Re: RC: Whips and Spurs in Endurance

[DreamWeaver <karen@chaton.gardnerville.nv.us>]

At 10:28 AM 09/21/2000 -0700, you wrote:
>K S SWIGART   katswig@earthlink.net
>Let's get one thing straight here, in the AERC, whips and spurs
>are not disallowed.  In FEI, only "spurs are prohibited" (and a
>stupid rule if ever I heard one).

I don't think it is stupid.  I have seen horses abused with spurs, and IMO, 
damn few riders know how to use them properly.

>And if the AERC ever passes such a rule, I will stop riding
>endurance.  I consider spurs to be an absolutely essential
>piece of safety equipment and will not go out on the trail
>without them.  As far as I am concerned, a rule prohibiting them
>would be as dumb as "helmets are prohibited."

I would consider a helmet safety equipment, but spurs?  Come on, if a rider 
doesn't have control of their horse without spurs they shouldn't be out on 
the trail.  I have seen very few riders on endurance rides use spurs 
properly, and some of the worst abuses I've ever seen at rides have been by 
riders wearing spurs.  My horses have over 6000 miles and I can't think of 
a single instance where having spurs on them would have been helpful.

>The effect of spurs is to enable the rider to give clear, concise
>and deliberate cues to the horse (assuming that the rider knows
>how to use them properly).  They are not intended (nor are they
>effective) for making a horse go faster (if they did, then
>jockeys would wear them in the Kentucky Derby).

You may not intend to make your horse go faster with spurs, but many people 
do.  And yes, they are effective at making a horse go faster.

>The fact that the FEI has passed a rule banning spurs for
>endurance riders suggests to me that either a) they are more
>concerned about appearances than they are of the actual safety
>of horses and riders or b) they are of the opinion that endurance
>riders are a bunch of intermediate riders who don't know how to
>use spurs properly and therefore should be banned from using them
>because they are more likely to use them improperly.

I agree with b.  While I agree that spurs do have their place, I think a 
horse should be trained well enough to go down an endurance trail without 
them.  If a rider can't control or move his/her horse with their leg/heel 
then they prolly should take some lessons and learn.  Using spurs in most 
of the cases I've seen is because the rider is overly competitive and/or 
too lazy to do the work it takes to not use them.  Like I said, I've seen a 
lot of abuse with spurs and very few people ride with them properly.

>their whips and/or spurs.  People who are going to over ride or
>abuse their horses cannot be stopped by taking away tools that
>are valuable riding aids for the rest of the horse riding population.

That's true.  Though I still won't ever believe that a rider needs to wear 
spurs on an endurance ride.  I don't think they need whips either.  I feel 
that a horse should be able to complete a ride without having aids to 
'push' them along, and that's what most people do that I've seen ride with 
whips and spurs.

  And they already have
>rules against abusing horses, so riders who abuse their horses
>with whips and spurs can be disqualified in the same way that
>riders who abuse their horses without them.

Oh yeah and we all know how those rules work in reality.  <NOT>.

>  As it
>was, I was able to quickly change her direction of motion, push
>her hindleg underneath her and get her to her feet with the
>single application of the spur on her right side.

And she wouldn't give to your leg or heel without a spur?

Karen