The other morning, someone asked me which horse shows I didn’t like. I stared. I thought. I ran through lists in my head. Hang on, I said, I want to give you a genuine answer. I kept scrolling. Nope. I couldn’t think of one. In over 1000 horse shows, I can’t say I’ve ever been to one I didn’t like.
There are people I have not liked and people I still do not like. There are people who are frustrating, there are governing bodies who don’t follow rules, and there are days that George Strait put it best when he said, “And I hope that judge ain’t blind,” in “Amarillo by Morning.” I have left horse shows crying, hot, cold, soaked through, sunburnt, bee stung, sore, actually injured, exhausted, and mad.
But I have honestly never not liked a horse show.
I’m planning my next show before I get home from my last show. Days at home are required, but downtime lacks the pressure and zest that I love feeling in the air at any show. Since every level and every aspect of our sport is so complex and difficult, feeling the same but different vibes from the most local show to the highest level of international sport is both comforting and invigorating to me. The level of importance of every moment we all feel in the social media era—it is probably unhealthy, but also intoxicating. Every class matters and every day is a new one to live our standards, to wake up earlier, and to strive for being better. And no matter how much better I do, someone else is doing it, too, and keeping it competitive.
I look forward to spending my entire life at horse shows, asking first myself and then those around me to do better. The values that I hold, and by extension those of The Plaid Horse, are community, education, and inspiration. As a community, we can feel supported and have fun while we all continually do better by our horses. We can all be more educated and enjoy competition from an ethical place. We all need the inspiration to keep our competitive spirits up—inspiration that comes in the form of excellence, caring, and doing any job to the highest degree.
So, how do we do it?
If we take USEF’s statements at face value, riders and trainers are doing despicable things to get (mostly) hunters and equitation horses quiet. How should we respond to this status quo? Rather than spending $5 million in member-funded medication fees in 2024 without meaningful results (catching those drugging their horses), we should redirect our efforts toward exploring new ideas that could actually make an impact.
Systems, rules, and policies create experiences which create outcomes. Every experience a horse and a competitor have at a rated show is dictated by the systems, rules, and policies that USEF (and their predecessor organizations) have put into place.
While we cannot say that people are widely drugging horses to be quiet, since there is still no proof of that from a five-figure quantity of drug tests in 2024, our community knows well the effort put into making sure horses are ready amongst long stretches of show season in small tent stalls. So many elements go into welfare and while the drugging or perceived drugging dominates the conversation, there are other elements contributing to how a horse spends their time at the show–much of it is spent standing on various surfaces, exercising in rings that probably need more arena grooming, doing classes during the week and morning of to be prepared, ring rides, whole other horse shows as preparation, and then time training, working on fitness, improving fitness, and various therapies to keep blood flowing to mimic a species who evolved to be in frequent motion.
A show horse’s life is practically dictated by four things: expected judging standards, expected course design standards, education of their care team, and the morals and desires of their care team.
The horse show is an interesting case study because it is both so homogenized day to day and location to location, but every trainer, rider, and owner tells me all the sentiment that “no else does it the way we do it.” We all seem to be missing the categorical imperative discussion on every aspect of what we do. If everyone did it, would it make the show better or worse?
How can the governing body build policies that make horses’ lives better? They can fully analyze the root causes of these four pillars and make systems and rules to structurally improve each one.
By regulating Zyrtec with medication reports, many trainers who do not trust that the federation receives their submission simply skip the medication, allowing their horses to struggle with the nature of the shavings, dust, footing, humidity, and allergens at the show. This is a rule that does not incentivize or prioritize rational horse welfare, nor is it based on any studies that say Zyrtec has any performance effect.
By hunting for microscopic overages of Robaxin, which can be compounded and given as a power in a horse’s feed and leave microscopic amounts in buckets, the on-the-ground result is that trainers who want comfort for that athlete are so scared that they stop giving Robaxin altogether or they are incentivized to give uncompounded Robaxin via an injection needle. Full sharps containers are never a good look, but using a gel, powder, or paste is not a risk a trainer can take in the current climate.
Nevermind that the allowable dose of Robaxin is already well below the established therapeutic level. These are two common examples of how policies are dictating life in the barn in ways that I certainly hope USEF is not intending. National horses going to work with a Zyrtec or a small quantity of compounded Robaxin to stand on concrete to me is not the problem in our sport.
These policies have the further effect of trainers’ feeling the need to protect themselves by allowing fewer people to hang around the barn. When you can’t risk your reputation by allowing your students to be involved in the training process, which includes feed, medication, and independence in the horse care process, you are pushing people away from the sport and into full care. Which then prices even more people out of the sport. These policies aren’t making a consumer experience that is good for horses or consistent with the governing body’s stated goals on horse welfare.
Course Design Standards
Continuing the discussion on how standards impact horse welfare and preparation, course design is a very interesting way to change how competitors relate to and prepare their horses. Building courses that reward a bolder rider and a nimble and attentive horse disincentivize overpreparation.
For example, given the size, stride, and capability of our horses, if some divisions had lines that were 3’ longer, would it disincentivize overpreparation? Would starting more classes on a line or a line away from the in gate disincentivize overpreparation when you need a horse that is sharp and paying attention from when they step into the ring, looking for the next challenge? Over my time, the Small Pony Hunter lines that used to be set at 71’ are now set at 68’. Watching how that change has echoed through the preparation of small ponies for the ring has been an interesting case study in how course design dictates training and incentives.
The jumps are very given and homogeneous to always give the best jump. We could argue that every single one is an oxer, and the oxers are triple bars. Would setting up the horses to jump well a little less result in the horse having to pay more attention to the fences and needing a little more pep in their step?
Today’s course in general is based on a culture of perfectionism and not challenge. Course designers regularly state their goals to get a ton of huge scores. Perfectionism leads to overpreparation and a ‘just in case’ mentality to training.
These are the conversations that I want the governing body to be having at the highest level. How do they use their unbelievably skilled and talented and thoughtful course designers to constantly improve sport to a better system for the horses?
Judging Design Standards
Most systems based on peer opinion have some sort of peer review. Our judges get informal peer review from horse show managers, but in general, if they show up on time and look like a judge and are affable to management, it is not incredibly complicated to keep being hired.
Every score a judge anywhere gives is a data point and the aggregation of those data points forms a trend to a standard which trainers then train their horses toward. The more or the larger classes a judge presides over, the more their personal view on horse training reverberates through the community and into the barn aisle of those seeking good competition.
What should our judging standards be? How did we get to this perfectionism point and is that serving us or our horses? There has been an unfounded equation of slow with safety in scoring. If you have a horse with momentum, it is hard to get prizes.
Is this a jumping competition primarily? How do we recenter ourselves in a world where a horse might boogie a bit down a line but was rewarded for jumping in incredible form out of it? How did we get to be so obsessed with quibbling about swapping? Swapping is such a small thing if the quality of the jump is the pinnacle of our sport, but I see so many horses at regular horse shows jump so average, but beat a quality round jump with a swap. This example is a case where the exhibitor and trainer are incentivized to overprepare because even if they “take the jump away,” it is better than a swap for many judges in practice for ribbons.
If the lines are set longer, how does that impact judging? Changes will be required, but what will they look like?
A formalized peer review system whose voices move the judging trend the most would be fascinating. Looking honestly at a list of people who truly dictate how horses are trained, and if they are the people we want shaping our sport.
There is so much talent in the box and the power to change how horses are prepared comes from where they are sitting. Using that power to start a discussion and make plans is the best place to start for large-scale change.
Educational Standards
I think we should have a trainer certification. I think anyone who is a professional should be allowed to scribe or apprentice in a judges’ box anytime at any show they are not competing at, and I think judges’ cards should be made available at every Channel II and Outreach show to start. I would hope these can be positions for volunteers at these shows to serve their communities–I certainly volunteer to do this.
I also think we need an annual conference on best practices, which could be part of the USHJA Annual Meeting, that is a closed-door and honest session about how to do better. It will be wildly uncomfortable, and the community can face and share and all work on ways to do better. There should be no rated competitions the week of the USHJA Annual Meeting and the USEF Annual Meeting so that everyone can attend and learn.
So many people are doing great work on pipelines and feeder programs, I would love to see those explored more so that there is a more seamless fit between the brand new rider and being ready and started correctly to move to a show barn. For example, if we could make some best practices relationship models that the starter barns get half of the commissions for the first two horses sold or leased to show customers, would that incentivise lesson programs to start and hand off students who are ready and desirous of more? The everyone trying to do every division and be everything to everyone model doesn’t always serve the horses, and how can we give people the incentives and financial stability to focus on the portion of the industry they are most passionate about?
Moral Standards
Who is our compass? Who is our North Star? Who do we trust to do a nice job with their animals? Is our goal that our horses live 30 years soundly or that they still love to compete into their 20s? Who is having sensible conversations?
I’m not sure who to look up to. I talk to so many trainers every single day who I know are putting their blood, sweat, and tears into doing their absolute best for every horse that comes through their care. We need to have some gritty conversations… what is worse, x or y? What is better, welfare x or y? How do we weigh the horse’s training with their realistic prospects of life tomorrow and then a decade down the road? What do we honestly do when show management doesn’t drag the lunging ring all day? What is the fairest action to the horse at that point? What actually are the best practices in our sport?
Everyone is still human, and over lionizing role models isn’t the answer, but are there some people who we as a community can agree are generally pillars that we can trust? Who are they, and how do they communicate values to us? How do we go to them for questions? This is probably the least concrete of the four issues to solve, but the conversations that come out of it will lead to visions, goals, and agendas for the other three conversations.
In conclusion, let us incentivize everyone at the horse show to be at their competitive best in ways that are most consistent with our evolving shared values on horse welfare. It’s time to think big and think bold and have conversations even if they might be unpopular with the current winners or status quo. The people who are truly good will always figure out the next system and land on their feet and those who bury their heads in the sand might be left behind for a new system. The governing body doesn’t need to be popular all the time and they have to make hard calls, but they do need to make sense. They have the power and if they spend their time using it to congregate and listen to the best experts in every aspect of this, our sport has a bright, bright future. We have so many hardworking, talented, and driven young people who are incredibly inspiring.
Our horses’ experience as USEF recorded members is based on policies and not excuses. Keep up the great work at holding the governing body accountable, and keep asking all the questions you have to board@usef.org and feedback@usef.org
