I've mentioned this book on here a couple of times and have always meant to go back and write an article on it. Well, I've finally got my act together and have put a few scribblings below. I'm not sure it's in its final form yet but this is the gist of it.
As before, if you have any commments as to bits which are confusing, boring, pretentious, crap etc then please let me know....
"Empty Cages" is the title of a book about animal rights by Tom Regan. He provides a persuasive argument why we should all adopt more "extremist" views towards animals. I suspect that most of who read it would feel challenged and perhaps ready to change some of the decisions we make regarding the exploitation of animals.
But this is not an article about animal rights. Instead I want to talk to you about the cat.
Regan begins his book with a description of a video, filmed in a retaurant in China (the more sensitive amongst you might want to skip the rest of this paragraph - it does not make for pleasant reading). As in some Western restaurants where patrons are able to choose a lobster out of the tank, in this restaurant patrons were able to inspect rows of tiny, cramped cages containing cats and dogs. Once the selection had been made, the chef used long metal tongs to grab a fluffy white cat from her cage. She was hit with an iron bar a few times, submerged in scalding water, skinned alive and thrown into the cooking pot where she finally drowned. The diners enjoyed their meal, offered praise and thanks to the chef and continued as though nothing out of the ordinary had occurred.
This is a pretty gruesome story and Regan goes on to discuss what it would take for us to feel happier about the process. How about if the cages were larger so that the animals were less cramped - would this make it acceptable? Errrrrm, no. How about if, as well as living in a larger cage, the cat was handled gently and given a drug to end her life peacefully? It's better but I think most of us would still find this distasteful.
Regan discusses various other options and compares what has taken place with levels of welfare adhered to by the major animal-user industries. But I shall just skip to the final variation, which is the only way in which he would feel happy with the situation. The television crew arrive to find an extremely angry chef - all the cages stand empty and the cats and dogs have escaped (with Regan's help!). Empty cages, not larger cages - that is what we find acceptable.
I want to use the concept of Empty Cages to help us think more about how we treat our horses. I am not talking literally, about whether or not we use stables, but more generally as a metaphor for any given situation. Let us set our standards high and reduce the level of compromise that horses have to make all day every day. Let us aim for empty cages, not larger cages.
For example, some people use electric cattle-prods on horses who won't move forwards. I hope you'll agree that that's a pretty unpleasant thing to do, regardless of whether "it works". I would agree with those who instead use a pressure halter - it is indeed an improvement. But I would also consider this the equivalent of just making the cage slightly larger. We want empty cages, not larger cages. There are more positive ways of teaching a horse to move forwards. Similarly, some people choose to use spurs and/or a whip when riding their "lazy" horse. They argue that it is better than repetitive kicking and I would agree. But again, I think this is just a way of making the cage larger. There are other ways to ride your horse - why is the horse unmotivated and what can we do to change that?
How often do we hear the following responses regarding a horse's behaviour?
That's just his way of going...
He's always done that...
He's always had bad feet...
I've tried everything...
He copes fine by himself / stabled 24/7 / whatever...
It doesn't hurt him...
He's not scared he's just naughty / stubborn / taking the mickey...
Positive reinforcement is all very well but some horses need to be reprimanded...
These are yet more examples of how we frequently fail to maximise our horses' welfare. We often wait for things to go badly wrong before looking for solutions. But there are many horses out there who are just coping. Is this enough? We need to examine and improve the status quo - not just big problems. And we need to consider the status quo of each individual horse, not some generalised average.
These improvements won't be made instantly. There are many situations in which it is unlikely that we can jump from tiny cages to empty cages all in one go. We are constrained by money, family, peer-pressure, livery yard rules. I have no objection to larger cages, they are better than tiny cages - provided we keep on pushing the boundaries and keep those cages growing.
What possible reason have we for not adopting such an "extremist" approach? In "The Road Less Travelled" M. Scott Peck defines love in terms of making ourselves uncomfortable. I love my horse and will do what it takes to allow him to be happy - that has involved (and still involves) a number of of difficult decisions in which I have felt very uncomfortable. Ben Hart's philosophy of "putting the horse first" is not easy. But if, as we all claim, we love our horses then this is what we must do. Let us aim high.
Hmmm - I love more or less all animals, but I cannot help feeling this is a bit too idealistic for me. However, I have always felt that animals should have more rights, but it is down to people to give them rights - and the only way to do this is by educating our children (and ourselves of course).
First of all, about cats and dogs in China (and other parts of Asia) - this is part of their culture. Cats and especially dogs are widely eaten in Asia, and the way they are prepared / killed is horrible to us but totally acceptable to that culture, just like we do lobsters or fish, chicken etc - and if cows were smaller, I think they might be prepared in a similar way? It feels cruel and horrible to us because we keep cats and dogs as pets.
Regarding empty cages, I think I am unlikely to be able to offer my horses an empty cage, but I hope the one they have is huge. There are things such as my children, my farmer landlord, my bank balance amongst other things that restrict my time, options and facilities I have to offer to my horses. I do everything I can to make their lives happy - but then again, who defines what is a happy horse - the definition might be different to me and someone else.
I'm quoting this from Catherine: "We often wait for things to go badly wrong before looking for solutions. But there are many horses out there who are just coping. Is this enough?" This is right, but then again - if it aint broke why fix it? Most horse owners react only when things start to go wrong, some cannot even then hear their horse shouting - but who will change these people if it doesn't come from within?
All in all, the article is good and worth sending somewhere so more people would stop and think!
I wanted to add this as I thought the quote describes so well how we don't always think what we are doing to our horses. It is is from the Intelligent Horsemanship Member's Forum site, a quote put up by "HeatherL" in a thread called "100 Things Your Horse Wants You to Know".
Your horse wants you to know...
He didn't choose you, you chose him.
He didn't choose his accomodation or his food.
He didn't choose to have to carry you you asked him to.
He doesn't get to choose his hairstyles or his clothes.
He can't always choose his friends they are often thrust upon him.
He doesn't choose where to go on outings you do.
He might want a day off but he can't choose when.
He might be rather attached to his coat, his mane and various other bits of his hairy anatomy but he doesn't always get to keep them. You choose that for him too.
In fact he has so very little choice could you please try and make the very best choices you can for him. After all the only payment he receives for his efforts are also your choice.
Hi Lesley - aw thanks! I will certainly send it to the EBF at some point. Just waiting a bit as they currently have a couple of my other articles waiting to publish. Don't want to put in too much and have people get fed up with me!
Hi Mariaana
It's great to hear your feedback, and particularly to be disagreed with - we can get very boring on here sometimes!! Thank you!
Thanks for bringing up the subject of Asian culture as it is something I should have addressed. I was not for a minute criticising the culture of eating dogs and cats and completely agree with what you say. In fact, Regan actually spends a lot of his book making the point that as Westerners we find that story about the cat distasteful - BUT that there are many ways in which our treatment of animals is considerably worse. I will clarify this before posting it anywhere else.
We all have the same sort of constraints on our time and money. There is often a misconception that being a better horse owner might mean spending more money, spending more time with your horse. But often it is a less-is-more approach that is really needed. I have saved myself a fortune since realising that Jak is much healthier and happier living out, barefoot and not being rugged or clipped. I also find I have a lot more time for him and my husband. No more spending hours mucking out (although sometimes waiting for him to eat his feed in the winter is just as time-consuming!) or having a nightmare arranging someone to look after him every time I need to go away.
I strive constantly to be a better horse-trainer and -owner. A lot of that is just changing ideas in my head and, as you say, a lot of the change is what comes from within - it is not about external factors. A lot of it is just being more aware of my body language and how the horse responds to what I do (deliberately and inadvertantly). A lot of it is doing things that I wanted to do anyway, such as yoga and Alexander Technique. Very little of it involves spending more money - I must be one of the few horse-owners who can look through the Robinsons catalogue and find absolutely nothing in it that I want!
I agree that we all have different ideas of what constitutes equine happiness but that is actually why I am really opposed to the idea of "if it aint broke don't fix it" in this context. We all have different ideas of what it means to be "broke". The more I have learnt about behaviour, shiatsu, hoofcare etc, the more I recognise "broke" where other people think all is well. Likewise when I'm observing people and their behaviour, posture etc. I am sure we are all the same on here, just with different areas in which we are happy with the status quo and different areas in which we think there are problems, depending on our areas of expertise. BTW - I am not advocating that we start gratuitously experimenting with training methods and therapies when I say all this - I'm not suggesting that using our horses as guinea pigs is the best way forwards! It is more about doing the research.
But I completely agree with you that some people can't hear their horses shouting. We can but try to get the message across. I just don't think that should stop me (us?) from always trying harder to hear the tiniest whisper.
And yes, I would agree with you in that from what I've seen of your yard, your horses have a pretty big cage!
Catherine
This message has been edited by Brocksopp on Apr 27, 2006 2:40 PM This message has been edited by Brocksopp on Apr 27, 2006 2:39 PM
I love this article, particularly the comments on love. Has helped me make a decision today (not something I'm known for usually, LOL!)
Will e-mail you when I get a chance, not only is my broadband at home dead but my work e-mail is also being more than a little bit tempramental. You click, you treat and it still doesn't work!
Very thought-provoking and well written as always! I disagree immensely with this way of eating ANY animal. I did not take this as a slating of the consumption of animals which I consider as pets. I am completely accepting of that aspect, as I am with the eating of horse. My HUGE bug-bear (as with many animals) is the way these animals are reared and slaughtered. In the case of cats in Asia, this is nothing more than torture and is completely unnecessary. I would dearly love to dip one of these chefs in boiling water, then skin his arm, just as a reminder of what it feels like to experience such pain >: Why is it so terrible to such people to contemplate the humane raising and slaughter of such animals? I suppose the 'Western' Method would be considered a larger cage - quite possibly why I eat very little meat these days (and I feel much healthier for that!!).
"We often wait for things to go badly wrong before looking for solutions. But there are many horses out there who are just coping."
This quote from you, Catherine, rings particularly true. I know I've been guilty of it. It also highlights our tolerance for what we perceive as 'misbehaviour', such as napping out on a hack (leading to rearing, spinning and bolting when the cause is not established and dealt with). Only when the latter symptoms are displayed, would most people act.
Edited to say:
Lucy, your problems with email might be this: although you are clicking (the mouse), you are treating YOURSELF. Put down the choccies, pick up a sledgehammer and treat the computer accordingly. This shall hereon be known as 'anger displacement'. He he he!
This message has been edited by scientificbod on May 2, 2006 10:33 AM
Sue - did you mean on the forum or the articles page? Would be delighted to have it on the articles page (although I'll email you an updated version so don't copy the one from this thread). If you meant on the forum then I think Lucy's idea is great - please could you just post the link and then we can keep any discussion in one place!
I definately agree with the idea of empty cages not larger cages, after all the amount of suffering horse endure in certain situations in terrible (living in 24/7 limited forage, poor riding ect). But I think the key problem is getting people to change. At the moment the above management methods are considered acceptable by most of the horsey world (including some welfare groups) and are used and encourage by prominent public equine places (police and army). It would take a massive change for this to be improved and I think is one of the reasons welfare groups and animal rights organisations need to be educated about real equine welfare. For example there's lots of peta type organisations protesting abut intensive diary farmiing but not about intensive managment of dressage horse who are never even allowed to touch each other. I think really the animal lib people need to be made aware of just how bad certain aspects of the equine industry are as do the general public.
Afterall horses arent essential for anyone in the west anymore so why should they have to suffer unneccasarily.
That's a good point Jo m. I suppose even on here what we consider acceptable varies hugely. For example my horses are shod (natural balance) but some of you would probably not do that to your own animals were as you might stable them over nigh on a regular bases which I would not.
I suppose I think that all horses should be entitled to several hourse of free running a day (even if its only a 20m by 20m paddock) and have the opportunity to socialise with other horses (even if its just through a grill in the stable wall or over an electric fence)most of the time (e;g 12 hours or more a day). Neither do I think its acceptable to reduce eating time to less than 12 hours a day.
I think horses shouldn't be over rugged or ridden in such a way that causes physical strains or mental stress (over bent, draw reins ect).
I also don't think covering in hand is acceptable (or very effective due to the lowered fertilty rates) and believe that breeding should be pature breeding or AI. But this is kinda going off thread here, that stuff I've said is to me the most minimum acceptablity level for humane horse management and is just making the cage bigger. But how many horses don't even get that?
I think one of the big problems for horses is that their almost seen as a lesiure commodity like a flashy car as opposed to commericial (like cattle) or companions (like dogs) because of this they don't seem to have a real emotional (or practical) value and thus get very little protection or consideration. Also the current horse inductry is dominated by the attitude of useing horses (read a horse mag and compare to a dog mag).
I suppose the biggest consideration when trying to improve animal welfare (I think its important to stay away from the term animal rights as it's a bit airy fairy for some and too extreme for others) Is the animals themselves. When you get down to it they are the ones having to live a certain lifestyle and can't change it where as their owners and carers can decied to change their job, dump their partner, or move house if they want to.
Sorry for delay getting back to this one.....These are my thoughts on the issues Jo brought up - feel free to disagree!
Regarding "owning" an animal - I agree that this is a big philosophical debate. But in a case-by-case situation I think it depends on the horse. Do I think Jak would be better off if I were to release him into the wild? I really don't think he would be. Partly due to hi QH breeding, his feet wouldn't work barefoot if he were permanently in wet conditions (we are on sand here where he does very well) and the thought of him never having a well-trained human to scratch his fly-bites????? eeeeek, I don't think he'd cope!
Seriously though, as much as I support an "as close to natural as possible" environment, I still think that humans can be perceived as positive extras in any given horse's life. They can enjoy going out for hacks or jumping. That's not to say that there aren't some horses who would probably be better off if their owners just stopped coming to visit them - I've been at yards where there have been horses pretty much abandoned and they can do incredibly well on it! As always I think it depends on the horse and the human.
Similarly - who gets to play God and decides what constitutes an empty cage as opposed to just a bigger one? Surely it can only be each and every one of our horses? All we can do is observe their behaviour and use all the information they give us and be constantly working to improve what we do. For example, I have pretty much the perfect DIY livery yard at the moment and have no intention of moving. But I am always on the look-out for yards I didn't know about, just in case I find one that's better, or just in case things go wrong and the current place is closed down etc Likewise I think Jak's feet are pretty good but that doesn't stop me continuing to go on trimming courses and learn more about how to be better at what I do.I think that the minute we become complacent and think that the cage is as big as it needs to be then we start exploiting the horses.
But I don't want to blow this out of proportion - I'm not suggesting we all need to become neurotic about this! That wouldn't benefit the horses either!
Catherine
This message has been edited by Brocksopp on Jun 12, 2006 1:26 PM This message has been edited by Brocksopp on Jun 12, 2006 1:24 PM
And, I too think my "competition" horse would be much happier with me than fending for himself, he definatley see's benefits in me and other humans and has trained us well!!.
However, there are definately some horses who don't see any benefit to being with humans and therefore for them, given the choice, they may very well decide to roam the ranges without being "looked after" by a human.
I'm not trying to be the opposing view, I do think everyone in the whole world should think about ethically keeping horses and animal (or child for that matter).
But the criteria for the cage that even the most ethically minded human puts together still would not suit ALL horses or animals.
I just believe that Utopia does not exist, which doesn't mean that we can't theoretically discuss it, but more that there will for some, always be a cage, however large.
I completely agree that every individual horse will have his own personal perfect lifestyle - I'm not for a minute suggesting that there is one horsey Utopia (eeeek - did it sound as though I did? ) Definitely as many horsey Utopias as horses I would imagine!
But I'm not sure we are both thinking of the concept in the same way so we might be talking a little at cross-purposes. I suspect that for all horses, feral or pampered, there will always be some level of compromise or "cage" (and people for that matter! How many of us feel our lives are pefect?!). So all I'm suggesting is that for any given aspect of our horses' care, training, management etc (or our own!) we should keep pushing for improvements without ever getting settled into complacency.
But to use your example of a horse who sees no value in humans - the "empty cage" might be to turn it loose in a feral herd (unlikely to happen and might not even be that beneficial to the horse) or it might be to teach the horse how to find value in those humans (might be doable, given the right humans doing the "training"), or it might be to retire it somewhere with minimal human contact (might be perfect but what if the horse could have learnt to find value in humans?).
There is always going to be a judgement call and "feel" needed, rather than some prescription. It's about reducing the level of compromise by more effective training or management, not necessarily just returning them to the wild. Stretching of comfort zones and counter-conditioning might be needed in order for the horse to find his approaching-empty cage.
Clear as mud huh? Maybe I should give up on this one!
Catherine
This message has been edited by Brocksopp on Jun 13, 2006 6:05 PM
Much as it pains me to say it, I KNOW that Henry would love to be turned out into the wild. In his case, he did come from the moors as a 2yr old, therefore any benefits with humans will always be counteracted by his early experiences with them. I know it took a LONG time to gain his trust (he was loaned out repeatedly before I took him on and came back so many times he was nicknamed 'Boomerang Henry'). His 'Empty Cage' is just untacking him on the top of Leith Hill and saying, 'Enjoy!'. Nope, can't imagine him ever seeing his empty cage, but I'm trying to make it very, very big!!!
This topic has reminded me of the semi-feral ponies I studied in South Wales. I was looking to see how a group of mares behaved when there was a harem stallion, and when there wasn't. On this particular common stallions run out with the resident mares for the breeding season, and then are removed - in my case a couple of months early due to a hill pony festival in Usk that year.
The mares had a completely different home range when the stallion was there compared to when he wasn't. When he was there they occupied an area 2/3's the size of the total range seen at the end of the study. The area they were occupying was also closest to the stud that was managing the stallion (in the sense that they were taking responsibity - he never actually lived there ever, he'd been brought in from another part of Wales). There were other groups of mares there, and another few stallions (24/7 stabled) that he'd have roaring contests with on the occassion he needed to visit with other mares, and generally explore possibilities and check up on what was going on. wWhen he wnt on these excursions, his harem would wait wherever he left them all day and all night if he was away that long.
When the stallion was taken away, the mares left the range and visited areas I'd not seen them go to before. They stayed away from the original home range for a whole week before using the whole area. They knew he was gone as opposed to visiting, as he was caught up from the hill - came to a bucket, no rounding up, pinning in corners/corals etc. He had his headcollar on and loaded easily into the trailer. They would have learned that this was final as it happened every year with different stallions.
The stallion rarely did any active rounding up, and the mares all appeared to like him and have some attachment to him. But with the demands of rearing young, they would have had required plenty of feeding. This was best achieved by using a bigger home range.
I think that in a way the stallion was acting like a cage - although the mares could have left whenever he went off on his little forays to the stud. And it was interesting that the stallion put up no resistence to his capture - perhaps he wondered which other mares he was being carted off to?
Anyway, the discussion reminded me and i thought maybe you'd like me to share
