The weighty issue of obesity has now got it's teeth into the equestrian industry and this time we're not talking porky ponies but the knives are out for the rotund rider.
Chew on this.
Because the average British woman is a size 16 and booties on saddles are becoming bigger, Wow have designed the Bounty dressage saddle for plus-sized riders. But, is what's good for the rider equally good for the horse?
Wow want to reassure us that the Bounty shouldn't be a pain in the horse's back. Co-proprietor David Kempsell has said, "Importantly, we have designed a longer, larger seat without making a longer saddle, as many weight-carrying horses are short-backed. The panel of the saddle measures 18”, so it is suitable for all horses.”
However this still leaves many equestrians tutting that horses are getting a BIG bum deal here. Rather than saddles up-sizing, shouldn't riders be down-sizing?
A big slice of research.
A study published in the Journal of Veterinary Behaviour, would seem to compound this opinion as they found that a third of recreational riders are overweight (cue another pop at pleasure riders!) They claim that as a consequence horses are suffering health problems, such as arthritis and lameness, and behavioural problems like bucking and rearing. Although in my opinion, the fact the horse can still get two hooves off the ground, should be taken as a good sign!
The study which analyzed 152 horses and their adult riders from Devon and Cornwall found that just 8 of them, (5%) weighed less than 10% of the weight of the horse, which adheres to recommended veterinary guidelines, 95 riders (62.5%) weighed between 10-15% of the horse's weight, which they considered 'satisfactory' whilst 49 (32%) weighed more than 15% which they claim to be a welfare issue.
From this they concluded that because so many riders are, by their calculations, too heavy for their mounts there should be industry-wide guidelines to protect horses. They also suggest that larger riders need to ride bigger horses.
This plays into an old saying of mine, 'If you want to look like you have a smaller bottom, get a bigger horse!' But, joking aside, there are already too many people who are over-horsed because they get themselves a stonking big, athletic warmblood, rather than a gentle giant like a shire X or a heavyweight cob. As a result there is a glut of unhappy riders and unhappy horses. These horses may look gorgeous and shiny, groomed to within an inch of their lives and caccooned in designer rugs but unfortunately they're hardly ridden because their owners are afraid to. Bigger can be better as long as it's the right breed.
On the subject of breeds, shouldn't that have been taken into consideration? Am I wrong in thinking that our stocky native breeds can bear a larger weight proportionate to their size?
Also a well ridden, well schooled horse can carry weight better too. Picture a big person on a horse engaging it's stomach muscles and lifting it's back Vs a skinny rider on a horse with it's head in the air, back dropped, pulling itself along on the forehand-which do you think is the most damaging?
Riding is a sport, so yes I do believe we should be 'fit to ride' but that's about more than dress size. There are big bottomed girls who can do it just as well so let's keep the issue of rider weight in proportion.
So, how do you feel about this weighty debate?
For my degree in Equine Studies I completed a study to determine if rider fitness affects rider ability. I found, even in my relatively small sample size, that fitter riders are better riders. The fitter riders in my sample were not over weight. I am not stating that all overweight people are unfit or that all unfit people are poorer riders but I feel there is a trend suggesting overweight people are unfitter and according to trends in my study this suggets they would be poorer riders and we know that riders with less ability are to the determent of horse welfare.
ReplyDeleteHi Amy, thanks for sharing your study. Don't get me wrong, I really agree that it's important we are fit to ride, and yes weight and fitness are linked. I'm just wary of finger wagging and bitching about anyone who is over a size 10! I am going to write another blog on this issue soon but am trying to keep my posts down to bite size pieces and not say it all at once!! Would be interested in discussing your study further.
DeleteIf a rider is considerd to be heavy enough to be causing a welfare issue, that rider has three options: to buy a bigger horse, not all big horses are scary warmbloods, to loose weigh, or to stop riding.
DeleteTo just carry on, because you sit tall and are well balanced is just not good enough.
Yes you can make the horse carry you properly and sit lightly, but you cannot shake weight off into thin air because you are able to ask your horse to engage, if you weigh 16 stone there is 16 stone on your horses back regardless of how you place it.
Also in response too " getting two hooves off the floor is a good start" I would like to point out that the donkeys and mules in india that carry 20 stone of bricks, get "two hooves off the floor" and up a mountine side every day! Just because they can, does not mean they should!
Just because you weigh more doesn't necessarily mean you're unfit - we know a few people, who are "big" sizes, but do triathlons, marathons and other sports that need you to be quite fit! Being overweight can also have other, health-related causes, not everybody's overweight because they eat too much and/or exercise too little. I'm not a stick insect myself, but I found that due to riding twice a week in a riding lesson at my riding school, it has improved my fitness and shape quite a lot and that's not loosing weight. I've been told I have a safe seat, am well-balanced and use my aids quite well, which makes the horse go forward and carry himself well. While I think it's healthier for me to loose weight, I don't think this means I'm not fit enough to ride. Also, here in Scotland at least, I know that many riding schools and stables have weight restrictions for their horses, so this alone should prevent a mis-match between rider's size and horse/pony.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment-agreed that you can replace fat with muscle and when you jump on the scales you aren't necessarily going to weigh less but you will be healthier. I think we have to be careful not to label everyone who is overweight as greedy and lazy and now cruel to horses. And you bring up an interesting point about riding stables-I have heard that most of them are very careful about matching horses and riders.
Deleteyou may be fit, but if you're fat & too heavy for your horse, the ride a shire!!!
Deleteyes I am a fuller figured person. my horse is 15 hhs standarbred...very sturdy boy...it has been a concern of mine that my weight affects his health and I get this, his back and legs/hooves checked regularly. We have been together for 5 years and in fact his back has improved with topline and we are both fitter. Unfortunately if I had to have a bigger horse I would have to give up riding as I simply cannot afford to purchase another horse of what is regardsed as a suitable size.
DeleteI wonder in all these studies do they look at the historical aspect of past ages in rider weight/horse size? Which is not to suggest just because it was like that a 100 or more years ago it still should be...science generally does improve the welfare of all concerned and certainly a more realistic weight profile of horse/rider should be good...but I do think that is the 'nanny state' gets it's teeth into the horse industry then a lot of people will just give up on riding and be sadder poorer people because of it...and then what happens to all the horses no one wants anymore? These studies can be beneficial to horse and rider but people must not go off on witch hunts about it...(ok getting down off high horse ~pun intended~)
Can only speak for my own experience. I rode much better when I was lighter and thinner (48kg/ 149cm tall - now an aching 70kg). Not as agile, nor as well balanced in the saddle. I have Arabians - my mare (also v. overweight) at 14hh is not happy to carry me, as I am not as secure in the saddle; my gelding is more forgiving - he is 14.3hh and light framed, yet carries me easily.
ReplyDeleteThis has nothing to do with ability as a rider, or the fact that I am now 57! It's mostly down to my weight that holds back my ability to take my horses further in competition.
I used to do endurance, up to 160kms in day. Never lost weight by riding, but gosh did I pile the weight on when I stopped competing and training hard.
Yes, the extra weight has impacted on my ability to ride. That's not to say everyone will be the same.
Nevertheless, I still ride, I still enjoy riding, and I tailor my demands on my gelding so as not to stress him unduly. Riding the little mare is "on hold" until I get below 60kgs.
Thanks for being so honest and good luck with the dieting so that you can get back on your little mare soon. I shall be writing my thoughts on diets soon and it won't involve going on a guilt trip! :)
DeleteI agree the larger the person, the larger the horse, but what about men? Men are inherently heavier than women due to muscle mass, bigger bones. Many big men ride horses, day in and day out, in the Outback (of Australia) droving cattle for months at a time with little detriment to the horse or rider. So I suspect the fitness of both horse AND rider is of utmost concern.
ReplyDeleteGood point! And what about male soldiers in the army and all the kit they have to carry-I wonder what their weight to horse weight ratio is? Do the drovers you mention have western saddles on-I wonder if this has any weight-bearing on this issue-sorry, can't stop it with the puns today!
DeleteThe military would set a standard for horses that carrying between 15-20% is optimal, and you do not want to go over 25%. Personally, I stick to the 20% rule of a FIT horse's weight for optimum carrying ability.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRidiculous. Horses were bred to carry weight, and I'm not surprised only 5% adhered to the 10% rule. I've always been told and understood that 20% was around the average, which makes perfect sense. You only have to look in places like Egypt, where grown men ride tiny donkeys, to know that Britain is not in a crisis.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the 'riding light' issue too - I weigh around 9 stone and the pony I loan is 14.1hh. My dad (12 stone) has had an occasional plod without any problem. Plus, another way of telling if they can carry you is if they can take off with you - rest assured this has happened even when I rode a shetland! My friend also rode my pony, and although she was 7 1/2 stone, he struggled to work properly and forward rather than carrying me. That being said, I wouldn't ride an 11hh welsh pony - the rider has to be realistic about what they weigh and what they ride. I did worry about my weight on my pony, but providing they're happy, in reasonable fitness and worked on a forgiving surface, I see no problem with plus size riders on heavy horses. The only issue I would um and ah over is 16 stone people riding 14hh cobs. Cobs, whilst being strong, aren't as strong as a shire.
Drafts horses are not built to carry weight though, they are bred for pulling. So optimally, only 15% of the draft's weight should be on their back.
DeleteYes, however the drafts you speak of are from 100 years ago. Drafts have developed stronger backs and through evolution, will be better suited to carrying heavier riders. Plus, if I were 20 stone I'd rather get on a shire than a cob.
DeleteActually what you refer to as draught or heavy horses were orginally bred to be ridden - to carry fighting men in armour and to enable them to fight from horseback as well. Pulling things came later for these big horses. Carts etc were pulled by cheaper, smaller horses in teams if necessary and, more often, by oxen.
DeleteBack to the main point - I think up to 20% is prefectly reasonable provided you ride well and don't slob about, and your tack fits your horse. A military saddle stands well clear of the horses spine and spreads the weight over both sides evenly. But losing wieght can only help you and your horse - what better motivation would you want?
Its not the weight itself, but the strength and stamina to control your body and balance yourself. I am a women, an american size 12, very active and 180 pounds. I am also to use the american term built like a brick house. My husband is taller but also 180 pounds. He is not a lifelong rider and does not have the balance or stamina I have in the saddle. I can ride my horse for the exact same amount of time at the same speeds as my husband and the horse will be a little more tired and a lot more sweated up because the horse has to work extra to compensate.
ReplyDeleteI often see overweight riders, and most of them (and their horses) seem to get along quite happily. But I must say that recently I had a (slihtly overweight) friend ride the weight carrying 21yo Irish Cob that I share. I'm not sure how much she weighs, but I weigh 8 stone. As soon as she was on she was much too far back in the saddle because of how the saddle was built which meant her bum didn't quite fit, putting weight on his back legs rather than a balance in the middle. He tried bless him but I could see the strain it was putting on his arthritic legs. He almost dragged himself along. To me, if heavier people were to ride arthritic horses regularly, I don't think that's fair on a welfare level.
ReplyDeleteAlso, at home and at shows I often see larger riders attempting to showjump. I must admit a few do very well, but there are a few who seem to have no flexibility at the hip, so instead of leaning forward, lifting your seat with soft hands over the fence, they seem to just stand up in their stirrups and put real strain on the horses back and legs :S I don't know if anyone else has noticed this?
As said in the article, it would be better to have a larger rider with a light seat and soft hands than a skinnier rider with bad balance who leans on their hands. But I do feel that often larger riders (that I see anyway) do seem to have balance issues and lean on their hands more.
I haven't read all the comments, (who has the time!) I am a fuller filly, after having three kids I don't have the stomach I used to, but I did compete in dressage at a local level and lost some weight. I don't feel that I am a worse rider now after putting on a bit of weight, I am dieting and exercising to lose some and did manage to lose nearly two stone in preparation for a sponsored ride for the BHS welfare, last year. I rode 196k in fives days on Icelandic horses ranging from 12.2 to 13.3, I was very concerned about being put on such a small horse (you have to call them horses as the Icelandic people get rather cross if you call them ponies!) but after a few hours in the saddle I found them to be sure footed and immensley hardy!! It should not be height but breed and build, I have a 13.2 gypsy cob and he carries me fine, but I would not ride something with less bone.
ReplyDeleteDid the researchers take into account the horse's body condition? A horse who is overweight should be carrying less rider weight, not more.
ReplyDeleteI believe each rider needs to fit the horse like a fitted saddle. I also think that weight restrictions should be made clear in jumping and cross country, for the sake of the horse. The other big thing would depend on the riders them selves, to take note on behavior and the horse's conformation, enough to know when their weight and techniques are more damaging than good.
ReplyDeletePeople need to swallow their pride and realize when they are not only a risk to themselves, but also to their horse.
The school I attend for Equine Studies recently put in a mandentory fitness test and put a weight limit on the riders. I am 183lbs and 5 foot 2 inches and built like a stump. When I first became a student I was arounf 210 lbs and worked myself down to 190lbs by the time this test came into effect. It hurt me to be told that I was 'too big' to ride the large warmbloods at the college. I have a poor view of myself to begin with and work hard everyday to not let it get me down but to be told that 'I am too heavy' to ride a 1100 lb draft cross simply pissed me off. I've worked on a farm since I was 16 (I'm 26 now) and can out clean, out lift, out work and out school the majority of the girls I go to school with. Just because a rider is skinny doesn't mean they are fit and just because another is 'heavy' doesn't mean they aren't fit enough to do their job. It all comes down to how you carry the weight and what type of job you do. Being able to ride isn't the ONLY thing one has to do in the horse industry everyday. Sure, your a skinny little thing that can ride the slim thoroughbred and jump crazy heights but at the end of the day if you can't lug the water, lift the trunks onto the 18 wheeler and stack 400 bales of hay are you fit enough to do the job?
ReplyDeleteHonestly, it shouldn't be about weight. It should all be on how you care for your horse, ride your horse and display of skill. Size shouldn't matter but sadly it does and the 'heavy' women are always over looked. Sometimes I hate this industry.
Surely decisions should be made on a case by case basis? And according to each rider and each horse? A single rule is discriminatory. I am 6 ft 2inches tall and 14 1/2 stone - a reasonable height to weight ratio but outside the criteria of this school - is that right? I don't think so.
DeletePerhaps they need some more down to earth horses with a bit of bone instead of just sport horses?
I'm tiny (5ft3), I weigh about 8 stone and I have a 12.2 dartmoor pony, I have been told that I am to heavy for her because she is only quite young(5) and we want her bones to grow properly However I am a very light rider, and the pony I ride is 13hh at the most, but older and takes my weight perfectly fine... So without trying to be disrespectful to larger riders, I don't see how skimy thoroughbreds are meant to be able to take their weight around a showjumping or cross country course, bearing in mind the pressure this puts on their legs even with no rider! Having said this, however, if the horse is comfortable with larger riders, for example a cob or a chunkier type, I personally see no problem with fuller fillies!!
ReplyDeleteJust wanted to add a additional point to this issue as I don't think it had been raised so far - the weight of tack too. I ride my friends 14.2hh welsh cob. Shes 24 ish years old, overweight and needs gentle excercise. After riding 15.2hh TBs i was worried that i was too much for her but she sure can move! I'm 5ft8 and weigh 10st10lbs Im trying to lose weight and get down to 10 stone to be easier for her to carry me but she shows no issue whatsoever carrying me and always has her ears forward when we hack out. Due to her weight we are only walking out at the moment but she can always do more. The thing I was most concerned about was the weight of my tack. Some saddles are really heavy, 6KGs and more I wonder if people take this into consideration? I now ride in a Treefree treeless saddle (which is fantastic!) and also endurance stirrups to keep the additional weight down. Any thoughts?
ReplyDeleteJUST ASK YOUR HORSE!!! *SIMPLES* !! :)
ReplyDeleteHi! I would be really interested in reading the full article that was published by the Journal of Veterinary Behaviour. If anyone has the title or link to it could they please reply to this ASAP? I'm writing my dissertation on how different weights effect the horse's way of going (stride length, knee & fetlock angles, etc.) and this paper seems perfect. Thanks!
ReplyDeleteSo what do people think about horses who pull a carriage with two people in it and a driver as well? Think of the amount of weight there. Yes, I know it's not sat upon the horses back, but it is a huge amount to pull along.
ReplyDeleteI am a size 16 and ride a 15.1 cob and I don't think he struggles at all with me. He is very fit and healthy and works beautifully. The only reason I feel uncomfortable is I worry about what other people think when they see me in my jods and I imagine lots of comments about "that poor horse". But that might just be me.