 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
To Establish Foundation Or Not? |
|||||||||||||
Foundation is a "BIG" word in animal
breeding. What we are focusing on is the
Equine area of Foundation.
The word foundation is used in a few different ways, seen frequently are
the terms Foundation Stock, Foundation Stallion, or less used Mare, in
which the Mare is as much Foundation as the Stallion in a breeding
program. Then there are Foundation Horse Associations, Groups,
and so forth.
A Foundation Sire, or Mare is a legitimate term, because it represents
the foundation of a certain breeding program in which a certain breeder
uses the same animal, or animals to accomplish a certain outcome in which
they have achieved the goals in an animal or equine that they want to
see.
For instance, if Jane bred Mare # 7 to Sire # 2 and produced time and
again the same characteristics that they the breeder were looking for
then Mare #7 and Sire #2 would become that breeders foundation Sire and
Mare.
In a good line breeding program the get are usually bred with another horse with distant or no relations but with the same or similar
characteristics, then the great get would then be bred back to the
Foundation sire or mare to strengthen these characteristics and so forth.
When this line produces enough get to copulate a continuing breeding
program this then would be a legitimate Foundation Stock. However in
every good breeding program there needs to be out breeding, to bring a
distance from the foundation sire and mare to breed back in and continue
the line, there is no way around this.
Too closely bred (inbred) too many times will most certainly end up with
gene deficiencies, so there is a fine line in this scenario. Although
what I have written in a short sense, would be a flawless choice of
animals for the breeder Jane, in reality, it usually takes years for a
breeder to form a line that continues the characteristics that are
sought after. Sometimes the combination may never be found, and a new
beginning must be made.
Foundation Associations, Groups etc... that term "Foundation" within in
their group are loosely termed.
For example… if a Foundation Group terms "Foundation" with a certain
color, gait, or date, to a whole breed, this indeed is a deception.
Lets take for example Justin Morgan the Horse, this is a perfect example,
and is a well known horse of breed to use, because, the true Foundation
Sire can be traced.
Figure (Justin Morgan the horse) was born of what is thought to be Pure blood
English equine or Thoroughbred, and possibly Wild air, or Barb. Although
there are a few other claims that he was Sired by Canadian Warm blood,
this will never truly be known, because the records of this breeding at
the time were lost, even though there are claims that the records exist.
When Justin Morgan, (Figure), which he was named by his owner, Justin
Morgan the man, was being bred in the late 1700's there was only one
Morgan Horse the Progenitor of the breed, Figure.
Unknowingly to Justin Morgan the man, Figures offspring held all his
characteristics no matter what breed of horse he was bred to.
This was how strong Figures genes were.
All of his get and his great get and so forth resembled Figure.
However, Figure being of Pure Blood is an incorrect statement, because he
was the get of apparently two opposing breeds. It just so happens
that this combination of breed, possibly at that one time, never
duplicating itself, produced dominating genes, that reproduced themselves
over and over again.
And being stated that Figures offspring was of pure Morgan blood is also
incorrect, because for years, maybe 20, each of the offspring came from
Figure and another breed, then that offspring propagated with again
another breed, and so forth. In which, leaves to be said, that, the Morgan
blood is of many and many different breeds with the Morgan genes dominating.
In which the characteristics on a whole remained the same.
Again, for some years all Morgan’s came from a Morgan, and for arguments
sake, a Thoroughbred, of a Canadian, a Narragansett, and on, and so forth.
Although, after years of Justin Morgan (Figure) propagating, did breeders of
distinction realize that they needed to contain and strengthen these
characteristics, for, if out bred consistently, characteristics would
undoubtedly be lost.
And this they did, with absolute positive outcomes.
So, the Morgan horse is of, and based on, characteristics. It is unavoidably
not argumentative to say that, this breed is of pure blood. Which in
any start, of any breed distinguishing themselves, will not, and cannot be
of pure blood.
However, within a breed, can a distinction be made with families, such as
the Lambert, Lippitt, Brunk etc...
These families carry their own characteristics, but also are
recognizable as the breed of horse which in this case is the Morgan
Horse. Characteristics may vary such as the Western Morgan, with a lower
headset for the ability of better saddle riding, and use on cows and
cattle. Some are bred to be gaited, as this produces a smoother easier
ride.
Further, to say that "Foundation" in this breed can be confined to a
color, gait, or a year, no matter what the argument may be, is incorrect.
The only possible way to label a true and correct "Foundation" Morgan
Horse is through pedigree only, and the "purest" highest blood of Figure
would be those who have the very least crossbreeding (bred to other
breeds), in its pedigree. This in itself is a laborious task and would take
countless time and money for each individual horse. This in a
business sense, is neither cost effective, nor efficient. So, a stipulation
is
put onto the groups rules or laws, which now makes it effectively
efficient, for the business to profit.
To exemplify the point of incorrectness in confining "Foundation", an
example of using a date will be used.
Lets say Jane has a Morgan of 7 years, and this is a Morgan of epitome to
the breed, but Jane’s Morgan’s great ,great, great grandfather was crossbred
with a Canadian. Although this is the only crossbreeding in the pedigree
back to Justin Morgan, her horse cannot be considered a "Foundation"
horse, because, the crossbreeding took place five years after the date of
the association, or group, made the crossbreeding date cutoff.
Now John, has a Morgan who has no crossbreeding after the date stipulated
with the group, but in his Morgan’s pedigree there has been
10 different instances of crossbreeding before this date.
The issue…….
Jane has one crossbreeding in her horses pedigree, and does not qualify,
John has 10 separate instances of crossbreeding in his pedigree but does
qualify.
This in itself shows the incorrectness of this theory, and, the terminal
damage
that it may have on this breed, in this case the Morgan horse.
The only other possible way to create a "Foundation" for the Morgan, would
be to accumulate a points system, and judge or rate each individual horse
for each characteristic specific to the Morgan Horse, because the Morgan
is of Characteristics and not of crossbreeding.
By which I mean, if Jane’s Morgan is that, the reflection of Figure, and
produces get in his image, then that is a true "Foundation Morgan",
regardless of the crossbreeding in his pedigree.
It needs to be relied upon by honest breeders, who wholeheartedly strive
to continue this breed in its Progenitors image, Figure.
At last, with this said, it would be of a facade to create a Foundation
Morgan Horse Association.
Thank you for your time.
© Copyright 2006-2007 Foundation Morgan Horse Association.
