# *WARNING: VENT* Keeping an Open Mind



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

*Warning: *this is a personal vent that has made me very upset recently. Opinions might be controversial. Proceed with caution. _Keep your train wrecks on the tracks please._

I find, specifically online, the equestrian community very close minded. We all come from different areas, have different experiences, and have access to different feeds, husbandry practices, hay, and boarding situations.

Just because someone else does something differently than you does not make it _wrong_. It does not mean you are _inefficient_ in your horse keeping practices. It does not mean you are a *bad caregiver*.

Around the country the quality and standard of living is different. What might be cheap in New York is considered expensive in Alabama. What might be cheap in Nebraska is a steal in Oregon. What's common horsekeeping practice in Kentucky might never even be known to those in California.

The reality is not everyone has pastures. Not everyone has round bales. Not everyone's horse even gets turnout, or free choice hay, or maybe even hay at all! Specifically, where I live, it is normal for horses to be stalled 24/7, to be fed *hay pellets* 2x a day, and worked at least 2x a day for 1.5 hours each. My area is prodominantly rich and upscale and the horses are worth in the hundreds of thousands. Turnout risks an injury. Feeding hay is *expensive* and hard to store on *limited acres*. Every barn is about 3 acres large. No bigger. There are *no pastures* and if you can find them they are *poorly kept* and considered the lowest ranked boarding because the BOs don't care about those horses _at all_, they are left to their natural devices.

I find so many people online jump down others throats about management styles. "You don't have turnout? FIND A BARN THAT DOES!" Does that mean someone, where I am, has to uproot and MOVE to a state that has pastures, leave their job and home JUST to satisfy that "insufficient" horse care they are being accused of?

Or do we do the *best we can* with whatever situations we have? There may be financial constraints. There might be availability issues. There are so many reasons some of us can't get to the "basic care" that others claim is just "so easy." It's not, not for everyone. Not for people in really urban environments where land is limited and 500,000 dollar horse can't afford to get a tendon injury being kicked in a pasture.

If you can't meet the "basics" the nation seems to have set, based predominantly on the midwestern horsecare standard, are you a bad owner? Or do you simply live in an area that has DIFFERENT basics that the other horse owners haven't considered?

-sigh- rant over... thanks for listening :runninghorse2:


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

I really think it depends on the situation. 

If someone is not giving their horse proper care simply because they don't want to take them somewhere or do anything that inconveniences them, then yes, I have a problem with it. For example where Cherokee lives. His owner has too many horses to afford, doesn't properly get feet trimmed, several have Thrush and are overweight, and she doesn't seem to care to correct those issues. The one horse she does ride, she does so with a harsh bit, and gets "respect" by jerking on the reins or popping him for the smallest thing...

If you're doing your best; that's all that's possible, regardless of where you go, and the only way anyone can have a horse is for them to be kept that way, it's different. Unfortunately not every place has the nice facilities that others might. As long as your horse is well cared for and happy, then do what you can, where you are, with what you have.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 - 100% agreement. I think a lot of us take for granted what we have. Horses require a lot of care, it's true, but one doesn't need "the perfect situation" to be successful in horse care. The horse's happiness is paramount. There's a huge difference between "will not" and "cannot"

I would consider cherokee's owner's standard of care hovering in the "abusive/neglect" category. Neglect if it is due to ignorance, abuse if it is through a choice autonomically.


----------



## BlindHorseEnthusiast4582 (Apr 11, 2016)

No abuse per-say, or at least not to him directly, neglect yeah. I think it started as trying to take on too much, then lack of knowledge has made those issues worse. Don't want to derail your thread though.

I agree, those who have been part of well-kept and fancy riding operations (which I have not) can take them for granted. Then again, not all of them do, and some would prefer a "lower stress" setup.


----------



## Kalraii (Jul 28, 2015)

My boyfriend calls these sorts of people "Keyboard Warriors". As a Londoner I know all about the urban horse scene. It is actually very natural for locals to keep their horses this way. Everyone knows it's not ideal but everyone is in the same boat of "well it's either this or sell my horse". And we have a horse crisis. My instructor says that she's a big advocate for these sorts of facilities as horses get more care than given credit for. The worst cases of neglect she has seen are private owners with no one to regulate them. Good feed, good shoeing and all medical expenses paid. The horse doesn't know any different, most of the time. Not every owner has the funding or the transport. 

It's just not so black and white. If everyone was expected to meet the ideal requirements as a minimum there would be more horses at slaughter or more being abandoned. But when you see a donkey in a small stall with only a sprinkle of sand for bedding and no turnout, I do have to wonder if they would just have been better off not being born at all. By the way, I get crap all the time over this sort of thing. I rehabilitate exotic animals and always get "WHY DON'T YOU JUST RELEASE THE ANIMAL BACK INTO THE WILD?!?!?" Yeah, the green tree boa, native to England. Or about caged birds or how my birds only get about 2 hours flight time a day. Like CHILL MAN I'm doing MY BEST HERE! Anyway, joined in ranting there. I have to travel two hours to see mine because I wanted her to have turnout. My decision, does not affect anyone else nor should it. Good points. I like discussion.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

I would give anything to have a barn where tyra can come in at night and play in the pasture all day. I didn't even know those existed until recently. Right now, she lives where she can be outside, alas in a pen next to a buddy, all day and she comes into the barn at night. That's as close as we get to an in and out situation. Public barns, unfortunately, don't even have this option.

someday, when she is retired from being a show horse, i will move her to a 24/7 pasture environment. I feel as long as she is in competition she needs a somewhat injury-free set up, but mark my words when she's 12 or 13 she's getting the good life and going out to be in a herd. That's my plan for her.
@Kalraii - COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND. I can imagine!!! London has a lot of box stalls, yes? Do you guys get pasture or no? I'd bet there'd be no room for big grass in the city... And I don't think its right either for someone to tell you "well just take your horse out to the country!" because what if that is an hour drive away and it means you only see them twice a week instead of every day?! If i were a horse in a box stall I'd rather be able to see my owner every day than only see her sporadically throughout the week. 

When we were in a box stall situation Tyra used to go off her feed the days I wouldn't come see her, which were extremely rare indeed. I went up to see her every single day because I knew our situation was not ideal, but it was all I could do to take her out, let her graze, give her a little ride, and then stay with her for a few hours before heading home. Now that she's in a more full-care situation I see her a lot less, maybe 4 times a week. I admit I miss being missed...


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

I think people just turn themselves off to "differences" and become somewhat snobby. It's so easy to tell someone they have to change. It's harder to help them find ways to manage their current situation. it takes more thought, more compassion, more creativity. People who aren't as well-versed in horse management, for whatever reasons (big fancy barns who did everything for them, left horses out to do their own thing mostly, etc), i think, get defensive and uppity because maybe it makes them question if they NEED all the sparkles and the extras? Maybe their horses would be alright on less? A lot of people don't want to think that way, because they need to justify the sacrifices they make just to have the top-tier quality.


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

On the other hand...if you have been on forums for many years you tend to come ‘pre sceptical’

Sadly so many people have spent a lot of time trying to help people, to make suggestions, only to have everything pushed back, for every single suggestion made there is an excuse why nothing can be changed. I admit that I am jaded by this, people who are looking for a magic wand to fix something without actually making any changes.

I do agree with your basic premise, no allowance is made for different parts of the country, or different countries.....living in the UK I had no concept of how a horse could live out 24/7 without a blanket on in winters that reach -40*C, now I’m living it I understand that. But again, some horses cannot be kept the way people are keeping them, I’ve had horses that were extremely stressed by being stalled, some that were equally stressed by being asked to live outside.

All we can do is say what works for us, or to speak up when things sound dangerous or plain wrong.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

goldie those are some good points. I definitely agree that some people who ask for help are sort of... testing the waters, maybe? seeing what the possible outcomes or solutions could be? At the end of the day it is their decision what they do with the information they receive over the internet.

I, myself, am very sensitive to those with budget constraints. I tend to promote a more penny-pinching way of caring for horses, even though there's really NOT that much room for skimping and you certainly need to make sure all your bases are covered. But the extras? I don't know. It depends on the horse. We found out that my horse did need the sparkly, super duper top notch care, and that she was not thriving in a barn that was very diy.

But I got lucky that i was able to put her in a new situation. For people around the US and around the world there are not always the greatest boarding situations available, and owners need to plug in the holes the BO's refuse to. Making lemonade out of really bad lemons, I guess. Sometimes it's board at a really crappy place and finance it yourself, or sell your horse. I couldn't even imagine doing the latter. Losing my precious mare? I'd rather starve myself.

The barn we originally boarded at was fairly poverty-stricken. People were either too cheap or simply didn't have the money to provide even basic care. It was pretty jading to board there. I am glad I got out to see the good life. But, now I know what to do if i ever had to board at another barn like that, having had past experience needing to do a lot of self-care and picking up the slack boarding did not provide.


----------



## Kalraii (Jul 28, 2015)

@thecolorcoal I visited a lot of places and have worked/volunteered a few as well. The ones IN the city? Nope, just a few hours turnout in the arena, taking turns. They usually have fields out of the city but those are for long holidays or retirement. On the fringes of the city you there are some with turnout (like mine) but as you can imagine the rates.. phwoah. I think at minimum without turnout they need to be exercised often enough. That of course many horses would prefer to be left alone in a grassy field BUT in this scenario will usually enjoy work as it breaks up the day and stimulates them. They get more care than some factory workers in 3rd world countries. It is just as hard seeing a horse mentally shut down from mind numbing work/lack of enrichment as it is seeing one physically neglected and abused. We can all upfront agree that the horses without proper turnout aren't exactly perky buttons at their peak, but with the right owner and care they aren't exactly the walking dead either. People over exaggerate at times! 

It's easy to say it's not fair and one should not own xyz animal. But the fact is that is never going to happen. People will still get animals and you'll get ones that actually care for them and those that dont. And if you, in your situation, feel guilty for not being able to provide the best given your situation then that's fine. But it's when you get an army of outsiders making you feel like poo without offering any sympathy or even a realistic alternative that is irritating. Like I said I get it all the time. "YOU CAN'T KEEP A BABY CROCODILE IN YOUR HOME IT'S UNNATURAL". Sure, would YOU like to have it instead? Where should I put it? The River Thames? lol


----------



## walkinthewalk (Jul 23, 2008)

Golden Horse said:


> On the other hand...if you have been on forums for many years you tend to come ‘pre sceptical’
> 
> Sadly so many people have spent a lot of time trying to help people, to make suggestions, only to have everything pushed back, for every single suggestion made there is an excuse why nothing can be changed. I admit that I am jaded by this, people who are looking for a magic wand to fix something without actually making any changes.
> 
> ...


^^^Well said --- :cowboy:


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

@Kalraii - at *least* they have that turnout situation. you can be happy for it. it's a step up from 24/7 stall, you know? 

I am with you, especially with exotic animals. Sometimes "exotics" raised in captivity and/or rescued as babies and reared with humans are at a greater disadvantage being let go into the wild, because they simply don't have the instincts to survive. The baby crocodile released into the wild is not going to know where to go? or how to hunt? or how to live? it's not the human nor the crocodile's fault, the human caregiver did what they thought was best: rescue abandoned baby crocodile/abandoned pet crocodile. If it's best if croc live with the human if the human has no way to send it to africa, how is that so bad? as long as human meets its basic needs?

smh... maybe I am just TOO open minded O_O xD
@walkinthewalk, the issue i have with "wrong" is it is interpretive too. Some people think it's "wrong" to ride in bits. Some people think it's "wrong" for a gaited horse to gait due to future lameness? Some people think owning horses is "wrong" in general. So where does right stop and wrong begin? It's different for everyone. That is where my feathers get puffed up, because the majority of horse-care is relative. Same with cultures. What might be "right" in one culture is "wrong" in another, but who's to say EITHER is right or wrong?


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

Even though we both get along splendidly with them, my wife and I do not have a dog at home because we both work full time, and we consider the poor quality of life that dog would have being by himself for most of the day, apart from the few hours between coming home and going to sleep. 

We know what horses need in order to thrive. Failing to provide for those needs because one desires them as status symbols does not inspire me to nod in agreement with stalling 24/7 without herd life, without grazing, without normal physical activity (rather than doing jump courses or the piaffe for an hour or so twice a day). It is beneficial for the owner (as long as the horse wins), it is detrimental to the horse. There is no partnership in this.

The horses you lock up in isolation for their entire lives, being at any moment either stall ornaments or being readied to earn ribbons and prize money, may well be even worse off elsewhere, that is true. But "I'm doing the best I can!" is poor comfort to them. Saying, "I live in an upscale neighborhood, have an expensive horse, but hay is sooo pricey!" – I'm sorry. You willingly and informedly make the decision to put an animal in a situation that is suboptimal for its physical and mental wellbeing, for whatever reason. I can't give you the "There, there!" you seem to be looking for here.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

mmshiro i'm not in the group of upscale people, i was just commenting about the fact that the area which i board is mostly known for that kind of care. so what are people supposed to do? move away? i don't think so. If that is the care that exists in the area, it's not like you can change it. You need to make it work, any way you can, because like it or not horses will live there. it's no one's place to tell someone they can't board at barn x or barn y because it's missing abc. 

I don't have a dog either because i don't have the time or space for it. but if i had the time? the small space could be nullified with the time i'd spend with the dog outside. but no time + no space = no dog. but time + no space = dog could work.

At the end of the day it's the barn management that decides if horses get grain, turnout, hay, space, etc. it's not up to the owner, it's up to the BARN owner. and sometimes barn owners are "accept it or get out."


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

I'm telling you you are providing these animals willfully with suboptimal living conditions. There is a reason why people talk about "stall vices" instead of "pasture vices". Horses grow neurotic at best, lunatic at worst, under the conditions in which you keep them. I'm not telling you what to do; I'm simply not giving you absolution. 

You have a choice, you made a choice, be happy with the consequences of your decision or do something about it. Clearly your original post comes from a defensive point of view, and you are looking for allies to tell you that "It's okay". Well, the number of people doing the same thing as you has no bearing on what is happening to the horse for which you, and you alone, have taken on responsibility through ownership. 

Lots of children worked in the coal mines during the Industrial Revolution - which is better than starving in the street, but it's still working in the coal mines. In as far as childhood development is concerned, that was a suboptimal activity to engage in for them. So horses being incarcerated with minimal yard exercise is better than starving neglected in someone's muddy backyard, but in as far as horsemanship is concerned, it's still a pretty mediocre level of care for the animal. No amount of commiseration will change that - it'll only make you feel like you're not the only one.


----------



## Kalraii (Jul 28, 2015)

thecolorcoal said:


> And I don't think its right either for someone to tell you "well just take your horse out to the country!" because what if that is an hour drive away and it means you only see them twice a week instead of every day?! If i were a horse in a box stall I'd rather be able to see my owner every day than only see her sporadically throughout the week.


I think this is the only bit I disagree with. I would absolutely kill to have a one hour journey to see mine. But it's normally 2 hours a push. Today it was just barely over 5 hours of travelling via public transport to see her. I chose not to ride. Now I do get crap for that haha xD "What's the point, you can only see her a few times a week." I know for a FACT that Katie prefers turnout. Like any horse. It is possible to be attached to an animal but accept that it's not reciprocated. I have to deal with it al the time - I try to pair bond abused parrots. They love me one moment and when they get a mate will even try bite my face off to defend them. But that's good for THEM. That's how it SHOULD be. I have had people refuse a second animal because they don't want them to bond with anyone else but their owner. 

I completely understand that for many stalling in the city this is just how it is. And it sounds worse than it is - when you are there in person, at a good facility even without turnout, the horses can still live OK. Not amazing, but not dying either. BUT, thecolorcoral, it is my belief that you will only get 100% from any animal when you give them its freedom. This is with most animals I have worked with. By freedom, I mean as much as we can given our circumstance. If it is at all possible that you can put Tyra in a situation that is maybe less benficial for you but gives her more freedom, consider it. You might gain way more than you think. And if there is zero option, as in truly zero, not just "justification zero", continue as you are because it's obvious she's well loved and cared for beyond more than what many get.  I think you know what is best for Tyra, do your best to keep challenging yourself <3


----------



## horseluvr2524 (Sep 17, 2013)

Kalraii said:


> My boyfriend calls these sorts of people "Keyboard Warriors". As a Londoner I know all about the urban horse scene. It is actually very natural for locals to keep their horses this way. Everyone knows it's not ideal but everyone is in the same boat of "well it's either this or sell my horse". And we have a horse crisis. My instructor says that she's a big advocate for these sorts of facilities as horses get more care than given credit for. The worst cases of neglect she has seen are private owners with no one to regulate them. Good feed, good shoeing and all medical expenses paid. The horse doesn't know any different, most of the time. Not every owner has the funding or the transport.
> 
> It's just not so black and white. If everyone was expected to meet the ideal requirements as a minimum there would be more horses at slaughter or more being abandoned. But when you see a donkey in a small stall with only a sprinkle of sand for bedding and no turnout, I do have to wonder if they would just have been better off not being born at all. By the way, I get crap all the time over this sort of thing. I rehabilitate exotic animals and always get "WHY DON'T YOU JUST RELEASE THE ANIMAL BACK INTO THE WILD?!?!?" Yeah, the green tree boa, native to England. Or about caged birds or how my birds only get about 2 hours flight time a day. Like CHILL MAN I'm doing MY BEST HERE! Anyway, joined in ranting there. I have to travel two hours to see mine because I wanted her to have turnout. My decision, does not affect anyone else nor should it. Good points. I like discussion.


I really really really really really really really REALLY want you to start a journal about your exotic animal experiences (you could put it in the 'other pets' section). You have done what was, and still kind of is, my dream job: working with/training exotic animals. I'd especially love to hear about the exotic birds. I adore birds, am a total bird nerd. I've got quite a bit of parrot experience, though I will admit to being only truly comfortable with the little guys. I have a lovebird, he's awesome. I would love having a macaw someday, but first I have to get over my big beak o phobia and build an aviary so they have space to fly! Anyway... journal please!

Sorry for off topic. back to discussion.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

mmshiro said:


> I'm telling you you are providing these animals willfully with suboptimal living conditions. There is a reason why people talk about "stall vices" instead of "pasture vices". Horses grow neurotic at best, lunatic at worst, under the conditions in which you keep them. I'm not telling you what to do; I'm simply not giving you absolution.
> 
> You have a choice, you made a choice, be happy with the consequences of your decision or do something about it. Clearly your original post comes from a defensive point of view, and you are looking for allies to tell you that "It's okay". Well, the number of people doing the same thing as you has no bearing on what is happening to the horse for which you, and you alone, have taken on responsibility through ownership.
> 
> Lots of children worked in the coal mines during the Industrial Revolution - which is better than starving in the street, but it's still working in the coal mines. In as far as childhood development is concerned, that was a suboptimal activity to engage in for them. So horses being incarcerated with minimal yard exercise is better than starving neglected in someone's muddy backyard, but in as far as horsemanship is concerned, it's still a pretty mediocre level of care for the animal. No amount of commiseration will change that - it'll only make you feel like you're not the only one.


Again i am not referencing myself. My horse has good quality care* but we do not have pasture*, which apparently is a mortal sin in some people's eyes? this i do not understand.

Scenario, two barns:

One can make the decision to board at pellet barn or hay barn. if you board at pellet barn, you get 3 riding arenas PLUS a covered (we don't do indoors in ca), with miles of trails and the horses et 4 hour turnout. Ok, pretty standard. Draw back is they don't get long stem hay. Barn doesn't allowed subsidizing. Stalls cleaned twice a day. $1200/mo

The hay barn has stall access with an outdoor run, no turnout access, but feeds 2 flakes of hay morning and afternoon. Whatever extras owners are allowed to supplement but barn will not provide. Facilities are lacking, footing is bad, rings are torn up and the entire property is poorly maintained. Stalls are not cleaned, owner must clean. $450/mo

Which one is better?

If you are a competition rider with a horse who is _USED_ to a more controlled, scheduled, and padded lifestyle, you go with barn #1. If you have limited time to go see your horse, you pick 1. If you are competing and need good facilities, you pick 1.

But if you are able to supply all your horse's extra care, are not a competition rider, you'd go for barn #2 because there's a lot more freedom and possibility. 

Are you telling us the urban horse people are somehow unequipped to own horses? I don't think the riders in germany or england or even new york city would agree much.... When you don't have the luxury of big fields because you aren't in the mid west where land is cheap and plentiful, or anywhere that has a lot of green and space, you have to get creative.

Some horses do not thrive in conditions like barn #1 or #2! And you just have to know that about your horse, but if you have *no other choice*, as is the case with many owners, due to budget constraints or whatever (see the huge price difference?), do you simply not buy a horse? Barn #2 exists for a reason. If everyone felt the way you did, it would go out of business.

My point is that horse care comes in all forms. as long as you are TRYING, i think that is what really, really matters.

The basic issue I have is horse owners only see what exists *in their area* and if they hear about a variation in another area/state/region they somehow feel it is INFERIOR.


----------



## k9kenai (Jul 1, 2017)

Here in New Mexico, we don't have grass pastures. It's all dirt. The largest boarding barn I've stayed at had 5+ horses to each 1/3 acre dirt turnout, 30+ horses to an entire 6 acre boarding property. This was the nicest, most well respected boarding barn in the entire northern part of the state. They had one 1/4 acre grass pasture that each horse got 30min turnout on once every other week in the summer time only. Otherwise everybody got turned out into the dirt paddock three times a week for about four-five hours. They lived in 10 x 24 pipe runs with a 10 x 8 roof over one end and shared water troughs between runs. Grass hay fed twice a day, and quality was never consistent because it's New Mexico...Runs were cleaned once a day. _All_ of the horses were happy and healthy, and there were no vices to be found, despite no turnout in large areas, no turnout on grass, cramped conditions in turnout, etc.

One of my friends recently purchased a TWH from a show barn to use as a trail horse. He had been kept in a stall with limited turnout, and the previous owners said that was what he preferred. My friend turned her horses out daily, and the first few times she tried turning him out he was absolutely _miserable_ and only wanted to go back to his stall. She tried walking him out and leaving him hoping he would get used to it but the stress of being out in the larger pasture gave him ulcers. Eventually he refused to even come out of the run when she opened up the gate. So she gave up on turning him out with the others and just added on a smaller paddock to his stall area so he could have his own little space. He was _much_ happier being in a smaller confined area then being turned out with the other horses in a larger pasture, and he's been fine ever since.

I think this is an issue that is very _much_ an individual thing, both in relation to a person's location and the individual horse. Horses are very adaptable creatures due to domestication and an ever changing world, and while there are basic psychological and physical needs that absolutely must be met, there are many ways to meet those needs besides what is generally considered the "only" acceptable way and while in certain situations an owner may have to do more to meet those needs than an owner in a different situation, I wouldn't say it is impossible to have a happy and healthy horse in either situation.

Just my opinion, though...


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

@k9kenai that's very cool. I have never ever ever seen a public barn out here with pasture. I've seen several with turnout. Today on the trail we saw some homes with pastures, sure, but they are private homes and not always open for boarding. As far as public boarding goes, the best i've seen is turnout pens, which is what we have at my place. My horse is SO happy in her turnout pen. She gets her best friend right next door, sunshine, and some room to walk around. Ok, we don't have a pasture. What are the BO's supposed to do? There is no room to install a pasture!!! So the fact that someone would say my horse is in a "bad situation" because she doesn't have pasture is absurd! She's so happy where she is, and we are LUCKY to have turnout at all!!!!!!!!

This post originally came about because I've been hearing people criticize others about their feed schedules for their horses. yes 24/7 is ideal. But hay is expensive. Around here almost all barns have set rations. I have set rations for my barn too but the BO and the BM have made great strides in giving my horse what she needs to maintain, but some people continue to be critical because she's only fed "free choice" for 12 hours... I think i've maxed out on my hay budget at my barn, my BO is already giving me the raised eyebrow about adding oil to my horse's feed to bulk up calories. I have to come up with more creative ways to help my horse gain her weight because we aren't allowed unlimited hay here. Hay is extremely, extremely expensive. I think good hay goes for $35-50 a bale. A BALE. that's 108 lbs! And some "keyboard warriors" are demanding every horse eat a bale a day! 

My horse gets roughly 22 lbs of hay a day. That's meeting her nutritional requirements. Calorically she needs more, which is why i supplement with grain and oil and rice bran, but for people to tell me "you need to move barns your management is bad?" because of HAY? I'm not leaving my barn! Not when there are so many good things about it.


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

(i have skipped comments at this time) AMEN to that! I live in arizona. there are 5 barns, 4 arenas and 3 round pens where i board. there are curently 40-42 horses there too. the proporty is only 5 acres. My horses have been born in stalls. they live in stallsa 24/7 and i hope not, but most likly will die in stalls like hundreds of horses before them. they get pellets 2 (geldings 3) times a day as they are safer and easier to store and cheaper. I have been ripped on about "doing right by them" and moving them up north to pasture boarding. the CLOSEST place is 89+ MILES (143.232km) one way! thats half my weekly driving to work and to the barn! i would NEVER see my horses and they would be left to fend for themselves on a lat that happened to have some grass on it.

I know that they should have free choice hay (well one has no teeth and the other chokes so not them), be turned out all the time and have the vet out 2 times a year for shots and teeth and what not. the reality is i get them out as much as i can. sometimes that is only once a week but that is still more than some. they get fed when they get fed. the barn wont feed hay and i only have two that can eat it anyway. i give my own shots and only call the vet when needed because they are getting more and more expensive each year (4 x rays cost me 350 in 2016. last year was quoted 600+ for the same x rays by the same vet). 

i have had people on here tell me i should find new homes for them or should not have them because xyz. well considering i have a sound 33 year old who still loves to work and looks good meand is doing SOMETHING right. and who in their right mind would sell old horses if they actualy cared about them? it would be a death sentance for my 33 year old and 28 year old who need advanced experianced riders only (unless you are in the arena, then the gelding might be ok). who would buy a half crippled, 22 year old unregistered arab? i have my main riding horse as an only sellable option and still his odds are he will be shoved in a stall his entier life.


sometimes ideal is not reality. i am working towards what SHOULD be done but some of us dont always have the options many others dont.


----------



## k9kenai (Jul 1, 2017)

@thecolorcoal

I used to supplement pellets with my gelding when he went through a growing phase. Once he finished the growing phase he went back to two flakes of hay twice a day and was fine. He was a perfect weight. All of the barns I've been at fed around 2-3 flakes twice a day, sometimes throwing out a bit of alfalfa once a day every now and then. All of the horse owners I know around here do not free choice hay here. They either feed by amount of flakes, or by weight in a hay net (roughly 4-6lbs per horse twice a day). None of the horses are lacking for weight and a few of my friend's horses could really stand to lose a few pounds...

I just checked hay prices for the state from our local USDA office and for the Eastern part of the state it's $125.00 a bale for Alfalfa, Large Square Fair Quality, $145.00 for Feedlot Quality Square Bales, and $85.00 per ton for Sudan hay large bales, Fair Quality. Southeastern it's around the same, but with small bales of Sudan hay at $240.00 per ton. Southern/Southwestern part of the state has large square bales of utility quality Alfalfa at $90.00/ton or $5.00 per bale, and the same goes for the Central part of the state.


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

mmshiro said:


> I'm telling you you are providing these animals willfully with suboptimal living conditions. There is a reason why people talk about "stall vices" instead of "pasture vices". Horses grow neurotic at best, lunatic at worst, under the conditions in which you keep them. I'm not telling you what to do; I'm simply not giving you absolution.
> 
> You have a choice, you made a choice, be happy with the consequences of your decision or do something about it. Clearly your original post comes from a defensive point of view, and you are looking for allies to tell you that "It's okay". Well, the number of people doing the same thing as you has no bearing on what is happening to the horse for which you, and you alone, have taken on responsibility through ownership.
> 
> Lots of children worked in the coal mines during the Industrial Revolution - which is better than starving in the street, but it's still working in the coal mines. In as far as childhood development is concerned, that was a suboptimal activity to engage in for them. So horses being incarcerated with minimal yard exercise is better than starving neglected in someone's muddy backyard, but in as far as horsemanship is concerned, it's still a pretty mediocre level of care for the animal. No amount of commiseration will change that - it'll only make you feel like you're not the only one.


at my barn there are 40-42 horses. not a SINGLE horse there has a stall vise. they are pipe stalls so they can interact with the horses next to them. i have knows some cribbers. funny enought they had been boarded at places with daily turn out and still developed the habit. our mare notty has been stalled since she was rounded up as a 2 year old. she has never lived on turn out. she is 28. you know what happens when i turn my horses out? they run around for about 5 min then stand at the gate for the rest of the hour. they try and push their way past me as i bring them in one by one.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

I just feel some can be too quick to stamp "neglect" on some horse care practices they may find different. Maybe that is just the world we live in. What is unfamiliar is "wrong," which seems to be the common thread in today's society. But horses are adaptable, hardy creatures. They are also DOMESTICATED. These are not free-ranged mustangs. They have been bred to tolerate captivity. I would consider pasture an *extra,* not a standard. But then again I also have my own scope of experience, being in CA where things are 10x pricier than other states and land is extremely scarce.


----------



## Banjo4blue (Feb 12, 2018)

thecolorcoal said:


> *Warning: *this is a personal vent that has made me very upset recently. Opinions might be controversial. Proceed with caution. _Keep your train wrecks on the tracks please._
> 
> I find, specifically online, the equestrian community very close minded. We all come from different areas, have different experiences, and have access to different feeds, husbandry practices, hay, and boarding situations.
> 
> Just because someone else does something differently than you does not make it _wrong_. It does not mean you are _inefficient_ in your horse keeping practices. It does not mean you are a *bad caregiver*.


I completely understand this. I have felt the same way and noticed the same things, and would like to offer my opinion as well. Note i say _opinion_ not fact. Everyone has opinion and they will often be different. I have found that my opinions are based only on facts though, mostly likely be cause of the hundreds of books I have carefully read through on horse care before actually being part of the horse world. Therefore I was not influenced by people saying that bits were abusive, or that every horse should be shod or anything. What I learned is this: Most horses do well with a bit. Some do not. Some horses do very poorly bitless, and others thrive. A bit should not hurt the horse. If it's hurting the horse, the rider is doing something wrong. A hackamore can inflict even more pain and discomfort if used incorrectly. 

Same basic rules for shoeing, feeding, turnout, blanketing etc. Make decisions based on the individual horse, knowledge, and available resources. If you live in an area where there aren't good pasture space, thats nota your fault, and people shouldn't jump down your throat about it. What would they do in the same situation? Probably the same thing. I have found in the short time I've been on this forum that there are lots of nice, helpful, people, but also some who think that just because they were raised on horses or have been on the forum for a long time or whatever that they can judge people freely, and if others aren't doing things the way they do things, it must be wrong. These people don't seem to take into consideration that the people they're be-raiding over the internet are real people. With real problems. People who are doing the best they can for the horses they obviously love and care about. These 'keyboard warriors' don't seem to realize that not everyone has the same resources as they might. 

For example, I had a lot of people who wouldn't stop telling me I had to get a new saddle that fit my horse better. As if I could just use my nonexistent thousand dollars to buy a super fancy saddle that somehow fits my pony and me better than the one I have already. I then felt bullied into having to take my camera down to the barn to take a ton of pictures of my saddle on the pony to show people. And then there was a lot of people telling me my saddle fit him really well.
My point in this is that people who think they're the boss and know everything, might not be as good as they think. I'm sure not all their saddles fit perfectly either. I'm sure there are other people that would judge the way the kept horses! For goodness sake, some people think riding horses is abusive!

*Sigh* They are lots of people in the world. And they're all different. I think everyone should be respectful of others and their living situations, have some perspective and understanding, and not be so judge-y. I hope no one has been offended by this and I hope I gave an understandable reasonable opinion. I also hope I didn't get o off topic, seems like I kind of got carried away, I tend to enjoy discussing controversial topics and exploring others opinions and giving my thoughts. 

Side note: I apologize if I spelled anything wrong, I am dyslexic and I can't tell if I spelled everything correctly or not, but I do my best.


----------



## findinghappy (Feb 24, 2018)

Hmm, take everything I have to say with a grain (or 100) of salt as I do have horse experience, but I do not currently own a horse. That being said. . . 

For my next horses, I don't plan on buying a $3,000 saddle. I don't plan on giving it bathes every day. I refuse to feed alfalfa. It made our OTTB so hot, and we have horrible blister beetles here. I've also considered the idea of feeding pellets. It has pros and cons to it, but alas I need to do more research and it seems to be very frowned upon. I still consider myself a beginner and I won't be boarding at a stable, I'll be all self care. I also do not own a trailer, even though we are buying a truck, so I suppose that helps.

All in all, I feel as if I'm breaking a lot of experienced horseman's "rules" but at the end of the day, my horse will be fed, loved, and well cared for. If I have questions I can ask or find help, and if I don't like something I can change it. As long as I keep an open mind about mine and others journeys and experiences, I figure all will end well. Keep your chin up, do your best and hug your horse. Don't mind people, I try not to.


----------



## horseluvr2524 (Sep 17, 2013)

k9kenai said:


> I just checked hay prices for the state from our local USDA office and for the Eastern part of the state it's $125.00 a bale for Alfalfa, Large Square Fair Quality, $145.00 for Feedlot Quality Square Bales, and $85.00 per ton for Sudan hay large bales, Fair Quality. Southeastern it's around the same, but with small bales of Sudan hay at $240.00 per ton. Southern/Southwestern part of the state has large square bales of utility quality Alfalfa at $90.00/ton or $5.00 per bale, and the same goes for the Central part of the state.


Wow. Is that per 100lb bale or... what kind of bales? I can't imagine how anyone could afford to keep a horse with those prices.

My feed bill for one normal sized horse fluctuates between $70 to $100, depending on season and prices, amount of work my horse is getting, etc. I was feeding her free choice for a long time, but since she completely tore apart her custom wooden slow feeder and we are moving her across country in a little over a month, we chose not to fix it and ration. she now gets about 4 flakes a day. I try to make sure those get fed in a slow feed net, but unfortunately one of the other DIY boarders likes to be overly helpful and feed for you, without telling you. After two months I've given up and succumbed to it. She still has hay most of the day even without the net. When I'm able to make it out, I throw a little hay in her net for her, feed supplements, turn out with her buddy, groom, etc.

She lives in a 15x30ft fence panel pen where she can easily interact with her buddy next to her. I used to ride her 3 to 4 times a week, but my pregnancy has made that difficult. So I go out and lunge her, play at liberty, work on tricks, trim her hooves, groom her, and she's happy. She enjoys what time I can give her and seems to be OK taking it easy for now.

I can say pretty assuredly that she is happier here, where she is mostly under my care, than she was at the places I boarded and she had daily turnout. The one place she was miserable at despite being fed 5x a day and "the best care", which it really was not the best for her. She had a large pen to live in and geldings over the fence to visit with. But she was unhappy partly because I couldn't make it out that frequently as the place was a bit of a drive. She also started eating her manure, which I think was due to not enough long stem fiber in the diet (fed mostly pellet diet), despite me pouring supplements into her at BO's insistence. The second place we were at with turnout she seemed alright at but not necessarily very happy. I was unhappy there as the BO ran a "rescue" and I saw some things that I wish I could unsee. She ended up being kind of a shifty person, and we were out of there quick.

I am blessed enough to actually be moving to the midwest where my sweet mare will finally have pasture. But not everyone can do that.

I think if the horse is receiving adequate care to cover their basic needs, seems happy and content, and the owner is doing their best, then who's to harshly judge or say nay? Horse keeping is not a one size fits all. If you humble yourself and realize that "you never stop learning with horses" also includes horse keeping, realize that we all have something to learn from each other and all have something valuable to contribute, you would grow in leaps and bounds.

Sure there are ideals that are better. Ideally a horse would live in a herd and not be made to work by humans. Ideally a dog would live in a pack of dogs and not with humans. Ideally a parrot would live out in the wild and be free to choose their lifelong mate, rather than being a human's lifelong companion. See, when we take something out of the natural and domesticate it, we logically cannot argue that training/keeping the domesticated animal a certain way is not natural to it, because it is no longer a natural thing. It is domesticated. It has been changed by humans, and we are then charged with doing the best by it that we can using what we have available to us in this artificial environment and situation. A pasture is artificial, not natural. A pasture is fenced, and hopefully maintained, and any caring owner would not leave a horse to their own devices without checking on them. That is artificial, not natural. Natural is survival of the fittest. Natural is exclusion of those that are lame or sick, as they can hurt and hinder the healthy. Natural is not necessarily pretty, it can be very ugly and very harsh.

Do your best with what you have available to you. If the horse's basic needs are met and it is healthy and happy, then you have done right by it. That's all that matters.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

@Banjo4blue - amen!!!! it's just difficult because you want to do the best by your horse, and then you have others who are more experienced, and who you should respect, telling you that you are doing a terrible job. but your horse knows you love it, even if it doesn't have the nicest stall or a huge, groomed pasture. 
@findinghappy - right there with you  i try not to care either, but i often seek the wisdom of others because i love to learn, but i find it's not always in a helpful spirit...


----------



## k9kenai (Jul 1, 2017)

horseluvr2524 said:


> Wow. Is that per 100lb bale or... what kind of bales? I can't imagine how anyone could afford to keep a horse with those prices.


I'm _guessing_ it's the larger bales (but NOT the round bales...those are completely unavailable here unless special ordered)...but who knows, really. It's an automatically generated request to the USDA based on average prices reported to them by participating farms, and it doesn't go into a lot of specifics size-wise. In smaller local areas there may still be price differences. I know that I personally have paid as much as $35 for a 3-strand bale of premium grass hay. I think my instructors were paying $22 a 3-strand bale for good quality grass hay back in November. When I was supplementing two cups of pellets to two flakes of hay twice a day (about six pounds of grass hay) it was a 50lb bag of grass pellets for $20 and it lasted about a month. So I can see why a lot of people in our area at least supplement with pellets!


----------



## gottatrot (Jan 9, 2011)

Sometimes I think what people perceive as criticism from others is actually meant well. Some people who have made mistakes and learned from them over the years want to help prevent others from having the same problems.

There is such a thing as being blind to the situation you are in and thinking it is fine, and later you may look back and see that it was not a good situation.

One question people have to ask themselves is if they are doing something for the horse or for themselves. There will always be compromises, and there will always be individuals that do better in situations that might be perceived as less ideal. 

But making the choice for the horse vs our wishes can be difficult. I've had to decide to go without a covered arena so my horses could have a better living situation with turnout every day. I've had to choose smaller and dumpier boarding barns that were more horse-centric over nicer, fancier ones that put the people's needs over the horse's needs. I've had to see my horses less often because the closer barns were not as good for them. Sometimes you can get a better situation from a private person who will let you keep your horse on their land...but go without arenas and wash racks and tack up areas. 

Small compromises are unavoidable. No one can always have everything ideal. It's the big compromises that affect horses. I've looked at boarding stables where horses literally stand in stalls all day with tail setting devices on, and the barn is damp and as dark as a cave. The barn had beautiful pastures surrounded by white fences, and not a horse to be seen. 
I think not turning a horse out for fear of injury is absolutely ridiculous and not justifiable. To me it is no better than a mother who locks a child up in a room to keep them safe because the world is dangerous. We must allow an animal to live just like we have to drive a car that is dangerous and risk getting in an accident. Otherwise we are treating horses like objects. 

I think it is fine to try to save money where you can. However, I see so many people who think they can afford more horses than they should own because they give sub-par care. They justify not floating horses' teeth until the horse can't chew and is dropping feed. That way they can have three horses instead of one and only float teeth every 3-4 years, setting the horse up for serious problems in older age.
They justify only trimming the hooves every 8 weeks or longer, so they can have 3 or 4 horses and still pay the farrier. They don't call the vet for serious wounds and just watch and see what happens. They use saddles that don't fit and try adding cheap pads and hope the horse won't get too sore. Then they want advice on the horse's attitude and how to fix him from being "bratty." 

My biggest pet peeve is the people who are super cheap about their horse's care but spend money like crazy on themselves. They show up at the barn with their mocha each day but then I hear a vet telling them about a medication that costs 85 cents a day and they are hemming and hawing about how much that will cost in a month. They upgrade their nearly new car, are wearing a new jacket and boots every couple months, and you see pictures of them eating at fancy restaurants on FB and going to concerts all the time. Then they are stomping around upset because they lost their hoof pick that cost three bucks and complain about how the barn owner thinks their horse needs extra hay and wants to charge an extra $20 a month for it.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

Sure, everyone has access to a different setups, I accept that. And that some horses have to be stalled. But I disagree with the statement that turnout = risk of injury. My horses are out 24/7 with access to their stalls so they can go in and out as much as they please. They have never injured themselves because turnout isn't a big deal to them. They don't go crazy as soon as I let them though the gate. I'm not saying all horses need 24/7 turnout, but I think that in an ideal world, horses would get several hours of turnout a day. 

Saying that you don't have access to turnout is one thing, and it doesn't necessarily make you a bad owner (assuming the horse has exercise and stimulation provided in other ways). Saying that turnout is too dangerous for expensive horses, and therefore that it's best to stall a horse, is altogether different, and I would have to vehemently disagree with that.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

KigerQueen said:


> she has never lived on turn out. she is 28. you know what happens when i turn my horses out? they run around for about 5 min then stand at the gate for the rest of the hour. they try and push their way past me as i bring them in one by one.


So you took away your horse's ability to experience social life in the herd and handle stimuli it encounters outside with confidence, and you use *that* as a justification for why the horse is "much happier" in its prison... :neutral: People only need short stints in prison to become unable to live a life that you find "normal"; you have _never_ allowed your horse to experience a normal horse life. Have you noticed that the depressed and agoraphobics exhibit that very same behavior, and that it is not a sign of being content in the house?

https://thehorse.com/121297/consequences-of-stall-confinement/
https://equusmagazine.com/management/rethinking-the-box-stall
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sc...raditional-stables-make-horses-depressed.html
https://ker.com/equinews/stalling-young-horses-alters-normal-bone-growth/
Housing for Horses -- Stalls, or Pasture? Part I: Bone Health -
https://practicalhorsemanmag.com/news/stall-horse-stress-28445
https://www.researchgate.net/public...g_Conditions_on_Stress_and_Behavior_of_Horses


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

thecolorcoal said:


> @*walkinthewalk* , the issue i have with "wrong" is it is interpretive too. Some people think it's "wrong" to ride in bits. Some people think it's "wrong" for a gaited horse to gait due to future lameness? Some people think owning horses is "wrong" in general. So where does right stop and wrong begin? It's different for everyone. That is where my feathers get puffed up, because the majority of horse-care is relative. Same with cultures. What might be "right" in one culture is "wrong" in another, but who's to say EITHER is right or wrong?


Yeah, the problem with this moral relativity is that it has no limits. Who's to say murder is wrong, really? And who's to say animal abuse is wrong? My point is that saying that "wrong" is "interpretive" leads to no one being wrong, ever. How do you prosecute animal abusers? Criminals? There has to be a line somewhere. I am in no way suggesting you have crossed it by the way, I'm just saying that this argument doesn't fly. There is a difference between choosing between two equally valid options (I blanket one horse, but hardly ever blanket the other - they are individuals with different needs), and choosing between a good option and a bad one. 

And if you're going to ask who gets to decide, the answer is simple. Scientific studies are clear. Large amounts of forage are better than grain. Pasture is better than none. Turnout is better than stalling. This is science. If you're going to argue with that, you might as well say the earth is flat. However, it doesn't mean that if you can't provide all those things, you can't have horses, but it does mean that you have to be aware that you're providing your animal(s) with less than optimal conditions.


----------



## Dreamcatcher Arabians (Nov 14, 2010)

One thing I think we need to ask ourselves is, "Why do we care what someone 12 states/provinces/countries away from us thinks?". There are keyboard warriors who a)have only ever seen pics of horses, b) only owned 1 horse their whole life, c) think their horse is a child with fur, d) haven't got a clue what kind of living conditions/weather is really like in your area, d) are just abusive by nature or e) not necessarily meaning to be jerks but for whom English is a 2nd language, f) are really direct by nature. We also need to remember that free advice is worth exactly what we paid for it, frequently. 

When I toss ideas out, I try to say things like "I don't know if this is available where you are but.........." or "Can you do something like this where you are?" or "Is this possible where you are?". I admit to being totally out of patience with people who ask for advice and then say every single thing is impossible for one reason or another. If that's the case, shut up and sell/euthanize/give away the animal. 

I grew up in So. Cal where the most obvious sign of conspicuous consumption is a big lawn rather than desert-scaping or gravel or ???? anything but grass. Turn out was in a big arena. When I lived in the desert in Apple Valley, I had a 200 X 300 arena that I turned my horses out in. I would put 8-10 piles of hay out so they could cruise around and 'graze'. At night they each went into their own corral with shelter. It wasn't perfect but it worked. Now, I live on place in OK and have land and pastures for them to graze on, I try to not have more than 2-3 horses/5 acres and most of the time I have a big round bale (never heard of such in CA or AZ) out for them to supplement in case the grass gets grazed down. I keep a sacrifice pasture. 

Not everyone can just pick up and move like we did when we got tired enough of living in town. Not everyone has the luxury of being able to provide turnout in a herd environment. Their horses do just fine anyhow. Everyone is always tossing out the "In the WILD" card, but our horses are not in the wild. They don't need to be part of a herd to be fed or stay safe. Would it be ideal? Sure. I live in Tornado Alley, that's not ideal for horse or human, but it's where I can afford to live and have the size property I want, so we deal with the tornadoes. We're also in the West Nile Corridor, now I'd hardly call THAT ideal. We vaccinate. Guess what? I've had humans die all around me of WNV or get really sick and eventually get better, but not one single horse. We do the best we can. The horses are fat, sassy, shiny and seem to be very happy. 

Bottom line, as long as your horse is happy, healthy and appears to be doing well, it's nobody else's business how you keep him. I've got neighbors here that don't have barns. Some of them don't have storm cellars either. So? Their horses look just fine. They've lived their whole lives without a storm cellar. The horses don't know what a barn is, or a shelter or ??? It's none of my business. I have one of mine in training and she has a nice 12 X 12 stall with a run out behind it, a 3 year old bratty gelding for a neighbor (she's sorted HIM out real quick) and she's fed well, trained well and is always happy to see me. Does she miss her pasture? No doubt she does, but that barn is POSH and there's hot and cold running help and an indoor arena, an outdoor and several LARGE turn out pastures that she'll get to take a break in when show season is over. Or she can come home for a while and another horse go in her place. 

So take what's offered, throw out what doesn't work and ignore the rest. The ignore button on most boards, Facebook, works really well. If somebody is just a complete jerk, give them the boot and don't sweat it.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

Dreamcatcher Arabians said:


> They don't need to be part of a herd to be fed or *stay* safe.


There is a difference in "being safe" and "feeling safe". You may well "be" safe at 2 a.m. in a dark alley because there's nobody around, but are you relaxed? Content? What if you were in such an environment your entire life? What is the goal here: survival or living?

I would posit the opposite point of view: Humans don't _need_ to own horses to eat (agriculture) or provide transportation. It's the _human wants_ that often supersede the horses' needs they are born with and cannot do anything about.

In general, I hardly argue online for the benefit of persuading the person I'm arguing with (or against). I'm providing an opposing viewpoint for lurkers and undecideds to contemplate, alongside the original argument. Truth is best found in the opposition of opinions, not in an echo chamber where we all tell each other that everything is fine.


----------



## gottatrot (Jan 9, 2011)

Acadianartist said:


> ...And if you're going to ask who gets to decide, the answer is simple. Scientific studies are clear. Large amounts of forage are better than grain. Pasture is better than none. Turnout is better than stalling. This is science. If you're going to argue with that, you might as well say the earth is flat. However, it doesn't mean that if you can't provide all those things, you can't have horses, but it does mean that you have to be aware that you're providing your animal(s) with less than optimal conditions.


Very well said!!

That's the biggest thing in my mind...not that everything we provide is perfect, but that we understand what science says our horses need for an ideal life, and do our best to make things as close to that as we can in our particular environment and with the resources we have.
That is very different in various parts of the world. Horses are quite adaptable, in many ways. However, there are things that certain individuals just can't adapt to. That is the fault of the owner and lifestyle provided, not the horse.

Agree also with @mmshiro that horses can become abnormal in their behaviors due to unnatural living conditions and that is not a sign that everything is fine. I'm learning over time that any attempts to adapt the horse to a more ideal setup will help the horse both physically and mentally in the long run. But it may take some persistent effort at first. 

A physical example of this is a horse that gets thin unless fed tons of hard feed, but is not old and has good dentition. I've learned that one the hard way...even though it seems wrong, cutting down the feed and getting the horse to adapt back to a roughage diet of long-stemmed hay will eventually put the weight back on the horse.


----------



## Fimargue (Jun 19, 2015)

When you have shed a bucket load of cash to buy that expensive horse, you don't get to complain about hay being expensive. I'm one of those to believe that if you can't offer a horse the very minimum of the life they were intended to live, don't get a horse.

Having worked in a place where all those expensive horses come having been broken by the life being kept locked up in a stall and then ridden in a way that pushes their body and mind beyond the ability - sorry I have no sympathy for a person wanting to keep their horse in an injury free lifestyle against their very nature. These horses came to retire in a life that was in the field 24/7, huge one as well at that so that they would be moving a lot in a day, and none were ever injured. And some horses who were supposed to be absolutely never ridable again, would have been after the recovery period.

I recently visited a place where the horses were kept mostly indoors because the field was too soggy, or it was too much work. It was like a night and day compared to the relaxed, happy horses I used to work with, many of them with foals - and no mare ever told me to **** off from approaching and checking their babies. The mares with foals were pinning their ears, threatening to bite and throwing their head at me. They had stable vices. That short visit sucked the life right out of me.


----------



## Dreamcatcher Arabians (Nov 14, 2010)

mmshiro said:


> There is a difference in "being safe" and "feeling safe". You may well "be" safe at 2 a.m. in a dark alley because there's nobody around, but are you relaxed? Content? What if you were in such an environment your entire life?
> 
> In general, I hardly argue online for the benefit of persuading the person I'm arguing with (or against). I'm providing an opposing viewpoint for lurkers and undecideds to contemplate, alongside the original argument. Truth is best found in the opposition of opinions, not in an echo chamber where we all tell each other that everything is fine.





Fimargue said:


> When you have shed a bucket load of cash to buy that expensive horse, you don't get to complain about hay being expensive. I'm one of those to believe that if you can't offer a horse the very minimum of the life they were intended to live, don't get a horse.


 @mmshiro, Anyone who grew up in San Bernardino, CA (we didn't call it San Burn A Ghetto for nothing) DID grow up in that environment. Again, not ideal for horses OR humans, but somehow we all did ok, horses and humans alike. 
@Fimargue, but you see, this isn't your call to make. I have several not inexpensive horses and I cry about the cost of hay all the time. 

@Both, You both have view points that differ from others. Remember that others have not been put on this earth to live up to your standards. You're passionate about how you feel, and that's good because you will try to take care of any horses you own to the very best of your ability for the good of the horses. It doesn't make everyone who isn't doing exactly what you think, wrong.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

I think this is exactly right. I encourage other viewpoints and I think people have made a clear distinction between what is and isn’t acceptable in horse care. The experiences of gottatrot and others are interesting because i personally have never been with owners who own more than the amount of horses they financially can provide for. She, apparently has and it has shaped her understanding of horse care. That’s completely appropriate.

What I am saying is there are people who DON’T have what others have. At all. It’s nonexistant in these states and areas and people are still telling others they should “do something about it.” Like what? Move away? That’s a little extreme. And wishful thinking.

MORALS ARE ONLY REALTIVE TO THE CULTURE. Believe it or not there are communities that believe murder is justifiable. There are exceptions even in America where murder is allowed (self defense anyone?). So it’s not a black and white issue, it’s a grayscale. The way we can be more open minded as a community is to accept that others are different from us, and when we give advice we give it within the constraints of the situation, not telling someone they need to make gold out of straw.


----------



## Cordillera Cowboy (Jun 6, 2014)

I;ll chime in since I'm in an area with less than optimal horse keeping conditions. 


But first, I'll say that I witnessed an example of what the OP is complaining of right here on Horse Forum. A young fellow from somewhere in the Middle East had just joined. He posted photos and a video of the horse he had just received as a gift. He had never had the opportunity to be around horses, though he had loved them all his life. You could feel the excitement and joy in his post as he shared his good fortune with us. He wanted to share his good fortune with us, folks it would be assumed would be happy, and encouraging to him. 


He did get some congratulations, and encouragement to take riding lessons. But mostly he got criticism. His horse was small and lightly built, I think 2 years old. The video showed a relative riding the horse. The guy was too heavy for the small horse, and rode in the manner that I've seen plenty of times in the 3rd world. Running around and jerking the horse into the turns and stops. There are folks in that area who ride to a higher equestrian standard. But, by and large, what was shown in the video is how things are done in that part of the world. 


The guys culture was called cruel and backwards. The rider, a relative that the poster looked up to, was criticized as not knowing what he was doing. As far as I'm aware, that fellow never came back to Horse Forum. I feel that I am the poorer for it, having lost the opportunity to see this young fellows progress with his new horse. I believe the young man was driven out of a place where he could learn of alternate ways of working with horses. I feel that we Westerners showed our asses by appearing smug and superior to another culture. 


So, yes, I understand what the OP here is driving at.


----------



## cbar (Nov 27, 2015)

It is enlightening and interesting to hear everyone's opinions. I try not to judge others on how they keep their horse (aside from an abuse/neglect situation), but I do know how I like to keep my horses. Mine are on 24/7 turnout. In the winter they are on a 1/4 section that is surrounded by barbed wire (Gasp!!!) In the three winters they have been out there, I have not dealt with a single barbed wire injury. 


I do, however think it is preposterous that horses are not allowed turn out time b/c they are too valuable and might hurt themselves. That absolutely does not make sense to me. I used to work on a large horse racing farm. The horses were kept in stalls, and exercised every day except on weekends. I worked the weekend shift, and guess what? Those horses got their turnout time into individual pipe paddocks that were large enough they could run around a bit. Not once did we have a horse come in from turnout with an injury. The injuries they DID get were from the track. 

But I digress...I get that folks in different areas have limitations that maybe some of us don't even realize exist. 

Last year i paid $50 a bale for gorgeous 1100lb round bales. This is why I feed my horses hay....I realize this may not be available in areas where hay cannot even be grown.


----------



## Dreamcatcher Arabians (Nov 14, 2010)

cbar said:


> It is enlightening and interesting to hear everyone's opinions. I try not to judge others on how they keep their horse (aside from an abuse/neglect situation), but I do know how I like to keep my horses. Mine are on 24/7 turnout. In the winter they are on a 1/4 section that is surrounded by barbed wire (Gasp!!!) In the three winters they have been out there, I have not dealt with a single barbed wire injury.
> 
> 
> I do, however think it is preposterous that horses are not allowed turn out time b/c they are too valuable and might hurt themselves. That absolutely does not make sense to me. I used to work on a large horse racing farm. The horses were kept in stalls, and exercised every day except on weekends. I worked the weekend shift, and guess what? Those horses got their turnout time into individual pipe paddocks that were large enough they could run around a bit. Not once did we have a horse come in from turnout with an injury. The injuries they DID get were from the track.
> ...


When I was active in Arabians, I got my then yearling colt home from showing and turned him out with 3 pregnant mares, to get some socialization time and to run amok. His breeder has not spoken to me since. She was afraid he would be ruined because he'd be injured. Well, he got his share on lumps, bumps and a couple of lacerations (from being young and dumb and not backing off when the mares told him to), but nothing lasting. Until I brought him home he had never seen grass growing on the ground. He'd never been able to run for joy in a 10 acre paddock. For fear of injury. 

I used to drive my old trainer INSANE because after doing training with my horses, at the training barn where they were not ever turned out, I would take each one on about an hour long 'trail ride' through the countryside near the barn. The trainer just KNEW we were going to be maimed, killed, injured beyond repair, you name it, he had a dire circumstance for it. These horses were TOO valuable to treat like that. I told him that if they didn't have the physical stamina and mental stamina to handle it, they weren't valuable ENOUGH. 

My training routine with young horses is to send them out for about 3 months of saddle training in their 2 year old year and to show them once or twice during that year. After they show, the come home until about now, and just be horses. Along about end of Feb, beginning of March, they go back to the trainer and shown a little more. Then come back home to play during the winter. Even my 'aged' show horses follow pretty much that same schedule. Other show horses remain in training year round and show all year in climates that allow for it. I've done both and can't say I've had any problems either way. 

I think we all do what we can, when we can and we make things work. Horses are not the hot house flowers some would like us to believe they are. They're amazingly adaptable and agreeable animals. They like to get along. As long as they get fed regularly, they seem to pretty much take other stuff in stride.


----------



## k9kenai (Jul 1, 2017)

Cordillera Cowboy said:


> I;ll chime in since I'm in an area with less than optimal horse keeping conditions.
> 
> 
> But first, I'll say that I witnessed an example of what the OP is complaining of right here on Horse Forum. A young fellow from somewhere in the Middle East had just joined. He posted photos and a video of the horse he had just received as a gift. He had never had the opportunity to be around horses, though he had loved them all his life. You could feel the excitement and joy in his post as he shared his good fortune with us. He wanted to share his good fortune with us, folks it would be assumed would be happy, and encouraging to him.
> ...


Thank you for this story. It reminds me a lot of what I see with the Akhal Teke horses in their native Turkmenistan. When people first see pictures and videos (or get the rare chance to visit the breeding farms or racetracks in person), they are shocked and appalled at what they consider poor conditions in which the horses are kept (rundown corrals and barns with pointy objects, fences, etc.), there is no grass turnout, there are no pastures except for only the largest breeding farm in the nation, many horses are even turned out in rock hard dirt turnouts, there are no geldings, stallions are kept with stallions in stud sheds and mares with their foals in broodmare sheds, and for the stallions that are ridden or raced they are jerked around and encouraged to rear and act feisty as the locals love that in them. People would assume that these horses are viewed as nothing more than things, but that is the complete opposite. 

These horses are viewed as _gods_ in this country. They are the national emblem, and they have a festival dedicated pretty much only to them. It is illegal to do anything that would permanently maim them or cause them irreparable harm, and I believe it is even illegal to change their name once it has been chosen. There are emblems of the horse _everywhere_ you go throughout the country, including on their money. They are fed only the highest quality foods. The horses are happy and thriving in these conditions, and all of their basic needs are being met. But to an outsider, just because they are kept in conditions different to what we consider optimal in our country, due to them being in a 3rd world country, we assume their needs are being neglected at best or they are being abused at worst.


----------



## carshon (Apr 7, 2015)

k9kenai thank you for your post. I think this is the core to what the original OP was getting at - horses do not always have to be kept in Oak stalls, with unlimited turn out, green fields, alfalfa hay to be loved and well cared for. As for show horses or other horses that get minimal turn out and it being called "unnatural" I think that term could be used for how most of us keep horses. Horses in a natural environment have to walk miles each day to forage for food and find drinking water - domesticated horses in most parts of the country do neither. 

I am not saying I want any horse to be locked up in a stall at all times - but as has been mentioned horses are adaptable and for some they adapt quite well. it is not just stalled horses that develop vices.


----------



## Dustbunny (Oct 22, 2012)

I will say that I have only read the first page. I have to get out to the barn to shovel...and we all know how important that is!!!!
Very often, when a new, or relatively new member comes on with a question, we have no clue as to their level of experience or their location on the planet. Sometimes we get a question that sounds like it is coming from a total greenie only to find out we have insulted a person with years of horse handling. Honestly, it is often a total crap shoot for those responding. One hopes to be giving a helpful response with the knowledge at hand. 
I have had horses for decades. I cannot tell you how much I have appreciated this group of people and the knowledge they have handed out! Certainly not all applies to me and my horse keeping situation. But we all can learn from each other and that is important.
That's all...gotta go.


----------



## findinghappy (Feb 24, 2018)

I think it's all just a slippery slope. Once you start, it's rather difficult to stop. Horses are not meant to be stalled. Ok, well then they are also not meant to have bits, be saddled, carry riders, be trailered etc etc. . . And so the slide down the slope begins. Many different cultures around the world have horses, as @Cordillera Cowboy pointed out, and they all have very different standards of care. 

I believe horses, like dogs and cats, as well as some birds and reptiles, as @Kalraii pointed out have even began to adapt to being domesticated by humans. Is it ideal? Hardly. Will it work? Certainly. These animals are no longer wild. Most, not for generations and generations.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

findinghappy said:


> I think it's all just a slippery slope. Once you start, it's rather difficult to stop. Horses are not meant to be stalled. Ok, well then they are also not meant to have bits, be saddled, carry riders, be trailered etc etc. . .


I think you are confusing "meant to be stalled" with "meant to be stalled 24/7". I would agree that a horse should not carry a rider 24/7 - the slippery slope you allude to does not exist.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

Dustbunny said:


> Sometimes we get a question that sounds like it is coming from a total greenie only to find out we have insulted a person with years of horse handling.


And yet - "years of horse handling" in no way correlates to "years of best practice in horse handling". A horse, as an organism, has certain needs in order to experience absence of stress. Those needs are either satisfied or not. To be clear, The Wild (TM) does not provide for those needs by any stretch of the imagination - any injuries and diseases tend to be deadly, as are the predators and parasites they live with, and food or water shortage is always a risk.

However, when you design the environment in which the animal lives, your are responsible for all effects of that environment on the animal - good, bad, or indifferent. From skeletal problems (standing with locked joints for long period of times) to mental problems (no herd interactions) and nutritional ones (irregular or infrequent food intake amplifying the effects of stress on the stomach), anyone who puts a horse in such an environment is responsible for the consequences, as they were predictable. 

There is a spectrum of measures that one can take to mitigate these effects, and the more are taken the better, but turn-out in at least a minimal herd with free-choice shelter and free-choice forage are nowadays established _best_ practices of horse keeping. Horses are probably robust enough to easily live under a "12 hours in - 12 hours out" routine, but that's as far as _I'd_ deviate from the ideal, no more. 

So here's the kicker: If you know the best practices, and you don't refute the science on the subject, but you respond to, "What you are doing is detrimental to the horse!" with "It's the best I can do!", then you are in it for yourself and only yourself, and the horse is merely a means to satisfy *your* wants and desires.


----------



## horseluvr2524 (Sep 17, 2013)

@mmshiro

Actually, horses were not designed nor intended to carry a rider at all, according to science.

The problem with saying that there is only ONE way to care for a horse and ALL others are abusive and absolutely unacceptable, is that leaves one very large problem. The horse keeping situation that is described as the ideal and only way represents a minority of situations available around the world. So if it is abusive and morally wrong to keep the rest of the horses in the situation they are in, what do you suggest their "selfish" owners do with them?

There are not enough ideal homes for them that can offer the "right and only way" to live. The only solution I can come up with is slaughter and euthanasia. If it is agreeable to you that it would be better for them to die rather than continue to live in their imperfect situation, then I have nothing further to say on the subject, as I most certainly would disagree, and we would be at an impasse.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

horseluvr2524 said:


> @mmshiro
> 
> Actually, horses were not designed nor intended to carry a rider at all, according to science.
> 
> ...


We were not designed to type on a keyboard or play the piano, and yet we do, and if we do it *to the extreme*, we get repetitive stress injuries. You are not understanding that "stalled 24/7" is the *extreme* of a continuum, and that is what OP was defending.

There is no need for humans to keep horses in the industrialized world because we can get transport and pulling power without them. Owning them is a luxury. Compassion dictates that you do not choose to put an animal in a situation where it is exposed to chronic stress, rather than temporary stress that is a normal part of life - human or horse. Just like in the work place or in athletics, temporary stress enhances your resilience, but chronic stress (again, let me emphasize *"24/7"*, because somehow that goal post always shifts in the responses) makes you ill, physically and psychologically.

What should those owners do? *Own up* to the fact that they act without compassion towards their animals, and stop crying a river when they are called out on it.

And let's remember that there are two sides of the coin: supply and demand. If stables who offer miserable conditions stop making money from trophy hunting horse-machine owners, they would have to adjust their business model. As long as they fill their cells, they have no incentive to provide for better conditions for their inmates. But, if all you need and want is a ribbon and a trophy, a sparkly clean garage that keeps your horse locked away for you so it's accessible and clean when you show up is quite sufficient, and so much more convenient than trying to catch a dirty horse with which you have no relationship other than showing it who the boss is from the pasture. (This latter remark does not refer to anyone in particular, but addresses a general tendency.)

As for your euthanasia outrage, you may want to read what's written on New Hampshire license plates. I grew up in East Germany, where thousands of people have made exactly that choice: risk their life, and lose it, rather than live in a prison - even though it was the size of a country, not the size of a shoe box. 

Imprisonment causes chronic stress, and different individuals deal with it differently.


----------



## gottatrot (Jan 9, 2011)

I don't see why there has to be this black and white delineation that there is either abusive horse keeping or perfect horse keeping.
There is the ethereal ideal, but then there is reality. 

Reality is what each of us as horse people physically face in the actual world we live in that has horses in it. That world involves actual horses, and that is where we can make the difference. 

This is true whether we live in a country that thinks of horses as gods but treats them in ways that are against their nature, or we watch feral horses running outside our window. What is not helpful to those actual horses is to say "this is the way it is." Instead, we can make a difference to that one horse and change his life for the better.

I believe this is the same with all animals in our lives. The key is education, that we understand what science says is good for that animal. It can help to understand how they live naturally, but often with domesticated animals we know more about how they can thrive while in domestication. 

If you are leasing a horse that is in a stall 24/7, that actual horse can have a big improvement in his life if you can find ways to get him out of the stall, moving around, and finding ways to interact with other horses. If I meet someone with a horse in a field and rain rot in his coat and long hooves, I can offer to medicate the horse and trim his hooves. 

Better than criticizing those who are not keeping horses in an "ideal" way, is to find ways to educate or help people to make even small improvements in the horse's life. As @Dustbunny says, sometimes well meaning people will step on toes by accident. That is also something to learn from and maybe next time we can find a better approach. In my world I've found many ways to help horses and people help their horses. 

As someone else mentioned in a similar way, if you go into a pet store, you will see a bird in a cage. That type of bird might come from a country where he could have flown free in the skies. But this bird in this cage was born and bred in a cage, and will never have a way to go to that ideal life. What you can do if you adopt that bird is to find ways to make his life better, closer to what he needs. That will be much better for him than the alternative which might have been getting adopted by someone who would just put him in a small cage in a corner to sit there for years. 
What we CAN do is make a difference for the animals that come into our own individual lives.


----------



## horseluvr2524 (Sep 17, 2013)

I suppose that where I mainly took offense is a page or two back where, as it was written and came across, you attacked kigerqueen for how she keeps her horses, and the horses inability to fully enjoy turnout. Things are so very, very different here from other parts of the USA for horse keeping. I've gotten to know kigerqueen over a few years on this forum. She really does her best to take care of these horses and give them the best life possible. And I am all for her continuing to do that, when the alternative for low value horses is the slaughter truck to Mexico. And it is not as if they are locked in tiny box stalls. They are not prisons. Our pens/stalls are not like that out here. Ideal amount of space? No, not really. But they are large enough that they can trot back and forth. Plenty open so they have full socialization with their neighbors, can stick their heads through the fence and groom each other. They are out in the sunshine (with shade available of course), wind, rain, not small dark boxes. They get fed regularly. Some get turned out and worked every day, some don't. But what I see most places are happy horses, content. They are fed well. They are not stressed. They like getting out, but they also like coming to the comfort of home.

FWIW, I have in the past been religious about getting my horses turned out almost constantly, when I had those facilities available. Yes, on dirt lots, that is all we have here. When out, they stand, flicking flies because there is no grass to graze. With access to the stalls being open to turnout, they spent most of their time in their stalls, eating free choice hay, getting away from flies. At night, they slept in the stalls. If you observe horses on pasture, they spend the majority of their time eating/grazing. So what would they do in a dirt lot with no available food at the time to eat? They would stand. So kigerqueen's horses standing at the gate waiting to come in is not abnormal behavior.

"What should those owners do? Own up to the fact that they act without compassion towards their animals, and stop crying a river when they are called out on it."

Again, you offer no solutions. You no more have an answer for the owners than they can find themselves. Your statement communicates three choices to such owners: sell your horse (uncertain future, could be worse living conditions or an unkind death), euthanize your horse, or just wallow in misery and feel like a horrible person for only being able to provide a suboptimal lifestyle. Let me be clear that the owners I was speaking of were those like kigerqueen and I, who live in a particular area where turnout and pasture are not norm and difficult to find, but neither do our horses live in tiny little boxes. Less than ideal living situations, but not prisons. You should visit the southwest and see the horses, and see what most people have to work with, before you make a final judgement. I can guarantee you that my horse is not stressed or unhappy, but clearly my word is not enough.

"As for your euthanasia outrage, you may want to read what's written on New Hampshire license plates. I grew up in East Germany, where thousands of people have made exactly that choice: risk their life, and lose it, rather than live in a prison - even though it was the size of a country, not the size of a shoe box."

Euthanasia outrage? Your word choice intrigues me. I am not outraged over euthanasia. I am certainly not for the slaughter and euthanasia of perfectly healthy and good horses. But neither do I have anything against euthanasia of horses that are ailing in health to the point where life is no longer comfortable. 
Horses are not people. A healthy horse, if they were sentient and conscious enough to make this decision and communicate it to us, would certainly choose feed in a stall over death/euthanasia. So on this, I cannot agree with you.

It seems that your problem is with the bubble wrapped show horse style keeping. Yet I have seen you throughout this thread, more or less, attack those who don't keep their horses that way, but neither have what would be considered adequate turnout/pasture. I have seen you contribute little to nothing useful, but rather continuously play what you might call "devil's advocate", which can be helpful for a short time. But now it is slowly spiraling into what I would call nonconstructive criticism. 

I can't find anything to constructively gain nor add to this thread, so I will take my leave of it now.


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

mmshiro said:


> So you took away your horse's ability to experience social life in the herd and handle stimuli it encounters outside with confidence, and you use *that* as a justification for why the horse is "much happier" in its prison... :neutral: People only need short stints in prison to become unable to live a life that you find "normal"; you have _never_ allowed your horse to experience a normal horse life. Have you noticed that the depressed and agoraphobics exhibit that very same behavior, and that it is not a sign of being content in the house?
> 
> https://thehorse.com/121297/consequences-of-stall-confinement/
> https://equusmagazine.com/management/rethinking-the-box-stall
> ...


well i just we should have just let the apache send her off to mexico then. and she can socalize just fine. she gets turned out when i go to the barn if an arena is open and she can interact with 3 difrent horses all day. its a pipe stall. they can even groom each other if they want.


----------



## Cordillera Cowboy (Jun 6, 2014)

mmshiro said:


> ..............
> So here's the kicker: If you know the best practices, and you don't refute the science on the subject, but you respond to, "What you are doing is detrimental to the horse!" with "It's the best I can do!", then you are in it for yourself and only yourself, and the horse is merely a means to satisfy *your* wants and desires.





I will never deny that I am keeping a horse, soon to be horses, in 3rd world conditions, because *I* want to. My life here would be infinitely simpler without them, but I now have the place for them and won't be without. Some of the steps I'm taking to mitigate the less than optimal conditions will take years to develop, nutritional forage grasses, for instance. 


Except for working animals that come off the picket for that work nearly all large livestock in this part of the Philippines live their entire lives on a picket rope. Ours will be on the picket rope until we get at least one more interior fence line done. If *I *have to chase down a horse, I want it to be on 10 acres rather than 30. Ours are picketed on grass during the day and turned into the corral overnight. 


I don't think @mmshiro is saying this, but I can't find it in me to criticize someone who is keeping a horse on a dry lot in the desert Southwest, or stalled in a more urban environment. I think that pelletized hay is a reasonable alternative to extremely expensive stem hay. I think regular work is a reasonable alternative to regular turnout.


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

@horseluvr2524 Thank you! mine get out and run but are not sad creatures wither. they are bright an happy, healthy and get out as much as i can. i have looked at pasture boarding. i pay 750 for my 4 horses and that includes feed, stall cleaning and shaveings two times a month. that is a smokeing deal. for "pasture" board it would be $500 per horse and it would be all 4 liveing with 7 other horses on an acre. that dose not sound like a good idea. or i could euthanize 4 perfectly healthy horses who are content in their lives because some people dont like how they are lept. i know over 200 horses who by thoughs standards should be put down right now. and thats only between 5 barns in my small area. that is not including the rest of the state.

here are the horrible prisons they live in by the way.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

KigerQueen said:


> well i just we should have just let the apache send her off to mexico then. and she can socalize just fine. she gets turned out when i go to the barn if an arena is open and she can interact with 3 difrent horses all day. its a pipe stall. they can even groom each other if they want.


See, and already we have a vast improvement over *stall 24/7*. (I need to keep bold-facing this because people still haven't caught on that my argument is not for "nothing but perfect conditions", but for "all but extreme conditions".)

So your horse has interactions with other horses which keeps her mind active and satisfies her need for social interactions, and she can move her joints and muscles all day. Much better than "box stall 24/7", which means "standing still in isolation 24/7". I do not see *your* arrangement as extreme at all.


----------



## Loner (Dec 21, 2017)

My Horses get quality hay, green pasture,$6.85 sweet pellets (2 scoops a piece) and thats the best I can afford. They have great weight and muscle build.


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

mmshiro said:


> See, and already we have a vast improvement over *stall 24/7*. (I need to keep bold-facing this because people still haven't caught on that my argument is not for "nothing but perfect conditions", but for "all but extreme conditions".)
> 
> So your horse has interactions with other horses which keeps her mind active and satisfies her need for social interactions, and she can move her joints and muscles all day. Much better than "box stall 24/7", which means "standing still in isolation 24/7". I do not see *your* arrangement as extreme at all.



when horses live in stalls these are the types talked about. rarely are horses kept in tiny box stalls without interaction. even most show barns out here have small runs atached to box stalls so they can see other horses.

THIS is the living arangements people are getting on us fore. there have been a week here and there i could not turn out because of health or car issues. today there where no open arenas so i only rode odie. the other three got trimmed and a short walk and thats it. i wont see them tomorrow and and mostlikly wont friday either. they live.


----------



## rambo99 (Nov 29, 2016)

Comes down to doing the best you can for what's available. If turnout is only limited and pasture 24/7 turnout not available not much one can do. Horses adapt to the lifestyle they have,some don't...but we don't live in a perfect world. My horse's live outside all winter long have a shelter thats small. But it's a windbreak gets them out of the elements currently shelter is getting wet from melting snow only back part is dry. Literally has puddles in it,now those puddles are frozen as it's been below freezing again. My barn with stalls is also flooding south side has water coming in. It's rubber matted so puddles on mats ,that i or kids take scoop shovel and put water in a muck bucket and dump it outside. 

Not made of money so i do the best i can for them hay 24/7 big round bales put in feeder. Feed alfalfa pellets and oat/corn mix 2 times a day horse's look ok on it.


----------



## Kalraii (Jul 28, 2015)

@mmshiro there is ONE stable I worked at in the city that does keep horses stalled, in quite literally a stall (not with a run like @KigerQueen) for 23 hours a day. They get one hour turnout in the arena. About 25 horses and several stallions. It's ancient, leaky and they are mostly in darkness. The owner will only use straw and I was only allowed to poo pick with my hands - the stalls were only added to for 6 days of the week and actually mucked out on the 7th. It's the same place I had 5 minutes to groom each horse alone and got shouted at for not being fast enough. I wanted to learn about horses and spend some quality time. But nope, not allowed. There were livery horses kept the same and I saw the owners several times - came for their ride and left immediately after. I was not allowed to take them out of their stall for grooming so no way I could really tell even with my phone torch if anything was up. Many also didn't like their bellies being touched and now that I think about it and know more, it probably WAS ulcers. Their diet wasn't the best, as you can imagine. 

I didn't stay long. I was worked like a dog and the horses were very unhappy - swaying and cribbing. The stallions were out of their mind. She tried breeding the youngest stallion for the first time - he nearly killed the mare. And it *AMAZED ME* that everyone was blind to it or purposely turned away. The owner, the staff, the livery owners.... the riding school clients obviously didn't know better either. 

Places like this do exist, exactly as you imagine it. And no, the horses aren't happy. There is another facility very well known actually but also stalls their horses 24/7. BUT every two months the horses go to a field out of the city for a month off. You can actually see a difference between the two. The other place lets the mares and gelding stay every night in each of the outdoor arenas with lots of hay nets hung around. It's not ideal but the manager (who had taken over recently and put this new practice in place) said the horses were far more relaxed for it. They have only an acre of grass on site and a few horses each month will get a week off. They have out of city fields again and every half year they'll go for a holiday. Another one also keeps them stalled - literally, in a stall. Not these pipe runs or whatever you call them. But the horses receive full on, top notch care. They get a thorough grooming every day + pedicure and get exercised twice a day by the staff. It has less cribbers and swaying and they are more taken care off, hands on. But that's money. The place I mentioned first, the "dive", where they get no attention, no exercise and no turnout. That's the worst. And I agree, they should be put down. But the owner rakes in money with her fancy bloodlines. 

What @KigerQueen linked is actually HEAVEN compared to a few stables around here centrally. But these ones are the less great ones I've visited. There are better ones, with better compromises, holidays and turn out.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

@gottatrot - this is my EXACT point. Your entire post hit it on the head!
@mmshiro - while I don't agree at all with your argument delivery I understand what you are saying. AT THE SAME TIME you cannot sweep "stall people" all under the rug and say we are inferior/abusive/backwards.

there are stalls and then there are stalls.

Exhibit A
Exhibit B

My horse was stalled 24/7 WITH A RUN, but for her it was NOT a good thing. However, there were over 200 horses on that huge property and all of them adapted and accepted life. all of them had access to other horses. for whatever reason my girl just wasn't thriving, she needed time for herself.

Enter new barn: pipe coral turnouts. an IMPROVEMENT, as gottatrot said. Still not a pasture but we are literally smack dab in the middle of a mountain town. all barns are on people's private property! 

Searching for "worst case scenario" box stall on google actuall resulted in almost NO results. I can't quite find a good set of pictures that show a set up where horses are, at the very least, not able to see each other.

Exhibit B is what we exclusively have out here, sometimes even bigger. I am not sure WHAT your stall experience is, but if you have that negative of an interpretation I am sad for your memories.

In Santa Cruz you get some pastures, but again "pasture boarding" (called 24/7 turnout everywhere else) is 100% outside, NOT MAINTAINED/CHECKED ON/MANAGED by barn owner. "pasture" horses are usually thought of as old, retired horses who the owners just need to stick somewhere until they die. it is for people who TRULY cannot afford a horse. That is the assumption about people who pasture board where I am.

a STALLED HORSE, on the other hand, is a horse who is valuable to the owner. They are cared about and managed. They are either beloved pets or high-performing athletes. STALLED HORSES are well-maintained, looked over by the barn staff and the price is much higher. STALLED HORSES are loved. PASTURE HORSES are those wanting to be forgotten.

THAT IS the dichotomy where i live, so when i started exploring different parts of the countries horse care practices i was SHOCKED so many put their horses in pastures and "demanded" their 500,000 dollar FEI dressage horse have exclusive access to grass and a herd. The horror! that would not fly out here, no way. 

Do you see what I mean? Different areas have different cultures. I still somewhat feel, at least here, pasture is for "lesser" horse owners, and stalls are for the "true" horse owners, but elsewhere stall people might be considered cheap and overbearing because pasture means higher chance of injury and mayhem, a rish they can't afford when they have 50 1,000 dollar shows lined up for the season.


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

Some people have a choice where they put their horses, some have little or none. I guess if you have the choice to put them where they get the best amount of turn out, the most social engagement, and are fed well, and in your budget, but you dont' take that choice, then you might be liable for some realisitc critisism. If you are chosing out of convenience to yourself, then admit it. and go on. The horse will be ok, but you just have to be real and say this is the best situation for ME. I pay the bills, I bought the horse, I want to ride him in a place that works for me, etc.

Where we are, the horses have all day turn out, most on large pastures. It's heaven for them. BUT, we have only a few stalls, and no covered arena, in a very wet climate. some folks come here, and decide they'd rather put their horse in a neighboring faciliyt, with virtually no turn out , and NO pasture, but that DOES have an indoor arena. They do this for themselves, not the horse.
I am not going to blame them. But if they talk like it can't be helped, . . well, I'm not with that.

Most horses will adapt to stall/paddock life if there is enough activity going on around them to engage their curiousity, and if they get out for an hour.

In the old days, horses were kept in cities, in terrible conditions, but since they worked all day, very hard, when they returned to their tiny stall, they were not stall walking, they were happy to stand, eat and rest.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

thecolorcoal said:


> I find, specifically online, the equestrian community very close minded. We all come from different areas, have different experiences,


I find it interesting you should think so, yet what you speak of sounds a bit narrow to me. Of course, whatever subject, whether in real life or on the net, close-mindedness & lack of objectivity is very common. (I kno i strive not to be personally but dont always succeed either) But I personally find this & some other(not all by far) forums refreshingly open-minded as a general rule. Especially more so than little insulated communities IME, that don't consider any more than what's normal & acceptable in that particular realm. And learning what is 'best practice' in different areas is certainly an eye opener for me at least! 



> Not everyone's horse even gets turnout, or free choice hay, or maybe even hay at all! Specifically, where I live, it is normal for horses to be stalled 24/7, to be fed *hay pellets* 2x a day, and worked at least 2x a day for 1.5 hours each. My area is prodominantly rich and upscale and the horses are worth in the hundreds of thousands. Turnout risks an injury. Feeding hay is *expensive* and hard to store on *limited acres*.


Yes agreed, we all have to do the best we can with what we have. People have different priorities too. Eg. health & wellbeing is far more important to me than risk of the horse copping a couple of bruises or such when turned out with their mates, but i do appreciate not everyone feels that way. 

So, on your above egs, the reasons most people who are up to date with studies on health, soundness & wellbeing advise against those sort of practices is because they are unhealthy & problematic. Appreciating that will allow you to at least consider how to take measures to minimize issues, if you can't change much. 

Of course you don't have to conform to that, or even agree. But you can try to understand & respect that others have different views, different knowledge and just because we advise something you don't want to do doesnt in the least make it 'narrow minded'. 

Just bit of an aside, but it doesn't take me anything like an acre(Big She'd does it) to store eEnough Nough Hay for 5 Horses for y 6 
Modo I don't get how you don't have room to store it & what th3 acres are used for if no turnout? Ing


Nb. Fone gIngone stupid so I stop therStupe. 


> Every barn is about 3 acres large. No bigger. There are *no pastures* and if you can find them they are *poorly kept* and considered the lowest ranked boarding because the BOs don't care about those horses _at all_, they are left to their natural devices.
> 
> I find so many people online jump down others throats about management styles. "You don't have turnout? FIND A BARN THAT DOES!" Does that mean someone, where I am, has to uproot and MOVE to a state that has pastures, leave their job and home JUST to satisfy that "insufficient" horse care they are being accused of?
> 
> ...


----------



## Spanish Rider (May 1, 2014)

> Own up to the fact that they act without compassion towards their animals, and stop crying a river when they are called out on it.


Ouch! 

I have lived in many areas of the world, and, if nothing else, I have learned not to pass my personal experience-based judgement quite so quickly on customs and cultures which I may not fully comprehend.

Having grown up in rural New England, I was accustomed to horses having plenty of water, shade, and grassy turn-outs. As in the American Southwest, this is not the case in most of Spain. Grass simply does not exist, neither do shade trees, and the water supply can often get complicated. Horses under the Spanish heat, sun and wind, and extreme winter cold and damp, do not fare well, so the best cared-for horses are stalled most of the day.

Due to several circumstances of little import, I am currently riding at a competition show-jumping barn, where many horses are stalled 24/7, except for their daily work. Those who are not ridden on any given day due to scheduling inadequacies are worked with other horses in an electric walker. These horses are not lesson horses or trail horses. Each costs more than my home, and they have a groom to tend to their every need who lives on-site. They are young, large 18hh European warmbloods, international show-jumpers, and the hottest horses I have ever personally worked around. In a paddock or turn-out, they would be a danger to themselves and any other horses around them, or they could jump a fence in a blink of an eye and be out on the road. So, yes, they are stalled. Yet, it is a conscious decision made for their own well-being.

Ideal? Certainly not. My decision? Not at all. Yet, I respect it, and it does involve compassion. Because paddock/pasture accidents DO happen. Last year alone, our barn lost 2 horses to such accidents: a beloved lesson pony and a pregnant mare. Now, this is neither a reason nor an excuse to stall all horses 24/7. However, for some horses, in certain places, and under specific circumstances, it IS the best-case scenario. Scientifically proven? Of course not. But it is impossible for any one study to account for all the possible variables involved, and I am sure no horse owner with steeds of this caliber would allow their animals to be part of the “control” group.


----------



## Fimargue (Jun 19, 2015)

What @Kalraii was talking about is the reality in so many places. I have seen high level dressage horses who have never been with other horses, and a stallion who was kept in a box for 18 years. This is a norm in so many parts of Europe. And the stall, our box, is literally that. It is dark, small, and there is no possibility to interact with other horses.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

Some really good points Kalraii



Kalraii said:


> Everyone knows it's not ideal but everyone is in the same boat of "well it's either this or sell my horse".


I think a huge point is that first bit above - people who appreciate it IS problematic will (hopefully) take steps to minimise the negative aspects. But there are many who just see everyone else doing it so they just assume it's OK without thinking. Or their convenience is all that matters. Or claiming it's too expensive so unreasonable to expect them to change stuff, when they've spent a heap of money on a stupidly expensive horse. I don't at all necessarily think people should sell their horses if they have to keep them like that, but that they take measures to ensure the horse has an acceptable life & they consider & minimise issues caused. It is not something I would do tho - if I chose to live in the city and have a horse, I would be keeping it out of town. If it came down to money or time being too expensive, I'd consider I couldn't afford a horse.



> It's just not so black and white. If everyone was expected to meet the ideal requirements as a minimum there would be more horses at slaughter or more being abandoned. But when you see a donkey in a small stall with only a sprinkle of sand for bedding and no turnout, I do have to wonder if they would just have been better off not being born at all.


Maybe in the short term there would be more abandoned & slaughtered, but it would soon be accepted that horses just must be kept more like... horses. And if it is a horrible existence(again, not assuming it necessarily is), perhaps that's not a bad thing, that they're put out of their misery. Why is a donkey any more sad in that situation than a horse & why do people see slaughter as nastier than keeping horses like that? 

Again, not assuming specifically of any one situation, I agree it's far from black & white, but I do see the 'horses would be slaughtered otherwise' as an excuse for a lot of terrible practices because 'oh well, he's being kept alive'. Like the 'rescuer' who's horses are painfully lame but they have too many horses to 'look after' to afford vet treatment, but 'they're much better off than where they came from' so it is disregarded.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

All of the above. 

Having a horse in less than optimal conditions because you CHOOSE that is one thing. Trying to convince yourself that the horse is actually better off than if it was living in optimal conditions is plain wrong. Plenty of hot-blooded 18 hh horses live in pastures - in fact, they thrive in that environment because they can spend that pent-up energy. Pasture injuries can happen, but so can stall injuries. I can't believe I even have to state that. If people choose to keep their horse stalled, that's their choice, but that doesn't make it optimal. And yes, it IS a choice. And having a horse is a choice, not a right. 

For over 30 years I did not have horses. Was it killing me? Heck yes! But my lifestyle at that time (being a university student for 12 years, traveling all over Europe, building a career, having two babies before I could find full-time permanent work) was not suited to having horses. It would have been selfish and unfair, so I CHOSE not to have them. I would not have had the time or the money to provide them with the life they deserve. And I am not telling people not to have horses, I'm just expressing that it IS a choice, just like it IS a choice to board at a barn that doesn't have the best facilities because other factors come into play (proximity, price, a covered indoor). When I could finally afford to do it properly, and when my lifestyle was more stable, I chose to build a barn and keep my horses at home. I am very fortunate to live in an area where they have lots of green pasture, access to cheap hay (I won't even tell you how much I pay for a bale, but I'm starting to think I should be a hay exporter to the US), and to be able to turn my horses out 24/7. However, I lost my access to an indoor which I had at my boarding barn with minimal, muddy turnout. That means I freeze my tooshie off all winter long in our cold climate, but my horses don't mind the snow and cold. I put their health and well-being before my desire for comfort. 

Again, I am not suggesting people cannot have horses unless they can provide perfect conditions, but there are some instances where people should not have horses. To state otherwise is just unrealistic. To pretend they have no choice in the matter is simply untrue.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

Spanish Rider said:


> Ouch!
> 
> I have lived in many areas of the world, and, if nothing else, I have learned not to pass my personal experience-based judgement quite so quickly on customs and cultures which I may not fully comprehend.


The needs of an animal do not change with the customs, culture, and climate of the region into which they have been put (not "migrated to", but "put"). Whoever knows about the needs of an animal to thrive, and willfully puts and keeps the animal where those needs cannot even be met, even on a level of compromise, is guilty of a lack of compassion.

There are many human experiences that are part of a culture which we do not hesitate to criticize: slavery, female genital mutilation, child labor, child soldiers...the list goes on. I'm sure there are pretty solid explanation of why they have "no choice" but to engage in these things - and yet, suffering is suffering irrespective of the circumstances which brought on the suffering. 

There is a reason why polar bears are not in the Sahara desert: they are not adapted to live there. _Putting_ them there, because it's cool to own a polar bear, would be very stressful to them. Horses are no different - they don't get to decide on their migratory patterns anymore, so whenever they end up where they suffer due to not being adapted to the environment that they face 24/7, whoever puts them there is to blame. Everything else is just rationalization that amounts to, "But I really want a horse, and since I pay the bill, I put it where it's convenient for *me*."


----------



## madisonjo1 (Feb 24, 2018)

I love your photo & also, I really enjoyed your blog! 

Off comment, but I certainly agree. I am a total newbie, starting with a green horse. Not the typical or smart thing to do. But she is a rescue horse, and I have the funds and time to raise her. I literally scooped her up for a "killer" price. So, she is mine, and I will do everything I can despite my level of knowledge and training. 
I know 99% of people disagree with that.


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

Ww also need to look at each horse as an individual, what are their actual needs....

Not sure i’m Explaining well.

I had a friend in Florida, she had a horse she truly loved, but struggled for years to keep him happy and healthy in the climate. Eventually she took the kind offer of another friend further north and gave him to her. Said horse was far happier living in a cooler climate. Nothing wrong with keeping horses in Florida, didn’t work for this one.

If a horse is happy in whatever environment we keep them in, then all is good, but for some horses our best is not good enough, then you should seriously consider what is best for THAT horse.


----------



## Dreamcatcher Arabians (Nov 14, 2010)

Horses are a luxury and we all know that they are no longer a necessity for most people who own them. So, ANY horse is kept at the whim, comfort, convenience, pleasure of the person who owns him. We do the best we can with what we have. We do the same with children and dogs and cats and gerbils and so on. So what? We do the best we can, and in as much as we're not being abusive, it's nobody else's business really.


----------



## gottatrot (Jan 9, 2011)

Golden Horse said:


> Ww also need to look at each horse as an individual, what are their actual needs....


Right, this is important. For example, I've known people to sell a black Freisian from a hot climate because he had difficulty staying cool. I knew a doctor who found her horse with arthritis a good home when she moved to California, because she was only able to find those confined boarding situations and he was more sore when he didn't move around. I've also known people to move horses with heaves from dry, dusty climates and horses with certain allergies to other areas. I think that is very good horsemanship.

Agree that it is still no excuse to not turn out big, hot horses because they are too hot so will get injured. The hottest types benefit the most from regular turnout. I've personally seen some horses that were almost too much to handle safely that became much less hot and more sane when turned out regularly and allowed to disperse some of that energy.

I also have seen some horrific injuries happen in stalls. Probably the worst was a horse that degloved his leg on the handle of a water bucket. It was a regular bucket and appeared safe. All the skin came down from above the knee and ended up around his pastern. Another horse somehow broke her femur in the stall, and horses can kick and break boards, get caught in metal, etc.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

mmshiro said:


> ...There is a spectrum of measures that one can take to mitigate these effects, and the more are taken the better, but turn-out in at least a minimal herd with free-choice shelter and free-choice forage are nowadays established _best_ practices of horse keeping. Horses are probably robust enough to easily live under a "12 hours in - 12 hours out" routine, but that's as far as _I'd_ deviate from the ideal, no more.
> 
> So here's the kicker: If you know the best practices, and you don't refute the science on the subject, but you respond to, "What you are doing is detrimental to the horse!" with "It's the best I can do!", then you are in it for yourself and only yourself, and the horse is merely a means to satisfy *your* wants and desires.


Great! I'll go shoot my three horses. Then I'll travel around southern Arizona, killing all the abused horses living on dry lots. I'll wear a mask and call myself The Angel of Mercy. I'm going to need a LOT of ammo, because there are a lot of horses to kill!

Trooper is an ex-ranch horse. He spent a few years being ridden in the mountains and deserts of Utah, 12+ hour days, before coming here. His former owner watched Trooper in our corral and said Trooper is now living the GOOD life! Gets 3 meals a day, constant water, little work. I can leave Trooper in the corral for 2 months, take him out - and he'll ride just like he did 60 days before. After 10 years of watching him, I'm convinced he'd be happy to eat, drink, avoid the sun and just hang out for the rest of his life.

Cowboy is a BLM mustang. He is now in a separate corral. Why? Because it involves less fighting and less stress on him, as best I can tell. He's 8 inches shorter than the other horses and insists on acting aggressive to make up for it. He gobbles food when mixed, but slowly eats when separate. He likes knowing the other horses are nearby, but he seems more RELAXED on his own!

Bandit was raised on the Navajo Nation. He was part of a herd that was allowed to roam for MILES. Not acres, but hundreds of square miles. Except, according to his former owner, he hung around the outskirts of the herd and rarely mixed. He ran a lot of miles training for relay races & gets far less exercise here. But again...his former owner visited and said Bandit looked happier here than when he was living near the herd. He's gained weight, his feet are better, his mane and tail have grown out, and he is vastly more RELAXED when ridden than he was before.

We've switched them to 2 meals of pelleted hay a day plus one of alfalfa hay. Why? Thought we would try it...and after 3 months, all three horses have gained weight, have denser coats, better hooves, etc. The people who make the pellets supplement as needed to keep a constant level of nutrients - unlike the hay, which varies enormously in quality. The horses love their pellets and are looking better since I upped the pellets and reduced the hay.

And no, they don't get ANY turnout or pasture. I guess "science" says I should kill them. Or pay a rancher to let them roam "free" on a ranch. *But all three have spent time on thousands of acres...and they seem pretty darn happy with their corrals and 3 meals a day!
*
"_then you are in it for yourself and only yourself_" - @*mmshiro* 

Yep! Going out to feed them 3 meals a day, cleaning the corrals twice a day, filling their water buckets, paying $15-20 for a 90 lb bale of hay, having their hooves trimmed every 6 weeks...it is just all about me. Me, me, me. If I really cared for them, I'd...shoot them? Not a big market for 20 year old horses, one who is 13 hands and one who is slowly losing his vision in one eye. And Bandito has developed this strange idea that the person on his back is a consultant, not a boss. I'm one of the few riders I've met content to be a consultant. I'm also pretty sure, nearly 3 years later, than Bandit is pretty happy, relaxed and healthy where he is.

"Born Free" was one of my favorite movies as a kid. As an adult, I noticed that after Elsa was returned to the wild, she was often hungry, often injured, and died of disease a short time later. But science would tell us she was living the life she was meant to live. Food for thought.

Bandit 3 years ago. He's the small one next to the gorgeous Arabian mare...








​
Bandit after 3 years of near-abusive living:








​


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

Dreamcatcher Arabians said:


> So, ANY horse is kept at the whim, comfort, convenience, pleasure of the person who owns him. We do the best we can


Do you see the inherent contradiction in that statement? Is it really _the best_ you can do, or is it not rather just the maximum inconvenience you are willing to accept? Horse ownership is always inconvenient - there is work, there are expenses, there are nerves involved. What if you thought that _actually_ doing the best you can is too much of an inconvenience for you to own that horse?


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

bsms said:


> Great! I'll go shoot my three horses.


Seriously? I'm getting a bit impatient with the willful obtuseness in some of these responses. Talk about strawman argument! It looks as though your horses see and interact with other horses, have room to move their limbs, and proper nutrition.

They are not confined *24/7* motionless to a box without any stimuli to occupy their minds. 
They are not confined *24/7* motionless to a box without any stimuli to occupy their minds. 
They are not confined *24/7* motionless to a box without any stimuli to occupy their minds. 
They are not confined *24/7* motionless to a box without any stimuli to occupy their minds. 
They are not confined *24/7* motionless to a box without any stimuli to occupy their minds. 
They are not confined *24/7* motionless to a box without any stimuli to occupy their minds.


----------



## Dreamcatcher Arabians (Nov 14, 2010)

mmshiro said:


> Do you see the inherent contradiction in that statement? Is it really _the best_ you can do, or is it not rather just the maximum inconvenience you are willing to accept? Horse ownership is always inconvenient - there is work, there are expenses, there are nerves involved. What if you thought that _actually_ doing the best you can is too much of an inconvenience for you to own that horse?


I do see what you're getting at. And I'll agree it's the maximum inconvenience that you're willing to accept. It's the best you can do within that frame work. I also have 'maximum inconvenience' parameters for friends and family. So? My horses are healthy, happy to see me, and when just hanging out we all seem to relate well to each other. I don't think you can ask for a whole lot more than that. 

At this point, you're beating a dead horse, IMO. And no, mine are not stalled 24/7 MOST of the time. During really nasty weather, yes they are. And it's easy to admit that it's for my convenience. It's a whole lot more convenient for me to clean a stall than to have to rent a backhoe to dig the hole I'd need to put a horse in if it got struck by lightning. Or thrown a mile by a tornado. They use up a lot less hay when they're blanketed and brought in during ice storms. Yup, more convenience for me. Funny thing is, if you watch the horses, they are telling you it's convenient for THEM too. The come running to the gate at the barn at the first sign of thunder & lightning, wind chills in the negatives, when ice is falling from the sky, etc, etc. It's very convenient for them when I come out, clean their stalls, blanket them and feed them and groom every single one (I have 12 of my own). 

And it's certainly convenient to have them at a trainer's so all I have to do is go groom, tack, ride, groom and put away. Funny thing is, we all seem to like it that way. No cribbers, no weavers, no stall walkers in the bunch. I don't see convenience as a sin.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

Yeah, no one is saying that if you don't have turnout you need to go shoot your horses. We're saying that turnout is better than none. And that pretending that's not true is foolish. But also that if you know you cannot provide turnout or pasture to your horse, that you take the necessary means to ensure they are provided with other kinds of stimulation and exercise, and are able to interact with other horses. Being dry-lotted is not the same as being stalled 24/7. No one suggested it was. 

I think Kalraii explained the difference very clearly in a previous post, where she compared one barn where the horses were kept in damp, dark and dirty stalls 24/7 with very limited human interaction, and another stable with very limited turnout, but a lot of interaction and care. The difference she noticed in the horses' behaviors was clear. Turnout is better, keeping the horses busy is better, a lot of interaction is better, open, airy stalls are better, etc. etc. 

Saying that horses can adapt to a variety of living situations is accurate. Saying there is no wrong way to keep a horse leads to hoarding, neglectful situations, plain and simple.


----------



## Dreamcatcher Arabians (Nov 14, 2010)

Acadianartist said:


> Saying that horses can adapt to a variety of living situations is accurate. Saying there is no wrong way to keep a horse leads to hoarding, neglectful situations, plain and simple.


I agree with this 100%.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

mmshiro said:


> ...Talk about strawman argument! It looks as though your horses see and interact with other horses, have room to move their limbs, and proper nutrition...


They live in a corral that is a maximum of 100' long. They get pelleted hay twice a day, and a flake of alfalfa once a day. They have several 12x12 shelters (anything bigger requires a building permit from the county, to include submitting engineering diagrams).

Two of the three once had MILES to roam. Hundreds of square miles. Involving real herds, roaming with a stallion and older mares. The third has lived on pastures of 20-50 acres while also being used in the mountains. Yet all three act relaxed in a corral that is 100' long. With their primary feed coming in pellets, with zero pasture time. 

Compare that to "_turn-out in at least a minimal herd with free-choice shelter and free-choice forage are nowadays established best practices of horse keeping. Horses are probably robust enough to easily live under a "12 hours in - 12 hours out" routine, *but that's as far as I'd deviate from the ideal, no more*._"

I'm not a big fan of stalled horses, but I'm also not a big fan of working in cubicles - which many of us humans have experienced, with all sorts of health implications. Like humans, horses adapt. Often with some issues, but...


----------



## Spanish Rider (May 1, 2014)

> The needs of an animal do not change with the customs, culture, and climate of the region into which they have been put


Granted. However, the interpretation of those needs can vary depending on customs, culture and climate. When I once told a Moroccan groom that some people consider no turnout for a horse mistreatment, he was dumbstruck. "But, why would you DO that? They suffer outside!" Some people who are unaccustomed to snow, rain and sub-freezing temperatures believe that a horse left out in the elements is an abomination. Simply another interpretation of a same situation based on one's culture/climate/custom-based experience.


----------



## Kalraii (Jul 28, 2015)

@loosie sorry if I confused - they keep donkeys at one of the schools. They don't get ridden and are there just... well because. I used it as it was a recent example of the saddest state I've seen in the last month. Of course it's the same for a horse. The yard I most recently discussed - if I heard that they were all euthanized I would be relived for them. Between the swaying, cribbing and the VERY vacant look in their eyes there already dead, my opinion.


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

I'm guessing @mmshiro's point is that if you choose circumstances of care for your horse that are actually DETRIMENTAL to their well being, and you do so because it's better for your own well being, then fess up to that. Be honest about it. Don't fool yourself into the old idea that you are a helpless victim.

I would totally keep a horse in a place where he was stalled all day, if I was into showing and wanted access to a good indoor arena. in a heartbeat. I love horses, but if I am going to shell out big bucks, I want to 'use' my horse. Darn, that sounds cruel, but I want to ride, not just admire. 

Sure, if we kept them ONLY in places that were perfect for them we'd see a whole new animal emerge, because horses kept in human engineered situations (of all kinds) are a mere shadow of what they are as wild animals. their brio is dulled, their intelligence muted, their speed slowed, their fight trained out of them.

most people who ride horses couldn't handle a REAL horse ('you can't handle the truth!')

I admire wild horses, but I dont' want to ride one.


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

Spanish Rider said:


> Granted. However, the interpretation of those needs can vary depending on customs, culture and climate. When I once told a Moroccan groom that some people consider no turnout for a horse mistreatment, he was dumbstruck. "But, why would you DO that? They suffer outside!" Some people who are unaccustomed to snow, rain and sub-freezing temperatures believe that a horse left out in the elements is an abomination. Simply another interpretation of a same situation based on one's culture/climate/custom-based experience.


Well, we are talking in circles a bit because we are talking about several different things. 

First, optimal care for a horse. This is quite well known. Horses need the social company of other horses, with the space to successfully interact without a lot of risk (no place to get trapped by a dominant horse, food enough for all with room to eat in a relaxed way, etc.), they need a feeding regimen which as closely as possible mimics grazing on coarse grasses on the ground most of the day and night. Just for starters. Emphasis: this is KNOWN. It isn't a subject of debate. What someone in Morocco or London or anywhere else believes about this is not relevant to the data.

Then we have judging cultural norms in different parts of the world and different disciplines, based on the degree to which they are unaligned with Optimal Care, above. 

This is the can of worms. It is essentially an ethical question, which has come to loom very large in modern life: do animals have rights? What are those rights? Do we have the right to keep them however it pleases us? Do we have moral obligations to the animals we care for, and what are those obligations? Does society as a whole have the right -- or the obligation -- to mandate and enforce standards of care based on scientific data?

This has special complexity when keeping those animals is entirely discretionary, does not include raising animals for needed transportation or draft purposes, or for production of meat, milk, fiber, etc. The conflict between the _desires_ (not the needs) of human beings and the needs of the animal become fraught. 

I don't think there are any easy answers to the above -- and if someone says there are, run away fast! 

Somewhere between "animals are ours, to use, display, abuse, discard, any way that seems fit to us" and "humans should give up all relationship to animals except for looking at wild animals from a safe distance" is where almost all of us live. But that's a broad ground.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

tinyliny said:


> because horses kept in human engineered situations (of all kinds) are a mere shadow of what they are as wild animals. their brio is dulled, their intelligence muted, their speed slowed, their fight trained out of them.
> 
> most people who ride horses couldn't handle a REAL horse ('you can't handle the truth!')
> 
> I admire wild horses, but I dont' want to ride one.


Hah, that's interesting, because "fight trained out of them" implies "beat into submission". I always thought that if you want to "ride a wild horse", you first teach them to trust you, so they still have the "fight", but choose not to use it because you are not a threat. Isn't that how (almost) all "Mustang _gentling_" works?

But I'm really not talking about behavior modification. I'm talking about meeting physical and psychological needs of the animal, needs which cause significant and continuous stress in the animal if they are not met. You can keep your eyes open for some time, but having them taped open is a whole different matter. You can hold a stretchy yoga pose for some time, with some discomfort; being fixated in that position is a different matter.

I believe a horse, put in a stall for most of its waking hours, experiences stress like a POW being forced to crouch in a cage just a bit too small to move.










I believe the complete lack of interactions with members of the same species leads to the same stress as human loneliness. Not having any intellectual stimulation either (I mean, how closely can you study the cracks in the boards of your stall wall) compounds the loneliness they experience significantly.

I have seen horses standing in the freezing rain, just outside their empty run-in shelters, heads down, butt into the wind - content to be with their buddies and a mouthful of hay. They truly don't need much. Taking away _permanently_ what little they do need, for convenience or out of a sense of entitlement, is just unnecessarily cruel.


----------



## Dreamcatcher Arabians (Nov 14, 2010)

I think too that there are differences in how horses are kept and what a person's 'willingness to tolerate inconvenience" is different depending on several different factors. 

#1 How many horses does a person have? 0? 1? 10? 20? 300?
#2 How long has the person owned horses? Newcomer? less than 5 years? over 5 years? 10 years? 20 years? 
#3 What do they actually DO with the horse? Pet and love on? Hand walk & graze? Admire in their pasture (yard art)? Ride at home? Ride on trail? Trailer in for lessons? Show a little? Show a lot? Show a lot of horses at each show? 
#4 Do they board or keep at home?
#5 Do they have barn help or is it all self care? 

The answers to those questions can really make an impact on how you will care for your horses. I show. A lot. So, I drive my friends crazy with all my grooming. I bathe, I curry, I brush, I clip, I give 'hot oil' treatments, feed coat supplements, etc, etc. They knock the dirt off and go trail riding. I want my horse looking like he's ready to go to a World Championship no matter what we're doing. My inconvenience vs theirs. 

I have 12 horses that I own and I breed for 1 or 2 per year, so it fluctuates depending on who's ready to be sold. It can go as high as 20 (not recently, thank you God), and get down to about 6. I have an assistant. So, in a lot of cases it isn't my inconvenience, it's hers. But if she's not here, it's all mine. So, do I do things a little differently than I would if I only had 1? Oh absolutely! 

I've been in horses all my life, have had my very own horse since I was 13 years old, before that I helped with mom & dad's TBs. So do I know for an absolute fact that horses will not immediately colic and die if they are not fed on the tick of 0630 and 1630 every single day? Yes I do. Have for years. But is it best for them to be fed on a schedule? Yes it is and I do it more than I don't. But I no longer panic if I'm late or have to be early. And let's define "feeding". My horses have 24/7 access to grass and grass hay, so their "feeding" is just their buckets of Enhance or Strategy. The absolutely will not die if it's late nor will they if I would actually even miss a feeding (never actually tested that one but I'm pretty sure). They tell me they're dying of starvation and barely have the energy to buck, kick, or push the other guy away from the gate when it's time to eat, but really, they're fine. 

I have known many breeders who own more than 300 hundred horses. Their standard of care is a LOT different from mine. Their horses are all happy, healthy, and produce great babies. My horses are healthy, happy, and produce great babies. Differences in the horses? Theirs are frequently a challenge to handle, rarely if ever see a brush or curry comb and most aren't broke to saddle. Every single one of my horses is broke to ride (that's old enough that is) except Honey Boo Boo. The only reason she's not been saddle broke is because she was 11 when I got her, she's here for life, and since I have a lot of nice horses to ride I don't need to ride her. She was shown at halter as a youngster, she's got at least 1 ROM, so not totally untrained. IF she was part of the show string or destined to sell, she'd be under saddle, that's kind of my 'insurance policy' for them, if they ride they will stand a better chance of having a good home buy them than ending up at auction. 

It's all in what you want to do. I LIKE it when people drive by, see my horses, stop and stare because they're all so shiny and pretty. Others don't care. They just want a horse that rides to their specs and they can hose 'em off, sometimes, and toss back out in the field. There's nothing wrong with either way.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Cowboy & Trooper have lived what many would say is ideal - large pastures or totally open country. But they are both unimaginative horses. They really don't need much mental stimulation. Food, water, place out of the rain and sun. They could both spend the rest of their lives in my corral and NOT feel stressed.

At 60, part of me is ready to sell my horses. But as a practical matter, no one would want a 20 year old 13 hand pony who HATES arenas, and I doubt anyone would want a 19 year old Appy who is starting to lose his vision. Because of family changes, I doubt either will be ridden much. But I see no sign they crave mental stimulation or exercise.

Mia? A big part of her spookiness really was a need to move. She came from racing lines and the short runs I could afford her were not enough to get her settled, deep down. Moving to the Navajo Nation, spending time with miles to move, having foals, being galloped regularly for a few miles at a time - I'm told she has become a "bombproof" horse. Utterly trustworthy. And the truth was that my living arrangements and the total lack of anyplace where I could safely gallop her for miles probably made her spooky. I did my best, and gave her away when there was a chance for her to do better.

Bandit is in between. He is very much a thinking horse. At 10, he likes to play and likes to observe and likes to make decisions. Two months with little riding left him...bouncy...for the first 15 minutes the other day. By 20 minutes though, he was OK for my DIL to ride. And yesterday, he was relaxed and easy, if herd bound again. Putting him in an enclosed stall would be cruel. Putting him in a pen at a stable, able to watch a lot of horses around and getting exercised a few times a week, would be OK for him.

What works fine for Cowboy and Trooper was well below "right" for Mia, while Bandit is OK - IF he gets out regularly. But I owned Mia for 7 years in large part because no one was able to offer her anything better, and several would be buyers who just wanted a pretty horse would have given her far worse.

I think horse owners need to do their best by their horses, but I also think a lot of horses - including my "born in the wild" BLM mustang - are pretty content with a lot less than some people demand.


----------



## my2geldings (Feb 18, 2008)

Kalraii said:


> My boyfriend calls these sorts of people "Keyboard Warriors".


Thats hilarious I call them keyboard ninjas. I like your version better...


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

Tiny, Acadianartist & mmshiro replies on page 7; I wish I could like your posts more than once. Boy, thought I was on the last page but it's marched away again. Only read first & 7th page...


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

Dreamcatcher Arabians said:


> We do the best we can, and in as much as we're not being abusive, it's nobody else's business really.


Yes, since you put it that way, I agree, but the issue that we appear to be discussing though is that some management practices ARE effectively abusive. Albeit, accepted in different areas of the world & not seen as abusive. But unlike starving or beating an animal, there is no straight black & white about it & 'it depends' is the only generalised answer I could give personally as to whether full time lockdown of a horse was 'abusive'.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

Spanish Rider said:


> Granted. However, the interpretation of those needs can vary depending on customs, culture and climate. When I once told a Moroccan groom that some people consider no turnout for a horse mistreatment, he was dumbstruck. "But, why would you DO that? They suffer outside!" Some people who are unaccustomed to snow, rain and sub-freezing temperatures believe that a horse left out in the elements is an abomination. Simply another interpretation of a same situation based on one's culture/climate/custom-based experience.


The discussion IMO is not about justifying ignorance/lack of understanding of what is good or bad for a horse leading to different interpretations of 'good' practices. We could justify anything & everything with that argument...


----------



## updownrider (Mar 31, 2009)

I have been reading along, but I keep going back to the OP. Competition horses worth hundreds of thousands and millions and millions do get turn out. Olympic horses, WEG horses, 5* horses. All of them? Probably not. Ones I know? Yes, some do. 

A blanket statement that show horses worth hundreds of thousands dollars in wealthy areas do not get turned out because of the risk of injury is ignorant and not true. I lived in the OP's area for a dozen years and knew quite a few show horses. If there was paddock available, they went out. Where I am now I see world class horses in paddocks everyday. 


Example of a champion horse that goes out in a paddock. 
HH Azur- World Cup Finals show jumping winner
The Chronicle of the Horse

Another one
http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/behind-stall-door-rothchild

And another
http://www.chronofhorse.com/article/behind-the-stall-door-with-cornet-39


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

updownrider said:


> A blanket statement that show horses worth hundreds of thousands dollars in wealthy areas do not get turned out because of the risk of injury is ignorant and not true.


I also find it... incongruous that 'can't afford it' or 'too expensive' is given as a reason, when people are willing & able to put that kind of money into a horse.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

updownrider said:


> I have been reading along, but I keep going back to the OP. Competition horses worth hundreds of thousands and millions and millions do get turn out. Olympic horses, WEG horses, 5* horses. All of them? Probably not. Ones I know? Yes, some do.


I agree.

I just had the chance to visit a nearby TB breeding farm during baby season. Apart from the cuteness overload of the 1 month olds (outside with their mom), I also gave a carrot to a $2Million yearling: happy little chap living it up in his pasture with a pal.

If you can afford an expensive horse, you can afford to insure it. Otherwise you can't afford an expensive horse.


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

bsms said:


> Cowboy & Trooper have lived what many would say is ideal - large pastures or totally open country. But they are both unimaginative horses. They really don't need much mental stimulation.


You are overestimating the level of complexity here. Just imagine for yourself: 24 hours looking at your bathroom tiles, or 24 hours looking out the window. You really can't see how that makes a huge difference? They don't need a research library...


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

thecolorcoal said:


> . Keep your train wrecks on the tracks please.


Is that possible? Is not the definition of a train wreck, one that has left the tracks?

Still getting my head around these thoughts....avoiding a train wreck by keeping the train on the track, I get that...


----------



## Cordillera Cowboy (Jun 6, 2014)

mmshiro said:


> Seriously?
> ................
> They are not confined *24/7* motionless to a box without any stimuli to occupy their minds.
> They are not confined *24/7* motionless to a box without any stimuli to occupy their minds.
> ...


Thank you for distilling your argument down to your main point. It's likely that you are one of the few who habitually use a linear, logical thought process. I found that I was reading more into your argument than this.


----------



## updownrider (Mar 31, 2009)

mmshiro said:


> I agree.
> 
> I just had the chance to visit a nearby TB breeding farm during baby season. Apart from the cuteness overload of the 1 month olds (outside with their mom), I also gave a carrot to a $2Million yearling: happy little chap living it up in his pasture with a pal.
> 
> If you can afford an expensive horse, you can afford to insure it. Otherwise you can't afford an expensive horse.


You misunderstood the point of my post. Foals on a TB breeding farm and show horses can't be compared. Young show horses had a few years in pastures to grow up before they became show horses.

Insurance has nothing to do with turning out a horse or not. I have known of horses that are owned by owners that self-insure.


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

mmshiro said:


> Hah, that's interesting, because "fight trained out of them" implies "beat into submission".
> 
> your comment regarding my remark about haveing the 'fight trained out of them".
> 
> ...


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

I am glad I brought this conversation up because I love learning about everyone's expectations in horse care.

Referring to the comment I made about show horses not getting turn out. I do understand that in *other parts of the country* there are many a 60, 70, 80k+ horses getting put out in pasture to play. But I do know for a fact places in europe *do not* have pastures or turnouts, and that *does* pose problems for the horses behavior. My comment references things people have told me about their horses, that they are too expensive to turn out because they can't afford to miss fei shows for a kick to the leg, a torn suspensory. My rather limited experience over the internet has shown me these thoughts are not the norm, but for a long time, because it was the only horse world I was involved in, they were for me.

A barn I was at east of santa cruz had 20 horses and 4 turnout pens. each horse got about 3 hours in the pen a day. The barn was on 4 acres. It held the actual barn, a ring, the owners house, a round pen, the turnouts, a mare motel, and a retirement pasture (about 1/2 acre with 7 horses). The show horses were hot, probably because they didn't get much time outside, but that was what I grew up undertanding as "turn out," aka letting the horse loose in a small corral for a set number of hours a day. to stretch their legs. it wasn't mandatory, it was an *extra* at some barns.

A barn i rode at in high school had 14 horses and *one* 12 x 24 turnout pipe coral. Barn was on 2 acres that included all facilities. *only the horses in the barn* (there were 7 in the barn), who were confined to 12 x 12's got the turnout. The others, in the mare motels which were 24 x 48, didn't.

My current barn has 7 horses, and 7 individual turnouts ranging from 24 x 48 to 48 x 48 (the big guy gets the biggest turn out). They go outside from 9am to about 4pm. 5 of the 7 stalls have outdoor runs. 2 of the stalls are box stalls. Besides the box stalls all the horses get physical contact with each other, able to touch one another from across the back runs. The stalls are 24 x 24 plus a 48 sized run. 

The stall I was at before was a 12 x 12 with a 20" run. NO TURNOUT. My horse was miserable. We had so many behavioral issues that stemmed from her being confined to her stall, despite the run, for 23 hours a day.

I am not saying turnout is not important. IT IS. But, if you are like how I was, with no other choice because financially that was the only set up I could afford and the ONLY set up with available space (everything else was full), you make do. How? Hire someone to hand walk the horse for an hour a day. Hire someone to ride it once a day. Come out for 3 hours after work to spend time with it. While it's not ideal it helps. 

If you willfully put your horse in a box 12 x 12 and said "meh they'll be fine" and that was the end of the discussion, I'd be very concerned for your horse. In that respect, I agree with mmshiro. But I believe mmshiro, from the tone and the descriptions I've read, would go further and claim that my 12 x 48 set up at barn 1 was just as "cruel" as the 12 x 12 because we are still missing a pasture. I'd even guess that perhaps mmshiro would claim my CURRENT set up would be "abusive" because the horses aren't in a pasture. Again.

If I were locked in a bathroom with the only choice to be staring at the bathroom wall, I could cope. I, personally, have good isolation coping skills. It wouldn't be a huge struggle for me. If I could do it with a buddy beside me? No problem. If I got out of my box once a day? great. If not at all? If I had things to watch outside, people pacing back and forth and working with only my thoughts to entertain me, I think I would be alright. Not great, not sane, not thriving, but I would survive.

So do horses. I know I have yet to see all the horrible bad sh*t older people on this forum have seen, and when i talk about close mindedness I am not necessarily referencing HF at all. It is an issue outside the internet, too. Our community as a whole tends to be "if I don't recognize how you are doing something, it's wrong." Be it training, horse-keeping, farrier work, whatever - it just seems to be the growing theme.

The basic premise of this post was not to demonize or justify anyone, it was to try and show people there are different ways of having horses. And just because they aren't living "as nature intended," it might not be because the owner has WILLFULLY chosen NOT to keep them that way, but the limitations of their area have forced them to make severe compromises. What the facility lacks in pasture the owner might make up with in time spent with the horse. What the facility lacks in feed the owner might make up with lower excercise requirements or supplementing feed themselves. Whatever the boarding situation lacks needs to be made up to keep the equilibrium.

if you throw your horse in a 12x12, no turn out with limited human and/or horse contact, that is abuse. No question, because you *made the decision* to keep them that way without supplementing what they lacked. If you cannot supplement, like mmshiro said, you *need to admit it to yourself* and take responsibility for the suffering of the animal. I don't believe those who cannot fill in the holes of horsecare should have horses, either, but it seems to me *everyone* on this forum, whether they have an idea situation or not, is doing their best to meet the basic needs of their animals. To assume this is not the case is not ignorance but sheer close-mindedness.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

thecolorcoal said:


> My comment references things people have told me about their horses, that they are too expensive to turn out... My rather limited experience over the internet has shown me these thoughts are not the norm, but for a long time, because it was the only horse world I was involved in, they were for me.


So I haven't read all the middle pages in this thread, if you explained better, but I'm actually struggling to understand what you're on about now, as that sounds - the whole post - like a direct contradiction of your first post which accused 'the internet'(so us on this forum included) of being closed minded, when advising keeping horses other than you do(well, said you did in the first) as opposed to your personal 'real' experience of horse people.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

I'm also not exactly sure what you are trying to say OP, because there are so many contradictions in your last post. First you say:



thecolorcoal said:


> The stall I was at before was a 12 x 12 with a 20" run. NO TURNOUT. My horse was miserable. We had so many behavioral issues that stemmed from her being confined to her stall, despite the run, for 23 hours a day.


And then it gets muddled...



thecolorcoal said:


> I am not saying turnout is not important. IT IS. But, if you are like how I was, with no other choice because financially that was the only set up I could afford and the ONLY set up with available space (everything else was full), you make do. How? Hire someone to hand walk the horse for an hour a day. Hire someone to ride it once a day. Come out for 3 hours after work to spend time with it. While it's not ideal it helps.
> 
> If you willfully put your horse in a box 12 x 12 and said "meh they'll be fine" and that was the end of the discussion, I'd be very concerned for your horse.
> 
> If I were locked in a bathroom with the only choice to be staring at the bathroom wall, I could cope.


So you are claiming you had NO CHOICE. This is where I take issue. You DO have a choice, you ALWAYS have choices in life. And you DID willfully put your horse in a box because in a previous post, you said you felt it was better to keep your horse closer to you so he could see you everyday (because presumably, he would prefer that to getting turned out?). Maybe this is not the same barn, but you DID have choices, since you have gone on about all the various pros and cons of the barns you visited. Furthermore, you chose to keep a horse even though you could not afford to provide him with turnout, which you recognize is preferable. 

This is pretty much what you are saying in this paragraph, but then you end in saying that everyone on this forum is doing their best to meet the needs of their horses (how do you know this though?):



thecolorcoal said:


> if you throw your horse in a 12x12, no turn out with limited human and/or horse contact, that is abuse. No question, because you *made the decision* to keep them that way without supplementing what they lacked. If you cannot supplement, like mmshiro said, you *need to admit it to yourself* and take responsibility for the suffering of the animal. I don't believe those who cannot fill in the holes of horsecare should have horses, either, but it seems to me *everyone* on this forum, whether they have an idea situation or not, is doing their best to meet the basic needs of their animals. To assume this is not the case is not ignorance but sheer close-mindedness.


So it is close-minded to think that maybe not EVERYONE on HF is doing their best to meet the basic needs of their animals. Really? By virtue of being on HF that automatically eliminates the possibility of anyone being abusive or neglectful? Seems like a bit of a leap in logic. 

My goal is not to pick apart your arguments @thecolourcoal, just to say that if you're going to tell people they're being close-minded, it's best to be consistent in what you're trying to express. First you say it's normal not to offer turnout and that horses are perfectly fine, and in fact, that it's better for them (less injuries). Then you say you recognize that turnout is best. Then you say you personally would be just fine living in your bathroom 24/7 (and so by extension, no turnout is fine). Then you say people need to take responsibility for their decisions. Then everyone on HF is doing their best, and if we don't agree, we are just close-minded. This is becoming a rather confused thread.


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

@thecolorcoal, please do not anecdotally compare something that you imagine you could personally cope with (without having in any way experienced it) to what a horse experiences under similar circumstances. 

Humans are not horses. Your imagination is not the same as reality. It just makes your argument look weak.


----------



## cbar (Nov 27, 2015)

Avna said:


> @thecolorcoal, please do not anecdotally compare something that you imagine you could personally cope with (without having in any way experienced it) to what a horse experiences under similar circumstances.
> 
> Humans are not horses. Your imagination is not the same as reality. It just makes your argument look weak.



I agree with this. This is a very weak argument - what you yourself can handle another person may not. And horses are not the same as people; so it doesn't even make sense to compare the two.


----------



## EstrellaandJericho (Aug 12, 2017)

If I spent $500,000 on a horse I would have them insured. With an investment like that, it is necessary. I can understand to prevent injury during show season to keep a horse stalled or on it's own, but on the off season i would personally let the horse be a horse (of course of course). Some insurances will pay out in the event of death or serious injury. When I bought my mare the breeder introduced me to his insurance lady who showed me many packages she had available. Since I am not showing Estrella, I declined. 

Where I live, it's cheaper to put a horse on pasture board than stalled board, my horses seem happy. I worked at a barn once and had many run ins with unhappy stalled horses. Some we're okay with it. They all (unless injured) were either out at night or during the day, depending on the season. The worst one was the one who had hock surgery. His owner decided, rather than letting him off riding for a few months and preparing him for retirement (17 year old fellow), elected into surgery which included stall rest 23/7 with an hour a day of hand walking. She didn't want to hand walk him either and since I was the barn hand she expected me or the owner to. He was unmanageable even for the male trainer. I think that guy would have been happier with the months of turnout. He definitely didn't like the stall.

We often find reasons to justify bad decisions. Though I sometimes don't succeed in my efforts, I'm of the opinion that I should keep my nose in my business, do my best for my horses, and not comment to others what I think of their decision making skills. Also, I try not to let others opinions hurt my feelings. Often I am too lazy to be offended, I would rather put my energy into understanding my horses.

In my case, my mare might tolerate a stall but I think my gelding would become a drug addict (cribbing) and couldn't be handled. He would literally go bonkers. Though I haven't tested this theory, I am sure of it. Maybe if he never knew the feeling of running on hundreds of acres wild and free it would be different. If you never knew what true freedom felt like, you would never miss it. Or would you?

Just my two cents.


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

Going WAAAAAY back to the OP's first post, . . she felt critisized by others who thought she was not being a good horse owner because she put her horse in a stall, and didn't turn her out with other horses and such.

well, I've gotten the reverse sort of critical attitude by some folks, the ones who do show, and DO used all kinds of boots for this or that and have a clean pad for every ride, and bathe their horses after every ride, and wouldn't dream of sending them out into a pasture with 14 other horses, etc.


I don't use brush boots, bell boots, sport boots or hoof boots. I don't use a cooler after a sweaty ride, except in extreme circumstances. my lease horse goes out in the pasture, wet after a rainy or sweaty ride. there is nothing I can do or change about that when it's pouring rain. He does not care. He does no better with polo wraps or sports boots than without. He doe not NEED a noseband with a bridle, and in fact does ok in a rope halter.

See, that sort of 'look down your nose' at other horse people can be from the 'natural care ' toward the ' fancy care', and back. both directions.
have YOU mentally judged someone for not useing boots, or a nose band, or coolers, or bathing, or herd care or ?

if we are honest with each other, we DO hold judgements agains other types of horse care. It's best we learn to both keep ours inside, AND allow 'theirs' to roll off our feathers.


----------



## pennywise (Feb 1, 2016)

tl;dr.... horses not being let outside has huge effects on them mentally and physically. There are lots of ways you can be thrifty and keep a horse heathy on "less", but there is no debate here on whether or not turnout is an unnecessary thing that privileged people push on everyone else. They may push it on you and be snobbish about everything they do, but they're not wrong.

Regardless what's available in the area you live in, there are objective truths about caring for living creatures and one of those is that it's not healthy to keep animals in a box 24/7 (or, nearly so). That might be the only #1 important thing about having a large animal is being able to have enough room for it. That always comes first in my mind. Even if a horse seems stall-bound, he still needs to get outside. 

Sure, there are lots of ways that people pay for "higher end" stuff that doesn't make a huge difference to the horse and then turn around to everyone else (people who own horses are either rich or incredibly thrifty, lets be honest) and look down. They suck. But, again, that thing about not having turn out, that's not good enough. It can't be. And no matter how much you like an animal, maybe that's one of those "you cant always get want you want" situations if it's a choice of owning a horse who lives in box, or not owning one at all. 

If you want horses, maybe you _do_ have to pick up your life and more to where the community has more options. It's a big commitment and I absolutely do judge people who think that they can carry on with a regular life that doesn't consist of 70% of their time going towards the horse. I really just can't get on that "pet" train where people want something because they like it and the idea of not being able to own is sooooo devastating that they'd rather keep their animal in a situation that is not good for it. _Too bad!_ 

Animals are not objects and love does not replace the care it needs. I understand that it feels no different for you to own the horse who lives in a box than someone else,_ why not just have it yourself_? Well, now you're contributing to that trend and it's just one more pocket book supporting these barns that don't give better care. It's not about the most ideal situation, dream barn, or whatever. It comes down to money now and if you can't afford the horse in any way; food, shelter, vet etc. then I'm sorry, I have to side with the people who make you feel bad, by saying that you ought not to have that animal. If you can't afford insurance, for example, and decide that you'll keep your horse out of the field... you should not have the animal. 

The "less" that you're referring to, how long the animal is in a stall, is not up for question imo. It may sound harsh to step on the dreams of people who don't have a lot of money and can't afford a barn that offers this, but it really does not matter how much passion you have for something. If you can't afford what keeps it healthy, then you shouldn't have it. End of story. 

Why is this so difficult? You're talking about how relative it is, and you're right---pricing, and food, and lots of other stuff is incredibly relative to the area of the country and most of us recognize that. But it is not a "standard" created by the nation unknown to some parts of the country that horses need to be outside. That is a scientific fact and, true, I'm sure lots of people don't think about it, but as a person who does, it would weigh on my conscious pretty heavy.


----------



## cbar (Nov 27, 2015)

What I find kind of ironic is that horse board for horses that live in box stalls is far more expensive than for horses that are on pasture board. (at least in my area). 

I have owned horses for over 15 years....I am on a budget so all I could afford when I was boarding was paddock or pasture board. I felt at the barn I was at, the folks who paid for box stalls really did it for themselves. They didn't have to walk out in -30 to go catch their horses. Kind of funny though, because I believe the horses that lived outside 24/7 were probably far happier than the ones in box stalls. 

Hmm...I'm torn on the above post. If everyone who had horses who couldn't afford them had to give them up, do you not think most of those horses would end up in the slaughterhouse? I'm sorry, but unless the horse is starving or being neglected or abused, I still believe that horse would rather be alive in a less than ideal environment than sent for slaughter.


----------



## EstrellaandJericho (Aug 12, 2017)

cbar said:


> What I find kind of ironic is that horse board for horses that live in box stalls is far more expensive than for horses that are on pasture board. (at least in my area).
> 
> I have owned horses for over 15 years....I am on a budget so all I could afford when I was boarding was paddock or pasture board. I felt at the barn I was at, the folks who paid for box stalls really did it for themselves. They didn't have to walk out in -30 to go catch their horses. Kind of funny though, because I believe the horses that lived outside 24/7 were probably far happier than the ones in box stalls.
> 
> Hmm...I'm torn on the above post. If everyone who had horses who couldn't afford them had to give them up, do you not think most of those horses would end up in the slaughterhouse? I'm sorry, but unless the horse is starving or being neglected or abused, I still believe that horse would rather be alive in a less than ideal environment than sent for slaughter.


this is off topic but horse slaughter should be regulated, riding horses ingest things (like bute) that once they consume it makes the horse not good for human consumption. 

I feel like most horses would find a home. Or so we would hope.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

I will state again that different parts of the country are different. Those still arguing that their set up is the best and only experience for a horse obviously do not have a vast world view or experience. That’s fine. But I’m calling it out.

My horse is happy and healthy not having a pasture. I think it is incredibly sad that some people believe it’s “pasture or nothing at all.” Domestic horses are not mustangs. Actually, mustangs aren’t even “wild horses.”

Keeping a tiger caught in the wild as a pet locked in a cage is one thing. Keeping a domesticated animal, bred for the benefit of humans, is another completely. You can not compare the needs of a wild horse in Mongolia to the needs of a Dutch warmblood born and bred for the highest levels of showjumping.

I only have one horse because I can only financially care for one horse. EVEN IF I SKIMPED OUT ON HORSE CARE I still could NOT financially afford more than one because the cost of board is way too high. WAY too high. Imagine it when homes around here are cheap when they are selling for 2.2 million. Those are the ratios I am talking about.

If people are paying 187 for pasture board, and the total yearly expense is maybe 2000 with feed and vet bills I’d think that’s pretty good.

I also think the root of the problem we are having in this discussion is that everyone has a different idea of how much caring for a horse should cost. My experience is only in th area of California I am in where full care board is about 1200 dollars and self care board, at minimum, is 500. Pasture board is at least 400 in my area, again. Way south and way north the prices go down, but considering the cost of living here is so high that also translates to HorseCare.

One man’s expensive is another man’s cheap. That is the root of the issue I am trying to push. We’ve already heard from people in parts of the country like New Mexico where there is no grass. Don’t forget California is a desert too. It would be interesting to hear the price expectations of those who claim pasture board is it or one shouldn’t have a horse? I am paying close to 1000 to have my horse in a safe area with good facilities, excellent feed, and great care. If I chose to pasture board I would risk sickness, lameness, and possibly death due to barb wire fencing, no vaccination requirements, lack of manure clean up and negligent barn owners who are only there to collect the funds.

We discussed that neglect is willfully putting your horse in a situation where they could be compromised for your own convenience. For me, this boarding situation of which everyone claims is the best and most natural is neglect IN MY AREA because the care the horses are given is nonexistant.


----------



## EstrellaandJericho (Aug 12, 2017)

I'm sorry you live in a state where the cost of everything is astronomical. If you had the option for great care AND pasture board would you choose that or your current situation? If they were equal in price and all else?

I wish I could afford a barn, so I'm in a similar (just opposite) situation as you. Instead they have a lean to. Also, please understand I am coming from my experience with my horses and the horses I have interacted with. I am not judging you or the situation you are in.


----------



## boots (Jan 16, 2012)

Interesting discussion.

I have very narrow parameters for what I consider necessary to keep a horse. When those cannot be met by me, I don't have one. 

That said, I have worked with horses (professionally, I suppose, since I was paid) for more than 40 years. In that time I have worked with and cared for horses in a huge variety of settings and for an unbelievable variety of owners. 

I have come to realize there are "many spokes on the wheel and they all lead to the center." Rarely, I could count on one hand, the owners who didn't want good things for the horse. How they achieve that differs, but the end goal is always the same: Keep the horse(s) happy and healthy. 

And also as rare as the bad owner has been the horse that didn't do well in the environment they lived in.


----------



## Kalraii (Jul 28, 2015)

I don't think many are debating if a horse can be happy without pasture - and by "without" I mean at least a run of some sort. I think the question seems to have evolved into "is a horse HAPPIER with available pasture" and the answer should always be yes. I say should because there are horses that I imagine, like people, that develop mental health issues or maybe have physical problems. People don't have the time, want or knowledge to help an agoraphobic horse... I certainly don't. We all agree that being in a stall 24/7 is wrong and anyone that says it is OK is trying to justify it for their own selfish needs. I like the pipe-runs compared to the 24/7 stall without turnout. If a horse likes 24/7 stall time then they have a mental health issue. Just because someone likes heroin doesn't make it OK.

But your horse isn't 24/7 stalled now is she? And you said she prefers her new situation, as well. Especially if its more like Dreams.


----------



## pennywise (Feb 1, 2016)

cbar said:


> What I find kind of ironic is that horse board for horses that live in box stalls is far more expensive than for horses that are on pasture board. (at least in my area).
> 
> I have owned horses for over 15 years....I am on a budget so all I could afford when I was boarding was paddock or pasture board. I felt at the barn I was at, the folks who paid for box stalls really did it for themselves. They didn't have to walk out in -30 to go catch their horses. Kind of funny though, because I believe the horses that lived outside 24/7 were probably far happier than the ones in box stalls.
> 
> Hmm...I'm torn on the above post. If everyone who had horses who couldn't afford them had to give them up, do you not think most of those horses would end up in the slaughterhouse? I'm sorry, but unless the horse is starving or being neglected or abused, I still believe that horse would rather be alive in a less than ideal environment than sent for slaughter.


Pasture board in my area of washington can be as low as 150/month for self care and some barns offer a stall + turnout every day for 300-500 full care. Most of them even have covered arenas on site. It's kind of funny that some bigger hunter/jumper facilities think they can get away with charging 800+/month for less space than these other barns just because they have a heated snacking room and a clean isle. I remember going to a few of these and laughing because I knew the clientele they had was only there because status and appearance meant something to them vs the rest of everyone else. I don't know who would actually pay that much if they weren't getting a pasture, too.

This idea that if you don't buy the horse or if you sell the horse it'll automatically end up as glue is ridiculous. Lots of them do end up there... especially the ones that are forced surrendered because the owner was blind to how bad their care was :|. Lots of people think they're "saving" animals by taking them on when they are ill-prepared or not giving them up when something goes wrong. Sometimes you have to let it have a chance by passing it up in the first place. Half the people I know are in debt _because_ of their horses. Being able to afford a horse doesn't mean you have to be rich, you just have to be good at budgeting, reasonable, and.. smart. And honestly, maybe I'm in the minority, but death is not the worst thing a living creature can go through. It's not worth it to mess with an animals mind because you think "at least he's not dead". I think that stalling a horse without daily turnout (this includes a run, an opportunity for him to be outside) _is_ abuse, so it makes a lot of sense for me to say what I did considering my p.o.v.


----------



## pennywise (Feb 1, 2016)

I have been working with/around horses for over 10 years and know very much well what I'm talking about concerning care for them. I choose to lease because I recognize that I don't have the time or money, the job, to fully own, to do it by myself.

Btw, the sale is pending but I'm going to be co-owning a horse with a gal from my barn and I'm very excited about it!


----------



## cbar (Nov 27, 2015)

pennywise said:


> This idea that if you don't buy the horse or if you sell the horse it'll automatically end up as glue is ridiculous. Lots of them do end up there... especially the ones that are forced surrendered because the owner was blind to how bad their care was :|. Lots of people think they're "saving" animals by taking them on when they are ill-prepared or not giving them up when something goes wrong. Sometimes you have to let it have a chance by passing it up in the first place. Half the people I know are in debt _because_ of their horses. Being able to afford a horse doesn't mean you have to be rich, you just have to be good at budgeting, reasonable, and.. smart. And honestly, maybe I'm in the minority, but death is not the worst thing a living creature can go through. It's not worth it to mess with an animals mind because you think "at least he's not dead". I think that stalling a horse without daily turnout (this includes a run, an opportunity for him to be outside) _is_ abuse, so it makes a lot of sense for me to say what I did considering my p.o.v.



I never said it was good to stall a horse without any turnout...I do believe that borders on abuse. My point is that some horses live in less than ideal environments (IE: large stalls/run-ins that do not allow them to actually behave like a horse). This, to me is not ideal. However, I don't believe that all owners who stall their horses the majority of the time should feel that they need to sell them b/c of 'inadequate' care. In fact, the folks who stall their horses probably have MORE disposable income than the average joe. I, for one, could never afford to stall even if I wanted to. And if someone is in debt b/c of their horse, that is none of my business. I know people who end up in to debt for much less.....

Other people would look at my set up and say I provide inadequate care for my horses. I do not have stalls or even a barn. My horses are outside 24/7 in all weather conditions. Sure, they have a shelter if they need to get out of the elements. Should I have to sell my horses? I can guarantee to you that 2 of my 3 would likely end up with a one way ticket to the slaughterhouse. I'm pretty sure they'd rather stand in a snowstorm than be dealt that fateful card.

My point is that everyone has a different perspective on what is considered ideal. Talking about animal hoarders is an entirely different subject.


----------



## pennywise (Feb 1, 2016)

cbar said:


> I never said it was good to stall a horse without any turnout...I do believe that borders on abuse. My point is that some horses live in less than ideal environments (IE: large stalls/run-ins that do not allow them to actually behave like a horse). This, to me is not ideal. However, I don't believe that all owners who stall their horses the majority of the time should feel that they need to sell them b/c of 'inadequate' care. In fact, the folks who stall their horses probably have MORE disposable income than the average joe. I, for one, could never afford to stall even if I wanted to. And if someone is in debt b/c of their horse, that is none of my business. I know people who end up in to debt for much less.....
> 
> Other people would look at my set up and say I provide inadequate care for my horses. I do not have stalls or even a barn. My horses are outside 24/7 in all weather conditions. Sure, they have a shelter if they need to get out of the elements. Should I have to sell my horses? I can guarantee to you that 2 of my 3 would likely end up with a one way ticket to the slaughterhouse. I'm pretty sure they'd rather stand in a snowstorm than be dealt that fateful card.
> 
> My point is that everyone has a different perspective on what is considered ideal. Talking about animal hoarders is an entirely different subject.


I don't know what's being responded to, then. My argument from the dawn of my first response is that people who stall with no turnout suck eggs (I've seen those barns, there are no runs attached). I think runs are fine. They let the horse move and escape ammonia. My horse only has a small paddock and a shelter, after all. I prefer pasture boards over a stall any day because if anyone cares to dig, that's the best situation you can have for you horse in face of all the other options. I was responding very strictly to the idea that _a stall may be less than ideal, but is adequate._ My p.o.v is that a stall alone is incredibly inadequate and if that's all you can get, you're doing your horse a disservice by keeping him. No, runs are not ideal, but they won't drive a horse mad and that's not what I thought I was talking about.


----------



## Phantomrose (Jul 25, 2016)

I agree that there are so many different perspectives and opinions in the horse world, and some things tend to get very heated. The ideal situation would be to give a horse as much turn out, and socialization with other horses, as it is good for them mentally, however, it also depends on the individual horse. 

At my barn, the horses only come in for their am and pm feed. Unless there is really bad weather, the horses are kept inside, in herd groups of up to three to four horses, with hay for them (they also get hay during their am and pm feeding time). The lesson horses have their own space in the lower barn, where they have stalls attached to run ins (there are two separate barns, the main barn is for borders and the lower barn is for the school horses.) The run ins are a decent size, and there's also two additional grassy paddocks that they get turned out in. There is one particular lesson horse, however that loves his stall. He hates being turned out, and when he does get the turn out time, all he does in stand by the gate, waiting to come in. When he is in the stall with the run in attached, the person will most likely find him in the stall. 

I pay $425 for my pony's board. This includes feeding, his stall getting cleaned every day, access to all the arenas, basic blanketing, and turn out. At the moment I am only able to see him two to three times a week, due to my work schedule, but I am content knowing the care that he gets. When I do come by the barn, I usually see him turned out with his buddies. It is my job to catch him, groom him, and work with him. When I am able to come, I usually help out with the barn chores anyway, like mucking out stalls, helping with water buckets, getting horses turned in/out, etc. because it is a great experience just being able to do have that opportunity. 

I believe, that as a horse owners, we should strive for the best care we can provide for these animals to live long, healthy lives. Before even getting a horse, one should look at one's budget, and look to see if horse ownership would be ideal. Before I got Jet, I had a talk with my friends, family, co workers, trainer, husband, etc. and then came up with a annual budget, to see if it was possible on my income. When I was satisfied, and confident that I could do it, I went ahead with the horse shopping. Most of the money that I earn goes toward Jet. He gets his feet done every six to eight weeks, which is about $90, $93 in the winter time with snow pads. His vet is about $165 annually, and I usually spend about $23 a month on his feed. Then there is his board, which is due on the first of every month, which is $425. 

Some of the other prices I hear for full care, like 1k+ sounds ridiculous, but I also understand that it depends on where you live, and that urban areas tend to have more expensive options than rural areas.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

I certainly would love a pasture situation for my horse. I dream every day of her being out there with a herd, with friends. If I relocate (most likely) and can find a pasture up to my standards it would be the first choice of board for me. I’m not the type to want to “protect” my horse, but i can not afford the extensive vet bills that come with barb wire accidents and pasture kicks... she’s simply too valuable to me.

It sucks that California is so expensive, but I hope the price breakdown puts it into perspective.

@pennywise, I hope when you begin your horse care journey you will have the opportunity to see that things are not always as black and white as you want them to be. Horses have an interesting way of humbling people and allowing them to appreciate the small gifts in life....


----------



## pennywise (Feb 1, 2016)

I was responding to the OP the way I did because I felt like lots of people act like it's the end of the world if they can have a life with horses in it, therefore, they "do the best they can". Op mentioned that there was no turnout, and to me, turnout means that the horse can escape the stall and stretch his body. To me, it's my opinion, that people should not own horses that would keep them in a stall. It is not, however, my opinion that it is unhealthy to do so.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

I don't disagree that stalls are problematic. but horses have lived in stalls for years and years before the science came out. i still don't want to demonize those who have limited choices of boarding in their area. it's not "check all the boxes or no horse for you." horses are a privilege and a joy, and if you have a less than ideal situation that is beyond your control the way to make up for that and have a horse is to put in the extra leg work.

know that a 12 x 12 stall is going to mean your horse needs to get out at least 3x a day (lets call that your ideal) for one hour. He is going to need toys. He is going to need attention. You're going to need to hire help to make that situation work. In the long run it may be more affordable to wait until you can locate a better situation, with the cost of vet bills you will surely run into due to vices/ulcers/etc. 

But if Tyra and I ever moved to a location, let's say for work, and the only option was an old racehorse shedrow boarding situation with no extra land for turnout and no runs, I would find a job close to the barn so I could handwalk tyra at least at 12, and then at 3, and then come back at 6 for another walk. At the very least i'd need to hire someone.

I admit the only places I can think of that have really, really limited space are places in europe. I can see why a pasture/turnout situation would not work in a country like germany or belgium. I do know that the horse care there is top knotch and they recognize the lack of space the horses have, and do their best to find ways to make do.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

thecolorcoal said:


> I think it is incredibly sad that some people believe it’s “pasture or nothing at all.” Domestic horses are not mustangs. Actually, mustangs aren’t even “wild horses.”
> 
> Keeping a tiger caught in the wild as a pet locked in a cage is one thing. Keeping a domesticated animal, bred for the benefit of humans, is another completely. You can not compare the needs of a wild horse in Mongolia to the needs of a Dutch warmblood born and bred for the highest levels of showjumping.


First sentence - as said, haven't read the whole thread, but I haven't seen one single person here say “pasture or nothing at all.”

Re 'horses are not mustangs', I think your next sentence qualifies that you do actually realise that's not correct. But whether it's a Przewalski horse or a miniature or your Dutch warmblood, it is still a _horse_ and all horses have the same basic needs to stay healthy. You are incorrect in thinking that we have bred the innate needs out of them. 3 of of those needs are free movement, socialisation and small amounts of 'low grade' roughage going through their stomach relatively constantly. Regardless of breeding, ALL horses have the same basic needs. Again, that is not to say they cannot adapt - again, regardless of breed - to different situations, or that there aren't alternate ways to keep them healthily that are 'less than ideal' if we are prepared to go to necessary lengths to compensate, but your premise that domestic horses are innately different to wild ones is just incorrect.

I just don't get the argument that keeping a tiger caged is essentially different to keeping a horse caged. Excepting that a free roaming herd animal is LESS suited to a sedentary, solitary life than a tiger. Unless they're hermitlike, solitary, sedentary species(of which I can't think of any right now - sloth or snake maybe??) I don't believe it's appropriate to keep_ any _animal in a small cage for it's life. *Again, please don't assume I'm saying no animal should ever be caged ever...

I also don't understand the attitude at all that just because we have bred animals for our own use, this negates any need to provide appropriately for that animal. I don't understand why some people think battery farmed animals deserve less humane consideration just because they're bred for our consumption. 



> I also think the root of the problem we are having in this discussion is that everyone has a different idea of how much caring for a horse should cost.


You have brought expense into it, as a reason for not providing hay, turnout etc(tho you say horses cost 100's of 1000's), but I actually don't think specific expenses & areas are relevant to the discussion. Regardless where you live, either you can afford to give your horse adequate care or you can't. If you can't, you cannot afford to *responsibly* keep a horse.



> If I chose to pasture board I would risk sickness, lameness, and possibly death due to barb wire fencing, no vaccination requirements, lack of manure clean up and negligent barn owners who are only there to collect the funds.


That is a HUGE unfounded assumption IMO. You are indeed 'risking' sickness & lameness & death in keeping your horse stabled 24/7 for one! 'If you don't use it, you lose it' clause applies equally for horses as for us & other animals. If your horse doesn't have enough free movement & regular exercise, just like a sedentary person, they become weak, unfit, their bones become less dense.... On top of that, hooves do not develop good caudal strength & contraction & 'navicular' among other issues are far more common. And it's been shown their digestive system doesn't work optimally without free movement either. Colic for eg is far more prevalent among stabled horses, of which I don't believe is completely due to unhealthy diet & feeding practices. 

Then there's the assumption that pasture board means barbed wire, negligent property owners etc. Esp given the title of the thread... 



> everyone claims is the best and most natural is neglect IN MY AREA because the care the horses are given is nonexistant.


I think you are reading a lot between the lines that isn't there. It sounds like you're making a lot of assumptions without actually knowing the facts. It sounds like you do need to do some more learning about what horse's needs are, that you don't appreciate that, which may be at the root of your reasoning. 

The bottom line is, and what I've seen people are saying here is, that _WHEREVER YOU ARE, REGARDLESS OF NORMS IN YOUR AREA, EXPENSES IN YOUR AREA_, if you cannot provide adequate care that is appropriate for a HORSE, if you cannot adequately compensate for the compromises you CHOOSE to make if you CHOOSE to keep a horse in such an unnatural situation, _THEN_ you are being negligent if you do so.


----------



## EstrellaandJericho (Aug 12, 2017)

thecolorcoal said:


> @pennywise
> 
> i don't disagree that stalls are problematic. but horses have lived in stalls for years and years before the science came out.


 and horses lived thousands of years without needing stalls to keep them safe too. 


> still don't want to demonize those who have limited choices of boarding in their area. it's not "check all the boxes or no horse for you." horses are a privilege and a joy, and if you have a less than ideal situation that is beyond your control the way to make up for that and have a horse is to put in the extra leg work.
> 
> know that a 12 x 12 stall is going to mean your horse needs to get out at least 3x a day (lets call that your ideal) for one hour. He is going to need toys. He is going to need attention. You're going to need to hire help to make that situation work.


 to make you happy and not the horse.


> In the long run it may be more affordable to wait until you can locate a better situation, with the cost of vet bills you will surely run into due to vices/ulcers/etc.
> 
> But if Tyra and I ever moved to a location, let's say for work, and the only option was an old racehorse shedrow boarding situation with no extra land for turnout and no runs, I would find a job close to the barn so I could handwalk tyra at least at 12, and then at 3, and then come back at 6 for another walk. At the very least i'd need to hire someone.


 because you're a good human being and have value in their horse. Some people say that's what they do and never do it. And don't say that isn't true because I said I'd do the dishes and I haven't yet, and it's only human to think you can handle doing something you really can't.


> I admit the only places I can think of that have really, really limited space are places in europe. I can see why a pasture/turnout situation would not work in a country like germany or belgium. I do know that the horse care there is top knotch and they recognize the lack of space the horses have, and do their best to find ways to make do.


 I think all in all (I'm not directly saying this to the poster I am quoting, I am saying this in general)You may have lots of experience but you still have something to learn. Heck, I've been in my personal profession most of my adult life and still I have things to learn. You never stop learning unless you make yourself stop learning by being offended and taking stuff personally.


----------



## EstrellaandJericho (Aug 12, 2017)

loosie said:


> First sentence - as said, haven't read the whole thread, but I haven't seen one single person here say “pasture or nothing at all.”
> 
> Re 'horses are not mustangs', I think your next sentence qualifies that you do actually realise that's not correct. But whether it's a Przewalski horse or a miniature or your Dutch warmblood, it is still a _horse_ and all horses have the same basic needs to stay healthy. You are incorrect in thinking that we have bred the innate needs out of them. 3 of of those needs are free movement, socialisation and small amounts of 'low grade' roughage going through their stomach relatively constantly. Regardless of breeding, ALL horses have the same basic needs. Again, that is not to say they cannot adapt - again, regardless of breed - to different situations, or that there aren't alternate ways to keep them healthily that are 'less than ideal' if we are prepared to go to necessary lengths to compensate, but your premise that domestic horses are innately different to wild ones is just incorrect.
> 
> ...


Beautifully said and brutally honest. If there was a love button I'd hit it.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

@loosie, but i really don't think i am being neglectful. you can say it's neglect when you don't try and make a not so good situation work. you can't call someone out on abuse/neglect when they are trying. even at my old barn. *we did what we could.* it was not my fault there was no turn out, that the pastures were terrible, that the barn owners were near crooks. they also had no available pasture spots, the waitlist was a mile long. In the recent months they had to cut the number of horses in pasture back by 20 because the university that owns the land said they breached their contract, and there was too much manure and waste they were not maintaining. at the time that was the only place I could afford to keep her. When I didn't have work and I was there 8 hours a day it worked great for us. But once I got a full-time job and only saw her after work, things began to fall apart and the behavioral issues were astronomically bad. She would colic, lose weight, go lame, get sick, all the above. That is why I took her somewhere else. But that "somewhere else" was not just another barn down the street. there are no other barns "down the street." she is at a person's home now, and I only got in via a referral from a woman I know and I was vetted by the owners before I moved in. If that hadn't happened we'd still be at barn 1. And I'd still be finding ways to make it work.

I guess what shocks me is that people say it's the anomaly to go above and beyond for a horse when you - i'll give everyone this bit - have *chosen* a lifestyle for it that may not be in its best interest, for whatever reason. I was at the barn every weekend, 8 hours a day, taking care of tyra. I was at the barn every day after work taking care of tyra. I even came before work some days to clean her stall and feed her breakfast. I hired a woman to walk her twice a day, a lady to ride her, and I never did anything for myself. But she is my entire world and I love her oh so much, so for me it was no sacrifice.

Now that she's somewhere much better I don't have to see her every day because I know she is getting the best care, and she gets outdoor time with her turnout buddy. Is it a big, green, lush pasture? no. but is there lots to see? chickens across the yard, the barn dogs in the owner's back yard, all the horses are next to each other, she can watch people ride in the arena, and I see her after work to tuck her into bed and give her a bedtime snack. 

For me, that is my *minimum* horse care requirements. Chucking them out in a field and seeing them rarely sounds like neglect to me? Sure, they get a big pasture but are you actually caring for them? In the above case, no. And, AGAIN MY EXPERIENCE, all the pasture boarders i know from the various barns i've been at have that mentality. Pasture is easier, because you don't need to show up. With a stalled horse you have to be there rain or shine to make up for what a pasture could provide. You don't get a day off.

But then again, why would you want one?


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

In arizona ther is VERY little pasture boarding. and if there is its only a couple of hours a day. put it this way i pay $250 per horse at a parn with big pipe stalls. 4 arenas, 3 round pens, feed included, stalls cleaned daily and shaveing put in the stalls 2 times a month. most barns in my area like that are $500 per horse. Pasture board is about $450-$600 per horse. they are shoved in over crouded pastures where older horses or submissive horses will not thrive at all. they are also 85-100+ miles away. i found 1 place that had pasture board here in the valley. it was 5 acres. it had a house, a barn and round pen on it ALONG with a "pasture". the pasture was broken into 4 parts with 4-6 horses in each part... and it was $500 per horse and i think i had to previde feed. and it was an hour away. sounds like a mess in the making. odie is pushy and gets agressive if out with mares. he is fine with the mares. its the geldings he attacks. with geldings he wont stop playing untill he is kicked bloody. have seen 2 horses die from broken shoulders from similar behavior... rocket is pushed around. and notty likes my other 3 horses. thats it. she runs others thought a fence. sounds like a bunch of vet bills in the making. if i could find a privent place where odie could be on one area away from the others but shareing a fenceline that would be amazing. that being said dont think im finding that.

did find one place where each horse got a huge pen to themselves. issue was it was 20 years of tilled manure. that is a death trap when it rains out here. its slippery and we have clay out here. and well its just nasty too. 

to answer if i had the option for pasture would i take it? yes as long as i can keep sertain horses togeather and others away from others and they dont play well with others. im hopeing to move to kentucky in the next couple of years. my horses will be on a track system with a grazing area in a heartbeat.


----------



## thecolorcoal (Jan 28, 2015)

so I just realized my vision for a stalled horse is apparently different than what loose and others are thinking of.

to me, an acceptable stalled horse is:

A horse that lives inside a barn and gets ridden once a day.

Are there actually places that keep their stalled horses inside without them getting out AT ALL? I find this very hard to believe. Surely they are ridden? if you aren't riding your horse why keep it in a stall?

And I know many a retired horse who lived in a stall but not a 12 x 12, they had runs attached and had people hand walk them every day at the very least.

*Where is everyone getting this idea that horses stay in stalls 24/7 without going outside AT ALL?* Where does this happen? Certainly nowhere reputable?
@KigerQueen, that's so interesting. pasture boarding out here is inexpensive because the expectation is that it is where throwaway/retired horses go. they aren't looked after either. in fact, i found a few barns that ONLY allow pasture boarding for retirees because land is SO scarce. And those unrideables have to go sonewhere. And I want to go to kentucky too! Take me with you!


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

boots said:


> Rarely, I could count on one hand, the owners who didn't want good things for the horse. How they achieve that differs, but the end goal is always the same: Keep the horse(s) happy and healthy.
> 
> And also as rare as the bad owner has been the horse that didn't do well in the environment they lived in.


Yep, I agree that rare are the owners who don't *want* the best for their horses & honestly believe they're doing well by them. But IME the horses who 'don't do well' & owners who fail to recognise it are not that rare at all IME. 

In my business I've visited many & varied properties, and turnout IS the norm for most here. 'Even' in 'show establishments', warmblood studs & racing stables I've worked at, it's very rare for horses to get NO turnout. And the more 'intensive' places IMO do usually make a lot of effort to... offset the effects. Although I worked for one... nutter who used to IV inject sedative into the young horses on her stud before she let them loose, so they wouldn't run around!

But what I see that's so normal & sad is all those acres of horses in 'private paddocks' who usually stand around depressed in one corner of their small, square, bare environment, or pace the fenceline constantly, trying to get to the other depressed or anxious horses on the other side.


----------



## Fimargue (Jun 19, 2015)

thecolorcoal said:


> *Where is everyone getting this idea that horses stay in stalls 24/7 without going outside AT ALL?* Where does this happen? Certainly nowhere reputable?


Having been places and working in a facility who takes these horses for rehabilitation and retirement. I have seen the behavioral and physical changes. Riding does not replace the natural exercise that they get being out. Especially that many people ride these horses in a forceful manner.

That is why the very well bred expensive horses are broken even before their teens. And many before 13.

Some horses came because they had persistent colic problems. In a pasture environment, on grass and hay, colic does not exist.


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

thecolorcoal said:


> so I just realized my vision for a stalled horse is apparently different than what loose and others are thinking of.
> 
> to me, an acceptable stalled horse is:
> 
> ...


put it this way. a cheap house on no proporty is about 150K-300k. you add any land to something and it hits over 400k-1mill and it only needs like a few acres to be worth 1 mill with a cheep maremotel. there is a half acre lot that they want over 60k for by where i used to board. that is not even enough space for a house and any horse facilities. so any land that is used for boarding has to pay for itself and taxes. one place my fiance worked the takes on the property where 3k a month. so he had to find some way to shove 30 horses onto 2 acres. he was still going under charging people 250 per month and including hay too.

so no one dose turn out out here because it has become accepted that horses are stalled and because of that instead of 5 horses on an acre of turn out they can cram 40 stalls and arenas on it. what makes you more, 5 horses at $500 a month or 40 at 250-300? so IF there is pasture they want their money out of it so the charge an arm and a leg. and all but one place i have seen are all 85+ miles one way through the mountains north of me AND they want around $500+ per horse (and they dont groom or anything. they will let their hide rot off if you did not go check on them enough). i would see them once a month at most because of gas and miles on my car. seams selfish about the car but no car, no job. no job no horses. and my dinosaur horses suffer for it. OR i can keep them in what they have lived in for 20-30+ years with their buddies, good feed, daily interaction and me getting out as often as possible. they seam bright, happy and still active. my 28 year old is JUST starting to get stiff in her age, dispite being used hard un untill 4 years ago. my 33 year old has hardly any arthritus either and is quite happy. As i said. IF i HAD the option for pasture, i would. but thats not happening.

this will make you all laugh. here is one place i boarded at that has a "pasture". i highlighted it in green incase you cant find it ****! note there are like 20 horses on that proporty.


----------



## gottatrot (Jan 9, 2011)

thecolorcoal said:


> ...Are there actually places that keep their stalled horses inside without them getting out AT ALL? I find this very hard to believe. Surely they are ridden? if you aren't riding your horse why keep it in a stall?
> 
> And I know many a retired horse who lived in a stall but not a 12 x 12, they had runs attached and had people hand walk them every day at the very least.
> 
> *Where is everyone getting this idea that horses stay in stalls 24/7 without going outside AT ALL?* Where does this happen? Certainly nowhere reputable?...


Lots of interesting points made by many.

Yes, there are horses that stay in stalls 24/7 without going outside at all. I've seen this in a few places.
Some barns have self care, and that means the owner must turn the horse outside and provide all care. In some of these cases, the owners are terrible and even if other boarders complain, some of the facilities are run as "rent the space only" and will not step in unless law enforcement is involved. Keeping a horse in a stall is not considered abuse in my area.

One very nice horse I knew was kept in a stall. His owner came out to clean "almost" every day. He had water available. She would clean the stall with him in it, because she didn't want him to get injured. After he had been inside for a month, she put him in the arena one day. He bolted and bucked and came back limping. She said, "See, that's why he doesn't go out, he hurts himself." Then she put him back in the stall. She had all kinds of excuses. She didn't take him out because he was "injured." If she let him out he was "stupid." 

Even "reputable" boarding stables will keep horses in stalls because they don't want to ruin their property, and if the owners don't have time to ride or exercise the horses, they stay in for days at a time. Or they will charge extra for turnout and turn in, and if the owners don't want to pay extra, the horses stay in their stalls until the owner visits once a week.

I've also seen places that say they turn horses out, but when you go the horses are all inside. The staff will keep the horses in because of the "weather," which means most days of the week the horses are inside because it rained for ten minutes in the morning when the staff was thinking about turning out. 

Some people keep horses in a stall even if they don't have time to ride, because the other option in some areas is a pasture only with no shelter and no one to feed the horse daily. Sometimes people board at these places because they have careers that take them out of town and they can't be at the barn every day.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

thecolorcoal said:


> *Where is everyone getting this idea that horses stay in stalls 24/7 without going outside AT ALL?*


* 

Here's a bit from your first post...




Not everyone's horse even gets turnout, or free choice hay, or maybe even hay at all! Specifically, where I live, it is normal for horses to be stalled 24/7,

Click to expand...

*


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

MOD NOTE
Some posts here have been edited or removed because they were getting a bit personal & inflammatory. 

This is a very 'hot' topic, easy to take offense or read own meanings into things, so reminding people to be civil, objective & respectful in their replies, so it doesn't come to closing the thread. 

Reminding people that if you see something offensive, please report it to the mod team instead of having public 'tiffs' about stuff please.


----------



## Acadianartist (Apr 21, 2015)

thecolorcoal said:


> @*loosie* , but i really don't think i am being neglectful. you can say it's neglect when you don't try and make a not so good situation work. you can't call someone out on abuse/neglect when they are trying. even at my old barn. *we did what we could.* it was not my fault there was no turn out, that the pastures were terrible, that the barn owners were near crooks.


Sorry, but yes, you CAN call someone out on abuse/neglect even if they are TRYING to make it work. Trying isn't enough. Every animal hoarder on the planet would tell you they're TRYING and that they love their animals. It's not enough. Of course I am not at all suggesting you are in that category, because it sounds like you did take measures to provide your horse with exercise, I'm just making the point that I don't think people should get a free pass because they are TRYING. 

And I have to disagree with this statement as well:



thecolorcoal said:


> For me, that is my *minimum* horse care requirements. Chucking them out in a field and seeing them rarely sounds like neglect to me? Sure, they get a big pasture but are you actually caring for them? In the above case, no. And, AGAIN MY EXPERIENCE, all the pasture boarders i know from the various barns i've been at have that mentality. Pasture is easier, because you don't need to show up. With a stalled horse you have to be there rain or shine to make up for what a pasture could provide. You don't get a day off.


You're kidding right? "chucking them out in a field and seeing them rarely" is neglect? I'd venture to say that my horses would choose pasture over seeing me every day. Because it makes them happy and healthy. Oh, sure, they like me because I feed them, but they could probably lead a pretty happy life without me. And I actually pick all the manure out of my 5 acre pasture, feed them hay cubes and supplements twice a day, provide them with clean drinking water, and go over them for injuries, so no, I don't "chuck" them out in a pasture and forget about them.

Furthermore, I know a lot of horses who are forgotten by their owners for months at a time, whether stalled or pastured. There is no way you're going to convince me that an owner who chooses to keep his horse stalled is a better owner. Because that's what it sounds like you're saying.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

"_3 of of those needs are free movement, socialisation and small amounts of 'low grade' roughage going through their stomach relatively constantly._" - @loosie

The question is one of degree. HOW MUCH free movement? HOW MUCH socialization? HOW MUCH "roughage"?

Let's take roughage as an example. I met a guy a few years back who had 9 horses. He hadn't fed them hay for years. Nothing but pelleted hay. No pasture. He also claimed his horses were healthy. Hmmm....

I'm currently feeding my 3 horses pelleted hay for 2 of their 3 meals. I plan to continue because they seem HEALTHIER since I switched - hooves growing out faster and thicker, better coats of hair, more consistent manure, etc. Like the hay available in southern Arizona, pasture is very inconsistent. The pellet companies can add calcium if needed, or add fat, or add vitamins. When I buy hay, I buy untested hay - and every time I buy, I'm getting hay the store buys over the Internet, delivered from who knows where.

Heck, we humans don't eat our scientifically optimum diet either! We don't even KNOW what an optimum diet would be for a human. Is coffee good or bad? Should you go high carb or low carb? Know something? I grabbed a meal at McDonalds last night coming home from work. Pink slime & I are old friends!

And how MUCH movement, of what sort, is needed? Cowboy is now living in a fairly small corral. But then, he doesn't move much in a larger corral, mixed with the other horses.

Socialization? Horses can be darn mean to each other! When Bandit was kicked in the knee by Cowboy, I had to separate Bandit - because Trooper took advantage of his inability to defend himself to abuse Bandit. When Bandit was better, I put them together - and Bandit made it clear he'd beat the tar out of Cowboy if Cowboy took a wrong step. And while Bandit tends to take care of Trooper, the truth is Trooper would be mean to Bandit tomorrow if Bandit was hurt enough that he couldn't defend himself. Bandit, Mia & Lilly have been my horses who are nice to others. Trooper and Cowboy can both be very mean to any horse who won't (or cannot) fight. And in a free roaming herd, Bandit did NOT socialize with the others.

There is a supposedly scientific study showing horses should not have riders who weigh more than 20% of the horse's weight. The study is seriously flawed and ignores the reality of the millions of horses who carry heavier riders daily while remaining healthy and content. It was a bad study. But it is also frequently quoted, and I've been told I'm an abusive person for riding Bandit (and Mia before him). After all, my weight fluctuates between 160-180, and I use a western saddle, so I cannot ride a horse who weighs 800-900 lbs without abusing them. Science has settled it. It is a fact. Except it is hogwash.

I think no human should be forced to sit in a cubicle for 8-10 hours/day, typing. Creates health and socialization problems. Humans didn't evolve to live like that. But many of us HAVE done it. I'm glad I don't...but it is life for lots of humans. And people, like horses, dogs and coyotes, are adaptable.

Some horses, like some people and some dogs, NEED more room than others. Others get by fine with very little.

One of my concerns about keeping Bandit is that he is 10 years younger than the others. What happens when he is the only horse, and I'm in my 70s? While hiking yesterday morning, it occurred to me I could then put him in a local stable, where the pens are not very large but where he would be within sight and smell and sound of 20-50 other horses. Ridden a couple times a week, with lots to watch, Bandit might consider that "The Good Life".

A lot depends on the horse. But those who claim horses need long stem plants running thru their guts continuously can't explain why many horses seem to be quite relaxed on pelleted feed. It is like the flight surgeon (MD) who told us before a deployment to Saudi that drinking coffee would cause us to expel more water than we were taking in. The Colonel stood up and replied, "_Then I must be a ____ mummy, because I've survived on coffee and beer for the last 40 years!_"


----------



## mmshiro (May 3, 2017)

@bsms: You are still shifting the goal posts to argue against a phantom argument. What this thread is about is _keeping a horse under conditions that are equivalent to solitary confinement in a penal institution_. If that's such a fantastic arrangement, who do I have to kill to get in on that gig??

So what you work in a cubicle farm! Can you go to the kitchen to grab a cup of coffee and chat with a coworker? Do you go out for lunch? Can you, should you desire, hit the stairwell or look out the window for a break? Can you go home and do whatever the hell you want after you put in your 8 hours? 

Yes, horses can be mean to each other, but the resulting injuries are a consequence of not enough room, not too much. Horses get injured by bullies when they get cornered and can't give to the pressure they receive. That is a problem artificially created by humans. If there was enough room to evade the attacker, they'd just run it out. So it's not your horses' fault they injured each other when they were together, it's yours, and it's because you created an environment for them that increased that risk. The _solution_ is not to turn a herd animal into a solitary one, it's a _band-aid_ that avoids the injuries you can see (and have to treat) for other damages that weigh less on your conscience - out of sight, out of mind.


----------



## cbar (Nov 27, 2015)

Acadianartist said:


> S
> 
> You're kidding right? "chucking them out in a field and seeing them rarely" is neglect? I'd venture to say that my horses would choose pasture over seeing me every day. Because it makes them happy and healthy. Oh, sure, they like me because I feed them, but they could probably lead a pretty happy life without me. And I actually pick all the manure out of my 5 acre pasture, feed them hay cubes and supplements twice a day, provide them with clean drinking water, and go over them for injuries, so no, I don't "chuck" them out in a pasture and forget about them.


I had a laugh at this as well. My horses would probably love it if I left them alone out in the field. I have one horse that is a pasture ornament - too many injuries from racing, so I've given him a good retirement home. My B/F (who is not a horse person) has commented that i need to do something with that horse b/c he feels left out. I just roll my eyes b/c I'm pretty sure Chevy is living the life of a king and is perfectly happy. He gets his basic needs met (farrier, shots, de-worming, teeth), plus I groom him as much as the others. 

I think the difference is that my horses are out 24/7 socializing with eachother. They do not crave interaction. A horse who is locked in a stall all the time is likely very happy to see someone come to visit for a chance to get out of that stall 

I also don't believe that riding a horse that is stalled 24/7 is a replacement for normal pasture time and horse socializing.


----------



## pennywise (Feb 1, 2016)

The sad thing for the animal when you stall him all the time and only take him out for a ride (30min-1hour, right? That seems average) a good chunk of that ride is him getting yanked and punished for being a wacko. I think this reality of 24/7 stalling is what lots of stallion care consists of and it's kind of scary. One of the barns I cleaned had this beautiful overo stallion who was HUGE and they gave him a big stall, which seemed nice, but then every day I realized that he wasn't getting turnout. He was incredibly violent towards me for entering his stall (trying to bite me, trying to corner me, pushing me with his head if I turned my back on him, etc.. Same thing with the Arabian filly they had stalled.. stallion or not, they will literally become protective of that space and some people look at that and think that their horse is more comfortable there than a paddock... well, yeah. Of course he likes it more than a paddock. He's clearly become lethargic and that's a sign of "mental illness" in your horse. 

I still don't fully understand why there's disagreement here? We can all acknowledge that just like humans, horses need fresh air, sunlight, and the closest sense of "freedom" they can get. Lock anyone up in a small space and they'll soon hate going outside (that's me when I was 16, watched anime all summer and developed a random anxiety disorder when school started). It's mind numbing. The horse's life should not consist of being connected to a rope, connected to you, whenever he can go outside. Why do we all feel like the reality of what people want somehow leaks into the reality of what actually needs to happen? Why does it matter if we _want_ to own a horse, and why do we think that our wanting it changes the needs of the animal? My parents taught me this stuff, didn't we all hear it? "if you can't take care of it, don't ask for it".... specifically when I demanded we put a horse in our back yard. I was constantly reminded that there was not enough space. "Sorry, honey, you'll have to wait until you're older." Horses are my life now and I can't imagine answering the above response with the childish remarks I would have given _"but, I want it!_. I understand what my parents were saying when they told me to think long and hard about choices that I make and how they will effect others. 'Others' to me, includes the horses and it includes the other animals I purchase and force into my life. I know what they meant when they were talking about financial means and time constraint. At what point does a person honestly try to rationalize owning something because you want it, above all costs? We have to know that "above all costs" is usually at the cost of the animal, not yours. To me, "doing the best I can" would result in me living in a box (down by the river) so that the animal could have it's freedom. But that's not what happens most of the time. When I hear "no turnout" "stalled 24/7" it's very straight forward. I know barns like that. I worked at them. it was a shame. There were no runs. There were no riders anywhere to be seen and no one was, surely, outside giving their horse a walk. Not even that. Anything that comes close to justifying that needs to be... opposed. 

Btw, I never saw my position as being "high horsed". I know perfectly well what it's like to struggle for the things you want. I mean, wow, I'm used to working 60 hour weeks for crackers' sake and I appreciate the things in my life to very, very high degree. It's kind of hard to look down on people when I'm struggling to keep my own head above water. I am a bit miffed that the first response lots of people have when criticized is to say..._"do you think you're better than me??! You don't understand what it's like..."_... that I'm looking down my nose? I don't get it. I don't want to fall into the slot of the person who leaves their horse in a stall all day, does anyone? and I don't like to take the position that it's "none of my business". I would risk having arguments all the time if it meant that I wasn't just minding myself alone and pretending not to notice.


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

@pennywise
I appreciate that you are very clear on your stance regarding animal care, and whether or not humans have the 'right' to keep animals in less than sufficient care models. However, at one point you likened this to people and children, saying that people should not have children if they cannot give them basic care. I don't want to derail the thread, but I just have to respond to that.

I think that that might make a good third of the world be in the category of 'should not have children', or 'should not keep horses'. And we don't have the right to tell people who can't provide what we think is basic, that they can't have children. And we don't have the right to say they cannot keep a horse or donkey, that they NEED for survival, in poor conditions. 

I mean, yeah, in a perfect world they probably SHOULDN'T have children, or keep large animals, since they aren't likely to have 'good' care. But, first of all what is 'good' care is always debatable, and secondly, to have such a judgement on people , especially regarding whether or not they should have children or not, is pretty elitist. If we did this, it's like saying 'the poor should stop breeding". right up there with "let them eat cake".

Again, I have a certain level of respect for your willingness, pennywise, to hold firm to your convictions, but sometimes it can become a rigidity that you will be unable to keep up, without breaking yourself.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

thecolorcoal said:


> you can't call someone out on abuse/neglect when they are trying. even at my old barn. *we did what we could.* it was not my fault there was no turn out,


I see your point & do agree, *to a degree*. If, say, you were in a situation where there was absolutely no choice - as in, not just not convenient or not close to you or such, and you were dumped with, or rescued a horse you couldn't find a GOOD home for, then it becomes a situation of 'better evils'. It depends. 

But it seems here it is purely your choice to keep a horse, your choice to put it in those conditions. So yes, it sounds like you are absolutely a responsible party to the horse's 'neglect' *IF you don't go to those seemingly unsustainable extremes you tell us you did, of being at the barn and hiring people when you couldn't. And 'doing what you can' even to those extremes is not necessarily good enough. As you tell us below...



> behavioral issues were astronomically bad. She would colic, lose weight, go lame, get sick, all the above. That is why I took her somewhere else. ...If that hadn't happened we'd still be at barn 1.


That's great that you have got your horse out of the terrible situation. But I just don't understand how you can not see that you are responsible for her welfare, so you are indeed party to her lack if you keep her in that situation. And I just don't understand, when you do realise just how bad the situation is, that instead you open a thread trying to justify & excuse it? & accusing people of being 'close minded' for telling you it's a terrible situation & to get her out?? I just don't get that.



> I was at the barn every weekend, 8 hours a day, taking care of tyra. I was at the barn every day after work taking care of tyra. I even came before work some days to clean her stall and feed her breakfast. I hired a woman to walk her twice a day, a lady to ride her, and I never did anything for myself.


Not at all knocking you for that - that is above & beyond what the vast majority would/could do in that situation. But it just doesn't justify keeping her there IMO. Sounds like it didn't for you either, so again, I don't get your judgemental & justifying first post.



> Chucking them out in a field and seeing them rarely sounds like neglect to me? Sure, they get a big pasture but are you actually caring for them?


And then you give this sort of blanket statement which sounds extremely narrow minded & unreasonable. Sure, horses in big paddocks can be neglected just as stabled ones can. 



> Pasture is easier, because you don't need to show up. With a stalled horse you have to be there rain or shine to make up for what a pasture could provide. You don't get a day off.
> 
> But then again, why would you want one?


Again, I find it... strange you are accusing others of close mindedness, not appreciating others are in different situations, when you have this attitude. Why would you _want _one? Well, some of us have a LIFE outside our horses for a start, many more commitments, that regardless of our _wants_, we may not be able to spend that kind of time. Some of us cannot keep our horses around the corner & spend many hours a day with them. And yes, there are those - many, many, I'd wager, who don't _want_ to do that either.


----------



## KigerQueen (Jun 16, 2013)

some people are cruel and never get their stalled horses out. that is neglect imo. yes mine are stalled and they dont get out every day but i try. and if i cant get out for an extended period of time i ask a friend to turn them out for me. There is one horse at the place i posted who has not lef his stall in 10 years. he is a stallion. its a shame as he is SUPER sweet and surprisingly NOT crazy. i mean its a 20x20 stall so he can move if needed but its still not right. they could at least put him in the round pen for an hour a day. 

i have been told in the past on here that im not trying by my horses because i wont drive 85+ miles to board them up north on pasture. not only is it to expensive but the care is subpar at most. i would never see my horses. i have boarded at over 9 places in the past 7 years. and EVERY. SINGLE. TIME i moved my horse to a place i could not see her weekly she sufferd. i found a pasture for my arab. they kept her in a stall and did not tell me. they sed my feed for their horses and not her. my arab was there a month and dropped 100lbs if not more. this has happened a other times as other boarding places. as you can see im afrade to move them somewhere i cant see them. my 33 year old cant handle that happening to him. he will not recover from it. and i cannot find in within the valley. 

it is hard to find good boarding out here. even if the place is nice BO can be a basket case. so far i have found only two places that work. where i am at now and the self care place i used to be at. if i could find pasture board where i could actualy see them some what reguraly i would go for it. that seams impossible to find. you are all welcomed to look if you like. you will see my issue. 

i HAVE been told by members of this forum they i should rehome my horses to someone "willing" to move them up north for boarding. and that "what life" dose my 33 year old have "worth living" because he is only on soaked pellets because he is a dinosaur. its comments like that that spark threds like this. i think if given the choice any sane horse person would opt for turn out provided it is SAFE. the issue alot of out in the south west have is it is either NOT safe (barb wire, metal and garbage in said "pasture". or flat out dose not exist. how can you board somewhere that does not exist? i would love to board on pasture. but there. is. no. pasture/lot. boarding. within. 50. miles. of. me.

there may be some in south phoenix but that falls under the not safe catagory.


----------



## Avna (Jul 11, 2015)

More and more I suspect the OP is engaged in a struggle to justify horse management decisions she has made but feels bad about, and is seeking approval from the internet in order to feel less guilty about them.


----------



## egrogan (Jun 1, 2011)

One thing that has bothered me throughout this thread is that if I am interpreting @*thecolorcoal* correctly (I might not be) s/he seems to be saying turnout = pasture and arguing that not needing pasture is the same as not needing turnout. I completely understand that in desert areas (a la @*bsms* ' neighborhood) grass just doesn't exist. But his horses are still out moving around in open spaces with each other. That makes total sense to me. I personally couldn't exist in that kind of landscape but I sure admire the beauty of what I see in his photos. So his (happy) horses have turnout, but not pasture, because it doesn't exist.

My horses have 24/7 turnout with a 3 sided shed. In the summer, that is on pasture. Five months of the year, in the same field with the same shelter, they have turnout but no pasture. Why? Because the ground and the grass that grows on it is buried under a foot of snow. Their forage, while in their all day every day turnout, is provided in free choice orchard hay. So in my mind, turnout ~= pasture. But turnout and access to quality forage is a necessary condition for happy, healthy horses, in my opinion.

Clearly the OP has some sort of baggage about finances and not "keeping up with the Joneses," but I don't particularly understand where the argument that a horse who is out and moving around is in suboptimal conditions unless standing in a meadow of grass 24/7. And I don't really hear anyone making that argument here, though it seems like are some valid differences of opinion about the source of forage.

I've probably added nothing to this discussion so I will go back to reading along now :wink:


----------



## Spanish Rider (May 1, 2014)

While several posters seem to express their zero-tolerance of no pasture/turnout situations, I believe that this factor is simply one more criterion to be used in determining the overall quality of care of a horse. Excellent pasture/outdoor access cannot make up for inadequacies in other areas, and I’m sure we can all think of deplorable examples.

Likewise, it is my argument that the lack of pasture alone cannot exemplify mistreatment. Unfortunate, yes. Less than optimal, uh-huh. Poor, perhaps. But, there are stalled-horse situations that I would have a hard time calling “abusive” or “cruel”, nor would I call into question the compassion of these horse owners. And, no, I am not a show-jumper, nor have I competed in any of the disciplines in which I have participated, so my argument is not based on the need to defend my own actions. I am just calling ‘em as I see ‘em.

The fact is that many top training facilities do not provide their horses with regular turnouts or pasture time during their years of high-performance work. Immediately, world-renowned equestrian centers come to mind, including the Spanish Riding School in Vienna, the German Riding School in Warendorf and the Royal Andalusian School of Equestrian Art in Jerez. Unquestionably, other riding centers emulate their training techniques and structured schedules. In fact, the school in Vienna has posted its schedule online, which is similar to practices that I have seen in several countries. Based on lack of pasture/turnout time, are we willing to label these training centers abusive, cruel or neglectful?


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

mmshiro said:


> @*bsms* : You are still shifting the goal posts to argue against a phantom argument...Horses get injured by bullies when they get cornered and can't give to the pressure they receive. That is a problem artificially created by humans. If there was enough room to evade the attacker, they'd just run it out. So it's not your horses' fault they injured each other when they were together, it's yours...


No, I'm not shifting the goal posts. I'm pointing out that NO ONE believes in shutting a horse in an enclosed stall for 17 years! I'm pointing out that some of the supposed requirements - a constant flow of grass, for example - are artificial because horses can do fine without free forage. That, in fact, some horses (mine) are doing fine with only 1/3 of their food being hay, and with zero pasture.

As for injuries...no, horses do NOT only get injured when cornered. There are no corners in my corral. But yes, horses CAN decide to hold their ground and fight. We sold Lilly because it had reached the point Trooper and Lilly would try to kill each other if they got together - speaking as someone who waded in between them with a shovel.

And the point was NOT just "injuries". Some horses, believe it or not, don't feel a great need to be best buddies with ANY other horse. I don't care if it is breeding or how they were raised - some horses just aren't all that social. I'm told Bandit was one, back when he was part of a free-ranging herd. Mia tolerated other horses, but she would often go to the far side of the corral to get away from them. She just wasn't that enamored with the other horses! And after 3 years with Bandit, I'm sure he'd be content to SEE other horses around.

Not all horses want to hang around and sing Kumbayah together.

""_3 of of those needs are free movement, socialisation and small amounts of 'low grade' roughage going through their stomach relatively constantly._"

Again - how free is free? An acre? A half-acre? A hundred sq miles or more - which 2 of my 3 horses have experienced? County rules ban any stall under 400 sq feet (20x20) as cruel. But how much is "enough"? And in my limited experience, that depends on the horse. For Mia, enough was a much bigger space than Cowboy's enough.

Socialization? I wouldn't keep a horse alone, which is part of the reason I've considered selling 10 year old Bandit and keeping my 20 year old pair. But I used to think the stable I first rode at was cruel because the pens didn't allow the horses to mix. It took me a while to admit a lot of the horses acted pretty content since they could all SEE each other. Even so, a horse's need to "socialize" varies - just as it does in humans.

And roughage? Grass? My horses are doing better since I reduced their hay. Mia coliced a bunch of times her first 6 months here - almost certainly nerves. She would break into a heavy sweat just standing still. Once she relaxed, no more colic. None of the other horses have ever coliced. They poop better and more regularly with pelleted feed. When I got them 10 years ago, they got grass hay 3 times a day. Now? Pellets keep them healthier.


----------



## tinyliny (Oct 31, 2009)

This thread is closed for review.


----------

