Chestnut Friesians: Why Did The Registries Do This?

Discussion in 'Horse Breeding' started by S.HorseWoman, Nov 22, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. S.HorseWoman

    S.HorseWoman Senior Member+

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,779
    Likes Received:
    128
    I was looking at a website and they have listed at stud, a purebred Friesian stallion who is a Chestnut. I searched and found there are actually four known living chestnut Friesians that are completely purebred.

    I also found that the registries for Friesians basically had a fit that these chestnut foals were born and BANNED any stallion that did not test homozygous for black (Basically Ee instead of EE) from breeding! Apparently, they did not test any mares.

    My question is, why on earth would they do that? It is very simple to prevent the chestnut from reappearing if it is that big a deal by knowledgeable breeding. The Friesian is a very rare breed with a VERY small genepool so why limit the bloodlines even further by banning approved stallions just becuase they carry the gene for red. Again, just because they CARRY it, does not mean it has to show up! Just make sure the stallion is bred to homozygous black mares and they will NEVER have another chestnut foal.

    Still, I don't see what the huge deal was about a few chestnut Friesians being born. Yes, I understand the standard is for black, but still, it seems a little silly. The Lippizan stallions were bred exclusively for gray (white), but you still get an occasional bay or black that appears and stays that color. The U.S. likes them, though I don't believe Europe is fond, but still the registries did not ban any stallion or mare that had a non-gray foal or refuse to allow the non-grays full regisitry.

    As I understand it, you can only registered a chestnut Friesian in a foal book, basically as coming from a purebred mare. Other than that, they are not registered, even if they have good conformation or anything else. Again, I just find that to be unwise. Discussions have already been had of why small genepools cause trouble, and the Friesian is already in trouble for new blood and having problems because of that. Why limit what little is left for something so easy to "fix" and control?
     
    secuono and SportPonyCrayzi like this.
  2. harli36

    harli36 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    5,513
    Likes Received:
    3,066
    According to my understanding of it they didn't BAN the horses from the registry. After all they can't do that because genetically they are purebreed Friesians. But what they did do is keep the chestnut horse in the registry but won't allow any offspring of those horses to be registered.

    Quite frankly I don't blame them. They want their horses to be a certain standard and when 99.9% of those horse are black then chestnut horses don't follow the standard. Friesians wouldn't be Friesians if they were chestnut. And while color shouldn't be most important, when almost the entire breed is black why allow what they see as a less favorable color into the gene pool?

    It is true that the Freisians have a small gene pool but I think that they are well enough off now that they can sacrifice 4 breeding horses ;)

    Personally I think the Freisian people are very commited to breeding standards. Their breeders are very strict about which animals get to breed and when an animal goes against the standard in any way they won't breed it. Chestnut is against the standard. Why take the chance you will end up with another chestnut when you can breed to a black and get a black?
     
  3. S.HorseWoman

    S.HorseWoman Senior Member+

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,779
    Likes Received:
    128
    No, that's just it! They did not JUST ban the chestnut horses from breeding. The registries ALSO banned ANY stallion that did not test homozygous for black as well! If I remember the article right, it was a fairly large number of stallions, several of which had NOT even produced a chestnut as yet.

    Considering the amount of inbreeding and linebreeding Friesians already have AND the high standards, why ban APPROVED stallions just because they carry one red gene?

    They AREN'T just sacrificing the four actual chestnuts, they are getting rid of multiple approved studs and their genetic diversity as well for no good reason. Chestnut is RECESSIVE; all they had to do to prevent any more chestnuts was make sure the stallions were bred to EE(homozygous black) mares of which there are PLENTY within the breed.

    Why not do that instead of throwing away approved stallions just because they CARRY the gene and DO NOT actually show it?

    I am not saying they should start breeding for chestnut Friesians, but why not work to control the color by intelligent breeding instead of banning good, valuable bloodlines that have already been inspected and approved? It seems like they are "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" doing that. Last time I heard there are only about 3,000 Friesians in the U.S.; not a very small number, but remember a LOT are closely related to each other and those that are not are linebred to the same horses farther back.
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2005
    secuono likes this.
  4. S.HorseWoman

    S.HorseWoman Senior Member+

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,779
    Likes Received:
    128
    Oh, just in case anyone is curious as to what a chestnut Friesian looks like: http://www.angelfire.com/tx2/friesians/red.html

    Again, I am not saying that they should be breeding for chestnut. I agree, chestnut is not the standard and not as striking as pure black, BUT I see no reason to ban good breeding stallions that AREN'T chestnut and need never produce one.

    It just seems a little arcane to me, similiar to Quarter Horse refusing to register cremellos.
     
  5. BestofPrincess

    BestofPrincess Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,328
    Likes Received:
    211
    They have not alowed red based friesian for a long time, this is nothing new. the stallion would never had aproval. this breed registrey is doing the same thing arabs did with pinto markings, and I know which stallion you are talking about even if you change his color he still is not a good example of the breed, conformation no just not right
    besides not only is that horse not the color the breed registry excepts he also HAS A WHITE MARKING a nother thing not alowed in FAHNA, FPS, or FOA
     
  6. bereider

    bereider Full Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2005
    Messages:
    154
    Likes Received:
    7
    QH did this with the cremello and perlion colored QH. Did not let them in because of color. So they had to be reg. as a breeding stock paint. Just over the last few years QH has let the cremello and perlion colors in to be QH. I think it so silly to band any horse from its breed because the color is wrong. i can understand this with color reg. But not breed Reg.
     
    secuono and irideazip like this.
  7. harli36

    harli36 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    5,513
    Likes Received:
    3,066
    So your saying that they tested all the stallions for the black gene and any heterozygous blacks were omited from the registry? Which of the Friesian registry's did this?

    I would love to see that article.

    Not trying to be sarcastic here I'm just curious.
     
  8. irideazip

    irideazip Senior Member+

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    6,463
    Likes Received:
    465
    while i agree that a fresian is just not a fresian unless he/she is black, the shestnut ones are quite beautiful as well and carry the same "look" about them as any other fresian. If a chestnut one pops up, why ban him/her from producing offspring? they are still the same breed and, like all other breeds, you have to expect other colors to become known.

    You never know, maybe the chestnut coloring has something to do with ancestry or origination or something to that effect.
     
  9. irideazip

    irideazip Senior Member+

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    6,463
    Likes Received:
    465
    i agree 100%
     
  10. shell

    shell Senior Member+

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Messages:
    10,482
    Likes Received:
    490
    QH is also allowing crop outs and sabinos in. I think they were sick of loosing registration money to APHA!!:wink:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page