Old horses - are people getting unrealistic?

Devonlass, if you re read my posts I said repeatedly 'if I had the money, time and the vet and myself felt the horse was able to withstand the surgery and recovery. I didn't just mention the money aspect. I still think bringing the child aspect into it is a bit ridiculous.
 
OK, since people actually want to discuss the point and TFC has ignored my request to remove it because of the upset I unthinkingly caused Serena, what concerns me is that for every 35 year old that people can post about, I suspect that there may be a dozen 25 year olds creaking with painful arthritis that would probably be happier with a quiet and dignified release. And my fear is that less experienced people reading forums like this may press their vets to keep horses that I would classify as very old - over 25 say, alive when they would be better off put to sleep, because they think that 35 is perfectly achievable for the average horse. Some people would even feel that they failed the horse in not getting it to that age when other people did.

I know things have moved on from when I first started, when no horse over 15 was insurable except for accidents, and when any ordinary horse immediately lost value on reaching double figures. But I held two horses for my friend when they wre put down in the last two years, one 27 (IDx) and one 23 (TB) and both were very old and very creaky and definitely in constant pain.
 
Last edited:
marmalade76 said:
I have no trouble comprehending what you are saying, and as I said before, no to colic surgery, no to fixing a broken leg, etc. Some things are just not worth fixing, the trauma of treatment and the lengthy recovery is just not worth putting a horse through IMO, regardless of how much time and money I have on my hands.
Click to expand...

I hold exactly this view :)
 
I think the issue is as cptrayes last post says. People see the healthy happy 30odd yr old, or the 20yr old competing etc, & sometimes use that as reasoning as to why their 20+ horse can't possibly need putting out of its misery. We all talk about the horses, ponies, & even cats & dogs that live happily beyond average lifespans. But, there's rarely a need to recount tales of the 25yr old pts from age related issues, or the 20yr old pony that had to be retired from old age. And I think if people view late 20's for horses, or mid 30's for ponies as an easily achievable age, they are less likely to make a tough decision about a horse that is early 20's. My friends 15hh tbx was pts from age related problems, at the same age my 14.2 connie x tb is now, nearly 24. Unless her melanomas cause issues, I have every reason to believe she'll be doing pc stuff with my daughter into her late 20's. And I think its possible some people may make decisions for their own horse, based on situations like mine, rather than more average situations like the 15hh tbx's.
 
marmalade76 said:
I have no trouble comprehending what you are saying, and as I said before, no to colic surgery, no to fixing a broken leg, etc. Some things are just not worth fixing, the trauma of treatment and the lengthy recovery is just not worth putting a horse through IMO, regardless of how much time and money I have on my hands.
Click to expand...

Sorry Marmalade but if I went by that ethos my Anglo would have been put down at 10 when she broke her leg in the field, instead she had it pinned, went on to win Riding Horse classes at a good level and then have two foals, one of which became a National Champion. She did not retire from being ridden (and was a lively ride too) until she was 25 years old, and then only because I did not have a rider for her and had two of her youngsters to bring on. She spent the remaining 7 years of her life being nanny to babies, she was a very good nanny too, instilling manners into even the bounciest of babies.
 
Exactly Littlelegs. I once said to my vet that the one sentence he would never hear me say would be "Do everything you can to save him". His reply? "I wish more of my clients were the same".
 
Littlelegs said:
I think the issue is as cptrayes last post says. People see the healthy happy 30odd yr old, or the 20yr old competing etc, & sometimes use that as reasoning as to why their 20+ horse can't possibly need putting out of its misery. We all talk about the horses, ponies, & even cats & dogs that live happily beyond average lifespans. But, there's rarely a need to recount tales of the 25yr old pts from age related issues, or the 20yr old pony that had to be retired from old age. And I think if people view late 20's for horses, or mid 30's for ponies as an easily achievable age, they are less likely to make a tough decision about a horse that is early 20's. My friends 15hh tbx was pts from age related problems, at the same age my 14.2 connie x tb is now, nearly 24. Unless her melanomas cause issues, I have every reason to believe she'll be doing pc stuff with my daughter into her late 20's. And I think its possible some people may make decisions for their own horse, based on situations like mine, rather than more average situations like the 15hh tbx's.
Click to expand...

I do agree with you, it does depend on the individual horse, some horses are old at 20 and others are just starting their second childhood so to speak.

It has to be about quality of life.
 
Amaranta said:
Sorry Marmalade but if I went by that ethos my Anglo would have been put down at 10 when she broke her leg in the field, instead she had it pinned, went on to win Riding Horse classes at a good level and then have two foals, one of which became a National Champion. She did not retire from being ridden (and was a lively ride too) until she was 25 years old, and then only because I did not have a rider for her and had two of her youngsters to bring on. She spent the remaining 7 years of her life being nanny to babies, she was a very good nanny too, instilling manners into even the bounciest of babies.
Click to expand...


Yes, Amaranta, but how many other horses have broken their legs at 10, been on months and months of cross-tied box rest and then been put down some time later anyway because of a bad result? I'm glad your horse repaired well but I know of plenty that haven't. I am with Marmalade, I would put down a horse with a fractured leg that was going to require extensive immobilisation.
 
Last edited:
Moomin1 said:
So what's the answer CPT? I agree with what you are saying but I don't see what can be done about it.
Click to expand...

I think the "easy" answer lies with the vets but is probably unachievable. if an owner begs them to try to save a horse, what can they do, refuse? It seems unlikely.

I wish that we could wholeheartedly believe of every single vet that all the treatment that they give they genuinely believe to be in the best interests of the horse, but every profession has bad apples who will do stuff for the money. Unfortunately the big hospitals seem to be some of the worst offenders in that regard, maybe because they have all the hammers and have to go looking for nails.

I believe that threads like this are about all that can be done - at least some readers are now aware when they weren't before that it isn't normal for horses to live to 35 and that those are the very lucky small percentage of cases.

And owners whose vets are advising colic ops, fracture repair etc who feel uncomfortable with that advice know that there are plenty of people on here who would support them if they chose to reject that advice.

It's a start.
 
Last edited:
cptrayes said:
Yes, Amaranta, but how many other horses have broken their legs at 10, been on months and months of cross-tied box rest and then been put down some time later anyway? I'm glad your horse repaired well but I know of plenty that haven't. I am with Marmalade, I would put down a horse with a fractured leg that was going to require extensive immobilisation.
Click to expand...

Now you see that very much depends on the break, mine split her long pastern which is a very common break and fairly easy to fix. There was also no break in the skin. A fracture is something complete different, much more complicated and often has broken skin too, in that situation I don't think that any vet would consider trying to fix it. Mine was never cross tied btw which is usually for soft tissue injuries.

Each case has to be taken on it's own merits and NOT every horse can be fixed just as not every horse has to be pts. It is all about quality of life, some 21 year olds would do well after colic surgery and others I would not put through it, unless you are the owner and/or the vet then you have no right to pass judgement.
 
I think it depends entirely on the horse. I have a 28yr old ex puissance horse still in work, sound, happy, and still doing the odd competition and days hunting, but then equally I also have a 15yr old TB who is much older than him physically, and probably won't be in full work for much longer.

My old boy's legs leave a lot to be desired, and would make most people shudder - he has windgalls on his windgalls! My vets are fab, and when he tweaked a tendon a few weeks ago, resulting in some heat and swelling, they were totally realistic about it. They said what I was thinking, that his legs are already shocking, he's a hundred years old, as long as he's comfortable and happy, we'll keep going with him. So, rather than box resting him (chronic box walker if in during the day), we've just given him some time off and turned out as usual, and it's almost totally normal again now.

I love my old boy, but I wouldn't put him through surgery now. He's too old, and it wouldn't be fair. I didn't put my 6yr old through surgery in November, and sadly lost him, but it was the right decision for the horse. I think it depends, as I said, entirely on the horse.
 
Amaranta said:
Sorry Marmalade but if I went by that ethos my Anglo would have been put down at 10 when she broke her leg in the field, instead she had it pinned, went on to win Riding Horse classes at a good level and then have two foals, one of which became a National Champion. She did not retire from being ridden (and was a lively ride too) until she was 25 years old, and then only because I did not have a rider for her and had two of her youngsters to bring on. She spent the remaining 7 years of her life being nanny to babies, she was a very good nanny too, instilling manners into even the bounciest of babies.
Click to expand...

The post you quoted included 'IMO'. What you do with your horse is upto you, as what I do with mine is upto me. Two of my three could not become broodmares for a start!
 
cptrayes said:
I am sorry that the three of you do not see this as a serious subject of horse welfare that needs to be discussed, but I do.

Serena2005 I did not connect your thread with your post here, but please do not cause yourself any further grief by opening this thread again. I understand why you have have elected for surgery and I wish your horse the very best.
Click to expand...

For once, I agree with you OP. If anyone always stopped to post because it might be sensitive to someone, HHO would die a death very quickly.

Delicious_D said:
Oh stop it! You love to be controversial! Shame on you :mad:
Click to expand...

You're just jumping on the bandwagon.

marmalade76 said:
Agree with this, but then I wouldn't put any of mine through colic surgery, regardless of their age.

As for old horses, I agree with you OP, they could pop their cloggs at any time once over 20 and every year of hunting or competing over that age is a bonus. But you do get some people who go on too long with them and/or do more than is fair with an older horse and there's usually a corus of 'doesn't he look good for his age!' when quite often he doesn't, he looks like an old hose!
Click to expand...

Agree with this completely.

quirky said:
I wouldn't put any horse of mine through colic surgery. Age doesn't come into it for me.
Click to expand...

Absolutely this, not an option I would consider at all. Even my vet who is one of the top men at Leahurst would categorically NOT put a horse of his through colic surgery.

Everyone's entitled to their own opinions of course but it's very sad when the horse suffers needlessly because of them - and that's not directed at anyone in particular either current or in the past so don't start bleating it is.
 
Last edited:
Welham won the Hickstead derby when he was 20. Not bad eh?

So if the horse was still fit and going strong then I would see nothing wrong with putting it through surgery. Personally though, after losing my 16 year old gelding to colic surgery after he couldn't get up, I may think twice. Certainly if a horse was already contending with various health issues. My own mare for example, much as it would break my heart, as I love her more than any other animal I have ever known, I would probably opt to PTS. She already has come through breaking her shoulder, and is contending with cushings and repeated laminitis attacks, I think it would be too much to put her through. She's 19.
 
Last edited:
The original interpretation of the post was as the title suggests. We had a 36+ horse who was well up until last few months no drugs 0 was happy as larry. No special anything just looked after as a horse.Couldnt keep weight on and then he lost too many teeth!

If major surgery was going to give my horse a chance even if small I would personally not take it. Horses are herd animals, and need to be out and about and I would rather PTS. I know of a young pony that was put on box rest and became a nightmare over an eye condition and was eventually after months so out of control it ended up in the horse sales probably in a pie somewhere.

Private insurance is big business and so are some vets. If the odds are poor I would not save my beloved animal at any price. However if the odds are great then yes I would operate etc as long as no long suffering was going to happen but only if a young horse.

But I think the whole point of the post was to do with the elderly horse and yes I think some owners are unrealistic. My vet just saw the potential ££££ signs I would not submit my horse for experimentation.
 
I havent read all of this post, and as the owner of an oldie myself (20 in May), I think its a little bit daft to generalise that they will all drop dead after 20. Mine is still fit and healthy and behaving disgracefully as he has always done.

However, one thing I will say is that if he needed serious surgery and there were doubts over his quality of life or survival I would take my vets advice. I would not beg for him to be kept alive because of my wishes. I would hope I would have the good grace and strength to let him go, after all he owes me nothing and I owe him everything.
 
Yes and he was in fine fettle having been looked after by a pro for the majority of his life, you wouldn't expect anything less. It's the ones that don't have his type of advantages (steady and consistent work, not pulled out only on a weekend) that you worry about.
 
Last edited:
After my TB mare breaking her leg and it being "fixed" and being on box rest for 3 months, restricted turnout for another 4 months, slowly being brought back into work , coping with the mental anguish that box rest /restricted turnout caused, paying a 6 grand vet bill.... then the mare getting colic and the vet wanting surgery done to her (even though the odds weren't good), I said no time to call it a day. After that experience any horse of mine that breaks a leg will be shot... no horse of mine would go through colic surgery either...
 
Though I must add, I HATE vets who will say one treatment/option for a horse then change their minds about what to do when they find out they are insured!
 
zigzag said:
Though I must add, I HATE vets who will say one treatment/option for a horse then change their minds about what to do when they find out they are insured!
Click to expand...

I agree, this is awful because they should be doing what is best for the animal not totting up the pounds in their head as they go. This is why before I knew my own vet (10 years ago now at least) I always met them with " they're not insured" so they know from the outset what they're having to deal with and how to deal with it. :)
 
marmalade76 said:
The post you quoted included 'IMO'. What you do with your horse is upto you, as what I do with mine is upto me. Two of my three could not become broodmares for a start!
Click to expand...

I do not disagree with you but what I was saying is that some horses can and do recover well from broken leg surgery, I was not passing judgement on you OR what you do with your horses. If you read my other post you will see that I feel it is up to the owner and the attending vet to make the decision and no one else - this works either way!
 
Exactly, quality of life, rather than quantity. I also think quality of life is more complicated in horses, & people judge them by human, or even dog standards. A human with very limited physical ability can still have a good quality of life. And even a lot of older dogs, past running for miles, can still enjoy long strolls sniffing & walking alongside a human. But a horses quality of life is effected at a much earlier stage. And I think sometimes people miss that. I've seen plenty of old dogs who are quite happy not to race round with the younger dogs, & walk behind with the owner. But I have always said I would never allow my horse to reach the stage its the old one, jogging & struggling behind in an exhausted attempt to keep up with the others racing across the field. And yes, of course with horses there is more to weigh up than just age. But, I could justify making a younger horse have little quality of life for a short time, assuming a very good prognosis, its balanced out by the many years of good quality of life after treatment. For an older horse though, its not worth reducing quality of life, for the sake of a few years tops after treatment.
 
Wow, what an emotional, volatile thread!

I've actually found it very interesting. I agree that two 20yr olds can be very different. My friend had a 17yr old TB on DIY that had had colic surgery, and various other ailments, he was really old for his age. I upset her once by saying I thought she should think of PTS in the next couple of years. Yet she then bought her own place with stables and land, and being on a smaller quieter yard with the routine based around him, he has thrived and become a lot better. He is now 25.

I would like to think that I assess my horses generally as they age. I'm lucky in that I've had no major ailments with any horse so far (just one bout of lami with a pony), but was I to, I have good "sensible" vets who would discuss things with me, and then I would decide what to do based on how that individual horse would cope with the treatment and recovery. I'm lucky that I have my own yard, so can work around any treatments in how the horses are looked after. I may have a horse operated on at 20 if it was strong and fit, but if it had already had ailments and issues it would be a different story.
 
TheoryX1 said:
I think its a little bit daft to generalise that they will all drop dead after 20.
Click to expand...

To be fair, I think what was said was that they could drop dead after 20, not that they would. Arguably a horse could drop dead at any age, but it's more likely when they're older.

A lot has to depend on the general health and temperament of the horse, surely?

Mollie is about 18 and in very good health. However she's a very nervous mare who hates change, is terrified of vets, travel and anything unusual :rolleyes:. I would not traumatize her by putting her through any major treatment and definitely not surgery.

If she was a calmer nature my decision might be different.

My old lad back in the 1970s had a spell at Leahurst in his late teens (considered older then) with heart problems and was quite unperturbed by any of it. He recovered and went on to have quite a few more years of healthy useful life.

I've never objected to the vet asking is an animal insured. It seems a sensible place to start to establish whether funds are available before starting very expensive treatment.
 
Last edited:
Little legs just came here to say what I was going to say.

I won't put mine through colic surgery either. That does not mean I don't love my horses and that they're disposable. I love my horses for what they are. Going to the ends of the earth and putting them through things I think will be beneficial may not be so to them. It's not about the money really. Some people think you shouldn't own a horse unless its covered for everything under insurance and you go into debt to "heal" said horse. If you're throwing money at something that must mean you care. To me that's a warped world. Sometimes I actually wonder if people really know what makes horses happy or if they just assume anything that makes them happy equals a happy horse.

I saw a pony pop up on my news feed from an animal rescue. It was a pony with a fake leg. Not from this rescue but the comments were ridiculous. Along the lines of cruel owners who put their horses down instead of giving them a chance at life like this pony. Really? Is that what people really think and if so I hope none of them owns horses.

Terri
 
My now 23 year old had a bone chip removed under GA at 21. She is still fit and in work happily today. I think the best person to make a decision for an individual is its owner and vet at the time - I would never have thought I would put mine through surgery until I did. She came through it relatively easily.
 
I think that the concept of a horse being old at 15 and ancient at 20 has become outdated. Horses, like people are living and staying healthier for longer. People used to be old when they retired, now you are more likely to back pack around the globe at 65 than stay at home with your pipe & slippers and it's no different in the horse world.

Nutrition, health care and an increased understanding of the needs of the horse have come on considerably. When I think back (25 plus years ago) to when I started out with horses, so much has changed.

I think sometimes there is a temptation to keep trying different treatments when it might be kinder to put the horse to sleep but I don't think that is a change from the past. 25 years ago they had newly discovered or experimental treatments too and people were probably saying the same thing then.

I think that you need to assess each animal on its own merit regardless of age. My mare is 22 this year and to be honest she hasn't changed physically or mentally in about the last 15 years. I pay more attention to warming her up properly and increase activity more slowly etc than I would have done when she was younger but that is down to me not her. On the other hand, my stepmum's cob is 30 and looks and acts old and was much older at my mare's age than she is. He has had reoccuring sarcoids since he was a youngster and that coupled with the fact that we know he probably did not get great care in terms of worming, vacinations and nutrition until he was three has probably aged him before his time. Whilst he is in healthy and pain free he's got a well earned retirement but if he faced any major health issue, like surgery we would not want to put him through that.
 
beccylovespurple said:
I think that you need to assess each animal on its own merit regardless of age.

I agree with this, no judgement can be made on age alone. We had an arabx mare who at 25 was like a 12 year old and yes we would have done anything at that age to keep her. She died peacefully in the field just before she was 35 but I now have a rising 20 TB X Welsh D and I would have her PTS should any major medical issue arise as she has had a lot of health problems and has been retired for over 10 years. Every animal has to be treated individually.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top