Saddleseat Myths...haters need to read this.

[SmartAlex]

Tail cutting and setting was commonplace hundreds of years before the ASB was created. The tendons are nicked, but it is becoming much more common to hand stretch the tail instead because you eliminate the risk of the nick healing crooked.

It was first done to prevent harness horses from clamping their tails on the reins and many believe that it frees up a trappy moving horse. Now you can scoff all you want about that, but there are some horses that move just terrible behind until their tails are freed up by nicking or stretching. I have seen it first hand. There are horses that are so tense it’s like their tail is chasing them and they are very unhappy and yes, good setting will fix it. I have hand stretched the tail on my riding horse. Heck, there are a whole bunch of sites on the internet not even remotely related to Saddlebreds about the massage benefits of doing so.

Everyone has this image of ASBs wearing an uncomfortable set 23 hours a day, and no doubt it happens. Many horses, particularly AOTR horses only wear it the week of a show. Some horses cannot be left alone with one on and only wear it when there is staff in the barn to keep an eye on it. A tailboard will NOT prevent a horse from removing a set. Trust me. If a horse wants out of the set, he’s getting out. I’ve found sets on the floor with not a snap or buckle undone, and no straps broken.

I wish that tail setting was not as popular as it is. When done by experts in a well supervised environment the results are harmless, pain free and beautiful. When poorly done or botched later in life by inexperienced caretakers, the result is pitiful.

[SmartAlex]

[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;7400347]
In other words, outlawing tail cutting would not stop tail setting. And at that point you are disliking a ‘look’ that a horse can do without discomfort -and labeling that abuse. [/QUOTE]

Tail cutting is actually illegal in several states. NY for one. And if you exhibit a horse with a cut tail, you are supposed to carry paperwork with you to prove that it was done in a state where it is legal.

The problem with this? It is pretty darn near impossible to prove a tail has been cut unless you can find that tiny scar. And remember, the cutting and setting is done to imitate the ideal ASB trait. Yes folks, there are horses out there that are born looking like their tails have been nicked and set. Now they aren’t going to look like the extreme braced tails, but I guarantee you there are horses out there with tails that are flexible enough to brace that haven’t had a set on in years.

[saultgirl]

I couldn’t watch the tail-set video, it was making me sick.

[D_BaldStockings]

[QUOTE=SmartAlex;7400398]
Tail cutting is actually illegal in several states. NY for one. And if you exhibit a horse with a cut tail, you are supposed to carry paperwork with you to prove that it was done in a state where it is legal.

The problem with this? It is pretty darn near impossible to prove a tail has been cut unless you can find that tiny scar. And remember, the cutting and setting is done to imitate the ideal ASB trait. Yes folks, there are horses out there that are born looking like their tails have been nicked and set. Now they aren’t going to look like the extreme braced tails, but I guarantee you there are horses out there with tails that are flexible enough to brace that haven’t had a set on in years.[/QUOTE]

You left out “illegal in most countries” not just states in the US. I happen to prefer the look of unset tails. But that doesn’t give me license to label a tailset harness as abusive when I have SEEN that it is not. When I see a badly managed Set, that is awful, and a valid reason to discourage use, just as one ought to discourage novices from skiing on the reins, using spurs without letup, or smacking the life out of a horse with a crop or bat - all of which have an accepted use in humanehorsemanship but can easily be abused.

You know I’d love fashion to change, but I’m not the fashion police, either.

[SmartAlex]

[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;7400463]

You know I’d love fashion to change, but I’m not the fashion police, either.[/QUOTE]

Me either. And there are still people out there that prepare their horses differently and win. I’m sure the ASB fashion will eventually go full circle and there will be natural tailed WGCHs again.

Remember some of those old horsemanship books we dug up with the diagrams of how to set a tail before they created tail sets?

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;7400463]
You left out “illegal in most countries” not just states in the US. I happen to prefer the look of unset tails. But that doesn’t give me license to label a tailset harness as abusive when I have SEEN that it is not. When I see a badly managed Set, that is awful, and a valid reason to discourage use, just as one ought to discourage novices from skiing on the reins, using spurs without letup, or smacking the life out of a horse with a crop or bat - all of which have an accepted use in humanehorsemanship but can easily be abused.

You know I’d love fashion to change, but I’m not the fashion police, either.[/QUOTE]

I thought the point of this discussion is that cutting tails is but one more fad, nothing more or less.

When trying to defend that as necessary, well, I think it falls flat, really, any more than defending pierced faces in humans as necessary.:rolleyes:

[D_BaldStockings]

[QUOTE=Appsolute;7400228]
Got it - personally, my horse lives in a large paddock with a stall, gets group turn out for most of the day, works in the arena only occasionally - to improve suppleness and straightness, and otherwise enjoys trail rides (which I take her out on as often as possible as I believe exercise is necessary for the health of the horse. Although sometimes we go for “hikes” instead, I need exercise too so I lead her). Mane and tail are trimmed, never pulled, and she gets to keep her whiskers.

But I see now, the fact that I “ride” her is no different than cutting her tail - and asking her live in a harness 24/7 to keep the tail set in an unnatural position. Totally apples to apples.

I quit pulling manes YEARS ago - I can do a fine job with a clipper blade. No need to put the horse through needless pain for aesthetics. And last I checked, a gelding does not have to live in a harness - its a once time procedure, quick healing time, and then its done.

Really, I do try to avoid inflicting pain or discomfort upon my horse for aesthetics.[/QUOTE]

As posted earlier, the tail is not in an unnatural position. A horse can assume the position taken within a tailset simply by lifting the tail. If a horse in a tailset is unable to lift the tail off the set ‘spoon’ that the tail lies in, then the set is wrongly adjusted and WILL damage the tail dock.

I am not RECOMMENDING that anyone not seriously showing a horse in a set-tail division ever use a tailset, as there would be no need to spend the extra time needed daily to care for a horse in a set which is largely excessive outside of a show establishment; I am only explaining that a horse can raise the tail off the padded set.

If it could not, there would be no need to carefully pad, tie and wrap the tail to prevent the horse simply swishing sideways out of the set.

[SmartAlex]

[QUOTE=Bluey;7400486]
I thought the point of this discussion is that cutting tails is but one more fad, nothing more or less.[/QUOTE]

A 300+ year old “fad”.

[D_BaldStockings]

[QUOTE=Bluey;7400486]
I thought the point of this discussion is that cutting tails is but one more fad, nothing more or less.

When trying to defend that as necessary, well, I think it falls flat, really, any more than defending pierced faces in humans as necessary.:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

Hold on, there.
Remember I stated that setting would not go away with cutting being abolished.

The look is the fashion. How it is achieved could be interpreted as possible abuse (if you are anti-surgical alteration of nature) or simple dislike (tailsets look icky and I don’t do it, so it must be painful…) and dislike is not ever reason enough to label something abusive.

No, I don’t think cutting is necessary. I am not defending cutting, others will have to do that. The look, which does not require cutting, but does benefit from setting, is a choice, not an abuse.

On the other hand, I would have no problem buying a horse that had had the tail cut or ever been in a set.
There would be no effect on the horse’s future usefulness or appearance except it would be very good about having the tail handled without kicking or becoming stressed.

I would definitely have a problem with a horse that had been nerved, had massive joint injections, or otherwise desensitized to lameness surgically, even though that would be for alleviating pain.

[D_BaldStockings]

By the way, not all Saddle seat horses are ridden etc. with an altered or set tail.

The style of riding/driving does not go with a set-tail like a siamese twin.

If that was all there was to any discipline, one could throw on a western saddle and one-ear bridle and voila! reining horse; or pop on a dressage saddle and crank noseband with a tailcoat on the rider and oooh! dressage pirouette exemplar; or girth up a hunt saddle and braid, do hunter hair and you’re magically getting every distance and a back-cracking jump.

I enjoy watching all disciplines, and appreciate superb performances.
I can see abuses in all disciplines, as well.

Seeing abuse where a horse is comfortable and good natured without ‘better living through medicine’ only because ‘they do things really different’ in discipline XX is easy to do.
That doesn’t mean thinking something is abuse is correct.
Sometimes it is and sometimes it is simply different.

[NBChoice]

This is NOT related to the tail setting/cutting issue being discussed. I just wanted to post this video that is a short history of Saddlebreds for anyone who is interested. It is from the Saddlebred association’s youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1I51sn9s3A

Also, I know I am an AOTR, so different from a training barn. However, my Saddlebreds all live in a stall with an attached run. Even my show horse with wedge pads on his front hooves. The only time he is shut in his stall is when the weather is super crappy out, and at night time. He (the show horse) gets turned out in the arena and round pen with bell boots on. A lot of the AOTR’s DO turn out their horses, even with show shoes on. I know of training barns in the area that also turn out their horses in the arena with protective boots on. It is not uncommon.

I’ve said my part on that. Carry on with the tail discussion.

[ccoronios]

Thank you, blairasb - that was a lovely, educated response and description.

There are trainers in every breed & discipline that any compassionate horseperson would avoid like the plague. Unfortunately, there are not enough compassionate horsepeople to put these people out of business.

Just because one type of horse goes differently than the one you’re accustomed to does NOT mean it’s bad, mistreated, poorly trained, or stupid. It means that YOU are not educated - or willing to become objectively, historically educated - as to that particular horse’s/discipline’s purpose. And that makes you a lesser horseperson.

[Bluey]

[QUOTE=ccoronios;7401242]
Thank you, blairasb - that was a lovely, educated response and description.

There are trainers in every breed & discipline that any compassionate horseperson would avoid like the plague. Unfortunately, there are not enough compassionate horsepeople to put these people out of business.

Just because one type of horse goes differently than the one you’re accustomed to does NOT mean it’s bad, mistreated, poorly trained, or stupid. It means that YOU are not educated - or willing to become objectively, historically educated - as to that particular horse’s/discipline’s purpose. And that makes you a lesser horseperson.[/QUOTE]

Hold your horses there.
No need to insult anyone just because some disagree with you, or dislike what you like in a horse.

Best to do what you think is right and let that show it is beyond reproach.
Do understand it won’t be everyone’s cup of tea.

[Alagirl]

[QUOTE=ccoronios;7401242]
Thank you, blairasb - that was a lovely, educated response and description.

There are trainers in every breed & discipline that any compassionate horseperson would avoid like the plague. Unfortunately, there are not enough compassionate horsepeople to put these people out of business.

Just because one type of horse goes differently than the one you’re accustomed to does NOT mean it’s bad, mistreated, poorly trained, or stupid. It means that YOU are not educated - or willing to become objectively, historically educated - as to that particular horse’s/discipline’s purpose. And that makes you a lesser horseperson.[/QUOTE]

Ah, yes…the ‘you don’t know what you are looking at’ defense…

[poltroon]

What I will encourage people to do - and it’s advice for every discipline - is to stay vigilant about judging preferences and judging standards and how they affect management of horses. We saw how a halter preference for tiny feet damaged the Quarter Horse as a useful performance animal, and we’ve talked at length about how the perceived penalty for normal horsey expression in hunters has encouraged terrible practices there.

So when horses are rewarded, or perceived to be rewarded, for a high tailset (or for that matter, for an extremely low, quiet tail) that can be better achieved by artificial means, is that what you meant to do for your discipline and the people and horses in it?

Someone said, “I’m not the horse fashion police.” Begging your pardon, but we all are, and all need to be. It is our job to protect them.

Here is an approach from a different five-gaited breed:

FEIF (International Federation of Icelandic Horse Associations) does not permit clipping the horse’s whiskers:

“The Icelandic horse is an unique breed with special qualities related to its primitive character. It shall be shown respect unreservedly. The following rules apply at all times: the natural appearance (e.g. natural growth and colour of hair) of the horse shall not be changed. Exceptions – the mane and tail may be trimmed if too long, and the horse may be clipped for health and welfare reasons. Hair on the muzzle, fetlocks, and inside the ears shall not be clipped. The rider shall take into account the special background and needs of the Icelandic horse, and keep the horse under as natural conditions as possible, which provide enough light, fresh air and space for free exercise. Artificial or psychological methods to alter the natural expression of the horse are not allowed.”

[wendy]

As posted earlier, the tail is not in an unnatural position. A horse can assume the position taken within a tailset simply by lifting the tail.

What you’re actually doing with that tailset is damaging muscles and tendons by artificially holding the tail in that “natural” position for much longer than is normal. Which will be painful to the horse during the process, and causes permanent damage= abuse. Try tying your arm around behind your back to your belt- a very natural position. Now try being tied in that position for several hours. Hurts after a bit, even though it’s natural, and soon enough the pain turns into absolute agony. Try tying your arm into that position for hours a day, day after day. Your arm will start to suffer permanent disability in the way it moves and functions.

and until they outright ban the “special” shoes and pads from saddle seat shows, I’m going to continue to not be a fan. they might not be able to stop trainers from being abusive at home, but they can quite easily get rid of one bit of abuse in public.

don’t hate the venue, just hate abuse. and certain venues seem to lend themselves to abuse more than others.

[GraceLikeRain]

@D_BaldStockings;7400487

As posted earlier, the tail is not in an unnatural position. A horse can assume the position taken within a tailset simply by lifting the tail. If a horse in a tailset is unable to lift the tail off the set ‘spoon’ that the tail lies in, then the set is wrongly adjusted and WILL damage the tail dock.

I can lift my left arm above my head. In fact, I do it quite frequently. Sometimes I get really excited and I sprint around like a lunatic waving BOTH arms above my head. That doesn’t mean that I want to live with my left arm set in a padded brace at shoulder height. Nor would telling me that I could still lift my arm higher if I so desired provide me with any degree of joy about my predicament.

It is unnatural because it is not the height at which the tail naturally rests. Consequently, it is going to cause tension in other parts of the hindquarters as a compensation mechanism. This seems like very common sense.

If you want to argue that you are okay with setting tails because you don’t care about the discomfort then that’s fine, but do not expect that using the excuse of it being “natural” will fly on COTH.

[D_BaldStockings]

[QUOTE=wendy;7401621]
What you’re actually doing with that tailset is damaging muscles and tendons by artificially holding the tail in that “natural” position for much longer than is normal. Which will be painful to the horse during the process, and causes permanent damage= abuse. Try tying your arm around behind your back to your belt- a very natural position. Now try being tied in that position for several hours. Hurts after a bit, even though it’s natural, and soon enough the pain turns into absolute agony. Try tying your arm into that position for hours a day, day after day. Your arm will start to suffer permanent disability in the way it moves and functions.

and until they outright ban the “special” shoes and pads from saddle seat shows, I’m going to continue to not be a fan. they might not be able to stop trainers from being abusive at home, but they can quite easily get rid of one bit of abuse in public.

don’t hate the venue, just hate abuse. and certain venues seem to lend themselves to abuse more than others.[/QUOTE]

Have you ever touched a horse with, say, a sore back? Did you notice the flinch? Horses tell you if something hurts.

A sore tail would be sore.
The horse would object to it being handled.
If that happens, you are doing things wrong.

Horses lift their tails to poop. Painlessly.

An arm tied behind your back is not at all the same as a finger in a splint, an arm in a sling or a tail in a set.
Being supported in a natural range of motion position is not painful in and of itself.
Nor is there permanent damage unless the tail is also cut; muscles are very adaptable and quickly return to unhabituated use range, most retireees and horses off work use and carry their tails fully, including being capable of showing the active dressage swing of a correct tail.

And remember a horse is out of the set daily for grooming, work, etc.
If it was painful, the horse would be objecting and the pace at the stable would slow to a crawl. It simply isn’t so at a stable where people do things correctly.

My own horses were purchased after careers or never used in SS discipline: you can’t tell the difference between their tails now unless you go back and look at a show picture.

Perhaps it is time for the question: If there were no tailsets, would everyone be on board that SS is not abusive or are there other issues…?

[GraceLikeRain]

[QUOTE=D_BaldStockings;7401743]
If there were no tailsets, would everyone be on board that SS is not abusive or are there other issues…?[/QUOTE]

Please refer to pages 1-7 for a small sample of the other concerns. Tailsetting is just one of many disturbing practices.

[D_BaldStockings]

[QUOTE=GraceLikeRain;7401879]
Please refer to pages 1-7 for a small sample of the other concerns. Tailsetting is just one of many disturbing practices.[/QUOTE]

Disturbing practices; or disturbed reactions/interpretations to practices outside of a personal experience zone?

If a horse stops at a jump, is that indicative that the horse is too sore to jump?
If a horse being trained to piaffe shifts weight to the forehand, rocks sideways or fades to a stop, is it sore?
Is it correct to ask either of these animals in their respective situations to ‘step it up’ by cueing or correcting with a crop or whip?

I am only trying to point out that where one stands may change an opinion on whether an action of another person is acceptable.

There is a large difference between
“I was in a barn on Wednesday about 2pm, all the horses were in stalls and the interior was dark natural wood, no lights.” and
“I can tell you the barns are kept dark which hurts the horses and the horses never get out, all those people are so abusive.”

One snowfall does not an Antarctica make.

There are barns where when the barn help leaves and the horses have had their morning works, the lights go out and the horses rest or snooze in their stalls for part of the afternoon until activity ramps up with the after school lessons, etc.

Horses have very good dark adaptation vision compared to humans and canter around easily at night wehn humans are tripping over every tuft of grass in the paddock.

Horses left out in rain or snow don’t melt. Nor do horses kept up in stalls go lame or necessarily develop ulcers.

Disliking a method for a valid reason or even for personal preference is everyone’s prerogative.
Labeling what is disliked as abusive ought to have some science behind it beyond ‘I’ve heard’ and ‘I believe’.

Personally, I would wish more people would take advantage of the opportunity to contact local lesson stables in all disciplines and try out for themselves/ feel what is actually going on with the people and the horses.

-I don’t do lessons, my horses are OLD and retired, and I don’t have an indoor. So don’t ask me, I can’t fulfill that.

Cheers