Talking about death

[enjoytheride]

Yes, what a morbid subject. I posted something about this on the other thread but was told that it was not allowed there. It seems like talking about the specific horse is not allowed. I was there and I'm not sure if I would go back because I will not put my money and heart in a sport where a horse dies every year no matter what the cause.

My issue is are deaths only significant if they are fall related? Or is a physical condition signficant as well?

As a rider would number of deaths per event would cause you to withdraw your horse? What type of death is more acceptable?

I am worried that an incident where the horse dies of natural causes will be brushed off as normal or not preventable, of course horses can drop dead doing anything anywhere but is there something about eventing that makes it more likely?

[kookicat]

I'm thinking of stopping eventing altogether, or at least sitting this season out. I'm not sure that it's worth the risk anymore.

[ne900]

I think there is a huge difference between death from a physical condition and death because a rider was irresponsible and/or a poor horseman.

I competed in a different equine discipline before eventing, and despite no "at risk" activity such as running and jumping, I _watched_ 2 horses die from ruptured blood vessels while simply walking and trotting- neither one even under saddle. A horse that dies from a physical condition could do so at home playing in the field. For that matter, horses die in pasture accidents- probably more often than in an eventing competition. I even remember a young horse that broke its neck in its stall overnight- there was nothing unsafe about the stall- it was a freak accident. I could go on and on. When you spend your life around horses, you see and experience a lot.

Would I decide not to attend an event based on the number of deaths? It would depend on the causes of the deaths. If the reason was the fault of the venue itself- unsafe course design and/or terrain and no attempts at resolving the issues- it would definitely make me not attend an event. Rider irresponsibility or a physical condition- no- I don't feel that either of these can be blamed on the event itself.

[Couture TB]

Honestly, I have not competed in the last 6 or so years do to surgeries and being very ill. Right now I am planning on competing a few horses at some local ie within 12hr driving distance:lol: events this fall and seeing if I really wish to get back into the sport. I use to compete at the upper levels, and maybe I am looking back with rose colored glasses, but I don't remember this many deaths and serious accidents.

I may just switch to jumpers. At least we can win money there.

[horsepix76]

Some may not agree with me, but I still relate these types of deaths to the lack of long format. If the horses had been required to condition and train for the full 4* long format event, chances are, the physical limitation would have come into play long before they ever stepped onto the 4* course. Weak areas on tendons, aneurysms, etc., most likely, would rear their ugly heads before the horse made it to the 4* level if it were required to meet the fitness level necessary for a long format 4*.

Just my opinion...

[Divine Comedy]

Weak areas on tendons, aneurysms, etc., most likely, would rear their ugly heads before the horse made it to the 4* level if it were required to meet the fitness level necessary for a long format 4*.

Not sure what my opinion is on the entire subject, but I do think this logic is a little flawed. Okay, so they don't drop dead on XC because of an aneurysm on a 4* course, b/c they dropped dead at a 1*/2*/3* LF before they were able to get to the 4*? Not sure how that is better.

[kt]

My friend was at fence 10 as well. He is not a horse person but was there to shoot photos. It was his first Rolex experience. Purely out of the result of how many frames per second his camera was shooting, he managed to capture nearly every moment from Kingpin's approach to landing at this fence.

After the fall, he called me from where he was, obviously shaken. He said he'd just witnessed the worst thing he'd ever seen. I should also mention that he is a longtime paramedic.

Although I knew there'd been a fall, I hadn't realized how serious it was (and on another note, I think there was a very obvious effort on the part of the organizers/announcers to keep this type of info under wraps this year). But even after my friend told me the extent of what happened, I found myself not really all that suprised in my reply to him. Although I was sad and upset, there was a numbness to me about it. A numbness that shouldn't have been there. Looking back, I almost think in the back of my mind I ... expected... something catastrophic to happen. It seems like the norm anymore.

It was really unfortunate and horrible that the death happened in the first place. But what's worse is that it seems to have become more a part of this sport at this level. My friend clearly was very intrigued and interested in and impressed with Rolex this weekend, but it was difficult watching him try to reconcile that with the fact that he witnessed a horrific wreck and death of a horse just yards away. He came away confused. And I can't really blame him.

[horsepix76]

Not sure what my opinion is on the entire subject, but I do think this logic is a little flawed. Okay, so they don't drop dead on XC because of an aneurysm on a 4* course, b/c they dropped dead at a 1*/2*/3* LF before they were able to get to the 4*? Not sure how that is better.

I'm not saying its perfectly logical. ;) I'm just saying that its my opinion that these types of deaths were not happening at Rolex or other advanced level events until about 3 years after the long format was done away with (i.e. the majority of horses running at advanced never had to be at the fitness level of a true long format 3-day).

[martyc]

I know of at least one at Rolex (Yves Landry's horse) that died of "natural causes" at a long format. There have also been deaths at Fair Hill and Foxhall when they were long format. I dont think this is a long vs short issue.

[Duramax]

FWIW... the only 2 catastrophic events I've ever had with horses occured unmounted. (In about 15 years of eventing.) I had a broodmare die of an aneursym while I was about to load her onto a trailer. I was holding the end of her leadrope. My once-in-a-lifetime prelim horse broke her leg in the washrack when I was cold hosing her hock. :shrugs:

[Arcadien]

Not sure how I feel about all this yet, but just piping in to say my first experience of a horse death eventing was at Rolex long format, Yves Landry's horse, vets decided cause was a pulmonary embolism.

So, yeah, seems it happened back then too.

My trouble is more on the lines of, I'm starting to think this many deaths of rider & horse happened all the time, all horse sports, even all backyard horse sports - we just didn't hear about them so quickly, nor have such a convenient medium for hashing them out in detail and perhaps knowing more than we wish (later) we did about them.

In spite of obviously leaning towards the theory that nothing is different about today's serious horse sport, I'm struggling with the concept that I now have to accept that risk and carry on...

Its tough anyway you look at it, it seems...

At any rate, I for one, still intend to ride & compete and even continue to have dreams of going Advanced, FWIW. I do intend to research & put into practice every precautionary measure I can, and on the other side, may look into sports psychology for dealing with my emotions about all this.

Hugs to those who lost a horse (or a human, in UK)family member to equine sport this weekend, and supporting thoughts to the others struggling finding ways to deal with all this.

Arcadien

[oreo]

I used to be passionate about Eventing as a true partnership. Used to compete many times a year, organized horse trials, then helped organize parts of several events. Last year I helped organize four horse trials up to CCI format. This year I resigned from helping any of them.

Sold the last of my eventing horses in March. Done with it. It used to be about partnership. Now its just about money and status.

Flame me if you like - I really don't care and may log on again next year, just to find out how the Europeans are whopping our butts again at Rolex. Good for them!

[BLBGP]

When was the last time a horse didn't die at Rolex?

[adamsmom]

Not sure how I feel about all this yet, but just piping in to say my first experience of a horse death eventing was at Rolex long format, Yves Landry's horse, vets decided cause was a pulmonary embolism.

So, yeah, seems it happened back then too.

My trouble is more on the lines of, I'm starting to think this many deaths of rider & horse happened all the time, all horse sports, even all backyard horse sports - we just didn't hear about them so quickly, nor have such a convenient medium for hashing them out in detail and perhaps knowing more than we wish (later) we did about them.

In spite of obviously leaning towards the theory that nothing is different about today's serious horse sport, I'm struggling with the concept that I now have to accept that risk and carry on...

Its tough anyway you look at it, it seems...

At any rate, I for one, still intend to ride & compete and even continue to have dreams of going Advanced, FWIW. I do intend to research & put into practice every precautionary measure I can, and on the other side, may look into sports psychology for dealing with my emotions about all this.

Hugs to those who lost a horse (or a human, in UK)family member to equine sport this weekend, and supporting thoughts to the others struggling finding ways to deal with all this.

Arcadien

I agree with you. It's not that there are more deaths necessarily, it's that we find out about them publicly and almost simultaneously.

It's interesting to me how many horses die in the H/J world, yet no one raises a ruckus about those. They die from fractured pasterns while lungeing, when they land off a fence, from aneurysms, from falling at fences and breaking their necks....
Yet no one says "I'm done with hunters/jumpers"....

[adamsmom]

When was the last time a horse didn't die at Rolex?

2006, although Le Samurai technically did not die at Rolex in 2007.
He was euthanized several days later, after it was determined he couldn't be saved.

[BLBGP]

I agree with you. It's not that there are more deaths necessarily, it's that we find out about them publicly and almost simultaneously.

It's interesting to me how many horses die in the H/J world, yet no one raises a ruckus about those. They die from fractured pasterns while lungeing, when they land off a fence, from aneurysms, from falling at fences and breaking their necks....
Yet no one says "I'm done with hunters/jumpers"....

Do you have stats on that? I've been showing H/J all my life and was only on the show grounds once when a horse broke a leg and was euthanized. A freak accident is mentioned from time to time on the H/J board, are you saying that news of all these other deaths is suppressed?

[adamsmom]

Do you have stats on that? I've been showing H/J all my life and was only on the show grounds once when a horse broke a leg and was euthanized. A freak accident is mentioned from time to time on the H/J board, are you saying that news of all these other deaths is suppressed?

I don't have "stats", just personal knowledge. And I wouldn't say "suppressed", just not publicized.

After all, in a sport where ESPN isn't there, who's to know if you don't report something?

[SuZQuzie]

Just to show that it does happen in other equestrian sports...

http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=201877

[Equilibrium]

Take this for what it's worth as I'm not an eventing person.

Horses die in all possible ways imaginable. Heck considering I lost 2 foals to freak accidents out of a foal crop of 5 in 2 years, I think it's lucky if they make it to weaning. The difference is I don't have worldwide coverage at my farm and everyone on the worldwide web trying to pick through everything that happened. It is never easy to lose a horse in tragic circumstances because you are left with the what if's replaying through your head over and over.

I have admiration for anyone who competes in eventing. The riders and horses are fantastic. I think if you ever start to question if you should keep eventing for any reason, it's time to get out. And maybe that's only my logic from galloping horses for 12 years and a time when I had to deal with my own mortality issues, but once you start you just aren't the same rider. And yes I know this is about horses mostly, but I'm sure the human aspect has to come into play too.

I agree money is a major driving force in eventing now. You'd be crazy in Ireland not to try and breed an eventer type considering programs like the FEHL. But isn't money a driving force in any equestrian event?

I think the horses at this level love what they're doing - they have to love it. And I'm so sorry for Kingpin's connections but I wouldn't outright say the event killed him. This type of thing could have happened at home or on the way to an event.

If you love eventing and are serious about the sport please keep on riding. Those of us who have lost our nerve a long time ago, we love to see you competing and have nothing but respect for admiration for the riders and horses. You make the world a little brighter and a little less scary.

Terri

[Seven-up]

I agree with you. It's not that there are more deaths necessarily, it's that we find out about them publicly and almost simultaneously.

It's interesting to me how many horses die in the H/J world, yet no one raises a ruckus about those. They die from fractured pasterns while lungeing, when they land off a fence, from aneurysms, from falling at fences and breaking their necks....
Yet no one says "I'm done with hunters/jumpers"....

Whaaaaa? I've been showing a long time (close to 20 years) and I've yet to see a broken leg at a show. I think that without stats, this statement is way off. I can only think of one fatal injury to a horse in recent memory at a show, the jumper at Wellington this past year. As gossipy as the h/j world is, I find it hard to believe we're sweeping deadly injuries under the rug. ;) There's a lengthy thread any time something happens. People tend to be horrified because it's a fairly non-strenuous sport. What sort of ruckus would you like?


And are you saying that no one changes disciplines from h/j? Really? Didn't Debbie McDonald start doing dressage because of S.J. injuries? I know people who were tired of getting hurt and switched to dressage, western, trail riding. Some people get tired of the "politics" in the hunter ring and switch to a discipline that isn't based on a judge's opinion. People stop doing h/j all the time, but it's usually people issues, not because horses keep dying at every major event.

[SaddleFitterVA]

Just to show that it does happen in other equestrian sports...

http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=201877

That thread is about the rider dying. Nothing about the horse's status. The title is misleading as everyone expects it to be about a horse death.

[hamsterpoop]

Perspective, people! Mother nature has ordained nothing but the most hideous deaths for prey animals in the wild. Weak, injured or old, they are literally torn to shreds and eaten alive by predators or have painful miserable deaths from exposure, injury and any small injury that festers and spreads. THEN they are torn to shreds by predators. Why don't you write Mother Nature a letter of complaint? We do a damn good job taking care of our animals IMHO. In humans,we cure cancer and suddenly everyone is dying of heart attacks.( or vice versa ) My point is that death, from a biological perspective, is normal and natural. Something will get us or our horses sooner or later. We have fewer colics, kepp them from being put down from now treatable injuries and suddenly we see other causes of death pop up. Not at all scientific but things are not nearly as simple as they appear on the surface.

[SR Rider]

re other disciplines...I have seen some nasty pictures of Western riding accidents in junior rodeos

[fordtraktor]

Whether there are more horse deaths at the upper levels of eventing or not is simply not debatable. Look at the number of horses that have died from ruptures in the last several years. I can think of at least four domestically.

I spend most of my time in the jumper ring. I have NEVER seen a horse die from a cardiac event during a jumper round, and I have seen thousands of them, at the very top levels. I know it happens, but it is very, very rare. There is some reason why it happens more during XC, and if we can find out what causes it we can start looking at ways to prevent it.

The need for more/better scientific investigation into what is causing these problems for eventers could not be more clear. Pretending it isn't happening or that it isn't a problem/could just as easily happen in the field is counterproductive, as it delays research that could save horse lives.

[JAM]

ESPN probably carries (or at least carried) a lot more jumping than eventing. In fact, I can't think of any eventing it has covered except for the story last year.

The whole killing for insurance in the h/j world got plenty of coverage. The problems with TB horse racing have gotten plenty of coverage. I don't think eventing is being singled out.

... After all, in a sport where ESPN isn't there, who's to know if you don't report something?

[adamsmom]

ESPN probably carries (or at least carried) a lot more jumping than eventing. In fact, I can't think of any eventing it has covered except for the story last year.

The whole killing for insurance in the h/j world got plenty of coverage. The problems with TB horse racing have gotten plenty of coverage. I don't think eventing is being singled out.

If you can find jumping on ESPN these days, I'd be amazed. They used to cover it quite a lot, but not much now.

However, I'm not suggesting that eventing is being singled out.
What I'm saying is that I personally know of several horses over the past 2-3 years that have died at or in connection with hunter/jumper competitions. No, most of them were not cardiac events, but they did result in the death of the horses in question.

[ne900]

I think "hamster" may have touched on something important- horses are living longer productive lives because of improved veterinary care, feeding programs and management. Are older horses more apt to be affected by cardiac events than younger horses- just like people? I know that one of last years XC deaths involved an older horse. I myself lost an older horse to a cardiac event many years ago.

Another factor to consider is whether some horses are genetically predisposed to cardiac events, making them more susceptible at a younger age- again just like people?

Certainly, when a horse is working closer to its maximum capacity, it is more likely to experience a cardiac event than a horse not working close to its maximum capacity. Maybe that is a factor in why there seem to be more incidents in upper level eventing than some other sports.

This is not simple- there are so many factors that need to be studied and analyzed. We need to be able to predict what horses might be more prone to these problems and know how to monitor their cardiac health as well as the external factors that impact their cardiac health.

I know that eventing is not alone with cardiac events affecting horses. Without having to think hard, I can list four incidents in four other disciplines, three of which received _no_ online attention: saddlebred that was being long-lined at home at walk/trot for 15-20 minutes, standardbred warming up at walk and trot at a horse show, endurance horse having just finished a competitive ride (and these horses are vet-checked at several points along the ride). None of these were covered up- there just wasn't any interest or vehicle to discuss them.

I can also list recent incidents with race horses and even an occurence during a dressage test. These incidents received some online attention.

I believe that eventing incidents do receive more online attention than incidents in other disciplines. We have a passionate group of individuals on this board who either participate in or follow eventing. Therefore, we have intense discussion when an incident occurs in eventing. Because the membership of this group is broad and distributed, and because message boards are asynchronous, we are aware of incidents soon after they occur- regardless of what level or geography they occur in. The same level of attention is just not given when Jane's horse has a cardiac event in the pasture at home, unless Jane's horse happened to be a famous ex-eventer.

[fordtraktor]

Adamsmom, maybe there are a few deaths here and there, though I have not heard of any death-causing longeing accidents (does that even count?!) and certainly am not aware of any patterns of several deaths from related causes. But look at the sheer numbers of horses that compete in H/J v. eventing. It is not uncommon for a H/J show to have several thousand entries, and for grand prixs to have 70 or more horses. And there are major competitions every weekend all over the country. There are far fewer upper-level events and far more deaths, particularly from pulmonary embolisms. Why NOT focus on it, do the research, and try to reduce the numbers?

Believe me, if I saw any sort of death trend in H/J world, I would raise holy hell until they were addressed. I ride horses for fun, and dead horses are not fun.

For the record, I have not seen any dynamic/controversial coverage of ex-eventers falling over dead in the pasture, any more so that any other horse whose passing we note and regret. I don't recall anyone saying "poor thing must have died because it once participated in a dangerous sport."

[Robby Johnson]

Perspective, people! Mother nature has ordained nothing but the most hideous deaths for prey animals in the wild. Weak, injured or old, they are literally torn to shreds and eaten alive by predators or have painful miserable deaths from exposure, injury and any small injury that festers and spreads. THEN they are torn to shreds by predators. Why don't you write Mother Nature a letter of complaint? We do a damn good job taking care of our animals IMHO. In humans,we cure cancer and suddenly everyone is dying of heart attacks.( or vice versa ) My point is that death, from a biological perspective, is normal and natural. Something will get us or our horses sooner or later. We have fewer colics, kepp them from being put down from now treatable injuries and suddenly we see other causes of death pop up. Not at all scientific but things are not nearly as simple as they appear on the surface.

I couldn't agree with you more. I would add, however, that making choices that set the horse/human up to live longer and healthier should be the M.O.

[findeight]

Well, I started showing in '68 and can recall one Jumper, Jimmy Willliams old buckskin veteran, The Plainsman, breaking a leg in the Junior Jumpers at Del Mar back when it was still at the track-and he made it back to the barn.

Had a friend whose AA Hunter dropped from an anyurism in the practice ring at, like, Capital Challege or something maybe 8/10 years ago.

I know a horse was badly hurt last year in a GP event at KHP but was not at that ring.

That's it. Oh, been to the track a few hundred times over 40+ years and watch on the TV yet only a total of about 10 or 15 that I actually was there or watching on the telly.

Went to one event, a ***, saw a horrible wreck when one slid across a table and skinned most of one side-later euthed. Another was put down on course after flipping at a coffin. Was not on that part of the course. That was my one and only in person.

Since I have lived here, paid a little attention to the Rolex since it's so close and thought of going BUT...most years there is 1. Sometimes 2. One year it was a rider in the *** undercard they used to run plus 2 horses put down on the course. My neighbors went to that one with their 2 little girls.

Not blaming anybody or anything but no longer recommend anybody go spectate as an introduction to horse sports. Just seems a given something will die at a ****.

Racing has lost some sponsership and alot of TV time because it is no longer "just part of the game" to most viewers. Eventing may be next.

[magnolia73]

I think that the occasional cardiac event is not really a horrible thing. Sad for the owner, rider and horse and hope some research can help.

BUT, the fact is that eventing has also had some issues with poor judgement and those few deaths (horse and rider) really marked the sport and leave no room for the random death to be politely brushed off.

And Rolex is a pretty small pool of riders, once a year. The comparison is not the sport of hunter jumpers.... but more like one big class. It would be a more valid comparison to look at all the deaths in the WEF series of Grand Prixs vs Rolex.

I don't go to Rolex (or the big event near me), steeplechases and skip watching racing on TV.

[saratoga]

I dont see how anyone can deny that upper level eventing and racing carry a higher level of risk to the horse than other horse sports. I think its foolish to deny it. You just have to decide if *you* can handle seeing it, if its acceptable for *you*. If you go to the track, you know you may see a horse break a leg. You know you may see a horse die at Rolex. If you cant handle that, then you shouldnt go. Plus, usually the way the horses die in eventing and on the track, is so graphic and horrific that its really traumatizing.

I evented up to Training but wouldnt risk myself or my horse at the Upper Levels. I wouldnt put a horse on the racetrack either. Its really everyone's choice. I think all possible safety precautions should be made, but like racing, its just a dangerous sport by its nature, both in what the horse has to do and the physical exertion necessary.

[adamsmom]

Why NOT focus on it, do the research, and try to reduce the numbers?


I never ever said not to do the research. I would never ever suggest that we not try to find out if there is a reason for every type of death out there. I think it's essential that research be done, and it is being done. There may or may not be trends, and I'm certainly not suggesting that there is a "pattern". That's why research needs to be done.

All I'm saying is that deaths happen everywhere, from any number of reasons. And some are more publicly known than others.

And personally, yes, I think a horse breaking it's leg while being lunged does count, but maybe that's just me.

[sporthorselover]

I personally have witnessed horse deaths at probably 6 of the past 8 Radnor Races held every spring in Malvern, Pennsylvania. i can't take it anymore and am not going this year.

there doesn't seem to be a similar outcry about the rate of deaths in that sport.

[fordtraktor]

And personally, yes, I think a horse breaking it's leg while being lunged does count, but maybe that's just me.

I meant does it count as a show-jumping death? Horses get longed in virtually every horse sport and can take a bad step anywhere. If there was something specifically H/J about the longeing, what was it?

[LAZ]

I don't even like to talk about the 3 that died here in 2007, let alone the horses I have no personal knowledge of.

My 3 were:

18 year old Morgan gelding that had a nasal tumor that progressed to the point that it was time. He was humanely euthanized.

Tb that broke his hock in turn out. Had surgery, shattered the repaired leg when getting up from surgery, humanely euthanized.

Tb that was galloping around the pasture, took a mis-step and broke his knee. There was no chance of recovery and was humanely euthanized after radiographs.

In 30 years of keeping horses it was the first time I'd ever had horse deaths of any of the horses in my care. Luckily I haven't had any more since.

In regards to the original question--I have serious reservations about developing upper level horses/riders at this point, though I've recently sold one to a YR that I think will bring it to Advanced. I know when one of "my" track horses and one of "my" kids went around Rolex a few years ago my adrenaline was running so high I was shivering--and it wasn't because I was afraid they'd die, I had complete faith in the horse's ability to stay on his feet--but the risk is always there, every time you saddle a horse.

I'm glad research is being focused on these 'health" deaths. Hopefully some consistent common ground will be discovered between them and we will be able to adapt either our training skills or course designing skills to eliminate, or nearly eliminate them. I do not think knee-jerk rules and wailing around is going to produce any good results, though.

[sporthorselover]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/horses/2009-04-27-295188548_x.htm

[riderboy]

I'm being blinded by the shining halo of goodness and purity worn by all non-eventers today.

[JER]

I personally have witnessed horse deaths at probably 6 of the past 8 Radnor Races held every spring in Malvern, Pennsylvania. i can't take it anymore and am not going this year.

there doesn't seem to be a similar outcry about the rate of deaths in that sport.

Maybe not in the US but that's because nobody's heard of steeplechasing in the US.

In the UK, NH racing has been under fire for horse welfare issues for many, many years. The most famous race, the Grand National, has been changed over the years to make it safer for horses. There are also a lot of studies being done on falls and injuries in the sport (some of which i cited last week on a different thread).

[fordtraktor]

I'm being blinded by the shining halo of goodness and purity worn by all non-eventers today.

We all have an interest in reducing fatalities in eventing.

Whether you want to believe it or not, bad press for eventing negatively affects all horse sports. I don't know how many times I have heard about those NYT articles last year from people questioning my sanity for riding horses.

People don't know the difference between the different sports, but they do get worked up over people and animals dying. If we want any horse sports to get mainstream support, we have to do whatever we can to reinforce that equestrian community as a whole is doing what it can to provide entertainment, safety and humane practices at the same time, across the sport.

Fact of life. If you don't like us "interfering," start eventing cows.

[riderboy]

We all have an interest in reducing fatalities in eventing.

Whether you want to believe it or not, bad press for eventing negatively affects all horse sports. I don't know how many times I have heard about those NYT articles last year from people questioning my sanity for riding horses.

People don't know the difference between the different sports, but they do get worked up over people and animals dying. If we want any horse sports to get mainstream support, we have to do whatever we can to reinforce that equestrian community as a whole is doing what it can to provide entertainment, safety and humane practices at the same time, across the sport.

Fact of life. If you don't like us "interfering," start eventing cows.Well, finally, a glimmer of intelligence. I couldn't agree more, except for the cows. I do not recall seeing any other disciplines at the Eventing Safety Summit last summer. Perhaps that is the next step, (including other disciplines in safety meetings) because it is inevitable that each discipline will have it's own problems. Eventing is leading the way to improve horse and rider safety.

[foxhavenfarm]

As far as pulmonary embolisms or ruptured aneurysms, these can happen at ANY time a horse's heartrate is up or it is stressed. How about breeding stallions that drop dead after covering a mare?

[JER]

We can't shy away from talking about death. It's a big part of life.

Death isn't a mystery or a message from god or proof of karma. It's just the end of a life and can happen in far more ways than we can imagine.

One thing I've learned in life is to treat death as an equal, not as a looming, scary phenomenon. No need to be afraid. It's an equalizer for sure, as death eventually finds its way to all of us but we can often teach death a lesson or two by learning more about it. Cancer research, accident prevention, safety initiatives -- all that comes from looking hard at the causes of death and working to eliminate them.

[pony grandma]

Suffering is worst than death, and we have a lot of global suffering. Perspective is always important.

[lstevenson]

Believe me, if I saw any sort of death trend in H/J world, I would raise holy hell until they were addressed.


Aortic ruptures happen in the H/J world too. I know of two personally. One was owned by a friend of mine, and was a low level hunter. And the other was one of Hap Hansen's horses in the early 80's. He died mid air over a big oxer. And I'm sure there are lots more, but since they don't happen in front of 50,000 people you may not hear about them.

[lstevenson]

Perspective, people! Mother nature has ordained nothing but the most hideous deaths for prey animals in the wild. Weak, injured or old, they are literally torn to shreds and eaten alive by predators or have painful miserable deaths from exposure, injury and any small injury that festers and spreads. THEN they are torn to shreds by predators. Why don't you write Mother Nature a letter of complaint? We do a damn good job taking care of our animals IMHO. In humans,we cure cancer and suddenly everyone is dying of heart attacks.( or vice versa ) My point is that death, from a biological perspective, is normal and natural. Something will get us or our horses sooner or later. We have fewer colics, kepp them from being put down from now treatable injuries and suddenly we see other causes of death pop up. Not at all scientific but things are not nearly as simple as they appear on the surface.


Very true.

[badawg]

We had a horse die here locally during a dressage test, most likely of an aneurysm. I also recall a Training level horse falling over dead during it SJ round at Rebecca Farm a couple of years ago. Again, this stuff happens a lot more often than we realize. These horses weren't elite athletes, nothing fancy. Just doing a lower level tests. Happens all the time. I think we are just hearing more about it now due to forums such as this one. And this is a good thing, because we are able to talk about it and get the info out there, and possibly get more money into the research to make it better.

[Trixie]

So when a jumper drops dead during a competition, is that also a BIG PROBLEM?

Because that also happens, but no one seems outraged. But maybe that's because there are so many big jumper shows and no one webcasts them like they do Rolex.

Or what about the Arabian that drops dead during a halter class? Because that happens as well.

Horses die, people. I hate it, but it happens. And until the data is fully analyzed, no one can say what the real problem is. But it happens across all horse sports, and all we can hope is that we somehow figure out how to make it happen less often.

All I'm saying is that deaths happen everywhere, from any number of reasons. And some are more publicly known than others.

The truth is, there’s been a very disturbing trend in eventing, at many major events over the last few years that horses have been dying. That now, after Rolex weekend, I log onto COTH on Monday morning and was FRIGHTENED to read the board, because I didn’t want to hear about MORE horses dying. That it has been constant and consistent over the last several years. It is disturbing.

That is not the case when I log onto the H/J forum. In one year, the number of horses that die in enormously public ways at H/J shows is FAR fewer, and way further between.

We’re not really talking about horses that take a misstep on the lunge, fall in their field, get kicked in the schooling ring, whatever. These things happen equally across all disciplines of competition, and yes, injuries and deaths do happen. We’re talking about the upper levels of a sport that now has a reputation for being deadly, for killing horses, for killing riders, in competition.

I too would like to see some specific examples of hunters and jumpers who have died at the same rate in competition as eventers. As it stands right now, I just don’t see it adding up.

If you all want this sport to stick around, you need to address this BIG PROBLEM - yes, yes, it is a BIG PROBLEM.

[lstevenson]

The truth is, there’s been a very disturbing trend in eventing, at many major events over the last few years that horses have been dying. That now, after Rolex weekend, I log onto COTH on Monday morning and was FRIGHTENED to read the board, because I didn’t want to hear about MORE horses dying. That it has been constant and consistent over the last several years. It is disturbing.

That is not the case when I log onto the H/J forum. In one year, the number of horses that die in enormously public ways at H/J shows is FAR fewer, and way further between.

We’re not really talking about horses that take a misstep on the lunge, fall in their field, get kicked in the schooling ring, whatever. These things happen equally across all disciplines of competition, and yes, injuries and deaths do happen. We’re talking about the upper levels of a sport that now has a reputation for being deadly, for killing horses, for killing riders, in competition.

I too would like to see some specific examples of hunters and jumpers who have died at the same rate in competition as eventers. As it stands right now, I just don’t see it adding up.

If you all want this sport to stick around, you need to address this BIG PROBLEM - yes, yes, it is a BIG PROBLEM.


I'm willing to bet that the rate of death by 'natural causes' is fairly consistant in the h/j world vs the eventing world. The difference is the amount of coverage it receives. Go back and read my previous post where my friend's low level hunter died of aortic rupture. Absolutely no one heard about it. Unlike when it happens at Rolex, where everyone in the country hears about it within seconds.

[fordtraktor]

Aortic ruptures happen in the H/J world too. I know of two personally. One was owned by a friend of mine, and was a low level hunter. And the other was one of Hap Hansen's horses in the early 80's. He died mid air over a big oxer. And I'm sure there are lots more, but since they don't happen in front of 50,000 people you may not hear about them.

They certainly do, no one denies it. I hadn't heard of any until now, but of course there are some.

But the fact that you can cite two in nearly thirty years is telling. I can cite four upper-level eventers in two years, and there are many, many more hunter/jumpers competing than eventers. Something about eventing makes it happen at a much higher rate during competition.

If we figure out what causes it and how it can be recognized before it happens, then I will be the first to say that all horse sports stand to benefit, not just eventing. But the benefits would be higher for eventers, because the problem occurs more at the upper level of eventing. I don't think anything I have said is all that controversial.

[fordtraktor]

I'm willing to bet that the rate of death by 'natural causes' is fairly consistant in the h/j world vs the eventing world. The difference is the amount of coverage it receives. Go back and read my previous post where my friend's low level hunter died of aortic rupture. Absolutely no one heard about it. Unlike when it happens at Rolex, where everyone in the country hears about it within seconds.

How much are you willing to bet?

[Trixie]

I'm willing to bet that the rate of death by 'natural causes' is fairly consistant in the h/j world vs the eventing world. The difference is the amount of coverage it receives. Go back and read my previous post where my friend's low level hunter died of aortic rupture. Absolutely no one heard about it. Unlike when it happens at Rolex, where everyone in the country hears about it within seconds.

Eh, that's pretty much what I just said:

We’re not really talking about horses that take a misstep on the lunge, fall in their field, get kicked in the schooling ring, whatever. These things happen equally across all disciplines of competition, and yes, injuries and deaths do happen. We’re talking about the upper levels of a sport that now has a reputation for being deadly, for killing horses, for killing riders, in competition.

However, BECAUSE it keeps happening in eventing, both consistently and extremely publically, it needs to be readdressed. Believe me, if horses and riders were dying at the rate of upper levels eventer in show jumping competition, it would be equally public.

[bornfreenowexpensive]

Do you have stats on that? I've been showing H/J all my life and was only on the show grounds once when a horse broke a leg and was euthanized. A freak accident is mentioned from time to time on the H/J board, are you saying that news of all these other deaths is suppressed?


They are not talked about....but I was a show groom and knew of 3 in one year....which means that there were likely more that I didn't know about. I could walk by the tents and smell the DMSO drips. Also...many more hurt or died in training. Back in the day...you really didn't hear about since there wasn't the internet.

Horses are fragile creatures....they die very very easily. If you have them long enough, you will see it and have to deal with it....whether it be at a competition or at home. I don't care if you are a back yard trail rider or event/race rider. Obviously, the more strenuous the activity, the greater the risk and chance of injury. But even with being an eventer and show groom...I've seen more horse deaths or severe injuries with horses at home....and most have been when in thier turnout.

[hamsterpoop]

The truth is, there’s been a very disturbing trend in eventing, at many major events over the last few years that horses have been dying. That now, after Rolex weekend, I log onto COTH on Monday morning and was FRIGHTENED to read the board, because I didn’t want to hear about MORE horses dying. That it has been constant and consistent over the last several years. It is disturbing.

That is not the case when I log onto the H/J forum. In one year, the number of horses that die in enormously public ways at H/J shows is FAR fewer, and way further between.

We’re not really talking about horses that take a misstep on the lunge, fall in their field, get kicked in the schooling ring, whatever. These things happen equally across all disciplines of competition, and yes, injuries and deaths do happen. We’re talking about the upper levels of a sport that now has a reputation for being deadly, for killing horses, for killing riders, in competition.

I too would like to see some specific examples of hunters and jumpers who have died at the same rate in competition as eventers. As it stands right now, I just don’t see it adding up.

If you all want this sport to stick around, you need to address this BIG PROBLEM - yes, yes, it is a BIG PROBLEM. Hey girl, no need to blow a gasket, I ,at least, am picking up what you are laying down, capital letters and everything. I doubt you subscribe to Eventing magazine but on page 58 of the last issue is the Cooperation and Collaboration: Following Through on our Safety Initiatives article. It's good, read it. I, for one, realize that the sport is dangerous and needs to be improved and am actively involved in that process. Instead of holding the shift key down on the word BIG why don't you contribute money or time to any of the USEF or USEA safety initiatives? Just a thought.

[Trixie]

Hey girl, no need to blow a gasket, I ,at least, am picking up what you are laying down, capital letters and everything. I doubt you subscribe to Eventing magazine but on page 58 of the last issue is the Cooperation and Collaboration: Following Through on our Safety Initiatives article. It's good, read it. I, for one, realize that the sport is dangerous and needs to be improved and am actively involved in that process. Instead of holding the shift key down on the word BIG why don't you contribute money or time to any of the USEF or USEA safety initiatives? Just a thought.

Um, how do you have any idea as to what I do and don't contribute to, financially or otherwise? :rolleyes:

I'm merely emphasizing that using the arguement that "show jumpers and hunters die all the time" doesn't hold water when horses are publically dying year after year during one particular phase of competition in one particular discipline.

That's in the interest of perpetuating discussion, not sweeping it under the rug as "natural causes."

BTW, emphasis on "BIG PROBLEM" wasn't mine. Read what I quoted.

[hamsterpoop]

:)Fair enough! Didn"t know you were helping out the cause.

[rabicon]

I can't understand why there has to be such a fuss over this. Yes, its upsetting, yes its tragic, yes this was probably nautral reasons. Eventing deaths are up nodoubtly but they are trying to work on it. In every horse discipline things happen and people and horses die. At home, at a show, or on a trail ride. Have you ever looked up the est. deaths of riders and/or horses that were trail riding?? You'd be surprised its more than eventing ;) So should we stop even taking our horses on the trail? All you that are going to stop riding in this sport going to stop trail riding or take up western pleasure? Oh wait, horses die in western pleasure also :eek: So do people. Over 5,000 horses died on the track since 2003!!! Are you going to stop watching the derby? It happens and the right people are trying to do something about it. You do have to realize that more people are eventing now than in the 90's and 80's so it just makes since with more horses and more riders at these levels you will have more accidents. Its like living now and living in the 50's. In the 50's there wasn't as many carjackings or people breaking into houses or robbing stores and killing others for no reason. Alot of that has to do with the number of people in this country now. More people, more crime. Same with eventing or any other horse sport, more competitors more accidents.

I should rephrase my first sentance. There should be a fuss but not amoung us, we should be comrades and working together to help our sport.

[magnolia73]

I have to say- I get the same way Trixie has. I got the COTH Rolex preview and instead of wondering which horse would win, I wondered who would not make it back.

I really don't think it is comparable to look at Grand Prix and running XC. Horses just don't tend to die on Grand Prix courses. There may well be similar rates of death.... but I imagine the HJ injuries are more cumulative and the deaths happen at home or back in the barn vs. a catastrophic failure on course. IE, the untimely death of a jumper probably isn't often caused by the act one time act of jumping a jumper course.

I would think eventing would find a good partner in steeplechasing in examining deaths and solving problems. The sports seem more similar- horses are exerting over a longer time period etc. I would think that the physical stressors are more similar between eventers and steeplechasers than between HJ and eventers.

I mean, if you want to tit for a tat to make yourself feel better- yeah, rip on HJ, but if you want a useful analogy look at steeplechase.

[bornfreenowexpensive]

I would think eventing would find a good partner in steeplechasing in examining deaths and solving problems. The sports seem more similar- horses are exerting over a longer time period etc. I would think that the physical stressors are more similar between eventers and steeplechasers than between HJ and eventers.




Statistics for steeplechasing and timber racing is a bit higher per number than eventing....which makes sense since racing is FAST, with solid jumps and a PACK of horses. And yes, they do examine them and use them both for trying to make all those sports safer.

But just don't kid yourself....horses in general are dangerous. You can get seriously hurt and die anytime you swing your leg over them. I've known people to be killed loading a horse on a trailer, grooming them in the barn, riding dressage, riding on the trails, doing jumpers and eventing. I've known horses that have died at horse shows, at events, at races and most often....at home. They can drop dead in their stalls or in their fields...break bones, colic and do things I hope that you never have to learn about.

No doubt eventing is dangerous....and so are all horse activities. Most event horses are extremely well cared for and well loved....especially the elite. They live fantastic lives and do not work very hard for their living....as I'm reminded every time is see an Amish buggy drive by....

[mbdobbs]

Good job!

The faster anything moves, the more it will be damaged upon impact. These are laws of physics, hence the HUGE amount of death in racing and the increased deaths in eventing.

Somone made the point earlier that our horses are much better taken care of than they used to be, and someone else noted the relativity of it all (apologies for not putting appropriate citations here), and for those of us who have lived in the third world and seen starving horses (donkeys / camels / oxen) pulling huge loads through 100-degree heat on a crowded smog-choked street, our 4* horses have it pretty good.

As a 40-year-old with a terminal illness who will not be around to help reelect Obama, I can honestly say that a short life in which you are taken care of is much better than a long one full of regular suffering. I'll take my plight any day over billions of others. And let's all give more money to rescue organizations.

And I'll event till I die -- no higher than T because I don't think I could ever do P safely.

Melissa

You do have to realize that more people are eventing now than in the 90's and 80's so it just makes since with more horses and more riders at these levels you will have more accidents. Its like living now and living in the 50's. In the 50's there wasn't as many carjackings or people breaking into houses or robbing stores and killing others for no reason. Alot of that has to do with the number of people in this country now. More people, more crime. Same with eventing or any other horse sport, more competitors more accidents.

I should rephrase my first sentance. There should be a fuss but not amoung us, we should be comrades and working together to help our sport.

[Arcadien]

Some comments have given me some new thoughts about this that I want to share.

Many are comparing the large numbers of H/J competitors to those at events and pointing out how few deaths per competition there are in H/J as proof that H/J is less dangerous to horses than eventing.

Then I realized, they may be comparing apples & oranges here. By far the majority of the "thousands" that compete at that H/J show are in no way shape or form teams that should consider setting hoof on an event - yet.

If you think of the first level of "real" eventing as I do, as Novice, I don't recommend anyone daring to enter that start box until they and their horses are confident jumping 3'6" stadium courses (without their trainer putting the horse over the same course first a few times), can perform a decent 1st level dressage test (at home, even if not yet in a show), and are confident & fit enough to gallop for 5 minutes solo over open fields & wooded trails.

How many of those "thousands" of H/J competitors could even consider eventing at the lowest level yet given these basic preparation criteria?

Not to put down H/J riders in any way as I see it as a major stepping stone for training & preparing event riders & horses, and even after a team starts eventing, I think they should go back to H/J to remind themselves & their horses that smooth, flowing rides over 3'6" courses are possible (lol). I have all the respect for H/J, but

My point is, eventing is a harder sport than your basic H/J and I think the death statistics should be compared to those professional 3'6" & up H/J teams, races horses, & steeplechase horses - not the "thousands" that compete every weekend in H/J.

What do others think?

Arcadien
very keen to hash out this topic as she has a beloved 5 yo with "upper level" eventer stamped all over him in the barn right now, ready to embark on his serious pursuit of this career...

[hamsterpoop]

Wow; Some incredibly moving posts. That's it, though, really- a passion that defies logic or sense. Eventers love their horses and have a bond that is cemented in a way that seems difficult to describe to normal "roundheads". If you've ever felt your boy shift underneath you over a big trakehner to save your ass you know that feeling as you give him a big pat and thank him from the bottom of your heart. I'm a bit like David Sedaris' sister. Human suffering is one thing-but if she saw a bad car wreck her first thought would be "Oh my God, I hope there wasn't a dog in the backseat." In my view, you can either be part of the solution or just making the problems worse.

[fordtraktor]

Arcadien, it is true that many H/J competitors do not ride at serious levels (many eventers do not as well!). And I have seen competitors jumping 3'6 at H/J and events that I would not let jump a crossrail on one of my horses.

But that doesn't explain why horses are not regularly kicking the bucket at the grand prix level like they are at four stars. There *are* thousands of horses competing at shows like Wellington at 3'6 and up -- not just those interminable 2'6 divisions you have at the local level. There are regularly 70+ in the Junior Jumpers at big shows, with relatively inexperienced kids showing 4'6". Even so, the death rates are not even comparable.

You hit on the root of the matter -- I expect that what big-time jumpers do is not as stressful on the horse's cardiac system as what eventers do, regardless of whether it is "harder" as a sport (that is not a debate worth having -- everyone thinks their own sport is the hardest). Even so, there are still some horse fatalities for jumpers, and we would all be well-served from figuring out if the fatalities in all sports are preventable.

I don't understand the "horses die, they had a good life, so what" attitude in some posts. Sure horses die, but I do everything I can do make sure mine have as good and long a life as possible, and if I had better information about how to protect them I would use it. So, I bet, would upper-level eventers.

[Trixie]

As a primarily H/J rider, I quite meet your criteria to even enter an event.

I do agree that there are those that do not. But I don't think we were comparing lower level horse to lower level horse, in this respect: there aren't a ton of lower level in competition deaths in EITHER sport.

But comparing the "crème de la crème" of both sports, upper level eventing deaths still top out upper level jumper deaths in regards to horse fatalities in competition.

[smay]

..died as a result of "bad fencing" then... In 2000, my 16-year old TB gelding followed our Welsh pony out of a broken gate on our property, took about 10 steps into the backyard and fell over dead ( witnessed by us) almost instantly, due to an aortic rupture. He didn't even struggle - he was dead immediately. So you're saying the FENCE caused his death?

We just got home from Rolex, and fortunately were standing at Head of the Lakes when Mike Winters was on course. No announcement was made about the hold on the course. We were just left wondering.

[rabicon]

Just saw the video of the fall :no::cry: There was a lot of momentum loss and I have other thoughts now that I have seen the video about what happened but they are not nice so I will not comment.

I do also think beside my earlier comment is people need to be able to read their horses better if they are going to ride at this level.

[spotted mustang]

One thing that always gets me after another rider tragedy is that people will say, "he died doing what he enjoyed most", or something like that.

No, no. What a tired cliche that is. People die when their 1200 pound horse fell on them, and I doubt very much that they did enjoy that.

I think we just have to look the cold, hard facts in the face: eventing is the most dangerous of all the equestrian sports. We love it and enjoy it, it gives us thrills to watch it or to pop our horsey over a log in the field. But a small number of riders and horses - and someday, it might be us or our own horse - will die or get crippled in the process.

As far as I can tell, the discussion on how to make eventing safer has raged on for years and years, and horses and riders still die. Which leaves us with a simple question: Can we live with that or can we not?

[jumpforjoy]

Ok, horses die doing all sorts of things, its nature, its bad riding, its bad luck...whatever. I think what some people are saying is...they aren't going to pay to watch it. Its bad enough to have it happen on your farm or in your barn. So for whatever reason it is happening in upper level eventing, if it becomes almost a certainty that you are going to see a horse die or significantly injured; you might choose not to drive there to watch it happen. I have gone to a ton of hunter / jumper competions.... never seen a horse die, but every time I go to Rolex...a horse dies, a rider is injured. I don't care to argue about why it happens, I'm just saying if it is a probability that it will happen ( and as my luck has it, it will happen at the fence where I am standing) I'm not going to put myself through it. Call me a goodie two shoes, or whatever snotty name you can think of , I am one of many horse people that just won't go any more if there will probably be a horse's death at the event. That isn't the same as me saying all of the rest of you shouldn't go...Go! But don't get cranky with those of us that have chosen not to watch the carnage.

[SevenDogs]

One thing that always gets me after another rider tragedy is that people will say, "he died doing what he enjoyed most", or something like that.

No, no. What a tired cliche that is. People die when their 1200 pound horse fell on them, and I doubt very much that they did enjoy that.



I know what you are trying to say, but you might be being a bit glib (sorry for the Tom Cruise reference there!).

Actually, I can speak from personal experience and say that you are very much wrong. All though I am glad that I had no permanent damage, I had a fairly serious accident during a jumping lesson last year, when my horse fell while negotiating a stadium jump. He was absolutely fine (except for some scrapes, etc), but I was knocked unconcious and don't remember anything until the paramedics were affixing the spinal collar. Again, happy to report that other than a concussion (which I treated correctly and only returned to riding sensibly), I was fine.

I do very clearly remember being in the ambulance on the way to the hospital struggling to remember the actual fence. I was able to gain enough clarity to remember the moment I was headed down (saw my horses front feet go in between the front and back rail of the oxer when he tried to put his landing gear down after takeoff) and thinking "this might be it" and being totally ok with it. Yes, I regretted the thought of leaving my life, family, etc. and I regretted the pain it would cause them, but I knew the risk going in to a sport that I loved and when the moment came (or so I thought), I was ok with it.

I actually spent time after the accident making sure that my family members knew that I really would have been ok if this had been my time (and they are non-horsey people who are none too thrilled that I take this risk). Trust me, my husband was none too happy to be called to the ER by my trainer!

It was an interesting experience (that I would like to avoid repeating), but it brought me an awful lot of clarity that could only come from being in that moment.

[newsshooter]

This is kind of a side note...but I am wondering how people feel about the incident saturday being covered by non-horsey media outlets? Do you feel it's being covered unnecessarily or not enough, and why?

[bornfreenowexpensive]

Sure horses die, but I do everything I can do make sure mine have as good and long a life as possible, and if I had better information about how to protect them I would use it. So, I bet, would upper-level eventers.

You are not hearing that said because of COURSE that is done and goes without saying. Eventing is dangerous and always has been....and of course we do what we can to minimize the danger and honestly, I think it has been minimized in the recent years. Increasing our skills, improving course designing and building, research on understanding aneurysm....etc.

And JUST like the HJ world...seeking to produce more horsemen....instead of just riders.

I understand if someone doesn't want to risk their horse or themselves in eventing....and even understand folks who don't want to risk their horses or themselves in JUMPING at all.....but I accept the dangers of eventing for both me and my horses...and I do understand the dangers. I enjoy eventing and it makes me feel alive. I've done the jumpers....at a high level. There were many many things in that world that I dislike and that is why I will not compete in that world.....even if it is "safer" for my horse. Even with the dangers with eventing....I still know that in my experience, most of my dangers are at home or on the road in my car and with horses even if I kept them at home in a padded stall, they will still die or get injured. So we do what we can to keep them safe but we don't let our fears of death stop us from doing things that we enjoy.

MbDobbs sorry you are going through what you are going through......and I agree, perspective is everything. I hope that you are eventing far longer than you expect to be....which is what I hope for all of us!

[spotted mustang]

It was an interesting experience (that I would like to avoid repeating), but it brought me an awful lot of clarity that could only come from being in that moment.

well, I had my share of spills and you're right: in the moment, you're too full of adrenaline and everything goes too fast to feel any real pain or regret. But what if you had been crippled for life? Or what if your horse had died? How would you have felt about it afterwards?

I'm just playing Devil's advocate here. I ride, I jump, and I gallop in the fields. I also do wild and crazy things involving a big, strong dog and a pair of skis :). I hike and camp for weeks in the wilderness. I take all kinds of risks, and like most people who do, I know there's a chance I'll get killed or hurt someday. But I can't discuss that possibility away: it exists.

[deltawave]

If you think of the first level of "real" eventing as I do, as Novice, I don't recommend anyone daring to enter that start box until they and their horses are confident jumping 3'6" stadium courses (without their trainer putting the horse over the same course first a few times), can perform a decent 1st level dressage test (at home, even if not yet in a show), and are confident & fit enough to gallop for 5 minutes solo over open fields & wooded trails.


Those are some pretty high expectations for Novice. I don't have any opinion on what constitutes "real" eventing, but I certainly "dare" to enter the start box all right, and I'm pretty sure my horse has never done a 3'6" stadium course. I have, many times, but don't think my horse exactly needs to do that to make her way around the 2'11" stadium stuff. :)

I don't understand the "horses die, they had a good life, so what" attitude in some posts. Sure horses die, but I do everything I can do make sure mine have as good and long a life as possible, and if I had better information about how to protect them I would use it. So, I bet, would upper-level eventers.

But until we have this elusive information that will ensure their safety, what do we do? Stop competing? Stop riding? Once we figure out the aortic pathology, will we then tackle catastrophic locomotor breakdowns? EIPH? There will always be dangers, even when/if we have answers. Which I don't anticipate is going to happen in the lifetime of horses that are alive today.

[JER]

If you think of the first level of "real" eventing as I do, as Novice, I don't recommend anyone daring to enter that start box until they and their horses are confident jumping 3'6" stadium courses (without their trainer putting the horse over the same course first a few times), can perform a decent 1st level dressage test (at home, even if not yet in a show),

Some of the very best Novice horses that I've seen are not capable of the above, never were, and never will be. :)

[enjoytheride]

Mother nature isn't slapping a saddle on the horse's back and galloping him around at full speed over solid obstacles. Comparing what happens to wild animals when they get eaten to a horse dying while competing in a sport to entertain humans is a bunch of bullshit.

I don't care that we have colic surgery, special medications, injections, stall mats, or anything else. What I care about is if my sport is killing the animals that I love. You can't say that it makes it ok that pookie flipped over a fence and broke his neck at Rolex because his owner gave him a better life then a wild animal.

[SevenDogs]

well, I had my share of spills and you're right: in the moment, you're too full of adrenaline and everything goes too fast to feel any real pain or regret. But what if you had been crippled for life? Or what if your horse had died? How would you have felt about it afterwards

Two completely separate things: Self vs. Horse

I really find it incredible for you to tell me that YOU are better at judging what was going through my head that moment, than I was. Did you really mean to say that my feeling were not "real" but rather only adrenaline induced? I mean... really... think about what you just posted. That was completely insulting, at best.

Your original post referred to "Rider Death" not horse and I relayed my personal experience.

Everyone has there own limitations. For me, I know that if I caused (or participated in) my horse's serious or mortal injury, that would be it for me and riding. I have always known this and accepted it and done my best to minimize the risks. All of my horses have lived with me, until their death of natural causes, well into their 20's and 30's. The one stupid thing I did, while recovering from my concussion, was drive out to the ranch the day after to see my horse. Although I knew he was well taken care of and had not sustained any serious injuries in the fall, I just HAD to see him. The look in his eyes told me that the feeling was mutual (or perhaps, Spotted Mustang you would like to tell me otherwise about that too).

Although I would be devastated, I don't view horse deaths from heart related failure, embolism, etc. the same as an injury/death that happened as a direct result of my riding them (unless I had been negligent in conditioning them appropriately, etc). I would like to see a whole lot more research on early detection/prevention (just like everyone else), but my best guess (since it has not happened to me) is that I would continue riding after some serious grief. I don't know for sure, I and sure as heck hope I never find out.

[Cisco's_Mom]

I think:
It's sad when a horse, or other animal (loved or not), dies a tragic death (natural or not)
It's not only at the upper levels of eventing. Three weeks ago I witnessed (from < 500ft away) a Training Level event horse drop dead on the cross country course. (Never heard the final cause, rumored to be an aneurysm, but the horse was between fences.... one second she was galloping along with her ears up, the next she was laying on the ground moaning).
It's always happened, but as mentioned before, the Internet hasn't always been around. Worldwide communication is now instantaneous; we hear about things immediately now, that we would never have know about in previous years.
The bond between event riders and their horses is extraordinary. The partnership, trust, and respect they have for one another is not only enviable, but necessary for them to be successful at all levels. (not saying that these things are not just as evident or important to other equine/human disciplines and partnerships).I found eventing about 10 years ago and have been a fan ever since. Watching or hearing about horses (or riders) getting injured or dying while participating in an activity they love doing is hard (and, if it is preventable, steps should be taken to make it so.) It hasn't turned me away from the sport; but more grateful that I and my horses, my friends & their horses, and other riders & horses are safe at the end of the day.

[riderboy]

Mother nature isn't slapping a saddle on the horse's back and galloping him around at full speed over solid obstacles. Comparing what happens to wild animals when they get eaten to a horse dying while competing in a sport to entertain humans is a bunch of bullshit.

I don't care that we have colic surgery, special medications, injections, stall mats, or anything else. What I care about is if my sport is killing the animals that I love. You can't say that it makes it ok that pookie flipped over a fence and broke his neck at Rolex because his owner gave him a better life then a wild animal.Yes, unfortunately this sport most definitely can kill the animals you love.

[La Gringa]

Just to show that it does happen in other equestrian sports...

http://www.chronicleforums.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=201877

I don't think anybody that knows anything about this topic denies that their is risk in all horse sports. The point here is how much risk is acceptable? If the risk is causing a death every single year at Rolex, it's too dangerous. Period. How many horses or riders have to die before people admit it and change what is wrong?

It's not rocket science... it's common sense. It seems that people just are afraid to change it back to long format.. Why is that? Why allow this to keep happening at all?

I dreaded hearing the Rolex news this year, after last year. Is that right? Is that what an event of this caliber should be about? NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think I am not the only one that thinks this either.

It's just too dangerous as it is now... something must change.

[La Gringa]

I think:

It's sad when a horse, or other animal (loved or not), dies a tragic death (natural or not)
It's not only at the upper levels of eventing. Three weeks ago I witnessed (from < 500ft away) a Training Level event horse drop dead on the cross country course. (Never heard the final cause, rumored to be an aneurysm, but the horse was between fences.... one second she was galloping along with her ears up, the next she was laying on the ground moaning).
It's always happened, but as mentioned before, the Internet hasn't always been around. Worldwide communication is now instantaneous; we hear about things immediately now, that we would never have know about in previous years.
The bond between event riders and their horses is extraordinary. The partnership, trust, and respect they have for one another is not only enviable, but necessary for them to be successful at all levels. (not saying that these things are not just as evident or important to other equine/human disciplines and partnerships).I found eventing about 10 years ago and have been a fan ever since. Watching or hearing about horses (or riders) getting injured or dying while participating in an activity they love doing is hard (and, if it is preventable, steps should be taken to make it so.) It hasn't turned me away from the sport; but more grateful that I and my horses, my friends & their horses, and other riders & horses are safe at the end of the day.


I think the point about the internet isn't so relevant. People have had news and the ability to communicate since telephones and cell phones have been around. It would be published in the magazines or reported in horse journals. Eventing is more dangerous, as is steeplechasing and flat racing for that matter, but the deaths are more prevalent now. I never before in 30 years of riding heard of as many deaths as happened last year.

News has been able to travel fast. I remember when the first gulf war happened in 91, we knew right away. We had TV, we had video, we had cell phones, and other ways of communication besides internet. The news may have travelled slower but it still got there.

[spotted mustang]

Two completely separate things: Self vs. Horse

I really find it incredible for you to tell me that YOU are better at judging what was going through my head that moment, than I was. Did you really mean to say that my feeling were not "real" but rather only adrenaline induced? I mean... really... think about what you just posted. That was completely insulting, at best.



deep breath, kiddo. I was talking about MY head and MY experience falling off, not yours. I used the universal "you", not referring to you, personally. :)

[Arcadien]

Can I just say, I am glad we are brave enough to have this conversation, and I'm feeling a depth of gratitude for those of you who have posted, even those who didn't agree with me. :) It is such a tough subject, and one way to deal with it, one I've unfortunately turned to sometimes in the past, is to keep these thoughts & feelings inside & try to deal with them on ones own.

I'm glad we're talking about it, and feeling immense respect too, for all my fellow COTH-ers.

Still sifting through my own thoughts & feelings, so not sure where I stand at the moment.

But one more thought, those of you who balked at my idea that a Novice eventer being able to jump 3'6" stadium (mind I meant at home, or in a lesson, not necessarily competing at that level), don't you ever jump higher than the 2'11" limit for those solid XC jumps? I mean, even a little higher, if you think my 3'6" is too much ;) I ask because I always felt it imperative that I & my horse had this experience before tackling solid 2'11" fences in case we got in a little wrong, or the footing turned out too deep, or the course designer used the "brush" height (always a few inches higher than solid limit, not sure what it is for Novice right now) a bit generously... you know. It gives me, and I think, my horse, that bit of extra confidence & safety cushion, you know?

For whoever pointed out that there really are thousands of H/J riders competing every weekend at 3'6" & above, & therefore meet my criteria, thank you. I didn't realize that, and it does help me think of all this.

Cheers,
Arcadien

[deltawave]

Yes, much schooling at 3'3" or so for my Novice horse. But only occasionally higher. It of course depends on the horse--mine needs more attention paid to steadiness, balance, approach, etc. than "how high" and I can work her much more safely and just as effectively over lower jumps WRT those exercises. If she's being sloppy or careless or lazy, then the jumps go up. :) I rarely find that the extra 3" makes as much of a difference as the actual exercise being done.

[Foxnhound919]

I too, am struggling and sifting. What do I do with my 11 year old daughter, a pony clubber who breathes, eats and sleeps this sport? She was there for Amy's disaster as well as last year and this year. The message is not a good one for a kid. How to explain...?

[vineyridge]

What I would like to see are actual statistics from other equestrian disciplines.

The Europeans run a huge number of jumps races every year. Their governing bodies should have the number of deaths per year that occur during jumps races and the causes of the deaths.

Or what about American timber racing over 5' solid jumps for three and a half miles at racing speeds? I'm not talking about jumping accidents, but about catastrophic system failure during competition.

Foxhunting, of course, would have no official statistics; but I'm thinking Irish foxhunting would be somewhat comparable to eventing XC. How many of those horses drop dead during hunts?

My gut feeling is that eventing XC at the highest levels under the new regime puts extreme stress on the cardio vasular system; and I also wonder if the professional eventers who have large strings are able to give the horses the constant long, slow conditioning that was required under the long format.

Don't know diddley about H/J, but surely somewhere there will be records of horse deaths in the ring. Heck, how many event horses have dropped dead in either the dressage phase or the showjumping phase?

Without records and numbers, nothing substantive can be postulated and tested.

That's what is so damnably frustrating.

[tlw]

From 3 pm on Fri. before the event we are the only ones allowed under the rules to ride, etc. our event horses. This is much different than at dressage or hunter shows. I've seen dressage trainers on the horse just minutes before their students got on and went into the ring. We eventers are truly connected to our partners and have a depth of relationship that rivals that of a really good marriage (and I have been very happily married for 30 years)! It's really hard to imagine that we would do anything that would ignore something that indicates that our horses are at risk. Just my humble opinion based on my love and respect for my wondefrul mare.

[LAZ]

I was able to gain enough clarity to remember the moment I was headed down (saw my horses front feet go in between the front and back rail of the oxer when he tried to put his landing gear down after takeoff) and thinking "this might be it" and being totally ok with it.


You're better than me--my thought has been "Aw *$@&! This one is REALLY GOING TO HURT!"
:D

[La Gringa]

Why do they allow these events with the known problems to keep runnnig like this? WHy don't they halt them until a solution is found?

Money?

[SevenDogs]

You're better than me--my thought has been "Aw *$@&! This one is REALLY GOING TO HURT!"
:D

There was plenty of that going on too! Funny how time slows down enough to allow for both an important cosmic moment AND an incredible array of profanity! :lol:

[Seven-up]

From 3 pm on Fri. before the event we are the only ones allowed under the rules to ride, etc. our event horses. This is much different than at dressage or hunter shows. I've seen dressage trainers on the horse just minutes before their students got on and went into the ring. We eventers are truly connected to our partners and have a depth of relationship that rivals that of a really good marriage (and I have been very happily married for 30 years)! It's really hard to imagine that we would do anything that would ignore something that indicates that our horses are at risk. Just my humble opinion based on my love and respect for my wondefrul mare.

Hunter princesses are not the majority, keep that in mind. Having a bond with your horse and loving your horse is not an eventing thing. It's a horse owner thing. Implying anything less than that is insulting. Most of us are the only ones to sit on our own horses, feed, groom, clean stalls.

The main reason I never wanted to event was that I couldn't imagine taking the risk of coming home without my horse. I could never own a racehorse for the same reason. Having a horse is risky enough without the added danger.

If the risk is worth it to someone, I have no problems with that person choosing to event. It's just not worth it to me. It's worth it to others, and that's fine.


Edit to change the tone of my post: I actually think you make an excellent point here. What makes eventers, who claim to care so deeply for their horses, choose to risk their lives? I don't doubt the love, and of course a horse can get hurt in many many different ways. But if you go to Rolex, don't you have to know in the back of your head that you could be coming home with an empty trailer?

[Divine Comedy]

I think that everyone needs to realize that risk is an inherent part of life. There is risk in everything we do; crossing the street, driving cars, the list goes on and on. Hell, you can die from choking the next time you eat something. None of this stops me from doing these things, and freak health occurrences are not going to keep me from eventing.

And I do count these health issues as separate from the safety issues; the safety problems often occur as a bad decision on the rider's part while the health problems are a bit more spontaneous, and nothing the rider does can prevent it. Granted, the health problems can in turn cause safety issues, but I still wouldn't categorize them under the safety umbrella.

While I recognize the risks inherent in the sport (and think it is unlikely that we can ever completely eliminate all risk), I also think we should do whatever possible to reduce or eliminate risk. Similarly, I also recognize that some people do NOT accept the risk and feel that they can't participate in the sport because of that. I accept that too and I respect their decision, but it's not mine.

I also believe that the Internet plays a huge factor in publicity that we didn't have even ten years ago. Since I am younger, I cannot confirm or deny whether such deaths occurred with less frequency in the past. However, I think that with the advent of the Internet, the deaths are much more discussed and dissected than in the past. Someone mentioned that they didn't think the Internet was a factor because there was still cell phones and newspapers. I don't think the three are comparable. Cell phones make it possible to discuss the deaths with only one other person, and once you hang up, the record is theoretically gone forever. It is also a private forum. Newspapers are a public record that share news with many people, but there is no way to have a discussion with other readers or the author. These forums and message boards provide not only a public venue on which to announce such news, but also provide an excellent medium for discussions which can literally last weeks. Similarly, the written word is very strong and these threads can be saved and referred to for years. Therefore, the Internet allows us to continue to rehash why over and over for weeks, which keeps the incident very strong in our memory.

I would fully support research into why cases such as Task Force, Kingpin, and Tigger Too occur, because I want to reduce the risk. However, I still don't believe we can weed all of the possible issues out. For instance, both NBA and NFL teams do incredibly exhaustive full health work ups on potential players. This is because they are paying them millions a year to play their sport at a very high level. If there is even a slight defect or irregularity, they often won't sign them, and definitely won't sign them if the problem may be fatal. Despite these exhaustive medical tests, every couple years one of these top athletes dies spontaneously at practice (not a game thus far to my knowledge, but I could be wrong). My point is that even with all these tests, the doctors still cannot weed out every single person who might die. I'm pretty sure that human medicine is worlds ahead of equine medicine, simply because more money is expended in that area; again, I could be wrong. However, because of this, I believe that we may never get to the point where we can prevent all deaths.

Risk is in our sport. Hell, it's part of what makes our sport exhilarating. I believe that we should attempt to reduce it, especially in the case of our equine athletes who only valiantly attempt to do as we ask without knowing why. However, I am also not going to take years off my life stressing over something that is part of everything we do. Risk is a fact; we can accept or reject it, and we can attempt to reduce it, but like it or not, we cannot eliminate it from all aspects.

[Seven-up]

You might run the risk of getting hit by a car when crossing the street, but you have a better chance of getting run over if you play in traffic.


You could get hit by a bullet in a drive-by shooting, but it's more likely you'll get hit if you play Russian roulette.


Can one justify putting both themselves & their horse at a higher risk by saying, "accidents happen"? You can justify it to yourself, but no matter what you say, you may not be able to justify it to someone else.

[Arcadien]

I also believe that the Internet plays a huge factor in publicity that we didn't have even ten years ago. Since I am younger, I cannot confirm or deny whether such deaths occurred with less frequency in the past. However, I think that with the advent of the Internet, the deaths are much more discussed and dissected than in the past. Someone mentioned that they didn't think the Internet was a factor because there was still cell phones and newspapers. I don't think the three are comparable. Cell phones make it possible to discuss the deaths with only one other person, and once you hang up, the record is theoretically gone forever. It is also a private forum. Newspapers are a public record that share news with many people, but there is no way to have a discussion with other readers or the author. These forums and message boards provide not only a public venue on which to announce such news, but also provide an excellent medium for discussions which can literally last weeks....
Risk is a fact; we can accept or reject it, and we can attempt to reduce it, but like it or not, we cannot eliminate it from all aspects.

Many good points, and I for one am inclined to believe the advent of the internet is a much larger part of our current thinking about things like this than many realize (including myself, until I realize a large portion of users are 25 years or so younger than me!)

Regards,
Arcadien

[vineyridge]

I disagree that there is nothing a rider can do to prevent health problems. Conditioning is a vital part of preparing the horse for competition, and there is not even enough solid data on different conditioning programs to say which ones are best.

EIPH seems to have a genetic basis. That seems fairly well established. The other catastrophic system failures don't seem to have gotten the same attention from the TB racing world and its research projects yet; and they seem to be the only ones actually funding research.

[Divine Comedy]

I disagree that there is nothing a rider can do to prevent health problems. Conditioning is a vital part of preparing the horse for competition, and there is not even enough solid data on different conditioning programs to say which ones are best.

EIPH seems to have a genetic basis. That seems fairly well established. The other catastrophic system failures don't seem to have gotten the same attention from the TB racing world and its research projects yet; and they seem to be the only ones actually funding research.

And these areas would be research that I fully support; if there was an available test to see if my horse turned out to be susceptible to EIPH, I wouldn't subject him to a level where he would be at higher risk. But there currently isn't a test, so I can only condition him to the best of my ability and hope that he is not susceptible.

[subk]

I care very deeply for all my horses, and I work very hard protecting their welfare. BUT they are not my children, not my best friends or even really my pets. They are livestock. And like the vast majority of you who post or have read "how much" threads we are all well aware they have significant financial value--very much unlike my dog (or kids.)

I guess some of you thinks this makes me a a$$ but I don't think they have "rights." I do think we have a serious stewardship of them--NOT as human children, but as livestock. This might be a good place to remind everyone that the vast majority of livestock in this country is raised for the expressed and intent purpose of killing. Where is the outrage?

So I rather think my event horses in the grand scheme of things have it pretty good--even with risk. Especially if you believe like I do, that they don't care so much about life and death as humans do. Suffering, yes they care about, but survival is only instinctual. I try very hard to dignify them by remembering at all times that they are not human, but instead special for what they are. There is something degrading about anthropomorphizing--it's as if being just a horse isn't good enough so we have to apply human characteristics instead of celebrating the uniquely equine ones.

The outrage about the risk to the event horses is very much tied in to society's absolute craze to anthropomorphize anything and everything. Except of course beef cattle which are nameless, faceless and without personality--as it would be inconvenient for it to be otherwise. I blame Walt Disney starting with Bambi.

[Cheval Gris]

I just had to chime in after reading 5 pages of this....

First, if you are not an eventer, have never evented, aren't involved in eventing, you can't really say you know what it is like to bring an eventer along, or what the thrill is like, or what the bond is like between animal and rider. Or what an event rider thinks when they 'put their horse's life at risk going on course'. Yea, there are a few riders out there for the name and "money" in the sport, but 95% of us do not make a dollar competing. We don't do it for money, its pure heart. Whereas the h/j world there is quite a lot of purse money involved, correct? So there must be something said about that passion/heart of about 95% of event riders and their horses.
Next, I have read so many posts from h/j vs. eventers saying 'eventers are crazy and dangerous. Or h/j is not a risk'. Bla bla whatever. The point here is that looking at a percentage, the ratio of horse/rider deaths in the event world is higher than the ratio in the h/j world. Cleary, some have stated here that one h/j show may have 500 + entries, whereas a 4* will have 50. Two horses die at an event, thats 5%. Two horses die out of 500, thats like, barely over 1/2 a %.
So cleary eventing is as a whole is more dangerous. Why is there even an argument about that? :eek:
That doesn't really add anything to the research going into deaths...

[enjoytheride]

That is a very unfair and wrong judgement to assume that eventers only know about the bond with their horses and any rider that makes money does not. I know people that show hunters and they don't make money doing it even if they did I think it is a cop out to assume that only people that don't make money have a bond.

Are you saying it makes it ok to put an animal's life at risk for sport as long as you "love them" more then someone who puts them at less risk?

[eventingfan]

"So I rather think my event horses in the grand scheme of things have it pretty good--even with risk. Especially if you believe like I do, that they don't care so much about life and death as humans do. Suffering, yes they care about, but survival is only instinctual. I try very hard to dignify them by remembering at all times that they are not human, but instead special for what they are. There is something degrading about anthropomorphizing--it's as if being just a horse isn't good enough so we have to apply human characteristics instead of celebrating the uniquely equine ones. "



Very well put, subk.

[riderboy]

From 3 pm on Fri. before the event we are the only ones allowed under the rules to ride, etc. our event horses. This is much different than at dressage or hunter shows. I've seen dressage trainers on the horse just minutes before their students got on and went into the ring. We eventers are truly connected to our partners and have a depth of relationship that rivals that of a really good marriage (and I have been very happily married for 30 years)! It's really hard to imagine that we would do anything that would ignore something that indicates that our horses are at risk. Just my humble opinion based on my love and respect for my wondefrul mare.

That is a very unfair and wrong judgement to assume that eventers only know about the bond with their horses and any rider that makes money does not. I know people that show hunters and they don't make money doing it even if they did I think it is a cop out to assume that only people that don't make money have a bond.

Are you saying it makes it ok to put an animal's life at risk for sport as long as you "love them" more then someone who puts them at less risk?
If this is the post you are referring to then you have completely twisted it's meaning. I don't read that at all.

[tlw]

Thanks Riderboy. Enjoytheride, my comment was not meant to suggest anything negative about anybody. I was simply offering my opinion that it is hard for me to believe that folks who event would keep riding their horse around a cross country course when they knew there was something wrong with the horse. I'm not a H/J person so I didn't offer an opinion about them. I do ride dressage also, however, thus my observation about how eventers are the only ones allowed to ride their horses at competitions after 3 pm the day before the event begins. In my personal experience, this provides an opportunity for the competitor to be more familiar with their horse than one who shows up an hour before their class, has their trainer warm up their horse and then gets on just before they go into the ring. Not every dressage rider does that, in fact, I suspect that only a few do but my point was simply to comment on the bond eventers have with their horses. I was not speaking about other folks, they can do that for themselves.

[deltawave]

LaGringa wrote:
Why do they allow these events with the known problems to keep runnnig like this?

Which "known problems", precisely, are you referring to? :confused:

[flyingchange]

I care very deeply for all my horses, and I work very hard protecting their welfare. BUT they are not my children, not my best friends or even really my pets. They are livestock. And like the vast majority of you who post or have read "how much" threads we are all well aware they have significant financial value--very much unlike my dog (or kids.)

I guess some of you thinks this makes me a a$$ but I don't think they have "rights." I do think we have a serious stewardship of them--NOT as human children, but as livestock. This might be a good place to remind everyone that the vast majority of livestock in this country is raised for the expressed and intent purpose of killing. Where is the outrage?

So I rather think my event horses in the grand scheme of things have it pretty good--even with risk. Especially if you believe like I do, that they don't care so much about life and death as humans do. Suffering, yes they care about, but survival is only instinctual. I try very hard to dignify them by remembering at all times that they are not human, but instead special for what they are. There is something degrading about anthropomorphizing--it's as if being just a horse isn't good enough so we have to apply human characteristics instead of celebrating the uniquely equine ones.

The outrage about the risk to the event horses is very much tied in to society's absolute craze to anthropomorphize anything and everything. Except of course beef cattle which are nameless, faceless and without personality--as it would be inconvenient for it to be otherwise. I blame Walt Disney starting with Bambi.

Wow. Is this how a lot of other people feel? Am I in the minority in feeling that my horses (and all animals) have rights? As far as other "livestock" and my attitude towards killing/eating it - I am appalled by the large-scale beef/poultry/swine industry's practices in this country and I therefore try very hard to boycott its products. I buy and eat locally raised and quietly butchered livestock.

Anyway, I just am surprised by your sentiments, subk. Nothing personal I just didn't realize people felt this way about their horses.

[CarrieK]

I was there and I'm not sure if I would go back because I will not put my money and heart in a sport where a horse dies every year no matter what the cause.
Fair enough. That's your choice and it's yours to make.

My issue is are deaths only significant if they are fall related?
That is significant to me. Fall-related could imply a course or design defect. Fall-related deaths are something that, in theory, could be corrected and eliminated if the course or the design is changed.

Or is a physical condition signficant as well?
If the physical condition is a lack of conditioning on the rider/trainer's part, than that has no bearing on whether I would have an accident. If the physical condition is an unknown condition in the horse itself, again, that would have no bearing on whether I would have an accident, or if my horse might have the same condition.

As a rider would number of deaths per event would cause you to withdraw your horse?
Is that at one event over the years, or at one year's event? If, let's say, three horses died at an event over the years it would not be a factor. If three horses ahead of me died, I might reconsider going into the start box.

What type of death is more acceptable?
Natural causes.

I am worried that an incident where the horse dies of natural causes will be brushed off as normal or not preventable
I have not read any posts here on the eventing forum in which I saw the poster "brushing off" any horse's death. Never.

If my horse has a heretofore unknown ailment and dies during a competition, tell me how that is a preventable death without, of course, telling me never to get on his back. How is anyone supposed to know of an ailment which has not presented any symptoms?

of course horses can drop dead doing anything anywhere but is there something about eventing that makes it more likely?
That's a loaded question, apples to oranges and all that. You simply cannot compare eventing to showing western equitation, to showing halter, to showing breed-show trail classes, to ambling down the road. You can't even compare to other competitions-at-speed such as endurance trail riding or flat racing.

[CarrieK]

Is this how a lot of other people feel?
I don't know about a lot, but it's how I feel. Welfare, yes, stewardship, yes. Rights, no.

Rights are a human concept and a human construct.

Animals do not have rights within their own communities, herds, flocks, what have you. If they did, chickens could not have a pecking order, could they, because every chicken would have the right to equal standing, equal rights to the food, the water, and to whatever else chickens get all uppity about.

[deltawave]

Another vote for "stewardship" on the part of humans, and not elevating animals to our level. Can't say it better than CarrieK--would be 18 paragraphs if I tried--"rights" are human creations and best left to us, for better or worse. :)

That doesn't mean I am incapable of loving them, but it is just not the same as a human relationship. :) It's not that animals are less worthy of care, respect, etc. I look at it more like humans are worth MORE. I realize not all animal lovers share that sentiment. :)

[Trixie]

First, if you are not an eventer, have never evented, aren't involved in eventing, you can't really say you know what it is like to bring an eventer along, or what the thrill is like, or what the bond is like between animal and rider. Or what an event rider thinks when they 'put their horse's life at risk going on course'. Yea, there are a few riders out there for the name and "money" in the sport, but 95% of us do not make a dollar competing. We don't do it for money, its pure heart. Whereas the h/j world there is quite a lot of purse money involved, correct? So there must be something said about that passion/heart of about 95% of event riders and their horses.

First of all, it’s extraordinarily presumptuous of you to think that just because one doesn’t event, one doesn’t “know what the bond is like between animal and rider.” Seriously? SERIOUSLY? Are you actually telling us that those who don’t compete in your chosen division “don’t know what the bond is like between animal and rider?” This isn’t “International Velvet.”

Secondly… there’s a lot of PURSE money involved in H/J? Oh my, easily one of the funniest things I’ve ever read on this board. It’s actually pretty rare for a H/J competitor to make back even a small fraction of what they spent. Yeesh, I’ve been doing hunters and jumpers for well over 15 years, with some degree of success, so where’s MY money??!!

[CarrieK]

First of all, it’s extraordinarily presumptuous of you to think that just because one doesn’t event, one doesn’t “know what the bond is like between animal and rider.” Seriously? SERIOUSLY? Are you actually telling us that those who don’t compete in your chosen division “don’t know what the bond is like between animal and rider?” This isn’t “International Velvet.”
I didn't read these exchanges as an insult to non-eventers, but as an insult to eventers. As in: if you love your horse as much as you say you do how can you possibly event? How can you possibly put their lives at risk?

[Everythingbutwings]

I just had to chime in after reading 5 pages of this....

Yea, there are a few riders out there for the name and "money" in the sport, but 95% of us do not make a dollar competing. We don't do it for money, its pure heart. Whereas the h/j world there is quite a lot of purse money involved, correct? So there must be something said about that passion/heart of about 95% of event riders and their horses.


You make me laugh so hard! :lol: Where's the rule that only eventers "bond" with their horse? In every discipline, be it barrel racing, dressage, hunters, endurance (OH DARE YOU to tell that to endurance riders!) there is love and a partnership between horse and rider if that pair is going to succeed or even just have a good ride.

Trixie: It’s actually pretty rare for a H/J competitor to make back even a small fraction of what they spent. Yeesh, I’ve been doing hunters and jumpers for well over 15 years, with some degree of success, so where’s MY money??!!

You don't get money, you don't have PASSION! Besides, your horse doesn't love you enough. :D

[awm]

subk, you have put my thoughts down so well & reasonably, thanks!

I also believe we are responsible for WELFARE of our animals, I am very fond of my horses---
I foxhunt, event, hunter pace, and am slowing down considerably in the past couple years,
but will loan my horses out to friends, as they are working animals. I don't think the *feelings* I have for them are reciprocated, that was a sad day when I realized that as a teenager. I sell them responsibly or put them down when it is time as I am responsible for their WELFARE.
I take great pride in the healthy & well-trained horses I have & very much liked subk' comment about how humanizing animals is degading to them!!!
Everything has its place in the great scheme of life---I like the natural order of it all, as we
have created it! Evolution will sort out what is done right or wrongly!
Most of my friends feel as I do, but there are a few that treat their horses as children or as
equals, we all get along in the neighborhood!!!

[Cheval Gris]

No where does that post say ONLY eventers bond with their animals. No where does it say that h/j make money and eventers don't. There are plenty of posts that speak of the heart/courage of an eventer, from the eventing world and outside the eventing world. So take that how you will. Thats ridiculous. And its ridiculous to compare the danger difference between the two sports. Thats a waste of time. Black Velvet? I guess you think it is ridiculous to say horse and rider don't share a bond, of any discipline. I am sorry for you. This thread is getting ridiculous.

[deltawave]

AWM, I think you meant to agree with subk's post, which flyingchange had quoted. :)

[flyingchange]

Hmm. Well, basic rights of animals are, in my mind:

- access to clean water and proper food
- access to shelter from elements
- fair and humane treatment from their stewards

Am I just mislabeling these things as "rights"? What do you guys think of them as if you don't think of them as "rights"?

[awm]

Those *rights* are stewardship----responsible caring for your animals---

[Trixie]

No where does that post say ONLY eventers bond with their animals. No where does it say that h/j make money and eventers don't.

You’re the one that suggested that in the H/J world there’s a lot of purse money involved, immediately after pointing out that eventers don't do it for money, just "pure heart." I’m inclined to point out that 95% of us competing H/J don’t actually make a dollar competing either. Actually, that’s not entirely fair. The last time I showed ETBW’s horse in a Handy Hunter Classic, I received a check for $7 in winnings.

I guess you think it is ridiculous to say horse and rider don't share a bond, of any discipline.

Huh?

And its ridiculous to compare the danger difference between the two sports. Thats a waste of time.

I actually agree with you here.

[rabicon]

*flamesuit on*

This might not sit to well, but it is an honest thought that I have. With the tragedies lately. When things like this happen I don't know what is going thru that riders mind but here goes.

Do you think that the lack of time spent (truely spent not just conditioning) with these top horses is making the riders not know their horse. Yes, I understand they know the horse but in a true deep way. If you saw this accident or even Amy 2 years ago. Shouldn't these riders have known that this horse is not right???? I saw the video of this incident with Kingpin, and I do like Mike Winters but the horse lost so much momentum and power and then gets cropped over the jump? Or Amy pushing and pushing to the last jump when the horse is dead lame? Is there actually a bond missing between the BNR and their horses. You think about it, they have grooms that feed, groom, bathe, cool down, condition, etc... these horses and the riders are bombareded with SOOOOO many horses, which proves at events when one rider is riding 7 horses that they lose they connection that they need to really know the horse. They know how to ride the horse of course and they know each horses way of going and quirks but do you not think that they are starting to get out of touch with these amazing creatures that do so much for them?

[deltawave]

It's possible, but difficult to measure in any meaningful way. :sigh:

[magnolia73]

Whereas the h/j world there is quite a lot of purse money involved, correct? So there must be something said about that passion/heart of about 95% of event riders and their horses.

Yeah- no- there really is not much prize money in hunters. Showjumpers can win big purses, but really, not a get rich quick scheme.

People who show HJ do not, trust me, do it for the money.

I think most of us understand the bond and belief... but the bond and belief, passion and heart does not make it safer or impact the fact that running XC at the upper levels is more dangerous than many other disciplines. And I think most riders honor that extra level of hazard. Unfortunately, you had a few bad apples spoil the bunch. Without them, it would be simple to brush the latest death off as an anomaly vs a regular occurence.

[flyingchange]

OK. So what dictates providing proper stewardship? In other words, why do you provide water/shelter/food/humane treatment. What tells you to do so? Is it simply to keep the animal alive and in condidtion for your purposes (showing or meat market or whatever you "do" with them)?

[CarrieK]

Hmm. Well, basic rights of animals are, in my mind:

- access to clean water and proper food
- access to shelter from elements
- fair and humane treatment from their stewards

Am I just mislabeling these things as "rights"? What do you guys think of them as if you don't think of them as "rights"?
Yes, I think you are mislabeling them as rights. A right implies equality, equal among equals. That is, one human to another. Most animals do not function in terms rights, they do not think in terms of equality, horse to horse, chicken to chicken, lion to lion.

Also, in terms of the conflict between animal rights and animal welfare, folks who advocate for animal rights (you know the groups I'm talking about ;) ) are putting animals on the same level as humans. The fact of the matter is, my horse cannot write, my dog cannot talk, my cat can cut but cannot perform surgery. I'm not talking about whether animals feel pain or whether they have a soul, but animals are animals and not human. Whether it insults us or not, animals are property, they are service or working or market or companion animals, and to say they have rights that supercede us is wrong. My horse does not have the right not to be ridden, my dog does not have the right not to be disciplined when he jumps on people, my cat does not have the right not to get squirted when she walks among my tea pot collection. My horse, dog and cat just don't get a vote.

[flyingchange]

*flamesuit on*

This might not sit to well, but it is an honest thought that I have. With the tragedies lately. When things like this happen I don't know what is going thru that riders mind but here goes.

Do you think that the lack of time spent (truely spent not just conditioning) with these top horses is making the riders not know their horse. Yes, I understand they know the horse but in a true deep way. If you saw this accident or even Amy 2 years ago. Shouldn't these riders have known that this horse is not right???? I saw the video of this incident with Kingpin, and I do like Mike Winters but the horse lost so much momentum and power and then gets cropped over the jump? Or Amy pushing and pushing to the last jump when the horse is dead lame? Is there actually a bond missing between the BNR and their horses. You think about it, they have grooms that feed, groom, bathe, cool down, condition, etc... these horses and the riders are bombareded with SOOOOO many horses, which proves at events when one rider is riding 7 horses that they lose they connection that they need to really know the horse. They know how to ride the horse of course and they know each horses way of going and quirks but do you not think that they are starting to get out of touch with these amazing creatures that do so much for them?

I think you have a point. However, I can't help but think of race riders/jockeys who ride each horse for a couple of minutes (not counting the walk to and from the track) and so many of them are able to feel when a horse who they rarely sit on is in trouble. And they are able to pull the horse up in the heat of a race. Of course, not all of them are so successful with this and there are plenty of resulting tragedies from not feeling or ignoring. But, there are plenty that do feel and react correctly, saving the life of the horse or giving it at least a chance to not go down.

This is not a commentary on Mike Winter and this accident. Just saying that although I see your point, I am not sure that it is an excuse.

It's very sad about Kingpen. I haven't seen the pictures. I have seen pix of him from other 3 days and boy he had a big heart.

[deltawave]

It certainly can be as simple as that for someone like a production farmer. But just because stewardship is defined (at least on this thread) as something "less than what is given to a human being" that doesn't mean it has to be hard-hearted, inhumane, or without a great deal of feeling and care. :)

Asking "why do you provide XYZ" is going to yield you a very large number of answers. There isn't just ONE.

[LAZ]

EIPH seems to have a genetic basis. That seems fairly well established. The other catastrophic system failures don't seem to have gotten the same attention from the TB racing world and its research projects yet; and they seem to be the only ones actually funding research.

A vet friend of mine is doing a PhD on lung function in racehorses. She's an eventer, so we're hoping that some aspect of this study will help with further knowledge for event horses.

I believe (and would have to confirm my memory) that her study is being funded by racing $$. Maybe we could get some $$ kicked in for further studies.

[deltawave]

Maybe we could get some $$ kicked in for further studies.

See the 250/5/250 thread. I do hope the USEA will listen and be proactive and allow people the comfort of "earmarking" their donations for research.

[EventingChase]

In response to the question that possibly not knowing the horses well enough causes riders not to recognise when things are wrong.....

What if (now this is pure speculation)

MW did know the horse well enough and, for example, backing off of a ditch fence is something in this horse's history. Going to his stick then would make perfect sense. Mike might not have had the same reponse if he had felt the same thing on his later ride. On that horse backing off may have been a real warning sign that something was wrong... However, on Kingpin it may have been part of the horse's history or behavior.

Again, I don't know this, but I do know that experince usually dictates response and if I were riding a horse with a history of being "ditchy" or propping in front of fences the first thing I might have done when feeling that is to go to my stick to remind them that it is not acceptable behavior. On the other hand, if on a horse with no history of this behavior I would be much more likely to think that something is wrong.

I would like to give the rider the benifit of the doubt and believe that going to the stick is a case of knowing the horse "too" well rather then not well enough.

[CarrieK]

OK. So what dictates providing proper stewardship? In other words, why do you provide water/shelter/food/humane treatment. What tells you to do so? Is it simply to keep the animal alive and in condidtion for your purposes (showing or meat market or whatever you "do" with them)?


Now, "proper" is relative, isn't it? Seriously, we see it all the time, and right here on COTH, the debate edition: shoeing vs barefoot, stalled vs pasture-board, everyone vs Saddlebred show horses ;).

For me, the indicator is the stress level of the individual horse. My horse cannot tolerate being stalled for any length of time. He literally tears down the barn, nail by nail, board by board, even with hay and with stall toys available. After he destroyed his new stall this past winter--after less than a week--he was pastured (after the pastures drained, which was why he was in the barn in the first place). Blanketed, but pastured.

And you know some people driving by were condemning us for keeping him in the weather. But he was contented or, rather, much, much less destructive.

[flyingchange]

It certainly can be as simple as that for someone like a production farmer. But just because stewardship is defined (at least on this thread) as something "less than what is given to a human being" that doesn't mean it has to be hard-hearted, inhumane, or without a great deal of feeling and care. :)

Asking "why do you provide XYZ" is going to yield you a very large number of answers. There isn't just ONE.

Yes, I realize that DW. I am pretty familiar with the livestock-for-market mindset.

I am not saying that "production farmer" equals non-feeling. Hell, my hay farmer who farms turkeys nearly cries telling me about what they do with the male hatchlings. Seriously.

I do know that yes, farmers do provide for the animals' care, based on economics. However, I also know that many of them do care about their animals' welfare - very much. This is old-style farming. Not current big-ag commercial farming for the big-time feedlots. And please don't misinterpret that I am generalizing. I am not.

My point here is that there is not one universal answer to the question of whether animals have rights. Some people feel they do not. Some people feel they do (and risk being accused of anthropomorphizing, applying human philosophical and legal constructs to animals). From the limited research I've done on it in the past hour I see that the debate goes back hundreds of years and that there are different philosophies on it - some accepted by some people, others by other people.

[Blondie22]

From 3 pm on Fri. before the event we are the only ones allowed under the rules to ride, etc. our event horses. This is much different than at dressage or hunter shows. I've seen dressage trainers on the horse just minutes before their students got on and went into the ring. We eventers are truly connected to our partners and have a depth of relationship that rivals that of a really good marriage (and I have been very happily married for 30 years)! It's really hard to imagine that we would do anything that would ignore something that indicates that our horses are at risk. Just my humble opinion based on my love and respect for my wondefrul mare.

I have an A/A hunter. Does this mean that I don't care about my horse or that I don't have a connection with him because my trainer will occasionally get on for a tune up ride? Just because I have a hunter instead of an eventer doesn't mean that I love my horse any less. As another poster previously mentioned - this is a horse OWNER thing, not an eventer thing.

[rabicon]

I think you have a point. However, I can't help but think of race riders/jockeys who ride each horse for a couple of minutes (not counting the walk to and from the track) and so many of them are able to feel when a horse who they rarely sit on is in trouble. And they are able to pull the horse up in the heat of a race. Of course, not all of them are so successful with this and there are plenty of resulting tragedies from not feeling or ignoring. But, there are plenty that do feel and react correctly, saving the life of the horse or giving it at least a chance to not go down.

This is not a commentary on Mike Winter and this accident. Just saying that although I see your point, I am not sure that it is an excuse.

It's very sad about Kingpen. I haven't seen the pictures. I have seen pix of him from other 3 days and boy he had a big heart.


I see your point also. It is rare that a jockey pulls up a horse though, from what I've seen and know about racing. Maybe that is the difference though. There are more deaths on the racetrack a year than in eventing so really there are ALOT of horses that don't get pulled up, but there are those like Mike Smith that just knows and cares more about that than the payday. Maybe its that a jockey really has no vested intrest in a horse just if it wins or not so except for their pay so they go out and do their job. They know they will have another horse to ride in another race because their are soooo many races compared to events. eventers have an intrest in a horse and how it does because it is their reputation on the line and the owners of that horse are excepting things that maybe the eventer blocks out things that shouldn't be and strive for more. So they push harder to make everyone happy. Because if they didn't succeed to some level in the sport they wouldn't have 7-8 horses to ride and to be paid for riding plus lessons and training etc... This is their living and how they do it. And no a horse dying isn't best for buisness but I believe its that it won't happen to me way of thinking. I don't know this is just my mind going into overdrive and this may not make since to most of you where I'm coming from with this statement but its hard to get it out in words.

[LAZ]

Wow. Is this how a lot of other people feel? Am I in the minority in feeling that my horses (and all animals) have rights? As far as other "livestock" and my attitude towards killing/eating it - I am appalled by the large-scale beef/poultry/swine industry's practices in this country and I therefore try very hard to boycott its products. I buy and eat locally raised and quietly butchered livestock.

Anyway, I just am surprised by your sentiments, subk. Nothing personal I just didn't realize people felt this way about their horses.


I also feel this way.

And I also buy locally grass-raised beef and am raising my own chickens for the reasons you cite. But I do eat animals and wear leather.

My horses get very good stewardship, but they are in fact livestock, not my BFF or family.

My dogs, on the other hand, are family!

[flyingchange]

I also feel this way.

And I also buy locally grass-raised beef and am raising my own chickens for the reasons you cite. But I do eat animals and wear leather.

My horses get very good stewardship, but they are in fact livestock, not my BFF or family.

My dogs, on the other hand, are family!

Hey LAZ,

That is awesome that you buy local and are raising your own poultry!

However, please don't misinterpret my reasoning for bringing up the fact that I also buy locally raised (quietly butchered). I brought that up not as a "look at what I do" point. It was in response to SUBK's question "where is the outrage" with regard to commercial farming/slaughtering in the US. My point was that I, for one, am outraged by that practice and I therefore choose alternative beef/poultry/swine sources. But at any rate, good for you for choosing local. I mean that.

[ellemayo]

Wow. Is this how a lot of other people feel? Am I in the minority in feeling that my horses (and all animals) have rights? As far as other "livestock" and my attitude towards killing/eating it - I am appalled by the large-scale beef/poultry/swine industry's practices in this country and I therefore try very hard to boycott its products. I buy and eat locally raised and quietly butchered livestock.

Anyway, I just am surprised by your sentiments, subk. Nothing personal I just didn't realize people felt this way about their horses.

I think your logic is flawed here.
You're stating that you feel animals have rights, therefore you only eat "quietly butchered" livestock. What about those animals' rights not to die for the sake of humans?

Part of the problem with people thrusting human characteristics on animals and declaring that they have rights, is that those people seem to present them with whatever "rights" they decide are appropriate.

So some people decide that animals have the right to not be killed for human consumption. Some people decide that animals have the right to be killed humanely. Some people decide that they have the right to be forced into the H/J ring to do course after course, but not onto the cross country course where they may have a higher risk of death.

The reason that people are able to give animals whatever rights they feel are necessary, is because animals do not innately possess them. We simply give them to them in our own minds, as we see fit.

And for those people (I believe one was flyingchange again) who want to know what dictates proper stewardship, and why we feel that horses don't have rights but we still give them proper care. I can only answer for myself. I believe that the way we treat animals and those who cannot speak for themselves says something about who we are as people. I also believe that God put humans and animals on this earth with different purposes. Humans innately have certain rights and animals do not; they are subservient to us. Therefore, it is their purpose to be useful and also to be companions. However because of this, it is our responsibility to care for them.

My intent was not to turn this into a religious discussion, but that is why I feel the way I do about the roles of animals and humans, and why I treat mine with love and respect.

[deltawave]

My understanding was that you said this:
I just didn't realize people felt this way about their horses. because this was a horse-type question, not a cattle-chicken-pig type question.

[flyingchange]

I think your logic is flawed here.
You're stating that you feel animals have rights, therefore you only eat "quietly butchered" livestock. What about those animals' rights not to die for the sake of humans?

Part of the problem with people thrusting human characteristics on animals and declaring that they have rights, is that those people seem to present them with whatever "rights" they decide are appropriate.

So some people decide that animals have the right to not be killed for human consumption. Some people decide that animals have the right to be killed humanely. Some people decide that they have the right to be forced into the H/J ring to do course after course, but not onto the cross country course where they may have a higher risk of death.

The reason that people are able to give animals whatever rights they feel are necessary, is because animals do not innately possess them. We simply give them to them in our own minds, as we see fit.

And for those people (I believe one was flyingchange again) who want to know what dictates proper stewardship, and why we feel that horses don't have rights but we still give them proper care. I can only answer for myself. I believe that the way we treat animals and those who cannot speak for themselves says something about who we are as people. I also believe that God put humans and animals on this earth with different purposes. Humans innately have certain rights and animals do not; they are subservient to us. Therefore, it is their purpose to be useful and also to be companions. However because of this, it is our responsibility to care for them.

My intent was not to turn this into a religious discussion, but that is why I feel the way I do about the roles of animals and humans, and why I treat mine with love and respect.

Well, my logic would be flawed if I applied your tenet that animals/livestock have the right not to "die for the sake of humans." I never said that nor implied it.

As far as your assertion that "God put humans and animals on this earth with different purposes" ... I won't be commenting on that other than to say that I respect it as your point of view (as long as you don't try to force it upon me).

[flyingchange]

My understanding was that you said this:
because this was a horse-type question, not a cattle-chicken-pig type question.

You are correct. Somehow it expanded. Funny how that happens here on COTH!

Look, I don't want to get into an argument over this. Trying really hard not to actually. I honestly did not realize that I was an anomaly in my viewpoint on my horses' (all animals') rights. I realize that that is apparently not a popular term to pair up with animals - not around here. Didn't realize it until this very compelling discussion. I see that I think about it quite differently from a number of people. That is fine. Was just surprising to learn at first.

[Pat Ness]

You land a jump and you can feel your horse asking "Where's the next fence?"

Wondering if that max table might be asking too much, then you feel your horse giving you that extra spread over the jump.

Simply galloping down a lane and enjoying a spring day.

Don't they deserve more?

Pat Ness

[crittertwitter]

The more common cousin of anthropomorphizing is the act of not seeing value in others who do not exhibit human characterstics (e.g., writing, speaking, voting). The fact that horses don't post on the coth forums validates your perception of them as less than you? You're quite as guilty of anthropomorphizing as animal rights folks if you equate value only to what is human.

Horses are unique in their own right. Whether you appreciate them as equals or not is as arbitrary as your taste in friends. I've heard/read a number of quotes by pros saying things to the effect of, "I'm just looking for the horse that will take me to [the top level of the sport]," and that always puts me off a bit. I know most are looking for that horse, but the stewardship attitude kinda mystifies me. I don't know how you can interact intimately with these big charatcers and come away seeing them as livestock... seeing any animals as livestock, focusing on what they're going to do for you rather than a great partnership reined by mutual appreciation. That's why I so loved the interviews with Bettina Hoy re: Ringwood Cockatoo and the picture Lisa Cook shared of them.

On another note, we were trying to impart our feelings about the horses to my fiancee when he started coming to events with us and we had a big debate over proper pronouns for horses. We were at an event with a pretty popular rider behind us picking up her packet and he overheard her referring to her horse as 'it'. On the way home, we debated whether that is a dismissive way to refer to a horse or if, perhaps, it's something that feminism should take from the horse world, in that it relegates gender to an insignificant role. We now occasionally refer to each other as 'it,' for a nice change of pace, and some good amusement.

[ellemayo]

Well, my logic would be flawed if I applied your tenet that animals/livestock have the right not to "die for the sake of humans." I never said that nor implied it.

As far as your assertion that "God put humans and animals on this earth with different purposes" ... I won't be commenting on that other than to say that I respect it as your point of view (as long as you don't try to force it upon me).

Well then my question to you is, who decides what rights animals have? You said you think they have rights, but your definition of their rights could be much different than someone else's. With this logic "inhumane" slaughter could be considered appropriate, because those people don't believe the animals have the right to a humane death, the same way you don't believe that animals have the right to avoid death for human consumption period.

It's really the same argument that people make in law classes all the time. What is right? Who determines that? If people give animals whatever rights they want, then animals don't really innately have them. They're just gifted whichever ones the people they have contact with believe in.

And I appreciate that you are willing to respect my opinion. I would never try to push it on anyone else, I was just trying to explain why I feel the way I do.

[CarrieK]

The more common cousin of anthropomorphizing is the act of not seeing value in others who do not exhibit human characterstics (e.g., writing, speaking, voting). The fact that horses don't post on the coth forums validates your perception of them as less than you? You're quite as guilty of anthropomorphizing as animal rights folks if you equate value only to what is human.

I certainly hope you are not referring to me. If you think I value only what is human you are wrong because that is not what I said. If you re-read my post I talk about equality on the same level, horse to horse, human to human.

Horses are unique in their own right.
Agreed.

Whether you appreciate them as equals or not is as arbitrary as your taste in friends.
Arbitrary? How so?

I've heard/read a number of quotes by pros saying things to the effect of, "I'm just looking for the horse that will take me to [the top level of the sport]," and that always puts me off a bit.
That does not apply to me.

but the stewardship attitude
But this does. Stewardship does not mean there is no bond. Stewardship does not mean I don't love my horse. Stewardship does not mean that I won't move heaven and earth to give my horse the best of what I can. Why would you think that it would be otherwise?

he overheard her referring to her horse as 'it'. On the way home, we debated whether that is a dismissive way to refer to a horse or if,
Dismissive to whom? The horse has no concept of this, so its feelings aren't hurt.

[ellemayo]

I'm also not trying to say that I don't have relationships with my animals. I definitely don't think of my horses as simply livestock, in fact, I love them a great deal. I'm just saying that I don't think they have rights in the same way as people.

I was one of those kids who could watch a million people die in movies and not shed a tear, but as soon as that dog died, I was a bawling mess.

I would say that my viewpoint makes me care for animals even more, not less. I don't think of them as simply livestock. I do believe that they're here for a different purpose, but I don't necessarily think that purpose is any less important than the purpose of humans. It's just different.

[deltawave]

What "more" do they need, Pat? Really--thinking about it from the horse's perspective (which is FRAUGHT with difficulty, naturally)--do you think they "need" much beyond "today" and to have their basic needs met: food, water, shelter, companionship, a chance to reproduce? (oops, all the world's geldings, ARISE!) ;)

I'm not trying to be flip, really. This is a philosophical/ethical question, and the number of "possibly correct answers" = "number of people having a say + 1", as the saying goes.

It IS anthropomorphizing to say that a horse "loves his job and would rather be going to horse shows". Since it is us "anthros" making these observations, they are what they are--probably correct to some degree, but ultimately sort of irrelevant. Unless we choose to NOT own horses, which IS a human right, we are responsible for what happens to them. Does commitment to excellent care and husbandry outweigh the XXX% risk that something bad could happen to them during XC, or during that lovely gallop down a lane on a spring day? We all get to decide for ourselves.

The event horses and hunters of the world have it way, WAY better than a lot of their brethren, and I daresay a lot of HUMANS, too.

[crittertwitter]

I certainly hope you are not referring to me. If you think I value only what is human you are wrong because that is not what I said. If you re-read my post I talk about equality on the same level, horse to horse, human to human.

Carrie, indeed the writing, typing, communicating parcels were directed at your post - not at you in particular because the 'verbal communication' example is one of those hackneyed rationalizations people love to use for what gives animals less purpose than humans. Here is your quote...

I'm not talking about whether animals feel pain or whether they have a soul, but animals are animals and not human. Whether it insults us or not, animals are property, they are service or working or market or companion animals, and to say they have rights that supercede us is wrong.

Which brings me to your question about my comment that your perception of horses as equals is as arbitrary as your selection of friends. In that, I mean that some will see their horses as valued partners, friends, best friends, and equal to their human friend counterparts. It's arbitrary. It's a matter of who you value.

"Rights" are a man-made concept, whether they refer to humans or animals. I don't take issue with the meaning of stewardship in and of itself, but in the context that it has been discussed on the thread, as equating horses to livestock. I think we are all stewards of those we choose to care for, human or not. However, often to some that implies inequality. I don't care if horses are personal property. The relationship part is all in perception. There was a time when wives were property and husbands were stewards. Some were respectful stewards (those who respect their property) and others used the fact that their wives were personal property to do whatever they wanted with them. It's all in the eye of the steward.

As far as the pronoun and the 'dismissive' use of 'it', I don't think it matters if the horse is offended or not. I use he/she to create an atmosphere of respect. I do think horses are sensitive to atmosphere. In reality, we could call our horses it or shmit or **** and they know they are all royalty.

[La Gringa]

LaGringa wrote:


Which "known problems", precisely, are you referring to? :confused:

The fact that serious injury and fatalities have increased for some reason to provoke emergency meetings with the USEA and the entire horse and eventing community is under the microscope because of it?

Exactly what is wrong is the question.. why not stop and find out before more die?

At least take a hard look and evaluate and try to really change what is the problem.... once they find it.


I am glad however that the results from the reports showed King Pin's death wasn't a heart failure or rupture of a pipe.

The changes to the rules do seem to have helped some.. the dangerous riding rules and responsible horsemanship seems to have worked to make it safer. That is a good thing.

My point really is this... if an annual death or two are becoming the "norm" at Rolex... why not stop and see why and fix it? That goes for any other event of this level that has the same issues.

Saumur had this happen last year too didn't they? What about others?

If a safety flaw is found in a car that caused this many deaths or injuries it would be recalled and fixed....

[enjoytheride]

My post was directed at Painted Hill. However, I do feel it is unfair to assume that an eventer is bonded with their horse more because nobody gets on to school it.

I event and I love to have people school my horse over fences or in dressage. Not because I don't have a bond, but because a pro can explain to my horse much better then I can or take them to a level I can't do on my own. It enables them to understand their job better without my conflicting aids in some cases just like when I take a lesson on a schoolmaster so I can work on myself without working on my green horse too I like my horse to work on things without me getting in the way.

[TB or not TB?]

To answer the OP: To me, all deaths are significant. There is no such thing as a "natural" death during competition. If the horse dies peacefully in his sleep after dressage, we'll talk, but otherwise we do disservice to our horses to treat their deaths for the sake of our sport (and I mean that in the form of entertainment/play, not "eventing") as anything other than profoundly meaningful. In pony club we were always taught to treat our horses with the same consideration as due a partner. I see no reason to think of a horse's death any differently because of the manner. I posted a long reply in the "thoughtful horsemanship" thread about how I'm no longer ready to let people off the hook if their horse keels over from an aneurysm or EIPH, but that is a discussion best left to its own venue. Suffice it to say, there seems to be an awful lot of those "natural, unforeseeable" deaths during upper level cross country, and it's time we start examining them more closely.

As to what we owe our horses, to me it goes so far beyond food, water, and shelter that I am a little appalled that answer. We owe them a lifestyle that is conducive to our high requirements. We owe them a pain free environment, and equipment and expectations that don't hurt or inhibit their abilities or mental status. We owe them a purpose and a recognition of their gifts. We owe them the courtesy of treating them as thinking, feeling creatures, and not mindless robots. We owe them the highest standard of stable, veterinary, and mental care. We owe them compassion for their weaknesses and praise for their strengths. We owe them the opportunity to succeed within their abilities, and the same care even if they don't. We owe them the same trust that they place in us. In short, the "consideration due a partner."

[spotted mustang]

y'know, there are a lot of parallels to the Iditarod dog race, which is such a big deal here in Alaska: those dogs are some of the best-cared for, healthiest, fittest dogs on the planet. They get outstanding food and vet care. They are very much loved by their mushers.

Yet, every year during the Iditarod, a few of them die. The mushers are always devastated. Necropsies uncover a lot of pulmonary/cardiac causes or bleeding stomach ulcers that people call "natural" causes. But others say, would this same dog have died if it hadn't just run 10 days non-stop across Alaska? Is it really a "natural" cause? Other dogs have died in accidents or even frozen to death. Animal Rights groups want to shut down the whole event.

There is no easy answer to all this: but if we take them 'out there', we are responsible for what happens to them. It still comes down to the same question: do we accept the risk or not?

[McVillesMom]

I am glad however that the results from the reports showed King Pin's death wasn't a heart failure or rupture of a pipe.

Um...what exactly do you think "a hemorrhage of the large vessels in the abdomen" means?

Otherwise, I do agree with you. This has got to stop. The fact that this could have happened in the field, etc. is really moot, because it didn't, it happened in front of thousands of people. The general public doesn't understand the difference between something like this and a careless rider charging way too fast at a fence and flipping over. I love working with these elite athletes, and I'm very likely going to be a sport horse vet when I get done. But this is getting pretty damn hard to take.

[deltawave]

We owe them a pain free environment, and equipment and expectations that don't hurt or inhibit their abilities or mental status. We owe them a purpose and a recognition of their gifts. We owe them the courtesy of treating them as thinking, feeling creatures, and not mindless robots. We owe them the highest standard of stable, veterinary, and mental care. We owe them compassion for their weaknesses and praise for their strengths. We owe them the opportunity to succeed within their abilities, and the same care even if they don't. We owe them the same trust that they place in us. In short, the "consideration due a partner."

I'd estimate, then, that 90% of horses in this country and about 99.999% of the horses in the world would not be meeting your standards. And that group of left-outs would NOT include most event horses. :)

[La Gringa]

Um...what exactly do you think "a hemorrhage of the large vessels in the abdomen" means?

Otherwise, I do agree with you. This has got to stop. The fact that this could have happened in the field, etc. is really moot, because it didn't, it happened in front of thousands of people. The general public doesn't understand the difference between something like this and a careless rider charging way too fast at a fence and flipping over. I love working with these elite athletes, and I'm very likely going to be a sport horse vet when I get done. But this is getting pretty damn hard to take.

Oh I guess it does relate to a heart pipe even in the abdomen? I thought it was stated it was a "rare condition." I assumed it was non-heart related.. but if it is a major blood structure that failed, even in the abdomen.. then I guess that does mean it was related to a heart pipe failure.

Thanks for clarifying.

[subk]

I'd estimate, then, that 90% of horses in this country and about 99.999% of the horses in the world would not be meeting your standards. And that group of left-outs would NOT include most event horses. :)
Exactly what I thought when I read the same post.

I thought it was stated it was a "rare condition." It was stated that it was a rare condition and it is. Just because when it happens it is thrown out to the world for discussion ad nauseam does not mean it is not "rare."

Since the lack on awareness seems to abound, I will repeat that studies were already commenced by the sport late last year to examine this issue. It would certainly be nice if we could snap our fingers and get money, conduct a study and find some conclusion in a matter of days or weeks but that is just not reality.

[deltawave]

A rupture of the aorta has NOTHING to do with the heart. Pump does not equal pipe, to continue the analogy. :)

[TB or not TB?]

I'd estimate, then, that 90% of horses in this country and about 99.999% of the horses in the world would not be meeting your standards. And that group of left-outs would NOT include most event horses. :)

Really? I know a ton of horses who are cared for with this standard. Of course, the more you ask of an animal, the more you need to reciprocate. I don't consider the upper levels of eventing as a fair game these days, so you're right in that it would probably exclude many of those 4* horses, but I think on the most part that those standards are what good horsemanship is. Sure, everyone will have their own variations and word it differently, but that's the best I could do to verbalize the overriding philosophy behind good horsekeeping. Is 90% of the equestrian population just riders/owners and not horsemen? It's hard to say. I would hazard that a third or so are "horsemen," another third are "riders," and the rest range from ignorant to yahoo. :lol:

However the saddest part is that it seems so many people find this an impossible measure. :sadsmile: My "standard" of horsekeeping doesn't require a ton of money or fancy equipment, just awareness and respect of the animals who share their lives with us.

[Seven-up]

I consider a large part of my job as a horse owner to do whatever I can to prevent the horse from killing itself. If you've had horses long enough you know how hard that can be. I feel that not putting the horse in a situation where there is potential to get killed falls under that category. For instance, those people who run horses down the side of a cliff...I don't understand the mentality of, "It's really cool if you can make it down in one piece!"

It sounds like a lot of people consider their horses to be property and not living creatures they are supposed to be keeping from commiting suicide. Instead you're handing him a gun and saying, "let's see if he's smart enough not to use it." It makes it even harder to believe all the blah blah blah about a bond and heart and all that crap.

Seems like many people consider part of the fun of riding is to drop their horse in a shark tank and see if he can make it out in one piece, instead of preventing them from getting near the shark tank in the first place.

[Hony]

Really? I know a ton of horses who are cared for with this standard. Of course, the more you ask of an animal, the more you need to reciprocate. I don't consider the upper levels of eventing as a fair game these days, so you're right in that it would probably exclude many of those 4* horses, but I think on the most part that those standards are what good horsemanship is. Sure, everyone will have their own variations and word it differently, but that's the best I could do to verbalize the overriding philosophy behind good horsekeeping. Is 90% of the equestrian population just riders/owners and not horsemen? It's hard to say. I would hazard that a third or so are "horsemen," another third are "riders," and the rest range from ignorant to yahoo. :lol:

However the saddest part is that it seems so many people find this an impossible measure. :sadsmile: My "standard" of horsekeeping doesn't require a ton of money or fancy equipment, just awareness and respect of the animals who share their lives with us.

Boy you live in a bubble. Have you considered the number of horses that are left to starve each year, or the number of horses that are used solely for work in less developed nations and don't get medical care even when they really need it. You have to remember the demographic or this board is pretty narrow and sure we can keep our horses in near perfect scenarios but the same can't be said for the majority of horses in the world.
It is my opinion that event horses, even at the highest levels are extremely well cared for. If there were anything that the riders or horses who have experienced abdominal hemorrhage could have done then they would have done it.

[subk]

I I feel that not putting the horse in a situation where there is potential to get killed falls under that category.
Since the vast majority of "horse suicides" happen while turned out in their own paddocks and fields, I have to ask if you allow your horses to be turn out or do they live in a stall all the time because it is statistically "safer?"

[JSwan]

I'd estimate, then, that 90% of horses in this country and about 99.999% of the horses in the world would not be meeting your standards. And that group of left-outs would NOT include most event horses. :)

Heck - I was thinking that 90% of the world's human population are not accorded that standard. ;)

[deltawave]

Well, let's parse what your standards actually were. :)

(TB's standards in blue)

We owe them a lifestyle that is conducive to our high requirements. We owe them a pain free environment

Not sure what the first part entails--I require virtually nothing of my retiree--should I just dump her in a pasture, then? She also probably has some pain going on in her aging, creaky hocks. Should I put her down? What about the flies that bite her? The electric fence she occasionally forgets to pay attention to? Those things CAUSE PAIN. Pain free environment? Really? I don't have one of those.

and equipment and expectations that don't hurt or inhibit their abilities or mental status.

I'm REALLY not sure what this means. Muzzles inhibit my pony's ability to stuff herself with grass until she founders. Am I mistreating her, then, by inhibiting her ability to kill herself? If I twitch a horse that needs it, am I not inhibiting its mental status? How about tranquilizers for gelding or a tooth extraction? Needlessly cruel?

We owe them a purpose and a recognition of their gifts. We owe them the courtesy of treating them as thinking, feeling creatures, and not mindless robots.

I can do courtesy, respect, and an appreciation that they are sentient, feeling creatures. No sweat. But what if a horse doesn't have any particular "gifts"? What, then, am I to recognize that's "special" and why does that horse deserve less than a stellar athlete or winning racehorse?

We owe them the highest standard of stable, veterinary, and mental care. We owe them compassion for their weaknesses and praise for their strengths. We owe them the opportunity to succeed within their abilities, and the same care even if they don't.

What is the highest standard, please? What mental care is best? And really, why does my horse need to "succeed" at anything??

I am totally with you on good care, the best we know how and can make available to them. But the stuff you wrote up there is ridiculously nebulous and to some degree anthropomorphic and a little bit weird, to be perfectly honest. :) Which is why I said 90% of horses would not meet THOSE CRITERIA. That's not to say 90% of horses aren't deserving of the best their owners can offer them--although I'd amend THAT number to 100%. :)

[deltawave]

And yes, JSwan, I agree with you--there are probably more than a billion members of our fellow species on the planet that would consider themselves lucky to live by the same standards as even an "average" American horse. :no:

[Seven-up]

Since the vast majority of "horse suicides" happen while turned out in their own paddocks and fields, I have to ask if you allow your horses to be turn out or do they live in a stall all the time because it is statistically "safer?"

Both. And my job is to horseproof the pastures (and stalls) as much as possible. But I guess no matter how I answer that question, the answer is wrong, huh?;)

But justifying putting your horse in danger for fun because horses can die just standing there or because other people starve their horses is pretty damn illogical there, Spock. (Not referring to you specifically--there are quite a few Spocks in this thread.) That's like saying I might as well shoot up heroin because a satellite could fall out of the sky and land on my head.

[deltawave]

I don't know of anyone who would consider horse sports to be "putting your horses in danger for fun". That is one way to look at it, I suppose, but it sort of misses the entire point of owning and competing horses, doesn't it? :confused:

[Seven-up]

It does, doesn't it? I guess as long as you can justify it in your own head, it's ok.

[TB or not TB?]

:lol: There's no need to ridiculoufy my words.

Lifestyle conducive to our high requirements: If you want to compete your horse in endurance, don't throw it out on the back 40 for 300 days a year until the show season starts and expect to compete. If you want to trail ride, that's probably fine. If you have a retiree with NO requirements, life in a 40 acre pasture would be heaven.

Pain free environment: Means that the horse isn't standing on a concrete pen wrapped in rusty barbed wire, being ridden in an arena who's base is half sand, half smashed glass. Horse isn't tied in a stall day and night with its head tied to its girth, or forced to live on hooves that are never trimmed.

Equipment and expectations that do not hurt or inhibit their abilities and mental status: Use a saddle that fits. Don't expect that grade QH you bought from auction that is 300 lbs underweight to be able to compete in the level 5 jumpers next week. Don't parellify your horse so that it constantly tries to run backwards, or beat him bloody with a crop so that he's terrified of you.

Purpose and a recognition of their gifts. We owe them the courtesy of treating them as thinking, feeling creatures, and not mindless robots: Don't use a horse up because you have a string of 6 others at home. Find some gratitude that they are willing pack one's butt around a course, and are tolerant of our mistakes and foibles. That is a big darn gift in my book. Even if a horse can't be ridden doesn't mean it doesn't have gifts. The retiree who babysits weanlings, the youngster who makes you laugh every day with his antics - apparently it sounds anthropomorphic to appreciate that about horses which makes us love them. I find it incomprehensible not to.

We owe them the highest standard of stable, veterinary, and mental care: should be self evident but apparently I need to spell it out. Utilize proper horsekeeping techniques current with modern research and information. A pony that worked in a coal mine may have been kept to the best of its ability, but that is not the "highest standard" today. Ensure the horse has proper veterinary and hoof care. Again, outdated or techniques that have been debunked would not be considered the highest standard. Mental care? Let your horse outdoors once in a while. Find a discipline that suits him; if he's too hot to do thehunters, you are both going to be vastly unhappy trying to make that work. Continually frustrating him with abusive training is not generally bettering his mental health.

Compassion for their weaknesses and praise for their strengths. We owe them the opportunity to succeed within their abilities, and the same care even if they don't: Not every horse can jump 5'. Don't beat the hell out of him because he can't. Not every horse will make it to Grand Prix dressage. Don't be the hell out of him because he can't. Find something he's good at, and let him do that. Don't take your saddleseat horse who's never jumped to an event and get mad at him because he knocks a rail.

You guys seriously think these are weird and excessive requirements? These should be NO BRAINERS. That they apparently are not is a rather sick representation of our society. I never said that every horse GETS this. The question was, what SHOULD the standards of care be, above and beyond food/water/shelter.

It's okay for a horse to get bleeding welts on his sides every day from a crop, provided he has food, shelter, and water? It's okay for a horse to live on overgrown hooves that have curled around and lamed him, as long as he's full? It's okay for a kid to keep jumping a horse over 4' oxers who can't handle the height until he breaks his neck? I can't imagine any of you would think these are okay. DW, you asked "what more is there than food/water/shelter." I did my best to verbalize a few more tangible guidelines. I'm not sure if you all are feeling particularly nasty today or what, but none of these should really be that :eek:

[Seven-up]

It's okay for a horse to get bleeding welts on his sides every day from a crop, provided he has food, shelter, and water? It's okay for a horse to live on overgrown hooves that have curled around and lamed him, as long as he's full? It's okay for a kid to keep jumping a horse over 4' oxers who can't handle the height until he breaks his neck? I can't imagine any of you would think these are okay. DW, you asked "what more is there than food/water/shelter." I did my best to verbalize a few more tangible guidelines. I'm not sure if you all are feeling particularly nasty today or what, but none of these should really be that :eek:

I'm with you on this one.

Doesn't it seem like some people would say it's ok to only feed your own kid every other day because on the other side of the world, kids only eat once a week? And that the every other day kid should be happy because he's lucky to eat that much?

[HorsesinHaiti]

Originally Posted by deltawave
I'd estimate, then, that 90% of horses in this country and about 99.999% of the horses in the world would not be meeting your standards. And that group of left-outs would NOT include most event horses.

Heck - I was thinking that 90% of the world's human population are not accorded that standard. ;)

And I'm trying to help thousands of those 90% of humans who can't meet that standard for their people or their horses - there's tons of things we do here that would make you all CRINGE if I mentioned them. But it's all folk here can manage as best practices with the resources that are available TO THEM. You do what you can and you avoid taking on more kids or animals than you can meet your standard with, but you can't eliminate kids or horses in Haiti even if you can never meet some other places standards. I'm not convinced you can ever eliminate horses working at maximum effort either. We can apply what we do know as responsibly as possible, and use discussion and research to answer the questions we need answered.

[Trixie]

Anthropomorphizing aside, I agree with TB's ideas, to a simpler extent: we owe our horses the best that we can do.

Not every accident in the field is preventable, not every horse will forever be pain free. What we can do is offer them an environment that is as safe as POSSIBLE, proper sustinence, and compassion for their well being (FWIW, I'd consider tranquing or twitching a horse to provide treatment as caring for their well being, not "hurting their mental state" or whatever). IMO, if you can't provide those things, you shouldn't be owning a horse.

This also falls under not pushing a horse up the levels too quickly because we're sure Dobbin totally wants to go advanced. It's pulling up or scratching at an event because you feel a hitch in his step that wasn't there before prior to heading out over a course of giant jumps that don't fall down, no matter how much you wanted to go. It's making decisions to the best of your knowledge and abilities and taking responsibility. In that, it's also taking the time to question the direction of the sport itself during a tumultuous time.

Mind you - none of this is to say that all accidents are preventable or that all horses will live the life of Riley. Only saying that I agree we all need to take responsibility and do the best we can.

That's like saying I might as well shoot up heroin because a satellite could fall out of the sky and land on my head.

:lol:

[TB or not TB?]

Trixie, that is exactly what I've been trying to get across. Thanks for wording it better. :sigh: And no, I don't consider simple horsekeeping practices like using a twitch to be "hurting their mental state." I consider starvation and physical abuse to do so, though. And even rushing a horse through the levels, to a degree. We've all seen the brain fried horses who have been the "casualties" of someone's career. That's the stuff I'm talking about.

[spotted mustang]

another way to look at it:

if the horse was NOT a domesticated animal, being used for people's purposes, whether as a beast of burden, beloved pet, vehicle of warfare etc, it would pretty much be extinct as a species, since the only true wild horses left on earth are a few Przewalskis in Mongolia.

Of course, that doesn't relieve us of our obligation to give them the best care we can. Horse care has advanced tremendously over the centuries, however. I'd bet that a modern high-profile event horse has it better than the vast majority of horses living elsewhere or in other centuries. Even if it has a certain percent chance of a violent death during some XC course.

[Seven-up]

Of course, that doesn't relieve us of our obligation to give them the best care we can. Horse care has advanced tremendously over the centuries, however. I'd bet that a modern high-profile event horse has it better than the vast majority of horses living elsewhere or in other centuries. Even if it has a certain percent chance of a violent death during some XC course.

But again, so what? If I spoil my kid with candy and video games, does that make it ok when I throw him off a cliff? "It's ok, he had a good life. He was playing his Game Boy on the way down, so he died doing something he loved. Who could ask for a better way to go?":rolleyes:;)

[CarrieK]

. I don't take issue with the meaning of stewardship in and of itself, but in the context that it has been discussed on the thread, as equating horses to livestock.
This is interesting: horses should be on an equal basis with humans--our friends, our family members--but not on an equal basis with livestock. Everything has a ghetto, I suppose, even animals. I don't agree with that. I don't believe that horses have any greater intrinsic "rights" than other animals because my definition of stewardship makes no differentiation between caring for chickens or dogs or horses or beef cattle or market hogs: providing the best, the least-stressful and most-healthful environment, for that animal, whether that's my horse Drummer or a calf living only to be slaughtered.

As far as the pronoun and the 'dismissive' use of 'it', I don't think it matters if the horse is offended or not. I use he/she to create an atmosphere of respect.
Well, of course it doesn't matter if the horse is offended because the horse cannot be offended, that's my whole point. I agree, to an extent, with your concept of an atmosphere of respect. However, that atmosphere is merely maintained by the tone, not the words, because a horse does not understand "it" as oppossed to "s/he." The use of "s/he" as opposed to "it" makes you feel better about things, not the horse.

[adamsmom]

But again, so what? If I spoil my kid with candy and video games, does that make it ok when I throw him off a cliff? "It's ok, he had a good life. He was playing his Game Boy on the way down, so he died doing something he loved. Who could ask for a better way to go?":rolleyes:;)

I think that's a poor analogy. How about, you love your kid, feed him right, let him play his Gameboy, occasionally let him stay up late and eat things that aren't good for him, but that taste good.

You also let him play baseball, which he enjoys and is good at. One day, he gets hit in the head by a pitch and it kills him.

That's more in line with competing a horse that dies. No riders I know are throwing their horses off cliffs.

[danceronice]

This is interesting: horses should be on an equal basis with humans--our friends, our family members--but not on an equal basis with livestock. Everything has a ghetto, I suppose, even animals. I don't agree with that. I don't believe that horses have any greater intrinsic "rights" than other animals because my definition of stewardship makes no differentiation between caring for chickens or dogs or horses or beef cattle or market hogs: providing the best, the least-stressful and most-healthful environment, for that animal, whether that's my horse Drummer or a calf living only to be slaughtered.

:yes:


Well, of course it doesn't matter if the horse is offended because the horse cannot be offended, that's my whole point. I agree, to an extent, with your concept of an atmosphere of respect. However, that atmosphere is merely maintained by the tone, not the words, because a horse does not understand "it" as oppossed to "s/he." The use of "s/he" as opposed to "it" makes you feel better about things, not the horse.

YES. Horses are animals like any other animal. They don't understand English, they don't care what you call them as long as the tone is kind.

Dennis Leary had a great bit in "No Cure For Cancer" about how humans categorize/value animals. "What are you?" "I'm an otter." "And what do you do?" "I lie on my back in the water and do cute little human things with my hands." "You're free to go. What are you?" "I'm a cow." "GET ON THE TRUCK!" "But...I'm a cow, I--" "You're a baseball glove! Get on the ***** truck!" Horses are pretty and romantic and run fast and we don't like to think that they're livestock like cows. But they are.

That said--a horse a year at Rolex is a bit eyebrow-raising. That would be like one horse at *every* Kentucky Derby having a catastrophic breakdown. (Eight Belles was a shock because that doesn't usually happen in the Derby.) It suggests they might want to consider the course and the condition of the horses and see if there are changes that could be made for the sake of the horses, the riders, and the sport. I won't stop watching eventing or cheering on my friend who events, but I would feel more reassured if I knew the people in charge of the sport's elite events were taking a serious look at the kind of accidents that are happening and seeing if something can be done to help avoid them.

[Seven-up]

I think that's a poor analogy. How about, you love your kid, feed him right, let him play his Gameboy, occasionally let him stay up late and eat things that aren't good for him, but that taste good.

You also let him play baseball, which he enjoys and is good at. One day, he gets hit in the head by a pitch and it kills him.

That's more in line with competing a horse that dies. No riders I know are throwing their horses off cliffs.


Well, if Lainey had a cliff...:winkgrin:


It is a poor analogy when you are comparing kid-throwing and eventing, but that wasn't the comparison. The quote was that because a horse receives the best of care, it's ok to subject it to potential danger. To make it a little more accurate, let's say instead of flinging the kid off a cliff, I just dangle his Game Boy just out of reach over the cliff, and see if he can get to it without going for a ride.


But the point remains the same. Because you take care of your horse better than someone in a 3rd world country does, is it ok for you to increase the likelyhood of injury? It just doesn't make sense, and pointing out how other horses are suffering around the world is just throwing out a red herring.

Does that make sense?

[adamsmom]

Well, if Lainey had a cliff...:winkgrin:


It is a poor analogy when you are comparing kid-throwing and eventing, but that wasn't the comparison. The quote was that because a horse receives the best of care, it's ok to subject it to potential danger. To make it a little more accurate, let's say instead of flinging the kid off a cliff, I just dangle his Game Boy just out of reach over the cliff, and see if he can get to it without going for a ride.


But the point remains the same. Because you take care of your horse better than someone in a 3rd world country does, is it ok for you to increase the likelyhood of injury? It just doesn't make sense, and pointing out how other horses are suffering around the world is just throwing out a red herring.

Does that make sense?

Oh, I guess I thought you meant actively putting your horse/kid in danger.
Because while I think that everyone who owns a horse puts that horse in danger, I don't think they intend to "throw them off a cliff", thereby adding a specific intent to put their horse in danger.

Likewise, everyone who has kids immediately puts them in danger. Shite happens...But not everyone shakes the baby.

But your analogy is more geared to "my horse has it good because the blacksmith comes once a year" compared to the horse in India that never sees a blacksmith or vet.

I think I gotcha...

No comment on the Lainey comment....

[CarrieK]

Oh, I guess I thought you meant actively putting your horse/kid in danger.
Because while I think that everyone who owns a horse puts that horse in danger, I don't think they intend to "throw them off a cliff", thereby adding a specific intent to put their horse in danger.
But maybe competing at Rolex is a specific intent? Or maybe competing in eventing at all? I don't know if that's what Seven-up meant, but that's the feeling I'm getting from a lot of posts I've been reading lately....

[HorsesinHaiti]

It comes back to the call, what is 'overprotective bubble-wrap' standards, what is acceptable risk, and what is unacceptable risk, for eventers in general and for specific eventing horses in particular? and Who calls that standard How and Why on What Data?

It's not just for eventers, I have to make similar calls for the pony here, but the discussion here is primarily about eventing.

I don't see that you can, or anyone wants to, declare that all cross country work should be banned. I don't see that anyone is truly happy with how things are going now. We're lacking data to tell us why many of the natural causes excaberated by ?? are happening so we can keep them from happening. Back 'round to, how do we get collectively to the point where riders and the sport can get these calls better made and carried out?

[Seven-up]

But maybe competing at Rolex is a specific intent? Or maybe competing in eventing at all? I don't know if that's what Seven-up meant, but that's the feeling I'm getting from a lot of posts I've been reading lately....

Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant. Maybe you're not tossing baby off a cliff, but you're pushing him reeeeeeeal close to the edge, you know? And then when he teeters over the edge, you say, "Well, it's ok because he liked cliffs."

I think if you choose to compete at a high risk sport (eventing, racing, steeplechasing) it's like choosing to set that baby right up on the edge of the cliff. While it's up to that individual what they choose to do with their own property (and it seems like many consider it a "thing" instead of a horse) is up to them, I just don't get the bizarre logic. "I feed him good food so it's ok." "He'd be dead if he lived in the wild." "He has a lot of heart." Etc., etc.

[deltawave]

If I spoil my kid with candy and video games, does that make it ok when I throw him off a cliff?

It is a poor analogy when you are comparing kid-throwing and eventing, but that wasn't the comparison. The quote was that because a horse receives the best of care, it's ok to subject it to potential danger.

You really think allowing a kid to play Game Boys and eat crap all day is the "best of care"? If that kid were a horse, TB or not TB? would report you to the Humane Society? :) Need another analogy. The one about the healthy, normal kid playing a game they love and are good at, then having an accident happen is by far more apt.

How do you propose we decrease our horses' likelihood of injury, in realistic, concrete terms? Not do Rolex? OK. What about a CIC**? Too dangerous? Yes? Then how about Preliminary HTs? Still too dangerous? Hmmm, Novice? BN? Crossrails? The point I'm belaboring, of course, is that like every other assessment of risk, it is INDIVIDUAL. The helmet controversy is useful--do we all wear a helmet every SINGLE time we ride? Really? How about on vacation? Driving a pony cart? Riding a bicycle? Handling a fractious yearling? Handling an old retired horse? All risky to some extent. Too risky? For whom? Who decides?

Rhetorical questions done for now. :)

[Seven-up]

Feel better now, Delta?;)


You know you and I disagree on practically everything, so there's no point in answering...besides the fact that you don't want an answer anyway. We shall continue on happily on our opposite ends of the spectrum.:)

[deltawave]

Actually, I didn't know that--not sure I remember having knock-down drag outs with you in the past, or that we'd been at odds before. Sorry. :confused: But it's good to be informed of these things, I guess. Saves typing. :uhoh: Cheers. :)

And of course, the trick to rhetorical questions (like ethical dilemmas) is that they HAVE no real "answers". :)

[Seven-up]

Practically every thing I say you come along and say to do the opposite. You're not picking on me, and you're not doing it just do disagree. We just think differently, and that's fine. I feel that for the most part, :winkgrin:it's amicable. You do have a lot of good info and sometimes I learn things. It's not like I have a little Delta voodoo doll or anything.:lol: It's all good.:D

[Arcadien]

Okay, its late and I'm not at my most articulate, but with the last page of largely non-sensical PETA worthy garbage, have to pipe in to say I support Deltawave's logical argument.

And whoever put out that lengthy 5 star care of horses as being the only acceptable, all I can say is SHEESH.... have you ever rescued a horse???? I have, several, and all I can say is, there are at least 75% (likely very low estimate) of horses out there tonight that would give 3 of their hooves to be someone's upper level event horse tonight.

Arcadien,
hoping the goofballs go back to fighting the evil deer hunters (as every deer has a right to starve to death, you know) so the rest of the forum can get back to reality & constructive work on these issues.

(and sorry if this post is sharper than usual, I've been working too many hours then taking care of my abused eventers tonight....)

[deltawave]

Glad you feel that way, Seven. In the end, it's all a bunch of human beings trying to do what DOESN'T come naturally--communicate via our fingertips. :p

[Seven-up]

Now that I can agree with! And here's a pthpthtt for you too.:p :winkgrin:

[adamsmom]

Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant. Maybe you're not tossing baby off a cliff, but you're pushing him reeeeeeeal close to the edge, you know? And then when he teeters over the edge, you say, "Well, it's ok because he liked cliffs."

I think if you choose to compete at a high risk sport (eventing, racing, steeplechasing) it's like choosing to set that baby right up on the edge of the cliff. While it's up to that individual what they choose to do with their own property (and it seems like many consider it a "thing" instead of a horse) is up to them, I just don't get the bizarre logic. "I feed him good food so it's ok." "He'd be dead if he lived in the wild." "He has a lot of heart." Etc., etc.

Well, then I think that your analogy is still flawed. A horse gets to the upper levels (or even the mid levels) of any sport by being happy & good at what it does. If he didn't like it or wasn't good at it, he'd go do something else. I have a fabulous horse that doesn't like cross-country. Therefore he's going to go be a hunter. Less risk? Perhaps. But the choice wasn't really mine. If he liked and was good at cross-country, he'd probably still be an eventer.

Now, if he was a kid....
If he's good at sports, and likes them, I'll probably encourage him to go on and participate in that sport. He could, as I pointed out, die from participating in any one of those sports. Should I keep him inside and encourage him, rather, to learn chess, read and watch SpongeBob?

So, yes, it may be specific intent to compete a horse in eventing, and thus subject him to harm and possible death. It is not, however, the same as throwing a child off a cliff.

Taking a horse out and smashing him in the legs with a crowbar, now THAT'S specific intent.

[deltawave]

See, now there I must disagree with you, apparently not for the first time. ;) The :p symbol is a "PTHTHBHTTHT" to you? Seriously? I've always seen it as kind of sticking your tongue out and going "heh heh heh" or "nyah nyah" in a friendly and sort of conspiratorial fashion. See what I mean? What a stupid way to communicate! :lol:

I am forced to conclude on pondering this weighty and imponderable :p that the little title that pops up when you hover over it ("Razz") would indicate that I've been very sadly misusing the :p for approximately 8 years. :lol: I think it's a family thing--we stick our tongues out at each other A LOT. And those ??Budweiser?? commercials where all the guys called each other on the phone and went "YAAAAAHHHHH" with their tongues out? That would be my family. :D So there's my excuse. Time to make like a true scientist and amend my beliefs in the face of better data. :p Ooops. I mean. :lol:

[adamsmom]

See, now there I must disagree with you, apparently not for the first time. ;) The :p symbol is a "PTHTHBHTTHT" to you? Seriously? I've always seen it as kind of sticking your tongue out and going "heh heh heh" or "nyah nyah" in a friendly and sort of conspiratorial fashion. See what I mean? What a stupid way to communicate! :lol:

I am forced to conclude on pondering this weighty and imponderable :p that the little title that pops up when you hover over it ("Razz") would indicate that I've been very sadly misusing the :p for approximately 8 years. :lol: I think it's a family thing--we stick our tongues out at each other A LOT. And those ??Budweiser?? commercials where all the guys called each other on the phone and went "YAAAAAHHHHH" with their tongues out? That would be my family. :D So there's my excuse. Time to make like a true scientist and amend my beliefs in the face of better data. :p Ooops. I mean. :lol:

Now, here I agree with you DW.
To me, the :p is simply sticking out your tongue in a "nannie nannie boo boo" kind of way. No PTHTHBHTTHT sound.

But then, I stick my tongue out at a lot of people, but generally in a good natured way.
If I wanna make the PTHTHBHTTHT sound at them, I generally use other gestures.
:winkgrin:

[TB or not TB?]

You really think allowing a kid to play Game Boys and eat crap all day is the "best of care"? If that kid were a horse, TB or not TB? would report you to the Humane Society? :)

Yes, because in all my years here, I've clearly been a kool-aid drinking looney on the fringe of madness what with my outspoken support of safety measures in eventing and discussion of current events and issues. :uhoh: Now that I have been discovered, I see no reason to keep up this farce and my true nature comes out.

'z0mgz ppl u shdnt ride hr2ses thats so mean'

[Seven-up]

See, now there I must disagree with you, apparently not for the first time. ;) The :p symbol is a "PTHTHBHTTHT" to you? Seriously? I've always seen it as kind of sticking your tongue out and going "heh heh heh" or "nyah nyah" in a friendly and sort of conspiratorial fashion. See what I mean? What a stupid way to communicate! :lol:

I am forced to conclude on pondering this weighty and imponderable :p that the little title that pops up when you hover over it ("Razz") would indicate that I've been very sadly misusing the :p for approximately 8 years. :lol: I think it's a family thing--we stick our tongues out at each other A LOT. And those ??Budweiser?? commercials where all the guys called each other on the phone and went "YAAAAAHHHHH" with their tongues out? That would be my family. :D So there's my excuse. Time to make like a true scientist and amend my beliefs in the face of better data. :p Ooops. I mean. :lol:

Didn't mean to make you question the imponderable. Who is life? How does it all mean? Why is the point to it all? :lol:

Raspberries and tongue-sticking-outing is all the same to me. And in my circle, tends to be an affection kind of thing. See? I do love you, Delta!:lol::lol: Kum-ba-ya, my Lord, Kum-ba-ya! Sweet baby-tossing Jesus, I'm not even drinking right now...imagine how wacky this response would be if I was!

[Seven-up]

Well, then I think that your analogy is still flawed. A horse gets to the upper levels (or even the mid levels) of any sport by being happy & good at what it does. If he didn't like it or wasn't good at it, he'd go do something else. I have a fabulous horse that doesn't like cross-country. Therefore he's going to go be a hunter. Less risk? Perhaps. But the choice wasn't really mine. If he liked and was good at cross-country, he'd probably still be an eventer.

Now, if he was a kid....
If he's good at sports, and likes them, I'll probably encourage him to go on and participate in that sport. He could, as I pointed out, die from participating in any one of those sports. Should I keep him inside and encourage him, rather, to learn chess, read and watch SpongeBob?

So, yes, it may be specific intent to compete a horse in eventing, and thus subject him to harm and possible death. It is not, however, the same as throwing a child off a cliff.

Taking a horse out and smashing him in the legs with a crowbar, now THAT'S specific intent.



Awww, well, you know, I just don't care anymore. I throw up my hands on this one. Analogies and SpongeBob and cliff diving and pthtptht-ing and whatever. :lol: :p<<Here's one for you too--take it in whatever manner seems friendly to you. I'll let you decide if it has sound effects or not.:D

I'm off to find that drink so that I can make my weirdness seem more appropriate.:winkgrin:

[adamsmom]

Awww, well, you know, I just don't care anymore. I throw up my hands on this one. Analogies and SpongeBob and cliff diving and pthtptht-ing and whatever. :lol: :p<<Here's one for you too--take it in whatever manner seems friendly to you. I'll let you decide if it has sound effects or not.:D

I'm off to find that drink so that I can make my weirdness seem more appropriate.:winkgrin:

Drinking definitely helps make some sort of sense of all of this. Or some of this. Whatever...
:p:lol:

[subk]

I've been busy the last few hours with a real life but I really want to say something about the ridiculous analogy before the last ridiculous analogy...

Both. And my job is to horseproof the pastures (and stalls) as much as possible. But I guess no matter how I answer that question, the answer is wrong, huh?;)

But justifying putting your horse in danger for fun because horses can die just standing there or because other people starve their horses is pretty damn illogical there, Spock. (Not referring to you specifically--there are quite a few Spocks in this thread.) That's like saying I might as well shoot up heroin because a satellite could fall out of the sky and land on my head.
No, I'm not justifying anything. I asked because I thought your original statement was bizarre. I'm just looking for some logic, but heroin and satellites don't get there either unless getting hit by a satellite is a greater risk than getting addicted to heroin after you shoot it up.

And personally I could not keep my horses in 24/7 as routine because I think that is cruel and abusive--worse than facing an advanced XC course. Obviously we value quality of life issues differently. But I am not so asinine as to believe that my personal standards should be imposed on others. I can still respect you if we disagree and you keep yours in. But if I run a horse advanced there's a whole cadre of you who think I'm something awful.

[adamsmom]

But if I run a horse advanced there's a whole cadre of you who think I'm something awful.

Not me. Cause I've had a few horses that have run advanced (not with me on board, but...), and you know what? Anthropomorphizing or not, I'm pretty sure they enjoyed the hell out of what they were doing.

And if I go to hell for asking them to do that, so be it.

[Seven-up]

The heroin/satellite analogy was referring to those who say that because there are risks in just being alive every day it's ok to put your horse's life in peril. Since I could get hit by a bus crossing the street, I might as well shoot up because I could be dead tomorrow and why wouldn't I want to do something fun? Some people think jumping out of planes is fun. Junkies think heroin is fun. It doesn't make any sense, and that's the point to the whole analogy. I see lots of people defending what they do by saying something else that's totally unrelated, just because it makes people stop and say, "huh?" and forget what they're arguing about. It's like the argument that because a horse has the best care available, it's ok to risk its life because horses are dying of starvation. It no makey sense.

You can call my analogies ridiculous if you like, but realize that I'm making up ridiculous analogies to counter others' ridiculous explanations of why they do what they do. Those folks don't make sense to me and I don't make sense to them, and I don't care anymore because there's a drink in my hand.:D So carry on.:lol:

[sofiethewonderhorse]

2006, although Le Samurai technically did not die at Rolex in 2007.
He was euthanized several days later, after it was determined he couldn't be saved.

Did you forget about Frodo? 2008?

[crittertwitter]

This is interesting: horses should be on an equal basis with humans--our friends, our family members--but not on an equal basis with livestock. Everything has a ghetto, I suppose, even animals. I don't agree with that. I don't believe that horses have any greater intrinsic "rights" than other animals because my definition of stewardship makes no differentiation between caring for chickens or dogs or horses or beef cattle or market hogs: providing the best, the least-stressful and most-healthful environment, for that animal, whether that's my horse Drummer or a calf living only to be slaughtered.

Good point, Carrie. Agreed. I don't want to turn this into a discussion of my personal feelings on animals, but for the record, I'm a vegetarian. I don't kill *anyone* on purpose, from bugs to mammals to reptiles. I personally don't wear or use leather and avoid products made from glycerin, gelatin, etc.

However, globally, what I do not understand is eventers whose lives depend on the heart and competence of their horses, yet see them as equal to those they consider food sources. Again, I believe it's a matter of who in your life you value. Some riders care for their horses out of obligation and others care for them because they're family. On my end, our animals are family. It is indeed odd to me that anyone who gets to know a horse as intimately as an eventer knows their own horse wouldn't see them as family.


Well, of course it doesn't matter if the horse is offended because the horse cannot be offended, that's my whole point. I agree, to an extent, with your concept of an atmosphere of respect. However, that atmosphere is merely maintained by the tone, not the words, because a horse does not understand "it" as oppossed to "s/he." The use of "s/he" as opposed to "it" makes you feel better about things, not the horse.

True. They don't care if we call them it, but I stand behind their awareness of an atmosphere of respect, which is what we strive to create for them. My only point in the 'it/he/she' discussion was to point out that we try to create an atmosphere of respect because I believe they are sensitive to appreciation. I have seen some offended horses, but not because someone called them it.

[subk]

However, globally, what I do not understand is eventers whose lives depend on the heart and competence of their horses, yet see them as equal to those they consider food sources.
It's not like food is very important to our existence or anything. Maybe the problem is YOU don't value your food sources enough.

[adamsmom]

Did you forget about Frodo? 2008?

No, I did not forget. I believe the question I was answering was when was the last time a horse did not die at Rolex.

[findeight]

No, I did not forget. I believe the question I was answering was when was the last time a horse did not die at Rolex.


As it was...this has been...er....entertaining. You never know what track they will take.

[Finnch]

For those of you that say it is not true horsemanship to "put your horse in a position to get killed," prove your enthusiasm. Stop riding. Pull your horse's shoes and put them out in a field to live their happy life. You think that only the upper levels are dangerous? A horse could slip and fall while walking. Are you saying that Karen O'Conner is responsible for Teddy's death because she was riding and fell and he got loose, therefore by taking him out of the barn she put him in a position to be killed? I have seen a horse die of an aneurysm in dressage. No high stress there right? It's only cross-country you're blaming. Horrible things happen and yes it is very sad. I have lost a horse and it was awful. But tell me where PETA set up the recruiting booth at Rolex so that I can avoid it next year. The things you people are saying calls for riders to have a sixth sense to detect a weakened blood vessel or a torn lining. Even in humans, these are very difficult to detect without extended tests and specialized doctors. If you don't think those upper level riders care for their horses, then you are completely delusional. Since when did being an advanced rider, something that was once considered a momentous achievement, become a heinous crime?

[Trixie]

For those of you that say it is not true horsemanship to "put your horse in a position to get killed," prove your enthusiasm. Stop riding. Pull your horse's shoes and put them out in a field to live their happy life.

Please. Everyone knows the risk can't be completely eliminated, the point is to mitigate the risk to the point where it's reasonable. When an event has a death every year, and over 20 horses have died specifically in upper level competition since 2007, not to mention quite a few riders, something needs to be readdressed. You don't see numbers like that in *most* other horse sports, racing sports aside. It's not a reasonable rate.

You think that only the upper levels are dangerous? A horse could slip and fall while walking.

An accident can happen at anytime, but people need to take reasonable precautions. People can get killed crossing the street, but one is far MORE LIKELY to die in a traffic accident if they are playing in traffic instead of crossing at a crosswalk.

Are you saying that Karen O'Conner is responsible for Teddy's death because she was riding and fell and he got loose, therefore by taking him out of the barn she put him in a position to be killed?

Please, pray tell... where did ANYONE say that? :rolleyes:

I have seen a horse die of an aneurysm in dressage.

Was it 20+ horses in just a few years, or a freak accident?

No high stress there right? It's only cross-country you're blaming.

It seems to be cross country where it KEEPS HAPPENING.

[magnolia73]

For those of you that say it is not true horsemanship to "put your horse in a position to get killed," prove your enthusiasm. Stop riding. Pull your horse's shoes and put them out in a field to live their happy life.


Fine, running your horse at advanced level XC is no more dangerous, statistically than the 2'6 hunters or training level dressage.

I think that is not true.... and that there is a limit as to what a horse can handle in terms of running and jumping and "answering questions". I think in recent years XC has gotten too difficult to be a good risk for most horse and rider teams, thus a high incident of deaths. If you can name 20 horses that have died in the dressage and/or jumper ring at FEI levels in the past 3 years- great. I'll eat crow and be satisfied that eventing is not a bigger risk.

It sounds like they made things a little more reasonable this year. Took the difficulty down a notch. Excellent. Now make it a bit easier on the horse's physical systems.

I think we just all need to agree to disagree. We won't all have the same level of acceptable risk- just please stop alluding to the risk of running XC at Rolex being no more risky than doing other sports.

[crittertwitter]

Yea, there's a reason some people go eventing while others compete in jumpers or dressage. If it were all the same - just competing athletes at the same level of exertion - the idea of losing eventing altogether wouldn't make some people feel that they were staring into their soul's grave. They'd just say, "Oh No problem! I'll just go do the jumpers instead." XC *is* different. You can't take pride in what it requires of your horse and you and your partnership, on the one hand, but say it's no more demanding than any other equine sport on the other. I do think it's a given that it is more dangerous. However, it's the nature of the sport... not the desired outcome of those who participate in it. I recall a thread months back in which people criticized the idea of safer jump construction because then xc "wouldn't be dangerous anymore... It wouldn't be eventing!" they screamed. "Then everyone would do it... who knows who would go Advanced." I have no doubt that the danger comes into play somewhere in the thrill of going xc, but that doesn't equate to a death wish.

I hear people asking that the eventing community do whatever necessary to keep the horses as safe as possible given the elevated risk that comes with eventing. They are asking that riders and grooms and vets be as mindful as possible - not necessarily psychic, but *attentive* - of their horses' needs and respect their horses enough to keep their eye on their horse's well-being above any other goal.

I haven't read the whole thread thoroughly, but I haven't seen anyone suggesting that eventers just don't care at all. I think there are just ways that we can all learn to care *better*. But that's what horsemanship is, isn't it? Always learning more and in turn being better and better 'stewards' if that's what you guys want to call us.

[Shrunk "N" Da Wash]

Some may not agree with me, but I still relate these types of deaths to the lack of long format. If the horses had been required to condition and train for the full 4* long format event, chances are, the physical limitation would have come into play long before they ever stepped onto the 4* course. Weak areas on tendons, aneurysms, etc., most likely, would rear their ugly heads before the horse made it to the 4* level if it were required to meet the fitness level necessary for a long format 4*.

Just my opinion...

I like the way you worded that.:yes: It makes sense to think that soundness issues would crop up earlier and horses would break down in preparation rather then at the actual event.

[Blugal]

Not that breaking down in preparation is exactly a desirable result...

[JWB]

Last year I retired my 12 year old Arabian. She was navicular. I searched long and hard for treatment options and eventually gave her to a friend at a trail horse...

At one point I was discussing pulling her shoes and trying a mustang trim on her. One person had pointed out that you almost never see navicular mustangs. I ran this idea by TWO farriers. Both laughed.

"You never see a navicular mustang because the wild mustangs die by the time they're 12," was one farrier's response. The others was similar, but more colorful in language and not suitable for public posting:eek:

Our horses are our partners and friends. They are very fragile too though. Yes, Kingpin died of a hemorrhage on a cross country course but the same condition could have killed him at home too. We lost a percheron a few years ago to an aneurysm. He was just standing in the field at the time.

We form bonds and partnerships and try to keep them as safe as possible but accidents will happen. It is always sad and tragic but the fact is, even if we put them in a bubble, accidents will still happen. Teddy died on his farm at home!

To stop doing something because it involves risk is a slippery slope to start down. First we say "no long format eventing" and that becomes "no cross country" which will turn into "no jumping" and then "no racing" - do you see where I am going?

Just my 2 cents worth....

[bornfreenowexpensive]

When an event has a death every year, and over 20 horses have died specifically in upper level competition since 2007, not to mention quite a few riders, something needs to be readdressed. You don't see numbers like that in *most* other horse sports, racing sports aside. It's not a reasonable rate.





Ok...what is a reasonable rate?

The answer to that question is going to be different for every person...and why there will not ever be an end to this thread. Eventing IS challenging and it IS dangerous. That is eventing. It is why it isn't a sport for eveyone or every horse.

I agree that movement should always be made to make things safer....of course. That has been done and continues to be done. There are many things about today's xc courses that are far safer than years past...course design, course building and training have improved significantly.....the level of the skills of the riders and the quality of their horses today is very impressive.

But this sport by its very nature is a dangerous one and there is no way for it not to be one without losing what is the heart of the sport. Eventers do take responsibility for their sport and do work to make it safer but we also accept that it will never be without risks. We also know that the NUMBER ONE safety measure....is developing SKILLS....skill in the rider, skills in the horse...and skills in the horsemanship of the rider to know when they (as a partnership) are prepared or not to handle a course and the risks posed by that course on any given day. And at least of all the eventers that I know....it is one safety measure that we work hard on every day.

[merrygoround]

Some may not agree with me, but I still relate these types of deaths to the lack of long format. If the horses had been required to condition and train for the full 4* long format event, chances are, the physical limitation would have come into play long before they ever stepped onto the 4* course. Weak areas on tendons, aneurysms, etc., most likely, would rear their ugly heads before the horse made it to the 4* level if it were required to meet the fitness level necessary for a long format 4*.

Just my opinion...

Not so! Horses have died on long formats, horses that were invariably well conditioned, well ridden. Aneurysms rear their ugly heads whenever they are ready. They are unpredictable and are rarely diagnosed ahead of time.

However until recently, little was said about it. Publicity was avoided.

[deltawave]

Once again let me remind everyone that the term "aneurysm" is probably being used incorrectly here. "Aortic rupture" is not as catchy, but is probably more accurate. The word "aneurysm" implies "something that might have been detected ahead of time" whereas I don't think there's any evidence that this is so. Aneurysms can and do develop in horses, but we don't know (yet) if this is an anatomic problem (visible to the naked eye) or a microscopic/tissue-level disorder.

[riderboy]

Ok...what is a reasonable rate?

The answer to that question is going to be different for every person...and why there will not ever be an end to this thread. Eventing IS challenging and it IS dangerous. That is eventing. It is why it isn't a sport for eveyone or every horse.

I agree that movement should always be made to make things safer....of course. That has been done and continues to be done. There are many things about today's xc courses that are far safer than years past...course design, course building and training have improved significantly.....the level of the skills of the riders and the quality of their horses today is very impressive.

But this sport by its very nature is a dangerous one and there is no way for it not to be one without losing what is the heart of the sport. Eventers do take responsibility for their sport and do work to make it safer but we also accept that it will never be without risks. We also know that the NUMBER ONE safety measure....is developing SKILLS....skill in the rider, skills in the horse...and skills in the horsemanship of the rider to know when they (as a partnership) are prepared or not to handle a course and the risks posed by that course on any given day. And at least of all the eventers that I know....it is one safety measure that we work hard on every day.Ah ha! That is really a great question. How much death and destruction do we accept? I've posted that there are some who will not accept even the tiniest risk. I think the risk I am willing to accept is that which occurs after we've done all we can to make the sport safer. So, we have a way to go before I can say " This sport is as safe as it can humanly be made to be." So there is a lot of work to do. Please get involved and do something to help. The risk, however,will never be zero.

[Janet]

Lets not look at the past (long format) with rose colored glasses.

How many horses died at the Rome Olympice? Mexico City?

[rabicon]

My friends horse is navicular and he is trimmed by a farrier. Not a mustang trim but the farrier and vet worked together and he gets trimmed every 4 weeks and is doing great without a lame step.

[subk]

Fine, running your horse at advanced level XC is no more dangerous, statistically than the 2'6 hunters ...
Obviously you don't think it is. My question though is "what do you think horses fear the most?" If you were considering equine welfare from the point of view of a horse wouldn't the most "dangerous" thing be that thing that is most likely to result in what horses fear the most?

I don't think horses have a concept of death. They have a basic instinct of survival, but so do squid which aren't noted for much thinking power. I believe that what horses fear is suffering, not death. Suffering they know. Most horses have experienced it to some degree at some point in their life, and they have excellent memories.

Since 2'6" hunters is the example given I'll go from there--although I don't think my point is discipline specific. It is not an uncommon occurrence for horses to be lunged excessively before showing in the hunter ring. The purpose is to compensate for a horse with less than ideal disposition, or a rider with less than ideal skill, and/or a trainer who is, well, less than ideal for the task at hand. It's not lunging as a training tool, it's lunging for as much as an hour to wear the horse out for the day so he will behave better. It also prematurely wears the hell out of his joints. All leading to pain and suffering down the road.

In contrast, Kingpin at a few minutes after ten in the morning was in the start box feeling as fit and healthy as any horse in the whole world. Less than five minutes later he was dead. Moments after a catastrophic internal failure he was in shock and most likely unable to process any suffering.

So my hypothetical 2'6" hunter horse suffers with painful joints for the last decade of his life and Kingpin dies with the briefest moments of suffering. If you fear suffering, but don't have any concept of death which would you find worse? Which activity is more "dangerous."

No, I don't think the current statistics are acceptable. Yes, I'm concretely supporting finding answers. No, I don't think either death or suffering are good options. But I do think to proceed in the most moral way with the stewardship granted us we need to step out of our own shoes and try on a pair of size 2's with toe clips and consider priorities. With a species such as ourselves that is so obsessed with death that every major world religion centers around an answer to it, it is very difficult to extricate ourselves from the Dinseyesque form of animal psychology that makes animals just like us, but in outer coverings that look different so that we can consider death from a whole different view point.

If death is worse than suffering wouldn't that negate the blessing of well timed euthanasia? Is it our moral obligation to prioritize protecting horses from the dangers they fear most or the dangers we fear most?

[magnolia73]

Is it our moral obligation to prioritize protecting horses from the dangers they fear most or the dangers we fear most?

I think we need to not continue to "test" what horses can do. IMO, 07 and 08 were a push to see just what we could make an event horse deal with... and the sport was pushed to the margin.

IMO, running a horse over fences with almost no margin of error to satisfy the want and ego of the rider is wrong. And I agree on the 2'6 hunter lifestyle- and practice what I preach- my girl lives in a giant field and gets longed almost never. And her joints already at age 6 have damage from racing. But yes, horses get longed for hours and end up crippled to satisfy egos. I think that is wrong as well. And I *hate* the Derby.

I just wish we could race horses starting at age 6, when they have finished growing, run XC a notch easier, perhaps placing some emphasis on fitness in the score. I wish they would limit hunters to 15 shows a year and enjoy a forward horse with some spirit. Just a little modification that puts the horse's best interest first. It seems like all we do is step a little farther from what is best for the horse instead of getting closer to what is best for the horse.

I think it is very hard to compare horse sports to anything else. You have a being that can't comprehend the results of their actions. And I'll be honest- I don't get the mentality that lands off a jump and is thrilled because "man- that was close- you saved my butt".

I think there is a scale- 1 being frothy PETA type, 10 being that cruel guy from Black Beauty who whipped the lame horse to win the race. I think probably everyone participating here is somewhere between a 5 to a 7. It's a useful and interesting conversation and important to understand it isn't black and white, but very grey.

[deltawave]

10 being that cruel guy from Black Beauty who whipped the lame horse to win the race.

Whaaaat? :lol: There was no racing in Black Beauty. :winkgrin: Plenty of heinous behavior on the part of humans, though, so point well taken. :)

I'd put myself at a "6", I guess. Slightly on the cruel side of PETA-esque. :p

[Everythingbutwings]

Sorry Deltawave, the evil son of Beauty's third owner (not farmer, not nice family with sick wife) rode the snot out of Ginger and caused her to break down. In the movie version it was in a race. I don't have my copy of the book in front of me but IIRC, he ran the snot out of her whipping and spurring in the book but I'm fuzzy on if it was in a race in the original book version.

Found the entire book on-line, got to love the internet!

Lord George was young and would take no warn-
ing ; he was a hard rider, and would hunt whenever
he could get the chance, quite careless of his horse.
Soon after I left the stable there was a steeple chase,
and he determined to ride, though the groom told
him she was a little strained, and was not fit for the
race. He did not believe it, and on the day of the
race, urged Ginger to keep up with the foremost
riders. With her high spirit, she strained herself
to the utmost; she came in with the first three
horses, but her wind was touched, beside which,
he was too heavy for her, and her back was strained ;
" And so," she said, " here we are ruined in
the prime of our youth and strength you by a
drunkard, and I by a fool ; it is very hard."

[deltawave]

I stand corrected--had always thought it was hunting, not 'chasing. :) But she wasn't lame, just bad back and "wind", IIRC.

[Lori B]

subk, your excellent post captures exactly what I think about how we approach responsible stewardship / horsekeeping. Stop anthropomorphizing, and start thinking clearly about our own best and most honest understanding of how horse's experience their lives. It's not the same as humans.

I think the medical / fitness research angle is very important, and I don't find Kingpin's death in some way 'ok', but if he died doing a trot set the week before Rolex of the same cause, would we be talking about banning trot sets?

[subk]

subk, your excellent post captures exactly what I think about how we approach responsible stewardship / horsekeeping. Stop anthropomorphizing, and start thinking clearly about our own best and most honest understanding of how horse's experience their lives. It's not the same as humans.
Thanks. People talk about the "bond" eventers seem to have with their horses. I think a big part of it is that when we run xc--a course the horse has never seen before--as rider the better we can understand how the HORSE sees a question and how the HORSE processes the information the more success we will have. Reed talks about XC being the only time he can "BE the horse." You can only BE the horse if for a moment you stop assigning your human priorities and perceptions to the horse.

I know I am bias, but I think of all the disciplines I've come into close contact with eventers seem to understand and respect the distinction between horse and human on a day to day basis the best. And best of all the very essence of the sport encourages that understanding.

[riderboy]

Thanks. People talk about the "bond" eventers seem to have with their horses. I think a big part of it is that when we run xc--a course the horse has never seen before--as rider the better we can understand how the HORSE sees a question and how the HORSE processes the information the more success we will have. Reed talks about XC being the only time he can "BE the horse." You can only BE the horse if for a moment you stop assigning your human priorities and perceptions to the horse.

I know I am bias, but I think of all the disciplines I've come into close contact with eventers seem to understand and respect the distinction between horse and human on a day to day basis the best. And best of all the very essence of the sport encourages that understanding.Oh, I LIKE that!

[vineyridge]

Once again let me remind everyone that the term "aneurysm" is probably being used incorrectly here. "Aortic rupture" is not as catchy, but is probably more accurate. The word "aneurysm" implies "something that might have been detected ahead of time" whereas I don't think there's any evidence that this is so. Aneurysms can and do develop in horses, but we don't know (yet) if this is an anatomic problem (visible to the naked eye) or a microscopic/tissue-level disorder.

DW, you're the scientifically trained medical mind on this. I question whether or not the term "aneurysm" is or is not correct only because people aren't looking for them in horses. If there were the same sorts of diagnostic tools available for horses as for humans and they were used as often, who knows what would be found?

[deltawave]

The fact is, we just don't know. But it is certainly possible to rupture, tear, or dissect a vessel without any pre-existing, visible bulging aneurysm. The defect can be microscopic. Imaging is very, very difficult in horses for so many reasons, but it would be an extremely fruitful place to start, IMO.

[TheTetrarch]

If the defect is microscopic, who's to say it isn't from prior parasite damage?

[deltawave]

That is solidly on the list of possibilities, although I'm told this is seen much less commonly in the days of modern dewormers. The necropsy findings, I'm also told, are very distinct between verminous arteritis and cystic medial necrosis. (which is the histopathological common denominator in most aneurysm/rupture cases I've read about in the available literature)

[annikak]

I think the medical / fitness research angle is very important, and I don't find Kingpin's death in some way 'ok', but if he died doing a trot set the week before Rolex of the same cause, would we be talking about banning trot sets?

Actually, I don't think so- we'd be saying how sad it is, or something like that. But- it would not involve a jump, going at speed, in front of thousands (many horse lovers, but not many that fully understand some of what we are talking about on these threads...) risking a human life.

I realize that sounds cruel, but I do think it would be different. IMO, as sad, but from a different perspective.

Thanks, DW for all the great info....:yes:

[hamsterpoop]

Posted on another thread; Lucinda Green's horse Wideawake died while awaiting their victory lap after winning Badminton in 1976. Do we ban Victory laps?