Of all of the controversial topics I've covered, nothing has drawn the ire of the internet
as much as questioning the ethics of horseback riding.
In the years since my first video on this topic, I've realized a few things.
One:
horse
people
are
passionate.
And two: there’s a lot I failed to address.
In fact, I've been rethinking my approach to this debate entirely.
So, is horse riding cruel?
It is vegan?
And is there any ethical way to ride a horse?
(cracks neck)
Let's do this
Hi, it's Emily from BiteSizeVegan.org, where you can find all the sources for this video,
and my entire Horse Riding Ethics series.
Before we discuss whether horse riding is cruel, I want you to think about another question entirely:
Are horses meant to be ridden?
You see, the question of whether horse riding is cruel tends to result in heated debate
over which methods or schools of riding are best, with riders insisting that horse riding
is not harmful if done "correctly."
Any physical or emotional harm caused by riding horses is due to inexperienced riders, poor
use of equipment, or any other number of factors.
But all of this debate over how to ride horses "properly" presupposes that there is an acceptable
way to use another being for our own purposes.
Even the very question of whether horse riding is cruel risks implying that the only problem
with riding horses is whether they suffer.
The foundational ethical issue with horseback riding isn't whether it hurts horses
—it's the presumption that they are ours to use in the first place.
That horses are meant to be ridden.
We'll explore this further throughout this video, but I wanted to plant this seed before
we get too lost in the weeds—and before the vast majority of YouTube viewers leave
the video entirely.
(And they're gone...)
Let's start by addressing head-on four common arguments in defense of riding horses.
The most basic argument in the defence of riding horses is that horses need exercise.
This also comes with the most basic refutation: so do dogs, cats, and human children—yet
we've somehow found a way to provide such necessary physical activity
without mounting any of them.
Yes, horses—like all animals—need exercise.
And if riding them is the only way they are allowed to receive that exercise, then yes—it's
more beneficial than being stuck in a stall 24/7 But the choice of being ridden or receiving
no exercise at all is a human-created false dichotomy.
The reason horses even need humans to provide them with exercise
is that we have confined them in the first place.
A second argument is that riding provides horses with an enriched environment and stimulation.
As with exercise, these are valid needs of any living being—and fully achievable without
being mounted by a human.
Again, if horses weren’t deprived of enrichment and stimulation by humans in the first place,
they wouldn’t need to be given enrichment and stimulation by humans.
Now, I know I've been a bit flippant in my responses to the first two arguments, but
I'm going to take some time on the final two because they speak to profoundly important
dynamics in how we conceptualize our relationships with horses.
The assertion that horses enjoy being ridden comes in many forms, but almost always starts
with "but my horse loves..." and insert: being ridden, going to shows, wearing a bridle,
having a bit, running the barrels, and what have you.
Horse riding advocates describe how excited their horses are when they see it's time to
go for a ride, listing behavioral signs of enjoyment versus those indicating distress.
Rather than debate the meaning of equine body language, let's assume—for a moment—that
a horse does show excitement about being ridden.
This excitement has to be viewed within the context of the limitations we've placed upon the horse
What else do they have to look forward to?
When your options are staying in a stall or getting to go outside—albeit while being
ridden—which would you choose?
Adapting to the limits of confinement is a survival mechanism in all animals—humans included
Think of how imprisoned people find ingenious ways to fulfill the need for social and communal
interaction, intellectual stimulation, and physical activity.
They may very well come to enjoy any time they have outside their cell and excitedly
anticipate things that, to non-imprisoned people, seem trivial or even unappealing.
But within the limited framework of confinement, they adapt to stay sane.
This re-frames the issue entirely to the ethics of domestication itself—something explored
by former horse trainer, trader, and rider Ren Hurst in my interview with her:
Most people have no idea that the animals they are spending time with are in an absolute
state of learned helplessness, of conditioning, that doesn’t even allow you to experience their true nature.
What you are experiencing is like this empty shell version... of the animal in front of you
Even if we could accurately determine consent from other species, true consent cannot be
freely given under unequal power dynamics and constraints.
This leads us to what I think may be the most painful defense for riders to confront:
the love they feel for their horses, and the deep emotional bond formed through riding.
To those of you who ride horses: I do believe that you love them.
I do believe that you feel a deep emotional connection to them.
And I believe that the depth of that love is precisely what makes it so profoundly painful
to question the true nature of your relationship with them.
I also understand the resistance to having that bond questioned by me—someone with
no background in horse riding.
So, I’ll again defer to Ren Hurst,
You have to almost experience a truly free horse… otherwise, your perception of what
horses are and how they behave is really skewed.
This is a being you have placed in your control and in your care, and then you call that “love.”
I mean, there’s nothing “loving” about using someone for your own personal benefit.
That’s not a loving relationship, and it’s not an equal relationship.
Riding horses involves using non-human animals for entertainment, emotional fulfillment—even love.
But using someone for love is still using someone.
Now that we've touched on some of the principal defenses for riding horses, let's explore
the main arguments against horse riding.
I'll be honest: the most common arguments against horseback riding—which I myself
focused upon in my original video and article on this topic—all center upon the physical
harm riding inflicts upon horses.
Yes, it's important to address the physical consequences horses endure.
But focusing exclusively on their physical suffering as the reason to stop riding horses
misses the greater ethical issues entirely.
Instead of questioning our use of horses in the first place, we end up nitpicking the
appropriate terms of their exploitation: arguing about the best and worst methods of riding,
the proper and improper use of equipment, et cetera.
It is the very same trap of all animal welfarism, like humane, free-range, and cage-free labels.
Our right to use these beings is seen as a foregone conclusion—the only thing we question
is the "acceptable" ways in which we can use them.
With that caveat stated, let's look at the physical impact of horseback riding on horses
before further exploring the vegan animal rights perspective.
The short answer is yes, horse riding does hurt horses.
Now, The exact nature and degree of the harm, the precise causality, and proposed methods
by which such harm may be mitigated is a long-standing contentious debate
that shows no signs of resolution.
A major problem with the scientific and medical literature is that it is conducted through
the lens of minimizing the harm of horse use in order to prolong that use.
It is also framed within the unquestioned constraints we've placed upon horses.
Before we get into more detail, I want to again urge you to take a step back and think
about another question entirely: if so much has to be done "correctly" to minimize the
harm of riding horses, and no one can actually agree on what that "correct" formula is, and
riding horses is entirely unnecessary in the first place—
why are we still so insistent on doing this to them?
For the horse racing industry, the answer is clear: money.
But for the individual rider—for the horse lover—
stop to question why you feel you need to ride.
The majority of blog posts and informal articles I came across discussing whether riding hurts
horses were written by riders.
People who obviously have concern that their actions are adversely impacting the beings they love.
Yet those posts went on to catalog—sometimes in extensive detail—how, exactly, to make
the riding experience as enjoyable as possible for your horse.
How to minimize injury and distress.
Some echo the journey of Ren Hurst, progressively using less and less horse tack and adopting
more gentle methods, all in an effort to find a justifiable way to still use horses.
So, let's follow this path and start with the harm of horse tack.
If you’re not familiar, horse tack refers to the equipment and accessories used on domesticated horses.
This includes things like saddles, bits, bridles, and whips.
It's worth noting that most horse tack is made from the skin of other non-human animals,
further compounding the exploitation.
I cover the leather industry in depth in another video.
In addition to general wear and chafing, saddles run the risk of causing vascular occlusion—meaning
the restriction of blood flow—which can, if prolonged, lead to "necrosis of the under-lying
tissues" —meaning the horse's skin and muscles die.
Riding bareback (without a saddle) isn't the answer, as it may actually increase the risk
of injury by putting more concentrated pressure on a horse's back than with a saddle.
So, To avoid severe consequences such as necrosis, much industry and scientific research goes
into designing and educating riders about "proper" saddle fit and use.
The option of just not riding horses at all never even enters the discussion.
Because we just have to get up on them.
I have a video covering bits, so I’ll keep this brief.
Bits cause pain and damage to a horse’s complex cranial nerves as well as their teeth,
tongue, and palate.
Facial nerves are very close to the skin and thus extremely sensitive.
Bits provide a perfect example of the incremental negotiation of acceptable exploitation that
occurs when viewing a horses' pain as the only problem.
Rather than question the domination and control of another being, more and more riders adopt
and advocate for bitless bridles.
Then, when research hints that perhaps even bitless bridles cause pain, there's another
school or device or approach ready to take its place.
Riding advocates emphasize that whips and crops should not be used as punishment
—only as encouragement.
As with all horse tack, there is unending debate over their "proper" use, with much
focus given to the potential physical and emotional harm of misuse.
Let's pause for a moment to consider that we're now debating the proper way to whip
a being we love.
Let's proceed.
The most widespread controversy about whips is their use in the horse racing industry,
which I've covered in a dedicated video and article.
While the way whips are used within horse racing differs from how they're used in non-competitive
riding, recent research into horse pain perception from whips is applicable to the larger issues
we've been exploring.
There's a long-standing misconception that horses have "thicker skin" than humans, and
thus, whips don't hurt them.
Not that we should need this to know better, but research has found that this is not the case,
with a 2020 study finding "no significant difference between humans and horses in either
the concentration of nerve endings in the outer pain-detecting layer of skin or in the
thickness of this layer...although horse skin is thicker overall than human skin, the part
of the skin that is thicker does not insulate them from pain...humans and horses have the
equivalent basic anatomic structures to detect pain in the skin."
Six years before this study, one of the authors, Paul McGreevy decided to whip himself while
taking thermographic imaging, saying: "My view is that – because there is no evidence
to the contrary – we must assume that, just as I felt pain and distress from the impact
of the padded whip, similar whipping in a horse would also cause pain and distress."
While it's validating to now have the scientific verification, I wanted to highlight McGreevy's point:
Why not assume that other sentient beings feel pain as we do, rather than continue
to harm them unless we've proven to ourselves that it is harm?
Now that we've addressed horse tack, what about the act of riding itself?
When researching the physical harm of riding horses, I found an astounding lack of consensus
and ongoing controversy regarding horse skeletal maturation and growth plate closure rates,
diagnosis and treatment of injuries, and the relationship of riding and training practices to injury rates.
Even a veterinary manual explaining "the most common cause of back soreness in the horse"
is soft-tissue damage to the muscles and supraspinous ligament in a horse's back, which "are strained
while the horse is being ridden" is sure to point out that "there is considerable controversy
over the diagnosis and treatment of back problems in horses."
It’s acknowledged that "Across all equestrian disciplines, the single largest reason for
wastage"—also euphemistically referred to as "loss of horses"— "is musculoskeletal injury,"
Yet horse skeletal maturation rates and damage from riding remain particularly contentious.
Many studies and sources declare horses "skeletally mature" at 2–3 years of age based either
on the growth plates closing in their legs, or their having reached their full height and weight.
None of these factors speak to the maturity of their axial skeleton, which includes their
vertebral column—y'know, the part you sit on—or even parts of the pubis that don't
fuse until 4.5–5 years of age, long after they're already being ridden.
I spent days delving into horse skeletal development—I even chased down findings about horse pubic
epiphyseal fusion not occurring until up to 5 years of age that were made in 1897.
Yet well over 100 years later, we're still asking when horses are skeletally mature and
basing it off the earliest fusing plates in their limbs.
I've included more detail on my research process and findings on the article for this video
if you want to dive deeper.
But honestly, those hundred or so hours I spent digging only highlighted the utter insanity
of how much time, energy, and effort we humans put into justifying our use of other animals.
In the end, the industry, scientific, medical, and even lay-rider literature doesn't really
refute the harm of riding—it just strives to determine the best way to reduce that harm
and prolong the use of horses.
The warring approaches to riding, endless studies on training practices, and progressive
bargaining of using less and less tack are all manifestations of the same incremental
negotiation of exploitation we perform with all non-human animals.
Battery cages are too cruel for layer hens, so we give them slightly larger cages.
Still problematic?
How about a crowded shed?
Still too grim?
Let's raise backyard chickens.
We barter and bargain and give ourselves happy-sounding labels, doing anything we can to keep using animals
—but feel good about it.
Within the horse world, a poignant example of this mentality is the United States horse
racing industry patting itself on the back for a 23.5% decrease in fatalities over a
decade of voluntary data collection by The Jockey Club.
Now there are going to be fatalities.
But, as The Jockey Club's senior counsel said, the fact that slightly fewer horses died of
fatal injuries while racing "indicates that the Thoroughbred industry's commitment to
equine safety is paying dividends."
Not only do we fail to question what we're doing to these beings, but we actually congratulate
ourselves for being the heroes in the disasters of our own creation.
We swoop in to make their abbreviated lives slightly less miserable—lives that we've
made abbreviated and miserable in the first place.
By this point, you can probably guess the answer to whether horse riding is vegan.
The question "is horse riding vegan" is quite different from the question "is horse riding cruel"
Veganism and animal rights oppose any exploitation of sentient beings
It's evident that horses do not need to be ridden.
When a horse's basic needs are met without being ridden, horseback riding solely benefits the rider
Whether that benefit is financial gain, entertainment, emotional fulfillment, or even a presumed
expression of love—it is exploitation.
There is no way to take advantage of someone's captive dependency without exploiting them.
Underlying all of the debates over the "proper" way to train and ride horses is not only the
tacit acknowledgment that some degree of harm is acceptable but also the deeply entrenched
and unquestioned presumption that horses are ours to use.
Confronting the exploitation of horse use is—I'm sure—profoundly painful.
It's likely as traumatic as confronting what we do to animals in the food industry—and
elicits just as strong defenses and justifications, even from vegans who continue to ride.
Again, I will encourage those of you who ride horses to ask yourself: why?
Why do you insist on doing this to them?
As much as I'm sure you love them, is this how you express love for any other being in your life?
This isn’t about shame—it’s about learning to love horses truly unconditionally, and
allowing them to be their full selves outside of the constraints of who we need them to be.
I'll be honest—revisiting the ethics of horse riding has been an exhausting, challenging,
and somewhat maddening experience.
My hope is that this video will reach those of you who are still riding—and
that you'll find a way to work through your defenses and take an honest look at your relationship with horses.
I highly recommend watching my interview with Ren Hurst—hearing from someone who has been
where you are is no doubt more powerful than anything I can say.
Please share this video with others who ride.
And, as much as I joked about "passionate feedback," I do want to hear from you in the comments.
What are your thoughts on the ethics of horse riding?
To stay in the loop about new Bite Size Vegan content and updates, subscribe to the newsletter
or follow the Telegram channel for the most reliable notifications.
Just click Subscribe at BiteSizeVegan.org.
Now go live vegan, and I'll see you soon.