02/06/2026
๐๐ก๐จโ๐ฌ ๐๐ง ๐๐ก๐ ๐๐จ๐จ๐ฆ?
Another welfare task force has been announced by the FEI, and I cannot help wondering whether horse sport is better at discussing welfare than delivering it. The focus is the blood rule and the fact that different disciplines currently operate under different standards. The aim is to create a more harmonised approach across the sport.
Fineโฆ..That all sounds very sensible.๐ค
What I am struggling with is the feeling that we have heard versions of this before. Horse welfare is not a new issue. The science is not new. The concerns are not new. The conversations are not new.
Andrew McLean has spent years talking about learning theory. Researchers have spent years studying pain, stress and horse behaviour. Welfare organisations have spent years raising concerns. More recently, Matt Brown and Cecily Clark have sparked huge discussion through their open letter and the conversations on the Changing Rein podcast. The knowledge already exists.
So why does it feel like we are constantly setting up new groups to discuss things that have already been discussed?
Listening to Changing Rein, one point really stood out. What if many of the welfare concerns we see are not simply the result of individual riders, trainers or incidents? What if they are the result of systems, cultures and incentives that have been building for years? That is a much harder conversation.๐คฆ๐ฝโโ๏ธ
It is also the conversation I am not yet convinced the FEI is prepared to have.
The announcement talks about reviewing protocols, regulations and sanctions. It talks about consistency. It talks about harmonisation.
What it does not tell us is who will actually be sitting around the table. In fact, it may be the most important question of all.
โ๏ธWill there be independent welfare scientists?
โ๏ธWill there be behaviour experts?
โ๏ธWill there be people prepared to challenge long standing traditions and accepted practices?
โ๏ธWill there be people willing to ask awkward questions?
โ๏ธOr will the sport once again be reviewing itself?
Because those are two very different things.
At this stage, I think horse owners are entitled to be sceptical. The FEI has had welfare committees, veterinary committees, reviews, consultations and working groups before. Yet many of the same welfare concerns continue to surface year after year.
Maybe this task force will be different. I genuinely hope it is. But horse welfare deserves more than another announcement, another committee and another report. And before anyone tells us this task force is the answer, I would quite like to know who is being asked the questions.
Because if the sport is serious about challenging itself, the people in the room matter just as much as the questions on the agenda.
The blood rule may be what started this review.
I suspect the real story is whether equestrian sport is finally prepared to look beyond individual incidents and ask whether some of the systems behind them need to change.
That is the conversation I want to hear.
And that is the conversation I am still waiting for the FEI to have.
A photo from the bridleless competition last weekend! Jumping 1.20! Give the choice back to rider to what they want to compete in, Iโd pay to see this in the Olympics.
Link to podcast in comments ๏ฟผ