The differences between opinions, evidence and facts are becoming increasingly important as the “science” behind welfare becomes increasingly politicised and if you aren’t against something (because you feel there is not sufficient evidence) then you must be for it and therefore supporting animal abuse.
We have seen this increasingly over the past few years with our noseband, bridle and tongue research!
I’m not a massive fan of double bridles, I like the concept of bitless bridles. I love seeing horses doing dressage and jumping bitless and even in rare cases, bridleless – I still want to know if this (bitless, bridleless) is 1) safe 2) better for the horse. My inclination is it may be, but when we theorise we can make mistakes. Evidence supports, modifies or reject theories.
It may be more complex than a binary yes or no. It may depend on factors such as the horse, the noseband tightness, the type of bridle, the riders skill, the rider empathy, the riders knowledge. It may be that not every solution suits every horse – to be honest I’m fairly certain that one is true. It may also be a very different answer for a foal trained in one method or the other from birth compared with a mature horse transitioned from one to the other.
At the end of the day, my goal is to see incremental improvements in horse welfare, however we can achieve them. Once I have evidence, I am happy to give an expert opinion. From experience, I know this can lead to change.
Remember, at the Barcelona Olympics in 1992, we had multiple horses collapsing in the heat, and although it’s a miracle none died, many never competed successfully again at that level. Following the Atlanta Research project from 1993-1996 we haven’t had a single heat-related fatality or single case of heat stroke at an Olympics or World Games (where all aspects of climate mitigation are employed). BUT, before Atlanta, the demand was that we didn’t need research; just make the second roads and tracks longer to “give more time for recovery.” Subsequent research actually shows this would have made things worse, with no horses being able to start XC. A perfect example of why we usually need research and evidence over emotion and opinion.
At the moment, we seem to have an excess of emotion and opinion in some “camps”. Those of us conducting research are simply doing it, publishing it, and communicating with stakeholders to encourage change. We are not attacking or trolling anyone who holds alternative views. Alternative views are good. But when you stand up to speak, it’s always good to be armed with evidence over opinion.
