Well, today’s discussion has turned into rather a rant, inspired by outside discussion. In presenting my plans and goals for creating the mini gypsy to others, I often encounter opposition to the idea, mostly by people whose opinion it is that I am trying to do some kind of harm to the current gypsy horse market or the breed as a whole; as well as thoughts that now is a hell of a time to be producing “extra” horses into the world when there are so many needing homes. And I cannot deny that all of those things are worth discussing , yet I cannot give up my dreams because the politics of the world has changed so much in the last few years. My prediction is that within a few years people will start to notice fewer and fewer ponies across the nation that are available, as so few people are continuing to raise ponies aside from miniature horses, at all. Between the horse and general market crash in the recent past, and pony breeders simply getting old and closing business, and fewer and fewer people having barnyard areas, small lots and pastures to keep a few ponies; good old grade ponies like I grew up riding are going to be quite scarse in ten years.
Someone compared my efforts with the negative effects already present in the “genetic baseline” whatever that means, in the welsh…now if you had stated Shetland Ponies, I would have went, YEAH too weird how that happened through the years of the 20th century, they have basicly disappeared in the USA from what the native stock is. I don’t see that so much in the welsh, I think most welsh are fairly identifiable with their native counterparts. Now isn’t it better to go at it from the beginning, forming a breed from the breed traits (all kinds of horses have gone into making the gypsy horse, they are NOT a purebred by any means). I have only been making my effort for five years and I’m already using my 4th gypsy stallion from imported stock, or direct imports, always seeking to use what I believe I well understand are desired traits that create the look of a gypsy cob. I just don’t get why people think my development of a separate facet of the “LOOK” will in any way affect the group of horses who are currently registered as “purebred” gypsy horses. I have witnessed no inclination on the part of the present registries (four registries are already established to handle the squabbling among the people who have imported the gypsy horses to the US), and no doubt, people will import more littles at some point and apparently they will be eligible for inclusiion in the “purebred” registries because they come from gypsy breeders, not because they are in any way guaranteed to be a “PUREBRED”. But those who are imported are likely the best TYPE phenotypically, they look like what people have come to believe a gypsy horse should look like.
You might consider that there are more than one “purebred” horse or pony studbook still with open sections to them for breeders who are seeking traits they want to add in, and that this was still common 50 years ago in practically all the registries. If you study genetics at all you find that it is beneficial to the cell to have MORE genetic diversity vs. less (this fact was started to be promoted among scientists about 20 years ago, after most of the registries “closed” to outside horses), but most people are sold on the value of the pure blood, not the best quality animal overall. In my opinion, the individual should always be more important than the group, when choosing to improve traits.
As to registration of a mini gypsy from me, that is yet to develop as far as others joining in and creating an organization that will support such a thing. I am not worried about that at all; in the meantime, if people choose to they CAN use partbred registration in most of the current gypsy horse registries; furthermore, there are other choices as well according to how buyers ever go on to train and use their mini gypsy….it’s wide open opportunity from my view.