MizElz
Well-Known Member
Reading some of the comments from my 'shoeing' thread yesterday, I am surprised by the fact that some people seem to think that you have to pay a certain price, or do certain things at a set time, regardless of the service you get and of the individual horse's needs. This may relate to shoeing; I will admit I know my horse is an unusual case, but a couple of others on here have already said that their horses can comfortably go longer than average, too. I cannot understand the carry-on-regardless attitude that states a horse must be shod every 5/6 weeks, regardless. Why?
Why pay over the odds for a service that you don't actually need so often? Us horsey folk are always complaining that we have no money, but why are so many unwilling to be flexible regarding their individual horse's requirements? If I had a TB, for instance, I would expect to have to have the farrier out every 6 weeks at least; with Ellie, this is not the case, and I'm gratefully making the most of it!
I don't believe in 'cutting corners' - my horses have always been vaccinated on time, and we have always wormed regularly. I do like to search for a bargain, but I would never buy anything simply because it was cheap; if it's not right for my horse, it goes straight back, and if I have to pay more to get it right, so be it.
Instruction is another area that I think is misunderstood. Granted, if you want to go to a top trainer, you have to pay a price for the service, and I'm not going to dispute this. But the lady I have lessons with at the moment is actually the same one who taught me to ride when I was a toddler, and she still charges the same! She's fully qualified, and a successful dressage rider in her own right, and she has already worked miracles with Ellie and I on the flatwork front. I could go elsewhere, and I'd have to pay double, to someone who would be unlikely to achieve any more than I am with the current instructor. When I was at a show the other day, the dressage judge complimented me on my riding, but then asked me who my instructor was. When I told her, she sneered and said 'oh, you need someone a bit more famous round here than that!' What a shallow attitude! If it was fame I was looking for, I would ring up Carl Hester! But this, to me, proved the point that sometimes, less is more. Why would said judge have complimented me first, if my instructor is so apparently useless?!?!
Ok, essay over......
I don't believe in 'cutting corners' - my horses have always been vaccinated on time, and we have always wormed regularly. I do like to search for a bargain, but I would never buy anything simply because it was cheap; if it's not right for my horse, it goes straight back, and if I have to pay more to get it right, so be it.
Instruction is another area that I think is misunderstood. Granted, if you want to go to a top trainer, you have to pay a price for the service, and I'm not going to dispute this. But the lady I have lessons with at the moment is actually the same one who taught me to ride when I was a toddler, and she still charges the same! She's fully qualified, and a successful dressage rider in her own right, and she has already worked miracles with Ellie and I on the flatwork front. I could go elsewhere, and I'd have to pay double, to someone who would be unlikely to achieve any more than I am with the current instructor. When I was at a show the other day, the dressage judge complimented me on my riding, but then asked me who my instructor was. When I told her, she sneered and said 'oh, you need someone a bit more famous round here than that!' What a shallow attitude! If it was fame I was looking for, I would ring up Carl Hester! But this, to me, proved the point that sometimes, less is more. Why would said judge have complimented me first, if my instructor is so apparently useless?!?!
Ok, essay over......