The saddest thing about the ‘releasing the tail/ back’ argument is that is paints a picture of our breed as being somehow LESS trainable than those breeds not requiring surgery to learn to wear a harness.
Now, is that really so? I’m afraid it reflects far more on the trainers who believe this than on a breed that is arguably one of the most trainable ever developed.
And if it was really only about releasing the tail/ back?
There would be no outcry against discarding of the artificial appliances and care to produce the extreme set tail effect for the show ring - because is not necessary to cut a tail to ‘set’ a tail, yet there IS outcry, since it is fashionably necessary to ‘set’ a tail in order to place well in the Breed Show Performance ring.
The show presentation of the horse needs to move beyond the 1940’s, just as riding attire fashion has changed.
A great mare
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/6a/d0/19/6ad019daf1bbc958ad63ce96da008cc1.jpg
A great stallion
http://regaljada.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/historyofapparel4.jpg