Welfare and the precautionary principle
A University of Guelph review argues that many long-accepted riding practices deserve closer scrutiny, even where definitive evidence of harm is still lacking.
A review by Caleigh Copelin and Katrina Merkies, published in the March 2026 edition of the Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, makes the case that modern equestrianism is at a turning point. Welfare standards are no longer assessed solely within the industry; public perception and scientific research are increasingly shaping the conversation. The FEI’s Equine Ethics and Wellbeing Commission has reported that 65% of the general public and 75% of equestrian stakeholders have concerns about the welfare of competition horses. The paper argues that riding practices, tack choices, rider biomechanics, and management decisions should all be evaluated through the ‘precautionary principle’: the idea that a practice should not be assumed harmless simply because proof of harm is incomplete.
This is not a paper demonising riders, or criticising riding, far from it in fact. Rather, for experienced equestrians, it is a simple call for evidence-based horsemanship.
Reading the horse
Before examining specific practices, the review addresses how we recognise when a horse is struggling. Conflict behaviours, such as bucking, rearing, bolting, head tossing, and evading aids, are well-established indicators of negative states linked to pain, fear, confusion, or inescapable pressure. These are strongly associated with ridden horses and suggest welfare concerns that may be caused or worsened by human intervention.
Identifying positive affect, however, is far harder. A horse that appears quiet and compliant may not be content; it may simply be under such high stimulus control that it no longer acts out against pain or stress. In more serious cases, repeated exposure to inescapable unpleasant stimuli can result in learned helplessness, where the horse shuts down emotionally and physically. Some equipment may prevent the physical expression of discomfort even when the motivation to act out remains. The authors note that human observers show the least agreement when identifying emotionally neutral responses in horses, and that even equitation scientists, behaviourists, and veterinarians disagree on what constitutes a stress indicator. This difficulty in confirming positive or neutral affect is precisely what makes the precautionary principle so relevant: if wellbeing cannot easily be confirmed, a practice cannot be assumed harmless.
Tack and equipment
Nosebands
On nosebands, the review is pointed. Overtight fastening increases heart rate and eye temperature even at rest, suppresses normal oral behaviours including yawning and swallowing, and after removal triggers a rebound period of those same behaviours, suggesting active deprivation while the noseband is worn. Tighter nosebands have also been associated with higher rates of bit-related mouth lesions, and bony changes at the noseband site have been identified in up to 82% of horses in one sample. Crank nosebands can exert between 200 and 400 mmHg of pressure on the horse’s face, far exceeding the 50 mmHg threshold at which nerve damage from tourniquet use has been recorded in humans.
Plain cavesson nosebands, fastened with appropriate space, are considered largely unobtrusive. The picture is complicated by regional variation: a 2022 Canadian study found 71% of nosebands were correctly fitted, while a 2017 Danish study found only 7% were. The FEI introduced standardised noseband measurement protocols in 2025, an example of the precautionary principle applied at an institutional level.
Bits
The mouth is densely innervated to detect mechanical, chemical, and thermal stimuli. Bits can cause harm through design or application, with thin mouthpieces, leverage systems, abrasive materials, and contradictory mechanics all raising the risk of pain or conflict behaviours. Some designs, such as gag bits, simultaneously cue the horse to raise and lower its head, creating pressure that cannot be escaped.
Oral lesions are common across disciplines. Approximately 52% of eventing horses were found to have acute lesions after a cross-country test, and around 53% of racing thoroughbreds presented with lip commissure lesions. Bit design matters: in eventing horses, double-jointed bits of all types were associated with lower lesion rates than unjointed or single-jointed designs, while both very thin and very thick mouthpieces increased prevalence compared to medium-sized bits.
The review also raises an under-discussed issue: bits may impair a horse’s ability to breathe properly by breaking the lip seal, prompting tongue movement that alters airway mechanics, or causing poll flexion that reduces the throat angle. Increasing breathlessness during exertion can affect both performance and welfare.
Bitless bridles
Bitless riding is sometimes presented as a straightforward welfare improvement, but the review is cautious. Some evidence does support it: showjumping horses in mechanical hackamores showed fewer aversive movements than most bitted horses, and riders using bitless bridles report higher satisfaction and better responsiveness. However, bitless bridles are not universally safer. Sidepull designs can generate pressures capable of tissue damage if sustained, and cross-under designs have been found to produce elevated head and neck positions that can have long-term musculoskeletal consequences. Like any equipment, bitless bridles require appropriate training and can be misused.
Head and neck position
Horses naturally raise their heads to use binocular vision, particularly when assessing fences. Restricting this through equipment or technique, such as martingales on jumping horses, may limit their ability to see and evaluate obstacles clearly.
At the other extreme, behind-the-vertical and rollkur positions are associated with increased fear responses, tension, defensive movements, and indicators of facial pain. A meta-analysis of 58 studies on hyperflexion found that neither training level, prior exposure to the position, duration, nor method of achieving it reduced its negative impact on wellbeing. Around 65% of those studies found hyperflexed head and neck positions had negative or no effect on performance, contrary to the claims of some proponents.
Despite this, the practice appears to be increasing rather than declining. Research has found that dressage judges actively reward behind-the-vertical head positions, with horses receiving higher scores for piaffe the further behind the vertical their heads were held, in direct contradiction to the FEI Dressage Judging Manual. This creates a competition incentive that runs counter to welfare guidance.
Saddle fit
Ill-fitting saddles are associated with back pain, muscle changes, behavioural resistance, and altered movement, with one study identifying saddle fit issues in 38% of a sample of riding horses. The review emphasises that saddle fit is a two-way problem: the saddle must work for both horse and rider.
Rider asymmetry is widespread. One study found 83% of riders showed significantly greater hip rotation on one side, and 37% were found to sit crookedly, frequently linked to a history of significant personal injury. Poor rider balance impedes even force distribution, risking back pain and damage in the horse.
Saddle fitting is also hampered by a lack of regulation. There are no universal standards governing the education or certification of saddle fitters, and even among qualified fitters, agreement on what constitutes appropriate fit is variable. Much of current practice is based on tradition rather than peer-reviewed evidence.
The rider’s role
Skill and fitness
Rider skill affects the horse’s experience directly. Advanced riders demonstrate better coordination, rhythm, and consistency, generate clearer cues, and place lower physiological demands on the horse. An unbalanced or asymmetrical rider increases uneven loading and the potential for conflicting signals. Personal fitness matters too: improved balance and core strength reduce the risk of generating problematic saddle pressures.
Size and weight
Rider size relative to the horse is a genuinely complex issue, and the review resists simplistic rules. Heavier riders have been found to transiently induce lameness in some horses, though this was confounded by saddle fit; in those studies, the saddles were too small for the riders, making it difficult to separate weight effects from fit effects. Studies using added weights rather than naturally heavier riders found no lameness or significant behavioural changes. The authors suggest that saddle fit and rider skill may be more critical variables than weight alone.
The commonly cited 20% rider-to-horse bodyweight ratio is noted, though the review cautions against applying it rigidly. A UK study found average ratios well within this threshold, with under 1% of riders exceeding it. The paper emphasises that any assessment of appropriate rider-horse pairing should account for the horse’s fitness, soundness, age, and conformation, as well as the activity, equipment, and rider skill.
Education and mindset
Nearly one-third of horse owners have been found to lack fundamental knowledge of horse care, with equine behaviour being the weakest area. Owners frequently misread fear and anxiety as naughtiness or excitability. Reactive or anxious riders may inadvertently generate conflict behaviours, while riders with positive attitudes and higher confidence have been shown to reduce horses’ heart rates and navigate challenges more effectively. Mental preparation is as relevant as physical training.
Physical health
Ulcers
Gastric ulceration is widespread in ridden horse populations, affecting up to 86-88% of racehorses and 53% of leisure horses. Exercise increases intra-abdominal pressure, pushing stomach acid into the squamous region of the stomach. Competition environments appear particularly high-risk: in one study, 35% of previously healthy horses developed gastric ulcers after just five days in a simulated show environment. During competition season, 93% of the population of high-level endurance horses presented with ulcers, compared to 48% outside of it.
Research links gastric ulceration to higher pain scores under saddle, girth sensitivity, self-mutilation, and conflict behaviours, including bucking, kicking out, and spooky behaviour, with improvement seen following treatment. Horses with severe ulcers also show heightened sensitivity to stress and novel environments generally, which may contribute to the high prevalence in competition and race horses.
Lameness
Studies have identified lameness in between 50% and 89% of sampled riding horse populations. Owners’ ability to detect it is poor: one study found they disagreed with veterinary assessment in 82% of cases. While agreement was higher for severe lameness, 89% of horses presented by owners as sound and in regular work were found on veterinary examination to have mild to moderate clinical lameness. The gap between owner perception and clinical reality may be one of the most significant welfare blind spots in the industry. Emerging technologies, including inertial motion sensors and AI-based movement analysis, may offer more accessible and objective ways to detect subtle gait changes.
Hoof care and shoeing
The review includes an often-overlooked topic: the welfare implications of shoeing. Conventional horseshoes have been found to reduce heel expansion by around 36%, potentially limiting the hoof’s natural shock absorption. Shod horses also experience higher impact vibrations on the hoof wall and slower vibration dissipation than unshod horses. Toe-grab shoes, used to improve grip in racehorses, are associated with an increased risk of injury.
Beyond the mechanical, the hoof is a neurosensory organ. Its receptors provide proprioceptive information about terrain, supporting balance, pain sensing, and confident movement. Traditional shoeing lifts the hoof off the ground and limits this sensory feedback, though the psychological implications of this have not yet been studied.
Shoeing is not without benefits: corrective shoeing can reduce strain on specific tendons, ligaments, and joints, and in horses working at a pace that exceeds natural hoof growth, it can prevent sole soreness and structural damage. Whether a horse should be kept shod or barefoot should be assessed individually, considering hoof conformation, veterinary conditions, performance demands, and footing. What the review does emphasise is that, regardless of approach, regular appropriate trimming is essential: hoof deformities, uneven trims, and long toes can cause pain and uneven loading on the ground and under saddle.
Shifting the burden of proof
The precautionary principle, as applied here, rests on four components: taking preventative action in the face of uncertainty; shifting the burden of proof to those proposing or maintaining an activity; exploring alternatives to potentially harmful practices; and increasing public participation in decision-making. Traditionally, the onus has fallen on those advocating for change to prove harm before action is taken. The authors argue for inverting this: those wishing to maintain established practices should demonstrate their safety. For an industry navigating growing public scrutiny, that may be the most significant shift the paper is calling for.
Reference
Copelin, C. and Merkies, K. (2026). Riding with care: a review of factors that influence the welfare of the ridden horse and a case for the application of the precautionary principle in equestrian pursuits. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 158, 105801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jevs.2026.105801