Social licence questions again.

[blitznbobs]

What she's saying isn't competition specific. People almost always buy horses because they want to ride, whether that be going out for hacks or doing PSG. (Alternative folk like riding too!) It's not necessarily wrong, but you also can't say that your ultimate priority is the care of a specific animal, if you then choose to move them on for the sake of your goals. A change of home - a new routine, new carers, new conspecifics, will almost always be stressful for a horse, even if they're going to be in a better home. It's not a decision that comes with no consequences for the horse.

In the end, ownership is a huge expense to commit to if you can't achieve what you're trying to achieve (whether that be moving up the levels or just riding). For most people, that goal is not just owning a horse, regardless of what they can do with it. It shouldn't be a surprise, because most of us have our first experiences with horses, the ones that make fall in love, in the saddle.

It's not exactly news that people don't tend to buy unridden horses, and criticism of people who think it's a good idea to sell on an older and unridden horse isn't uncommon, especially on this forum.

My boy can't stand up to ridden work anymore due to historically being poorly managed, and ridden into the ground by previous owners. Ten separate people have told me what a 'sacrifice' I've made to have him, which tells you their thoughts on keeping an unridden. And I'm not much better either - the only reason I bought him, knowing he couldn't be ridden anymore, was because I'd known him in the past. I wouldn't have bought another horse in his situation that I didn't have some emotional ties to.

I have never moved a horse on because it couldn’t do a job… in fact its the reason I started doing pure dressage .. my ‘eventer’ hated cross country but danced round the ballet bit… choice sell or embrace his Preferences… and that is exactly what happened.

 

[Highmileagecob]

Any sport starts to become questionable once big money is involved. The horse sport industry is slightly different in that it involves living animals who cannot speak up for themselves or vote with their feet if they do not like something. They need a good advocate, and this is a difficult area, as there will always be the voice of money that elbows out the welfare. I still stand by my earlier comment that a good rider should be able to take a horse round a course in basic, minimal tack, without the latest fashion item strapped to it's head. Ratface, your post relating Pony Club lessons of yesteryear was familiar. Learning to control without relying on tack was routinely taught - perhaps today's young riders are not expected to get into the scrapes that we did, or has Health & Safety struck again?

 

[LEC]

Whereas I happily move them on if don’t do the job I want. I think everyone is happier as the horse is doing an appropriate job in the right home and I tbh the end result would be the same as would give up. Maybe I don’t truly love horses as defined by one teenagers view in Canada, but I also don’t believe in the magical bond that people allude to because horses brains don’t work that way …. Everyone has horse ownership for a different reason though it’s right to think about this stuff I don’t think people should feel guilty about horse ownership.

 

[ycbm]

But that's what a pro is? Surely? Someone at the top of their game, has probably done courses, taken lessons, done an apprenticeship and PROVED they know their stuff. And yes, I would listen to a pro.
I would take lessons from a pro rather than someone with no credentials whatsoever.

I've been musing on this one and I think the problem is that when you grow up and do all your learning inside an existing system it's difficult to see where that system is going wrong.

To take a medical example, I remember watching a BBC documentary in the very dim and distant past when documentaries were about fact, not about showing weeping people and with overlaid emotive music. It was about the desperate fight of a researcher/research group over the conventional wisdom that stomach ulcers in humans were caused by stress and a fatty diet. They had proven to themselves that stomach ulcers were primarily caused by helicobacter pylori infection but they simply could not get the experts on treating stomach ulcers to believe them and change their methods. Antibiotic treatment for stomach ulcers caused by helicobacter pylori is now standard.

To take an extreme equestrian example from the US, the trainers of TWH competition horses really don't believe that they are doing anything wrong. It can be as clear as daylight to the rest of us, but they learnt everything they knew in that system and all they can see is that it "works".

And a day to day example from the bottom to the top of horse training, that trainers of all levels will often simply hoik the bit really high in the mouth and/or slap on a mouth closing noseband if the horse is unsettled in its mouth. Because that's just normal in the current system.

Regarding top level sport, I'm coming to the conclusion that minimal tack should be a rule and that the best horse and trainer is therefore the one which wins wearing minimal tack. We're using live animals for sport and entertainment here, it can't just be about which horse is capable of jumping the highest and most twisting courses without breaking.
.

 

[stormox]

ycbm- that is making the assumption that the less tack is more comfortable for the horse. Is it though? I can see no reason why a running martingale (for example) should cause a horse pain, or a bitless bridle is preferable to a bitted one.

 

[ycbm]

Whereas I happily move them on if don’t do the job I want. I think everyone is happier as the horse is doing an appropriate job in the right home and I tbh the end result would be the same as would give up. Maybe I don’t truly love horses as defined by one teenagers view in Canada, but I also don’t believe in the magical bond that people allude to because horses brains don’t work that way …. Everyone has horse ownership for a different reason though it’s right to think about this stuff I don’t think people should feel guilty about horse ownership.

I agree with this. I have in the past sold horses to provide me income, and that was fine because otherwise there wouldn't be enough horses for people to buy.

I have also moved on horses I had achieved everything I wanted with, and that was fine too because that allowed other people to buy horses with the experience they needed.

And I have moved on horses I simply didn't like. And i did the that entirely with a clear conscience in the belief that it was better for a horse to be cared for by someone who actually liked it than by someone who didn't, however good the care that person provided was.

This time round I deliberately set out to buy a horse where the care and attention I'm going to be able give him is going to be better than he has known before. Because I know what I'm offering is far from perfect for a "blank slate" horse and this is the only way I can now settle in my head the conflict between what I want/need from horse owning and what would be perfect in the eyes of a horse kept more naturally from birth.

I honestly feel we're in an ethical minefield with horse owning right now as continuing research discloses just what emotions mammals all share, just what cognitive abilities even a goldfish has* and the damage we can unknowingly cause horses.





*they can be taught to drive a fishbowl through an obstacle course for reward.

 

[ycbm]

ycbm- that is making the assumption that the less tack is more comfortable for the horse. Is it though? I can see no reason why a running martingale (for example) should cause a horse pain, or a bitter bridle as opposed to a bitless one.

I think there's every reason to believe that it isn't in a horses best interests to put a bar of metal in its mouth for hours and that it would never choose to do that.

A running martingale is used to stop a horse objecting to a contact from the reins that it disagrees with. Again I'm sure that the horse would not make the choice of having that, and if a horse without a martingale can jump the same height in the same time then that, imo, is the more worthy winner of a competition.

ETA my new horse will wear a bit, and if necessary a martingale. I'm not trying to preach here, just discuss. .

 

[stormox]

The problem is its a matter of 'degree' of right or wrong. It isn't black and white. The argument is ' is it right to force an animal to do something it really would never do given the choice'.
How many riders say "my horse loves jumping" - if they turned said horse in a field with jumps, would it canter round a course of jumps or stand and eat grass?

 

[ycbm]

The problem is its a matter of 'degree' of right or wrong. It isn't black and white. The argument is ' is it right to force an animal to do something it really would never do given the choice'.
How many riders say "my horse loves jumping" - if they turned said horse in a field with jumps, would it canter round a course of jumps or stand and eat grass?

Well I know I've never been happier than when I was told my horse did exactly that .

I agree with you that we are getting into some very fuzzy boundaries, but I think there is a clearly understandable difference between a horse which will only jump consistently clear when wearing a martingale and one which will jump clear without one, and I don't really see why that shouldn't be part of finding a worthy winner. Except that's currently not our "system".
.

 

[Pearlsacarolsinger]

The problem is its a matter of 'degree' of right or wrong. It isn't black and white. The argument is ' is it right to force an animal to do something it really would never do given the choice'.
How many riders say "my horse loves jumping" - if they turned said horse in a field with jumps, would it canter round a course of jumps or stand and eat grass?

I have had horses that would happily jump over a course of jumps when turned out in a field. I personally prefer not to jump.

Eta thinking specifically of a Welsh A and a TBx WelshD who followed each other round.

 

[cauda equina]

The problem is its a matter of 'degree' of right or wrong. It isn't black and white. The argument is ' is it right to force an animal to do something it really would never do given the choice'.
How many riders say "my horse loves jumping" - if they turned said horse in a field with jumps, would it canter round a course of jumps or stand and eat grass?

I think minimal force is key here - or better still, no force at all
If a horse is trained to comply with reasonable requests, understands what is required of him and is willing to comply then you don't need force
I'm reminded of a thread some time ago about a horse that had to be cross tied to be tacked up and turned out to be lame; if a horse is tacked up loose at least he can have a say in the matter

Of course opinions will vary as to what it's reasonable to ask of a horse

 

[welshwizzard]

Having spent many an hour watching the antics in collecting rings at low level BS shows, I often mused hat would happen if riders were restricted to snaffles and a martingale. Probably wouldn't be pretty I think.
My horse used to play tag with his mate over jumps in the field , but he was a bit weird lol.

 

[SibeliusMB]

I'm a bit late to the discussion, but this is a great thread and I'd like to offer some thoughts that have been bouncing around in my head the last day or two.

We have seen a lot of "but they're pros" statements in this thread and in many other discussions like this over the years. Leaning on professional riders and trainers to be the authority on what is/is not ethical from a welfare perspective is a tricky and potentially dangerous approach for the horses. By definition (at least where I'm from), the literal definition of a "professional" is someone who makes a certain amount of their income (25% or more in the US) from horses. Other countries and cultures surely also have a certification component to it as well, but at the heart of it, professional riders and trainers earn a living from producing, competing, and selling horses. Leaving it to them to be the only voice of reason when it comes to equine welfare is a conflict of interest.

By no means do all professionals operate with a mentality that horses are only goods to be produced/sold, I know we have some very compassionate and loving pros who treat their animals as individuals and genuinely love them. However, the horse business is still a business. For example, the rider/trainer that takes an extra year or more to get a horse to a point where it can go around a grand prix course with no martingale and a snaffle is probably losing significant amounts of money compared to the rider/trainer who is using additional tack/gadgets to produce an artificial level of rideability, and can therefore compete and win on that horse faster.

I was a pro for a few short years, and one of the main reasons I left the industry was because I didn't agree with the shortcuts I was being asked to use. This was just at a private hunt yard, not a big competition horse factory, but still...I was asked to start jumping courses with the three year old I had just backed and put 30 days on. I was asked to stick another horse in draw reins, not because the head trainer didn't trust me to educate the horse correctly or feel that's what the horse really needed, but because the client gave them 30 days to "get the horse's head down." My employer was a great horseman, a former international 4* champion, but even she caved to the pressures of the industry. As she said, if we don't do what's asked, the client will go down the street to someone who will. I put my notice in shortly thereafter and eventually changed careers. And the reality is, that's the same pressure that every professional in the industry feels. Young people getting into the horse industry have no idea or appreciation that it's ultimately not about the horses at all...it's about people. The nature of this business puts good people and good horsemen in difficult situations where they sometimes have to choose between their principles and putting food on the table. And that's why I don't think the pros can be the sole authority on what is/isn't ethical treatment, even if most of them are good people and want to do the right thing.

Equine vets and behaviorists should take a more prominent role. On the behavior piece, it's probably reasonable to assume that some of these professional riders who have grown up at competition yards probably know very little about horse behavior in a natural setting. As someone said above, it's the institution that the riders know and understand, and if that institution offers very little opportunity to work with horses in a more natural environment (large turnout spaces, herds, etc), then they're just not going to know. Some horses get labeled as "difficult" or "naughty" due to behaviors they're exhibiting because of the environment they're in, and the riders are failing to understand what the horse is clearly trying to say.

On a personal note, I've tried to make more decisions lately to improve the life of my horse. He lives out 24/7 due to his sensitive nature and tendency to develop ulcers if stabled. I've switched to a gel bit for flatwork and jumping, and he goes bitless when hacking. I've always done groundwork, but the last year or so been focusing more on being present ("attuned") and seeking more of my horse's permission in the things that we do. Little steps that I hope are making him an even happier horse. I have a long way to go, but learning more about these techniques has made such a huge and positive impact on our communication. I would hope that others in the industry could learn to also keep an open mind.

 

[littleshetland]

It seems that almost every day science/animal behaviourists turn up new evidence about the increasing levels of sentience and emotional awareness in the animal and plant kingdom. After all, who'd have though octopus' could display such intelligence? Trees communicating with each other via a 'wood wide web' of mycelium? I think there is so much more to come, and I fully expect some sort of computer programme that will be able to translate the thoughts and emotions of our fellow species directly on to a screen. How, I wonder, will humanity cope with that?
For the last few millennia mankind has been taught through various, mostly religious tropes, that humans are elevated above the rest of the species on the planet, and they are ours to command, use and manipulate in any way we see fit...I guess this why we are where we are.
I do hope we're starting to see a gradual shift in peoples perceptions of how we interact with the animals around us, but I think we've got a long way to go yet.

 

[paddy555]

ycbm- that is making the assumption that the less tack is more comfortable for the horse. Is it though? I can see no reason why a running martingale (for example) should cause a horse pain, or a bitless bridle is preferable to a bitted one.

if you take a horse with endless amounts of tack on its head and front end ie reins etc that may well have all that tack because the rider finds it impossible to control without.
Put the same horse in an enclosed school (for safety when you do this) remove the tack, all of it and put a neck ring on. Ride around and very often you find a horse who listens, who stops and who most of all takes responsibility, They do that on the first ride and as with all things they improve with training and practise.

Why if you remove everything does the horse co operate yet with the endless tack he is difficult. Is he comfortable, does he just think you are fighting him.

I rode miles this way, over open moorland, through herds of feral animals, on the roads, jumped. The only reason I stopped was not that I couldn't control the horse but as traffic got worse I realised it was silly in case I fell off and there was no headcollar or bridle for someone to lead with.

Sadly it seems to have been removed but at one time there was some lovely footage on the rockleyblog (ie the barefoot place) if Nic riding and jumping with just a neck ring. That was on quite a large hunter.
I've watched many at clinics where the headgear has been replaced by a neck ring and it is very usual for them to behave well. You would really think that get all the tack off, put a rider on and they will charge off with no control. They don't.

So if a horse can be controlled without anything why can't it have just basic headgear when it goes out show jumping etc?

 

[paddy555]

. For example, the rider/trainer that takes an extra year or more to get a horse to a point where it can go around a grand prix course with no martingale and a snaffle is probably losing significant amounts of money compared to the rider/trainer who is using additional tack/gadgets to produce an artificial level of rideability, and can therefore compete and win on that horse faster.

that makes the point perfectly. The horse could actually do it but money and winning talks.

 

[Sossigpoker]

I just saw a list of Oliver Townends warnings for whip use and abuse of horse. How can this be acceptable?
Shame on those owners who give their horses to him to ride. Imagine what he does when there are no cameras?

 

[paddy555]

I've been musing on this one and I think the problem is that when you grow up and do all your learning inside an existing system it's difficult to see where that system is going wrong.


.

that is an interesting point and one the vet and I were discussing only last week. We were talking about local farmers and some of the very very poor welfare standards of some of our farmers. The incomers (say within the last 50 years) have for the most part far higher standards than the "natives" (ie going back generations)
We concluded that if you were brought up with poor standards then you would think it normal and would see little reason to look out of your upbringing and educate yourself on better ways.

If you are young and watch successful show jumpers with all this tack on or help in that sort of yard then it must be obvious to you this is the way to do it.
If, as some on here have, you have grown up with the old fashioned pony club and have had to learn rather than control by gadgets you probably look at all the tack with horror.

 

[teapot]

Imposing tighter tack rules, aka less is more would be fine in theory but could end up with some disastrous consequences given the current decline in training and standards.

Until there's a focus again on education, training, and trying to be the best you can, which naturally comes at some cost both short and long term, people will always take the option of shoving a stronger bit in the horse's mouth and cracking on because it's easier, cheaper, and doesn't interfere with their instagram posting scheduling. The UK could learn a thing or two from the German or French models of having to be 'qualified' to compete imho.

 

[humblepie]

I find it interesting in that have someone on the yard where I keep my horse who is a professional in that they earn their living working with horses and I think always have done. In my view some of their basic standards of horsemanship are dire with a lack of common horse sense.

 

[blitznbobs]

The problem is its a matter of 'degree' of right or wrong. It isn't black and white. The argument is ' is it right to force an animal to do something it really would never do given the choice'.
How many riders say "my horse loves jumping" - if they turned said horse in a field with jumps, would it canter round a course of jumps or stand and eat grass?

I have had more than one horse that happily went field hopping for no apparently obvious reason other than they wanted to for whatever reason… some horses love jumping, some do not.

 

[Chianti]

But the OP was about tack. Nick Skelton's tack.
I have seen numpties riding round the villages doing more harm to their horses by sloppy riding on ill- fitting saddles and yanking on a simple snaffle because their reins are in loops than a professional would do with a proper combination of bridle and accessories that suit their particular horse.

But that's a completely different issue/ problem. If you eliminated the 'numpties' you'd still have the professionals flinging on layer after layer of tack, keeping their horses in unnatural ways and riding them with their chins pinned to their chests.

 

[LEC]

But that's a completely different issue/ problem. If you eliminated the 'numpties' you'd still have the professionals flinging on layer after layer of tack, keeping their horses in unnatural ways and riding them with their chins pinned to their chests.

This is a very judgemental post! So many of the sjers I know are trying better and Peder Fredericson is leading the way. I still follow his breeding experiment which is going on in Sweden though haven’t seen an update lately where they have turned out sporthorse youngsters with natives on hundreds of acres of wilderness to see if it produces tougher horses who have less issues. My gut instinct says it will….

 

[ycbm]

This is a very judgemental post! So many of the sjers I know are trying better and Peder Fredericson is leading the way. I still follow his breeding experiment which is going on in Sweden though haven’t seen an update lately where they have turned out sporthorse youngsters with natives on hundreds of acres of wilderness to see if it produces tougher horses who have less issues. My gut instinct says it will….

This is great to read. Clearly a move in the right direction to test this kind of thing.
.

 

[FestiveG]

Jimmy Savile was pretty successful too (NOT a direct comparison!). But seriously look at the system and what role models like these, and the stories they tell, contribute to the mismanagement of horses.

That is such an abhorrent statement, which both diminishes Saviles victims and suggests that Skelton is a child abuser.

 

[Miss_Millie]

That is such an abhorrent statement, which both diminishes Saviles victims and suggests that Skelton is a child abuser.

Sbloom literally said not a direct comparison?

The point is that being what is conventionally considered 'successful' does not automatically make you a good role model or make you right.

 

[honetpot]

This is a very judgemental post! So many of the sjers I know are trying better and Peder Fredericson is leading the way. I still follow his breeding experiment which is going on in Sweden though haven’t seen an update lately where they have turned out sporthorse youngsters with natives on hundreds of acres of wilderness to see if it produces tougher horses who have less issues. My gut instinct says it will….

The thing is for many it is a business not just a sport, and they have to make a living, usually by results, or they do not get rides and sponsors and pay the bills.
I have a friend who stewards at FEI level, and she told me many years ago about the things that go on, the thing that really struck with me was when they said, 'the pros know when to stop'(abuse). So if you think of abuse as a pyramid, we are only seeing what they want us to see, the top, the rest hidden.
I grew up around some rough people, I have seen a horse punched in the mouth as a child, and most of the poor management /handling I see at lower levels is caused by poor knowledge and trying some have baked idea that someone is pushing on social media. When a pro does something, they should know better and also set an example of good practice.
I would like them to do the equivalent of a risk assessment for every bit of equipment they use of a horse in affiliated competition, with a reason why it is needed, and it's checked off by the tack/ring steward. At least then they would have to think, and there could be an audit of what is being used and why. Like any job you should have a process of why you do something, horses in the UK have less protection than livestock.

 

[stangs]

On the topic of SJers doing things right: Keeping it natural: barefoot, bitless mare who lives out wins 5* at Royal Windsor

“I feel they’re much more healthy this way,” he said. “The sport is really something not natural, so at home I try to give them the possibility to be as natural as possible and put them out in groups so they can socialise.”

Pictures of the mare before and after as well (both taken this year!) - good example that, with the right approach, horses don't need all that stuff on their face.

 

[FestiveG]

Sbloom literally said not a direct comparison?

The point is that being what is conventionally considered 'successful' does not automatically make you a good role model or make you right.

I still feel that it is wrong to use Savile's horrendous, criminal acts as a comparator to someone who you feel doesn't tack their horse correctly. It diminishes one and is a massive overreach of the other. Having had contact with more than one of Saviles victims, this has made me really angry.

 

[Jellymoon]

Nick Skelton and Big Star have won Olympic Gold.
Who are we to criticise?

Is that a genuine comment, or tongue in cheek?! Because for me, this is a massive issue. Those of us who don’t compete at the highest level are not allowed to comment, we have no right to ask questions or dare to criticise as we are but lowly amateurs. How dare we expose their world and spoil their fun? We are belittled as ‘infatuated numpties’, ‘leisure riders’, ‘happy hackers’.
So, let me ask this, if my kids were at a school (let’s say, even, a very successful school turning out children to the highest level, with several aiming for Oxbridge) where I thought the teachers (the ‘professionals’ and ‘experts’) were cruelly treating the children, would I not be able to call it out because I am not a qualified professional being paid to look after the children? Would I only be allowed to comment if I were also producing children to the highest level?