses IMO, but by far the best Shah sons were lost to the breed here - Indian Treasure and Crystal Charmer. Indian Treasure went to Tasmania with his owner (the author of 'Spycatcher'!). Crystal Charmer was way ahead of all the others that I saw, though - a tall, lovely horse with plenty of substance but refined too, he got the best that both sides of his pedigree had to offer. He lived in obscurity in darkest Devon, but the one year he came to Ascot, he so impressed the judge, Don Diego Mendez, that he leased him and took him back to Spain. Unfortunately, I believe he fell ill there, and was subsequently bought by someone who took him to the US, where he was seized as an asset when his new owner's company went bust, and ultimately I believe shot.
A third Shah son who was lost was a full brother to Dr Alexander's well-known mare Latifah: sadly, he was killed in a stable accident very young. If he had been as good as his full sisters, he would have been a top-class horse.
Keren |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Sadika
Platinum Member
United Kingdom
3520 Posts |
Posted - 30 Nov 2005 : 10:31:46 PM
|
| I didn't know all that about Crystal Charmer - what a shame - I remember him well from his appearence at Ascot - very striking! Personally I had a soft spot for The Shah's son ex Bright Venus - IBN EL NAFIS. |
Marilyn
     
www.sweetphotography.com ** Now available online Our 2016 Galleries ** |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Nick
Gold Member
United Kingdom
887 Posts |
Posted - 30 Nov 2005 : 11:49:55 PM
|
Keren it is so easy to say this won that or this one is best,
I did not mention Courthouse or single out any one bloodline,
But stick to my guns with Preservation for its own sake is not worth doing,
You can breed and preserve what bloodlines you like,
And i will go my own way with no thought of preservation just breeding for the sort of Horse i enjoy owning regardless of Fashion or Bloodline,
You seem to have this thing about "Fashion" if a good horse becomes popular maybe that is not "Fashion" simply he is a good Horse,
Regarding Shapoor i spent a lot of of time not looking but living with the Horse and IMO he changed my life and not for the 'Rissalix'
back but for is Amazing ARABIAN type.
To sum up breed horses for yourselves for your ideal without Fad Fashion or Preservation do your own thing other peoples opinions are only that their opinion,and do not be swayed by show results or clever adverts,
Dragon |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Mike
Platinum Member
Eire
1872 Posts |
Posted - 01 Dec 2005 : 04:16:58 AM
|
Sorry Nick, but quality, impeccable breeding, and the ability to reproduce that quality are not of themselves sufficient to result in "popularity". That requires the marketing and promotion of the horse and his or her stock, as well as being fortunate enough to be in the right place at the right time! A "popular" horse is not implicitly either "better" or "worse" than any other horse, it simply is better known and has a higher profile this gives that horses offspring brand-name recognition.[:)
There is nothing wrong, and much good can come from "mixing & matching" bloodlines in order to tryto breed ones ideal horse But to be able to do this there has be a variety of lines to choose from
Hi Keren, if I had to choose a "favourite" son of The Shah, then it would probably be Shah Royle out of Mazella(Manto X Azella) Azella being a full sister of Count Orlando I do still have a grandson of Dr June's Latifah by the way
Mike |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Mike
Platinum Member
Eire
1872 Posts |
Posted - 01 Dec 2005 : 04:33:58 AM
|
One further thought, every foal we breed(and not all will breed on for a variety of reasons), "preserves" its bloodlines for another generation. The difference between a "normal" breeder and a "preservationist" lies only in the range of available bloodlines, so long as both are trying to breed good horses.
Mike |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Basilisk
Gold Member
United Kingdom
521 Posts |
Posted - 01 Dec 2005 : 12:48:21 PM
|
Originally posted by MikeSorry Nick, but quality, impeccable breeding, and the ability to reproduce that quality are not of themselves sufficient to result in "popularity". That requires the marketing and promotion of the horse and his or her stock, as well as being fortunate enough to be in the right place at the right time! A "popular" horse is not implicitly either "better" or "worse" than any other horse, it simply is better known and has a higher profile this gives that horses offspring brand-name recognition.[:) There is nothing wrong, and much good can come from "mixing & matching" bloodlines in order to tryto breed ones ideal horse But to be able to do this there has be a variety of lines to choose from Hi Keren, if I had to choose a "favourite" son of The Shah, then it would probably be Shah Royle out of Mazella(Manto X Azella) Azella being a full sister of Count Orlando I do still have a grandson of Dr June's Latifah by the way Mike
Absolutely my point, Mike. A horse is much more likely to attract attention and be thought of some worth - regardless of its actual quality, etc - if its owner can afford to buy it full colour double page spreads in the press than an equally good or better horse whose owner is on a budget and can only advertise in a small way!
In advertising this phenomenon is known as 'selling the sizzle, not the sausage'. However, most preservationist breeders are by definition 'sausage' people: they are more interested in proven qualities than hype.
Location is another factor that acts to the detriment of some lines: I doubt anyone would try to deny that Naseel was one of the most important sires of the last century, but since he was based in Ireland, he had little chance to breed purebreds. And with mares, ironically, the better they are under saddle, the less likely they are to get the chance to pass their qualities on, since their owners are too busy riding them to want to lose 18 months breeding a foal. Then there are those breeders who are concerned to place their horses in lifetime homes: thus, good horses may have a loving owner, but are effectively lost to the breed.
The list of quality sires alone who nearly vanished this way is long: just three who spring to mind are *Argos, Silvadoris and Diane Jeffries' El Kabah.
This is why Nick's simplistic argument fails to hold water - there are MANY reasons why good horses fail to breed on and therefore need the attention of preservation breeders who are prepared to seek them out and breed them to the most appropriate partner to preserve their particular qualities.
Mike, I must be old to have forgotten Shah Royle! Another perfect example of a good horse in obscurity. I sent my Latifah daughter to him, but sadly she didn't hold: a pity, as he left some good stock. And Marilyn, I thought Ibn el Nafis was too well known to need me to mention him :)
Keren |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Nick
Gold Member
United Kingdom
887 Posts |
Posted - 01 Dec 2005 : 12:51:18 PM
|
Mike that is my point you have to dig them out see if they suit you,
Marketing does not make a good horse,Neither does preservation,
Yes you have to have faith in your knowledge of pedigrees,coupled with a eye for what you want,And then that huge dose of luck needed
for it to come together,
There is something in breeding to suit all tastes Arabians come in all shapes and sizes with different strenghts and weakness,
Indeed we have eight females with a variety of both,It is one of the reasons we do not keep a Stallion we have a better chance of breeding our ideal by multiple choice of Stallions and not ne tied into one,
That is not to say if we breed one we would not keep him for our own use if he was close to our ideal,But we come back to choice,
A lot is made of the word Fashion but Crabbet must have been the height of fashion in its day,And along came a Stallion whose pedigree is some circles was and still is disputed in some circles and pushed the boundries was he Fashion, Preservation, Or as i see it good breeding,
Dragon |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Nick
Gold Member
United Kingdom
887 Posts |
Posted - 01 Dec 2005 : 12:56:20 PM
|
But Keren that is my argument it is very simplistic but you are doing the leftie socialist thing "putting on the spin"
Dragon |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
mazey
Gold Member
England
501 Posts |
Posted - 01 Dec 2005 : 5:44:01 PM
|
| This is fascinating reading but I've got lost PLEASE could somebody tell me exactly what preservationist breeding means. My friend from Tasmania worked as a manager at the Wright's stud until the stud closed last year and has Indian Treasure offspring |
   |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Mike
Platinum Member
Eire
1872 Posts |
Posted - 01 Dec 2005 : 6:59:30 PM
|
Glad you mentioned Crabbet Nick, whilst Lady Wentworth was without doubt the consummate breeder, she was also the most skilfull, knowledgeable and authoratitive publicist the breed has ever had! No-one at the time was left with any doubt that during her reign, Crabbet was the world's premier arab stud.
Mazey, "preservation" with regard to horse breeding is a bit of a misnomer. The aim is to maintain the existence of old/rare/valuable bloodlines usually from one source in their "purest" form ie without the admixture of other lines from elsewhere. So long as the original quality is maintained along with perpetuating the desired lines, then its a noble and worthwhile undertaking and one that is far from being easy.
Mike |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
stuart
Silver Member
United Kingdom
335 Posts |
Posted - 01 Dec 2005 : 8:24:01 PM
|
Read with interest.Surely it is suffice to say that without "preservation" or indeed "purist"(sic)enthusiasts,
the choice for breeding would become much diminished. |
North Norfolk |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Libby Frost
Platinum Member
United Kingdom
4711 Posts |
Posted - 01 Dec 2005 : 11:31:58 PM
|
| Im gonna put my two penneth in now,i believe you can maintain all the best bloodlines i.e,keeping to spanish ,crabbet etc surely just by good and concise breedings,i.e simply using half decent breeding stock in the first place!!Or is that too straightforward? |
     |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Basilisk
Gold Member
United Kingdom
521 Posts |
Posted - 02 Dec 2005 : 1:18:06 PM
|
Nick, I'm sorry but I fail to see what 'leftie socialism' has to do with this discussion.
I didn't need to put any 'spin' on your words. You said very bluntly that "if a bloodline needs preservation, Something was lacking and not worth preserving". You didn't qualify that in any way, so your statement could only be read to mean that any bloodline that through whatever cause had been reduced to a level where its continuation was in danger was not worth preserving. And that is demonstrably not the case.
Lady Wentworth, as Mike has said, was a self-publicist who would have put Max Clifford to shame. Now SHE was one of the greatest spin-meisters the breed has ever known! She even claimed that she was Tennis Champion of the World, when in reality she had only beaten her real tennis playing partner!
Libby, in an ideal world, where all breeders are intelligent and educated about all the different bloodlines and their qualities, you are quite right. However, over the last couple of decades we have seen a big shift away from a situation where the big breeders were in it for the long term and were almost all people who understood the ridden horse and what it took to create one that would have a long functional life to one where people come in with no experience at all, spend big time on what they are *told* to buy, and where fashion is of more importance than function. That is why 'preservation' breeding is so important: it does not truckle to superficial fads, but aims to provide a wide resource of lines with their qualities intact for future use.
I think it is a serious lack that recent issues of the News have carried virtually no articles on significant horses and lines of the past. After all, it should be the *first* place where owners and those interested in the breed come to learn.
Keren |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Nick
Gold Member
United Kingdom
887 Posts |
Posted - 02 Dec 2005 : 4:10:54 PM
|
This is expanding back to Fad, Fashion,And everything In Hand now is
for Horses who cannot carry a saddle,And everything was rosy in years gone by?I am old enough to remember "Cow Hocks" and a few others that are not hardly seen in todays Horses,
I have lost count of how many times i have read about how poor todays In Hand classes are it is one of peoples favourite rants,
And time and time again knocking new people buying Horses that suits their needs,
Everyone has to start and learn and make mistakes,As the old saying goes the person who as not made mistakes,As not done anything,
And i will stick with my guns Bloodlines ,Fad ,Fashion,Preservation call it what you like it is up to the breeder to decide,
As for Spin or fancy adverts again you have to trawl through and then make your mind up,
Look at the foal and youngstock classes and see what suits you,
Look at the ridden classes and see what bloodlines you like,
But with all this you must remember any Horse is only as good as their owner or trainer,Some people can make a silk purse from a sows ear,And others can turn a silk purse into a sows ear.
Dragon |
| Report to Moderator |
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Topic Locked 