Totilas even has special shoes?!

nikkimariet said:
No. I didn't say it in any sort of way that warranted the reaction I (and a few others) got.

The term blinkered vision comes to mind with regards to several of the comments made on here. 'Here' being H&H in general. Not just this thread.
Click to expand...

NM - I'm really sorry as I respect you as a rider and a horsewoman but I disagree with you on this point. You complain about people not understanding and that they should just accept things but you also don't see it from their point of view and come across as very condescending to those who believe horses should get some turnout. Apologies if this wasn't your intention. I don't think anyone on this thread has said that all horses should be out 24/7, most are saying that it would be nice for the horse if he had been brought up with a couple of hours turnout every day. As many have said, it's about time for chilling and being a horse. TBH most of your replies have been replying to more personal comments rather than defending your point of view.
No-one is saying your routine is wrong, they are saying that it doesn't matter how much a horse is worth, they should have turnout from a young age. The reason Totilas would injure himself if turned out is because he has had years of being in and it would blow his brains. I'm sorry about your horse that was injured while turned out, but that could have easily happened under saddle.
 
nikkimariet said:
No. I didn't say it in any sort of way that warranted the reaction I (and a few others) got.

The term blinkered vision comes to mind with regards to several of the comments made on here. 'Here' being H&H in general. Not just this thread.
Click to expand...

That, my dear, is your opinion but you should really read your posts properly.
 
Nocturnal said:
I'd be interested in hearing from FrodoBeutlin whether she's observed a higher rate of arthritis and gastric ulcers on the yards with little or no turnout where she lives, in comparison to yards with ample turnout...?
Click to expand...

I think the levels of gastric ulcers in racehorses is perhaps the evidence there, it is also becoming more common in sports horses.

As for arthritis, lack of mobility and confinelment are known causes.
 
Jimbol said:
I think the levels of gastric ulcers in racehorses is perhaps the evidence there, it is also becoming more common in sports horses.

As for arthritis, lack of mobility and confinelment are known causes.
Click to expand...

Given the other possible factors involved in racehorse training it would be interesting to hear about other types of horses in other disciplines.

With regards to arthritis etc, I was hoping for some real life experiences, hence my question.
 
I remember discussing a study of respiratory issues, with Mary Bromiley, in dressage horses and over 90% of them had one problem or another in their wind due to being incorrectly ridden and managed.

I also love the "feed it from a manger to increase its neck muscles" bullshit aswell, you could eat your dinner with your chin on your chest and see how much you like it!

I would be interested to hear from anyone on these top yards about the amount of joint medicating that goes on in relatively young competition horses due to confinement, lack of correct musculature and too much pressure to perform put on young immature bodies.
 
Apercrumbie said:
NM - You complain about people not understanding and that they should just accept things but you also don't see it from their point of view and come across as very condescending to those who believe horses should get some turnout. Apologies if this wasn't your intention.
Click to expand...

*facepalm*

I AM someone who believes horses should get turnout!! I am SO grateful that we have our own land and can turn ours out for as long as we want - I think turnout IS an important aspect of a horses life (regardless of whether it is a pet or a commodity....)

What I'm saying is that you (plural, not specifically you) should be able and willing to accept that not all owners/riders think that turnout is necessary and provide it for their horses and/or that not all owners/riders have turnout readily available so turnout is not an aspect of their horses lives.
 
xspiralx said:
Firstly, nobody has to accept anything they don't agree with. It is a fact that must be acknowledged [like factory farming for example], but nobody has to accept it if they don't think it is right.

Secondly, the climate doesn't really matter. Even if horses cannot really graze outside, the point is having the space for turnout in any capacity. If people can manage to turn horses out in England [a tiny country with a huge population], then it can be managed in other countries.

Horses are all individuals of course, and I don't doubt that there are a few who prefer to be indoors the majority of the time, but I think it is a bit too convenient that this explanation seems to be applied to the majority of top dressage horses. If one is going to put human ambition above equine welfare, then at least call a spade a spade instead of trying to argue that it is somehow unavoidable or actually better for the horse.
Click to expand...

A, accepting something is to acknowledge the information in question?.....

B, turnout for GRAZING is the main argument.....posters are upset because Toto cannot graze every day 'like a natural horse'. (my point of climate difference was referring to a non Toto example....)

C, equine welfare? Does Toto look like a horse OR act like a horse that is mistreated???....

To add the the last bit - the combination of horse value/job required of a horse/horse behaviour/yard routine/owner and or rider preference means that in this case IE that of Toto, is a justified one.
 
Degenerative diseases such as Arthritis are rarely the result of one thing, however lack of mobility will cause it, in human or animal.

As for gastric ulcers it can be diet, stress, pharmaceutical or a range of other causes, but again the lifestyle of a boxed horse will have many of the factors that cause these diseases. I now would also like to add respiratory diseases to the list.
 
Leaving aside different disciplines/conformation and people with egos the size of Wales (let's just call them 'the master race'). The RIDER'S musculature will have far more bearing on the horse's musculature than any turnout or lack thereof. This will also contribute to injuries which may come out in the field but originate under saddle.
 
nikkimariet said:
A, accepting something is to acknowledge the information in question?.....

B, turnout for GRAZING is the main argument.....posters are upset because Toto cannot graze every day 'like a natural horse'. (my point of climate difference was referring to a non Toto example....)

C, equine welfare? Does Toto look like a horse OR act like a horse that is mistreated???....

To add the the last bit - the combination of horse value/job required of a horse/horse behaviour/yard routine/owner and or rider preference means that in this case IE that of Toto, is a justified one.
Click to expand...

a. No it isn't. Accepting something means "to regard as true or sound; to believe; to regard as normal, suitable, or usual." There is a vast difference between acknowledging a fact, and accepting it.

b. I don't believe it is the main argument, I believe it is the lack of freedom to run, play or even wander around an open space like a normal horse. If grass is not available due to climate then hay or haylage is a good substitute anyway.

c. Did I say mistreated? No. He is treated very very well. But ultimately the decision to keep a horse with no turnout is not a decision that is made for the welfare of the horse.
 
Jimbol said:
Degenerative diseases such as Arthritis are rarely the result of one thing, however lack of mobility will cause it, in human or animal.

As for gastric ulcers it can be diet, stress, pharmaceutical or a range of other causes, but again the lifestyle of a boxed horse will have many of the factors that cause these diseases. I now would also like to add respiratory diseases to the list.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm aware of the theory behind these diseases, it was specifically the experiences of someone who's spent time on yards with very limited or no turnout that I was enquiring about.
 
xspiralx said:
a. No it isn't. Accepting something means "to regard as true or sound; to believe; to regard as normal, suitable, or usual." There is a vast difference between acknowledging a fact, and accepting it.

b. I don't believe it is the main argument, I believe it is the lack of freedom to run, play or even wander around an open space like a normal horse. If grass is not available due to climate then hay or haylage is a good substitute anyway.

c. Did I say mistreated? No. He is treated very very well. But ultimately the decision to keep a horse with no turnout is not a decision that is made for the welfare of the horse.
Click to expand...

*double facepalm*
 
Always good to resort to a gesture of frustration when you haven't actually got a reasoned answer :)
 
TGM said:
Have you heard the saying "It is not what you say but the way that you say it"? I think that applies to your postings on this thread and explains why you got the reactions you did!
Click to expand...

Agree with this. It was me who used the word arrogant in a response to NM but, for clarity, I didn't say you were arrogant, I said that you were usually well balanced in your postings but that a particular statement you made in this thread came across as arrogant. Big, and important, difference.

Oh yes, one more thing, NM, I have a strong enough command of the English language to know which word I was looking for and it was arrogant, not ignorant.
 
PoppyAnderson said:
Agree with this. It was me who used the word arrogant in a response to NM but, for clarity, I didn't say you were arrogant, I said that you were usually well balanced in your postings but that a particular statement you made in this thread came across as arrogant. Big, and important, difference.

Oh yes, one more thing, NM, I have a strong enough command of the English language to know which word I was looking for and it was arrogant, not ignorant.
Click to expand...

OH. :eek: That's certainly taught me a lesson. I must never ever ever EVER oppose you and your mighty views and your mighty friends and their mighty views.


















P.S. If you're going to attempt to patronize me, please pick on someone who you can bully a little easier.
 
For someone enjoying poking the angry bears, you seem quite... ummm... angry.

Tell me, do you display any ursine tendencies? Do you hibernate during periods of inclement weather? Have a predilection for pick-er-nick baskets, or perhaps honey?
r010.gif

:p
 
Spudlet said:
For someone enjoying poking the angry bears, you seem quite... ummm... angry.

Tell me, do you display any ursine tendencies? Do you hibernate during periods of inclement weather? Have a predilection for pick-er-nick baskets, or perhaps honey?
r010.gif

:p
Click to expand...

I don't like bullies. Bullies do make me angry.

You're not going to start asking questions about my periods again are you? Because that was. Erm. Weird.
 
I can assure you, your menstrual cycle has never held any interest for me. I think you are getting me confused with someone else.



















Of course, short term memory loss like this may be a sign of the Change. Perhaps HRT is the answer for you?
 
Spudlet said:
I can assure you, your menstrual cycle has never held any interest for me. I think you are getting me confused with someone else
Click to expand...

Sorry. It was Allover who originally asked bizarre personal questions; you are easily confused with other members of your herd, so again, sorry.
 
nikkimariet said:
OH. :eek: That's certainly taught me a lesson. I must never ever ever EVER oppose you and your mighty views and your mighty friends and their mighty views.


P.S. If you're going to attempt to patronize me, please pick on someone who you can bully a little easier.
Click to expand...

You have some major anger issues going on. I don't have mighty views or friends and have never purported to have. I have no idea why you're getting so uptight about what I said. I said you were usually pretty balanced, so I was hardly doing a character assassination. I can only assume that an imposter has hijacked your username, as I've never read anything you've previously written which has come across as so unhinged.
 
I've somehow managed to trawl through all 32 pages of this and I have once again realised why a don't come in New Lounge anymore....ah well, back to CR and PG for me *toddles off*
 
x
nikkimariet said:
B, turnout for GRAZING is the main argument.....posters are upset because Toto cannot graze every day 'like a natural horse'. (my point of climate difference was referring to a non Toto example....)
Click to expand...

Sorry to be a bit of a bugger, but yes the ability to graze is ideal, but I for one would be happier if he got space to wander around in if it made turnout possible in the eyes of his keepers. Unless his stable is 20 x 40 and I didn't known about it.

Spudlet said:
r010.gif

:p
Click to expand...

Aaaaahhhh!

nikkimariet said:
Sorry. It was Allover who originally asked bizarre personal questions; you are easily confused with other members of your herd, so again, sorry.
Click to expand...

Whereas you are clearly unique :)
 
I think xspiralx's posts summed things up very well for me, plus gave a good example of how to debate a subject in a reasoned and clear fashion! (Perhaps an example some other posters could follow. :))
 
xspiralx said:
a.

c. Did I say mistreated? No. He is treated very very well. But ultimately the decision to keep a horse with no turnout is not a decision that is made for the welfare of the horse.
Click to expand...

I have to say that I agree strongly with this post.

The fear with this horses managers is that he will suffer some injury if allowed turnout and this is obviously a decision made with consideration to potential financial loss being the main factor.

It is ingenuous all round to say that the behavioural conditioning of this horse is the reason for his incarceration.

Mistreatment is both emotive and subjective in these circumstances. He is obviously well cared for, but going back to the very first post, it may be argued that the singular conditions this horse is kept in may already be having a detrimental effect on the physical well-being of this horse, in as much as his feet may be breaking down. If he became infertile through the management syste, not only an ironic end, but I'm sure his guilded cage would then disappear.
 
ditto TGM I thought your post was excellent spiral :).

NL is created by the people who are in it, generally it is used for discussion of horsey topics if you enjoy such discussion, join in, if you don't think you will perhaps it isn't for you. I find it often makes me think what my views are on topics I have not previously considered :).
 
nikkimariet said:
I don't like bullies. Bullies do make me angry.

You're not going to start asking questions about my periods again are you? Because that was. Erm. Weird.
Click to expand...

No that was me!!

I asked because whereas your posts are normally quite sane, sensible, informative and generally kind you seem to be being a bit agressive and dismissive in this one, hence i questioned your cycle as you did not seem to be in your "normal" nice posting mood! :D
 
PoppyAnderson said:
Agree with this. It was me who used the word arrogant in a response to NM but, for clarity, I didn't say you were arrogant, I said that you were usually well balanced in your postings but that a particular statement you made in this thread came across as arrogant. Big, and important, difference.
Click to expand...

I have to say, NM usually seems pretty arrogant to me.

Plus, good posts Spiral.
 
Nocturnal said:
I'd be interested in hearing from FrodoBeutlin whether she's observed a higher rate of arthritis and gastric ulcers on the yards with little or no turnout where she lives, in comparison to yards with ample turnout...?
Click to expand...

In my (anectodal) experience no, not really. I have known some horses with ulcers but not sure the lack of turnout was to blame for that -- they were horses competing at a very high level (international), travelling a lot most weekends etc. so horses prone to gastric ulcers irrespective of turnout or lack of it.

In fact I have been trying for a while to find scientific papers which PROVE that turnout is beneficial (in terms of health) and therefore it is actually more dangerous to stable horses rather than turning them out, just to have something to show to friends who are convinced that if you turn your horse out you are a crazy, heartless person who does not care about her horse (!), but they are not easy to find.

The only thing which comes close is a paper at the last Global Dressage Forum which recommended some turnout for dressage horses but as far as I know it did not quote any scientific papers, it was more of a "common sense" approach so to speak. (Disclaimer: I was not there so not sure if my information is correct, it's what I've picked up reading articles about it on the internet).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top