Post by jennyb on Jan 6, 2010 13:28:11 GMT 1
Ha ha, it appears that Mr Roly Owers who made that ridiculous quote is none other than the Chief Exec of WHW!!! He sent this:
Dear Ms Burgess
Thank for your email.
The recent article in the Observer did not quote me correctly. World Horse Welfare does not believe that Rollkur is a 'valuable training method'. My comment to the journalist was that there are many people within the equestrian world who feel that Rollkur is a valuable training method, although clearly there are many people who take the contrary view. I also stressed that Rollkur, like any training method, can cause great harm if it is misused.
I am very aware of the strength of feeling regarding Rollkur as hopefully the latter part of my “quote” in the Observer made clear. That is exactly why we are taking a stance on this issue – seeking robust guidance for stewards at FEI events as to what “excessive” and “prolonged” use of Rollkur means in practice whilst also pushing for robust research to look at whether there is a welfare issue involved in training techniques using hyperflexion.
I hope that makes our position clear; as always I am acutely aware of our charitable objectives.
Best wishes,
Roly Owers
Hmm. This leaves something to be desired. He's not getting off that lightly. So I sent this:
Mr Owers,
Thank you for your reply. Might I suggest that you ask the Observer to print clarification over your quote, as it is extremely misleading and has upset many people in the equestrian world. They have omitted the key parts of your quote to them and as such it reads very differently to your intentions!
Thank you for the clarification and I am pleased to hear that WHW is involved in attempting to limit the use of hyperflexion whilst also looking for research on the matter. I believe the latter is where this argument is currently flawed and will struggle to be resolved either way - to date there has not been meaningful research carried out about the effects of hyperflexion on the horse. I do wonder how this research will be carried out in practice and whether the top riders who use hyperflexion will allow detailed veterinary examinations to be carried out, and for the results to be published if they eventually show the riding techniques in a negative light. I'm sure you are aware that certain continental riders are very quick to involve their lawyers over such matters and are effectively gagging people!
I do feel that until this research is carried out, welfare organisations such as yourselves should be outspoken against rollkur and hyperflexion because the effects, harmful or not, have not been proved and therefore I feel it should not be used as widely as it is. Forgive me, but I do feel that your comments to the journalist do "sit on the fence" somewhat. Those vets who are willing to speak out against these techniques, such as Gerd Heuschmann, have first hand experience of treating the injuries that are caused to the beautiful and talented horses by the use of such riding methods. The evidence against rollkur, albeit anedotal, is already out there. In my opinion, all that remains is the funding and organisation to get the research done to prove it in a formal way.
Incidentally, if you are taking an interest in such matters and are organising research, Dr Heuschmann is coming to the UK in September to give lectures and clinics about training methods and the effects on the horse. He is a very interesting and engaging speaker who has vast knowledge of his subject matter. Might I suggest that you take the time to see him, if you haven't already done so? I'm sure he would be very interested in any research proposal and would be well placed to offer guidance if necessary.
Kind regards,
Jenny Burgess
Dear Ms Burgess
Thank for your email.
The recent article in the Observer did not quote me correctly. World Horse Welfare does not believe that Rollkur is a 'valuable training method'. My comment to the journalist was that there are many people within the equestrian world who feel that Rollkur is a valuable training method, although clearly there are many people who take the contrary view. I also stressed that Rollkur, like any training method, can cause great harm if it is misused.
I am very aware of the strength of feeling regarding Rollkur as hopefully the latter part of my “quote” in the Observer made clear. That is exactly why we are taking a stance on this issue – seeking robust guidance for stewards at FEI events as to what “excessive” and “prolonged” use of Rollkur means in practice whilst also pushing for robust research to look at whether there is a welfare issue involved in training techniques using hyperflexion.
I hope that makes our position clear; as always I am acutely aware of our charitable objectives.
Best wishes,
Roly Owers
Hmm. This leaves something to be desired. He's not getting off that lightly. So I sent this:
Mr Owers,
Thank you for your reply. Might I suggest that you ask the Observer to print clarification over your quote, as it is extremely misleading and has upset many people in the equestrian world. They have omitted the key parts of your quote to them and as such it reads very differently to your intentions!
Thank you for the clarification and I am pleased to hear that WHW is involved in attempting to limit the use of hyperflexion whilst also looking for research on the matter. I believe the latter is where this argument is currently flawed and will struggle to be resolved either way - to date there has not been meaningful research carried out about the effects of hyperflexion on the horse. I do wonder how this research will be carried out in practice and whether the top riders who use hyperflexion will allow detailed veterinary examinations to be carried out, and for the results to be published if they eventually show the riding techniques in a negative light. I'm sure you are aware that certain continental riders are very quick to involve their lawyers over such matters and are effectively gagging people!
I do feel that until this research is carried out, welfare organisations such as yourselves should be outspoken against rollkur and hyperflexion because the effects, harmful or not, have not been proved and therefore I feel it should not be used as widely as it is. Forgive me, but I do feel that your comments to the journalist do "sit on the fence" somewhat. Those vets who are willing to speak out against these techniques, such as Gerd Heuschmann, have first hand experience of treating the injuries that are caused to the beautiful and talented horses by the use of such riding methods. The evidence against rollkur, albeit anedotal, is already out there. In my opinion, all that remains is the funding and organisation to get the research done to prove it in a formal way.
Incidentally, if you are taking an interest in such matters and are organising research, Dr Heuschmann is coming to the UK in September to give lectures and clinics about training methods and the effects on the horse. He is a very interesting and engaging speaker who has vast knowledge of his subject matter. Might I suggest that you take the time to see him, if you haven't already done so? I'm sure he would be very interested in any research proposal and would be well placed to offer guidance if necessary.
Kind regards,
Jenny Burgess
