IS 2 too young to sit on a horse? [Archive]

CMR

20th Feb 2006, 06:23 AM

What is the point of sitting on, if you are not planning on riding pretty closely in the future? The only purpose of "sitting" on a horse that I see is to get the horse used to the weight, movement, etc, of a strange being upon it's back to prepare it for the human being to sit on and walk, then eventually do other gaits. If you do this too early, and then quit doing it, you might as well have never done it at all(and very well could have caused damage in the process.)You don't need to "sit on" too often either, because depending on the horse, it should only take a few times to figure out what is going on(which is when you would progress to actually moving.) I don't think you should sit on until your horse is ready to be ridden. I have had people tell me, "Well if you don't start sitting on him now, once he's older and you try to start riding him he'll be too big to control." WHAT?!? This is a 2 1/2 year old 16 hand Spotted Draft that already weighs 1500+(according to a weight tape)you're talking about, he's already big. Even if he does get bigger, there was no "controlling" him to begin with(sorry, had to stick in a little rant :D)

So to answer your question, yes I do think it is too soon to start sitting on. And to add in another thing, I wouldn't advice the owner to get a bridle just yet, unless she is willing to fork out the money for a few more until he is full grown, his head is still growing too. ;)

Cheeky

20th Feb 2006, 08:45 AM

I have been really interested reading and following this thread .. and I think I will comment.

I was hoping that you would mention this .. but I'll ask anyways.

Have you ever trained a horse (a young horse at that) to be broken in??

I don't mean to sound negative or rude .. but to be honest I don't think you have. My reasons - 1. You think that it's time to get a bridle for his 'big head'. I mean, come on, unless your doing inhand showing, there is no point. He is still growing - like duh. He isn't even two - he is still maturing to his destined shape. So I would NOT recomend a bridle. You have NO use for it .. he will still need his teeth done anyways .. and plus, Your NOT riding.

2. You think, and I will quote, well she just doesnt want me to get hurt. (I thought that was what she was paying me for) . Sorry - but do you honestly think that someone would PAY to get you hurt?? Or even want you hurt?? Do you think your going to get hurt?? If you think this, I personally think you should step away from the horse. If your willing to alow yourself to get into a position to get hurt, why would you?? This horse almost sounds dangerous towards you.

And now to answer your question of .. BUT WHAT DO YOU THINK? Is this really too soon to sit on the horse and reenforce what has already been taught from the ground?

YES
Ofcoarse I think it's way too early to sit on that poor horse. He's hardly even two yet, and I don't give a flip if you want to get up and 'test' him out or what ever ...

Yes, I do put this harshly because you MUST understand that this horse isn't even two - It may not seem a big deal yet .. but there is honestly no rush!! This horse obviously has a career of being ridden for the rest of his life .. at least alow him to be grown up enough to deal with this!!!!

I will also point out, you said you have been working with this horse for a few months. If I am training a horse, like Missy, I wouldn't even consider sitting on her back unless I have confidence in her, and she has trust and confidence in me to show her the way through. And because I have waited - I have had no accidents. I know it seems supernatural .. but think about it. I spent over 6 months with her ... more than that, and I have sat on her .. what .. 4-6 times?? Only ever in walk. And I have never had any accidents, she is calm when I do ride, is relaxed and trusts me through difficult situations. The opposite was G - she didn't wait to gain confidence and jumped straight up. She has fallen off about 5++ times, and Missy can't confide in her .. example - she wouldnt walk through water. Fair enough, her first time. G tried for 10 mins then gave up. I took over, walked her straight in.

Sure, it doesnt seem a lot and prob wont effect you in any way .. but geez. Common sense please? That's all it is ... I personally do NOT believe in backing a horse until at LEAST the age of 3. I am strong about that .. but thats just me.

I do not blame his owner for 'freaking out' .. I would have to if you asked me.

So .. question time:

- how many (if any) horses have you trained before?
- What have you done with him so far?
- what else do you plan to do with him?
- How much do you trust this horse?
- More importantly .. how much does the horse trust you?
- Could you lead that horse past something scarry or through water for the first time or past barking dogs without him freaking out?
- Just out of interest .. what was the .. erge to ride him?? I am not discriminating .. I am just curious

KateWooten

20th Feb 2006, 03:03 PM

I wouldn't even consider sitting on her back unless I have confidence in her, and she has trust and confidence in me to show her the way through. And because I have waited - I have had no accidents

There is an enormous amount of truth in this statement. If you don't imediately recognise the truth of it, think about it next time you are out with your horse. I'm a novice at colt starting, so some of the rest of Cheeky's advice strikes me as a little harsh - everybody has to start somewhere - but she clearly has excellent 'feel' for the horse. She says maybe it sounds 'supernatural' - well, maybe it does sound off-the-wall if you've never thought of it this way, but once you have, it makes perfect sense. "Listen to the horse". Once you've figured out how to do that, he will tell you, very clearly, when he's ready.

Both my two, once I started listening to them, were started, backed, ridden out, have done their first trail rides, negotiated ditches ... all without accident or incident, because we waited, listened, developed trust and set up a 2-way dialogue.

I can also tell the same story as Cheeky ... my DH didn't take time with joePony - "he's broke for you isn't he ? I'll just get on him and ride". joePony pitched a bucking fit and DH was back on the ground. joePony has never bucked with me - I didn't think there was a buck in him !

KarinUS

20th Feb 2006, 07:00 PM

Are you kidding?
I would be livid if I caught anybody trying to sit on my 22 months old Perch X. Breed doesn't even have anything to do with it.

CMR

20th Feb 2006, 07:10 PM

Bravo Cheeky! :D You said what I wanted to say, I just didn't have the guts to be "harsh."(afraid of those flames, I am:o ) When I started my first reply to this post, I was being very bad :p I had to go back an edit several times. Naughty me:p . Once again, bravo Cheeky!:D

Morwenstow Stud

21st Feb 2006, 02:31 AM

Just to add my two penneth. I see lots of comparison of horse age to human age. I was always taught that there are approximately 3 horse years to one human year. This means that at 2 a horse would be rougly the equivalent of a 6yo child.Would you expect or ask a 6yo child to go to to work? I'd be disgusted by anyone I knew that was backing a 2yo.

stormy's mum

21st Feb 2006, 03:07 AM

my ri backed her colt at 2 and he was just fine no bucking or anxiety he trusts her completly if you are experianced enough you can get on their back and slowly introduce weight and movement race horses are raced at 2 i would not ride them a lot but getting used to weight will help them in the long run. just bellying them and sitting on them would be alright but no running

KarinUS

21st Feb 2006, 03:11 AM

I think many of the 'crimes' we commit against young horses won't surface until they are older. That's why it is so easy for people to ignore that what theya re doing is ignorant and wrong.
If they sell the horse on somebody else will get to deal with the fall out. If they keep it they still have the luxury of being in denial about the fact that they contributed to the horse's problems.

1 morejump

21st Feb 2006, 03:20 AM

I have 3 year old, 4 in June, Belgian mix. The lady I bought him only did ground work and some lunging. When I bought him he was so much more advanced than other horses twice his age because she had done a lot of work using a properly fitting saddle without getting on.

As far as actual riding goes, that first summer we did ride. Not much I understood very well that too much riding on a youngster can do damage, we didn't do more that 10 minuets of very light trot and walk work. During the school year he got his time off and during the summer we did light trot/walk work. In the summer of last year, when he turned 3 we moved and got land of our own and he is getting the full year off. When he is 4 we are going to start with the Dressage basics, in-hand work.

Cheeky

21st Feb 2006, 11:13 AM

KateWooten - congrats on your horse :)

but she clearly has excellent 'feel' for the horse.

Aww .. you make me blush lol! Thanks :)

negotiated ditches ... all without accident or incident, because we waited, listened, developed trust and set up a 2-way dialogue.
I thought that was cute .. 'negotiated ditches' .. and its great to see a young horse have such confidence in a rider :) Congrats!

cvreagzayn - hehehe thankyou :) I try to put my opinion accross effectively and .. gentley as possible :p But I dont think that there is any point 'sugar coating' something like this ... this is a horses' life at risk and a riders.

I agree with your post too cvreagzayn :)

Morwenstow Stud - I agree. I am very disguested when I see horses for sale that are just two years old and have already learnt to jump over 1.5m with a rider and begin dressage .. its disgusting.

fi-76

21st Feb 2006, 05:53 PM

[QUOTE=caitiesbell] (I thought that was what she was paying me for)

This poor owner is paying..you...!!!:eek:

Sorry, but how can you, with a clear conscience, accept payment to bring on someone's youngster and demonstrate such a complete lack of the absolute basic knowledge and horsemanship. If only we could show this thread to the owner and advise them to get some suitable experienced help.

You really got me (and apparently a few others) backs up, please please for the sake of your own safety and the horses you are in contact with, go get some lessons and training.

SupaTania

21st Feb 2006, 08:43 PM

the three year old i am considering purchasing, was backed at 2 1/2 and turned out for the fall and winter with no work done to him.

He is still bumhigh, but is very level-headed and allowed himself to be ridden again for the first time since august last week. He went well, needs work on steering, but is a calm and steady mount. If i do buy him, we will be working on ground manners and perhaps some clickertraining, and allow him to grow and develop a bit before I hope on and ride him. And even with riding him, We won't be doing much more then walking and trotting, and absolutely no jumping until he is at least 5, and even then simple crossrails will suffice. Although I will be getting him used to ground poles as soon as i possible can, i am in no rush, and want him to carry on as a baby.

Afellpony

21st Feb 2006, 09:29 PM

I personally wouldn't sit on a horse until it was 3 years old, nearer to 4 is best. As others have said the larger breeds are much slower to mature and you could do untold damage to soft bones and tissue at your horse's stage. Be patient and wait until the horse is old enough bot physically and mentally to have someone climb aboard. You can still make valuable use of the time spent with him by walking him in hand and showing him things. Perhaps even take him to a small show that has classes for in hand young stock.

JOJOBA

21st Feb 2006, 09:51 PM

Much too young! Why rush him out of being a baby?
The young horses I know were backed at 4 yrs old and then turned away to mature, coming back into work well into 5yrs old and then not properly starting any ridden work until about 7.
The youngest horse I ride is 5 and he is SUCH a baby. We only do very basic things with him and allow him to be green.
Rushing into things just ruins the horse - someone said to me the other day on a thread 'slow and steady wins the race' and I must say it applies to all aspects of horse riding.
When I acquire my baby it will spend the first 3 years of it's life being fussed, handled, but ultimately left alone. Then more handling and groundwork, then at 4 I will consider a saddle and possibly a sit on. Who knows.
Because percherons are big they give the impression of maturity, but he's still a baby in that huge oversized body, with baby bones and baby reactions.

xxx

Morwenstow Stud

22nd Feb 2006, 03:07 AM

One of mine is just turned 5 and he has only been started ridden in the last 3 months.He just wasn't mentally ready.It's not just a physical thing.

horselover1002

26th Feb 2006, 01:35 AM

NEVER!!!! wait till your horse is at least 4. if you dont it could result in not being able to ride in the future or sway back thats bad. so dont start to early.

caitiesbell

28th Feb 2006, 12:28 AM

So I guess EVERYONE here thinks that Im just some crazy ass bingbat who has taken this ladys baby and is going to just boucher it. Some one asked if i had ever done this before, as in breaking a horse yes as a matter a fact I have a have broken a few young colts and they have turned out quite well might I add. So far what I have been doing with this one is a lot of ground work. I work him in the round pen free lounging him so that he knows his voice comands. As to being calm when loud things are happening near him he is very good, we have worked on all kinds of "scary monsters" he doesnt mind dogs and their barking there is one to barks at him sometimes when im working him in the round pen. The trust between this horse and me on my end looks good he respects and listens to me, but the day I start trusting a Perch. baby is the day I might just have something bad happen. I have decied to wait to ride him and it probably wasnt going to happen until this summer, but thats besides the point. But ITS NOT LIKE I WAS GOING TO GET ON HIM AND START PACING HIM AT THE CANTER OR JUMPING HIM. IT WAS MORE OF WALKING, WEIGHT AND STEARING. SO thank you all for you bashing XOXOXO

Gracie

28th Feb 2006, 01:14 AM

Though I do agree with ALL of you that I totally think its a bad idea to sit on the horse....

I wouldn't go as FAR to say that the lady shouldn't be paying her and she knows nothing... Look how many trainers do train their horses at two I have seen more than 30 in my day and I am only 21 years old and only been around horses for 12 years. It is a very "old school" style of training. Look at how many race horse trainers ride the horses at a year old. Though I am not agreeing with it, and I do believe it is wrong, I can see where caitiesbell could get these ideas. There are still many trainers out there doing things the old school way even with the wealth of development in the horse world.

In addition I was put down and made fun of for 2 years when I didn't want to ride my two year old because I thought it was too early, and that was more than 1 barn that I went to.. who thought she should have someone on her back and trained.

This site is here for learning so I give caitiesbell kudos for doing the right thing by asking before she ran out and jumped on his back.

We all start our learning somewhere and if you really want to help someone understand the right way to do things, why not explain it to them in a way that makes sense and that is total fair.

So many people here gave me a wealth of information when I first bought Gracie (My first horse).

So lets at least give her credit for asking!:)

blackhorses

28th Feb 2006, 11:20 AM

I certainly agree with everyone that starting a 2yr old is too young and I personally would not even consider lunging it until it was at least 3yrs old even if it is loose. If you are that desperate to get some training into it at this age then the only thing I would be doing would be take it for a walk on a headcollar either with another older horse or while you take your dog for a walk so it gets used to things this way, there is only so much a baby horse can take in as they have the attention span of a goldfish! I personally don't do anything with my youngsters until they are 3 except halter train them and get them used to having thier feet picked up and groomed, I leave them to just be horses and to learn social behavior and how to react to things from the rest of the herd, and all my youngsters are really laid back and trust me. I have a 7yr old that I haven't even considered training yet as he was badly treated with his past owners, they tried to break him at 11/2yrs, it really screwed him up horses don't forget. I have had him for 4yrs and it has taken him that long to trust people and learn to be a horse again, I'm not in any hurry as it would ruin him, as horses have long lives it is pointless to rush things and will only backfire as they get older. I would leave the youngster alone if he is halter trained and start on him at the earliest 3yrs, but would not back him until he is 4.

Cheeky

28th Feb 2006, 01:26 PM

The trust between this horse and me on my end looks good he respects and listens to me, but the day I start trusting a Perch. baby is the day I might just have something bad happen. I have decied to wait to ride him and it probably wasnt going to happen until this summer, but thats besides the point.

SO thank you all for you bashing XOXOXO

I am sorry, but how dare you come back on here and expect us to agree that sitting on a horse under the age of two is acceptable! And then, after asking for our opinions and advice (As that is what this fourm is about) - you come back and acuse us of 'our bashing'!

The bits in bold .. I wanna talk about:

The day you start trusting a Perch Baby ... sorry but what does BREED have anything to do with it? If your horse trusts you, who cares what breed it is? That's almost like saying I will never trust Australians - I live in australia, but I'll never trust them (I do trust us Auzzies :P luv yaz - only an example). So its a Perch - who cares? I dont think you should judge a horse by its breed - its the personality that counts.

You also said that not happening this summer is besides the point. Then i ask you - what is the point?

Vicki&Milo

1st Mar 2006, 01:55 AM

for goodness sake guys, how old are we round here???
like someones already said, this forum is a place to ask questions, so when people do, accept they are trying to learn and offer ADVICE, but maybe think about how you say things and the way they could be interpretated.
Likewise when people start getting petty walk away-after all-i think we're adults and i think the mods are getting sick of having to keep saying it!!

caitiesbell

1st Mar 2006, 03:56 AM

Holy COW... I think there is a point between constructive criticuism and what ever here is going on. All my point in starting this thread was to ask a question and get some feed back from other people who are not envoled in my situation. YES i did get some helpful information out of this but really it kind of makes asking anything else UNINVITING. I know that when i feel strongly about something I make my point by putting it all out on the table and not trying to make anyone feel less that, because then they will either stop and give up or injure them or someone else in the process of trying to me wrong. When you lay out "YOUR WAY" which is maybe the "more correct way" and allow them to chose it as their own there is not fight and both of you are happy.
And by the way when im working with ANY YOUNG horse i do not trust it that much. I may trust my older horse more. But a horse is a horse and can do anything at anytime. My older horse i know better, BUT the babys are unperdictable. EXCUSE me for just talking about the specific Perch baby, but i do mean anyone of them.

Vicki&Milo

1st Mar 2006, 10:20 AM

walk away

ajhainey

1st Mar 2006, 11:01 AM

Caitesbell - it's just an unfortunate side effect of how message boards work - everyone wants to contribute so even when 10 people have already said something there is always one more wanting to pile in - and tact is not a widely held skill on the 'net :-) Add in the difficulty of getting tone and humour over in writing and this happens all the time, don't feel especially picked on - it happens to loads of people (try posting 'should I use draw reins on my 3 year old, my mum says I should as they are great' for instance :D)

I've been debating posting something on this thread for a while saying 'ease off I'm sure she gets it by now' - the only reason I didn't was that I thought you'd already been back and been scared off :p so don't think that everyone is unsympathetic, at least you asked right?

Don't let it put you off - just be prepared for it - you might find reading, writing answers and then deleting the first one you write and starting over helps with keeping things civil :p Or repeating 'I am a grown up, I will not start a fight on the mesasge board' over and over again in your head until he rage at the previous poster subsides :D

Hope to see you around on here again, and good luck with your baby Perch - I ride a percheron and I think they are FAB!

aj xx

kunama

1st Mar 2006, 11:15 AM

Gentle work i.e walking in hand , lose schooling in a big arena to cut down on corners, and stuff like that should be happening from a year up. If you think lose schooling is too much how much strain do you think traveling a foal to a show puts on it?!?

i personaly like to swim all my babys as soon as they are weened. it is a quater of a mile walk to the beach and they love the outing , little and often will strengthen young bones , joints and ligiments.

2 is abit young for rideing but if it as a big chunky type then yes i'd have a saddle and bridle on a lot of the time and i'd be leaning on him particularly if he is a twitchy sort. on the other hand if he is docile i would not bother leaning on him that often as it is too tempting to do to much too soon.

Voice aids should be well learnt on the lunge and you can do stuff like build obstical courses with bags and tyres and other scary stuff to make him think.

rember all those who would critisise there is a big difference between backing and rideing . and as long as it is not over done early work makes a well rounded horse. i can not say enough how important it is to instill a brave positive foward attitude in youngstock. it takes time and consistancey but i will also say that i would rather a 5 year old that had been brought on slowly but steadily since 3 than a 4 year old that has never been worked. you will find the horse with stronger bones and a better out look is the horse that was started sooner but with sensitivity.

Bones , joints and tendons become tougher through work light concussion encourages strong bone growth. Lots of walking a big circles will strengthen not comprimise the youngsters growth .

Emz

1st Mar 2006, 11:48 AM

I personally don't see the harm in you introducing a bridle and/or lightweight girthed up pad.

The more he experiences now, the easier it will be in the future when it comes to backing him. As long as you're careful not to overface him, it won't harm him.

When i groomed for my old YO at all the county shows, nationals etc all the yearlings/2 year olds were shown with a simple rubber bit and bridle.
Long reining him in a bridle and surcingle will help you teach him about rein aids from the ground.

BSJA wise - 4yr old jumps 1m, 5 yr olds jump 1.10m - Then you get SJers well into their teens still jumping 1.30+.

kunama

1st Mar 2006, 11:59 AM

Emz , quiet right and if anyone belives that BSJA jumpers compeating thier 4yr olds at 1m do'nt jump them till they are four?! well!

also racehorses, they are fine and flighty and are often raced as three and two year olds and they then go on raceing till 11 or 12ish and can live an active working life well ino thier 20's . and if raceing is not strenuouse i dont know what is!!!

KarinUS

1st Mar 2006, 12:54 PM

also racehorses, they are fine and flighty and are often raced as three and two year olds and they then go on raceing till 11 or 12ish and can live an active working life well ino thier 20's . and if raceing is not strenuouse i dont know what is!!!

Yes, they do live an active live - as long as they find somebody who will take them after their racing careers are over at around age 6. Some will survive it okay, some will come away with leg problems right off the bat, others will develop them later and most of them will have poor feet because they were shod long before their feet had fully developed.
Racing's focus is not on long-term health. It's use 'em now and dispose of them later.
I have two ex-racers in their teens and a 20-months old Percheron mix filly (whom I trust very much by the way. Trust is a two-way street. It's got to be earned)

Of course anybody can do anything with horses. What you need to figure out is what your plans are for the horse. Are you planning long-term? Are you concerned about how well the horse will be when it is 10 or 15 or 20? Or will it be most likely gone by then on to another buyer?

I think people have strong opionions on this because for many (including myself) the welfare of horses is a bigger priority than providing a learning experience for people. KWIM? ;)

JOJOBA

1st Mar 2006, 02:36 PM

like someones already said, this forum is a place to ask questions, so when people do, accept they are trying to learn and offer ADVICE, but maybe think about how you say things and the way they could be interpretated.
Likewise when people start getting petty walk away-after all-i think we're adults and i think the mods are getting sick of having to keep saying it!!

I agree with this and think sometimes people do overreact, but also we do have a lot of people who come on and ask questions simply wanting the repliers to agree with them - and you have to be prepared for people not to do that.
Ive been on the sharp end a couple of times, and you know if you start threads about young horses, draw reins, hunting etc etc then there are going to be people who have some pretty strong opinions one way or another.

xxx

Afellpony

1st Mar 2006, 02:45 PM

I personally wouldn't sit on a 2 year old horse. They are not mature enough either physically or mentally. The youngest I've ever sat on one was 3.6 years old. A 2 year old should just be handled and walked around to be introduced to 'things' he/she will meet in every day horsy life. After all, you wouldn't expect a 2 year old kid to go to school. Perhaps you would.:mad:

kunama

1st Mar 2006, 06:41 PM

in england racehorses are seen on the track in to thier 11th and 12th year and do go on to live full and happy lives afterwards. True some break down , but it is a highly strenuous sport , they are top athleets and as such are more prone to injury. And as i said before, i'm sure there are BSJA horses that are jumped at three / three and a half to compeate at four and they go on into thire late teens jumping big tracks and continue to lead a happy working life into thier late 20's. And there is a big diffence between rideing and backing. As a rule the twitchyer a horse and the bigger the sooner i like to start on them , little and often , untill they are 3 - 3 1/2 the focous should be on mental education rather than outlines and rideing. the horse that is twitchy as a two year old will not improve if left till four unless slow education takes place , and if you do wait you are asking for an explosion that could damage horse and rider.

As for trust. well i respect my horses and love them i will ride mine and jump him with no tack on but i do not 'trust' him as such. that would be a foolish thing to do, horses are at the end of the day big dangeruse animals that are unpredictiable. i have a strong bond with my horse i resect him he respects me and we love each other very much but i think trust is a bad word to describe the relationship people have with thier horses.

Aphrodite

1st Mar 2006, 07:15 PM

Hi all.

Must say, I do agree with the majority here. 1 1/2 is far too young IMHO. two is too young to be sat on, though you can still teach it other stuff (i'e', lifting feet). Disco will be four in may and is still growing (upwards - she's filled out a tiny bit but is still very narrow).

She was backed within the last few months, I think I've sat on her about ten times. About four of these have been walking on the lunge for her to get used to leg and had etc aids in relation to stopping and starting. There's no way I'm going to canter her. Her balance is all to pot as she's still growing and it won't benefit her inthe slightest.

There's loads you can do with a youngster. Teaching it to stand quitely when tied, hoof picking, leg hosing/washing (to get off mud), applying bandages, wraps, plaiting manes. The horse just needs to be used to people and knowing that people = good. trying new things like bandages will keep her mind ticking over and will also help you greatly should (God forbid) anything bad happen. I'm not suggesting leaving them on for any period of time, just applying them, leaving the horse have a look and a fiddle for 5-10mins and then taking it off.

Get it used to u looking under it's lips at it's teeth, all useful for the future. The more you do on the ground with a horse, the more used to your voice it is, the less likely you are to have any difficulties when it's ready to be broken as it'll trust you more from having guided it gently thru all these new things.;)

Good luck. :)

fine_filly1992

1st Mar 2006, 07:26 PM

HI i am new!! any way where i ride we break in horses n sometimes it is oldewr but it is normally 3 or 4 bu no younger but it depends on how mature the horse is!!!

Gracie

3rd Mar 2006, 01:29 AM

I have to agree with KarinUS here, that many race horses have poor feet, and have many leg problems in the future. My pony is 37, he had a WONDERFUL life with people who respected him, now in my time of knowing horses I don't know one ex race horse who lives to 30 LAME FREE, I don't even know 1 who lived to 30 PERIOD... That doesn't mean it hasn't happen.. but I would find it hard to believe...

kunama

3rd Mar 2006, 10:53 AM

herbyhorse

4th Mar 2006, 10:46 PM

yes too young!!!!

forgoodness sake when will we let our horses mature!

to young!!

ooo! :E

used to brake 2 yr TB - (badHH) wrong! and we must protest the racing industry... horses do not mature until 4 yrs!

stoli_dolly

22nd Mar 2006, 01:13 PM

Thanks guys for a very informative thread, you have just answered everything I could have possibly asked about training my 1 and 1/2yr old arab filly. excepting maybe this.....

When I took my filly out for a walk to somewhere we could go for a swim, should I walk out leading her and her companion mare or can I ride the companion and lead the filly?

Tracey

KateWooten

22nd Mar 2006, 03:06 PM

yes, you can ride the older and lead the younger - train up to it though, don't just hop on the older one and expect to be able to manage the youngster and ropes and everything out on a trail striaght off ! Also, it's easier if you ride western and have a horn to hang on to, and to take the pressure off your rope hand ... always assuming your older horse can take the rope perssure on tehe saddle. Anyways, train up to it in a safe area, and go when you're good and ready.

Kate

Baileigh

26th Mar 2006, 05:14 PM

In agreeance with everyone else based on the age thing, as I think that's been well answered.

However, I don't feel you should be riding any animal you don't trust. That just rings alarm bells with me. If I feel I don't trust an animal, I do a lot of work on the ground with, I get to know it and it's responses to various things, and I won't ride them until I feel I can trust them - while trust doesn't mean I don't expect them to ''do wrong'', it means that I trust they will be relatively sensible, they won't behave dangerously or in general put myself or themself in a situation where either of us could come to harm. Horses also know when you don't trust them, it's a bit like knowing when someone is afraid, and if you don't trust them, why should they trust you? Horses do pick up on these things.

And to further on what other people have said, breed makes no difference. The shetland pony who I trained/tamed/broke in was more wily and likely to do something than my current cob, who weighs over a ton. It's not about the breed, it's about the animal itself.

vickie

26th Mar 2006, 05:44 PM

I do . i know several x racers who are in thier 30's but mostly they do just make late 20's. TB's wether raced or not are more prone to foot and leg problems, they have been bred fo speed not good feet. If you dont look after a tb properly it will develop problems like any other horse, wether raced or not. raceing gives many eventers thier start in life, Andrew nickolson buys his horses when they have raced at two and three because it gives them a bold positive outlook , and i certianly think that raceing a two year old with a lightweight rider is far less damageing than jumping a three year old before it is muscularly sound. The raceing industry does have pitfalls like any big sport but it does breed horses for quality , and in this country looks after them (in most cases)once thier carrer is over.

this is not a dig, but i suggest you do some research on the wastage of horses coming out of racing, yes some do go on to live productive lives but an awful lot don't :( its nice that andrew nicholson buys ex racers, shame almost nobody else does, they are ten a penny and tend to go for below market rates because people know they are ex racers and know the soundness risks that come with that. i'd also be interested to know the difference in jumping a 3 yr old and racing a 2 yr old, surely the 2 things are on par?
just because something does happen doesn't make it right.

and i only wish that in this country we looked after ex racers once their racing career is over :(

Baileigh

26th Mar 2006, 10:40 PM

Racing wise... my knowledge isn't completely sound, but due to the age many are raced at (remember not all racers start at 2 years old, some start as 3 or even 4 year olds) - they do incur damage to their limbs, there are percentage who simply ''die'' on the track (accepting that they don't drop dead, but are put to sleep due to injuries too expensive to repair), then you have a percentage who are put down at the stable yard they live at - again due to injuries. There is a high percentage of injury and fatality among race horses - and it is mainly connected with the age that they start racing, before they are mature and fully formed. Also to blame are breeding practices where TBs today are much leaner, and of less bone than TBs of previous generations, to make them sleeker and faster on their feet - but sadly, also much more fragile.

A race horse may end it's career at a number of ages, for a 2 year old start, I believe if they get to 6 or 7, they are doing good. Many only have a 2 year run, from the ages of 2 to 4. Remember, the reason many come off the track - apart from injuries, is because they stop winning, and many stables are unwilling to feed and keep a ''loser''. For those racers who race at an older age, say 7+, there are very few of those who actually started at 2 years old. Many are also steeplechasers, as opposed to flat racers.

At the end of a racing TBs track career, they are lucky if they get a good home. While yes, there are a lot of good stories of rehabilitated TBs (and also STBs), there are thousands upon thousands of race horses coming out of racing each there, and it is not a large percentage that have a happy ending. Many end up in the meat trade, because no-one wants them. Quite a few are ''broken down'', others simply don't do well in re-training.

So, the race industry isn't a pretty picture for the animals involved. And the starting age isn't necessarily good, and there is opposition to having 2 year olds racing, many feel it is too young, and too much stress. Which I do agree with. But the reason being, the owner wants them racing as soon as possible, so they aren't dead weights on the budget. They want them earning their keep, not eating them out of house and home without contributing, another reason why they have 2 year old starts.

On a side point, I'm also led to believe that some western - I think western pleasure horses, may start under saddle showing wise at 2 years old. I've seen debates on this before, arguing the case when people have said it's cruel to ride a QH at 2 years old (yet agree with racing a 2 y.o TB).

But for a mainly pleasure beast, who is not requiring to start a show or race career at an early age, there is no reason on this earth to rush it. For a pleasure horse, you want the best out of them, and you also want long term soundness. You have to be looking at the future, which going back to the race industry, they don't. They don't care if by the age of 6, the animal can't walk, they only care about it's fitness and health between the ages of 2 and around 5.

prettybluepony

27th Mar 2006, 12:30 AM

Well at my yard we handle them to two and half years old, turn them out till they are three. Break them in, teach them the basics, and get them relaxed and confident. Then they turned away to "grow up".

We have a 4 year old race horse, completly sound, started lightly last year for a slightly harder 2006(gradual race build up). She's lovley, hacks out, not flighty or what ever, calm as anything.

Jaimee

27th Mar 2006, 03:00 AM

Noone has mentioned the studies done about CAREFULLY conditioning young horses and the increase in strength and longeivity of the animal. I cant remember the details but I know 2yo TB's were used and they were broken in with a very lightweight well balanced rider- track rider or similar. They were also walked over distance inhand and swam I believe and then medical and physical tests were done to assess how they fared. All horses had an increase in tendon and ligament development and heart and lung capacity compared to others in the group that werent worked.

This was to demonstrate that if done carefully it can be benificial too the horse for its longterm health.

This study was done in New Zealand where Andrew Nicholson is from incidentally. A lot of horses are broken in very lightly here at 2. And I do have to say our horses last easily just as long as yours do of any breed. It really just comes down to the care and correctness of what is done.

What is the difference between breaking in a 2yo that is perfectly mannered and has a wonderful trusting relaltionship. Walking for 10mins on each ride for maybe 5-10 rides so you have turning and stopping well established then turning out until its ready to do more? I beleive in this for the right horse because the best way is a gradual progression throughout life.

Or how many of us regularly as kids rode around on our friends backs crawling around on the floor. We used to do that all the time... And I can tell you now that a 20kilo child on another 20kilo child is a much higher percentage of weight carried than a 50kilo rider on a 600-700kilo horse. It all comes down to WHAT you do. I definately dont think its fair to shoot Caitiesbell down for asking. Put it in perspective! I sat on my girl when she was a year and 8 months. Of course she was lying down at the time and I didnt put weight on her. But if I just said to some of you that I had sat on her,what would you say?

At the same time as saying all this, I beleive if you dont have any reason to start them early why not wait. It is everyons own decision as to what they beleive. I know many of you are argueing for the sake of the animal and good on you. But how do you really know the difference it makes?? I have seen young and old horses mistreated. I have also seen horses broken in young last an incredible long time and be happy in their work for many, many years at top level.

KarinUS

27th Mar 2006, 03:13 AM

But how do you really know the difference it makes?? I have seen young and old horses mistreated. I have also seen horses broken in young last an incredible long time and be happy in their work for many, many years at top level.
I would liken that statement to the observation that there are 90 year olds that have smoked for the past 60 years and there are 30 year olds (people) that die of cancer eventhough theyr have always lived well. But that doesn't make smoking a good or healthy choice. It just means that some bodies hold up regardless. Smoking still increases the risk factors for a lot of diseases and conditions. Just because some guy smoked till he was a hundret doesn't make it a good reason for others to smoke as well.

Jaimee

27th Mar 2006, 04:57 AM

KarinUS I'm not here to offend anyone. Did you read the rest of my post? Also I can not see anything but a very vague similarity in your comment. I tried to give more of a both sides argument as most people have been very one sided, including some information for the smaller side. So Caitiesbell can make up her own mind........Must find my reference to the study done on young horses.

KateWooten

27th Mar 2006, 01:21 PM

I'll go dig out a reference or two as well, Jaimee. I've been keeping quiet on this one ... it's commonly 'known' that starting a horse at 2 damages it - in the same way that overworking a human athlete at a young age damages them .... so, why do we have toddlers doing baby-gym ? Why do we have PE/PT classes for our 5 yr olds in nursery school ? Because careful build-up, careful exercise promotes healthy bone growth. Studies which only look at the untrained horse's skeletal development indicate that his bone structure is not ready for him to be ridden til much later. These neglect the very important findings that if he's introduced to suitable exercise, this actually affects the way he develops and he is stronger for doing it !

In Victorian England it was 'known' that exercise was very, very damaging to young girls. They needed to be kept indoors and seated as much of the time as possible. Many died in their late 20s.

vickie

27th Mar 2006, 02:13 PM

why do we have toddlers doing baby-gym ? Why do we have PE/PT classes for our 5 yr olds in nursery school ? Because careful build-up, careful exercise promotes healthy bone growth. Studies which only look at the untrained horse's skeletal development indicate that his bone structure is not ready for him to be ridden til much later. These neglect the very important findings that if he's introduced to suitable exercise, this actually affects the way he develops and he is stronger for doing it !

In Victorian England it was 'known' that exercise was very, very damaging to young girls. They needed to be kept indoors and seated as much of the time as possible. Many died in their late 20s.

but that sort of exercise is akin to the sort of exercise a 2yr old horse would have turned out 24/7 surely? those 5yr old children are not carrying weight or being pushed physically, they are playing, same as a young horse would in the field. surely there is a vast difference between PE for 5yr old children and 2 yr old horses being pushed to their limit racing :confused:

and i think the short life span of people in victorian england was down to quite a lot more than not exercising

prettybluepony

27th Mar 2006, 03:12 PM

Hmmm, I've sat on a few 2 year olds, for short peroids of time, when lying down etc. so it's ok to sit on them I s'pose as long as your not galloping them around, and jumping etc. though I would use a light weight saddle. :) I float both ways, :D if it's done right it should be ok!

KateWooten

27th Mar 2006, 06:03 PM

Yes, I think there's a world of difference between the structured play of toddlers, and the blatant abuse of young horses in the racing industry. I was referring to the more general idea of when to introduce weight, and a rider, to a young riding horse. There's increasing evidence that structured, muscle-building work does in fact build stronger bones, and this includes having someone climb all over the horse (as in Kell Jeffries 'sacking out with the body').

I notice the original poster has not been back recently. That's a pity, we can all can gain from discussing difficult topics like this. The arguments for later starting horses, even physically, are by no means cut and dried. The water is muddied, unfortunately because we have two big industries that start horses very young, for reasons that have nothing to do with the horse's long-term welfare : the raciing of thoroughbreds not even 2 year olds, and the western 'futurities' whereby the big money is paid out to horses who show the most potential as 2 yr olds. Of course, they might never compete to their 'full potential' later in life - but they don't need to since trainers are pushing young reining horses to do every advanced move by 2. It's pretty horrible, and shows up all the problems of overworking a young horse, both physically and mentally.

However, the notion that a riding horse should simply be turned out, full-time, and not started in any training before 3 or 4 is what's increasingly being challenged.

As far as the original poster is concerned, I was far more worried about her overall mental picture of starting a young horse - that she felt she was being paid to take on the dangers of riding a horse she didn't trust. I am really a novice to starting horses, having started my own 2 (at 3 yrs old), last year. However, I would say that 100% of the time, I knew exactly what that young horse would do the first time he was ridden, because it was part of our long-term building of trust and respect. No suprises needed if you take it at the horse's pace and listen to the horse.

fitz

27th Mar 2006, 10:15 PM

Racing wise... my knowledge isn't completely sound, . If you have objections to the sport it could be an idea to get to know some people involved so you become more well informed

But the reason being, the owner wants them racing as soon as possible, so they aren't dead weights on the budget. They want them earning their keep, not eating them out of house and home without contributing, another reason why they have 2 year old starts. .

I really must say, noone buys a racehorse to make money except for Coolmore and the Maktoums. It really is a money pit, such a tiny percentage of horses pay for themselves. You will find there are three reasons people buy horses, 1. To make connections with other business people at meetings, 2. Because they have an interest in gambling and want 'inside information'. and 3. Surprisingly enough, a high percentage of owners just love horses and love the sport. I've totally been bitten by the bug, and would love to own and maybe even train one day.
As a matter of information, it is the trainer who has the final say on what the horse can and cant do in most cases, with a few famous exceptions like Dawn Run.

You have to be looking at the future, which going back to the race industry, they don't. They don't care if by the age of 6, the animal can't walk, they only care about it's fitness and health between the ages of 2 and around 5.
That is a massive generalisation, and may be true in some cases, but a lot of them are a massively sentimental lot, who care deeply for their horses.

I can only write about what I know, and put forward my point of view. There are lots of practices I disagree with, but racing in Britain and Ireland, really isnt a major animal welfare issue (to me anyway), unlike say battery farming, intensive dairying etc. I understand there are lots of concerns about the sport in the US and Canada, but I dont know enough about it to comment.

Jaimee

28th Mar 2006, 12:31 AM

The study done on two year olds was at Massey University in the Equine studies department of the vet school. The study was held by Dr Wayne McIlwraith and Elwyn Firth. I am approching them to get the published article.

I think it is important to be informed. And I am standing with KateWooten, We are not saying go out and jump up on all 2 year old horses and start riding them as you would any other. I believe with careful and INFORMED conditioning of the horse it can benefit from various stages of work throughout its life. You simply have to consider what is appropriate for its age. Personally I would prefer to make this decision based of facts found by a reputable study done at a university than any group of peoples opinions. I dont mean any offence to any of you who hold the opinion that a horse should not be started in any way at the age of two. But please consider where I stand with my own horse who I will do everything in my power to keep till she dies of old age. She is two and I have started her. Meaning I have always worked on different things improving our partnership throughout her different stages of life and I have now after an awful lot of consideration sat on her. I have longreined her and walked around on her fully tacked up. Only a handful of times, I am a tiny percentage of weight on her back and I am in balance. I indeed can go out and ride her after a month or more of nothing and she is perfect. It has always been a progression to her this is how she will be when she is older and ready to start work. I am creating my perfect horse that is sound in mind and body. I am not racing her or even trotting. It is amazing that virtually noone in this country bats an eyelid at a horse broken in at 2yrs it is pretty common. I cant believe how shocked the majority of posters on this thread are about it. I wasnt sure myself so I investigated the facts. I talked to an equine osteopath and a vet before doing what I did. As well as spending months finding out as much as I could. I obsess about my girl and want only the best for her she is my pride and joy. If anyone still thinks I am missguided in my view after the investigation I have done personally, you are entitled to you own view.

I also think it is a shame the knocking that Caitiesbell received and perhaps more tact should be taken in presenting veiws from both sides when a controvesial topic is brought up. I only hope she is still reading this thread and hasnt given up on New rider completely.

*shooting*star*

20th May 2006, 02:50 PM

1 and a half is waaaaay too young....

My mum and Me and my cousin have been breaking horses in for about a year or 2 now.........The Youngest horse/pony we have broken in was 4 and a half years and he was a heavy cob!!!:D

so i would leave it till he is at least 2 or 2 and a half!:)

Purple Hugs

20th May 2006, 04:01 PM

As always a very informative thread. :) Thanks.
I have a 2 year old (thought to only have just turned 2 but rescued so unsure). We are first time horse owners, but have the guidance of a very experience horseman, RI and former competitive rider.
I am pleased that we have had the 'right' advice to start when he's 3, with lunging and the likes, and then look at backing later on.
We are in no rush to increase riding once he's backed, and if riden will only be walked.
We are doing a lot of bonding work I like to call it. Picking feet (gone from kicking out to occasionally walking around but mostly standing having a 'nose' at me), Grooming, lead rein walking and occasional trotting now that he's put weight on and is getting fitter. Turning out has helped him, although he was reluctant at first and even now gets tired days so we keep him in occasionally for rest. Guess he's bombing up and down the field more now! hehe

it's lovely to see all the different views and experiences and add them to the advice I get already.

Just.Jump

20th May 2006, 04:22 PM

Okay, I've got a question- and rather than start a new thread, I'll just add on, since this one is well-read.

I'm picking up my mare this evening- a half and half clyde X quarter horse. Now, I have to ask how much is 'little', but she was broken at two and since has been ridden very 'little' and never more than an hour. She is currently nearing/at three years old- there's reason to believe whole heartedly that she hasn't had much, because her turning and stopping have little to be desired, and I tried her for one lope and she wasn't the smoothest- meaning hopefully she hasn't been worked very fast, or that she is still likely unbalanced. (It lasted all of three huge strides).

I'm planning on treating her like she's never been broken- learn parelli and pony boy methods without too much roundpen work, basic ground training, de sensitizing, and I'm thinking of opening her up to trail riding/hacking by leading her through some of the fields and trails rather than have the first time while ridden in a year. I don't want her to lose what training and acceptance she has- I was thinking of letting her settle in for 3-4 weeks with no riding, and then just sit on her in standing and walking for short periods a couple of times a week. The main'riding' will be long reining/ground driving once I learn how to do so. I'm a light girl, but-

How much damage could she potentially have in the future? She is currently sound, she has no major conformational flaws, and the breeder has been breeding and training this cross for 21 years and has never had a chronic lame horse or any big problems, generally vet-free, with no vaccinations or anything. I want her to be a sound 20 year old horse- is that possible? Is there any potential to 'fix' any occuring damage by treating her the way I've stated?

Edit to add: I'm also thinking of breeding her- I can't afford that this year, but when would it be aviseable to do so? I was thinking maybe next year or the year after- light riding up to that point, let her have the foal, and then maybe start working with her afterwards?

Dizzy

23rd May 2006, 02:21 AM

http://www.equinestudies.org/knowledge_base/ranger.html

I have long since learnt that this arguement can go round and round in circles - and that those folk who live and work in a horse world that start horses young for a living, normally defend what they do fiercley (sp)

But for those of you, who are unsure, read Dr Bennets article.

A young horse is a young horse - its bones mature with age - not with its size or nature.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with putting the saddle and bridle on at 2 year old - but to ride them is abusive.

It has nothing to do with trust and willingness, horses do trust and are willing, and will allow you to do as you will - but they don't know that you are harming them - they trust you - surely you should repay that trust and look after them. At 2 yr old thier growth plates are nowhere near closing, and thier muscles are very imature.

I strongly disagree with riding youngsters. When young horses are ridden its either money orientated or through ignorance - and by ignorance I mean either the person doesn't realise the damage they are doing - or that they are aware and choose to ignore the evidence they've been given.

Jaimmee, to use children playing is a pityful comparison - I work in a school. and can honestly say, hand on heart, I've never seen kids do that on a regular basis.

But on the other hand, I have heard of scolitis (sp) which has been associated with humping heavy school bags around.

Anyway I've said my piece - please read the attached article.

mogadoga

23rd May 2006, 10:28 AM

My horse is a huge cobby hunter thing lol. and big boned etc etc... sturdy you would think? No. He was obviously sat on too young! He was three and a half when i got him and the dealer cantered and poped him over a jump, aswell as took him out on hard ground. When i got on and ONLY walked on soft ground he was amazed, asking why i wasnt trying him properly. I idnt say anything as it would waste time... but rising six he has a nasty big splint on his back leg. And not off me because ive done nothing to get it there... obviously of being backed probably at two and jumped at rising 3! So be VERY careful with backing, and what work you do after that!

Afellpony

23rd May 2006, 11:03 AM

I've had 3 youngsters in my life and have backed 2 of them. Yes, I do think 2 years old is too young to be putting a saddle on them and sitting on them. With mine, I put a lightweight saddle on without the stirrups and did the girth up on my 2 Exmoors but did not sit on them. I used to leave the saddle on for a couple of minutes, increasing the time (over a few months) to 15 minutes. (No stirrups attached). After 6 months I did attach the stirrups. I dont know whether you intend just getting your horse used to the saddle or actually sitting on him: but, to my way of thinking a horse/pony should be at least 3yo (preferably a bit older) before you sit on them - but - there's no harm in getting a 2yo used to having a very lightweight saddle on his back. :eek:

dcp

23rd May 2006, 11:20 AM

I don't know much about breaking (never done it) but I know there are problems if you do it too young. When I got back into riding I had a 2 1/2 yr old loan horse who was learning to jump quite well. Never in a million years do I agree with that but wasn't my horse and I was kind of new to whole horsey thing.

Anyway I do think it's a shame that people have jumped down your throat and been quite insulting. Yes I've had threads where people haven't agreed or possible even slightly harsh but nothing like this. I can understand how important it is for people to get their point across but I'm shocked in the way that some people do it.

horse babe

23rd May 2006, 11:36 AM

give it at least untill he is 2 1/2 do as 1 morejump did work him with his sadle on but dont actually get on himjust do things like lunge him walk him round maybe trot i woulnt go for a canter untill you start getting on him make sure the saddle and bridle fit your horse properley before you do anything c ya x x

JOJOBA

23rd May 2006, 12:12 PM

Lunging's pretty hard work, not really very good for young horses.
My hossie's legs are covered with enormous splints from being broken young and, presumably, hacked around roads. He was hacking the motorway flyovers and housing estates before I got him. He's developing arthritis now too and has a swaying back.
Why rush?

xxx

Jaimee

23rd May 2006, 11:12 PM

Dizzy I have red the acticle you suplied, I have read it before, I understand what can be damaged which is why I am so careful.

I will not be lunging Lilly until she is almost four and not fast anyway. I can assure you I am light, very light. My saddle and myself work out below the limits of what they put on the racehorses. However I cant be compared to the racehorses as the maximum I do is under 10 minutes in a walk. Soft ground, well balanced and slow. This is not going to damage my horse. I have been on her back 10 times in 3 months in this way. Now she is almost ready for turn out until she is three.

There are a lot of variables. I do not in anyway condone hopping on a two year old and just going through the training process as you would an older horse. That would destroy them. All I was saying is it not black and white.

For instance if I had shoes on Lilly and was walking on hard ground then I would have to reconsider what Im doing.
In 1983, a study at the University of Zurich found “a shod horse walking on pavement receives three times the impact force as an unshod horse trotting on that surface.” --http://www.naturalhorsetalk.com/hoofcare.html

It sounds like some of the young horses you have come across were started by ignorant people, and you may think that I am the same. That is up to you.

KateWooten

24th May 2006, 01:45 AM

Jaimee - there is a growing body of evidence - and the research is not adequate yet - to suggest that carefully controlled introduction of weight bearing exercise, such as you are doing, actually has a beneficial effect on the horse's structure. Much as we expose out own immune systems to bacteria in the real world, and our body responds by building a tougher and more robust immune system ... so the horse's development responds to the controlled weight-bearing by building denser bones.

Like in everything, though, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and armed with that little bit of knowledge, some people will use that to justify riding 2 yr olds hard. I think that's why everyone is very against starting youngsters early - it's so open to abuse. However, done properly, as it sounds like you do, the evidence is growing that you will end up with a stronger, longer lasting horse, more capable of the work we want him to do.

Remember that in 'the wild' the perfectly adapted horse is perfectly adapted to living in 'the wild' not to carrying a rider fast over big jumps. I start mine lightly at 3 ... but I have to be careful because I don't know much, I'm just starting out, so it's wise for me to be conservative and to err on the side of caution.

KateWooten

24th May 2006, 01:56 AM

A young horse is a young horse - its bones mature with age - not with its size or nature.

Are you sure, absolutely sure, that age is the one single factor in the maturity, and come to that - the eventual bone desnsity ? Because I don't think anyone is really sure of this at present. We're in the middle of some paradigm shifting in the horse-world, and I think the jury is still out on whether or not other factors - like controlled, weight bearing exercise - can influence bone development.

jUmPingIsLifE

24th May 2006, 04:27 AM

kateW- yes, i think it has been proven that controlled excersize early on will strengthen bones more early on. HOWEVER the growth plates do not close earlier no matter what. so really the development isn't hinderd by anything we do.

Jaimee

24th May 2006, 11:36 AM

Very well said Kate, you have stated my exact point. Its not the fact that some people do it, its WHAT they do. I re-read that article from Dr Deb Bennett as a refresher. Some excerpts from it:

"So do you then have to wait until all these growth plates convert to bone? No. But the longer you wait, the safer you'll be".

It does actually say in that very article that it is not just age related also, and that different horses mature at different times, but not that they mature at different rates.

"The taller your horse and the longer its neck, the later the last fusions will occur. And for a male - is this a surprise? - you add six months. So, for example, a 17-hand Thoroughbred or Saddlebred or Warmblood gelding may not be fully mature until his 8th year".

Now this is the bit I was getting too....the only difference?? I have put a light weight on her back 6 months earlier. I am not in any rush, I will not sell her. Strangely I didnt see it mention back damage other than the photos. All the damage explained is impact to the legs. But I know for fact that too much weight on an undeveloped back will sway it.

"Bottom line: if you are one of those who equates "starting" with "riding", then I guess you better not start your horse until he's four. That would be the old, traditional, worldwide view: introduce the horse to equipment (all kinds of equipment and situations) when he's two, crawl on and off of him at three, saddle him to begin riding him and teaching him to guide at four, start teaching him maneuvers or the basics of whatever job he's going to do - cavalletti or stops or something beyond trailing cattle - at five, and he's on the payroll at six."

All quotes in inverted commas are direct from Dr Deb Bennetts article about Ranger.

Dizzy

25th May 2006, 02:11 AM

Katewooten, in answer to your question about 'me' being sure about the maturity of thier bones being related to thier age - well I personally have not researched it.

The evidence that the growth plates don't close until they are a certain age is not debatable.

Young horses are unbalanced, especially by the way they grow - backside first - this throws them onto the forehand - they are babies trying to cope with thier own body - is it fair to ask them to cope with us physically and mentally?

I don't understand why anyone would want to ride a 2 yr old (unless it was for financial reasons).

If it was our kids, we'd be up in arms if our pre-school child was imediately upgraded to year 2.

What is the rush to ride young horses. If you own one, resign your self to the fact, you have a wait - if you can't wait - sell him.

Or you could go for lessons in preparation for when you can ride your youngster.

I personally do not understand why folk buy young horses, when their intention is to ride, it doesn't matter when you're discussing a 2 yr old, how you explain what you're doing - by saying I m balanced - its only for 10 minutes - ect. The horse is only 2 yrs old, these are you're initial demands - these are only going to increase.

KateWooten

25th May 2006, 12:54 PM

Dizzy, I didn't mean to pick on you, I just meant to point out that you don't know, because none of us knows - whether age is the single factor influencing bone development - controlled weight-bearing might be another factor, we just don't know yet.

ok, now you know I didn't mean to pick on you last time .. here goes again ( aaarrrghh - don't hit me, honest, it's not personal, it's just that you raise good points to address...)

I don't understand why anyone would want to ride a 2 yr old (unless it was for financial reasons).

Perhaps if it were beneficial to the horse over his lifetime - that would be a good reason ? That's what the debate / research is about. Not whether we can 'get away' with riding them too young.... but whether we can develop stronger horses, more fit for their lifetime's work, by introducing weight-bearing exercise early.

I found an advert in a magazine recently - an eventing one, I think, for a training aid. It was a weights belt for horses - constructed just like a wrist or ankle weight for people - with pockets to add little sacks of lead shot. The max weight of this thing was 120 lbs. I'd like to see the research done into these things - perhaps it has been done, I don't know, I haven't seen it. I'd be pretty sure it hasn't been done to my satisfaction because I'd need to know the effects of early weight-training on the horse's longevity - and that takes more than one generation to do.

Dizzy

27th May 2006, 01:53 AM

KateWooten, isn't the minimum age of the event horse supposed to be 4 yr old?

To be honest, when I read your reply, my initail response was 'you can't be serious', so I decided not to reply straight away and think about it - which I have - and to be honest I feel the same.

I have never seen or heard of research that states that weighting 2 yr olds strengthens thier bone structure - but knowing that this research is taking place revolts me. This science is treating horses as vehicles, not as the beautiful, sensitive, willing animals that they are.

For this science to get results, they must be using young horses as lab rats. I'll stand corrected if I'm wrong - but reseach is a financed affair and all about getting results - and results only come from tests - Who put up the finance? What is the outlook for those youngsters who failed the tests?

Why if not for financial gain, would you want to work a 2 yr old? Taking away the fact that thier body's are not fully grown, and because of that they are physically unbalanced by the way that they grow - but they are mentally too young and under muscled to try to accomodate being unbalanced, without having to support extra weight on thier backs.

You mentioned a training aid, that could be weighted up to 120 lbs - that is approx 9 and half stone (a light person).

The only horses that I have heard of being weighted is race horses - and thats classed as being handicapped.

My Dad has been a Scaffolder all his life from the age of 14 - he's retired now but had his right knee replaced 3 yrs ago and he's now struggling with the left. My friends Dad was classed as an Irish Navy - worked from 13 - double hip replacement.

Dizzy, I didn't mean to pick on you, I just meant to point out that you don't know, because none of us knows - whether age is the single factor influencing bone development - controlled weight-bearing might be another factor, we just don't know yet

By your post (it may just be me ) but you seem to lose sight of the fact that you are talking about a young horse. When we're talking about a 2 yr old, why are we discussing its bone development, we already know the growth plates are no where near closing - why do you think we should question the natural passage of time - and more importantly, who will suffer in the long run if you are wrong? Its the young horse who trusts you - Navicular, Chronic Arthritus, Kissing Spines, Fallen Pasterns.

KateWooten I don't feel picked on - but I do worry that you're posts suggest that its ok to ride a 2yr old. I care about horses, not what folk think of me.

Young horses don't show the signs of being worked too young - it rears its ugly head between 10 and 15, sometimes earlier.

But to condone young horses being weighted experimentally is abhorant.

KateWooten

27th May 2006, 12:27 PM

I do understand where you are coming from Dizzy, and I know it's difficult to see because I am taking a controversial stand here... but at heart I'm coming from the same place too ... the long-term welfare of the horse.

I know, on the face of it, to use a young horse in an experiment is wrong ... but if you think about it, all human-horse interaction at some point has been experimental, right ? At some point, the first guy sat on a horse. At some point the first saddle got thought up ... etc etc.

Now, the domestic horse is not a wild horse ... he's being used very differently over his lifetime. Originally he was evolved to run, jump buck and fart ... but over the years of co-existing with man, he has 'evolved' some more to carry a rider better, and he's bred to carry a rider better over jumps, or in spins or whatever. The point is, how best to bring up that horse, for his long-term health, under these artificial demands that will be placed on him. Thing is, the best way to get a horse that will be sound and happy at 30 yrs old is not to ride him at 2. Or 4. Or 7, 10, 25 ... don't ride him at all ! That's much more natural for the horse. BUT ... if you're going to ride him, what is the best way to bring him up so that he develops as strong bone density or muscle structure as possible ? Do we know ? Shouldn't we make some effort to find out ?

Quite frankly, I find the assumption that we already know the best way to do everything, and no horse should carry any weight before their growth plates are closed ... the assumption that we already know these things without testing them out is really arrogant. Research on any animal is bound to be problematic because yes, we don't know the effects - that's what we're trying to find out - so yes if the results say that long term, this gentle weight bearing has proved harmful, then for those individuals involved in the research then harm has been done. But what if they find that current best practice is wrong ? Then all the currently started horses are being harmed just a bit ! And all those conditions you mention are conditions that we do currently see in horses which have not been started with early controlled weight bearing exercise.

The issue is still confused in people;s minds because we have 2 big industries which start horses very early, with no regard whatsoever for their long-term welfare - tb racing and western reining horses. The situation where your Dad was forced to overwork his young body is analagous to the these industries and is very much not what we're talking about.

You have a dim view of research. Maybe I can change that. Not all reseaerch involves singling out individuals and using them in specially designed experiments. Much, if not most, medical research - human and animal - is statistically based. You look at the population as a whole, and collect various facts about them, then analyse the data. That's to say, the people or animals go right ahead doing what they were doing anyway, and all the researcher does is use his great brain to study what effects that behaviour has. That's how they found the link in humans between that intestine disease (Khrone's disease ? ) and lack of early exposure of the immune system to a big enough variety of bugs. They didn't take some babies and deprive their immune systems, and then see if they developed the disease .. they simply looked with hindsigth at people who had the disease and looked at all sorts of factors in their early lives to see if they could spot a pattern.

Anyways, I gotta go, talk to you later

missie20

27th May 2006, 02:16 PM

i agree with what everyone is sayin!
i have first hand experience
i bought my mare as a three year old who had just been broke, had her about two weeks and she started to go mad, you couldnt get on her at all every time one foot was put in the stirup she would bolt and she would have bucked all the time bout a month later a fella i knew who knew the people i bought her off let it slip to me that she was a nightmare to break and was broke as a 2 year old!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! she didnt trust nobody1 and that explianed everything i had to leave the mare off for six months and worked with her from the ground it took her a good while to come around and trust me even with trust for me the mare still wasnt cnfident because she had such a bad experience beforehand! it took a lot of work with the mare and PATIENCE!!! she is now six, the mare is absolutely fanastic she would jump to the moon and back for me every time i go to competions never been place below 5th!
just take your time with him you want a happy horse who is willin to do things for you and a horse who is fun too ride not a horse that isnt enjoyin what they are doin or you arent enjoyin who they are!

Dizzy

30th May 2006, 12:22 AM

I don't think there will be many wild horses still on the go at 30 yr old - puting aside possible physical injury or worm burden, thier feet and/or teeth will probably have let them down long before then anyway.

We quite obviously have conflicting opinions, I'm not very happy about being labelled as arrogant, or of having a dim view of research.

But when the subject is weighting 2 yr old horses, my opinion remains the same.

For someone who has already said that they start thier horses lightly at 3 yr old, but saw an ad in an eventing magazine for a weighting aid - you haven't stated any scientifically proved evidence that supports your opinions.

For a horse lover to condone the testing of weighting 2 yr olds, and stating that if it damages them, then the damage is done and its unfortunate for those horses - especially when its obvious thier bone structure is far from being developed - is callous.

Young horses grow back end first, in thier early years, they are thrown onto the forehand. They are clumsy and are not very aware of what thier legs are doing. They are babies coping with an unbalanced body - why on earth would adding extra weight help them.

teabiscuit

30th May 2006, 08:15 AM

I believe that young horses (under 3) should get their exercise from playing and running about the field - thats wieght bearing enough for them to build healthy bones surely, and with less risk of joint damage, joint damage can be caused by the young horse being overweight, never mind being asked to carry someone.
ETA i saw a documentary where a researcher injected BSE into healthy primates, just to see if they would get vCJD-hey presto, they did, and died a horrible cruel and neccacary death-surely it was obvious they would suffer vCJD? they didn't have to do that to them.
not all research is valid quite frankly, and to believe in research just for its own sake is a nonsense

KateWooten

30th May 2006, 01:12 PM

The thing is, I don't have any opinions as yet - that's the point. We just don't know. I would like to see more research done on bone development rates under different factors.

Dizzy

31st May 2006, 02:04 AM

What different factors? When you say 'we just don't know'. Who is 'we'?

I am totally convinced by the research already done on horses' bone development. I don't understand why 'you' think that you can improve on nature, or why you feel, the research already done isn't adequate enough.

My mare's Mum was destroyed when she was 13 yr old, I had her on loan from a friend who bought as 6 yr old. Between us we tried everything to keep her sound - the vets/farrier bills far out weighed her worth in pound notes. The cause - being worked too young.

A friend bought a Connemara/TB cross as a 5 yr old from Ireland - already an experienced show jumper and hunter. Was destroyed when she was approx 13/14 yr old - hadn't been ridden for 2 yrs previous, because she riddled with arthritus, plus the fact because her weight ballooned out of exercise she became laminitic. The cause, in the vets words 'too much, too soon'.

KateWooten your posts have implied that weighting 2 yr olds might help them to live a longer life. You have not supplied any evidence supporting your statement.

My question to you is - Can you hand on heart support your statements?

And if not, do you not think that your opinions/statements posted on a website called NEWRIDER are extremely misleading and detrimental to young horses, and to how less experienced folk who own young horses will handle them.

I'm niether arrogant, nor do I have a dim view of research, but I strongly object to someone who can convincly talk the talk, and push aside already well researched evidence - but when asked for research/evidence to support your views, answer 'The thing is I don't have any opinions as yet - thats the point. We just don't know'

Come on KateWooten, I would never persue a post unless I wanted knowledge or knew that I totally believed what I was saying held some credence. I have to ask why did you pursue this post?

kunama

31st May 2006, 07:56 AM

Dizzy, i think you may be a little confused , there is a HUGE, no MASSIVE, differance between BACKING the youngster, particularly a big burly ,hot headed horse, and WORKING the youngster. I would never see a anything younger than 2 backed and nothing younger than 3.5yrs ridden.

i resent the commments that all people starting horses at a young age are doing so for money and are cruel or ignorant or both! I do not think i am any of those things.:eek:

What seem's to be happening on this thread is a lot of generalisation, what we all should remember about horses is that every horse is different , i am not debateing the age at which growth plates close , i am trying to say that where i would never back a tb or arab or rideing pony or any of the smaller breed's , or even a larger breed that is placid, i would start work on a big bolshy horse sooner, it takes time and patience to get through to those horses safely and the younger you start the better. Unneccessary early starting of a horse because you can is pointless, but there are exceptions to the rule we just have to remember not to push them or we will damage joints and bones.

I posted alot earlier on on this thread and got some interesting comments on trust, my horse and i are a partnership, we work together, but when staring a youngster you need to be the leader, the only thing you can trust a horse to be is unpredictable. They are prey animals that is the way thier minds work. I do not like the use of the word trust for rideing horses, it implies that the horse can be predictable and that if you trust you'r horse they will sigh a big sigh, and say at last ,and do what ever you want. it does not work like that , you must be quiet , fair and confidant around your horses and earn his respect , BUT do not expect him to stop being unpredictable because you trust him, he does not understand this.

On that note , this is a pic of me and my horse, as i say we are a working partnership, and i still maintain that trust is a misleading way to describe this relationship.

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c142/reductivani/arrifree.jpg

KateWooten

31st May 2006, 06:04 PM

What different factors? When you say 'we just don't know'. Who is 'we'?
One factor might be controlled weight-bearing exercise for example. It might be (well, it is in fact, that's not in dispute) that controlled weight bearing exercise builds stronger healthier denser bones. By 'we' I mean the horse-owning community in general.

I am totally convinced by the research already done on horses' bone development. I don't understand why 'you' think that you can improve on nature, or why you feel, the research already done isn't adequate enough.
Because we're not using horse in a natural way. I have no doubt at all that the best way to start a horse not to carry a rider on it's back, is not to put weight on it's back. But we're raising a horse to carry a rider on it's back, so inevitably the question does arise - how to best introduce weght bearing exercise to its back.

KateWooten your posts have implied that weighting 2 yr olds might help them to live a longer life....Come on KateWooten, I would never persue a post unless I wanted knowledge or knew that I totally believed what I was saying held some credence. I have to ask why did you pursue this post?
Your assumption is that I have already decided that controlled weight bearing exercise is a good thing, I haven't. I have stated frequently that I don't know - and that 'we' as horse owners - none of us know. That the research into controlled weight bearing has not been done (or at least, it may have been done, but I don't know about it). I can see it is a possibilty though.

I think it is perfectly ok to be interested in the answer to a question without having already decided the answer !

I am persuing this thread because I think it's an interesting question and I'm interested in the answer. Is that ok ?

KateWooten your posts have implied that weighting 2 yr olds might help them to live a longer life.

I do indeed countenance the possibility that it might. Or it might not. I don't know. I would like to see some research into it.

You have not supplied any evidence supporting your statement.

Which statement ? That it might ?? Of course it might ! Or it might not. We don't know, the research hasn't been done.

I think the problem between us right now is that somehow through my not-very-clear typing efforts I've managed to convince you that I'm big into jumping on yearlings and working them hard. That's not the case. You and I are most firmly on the same side of a particular fence - how best to prepare a horse for long-term health and happiness, whilst acknowledging that he will be in the very unnatural position of carrying a rider. You're very sure that not working them til they're older is the best way. I'm considerably less sure about the whole thing.

For example, suppose we were looking at a young man who had decided to make a career carrying weight in some form - perhaps he's going to be a hod-carrier for a bricklayer (ok, he's not very ambitious and fork-lifts haven't been invented.. but bear with me). His lifetime is going to be in carrying weights. He decides this as a very young child - a toddler. So then he does nothing at all until he is 21, besides just playing games - doens't carry any weight at all. Then, at 21, he goes into a gym, and because his career is going to involve lifting 150 lbs, he goes in, and lifts the full 150 lbs ...but only for a short while !

Ok, clearly that is absurd. . what he would do is build up gradually - starting even before the age of 21. We find with people, earlier than at physical maturity, if they do progressive controlled weight bearing exercise they build stronger denser bones, and muscle structures more fit for carrying those weights over their lifetimes.

But that first absurd example, thatIS similar to what we currently do with horses. We wait until they are physically mature ...and then introduce weight all at once (ok, some people will use a lighter person first, I know - but only a bt lighter - a 95 lb girl, rather than their regular 150 lb rider)

How about this - how about working a yearling in hand with a 5 lb weight on, gently, in hand. How about working a 2 yr old with 10 lbs on for 15 minutes at a time, and gradually building that up to say 55 lbs by the end of their 2nd year. How about starting again with 3 yr olds at 40 lbs and building up to 95 lbs by the fall of their third year in preparation for their 95 lb rider + 15 lb saddle. Would that regime build denser bones and stronger muscle structures. more able to carry a rider successfully over the course of a lifetime ?

I ask this because I DON'T KNOW !! Do you ? Do 'we' the responsible horse-owning community know the answer to whether this example, or any other sample training regime is 'better' long term ? I don't think so, because I don't think the research has been done.

I'm niether arrogant, nor do I have a dim view of research, but I strongly object to someone who can convincly talk the talk, and push aside already well researched evidence - but when asked for research/evidence to support your views, answer 'The thing is I don't have any opinions as yet - thats the point. We just don't know'

Good, then point me to the research on controlled weight bearing that has been done and shown not to build stronger, denser bone structures in horses.

I think we have 3 distinct 'models' of horse starting that can be discussed. At one end of the spectrum there is the traditional idea of leaving the horse to physically mature before asking him to do any weight bearing work - call that model A. Then at the other end of the spectrum there's the 'start them quick for profit and who cares if they break down later' ... call that model C. I'm sure we can all come up with a bunch of anecdotal evidence that model C causes horses to break down, and is not good. I can supply a bunch more if you like, but since nobody is advocating model C, I don't think that would add much.

I'm not advocating any model - what I'm suggesting is that there might be a better way - a model B - where controlled weight bearing is introduced into a horse's lifetime - before he is physically mature - in order to fit him better for his lifetime's work of weight bearing.

But if it's ok by you, I reserve the right to say that there might not be a better way - there might not be a model B that works for horses like it does for humans - there might, or there might not. I don't know. (but I'm still interested in finding out)

Tootsie4U

31st May 2006, 06:26 PM

Cheeky, dont ever book a plane ticket to the US. You'll be appauled with the vast majority of trainers here - who start horses at the age of 2 or 3!

If its common practice in the culture, how will up-and-comming trainers know any better? Certainly tar and feathering them isnt any help.

For what its worth, my horse was worked quite hard at the age of 2, broken to a rider at 3 and is as healthy as an ox and stronger than one too. That doesnt condone it but its not an automatic to claim that doing so will utterly ruin them either.

fitz

31st May 2006, 09:03 PM

Dizzy, where is this research that you speak of? and dont quote Deb Bennett, because that isnt research, its opinion.
She has no papers published therefore her articles have no credible scientific basis.
I'm genuinely interested to see if there is any 'real' research in this area.

teabiscuit

1st Jun 2006, 10:06 AM

The thing is, I don't have any opinions as yet - that's the point. We just don't know. I would like to see more research done on bone development rates under different factors.
speaking as a researcher (not on animals i hasten to add) i know that one of the "factors" you mention would be a control animal/animals whose job would be to show what happens to the bones of a horse when it is allowed no exercise at all from birth, thats how scientific research works.
i don't want that done to any animal to satisfy my curiosity about whne it is best to sit on a horse-i'll wait till they're 3 or over thanks, it's always worked for me, during a lifetime of breeding and starting ponies right up to big bolshy beautiful boys (including stallions).
bolshyness isn't an excuse to start them early imo

Esther.D

1st Jun 2006, 10:39 AM

bolshyness isn't an excuse to start them early imo

I agree - In my experience the reverse is true - you definitely need firm ground rules and handling is vitally important early on with a bolshy one, but I have found that actually delaying riding/driving with a bolshy horse is better than starting early - it gives them time to mature and get out of that teenage phase that it often comes with. Besides - I don't want to get on anything that I class as 'bolshy' until I have its respect on the ground, by which point it is no longer bolshy although might be opinionated and strongwilled. I want a horse to be working with me not against me when I start to ride/drive it and would rather sort that on the ground where it is a lot safer for all involved!

fitz

1st Jun 2006, 12:50 PM

speaking as a researcher (not on animals i hasten to add) i know that one of the "factors" you mention would be a control animal/animals whose job would be to show what happens to the bones of a horse when it is allowed no exercise at all from birth, thats how scientific research works.
i don't want that done to any animal to satisfy my curiosity about whne it is best to sit on a horse-i'll wait till they're 3 or over thanks, it's always worked for me, during a lifetime of breeding and starting ponies right up to big bolshy beautiful boys (including stallions).
bolshyness isn't an excuse to start them early imo

I see your point on this teabiscuit, but some horses are going to be started at two, whether or not the researcher likes it. Racing thoroughbreds could be used in a study without putting extra animals at risk.
I'd really love to see research carried out on this, I'm really interested in it.

chev

1st Jun 2006, 01:16 PM

There has been research done into the effect of weight-bearing and work on racehorse youngstock. It showed that early work resulted in better bone development *for racing*. There were fewer incidents of stress fracture for a start; the bone was better quality and horses coped better with racing if started early.

However! the same studies also showed that long-term soundness was seriously compromised. The horses that managed so well when started early broke down earlier in life than those started later. Given that this is research carried out in one specific industry (racing) the conclusions drawn were that early starting was fine; because there were fewer early casualties within that industry. Racing cares very little about the long-term soundness of its horses; those that break down are generally simply retired to stud or shot. No big deal.

That however is scientific research and papers have been published supporting the findings. Which to summarise are; early starting results in better bone development in horses and fewer stress-related injuries, but a far higher incidence of later long-term unsoundnesses.

I have to say that a decent amount of turnout on good ground with varied terrain will probably have a positive effect on bone development too; there have been no comparison studies looking at the differences (if there are any) between racehorses kept in unworked, those worked, but still in for long periods, and horses turned out and not worked.

And for every horse that doesn't suffer; there's one that does. Is it worth running the risk? This is Willow, started at two. And the back and hind limb deformities you see are a direct result of starting her that early.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v231/bronyfelin-ponies/today013.jpg

Willow trips, Willow is unbalanced, she has saddle-fitting problems, and her ridden career never got started because of her start. She could have had a fantastic ridden career, had someone left her another year or two.

Such a waste, for the sake of time. :(

chev

1st Jun 2006, 01:24 PM

Kate Wooten; I can see your point, and I actually agree with you on one level. But bear in mind that when you talk about kids preparing for one physical career or another, most kids who have long careers start very slowly! Everyone knows the examples of Russian gymnasts for a start, who begin 'work' early and rarely have long, physically healthy lives.

There are for me two issues. First is the danger of over-loading the horse physically. Starting slowly (having a two year old wear a 5lb saddle, for example) is probably going to do no harm at all. Sticking a rider on a two year old stands a much higher chance of harm.

Second, and generally ignored but just as vital, is the issue of mental maturity. Horses need to be babies. They need to be horses. Horses, sadly, cope failry well with sometimes heartbreaking levels of stress and 'unhappiness' for want of a better word before throwing a fit about it. I like to know my neds are mentally able to deal with work happily, before I start doing too much with them.

Five minutes of wearing a saddle three times a week isn't going to be too much. *Work* is a different matter.

Balance and modeartion in all things, I guess...

mell123

1st Jun 2006, 01:27 PM

i wouldnt sis a a young ster untin her about 3 maby 3 in a half

KateWooten

1st Jun 2006, 01:53 PM

Thanks for that Chev - I had a feeling there might have been some research done in the racing industry - do you have any links to it ? Of course, first thing springs to mind about that, is of course the racing industry's aims for a young horse are far far different to the general horse-owner's aims ! I'd be interested in reading what atually was done and how the horses were worked - and of course, what the control group was - I mean, if the control group is of race horses started the 'traditional' way, by galloping them flat out as yearlings, and the experimental group were started by adding weight, and then galloping them very fast as yearlings :eek: then their conclusions couldn't mean much to the average horseman.

teabiscuit, I think the scientific method works by comparing the group under test for one particular factor, against a control group for whom conditions are identical, ecxcept for that one particular factor. For example, were we to design an eperiment to investigate the idea that early weight bearing exercise may increase bone density - the control group for that would be horses raised and fed and kept exactly the same, except without the early weight bearing exercise. I don't think that would mean keeping them idle at all - if we kept a group totally idle, that would just tell us something we already know - keeping a young horse totally idle isn't good for him ! - and wouldn't give us anything to compare the weight-bearing exercise agains.t

EllieK

1st Jun 2006, 01:54 PM

In my opinion a young horse shouldn't be actively ridden until atleast 3 1/2 years to ensure that the bones and joints have matured sufficiently to carry the riders weight without too many adverse long term side effects. There simply is no need to ride them any earlier!
My horse was started at 4years old, was a successful international grade a and is now still perfectly sound and happy at 23. There is tremendous pressure is some sports to start horses far too early, the importance must be on the horses long term welfare.

Tootsie4U

1st Jun 2006, 02:01 PM

I said it before, but I'd love to see a study done comparing race horses started at 2 to race horses started later in life. I'd be very interested to see if longevity was really that different as I suspect it may not be so much related to the age of the horse, but the use.

KateWooten

1st Jun 2006, 02:16 PM

I'd be interested in that study too ... my gut feeling would be that by starting the young horses very early, they get increased speed over an extremely short time period - I'd bet that the horses started later would still break down, though not with quite such unerring regularity, but I'd bet they didn't have the raw turn of speed that the early starters (the ones not yet broken down that is) had. After all, the racing industry has evolved over hundreds of years - and there is only one way to win - to be the fastest .. even if the horse only lasts one race. To be 'quite fast' and last 100 races has no merit at all in that business. That's why I shy away from any research done in that industry - their goals are just so far away from what the average riding horse owner wants that none of their practices have much relevance to the rest of us.

chev

1st Jun 2006, 02:34 PM

There are several studies and branches of research really - I'm trying to find teh study I remember most, but no luck so far :rolleyes: . I haev posted it here somewhere before. I will keep looking.

Meantime there's this about bone density; supports the theory that some is good, more is not good when you look at the incidence of soreness after 5 months' training. Also note the age at which maximum BMC is reached... not until 6.

"Several studies have shown the effect training has on increasing bone density in young horses. One study compared weanlings that had been boxed with those that had been paddock raised and exercised daily. It was found that the paddock raised horses had 33% higher bone densities.

Scanning technology has shown that horses with a greater cross-sectional area of cannon bone combined with more bone in the dorsal cortex are able to better withstand the forces of impact and loading.

Research in thoroughbreds has shown that bone density increases more with training over shorter distances (400metres) at speeds around 13.5secs /furlong. It was found that in most cases (with all other factors being normal) the cannon bone has a fatigue life of around 50,000 strides, the equivalent of 5 months training. Once this point is reached, the incidence of shin soreness was found to increase dramatically.

Bone scans have shown that the shape and composition of bone is also affected by lack of exercise. Horses returning from the spelling paddock were found to have lower bone densities than when they were turned out. It was found that during the first 60 days of training, bone density decreased even further.

Nutrition is important in maximizing bone density. Skeletal growth is rapid during the first 12 months. A study of growth rates in young thoroughbreds showed that at 6 months of age a horse can reach 84% of its mature height but only 46% of its mature weight. At 12 months it can attain 94% of its height and 65% of its weight. By 22 months it has virtually stopped growing in height (97%) and has usually reached 90% of its mature weight. Skeletal growth therefore occurs faster than weight gain. Other studies have followed total bone mineral content (BMC) during the same growth period. At 6 months of age bone mineralisation is 68% complete, by 12 months it has increased to 76%. Maximum BMC is not reached until a horse is 6 years old. "

Article can be found here (http://www.vetpro.co.nz:888/Vet%20Talk_Equine/improving_bone_density.htm).

chev

1st Jun 2006, 02:46 PM

And this;

"Age at start of career has a significant impact on career longevity. High levels of loss occur in the first or second racing seasons (Mason and Bourke, 1973; Mohammed et al., 1991; Bourke, 1995); while lack of ability contributed to this loss, a significant proportion of horses may be retired due to injury or disease associated with training and racing. Several studies have found that the risk of injury increases with age (Robinson and Gordon, 1988; Mohammed et al., 1991; Bailey et al.,1997), but starting to compete at an older age has a negative impact on career duration (Bourke, 1995; Ricard and Fournet-Hanocq, 1997)."

Bit of a double-edged sword. Too much too young knackers them later; but starting later results in losses.

Full article here (http://www.funpecrp.com.br/GMR/year2006/vol1-5/gmr0181_full_text.htm).

And more;

"Quoting a study using
foals from birth to 11 months of age,
he reports that the musculoskeletal
system underwent rapid and profound
changes that were influenced by exer-
cise. “Foals were evaluated under
three different exercise regimes from
one week of age until weaning at five
months. The first group was confined
to a stall. The second group was also
maintained in box stalls, but was
trained with increasing gallop sprints
in a 48x15-meter enclosure. The third
group was maintained at pasture dur-
ing the entire study. From five months
to 11 months of age, all foals were
housed in a large stall with free access
to a small paddock. Tendon, muscle,
cartilage and bone were analyzed at
five and 11 months of age.”
The results showed that life in a
pasture was the best exercise program.
Those confined to stalls showed less
development of tissue components,
especially cartilage, and the trained
group, despite increased bone density
compared to the other groups at five
months, showed less quality in carti-
lage, bone, tendon and bone at 11
months. Not surprisingly, nature
knows best regarding the raising of
sound horses."

Again, full article can be found here (http://www.ctba.com/03magazine/oct/DOWNONTHEFARM.pdf).

And I still can't find the one I posted a while back...