Tail length

[abbijay]

I have spent a good chunk of this week at Cheshire show, parked next to the shire horse ring and have enjoyed listening to the commentary and learning a few things.
The one that really surprised me though was, did you know that when they clip a tail right out to only have a small amount of hair covering the top of the dock this is actually a more effective fly swat than a long tail?
I have gone halfway this year and clipped the underside of Ace's tail off so i can plait it up to show and it looks "appropriate" but there is still plenty of hair to let down when we're not competing. I couldn't bare to remove it all and try to keep him comforatble in the summer months but he has a huge, thick tail that I could not plait up without it looking like a dogs dinner.
I just can't believe that it's "better"!! Pictures for explanation:

This is mine plaited and with his remaining tail down.

This is an example of how little hair usually remains for show shires.
By all means choose to turn out your horse however you choose but I feel this was an unnecessary (and incorrect) justification for an action that not everyone is comfortable with.
I know it's already an uncomfortable week for the SHS as their shoeing news has been reported by the light horse circles now.

 

[cauda equina]

At a recent heavy horse display there was a poor Belgian mare with almost no tail at all

 

[ycbm]

If it wasn't a welfare issue it would be laughable to suggest that a 30cm stick is better at getting rid of flies than a one metre switch.
.

 

[Tiddlypom]

He looks much nicer with his full tail than how you had to have him for the show ring with his little stub tail.

Can you just ditch the ridiculous heavy horse showing scene and let him keep his whole lovely tail?

 

[Widgeon]

I find it rather sad that we put tradition above horse welfare when it's no longer needed. Presumably when they were ploughing a long tail was a liability with the machinery and traces, and they didn't have time to plait up every morning, so easier to just whip it off. But that's no longer the case, so in the interests of welfare, why can't they have long tails like any other horse, but decorated in the traditional manner?

He's a beautiful horse, that's a lovely photo of you. I'm glad you've found a way for him to keep his tail and still be competitive!

 

[Trouper]

I think they used the same excuse for docking dogs' tails. It should be a welfare issue not a fashion statement now.

 

[Snowfilly]

At a recent heavy horse display there was a poor Belgian mare with almost no tail at all

A lot of the Belgian and other European drafts here are imports and are docked, poor souls.

 

[OrangeAndLemon]

I've also seen people who remove half the tail depth wise rather than length wise as you've done. (Essentially, they cut the front half or the back half away) They similarly plait it up to hide for showing but leave a full length tail for fly swatting (albeit a thinner one).

ETA: I thought the basis for removing much of the tail was to prevent it getting caught in the chains and harness and that's where the tradition came from.

 

[SEL]

My little cob mare grows hair at a ridiculous rate - she falls over her leg hair. Her tail gets so thick & heavy that it isn't much use as a fly swat.
Back when we had rain she had a load of nasty mud dreadlocks in it and I hacked them out and cut her tail up to her hocks. Not my best day of hairdressing but I've noticed she's been a lot more swishy with the flies so I guess I need to keep on being scissor happy.

 

[Auslander]

I can't imagine how anyone can say a short tail is a more effective fly swish than a long one! My lot mostly have tails down to their fetlocks during summer (deliberately), and they can reach most of their bodies with a swish. The one with a shorter tail - just below the hock, can only reach half her hidnquarters.

 

[Cortez]

As the owner of a horse with a fully docked tail (lost due to an over-tight tail bandage - see my avatar), I can assure you that horses have long tails for a reason and that to deliberately remove a tail subjects the horse to pure torture from flies.

 

[rabatsa]

I have had various types of horses and ponies over the years and have found that those with very thick and heavy tails cannot use them as effectively as those with lighter tails. Often shortening the heavy tails allows them to be swished higher up the body than the same tail left long and it is less effort for the horse to do so. Thinning the tail also lightens it for a better swish.

 

[Elf On A Shelf]

The one thing that cracks me up with the Clydesdales up here is they have now bred them so that their hocks are virtually touching. They have mostly dropped the need for tieing the legs in to make them grow up cow hocked, they have evolved to be so.

And the reason for being so cow hocked? So the back feet fit in the plow lines.

Yup.

So the back feet fit in the plough lines.

What about the front feet?

And the fact that the plough is generally behind them and to the side slightly so it would plough in any marks left by feet?

Ours not to reason why ...

 

[abbijay]

He looks much nicer with his full tail than how you had to have him for the show ring with his little stub tail.

Can you just ditch the ridiculous heavy horse showing scene and let him keep his whole lovely tail?

I’ve only given it a go this year for a bit of fun and because I believe he’s a nice enough type to not look out of place. However what I have learned is that if you aren't prepared to "go the whole hog" (if you'll pardon the trimming pun) with taking tails off and whacking ridiculous shoes on and then being a "face" there is no point in showing. I enjoy getting my horse as clean and shiny as possible and having a gallop around in company for a bit of fun but I just can't be bothered to go all out with this.
Time to do some dressage I think!

I can get the point about very heavy tails but almost no tail left at all?! I can't see it. I was once told that a horse cant twitch the skin of their hind quarters the way they can in front to disturb flies and the tail allows them to swipe tails from this area so tails should be long enough for that job.

 

[abbijay]

The one thing that cracks me up with the Clydesdales up here is they have now bred them so that their hocks are virtually touching. They have mostly dropped the need for tieing the legs in to make them grow up cow hocked, they have evolved to be so.

And the reason for being so cow hocked? So the back feet fit in the plow lines.

Yup.

So the back feet fit in the plough lines.

What about the front feet?

And the fact that the plough is generally behind them and to the side slightly so it would plough in any marks left by feet?

Ours not to reason why ...

This is in part breeding and in part they are shod as youngsters to "develop" this trait. And technically they don't want them cow hocked, they still want them straight but very close set. I've never heard of tying though?! Sounds pretty brutal.
I was told by a very old school judge "you should be able to pass an envelope between the hind legs and a bowler hat between the forelegs." Honestly, I have no idea why?! The mechanics don't seem to stack up but i'm not an engineer nor a plough man.

Just to check, do you mean Plough lines? This is name given to the "reins" whereas the plough forms a furrow in the ground.

 

[rabatsa]

I think that it is only since horses stopped being used for everyday work that the breed societies have mucked up their legs.

 

[Elf On A Shelf]

This is in part breeding and in part they are shod as youngsters to "develop" this trait. And technically they don't want them cow hocked, they still want them straight but very close set. I've never heard of tying though?! Sounds pretty brutal.
I was told by a very old school judge "you should be able to pass an envelope between the hind legs and a bowler hat between the forelegs." Honestly, I have no idea why?! The mechanics don't seem to stack up but i'm not an engineer nor a plough man.

Just to check, do you mean Plough lines? This is name given to the "reins" whereas the plough forms a furrow in the ground.

Yes I meant furrow but couldn't think of the word at the time

I was judging a supreme with 3 other judges earlier this year and the clydesdale judge was singing the horses praises. Not only did it have a sarcoid - which they didn't even know what one was - it also had knocks to it's fetlocks where it was so close behind. Then they cheerfully said - we stopped tieing the legs in a few years ago when they all started being born close enough behind not to need it.

 

[abbijay]

Yes I meant furrow but couldn't think of the word at the time

I was judging a supreme with 3 other judges earlier this year and the clydesdale judge was singing the horses praises. Not only did it have a sarcoid - which they didn't even know what one was - it also had knocks to it's fetlocks where it was so close behind. Then they cheerfully said - we stopped tieing the legs in a few years ago when they all started being born close enough behind not to need it.

Well I met a horse that is going to HOYS in the new cart class, it had a capped hock the size of a tennis ball!!
As I've always said with competing at showing, I'm paying for someone's opinion of my horse. I don't have to agree with it!! I always take the best horse in the ring home so what else matters?

 

[Cortez]

Yes I meant furrow but couldn't think of the word at the time

I was judging a supreme with 3 other judges earlier this year and the clydesdale judge was singing the horses praises. Not only did it have a sarcoid - which they didn't even know what one was - it also had knocks to it's fetlocks where it was so close behind. Then they cheerfully said - we stopped tieing the legs in a few years ago when they all started being born close enough behind not to need it.

That's all mad, of course, but there actually is/was a practical reason to have plough horses that tracked very narrow - not for the sake of the furrows, but for the horses; treading on the risen furrow caused lameness due to the constant twisting of the fetlock.

ETA: I'm certainly no expert, but i have plowed a bit with horses (and oxen), and spent many fascinating hours talking to some very ancient plowmen. I am just old enough to have seen the last plowmen at work and I go along to watch the horse classes at ploughing competitions.

 

[Glitter's fun]

Ploughing was usually done with more than one horse because that's how you keep straight - one walks in the previously made furrow, so that means the furrows are always the same distance apart. You just got together with neighbours, & put together whatever combination of horses you could.
So yes - its easier if one horse does walk in the furrow BUT unless you are doing a demonstration, the next thing you do is walk all over the field again with a roller, seed drill etc so a few hoof prints in the wrong place are neither here nor there.

 

[Snowfilly]

Well I met a horse that is going to HOYS in the new cart class, it had a capped hock the size of a tennis ball!!
As I've always said with competing at showing, I'm paying for someone's opinion of my horse. I don't have to agree with it!! I always take the best horse in the ring home so what else matters?

The cart and harness classes with heavies have always been a bit more forgiving of scars and acquired damage - there’s plenty of horses who have gone top level in turnouts with scars or lumps and bumps. I remember Whitbread having a grey shire with a really fat tendon and it did the rounds for several years. I haven’t seen the mark scheme for the new cart class series but I wouldn’t be surprised if way of going and action was enough to outweigh that hock. Especially if it’s well driven.

 

[Elf On A Shelf]

That's all mad, of course, but there actually is/was a practical reason to have plough horses that tracked very narrow - not for the sake of the furrows, but for the horses; treading on the risen furrow caused lameness due to the constant twisting of the fetlock.

ETA: I'm certainly no expert, but i have plowed a bit with horses (and oxen), and spent many fascinating hours talking to some very ancient plowmen. I am just old enough to have seen the last plowmen at work and I go along to watch the horse classes at ploughing competitions.

Oh I can see the theory behind it but to say you only needed the back feet in tight when the fronts were walking the same path did make me laugh! Surely if you want to keep in the furrows you keep all 4 feet in them not just 2.

 

[Cortez]

Oh I can see the theory behind it but to say you only needed the back feet in tight when the fronts were walking the same path did make me laugh! Surely if you want to keep in the furrows you keep all 4 feet in them not just 2.

Clydesdales, which is what we're discussing here, are exceedingly base narrow all round, and that's the reason they are bred that way. Luckily few of them have to plow these days so continuing to breed them like that is a bit redundant, but it's nice to know what the theory behind the function is.