"A Horse Without a Job, is Wasted"

This was our very first episode back in September 2023, and I’m reposting it here because it’s super relevant to our newest episode!

In this podcast, we try something a little different: a debate! If you’re familiar with debate club rules, one person must defend the topic and one must oppose it. We did this using the current research in the field and went head-to-head to hash it out.

There are points involved, plus some hidden secret words we have to sneak in to earn bonus points!

Debating topics in horse care and equitation is valuable. Jen and I do this for fun and learning, and we still love each other afterwards. Good learning comes from respectful debate and from exploring different ideas and research within the field.

Voice note your questions on WhatsApp to +353 85 143 8688 to have your questions answered on the Podcast.

Meet Your Hosts

Barbara Hardman (Bright Horse Equiation)
www.brighthorse.ie

📧barbara.j.hardman@brighthorse.ie ☎️+353 85 143 8688

 Jen Nash (The Equine Method)
www.theequinemethod.co.uk

📧 Info@TheEquineMethod.co.uk ☎️+44 7902920923

Transcript

0:00

Future Barbara here, filling in for past Barbara and past Jen. During the summer, me and Jen decided to do some fun podcasts while we were recording and preparing for this show. Getting all our jokes in a row. And we decided that we would do a debate club. Basically, between the two of us. If you're not familiar with debate club rules, basically the house presents a motion. In this case, we said the barn, but the yard presents a motion. And you have to take one side or the other, regardless of your opinions, and debate that motion. During the episode, you'll hear we took five minutes each where we had to present our open arguments based only on scientific research and the research that's available to us now and debate. Unlike a normal debate, we didn't have a judge or a adjudicator, so we decided to sink in some secret words. These are words that we picked before the debate that we thought the other person would say. But this was so we could accrue some points because that was the only way we'd figure out who would win. We picked this debate because it's quite a challenging one, and we thought it would be a fun format to debate each other. So listen out for the secret words to see who wins the debate. And enjoy this special episode of Dangerous at Both Ends and Tricky in the Middle. Yay. This could be a this could be quite terrifying. Okay. So in this episode, we are going to debate the motion that this barn believes that a horse without a job is a wasted horse. And hopefully we did our homework. Um last minute.com. Don't say.com, Barbara. I hate that expression. I'm holding back the giggles so much. I'm so glad you can't see me. I'm literally covering my face right now, but I'm like, you can't even see me as it's phone. So we've got five minutes each word. We've definitely got five minutes for each. Okay. We have five minutes to present. I'm just gonna skip the each. I'm gonna try that again. We have five minutes to present all our arguments. They need to be based on evidence and facts. And one of us has to support the argument and one of us has to oppose the argument or the topic. One of us has to oppose the argument. Are you sure about that? No, I'm not. We aren't allowed to give personal opinion or rely on anecdotal evidence. These rules mean that our arguments must be presented regardless of our own opinion. So we're not allowed to use a straw man argument to defend our position. A straw man argument is one where we present an opposing position by warping an extreme version of what someone is presenting. For example, if I bought two new dresses, it's glorious sunshine, and I want to look pretty, and I asked my darling husband which one he prefers. He says he prefers the one that makes me look slim. And my response is so you think I'm fat then. This is a straw man argument. And this leads nicely into our final rule, Barbara, which is we must be kind to each other. So there will be absolutely no calling me a Scottish haggis. But I can call you a spoon. It's really important to understand that what we're debating here is research. It's all out there. You can Google the research for yourself. The purpose of this podcast is to make research fun and accessible. At the end of the debate, hopefully, we will be able to decide in a winner, but it's not always the case. So this is a bit of fun, but hopefully we're all going to learn something along the way and discuss some interesting, differing opinions. Now there's the fun competition bit. Me and Jen are a bit competitive and we want to keep things fun, so we have some rules around the debate to try and create scores. And one of them is we're gonna try and guess each other's arguments through what we're calling secret words. I have picked three secret words, and so has Jen, that I think she's gonna say during her opening argument. Every time Jen says it, I get a point. So we've written these down and time stamped them, so there's no cheating. We obviously can't use any words like ah and the because that would also be cheating. And we can't use any words that are in the title of the statement, uh, because I feel like that would also be cheating. So we picked them, we've we've sent them to ourselves, we have a timestamp, so neither of us know what they are, but we're gonna insert them here so you can listen along and see who gets the points. So before Jen gets started with her debatable section, my three secret words are enrichment, and I tossed and turned about orthopedic issues and laminitis. But I'm gonna go with laminitis, and then my third word is obesity. So fingers and hands crossed, but hopefully I'll get a few points. So, guys, remember Barbara can't hear this. My secret words that I expect her to say in her argument are freedom, herds, and social. I'm just gonna leave it there. Keep it short and sweet. Okay. Now we're moving into uncharted territory. We are into uncharted territory because who goes first? I'm just I yeah, I'm actually just gonna Google debate club rules and see what the standard is. Like, is it for supporting? Debate club rules. Who goes first? Okay, so it it's it's you so it's the person who supports goes first, and then the rebuttal is afterwards. That kind of makes sense. So they call it the affirmation and then the negative affirmation, and then there's a second that oh my god, there's someone here. Awesome. So you're going first. No, you're going first because you're supporting the statement. Oh god, yeah. Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Wasted horse, of course. So I will I'll introduce you, it seems only fair. Okay, okay. So first on the table is the wonderful, the beautiful, the enigmatic. Uh can I think of another word for Jen? Um the short. Jen Jen Nash. Okay, guys, so on my side of the house or the barn, as we like to call it as well, I am supporting the idea that a horse without a job is a wasted horse. Now, please bear in mind, guys, that we're doing this as factually and scientifically as possible, so it doesn't always mean that this is my own personal opinion. But let's get started. So, when we consider the horse, we know the horse has been in existence with human beings for hundreds of hundreds of years. I'm now thinking, is it thousands? It is thousands of years, isn't it? Are you asking me? Yeah, sudden. I assume thousands of years? Thousands, hundreds of thousands of years. I don't know, right, okay, we'll just carry on. So we know that the horse has been within our history for hundreds, thousands of years, and the horse has been domesticated to help us, and in return, we have actually been able to benefit the horses' lives as well. Now, in the wild or in feral existence, we know that life can be very hard for animals. They have to face disease and injury, and they can't be supported through that. So ultimately, having horses as domesticated animals can be argued that we've improved their welfare with regards to their health. When we think about horses through history, there has been a very rich history between the horse and human relationship. We have used horses across different cultures across the world for hundreds, thousands of years, and horses have been used in a cultural context, consumption, therapy, companionship, and also more recently within sport. So horses have played a huge role in the development of humans, which has helped us, arguably, but we have also been able to benefit the horses' lives massively by being able to involve them in our human world. Now, the feral world for the horse in a wild, free-ranging world is dangerous. They are at risk of predation, they are at risk of disease and injury from the environment, such as drought, wildfires. So having the horse domesticated, we can actually benefit their lives hugely and improve their well-being. So we think about the horse having a job, we're thinking about the horse within the human world, and we can meet a lot of their needs, which is why we discuss things such as the what used to be the five freedoms, is now known as the five domains. So that being nutrition, we can provide ready access to fresh water and a healthy diet to maintain their health. We can provide them with appropriate environment, such as shelter and comfortable resting areas. We can greatly improve their health through veterinary management and all our research and tools that we have at our disposals to improve their health. And in the right contact context, we absolutely can provide sufficient space, facilities, and company for our horses. And that leaves us with the mental experience, and this is the bit that I want to delve into. So we know that naturally horses can cover up to 20-22 kilometres per day. We know that in the wild or a free-ranging environment, horses will cover 20-22 kilometres per day, and that can be it can even be up to 78 kilometres per day in the wild, suggested. I mean, that paper I will admit was back in 1977, but more recently, so papers in 2015, we're looking at horses in a free-ranging environment covering about 20-22 kilometres per day. And we also know that movement, such as steps, are factors that are considered to be indicators for evaluating equine welfare in a domesticated setting, and that's been documented in many many papers. So if we just take a moment to consider that, movement is key for equine welfare. Movement is key for equine health. We also know that movement is key for hoof health, gut health, mental health, the development of muscle and bone. So this idea of horses not having a job is actually directly impacting their welfare. If we're going to have horses in a domesticated setting within stables or even fields and pastures, even track liveries, there's no way that we can meet that 20 to 22 kilometers per day per day, every single day, 365 days a year. So how are we going to meet that fundamental movement need of horses? Well, we're gonna have to give them a job, we're gonna have to exercise them, and that job could be anything, it could be target training that we know horses really engage very well with. The research behind positive reinforcement and the benefits in welfare are increasing in numbers as the years go by, and it's something that we've seen massively increase in canine welfare. And I would argue that working with a horse, even in a positive reinforcement clicker training, target training environment, is giving your horse a job. You're enriching their lives, you're giving them the possibility of social interaction. For example, if we looked at a more traditional ridden context, taking horses out to fun rides, endurance, even just hacking out with their friends, you are giving your horse a job. That job is to carry you on that hack in that outdoors over different terrains, and you're meeting their behavioural needs, you're allowing them to socialize, you're allowing them to meet that movement that they require. So looking at just one aspect alone, if we focus on movement, absolutely, horses need a job to maintain their welfare and to ensure that they do not have a wasted life. Yep, that's good. Awesome. I fucking got one word, Jen. Damn it! Yes, ah, just one. Oh, friend, I'm raging. And honestly, you were getting so close to it, and I was like, say it, say it, say it. Staring at the screen. Oh, I got one enrichment. I got one enrichment. Oh I was sure, oh, I was sure you were gonna talk more about enrichment, you know. And as you got closer to talking about it, I was like, come on, come on. You know, I probably would have if I wasn't just like, what am I gonna say next? What am I gonna say next? Um, because then I started looking at the time and I was like, shit, I've only talked about movement and I'm on four minutes. I know it's it's a short space of time, but that's what makes it fun and concise, and you're like, okay, I've got to get all this in here. Oh, that's very good. I enjoyed that. Um I was sure you were gonna say laminitis, and then you said hoof and movement health, and I was like, fuck it, you know, like because I think it and then the other one I was going to do is orthopedic issues, because I thought maybe you would talk about that. Uh and then I had obesity down, uh so I went into the case. Obesity would have been that would have been a really good point to talk about because that is a massive welfare issue. Absolutely, and being able to kind of manage that as well and goes back to your five domains because where do you where do you land from trying to adhere to those five domains in the welfare? And it's also worth saying as well, you know, you know, five domains of five freedoms, and we can we can definitely talk about them afterwards. Not only are they something that we've we've agreed on within the scientific community, um, but it's also enshrined in law. Um, so it's something that we recognise for all animals as as being critical. So, yeah, absolutely, like you know, movement health, um, and being able to like keep obese, you know, as it reduce obesity in the population for horses is maintaining their their health and their welfare and that movement health. Yeah. Well, yeah, absolutely. If we want to if we want to just get that in there, Animal Welfare Act 2006, nutrition, environment, health, behaviour, mental experiences, obesity falls under health because under health you've got prevent or rapidly diagnose and treat injury and disease, obesity that is a disease, so that is an aspect that is not being met in at equine welfare nationwide. Yeah, you know, and and I know obviously, like you can go the other side of that as well. Um, and I think that's one we kind of recognise a lot, but you know, P uh P I'm gonna say this wrong, PPSM, PPS, there's too many Psy. PSSN thank you, and PPID, um otherwise known as cushions, there are low and laminitis. I say there's a there's a lot of other health concerns, and no more than ourselves, um, you know, that we're becoming more aware of with adipose tissue and and bats and methods. So yeah, it's if we want to maintain health for our horses, then yeah, it's definitely an important factor. Yeah, I really enjoyed that. Okay. Whenever you're ready. Do I not get an introduction? I gave you an introduction. Oh yeah. Sorry. I I was I wasn't even really paying attention to that. I was just so like, what the fuck am I gonna say in this thing? Um okay. You chose big words. Now I'm getting staged right. Okay, okay. Right, guys, I'm gonna hand over the mic to the inspiring, the motivating, the encapsulating woman. That is Barbara Harmon. Thank you, Janet. That was very emotional. Um, I'm gonna start my argument with the idea of what a job is, and that it's very much a human narrative. A job is a paid position of regular work, either for a task or a piece of work, especially when it is being paid for. Horses, by their very nature, require care because we have domesticated them. By the very fact that we have taken on the responsibility to care for the animal, we are required to provide from an ethical perspective. Food and board for labor, for the human benefit of riding a horse, is not a job for a horse. A horse's job from a purely ethological and evolutionary perspective is to eat, sleep, and fuck. It is the dream. Through domestication, we've selectively bred the horse into an animal that we see today. As such, we have an ethical obligation to care for that animal. This isn't just an ethical obligation, but it's also enshrined in law, which, as my counterpart Jen has quite happily said earlier in the argument, this is enshrined in law. Freedom from hunger and thirst, freedom from discomfort, pain and injury and disease, freedom to express normal behavior, fear and distress is a requirement that we provide this to the horse. However, there's no getting away from the fact that the horse has been bred and kept as an agricultural animal, used in war, and now in modern equine sports. That's why we bred the horse. So we really need to talk about ridden exercise in its current format, which is what most people refer to as a horse's job. Even though, as stated, equine sports is not a paid position of regular employment, as we know what a job is. There's no evidence, to my knowledge, happy to be disputed, that ridden exercise or equine sport in its current format is the best form of exercise for a horse base for a horse based on their physiological and behavioural needs. I'm referring to venting, show jumping, endurance riding, carriage drive, introsage, and so on. Current equine sports. From a mental perspective, the research would actually suggest that it can be detrimental and cause behavioural stress, as well as the physiological health perspective that is little understood. There is ongoing research, and we are starting to understand the intrinsic motivation that the horses want to compete in sport, but at present there is little to no evidence that would suggest that dressage, for example, in its current format is supporting the horse. If this was the case, I would argue that we would see less percentage of injuries than we do in our current supporting format. Irrespective of discipline, I know I just picked on dressage there, but functional life in where the horse can move and be a horse within equestrian sports appears to be really limited to a median age of four years old. Although there's limited data on the estimated lifespan of the horse, research suggests that the horse could live to 30 to 40 years. Therefore, the athletic career of a horse is relatively short. I would agree that any exercise we do with the horse should reflect the horse's evolutionary lifestyle, which could provide a proactive mechanism to reduce the risk of injury. But there's so much research lacking in what is the ideal job for a horse. In its current format, I would argue that as it stands within equestrian sports, the horse is more likely what the jobs that we give horses is more likely to create wasted life than no job at all. I just want to take a second to just talk about what wastage is and when we talk about it in scientific literature and in regards to the horse, as wastage is talked about within the research. In this context, wastage means the waste of a product or substance. In this case, we are talking about the horse that is no longer suited for its intended purpose. If we have a dressage horse, some of the riding techniques have been linked in research to wastage of the horse. Given the potential for negative impact on rider safety and the welfare horse, demonstrated in numerous studies that, for example, speak to Rolker, that can be quite coercive and lead to wastage. I would argue that the job creates wastage in the horse. My closing statement is that a job is a paid position for Can I just say one thing? Because obviously, like I do, I'm obviously with you. I love you've just touched on something that really was like, oh shit, that's good. The fact that actually the use of horses in sport is could be creating more waste. Wastage. And that's what I have here with the racing here, like as I was just about to do some percentages. Yeah. But is it worth it? You know, if I can have an extra second, I I will if it's worth saying. Well, well, you've you've you've sparked an idea in me, so I'm trying to work out a way that I can talk about how horses stood around and getting a beast is a waste of life. But but I like this idea that you're fin if you kind of like introducing the idea that actually sport is wasting. And then that leads nicely into the rest of what we've yeah. I would argue that giving a horse a job in our current definition of equine sports is actually creating more wastage. Yeah? Yeah. Cool. Good. Cool. Lovely. I'm I'm curious, did I get any words? Yes. Fuck. Three. I did not. What did I say? Ah, this is sheer luck. I didn't even think about this that much, but one of my words was freedom. So when you started going through the five freedoms, I was like, freedom, freedom, freedom, freedom. Fuck. Honestly. I didn't think of sport though. Sport would have been such a good one. Oh, yeah, I did say sport at last. Yes, a sport a lot. But yeah, when you were going through the five freedoms there, I was like, fucking hell, yes, yes, yes. What was the third word? Oh, I had freedom, herds, and social. Oh, herds. Yeah, I thought you might say something about like horses are social animals, living in herds, free ranging. Some I I thought, I really thought that way might be a sentence. This is how pedantic I am. Um, and so you'll know for future. I don't like saying the word herd. Uh I prefer saying family bands made up of herds. So I usually refer to a band of horses. Uh that is a pedantic zoological brain of mine, yeah. I now need to um I now need to write myself a little post-it note about that for later. That's my next everyone's just like, oh, they're in a herd, and I'm like, they're in a band, and bands are in herds. Like, that's me being really pedantic. So yeah. So what way do you want to do it? Do you want to do do you want to rebuttal me? And then I'll rebuttal you. And then we'll discuss. This this is a sexy joke in there, and then we can discuss, yeah. Okay, let's try it. I'll do we'll do two minutes rebuttal and then we'll go questions and discussion. Sounds good. Okay. You ready? Okay, thank you, Barbara. So, as my lovely counterpart has decided to define a job, I would just like to bring up on that topic the fact that a job is not always defined by monetary value, otherwise, volunteering and other things wouldn't involve. So, I just wanted to get that out there. Also, my counterpart has really narrowed down the gap towards just sport. Now, if you want to think about horses having the only job or interaction of humans at sport, that's fine, but let's be honest, the use and involvement of horses within humans is much wider than that. However, if we look at horses on a much wider scale, we can see that they are involved in our everyday life, they're used within our recreational life, our therapy life, and horses do benefit our well-being. And if you want to be pedantic about the name of the word job, well, then I would argue that the job of the horse can also be just to benefit our well-being and our enrich our own lives, and we can feed that back to our horses. Now, Barbara also touched on wastage. I would argue that although sport might create some wastage, having horses, satin stables, sat in fields without an activity instead of a job, if we'll change the phrasing, without an activity to do with humans, and they are then becoming obese or developing physiological issues, such as bony issues or muscle issues, that is then impacting their quality of life, that is a waste, and that is our fault. So I think to uphold equine welfare, it is our duty of care towards horses to ensure that they do have an enriching job or activity that they can actively do to meet their needs to maintain welfare. Okay, good rebuttal. My counter-argument to that is do we have numbers of horses that are haven't got a job or activity? I do enjoy that you said activity. Yeah, I think that's probably you know a little bit more open-ended and gives us a bit more variety, as you say, and not narrow it down to sport. Do we have numbers of horses that are being wasted and becoming obese? Because we definitely have numbers, and I'm going to pick on the racing industry, so I do apologize. Um, but that's the research that we have in front of us. Um, so 4,683 horses, um, only 45% of them made it to racing. So rough maths, two and a half thousand didn't. What happened to those horses? Um that's that's that's nearly 50% of horses bred for one job that are potentially being wasted. Um and I feel like we need to redefine a job. I I love how you said activity because yes, like what is the what is the ideal activity that meets the horse's species-specific needs, promotes their physiology, and can we define that in our current sports? Like it is that do what we should say, is what we have at the moment the best method for ensuring that we meet the horse's needs? Is it our best definition of a job? I'm asking questions with no answers, I realize. Um I don't believe that our current definition of jobs meets those needs, but I would agree with you in the wastage of standing in the field as well. There are other needs that the horse needs to meet. Did I rebuttal properly? I think I agreed with you. I was gonna say, I mean, you started off like, yeah, arguing with me and then agreeing with me, and now I'm just like, did I just win? Dear God. Yeah. Debating, Barbara. Debating. Debating. Um I mean, I'm quite I'm happy if you want to do that again. Do what do I need to do again? Do what's it doing? No, there's no rules. Well, though I'll say there's no rules here, there are rules. We're making the rules. We do. Yeah. No, I'm I'm happy to go into the the questions if you are. Yeah. Okay, so do we have any figures for obesity in uh uh the prevalence of obesity in the Aquine population? I think we do. I think we do, I think we do, and that is sadly not something that I actually looked into, but I do know that this has been a very hot topic on social media. I know that the British Horse Society has done several surveys. I know that um Dr. David Marlin has been talking about it. Uh maybe it was a few months ago, there was a discussion regarding what a bigger welfare issue, role current or obesity in the UK. And I think reading through that thread, one of the things that was being talked about is we know that obesity is a welfare issue nationwide, but we don't have the specific numbers. So I think you could probably sorry, yeah. Um so I have a paper here, and it's highlighted as as you've said, Jen, that equine obesity is considered to be one of the UK's most serious welfare concerns, and that's their opening gambit, and they suggest that it affects somewhere between 31 to 54% of the UK's horse population. And again, you know, talks about factors in risk of equine obesity, the physiological effects of a horse carrying extra weight, and trying to, you know, reduce weight management, um, and that is you know quite a problem, like quite problematic in um in the horse industry. I think it's absolutely terrifying. Um I'm just looking at the British Horse Society website, and they do have references, but I'm struggling to find the actual paper details. But I'm just gonna read out this little uh paragraph for you. So, according to the British Horse Society website, worryingly in the UK up to 50% of horses are obese, and this figure is creeping up to 70% in some native pony breeds. I mean, that is terrifying. I'm just unfortunately, um so that this was last reviewed on the 29th of March 2023. Um, so that is pretty, pretty current. Jen's just giving me homework. Yeah, I have. Okay, Barbara, I actually on that topic, I have a question for you. So, in your discussion there, your argument, you discussed that the average aid median age for horses in sport is four years old. I was just wondering where that came from. I will pull it up now. Hold on. Um, so yeah, so this is a paper by Rogers et al. uh 2012. Um, so it is a little bit of an older paper, uh, it's 11 years, so potentially that median has changed. That is worth saying. Um, but they found that irrespective of discipline, whatever they're kind of doing in life within equestrian sports, it appears to be limited to a median age, and that's a median age of four, because it's very very hard to get kind of that that balance. Um it's try it's very hard to get a normal you know, a normal skew of data. Now I will say, let me just so that those day that data perm primarily comes from Swedish warm bloods used in competition and it comes from French show jumping horses, um, and that is so the genetic longevity in French sports horses. So it very much is limiting it to the sports horse sphere. Like when we look at those two types of horses, uh French show jumping horses, what type of horse is that? Um, chances are it's going to be uh a warm blood of some description, and again, the the other paper really clearly speaks to warm bloods. So does that skew that information? Is that four years just I assume this is what you're getting at, Jen? I'm just getting ahead of you. Um, is that what's skewing that data? And if we look at leisure horses or other horses in the industry, now I say this paper does say irrespective of discipline. I don't know how they arrived at that statement. So, yeah, so they got some of their data. They do they did gather some of their data from two-year-old um thoroughbred horses in New Zealand, standardbred horses as well, French horses, I've said, Swedish warm bloods, Swedish warm bloods. Oh, they do say cold bloods here as well, dressage, jump in, Australian thoroughbreds. So it very much does, it is very much looking at what we would consider horses used in sport. Sorry, I kind of I kind of forgot the point of my question there now. I just I've just been sat there listening to this and going, okay, so that's warm blood, that's this, that's that, like yeah, general population. Well, is that um representative of all the horses that we have out there? Um, you know, most leisure horses probably aren't dying at four years old. Um sorry, not dying, are being so was that was that horses that are retiring at four years old or they're breaking down, in which case, you know, we're talking about the effects of sport rather than general activity with humans. And I do you know, and and it's a really interesting point because I would almost um I would almost counter my own argument as well and say, well, how much of that is breeding and genetics? And I don't want to open that can of worms too much in this I can do another one. But is that horse's athletic ability driven by the economics and the value of that horse and wanting to be able to prove and and sell horses? Is that breeding driving the median age down? Um, and we do know again, don't really want to open this kind of worms, but I think it's worth considering the other factors that are at play in those statistics. Is the sport itself and the job what's causing those numbers? Or is it the type of horse that's being bred and the desire in the industry to breed a certain direction that is creating other genetic issues and limiting their their life expectancy? Um I think it very much is talking about you know um their competition career length and removing them from that sport. That's very much the focus, um, whether that's a uh a locomotory or a musculoskeletal issue that you know reduces their likelihood to compete. And I do think that's kind of a chicken and an egg question as well for another podcast is the demands of breeding and where we're breeding horses. Yeah, so it's definitely a confounding factor, I think. Yeah. So just run me down. That was shore jumpers and so it was show jumpers and what was the other one? Uh so yeah, French sport horses in jumping competitions. Uh we have standard breads and New Zealand, thoroughbreds in New Zealand, so very skewed New Zealand, but we also have Swedish warm bloods and cold blood horses. Um, and that one is very much about longevity and culling. Um, so they are taking it outside of just the competition setting, um, and then dressage horses as well, um, and yeah, Australian thoroughbreds, so very Australian, New Zealand focused um for the thoroughbreds and standard breads, and then European for warm bloods. They as I say, like it does look like they've managed to cross-reference quite a lot of data to get the their median age, but is it representative of the normal population? I don't think so. This is what I'm struggling with. As I'm yeah, I'm trying to I'm trying to think. I mean, this isn't this is now anecdotal. I'm thinking back to the Olympics, I'm thinking back to you know, when we were down at Hartbury, I'm thinking about when I was in British eventing. The thought that the average age was four years old is insane, especially when you think about you know, show jumping, or maybe not show jumping, I don't know, yeah, show jumping, eventing, dressage. You're talking about I would have thought the median range was about eight, ten. Yeah. So this is where I think the median is why they use median, because like you, you know, and and for anybody's interested in the statistics side of things, like you need a normal, you need a normal representation of the population really to do averages. You tend to do medians when the data is skewed, and I have a feeling that, and again, this is this is my own um guesstimation, that the thoroughbreds and standard breads were potentially skewing this data. Yeah. So I'm just I've just scrolled down here to the methodology, and they have picked out Swedish warm bloods, the median lifespan is 14 years of age for male males and 22 for gelding uh for for for uh sorry, the let's sorry, I'll try that again. You know, so they've they've they've even said these are estimates and the true longevity or lifespan is harder to come by because of the demographic data in most western countries. So they they have said as much to be fair to this paper, and I suppose it's a it's an indication that even in my argument I pulled out the the the number that you know was the most I was just gonna say have we just managed to uh destroy your most shocking bit of evidence? Statistics, you know, so questions are good. So yeah, so if you and and quite potentially, because it was a they they have stated as much in this paper that they're like, you know, and it's probably why they used median. I still think to be fair, they've just broken down those Swedish warm bloods and they've said 14 years plus or minus standard deviation, all the rest of it, for for for Geldans and 22 for Mayors. But when you look at like I still think that's a drastic reduction. It's not as dramatic as four years, yeah, as I originally stated in my open in my argument, but I still think if the lifespan is 14 years old when they could get to 30, that's still half. Well, do you know that was gonna be my next question? Was the 30 to 40 year olds? Where did that come from? Oh god. I'm counting these as all your questions. Um reference. Where's that gone? I just jumped. The paper that originally referenced 30 years old to 40 years old is getting that data from a paper that was published in 1999 with 96,622 equine animals surveyed, which is not an you know unreasonable one. Um, and they found that the mean age was between 11 and 37 years old. So that's quite a big range. So they must be getting that information from there, going like, well, what's the oldest horse living to? You know, what's the potential that they can live to, if that makes sense. Yeah, because that that age range, that age range is huge. We don't I don't think we see many horses really living past the age of 30, not in the grand scheme of things. I was just trying to see if I could find some information as well. Yeah. But it's not something I've looked into very much there. But I also think it's got to be really hard because you have so many different disciplines, so many different breed characteristics, you know, so many different uses. There's you know, genetic components, like there's so much there. So trying to estimate a lifespan of a horse. I think that's troubled water. That's tricky. That's a tricky one. That is a tricky one, and potentially dangerous because if you start narrowing the bandwidth too much, you end up with information that's useless. You know? Yep. Because if you want to look at the horses on total, like you say, we've ended up with what was that, 11 years to 30 years, but that's not very helpful. What we're talking about in some contexts is what's the average age of a horse in eventing, dressage, show jumping, and not even in sport. If you wanted to look at feral and free-ranging horses, I would I would guesstimate, I don't know the numbers, but I would I would guess that those that average lifespan would be different between free-ranging ponies and whales compared to Bozwalski's compared to zebra. You know, I would imagine because the environmental factors are different, the genetics, the breeds, predation, everything is different. So yeah, it's a very I mean, this is why we picked it. It's because it is tricky. Like you know you you dive into the nuances of of these, it makes it a really complicated argument to to to hold up. Because if we take that 1999 paper that studied 96,000 horses, that I just pulled up there, and they talk about say the lower end of the scale was 11 years old to 37, I should say. Well, then if we look at those Swedish warm bloods, they had the average life expectancy for mares at 22 and 14 years of age for geldings, which technically is a little is you know closer to the middle of the road with that other study. So then you're back to that argument of being like, well, you know, um, was it the the job or the work that they did or was it potentially the care and management that they got because of their maybe economic value towards the sport? Um and that's that maybe that's an argument for another day. That's something that I know is discussed a lot, like you know, the that the horses used in sport because of their economic value potentially have more medical intervention, better care, you know, and say that's that starts at opening another can of worms. Oh exactly, is is a long life a good life? I mean this opens up the door towards, and this is obviously something that is being discussed um when we look at the the FEI have now brought out the six objectives, key aims for a good life, I think it's called for the horse, um, which sort of touches on I know we we discussed it at the conference in Heartbury just because we can keep these horses going, just because we have the medical intervention, we have the knowledge, we have the surgical expertise. Yeah, that does that make it a good life? Are we still meeting their their behavioural and species specific needs? that's a totally different subject. It is. No, sorry. It's the same subject, but different topic. But yeah, I mean we could we could dive into it for for eight. And even as you were talking, I was thinking about you know end of life treatments for horses as well and you know when do when when do we euthanase and like that is a very very diff you know very challenging topic as well. And we talk about quality of life so yeah is just the very fact like it's not just about longevity and how long an animal is living but the quality of life as well. Yeah. And you start getting into really difficult you know areas because I well we know I don't have the answers. Um if you've come here if you've come here from the answers if you come here for the answers I'd walk away now. Um that brings us quite nicely background to the debate topic which is you know a horse without a job is a wasted horse and we've just talked there about meeting needs and having wait what was you just said a sentence quality of life quality quality of life yeah quality of life yeah and I think I think that's you yeah like when we talked about you talked about enrichment and you said like um oh you used a fantastic phrase rather than job activity activity yeah like you know an an activity I and I do think that is really critical for a social species that has been you know bred for high learning capacity. Wait hold on I have a question go yeah are the secret words over no you can't don't be sneaky don't be sneaky no why what else what did I say social no fuck off you're done you're done you've already you don't even need more secret words out of me you already got three I only got one yeah do you have any questions for me by the way because I've just been questioning you uh no I think mine deserved a little bit more prying as we see as we could see because I was able to pull out and I think that and hopefully like that's really obvious for people to see like I was able to pull out a number that was quite a shocking number implant it in my argument and the minute we probed it it all fell apart like so I think that was worth I think it was worth exploring. Definitely um and uh I trust in your editing skills to like get that across because I think we've we've we've taught we've touched on some really interesting things there. Yeah like and I and I think it is and like you know and it's it's being able to dive into those and understand the nuances as well like and even as say like for for both myself and Jen like you know we are you know we're practitioners we're echoing scientists we're scientifically minded people and this is what we you know this is what we do and we pick things apart um and we quite enjoy doing it as hopefully you can hear in this um but you can cherry pick stuff um to to to to win your argument which is hopefully the fun of what we're trying to do together and then pick it apart um together as well and yeah like and it's very important to dive into those numbers and see how it might be skewing the data. No I don't think I have well yeah actually I have one question for you and I suppose this is more of like an opinion or you know a personal question as much as anything else. You know we talk about kind of giving them enrichment or activity if you were to pick one that stigma maybe that's a bit too controversial. I don't know I'll ask anyway and you can always decide not to answer it do you think any of our sports in their current format are best at meeting the horse's needs to help reduce you know either wastage or obesity is there anything that you think is good for the muscular squetal system you know is that too controversial to ask I don't think it's too controversial to ask I just think I don't know enough. Yeah I think I think every I mean generalizing is never useful and generalizing is never safe but if I think about equestrian sport more as an avenue for people to do something with their horses there is a huge benefit to sport because it is both social for the horse arguably because they're around other horses social for the humans if the human's mental health is better a well-run event of any sport is assessing equine welfare you know the stewards have on in in every sport have a horribly intense job and there is now we we saw it there with Babbington I mean some people weren't happy with it some people were but we did see jump judges stopping riders we were seeing those new rules and you know things like that being enforced now nobody you can't keep everyone happy personally no change takes time as well yeah yeah change takes time perfect personally I am happy to see that those rulings were enforced and horses were stopped you know we also saw a lot of riders pulling up their own horses which was great but I'm slightly going off topic here. I don't think any sport at elite level can possibly ever meet equine welfare to the level that you or I or many others would like it to do because once you go to the elite level it's about the human not the animal it and it doesn't matter how you want to argue that yes horses are evolved to gallop and move quickly and are very well designed to jump that doesn't mean they were ever designed or evolved to do the jobs that we're asking them to do now. Yeah but I I think like yeah I I I yeah like so because like my my the thing I can't kind of get away from is like you know we know there's a huge amount of injuries muscular skeletal you know or other kind of problems within high level sports and that's across the board like you know if I was a basketball player I'm not um or like any kind of other professional sports there's obviously injuries you know occur at a higher level because you're pushing yourself because it is sport and I always just think like well if it really was so great as as a sport for the horse's musculoskeletal system then surely we'd see less injuries or is that me just being really pedantic? It's a really difficult one isn't it because injuries are so multifactor and multifactoral because it's not just the discipline it's also the current health status of the horse it's the previous training it's the weather conditions it's the influence of the rider the genetics yeah yeah I I yeah I don't think we're once again if you come here for answers. You've come to the wrong place you really have come to the wrong place but yeah I mean that's the whole point of this debate format we're attentively picking topics that are what's the name of the show Jen Dangerous at both ends tricky in the middle yeah there we go exactly because this is definitely dangerous at both ends and even trickier in the middle so that has brought us quite nicely round in a full circle back to the start here and in case you haven't realised the whole idea of these debates is to also spark debate. We're not here to have all the answers for you we've brought up some interesting topics to have a polarised opinion so sitting at either end of the spectrum can be really dangerous. Sitting in the middle and being open-minded to different viewpoints is very challenging and very tricky so Barbara that brings me around to asking you the question have I convinced you to my side of the argument and a horse without a job slash activity is a wasted horse if you say activity then yes I think my my my problem personally with the term the words we use is the word job and wasted agreed they're they're my they're my big two problems you know um because the idea of wasting is you know like is is having like a product or a creature that's no longer fit for its intended purpose and for me I'm like well the horse by the very fact that it's a horse is perfectly fit for its intended purpose you know so that that word wasted is one that I find very problematic and the word job as well is one that I find problematic. So if we change the phrase to you know a horse without an activity is not meeting its needs yeah I I agree with that you know because like you know and personally like and I think you know your your argument has been like you know it's like there is a a a culture there's a r between humans and horses that is developed over is it hundreds or thousands of years like I would look it up a bush I think we just it's a long time. You know there's there's a mutual benefit we are protecting them from predation as you clearly said we've we've given them you know a lot of care and we've increased their longevity. I know we discussed about longevity for a long time um and yeah there's there's a there's a steeped culture in the horse wherever you go whether you're a member of the public or you love horses we all just love horses you know um and that that connection is just there. I think it's really it's really really important to have that connection and if we look at other animal species that we don't use in equine sports whether they're zoological animals or conservation animals or companion animals it's still really really important to give them movement for health give them enriching activities uh how many people play fetch with their dog take their dog for a walk um elephants and hippos have water baths like in in zoos we give them activities that meet their needs so yes if we remove the idea of a job and waste it's those two words I have the biggest problem with and change how we see what we do with our horses and appreciate that a horse by being a horse is never going to be wasted because they're doing what horses need to do but the onus is on us to give them an enriched life then yeah I can I can get on board with that argument. That's not what it says though I'd just like to say yeah we're we're we're we're changing we're changing the narrative but I think that's always a very good thing to do within the equine industry so I'm going to I'm going to also state my opinion now so obviously I was arguing that a horse without a job is a wasted horse that was my argument that was my side to to present I am in full agreement with Barbara I don't like the wording I think it gives a very dangerous perspective and for me this this uh debate this podcast today has highlighted an area that can an organism ever be wasted if it is fulfilling its evolutionary and behavioural role I feel like I could have said that better. It can an organ can an organism ever be wasted if it only ever does what it was evolved to do and also wastage is very much a perception and a human concept so maybe what we need to be doing instead of worrying so much about what the horse is doing is worry a little bit more about what we need from a horse and if we can actually provide a suitable environment for that horse. Or what we can do for the horse yeah yep so are we both opposing this statement then the barn believes a horse without a job is a wasted horse? We both does that mean I win I think I don't know on the principle on the principle of the wording alone I think on the principle of the wording alone I don't agree but yeah on the principle of the message behind the bad wording I actually think the horses do need it's our responsibility to provide that active and enriching life for a horse so we do actually have points um allocated so we sort of put them into three categories and we have dangerous so if our argument was a little bit dangerous we got minus 10 points if our argument was tricky uh we're not so sure we went with zero points so it's just kind of in neutral and if it was a good argument where I'm quite comfortable to land in yes we got ten points I think we're probably both at zero. Yeah I feel like this has been a very very tricky one yeah and we this is supposed to be the easy one to start cut our teeth on I think I think this is uh this is setting us up for the future and I think that's zero each which means the tiebreaker is the secret words so looking at our our scores I don't think either of us were too dangerous. I know I hit on a dangerous point um and I think we dived into that but I think we're both a little bit tricky here so does that mean zero points each? I think so I think so this is a trick tricky topic I think if the topic title had been different then it I would have been a clear winner obviously because I'd very valid points and I argued very very well but unfortunately that is not the case and so I think that we do sit on the tricky scale here. Yeah so that means zero points each for our debate topic um which means the tiebreaker comes down to the secret words which I very excited about yeah go on go on go on again so as you guys know my secret words were freedom herds and social and unfortunately Barbara you did say freedom three times um so it's one point per secret word so that means Jen gets three points and my three words were enrichment laminitis and obesity and Jen only said enrichment once because she hates me so I only get one point. So Jen you are the winner thank you thank you thank you very much so yeah uh I was about to hang up on you there and I was like no that's you don't need to hang up on Jen. Yeah we also we don't have an outro or whatever we don't I just won't see you um okay so what can we do for an outro then? What would be good? Uh thanks for joining us I mean it wouldn't be really cheesy to be like thanks for joining us guys remember don't be dangerous try to be tricky Yeah like it go for it. Yeah I'll just take that I'm just I'm just gonna cut that you just said it