Dressage Breeding- German studbooks split over stallion licensing and doping over young horses

[shortstuff99]

Interesting article today on the increasing number of young horses presented for stallion licensing failing drug tests. There are interesting discussions about whether the tests are too much for young horses and it would be best to change it.

I think having them ready for licensing so young does encourage the pushing of young horses.

https://eurodressage.com/2022/02/10...suitability-test-format-united-against-doping

 

[Bernster]

Wow

 

[Roxylola]

I like the idea of licensing in general as a way to ensure only quality is bred from. I have never liked how early they do it, I understand to a degree - if they're not good enough to breed they can be castrated and potentially live a different life. But I think most people want a horse to have a record before breeding from them anyway so why the rush to license at 3

 

[j1ffy]

As so often happens, the problem will be financially-driven. It costs a lot to breed and produce these young colts and the potential to make money from them is equally large. A year's delay doesn't sound a lot (and could probably be easily absorbed by larger breeding operations) but is probably a big deal for smaller studs, hence the challenge for the breed societies and the increased willingness to use immoral means to get colts licensed.

I'm not a breeder, but if I was then temperament would be hugely important and I'd only want to use a stallion that is proven under saddle. I imagine some breeders targeting the young horse auctions may not be so worried and look more at type and movement.

 

[stangs]

From the little I know, stallion licensing exams under saddle in theory are as immoral as certain young horse classes. There's just no physiological justification imo for a horse doing that much that young.

hence the challenge for the breed societies and the increased willingness to use immoral means to get colts licensed.

I think you've hit the nail on the head with your post, but, surely, if a horse tests positive for doping, that'll put future breeders off using them as a sire, as it insinuates the owners weren't confidence he'd be sound enough. (Granted, certain sports breeders don't always seem to be breeding for longevity.)

 

[daffy44]

I am not keen on breeding from unlicensed stalions, and I totally accept the financial implications of waiting another year, and doing it when they are four rather than three, but even so, I think it would be so much better for the horses. The recent spate of drug issues in young stallions has been horrifying to me, and a clear sign that something is going very wrong, I do accept a shorter process is not a bad compromise, but personally, I'd still rather see the horses being given another year.

 

[TheMule]

If they could just delay the whole process by 1 year I would be much more comfortable with it. It will cause an economic shift for a year but then just become the normal.

 

[tristar]

if the horses were tested when older, they might be sounder, stay sounder and the financial prospects might improve

 

[milliepops]

I'm not a breeder, but if I was then temperament would be hugely important and I'd only want to use a stallion that is proven under saddle. I imagine some breeders targeting the young horse auctions may not be so worried and look more at type and movement.

Agree with this :/

My one homebred's sire was chosen almost entirely for temperament. I'm completely the wrong target market for these young stallions, it seems like a crazy world. the next one for me has been chosen for temp and longevity of career. but breeding for yourself is a very different game.

i agree with TM that one year of upset could change things significantly for the better but it doesn't seem likely.

 

[Cortez]

Back when I was preparing young Trakehner stallions for kuerung, they were evaluated at 2, for conformation and potential stallion quality, 3 for the former + movement, and then they had another 2 years to produce competition results under saddle at age-appropiate levels. They were also evaluated throughout their breeding lives, and approval could be withdrawn if their get was not up to standard. This was 20 years ago, so not sure if this is still the norm with Trakehners.

 

[shortstuff99]

Back when I was preparing young Trakehner stallions for kuerung, they were evaluated at 2, for conformation and potential stallion quality, 3 for the former + movement, and then they had another 2 years to produce competition results under saddle at age-appropiate levels. They were also evaluated throughout their breeding lives, and approval could be withdrawn if their get was not up to standard. This was 20 years ago, so not sure if this is still the norm with Trakehners.

This is quite similar to the Iberian route. They are basic graded at over 3 years with morphology scored and a basic WTC score. They then over the years can gain better breeding status through their competition record or even elite status through their own and their offspring competition record.

A 10 day trial just seems so much for a 3 year old!

 

[LEC]

There is a half way house between the poor standards of the British which just get looked at for the day and the over zealous ways of the Germans.

 

[Squeak]

Back when I was preparing young Trakehner stallions for kuerung, they were evaluated at 2, for conformation and potential stallion quality, 3 for the former + movement, and then they had another 2 years to produce competition results under saddle at age-appropiate levels. They were also evaluated throughout their breeding lives, and approval could be withdrawn if their get was not up to standard. This was 20 years ago, so not sure if this is still the norm with Trakehners.

Trakehners are mentioned as one of the studbooks scratching a test in the spring so it would be interesting to know if they still follow the above and if so which they're scrapping and if not why they changed it as it sounds a far more sensible approach.

 

[Cragrat]

if I were breeding, long term soundness would be near the top of my requirements, so the fact the stallion need to be medicated to pass grading would be very off-putting! 10 days intensive trialling is a huge amount of pressure.

 

[tristar]

the last stallion i kept for breeding was kept until 6 years old, before a decision was made to breed from him, during that time, 1 to 6 years, he never needed the vet, was never unsound, we tested him ourselves under saddle, and for temperament and willingness to co operate with humans despite being very hot.

a lot of it is hype, breeding for fashion and competition, and for money, not a system i would want to become involved with

 

[Cortez]

the last stallion i kept for breeding was kept until 6 years old, before a decision was made to breed from him, during that time, 1 to 6 years, he never needed the vet, was never unsound, we tested him ourselves under saddle, and for temperament and willingness to co operate with humans despite being very hot.

a lot of it is hype, breeding for fashion and competition, and for money, not a system i would want to become involved with

I don't think that personal evaluation is any match for formal evaluation by panels of expert vets, trainers, geneticists, breed judges, etc., etc. Without "breeding for money" there wouldn't be a horse industry, just random pet horses. I wouldn't use an unapproved stallion, I would hope that unregulated breeding is a thing of the past.

 

[ihatework]

the last stallion i kept for breeding was kept until 6 years old, before a decision was made to breed from him, during that time, 1 to 6 years, he never needed the vet, was never unsound, we tested him ourselves under saddle, and for temperament and willingness to co operate with humans despite being very hot.

For me, that is the way to do it initially. Then once you have satisfied yourself - you fully vet the horse and put the horse in front of panel of evaluators. If you get the thumbs up you breed. If you don’t you cut.

Not at all a commercial approach though.

 

[ycbm]

I wouldn't use an unapproved stallion, I would hope that unregulated breeding is a thing of the past.

I'm so conflicted about this. My mentally/physically unsoundest horses were all three bred from GP lines and none of my many mongrels has ever given me any problems related to their unknown parentage that I can recall.

I think if it could be guaranteed that neither the mother or father was out of work early for anything except an accident, and there were still "ordinary" stallions not bred for extremes of movement or looks available, I could agree, but not the way horse breeding is going at the moment.

 

[tristar]

the stallion in question is approved and licensed to breed.

people have always bred horses to use, not just make money

i suppose if you have 59 other people to approve a horse it does not say much for your own sense of judgement

after so many years of breeding i think the gifted breeder knows horses inside out, and has spent time studying the origins of any horses they use for breeding

i too have seen so many unsound horses, i have one now who was left to die in a trailer, he now is a fabulous boy, unknown breeding, if the ultimate aim of regulatory authorities is to control horse breeding

its all well and good being a scientist or vet or whatever, but some people have just got what it takes to breed good horses

 

[Cortez]

I'm so conflicted about this. My mentally/physically unsoundest horses were all three bred from GP lines and none of my many mongrels has ever given me any problems related to their unknown parentage that I can recall.

I think if it could be guaranteed that neither the mother or father was out of work early for anything except an accident, and there were still "ordinary" stallions not bred for extremes of movement or looks available, I could agree, but not the way horse breeding is going at the moment.

There are plenty of "ordinary" approved horses out there to choose for breeding, you don't have to choose an extravagant type.

 

[tristar]

For me, that is the way to do it initially. Then once you have satisfied yourself - you fully vet the horse and put the horse in front of panel of evaluators. If you get the thumbs up you breed. If you don’t you cut.

Not at all a commercial approach though.

but what can they tell you about your own horse you don`t already know

 

[Cortez]

the stallion in question is approved and licensed to breed.

people have always bred horses to use, not just make money

i suppose if you have 59 other people to approve a horse it does not say much for your own sense of judgement

after so many years of breeding i think the gifted breeder knows horses inside out, and has spent time studying the origins of any horses they use for breeding

i too have seen so many unsound horses, i have one now who was left to die in a trailer, he now is a fabulous boy, unknown breeding, if the ultimate aim of regulatory authorities is to control horse breeding

its all well and good being a scientist or vet or whatever, but some people have just got what it takes to breed good horses

There is a phenomenon called "barn blindness", or maybe a better name would be "fond parent syndrome"; it's always good to have an unbiased, knowledgeable eye on any stock. A large part of a larger studbook approval system includes testing for genetic problems and the ability to apply an overview of statistics. You only have to look at the current state of dog breeding to see what happens when there aren't any standards other than fashion. Of course there are good breeders out there, there are also some complete idiots that just breed because they want to with no clue whatsoever.

"i suppose if you have 59 other people to approve a horse it does not say much for your own sense of judgement"
It does if they approve the horse.............

 

[Cortez]

but what can they tell you about your own horse you don`t already know

Really? I doubt any breeder has the combined knowledge of all the people that make up a stallion approval panel. They can tell you how your horse rates in comparison with the entire breed standard, with the added benefit of often centuries of collating type and performance. I have bred warmbloods whose stud book began in 1732, and the wealth of knowledge behind the breed is astounding, allowing astonishingly accurate predictions on temperament, trainability, athleticism, size, hoof health, etc., etc. The same has applied to my PRE horses, although I do not breed them I can ask about any number of traits before purchase, and also get in-depth genetic information.

I have a lot of faith in the stallion approval system and worked hard to get a better level of competence in both the Irish Draught and Connemara Pony approval panels, which previously was very much based on letting breeders pass their own stock (with frankly pathetic results).

 

[tristar]

but not everyone breeds to a breed standard if they are not breeding within a particular stud book!

the warmblood machine holds not much interest for me, not many are pure breeds anyway

 

[tristar]

Really? I doubt any breeder has the combined knowledge of all the people that make up a stallion approval panel. They can tell you how your horse rates in comparison with the entire breed standard, with the added benefit of often centuries of collating type and performance. I have bred warmbloods whose stud book began in 1732, and the wealth of knowledge behind the breed is astounding, allowing astonishingly accurate predictions on temperament, trainability, athleticism, size, hoof health, etc., etc. The same has applied to my PRE horses, although I do not breed them I can ask about any number of traits before purchase, and also get in-depth genetic information.

I have a lot of faith in the stallion approval system and worked hard to get a better level of competence in both the Irish Draught and Connemara Pony approval panels, which previously was very much based on letting breeders pass their own stock (with frankly pathetic results).

you are assuming something that is not true


and you sound very angry

 

[Cortez]

you are assuming something that is not true


and you sound very angry

Not in the slightest, I have no skin in the game since I no longer breed.

What isn't true?

 

[ihatework]

I haven’t been ignoring this thread as I find it interesting. It’s the type of thing I mull over a lot in my own mind anyway. I still don’t think I’m any further forward as it’s quite a difficult topic, balancing act. I struggling to put down what I want to say in any real coherent form, so apologies.

Firstly - prohibited medication in performance testing I don’t think anyone, where ever you sit, will agree this is a path we should accept. It needs to be cracked down on pronto.

For me the ideal would be for any young stallion to be produced under saddle at an appropriate rate for that individual. They all are different. And whilst I don’t object to a 3yo doing a bit of work it really is in very few best (none in my book) best interest to be seen in public at that age. And to some extent that argument applies to some 4yos too. The problem being that there will always be the underlying pressure to just do that but more so the horse isn’t negatively judged for being too green, too weak, too whatever. But then you do that bit more and you risk overdoing it mentally an/or physically. It’s a fine balance for the horse and for the commercial element. A similar argument applies in performance age classes. The small % that are naturally at that level without the behind the scenes excessive production aren’t always distinguishable from the overdone ones. And in ridden horses the natural ones are normally the bubble wrapped ones not in the public eye at 4 anyway.

But then if you are going to breed from a young horse - which many studs need to do to be commercial (which let’s just accept sport horse breeding is) then something has to set that young horse apart to encourage breeders to use it. Genetics, type, movement and X-rays can all be evaluated at 3 (even 2), to shortlist potential young candidates. It’s the ride/train ability and long term soundness that is really what you need but also cannot be as easily evaluated at that age. The mere act of producing commercially from 2/3 years old could be argued to put the individual at a disadvantage to prove those traits long term.

So I think overall, licensing a year later and shortening the ridden requirements is probably a good balance to strike.

To be honest I’m not up to speed enough with the various stud book requirements, so this quite possibly already happens, but I’d say presented in hand as a 3yo the good ones should have approval for limited test covers and then once under saddle they get that expanded for more and once reach a time point for competitive achievement expanded further? Just musings, I haven’t really thought that through enough.

Then my own interest.
Eventing.
What a tricky discipline to breed for.
Genetic lines are relatively easy to select for in pure Dr & SJ. But what are eventers??? They are mongrels that aren’t good enough for Dr or Sj in the purest of discipline, but equally are in their own league of special. They are really mutants ?

The sport is evolving so quickly that the brave galloping tb, who scratched around the dressage and rubbed a couple of poles, is no longer particularly desirable at any level. Yet we still need that tb influence so that the horses can work with the ease that means you don’t end up over fittening and breaking them down at 3/4* level.

Another topic, British Breeding. Boy do we have a way to go, despite the imperfections I can list with the continental systems.

Having just watched the Eventing section of the British Breeding stallion show I have just about recovered from the deeply cringeworthy descriptions and performance of most of the entrants. Granted all the non pure Dr or pure Sj were dumped into one lot (eventers), where in reality probably 75% were lower level allrounders or show horses. Some really did not deserve to have their balls on even for allrounder/show category. A couple were so cringy I wouldn’t give them time as geldings.

Im sure more incoherent thoughts will pop into my head!

 

[stangs]

I agree with tristar for more low-level breeding (if the stallion's been checked out by his society, and has been tested for any issues known in the breed, then a good breeder's opinion of him as a horse should be more than enough), and with Cortez for the continental 'machine' producing WBs. Said WBs go for too much for the sires to not have been through all the checks and balances.

My mentally/physically unsoundest horses were all three bred from GP lines and none of my many mongrels has ever given me any problems related to their unknown parentage that I can recall.

I wonder how much of this is to do with how they're brought up, rather than their bloodlines?

 

[LEC]

Also if we are really drilling down into this the big issue is dressage horses. It’s not the jumpers. They are still pretty much judged on performance. They do the odd age class but on the whole you don’t see them until 6yo as everyone wants to see them perform not flash around an arena with ridiculous over the top paces which don’t make GP horses.

 

[tristar]

I agree with tristar for more low-level breeding (if the stallion's been checked out by his society, and has been tested for any issues known in the breed, then a good breeder's opinion of him as a horse should be more than enough), and with Cortez for the continental 'machine' producing WBs. Said WBs go for too much for the sires to not have been through all the checks and balances.


I wonder how much of this is to do with how they're brought up, rather than their bloodlines?

a lot is to do with hereditary pre disposition to skeletal unsoundness, competing too young, in general wb`s are fairly big and may have needed at lot more time to mature

i might add i am not breeding low level horses