Latest on top, so if your first visit, to follow the thread, read from bottom of page.

Our stallion scheme was no longer allowed to continue as 'failed' colts were totally excluded from breeding (contrary to EU 96/78) any male that failed either vet or assessor. Our stud book, the oldest in the world save for Wetherbys, has been divided only into foals, mares, stallions and for 30 years, a section for geldings. The section that allowed for ‘inspected stock’ was for ponies of unknown parentage, and their progeny could be upgraded. This stud book has only ever been about recording pedigrees, not quality, soundness etc. Various opinions about type/height colour and whether good, bad or indifferent have sat side by side in its tomes, ensuring the widest gene pool possible. Remembering that one man’s meat is another’s poison, as they are all pure bred stock, who should dictate anyone’s choice to breed from the available gene pool.
Having been an area organiser for our now abandoned stallion scheme, in the latter years, the assessor’s job was largely reduced to whether the animal forward ‘was representative of breed type’ and the real decision largely hung on whether the colt could pass the Society’s veterinary examination, carried out by ‘an approved veterinarian’.
There is some disparaging talk of ‘budgie’ vets passing colts now, or by owners own vets, with the potential of those vets passing colts as they are clients.
1. The Royal college of Veterinary surgeons may not be too pleased to hear such remarks as such practice implies their members are corrupt.
2. Any vet who passes a colt as suitable has to sign the document and stand by his professional decision.
3. Most, if not all breeders have a regular vet and consequently choose one with whom they are confident as to their expertise with equines. If there is such a thing as a ‘budgie’ vet, who would call them to a mare with a jammed or badly presented foal at 4am? Try asking a different vet from your usual vet to do something for you, eg colt inspection and brace yourself for an interrogation as to why!

The suggestion that stallions should be graded would be a nightmare for the breed and its diversity, and who would make such decisions? I’ll leave that one for you to think about. If our old stallion inspection, pass or fail was contentious, it would be as nothing compared to a grading scheme promoted by those who like to promote themselves as guardians of the breed whilst really serving their own self interest.

In conclusion it would be fair to point out that at least the breed society did organise international vets seminars to ensure as best they could, vetting was carried out to the same standard. Even then Holland and others would re-inspect/vet ‘UK passed and vetted’ stallions and dump them! You sell stallions to Holland and the like if you must, I’m disinclined. G.H.

Can I just ask why should we want a Section X and what is this section going to prove? 

So what criteria or faults do these ponies have to have to go in this section?  This sounds as if we will be back to having our ponies inspected to see which section we are going to be placed in.   If our ponies do not come up to breed standards and have bad defects well they shouldn’t be registered in the first place, instead , there is another more permanent  solution to the problem.   Or is Mrs. Russell saying they should all go in this section until they are vetted?  And by whom, a vet. or an appointed member of the Society.   

If it is the situation of the stallion inspection that Mrs. Russell is trying to highlight, as per the remarks from the Holland breeder, then it is my view that if you had to have the stallion inspected you must also inspect the mare that you are going to breed from.  Unfortunately, this would open a whole new ball game causing a lot of unnecessary extra work, expense because at the end of the day, the law laid down to our Society still says, that all ponies from registered stock  can be registered in their Society studbook.

  Mandy Sargeant

I have asked, but her publisher has refused!! They require me to provide a link to their subscription page,  and I must not allude to it in any more than 200 words! NO CHANCE! This is a magazine that from my experience does not correct or take any criticism about inaccurate reports.
AS TO YOUR OTHER COMMENTS I refer you to this part of my comments on NEWS PAGE..................... "Holland has always inspected imported stock even under our old stallion scheme and placed restrictions on an animal’s breeding as they saw fit, so if they are not buying now, it has more to do with the fact they have plenty of unsold stallions themselves, that and the current economic climate. Also of course that as always they are trying to protect their own market. In any event the key point has been missed by Mrs Russell where Holland is acting illegally. The UK is the mother Stud-Book and as such lays down the rules of entry into the stud book to which daughter stud books must comply ensuring free trade can exist. WE DO NOT CARRY OUT INSPECTION OF STOCK WHICH MAY DENY BREEDING RIGHTS TO PONIES, THEREFORE THEY MUST NOT."

Perhaps it would be a good idea to place Mrs. Russel's article on your site , so we can judge ourselves whether she is an "expert" .

I can only guess , from the comments you make, that she disagrees with the actual situation on the subject of stallion assessment

In the UK .
I can only hope that the " BREEDERS" in the UK  realize that the actual situation in your society is not the way forward and will limit their possibilities to sell abroad.

J. Bausch  Ankeveen Holland.