Behind the Foaling Door - Aging vs. Non-Aging?

Welcome to "Behind the Foaling Door," a series of articles that will tackle controversial topics in pedigree assignments. We used to run these on a regular basis and are bringing this article back to get the opinions of our newest members (and to see if our older members have changed their minds on anything!)

This issue we'll cover the time-old debate: should horses that are put up for stud or for hire be aging or non-aging? Everyone uses one system or the other, and most are pretty adamant in their choice. We have all been faced with the situation of sending away for an s/d list, opening up the envelope, and then feeling dismay when realizing that the list uses a different system. This issue has drawn breeders into two camps, and the debate continues to grow. I asked several breeders which system they used, and have listed some of the opinions here. IPABRA has no set policy on aging systems, so both are presented to help new breeders decide what to choose.

First, let me explain the differences between the two systems. Stables using the aging system will give their horses a foaling date, such as 1975 or 1987. Each year these horses become one year older. As these models age, their foals will as well. Every year another date will open up for foals to be used (this year, all aging models can produce 2002 foals, while they couldn't have done so in 2001).

On the other hand, stables that use the non-aging system will give their horses a numerical age that will not change with time. A stallion said to be nine years will always be nine years old. The foals will always need to be younger than the parent, so they will not be able to age either. The oldest age that the foals can be is permanently set according to the age of the parents (in the example above, the nine year old stallion could only have foals up to six years of age).

Here's what our breeders had to say!

"I used a modified version of the ageing system in order to work within the majority of "breeders" that I want to use. My horses are assigned a foaling date and they age. But when they are deceased, I don't reassign the body a new ID.

My cons with the ageing system are the reassigning. Once I assign an ID, it gets "fixed" to a model. It's just how I'm wired. :) Also, you can have a horse showing as an adult, but hasn't been assigned a foaling date until next year. I also don't like the ageing of foal models. I think a non-ageing system would make more sense for them.

My pros for the ageing system is that it is more realistic for mares (keeping track of their age, and usually promotes the one foal per year rule) and reduces the "anything goes" factor that sometimes non-aging systems seem to promote. Having breedings more limited makes it more fun and the research more valuable. Otherwise, I'm back to breeding cool names to cool names to create even more cool named models.:)

A Non-ageing system could just as well work for me if the one foal per year of the mare's age (-3 to -4 for the growing up years) was adhered to. If that was the case, I don't see why both systems couldn't get along." -Alicia Coolidge

"I am kind of partial to the non-aging myself but at the same time I like aging. I originally had my stock non-aging or simply listed as an Adult as I have been showing horses since 1980 and the Canadian Model Horse club I am with registers the horses as such for 7 cents. Also two thirds of the model owners also go the non-aging route as some of them have been showing horses since the 1970's! The only problem with the aging part if once a horse hits a certain age like 28 or so what do you do with the model that it represents? The aging part Is fantastic because then you can find real parents for those horses online. The only problem I am having is what if you switch from non-aging to aging and say you make the horse younger but when he was non-aging the years he won the champs don't jive? Which is what I found with some of them. As well as the above problem." -Karen Fawcett

"I use aging for my models because it is more realistic for pedigree assignment. For showing, if I think the age of the model would make a difference to the judge, I will put "shown at age X" on the photo or on a card by the horse." -Daralyn Wallace

"My horses age except for my foals. Foals take up a year from the mare, but I haven't until recently considered aging the foal to be on a s/d list. I have no problems with multiple foals from mares in the last ten years or so ( embryo transfer, registerable or not at the moment) but I do not have any which are multiples of my own old stock. I would only consider breeding multiple foals for registeries which accept them and in general have always been an aging one foal a year for mares type of person.

Although I know everyone wants the Real Mare Registries to record just one model foal per year and preferably only years the mare didn't produce, I can't agree. I've seen breedings to real mares I just can't accept and if I want that year for a foal of mine with what I consider more appropriate breeding I'll use it. I also do not care if the mare had a real foal that year.

I have no problem with non-aging horses though in general I do not use them myself. My horses age (I've even taken to aging the foals and will place them in appropriate places in my pedigrees) and retire from breeding at an appropriate age though would remain open for the years they were at stud. Some of my initial breeding stock was from non-aging but aged themselves, not a problem for me. Horses could be shown at a set age and "deceased" as far as breeding is concerned, I wouldn't have a problem with that as it happened way back when I used to show. I currently don't show but if I did would set ages for showing if necessary while continuing to age/retire my breeding stock.

The only thing that really matters to me in pedigreeing is accuracy and appropriateness for my breeding program. If I am breeding a dressage horse I want an accurate dressage pedigree. If I am breeding preservation Arabian breeding stock I want good solid preservation breeding stock. I really adore it when a pedigree assigner has a particular axe to grind and has a whole breeding program for their ponies which could save the world if only someone had bothered to do it when it could be done. (i.e. splashily colored PREs, conservation Arabs, unusual colored Hackneys, the sport horse breeding program to the max)" -Lisabeth Willens

"Since I have entered this hobby and began the "breeding" process I have seen quite a few steps or phases in making breeding more realistic. I will admit, some of my earlier pedigrees were wonky because I didn't know much back then. I have mostly "killed off" those IDs. I have, since dealing with IPABRA these past few months given my models' pedigrees a good looking-over. Some of the pedigrees weren't too bad, outside of some slight adjustments, since most of the breedings pre-IPABRA were done with such reputable breeders as Cory Hartung, Chris Wallbruch, Sherry Ball, Tina Wall, Judy Renee' Pope, and Christine Michel. I now have the policy that none of my horses are bred before age 5, and I don't breed my mares past age 15, usually. I have marked a couple of my older models as good peds, but accidental breedings of maybe a year before or after. Stallions breed a a few years longer. All my breeding models are aging and I really prefer breeding to aging parents thus preventing the "foal older than the parent" confusion syndrome. My foal models on the other hand are non-aging, just my preference. I have in a couple cases repainted an adult size model to resemble the foal "grown up". When the model's age reaches around 25 or so I give it new life as a look alike foal of the said model. Does all this make sense? I'm ever-learning and trying to be as realistic as possible." -Edith Zelmore

Thanks breeders, for your input! Next time we'll take a look at mares and their foals. Should model mares only have one foal per year, like real mares? Or should they have an unlimited amount? Write in and voice your opinion!

Back