Changes in the AKHR

[Michelle Clarke]

www.americankiger.com/

[Michelle Clarke]

I emailed Janice and she was nice enough to let me post her reply here on this board...
________
Michelle

AKHR temporarily will not register freeze-brand foundation Kigers born after 12/31/03, nor their offspring unless one of the foundation parents was born prior to that date. In other words, if you have a kiger that bases its pedigree for registration SOLELY on an ancestor that was born after 12/31/03, AKHR will temporarily not register that horse. However, if that same horse has an ancestor that was born prior to 12/31/03 from the one of the Kiger HMAs, that kiger will be registered. AKHR has become aware of changes in management practices and has reason to question the purity of the Kigers born after 12/31/07. Until management practice information is released to AKHR, the rule will stay in effect. To a certain extent, however, Kigers born after that date may be partial blood or purebred, depending on management practices.

I became worried in 2003/2004 when Connie "left" the wild horse unit. It became impossible to get information that before was very easy to obtain. It was also alarming when they refused to share management procedures and those critical management procedures became suspect to drastic change. As Josh Warburton pointed out at the forum, the registries are going to have to learn to cooperate with one another and confront BLM. I can foresee in the very near future a resolution to this issue.

I have reason to believe that BLM is introducing "non-kigers" to the 2 herds and/or possibly playing with genetics. My grandmother shared her experience with the "wild ones with the stripes" over 100 years ago. Her people [the Paiute nation] encountered these horses, but could not get close enough to catch them. Her description of their colors and confirmation was comparable to that of the first Kigers adopted in the 1980's.

I was disappointed by the quality of the captured Kigers at the last adoption as they were typified by long backs, fine bones, taller and more like QH, etc. Both BLM and the public have changed the look of this breed and if the registries do not come to some agreement on a conformation standard we could lose this special breed altogether. This could happen even if the registries come together for all the wrong reasons and without the breed/confirmation standard as a priority.

I was told by BLM personnel that I must take into account that these were the culls. These culls were much, much worse quality than in prior years. The almighty dollar must be getting in the way of the old style Kiger. Sacrifice conformation [and mind?] for marketability?

I believe from what I have been told that the breeding of the "wrong" type is probably both the introduction of new blood and untrained horse management. Again, I am not sure what is being "introduced" into the Kiger herds. With regard to the untrained horse management, when Connie "left" the horse unit, so did all of the dedicated buckaroos and other corral personnel. In other words, it sounds as though the new head honcho cleaned house. The Herds are rounded up, fed, and handled by independent contractors, not BLM horse unit personnel. It sounds like another case of the Federal government letting the lowest bidder do the job. I stood inside the area where the horses were prepared for loading and it appeared that the trained personnel in that area were old BLM people. I was allowed to take pictures in there and the horses were handled with care and respect by these older people.

I will keep digging until I do find out what has and is happening and if their efforts is compromising the two herds. This precious breed is deep in my heritage and I do not want it lost.

Sadly, the adoption horses this year had too many non-typical Kigers present and AKHR is concerned about the quality of the herds and is striving to PROTECT and PRESERVE the characteristics of the original Kiger. By closing the books to the "new" types of Kiger, it is AKHRs way of keeping to its Mission and Purpose.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any further questions.

Janice King

[lindaf]

Am I understanding correctly that the BLM will not meet with representatives of the Kiger community?

I agree that it will be impossible for the BLM to come up with a successful plan for the Kigers 1) if they do not employ veteran horsemen to handle the horses, 2) if they won't listen to the Kiger experts, and 3) if the Kiger experts cannot agree on what makes a superior Kiger. How can the BLM be expected to manage the herds to preserve outstanding characterisitcs if the Kiger people themselves can't agree on what these characteristics are?

As a newcomer I would like to know a few things about the registries and standardization.

1. How many Kiger registries exist?
2. Does each registry have a board of directors to represent it? (They should.)
3. Have the directors of all the registries ever seriously tried to come to agreement in the description of the ideal Kiger conformation?
4. How much of a role do egos and vested interests play in being unable to reach an agreement?


Why can't the directors of each registry, using a standardized form modeled on the kind that all breed organizatons use, each write their description of what a Kiger is? Then representatives from each group, say 2 from each, sit down literally or virtually and look at the similarities and differences. It should be the serious goal of the Kiger community to have a description of the type horse that should be preserved to the BLM by 2009 or sooner.

If Kiger owners cannot agree on what a Kiger is, it is understandable that the BLM is grasping at straws when they cull and release. If the BLM is introducing outside blood, it is only a matter of time that a Kiger will not be a Kiger, hence the action that the AKHR is taking.

I think the question that needs to be asked is "Do we want a designer horse that we call a Kiger, or do we want the Kiger that the environment made.? " If the first option is chosen, then anything goes according to what is fashionable. If it is the second option, then we'd surely better decide what a Kiger is, and fast, or the Kiger community will have no credible input in BLM decisions.

On a related subject....My second breed group (Norwegian Fjords) holds what are called evaluations. The horses receive scores from trained judges based on how closely they conform to the ideal. These scores are on record. When it comes time to select a stallion or mare to breed to, there is an objective ranking to help you choose the best of the best. This ranking of horses will also help buyers choose horses based on an evaluation by experts. Careless breeding will be discouraged and careful breeding will be rewarded, all based on comparison to a standard developed by those who know the breed well and want it to stay strong.

Personally, I do not want a designer Kiger. I want an historically relevant, conformationally correct Kiger whether it is a dun, a bay, or a grey. If the BLM has no guidelines for what to cull and what to keep and doesn't stop introducing non Kiger genes, the historially relevant Kiger will be gone.

Just MHO

[Michelle Clarke]

Very well said. Being a newcomer, I would say you are in for an awakening when it comes to the registries! There are WAAAAY too many for the small number of horses and no one agrees with anyone or anything. That is why it is so hard to move the Kigers into other area and arenas because no one agrees. It is "bad" enough to say "mustang" (read mutt to outsiders) and then on top of it have no one agree on what kind of "mutt" it is!

I was so surprised when I saw the Breed Standard for one of the registries as I have said before, not to mention nothing of it is condusive to "Spanish" type.

I think it is a hard balance to say let's take the Kiger for what they are and what nature has formed. To some extent, I very much agree. However, on the other hand, what is superior for survival, may not be good for domestic life.

Take one example: the trot is the most effective gait in the wild. Covers lots of ground and saves energy because each diagonal can rest each stride. Two feet on the ground at any time for balance and stability. This can quickly develop a horse that tends to prefer using his flexor muscles instead of his extenders. Using flexors means that they lock (or worse drop) the back, raise the head, pick up the knees and hocks and all the while the hind end is out behind them.

I have met many Kigers that much prefer the trot and the canter is very difficult to develop - quality canter especially. When in training, it is much easier to deveop a trot than a canter. Some Master horsemen say that if the horse does not have a natural canter, they never will. I see lots of Kigers with pretty trots and choppy, short canters that tend to want to hit heavier on the front end, instead of lift.

While this may be okay for your average rider (many which may not even know the difference), this does limit the breed from moving into many competition arenas.

The other is turned in hocks. While this does give an extra amount of balance in the backend, it also lends to earlier breakdown in the hock and stifle. This may not be noticable in the wild, but now add a saddle, rider and ask the horse to preform certain tasks, this can become a problem. This also gets us marked down in the Conformation Classes!

So, this makes it difficult when working on a Breed Standard. Do we just look at the Kigers for what they are and say this is what they should be - faults and all? How do we improve on the Breed Standard as private breeders go for future generations?

If a concave profile is okay with the breed standards (along with straight or convex), then what if the flavor becomes dishy faces and we begin to loose the other? Just like the halter QH's put all that muscle on those tiny feet for looks...

I do agree with you. The registries should get together and form one Standard of Perfection.

[lindaf]

When I began researching Kigers about a year ago, it was quickly obvious that there were some bitterly opinionated people about. I have not registered my filly because I haven't decided yet which one to select. I think it is important to register even if I do not breed her so that records can be accurate about the Kigers that exist, especially domestically bred horses like mine. The BLM will have records on the wild ones, but unless people register their ranch bred horses no one has any idea what bloodlines are out there. I will NOT join a registry that is spiteful and disrespectful no matter how informed about Kigers the founders of the registry are. I guess it is more accurate to say I know which registry(-ies) I will not use.

Unless the future of the breed itself becomes more important than insisting one's opinion is the only acceptable one, there will be no Kiger breed, just a bunch of loosely related horses that carry the Kiger name.

Michelle, you make a good point about characteristics that favor a horse in the wild being different than those that make him successful in a domestic career. That makes it more complicated. What if there were separate standards, one for helping the BLM choose the horses that stay in the HMAs and another standard for breeding operations that market to event competitors. That would help the wild ones stay adapted to life in the wild, and the domestic breeders could work toward correct conformation for competition. People could still have thrill of having a wild mustang whose conformation might not be quite right for the arena, or they could buy a domestically bred Kiger if they want a competition prospect.

[Michelle Clarke]

I'll do two seperate posts here.....

First, my Kigers that I have produced are not registered. Charro was registered when I bought him, so was Madonna, Sycha is although I can't get her paperwork from anyone, and Sages' fees and papers were sent in before I bought her but I have been there is no record of it.

I keep sitting back and waiting, and waiting and WAITING for a registry that makes some kind of sense to pop up. As many know, Madonna was a rare "claybank" - uh, greybank; so the KMA will not register her or her foals that are grey. Actually, she was registered with the KMA as a claybank, but under their rules, they would pull her breeding rights. BUT, Desi being a colored foal from her would be eligible. And like I said before, JP said Rev was the best example of a Iberian type Kiger he had ever seen, yet he is a grey-yo ;D, so that would knock him off the books.

I also belive the KMA has inspections (at least last time I emailed them) and there was no one in Texas to inspect my horses, so I could send in the fees and fill out the paperwork, but then what? How would they be inspected? How long would I have to wait? Plus some of my pure Kigers are greying, so there you go.

I did get the paperwork on the AKHR, but the paperwork was geared toward Kigers and their BLM numbers and geneology. Fine, but had no where for white markings or was not cross-bred friendly (which I have lots of). So, it was more of a cataloging type of registry from what I saw. Fine, there is a need for that! Janice has done tons of research on all that stuff and it is necessary, however not condusive to be in it by itself enough for me.

Rick has stated that the SMKR is basically for registering his horses. He does not have the time, manpower or inclination to do what is needed. That is fine too - he is being honest about it and if you buy a horse from him, it WILL be registered with the SMKR.

I like what the KHAR (www.kigerhorse.org/) has done with their registry - it seems to be on the ball, they have regional directors and seem to be off to a good start. They are also VERY involved with the BLM in keeping tabs on the Kigers and the inner-workings of that whole deal. They seem very knowledgable and bring alot to the table. However, we have a breed standard that I am not quite sure of (allowing the three types of heads again), and here are some of the disqaulifiying features:
 
* One full stocking (A white marking that extends from edge of the hoof to the bottom of knee or hock
or higher)
* Four socks (A white marking that extends beyond the top of the pastern joint on all four legs)
* White under the chin
* Grey
* Sorrel/Chestnut
* Palomino
* Appaloosa markings
* Buckskin
* Roan
* Lack of fawn (light color) in ear.
* Lack of dorsal (in all colors except Bay and Black)

There are 16 of these and all but the last three (bite and testicles) are color based. This is disappointing to me that everyone is still so focused on color.

If the color that is so desired is the "primative" color, than why is the breed standard a HUGE deviation from the "primative" body type? Here is your primative body type:



No one in the Kiger breed is head over heels about the Sulpher horses, which show more Sorraia type than most of the Kigers. Here are some of the "type" charactoristics of the primative horse:

The Sorraia horse is typically around 14 to 14,3 hands at the withers. It is a rather narrow, fairly long-legged horse. The neck is of sufficient length and thin, sometimes ewe-necked, and clean at the throatlatch. Fat Sorraias will develop a cresty neck.

The Sorraia's head is rather long and has a convex, or subconvex, profile. This convexity is not just referring to a dropping nose, often called Roman nose, but a continuous convex line from poll to nostrils. The strongest curve in this line is below the eye, while towards the muzzle it becomes almost straight. The eye is set fairly high, the forehead is narrow, the ears medium long to long and not particularly curved. The whole head gives a clear, "dry", bony, refined appearance, as opposed to a meaty, coarse look.

A prominent set of withers is typical for the Sorraia, as is a long shoulder, a medium-long back, a sloping (but not dropping) hip. Protruding hip bones occur, especially in mares; the hips being on the narrow side and tapering towards the tail, in contrast to the "square" rear end of, for instance, the Quarter Horse.

The horse may be narrow, but has great depth of chest. Cannon bones are fairly long, so are the pasterns. The hooves are small to medium size. There is no excessive hair around the fetlock joints.

Sorraias show amazing flexibility vertically and laterally. They have great ability to collect themselves and are extremely agile. A certain amount of knee action is typical, as is a free, ground-covering trot. Some Sorraias are naturally gaited.

Don't get me wrong, I happen to like these horses and am pretty excited that the Kigers are related; but I would own one maybe to ride and have around (or even use a few times in breeding for F1 crosses, then breed back up)....but, having to try to sell 14' hand gaited horses with a ewe neck acceptable and a butt smaller than the buyer is pretty impossible to do. There is just no market for it.

That is why I think the Kiger is so much more in demand. Yes, they have some primative features, but they are better and they are usuable and have alot more desirable charactoristics.

The whole picture needs to be looked at. If we say they are primative, then we are on the wrong path type wise (though not color wise ); if we say they are Iberian/Spanish type, then we are on the wrong path with the understanding of what that REALLY looks like.



I don't want to make the Kigers into something they are not, but I want to get down what is realistic of what they truely are and be able to use and promote that.

They are better then their primative ancestors for a modern, usable type. They are better than your domestic bred Spanish type horses due to their intelligence, balance, bonding and trainability. It's a sorry day when things are so focused on color and a big fat butt that we loose the treasure they truely are.

[Michelle Clarke]

As far as having two different "types" I am not sure how that would work, though I like the idea. Like how would we straighten the hocks out if that is the breed standard and that is what is coming off the range? Where do we get straight-hocked Kigers for domestic breeding programs? (just using the hocks as an example..)

Alot of breeders (in any breed or species) do not look past what is directly in front of them. You cannot discount a horse that has one bad feature when the rest of him may be good or he may be prepotent in passing on a terrific feature that he has. You breed to improve. If you have a horse with great gaits, but a weaker back, you breed to a stronger backed horse and then breed the offspring that get both of those traits. Most times when you see a major conformation fault, it is a recessive gene and can easily be bred out if you know what you are doing.

Inbreeding and linebreeding are actually better than outcrossing lines in most cases, because you get to know what your recessives are and you ELMINATE them! In an outcrossed horse, what you are seeing is the best of the genes and you have a whole host of recessives that usually start to pop up pretty darn quick when you begin breeding that stock. Now if you are just breeding for the first generation, then breed on! That gives buyers a great horse with all the stronger genes.

You don't know with the Kiger herds what you are getting. You do not know sire and dam and the history - all you have to go on is what you see in front of you. When folks are picking the best looking horse, they are most likely seeing the hybrid outcross of two "unrelated" lines. I picked my mare based on close-breeding factors: thin muscle, angular, small eyes, pronounced features. These I know from studying the inbred lines of Lusitanos and Paso Finos. That is why I have Charro, he has some of the same charactoristics, plus a few different ones - like being emotional and overly hot and excitable.

What I really wish is that someone would get the registries together, promote the hair off these horses and educate breeders in the fine art of breeding, because that is the future - not the whims of the powers that be. Each registry is focused on different areas, so one big registry or FOUNDATION or even better - Society, would be able to umbrella all the different areas and folks could still hold dear what they like. The horses can all be registered and cataloged under one name, then have initials after to show what type of Kiger: whether they are the original preservation type, appendix, Iberian, Stock type, whatever...

I think everyone is tired of what is going on and it is time to get together and make some progress.

[DianneC]

Janice,
What, other than the decline in the quality of the horses at the last adoption, makes you think that outside horses have been introduced? It would have to be on Riddle, if it happened. There are too many people out on the Kiger each year for a "ringer" to escape notice.

Contractors have always gathered the horses. What we need is someone from the original group that developed the Kiger to be present and select the horses to go back into the wild. At the KMA meeting at Burns, Ron Harding volunteered to do this. It's a simple and effect way to get the horses back on track.

[fantasykiger]

I too, as a half Kiger owner for the past 11yrs, have been at a loss with registries. Just to keep record of my horses they are registered with SMKR as it is one of the oldest foundation registries. That is not color bias and has the horses as priority. yeah, Rick has to like you and your horses. But he knows where the majority of these horses came from way back when.

If you have an older foundation stallion hang on to it. If it is true the BLM has been making poor choices, introducing non-characteristic type dun Mustangs to the herds to up numbers for the all mighty dollar and should the registries agree on a standard. Their value will most certainly go up. Especially if others follow suit as the AKHR and exclude this years Kigers from their registries.

I also can not help but feel sorry for all the new commers and hopefuls that head to the BLM corrals for the Kiger adoption with the dream of a owning a wild Kiger Mustang to later be informed by registers that their horse is second rate or unregisterable after the fact. You think there was P.Oed folks when they found out they purchased found horses. Wait until a registry tells them their Kiger Mustang isn't registerable. Which is what lead to so many registries in the first place in this breed. They could not agree on a color registry or not, bring in the outside horses or not. So what do you do You start another registry. Some horse owners don't like them 2 choices of registries, so why not start our own we can surely do it better. Then another owner has trouble getting their horses registered so they say "hey, let's start a registry" for us and our friends. It is altogether ridiculous.

[karismakigers]

>>>I like what the KHAR (http://www.kigerhorse.org/) has done with their registry - it seems to be on the ball, they have regional directors and seem to be off to a good start. They are also VERY involved with the BLM in keeping tabs on the Kigers and the inner-workings of that whole deal. They seem very knowledgable and bring alot to the table. However, we have a breed standard that I am not quite sure of (allowing the three types of heads again), and here are some of the disqaulifiying features. There are 16 of these and all but the last three (bite and testicles) are color based. This is disappointing to me that everyone is still so focused on color.>>>

Hi Michelle & others,

First, thank you for the comments about the registry. We openly welcome all comments, suggestions, criticisms, and praise about the registry.

As one of the founding members of KHAR, I feel that I must give some explaination of the DQ list. The DQ list is not something taken lightly. The items listed are based on the very nature of the Kiger Mustang and how it was developed. Starting in 1975, E. Ron Harding began his quest to find and protect the remaining pockets of Spanish type mustangs found in his district of Oregon. The very first management plans were written in 1975, with a vague bias for selecting for spanish type mustangs. In 1979, a memo was drawn up for complete selection for spanish type mustangs with dun factor being the leading selection for color. In it decribed body type, characteristics that would be known as Kiger type. The best examples would be found in East Kiger HMA, the second best in Smyth Creek, and the lowest examples found in Riddle HMA. Ron, et al., made this decision because they couldn't completely clear off Riddle. At the time, Sheepshead horses continually crossed into Riddle HMA as there was no fences in some areas and others weren't in good repair. Inventories of the Riddle pastures show this influx of other horses. It wasn't until they created Heath Creek that the influx was slowed from Sheepshead.

The KHAR registry is based upon the 1996 Management Plan. This is the last management plan that Ron Harding had direct control over. That plan is specific in the type of horse allowed to return to the wild for the breeding population. No paint characteristics are allowed to be returned. Paint characteristics aren't Kiger characteristics. Paint characteristics were brought in by horses freely flowing over from Sheepshead.

The three types of heads were there in the management plans from 1979 onward. I think more or less it was a compromise. There are those that would never buy a ram's headed horse and there are those that would never by an Arabian looking dished head and others still would feel a straight head was rather plain or even a bit coarse. Since all three head types occurred, the management plan did not place one superior to the other. You have to remember that regardless if the Kigers became popular or not, Ron et al, would still have to supply a horse to the population at large that was adoptable. If you were to ask 100 people at a roping clinic about what a ram's head means, 99% of them would probably say the horse was stubborn, untrainable, etc. It is a myth that has been created. Ron had to make sure the horses were adoptable, so he allowed the ram's heads for the minority group that would like them and the dished heads for the growing minority group that would like them.

Jillian McIntosh

[lwood92]

I think that we are going to have to look at the Kigers in the wild differently than the ones that are domesticated with regards to breed standard, etc. Because, in the end you are relying on an entity (the BLM/Federal Gov) to maintain the group. As administrations change and people who are running the BLM program in Oregon come and go, the herd priorities change. In the end, what we end up adopting are the culls of the herd. Sometimes better and sometimes worse. I am also not entirely convinced that the Federal Government won't, in the near future, get rid of the wild herds altogether. I think it would be a tragedy, but it's something that needs to be considered.

I also think that having some sort of "umbrella" society/federation (whatever you want to call it) would be good. I think it would look more cohesive to the outside world. It seems like a lot more people in this breed would like to bring it together more than has been done in the past.

My two cents,
Lynn

[lindaf]

I think this kind of discussion is vitally important. It's going to take awhile for me to study the previous posts to get an understanding of the issues. Thanks to everyone for the thought and time that went into the posts. It's really interesting.

It occurred to me that modern technology might help solve the dilemma. Is it possible that DNA testing of foundation Kigers, the old original ones for the Kiger HMAs, can establish the genotype of related horses that we have chosen to call Kiger? All horses have the selected genetic markers are considered true Kigers regardless of their phenotype. In that way we document that the horse is a Kiger genetically, but people are free to breed or adopt Kigers that show the external characteristics that they prefer.

This is a lot to think about. Meanwhile, I am off to visit my Kiger Mattie at the trainer's and will be back Wednesday to catch up on the discussion.

Linda

[fantasykiger]

I to was very interested in the KHAR at first they seemed to be the answer to so many questions Kiger owners were looking for until it came to that darn color standards and I had to walk away. It seemed they weren't listening when the majority of all Kiger owners said we did not want a color registry. With registries such as these there is no place for me and my horses. My main interest is in grey/claybank Kigers.

[karismakigers]

>>I to was very interested in the KHAR at first they seemed to be the answer to so many questions Kiger owners were looking for until it came to that darn color standards and I had to walk away. It seemed they weren't listening when the majority of all Kiger owners said we did not want a color registry. With registries such as these there is no place for me and my horses. My main interest is in grey/claybank Kigers.>>

I'm sorry that you feel that way. You Kigers are 1/2 and 3/4 blooded Kigers which are eligible for our Partblood division. There are no color restrictions in our Partblood division. Even your long ears foal would be eligible in the Partblood division as 1/4 Kiger! There is no minimum or maximum percentage of Kiger for the Partblood division, just as long as there was one traceable cross to a Kiger.

Claybank does occur without grey gene being involved. The claybank in the Kiger is a very light buttermilk dunskin color that doesn't fade or grey. I suspect it is due to cream or pearl, but noone has tested their claybanks for it yet. There was one claybank released on the Kiger HMA that I suspect was a true claybank, I'm still trying to find positive proof that he never greyed out. All the others have been found to be "grey-banks" or grey on grulla or dun.

The color restrictions in KHAR are based exactly what the BLM Management Plan restricts their breeding stock ('returned to the range' horses). We didn't want to change the image of the Kiger from what E Ron Harding and others had developed for the Kiger.

Members of KHAR could propose this coming year for a new division for those horses that are outside the normal aspect. A lineage only division for keeping track of bloodlines, perhaps an awards program which allowed them to participate, etc. The thing with KHAR is that the members have the right to propose and vote on any proposal. Ballots go out to everyone, you don't have to go to meetings just to vote on things. Since KHAR is national, we can't expect people form NY or GA to fly in for the meetings. All meetings have been teleconferencing based so far. All members get a chance to participate.

The main problem with a new division is...what to call it?? The new division would be for those horses that have no place in the Traditional or Appendix. These horses have a serious DQ that prevents them from being a good representative, phenotypically, of being a breeding quality Kiger. The division would include those horses that scored less than 80 points on inspection (serious conformation flaws), or has one of the DQs listed in the registration section of the registry. No matter what name is chosen, there will always the naysayers that say that it puts their horse in an inferior position. Can you come up with a name?

Then, what to do with the offspring as people will want to breed their 'non-typical' Kigers. KHAR currently allows non-grey offspring of Grey Kigers to be registered on their own merit. KHAR also allows those horses with acceptable levels of white out of an excessive white parent to register on their own merit. These cases fall under the Hardship clause.

At this point, KHAR doesn't register those Grey horses or the excessive white horses, but does give the phenotypically correct offspring a chance to stand on their own merits.

KHAR has not extended this hardship to sorrels, palomino, appy, buckskin (no dun gene), or roan as of yet. That would take a proposal and vote by the membership.

I am not unsympathetic, believe me. I have had my first sorrel Kiger. Luckily, Red Fox is a colt, soon to be gelding. Even if it were a sorrel filly, I would not advocate the breeding of a sorrel Kiger. Kigers were not developed to be a sorrel or palomino or pinto. If I was to put Red Fox in a group of QH foals, you would not be able to pick him out as the Kiger. Sorrel is not Kiger. Red Fox will be sold as a grade gelding. He will not be eligible for registration in any of the registries. Is that a problem? Nope. He will make someone a great trail horse, maybe even a good roping horse or a reining horse. If Red Fox does as well as Storm Warning did in reining this year, then I will congratulate the owner for their hard work and dedication. Red Fox will not need a piece of paper to make him valuable.

Jillian McIntosh
Karisma Kigers

[fantasykiger]

I stand corrected and as it is there is a place for the Kigers I have as partbloods in the KHAR. So were my mare Fantasy to ever produce a grey (which she has not yet) they would have a place in your registry. But if I was ever to purchase a full Kiger that was grey I would have to register elsewhere at this point.
I guess I am doing far to much thinking and worrying to much about this matter to be honest. I think I need to take a step back and a deep breath.