When is a spur mark “just” a spur mark?
Just for the record, Sidelines doesn’t side with hysterical mainstream media folk who throw about accusations of animal cruelty.
And just for the record, I don’t take a thing like a bloody spur mark lightly, no matter who you are.
I’m referencing this unfortunate news article that was released to the world in general over the weekend. It’s unfortunate because when Prince Harry makes a spur mark on his horse’s side, the entire world sees a horse sport + a bloody gouge and generally tend to think bad things about people who ride horses.
We (the collective horse world) want good PR, not an excuse for the UK’s version of PETA to say things like “The use of spurs in such a fast-moving event is a vicious advantage.”
Those people don’t know horses. I saw Prince Harry play polo in January, and he definitely plays to win. But I would never assume that he’d intentionally make a spur mark on one of horses. Harry also travels with an extensive entourage, and with that many people around him, it’s disappointing that not one of his handlers had the foresight to save him from the eventual media s***storm by pulling him off his grey horse before photographers got their shots.
But it wasn’t the overblown news article that still had me thinking about the subject days later, it was the many responses it got on Sunday (from horse people) on Sidelines’ and other Facebook pages (Hello, Dappled Grey!)
Are there really so many people out there willing to jump to the defense of spur marks?? In my corner of the world, any hint of a spur mark is taken very seriously. As an assistant trainer, I would expect to lose my job if I ever caused a big bloody streak like that. I don’t care what discipline you’re riding, a spur rub is a clear sign that some retraining is in order. You know, a horse can feel a fly land on its side and all that.
From polo to hunters, I’ve never met a horse that, with a little effort, can’t be trained to respond to lighter aids. Those of you who joke about the spur marks you all have made on your big lazy warmbloods should be ashamed. I have to say, I’m not too worried about that grey of Harry’s. Just because of the constant scrutiny the Prince lives under, his polo horses surely get some of the best care out there. It’s the horses of all the spur mark defenders that are the unlucky ones.
Prince Harry plays polo in Barbados, January 2010. With spurs - and no marks.
These are the archived posts of former Sidelines web editor Erin Gilmore's On the Line blog. This blog is no longer active.
Loading...
If you had any sense of modern animal cruelty movements you would see that polo would be in their crosshairs. It would be an easy rule change to eliminate whips, spurs, and certain bridles from approved gear, and still have the same superb game, but without the now energized animal cruelty groups on our ass. Fox hunting could have done exactly the same by converting to drag hunts, and look at the beating they took by continuing to hunt foxes – they were banned.
1WOW! That is pretty excessive… I don’t know how anyone could defend that…
2On the subject of spurs drwing blood, I must relate my experience-years ago I was taking a lesson from my very experienced instructor- this was at Morven park on the instructors course, equivillant to the BHSI- and my instructor got on my horse to demonstrate shoulder in- borrowed my spurs, which were brand new, (the short prince of wale type)and rode my horse for maybe 15 minutes. When she got off and we ran up the stirrups we were both shocked and horrified to see blood on my horses sides. I through the spurs out and was careful to choose spurs in the future.
3The point being, I am sure this is a similar mistake, and if the spurs are too sharp, they will draw blood in no time, surely unintentional by the Prince Harry camp.