>>> "Delicate horse" is not really a way that I'd describe Icelandics :-)
Me either, nor is it what I want in a horse. However, I was looking through some stallion evaluation scores, and many of the USA stallions who got good scores for comments, also had the comment, "light body" and/or "long legs." Nancy, I wonder if a light-bodied, long-legged Icelandic would feel so surefooted on the trail. Curious - what does the list think of the phrase, "cylindrical body" in regards to an Icelandic Horse? Would that be something you want, don't want, don't have a clue, or don't care one way or another...? Does it I also was disturbed when I looked through the scores of US stallions on the Tolt News stallion CD that was published about 2-3 years ago that the average of leg scores were 7.5 and 7.4. That's average and below average. The average for neck/withers/shoulders was 8.3, and the average for manes/tails was 8.2. I think there were 20 stallions on the CD, probably most evaluated were in Iceland before they were exported to the USA. There were several scores of 7's and even one 6.5 for joints. I got excited when I saw that one stallion got a "10" for "leg quality"...then I felt deflated when I saw that the comment included "abundant feathers." At least two had the "abundant feathers" comment. I was further disappointed to see that this same horse's score for "leg structure" (which I believe focuses on the joints - cow hocks, toed in/out, etc.) was only a 7.5 - average. Oh well. I think many, if not most, of these stallions had a composite score high enough to be awarded "first prize" status. That scares me that horses with weak legs can still attain that title. Of course, I'm assuming that the scores are based on sound judging principles, and I'm not positive of that. Karen Thomas, NC
