# Saddle Seat; cruel or no?



## disastercupcake

So, aside from everything we've seen about soring, tail-setting, weighting, and that whole bag of worms... is saddle seat in the very style of riding/training cruel to the horse? 

This question stems merely from my observation of a barn that is run mainly on teaching lessons to kids... mostly saddle seat. Their horses are mostly older, but there are a couple under 10. Every single one of them has muscle wasting in the back, and a sway back. Some I can barely stand to look at. 

I can't help but notice that during 'training', horses are bent and trapped into a 'U' shape with overchecks, WAY too short side reins, and croupers. They are strapped up, and let out into the area for a few mintues, then lunged for about 10 minutes. This is, on average, the only time they leave the stall in a week's time. Many of them are actually ridden like this, as well. 

Now, I rode saddles eat for a long time. But I was never at a 'professional' barn run like this. All my lessons were very similar to western or hunt seat lessons, just a little more fast-paced. There was no preoccupation with headset or how high my horses' feet came off the ground, and my horse _developed_ his back; it didn't atrophy.


----------



## PSNapier

As I understand it, many gaited breeds suffer when their heads are brought up and backs forced hollow so that their gaits are exaggerated. I remember one trainer describing it as the opposite of dressage- focusing on making the horse hollow and on the front end instead of round and on the hind end.

Personally though, I think it varies. Just as with any other discipline. Gaited breeds shouldn't _have_ to be hollow in order to gait if the gait is natural, and from what I've seen in Icelandics and Pasos it isn't necessary for smooth gaits at all.

I'll be curious to see what someone with more experience with gaited horses has to say on the matter! <3


----------



## greentree

Saddleseat itself is not cruel. I am sure many find the rest of the practices acceptable, but I do not. DH's bosses daughter rides in Academy at a Saddlebred barn. At the show, the horses are drugged. They have their tongues tied, with every manner of check, gag, and martingale available. I find it despicable.


----------



## texasgal

It's just like any other riding style. There are ways to do it right, and ways that are less kind to the horse..

The riding STYLE is not cruel .. people are.


----------



## clumsychelsea

I've never been sure how to feel about saddleseat. Like texasgal said, it's really like any other riding discipline in that there are correct ways to do it and incorrect ways. Unfortunately I think it's one of those disciplines that wind up being a little more wrong than right in most cases. 

Slightly off topic, but I was reading a breed book the other day and on the page of one of the gaited horses info pages was a picture of someone riding saddleseat with chains around the horses ankles, and the caption said, "Chains and heavy weights as well as other stimulants are used to encourage a gaited horse to lift their feet higher in the air." Made it sound normal and like it was expected to be done with gaited horses. Didn't like that.


----------



## Yogiwick

Agree. No discipline is cruel in and of itself.

Every discipline has some people that use cruel methods to achieve what they want.

Every discipline also has things that are questionable and may not really be helping (like the gadgets you're describing).

My Morgan was an ex Saddleseat champ.

Perfectly normal horse and nice solid back.

Completely sound and solid when he passed very suddenly at 30.

Regarding gaiting. Gaited horses gait BETTER with a normal head carriage. The same things you want in say dressage SHOULD be the same things you're looking at if you're wanting to enhance gait. Now you can't get that "showiness" (read move like the back is broken with the front feet waving around) with normal movement but normal movement is normal movement and the PROPER way to enhance ANY horses gait.

That old boy of mine was SUPER showy and quite the looker (I was put in the advanced group at camp I think solely cause they were impressed with my horse lol) but always VERY normal. He liked to go and lifted his feet high otherwise you'd never know.


----------



## trailhorserider

I don't know what breed(s) of horse are at the barn in question, but I thought I would mention that there is a genetic component to sway backs in Saddlebreds. Some of them are actually born with a sway. 

So are these Saddlebreds, gaited horses, Arabians, Morgans or what? Not all saddleseat horses are gaited. A lot of them are not.

The things I don't like about saddleseat are mostly related to the way they are shod. I don't like the exaggerated hoof length and pads and weighted shoes. I hate to see Arabians ridden like that. :-( But I will be honest and say I don't know if it actually causes lameness issues. I have no idea. But as someone who comes from a back ground of trail riding, I always find their feet rather unappealing.

And I don't like the bitting rigs and such either. But again, I have very little experience in that world so what do I know! :-|


----------



## 40232

Is the discipline of Saddleseat Cruel? No. Are some of the people in it? Most definitely.

I worked at a barn that specialized in Arabians and Arabian Crosses, some of which were Saddleseat horses. What I seen of "cruelty" were short cut methods - most of the horses were ridden in 10 ring martingales, draw reins, and "harsher" bits. A common practice there was long lining, which is not necessarily a bad practice, but when the horses are leaning on the trainer's hands the whole time, I see not so good training at work. At that particular barn, drugging was not uncommon. Melatonin (the human sleep drug) was used on certain horses to calm them a bit for lessons and sometimes shows. PerfectPrep, an untraceable drug was also used to calm horses for shows. 

Was it the saddleseat itself? No, but instead the trainer saying it was okay. 

The horses themselves were very high quality animals, many worth $10,000+. While I was working there, they were all very well cared for and cherished. All horses were cared for very well, and all of their needs were met, and then some. But they were treated as purely show animals, and needed to perform as such all of the time. If their was a way to get from Point A to Point B quicker, it was used. 

Saddleseat is a VERY fun discipline when done correctly though. I showed one of the horses that had been at that barn for our Highschool Equestrian team, and I had a blast. The horse I rode in the 3 Local Shows and then Regionals was a National Show Horse mare, about 20 years old. In her youth she was a winner at Regional breed shows and did make an appearance at Nationals in Halter, Country Pleasure and Driving. She LOVES her job. Not all Saddleseat is cruel, and these pictures should show that (I have permission to post)


















What I see is a forward moving horse with engagement of the hind end, use of her back, and acceptance of the double bridle. Don't knock Saddleseat until you try it, under a good trainer :wink:


----------



## sorrelmare

Saddle seat in it's self is not cruel. But just like any discipline, there are some bad apples in the bunch that are greedy and only care about winning and not the welfare of the horse. The big lickers in the TWH world are probably the cruelest, sickest people in the horse industry. If you don't know what the "big lick" is, look it up on youtube. But beware, most of those videos are extremely graphic and will have any horse lover in tears.


----------



## verona1016

There will always be people in all disciplines who use training gadgets to try and shortcut a horse to whatever is currently in vogue in the show ring. I think what really defines a discipline is what they allow openly at shows. 

I don't follow saddle seat as I have no interest in it, and I don't have a 'yes' or 'no' as to whether the discipline is 'cruel' as a matter of course. To get an answer I'd have to do some research and find out to what extent they allow those gadgets to be employed at shows (either in warm up or in the actual show ring); the governing body's stance on issues like that would be a big part in deciding that yes or no. The stacked shoes they allow in Big Lick, for example, is a clear indicator that that specific governing body is not concerned about the welfare of the horses.


----------



## disastercupcake

I appreciate everyone's response and i completely agree with the main theme that saddle seat can be done well our badly.
However, I guess i didn't specify that i was going after the very philosophy of the practice.What is the goal of saddle seat? The only thing I've found that it's the practice of showing off your nice, expensive horse.that leaves a lot for interpretation and free adaptation.
Add kin dressage, the profit is to improve upon the horses natural gaits and extend his useful life.in other words, to preserve the house. That may not always be what happens, but it is at least the intent.
Should salary be practiced like dressage, or should it be it's own purpose?


----------



## 40232

disastercupcake said:


> I appreciate everyone's response and i completely agree with the main theme that saddle seat can be done well our badly.
> However, I guess i didn't specify that i was going after the very philosophy of the practice.What is the goal of saddle seat? The only thing I've found that it's the practice of showing off your nice, expensive horse.that leaves a lot for interpretation and free adaptation.
> Add kin dressage, the profit is to improve upon the horses natural gaits and extend his useful life.in other words, to preserve the house. That may not always be what happens, but it is at least the intent.
> Should salary be practiced like dressage, or should it be it's own purpose?


Well, what is the goal of western pleasure, or hunt seat? I see both of those disciplines showing off their nice, expensive horses. :wink:

For arabians at least, there is 3 divisions of saddleseat: Country Pleasure, English Pleasure, and Park. Country Pleasure is the class that focuses on the manners of the horse, and then the action and animation of it's movement. If a horse misbehaves in this class, they are pretty much out of the placings. In Country pleasure, lighter shoes also tend to be used. English Pleasure is the step up from Country pleasure, and the manners and animation of the horses are both important. In English Pleasure, you start to see heavier shoes, but within weight limits for the class. In Park, animation and action of the horse is the main focus. Heavier shoes are used, and the horses are FLASHY! If a horse misbehaves in this class, it will probably be overlooked.

Here are examples of each:
Country Pleasure: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EF0p0vgM62k
English Pleasure: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xq7rf30S_Wk
Park: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_yjrcIFEQY

If saddleseat is trained correctly, it isn't ruining the horse. Of the horses I've been around, the arabians and crosses at these barns are by far cared for the most. The mare I rode for Highschool Equestrian is 20 years old and still being competed. Just now she is having problems with arthritis, which affects horses of all disciplines.


----------



## 4horses

The barn near me definitely was cruel. The horses were worked no more than 20 minutes at a time and stalled their entire lives. All the horses had stable vices. They had ulcers and coliced more than any stable I've known. 

The horses were drugged for trailering. All sorts of shortcuts were used during training. Gingering was used to improve tail set during shows.

Their feet were horrible with contacted heels... I have a feeling the reason they were worked for such a short time was that they would not stay sound with hooves that bad.

They had to be stalled for fear they would lose a shoe. There was no turnout and they never had a chance to socialize or act like a horse. The tailsets certainly looked uncomfortable.

I don't think they were at all happy. I think the trainer and owners were clueless as to the needs of their animals. I wouldn't say they were overly abused but that kind of confinement can't be good for their mind.

I would never keep my horses in a place like that! If you work your horse every day for a few hours, take them to shows and have them out and about, then I have no problem with stalling. But some of those horses never left their stalls and were never worked. 

What is the point of having an animal if you never give it attention and keep it locked up?


----------



## 40232

4horses said:


> The barn near me definitely was cruel. The horses were worked no more than 20 minutes at a time and stalled their entire lives. All the horses had stable vices. They had ulcers and coliced more than any stable I've known.
> 
> The horses were drugged for trailering. All sorts of shortcuts were used during training. Gingering was used to improve tail set during shows.
> 
> Their feet were horrible with contacted heels... I have a feeling the reason they were worked for such a short time was that they would not stay sound with hooves that bad.
> 
> They had to be stalled for fear they would lose a shoe. There was no turnout and they never had a chance to socialize or act like a horse. The tailsets certainly looked uncomfortable.
> 
> I don't think they were at all happy. I think the trainer and owners were clueless as to the needs of their animals. I wouldn't say they were overly abused but that kind of confinement can't be good for their mind.
> 
> I would never keep my horses in a place like that! If you work your horse every day for a few hours, take them to shows and have them out and about, then I have no problem with stalling. But some of those horses never left their stalls and were never worked.
> 
> What is the point of having an animal if you never give it attention and keep it locked up?


Any horses can have vices, bad feet and health problems - this is not saddleseat specific, but neglect by the owner.

You mention gingering and tailsets - I'm assuming you worked at a barn with mainly saddlebreds? 

At the barn I worked at, the horses were worked for around 30 minutes at top, which was more than enough to keep them in tip top working condition. They were taken from their stalls, groomed and tacked up, worked, untacked, groomed again and sometimes sprayed down, and tied to cool down in their stall. Many of the horses I was around LOVED being in their stalls. The higher energy horses did get to be turned out in the indoor arena for half an hour or an hour a day.

Shoes are a legitimate concern for turning out. Yes, they may lose a shoe, but when weight is added to the shoes, injuries can happen at pasture. The mare I mentioned in my previous posts was turned out with her weighted show shoes on, and ended up tearing her digital flexor tendon in her youth. Shoes are expensive, and can be dangerous if the horse dinks around in the pasture. Her injury happened by pure chance, but precautions still need to be made.


----------



## disastercupcake

4horses said:


> The barn near me definitely was cruel. The horses were worked no more than 20 minutes at a time and stalled their entire lives. All the horses had stable vices. They had ulcers and coliced more than any stable I've known.
> 
> The horses were drugged for trailering. All sorts of shortcuts were used during training. Gingering was used to improve tail set during shows.
> 
> Their feet were horrible with contacted heels... I have a feeling the reason they were worked for such a short time was that they would not stay sound with hooves that bad.
> 
> They had to be stalled for fear they would lose a shoe. There was no turnout and they never had a chance to socialize or act like a horse. The tailsets certainly looked uncomfortable.
> 
> I don't think they were at all happy. I think the trainer and owners were clueless as to the needs of their animals. I wouldn't say they were overly abused but that kind of confinement can't be good for their mind.
> 
> I would never keep my horses in a place like that! If you work your horse every day for a few hours, take them to shows and have them out and about, then I have no problem with stalling. But some of those horses never left their stalls and were never worked.
> 
> What is the point of having an animal if you never give it attention and keep it locked up?


This is exactly how the barn in question is run. 

A couple horses are there that I have literally not seen leave their stall in months. And I'm there every day for about 6 hours. I clean the stalls. 

I guess my hurt and anger towards this kind of treatment isn't really directed at the practice of Saddleseat, but at the notion that people can be so ignorant of what a horse is, and what a horse needs to be happy, and still believe that the horse is in fact happy and healthy. And they happen to do Saddleseat, which turns their backs into a sagging nightmare and gives them arthritis from the upright shoes and impact. 

So, back to the point I guess. If it is not just Saddleseat, and these things happen even in very large, professional barns, why are they still operational? Everyone with the knowledge and compassion should resolutely boycott these places. I know I will, if I've learned anything. I won't be going back there.


----------



## 40232

disastercupcake said:


> I guess my hurt and anger towards this kind of treatment isn't really directed at the practice of Saddleseat, but at the notion that people can be so ignorant of what a horse is, and what a horse needs to be happy, and still believe that the horse is in fact happy and healthy. And they happen to do Saddleseat, which turns their backs into a sagging nightmare and gives them arthritis from the upright shoes and impact.


Backs don't turn into sagging nightmares unless the horse has a long back (which is common in saddlebreds especially) or if the trainer isn't having the horse use itself correctly. There was 2 Saddlebreds at the barn I worked at which had terrible sway backs, but they were amazing performers. When compared to the Arabians that do the same exact discipline at the same level, the Arabians had far better backs. Breed definitely plays into how their backs are.

As with any high impact sports, arthritis can result, and it is not just in Saddleseat. How do you think sliding stops and spins impact reiners? Or how jumping and tight turns impact jumpers? Or the high level movements in dressage? Any and all disciplines have horses with arthritis.


----------



## trailhorserider

Maybe I missed it.....but what breed are the horses at the barn in question?


----------



## tinyliny

on the one hand, most of us riders don't ride such hot horses, and kudos to those that do , in a flat saddle like that.

but, on the other hand, I find the entire show world really baffling. for what? for what are you going to all that effort ? for what does the horse get bred for, and spend his /her life in a stall for? so you can show off? and that style of riding has no real application to any real life situation that I can think of.

jumpers teach a hrose to jump, and out on the trail, you may encounter a jump. western pleasure, as bizarre as it is , teaches a hrose to trot slow and conserve energy, and be easy to ride. ok, I can understand that. dressage teaches the hrose to move in a balanced and hopefully athletic way, and builds on the rider's ability to finely control the horse. it helps for other disciplines. 

but, Park? and English pleasure? the horse trots around at lightening speed, back braced, and hollowed, and gait created as much by weighted shoes as by genetics. what IS the purpose of that?

I respect the difficulty of riding Saddleseat, (having tried it) but, I just don't understand how the horses have any use except as show toys.


----------



## Incitatus32

I work in a saddleseat barn and I can tell you that a good trainer only does what a horse can do. A good trainer will not 'jack up' (or lift) a horse that has little front end height to his legs. A good trainer will get a horse on the bit and utilize his muscles and build him up for as big a step as he can take. 

For instance, we use padded weights and/or weighted shoes to teach horses to pick up their feet. However these are only used rarely throughout the week of training and the equines get plenty of down time from these. Older veterans know that when the shoes go on it's show season and time to pick their feet up, and when they come off they can go plod around like old nags.

The 'awful' side reins, martingales and other aids? Those are there to teach a horse the generic position and to encourage a natural carriage. A good trainer will not 'force' this, but will use these to encourage a young horse to follow his conformation and travel with his head up. As for tongue ties I've see just as many western horses tied as saddleseat horses. When done correctly AND professionally it's another good tool for a horse that likes to get its tongue over the bit or a safety tool. 

The worst accident I ever saw at a horse show was the owner arguing with a trainer that the tie was cruel. The trainer explained the horse would put its tongue over the bit and then rear and try to flip. The owner removed the tie before the class, went in on her horse, the horse got its tongue over the bit and flipped over on top of her. The lady barely survived and the horse cracked its head open and had brain damage. 

IME with GOOD trainers horses are only left inside a few days to a week (if the horse is naturally colder) before a show and then the rest of the time is on turnout 24/7. 

Saddleseat horses can be just as 'on the bit' as upper level dressage horses and yet again, IME have about the same amount of muscle. A good trainer only enhances what the horse naturally has, they don't try to create it. 

Point being the discipline doesn't cause horses to 'break down' or any undo pain or abuse: people do. Anything you say about saddleseat horses and what 'breaks them down' I can point out about any other discipline.

OP I was taught that the goal of saddle seat was to exentuate a flashy horse's attitude. For instance in the Morgans I work with, the 'park bred' ones have an attitude a mile wide. They are charismatic, pick up their feet and as foals look like little baby saddle seat horses. They love to preform and just strut their stuff. So basically our goal is to get a horse in the ring that loves it's job, has a passion for just showing off and puts their feet up to the sky. *Actually, a few saddle seat champions we had actually retired to a dressage barn which now shows them in gran prix levels. They've got (according to the barn) all the flash, intelligence and willingness (as well as conformation) as their dressage horses.


----------



## anndankev

4horses said:


> The barn near me definitely was cruel. ... stalled their entire lives. ... stable vices. ... ulcers and coliced more than any stable I've known.
> 
> The horses were drugged ... All sorts of shortcuts were used during training. Gingering was used....
> 
> Their feet were horrible ... not stay sound....
> 
> ...never had a chance to socialize or act like a horse....





KylieHuitema said:


> ...gingering and tailsets - I'm assuming you worked at a barn with mainly saddlebreds? ...





disastercupcake said:


> This is exactly how the barn in question is run. ...


This is also how the barn I have experience with is run also.

Ginger, tailset bustles tightened to extreme with rolled up diapers packed under tails, nails UNDER shoes, daily drugging 'to pep the old ones, calm down the young ones', that is a quote when I returned the drug kit I found. 

Rubber hoses, in fact one mare would only 'behave' if ridden with a crop-length section of green garden hose. Didn't have to hit her with it, only show it to her. Do you know that rubber hoses do not leave bruises? She already knew.

Much more. The stress colicing. Worst was the students believing this is OK, normal, not hurting them. Just the normal everyday way.

This was a Morgan show barn.


----------



## disastercupcake

Incitatus32 said:


> OP I was taught that the goal of saddle seat was to exentuate a flashy horse's attitude. For instance in the Morgans I work with, the 'park bred' ones have an attitude a mile wide. They are charismatic, pick up their feet and as foals look like little baby saddle seat horses. They love to preform and just strut their stuff. So basically our goal is to get a horse in the ring that loves it's job, has a passion for just showing off and puts their feet up to the sky. *Actually, a few saddle seat champions we had actually retired to a dressage barn which now shows them in gran prix levels. They've got (according to the barn) all the flash, intelligence and willingness (as well as conformation) as their dressage horses.


This sounds like a barn that I could go to and be absolutely contented with. I did ride saddle seat for a while, on Tennessee Walkers, and the attitude is entirely different. No one cared how high the feet were. They cared about quality of gait and good minds. Maybe they were just rinky-dink backyard shows. But they were breed shows. 

Thank you for explaining the purpose, as well. That actually does make more sense to me, and is more in line with my personal experience riding saddle seat. At the same time, though, there ARE a lot of barns like the one I describe, and others have seen them too. They still do what they do and get blue ribbons to come home and advertise and teach kids to do these things. I see little girls using those spiky chain bits on their horses. 

These are mostly Saddlebred horses, btw. There are also some Arabians and Morgans. 



Incitatus32 said:


> The 'awful' side reins, martingales and other aids? Those are there to teach a horse the generic position and to encourage a natural carriage. A good trainer will not 'force' this, but will use these to encourage a young horse to follow his conformation and travel with his head up. As for tongue ties I've see just as many western horses tied as saddleseat horses. When done correctly AND professionally it's another good tool for a horse that likes to get its tongue over the bit or a safety tool.


I agree with your method of properly using the side reins. I use them on my horses. What I was describing is side-reins adjusted so tight that the horse literally cannot move it's head from a cramped, artificially bent state. This forces the horse into a false frame, from which there is no escape because the overcheck prevents them from lowering there head at all. That, coupled with a crouper, keeps the underside of the neck pushed out and the back down and braced. 

These horses have enormously overdeveloped necks on the underside. It's almost like a large bulging goiter in some of them.


----------



## ponyboy

disastercupcake said:


> However, I guess i didn't specify that i was going after the very philosophy of the practice.What is the goal of saddle seat? The only thing I've found that it's the practice of showing off your nice, expensive horse.that leaves a lot for interpretation and free adaptation.


Ah-hah... I think you've hit the nail on the head here. The difference between saddleseat and other disciplines is that saddleseat has no purpose outside the show ring. The only reason to ride saddleseat is to win at shows... which means it tends to attract people who are interested in winning above all.


----------



## Northernstar

I ride my horses bit less, and occasionally- half of the time, short bare back rides... good groundwork with lots of praise in between keeping them sharp. The rest of the time my horses are allowed to have the wind in their manes, and it's the greatest pleasure in the world to see them enjoy their life as a horse in the most natural state I can provide


----------



## 40232

ponyboy said:


> Ah-hah... I think you've hit the nail on the head here. The difference between saddleseat and other disciplines is that saddleseat has no purpose outside the show ring. The only reason to ride saddleseat is to win at shows... which means it tends to attract people who are interested in winning above all.


Have you been on a saddleseat horse? They are FUN! There is such a rush involved when they are enjoying their job and performing because they want to. Competing is just a plus when you are in horses for the right reasons.


----------



## Incitatus32

ponyboy said:


> Ah-hah... I think you've hit the nail on the head here. The difference between saddleseat and other disciplines is that saddleseat has no purpose outside the show ring. The only reason to ride saddleseat is to win at shows... which means it tends to attract people who are interested in winning above all.



And what purpose does upper level dressage have? Or Western pleasure? Or English pleasure? Ride a saddleseat horse and you'll find out you're riding a horse who loves it's job and wants to get out there and show off. It's like watching a thespian act, or a musician preform. They WANT to show off, they WANT applause. I know I ride a saddleseat champion morgan at a horse demo every year. He never shows anymore but when we take him out and he sees the crowd and hears the applause he struts his stuff! When I ride saddleseat I ride it because I want to show off my horsemanship and put on a 'play' for the audience. 

Any and ALL disciplines will attract these people, not just one in particular.


----------



## ponyboy

Incitatus32 said:


> Ride a saddleseat horse and you'll find out you're riding a horse who loves it's job and wants to get out there and show off.


"loving their job" has nothing to do with whether a horse is being mistreated. Horses are animals who don't know any better. The racehorse doesn't know that his job puts him at a high risk of suffering a fatal injury. The dressage horse who is kept stalled 24/7 doesn't know that other horses get turnout. This is why horses need people to look out for their best interests. It's good that a horse loves his job, but it's not an excuse for everything else. 



Incitatus32 said:


> When I ride saddleseat I ride it because I want to show off my horsemanship and put on a 'play' for the audience.


My point exactly. 



Incitatus32 said:


> Any and ALL disciplines will attract these people, not just one in particular.


Which doesn't mean that all disciplines are created equal. Proportions matter. If _most_ of the people involved in a discipline use training methods that most other people find questionable, it means the discipline needs to change.


----------



## SummerBlaze1

Some forms can be


----------



## trailhorserider

tinyliny said:


> on the one hand, most of us riders don't ride such hot horses, and kudos to those that do , in a flat saddle like that.
> 
> but, on the other hand, I find the entire show world really baffling. for what? for what are you going to all that effort ? for what does the horse get bred for, and spend his /her life in a stall for? so you can show off? and that style of riding has no real application to any real life situation that I can think of.
> 
> jumpers teach a hrose to jump, and out on the trail, you may encounter a jump. western pleasure, as bizarre as it is , teaches a hrose to trot slow and conserve energy, and be easy to ride. ok, I can understand that. dressage teaches the hrose to move in a balanced and hopefully athletic way, and builds on the rider's ability to finely control the horse. it helps for other disciplines.
> 
> but, Park? and English pleasure? the horse trots around at lightening speed, back braced, and hollowed, and gait created as much by weighted shoes as by genetics. what IS the purpose of that?
> 
> I respect the difficulty of riding Saddleseat, (having tried it) but, I just don't understand how the horses have any use except as show toys.


Not picking on you Tinyliny, but you gave me a good jumping off point so I hope you don't mind me going with it. 

You know, unfortunately I think a lot of horses are kept just as expensive show toys. I don't think the other disciplines you mentioned are any different. It's not like the jumping, dressage, western pleasure horses are being trained that way for the trail. (Unless maybe those jumpers are good for fox hunting?) Even if a discipline might have applications in the real world, a horse at the top of these disciplines isn't in training for real world use. It is mainly for showing.

So I really don't see how saddleseat is much different. As a matter of fact, if someone offered me a saddleseat horse or a western pleasure horse, I would probably take the saddleseat horse because I like they way they move better and they look more sound. Not that either one would be my first choice as my next trail mount. But given the choice I like the look of saddleseat better than western pleasure.

How about halter horses? Maybe back in the early days, those were the horses with the best conformation that you would desire to breed. But nowadays I'm afraid most halter horses of popular breeds are mainly expensive show toys and don't reflect the best conformation for a horse you would actually use. So what good is a horse that's not even bred to ride? At least saddeseat horses are bred FOR riding. 

So I don't think saddleseat is unique in it's show-ring purpose. And I do think they would be fun to ride. If you have a "hot" horse that is also under control, well, that is a blast. 

I guess where I draw the line personally is I want to be able to take my horses out in the real world out on forests and trails. So anything like extra long feet, unsound conformation, tail sets, etc. would not be something I would want to do with my horses. But I also have no interest in showing. A lot of people want to show their horses. And as far as showing goes, I think all disciplines pretty much tweak what is natural for a horse in favor of what it takes to win.

What IS a natural discipline for a horse? You could say trails, endurance, or ranch work. But then it could be argued that it isn't natural for a horse to be carrying us around at all. So I guess I see everything as shades of gray. 

I definitely think the more natural we can keep our horses the better. Less stress, more natural living conditions, letting them carry themselves naturally, etc., the better. But everything is shades of gray so we have to do the best we can and decide what we can compromise on and what we can't.

I want to trail ride so I am not interested in "show stuff." But a lot of people are and who is to say exactly where you draw the line as far as which disciplines are okay and which aren't?

I think when people put showing over the needs of the horse it is wrong. It's not that showing is wrong in it's most innocent form....having fun with your horse and measuring your skill. But greed and money corrupt things and pretty soon the horse's well being is on the back burner.


----------



## disastercupcake

trailhorserider said:


> I think when people put showing over the needs of the horse it is wrong. It's not that showing is wrong in it's most innocent form....having fun with your horse and measuring your skill. But greed and money corrupt things and pretty soon the horse's well being is on the back burner.


Yes.

Could not have said it better.


----------



## Zexious

^But that can be said of any discipline.

To answer your question, OP, no. I do not think Saddle Seat is inherently cruel. I don't think most (and when I say most, I mean the /vast/ majority) disciplines are inherently cruel.

People are cruel, not disciplines.


----------



## Incitatus32

ponyboy said:


> "loving their job" has nothing to do with whether a horse is being mistreated. Horses are animals who don't know any better. The racehorse doesn't know that his job puts him at a high risk of suffering a fatal injury. The dressage horse who is kept stalled 24/7 doesn't know that other horses get turnout. This is why horses need people to look out for their best interests. It's good that a horse loves his job, but it's not an excuse for everything else.
> 
> Which doesn't mean that all disciplines are created equal. Proportions matter. If _most_ of the people involved in a discipline use training methods that most other people find questionable, it means the discipline needs to change.



Ponyboy I don't think you can say that most people in one discipline use questionable methods, or that said discipline attracts them. I know several good and honest saddleseat trainers and riders, I know several bad western/dressage/etc trainers. I've seen western horses beat over the head with crowbars to 'calm them' and dressage horses ridden with spiked bits to get their heads either on or behind the vertical. 

Does the quality of horsemanship depend on what the discipline is useful for outside of an arena? If so then dressage is bad, western pleasure and reining is bad, english pleasure is bad, and all these disciplines only attract unsavory horsemen and are cruel. 

To that end you're right, a horse doesn't know what it's missing when not turned out. And it IS people's job to ensure that the horse is well treated. However, the people who mistreat their animals should not cloud over the people who do right by their animals. 

I wish I could explain to you the feeling of riding a saddleseat horse. I wish I could explain to you and let you see the good things I've seen in those barns. My point is that the discipline is not bad, the people are. And change needs to happen in ALL disciplines. I for one think that we need to get rid of equine life insurance, get rid of ALL ill practices in EVERY discipline. But, in the horse world change comes with announcing the good and rewarding it, not bickering about getting rid of it all because of the bad and giving that the attention. 

I'm curious as to how you would change saddleseat, without changing what it's about?


----------



## ponyboy

Incitatus32 said:


> I know several bad western/dressage/etc trainers. I've seen western horses beat over the head with crowbars to 'calm them' and dressage horses ridden with spiked bits to get their heads either on or behind the vertical.


Once again, abuse is one discipline does not excuse abuse in another. By that logic all abuse is okay since there's abuse in all disciplines. 

Do you think I wouldn't speak out against people who ride with spiked bits because they were dressage riders? Of course I would.



Incitatus32 said:


> Does the quality of horsemanship depend on what the discipline is useful for outside of an arena? If so then dressage is bad, western pleasure and reining is bad, english pleasure is bad, and all these disciplines only attract unsavory horsemen and are cruel.


Actually, I don't approve of any kind of showing. It was supposed to be a means for BREEDERS to have the quality of their stock assessed, not for regular riders to win ribbons and money. 



Incitatus32 said:


> To that end you're right, a horse doesn't know what it's missing when not turned out.


Not consciously, but they suffer from physical and mental health problems because of it. 



Incitatus32 said:


> However, the people who mistreat their animals should not cloud over the people who do right by their animals.


Let me explain this for the umpteenth time. Percentages matter. If more than half of the trainers in a discipline are abusive, then yes, they are clouding over the nonabusive ones. If you don't think that's fair it's the abusive trainers you should be angry at. No one is forcing you to compete. It's your choice to be associated with those people. 



Incitatus32 said:


> I'm curious as to how you would change saddleseat, without changing what it's about?


No pads, stacks, chains, weighted shoes, long-toe trims or bits with shanks a mile long. Saddles that actually fit. No competing horses under 3. No rewarding riders whose horses are nervous or resistant in the ring (I see this every time – the calm horses always place last!) And most of all, enforcement for all of the above.


----------



## 40232

ponyboy said:


> Actually, I don't approve of any kind of showing. It was supposed to be a means for BREEDERS to have the quality of their stock assessed, not for regular riders to win ribbons and money.
> 
> Let me explain this for the umpteenth time. Percentages matter. If more than half of the trainers in a discipline are abusive, then yes, they are clouding over the nonabusive ones. If you don't think that's fair it's the abusive trainers you should be angry at. No one is forcing you to compete. It's your choice to be associated with those people.
> 
> No pads, stacks, chains, weighted shoes, long-toe trims or bits with shanks a mile long. Saddles that actually fit. No competing horses under 3. No rewarding riders whose horses are nervous or resistant in the ring (I see this every time – the calm horses always place last!) And most of all, enforcement for all of the above.


I don't see the problem with regular riders having the opportunity to compete - heck, it's a ton of fun! I have came out of SO MANY rings with no awards, so why do I do it? It's clearly not for the winning, but for the love of the game itself. With your logic, aren't you saying that there should be only professional leagues in human sports, but no amateur leagues? :lol:

So I am in the wrong for showing along with "abusive" trainers? I am in no means abusive, so what's wrong with me competing? 

I agree with you on the long-toe trims, they disgust me. But as for the long shanked bits? If you are riding properly, you really only use the snaffle. The curb shouldn't be used much at all. The ill-fitting tack? That can be found in any discipline if people don't know what they are doing. Horses move best when they are comfortable, so the tack is most likely not ill-fitting. Weighted shoes, stacked pads, and chains do not harm the horse. I think of the chains in particular like ankle weights - they just help strengthen muscles. Regular horses sometimes require pads on their shoes. And you may see nervous, but that is usually excitement, because the horse generally enjoys what it's doing. Oh, and competing under 3? I have never heard or seen a young horse being competed in saddleseat.


----------



## Incitatus32

ponyboy said:


> (1)Once again, abuse is one discipline does not excuse abuse in another. By that logic all abuse is okay since there's abuse in all disciplines.
> 
> (2)Actually, I don't approve of any kind of showing. It was supposed to be a means for BREEDERS to have the quality of their stock assessed, not for regular riders to win ribbons and money.
> 
> (3)Let me explain this for the umpteenth time. Percentages matter. If more than half of the trainers in a discipline are abusive, then yes, they are clouding over the nonabusive ones. If you don't think that's fair it's the abusive trainers you should be angry at. No one is forcing you to compete. It's your choice to be associated with those people.
> 
> (4)No pads, stacks, chains, weighted shoes, long-toe trims or bits with shanks a mile long. Saddles that actually fit. No competing horses under 3. No rewarding riders whose horses are nervous or resistant in the ring (I see this every time – the calm horses always place last!) And most of all, enforcement for all of the above.



1) I'm not sure where I was unclear but your right, abuse is abuse no matter the discipline and I do NOT tolerate nor condone it. That being said, does abuse within a discipline mean that the discipline itself needs to be abolished? Does it mean that all individuals in that area are bad? I like to think not. 

2) Yes, keyword being WAS. The horse industry has evolved with culture, and for better or for worse showing has as well. I believe that showing can be many things OTHER THAN money and ribbons to the people who are ACTUAL horsemen (and women). I know when I show (at both local and regional levels and in multiple disciplines) I do so to gain input from judges, expose my horses to new scenarios and put myself under the spotlight to help MYSELF grow used to challenging situations. I know the kids (and adults) I help teach love going to shows. They love getting third party opinions on their riding, they love training their horses to work under these conditions and they love getting together and having fun. I hardly ever see a child (or adult) complain about not getting a certain ribbon, and many even forget to collect them! Yet again I will reiterate myself, showing has good and bad people in it that make the industry seem dark and foreboding to both horse and rider. In reality it's just like anything else, when done right I'm all for it. 

3) I have no response to this other than this. I personally believe that any people who would associate good trainers and riders automatically with the scum of the horseworld are no better than the abusers and do no good for the industry. Stopping the bad in the discipline does not start and stop with competitors, it involves EVERYONE, even you. And step number one in my opinion is to recognize the good, stop stereotyping, and work WITH us to undo the bad. 

4)Maybe it's just me but I've never, EVER seen a saddle horse competed at or under five years of age. Most of our horses don't make debuts until their seven or eight at the least. I agree with you on the stacks and long trims. (Though I'm a bit confused as to how you can tell a saddle fits from the angles of the bleachers or the videos on youtube, AND take into account the individual circumstance.) And as to the bits a good rider WON'T ride on the curb, they'll do this: http://www.kentuckyhorse.org/attachments/wysiwyg/25/mainSSEquitWin08.gif

I was looking for another pic, but this one will have to do. If you notice the curb rein is loose. I'm looking for the video of that ride if anyone's interested; that to me is what good saddleseat riding is. The horse rides off of the snaffle the entire round, is nice and relaxed and clearly suited for the job mentally and physically. 

P.S: I think sometimes a lot of confusion comes about as to whether a horse is nervous or resistant versus has a lot of energy. Sometimes a horse that has a huge amount of pep looks very nervous the first few rounds but settles right in at last. I don't know if that was what you were seeing or if you could provide an example.


----------



## phantomhorse13

KylieHuitema said:


> Weighted shoes, stacked pads, and chains do not harm the horse. I think of the chains in particular like ankle weights - they just help strengthen muscles.


:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: 

I don't know what kind of ankle weights you use, but mine don't move up and down against my leg with motion.. and I sure as hell don't use them while wearing weighted sneakers with 8 inch platform soles on them (which may or may not be 2 sizes too small and loaded with sharp things, etc).

I think a saddleseat/gaited horse, moving _naturally_, is a thing of beauty and its a testament to the temperament of these breeds that they tolerate the attempts to "enhance" those gaits.


----------



## 40232

phantomhorse13 said:


> :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
> 
> I don't know what kind of ankle weights you use, but mine don't move up and down against my leg with motion.. and I sure as hell don't use them while wearing weighted sneakers with 8 inch platform soles on them (which may or may not be 2 sizes too small and loaded with sharp things, etc).
> 
> I think a saddleseat/gaited horse, moving _naturally_, is a thing of beauty and its a testament to the temperament of these breeds that they tolerate the attempts to "enhance" those gaits.



The "sneakers" _should not_ be too small, with huge soles, and loaded with sharp things. This is purely neglectful and possibly abuseful ownership on the trainers or owners behalf. I would argue that bell boots move around on the legs of a horse, and there is such thing as weighted bell boots, which have a place on my training shelf. When my horse was one sided, a weighted bell boot would go on the weaker leg. Is this abusive? Of course not, it was used as an "ankle weight". If I had a chain that wouldn't bother him, I would use it in place of the bell boot. 

I agree that a true born saddleseat horse is a gorgeous mover without enhancements, and their temperaments are great.


----------



## ponyboy

KylieHuitema said:


> *Weighted shoes, stacked pads, and chains do not harm the horse.*


This is the problem with saddleseat in a nutshell. No other discipline permanently attaches things to a horse just for appearances. I question your belief that it doesn't harm the horse, but even if it doesn't... It's the reason WHY you do those things that is the problem. 

Also, there's a big difference between the show world and the sport world... but that's another topic.


----------



## IndianaJones

Saddle seat in gaited horses means english riding. It has no baring on how the horse is ridden really...you'll see the same fox trot or flat foot walk under any saddle in a gaited show. Most stacked horses are kept in saddle seat saddles however...but I'm not going down that road :/


----------



## 40232

ponyboy said:


> This is the problem with saddleseat in a nutshell. No other discipline permanently attaches things to a horse just for appearances. I question your belief that it doesn't harm the horse, but even if it doesn't... It's the reason WHY you do those things that is the problem.
> 
> Also, there's a big difference between the show world and the sport world... but that's another topic.


Shoes are attached in multiple disciplines. In "pleasure" type horses, weighted shoes are used in more than just saddle seat, mostly seen in hunter under saddle, but sometimes seen in western. Western Pleasure stock breeds used to have their tails cut, and might still do (I'm not a stock rider). Stock breeds have their feet trimmed very upright. It's not just saddleseat that has this terrible "abuse". 

But is there really that big of a difference? Should the Olympics be only allowed because people train specifically for that one thing?


----------



## ponyboy

KylieHuitema said:


> Shoes are attached in multiple disciplines.


Oh come oooonnn! You know very well that ordinary horseshoes are used to protect horses' feet, not change the way they move. And let me repeat this one more time: ABUSE IN ONE DISCIPLINE DOES NOT EXCUSE ABUSE IN ANOTHER. So your comments about cut tails in Western pleasure are irrelevant. Western pleasure is not what this thread is about. (My comment was about attaching things to a horse, not altering them. Gelding is an alteration too and it's certainly not a bad thing). 

If weighted shoes are used in hunter showing then that's also bad, but it doesn't make saddleseat somehow less bad. 



KylieHuitema said:


> But is there really that big of a difference?


Absolutely. It has to do with evolutionary behavior, objective vs. subjective judging, factors that foster accountability in organizations, and how the span that differentiates winners and losers can be a source of corruption. But as I said, that's a topic for another day, when I have time to revise my essay. 

I wasn't expecting so many likes for this thread.


----------



## 40232

ponyboy said:


> Oh come oooonnn! You know very well that ordinary horseshoes are used to protect horses' feet, not change the way they move. And let me repeat this one more time: ABUSE IN ONE DISCIPLINE DOES NOT EXCUSE ABUSE IN ANOTHER. So your comments about cut tails in Western pleasure are irrelevant. Western pleasure is not what this thread is about. (My comment was about attaching things to a horse, not altering them. Gelding is an alteration too and it's certainly not a bad thing).
> 
> If weighted shoes are used in hunter showing then that's also bad, but it doesn't make saddleseat somehow less bad.
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely. It has to do with evolutionary behavior, objective vs. subjective judging, factors that foster accountability in organizations, and how the span that differentiates winners and losers can be a source of corruption. But as I said, that's a topic for another day, when I have time to revise my essay.
> 
> I wasn't expecting so many likes for this thread.



Well I've come to the conclusion that you have your opinions and I have mine. 

I am a horse abuser as well as many others on this forum through your eyes, and I can't change that.

Good day, I'm going to go enjoy my HAPPY, ABUSED horses


----------

