General Discussion

Re: Do we need standards?

JMFriedman — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 13:26:41 GMT

Gypsyfly, you're the best!! Thanks for the link.

Re: Do we need standards?

gypsy fly — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 19:45:25 GMT

We give beginners the Level I course. Their demonstrated skills move them up the progression ladder.

My wife also does Boy Scout Horsemanship Merit Badge. I believe she modifies the CHA template and matches it with the BSA requirements.

Re: Do we need standards?

JMFriedman — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 14:23:26 GMT

gypsy fly:
For our riding stable operations, we use the standards defined by the Certified Horsemanship Association. Each rider has to show profiency at a certain CHA level before they can take out a particular horse.
So, perhaps the CHA standards can help match the rider to the horse. I don't know dressage, but from what I gather, a Level 1 rider would probably mess up a Level 2 horse. Unless the Level 2 horse knows how to school a Level 1 rider up to a Level 2

Gypsy fly, where can I find those standards?

Just FYI, there's not all that much danger in a level 1 rider schooling a level 2 horse. The differences are actually rather small, mostly having to do with collection and extension and impulsion, which are mostly about the horse's ability to perform those actions. The girl about whose big horse I posted regarding stall size is an advanced beginner English eq rider with a 2nd level dressage horse. They're doing fine at local shows in English pleasure and eq classes. If she actually wanted to take tests on him at 2nd level or higher, she'd have to have serious instruction, but I can hop on him and ask, and he'll give me the 2nd level movements.

An aside: An advanced dressage rider recently tried out my big Paint, Zip, on whom I basically screw around, and she announced that he's ready to debut at 2nd level next year. Imagine my surprise! I'm the only owner he's ever had, and I'm riding at level negative-3. LOL

CowgirlforChrist, I'm thinkig that the problem lies partly in communication. If the buyer and seller are both honest (that's a big "if", but what the heck?), but have different definitions for their terms, it gets to be a real struggle to figure out where the horse really stands.

For example, I'm an experienced rider, and my daughter is a certified trainer who was running a beginner lesson program. We called a local dealer who we both know personally and asked if she had anything suitable for very young (7 years old and up) beginner-beginner riders. We needed something with a smooth trot-to-canter transition so the kids wouldn't freak like they did when the Arab pony leaped into his canter. She said she had something perfect for us. The something she showed us was 17hh (can you imagine a small child being launched from that height?--or imagine me lifting a kid that high!), a huge-barrelled draft/QH cross, only went western (the lessons were strictly English), and had only one canter lead (not great for a lesson horse). He was quiet enough, but he'd only been ridden on trails by an elderly man, so he only went in a straight line. Bending wasn't in his program. Some of those things could have been worked through, but we needed a made horse to start immediately, not a year down the road. The seller wasn't trying to put one over on us; she just had different requirements for a lesson horse.

Language. Unless there are empirical standards, it all comes down to the language.

Re: Do we need standards?

gypsy fly — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 07:37:29 GMT

Cowgirl for Christ:
seller should be honest about their horse

I believe the doctrine of caveat emptor, "let the buyer beware" came about because of horse selling, didn't it?

Re: Do we need standards?

Cowgirl for Christ — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 02:02:06 GMT

I say no. It should be the buyer's responsibility to research the horse and try it out and the seller should be honest about their horse. We don't need standards bc people should be responsible for their actions.

Re: Do we need standards?

gypsy fly — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 20:35:53 GMT

For our riding stable operations, we use the standards defined by the Certified Horsemanship Association. Each rider has to show profiency at a certain CHA level before they can take out a particular horse.

We do have one arabian that is attentive of any rider and can take a beginner to a jockey. In fact, two point and raise the reins and he'll look at you first to confirm your intentions. If he feels you really want him to go then he goes!

For the most part, each horse is best suited for particular CHA levels, mostly intermediate to advanced.

So, perhaps the CHA standards can help match the rider to the horse. I don't know dressage, but from what I gather, a Level 1 rider would probably mess up a Level 2 horse. Unless the Level 2 horse knows how to school a Level 1 rider up to a Level 2

Re: Do we need standards?

JMFriedman — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:06:42 GMT

Well said!

Re: Do we need standards?

gypsy fly — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 15:40:18 GMT

Of horses, there are prospects and there are projects. I'm sure the same goes with riders. Therefore, either one could mentor the other who needs to step up.

Like a new rider benefitting from an older bomb proof schooling horse rather than an up and coming show horse. Of course at some point the learning curves could intersect, the abilities of the horse and rider could match up and "fit" each other.

As mentioned in previous posts, riders may consider taking riding lessons to measure up to the horse or conversely, afford more training for the horse.

Is there really a perfect match unless both empower each other?

Re: Do we need standards?

JMFriedman — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 15:29:29 GMT

YESSS! Thank you!

I've been saying for years that we need some sort of certification program--just a simple thing with a few basic points--that would result in, say, a piece of paper being issued to the rider/buyer clearly noting what his/her actual riding level is. A short online course on horse care and management could end with a test. Then the test paper could be validated by an actual human being who would watch the person handle a horse and ride. Kind of like what the Boy Scouts require for a merit badge in horsemanship. I had to sign off on a boy once, and it was an interesting experience. If the whole thing were offered for free, wouldn't that be a tremendous boon to the horse business?

Re: Do we need standards?

BuckskinPaint — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 15:16:51 GMT

I think we need a standardized riding test the appraiser can use to rate the rider! (1-5) Then matching up horse-rider would be easier, right? I've seen too many riders rate themselves 3 or better when they're really about a 1...or a .5 Seriously if an accurate evaluation of the buyer were available it would make your job easier. Maybe relative levels are needed. A 3 to me would be a 5 to my dad. ( I'm guessing I'm about a 2.5 & hes a .5 LOL). Just an Idea.

Re: Do we need standards?

JMFriedman — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:24:03 GMT

And I just got a lovely image of a horse and owner walking hand-in-hoof along a beach. LOL

Yep, that's just what I think we need.

Now, Richard Shrake did a bang-up job of coming up with some very realistic and easily administered tests of trainability for the horse. I've seen them used in part in videos by various trainers. They're just as useful in getting a reading on how difficult a horse will be for a particular owner to handle. The trick is getting the information out to buyers and sellers and putting the process into a framework that is simple and easily applicable during shopping expeditions.

Re: Do we need standards?

gypsy fly — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 20:40:37 GMT

I just heard an eHarmony commercial. How nice it would be to have several established points of compatibility between equines and owners/riders.

Re: Do we need standards?

JMFriedman — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 13:26:31 GMT

gypsy fly:
JMFriedman:
the basis for comparison against other horses in the same market

So these comps function as a determinant for what a horse is worth in the current market? Are we to "ass u me" that the horse is an appreciating asset or a liability? If an asset then it needs to be colored up. If a liability then it needs to be covered up. If the appraisal includes matchmaking, then a well rehersed trial period may be the most reliable measure.

As for my Sweetheart, she'd say of any equine appraisal, "You had me at horse ..."

The asset/liability situation depends on the purpose of the appraisal. I'd guess if the horses were part of a rancorous divorce settlement they'd be worth quite a bit more than if they were part of the estate of a dearly-departed horse lover.

FLH, you certainly got that right! The way I look at it is if you need me to ride the horse because you're afraid or you don't trust the seller, then you don't need that horse. I will only ride a horse for someone else if there's a reason--like the buyer is out of state and wants an assessment of the horse's training level. I try to be honest without being unpleasant, but that's not always workable. LOL

I do suggest that a friend take a second look on another day if I think they're being too quick to judge, but I'm really not emotionally invested in the process unless it's someone in my family who's doing the shopping. If I'm going to have to live with the repercussions, then I'm much more assertive about my opinion.

I haven't been in the business end of the business as long as you have, so maybe my experience isn't wide enough, but it seems to me that buyers are far pickier now than they were ten or fifteen years ago. And they want guarantees up the wazoo. Maybe that's just here in the Sue Me State.

Re: Do we need standards?

FloridaHorseman — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 23:21:26 GMT

JMFriedman:
Now that horses are having trouble enough finding homes, it seems more important (to me, at least) to find a way to make good matches. Am I losing my mind (again), or does anyone else see this as an issue?

For what it's worth, I see this as "an issue" about the same way I see arranged marriages as an issue. No difference in the results.

And standards... WHAT standards? "We don't need no stinkin' standards!" Have you ever gone from one show ring or horse sale to another and experienced reliable "standards"? There's not even much uniform enforcement of RULES.

For an experienced horseperson to match un-saavy riders of various skill levels with the horses they SHOULD be on is pretty easy. But actually convincing them to buy, ride and keep those horses is another matter. As soon as they bump up against horse psychology or bad riding technique problems, the horse suddenly becomes either a "bad fit" or the wrong color, and winds up in that "having trouble enough finding homes" category. And the horse matchmaker that made the purchase recommendation becomes the scapegoat.

I do occasionally go with someone to "look at a horse". But that's ALL I usually do. Look. When they ask me to ride the horse for them, I ask if they're buying the horse for ME to ride. That often gets my point across. If I see them riding with poor skills and blaming the horse, THEN I'll ride to see who's really at fault and actually tell them where I think the problem is.

In over 30 years I can't remember ever telling someone "This is the horse for you!" And I've also lost count of the times I HAVE said "You need more riding lessons before you're ready to own this horse". I suppose there's a standard in there somewhere. But I know it doesn't weigh 20 pounds and doesn't appear to be widely accepted either. ~FH

Re: Do we need standards?

gypsy fly — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 22:35:58 GMT

JMFriedman:
the basis for comparison against other horses in the same market

So these comps function as a determinant for what a horse is worth in the current market? Are we to "ass u me" that the horse is an appreciating asset or a liability? If an asset then it needs to be colored up. If a liability then it needs to be covered up. If the appraisal includes matchmaking, then a well rehersed trial period may be the most reliable measure.

As for my Sweetheart, she'd say of any equine appraisal, "You had me at horse ..."