# When growth plates close



## PrinceHenry8 (May 10, 2018)

HI everyone, I just love Dr. Bennet. Check this out to learn when growth plates close..it's a great read!
















Excerpt below is taken from "Timing & Rate of Skeletal Maturation in Horses" by Dr. Deb Bennett, Ph.D 
The full article has much more information, but here's a taste of her message:

"Owners and trainers need to realize there's a definite, easy-to-remember schedule of bone fusion. Make a decision when to ride the horse based on that rather than on the external appearance of the horse.. For there are some breeds of horse--the Quarter Horse is the premier among these--which have been bred in such a manner as to LOOK mature LONG before they actually ARE. This puts these horses in jeopardy from people who are either ignorant of the closure schedule, or more interested in their own schedule (racing, jumping, futurities or other competitions) than they are in the welfare of the animal.

*The Schedule of Growth-Plate Conversion to Bone*

The process of fusion goes from the bottom up. In other words, the lower down toward the hooves, the earlier the growth plates will fuse--the higher up toward the animal's back you look, the later. The growth plate at the top of the coffin bone, in the hoof, is fused at birth. What this means is that the coffin bones get no TALLER after birth (they get much larger around, though, by another mechanism). That's the first one. In order after that:

*Short pastern* – bottom before birth; top between 9-12 months.
*Long pastern* – bottom unites with shaft at or shortly before birth; top 13 to 15 mos.
*Cannon bone* – top unites with shaft at or shortly before birth; bottom unites with shaft at about 18 mos.
*Small bones of the knee* – top and bottom of each, between 18 mos. and 2 years
*Radius-ulna* – upper weightbearing surface, between 15-18 mos.; distal surfaces, between 3 and 3.5 years
*Humerus* – bottom, between 1.5 and 2 years; top, between 3 and 3.5 years
*Scapula* – glenoid or bottom (weight-bearing) portion – between 3 and 3.5 years
*Hindlimb* – cannon bone, coffin bone, andpasterns same as forelimb
*Hock *– this joint is “late” for as low down asit is; growth plates on the tibial and fibulartarsals don’t fuse until the animal is 3-3.5(so the hocks are a known “weak point” –even the 18th-century literature warns against driving young horses in plow or other deep or sticky footing, or jumping them up into a heavy load, for danger of spraining their hocks).
*Tibia* – bottom, between 20 mos. and 2years; top, between 3 and 3.5 years
*Femur* – there are 4 major epiphyses on this bone, including the head that goes into the hip socket; they fuse between 3 - 4 years.
*Pelvis* – the hip socket is firm between 18mos. and 2 years, but the rest of the bone does not stop growing until the horse is 5 or more years old.

And what do you think is last? The vertebral column (spine) of course. A normal horse has 32 vertebrae between the back of the skull and the root of the dock, and there are several growth plates on each one, the most important of which is the one capping the centrum.

These do not finally fuse until the horse is at least 5 ½ years old (and this figure applies to a small-sized, scrubby, range-raised mare. The taller your horse and the longer its neck, the later the last fusions will occur. And for a male – is this a surprise? – you add six months. So, for example, a 17-hand Thoroughbred, Saddlebred or Warmblood gelding may not be fully mature until his 8th year – something that owners of such individuals have often told me that they “suspected”)

*Significance of the Closure Schedule for Injuries to Back and Neck vs. Limbs*

"The lateness of vertebral "closure" is most significant for two reasons. One: in no limb are there 32 growth plates! Two: The growth plates in the limbs are (more or less) oriented perpendicular (up and down) to the stress of the load passing through them, while those of the vertebral chain are oriented parallel (horizontal) to weight placed upon the horse's back. Bottom line: you can sprain a horse's back (i.e., displace the vertebral growth plates) a lot more easily than you can sprain those located in the limbs.

And here's another little fact: within the chain of vertebrae, the last to fully "close" are those at the base of the animal's neck--that's why the long-necked individual may go past 6 yrs. to achieve full maturity. So you also have to be careful--very careful--not to yank the neck around on your young horse, or get him in any situation where he strains his neck (i.e., better learn how to get a horse broke to tiebefore you ever tie him up, so that there will be no likelihood of him ever pulling back hard)."....​ ~ Dr. Deb Bennett, Ph.D. is a 1984 graduate of the University of Kansas, and until 1992 was with the Smithsonian Institute. She is internationally known for her scientific conformation analysis.​


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Consider a 10 year old horse, spine and limbs fully developed. But he's malnourished & badly underweight. Would you ride him? Of course not! But 6 months later, after rest, food and exercise, a 200 lb man might safely ride him. 

Why? Because riders are supported by muscles in the back, not by the spine. The spine of the malnourished horse and the healthy horse are essentially the same - but the healthy horse has the STRENGTH to carry a rider. He has enough MUSCLE to carry the rider.

The leg bones support weight. At 3 years, they are mostly full-grown. I'd prefer a horse be older before starting heavy work, but I can't deny a lot of horses started at 3 go on to live long, productive, healthy lives.

And the neck?

"_And here's another little fact: within the chain of vertebrae, the last to fully "close" are those at the base of the animal's neck--that's why the long-necked individual may go past 6 yrs. to achieve full maturity. So you also have to be careful--very careful--not to yank the neck around on your young horse..._"

Not a fan of yanking on the neck of ANY horse at ANY age...but a 3 year old horse has a very flexible neck. I can't image anything I do riding that would ever over-flex a horse's neck. If I did, I'd have much bigger problems with my riding than just the age of my horse.


----------



## SilverMaple (Jun 24, 2017)

Studies showing that horses started younger are less prone to breakdown due to bone remodeling during the growth phase lend a different credence altogether. One can find studies to support nearly any mindset. I don't have any particular issue with people starting horses at 2 or 3, but there's a big difference between 'starting' and going to the show pen with a fully-finished horse. 

I would have more respect for Dr. Bennett if she'd actually cite sources and studies in her published posts and articles. I'm enjoying her article series currently going on in Equus magazine, though.


----------



## koda2004 (Sep 2, 2017)

I agree with @SilverMaple. I would listen to more of Dr. Bennet's articles if she gave her resources. I too have read the articles supporting lightly starting young horses and because of that research I have chosen to lightly start my 2 year old. Everybody has different opinions on this subject and I feel like there is probably a lot of biased studies on it.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

I do think that Dr bennett's(& others) stuff on this is incredibly important. But I too see nothing wrong with a light person *lightly* starting a 3yo. I would absolutely hold off on heavy/long rides & 'high impact' stuff until the horse is far more mature though.

I liken it to something like a child doing some handstands, giving their mates 'piggyback rides', carrying appropriate weights for the size of the child... whatever, compared with a child doing hours a day of gruelling gymnastic or other athletic or weightbearing or impact type 'exercise'. A small amount/intensity is not likely to do any harm & on the contrary, will count as 'fittening' work & improve bone density & soft tissue. But tipped over into 'too much, too soon' is indeed a major cause of injury & suffering in later life. 

Regardless of age/maturity, I think people often confuse the concept that just because a horse CAN do something, it means its harmless.(& spines can/are indeed effected bsms - muscles attachvia tendons to bones & specific fittening exercises & specific riding style & heavy, unremitting pressure from saddles etc all effect that...) I believe a lot more damage is done than people frequently realize, and more understanding & consideration about riding should be taken by all.


----------



## PrinceHenry8 (May 10, 2018)

Everyone to their own, I prefer to listen to an expert on the subject myself and use my common sense. I'm 57 have had horses since I was 4 and have trained many...Myself, I don't back a horse before they are at least 4. There is so much more you can do with them besides ride them.

ABOUT DR. DEB: Deb Bennett, Ph.D., is a 1984 graduate of the University of Kansas, and until 1992 was with the Smithsonian Institution. She is known as an authority on the classification, evolution, anatomy, and biomechanics of fossil and living horses. Her research interests include the history of domestication and world bloodlines and breeds. She teaches unique anatomy short-courses and horsemanship clinics designed to be enjoyable to riders of all breeds and disciplines, and all levels of skill.

Internationally known for her scientific approach to conformation analysis, "Dr. Deb" has made a career out of conveying a kind of "X-ray vision" for bone structure to breeders and buyers. Her background in biomechanics helps her clearly explain how conformation relates to performance ability. Dr. Deb's clinics often feature real bones and interesting biomechanical models.

Dr. Deb doesn't confine her work to the chalkboard, but rides and trains, having participated over a 30-year span in nearly every form of horse competition. She is a universalist, constantly reminding students that the cut of a person's hat or the style of their saddle matters not one whit to a horse. Riding clubs and organizations everywhere have enjoyed and benefited from Dr. Deb's expertise and insight: Arabians, sporthorses, enduro, Morgans, gaited breeds, Warmbloods, Quarter Horses -- you name it -- for she is remarkably conversant with the needs and problems of many breeds. Practical problem-solving is always a focus, and "play" that develops the horse's mind is a top priority. Dr. Deb's goals for your horse are the same as for her own horses, who are athletically competent, happy, confident, long-lived and free-moving.

Dr. Deb's horsemanship philosophy is based on the belief that horses and humans have potentially equal intelligence. She encourages riders to increase their ability to perceive what the horse is thinking and feeling. Dr. Deb's horses are educated -- not "trained". She believes that all work with horses should consider both the physical body and the "inner life". Dr. Deb coined the term "Perjustice" to describe the very old art and science of using the horse's innate powers of movement to develop him as an excellent riding companion. She also invented "Birdie Theory", a way of putting yourself in your horse's shoes and a great aid to understanding what makes him "tick" on the inside.

Since 1984, Dr. Deb has been a consulting editor and frequent contributor to Equus Magazine, but has also been published in almost every other major horse magazine in North America. She also has a long list of technical publications (click on button at right). She is a major contributor to the Elsevier World Animal Science Encyclopedia and the Smithsonian Institution's "Seeds of Change" Columbus Quincentenary volume. She has published four books on horse-related topics. Dr. Deb founded Equine Studies Institute in 1992. Events led by Dr. Deb are essentially "intelligent conversations" about horsemanship -- and you're invited to participate. 

you can do a search for her publications


----------



## Change (Jul 19, 2014)

30 years ago - before all the science and technology of horse ownership became a "thing," we always x-rayed our 2 year old QHs knees to verify closure before starting to work them. 

I look around at all the "noise" from experts and all the training videos costing hundreds of dollars - and they're all selling stuff that I (and other old-timers) have been doing for years. I find it amusing.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

Change said:


> 30 years ago - before all the science and technology of horse ownership became a "thing," we always x-rayed our 2 year old QHs knees to verify closure before starting to work them. ... that I (and other old-timers) have been doing for years.


Huh? You say above you only xrayed knees, before beginning to work babies. So can only surmise from your words that you have NOT been heeding this 'amusing' thing at all, let alone for years.

The point that you seem to have missed completely is, that while knees may be 'closed' by around 2yo - & that's what 'old timers' who have discounted the science's ideas of 'mature enough' are based on - The further up you go - pelvis, shoulders, spine, 'close' FAR later than that, and that is where the most damage is done. I find it interesting(can't say amusing) that people are so quick to discount anything like this.

PrinceHenry & others interested in more info, Sharon May-Davis(aka 'The Bone Lady') is another name to look up. She is also a world renowned 'expert' who has studied & examined many 100's of horses of all types, dead & alive for many years and has also documented the evidence of damage to ridden(& harness raced) babies. There are indeed others, who's names elude me right now(except Bowker, who has shown what damage shoeing immature feet does), who have documented their studies into this.


----------



## SilverMaple (Jun 24, 2017)

I'm a bigger rider. My weight tends not to be a concern were I a man, but a woman of my weight is considered 'too big to ride' by some. That being said, when I look for a horse, the first things I'm looking for are stocky build, good bone, and short, strong back. Most of the horses I discounted off-hand have a long, weak back and so many have a markedly swayed back, even at the age of 6 or 8. Many of those horses were already in the show pen or working hard, day in and day out, with a big guy in the saddle as youngsters. Horses ridden by large folks who got a start as youngsters but were not ridden heavily tend to still look good at an older age, no matter who is in the saddle. Conformation plays a part, but a lot of horses you see for sale look good until you get a profile shot of them without a saddle... 


Like I said, there is a difference between starting a young horse -- riding for a week and then turning him out to grow up, or riding a few minutes a few times a week as opposed to those who are riding daily on a young horse to get him ready for the show ring or in the quest to have a fully-finished horse by the age of 4. Most of those are also ridden in circles, which exaccerbates the problem. Have a colt you want to put the basics on as a 2 year old? Fine. But then pitch him back out in the field to grow up for another six months. Then bring him in again for a couple of weeks, then back out he goes. Or ride a few minutes a day with the occasional trail ride to give him experience, but don't ask too much of him. What really makes me cringe are the 2 y.o.'s ridden daily in draw reins, asked to jog and lope endless circles in the arena and on the lunge line, doing hard fast work with spins and hard stops or working over fences or around barrels and showing every weekend. He's a baby. Start him, but let him grow up a bit before you start asking for everything he's got. If you wait, he'll likely last a heck of a lot longer.


----------



## AnitaAnne (Oct 31, 2010)

Very interesting to learn about the growth of the horse. Do believe breeds vary somewhat in the rate of growth but may not be statistically significant. 

What is done with the information is most likely the pertinent issue. I think what @Change was trying to say is that old timers knew this from experience. Didn't used to work 2 yr olds as hard as they do now. Everyone was aware that thoroughbreds were worked too hard too young and that's why they broke down young. Those horses went straight to the canner when they were done racing. This whole OTTB thing is a new way (well, new way if one is as old as dirt) to try to save some. 

Regular riding horses (or driving) weren't treated that way. All these two year old futurities and similar classes for young horses are a relatively new thing. All the circling and spinning and such was not done to young horses. The only ones doing small circles were Dressage horses, and they weren't started until they were 4 yrs old. 

Sliding stops used to be about 5 feet long, tops. The length of slide wasn't the goal, just getting them to slop suddenly was. Now they look like skiers, not horses stopping. 

Horses were not specialized either. We rode the same horses in the western pleasure, jumping and trail classes. Also showed them in halter. This was true whether they were Morgan, QH or Saddlebred, or just a mutt. 

Seems to me that many people are just not too concerned with the longevity of a horses career. Trainers now push clients to "move up" or "trade up" constantly. The younger horses go for top dollar and are used up by the time they are 6. By then how many are getting their joints injected? Then the downhill slide begins. The horses are said to be sound for light trail riding or companion horses and sold for 1/4 of the value they had as a 2 yr old if they are lucky. If they aren't lucky, maybe too lame, they wind up at an auction house. 

So really, is the industry going to change? Are the breeders going to make sure they have a quality foal because they have to house and feed the horse until he is four? Are the trainers going to give up their fat commissions and quit encouraging folks to buy a 2yr old every year or two? 

Are the big name Gurus going to start making instructional DVD's and devote clubs to how to avoid destroying your horse by delaying training until their skeleton has developed??

Sorry if this post is cynical, but really this stuff has been known, and ignored by most of the equine industry for ages.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

"_The further up you go - pelvis, shoulders, spine, 'close' FAR later than that, and that is where the most damage is done. I find it interesting(can't say amusing) that people are so quick to discount anything like this._" - @*loosie* 

I discount worrying about growth plates not fusing in the back until 6 because:

A) I don't know of anyone, not even Deb Bennett, who argues for waiting until a horse is 7 to start riding - and to start serious work.

B) I've never met anyone whose horse had demonstrated damage to the spine due to being ridden before 6.

Bandit was started at 3 and ridden HARD by 4. Hard as in galloping for miles carrying 35+% of his body weight. This was Bandit just before I got him:








​ 
A more recent picture, including Trooper in the background, who was also being ridden at well over 25% of his weight for 12 hour days by 4:








​ 
Both by breeding have short backs. Neither has ever shown any signs of weakness in their back, although ridden hard by 4. I've also known people who put horses down for leg problems, and for cancer and for blindness, but haven't met anyone whose horse was put down due to spinal damage. This doesn't mean that NO HORSE has ever been put down for spinal damage. Only that is seems much more common to see overuse injuries in LEGS.

As for the NECK not fusing until as late as 8...so what?

Now...if one wants to discuss making unnatural moves like sliding stops or spinning, etc...I dislike those at ANY age. I know many horses get away with it and I won't tell others not to do it. But I wouldn't knowingly buy a horse who has that in his background. 

I strongly dislike what was done to Bandit, though, and just didn't learn about it until after I got him. His left front leg in particular worries me because he came here using it at a 40 degree twist, with a wear pattern that went from 1:30 to 7:30. That has corrected itself, but lots of hard miles running like that cannot be good for a horse's leg. It will be a miracle if he stays sound long term. Not worried about his back, though.


----------



## koda2004 (Sep 2, 2017)

I imagine that most of the studies taken on horses ridden at 2 yrs were done on horses that were ridden hard at 2. There is a huge difference between riding a 2 yr old fifteen minutes at a time twice a week at a walk and somebody that lopes them in tight circles for an hour everyday. I have never actually heard of a horse with spine damage from riding them too young, not to say it doesn't happen. I have heard of joint damage if they are ridden hard.


----------



## Change (Jul 19, 2014)

@loosie - I said _started_. Started as in all that prep work that leads up to being backed and then maybe 15 to 30 minutes of light riding once a week. Started as in being ponied out on trails before being ridden because I didn't train horses in round pens or arenas. A round pen was only used for the initial saddling (with usual bucking for a few seconds or minutes), and the initial backing. One I had left, right, stop and go, the gate was opened and out we'd go. I didn't necessarily toss 'em back out in the field to grow some more (pasture is a bit rare in the desert), but the kids generally only got once weekly "let's see what you remember and can you learn this one new thing?" rides. 3 and 4 year olds generally got twice or 3 times a week and maybe an hour or more as they were in "finishing" stage and generally waiting for buyers. But even finishing work was done on the trail - learning to yield, legs, seat, leads, rate, neck reining, introduction to cows...

A couple of my colts/fillies grew up to be trail or working ranch horses or just riding buddy/pets. At least one filly made a lot of money for her rider running barrels. Two were cutting horses and one was a PRCA roping horse. As far as I know, they were all happy and healthy well into their 20s, and even then were still being ridden - though not competed - regularly. 

QHs, though, do tend to mature out much younger than other breeds. My RMH was started at 3, was 15h tall. He's 5 now, and 15.2h. He's ridden once or twice a week, usually for about 5 miles at w/g/c, but I've also started doing 10/12 mile intro endurance rides and hope to find the time this year to get him into condition for 25 miles.


----------



## QtrBel (May 31, 2012)

Skeletal maturity is different than percent height achieved by a certain age or muscle development and type of muscle. A horse can look mature at a young age but that does not mean it is mature and that the growth plates are finished. A leaner (muscle mass: think runner vs body builder) muscle type appears much more immature than the thicker types. A horse that is fed well (balanced and appropriately) will achieve height at rate that is affected by breed and type and while you may slow a horses growth by malnutrition that can (in the young) be compensated for and see an animal catch up. Over feeding to get that early growth is a cause of osteochondrosis - you may get height earlier and more muscle mass but it is at the expense of longevity (number of years of use before arthritis sets in due to OD) and you still have not changed the rate at which the growth plates close. While there is a range for each set of plates you aren't going to see a fully mature horse (defined by closure of plates) at 3 or even 4. 
 It'll be late in the 5th year and that is for females. Males will finish that process later. DB's article lends it to size and gender but I'd say IMO it is more gender and hormonal influence. The average percent of height achieved at a year is 90% (greater percentage for smaller breeds and lesser for larger) and this is skeletal height. By the end of the third year most will have 98-100% of skeletal height but hoof height (growth plus shoes), muscle (topline development) and fat beyond the point the skeleton stops can add more and make it appear the horse is still growing. Those can be influenced by nutrition so you may think you see explosive growth in that scrawny 3-4 y.o. but what you are seeing is the last bit of skeletal height that may have been slightly delayed topped by development of that muscle that never had the opportunity to grow to potential.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Apart from the legs, is there any actual evidence that riding and even working before the growth plates fuse is harmful?

IIRC, growth plates in a human male fuse by 16-18, with a few in some parts of the body not fusing until the 20s. I think most would agree a 16 year old cannot do the same level of hard work as a 25 year old, but that a 16 year old can still work hard without damage. 

In humans, concerns about growth plates seem to involve shock - impact - where the flat of the growth plate impacts another bone. Lifting weights has stress, but it is spread out over time and doesn't involve impact. Football tackles, OTOH, involve sudden impact. 

A 14 year old jogging 5 miles is fine, but a 14 year old playing football against bigger opponents is not. A 14 year old trying to run marathons is probably too much...but I jogged up to 8 miles when 14 and my knees are fine at 60. Of course, I was jogging, not racing. And when I got sore, I rested.

It seems the same ought to apply to horses. In the quotes below, notice damage to the spine and damage due to hiking or weight-lifting doesn't seem very common.

-----------------------Quotes below involve humans--------------------​ 
Each long bone has at least one growth plate at each end. When growth is complete during adolescence, the growth plates are replaced by solid bone.

Growth plate injuries can occur in children and adolescents. The growth plate is the weakest area of the growing skeleton, so a serious injury to a joint is more likely to damage a growth plate than the ligaments around it. An injury that would cause a sprain in an adult can be a potentially serious growth plate injury in a young child.

Most injuries to the growth plate are fractures. They are twice as common in boys, in part because girls stop growing at a younger age while boys continue to grow through their teen years when they are likely to play sports. Growth plate fractures occur most often in the long bones of the fingers (phalanges), then the outer bone of the forearm (radius) at the wrist. These injuries also occur frequently in the lower bones of the leg—the tibia and fibula.

They can also occur in the upper leg bone (femur) or in the ankle, foot, or hip bone.

https://www.verywellfit.com/growth-plate-injuries-3119295

Growth-plate injuries are twice as likely to occur in boys than in girls. Girls' bodies mature earlier than boys' bodies, so their growth plates are replaced by stronger bone at an earlier age.

Growth plate fractures most often occur in these bones:

Thighbone (femur)
Lower bones of the leg (tibia and fibula)
Outer bone of the forearm (radius), at the wrist
Ankle, foot or hip bone
Long bones of the fingers (phalanges)

Most growth plate injuries in children result from:

A fall, usually while running or playing
Competitive sports, such as football, basketball, baseball and softball, track and gymnastics
Recreational activities, such as biking, sledding, skiing, skateboarding and roller blading

http://www.chop.edu/conditions-diseases/growth-plate-injuries

Causes of Growth Plate Injuries

Most of the time, growth plate injuries happen from falling or twisting. Contact sports, like football or basketball, or fast-moving activities like skiing, skateboarding, sledding, or biking, are common causes. Injuries can also happen from activities that require repetitive training, like gymnastics, track and field, or pitching a baseball.

https://kidshealth.org/en/parents/growth-plate-injuries.html


Points To Remember About Growth Plate Injuries

Injuries to the growth plate happen when a break or fracture occurs near or at the end of a long bone.

Growth plate injuries happen to children and teens.

Most growth place injuries occur after a sudden accident, such as falling or having a hard hit to the limb.

Most growth plate injuries get better and do not cause any lasting problems for your child or teen.

https://www.niams.nih.gov/health-topics/growth-plate-injuries/advanced

While growth plate injuries are caused by an acute event, such as a fall or a blow to a limb, chronic injuries can also result from overuse. For example, a gymnast who practices for hours on the uneven bars, a long-distance runner, or a baseball pitcher perfecting his curve ball can all have growth plate injuries.

In one large study of growth plate injuries in children, the majority resulted from a fall, usually while running or playing on furniture or playground equipment. Competitive sports, such as football, basketball, softball, track and field, and gymnastics, accounted for one-third of all injuries. Recreational activities, such as biking, sledding, skiing, and skateboarding, accounted for one-fifth of all growth plate fractures, while car, motorcycle, and all-terrain-vehicle accidents accounted for only a small percentage of fractures involving the growth plate.

Whether an injury is acute or due to overuse, a child who has pain that persists or affects athletic performance or the ability to move or put pressure on a limb should be examined by a doctor. A child should never be allowed or expected to "work through the pain." 

https://www.medicinenet.com/growth_...article.htm#what_causes_growth_plate_injuries

Repetitive contraction of the quadriceps muscles in the thigh can stress the patellar tendon where it attaches to the kneecap, causing inflammation and tissue damage (this condition is also known as patellar tendinitis).

In growing children, the patellar tendon attaches to the growth plate of the kneecap, and repetitive stress on the tendon can irritate and injure the growth plate. This condition is referred to as Sinding-Larsen-Johansson disease.

Although these types of problems in the kneecap commonly occur in children who are active in sports that involve jumping — such as basketball and volleyball — they can be seen in almost any sport.

Whether the problem stems from the tendon or growth plate, a child will need to rest from sports activities until the pain resolves.

https://orthoinfo.aaos.org/en/diseases--conditions/overuse-injuries-in-children/


----------



## QtrBel (May 31, 2012)

This from The Horse.com: 
"The second type of physitis often occurs secondary to another problem, such as a flexural deformity or trauma. For example, this type of physitis can be seen in a foal with a chronic lameness in one limb; the foal bears much more weight on the opposite limb and can develop physitis in that limb. *This type of physitis is due to excessive weight bearing*, and the foal suffers a type of "crushing" injury to that growth plate." Bolding is mine and note this is just the weight of the horse's own body.

"Physitis is also seen in young horses. Some young racehorses (especially 2-year-olds) can have problems with physitis due to the strong forces of exercise on growth plates that are still open in the distal tibia and radius."

The other two types are from infection (bacterial) or nutrition (too rich).

These are injuries of the leg. Think of the horse like a bridge where the spine is the actual road and the legs are the supports. The supports of the horse are what absorb the impact directly while the spine is encased in muscle and is somewhat protected as long as it isn't overloaded. At least that is how I think of it.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

bsms said:


> A) I don't know of anyone, not even Deb Bennett, who argues for waiting until a horse is 7 to start riding - and to start serious work
> 
> B) I've never met anyone whose horse had demonstrated damage to the spine due to being ridden before 6.
> .


I think dismounting something out of hand just because you haven't met anyone who's horse had an (obvious) problem is very much throwing the baby out with the bathwater. 

As far as I'm aware, we are not talking about 'just being ridden before 6'(I'm not anyway, as per what I wrote earlier). But the amount/intensity of 'work' on an immature body is the biggest issue. -high impact stuff DOES cause injury to growth plates. 

As you showed in the human injury article you copied. No need to just consider horses/studies. Compression and overuse injuries are also common - look at 3rd world kids regularly made to carry stuff on their head or repetitive back bending field work for eg. Look at studies on dogs showing deformation, arthritis etc from too much/hard impact exercise like jumping. 

'Kissing spines' is one common injury. 'Hunters bump' & other pelvic issues are common, esp in horses who are jumped early. Shoulder injuries also. Arguably also to do with clamping a saddle over shoulders... 

Riding & athletic high impact stuff on a horse of any age is potentially(& commonly) damaging to them. It HAS been demonstrated time & again - including in what you quoted - that 'growth plates' are the weakest links in a skellington & easily damaged through weighbearing & impact. 

Therefore it stands to reason that if we don't want an animal damaged, these things need more careful, rational consideration, ESPECIALLY in growing bodies.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

Change said:


> @loosie - I said _started_. Started as in all that prep work that leads up to being backed and then maybe 15 to 30 minutes of light riding once a week.


Ok, so you don't agree with working an immature horse much. Just that what you said sounded like you were assuming they were mature enough once their knees were closed. Which apparently was assumed to be the case by many in 'the old days'. 


> QHs, though, do tend to mature out much younger than other breeds.


Actually, that's another common assumption that's been shown to be false - that different breeds mature very differently. It has been shown that whether its a pony or a shire horse, their skellington matures at much the same rate.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

😂😂pardon the... Pratchettism! Seems cos I get silly like that sometimes, my fone decided that's the proper way to write skellington!


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

loosie said:


> I think dismounting something out of hand just because you haven't met anyone who's horse had an (obvious) problem is very much throwing the baby out with the bathwater....
> 
> Riding & athletic high impact stuff on a horse of any age is potentially(& commonly) damaging to them....


I wrote, "_I've never met anyone whose horse had demonstrated damage to the spine due to being ridden before 6" _And I used 6 because the growth plates of the spine don't fuse before then, so ANY significant riding below that age should cause problems - IF the problem is rooted in growth plates not being fused. 

It is undoubtedly possible to give a horse back pain with an ill fitting saddle, but that has nothing to do with the age at which their spine fuses.

I had to read about kissing spines. Seems it is most commonly seen in jumping and dressage horses ( Kissing spines in veterinary equine patients: Easy to diagnose, complicated to treat ). Not many of those around me. But nothing in the articles I read indicate it has anything to do with the growth plates of the spine, or starting a horse at 3 instead of waiting until they are 7.

I looked up hunter's bump. "_...The publication of their findings states that dressage and show jumping horses appeared to be at particular risk. Affected horses were generally slightly older than the normal clinic population, taller at the withers, and of greater bodyweight. There was a significant effect of breed, with a substantially higher proportion of Warmblood horses..._" ( https://www.jwequine.com/jwequine/pdf/hunters-bump.pdf ) Again, this does not seem tied to riding young horses.

Notably, both kissing spines and hunter's bump are not associated with western QHs. Lots of complaints are made that QHs are started too early and ridden by too large a rider, yet these problems are more commonly seen in jumpers and dressage horses. If growth plates and riding too early were contributing causes, then shouldn't those back problems be more common in QHs? Shouldn't they be called "reiner's bump"? Or "ranch back"? 

So I repeat: "*Apart from the legs, is there any actual evidence that riding and even working before the growth plates fuse is harmful?*"


----------



## sarahfromsc (Sep 22, 2013)

Notably, both kissing spines and hunter's bump are not associated with western QHs. Lots of complaints are made that QHs are started too early and ridden by too large a rider, yet these problems are more commonly seen in jumpers and dressage horses. If growth plates and riding too early were contributing causes, then shouldn't those back problems be more common in QHs? Shouldn't they be called "reiner's bump"? Or "ranch back"? 

Notably, the studies were done overseas. Not many ranches and QHs doing ranch work in that part of the word. Maybe that is why KS wasn’t noted in QHs?

Just a thought.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

^^ Possibly. Or possibly the studies were done overseas because they are having more problems there than the QHs are here. And if riding a horse at 3 was the SOURCE of the problem, then it would probably be more common in the western US. Pretty common in southern Arizona to start a horse at 3 and to expect him to carry a man's weight, plus a western saddle. If riding before the spine's growth plates fused caused kissing spine, it would be nearly universal here.


----------



## koda2004 (Sep 2, 2017)

I agree with @*bsms* . If so many horses ridden young ended up with kissing spine then how come you never hear of any QHs that have it? There are Tons of QHs started at 2, if it was a serious problem I would think that most western horses I know would have it. I have heard of racehorses getting kissing spine but they are also run really hard very young. And I also hear of a lot of those English dressage and jumping horses that aren't started until 5 or 6 getting kissing spine and having hunters bumps!


----------



## sarahfromsc (Sep 22, 2013)

The article you posted @bsms also stated that kissing spine, and other changes in a horse’s spine, were found both in horses that exhibited back pain, and those that didn’t. So we all could be riding horses with back issues.

Also, I wish the article and studies had included information on the length of the backs of the horses studied and bone density. In my under educated view, horses with long backs would seem more prone to back issues than a horse with a short back. And growth rate. Horses that have a huge and fast growth spurt, do they show signs of wear and tear if being ridden durning growth spurts, versus horses that have a slower rate of growth while being trained/ridden?
@koda2004, come to gaited horse country and see the numerous hunters bump on gaited horses. Never jumped a day in their life. But, most are started at a year and a half, and hitting the trails all day by two. Poorly shod I may add as well. And the most I see are in the KMH, chocolate or silver dapple color. Genetics? 

Be that as it may, interesting discussion. I think one of the main reasons to wait on training and riding a young horse hasn’t been mentioned. The mental maturity of the individual horse. Some just are not mentally ready at age three or even four for the strain of hard training and riding.


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

loosie said:


> 😂😂pardon the... Pratchettism! Seems cos i get silly like that sometimes, my fone decided that's the proper way to write skellington!


----------



## koda2004 (Sep 2, 2017)

@*sarahfromsc* , I own two Gaited horses, A Missouri Fox trotter and a Tennessee Walker as well as a young QH. None of my horses have hunters bumps or anything like that. My 7 year old Missouri Fox Trotter was started at 2 and ridden on trails and she is fine, please note it was not me that started her. And I don;t know what you mean by color but my MFT is a Sorrel and my TWH is pure black.


----------



## sarahfromsc (Sep 22, 2013)

You see many gaited horse in the BSF every day, every weekend with a hunters bump. I see it mostly in the KMH who are chocolate in color....very desirable here, or what they call a silver chocolate dapple.

There is only ONE other rider besides myself I see regularly that is not on a gaited horse. That is how many gaited horses there are. Not many MFT though.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

BSM I haven't time for detailed response - or research, atm. Firstly, I said 'kissing spines' for eg, (because it IS one condition commonly associated with horses worked hard early) not only/always that condition. I have not found any studies on reinging futurity horses, but I would hazard a guess that pelvic and perhaps shoulder changes were more likely there. Dr Bennett HAS indeed advised not doing much weightbearing & high impact & repetitive stress exercise on horses under 6yo, in the 'Ranger Piece' & elsewhere. With a quick bit of searching, online(Google Scholar is a good source of stuff) & books I have here - have a relo who's a chiro/physio & has left some books here - I have found a bit about the risks to immature spines from sports type injuries. Most of this has been on humans - 'Spinal Injury to Immature Athletes' is one book I looked at, which said that compression type injuries, due to exercises such as jumping on a trampoline, 'RSI' injuries to joints including the spine, and twisting, bending type exercises were more likely to be seen in immature spines than in adults, as were 'impact trauma' injuries resulting in retardation of growth plates - trauma to growthplates can stop them continue developing prematurely.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

Oh & thanks for that reminder Golden, of the dyslexic rooster. That was actually one of the most recent books I've read to my kids. My eldest has a couple of Death(aka Grim Reaper) T-shirts & I'm actually very surprised she hasn't called her horse Binky!


----------



## SilverMaple (Jun 24, 2017)

I think there is a genetic component to KS as well. I went with a friend to have her mare x-rayed for it at a large vet school, and they said 90% of the horses they see it in are TB's with a smattering of WB's here and there. An occasional Quarter Horse, but usually those that carry a high percentage of Thoroughbred blood. So, while it may be exacerbated by riding or working the horse at a young age, I don't think that is the cause, or we'd see it a lot more in other breeds like gaited horses and cow-bred quarter horses--- usually under saddle and working hard by the time they're 2.


----------



## gottatrot (Jan 9, 2011)

This is an interesting thread.

I personally would not work a horse hard when young just to be safe. I do the same thing with my dogs, no forced/formal exercise until age 1, but they can do all the free play they want. 

That being said, I think there are many factors that contribute to the body issues horses have. It would be very difficult to create a study that took into account all the factors of why horses end up with certain conditions. I do believe there is good evidence that horses overfed and growing too fast are at a higher risk for OCD.

How many horses that end up with back issues, joint issues and sacroiliac injuries were brought into condition slowly and properly?  How many had their hooves properly balanced throughout the work they were asked to do? How many were ridden in saddles that didn't fit or were asked to carry their bodies in unnatural positions? Or braced against a bit they found uncomfortable? 

As was brought up, horses genetically can have differently shaped vertebrae that can make them more prone to having issues. This is why Saddlebreds as a breed have lordosis more than other breeds. Thoroughbreds share a lot of genetics with Saddlebreds. Perhaps the shape of their vertebrae makes some more susceptible to kissing spine. Also genetically horses can have legs that are less well aligned or a club hoof or etc. Muscle imbalances developed when young can create movement imbalances that affect the skeleton. Track Thoroughbreds notoriously have muscle imbalances. 
To me all of this muddies the water quite a bit.

One horse I saw develop a sacroiliac issue (hunter's bump) was an older horse that was unfit and was brought too quickly into fast work carrying a heavier rider up steep trails.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

^Yep, that's one 'crux' - too many variables to isolate for 'proven' scientific tests on many specifics I reckon. But absence of 'proof' is not proof of absence. And an immature body(whatever species) IS more susceptible to bone/joint/spinal damage - there is much evidence of that, regardless whether you choose to ignore it in horses specifically, because it might be due to other factors. So it stands to reason that this is indeed one of many factors we need to be more considerate about if we want to avoid damaging our horses.


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

There is a reason that we no longer have child labor in most ‘civilized counties’ we realized that making children work doing hard manual labour was not good, and caused issues.

There is a reason why kids these days are soft and unfit, they don’t do enough to support good growth.

I count myself fortunate that I grew up in the short period where we had childhoods, we could, and did play outside, riding bikes for miles, running having fun, we were fit, and we were healthy, because we were moving, and in my case was fed a good diet, most of the time.

Translate it back to horses, too much work, to early I think is damaging.

Letting them Stand around doing nothing, also not good. 

My ideal, work a little, and then kick them out in a herd and let them build muscle and bone as nature intended through play.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

^Absolutely! Another 'rule' applies, be that to growing bodies(where arguably it's even more important) or to mature; If you don't use it, you lose it. Or don't develop it in the first place. In my 'line' I see it all the time in hooves - it's not just incorrect hoofcare or shoeing from a young age or whatever, that causes contraction & p-weak caudal feet - it's these 'lovely' soft, sedentary environs we grow young horses up in - they never get a chance to develop their feet.

There is a reason (lack of)bone density is such a common prob in old people too - osteoporosis & fractures. And it's not that they need more calcium, despite the marketing. They don't 'use it' so they've lost it. Alas these days with so many sedentary young people too, so I wonder if/when osteoporosis & susceptibility of fractures will be across the board in first world countries.

All of this is OT, tho it's perhaps even more important when considering what/how much work/exercise we give our horses.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

loosie said:


> ^Yep, that's one 'crux' - too many variables to isolate for 'proven' scientific tests on many specifics I reckon. But absence of 'proof' is not proof of absence. And an immature body(whatever species) IS more susceptible to bone/joint/spinal damage...


Pretty much everyone agrees that concussive forces in young legs significantly increase the chance of damage. It doesn't have to be to the "growth plates" either.

Deb Bennett then tries to apply what a lot of experienced people have agreed about legs to the back and neck. However...the BONES of the leg take much of the shock. There isn't much the leg muscles can do to reduce impact. The leg muscles cannot protect the leg bones from stress.

That is very different with the back. The rider's weight on the back is not supported by bone, although a lack of muscle or too much weight can overwhelm that protection. But horses WILL try very hard to protect their spine from too much motion. That is why Bandit arrived using his back like an I-beam! Being ridden at 35% of his body weight taught him to move with a very stiff back.

But his muscles succeeded in protecting his back from the up/down stress of the rider's weight. It has taken a long time to get him to move with a relaxed back. He still reverts at times, and then remembers it is safe to relax now. But he can now trot and canter with a relaxed back (at 25% of his weight) with no sign of injury from previous use.

By adding in concerns about growth plates on the spine, Bennett has muddied the waters. The fact that almost no one waits, as a matter of deliberate practice, until a horse is 6-8 years old before backing means the "growth plate fusing" in the back is either irrelevant or trivial in effect. If it had significant impact, we would see it across the board - all breeds and all riding, since almost every horse is ridden before 6. 

"_But absence of 'proof' is not proof of absence_."

No, but proof of absence DOES exist where the spine and neck growth plates are concerned. The standard everywhere is to start riding horses before they turn 7. Bandit was started at 4 but then was ridden hard at extreme weights - without any discernible impact to his back. Most of the people who recommend waiting - and I'd prefer to wait until 4 myself - don't wait until 6 or older. Starting at 4 has worked for millions, although it is 2-3 years too early if Deb Bennett's hypothesis is correct.

If X is done successfully with millions of horses, then X cannot be very harmful.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

bsms said:


> That is very different with the back. The rider's weight on the back is not supported by bone, although a lack of muscle or too much weight can overwhelm that protection. But horses WILL try very hard to protect their spine from too much motion.


'Will try' doesn't mean successfully always, or that doing so is not harmful. Yes, in ideal (fit body for eg)situations, with normal & good type riding, the muscles take MUCH of the strain. Not all. That doesn't mean to say always, or that it's not harmful to immature structures. If too much, too hard 'work' has been shown to be harmful to human spines - which also are 'protected' with muscle - then IMO it's not reasonable to think that other animals, who are built & grow essentially the same way, wouldn't also suffer.

And again, you're talking exclusively the spine, whereas shoulders & pelvis for eg can also be effected.



> But his muscles succeeded in protecting his back from the up/down stress of the rider's weight.


'More susceptible' also doesn't mean that every horse in every situation WILL have damage. Just that it's more likely. If you've had his back xrayed & there is no damage there whatsoever, lucky bandit.



> The fact that almost no one waits, as a matter of deliberate practice, until a horse is 6-8 years old before backing means the "growth plate fusing" in the back is either irrelevant or trivial in effect.


Again, you're 'muddying waters' talking of 'backing' as in starting a horse before maturity, compared to high impact, heavy, long work for eg. Yes, I know you have decided that's not important either. I don't know that anyone, including Dr bennett is saying it is necessarily harmful to lightly ride a young horse, but she is far from the only one - & horses are not the only animal with evidence of damage - who advises putting off 'hard work' or long, repetitive stuff or high impact to a minimum or not at all, until the bones are mature.



> If X is done successfully with millions of horses, then X cannot be very harmful.


Yes. But IS it?? Given that there are a LOT of injuries attributed to working horses too hard, too young. Given that a LOT of injuries go unnoticed by people in these stoic animals. Given that sooo many probs are attributed to 'just behavioural' & not so many horses get back xrays, or even lesser diagnostics to show if this is likely the case, or there's a physical cause... Anecdotal stuff is not 'proof of absence' in this case IMO. You'd have to give me real evidence, before I'd be thinking there's no need to 'err on the side of caution'.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

loosie said:


> 'Will try' doesn't mean successfully always, or that doing so is not harmful...
> 
> And again, you're talking exclusively the spine, whereas shoulders & pelvis for eg can also be effected....
> 
> Again, you're 'muddying waters' talking of 'backing' as in starting a horse before maturity, compared to high impact, heavy, long work for eg. Yes, I know you have decided that's not important either....before I'd be thinking there's no need to 'err on the side of caution'.


1 - Yes, "try". Put 300 lbs on the wrong horse and you can do serious damage just standing there. No kidding. But that is true of a horse AT ANY AGE. Put 150 lbs on a 10 year old malnourished horse, and you can damage the spine. It doesn't involve "growth plates fusing".

I've called what was done to Bandit "abuse". I believe it was. At 4 years old, after the growth plates of the legs have fused, I believe his legs were abused. And his back. But the back muscles have reduced the probability of injury to his back, while his legs had no protection. I worry in particular about his left front leg. Doesn't matter than the growth plates had fused by then, although it probably would be worse if they had done that to him when he was younger.

2 - Yes, I'm talking the spine. Why? Because Bennett discusses the spine and even the neck. Legs fully fuse before 4 years, with the most vulnerable parts before 3 years.

But plenty of horses are ridden lightly before 3 without injury. I do object to horses being worked HARD before 3 and would prefer people not work them hard before 4. Even there though, lots of horses ARE worked hard before 4 without damage. So if lots of horses ARE worked earlier than "growth plates fusing" says is possible to do without damage, and they don't suffer damage, then maybe the fusing of growth plates is focusing on entirely the wrong point. Maybe things like conformation, and genetics, and breeding for heavier bones, and what activities are included in "heavy work" are important, and "growth plate fusing" is not.

3 - I'm muddying nothing. I've read too many threads where people are attacked for letting a 125 lb woman ride a walking 3 year old horse for 15 minutes at a time several times a week. And the people attacking always cite Deb Bennett as their guru.

I've read too many threads where people say only groundwork should be done with a 3 year old horse, although I suspect running a 3 year old around a round pen will do more damage to the horse than riding the same horse mostly at a walk in straight lines.

-------------------------------------

I think horse owners (and people in general) are quick to glom on to simplistic rules without ever looking around at the rest of the riding world to see if it makes any sense. The "20% Rule" for riding horses is an example. There are horse shows in England banning anyone who exceeds 20% of the horses weight because it is "abuse" - yet I've almost never ridden a horse below that limit, and know of horses ridden way above the limit for 12 hour days without harm.

I dislike seeing horses ridden with constant contact. But millions of English riders do so successfully with happy horses, so my dislike is just a personal feeling. That most riders in my area agree with my dislike is irrelevant. What has been done can be done.

I propose a rule: "_If millions of horses can do something contentedly and in good health, then that something - whatever it is - is not evil._"

And where I live, a whole lot of horses are started and ridden fairly hard at 3 with no sign of harm. If I think 4 would be better...ok, that is my personal FEELING. But if Deb Bennett's theory is correct, then I cannot see what I am seeing. People cannot do what they are doing. When a theory doesn't match what happens, junk the theory.

Then take a closer look, and see if one can find the REAL answer.

PS: In this discussion, anecdotal evidence is all any of us can discuss. I look around and see ranch horses starting at 3 and going on to live productive lives. Horses started at 3 who are now in their late 20s and healthy. If a lot of horses doing something successfully is not evidence that it can be done successfully, then what is? Unless we agree to consider Deb Bennett a Divine Oracle, how do YOU suggest we test her theory? If what has been done successfully is not evidence it can be done, then just what do you propose?


----------



## QtrBel (May 31, 2012)

Not all work their 3 year olds exclusively in round pens though there are some that do under the impression they are doing good. Realize too that the longer you wait to start a horse the more investment you have in that horse when it comes time to sell. That factors big in to when many start their horses. there is only so much time they can alot to any given horse before they are losing money.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

I never said wait till 6yo to back. I never said it was all about deb bennett's work either - or horses for that matter. But evidence of damage happening to immature bodies is there. So yet another factor to consider about riding horses. 

Just because we can do something, doesnt it mean we should, or it is not causing suffering... Horses are stoic beasts who put up with lots of things without *obvious to many people* noticing. Whether the horse shows it is obviously unhappy/suffering to the average joe is just not a good measure. Even if its obvious many physical probs are treated as 'just' behavioral, something to be 'trained out'. Just a grumpy/stubborn/naughty horse... 

And I was just pointing out its all anecdotal(in horses, anyway) because people were asking for proof. 

Back to feet, because its what I know best... Look at what's accepted as normal there, because it is just sooo common & not recognized as a problem(just that lameness or problems often mystifyingly happen too)... The weakness of the caudal foot, 'sidebone' being considered a normal progression, P3 being the only bone in the body(any body - not confined to horses) accepted as being 'porous' and not having a periosteum layer, only labeled as 'pedal osteitis'(osteoporosis) when a fracture happens... Could go on. 

My point is that there are many, many considerations that we are learning of, that we have just done in the past without a thought, so to assume that just because something has happened for 1000’s of years without consideration, because the horse was ABLE is no reason to assume they have done so happily, without suffering. 

Again, erring on the side of caution is bottom line - and that's what my opinion of riding horses at all, the '20% GUIDELINE is too - it is/should never be a 'rule' IMO, but as a guide it is fine. People like to take stuff fanatically, literally though, far too much IMO.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

QtrBel said:


> That factors big in to when many start their horses. there is only so much time they can alot to any given horse before they are losing money.


Yep and when its about making money, as we know, all sorts of stuff is justified...


----------



## koda2004 (Sep 2, 2017)

@*loosie* . So would you like it if it was illegal to ride a horse under 4-6? If it was illegal there would be a lot of young horses taken to auction or dumped. Not everybody can afford to have a horse for 6 years without doing anything with it. And most of the young horses started do okay.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

koda2004 said:


> @*loosie* . So would you like it if it was illegal to ride a horse under 4-6? If it was illegal there would be a lot of young horses taken to auction or dumped. Not everybody can afford to have a horse for 6 years without doing anything with it. And most of the young horses started do okay.


Oh for goodness sake, please read what I've written, not guess/assume at between the lines.


----------



## koda2004 (Sep 2, 2017)

@loosie. I was just trying to point out that not everybody can afford to have young horses around without being able to do something with them. While starting them young may not be superb it is better than tons of homeless horses.


----------



## loosie (Jun 19, 2008)

^It didn't seem you were just pointing that out, but seemed you were ignoring a lot of what I've said & assuming other stuff. NO ONE here I've seen, not even OP has said 'don't do anything with a horse until 6yo'. 

But your above post brings up another matter. If you 'can't afford' to have a young horse that you can't 'do something with'(assuming you're talking 1st world issues of 'can't afford' to keep a pet without using it for your fun kind of thing, assuming you're not in it as a business, wanting to just churn out 'trained' horses for $$), then you should not HAVE a young horse, but buy one that's 'ready made'. 

The argument about not starting early meaning 'tons of homeless horses' doesn't make any sense. There are tons of homeless OLDER horses, if you want to save some.


----------



## Golden Horse (Feb 20, 2010)

koda2004 said:


> @*loosie* . I was just trying to point out that not everybody can afford to have young horses around without being able to do something with them. While starting them young may not be superb it is better than tons of homeless horses.


I find that confusing the cost is the same if they are doing something or not! 

I guess it is a bit like the old day light saving argument










The aim should be a long and healthy life, if you start to early, and cause the working life to be shortened, then what have you gained?

Of course as we have discovered the rub is no one is sure how and when this particular horse should be started, what discipline it should be used in to guarantee the longest useful life possible...of only they came with bar codes eh?


----------



## koda2004 (Sep 2, 2017)

I'm sorry I riled up everybody. All I mean't is that If you are in the business of selling young horses already started then I can see why they are started earlier. i'm aware that they cost the same whether they are being ridden or not. 
I know of many horses started at 2 well into their 20s that are still being ridden, I think the most important part is not riding them too much. if you spend hours loping a young horse around everyday then it can do a fair amount of damage. However if you are just riding your 2 year old for 15 minutes at a time once a week I really don't think that that causes a ton of harm.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

A quote from my favorite writer on riding, who may well disagree with me:

"There is at least one more abuse of the horse, which unfortunately is frequently encountered; that is working the colt too early in life. The horse, particularly the thoroughbred, grows till he is six or seven years old. At the age of three years he is just a baby and neither his bones, tendons nor his mentality can stand vigorous work under the weight of the rider. His size, and the energy which he displays when playing free in the fields, deceive the inexperienced human eye by overemphasizing his strength and hiding his weaknesses. 

By working the horse hard, and particularly by jumping him, at the age of three, you are taking the chance of crippling him and by the time he is five years old he may be through with his serviceable life. It is just a matter of luck whether he will be crippled merely to the point where he can be allowed to exist as an unimportant hack or will have to be destroyed. 

Of course, even in the latter case the human tendency to justify one's actions may unconsciously invent other reasons for the horse's injuries. I have heard people blaming heredity, the horse's bucking when playing free, his misbehavior in the stall, slippery ground, a particular incident, bad luck with capital letters, etc. Very few people will have the courage to say honestly "I have murdered my horse." 

Many of those who work and jump their horses too early have read, and probably several times, the advice of experienced, intelligent horsemen that work with the horse should not begin before he is four years old and that nothing really strenuous should be asked of him before he is fully mature, that is six years old. Now, if they have read it, why don't they practice it? 

For many reasons: some cannot afford to keep a horse idle for so long; others don't have the patience; many are ready to take a chance, hoping that their horses will prove exceptions (there are exceptions); but often riders cripple and kill their horses just because they don't think. Here we are back to where I started this chapter: the major difficulties in making horsemen (not merely riders) revolve around people's reluctance to think honestly about their horses, themselves and their riding."

-- Common Sense Horsemanship, VS Littauer, 1963...so written at least 54 years ago, and it may be part of the original 1951 text.


----------



## QtrBel (May 31, 2012)

It would be the same as turnover. There is only so much space any given owner has and to occupy that space by the same animal for an extended period reduces your profitability. Not saying starting young is right. I personally don't. But there isn't that much significant difference in price between a youngster with no training and a started 4 year old if the breeding is there to back up the price. Finish that horse, have a niche market and you still have to subtract everything you put into that horse before you see a profit. The longer you have that horse the greater your input. Many choose the easy way and breed, train early or sell early to be trained. The big remudas that can breed and toss a horse on the range with little maintenance care and all the grass they need to grow can keep them for longer but many don't. There is still only so much space and selling young increases their profit.


----------



## AnitaAnne (Oct 31, 2010)

bsms said:


> A quote from my favorite writer on riding, who may well disagree with me:
> 
> "There is at least one more abuse of the horse, which unfortunately is frequently encountered; that is working the colt too early in life. The horse, particularly the thoroughbred, grows till he is six or seven years old. At the age of three years he is just a baby and neither his bones, tendons nor his mentality can stand vigorous work under the weight of the rider. His size, and the energy which he displays when playing free in the fields, deceive the inexperienced human eye by overemphasizing his strength and hiding his weaknesses.
> 
> ...


This may all be true, except ignorance is only the excuse of a few. 

The almighty dollar is the biggest reason. Many people are only looking to make a buck. Long term soundness only means they won't be able to sell another young horse, so it is not profitable. 

If a person keeps the same horse for its lifetime, say an average of 25 yrs, they are not going to buy too many horses. 

If that same person buys a 2 yr old and sells them at 7 yrs, in that same span of time (25 years) they will have bought 5 horses. 

Which one do you think the breeder and/or trainer wants to sell a horse to?? In addition to selling that person all those two year olds, the trainer could also be involved in selling those 7yr olds to another person who keeps the horse for 5 years and then sells them too. Rinse and repeat. 

It is very profitable for the ones making a commission on sales to keep their clients upgrading their horses.


----------



## Luv2Train81 (Jun 17, 2014)

SilverMaple said:


> Studies showing that horses started younger are less prone to breakdown due to bone remodeling during the growth phase lend a different credence altogether. One can find studies to support nearly any mindset. I don't have any particular issue with people starting horses at 2 or 3, but there's a big difference between 'starting' and going to the show pen with a fully-finished horse.
> 
> I would have more respect for Dr. Bennett if she'd actually cite sources and studies in her published posts and articles. I'm enjoying her article series currently going on in Equus magazine, though.


I truly dislike how people quote the part about the remodeling of bones and that young horses get stronger bones thru exercise. Yes it is correct that there's more circumference and bone density thru exercise. HOWEVER those studies have not been done on horses under saddle. These studies are inconclusive and lacking a lot of important info such as soft tissue damage, tendon damage and so on. Also I'd like to mention that this study states that there is a certain way of exercising a horse in order to make the bone formation happening. So it says that bones remodel thru short Sprint exercises... which happen naturally by turning a young horse out in pasture. So again those studies cannot be used to compare to Dr Debs article. I know people like to research and read what they want to believe and a lot of them stop there. But that's not how you do independant research 

On top of that by stating this type of research, you need to remember that the people creating these exercise programs are highly skilled in what it takes to condition a horse properly to be able to hold up to it. If you just state this, you're running into danger of every wannabe expert taking your word for bare value and then go out and ride their youngsters and causing severe damage to them. 

I also like to add on that there are more studies showing that after having a saddle on a horse for 20 minutes creates in itself so much heat and compression that the back is becoming compromised.


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

Luv2Train81 said:


> ...I also like to add on that there are more studies showing that after having a saddle on a horse for 20 minutes creates in itself so much heat and compression that the back is becoming compromised.


Really? I'd love to see them! I see no sign that riding compromises the back. I see a lot of signs it increases the strength of the back.

Arguably, jogging is causing wear and tear on my legs. But I started in 1971 and am still going. I remain convinced that MODERATE exercise is almost always good, while EXTREME exercise is not.

In the case of horses, learning to LISTEN to the horse is key. A couple of weeks ago, while jogging, my left foot came down too hard on a rock. It is still tender. Being human, and being stubborn, I'm still jogging. But I'm careful about where and how long I jog because I need my foot to heal.

Horses are often stoic, but I think that is largely because - as my daughter says - horses only talk to people who will listen. If you wait until your horse pulls up lame with a pus-filled abscess...well, that wasn't the FIRST sign. If one thinks in terms of things like enthusiasm, and eagerness, and assumes (as I do) that lots of horses love movement and exercise, then a drop in enthusiasm can be an important message from your horse.

If the rider is locked into "_My horse works for me! Ask, tell, DEMAND!_", then the horse may push himself into harm. I find a strong correlation between how rocky the ground is and how enthusiastic my horse is about trotting. In like manner, jogging in the sun yesterday, I found myself getting light-headed. Any desert rat can tell you that if you feel light-headed exercising in desert heat, you need to back off. NOW! So I walked a good ways home. My horse is usually happy to head home. So if he starts lagging...maybe there is a reason? Might be worth getting off, loosening the cinch, and letting him take it easy. People have told me my horse will take advantage of me, but I've seen no signs. When he is pooped, it's "Miller Time". When he isn't pooped, he'll cheerfully trot the same section:








​ 
This quote from a cavalryman in 1868 has become a favorite. I think it works, and I think it is a good cure for overworking a horse at any age:


> ...There is another thing to be considered with regard to the horse's character -* it loves to exercise its powers, and it possesses a great spirit of emulation; it likes variety of scene and amusement; and under a rider that understands how to indulge it in all this without overtaxing its powers, will work willingly to the last gasp, which is what entitles it to the name of a noble and generous animal...*
> 
> ..Horses don't like to be ennuye, and will rather stick at home than go out to be bored; *they like amusement, variety, and society*: give them their share of these, but never in a pedantic way, *and avoid getting into a groove of any kind, either as to time or place, especially with young animals*. It is evident that all these things must be taken into account and receive due attention, whether it be our object to prevent or to get rid of some bad habit a horse may have acquired ; and a little reflection will generally suffice to point out the means of remedying something that, if left to itself, would grow into a confirmed habit, or if attacked with the energy of folly and violence, would suddenly culminate in the grand catastrophe of restiveness...
> 
> - On Seats and Saddles, by Francis Dwyer, Major of Hussars in the Imperial Austrian Service (1868)


"...*the grand catastrophe of restiveness...*"​
If we would listen, and if we viewed restiveness as a grand catastrophe, we wouldn't overwork our horses, be they 3, 5, 10 or 20.


----------



## gottatrot (Jan 9, 2011)

bsms said:


> If we would listen, and if we viewed restiveness as a grand catastrophe, we wouldn't overwork our horses, be they 3, 5, 10 or 20.


Exactly. The biggest factor is whether we can listen to our horses, read them and assess them. A horse is not going to work to the point of injury at any age without giving any sign of it. Injuries hurt, regardless of age. 

Anyone who works a horse should be able to hear when a horse is beginning to breathe hard, notice when a horse is sweating, and feel when a horse is energetic or beginning to lag. It's the same with dogs. If you can't go chase your car for two miles down the beach, then don't throw your dog out and expect him to with his tongue hitting the ground. 

People often treat animals like machines. We should treat them like we treat ourselves when getting in shape. If you can't make the leap from walking a half mile to running six, then don't expect your horse to either. 
Horses can run 100 mile races. So can humans. Are you ready to go run one tomorrow?


----------



## Change (Jul 19, 2014)

I've skipped over a lot of comments (3 pages?) but like Golden said on page 3 or 4, I also grew up in the wonderful period where kids were allowed to play outdoors all day, and I was also lucky enough to live in a place with horses. But - I also did gymnastics as a kid (12-17), which is in no way low-impact, and trained horses (aka ate a lot of dirt). I have also never had the luxury of a "use it or lose it -- yep, lost it!" life-style, even though I have spent most of my adult life working in office-environments. And that's probably why it's only now, at 60 (okay - the past 5 years or so) that I'm beginning to feel the effects of my mis-spent youth. Degenerating lumbar, trashed cervical spine; achy knees....

Or maybe I'm just getting old. ;-)


----------



## Luv2Train81 (Jun 17, 2014)

bsms said:


> Luv2Train81 said:
> 
> 
> > ...I also like to add on that there are more studies showing that after having a saddle on a horse for 20 minutes creates in itself so much heat and compression that the back is becoming compromised.
> ...


----------



## Luv2Train81 (Jun 17, 2014)

Oops sorry. I thought it took my link. My bad https://listentoyourhorse.com/stormy-may-damage-from-horse-riding-how-to-protect-your-horse/


----------



## Luv2Train81 (Jun 17, 2014)

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjADegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw1ZWOPSElt-l5D3QNe6eqgC
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...WMAl6BAgAEAE&usg=AOvVaw236Gi42STnbnb2KLzx5nqF

Besides these the journal of veterinary equine science is great, science in motion website, etc are always a great place to. Look for studies etc 



http://www.scienceofmotion.com/i_equine_back_research.html


----------



## bsms (Dec 31, 2010)

From the link:

"_So what does it mean if the blood flow is shut down? This is what happens on a small scale when we press on our skin and it turns white, or if we sit in an awkward position for a longer amount of time, and we experience our leg or arm “going to sleep”._

_The author, Mary Wanless, writes in her book For the Good of the Horse, *“Perhaps one of the horse’s saving graces is that squeezing the blood out of his tissues causes pain for the first ten to fifteen minutes of a ride, and then his back goes numb.”*_

_So, until we learn how to levitate saddles, even a saddle with an excellent fit, the best air/foam/wool stuffed panels and an average weight rider, will have pressures which are more than twice what it takes to shut down the blood flow within the muscles."_

No.

If that was true, horses ridden for 12 hour days would ALWAYS have sores. Horses ridden for a couple of hours would have sores. Always.

And they don't. Nor do they have sore backs. Lots of horses are VERY expressive. Lots of people, including me, have horses who talk to us all the time. I had Mia for 7 years. If she didn't feel comfortable, she'd make it clear. Bandit arrived here very quiet. He's push thru until he couldn't, and then explode. I had to teach him to "talk". But he talks all the time now.

And a horse with a numb back would no more have a flowing, engaged back than you would. Bandit arrived with a back like an I-beam. It took time to get him to use his back, to flow instead of pound. But he does flow now. And he couldn't if the article was true, because his back would be numb within minutes. ALWAYS. Because none of us have levitating saddles, and that is what the article says would be needed.

The article says: "_It is hard for the typical rider to understand that a real relationship with a horse must begin on the ground with no halters, ropes, or small confined spaces._"

Yet what the cavalry officer wrote 150 years ago is how my horses act. When my horse and I go out, particularly with others, he shows the signs above: He likes showing off his strength, he likes variety, he dislikes boredom. He is entirely capable of enjoying himself. He can be alert without fear. Content to accelerate, or slow down. He likes a race more than I ever will. He likes it when I count on him to do something.

"_By this time, another signpost is that the personal desire of the human to ride the horse will have naturally dropped away. A person at this level of understanding would have no more wish to bridle and saddle her equine teacher than she would to bridle and saddle her best human friend and prod her along a nice “trail ride”. If you are at the beginning of this journey and can’t quite understand yet how a person could have a fulfilling relationship with a horse without riding, maybe it would be helpful to have a little carrot hung out to tempt you._"

More hogwash. Written by someone who apparently doesn't know how to allow their horse to have fun, or the intoxicating attraction "teamwork" has for a horse. Horses love being part of a team, and humans offer them a type of teamwork other horses rarely provide. A couple of years ago, my daughter rode a horse 26 miles on pavement, during a hot day, pushing sheep. The next morning, before dawn, I was on the horse's back - doing figure 8s with him in the pre-dawn twilight because he was raring to head out for another day. He had a job and he loved it! He didn't settle until his work began. THEN he was relaxed! He put another 25 mile day in and finished alert and trotting at his own initiative.

At some point, these theoreticians need to get out and LOOK at horses. If they have never been on a horse who starts giving a big trot, not because asked but out of the joy of living, or who offers a canter or gallop because the horse enjoys it - while ridden - then I pity their experience with horses! If they have never ridden a horse who was obviously having fun, then shame on them! If they have never seen a horse who loved his job, then they need to get out more.

Humans can be enablers for a horse. We can give a horse a chance to use his power in a productive way. I see lots of signs that horses enjoy work - just as I enjoy a hard run, and can sometimes still enjoy weightlifting. And they can take pleasure in being ridden by a team mate!


----------



## AnitaAnne (Oct 31, 2010)

bsms said:


> From the link:
> 
> "_So what does it mean if the blood flow is shut down? This is what happens on a small scale when we press on our skin and it turns white, or if we sit in an awkward position for a longer amount of time, and we experience our leg or arm “going to sleep”._
> 
> ...


Agree with all of the above. Hogwash it is. 

Only can add one thing to @bsms excellent response. 

I am an RN. Have seen bedsores (decubitus ulcers) on many occasions. From a spot of red on a heel to deep, oozing pressure sores with tunneling and rarely is the bone involved. Ulcers are staged based on what tissue is affected. They do not start at the bone, they end at the bone. 

That book you are quoting is complete hogwash. How do you explain 100 mile endurance rides ridden within a 24 hour period? How do you explain horses doing these rides into their 20's and remaining sound? 

My horse LOVES to hop on the trailer and go for a ride. He prefers the mountains to flatlands. We communicate really well and I can read him like a book. He will let me know if anything is hurting him, and I listen. I always say he picked the brand of saddle, I picked the style! He told me which one he liked. How the heck did he know the difference if his back was completely numb? Jeez.


----------



## AnitaAnne (Oct 31, 2010)

Luv2Train81 said:


> bsms said:
> 
> 
> > No you wouldn't see that. As I already stated that even most experienced vets have often an extremely hard time to diagnose back injuries. .
> ...


----------

