Right now the wide world of the web is aflame with a scientific report that PROVES that double bridles and nosebands have horrendous consequences for the poor horses subjected to them. The ABC news headline gives a fair taste: Olympic equestrian events under fire as research links riding equipment to stress response in horses. And the news items observes that scientists are ‘claiming nosebands and double bridles could cause unnecessary pain and suffering to horses during equestrian events’.
“This study is the first to show that a very common practice, and a very common piece of gear, is eliciting a stress response in horses,” said veterinarian and senior author of the study, Professor Paul McGreevy, “It is worth noting that this response emerged in horses without riders and without rein tension, so it’s possibly just the tip of the iceberg.”
Except the research proves just the opposite, according to Kate Fenner, the lead author of the study, the one who actually carried out the experiments on the twelve horses tested.
When I talk with Kate, a totally different picture emerges from the one that has been doing the rounds of the web, and frantically promoted by the RSPCA and Professor McGreevy.
Instead of ALL nosebands combined with double bridles having bad consequences for the horses, the only problem comes when they are used illegally. According to Kate, “A properly fitted noseband with the conventional two fingers of space, has no bad effect at all and that is what comes out of our research, in fact we’ve proved that there is no problem when they are used properly. I can’t comment on what the RSPCA are saying, but you are quite right, the extreme effect is only in condition 4, where the noseband is tightened so there is no space under the noseband. The problem as I see it is that the rules are not specific enough – if they were, and they ensured that all the nosebands were properly fitted, with the two fingers of space, then we wouldn’t be having this conversation.”
Interesting isn’t it, how research can prove one thing – and then be used to prove the opposite?
While we are on the subject, I do believe there is a problem with drop and flash nosebands used with snaffle bridles in Young Dressage Horse classes. The stewards seem to routinely ignore purple tongues and hideously tight nosebands. Now if, as their advocates claim, the drop noseband is a useful training tool, then it should have no place in the competition arena – the solution is simple, only allow cavesson nosebands fitted with a two finger space, and enforce the rule.
I suspect that the FEI is about to make the double bridle optional for Grand Prix dressage. Sad in that another tradition of our sport goes, but when we have World and Olympic champions who consistently misuse double bridles, it is perhaps no great loss – although they will be just as ugly in snaffles.
And in the meantime, next time you find a shock horror report, take the time to go to the original document, try to talk to its author, and you might find that the web furore is just the usual publicity seekers trying to get their moment of notoriety in the media and that the truth is quite different…
Chris Hector
I agree, as long as the nose band is fitted correctly there’s no problem. One great thing about horses is if they let you get away with something it won’t be for long. Horses stop working if they’re under stress of any kind so when people try to take short cuts or jump onto ‘fads’ to try and cheat the horse, they always have to come back to solid horsmanship to get anywhere. If people have their nosebands too tight, education is the key. what happened to the gear check before the event? Even the smallest shows have gear checks don’t they?
Well that is all well and good isn’t it, the thing is that the people who misuse bits and nosebands will never ride the GP in a snaffle so they are achieving nothing except to rub out another tradition of Dressage. This sport when ridden by the best riders on Champion horses is beautiful and poetic to watch. So are they going to start banning the hideous bits and contraptions they put on show jumpers and eventers? The other thing to realise is that the horses who actually reach the Grand Prix are for the most part kept by loving, caring people. These horses have wonderful homes and are looked after in the best possible way. Maybe the focus needs to be shifted, our best riders who dedicate their lives to riding Dressage need feel no guilt about the welfare of their horses.
If , as you claim,this gear is not painful or restrictive to the horses wearing them, then WHY are they so necessary to use? Obviously this gear is used because it gives the rider more control over the horse, which must mean that the rider would have less control without it.To bring about a change in the animals behaviour, then obviously the gear must cause a physical reaction, and the only physical change to cause this must , by such reasoning , be painful.Surely you would not have the gall to pretend that the leverage caused by this equipment is so delightful that the horse slows down out of pure pleasure?Anyone with the basest knowledge of physics can put A plus B together,leverage and solid metal together, with the animals mouth, all working in apposite directions can ONLY cause pain and discomfort. As someone who has trained horses in the past, I have seen for myself the injury that can be done to a horses mouth by even a snaffle bit.For you to suggest to uniformed people that this is not the case makes you disingenuous at best, and a manipulative lier at worst. If you are going to take a side in an argument at least have the courage and decency to tell the truth instead of trying to sugarcoat an issue that needs to be addressed in an honest manner.What next, horses love to perform with bleeding lungs and bowed tendons?I repeat, if you are going to mount an argument, don’t dismiss scientific evidence because it may hit your hip pocket.
Chris be careful not to be too critical, as the media frenzie has highlighted a problem that does exist and should be eradicated for the welfare of the horse. Re-focus all Gear Stewards on what to check for.!
Yes The Gear steward must do the job they have taken on properly as per the rules , The welfare of the horse MUST COME FIRST! It is up to the rider to make it a fair workplace for the horse.
Just to clarify a few things for any readers that might be a bit confused:
1) Over tightened (being referred to here as illegally used) nosebands are prevalent in dressage. In a study published in thehorse.com in 2013, 47% of nosebands were found to be fitted in this way and in only 12% of cases could 2 fingers fit under the noseband. You can read this study here: http://www.thehorse.com/articles/32369/researchers-measure-horses-noseband-pressure. This 47% of horses fit into the tight treatment of the current study, referred to above as ‘condition 4’.
2) This over-tightening of nosebands sadly isn’t illegal as has been suggested. Unfortunately the 2 finger rule was removed from the FEI rule book because it was thought to be imprecise as Christina Wilkins from Horses and People Magazine discovered: https://www.horsesandpeople.com.au/article/uk-politicians-support-monitoring-noseband-tightness#.VzMOGBV97ph.
Despite the introduction of an objective measuring device in 2012 by the International Society of Equitation Science in the form of a taper gauge (http://www.equitationscience.com/announcements/news2) this has neither been adopted casually or indeed legally.
3) It is worth noting that the horses in the current study were not subjected to any rein tension and were simply standing in the bridle without reins attached. With this in mind, we may be looking at the tip of an iceberg of a stress reaction when tight nosebands are combined with high rein tension values as Christensen found in 2011 that horses do not habituate to rein tension voluntarily – https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51146262_Rein_tension_acceptance_in_young_horses_in_a_voluntary_test_situation
4) Finally I would very much encourage people to go and read the paper for themselves if they are at all confused by Chris Hector’s interpretation. The study is freely available here in its entirety: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0154179
Its just the media and journo’s Chris. Paul McGreevy said the same thing. Its his research as much (if not more than) Kate Fenner’s. They both say the same thing.
Just use the little tool they want used to show the noseband is not cranked tight.. why not FFS! Really, watching that ABC program, those spoken to were too defensive… a simple fine, we are happy to use the tool, and will act if it’s too tight defuses the whole thing.
I will say it takes a strong gear steward to say to SOME of our prima donna DQs that their gear needs adjusting.
What you don’t realise, is that the so called bleeding heart “horse lovers” are the ones you need to sponsor events, to watch it on TV and to sit on their bums at your events.
Like it or not, if they THIN K something is cruel, they not only remove their support they become active against it.
Instead of sneering…. or being defensive, as seems to be happening all over on the horse web in OZ it’s high time equestrian people realise you have to give to get – and in this case if giving, is loosening a noseband two holes so be it.
Well said Fran, the problem for stewards is, if they have to enforce a rule they need an objective measurement tool that is used in the same place on each horse. Everyone happily presents their whip to be measured, there is also a bit diameter tool that is used;riders expect bit inspections after a test & the noseband taper provides a consistent guide so that we can prove that the noseband is not too tight. Those who have not been a gear steward may not appreciate the challenge of asking riders to adjust their gear; having a tool that prevents discussion on what constitutes “too tight” makes it easier for everyone.
We have to appreciate that the media want sensation- it sells stories to an audience and they will at times use langauage that suggests a certain opinion so that we readers/viewers/listeners pay more attention. Animal welfare is a high priority subject and we have to participate in and present our sport in a way that demonstrates to people who don’t have an equestrian background that it is not causing discomfort to the animals we love. The fact that Kate’s research showed that a correctly fitting noseband did not cause stress indicators to be manifested should be highlighted to everyone.
We use a lot of practices & techniques because they are traditional but some of those are linked to a time when horses were a means of transport or beast of burden which could be discarded if they were injured or no longer able to be worked. To outsiders that can appear cruel or unecessary. We know some handling techniques may be needed at times to keep horses and people safe but in this day of instant information, with photos and videos available the moment something happens or that can reinforce an opinion it will be out there. We have seen recent examples of cruelty though neglect for example and we are all appalled at this. Culturally, times have changed; people see equestrian sports as a leisure activity ( even if many people earn their living from it) and as such that horses are being used for our entertainment not to fulfill a critical life sustaining need so they expect evidence that how we use horses is not to their detriment.
We need to support well crafted, valid, repeatable research so that we can show that what we do is not unfair to horses. Of course, as in all fields there is poor research technique and reporting but it is hard for us to refute work if we haven’t read it. I agree 12 horses doesn’t sound like much of a sample but in research methodologies it is an acceptable sample in certain situations, Repeat studies of this would give us more evidence ( to support or refute the initial study) but of course this needs resources. We should be proactive in supporting constructive investigation into horse welfare before overzealous misinformed groups who don’t want any interaction with animals influence the general public and politicians to take away the privilege we enjoy of being involved with horses. I hope everyone goes and reads Kate’s paper so that they are better informed of the full story. The taper gauge has been around since 2012, It has been tested to show its reliability, let’s use it.
Horses will not just stop working because of stress n torture, yes the way they let you know is through behaviour and then get punished more for that so damed if they do n damed if they dont. They cant verbally speak out so we with a soul need to for them.
Here’s an article on the topic by Professor McGreevy.
https://theconversation.com/why-nosebands-should-be-loosened-on-dressage-horses-at-the-olympics-56370
My problem with nose bands (apart from the obvious too tight scenario) is that no one seems to be asking – why do we need them? If it is because the horse keeps opening his mouth then surely there is a very good reason for that that should be investigated – a low roof of the mouth will cause major problems with the link of the snaffle bruising it – to then force the horse to keep his mouth shut is, IMO nothing short of cruel.
I can’t see any reason for having to have these types of nosebands that can’t be addressed through investigation of the problem and/or correct and fair training.