This message is from: "bushnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This message is from: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"An evaluated Fjord can be worth more dollars than an unevaluated one." Carol posted this as one of her reasons for DVD evaluations. As much as I like and respect Carol, I don't think there is ANY way to prove this point one way or the other. Margaret IF THAT WERE NOT the case, there would be no justification for having a very expensive and elite complex evaluation system, would there? It is a widely accepted breed cross-section concept that evaluations are a marketing tool.(I seem to well recall pro evaluation folks cite the monetary advantage as incentive even!) Question.. who desires an elitist grading system that stamps their allegedly perfect Fjords more valuable and desirable than others that aren't? ..(A system which requires excessive funds and extenuating effort.) Answer.. those affluent few who want a marketing edge or prestige. America is wired for competitive excellence, you just naturally prefer an auto that is custom stickered with a longer warrantee for a few thousand dollars more. Fjords all come from the same genetic factory as well, but for a few thousand dollars more you can have an evaluated Deluxe Edition ...even though it is a blood cousin to an economy model that is not evaluated. Don't tell me it's not about money, it's ALWAYS about money. Some of the largest breeders, those whom evaluators might deem most needy, stay home on the farm raising Fjords because it is impractical, no--impossible! to drag umpteen stock to Timbuktu for an expensive approval rating. (many can't drive far enough or run fast enough, ha) They labor at home with stock that now might be deemed third rate because they have been naive enough to fund and tolerate an exclusive graded system that undermines their market, even though their economy Fjords are cousins to the evaluated Deluxe Edition--endorsed by an elitist evaluating clique that caters to an affluent few. It strikes me that the DVD idea of Carol's is a bid for a fair shake!--for every Fjord, --for every farm. I'm not necessarily saying that WE would use such a system here, because our video efforts SHOULD be touched up! hah =)) But why not explore the idea fully without personal recriminations? A thought on hairy legs being a consideration, shave them! or add a disclaimer for unseen considerations ...which is probably something that should already be in place as it occurs to me that all EC members possibly stand liable for random sanctioned MISjudgments anyhow. What does everyone want from an evaluation I ask myself? (just guessing, feel free to chime in) 1) unbiased, uninvolved, impartial judges, who have no client connection or conflict of interest whatsoever, just like the rulebook REQUIRES. for me this excludes Fjord breeders as judges, who are market competitors and who prefer their own breeding predilections (and my stock may not look like theirs.) If their stallion is a blue and other stallions red..well, you do the math. 2) horses, NOT handlers, judged against the Fjord Standard ONLY. 3) realistic affordable equal opportunity for EVERY member participation. 4) a more comprehensive record system that represents the breed as an ENTIRETY. The DVD idea fits ALL these criteria. But more than all of the above, I wish for a shift away from the mating "perfect to perfect" agenda and mentality. Yesterday a board member of the EC stated, "there has been talk about breeding the best to the best, that's always the way it should be." "the way it should be?!" (sputter) according to whom? "Directional selection" breeding is OUTDATED! If the present evaluation process has best-to-best breeding as their agenda we are in an alarming state of affairs for genetic breed conservation. Ruthie, nw mt us (who says to herself she will now permanently shut up on the subject, maybe =))
