Is it me.....?

[fburton]

Well, that would certainly be ideal for them, but not possible I'm afraid.

But you don't think there is a real welfare concern here - I think you've made that pretty clear in what you've written already. Or are you having second thoughts?

 

[peanut]

That's the key phrase, isn't it?

Indeed it is ... and it is what one has to always remember

 

[littleshetland]

Some people think that many horses - the majority of them - would be content never to be ridden again. Of course, there are many exceptions too. I don't think anyone here is denying that.

Again I ask - what are the signs of a bored horse? Is it really so easy to recognize by itself, without prior knowledge of how the horse is used or not used? Is it something that someone could film and put up on YouTube? How easy would it be to distinguish between the behaviour / demeanour of a New Forest pony in the New Forest with daily access to masses of space and a New Forest pony that had been turned out in a 2 acre field that happened to look identical from the camera's viewpoint (maybe some gorse bushes in the background)?

Whether a horse is wasted is a totally different issue from whether it is miserable as a result of not being ridden. Only one of those is a welfare issue; the other is entirely in the eye of the beholder - a subjective judgement.

it's a tricky one to answer, and as you say is in the eye of the beholder!
My feeling about them being bored is partly based on instinct, and the fact they're far more excitable in the field than any of the other horses here (past and present). The younger one is prone to jumping out from time to time(cracking jump!) All the others her are in regular work, and generally speaking, are more settled. Please don't get me wrong here, they are by no means desperately unhappy, I suppose I just find all that potential for joy and fun being wasted, a little sad..that's all.

 

[fburton]

it's a tricky one to answer, and as you say is in the eye of the beholder!
My feeling about them being bored is partly based on instinct, and the fact they're far more excitable in the field than any of the other horses here (past and present). The younger one is prone to jumping out from time to time(cracking jump!) All the others her are in regular work, and generally speaking, are more settled. Please don't get me wrong here, they are by no means desperately unhappy, I suppose I just find all that potential for joy and fun being wasted, a little sad..that's all.

I appreciate that. I feel the same way about people and their computers, so many of which are not used to anything like their full potential.

 

[Yellow_Ducky]

OH and other liveries agree with me.
QUOTE]

Sorry OP, I think its really not professional that you have "discussed" these two liveries with other liveries on your yard. Fair enough a chat with your OH in the privacy of your own home but as YO chatting about one livery to a group of others isn't professional. Maybe the two non-riding liveries are picking up on people watching them and commenting on them not riding and its putting them off? A yard atmosphere can be very intimidating, "typing" from my own experiences!

 

[littleshetland]

There's no atmosphere in the yard at all, other than nice vibes. As I've said before, they are very nice people, and we all chatter away about a lot of stuff, just not their horses.....they don't want to talk about them - that's fine. It's only a small yard, and we all get on - my liveries are now my friends, and past liveries who have left, have remained my friends. The spirit in which things have been discussed has been in one of concerned friendship - not bitchiness at all.

 

[Loulou2002]

We have a livery yard and have had many liveries come and go over the years, some i've remained really good friends with. It wouldn't bother me in the slightest if someone didn't ride even if it was a 5 year old potential gp horse. As long as the livery is covered and the horses welfare is taken care of that's good enough for us. I think you just need to focus on what nice liveries they are and the fact they aren't causing you any stress by not feeding, mucking out that type of thing.

 

[littleshetland]

We have a livery yard and have had many liveries come and go over the years, some i've remained really good friends with. It wouldn't bother me in the slightest if someone didn't ride even if it was a 5 year old potential gp horse. As long as the livery is covered and the horses welfare is taken care of that's good enough for us. I think you just need to focus on what nice liveries they are and the fact they aren't causing you any stress by not feeding, mucking out that type of thing.

Thank you loulou - I think you are exactly right. I've been for a nice hack this morning, the sun is shining and all the horses are grazing peacefully...things could be a whole lot worse!

 

[Loulou2002]

Thank you loulou - I think you are exactly right. I've been for a nice hack this morning, the sun is shining and all the horses are grazing peacefully...things could be a whole lot worse!

We have had some nightmares over the years with liveries! I almost prefer it when they don't ride......leaves the menage free for me! You just have to nod and smile to a lot of things. As long as our yard is kept tidy and the horses are regularly seen to and fed that's great for us. I compete every week but i know some people are happy just to groom their horse or go for a hack every fortnight.

 

[SkewbyTwo]

Read my further posts properly -and no, they're not looking for a new yard.

That you know of.

 

[PStarfish]

What if these horses were old, or injured (but field sound). Would that make a difference? Is it just that the horses are 'going to waste'? If so, it doesn't sound like they give a damn.
If two acres is not sufficient for a horse not in exercise, people had better start pts their retired horses as soon as their working life is over as there's not many yards out there that offer acres and acres of rolling fields. Even Redwings have paddocks varying in size but some less than an acre. Should they close their doors?

I do get your point OP, and no, I don't understand why you would pay out loads to break, train, buy tack etc when you have no intention to ride. But I do disagree that the horses are not in an acceptable position.

I've got a herd of 5 Shetlands of varying ages (4 - 35). They live out all year, I see them daily but they rarely get a brush (tangles removed from manes every now and then and feet checked daily). They don't go for walks, they don't really do anything (other than give great pony cuddles!). But they play with each other, are all so affectionate, have bright eyes and shiny coats and are a picture of health. Should I be doing 'something' with them to give them a purpose in life? Really it's the same thing, they're just smaller than the horses in question.

 

[Wagtail]

When I retire and when my horses do, I intend to move to a smaller place (around 4 acres). We will have two horses that we will retire when their time comes. Presumably we will be very cruel to only keep them on four acres and not provide any additional exercise. Or should everyone who keeps horses in retirement, youngsters or injured field sound horses be expected to buy a place with at least twenty acres or find them a livery yard with at least twenty acres? Am I a bad owner because my youngster currently only has the run of five acres and never goes anywhere outside the yard? And when I had two older field ornaments in a similar set up, presumably they were being neglected as well?

And there I was thinking my horses always seemed really happy.

 

[littleshetland]

What if these horses were old, or injured (but field sound). Would that make a difference? Is it just that the horses are 'going to waste'? If so, it doesn't sound like they give a damn.
If two acres is not sufficient for a horse not in exercise, people had better start pts their retired horses as soon as their working life is over as there's not many yards out there that offer acres and acres of rolling fields. Even Redwings have paddocks varying in size but some less than an acre. Should they close their doors?

I do get your point OP, and no, I don't understand why you would pay out loads to break, train, buy tack etc when you have no intention to ride. But I do disagree that the horses are not in an acceptable position.

I've got a herd of 5 Shetlands of varying ages (4 - 35). They live out all year, I see them daily but they rarely get a brush (tangles removed from manes every now and then and feet checked daily). They don't go for walks, they don't really do anything (other than give great pony cuddles!). But they play with each other, are all so affectionate, have bright eyes and shiny coats and are a picture of health. Should I be doing 'something' with them to give them a purpose in life? Really it's the same thing, they're just smaller than the horses in question.

I NEVER said in this whole thread that I find the horses and the condition in which they exist unacceptable - never. All I have done is express a degree of disappointment that two young, healthy, athletic horses are leading a rather staid and dull (in my opinion) existence. Some people have expressed an opinion that this state of affairs is perfectly ok, and some have agreed with me that perhaps a bit more mental stimulation would be preferable. There is no welfare issue with the horses, they are in excellent health and are bright eyed and bushy tailed.......I was merely interested in other peoples opinions on this. Of course, if they were lame and/ or old, I would probably feel different - but they're not. They're 2 real crackers. The main thing is tho - the horses are happy enough (even though I perceive them to be bored) - I suppose they can't miss what they've never had.

 

[NativePonyLover]

I'm glad I'm not your livery as they've been discussed for 11 pages now on a public forum for doing very little wrong & paying you for the privilege!

I've had my horse almost 4 years - I've ridden & not ridden in that period. I didn't ride for a while as I was very anxious & lost my riding nerve following a difficult personal time. I was chatty enough with people on the yard - but I wouldn't have told anyone why I wasn't riding and/or why Mum always came down with me, particularly when it was going to be busy. I politely declined offers of people riding him for me & other 'helpful' offers sometimes disguised as people trying to get more information to satisfy their curiosity.

There's probably more to this story than you think & even if there isn't, it's not your place to judge on a public forum when you're taking money off them.

 

[littleshetland]

Well said - i get your point. I was not being judgmental about the owners (even if it sounded that way) I like them very much actually. Any help offered on my part to my liveries was done in the spirit of friendship and a genuine desire to help - I'm sorry yours wasn't.

 

[cobgoblin]

I don't understand why posters are being so judgemental of the OP when frankly, she is doing her best to help both the owners and horses to enjoy each other's company. Admittedly there is little she can do if the owners do not want any help, but at least they know she is there and willing if needs be.
If more yard owners were like this I'm sure a lot of disasters could be averted.

 

[Goldenstar]

When I retire and when my horses do, I intend to move to a smaller place (around 4 acres). We will have two horses that we will retire when their time comes. Presumably we will be very cruel to only keep them on four acres and not provide any additional exercise. Or should everyone who keeps horses in retirement, youngsters or injured field sound horses be expected to buy a place with at least twenty acres or find them a livery yard with at least twenty acres? Am I a bad owner because my youngster currently only has the run of five acres and never goes anywhere outside the yard? And when I had two older field ornaments in a similar set up, presumably they were being neglected as well?

And there I was thinking my horses always seemed really happy.

Who said it would be cruel ?
Don't put words in peoples mouths .
I don't think a universe consisting of four acres is ideal for horses to spend their whole time .
I would not inflict that on my own horses what others chose to do with their own is up to them .

 

[fburton]

I suppose they can't miss what they've never had.

Indeed. And even if horses have something and then at some point they don't, they usually get over it quickly enough. Although they have long memories, I don't believe they spend time contemplating/imagining the past, wishing they were back in a previous situation. What would be the point? Of course, horses do react to change, sometimes badly. Grieving after losing a special friend (or perhaps more properly, becoming depressed) comes to mind - as does a foal's separation from its dam in cases where weaning is traumatic. Certain memories can be 'reawakened' at any time. I know of horses that have been hunted that become excited by the sound of the horn, and stallions that have covered mares previously will react much more vigorously to the usual trigger sights and smells. But that doesn't mean that retired hunters or sires suffer continually through the lack of whatever stirred their blood in the past, or that they are necessarily "bored" or frustrated. Horses are pretty adaptable on the whole.

 

[Goldenstar]

I think horses are very adaptable but I think they need a lot of movement .

 

[fburton]

Who said it would be cruel ?
Don't put words in peoples mouths .
I don't think a universe consisting of four acres is ideal for horses to spend their whole time .
I would not inflict that on my own horses what others chose to do with their own is up to them .

I understand what you're saying - but using the word "inflict" does imply a degree of cruelty though, doesn't it?

 

[fburton]

I think horses are very adaptable but I think they need a lot of movement .

Oh, absolutely - no arguments there!

 

[Wagtail]

Who said it would be cruel ?
Don't put words in peoples mouths .
I don't think a universe consisting of four acres is ideal for horses to spend their whole time .
I would not inflict that on my own horses what others chose to do with their own is up to them .

The fact that you say that me keeping my mare and her companion in a five acre field, is not something you would 'inflict' on your horses implies that you view it as cruel. If that is not what you are implying then maybe use less emotive terms than 'inflict'. I really don't see any other way to interpret it, quite frankly. The way you describe it sounds extremely condescending and superior. Not everyone who keeps horses is as privileged as you are.

I am comfortable in the knowledge that my horses are completely happy, chilled, and not in the least bit bored. But in your eyes I am inflicting some sort of unpleasantness on them, which in my book means being cruel. How else would you describe it?

 

[Goldenstar]

The fact that you say that me keeping my mare and her companion in a five acre field, is not something you would 'inflict' on your horses implies that you view it as cruel. If that is not what you are implying then maybe use less emotive terms than 'inflict'. I really don't see any other way to interpret it, quite frankly. The way you describe it sounds extremely condescending and superior. Not everyone who keeps horses is as privileged as you are.

I am comfortable in the knowledge that my horses are completely happy, chilled, and not in the least bit bored. But in your eyes I am inflicting some sort of unpleasantness on them, which in my book means being cruel. How else would you describe it?

Keeping them with less than optimal exercise .

 

[fburton]

In an ideal world...

 

[Wagtail]

Keeping them with less than optimal exercise .

I disagree. They are constantly on the move, grazing and playing. If the field were bigger they would not move more. Horses naturally move about when grazing. I have kept horses in all different field sizes and they do not move any more in a bigger field than they do in one of a couple of acres. In fact, if anything, when a field is bigger, it has more grass and so they do not need to move so much. They just move to a new patch and stay around that new area for longer. Obviously, too small a field would be detrimental to exercise because you would be having to feed hay, but I would argue that too small is not anything less than 20 acres.

 

[Goldenstar]

I disagree. They are constantly on the move, grazing and playing. If the field were bigger they would not move more. Horses naturally move about when grazing. I have kept horses in all different field sizes and they do not move any more in a bigger field than they do in one of a couple of acres. In fact, if anything, when a field is bigger, it has more grass and so they do not need to move so much. They just move to a new patch and stay around that new area for longer. Obviously, too small a field would be detrimental to exercise because you would be having to feed hay, but I would argue that too small is not anything less than 20 acres.

And neither have I we are talking optimal .

 

[Arizahn]

Realistically, to have upwards of twenty acres of varied grazing available year round for each pair of horses, there would first need to be a lot fewer horses alive. Some people may take issue with that. And then there's the issue of those irksome types; that seem to live off fresh air and lichen, and who would do far too well on unlimited grazing with no natural predators or competition for food. So we'd need to either restrict their grazing to less than optimal or presumably add in predators to keep them moving and competition for the grazing. And owners would need to be able to manage to check the entirety of their twenty plus acres at least twice per day for hazards, and provide correct management of the predators and competition grazers - probably need a special licence for at least some of these.

I don't personally feel that the optimal system of care will be feasible for me, but presumably others will differ in their view.

 

[LittleRooketRider]

My worry would be that at some point in the future the owners decide they don't want to have the expense and responsibility of two horses and look to move them on. They are currently 6 and 8 with possibly 20+ years of life ahead of them, I'd be concerned that as they get older without any real experience of the world except their field and the yard finding them good homes might be tricky. However, it is the owners choice but I suspect, like a lot of novices that take on young horses, they have taken on more than they can deal with.

This.

 

[9tails]

Realistically, to have upwards of twenty acres of varied grazing available year round for each pair of horses, there would first need to be a lot fewer horses alive. Some people may take issue with that. And then there's the issue of those irksome types; that seem to live off fresh air and lichen, and who would do far too well on unlimited grazing with no natural predators or competition for food. So we'd need to either restrict their grazing to less than optimal or presumably add in predators to keep them moving and competition for the grazing. And owners would need to be able to manage to check the entirety of their twenty plus acres at least twice per day for hazards, and provide correct management of the predators and competition grazers - probably need a special licence for at least some of these.

I don't personally feel that the optimal system of care will be feasible for me, but presumably others will differ in their view.

Adding predators! Smashing! That'll keep us on our toes when we want to bring in our pampered pets for a groom.

 

[fburton]

A few old paper bags in bushes should do the trick.