In defence of Rollkur...

B

Booboos

Well-Known Member
Joined
5 January 2008
Messages
12,776
Location
South of France
Visit site
I am not trying to be deliberately controvercial, nor do I practice Rollkur myself, but I am not entirely convinced there is evidence for the condemnation Rolkur is getting, so I was just interested to see if anyone has any more info on the following points:

1. Are there any studies showing that Rollkur causes more physical problems than are generally found in high level competition horses? In an earlier thread it was suggested that there are limited studies that show no negative physical effect. In the, apparent, absence of evidence that Rollkur is detrimental how do people conclude that it is?


2. The von Borstela et al study seems to suggest that horses prefer conventional training to Rollkur, however has there been a study showing horses' preferences between conventional training and hacking or between conventional training and being turned out? If there was and assuming horses showed a preference for hacking or for being turned out, would we be prepared to give up on training? Just because an animal prefers one option to another, does it mean that the rejected option goes against animal welfare? My dog would certainly prefer not to go to the vets...

3. Heuschmann has a number of significant reservations about Rollkur, BUT (as far as I understand him) he describes three possible training methods, with the 'absolute elevation' position created by very strong rein contact being worse than Rollkur. The absolute elevation type of training is MUCH more common than Rollkur and if we agree with H that it is worse, then shouldn't this be the priority in terms of training reform?

Just some thoughts for you!
smile.gif
 
It's toooooo early BB
grin.gif


I think that any form of extreme training/control/management unless for health reasons, e.g. box resting a horse that prefers to be out, etc., is wrong and should not be tolerated.

Sign me up
grin.gif
.
 
Sometimes, a little bit of reinforcement about what you mean goes a long way... Little welsh C A rides needs fairly strong aids to remind him about where he needs to be as he tends to use his naturally brilliant balance and suppleness to throw some amazing shapes. If you use a method that ios akin to scooping ice cream with your hand, he begins to soften and stops hooning round and leaning.
 
[ QUOTE ]
It's toooooo early BB
grin.gif


I think that any form of extreme training/control/management unless for health reasons, e.g. box resting a horse that prefers to be out, etc., is wrong and should not be tolerated.

Sign me up
grin.gif
.

[/ QUOTE ]

My body clock hasb't quite caught up to the change in time! I was up at 6.45, finished the horses ages ago and OH is still sleeping
grin.gif
But seriously, I am not trolling, I am genuinely interested.

In what sense is Rollkur an extreme form of training and what counts as 'standard' training? Are other training practices extreme, e.g. the collection required for higher levels of dressage or puissance?
 
It is still too early MM I do agree
smile.gif


1) I thought that there weren't many studies on it full stop? There aren't many studies on lots of things, but doesn't make them right (or wrong). but I maintain my objection to it because I believe it is an exreme position to force a head into, and that alternative (less exreme) ways of working a horse can give the same net result. Another reason for my belief is that anatomically, it doesn't make sense.

2) Pass. I don't know of the study, but it sounds like a hard topic to gauge a horse's response to.

As an aside, mice in boxes also prefered to be forewarned by a red light that they were about to receive an inescapable electric shock. Does that make it ok to shock the mouse?

3) pass again - I don't know much about absolute elevation, but if tis exreme like it sounds I refer back to my point no.1
grin.gif
 
I think its more all "false" means of achieving the appearance of a perfectly trained horse. The theory being that if everything is done classically, one step at a time, the horse will arrive happily and easily at a high level of training. However, life rarely lives up to theories, especially where large amounts of money and reputation are involved, and if people find ways to produce what appears to be the same result, but faster and easier for the rider, they will do it, even if it is less than ideal for the horses. Where the line is between less than ideal and cruel, is a grey area and down to individual principles.
 
Impact of riding in a coercively obtained Rollkur posture on welfare and fear of performance horses
Uta Ulrike von Borstela, b, , , Ian James Heatly Duncana, Anna Kate Shovellera, Katrina Merkiesd, Linda Jane Keelingb and Suzanne Theresa Millmanc

aDepartment of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ont. N1G 2W1, Canada

bDepartment of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, PO Box 7038, 75007 Uppsala, Sweden

cDepartment of Population Medicine, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ont. N1G 2W1, Canada

dDepartment of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Guelph, Kemptville Campus, 830 Prescott Street, PO Box 2003, Kemptville, Ont. K0G 1J0, Canada


Accepted 13 October 2008. Available online 25 November 2008.

Abstract
Rollkur, the usually coercively obtained hyperflexion of the horse's neck, is employed as a training method by some dressage riders; however, its use is controversial as it may cause discomfort and adversely affect the horse's welfare. The objectives of this study were to determine: (1) if horses showed differences in stress, discomfort and fear responses as measured by heart rate and behaviour when ridden in Rollkur (R) obtained by pressure on the reins compared to regular poll flexion (i.e. with the nose-line being at or just in front of the vertical; N), and (2) if they showed a preference between the two riding styles when given the choice. Fifteen riding horses were ridden 30 times through a Y-maze randomly alternating between sides. Riding through one arm of the Y-maze was always followed by a short round ridden in R, whereas riding through the other arm was followed by a short round ridden in N. Immediately after the conditioning phase, horses were again repeatedly ridden into the maze; however, riders left it to the horse to decide which arm of the maze to enter. During R, horses moved slower and showed more often behavioural signs of discomfort, such as tail-swishing, head-tossing or attempted bucks (P < 0.05), and 14 of the 15 horses chose significantly (P < 0.05) more often the maze-arm associated with N rather than R. Subsequently, eight of the horses were also subjected to two fear tests following a short ride in N as well as a ride in R. During R, horses tended to react stronger (P = 0.092) to the fear stimuli and to take longer (P = 0.087) to approach them. These findings indicate that a coercively obtained Rollkur position may be uncomfortable for horses and that it makes them more fearful and therefore potentially more dangerous to ride. Further studies need to assess horses’ reaction to gradual training of Rollkur, as opposed to a coercively obtained hyperflexion, in order to decide whether the practice should be banned.

Keywords: Horse; Coercive riding; Welfare; Rollkur; Fear; Training

http://209.190.249.61/assets/library/114_jaws09015.pdf

http://www.knmvd.nl/uri/?uri=AMGATE_7364_1_TICH_R41001038475199
 
1. If there are no studies either way then it will be difficult for the FEI to act. Overall I don't think we want the FEI to act without good evidence, otherwise they could take it into their heads to control/ban all sorts of reasonable things. In order to be held accountable to a community that has all sorts of different ideas about the husbandry and training of horses, the FEI has to act on the basis of evidence of abuse.

2. Completely agree but that's the problem with the study. The study showed that horses prefer conventional training to Rollkur but this does not equal that Rollkur is wrong.

3. I think the point here is that if there are things that are worse than Rollkur we should prioritise what we want the FEI to deal with. The FEI and everyone else has limited resources and time, so dealing with the worst examples should be a priority.
 
BooBoos I believe there is a very simple answer to this question, it may come across as simplistic but its valid........asking anyone horse or human to work in a forced and un natural, contorted position WILL cause damage or resistance of some sort.

I actually dont think you need tons of scientific papers to tell you this but there is evidence out there. Some of it will be anecdotal due to the 'names' involved but it does come form very well respected sources.
 
I agree that is the end result is less collection and engagement than otherwise then this should receive lower marks, but is this always the case? Totillas seems to have pretty spectacular engagement and Salinero did win two Olympics.

As for the happiness issue, some Rollkur horses show tension (Salinero) and some don't (Totillas), but then again some conventionally trained horses show tension (Satchmo) and some don't (Painted Black). Is there evidence that Rollkur equals unhappiness and conventional training does not?
 
Not at all simplistic! People can arrive at their opinions whichever way they want, not my place to say otherwise!

However, it depends what the objective is. If the objective is to convince others, to create public outcry, to deride those who practice R, to effect change, etc. then I think we do need more than anecdotal evidence. It is different to say 'I don't like something' and to say 'someone else should not do something'. For the latter I think you do need quite a bit of decent evidence.

On the 'unnatural' issue, I find this a problematic argument because a lot of what we do with horses is unnatural anyway.
 
QR the only published studies are pretty rubbish with poor control groups. just because something gets published doesnt make it true-particularly in some 3rd rate journal.

human athletes in various disciplines will use certain hyperflexions in different muscle groups-they arent allowed to hold them more than a few seconds and go ahead and ask them how much they hurt.
aside from anything else, the movement it reproduces is incorrect and hollow-look at the trailing back legs, the area behind the saddle and the ridiculous movement of the front legs.
 

ah, so what you are actually asking isn't "Is Rollkur ok or is it cruel?" but "Should the FEI ban it?

My answer is to that is no, not without scientific evidence.
 
Thanks for that gigglepig.

have to say how you can get any sort of viable statistically significant result with only 15 horses is beyond me.

I also wonder exactly how the riders allowed the horse to choose which branch of the Y to go down as we all know how much our horses pick up on things.
 
[ QUOTE ]

3. Heuschmann has a number of significant reservations about Rollkur, BUT (as far as I understand him) he describes three possible training methods, with the 'absolute elevation' position created by very strong rein contact being worse than Rollkur. The absolute elevation type of training is MUCH more common than Rollkur and if we agree with H that it is worse, then shouldn't this be the priority in terms of training reform?

[/ QUOTE ]

Both are IMHO are forms of abuse. Why do we have to 'pick one' as a priority?
 
A few points -- first of all, neither Satchmo nor Painted Black are 'conventionally trained'. As far as I know Painted Black is worked in rollkur like everybody else, and, although Isabell does not technically work in rollkur, she does work her horses deep (I stress that there is absolutely no comparison with Anky and I've never found watching Isabell train distressing at all... this is just to say that she isn't classically correct either).
If you want to look at horses who have received conventional training you have to look at ones like Whisper, Wansuela Suerte, Responsible, Ingrid Klimke's, Mistral Hojris and yes I do think that all of them are remarkably tension-free, overall.

The other point which seems to be missing is that according to FEI rules it is NOT correct to ride a horse that deep. Full stop. This to me is a very important point and it seems to be ignored (ok so these horses are more or less on the vertical when in the arena, but even so!)

And I don't agree with your final point that absolute elevation is more common than rollkur -- I see many many more instances of rollkur or softer forms of rollkur.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Not at all simplistic! People can arrive at their opinions whichever way they want, not my place to say otherwise!

However, it depends what the objective is. If the objective is to convince others, to create public outcry, to deride those who practice R, to effect change, etc. then I think we do need more than anecdotal evidence. It is different to say 'I don't like something' and to say 'someone else should not do something'. For the latter I think you do need quite a bit of decent evidence.

On the 'unnatural' issue, I find this a problematic argument because a lot of what we do with horses is unnatural anyway.

[/ QUOTE ] sorry but you do come out with some rubish... yes a lot of what we do with horses is unnatural but surely its our job to train the horse to accept what we are doing as ok and form a partnership not drag them round and force a performance out of them, the great horsemen and women form the most wonderful bond and trust with their horses which as a result seem happy doing their work while looking proud and beautiful
smile.gif
 
I don't understand why everyone is making this issue so complicated.

No novice horse should be asked to work rollkur - the muscle strength and flexibility isn't there. You wouldn't ask an athlete who is just beginning his training to perform an advanced stretch - they'd injure something.

However, horses trained to grand prix have muscle strength and flexibility of top athletes, which technically they are. Momentary rollkur simply stretches muscles which they'll be using throughout their work. The PROBLEM is that these horses are being subjected to lengthy sessions in rollkur. Again, no top athlete would perform a stretch and hold it for two hours - that has to hurt.

Anky herself has admitted that rollkur should only be used in short bursts, but that she loses track of time when she's "having fun". It's the fact that these riders put their own enjoyment before their horses' welfare that needs to be addressed.

If rollkur is not banned (which I doubt it will be), there needs to be a lot more education to prevent amateur riders trying to copy what these top riders are doing, and much stricter guidelines preventing on the excessive use of this training method.
 
[ QUOTE ]

ah, so what you are actually asking isn't "Is Rollkur ok or is it cruel?" but "Should the FEI ban it?

My answer is to that is no, not without scientific evidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I think I might be interested in the second as well, although knowing whether it is cruel or not will make a big difference on whether I think we should campaign to get the FEI to ban it.

I was interested to see some posts this morning about outcry and petitions, so it was in that context.
 
For what it's worth Anky claims that she does not use Rollkur with Painted Black as he does not need it. Not sure if there is evidence of her having used it with him though.

Interesting point about the FEI rules. What exactly do they say?
 
[ QUOTE ]
IMHO i dont think there is a defence, after watching the blue tongue video

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not sure the tongue was blue, it looked pretty pink underneath and if the tongue was OK all that video did was show Rollkur not explain why it is wrong.
 
There is no defence.

The fact of the matter is that:

The horse cannot see
The horse cannot breathe
The horse hyperventilates
The horses back is pulled up over his withers
The horse cannot engage his hind legs
The horses back is completely rigid in this position
The horse cannot swallow

Dr Gerd heuschmann's book 'Tug of war' and his DVD 'If horses could speak'.

But.....you can see for yourself how distressed horses forced into this position are...look at their eyes, tongues, sweat and foam.

There is absolutely NO DEFENCE for rollkur.
 
Thanks FB!

I am not being funny on purpose, but I do have to say that 401.6 seems to relate to the position of the horse's head and neck during a test, otherwise it rules out not only Rollkur but also working long and low. Have I misunderstood it?
 
Yes, I did say 'inside the arena' in my first message.

However, when a horse is worked long and low (correctly) the nose is still very much on or slightly in front of the vertical, so surely closer to the rule than RK.
 
I don't think Dr H makes these points in his book (although I have not read it for a while, so apologies if I remember wrong) and some of them seem mutually exclusive, e.g. can't breathe and hyperventilates (which requires rapid or deep breathing), while others sound physically very difficult to bring about, e.g. the back is pulled up over the withers.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, I did say 'inside the arena' in my first message.

However, when a horse is worked long and low (correctly) the nose is still very much on or slightly in front of the vertical, so surely closer to the rule than RK.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, reading through this too quickly!

Fair enough, then FEI does seem to rule out Rollkur, thanks!
 
With regards to the blue tongue, if it was, given the explanation on barnmice and what I thought the change in colour is due to over use of the curb so basically squashing the tongue between the curb bit and chain and limiting the blood supply. I assume that theoretically this would be possible with other methods of riding not just rollkur?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top