Opinions wanted – ApHC “Question of the Week”

As you can imagine, there are countless issues for the Board of Directors to consider these days. Leading up to a meeting in March, we’ll be asking for your input on a variety of proposals and suggestions. Your comments will be posted here and they will be provided to the directors.

For today:

Should Non-Pro’s and Youth exhibitors be allowed to show a leased horse?

Follow-up question: Should the Board consider allowing joint ownership of a horse between a Non-Pro exhibitor and an Open exhibitor?

Categories: Board /Show


  1. Brian Amerine Said,

    January 8, 2009 @ 10:37 am


    First off I commend you for attempting to reach out to the members for their input.

    On one hand, there is a fair amount of discussion about the need to stop monkeying with the rules. On the other hand, most regional shows need help increasing the amount of exhibitors, entries, and therefore income.

    Likewise, there are more then likely several points of view on this question.

    Initially my reaction is if it allows new folks the opportunity to test our breed shows then yes allow the leases to show. I also understand the removal of this opportunity was prompted by abuse of the system, and therefore some safe guards need to be instituted to prevent those issues. Maybe limiting this to novice non-pros or the amount of points earned with an individual lease.

    As to the follow up question: Should the Board consider allowing joint ownership of a horse between a Non-Pro exhibitor and an Open exhibitor?

    I believe this is certainly could be allowed. Look at the open (pro trainers) exhibitors who wives show as non-pro. I would think strictly from the standpoint of settling an estate that joint ownership is the way to go. However here again perhaps there needs to be safe guards in place to prevent abuse of the system.

    Perhaps there could be a way to track novice exhibitors in all non-pro classes and awards (points) granted for the best placing novice exhibitors, as well as the over all placing for all non-pros (applicable to halter classes for example).


  2. Sheree Black Said,

    January 8, 2009 @ 11:12 am

    Youth – yes
    Non- Pro’s – No

    The youth often need a inexpensive way in and these are your next marketing/buyer’s that we need to start bringing in.

  3. Andrea Said,

    January 8, 2009 @ 11:29 am

    In light of economic conditions and the costs associated with owning and showing horses continually increasing, I believe that show attendance and club memberships would increase if non-pro’s and youths were able to show leased horses.

  4. Gail Smith Said,

    January 8, 2009 @ 2:49 pm

    We had first hand experience with this. A Non-Pro purchased a horse on time. We put it in both of our names until it was paid off. She showed it in Non-Pro and we thought she had earned 7 or 8 points. Oops! Those points didn’t count. So we switched the papers to her name and she showed her at The World Show in a class that did not need qualifying points. For open and N/P. It was a yearling. So we learned that had we put her name on the papers alone the mare would have had more points, so next time we will put the name on the papers with a signed transfer back in case of default in addition to the contract. If people are going to cheat…they will find a way.

    I don’t see any problem with their name on the papers with another. It may be the only way they can own a a shared project or lease.

  5. Tom Hodges Said,

    January 8, 2009 @ 4:31 pm

    Yes. A novice youth or novice non-pro should be able to lease a horse. The lease should be in writing and filed with ApHC prior to competing. All participants in the lease must be a member of the ApHC. When a novice earns 50 points in any sanctioned breed association or wins his class at Nationals or Worlds, they no longer would be qualified to show a leased horse. All novices in the same family should be able to utilize the leased horse.
    This would attract new youth and non-pros for the purpose of participating at regional club level. During this hard economic times anything we can do to help the Regioal Clubs and ApHC we should look at.

  6. Christine Ruby Said,

    January 8, 2009 @ 5:08 pm

    Yes I think a Non-Pro or Youth should be able to show a leased horse. They are doing it now, just by doing a transfer, so why not make it easier on them by being able to lease the horse to show.

  7. Christine Ruby Said,

    January 8, 2009 @ 5:10 pm

    I also agree with a joint ownership between a Non-Pro and Open exhibitor that is not related. It is already being done just by transfering the horses, so make it easier and without all the scuttle butt talk and let there be co-ownership of these horses.

  8. Rich Maggard Said,

    January 8, 2009 @ 5:18 pm

    In the past, I would have supported the concept of non-pros and youth showing “leased” horses. However, certain breeder(s) and trainer(s) have abused the current rules to rack up titles on their horses. Thus, I would support a rule revision that would require a lease be in-force for an extended time period (ie: 6 months) before allowing them to show.

  9. Tiffany Said,

    January 8, 2009 @ 10:05 pm

    I think at least youth should be able to show a leased horse. There are so many kids out there who want to get the experience of owning, riding, and showing a horse but are limited financially. Having the opportunity to partner with members of the ApHC and lease a horse to gain that experience would provide them an opportunity they would otherwise be completely unable to experience. I think, for the youth, it would be a great idea.

  10. Norman Said,

    January 9, 2009 @ 6:13 am

    I think that the ApHC should allow NonPro and Youth to be able to show Leased horses. This could increase not just the number of horses at a show but also the number of entries in a class. The follow up question should be allowed as well. Again, this should be helpful for the increase of revenue with horses/entries. There are some married people that could do this already right? If one of the spouses is a trainer and the other a nonpro? Lets legalize it!Just my thoughts…

  11. Debbie Said,

    January 9, 2009 @ 11:10 am

    well i’m going to go against the trend here – in some cases with regards to new youth & non pros getting into the breed it might be a good concept -or in some cases cash straped people that want to show , but can’t afford to own the horses – but all too often – esp. at the larger shows you see this being abused – with a lot of the trainers horses owned by someone else & showing in the open classes showing up in the NP & youth classes shown by someone totally unrelated to the “open” owners of the horse – that is not really fair to the true NP & youth that own & show their own horses and may or may not be with a trainer. while i understand the need to increase numbers – it’s not a trend i like to see – this might be a viable opetion for youth , but i say no to NP

  12. Vicki Said,

    January 9, 2009 @ 11:20 am

    I believe the non-pro rules should stay exactly as they are. No changes.

  13. Naomi Said,

    January 10, 2009 @ 12:43 pm

    Yes I think a non pro or youth should be able to lease a horse . there is a lot of people that would love to show but the expense is to much for them or their parents,this way they can get their feet wet in the show world and if they find out that this is not the thing for them,then they dont have all this money tied up. but on the other hand you my sale a horse and have a new member. I might put a limit on how long they can lease .

  14. Anneli Werelius Said,

    January 10, 2009 @ 2:49 pm


    Non Pro-No

    It is a good learning experience for a youth to be able to go to a show and ride a good schooled horse. It might bring new young riders to the breed that in the future will be Appaloosa owners.

  15. Denise Said,

    January 10, 2009 @ 6:52 pm

    I don’t have much to say about the leasing of horses. If it would help a youth or non-pro get started, then yes.

    As for the follow-up question, I think there are gray areas to this issue as some pointed out. I have a problem with a niece not being able to show an aunt’s horse in NP classes. This is a way to get more people invovled as the financial crisis continues.

  16. Doyla Said,

    January 11, 2009 @ 8:01 am

    If I wasn’t absolutely certain that this privilege would be abused I would say it was a great idea. I know that this sounds very negative, but I would have to vote no to this rule change.

  17. Carla Said,

    January 11, 2009 @ 1:37 pm

    I agree that there has been way too much abuse of this rule but we need to address the issue more where the youth are concerned than with the NP. There are many good kids that flat out just cannot afford a horse and the training and all of the fancy stuff that goes with it. If they could be “co-owners” on a horse with an unrelated NP, the kid could show and help with the expenses of the trainer, hauling, stall, etc. I don’t agree with a trainer or open rider being listed as co-owners (family members that are trainers are an entirely different subject)but I think it would benefit the regional clubs as well as the ApHC. Face it, the people that are going to cheat are going to get around whatever rule you put out there no matter what it is for; they are doing it now and will continue ’til the end of time. THere are legitimate reasons for co-ownership on a horse between a non related youth and NP. My good trail gelding only needs a total of 10.5 points to complete his youth supreme champion; we simply misunderstood the requirements, thought we had it but found out after the end of the show season that we were short. Now that my son is a NP, we have to put some kids name on his papers and my son give up showing or we have to give up on the thought of getting the award. Here is a horse that has definitely earned the kudos but will probably never get the recognition due to the restricted ownership clause. It is not worth giving up the limited number of shows we now are able to attend just for that one award. With a simple change, a youth could have the opportunity to ride a decent horse (and get “hooked” on appaloosas to possibly purchase one of their own) the regional club and ApHC would get additional entries and fees and nobody would be the worse for the change. What about a youth whose horse gets hurt? And there is a NP in the barn that is willing to share their horse while the youth horse recovers? Not every exhibitor has an “open checkbook” and can just stroke a check for another horse if one gets hurt. As much as I hate the fact that the rule was abused (and still is being abused) I think a change would be good for youth and NP. I do NOT think it should be a co-ownership between a trainer and a non related NP.

  18. Dana Said,

    January 11, 2009 @ 2:54 pm

    I believe that rule change in both the question and the follow up question would be beneficial to not only the regional clubs who so desprately need entries, but also to the National organization who will benefit from increased revenue in fees and in people wanting to compete at the National and World shows.

  19. Debbie M Said,

    January 11, 2009 @ 6:51 pm

    Absolutely YES, to both questions. Considering the economy, and the direction the industry is headed, we should everything possible to encourage everyone to show, and learn about our breed!

  20. donna Said,

    January 11, 2009 @ 9:12 pm

    Unless something is going to be done about the few people that continue to abuse the non pro system, it really doesn’t matter what the outcome is…people will continue to just do an ownership transfer like they have always done.. as a non pro I have seen things continually discussed for Years…and nobody carrying through with anything and am finding this quite discouraging. 3 good examples…… 35/over Non-pro has Only 5 pointed/world/national classes when it is currently the largest division…. discussion of changing age groups for nonpro divisions which has now been talked about for over 3 years….and finally Pros that have made their complete livings off of horse training for 15 + years now becoming non pros after only 3 years….

  21. Judy Said,

    January 12, 2009 @ 6:53 am

    No one has mentioned anything about the people that (try to) keep track of all this on a regional level. How would we know who is (actually) eligible?
    Maybe you could do like the youth & let the non pros show a horse, but not be able to accrue any points until they own the horse outright. Personally I find it difficult enough to compete against the youth that has just turned non pro without allowing them (the non pro) to “skirt” the rules (somewhat) by in effect what amounts to (in my mind) the “borrowing” of a horse. The non pro division has shown some growth. Why “tinker” with something that doesn’t appear to be “broke?”

  22. Jacobs Said,

    January 12, 2009 @ 2:50 pm

    I probably should walk away from this one. I hope that you take what I say as positive input. That’s how it is ment to be presented. I would bet that most people commenting here are trainers or breeders (or under a top ApHC trainer). AND…it is beneficial to them to maintain this ruling or make it lean more towards them.

    The person/owner that owns only a handful (or one) Appaloosas doesn’t have a clue this venue is available to them. If they can’t afford a Top and/or ApHC trainer then they are pretty much done. They are not organized. They really don’t know that they have a voice…..thier fault, maybe…but the ApHC’s loss. They just love thier Appaloosa and don’t spend the time that someone in business would doing research. They are out there in the “trenches” doing more for promoting the Appaloosa then a lot of ApHC owners do at the ApHC shows. So, the results to this questionnaire, to me is really tainted. I do commend the DOB for trying and asking the question. Thank you!

    I would ask that the ApHC regional club/national club put together some questions (that you need specific answers to) and have someone in the Regional club physically contact some of the regional club’s “one hit wonders” to the ApHC regional shows. Or, Appaloosa owners doing well other venues (i.e. Open, 4-H, Gaming, Reining, etc) …and actually LISTEN to what they say. Not just breeders or trainers.

    I know that when I haul out to a ApHC breed show …. the Youth or Non Pro horse is the same horse I’ll see in the Open classes. The ApHC regional shows are totally geared towards the breeder or trainer. This has been so abused….and what amazes me is how openly it has been done. Very few abusers (depending on who you are) are held accountable in the ApHC. I won’t haul out to a ApHC show unless I am ready to compete with the pro’s! There is no place for the small owner to show in the ApHC and feel good about thier horse, be competitive and want to come back. I believe that this ruling was originally set up for them. They are telling you loud and clear that you product (regional shows) are not taking care of them (the new customer) by NOT coming/returning to your shows. It’s pretty simple really.

    If it stays the same (and nothing changes) then…..the results will stay the same. This way of thinking hasn’t brought in many NEW (optimum word here in NEW….not wife’s or transfers from other breeds) people/client in the past that stay (or at least not enough), so keeping it the same, will not make ANY difference.

    It cost MORE to show ApHC then AQHA and APHC (or at least it does around here) so……if I’m smart, I’d be changing breeds ASAP! If I have money (for smaller named trainers, etc), then again, it would be smarter to change breeds. Now, add the fact that I’m new and dealing with this ruling geared towards the breeder/trainer and have this political non-sense…..then, again I change breeds. And, there is more abuse/GOB/Politics in the ApHC shows then the other breeds around here. Sorry, I know many will disagree or don’t care to hear that comment. Look at the numbers and they don’t lie. If you make it so the little man can’t show, then the top trainers will have to “jump ship” to another breed (to be able to make money)…….hey, that’s pretty much what has been done!

    I have owned and LOVED only Appaloosas for over 30 years and will continue to own/love them. I will show ApHC shows ONLY when I feel that I’m ready. We show mainly open and 4-H regularly. I love it when people walk past and make comments like “stunning Appaloosa, were did you get him” or when we explain the breed to new people.

    We are seeing many new Appaloosa owners in the Open and 4-H shows and the horses are very nice. But, they don’t show ApHC shows. Those are the people that you need to talk to IMO.

    So, I’d like to see this ruling lean more for the “little people” or small time owner. Actually made stiffer (with more requirements) to insure that it’s used properly and for what it was (IMO) set up for. All abusers stopped and they are held accountable. The little people actually count and are needed by the trainers/breeders and for growth.

    Growth only really actually comes from NEW/returning to ApHC owners IMO.

  23. Ben & Carrie Hemken Said,

    January 13, 2009 @ 5:45 pm

    I don’t feel it would be right to allow youth lease of horses. I think this will discourage ownership by average horse people. If my child is going to now compete against open horses that would not otherwise be shown in youth classes this will make it very discouraging. Let’s find a way to gain youth without hurting those children that are already dedicated to the ApHC by owning and taking pride in their own animal. Horse ownership is a responsibility, this should not be RENT A HORSE.

    Likewise, I feel the same for Non-Pro. Who is going to want to raise and train horses on a small level just to be competing against someone that has spent a fraction of the cost of horse ownership. Riding animals take years to develop – what is the incentive to raise one to keep and promote if someone else is allowed these shortcuts?

  24. Sue Said,

    January 14, 2009 @ 8:10 am

    My response is NO on both. I must really agree with the basics of what “Jacobs” said. The system is totally geared to the people who go to Nationals and Worlds every year, and those people will usually find a way to get around the system anyway because they are current on issues/rules etc. Doing a sale/transfer back is probably more common than anyone realizes. So allowing a lease is just going to create a bunch of rule-making, rule revising, and pot stirring! Does the ApHC need more busy-work or something?
    My daughter leases a gelding to show, which is currently legal for youths to do, she just doesn’t get points . . . so what? It is a great way for me to see how serious she wants to be before I spend thousands on a youth horse. And youth don’t have to qualify for Youth Worlds anyway. So that option is already out there for beginners or people wanting to test the waters. As for the non-pro’s, this may really be out on a limb, but I feel that whole “non-pro” thing is so hugely abused we ought to just do away with it completely. There should be just open classes with a novice division. Once you earn so many points, you’re out. The top non-pros have been winning for years, are all hooked up with a top trainer (or married to one), and could beat most of the new/novice trainers in about anything. Plus it must be frustrating to a real non-pro to know they don’t have much of a chance of beating the same title holders year after year. This creates incentive for the Novice Non Pros to NOT SHOW at regional shows because they don’t want to earn points to lose their novice status in case they want to go to Nationals/Worlds. We need a true novice division that anyone can have a shot at – THAT would bring in new members/showers in my opinion.

  25. Jeanne Joliffe Said,

    January 15, 2009 @ 7:24 am

    Youth and Non-Pro already can show a leased horse just cannot earn National Points. I have no problem with this. I do not think it would be fair to earn Nat. Pts. just because you can afford to lease a Worlds/Nationals quality horse. I show Non-Pro and Open at regional shows. I have qualified for Worlds/Nationals but have never gone because I can not afford to go. My main problem is with showing against “professional” Non-Pros who stay just within the rules…oh, well, that’s life. I show because I love it and my ‘Appaloosa family’ at a level I can afford. I have my own horses to love and care for, not a ‘rent-a-horse’ to glorify myself in others eyes.

RSS feed for comments on this post