From: Dr Robert Cook
To: The five veterinarians at the FEI Round Table Conference on Over Bending in Lausanne, Switzerland on February 9, 2010. (John McEwen, Dr Gerd Heuschmann, Dr Sue Dyson, Professor René van Weeren and Graeme Cooke
Date: February 12, 2010
As you will see from my attached response to the FEI press release of February 9th,
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?created&&suggest¬e_id=323837991133&id=51217564556#!/notes/horses-for-life-publications/low-deep-and-round-or-a-blow-deep-and-unkind-dr-robert-cook-frcvs-phd/301929516133
I was deeply disappointed with the conclusions of the Round Table on Rollkur. It seems to me that, as a body, the representatives in Lausanne remained unconvinced of the inhumanity of over bending. I presume Dr Gerd Heuschmann spoke in favour of banning over bending and was out-voted. HRH Princess Haya 'accepted' the petition from 41,000 signatories who deplored over bending but apparently was unmoved.
I am wondering what your views were and whether you feel that the scientific evidence against Rollkur was really understood by the non-veterinarians at the meeting? The press release speaks of a consensus opinion. Does this mean that there was a vote and if so what was the vote? I would like to be reassured that there were dissenting opinions around the table and would hope that, at the very least, these included all of the five veterinarians.
From an outsiders perspective, it appears that the FEI's collective view on Rollkur has not changed since the 2007 workshop. It almost seems as though the views of the trainer, Sjef Janssen, once again gained ascendance on February 9th and were used as the basis of the meeting's recommendation. I am copying below, my comments on para 2.4 of the FEI's report on the Scientific session in 2007. These comments were part of the monograph I submitted to the FEI Veterinary Committee after that workshop.
2.4: THE TRAINER’S VIEW ON OVER-BENDING (“ROLLKUR”) AS A TRAINING AID FOR DRESSAGE COMPETITION.
Mr. Sjef Janssen made a distinction between what he regarded as acceptable short periods of low deep and round (LDR) and unacceptable prolonged periods of “Rollkur.” He conceded, however, that the copying of LDR by unskilled riders might involve “disadvantages.” With all due respect, I disagree most strongly with the suggestion that a training aid contraindicated on welfare grounds and, therefore, fundamentally wrong, can in some way become harmless when applied by an experienced rider. Apart from the fact that it is not harmless to that particular rider’s horse, experienced riders who use the technique are taken as role models and are setting a bad example.
The FEI is an organization that speaks for the welfare of the horse, worldwide, and must be seen to be worthy of this responsibility. As part of this commitment it is necessary for its deliberations to be transparent and open. I hope that you do not feel under any oath of secrecy as to what went on at the Feb 9th meeting and are able to share your views without divulging confidences and being disloyal to the FEI. I can understand that you may have a certain reluctance to be seen as a whistleblower but, as a veterinarian, I am sure you will agree that you have an over-riding responsibility to safeguard the welfare of the horse.
It is instructive but also sobering and immensely disappointing to look back at the recommendations and conclusions made by Professor Leo Jeffcott, chairman of the 2007 Workshop. Listed below are the summary points he made at the end of the workshop, followed by my comment on the lack of progress in the last three years.
1. The need for a definition of over-bending:
There was no need for a definition of over bending, as the FEI rule book already contained a definition of the required head position which makes such a definition unnecessary... " ... the head should remain in a steady position, as a rule slightly in front of the vertical ... " All that is needed is for the FEI to acknowledge, abide by and enforce its own rule. The call for a definition of over bending has, nevertheless, not been addressed. No one in the FEI has pointed out the irrelevance of such a requirement.
2. Horses must not be seen to be put under pressure
For three years since the workshop, horses have continued to be seen under pressure by over bending in the warm-up ring. The evidence has been documented many times on video, yet nothing has been done to prevent it. The recent most egregious example of this was the flagrant cyanotic tongue episode. The FEI's press release on February 9th, 2009 even admitted in so many words that this was why the Round Table was convened, to wit," . The issue came up for discussion after an Internet video circulated of Swedish Olympian Patrik Kittel warming up at October's CDI Odense, Denmark, using a method some call inhumane." Disappointingly, the FEI Round table did not think it appropriate to agree that the 'method' (i.e. over bending) was indeed inhumane.
As over bending can be seen in the warm-up ring, in full public view and without any sign of remorse on the part of the perpetrators, undoubtedly this and worse occurs during training. Once again, this transgresses the FEI's Code of Conduct. Item #10, for example, states; The national and international Rules and Regulations in equestrian sport regarding the health and welfare of the horse must be adhered to not only during national and international events, BUT ALSO IN TRAINING [emphasis added]. Competition Rules and Regulations shall be continually reviewed to ensure such welfare."
3. Evidence is needed to guide the Stewards in preventing abuse
Once again, I submit that a perfect guideline for stewards was already present in the FEI's own definition of 'on the bit.' " ... the head should remain in a steady position, as a rule slightly in front of the vertical ... " This was all that was needed in 2007 and it is all that is needed now. Any call by the FEI for further evidence is unjustified procrastination. There is no need for further evidence and any further delay in implementing their own rule is inexcusable.
In fact, additional evidence was submitted after the 2007 workshop. My own 51 page monograph, already cited, was received by the FEI Dressage Committee and, for all I know, there may well have been others who responded to the call for evidence.
4. The Dressage Committee would consider the findings of the Workshop
The Dressage Committee may or may not have considered these findings but they have not to my knowledge issued any public report or recommendation.
5. The Veterinary and Welfare Sub-committees should identify what research was required to answer the question of whether or not Over-bending was a welfare issue
If, prior to the 2007 workshop, there was any doubt in the minds of the members of the above committees as to whether over bending was a welfare issue (an unlikely possibility), there could have been no such doubt after reading my monograph. Over bending inflicts unnecessary pain and this alone is quite sufficient to answer the welfare question. But, once again, the FEI committees have issued no public statement by way of follow-up. For reasons unknown, the Welfare sub-committee has even been disbanded. Why this should have occurred at the very time when welfare considerations were of critical importance remains a mystery.
6. A draft proposal would be presented to the Dressage Committee for consideration prior to submission to the FEI.
Was such a proposal submitted to members of the Dressage Committee and did they, in turn, make any sort of recommendation to the FEI Board of Directors? Once again, even if they did, nothing has been issued by way of a public announcement.
To sum up, of the six recommendations by the chairman of the 2007 workshop,
• three were unnecessary in the first instance, there being appropriate rules and guidelines already in place, but they were still not acted on (as in #s1, 3 and 5)
•
• and three were necessary but not acted on (as in #2, 4 and 6).
•
This does not add up as a particularly stellar performance by the FEI in this matter of over bending. Additionally, the press release on February 9th fails to assure riders that anything has change for the better. The FEI, in relation to overbending, are non-compliant with nine of the ten items in their own Code of Conduct.
As veterinarians, we are under oath to protect the welfare of animals. Do you feel that the FEI are listening to the advice they must surely have received from their veterinary representatives?
I would very much appreciate your comments on the above observations.
billie hinton’s camera-obscura:
life and lessons on November Hill Farm
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Friday, February 26, 2010
wrapping up this week's discussion
Summary of the three things question from yesterday:
Lynda offered:
1. Double bridles are not permitted at levels below Grand Prix. (Harder to get hyperflexion in a snaffle!)
2. Horses that do not track up fully in trot exercises will be severely penalised.
3. The horse's poll must ALWAYS be the highest point of the neck.
I wrote:
1. Institute a review for all judges and stewards as to the existing standards, the new distinctions, with visual examples of what is okay and what is not. Sad to say this but I think some of the upper level judges need to see what a horse whose nose is slightly in front of the vertical looks like!
2. A strengthening of the process so that stewards are not intimidated or argued with - a rider can appeal a warning, etc. but must cease what he/she is doing until the judge reviews the call. Intimidation or argument with stewards is grounds for immediate disqualification. (there is no reason to argue with the stewards if there is an appeal process in place and especially if there are cameras so that looking at the infraction is simply done by the judge)
3. Include long-time classically trained dressage riders/trainers in the working group, the round-tables, committees, etc. IMO, Sjef Janssen being included as the "dressage representative" is counterproductive. According to Janssen, he invented rollkur. It seems unlikely that he will now denounce it as abusive. We need a balance of perspectives discussing these issues. He is not representative of the discipline and sport of dressage as many of us know and cherish it.
and Maire added:
Absolutely, stewards must be protected from intimidation. I am absolutely stuck on how to define aggressive force. Do they look at the rider's position, the horse's position or both? This is crucial as it is how they have distinguished Rolllkur from LDR. I wish they had not made this distinction but it is a given for now at any rate.
They could have a clear length of time that a LDR frame is held for.
I think we've covered some good things here. Thank you to everyone who came by to read and most especially to those of you who took the extra time and thought to comment.
Don't hesitate to continue adding comments if you've had a busy week and want to jump in. People come to these posts all day and all night long, and your words will continue provoking thought!
*******
This morning when in between sleep and wakefulness, I found myself thinking of the spectrum of thought on the issue of competition.
On one end is Nevzerov and his Haute Ecole, who I read just now have put up a petition calling for a complete ban to equine competition.
On the other end are riders and trainers who seem to feel that whatever they need to do to get the horses into the winners' circle is warranted, and if necessary they will invent a name for it and say it's better than classical dressage, in order to make the ends justify the means.
Most of us probably fall somewhere in the middle. Here at our little farm, my daughter enjoys competing at the local level, so we do occasionally go to shows. I've never taken Keil Bay to one, although he would probably be fine as long as he had plenty of hay and attention. Cody, our QH with PSSM issues, doesn't trailer well right now and wouldn't do well being stalled overnight, so his comfort dictates what we do with him. The pony seems to enjoy the "specialness" of being loaded and groomed and ridden in front of people, and although he's encountered some scary things (applause, a judge in a box, giant dressage markers, etc.) with some care he has overcome those fears. And we have never hesitated to scratch due to extreme temps or other last-minute factors that we feel will adversely affect his experience.
I noticed yesterday that Redford followed me out to the horse trailer where I am keeping hay. I went into the trailer and Redford came halfway in behind me, and suddenly Salina came charging out of the barn, whinnying her most concerned whinny. She does this any time either of the donkeys go near the trailer or practice loading.
For Salina, who was a fancy brood mare for years, babies and trailers mean one thing: mare and foal inspections. It is not a good memory for her.
I promise her repeatedly that those days are over, but she comes right out to the trailer and insists that the donkeys get out.
As I have wondered before about cross country courses, I wonder about competition: would any horse choose the trailer and a show stall and the loudness of music and announcers on speakers over home? I suspect most wouldn't, although obviously many seem to do okay while there. Others do not, and we see ulcers, stall vices, difficult to manage behavior, etc. as a result.
I think my final point is that if we choose to put horses into competition as our partners, or in my case, to join in as a spectator, we must do everything we can to make the experience a positive one. In my mind, doing no harm is an absolute, but I think going beyond that is a better goal.
The first thing I notice when I go to dressage shows is the horse's head, the frame, the noseband, the bit(s), and how the rider is impacting these. I think the fact that this part of the horse and rider stands out so blatantly is a huge red flag.
I notice too the busy legs of the rider, and the spurring forward.
Often I wander back to the stabling area, and see horses in tiny, dark stalls with no turn-out. In my mind I see them missing freedom, but the worse thing is that probably many of the horses don't even get that at home. They might have bigger stalls with more windows, but it's likely they don't have turn-out to the degree I feel they deserve.
The FEI cannot manage all of the above, nor is it their duty. But I do believe they play an important part in setting and adhering to standards that protect the horses in show stabling, in warm-up arenas, and in the actual competition rides.
We have to start with that, and move outward.
I think we've experienced here, this week, that it is far easier to complain than to engage in meaningful dialogue and to actually grapple with some of what the FEI committees and working groups experience each time they meet.
Back in my public mental health therapist days, I ended up as coordinator and then director of outpatient services for children and families. There was long-standing difficulty between the mental health clinics and the social services agencies. We had very different mandates, and yet we were all supposedly there to help children. And it was clear that more children would be helped if we worked well together than if we didn't.
In an effort to bridge the troubled waters between, I instituted a monthly luncheon and invited all the mental health child and family staff, as well as the social services staff. The first month there were two people in attendance. Me and one worker from social services. Eventually more people came, and we ate lunches together and to some degree realized that we were all trying to help children and families. And that it was harder to complain about each other after we had shared lunch together.
We did several years' worth of work trying to find ways to support one another. That work involved lots of meetings, lots of administrative and structural change, and sometimes negotiating that felt a little bit ridiculous, but got us the next step further that day, that meeting.
Still, when it came to individual cases and children at risk of harm, we did what we had to do. I threatened numerous times to involve the national media and the governor's office when children were being left at risk. I stopped being polite in open court when testifying as an expert witness. If I had seen mistakes made and incompetence allowed, I said that. I was not popular, but often in private, I was thanked for what I was doing.
It was difficult - trying to maintain working relationships with people and agencies I would disagree with the next week when a new case landed on my desk.
I think this is what we have to do here though - create relationships with the organizations who govern, such as the FEI, while at the same time serving as active advocates for the horses.
Talk and discuss, as we've done here. Try when we can to leave the role of complaint behind and take on the role of change-maker.
And when we go to the shows, take our video cameras to the warm-up arenas. Keep watching, reporting, speaking out when we see things that are not right. And let the FEI know about it.
Again, thank you to Malina and all who participated this week. Hopefully we can do this again after the working group completes its current tasks.
Lynda offered:
1. Double bridles are not permitted at levels below Grand Prix. (Harder to get hyperflexion in a snaffle!)
2. Horses that do not track up fully in trot exercises will be severely penalised.
3. The horse's poll must ALWAYS be the highest point of the neck.
I wrote:
1. Institute a review for all judges and stewards as to the existing standards, the new distinctions, with visual examples of what is okay and what is not. Sad to say this but I think some of the upper level judges need to see what a horse whose nose is slightly in front of the vertical looks like!
2. A strengthening of the process so that stewards are not intimidated or argued with - a rider can appeal a warning, etc. but must cease what he/she is doing until the judge reviews the call. Intimidation or argument with stewards is grounds for immediate disqualification. (there is no reason to argue with the stewards if there is an appeal process in place and especially if there are cameras so that looking at the infraction is simply done by the judge)
3. Include long-time classically trained dressage riders/trainers in the working group, the round-tables, committees, etc. IMO, Sjef Janssen being included as the "dressage representative" is counterproductive. According to Janssen, he invented rollkur. It seems unlikely that he will now denounce it as abusive. We need a balance of perspectives discussing these issues. He is not representative of the discipline and sport of dressage as many of us know and cherish it.
and Maire added:
Absolutely, stewards must be protected from intimidation. I am absolutely stuck on how to define aggressive force. Do they look at the rider's position, the horse's position or both? This is crucial as it is how they have distinguished Rolllkur from LDR. I wish they had not made this distinction but it is a given for now at any rate.
They could have a clear length of time that a LDR frame is held for.
I think we've covered some good things here. Thank you to everyone who came by to read and most especially to those of you who took the extra time and thought to comment.
Don't hesitate to continue adding comments if you've had a busy week and want to jump in. People come to these posts all day and all night long, and your words will continue provoking thought!
*******
This morning when in between sleep and wakefulness, I found myself thinking of the spectrum of thought on the issue of competition.
On one end is Nevzerov and his Haute Ecole, who I read just now have put up a petition calling for a complete ban to equine competition.
On the other end are riders and trainers who seem to feel that whatever they need to do to get the horses into the winners' circle is warranted, and if necessary they will invent a name for it and say it's better than classical dressage, in order to make the ends justify the means.
Most of us probably fall somewhere in the middle. Here at our little farm, my daughter enjoys competing at the local level, so we do occasionally go to shows. I've never taken Keil Bay to one, although he would probably be fine as long as he had plenty of hay and attention. Cody, our QH with PSSM issues, doesn't trailer well right now and wouldn't do well being stalled overnight, so his comfort dictates what we do with him. The pony seems to enjoy the "specialness" of being loaded and groomed and ridden in front of people, and although he's encountered some scary things (applause, a judge in a box, giant dressage markers, etc.) with some care he has overcome those fears. And we have never hesitated to scratch due to extreme temps or other last-minute factors that we feel will adversely affect his experience.
I noticed yesterday that Redford followed me out to the horse trailer where I am keeping hay. I went into the trailer and Redford came halfway in behind me, and suddenly Salina came charging out of the barn, whinnying her most concerned whinny. She does this any time either of the donkeys go near the trailer or practice loading.
For Salina, who was a fancy brood mare for years, babies and trailers mean one thing: mare and foal inspections. It is not a good memory for her.
I promise her repeatedly that those days are over, but she comes right out to the trailer and insists that the donkeys get out.
As I have wondered before about cross country courses, I wonder about competition: would any horse choose the trailer and a show stall and the loudness of music and announcers on speakers over home? I suspect most wouldn't, although obviously many seem to do okay while there. Others do not, and we see ulcers, stall vices, difficult to manage behavior, etc. as a result.
I think my final point is that if we choose to put horses into competition as our partners, or in my case, to join in as a spectator, we must do everything we can to make the experience a positive one. In my mind, doing no harm is an absolute, but I think going beyond that is a better goal.
The first thing I notice when I go to dressage shows is the horse's head, the frame, the noseband, the bit(s), and how the rider is impacting these. I think the fact that this part of the horse and rider stands out so blatantly is a huge red flag.
I notice too the busy legs of the rider, and the spurring forward.
Often I wander back to the stabling area, and see horses in tiny, dark stalls with no turn-out. In my mind I see them missing freedom, but the worse thing is that probably many of the horses don't even get that at home. They might have bigger stalls with more windows, but it's likely they don't have turn-out to the degree I feel they deserve.
The FEI cannot manage all of the above, nor is it their duty. But I do believe they play an important part in setting and adhering to standards that protect the horses in show stabling, in warm-up arenas, and in the actual competition rides.
We have to start with that, and move outward.
I think we've experienced here, this week, that it is far easier to complain than to engage in meaningful dialogue and to actually grapple with some of what the FEI committees and working groups experience each time they meet.
Back in my public mental health therapist days, I ended up as coordinator and then director of outpatient services for children and families. There was long-standing difficulty between the mental health clinics and the social services agencies. We had very different mandates, and yet we were all supposedly there to help children. And it was clear that more children would be helped if we worked well together than if we didn't.
In an effort to bridge the troubled waters between, I instituted a monthly luncheon and invited all the mental health child and family staff, as well as the social services staff. The first month there were two people in attendance. Me and one worker from social services. Eventually more people came, and we ate lunches together and to some degree realized that we were all trying to help children and families. And that it was harder to complain about each other after we had shared lunch together.
We did several years' worth of work trying to find ways to support one another. That work involved lots of meetings, lots of administrative and structural change, and sometimes negotiating that felt a little bit ridiculous, but got us the next step further that day, that meeting.
Still, when it came to individual cases and children at risk of harm, we did what we had to do. I threatened numerous times to involve the national media and the governor's office when children were being left at risk. I stopped being polite in open court when testifying as an expert witness. If I had seen mistakes made and incompetence allowed, I said that. I was not popular, but often in private, I was thanked for what I was doing.
It was difficult - trying to maintain working relationships with people and agencies I would disagree with the next week when a new case landed on my desk.
I think this is what we have to do here though - create relationships with the organizations who govern, such as the FEI, while at the same time serving as active advocates for the horses.
Talk and discuss, as we've done here. Try when we can to leave the role of complaint behind and take on the role of change-maker.
And when we go to the shows, take our video cameras to the warm-up arenas. Keep watching, reporting, speaking out when we see things that are not right. And let the FEI know about it.
Again, thank you to Malina and all who participated this week. Hopefully we can do this again after the working group completes its current tasks.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
3 very concrete steps the FEI could take towards definitive progress?
The week's end has come quick! And I am on a tight schedule today, so am not going to ramble on as I have done previously.
What I'm proposing is that we offer three concrete steps we each feel would lead to progress with reference to the issue of rollkur/hyperflexion/LDR. I know some of the issue is that there IS a distinction between the first two and LDR, but I personally feel they need to be considered as one. You don't have to follow my categorization at all.
Pretend YOU'RE on the working group that's trying to clarify the new rules. Pretend you can go beyond that if you want to. What three things would you add in to the rules, or change?
I'll add mine in later, probably early evening, and then will go through any comments tonight with the intention of posting the entire list tomorrow.
One thing I'm happy to read this morning from Horse For Life:
Today at 7:27am
In March 2009, in concert and with the support with a number of other horsemen, we put online a petition for the two finger rule. Knowing that a properly adjusted noseband could help make it that much more difficult to maintain and hold a horse in an overflexed position. It gives the horse his voice back!
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/savingthehorses/
Now 3000 signatures strong the USEF has in 2010 answered that call at a national level!!!
Rule 121.6. .... At any level of competition, a cavesson noseband may never be so tightly fixed that it causes severe irritation to the skin, and must be adjusted to allow at least two fingers under the noseband on the side of the face under the cheekbone.
As someone noted, it could be better - could have specified two fingers between top of nose and noseband. BUT, this is progress. I've argued this with trainers for years and loosened many cavessons the trainers had made overly tight. Now at least the rule tells you where to put the fingers! Not under the horse's jaw where the crevice is!
What I'm proposing is that we offer three concrete steps we each feel would lead to progress with reference to the issue of rollkur/hyperflexion/LDR. I know some of the issue is that there IS a distinction between the first two and LDR, but I personally feel they need to be considered as one. You don't have to follow my categorization at all.
Pretend YOU'RE on the working group that's trying to clarify the new rules. Pretend you can go beyond that if you want to. What three things would you add in to the rules, or change?
I'll add mine in later, probably early evening, and then will go through any comments tonight with the intention of posting the entire list tomorrow.
One thing I'm happy to read this morning from Horse For Life:
Today at 7:27am
In March 2009, in concert and with the support with a number of other horsemen, we put online a petition for the two finger rule. Knowing that a properly adjusted noseband could help make it that much more difficult to maintain and hold a horse in an overflexed position. It gives the horse his voice back!
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/savingthehorses/
Now 3000 signatures strong the USEF has in 2010 answered that call at a national level!!!
Rule 121.6. .... At any level of competition, a cavesson noseband may never be so tightly fixed that it causes severe irritation to the skin, and must be adjusted to allow at least two fingers under the noseband on the side of the face under the cheekbone.
As someone noted, it could be better - could have specified two fingers between top of nose and noseband. BUT, this is progress. I've argued this with trainers for years and loosened many cavessons the trainers had made overly tight. Now at least the rule tells you where to put the fingers! Not under the horse's jaw where the crevice is!
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
quick note
I meant to say in today's post that I will be adding things to each day's post as needed - so if you come back to check in, scan the full post again to see if there is new information!
Malina just commented on yesterday's post, and I have copied that at the bottom of today's to make sure everyone sees it.
Malina just commented on yesterday's post, and I have copied that at the bottom of today's to make sure everyone sees it.
various thoughts on judging, assessing the use of force, and the FEI's ability to adhere to the standards already in place
Arlene shared this quote in yesterday's comments:
What the horse does under compulsion...is done without understanding...and there is no beauty in it.
- Xenophon
Xenophon's statement perfectly frames our shift from yesterday's post and comments to today's, which has to do with stewards having clear criteria to follow when monitoring warm-ups, and which also connects to what comes after the warm-up: the ride itself.
Maire wrote:
How is a steward to decide if aggressive force is used? What about horses that have such force used at home and therefore have learned to submit to LDR? That cannot be judged. Dressage judging is subjective and I think that the steward judging of warm up rides will also have to be subjective. What is aggression? Is it a braced position on the part of the rider? Is it obvious signs of discomfort such as swishing tale, excessive sweating and these signs could also be argued the other way?
Maire has described the difficulty in very exact terms, asking what I believe are the critical questions the FEI's working group has to address.
Particularly important, I think, is the possibility that aggressive force used at home leads to learned helplessness and submission on the part of the horse, who then offers little resistance in the warm-up arena. How can a steward address that?
Dougie wrote:
I think the definition of LDR needs to be expanded into a really simple "If you see this (description of look/behaviour by horse and/or rider) this is what you should do."
That level of clarity would help everyone develop a much higher level of common understanding of what is/isn't acceptable & people would then start to self-analyse & change their behaviours, coz they know they won't be allowed to do what they've previously done.
From such small acorns, great oaks grow.
Dougie has come to what is needed - absolute clarity, with very specific criteria that become second-nature as they are implemented.
Which brings me to something I was thinking about last night as I read over the comments: in many sports, there are elements of subjectivity in judging, and to some degree we have to accept that if we use humans to judge. Having very clear criteria make it less subjective and easier to achieve consistency across many rides.
However, I'm going to say something here that might seem as if I'm leaning in the other direction. I feel that at the upper levels of the equine sport, the judging can get so technical and so focused on the movements and the extravagance of gait, that common sense is tossed out the window.
The image of a horse with muzzle to chest, or even muzzle behind the vertical, noseband cranked tight, curb rein nearly horizontal, mouth gagging open, eyes either fearful or worried or more disturbing, simply resigned, tail swishing, spurs active, tremendous sweat and foam and saliva - how hard is it to see and to judge that this is not correct, not good, and unworthy of reward? Many of the upper level rides that are winning seem to have completely skipped both rhythm and relaxation.
Instead of looking only at movement, or how far and high the front legs extend, how about telling the stewards and the judges to simply look at the horse's face? Look at the horse's back. At the tail. Is there a happy, relaxed demeanor? Is there a lovely soft swing through the back? Is the tail making that beautiful S-shaped swing at the trot? Are the hind legs tracking properly?
These are things I look for when my daughter rides her 12.2h pony in our modest backyard arena. Why can't these basic, standard signs of rhythm and relaxation be used at the upper levels, where they are even more important?
I remind you of the standards that I downloaded months ago from the FEI's website:
Chapter I Dressage
Article 401 OBJECT AND GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF DRESSAGE
The object of dressage is the development of the horse into a happy athlete through harmonious education. As a result, it makes the horse calm, supple, loose and flexible, but also confident, attentive and keen, thus achieving perfect understanding with the rider.
These qualities are revealed by:
• The freedom and regularity of the paces.
• The harmony, lightness and ease of the movements.
• The lightness of the forehand and the engagement of the
hindquarters, originating from a lively impulsion.
• The acceptance of the bit, with submissiveness/throughness
(Durchlässigkeit) without any tension or resistance.
2. The horse thus gives the impression of doing, of its own accord, what is required. Confident and attentive, submitting generously to the control of the athlete, remaining absolutely straight in any movement on a straight line and bending accordingly when moving on curved lines.
3. The walk is regular, free and unconstrained. The trot is free, supple, regular and active. The canter is united, light and balanced. The hindquarters are never inactive or sluggish. The horse responds to the slightest indication of the athlete and thereby gives life and spirit to all the rest of its body.
4. By virtue of a lively impulsion and the suppleness of the joints, free from the paralysing effects of resistance, the horse obeys willingly and without hesitation and responds to the various aids calmly and with precision, displaying a natural and harmonious balance both physically and mentally.
5. In all the work, even at the halt, the horse must be “on the bit”. A horse is said to be “on the bit” when the neck is more or less raised and arched according to the stage of training and the extension or collection of the pace,
accepting the bridle with a light and consistent soft submissive contact. The
head should remain in a steady position, as a rule slightly in front of the vertical, with a supple poll as the highest point of the neck, and no resistance should be offered to the athlete.
6. Cadence is shown in trot and canter and is the result of the proper harmony that a horse shows when it moves with well-marked regularity, impulsion and balance. Cadence must be maintained in all the different trot or canter exercises and in all the variations of these paces.
7. The regularity of the paces is fundamental to dressage.
I believe all judges should go through remedial training in 2010 to review the EXISTING standards. From the FEI level all the way down to local schooling shows. As recently as last summer, my daughter received a comment from a judge that said "shorten the reins and get your pony on the bit." This was in an intro level class.
If you were a 12-year old girl, what message would you take from that comment? In my opinion the ongoing focus on getting horses "on the bit" contributes mightily to the image of holding the horses' heads in a "frame" rather than learning to get horses correctly "on the aids" and moving with rhythm and relaxation, the first two steps of the training scale. Contact shouldn't be in the picture until the first two are achieved.
Even at a local schooling show, the winner of the show was an adult professional rider, who rode the entire test with her big warmblood's nose several inches behind the vertical. At intro level.
As recently as this week my daughter and I received an email from our local Pony Club, in which dressage was described as a discipline in which being "on the bit" was the most important thing. Again, what does this say to our young riders? The bit, the reins, the hands, the horse's head are the focus. Not the hindquarters, not the rider's seat, not the horse's entire body being in relaxation before any contact is attempted.
Part of why I am so adamant about the rollkur issue is that I feel if we correct the riding and the treatment of the horses at the TOP, those effects will ripple all the way down to the schooling arenas and shows and backyard arenas, where little girls and boys will learn to ride their ponies with kindness and correctness. Isn't that why the standards are in place? Shouldn't the riders at the top be examples of those same standards?
As far as I'm concerned, the FEI cleaning things up at the top has the potential to help create better riders and happier ponies and horses all over the world, which is the number one reason why it is so important that they take this seriously and do what needs to be done in as straightforward a manner as they can.
I've gone off on a slight rampage here, so feel free to rein me back in (no rollkur, please!) and share your thoughts.
*******
I wanted to add Malina's comment that just came through on yesterday's post:
Billie,
Thank you again for the opportunity to converse with you and your readers.
In order to ensure practical results in less than two months, the working group had to be kept small. It is important to note however that the working group will be consulting widely outside of its membership.
It shouldn’t be forgotten that Jacques Van Daele, FEI Honorary Steward General for Dressage, is on the working group. He has served at hundreds of FEI events from the lowest to the highest level over many years and is one of the most knowledgeable and experienced stewards working with the FEI. John Roche, who is FEI’s director for stewarding, is also a working group member.
The FEI has put in place a new education programme for stewards. All stewards officiating at international events will have to go through this programme in order to gain the best possible understanding of FEI rules and regulations and to be in a position to perform their tasks in the most informed and efficient way.
I hope that this information is of interest.
All the best,
Malina
Thanks, Malina - that is indeed interesting information and I'm very happy to hear about the stewards officiating at international events going through an education programme.
Will the education programme be available for use by stewards officiating at lower level events? I would hope that all stewards could have access to it and would be encouraged to take part.
And further, will the material covered by the programme be available for the general public? I personally would be extremely interested in the information. It might be just the thing to push me into volunteering for stewarding positions in local competition - they always seem to need extra help.
What the horse does under compulsion...is done without understanding...and there is no beauty in it.
- Xenophon
Xenophon's statement perfectly frames our shift from yesterday's post and comments to today's, which has to do with stewards having clear criteria to follow when monitoring warm-ups, and which also connects to what comes after the warm-up: the ride itself.
Maire wrote:
How is a steward to decide if aggressive force is used? What about horses that have such force used at home and therefore have learned to submit to LDR? That cannot be judged. Dressage judging is subjective and I think that the steward judging of warm up rides will also have to be subjective. What is aggression? Is it a braced position on the part of the rider? Is it obvious signs of discomfort such as swishing tale, excessive sweating and these signs could also be argued the other way?
Maire has described the difficulty in very exact terms, asking what I believe are the critical questions the FEI's working group has to address.
Particularly important, I think, is the possibility that aggressive force used at home leads to learned helplessness and submission on the part of the horse, who then offers little resistance in the warm-up arena. How can a steward address that?
Dougie wrote:
I think the definition of LDR needs to be expanded into a really simple "If you see this (description of look/behaviour by horse and/or rider) this is what you should do."
That level of clarity would help everyone develop a much higher level of common understanding of what is/isn't acceptable & people would then start to self-analyse & change their behaviours, coz they know they won't be allowed to do what they've previously done.
From such small acorns, great oaks grow.
Dougie has come to what is needed - absolute clarity, with very specific criteria that become second-nature as they are implemented.
Which brings me to something I was thinking about last night as I read over the comments: in many sports, there are elements of subjectivity in judging, and to some degree we have to accept that if we use humans to judge. Having very clear criteria make it less subjective and easier to achieve consistency across many rides.
However, I'm going to say something here that might seem as if I'm leaning in the other direction. I feel that at the upper levels of the equine sport, the judging can get so technical and so focused on the movements and the extravagance of gait, that common sense is tossed out the window.
The image of a horse with muzzle to chest, or even muzzle behind the vertical, noseband cranked tight, curb rein nearly horizontal, mouth gagging open, eyes either fearful or worried or more disturbing, simply resigned, tail swishing, spurs active, tremendous sweat and foam and saliva - how hard is it to see and to judge that this is not correct, not good, and unworthy of reward? Many of the upper level rides that are winning seem to have completely skipped both rhythm and relaxation.
Instead of looking only at movement, or how far and high the front legs extend, how about telling the stewards and the judges to simply look at the horse's face? Look at the horse's back. At the tail. Is there a happy, relaxed demeanor? Is there a lovely soft swing through the back? Is the tail making that beautiful S-shaped swing at the trot? Are the hind legs tracking properly?
These are things I look for when my daughter rides her 12.2h pony in our modest backyard arena. Why can't these basic, standard signs of rhythm and relaxation be used at the upper levels, where they are even more important?
I remind you of the standards that I downloaded months ago from the FEI's website:
Chapter I Dressage
Article 401 OBJECT AND GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF DRESSAGE
The object of dressage is the development of the horse into a happy athlete through harmonious education. As a result, it makes the horse calm, supple, loose and flexible, but also confident, attentive and keen, thus achieving perfect understanding with the rider.
These qualities are revealed by:
• The freedom and regularity of the paces.
• The harmony, lightness and ease of the movements.
• The lightness of the forehand and the engagement of the
hindquarters, originating from a lively impulsion.
• The acceptance of the bit, with submissiveness/throughness
(Durchlässigkeit) without any tension or resistance.
2. The horse thus gives the impression of doing, of its own accord, what is required. Confident and attentive, submitting generously to the control of the athlete, remaining absolutely straight in any movement on a straight line and bending accordingly when moving on curved lines.
3. The walk is regular, free and unconstrained. The trot is free, supple, regular and active. The canter is united, light and balanced. The hindquarters are never inactive or sluggish. The horse responds to the slightest indication of the athlete and thereby gives life and spirit to all the rest of its body.
4. By virtue of a lively impulsion and the suppleness of the joints, free from the paralysing effects of resistance, the horse obeys willingly and without hesitation and responds to the various aids calmly and with precision, displaying a natural and harmonious balance both physically and mentally.
5. In all the work, even at the halt, the horse must be “on the bit”. A horse is said to be “on the bit” when the neck is more or less raised and arched according to the stage of training and the extension or collection of the pace,
accepting the bridle with a light and consistent soft submissive contact. The
head should remain in a steady position, as a rule slightly in front of the vertical, with a supple poll as the highest point of the neck, and no resistance should be offered to the athlete.
6. Cadence is shown in trot and canter and is the result of the proper harmony that a horse shows when it moves with well-marked regularity, impulsion and balance. Cadence must be maintained in all the different trot or canter exercises and in all the variations of these paces.
7. The regularity of the paces is fundamental to dressage.
I believe all judges should go through remedial training in 2010 to review the EXISTING standards. From the FEI level all the way down to local schooling shows. As recently as last summer, my daughter received a comment from a judge that said "shorten the reins and get your pony on the bit." This was in an intro level class.
If you were a 12-year old girl, what message would you take from that comment? In my opinion the ongoing focus on getting horses "on the bit" contributes mightily to the image of holding the horses' heads in a "frame" rather than learning to get horses correctly "on the aids" and moving with rhythm and relaxation, the first two steps of the training scale. Contact shouldn't be in the picture until the first two are achieved.
Even at a local schooling show, the winner of the show was an adult professional rider, who rode the entire test with her big warmblood's nose several inches behind the vertical. At intro level.
As recently as this week my daughter and I received an email from our local Pony Club, in which dressage was described as a discipline in which being "on the bit" was the most important thing. Again, what does this say to our young riders? The bit, the reins, the hands, the horse's head are the focus. Not the hindquarters, not the rider's seat, not the horse's entire body being in relaxation before any contact is attempted.
Part of why I am so adamant about the rollkur issue is that I feel if we correct the riding and the treatment of the horses at the TOP, those effects will ripple all the way down to the schooling arenas and shows and backyard arenas, where little girls and boys will learn to ride their ponies with kindness and correctness. Isn't that why the standards are in place? Shouldn't the riders at the top be examples of those same standards?
As far as I'm concerned, the FEI cleaning things up at the top has the potential to help create better riders and happier ponies and horses all over the world, which is the number one reason why it is so important that they take this seriously and do what needs to be done in as straightforward a manner as they can.
I've gone off on a slight rampage here, so feel free to rein me back in (no rollkur, please!) and share your thoughts.
*******
I wanted to add Malina's comment that just came through on yesterday's post:
Billie,
Thank you again for the opportunity to converse with you and your readers.
In order to ensure practical results in less than two months, the working group had to be kept small. It is important to note however that the working group will be consulting widely outside of its membership.
It shouldn’t be forgotten that Jacques Van Daele, FEI Honorary Steward General for Dressage, is on the working group. He has served at hundreds of FEI events from the lowest to the highest level over many years and is one of the most knowledgeable and experienced stewards working with the FEI. John Roche, who is FEI’s director for stewarding, is also a working group member.
The FEI has put in place a new education programme for stewards. All stewards officiating at international events will have to go through this programme in order to gain the best possible understanding of FEI rules and regulations and to be in a position to perform their tasks in the most informed and efficient way.
I hope that this information is of interest.
All the best,
Malina
Thanks, Malina - that is indeed interesting information and I'm very happy to hear about the stewards officiating at international events going through an education programme.
Will the education programme be available for use by stewards officiating at lower level events? I would hope that all stewards could have access to it and would be encouraged to take part.
And further, will the material covered by the programme be available for the general public? I personally would be extremely interested in the information. It might be just the thing to push me into volunteering for stewarding positions in local competition - they always seem to need extra help.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)