08/12/2024
Abuse?
Whether I want it to or not, the topic of abuse in the horse industry keeps coming up. This conversation is as important as it is uncomfortable to have. Personally, I’m willing to take some risk and discomfort if I think it might wind up helping some horses, so buckle up.
As hard as I have reflected on the topic, I keep finding myself playing the Devil’s Advocate in these conversations. That’s mainly because the principles that I keep hearing espoused as to what constitutes abuse can’t be universally applied. That makes that principle inherently flawed at best and absolutely worthless is more likely. Iron sharpens iron. It would be my hope that arguing against the bad arguments I keep hearing will cause better, more well thought out principles to arise. Maybe then we’ll find common ground based on common sense and backed by the people who do actually understand what a horse is.
The P.A.S.T. Act, in one of its earlier incantations (current versions have had this part “fixed”), specifically sought to define as criminal: any act that could reasonably be foreseen to cause pain to a horse. I get that a horse lover would tend to have an adverse response to the thought of intentionally causing pain to a horse. That makes complete sense.
Causing pain to a horse intentionally, certainly feels wrong, right up until you take your horse to the vet for its annual vaccinations and Coggins test. Those needles that your vet uses hundreds of per week all come with a guarantee of causing pain.
It’s certain that any owner who would allow someone to hurt their horse is unfit to own one, right up until yours is 3-legged lame and you ask your farrier to find and drain the suspected abscess in his hoof. Hoof testers are a very useful tool, but their sole purpose is to test for pain in specific places within the hoof. If you didn’t know, they test for pain by seeing where they can easily cause pain...
I’ll assume that you own a horse, and that means that your horse was born. Because your horse was born, we must assume that a mare was bred. Someone probably made a plan and took actions so that your horse’s dam was exposed to your horse’s sire. When your horse was foaled, his dam was in pain. How dare you love your horse that caused its dam pain during birth? You monster!
Your vet, farrier, and breeder are all absolutely and regularly guilty of taking actions that they know are going to cause a horse pain in the process. Are you willing to call them abusive for performing basic acts of animal husbandry? If you are, just know that you’re an idiot and I hope you’re sterile…
Most see some of these videos that get passed around social media, like the recent one of Charlotte Dujardin, and immediately cry abuse. I want to be clear that I don’t think what went on in that video was a great thing in any way, but I also can’t honestly agree with the reasons I keep hearing it called out as abuse.
To be frank, I was underwhelmed by what was on the video. I’ve seen a lot worse. The thing that struck me was that her timing with that whip was very poor. Poor timing means that the whip will be needed many times more to have an effect than if the whip was sharp, but well timed. That’s truly unfortunate to see in someone touted as one of the world’s best. I think all trainers will understand when I say that being caught displaying terrible timing over and over again would be far more embarrassing to us than an amateur with the opinion that we were too harsh.
It seems the consensus is that “she should know better” and that “she shouldn’t be causing that horse pain or discomfort with more performance being the justification.” We know better now and so she should do better.
Folks, for a living, I watch and try to help people who are doing their best with the skills and abilities they currently have and are still kind of making a mess of things. Their horse isn’t better for them having interacted with it. This is most of you if I’m being honest. That might be best, because many or you have loudly and repeatedly claimed that the principle of pushing a horse, i.e. making it uncomfortable so that it will be motivated to act in the manner we seek, for the sake of making things better, aka higher performance, is not a valid or just route.
Those people who are condemning riders for “being abusive” because “they should know better” are the same ones who would eat up an article on “how necessary failure is” with a spoon, and “you should really cut yourself some slack, because you’re doing the best you can and tomorrow you’ll be better”. Don't forget "that we all need to support one another and stop putting others down". If your principle of why something is wrong can also be justified by you in a circumstance that you personally find justifiable, then your principle sucks and your argument is invalid by definition.
I’m certain that there is a principle and process of deduction that would clearly define what abuse is and when something isn’t abuse. I’m not at all certain that I’ve ever read or listened to that principle being articulated. I think most of what we claim falls short and any casual observer could readily accuse the accuser of violation of their exact stated principles defining abuse in that persons’ own practices and effects.
When you killed that horse fly on your horse’s rump, you also struck your horse. You bitch/bastard! Wasn’t that abuse? What about if I struck the horse to the exact same degree you did when you murdered the horsefly (you’ll be named now btw in the recently filed class action lawsuit by the Society of Entomological Justice and Equality). We could empirically measure the strike to within a thousandth of a percent or psi, but with the new purpose being to get their upward transitions sharper and more precise, am I now an abuser, but you’re vindicated? Are you the savior of a horse, but simultaneously the abuser of horse flies?
What if I stuck the horse 50% harder than your kill slap of the horse fly, and still just to gain better lead departures? Was I ok before because I didn’t hit harder than you, but am I now an abuser? What if that horse that Charlotte Dujardin struck with a whip 20 times in 1 minute was turned out 10 minutes after that lesson, with its buddies, and one of its buddies kicked that horse in the side 500% harder than the horse fly smack? Is the horse’s buddy now the horse abuser? If the horse she struck happily trotted right up to her and met her at the gate the next day, was it still abuse?
What if the horse she whipped is easy to catch and another horse she’s been superbly kind to is still hard to catch? Is she guilty of abusing the hard to catch horse because being hard to catch clearly indicates abuse? And you certainly can't take actions that might make the horse uncomfortable in the process simply to have it easier to catch. That's a clear violation of the principle of using pressure to gain performance. Am I now off the hook for the lead departure swat? Why is it ok to put me on a hook, and kill a horse fly, but not whack a lazy horse?
What about the Decathlon Coach from the Tokyo Olympics a few years ago who smacked that horse on the butt for refusing the jumps for that coach’s rider. I’d say that coach was smacking at approximately horse fly killing levels. Are they in the clear now because the pressure used was objectively similar to an acceptable act (which by the way is pre-meditated murder and you’ll be served by sheriff deputies those class action papers this coming Monday)?
The horses at the Olympics are very valuable and come with an entire pit crew of people to ensure their safety, comfort, and ability to perform at the highest levels. Those horses are primarily kept in stalls. They’re too valuable to risk being turned out with some random horses. They might get hurt, because horses routinely hurt each other. Who knew?
We have clear empirical evidence and multiple peer-reviewed research papers that clearly indicate that keeping horses in stalls and isolation is objectively far more stressful to those horses than keeping them turned out and in a herd. Are the Olympic horses’ handlers guilty of abuse for the nosebands, whips and pressure, but in the clear for keeping them in stalls?
Go to any lesson barn or boarding facility you want to and ask if it’s more expensive to keep a horse in a stall or out in pasture. We clearly are willing to pay a lot more to keep a horse in a stall. If you’re doing that, and many of you reading this are, are you justifying your abuse and willingness to literally pay more so that your horse is being abused just so he’s cleaner and more conveniently caught?
Do you appreciate being called an abuser? Do you agree that you are an abuser for simply keeping a horse in a stall when there’s clear data proving that there are better ways?
What constitutes abuse? Whatever the definition and underlying principle you come up with will certainly not be agreed with by everyone. This is not a clear, easy, or simple topic. A lot of conversations need to be had, for the horse, so that we do more commonly handle horses with their best interests in mind. The conversations need to be had so that what the best practices are known to be are known by all. Just keep in mind that they’re horses and their best interests aren’t in line with human sentiment or convenience in many, many cases.
I’m reminded of the cartoon of the western rider cleaning up a shaggy horse as an English rider leads their horse the opposite way with 5 layers of blankets on. Both riders have a thought bubble as they look at the other’s horse, saying “Poor horse!”
I’m definitely not okay with abuse. I’m not making excuses for abuse. I’m also very certain that we don’t have a reasonable standard of what abuse is. I could write an entire book on this subject, and one day, maybe I will. I’d be very happy to have your thoughts on this topic. Just keep it civil, because I’m big, strong, and tough, and also likely a lot meaner than you.
