Retirement for horses

[S1969]

@endlessclimb

I can’t believe you are comparing a human living through pain to an animal living through pain.

Can. Not. Believe it

LOL you literally said its unethical not to PTS a horse in pain every day.

I think you’re lucky to have a horse who has remained sound enough to ride before having to contemplate retirement. In many cases, a horse suffers an injury, goes on stall rest/rehab, and doesn’t return to soundness. At that point - do you hop on and ride 20-30 minutes anyway? Do you just decide to euthanize, even though it is happily turned out with friends eating grass? It’s not as black and white as you might like to believe. What about horses that were never rideable? I rescued a 10hh pony. What “test of soundness” do you use for an animal that was never rideable to begin with?

Now obviously, if an appropriate retirement environment is not an option, things are different. Neither of my horses would be happy if they were stalled 12 hours/day and/or did not have adequate turnout. But since they do, I don’t think they are telling me quite yet that they should be PTS.

@fivestrideline

Have you asked them? Genuinely?

Yes. I have. I agree that “being in constant chronic pain that no meds can break through and unable to perform daily tasks without suffering later” is a problem. It is not even remotely the same as " can be ridden for 20-30 minutes."

[endlessclimb]

@S1969 I’m not even going to discuss this further with you. If you are equating a human in pain with an animal in pain, I can tell you right now we will never see eye to eye on this.

You do you. Mine will be euthed long before they’re suffering, I know that for a fact.

[S1969]

@endlessclimb

@S1969 I’m not even going to discuss this further with you. If you are equating a human in pain with an animal in pain, I can tell you right now we will never see eye to eye on this.

You do you. Mine will be euthed long before they’re suffering, I know that for a fact.

yawn
OK but you started this tangent.

Again - what does it mean to “be suffering?” If being able to walk/trot with a rider for 30 minutes is your standard, I think it’s pretty high. Does that mean with or without pain meds? Does that mean without noticeable lameness, stiffness, etc? What about chronic conditions like Cushings? Do you just euthanize when they are no longer healthy enough for work? How do you know when that is? What about kissing spine where they are pasture sound without a rider?

No one is saying we should allow horses to suffer. You literally said it was unethical to keep a horse alive that experienced daily pain. Like arthritis pain?

Here are some of the things the vet (and COTH) thinks you should look for – #1 is ability to lie down and get up comfortably. Being able to tell that your horse IS lying down to sleep every night. Interacting with pasture mates, traveling around pastures at will, picking up a trot/canter at liberty, eating, drinking, pooping normally. Posture/demeanor - do they look comfortable, happy, interested in surroundings, etc. Do good days outnumber “bad days”?

[endlessclimb]

@S1969

yawn

.

[freda1]

So I was asked to watch this video, and I did, 5 times. I am, according to this video, a fool because it does not equate with me. I likened it to a horse race. All the horses are in the starting gate, some were great foals, some not. Some had great owners, some not. Some had great trainers, some not. Some had great jockeys, some not. The gate opened , they raced, the fastest horse likely won.
In the video, divorced parents, some divorces good, some not. Some Father figures good, some not. Helping Mom and Dad financially, some people work and prepare to take care of themselves and some don’t. Obviously, barring catastrophic events. Go to college, maybe some people don’t want to. But, not knowing any of these things, they were all able to be there (wherever that was), could all start on the same line and the fastest runner won the $100. But what the video said, in my opinion, the people left back because they had none of the stated disadvantages were discriminated against. I thought that was what you were against? The video stated emphatically it was “not their fault”. What I am saying is, for my entire life if people wanted something, they worked for it and tried to get it. What I want to know is, how far do we go making everybody equal? From what I am seeing/hearing, we don’t just make the start equal, the finish has to be equal as well. So, I still don’t see how the video proves anything, the fastest runner won the money. And I was struck by the expressions of the people in this demonstration, they looked confused. And I am still not understanding how this equates to USEF shoving DEI down the throats of their officials. Are they saying Judges Course Designers, Stewards, Schooling Supervisors, should be made aware of exhibitors backgrounds so they can give more credit to someone who was underprivileged? Example, that rider had 3 chips but they should win because they were disadvantaged? Steward, rider tied stirrups to girth, illegal, but they were disadvantaged so it’s okay? How far is this supposed ot go? I think everybody should give others a leg up whenever and wherever they can, but after the leg up, where does it stop? So, in MY OPINION, if they were serious in this video they would have said “some of the people in this line are disadvantaged for many reasons, but they got here”. Great job for advancing yourself , keep up the good work. Find out how they got there, tell others, and then seek out what stood in their way and work to fix that.

[freda1]

I don’t think that question can be answered. Everybdy has such different opinions on it. People are very different in how much they feel for their animals, including cats, dogs, etc. Give people the best information and advice and opinions we can and support each other no matter what their decisions are. With the caveat, do not support cruelty.

[freda1]

I did not say “first” , I used it as an example of things. I used DEI because honestly it is something USEF has enacted that I do not agree with. I think there are probably other things other people find expendable.

[S1969]

@freda1

What I am saying is, for my entire life if people wanted something, they worked for it and tried to get it. What I want to know is, how far do we go making everybody equal?

Well the first thing we do is not actively work against them. For example, in my search that produced only female candidates - if I personally had an issue with men, and I was only advancing candidates who were female, I am the problem.

This has been a very common occurrence in hiring - proven in studies. If the candidate resumes were nearly word for word the same, but the candidate name was changed from John Smith to Janet Smith, often the man with the exact same experience was advanced in the search process more often than the woman. In cases where the difference was a name like Sheniqua instead of Susan, that was also notable.

It’s not about the candidate “working for it” - they are being limited or screened out by selection bias, despite the qualifications/experience they worked hard to achieve.

[millerra]

Isn’t part of the problem for people who board to find safe, affordable retirement situations that are trustworthy? Maybe, as part of membership, regional (?area) groups could vet retirement options and set up a recommended list of options? Inspections? Boarders/Retiree owners chipping in to have routine vet inspection a couple of times a year? I live in a not high cost of living area (rural) which could have retirement facilities but they are uncommon here. Everyone here who wants to have horses tend to keep them at home. BUT, if I lived somewhere where I couldn’t keep eyes on one of mine, I sure wouldn’t trust any old “retirement” facility in nowheresville (where I live) to take good care of my boy. Just a thought… there could be a way to make things better…

[Fiesta01]

I was speaking of horses that are comfortable enough to enjoy their retirement. That means treatable pain that gives them a good quality of life.

[SMF11]

In my opinion, as someone who boards retired horses, and has for almost 20 years, there’s a middle ground between “must be rideable” and “living in constant pain”.

Only once have I had someone who didn’t want to euthanize a horse in pain. This was a friend of a friend, and the horse walked off the trailer with founder and many abscesses due to poorly treated Cushings. The owners were idiots (oh Cowboy likes to lie down!). I insisted this horse be euthanized, and the vet thanked me, saying he should have been put down years ago.

Ok, that was the ONLY time I’ve had that scenario. I’ve had many many others that are very happy and comfortable (and most do not require pain meds!) right up until they have something catastrophic – a strangulating lipoma, or EPM or something. And occasionally there’s a scheduled euthanasia.

But given good care, most horses on my farm live into their late 20’s and early 30’s. Comfortably and happily.

[Casey09]

These are the exact standards my vet gave me. I also think it’s important to know the horse. My own older horse was nicknamed Eeyore when he was much younger because he always looked a bit over everyone. He never enjoyed attention and kept to himself in the pasture.

[S1969]

Just watched both my retirees drop down and take a good roll in the snow and pop back up after two days of miserable weather. I think they both feel like living today.

One of them is happy to be alone if it’s on her terms. If she’s left alone, well that’s another story. She’s a cranky old lady. Well, I think she’s always been like that. She’s not an Eeyore, just self-absorbed. LOL.

[quietann]

Miss F says she hasn’t carried a rider since early July, but she’s perfectly happy to lie down for a snooze, and is enjoying her retirement.

She has a lot of arthritis, and is on Equioxx and pentosan. And still occasionally acts like a hooligan.

Yes, I miss having a horse to ride, but she’s earned however many more comfortable years she’ll get.

ETA: she’s on the equine equivalent of a “no code/DNR” list. No colic surgery and probably no surgery at all, I would probably try to treat laminitis but not actual founder, treating injuries requiring more than a few weeks stall rest would not be pursued, etc.

[steelerino]

@endlessclimb we see eye to eye on a lot of things but you lost me on this one. If my horse was ridable then why on earth would I have retired him? He wasn’t happy being ridden due to his kissing spines despite all the treatments so why keep pushing. He owes me nothing at 17 so he’s now barefoot, living it up, living medication free in Kentucky with a herd of friends. Hardly a candidate for euthanasia because he couldn’t carry the weight of a rider anymore and had to be retired.

[endlessclimb]

Retire from showing, my fault I wasn’t clear.

I still stand by what I said. If a 30 minute light walk trot excursion leaves a horse crippled the next day, they are in a lot of pain on a daily basis.
Same if they’re unable to stand for the farrier with reasonable breaks (not every 10 seconds, and not propped against a wall). Whether or not their caretakers choose to see it is a whole different matter, I guess.

[quietann]

Mine is fine with the farrier, just needs a little consideration in how he works with her RF because of arthritis in that knee, but the farrier can pick it up and hold it up, put it on the stand and keep it there, etc. Just can’t have much torque put on it.

She carried me willingly, but I stopped riding her because I didn’t want to trash that knee and her left stifle beyond where they are. (She is grade 1 lame on each.) And had a bump developing along her spine just down from her withers that has disappeared since I stopped riding her.

She’s good for an hour+ hand walking with a little hand-trotting, though she can get a bit wild about that. If I walk as fast as I can, she will jog beside me and not get silly.

[S1969]

@endlessclimb

I still stand by what I said. If a 30 minute light walk trot excursion leaves a horse crippled the next day, they are in a lot of pain on a daily basis.
Same if they’re unable to stand for the farrier with reasonable breaks (not every 10 seconds, and not propped against a wall). Whether or not their caretakers choose to see it is a whole different matter, I guess.

But again - why would someone ride a horse that is unsound? So your “test” is impossible. My mare who has arthritis from who knows what prior (undisclosed) injury, and then a torn patellar ligament - is not sound under saddle. At liberty, she can trot, she can canter if she wants. She walks a lot. She gets up and down, she sleeps, eats and drinks, likes a good grooming. Definitely likes to eat.

If I got on her and walk/trot for 30 minutes - you bet she’d be sore tomorrow. Because she hasn’t been ridden in 5 years, and because she has arthritis and probably some permanent soft tissue damage. But why would I even try? So how can I assess her “soundness?”

I give her bute for the farrier because it helps them both; allows a quick trim of the hinds and not requiring my farrier to be on his knees to do it.

But I hardly think she’s suffering on a daily basis.

[mmeqcenter]

Just because they can trot and canter out in the field with their friends, doesn’t mean they’re not in pain. They’re herd animals, they’re always going to try to keep up with the group whenever they can. Riding is a human-specific activity that will likely prevent them from adjusting their gait or posture to relieve some of the pain, as they would out in pasture. Therefore, if riding makes them crippled, that’s an indication that they’re in pain long before a saddle or rider gets on their back.

Pain = suffering.

YMMV

[S1969]

@mmeqcenter

Just because they can trot and canter out in the field with their friends, doesn’t mean they’re not in pain. They’re herd animals, they’re always going to try to keep up with the group whenever they can. Riding is a human-specific activity that will likely prevent them from adjusting their gait or posture to relieve some of the pain, as they would out in pasture. Therefore, if riding makes them crippled, that’s an indication that they’re in pain long before a saddle or rider gets on their back.

Pain = suffering.

YMMV

So you euthanize your horses when they are no longer rideable? Just making sure I understand your point.

ETA: sort of make it easier to manage their “retirement” though.