'There can be no sacred cows': horses deserve better

By Professor Nat Waran OBE

nat@navigatewelfare.com

(with thanks to Professor Kathalijne Visser, Aeres University of Applied Science, The Netherlands for her valuable input)

The history of the relationship between humans and horses involves a complex tapestry of utility, sport, companionship, and increasingly, moral responsibility. This evolving relationship reflects a profound societal shift: once primarily valued as working animals and economic assets, horses are now also treasured as companions with distinct social, emotional and behavioural needs, challenging us to examine whether established equestrian traditions genuinely benefit horses or simply perpetuate human-centred interests that fall short of acknowledging their intrinsic worth.

Increasingly much of the equestrian community is responding with welfare strategies to drive improvements, greater transparency, and improved communication to help with public education, since addressing social license challenges remains crucial for the long-term sustainability of horse-related activities and sports.

We are at a critical juncture in our association with horses, and we must confront uncomfortable truths that challenge traditional views and approaches to equestrianism.

The Scientific Landscape of Horse Welfare

Researchers from various backgrounds have provided us with increasing amounts of quality information about the equine experience, providing clear evidence of the need for more compassionate approaches to horse care, management and our expectations of them. Numerous studies have demonstrated the profound impact of training methods and equipment use on the horses' physical and emotional wellbeing, leading us to question many long-standing equestrian practices.

Researchers have examined the physiological and behavioural responses of horses during different training scenarios, showing that methods, based on use of coercion/force, significantly increase the risk of the horse experiencing negative emotional states such as fear, stress and pain.  There is now broad consensus, that certain, often traditionally used, training methods and equipment can pose significant health and welfare risks for horses. And with social media stories exposing a darker side to horse training, the equestrian world is increasingly moving to distance from such harsh or aversive techniques, and from those equestrians who have been found to be using such methods 'behind closed doors'.

Despite the serious repercussions for individuals and for the equestrian world as a whole, its concerning that these situations persist, with more examples being reported even at the highest levels. It seems that outdated and aversive practices continue to be utilised, sometimes subtly and sometimes overtly, with these justified in the name of enhanced performance, sporting tradition, or even for the ‘good of the horse’, despite the impact these practices have on the growing public concerns regarding horse welfare, scientific evidence of the detrimental physical and mental effects of poor training, and the clearly conflicting ethics related to prioritising horse welfare. This disconnect between public values and private actions undermines genuine progress and highlights an urgent need for transparency, accountability, and an overt culture that demonstrates that it is committed to putting horse well-being first.

Evidence based Equipment and Training

The equipment we use, training techniques we employ, and competitive environments we create each represent potential welfare compromises. One example, is the issue of tight nosebands that restrict natural breathing and another are the harsh bits that cause oral pain. These are not merely technical details, but also ethical considerations that fundamentally disrespect the horse's life experience.

Within parts of the equestrian community, tack and equipment are still treated as technical (or sport) matters rather than being viewed as welfare risks/concerns. Despite clear research-based evidence showing how the use and design of certain equipment causes (or risks causing), discomfort, stress, pain and even injury, these issues are sometimes ignored or dismissed by equestrians, and even disagreed with, demonstrating a deep resistance to accepting and acting upon evidence-based information that challenges current practice.

One equipment example - ‘The Noseband’ - has become the focus of a number of recent research studies providing critical insights into the likely physiological and psychological impacts of nosebands and practices, as well as challenging beliefs and attitudes.

The research has demonstrated that nosebands, when fastened tightly, cause (or risk causing) significant distress and possible physical harm to horses, including:

• restricted breathing

• pain and distress

• potential long-term tissue damage

• compromised ability to express natural behavioural responses (for example to alleviate bit pressure on the sensitive tissues of the mouth)

To avoid visible signs of discomfort (or to prevent evasion of the bit), such as a horse opening its mouth, some riders have been shown to tighten the noseband so that these behaviours are physically suppressed. Not surprisingly, this doesn't resolve the discomfort (or the need for evasion of the bit action) but likely conceals it, prioritising appearance over individual welfare and masking important indicators of equine distress (and probably symptoms of poor training). Additionally, riders may tighten nosebands out of concern that a loose fit allows the bit to move too much, potentially causing irritation or loss of control. While well-intentioned, this approach may create greater harm through continuous pressure that inhibits natural movement and behavioural expression.

But perhaps no recent issue more starkly illustrates the urgent need for welfare-centred training approaches, and acceptance of the research to underpin this, than the so called ‘blue tongue syndrome’ observed in some competition horses. The cyanosis observed in dressage horses during high level competition is thought to result from prolonged deformation and/or compression of the tongue due to pressure exerted through the rider's hand, bit(s), and bridle action. This represents an extreme manifestation of equipment-related welfare concerns, linking research evidence related to action and use of double bridles and tight nosebands to visible behavioural signs of distress.

Public Perception and Institutional Response

Not surprisingly, recent surveys carried out by the FEI appointed Equine Ethics and Wellbeing Commission and other organisations, reflect a significant and growing shift in public attitudes towards horse use and welfare. In fact, 75% of non-equestrian respondents expressed serious concerns about horse welfare in competitive sports. Interestingly, while 52% of people outside of the equestrian world think welfare standards should be improved, that proportion rises to 78% among equestrians themselves (the riders, trainers, and officials), highlighting that even those involved with horses feel practices need to change.

The establishment of the FEI Equine Ethics and Wellbeing Commission represented a positive institutional response. With the objective of systematically addressing welfare concerns, the Commission provided evidence-based recommendations through translating scientific knowledge to inform policy and practice. It’s heartening to see the FEI committed to delivering on their welfare strategy, with various actions planned to address both public and equestrian concerns. However, although this represents a positive step, it’s important that any compromises made to satisfy those who still question the need for change, do not result in ongoing suffering for horses in the name of sport. A Welfare Strategy is only worth something, if it’s actioned at all levels within an organisation to change culture and practice for the better, and to be seen to do that.

Science Provides a Way Forward

Technology and scientific understanding offer unprecedented opportunities for transformation. Biomechanical analysis, advanced understanding of equine psychology, sophisticated welfare assessment tools, and emerging AI technologies enable more accurate welfare assessments, ethical interactions, tools for change and demonstrate that we can provide horses with good lives.

The Five Domains Model offers a comprehensive framework for assessing and promoting equine welfare across the entire lifespan. It goes beyond identifying the absence of suffering by emphasising positive experiences, recognising that true welfare involves both minimising harm and maximizing well-being. The model encourages consideration of how nutrition, physical environment, health, and behavioural interactions influence a horse's mental state.

These interactions, how horses are handled, trained, transported, and managed have a profound impact on emotional well-being and behavioural development. Positive, low-stress experiences and opportunities for social contact and autonomy contribute to a sense of safety, trust, and agency. The model extends beyond basic needs to include freedom of movement, opportunity for choice, access to pasture, as well as social and environmental enrichment.

Applied throughout a horse's life, the Five Domains Model can be used to monitor welfare not just during competitive years, but also in early formative stages and after the sport or leisure career ends. This approach supports responsible breeding choices, ethical early training, humane workload and training management, and retirement/endo of life planning, shifting focus to measures related to quality of life. It’s good to see the different practical assessment tools being made available through Apps and Websites, but equestrians will need to be prepared to seek these out and make use of them if they are to make a difference in practice.

Turning Knowledge into Meaningful Change

Awareness alone is insufficient if meaningful change is to occur. As scientific knowledge accumulates, the challenge lies not in discovering what is right for the horse - but in actually doing it. Translating research into practice requires systemic change, strong leadership from governing bodies, personal responsibility and accountability mechanisms to ensure ethical standards are enforced.

Education, regulation, and cultural transformation must go hand in hand. Equestrian federations, trainers, breeders, riders, and sponsors all have roles in creating an environment where welfare is non-negotiable. Good Welfare should not be treated as an optional moral bonus, it needs integration into equestrian education, competition rules, coaching frameworks, judging and daily management and training practices. Without collective commitment, even the best scientific insights risk remaining theoretical rather than catalysts for progress.

There Can Be No Sacred Cows: Evolve or Move On

Equestrians find themselves at a critical crossroads. Those who genuinely care for their horses must acknowledge that the increasing knowledge about equine welfare carries an ethical obligation to act. Recognition of how the relationship between horses and humans is fundamentally unbalanced, meaning that horses have minimal agency while humans exercise considerable control over their lives, is essential if change is to occur.

Understanding that our horses cannot choose their living conditions, work schedules, training methods, or daily routines. They exist within boundaries that we establish, and their vulnerability demands that we act ethically and responsibly.

The scientific evidence is clear. Horses are not just athletes or working tools, but sentient (feeling) beings with complex individual needs. What has become normalised in equestrian practices often fails to align with horse needs and current knowledge about equine cognition, emotional capacity, and welfare requirements,  and in addition it fails to consider public perception and expectations.

Traditional or normalised approaches in the way we manage and train, as well as our expectations of the horse must therefore be constantly scrutinised through the lens of robust evidence.

Every aspect of horse care, use and management warrants critical examination, and this responsibility spans the entire equestrian world, from elite competition to recreational riding. While some disciplines have taken encouraging steps toward addressing welfare issues, some equestrians continue to assume an unwarranted exceptionalism. This must be a shared challenge requiring commitment to change to prioritise equine welfare across all disciplines and levels. Methods passed down through generations deserve respect for their historical context, but not immunity from scientific scrutiny. The bits that are used, housing systems that have become accepted, and training techniques that may work, but may do so through force or fear, must all be open to reconsideration.

Simply telling the public the benefits to horses of being involved in sport or with people, is insufficient to sustain equestrianism's social license. Society wants transparency, accountability, and a clear demonstration that horse welfare is genuinely prioritised. Maintaining trust means showing, not just saying, what we are doing to put the horse first.

Research, advice and evidence-based recommendations such as those provided through invited groups such as the Equine Ethics and Wellbeing Commission, provide a clear roadmap: prioritise individual horse welfare, embrace science-based ethical training methods, and reimagine our approach to equestrian activities. This means acknowledging that some conventional practices may need abandonment despite their entrenchment in equestrian culture.

Progress requires courage to question methods we've personally invested in and beliefs we've previously held dear. The most skilled equestrians demonstrate expertise not through rigid adherence to tradition, but through willingness to evolve as new information emerges.

The choice for all equestrians is clear: evolve or risk becoming obsolete.

Those who adapt, challenge assumptions, and genuinely prioritise horse welfare will preserve the future of equestrianism and elevate it to be more meaningful to society.

Our horses deserve better. They cannot advocate for themselves against practices that science has revealed to be harmful. The responsibility falls to all of us, to recognise and challenge outdated approaches, embrace evidence-based alternatives, and create a new paradigm of horsemanship that truly serves the horse best interests.