The ethics of genetics (within horse breeding)

[shortstuff99]

I have sort of tried to make a rhyming title. After diverting a current thread into a very interesting discussion about the genetics and ethics of horse breeding I thought it deserved it's own post!

I have recently come across some interesting discussion on the WFFS gene (warmbood fragile foal syndrome) within sport horses. Double copy of this gene is lethal but single copy is not, but there is now some early research indicating that it might lead to horses with increased hypermobility and ergo more spectacular paces. Famous horses with a copy include Everdale, Indian Rock and Apache. Study can be found here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8783495/

Also a good Eurodressage article here https://www.eurodressage.com/2018/0...ch-stallion-owners-take-action-germany-denial

Now the query is until we know more about the effects of this gene should we still be breeding from these horses? What effects might it have on breeding?

Other ethical conundrums with breeding also include the PSSM 2 genes, now we know that this is a disease that has devastating consequences but the link between these genes and expression of disease (from a purely genetic standpoint) is currently unproven and isn't as defined as WFFS or PSSM1 where the link is very clear. Should horses be tested for this and breeding?

Another interesting post I came across the other day was a breeder being thrilled that they had bred a colt to be homozygous for Silver (coat colour) even though it cause sight problems/ blindness as they can use the horse to breed guaranteed silvers.

Once we know about these genetic issues is it right that we "skirt" around the issues in the attempt to breed "perfect" horses?

Please discuss!

 

[Cortez]

I gave up breeding Warmbloods - specifically Trakheners, more than 25 years ago when genetics in horses was just getting going. I’m not even keen on line breeding, so the idea of continuing to use horses with known genetic problems makes me very uncomfortable indeed. I’m also not impressed by the supposedly “better” sports horses being produced today and don’t see the modern version as an improvement on what was being bred 20, 30 years ago. I was breeding around 15 foals a year, and put down 1 a year on average for reasons ranging from actual deformation to dummy foal syndrome. I also moved broodmares out of the breeding herd if they produced more than one foal with conformational or temperament problems, and the same with stallions: they got one dud, any more than that and they were gone.

The idea of using anything with known genetic markers for adverse conditions is crazy.

 

[palo1]

I have sort of tried to make a rhyming title. After diverting a current thread into a very interesting discussion about the genetics and ethics of horse breeding I thought it deserved it's own post!

I have recently come across some interesting discussion on the WFFS gene (warmbood fragile foal syndrome) within sport horses. Double copy of this gene is lethal but single copy is not, but there is now some early research indicating that it might lead to horses with increased hypermobility and ergo more spectacular paces. Famous horses with a copy include Everdale, Indian Rock and Apache. Study can be found here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8783495/

Also a good Eurodressage article here https://www.eurodressage.com/2018/0...ch-stallion-owners-take-action-germany-denial

Now the query is until we know more about the effects of this gene should we still be breeding from these horses? What effects might it have on breeding?

Other ethical conundrums with breeding also include the PSSM 2 genes, now we know that this is a disease that has devastating consequences but the link between these genes and expression if disease (from a purely genetic standpoint) is currently unproven and isn't as defined as WFFS or PSSM1 where the link is very clear. Should horses be tested for this and breeding?

Another interesting post I came across the other day was a breeder being thrilled that they had bred a colt to be homozygous for Silver (coat colour) even though it cause sight problems/ blindness as they can use the horse to breed guaranteed silvers.

Once we know about these genetic issues is it right that we "skirt" around the issues in the attempt to breed "perfect" horses?

Please discuss!

It is very interesting! Thank you for starting the thread. As horses have been comprehensively monetized and lost their position as ' working' animals I guess the incentive to breed for colour, paces and exaggerated features (sea horse arab anyone?) has become much more of a driver for breeders. PSSM is tricky because of difficulty with testing and expression, and I see both sides of the debate on that, though PSSM is undoubtedly a devastating condition. But where something is traceable and is associated with health, soundness or temperament issues, I think breed societies should not support breeding. In the UK backyard breeding is a problem and I have thought for a long time that ALL breeding of horses should be at least licenced and breeders should be members of a breed society ( I think we have enough of those!). I get some of the issues with that but ethically it isn't really possible to support the current 'Wild West' approach where literally anything goes, at any level! That would also mean a passporting and chipping system that had some integrity too though! At performance horse level, with the costs, risks and investments I wonder why there isn't more interest or drive towards genotyping? I am interested to hear the thoughts of those closer to performance horse breeding. If we were breeding, I think we would primarily use a phenotyping approach but where genetic info was available, for stallions, for example that would be useful. Of course, breeding cannot be reduced to pure science - there is a bit of magic/discernment involved too! Perhaps that is more relevant for small scale breeding across, for example 2 different breeds. I am not comfortable with industrial scale horse breeding but in that scenario you might think industrial techniques would apply...just trying to gather my thoughts on this to a degree.

 

[ycbm]

The idea of using anything with known genetic markers for adverse conditions is crazy

As the previous owner of a horse sired by the originator of HYPP, from semen used 15 years after his death, I can only agree. It was 50/50 whether mine got it or not, and he didn't, but he did get the PSSM Impressive also carried instead.

It never crossed my mind that anyone would be stupid enough to use such tainted semen, never mind be so proud of it that they got him DNA tested to his sire!
.

 

[Ample Prosecco]

I have recently come across some interesting discussion on the WFFS gene (warmbood fragile foal syndrome) within sport horses. Double copy of this gene is lethal but single copy is not, but there is now some early research indicating that it might lead to horses with increased hypermobility and ergo more spectacular paces. Famous horses with a copy include Everdale, Indian Rock and Apache. Study can be found here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8783495/

Also a good Eurodressage article here https://www.eurodressage.com/2018/0...ch-stallion-owners-take-action-germany-denial

I’m also not impressed by the supposedly “better” sports horses being produced today and don’t see the modern version as an improvement on what was being bred 20, 30 years ago.

. As horses have been comprehensively monetized and lost their position as ' working' animals I guess the incentive to breed for colour, paces and exaggerated features (sea horse arab anyone?) has become much more of a driver for breeders.

This bit does my head in completely. Just like the brachycephalic dogs winning at showing and the artificial gaits being rewarded in a Tennesse Walking Horse.

Exaggerated features should be marked DOWN not up. The breed standard should be one promoting health, soundness, robustness. Horses with an odd action linked to hypermobility should be viewed as having flawed paces not spectacularly impressive ones.

Sometimes freaks of nature (swimmers with flippers for feet!) win because they are FASTER. But there is no excuse for it when judging is involved.

 

[SEL]

As the previous owner of a horse sired by the originator of HYPP, from semen used 15 years after his death, I can only agree. It was 50/50 whether mine got it or not, and he didn't, but he did get the PSSM Impressive also carried instead.

It never crossed my mind that anyone would be stupid enough to use such tainted semen, never mind be so proud of it that they got him DNA tested to his sire!
.

Oh HYPP is still something certain US breeders proudly disclose on their 5 panel tested stallions - that muscle build is in demand.

 

[Fransurrey]

I hadn't really considered hypermobility in horses before. I am hypermobile in some joints and winters are particularly hard as they ache in cold, damp weather. The thought of purposefully breeding animals that suffer with it is horrific, particularly as they spend significant lengths of time in cold, damp conditions, even when stabled. Urgh. Humans.

 

[AppyLover1996]

Having dealt with and currently dealing with an equine with PSSM and the whole host of issues that can cause alongside it, I loathe anyone who knowingly breeds horses with any sort of health condition - it is not fair at all on the poor animal! Some manage a normal-ish life but the vast majority spend their life in some sort of long term low grade pain, which people aren't quick to spot as they've no/very little knowledge of the condition and therefore nothing/very little can be done for the animal by the time the health condition is diagnosed as usually it is too late to attempt to reverse the damage, so you're left doing damage control until the inevitable decision has to be made.

One of my yard friends was astonished at how complex my lad's diet can get with regards to his PSSM and if he's having a good or bad day - her response was "But looking at him now, he looks perfectly fine", to which I said "Yeah that's cause I've got him micromanaged to a T, if I slip up it can cause a massive chain reaction of problems". Don't get me wrong, I adore the bones of my lad and he's got the heart of a lion, but when he has a PSSM flare up by God does it shatter my heart seeing him so broken....but then again those who knowingly breed animals with health conditions don't have to deal with the heartbreak of what happens when they break, as they've usually sold them by the time they're young and not currently affected.

I understand accidents happen within breeding - but surely with the advancements in genetics etc, it should be commonplace to test for genetic conditions affecting the specific breeds and begin to phase them out of the bloodlines? Sadly I fear as long as breeders justify breeding animals with known health issues ("Oh there's only a 50% chance for the foal to be affected and the bloodlines haven't had any issues so far" is a very common one!) , we are banging our heads against a proverbial wall....horses that carry the gene for WFFS for example are known to produce a more extravagant movement and whilst this extravagantness is being rewarded in dressage, sadly that issue won't go away any time soon....

 

[shortstuff99]

Really good comments!

I can see the breeders side, they have (currently) winning horses that appear to have no issues and now people are saying not to breed them? And they can't (yet) prove the gene is even an issue!

But when you start to understand genetics it can seem high risk to allow a genotype to proliferate in a population without understanding the full ramifications of it.

Even without a known gene issue, the over use of certain stallions and lines seems risky to me. For example you would be hard pressed currently to find a Lusitano without Rubi in it, what if he turned out to have a dodgy gene? Or it is believed that Sir Donnerhall is a PSSM 2 carrier, he was prolific within warmblood breeding.

 

[SO1]

I think there must be more conditions that might have a genetic element to them and the breed societies really could look at collecting data on health conditions and use this to breed out conditions.

I would not be surprised if there is a genetic element to things like EMS and sweet itch, and the skin conditions such as mallanders.

A survey sent to owners asking if the horse or pony had ever had a list of conditions may identify lines that seem to be more impacted.

HWS in connemaras and PSSM in New Forests have been identified and this has not had any impact on the popularity of the breeds or reduced prices.

 

[Wishfilly]

Really good comments!

I can see the breeders side, they have (currently) winning horses that appear to have no issues and now people are saying not to breed them? And they can't (yet) prove the gene is even an issue!

But when you start to understand genetics it can seem high risk to allow a genotype to proliferate in a population without understanding the full ramifications of it.

Even without a known gene issue, the over use of certain stallions and lines seems risky to me. For example you would be hard pressed currently to find a Lusitano without Rubi in it, what if he turned out to have a dodgy gene? Or it is believed that Sir Donnerhall is a PSSM 2 carrier, he was prolific within warmblood breeding.

I really don't like the overuse of single stallions- I think it's much better to try and keep some genetic diversity within breeds where possible. I fully accept there's an economic drive to use popular sires. I'm also not a fan of line breeding, even though with two healthy animals it's unlikely to cause issues.

Definitely something with known health issues with a genetic component shouldn't bred from. If we don't fully understand it yet, that's all the more reason not to breed- I think the issue with PSSM at the moment is that there's still a lot of people who aren't fully aware of it as a health issue, let alone a genetic disorder.

Especially in terms of stallions, there are surely enough healthy stallions out there- I think there's definitely an argument that stud books should require genetic testing before liscensing.

I think there must be more conditions that might have a genetic element to them and the breed societies really could look at collecting data on health conditions and use this to breed out conditions.

I would not be surprised if there is a genetic element to things like EMS and sweet itch, and the skin conditions such as mallanders.

A survey sent to owners asking if the horse or pony had ever had a list of conditions may identify lines that seem to be more impacted.

HWS in connemaras and PSSM in New Forests have been identified and this has not had any impact on the popularity of the breeds or reduced prices.

TBF, a lot of people won't touch connemaras that aren't N/N, and I think the breed society have done a good job in terms of getting people to test and ensuring that carriers are not bred together.

 

[SEL]

HWS in connemaras and PSSM in New Forests have been identified and this has not had any impact on the popularity of the breeds or reduced prices.

I've been on the PSSM forums for 8 years so I remember the first New Forest being diagnosed. Once the breed society had confirmation the test was genuine they were all over testing stallions.

If I was buying a NF though I'd still want to know the mare was tested or rule it out via hair test or bloods at vetting. Sometimes prices don't change because the awareness just isn't there.

 

[Fransurrey]

I think there must be more conditions that might have a genetic element to them and the breed societies really could look at collecting data on health conditions and use this to breed out conditions.

I would not be surprised if there is a genetic element to things like EMS and sweet itch, and the skin conditions such as mallanders.

All diseases have genetic elements, some with more environmental influence than others. Genes encode proteins, so a combination of mutations or even a single gene will have an effect. For example, Sweet itch is thought to arise due to a combination of skin barrier proteins being defective, enabling colonisation of pathogenic bacteria, and over-production of the allergen-specific IgE. Unfortunately funders don't see it as a trendy topic (I wrote a couple of proposals to confirm particular genes, but they weren't successful).

 

[SEL]

I had two horses tested for type 1 PSSM back in 2016. One came back homozygous (p1/p1) and the other heterozygous. The spiel at the time told me the homozygous one should be more symptomatic but he had zero obvious symptoms and I only tested him alongside the other one because it is rife in the Belgian drafts. If he hadn't been gelded and had been my only experience of PSSM then I too would have wondered what all the fuss was about as regards breeding from them. My Appy mare though was at the opposite end of the scale and showed me exactly what all the fuss was about.

So even if I had a PSSM horse performing at the highest level I just wouldn't breed from it. The Gypsy cob fraternity in the US are convinced it isn't an issue for the breed but given the various cobs over here in the UK struggle with it I'm not on board with that. When I bought baby cob I wanted to know that both parents had had proper jobs and not just stood in a field looking pretty and I also asked the vet to test CK levels.

My foray into Animal Genetics actually started because I realised the Appy couldn't see in the dark the first winter I had her. The vet said she was convinced it was only registered Appaloosa's who had the issue but obviously it is the LP gene irrespective as to whether a parent is on any sort of register. I was a bit horrified that people would purposely breed horses that couldn't see in the dark but that one is more complicated than PSSM.

Would I breed from a hypermobile horse? If it was performing at a high level without needing vet input to keep it on the road then possibly but I think it will be interesting to see whether these flashy stallions can be kept at top level or if they will quietly be replaced by the next big thing when their joints, tendons, ligaments etc cannot cope any more.

 

[ihatework]

A few strands of thoughts to this.

1) Where there is an identified gene that when expressed causes a clear medical issue then I am 2000% behind not breeding from affected stock. I'm also completely supportive of measures that require breeders to test (and publish) for these conditions and mechanisms in place to prohibit affected stock gaining any breeding/stud papers. This applies to mares and stallions.

2) Where there is an identified gene that when expressed in a single copy and has no proven link to disease (eg WFFS) I personally would not breed. I would fully support research to evaluate if a single copy shows any potential phenotypic expression. I'm on the fence though as to whether 1) above should apply. I understand why some think it should, but I would lean more towards individual choice, with very close scrutiny of the phenotypic traits of the horse.

3) phenotypes that are undesirable (eg hypermobility) but don't have a clear genetic marker, shouldn't be bred from. But that is a whole other debate!

As part of the discussion on the other thread I've reflected on my own mares and whilst I'm 99% positive they are WFFS free via bloodline review they will all now be tested just to be 100%. I wouldn't use a stallion who wasn't tested negative so I should apply the same criteria to myself. In extension to that I hadn't considered PSSM but will add that to the list to test as well, given it's becoming increasingly clear it's probably more prevalent than we realised.

 

[Wishfilly]

I had two horses tested for type 1 PSSM back in 2016. One came back homozygous (p1/p1) and the other heterozygous. The spiel at the time told me the homozygous one should be more symptomatic but he had zero obvious symptoms and I only tested him alongside the other one because it is rife in the Belgian drafts. If he hadn't been gelded and had been my only experience of PSSM then I too would have wondered what all the fuss was about as regards breeding from them. My Appy mare though was at the opposite end of the scale and showed me exactly what all the fuss was about.

So even if I had a PSSM horse performing at the highest level I just wouldn't breed from it. The Gypsy cob fraternity in the US are convinced it isn't an issue for the breed but given the various cobs over here in the UK struggle with it I'm not on board with that. When I bought baby cob I wanted to know that both parents had had proper jobs and not just stood in a field looking pretty and I also asked the vet to test CK levels.

My foray into Animal Genetics actually started because I realised the Appy couldn't see in the dark the first winter I had her. The vet said she was convinced it was only registered Appaloosa's who had the issue but obviously it is the LP gene irrespective as to whether a parent is on any sort of register. I was a bit horrified that people would purposely breed horses that couldn't see in the dark but that one is more complicated than PSSM.

Would I breed from a hypermobile horse? If it was performing at a high level without needing vet input to keep it on the road then possibly but I think it will be interesting to see whether these flashy stallions can be kept at top level or if they will quietly be replaced by the next big thing when their joints, tendons, ligaments etc cannot cope any more.

With Gypsy Cobs in the US, I wonder if their population has a more limited gene pool- the flipside of small populations is that if you start with founders who happen to be healthy and have no problematic recessive genes then you'll obviously continue to have a healthy population. I know a lot do get imported, and I'm sure there's a high chance it will become an issue for cobs over there too, but maybe it isn't widespread in their population at the moment?

Here, obviously an awful lot of cobs are indiscriminately bred, and a lot of cobs probably have non cobs in their relatively recent ancestry. I'm sure a lot have native ponies or European draft horses in them somewhere which could possibly be the source of the PSSM? There's a pony I know in real life who has PSSM (type 1, I believe). I'd probably describe the pony as a cob/cobx but I wouldn't describe it as a gypsy cob, if that makes sense?

It's definitely something I'm increasingly aware of, and would be worried about in the future when buying.

In terms of breeding from a hypermobile horse, I definitely wouldn't want to breed two hypermobile horses together, as I'd be worried about it causing worse issues in the offspring. I definitely think it would be good to understand more about the genetics of these horses- I'm assuming that multiple genes contribute to the flashy gaits we see?

 

[ihatework]

hypermobility (as is being eluded to in dressage terms, spider legs) will have multiple genes involved plus environmental factors

 

[I'm Dun]

The problem with type 1 pssm is it makes cobs more appealing to some people. They are labelled lazy, steady, bombproof etc, etc. Lots of people want that in a horse so they overlook the fact its in continual pain.

 

[ycbm]

hypermobility (as is being eluded to in dressage terms, spider legs) will have multiple genes involved plus environmental factors

I'm not sure I understand why hypermobility, as in unusually loose ligaments and tendons, would be influenced by environment. Can you explain a bit?
.

 

[greasedweasel]

@SEL totally agree on homozygous / night blind spotted horses. I wouldn't breed them and advised against them for jobs such as junior eventers - which was not a popular opinion.

Other issues in Appaloosas included a bloodline horrifically affected by sarcoids (awful necks too!) - people got very strident about testing for PSSM but would breed from mares and stallions with endless other issues without question.

 

[Orangehorse]

Of course, in the UK at one time any stallion being used for breeding had to be inspected and licenced. I don't know if that applied if someone only used it for their own mares and didn't take visiting ones. In those days, also, there wouldn't have been the tests, DNA, genetic, etc. that are available now.

I don't know why this was discontinued. I think the argument was that breed societies would monitor and inspect their own breeding animals to their own standards. Which only worked if they did.

When I was looking for a horse of a certain breed it was a lesson in conformation. I couldn't imagine why some of the mares had been allowed to breed a foal. I think that it was a case of "we have paid £xxxxx for this filly, if we have a foal or two we will get our money back. Poor things, I really wondered what happened to some to them because they weren't built for work, that's for certain.

 

[Billabongchick]

Personally I would never breed anything with a suspect hereditary/genetic or conformational issue on either side. The hyperflexion really bothers me as has become so pronounced in recent years.

An interesting topic for sure… It seems hard to find a nice straightforward type these days (going by issues friends have had and the large number of lameness posts you see about young/5 stage vetted purchases needing retirement) and I've often thought the sport type horses average RC level competitors rode back in my childhood were much sturdier, albeit less fantastic movers. Where did it all go wrong?

 

[LEC]

WW1 and WW2 solved a lot of the genetic issues in British horses. Anything with terrible feet, eyes or lame was shot for meat. Pretty much every horse was inspected by the army/Ministry of Agriculture during this time so it wiped out a huge amount of genetic issues in one go. The Germans did not do this so hence they have a fair few genetic issues, like the leptospirosis issue which seems to mainly affect German bred horses.

 

[SEL]

With Gypsy Cobs in the US, I wonder if their population has a more limited gene pool- the flipside of small populations is that if you start with founders who happen to be healthy and have no problematic recessive genes then you'll obviously continue to have a healthy population. I know a lot do get imported, and I'm sure there's a high chance it will become an issue for cobs over there too, but maybe it isn't widespread in their population at the moment?

Here, obviously an awful lot of cobs are indiscriminately bred, and a lot of cobs probably have non cobs in their relatively recent ancestry. I'm sure a lot have native ponies or European draft horses in them somewhere which could possibly be the source of the PSSM? There's a pony I know in real life who has PSSM (type 1, I believe). I'd probably describe the pony as a cob/cobx but I wouldn't describe it as a gypsy cob, if that makes sense?

Type 1 PSSM has been tracked back to the Belgian drafts - generally believed to have been a genetic advantage when they were proper working horses. It primarily affects fast twitch muscle tissue so I have long suspected that's why my pure bred Ardennes showed little symptoms whereas the Appy is a muscular mess. Many of our traditional cob types can trace their lineage back to a Belgian somewhere - gave them their short stature and good shoulders.

You're being very generous with your views on the US gypsy cobs! They do have PSSM 1 in the breed and many test positive but the breeders just don't want to accept it can cause issues. To be fair for standing in a field or trotting up as a pretty show ornament it probably isn't - but putting them into work is a different issue. Often they are sold as dead quiet kids ponies and like said above PSSM horses can be very quiet when they're in pain. They can also bolt, buck, spook as some of us know too well.

I think FB / social media is doing a good job now of proving type 1 is in all the stock breeds as well as cobs and drafts. Responsible breeders are having to test because buyers are asking.

 

[Lexi 123]

I believe navicular is genetic but research won’t explore it as so many people breed mares that had to be retired from riding due to severe navicular * to give them a job * I have seen offspring and 99% had problems as young horses and if they were lucky they would make it to teen years. What really convinced me that it genetic is I saw offspring of mare with navicular that was 4 years old but looked like a yearling . The owners are still obsessed with breeding the mare every year there inexperienced that shouldn’t be breeding at all as they don’t even have the right setup and are getting very little money for the foals and was struggling to sell them. In my opinion i believe we need to get out of the mindset that any mare that can’t be ridden should become a broodmare. I think vets should stop saying it to people to breed their broken mares. I also believe we shouldn’t be giving broken down mares a broodmare job we should be talking about retirement or pts if the horse is young. If we replaced the word horse with dog people would call us irresponsible breeders.

 

[ycbm]

I believe navicular is genetic but research won’t explore it as so many people breed mares that had to be retired from riding due to severe navicular * to give them a job * I have seen offspring and 99% had problems as young horses and if they were lucky they would make it to teen years. What really convinced me that it genetic is I saw offspring of mare with navicular that was 4 years old but looked like a yearling .

I think since the advent of MRI it's been pretty clear that most of what we used to call navicular, but is now more accurately called caudal heel pain syndrome, is repetitive strain injury to tendons and ligaments caused by poor hoof balance in shoes which are left on year round. I guess there may be a genetic component to why some horses get away with that and some don't, but largely it's a preventable disease.

In my opinion i believe we need to get out of the mindset that any mare that can’t be ridden should become a broodmare. I think vets should stop saying it to people to breed their broken mares. I also believe we shouldn’t be giving broken down mares a broodmare job we should be talking about retirement or pts if the horse is young. If we replaced the word horse with dog people would call us irresponsible breeders.

I agree with you there. I know of a number of small breeders in this area (breeding up to 15 or so foals a year), whose mares are unrideable horses given to them free by owners who can't face putting an unsound horse to sleep. I know one quite closely who in the last 20 years has bred from a temperamentally unsound mare and produced a very tricky filly, a mare operated on for kissing spines but still unhappy ridden, a mare with severe EMS, a low mileage mare chronically lame with medicated hocks at 12 ... all sold. The mare with the hocks was well bred and was sold to a stud breeding high value warmbloods and that stud is now proudly selling her offspring.

It's an absolute minefield buying unproven young horses, as I think we can see from the sheer number of people reporting permanently broken 4/5/6/7 year olds.
.

 

[Peglo]

I was told that insurers will rarely pay out loss of use on mares as they can be used as broodmares if they can’t be ridden. Is that true does anyone know? I would hope not.

@ycbm that’s really interesting to hear about navicular. My first pony (she was an endurance pony in Germany) was supposed to have navicular when I got her. I rode her for 2 years before I had to retire her. She lasted 17 years after that retired from ridden work and came field sound. Can CHPS be solved from good trimming and retirement from ridden work?

 

[ycbm]

I was told that insurers will rarely pay out loss of use on mares as they can be used as broodmares if they can’t be ridden. Is that true does anyone know? I would hope not.

I don't know about currently but LOU always used to be lower on a mare because they still have value as a brood mare.
.

 

[ycbm]

@ycbm that’s really interesting to hear about navicular. My first pony (she was an endurance pony in Germany) was supposed to have navicular when I got her. I rode her for 2 years before I had to retire her. She lasted 17 years after that retired from ridden work and came field sound. Can CHPS be solved from good trimming and retirement from ridden work?

For sure. It can be resolved completely in, ime, most cases by doing a barefoot rehab and the horse can normally return to ridden work. A barefoot rehab isn't to remove the shoes and turn away, though. That sometimes works but the horse often needs correct work to break the adhesions, grow the right foot, and come right.
.

 

[Xmasha]

I agree with you there. I know of a number of small breeders in this area (breeding up to 15 or so foals a year), whose mares are unrideable horses given to them free by owners who can't face putting an unsound horse to sleep. I know one quite closely who in the last 20 years has bred from a temperamentally unsound mare and produced a very tricky filly, a mare operated on for kissing spines but still unhappy ridden, a mare with severe EMS, a low mileage mare chronically lame with medicated hocks at 12 ... all sold. The mare with the hocks was well bred and was sold to a stud breeding high value warmbloods and that stud is now proudly selling her offspring.

It's an absolute minefield buying unproven young horses, as I think we can see from the sheer number of people reporting permanently broken 4/5/6/7 year olds.
.

i see this all the time, really hacks me off. So many people advertising broken mares to be used as broodmares. Also, the mares that are never ridden but bred from. That to me is just bizarre. Surely you want to know the rideability of a mare if you intend to have her within your breeding programme ?