A response to the Jan. 26 article ‘Under Pressure: The Great Noseband Debate.’
One of the primary goals of Equestrian Canada (EC)’s ongoing Noseband Pilot Project is to educate and create awareness in the equestrian community about factors to consider with the use of nosebands. Additionally, its aim is to explore ideas, review current research and understand the use and application of nosebands at EC-sanctioned events and how they can best be measured and potentially regulated.
“With any undertaking like this, we at EC, our volunteers, advisors, and committee members have learned a lot through the process,” said Director of Active Equine Industry and Development Kristy Laroche. “We appreciate the opportunity to update the equestrian community on the current status because the research and input portions of the project have not concluded.” In fact, based on feedback from stewards, competitors, and industry partners, it is continuing to grow.
Over the development of the pilot, numerous advisors were sought to help buildout timelines, measuring tools and perimeters to gathering data including Dr. Hilary Clayton. Clayton, a veterinarian, researcher, and horsewoman, has performed innovative research in the many areas including locomotor biomechanics and the interaction between rider, tack, and horse for over 40 years. She has published seven books and more than 200 scientific articles in her areas of expertise. Dr. Clayton has been engaged and in final stages of securing funding to conduct further research to add to the project entitled The Effect of Noseband Tightness on Pressure on the Horse’s Face. It will include measuring a variety of tack including nosebands of different widths, cavessons, RMG, standard crank, flash, grackle, and drop nosebands.
The current investigative stage of the project includes seeking input from athletes, stewards, veterinarians, and industry partners. The athlete survey was launched as planned on January 27 and already has received over 1,000 responses. “There have been so many thoughtful comments, input and suggestions shared (see comments below) from our knowledgeable and caring community of horsepeople,” said Laroche. “We are so thankful to everyone that has already responded and appreciate their input. It really matters.” All the feedback received will be summarized in the report and shared back with the community.
In addition to literature reviews of available research (see a partial short list of citations on the subject below), the results from competitions that saw over 550 measurements taken across Canada in a wide variety of disciplines, survey feedback, and the new research, will all be included in a white paper to be prepared and published by the project’s academic working group.
“We have heard considerable support for the use of a standardized tool as it provides awareness and clarification in a fair and consistent manner,” shared Laroche. “But it’s important to know that we’re looking at not only whether a tool should be used, but which tool. Feedback from some of the stewards involved brought forward concerns with the ISES taper gauge, specifically its design.” Further thoughts from stewards show that using a tool is very valuable in “tie breaker” scenarios and helped reduce the potential for conflict with competitors. Even so, it’s clear that no one should jump to conclusions about a chosen method or the ISES tool just yet.
“This is, and continues to be, a collaborative process,” said EC’s CEO Meg Krueger. “And when there is fulsome information in hand, our staff and expert volunteers can then decide if they recommend moving forward with any potential rule changes or endorsement of a standardized tool. There is no plan to rush a decision or implement a new rule without further consultation and that is not evidence-based.”
The ultimate hope is that with collaboration from the equestrian community horse welfare can be maximized; riders, coaches, trainers, and athletes can educate themselves; and competition organizers and stewards can feel supported and safe in addressing noseband tightness. In the words of one respondent, “Working with horses is a privilege and not a right. We choose this life for our horses and as such have a responsibility to ensure they are able to do their jobs in a safe and comfortable manner.”
Some comments received by respondents in the online survey:
“I am so happy to see EC utilizing evidence based, objective measurements to ensure horse welfare at competitions.”
“Conformation of the head: shape of nose also is a factor. And the height where the nose band is set by the rider should be taken into consideration as many are improperly adjusted.”
“Gauges are better than fingers since all fingers are different.”
“Would like EC to share research, evidence, and reasoning in a more timely manner before taking on rule changes.”
“I feel this needs to be a warning/educational system when it’s first implemented, rather than being a severe punishment like immediate elimination, especially in disciplines where tack checks with a steward aren’t the norm.”
“Nosebands, especially tight ones are cruel and not necessary. It’s time to look at more humane ways of dealing with our horse partners.”
“I love that EC is addressing this. As a coach/competitor who also is a registered veterinary technician, I strongly like seeing horse welfare being put first.”
“I think a reasonable opinion of the steward should be adequate. The gauge seemed to confuse the stewards I observed and there is too much difference in finger sizes.”
*****
- FENNER K., YOON S., WHITE P., STARLING M. and McGREEVY P. (2016). The effect of noseband tightening on horses’ behavior, eye temperature, and cardiac responses . PLoS One , 11(5), page e0154179.
- ULDAHL M. and CLAYTON HM (2019). Lesions associated with the use of bits, nosebands, spurs and whips in Danish competition horses. Equine Veterinary Journal , 51(2), pages 154–162.
- DOHERTY O., CASEY V., McGREEVY P. and ARKINS S. (2017). Noseband use in Equestrian sports – An international study . PLoS One , 12(1), page e0169060.
- VISSER EK, KUYPERS MM, STAM JS and RIEDSTRA B. (2019). Practice of noseband use and intentions towards behavioral change in Dutch equestrians . Animals , 9(12), p. 1131.
- DOHERTY O., CASEY V., McGREEVY P. and ARKINS S. (2016). An investigation into noseband tightness levels on competition horses. Journal of Veterinary Behavior , 15, page 83.
- DOHERTY O., CONWAY T., CONWAY R., MURRAY G. and CASEY V. (2017). An objective measure of noseband tightness and its measurement using a novel digital tightness gauge . PLoS One , 12(1), page e0168996.
- Mc GREEVY P., WARREN-SMITH A. and GUISARD Y. (2012). The effect of double bridles and jaw-clamping crank nosebands on temperature of eyes and facial skin of horses. Journal of Veterinary Behavior , 7(3), pages 142-148.
