The following article titled “Wooden Horses for Training Recruits” is a reprint from the July-September 1917 Field Artillery Journal. Perhaps one of US Horsemanship’s readers if  the U.S. Army actually utilized this idea.  I find the theory behind the suggestion interesting, as it is not so far from the mechanical horses that are in use today. 

Thanks for joining me on USHorsemanship.
Barbara Fox

Stripped Wooden Horses Showing Construction

Wooden Horses for Training Recruits 

WITH a million men to train at once and little or no equipment in many cases with which to make a suitable beginning, the United States will, for months to come, be taxed to its utmost to find suitable extemporized schemes which will permit the most to be made of these early months of preparation. From abroad we can well afford to take a few hints, and particularly from a country that was caught unprepared, with a relatively small army and dependent upon voluntary enlistments when this great war began, since the situation was very much like our own in some respects.

Col. C. P. Summerall, of the United States Field Artillery, who recently returned from a trip of observation in England and France, presented to the JOURNAL for publication the photographs which appear in connection with this article, and gave this explanatory statement:

Wooden Horse Showing Attachment of Saddle

“Wooden horses, constructed as indicated by the accompanying photographs, have been used to a very great extent in training recruits for mounted batteries at the training camps in England. It has been found that a recruit will learn the proper method of standing to horse, holding the reins, mounting and dismounting, and of executing many of the mounted exercises as well with the wooden horses as with real animals. The wooden horses have the advantage of not intimidating the recruit, of saving real horses much rough handling about the mouth, and of enabling them to be utilized for more advanced instruction with harness and draft and with equitation. It is believed that these wooden horses will prove as advantageous in our training camps as they have done in the training camps of England.”

The construction of these auxiliaries is easy and the time is ripe.

Reaching Exercise on Wooden Horse

Many issues of rations are made in containers that can be utilized. Vinegar and flour both come in barrels that can be employed, when empty, to make the bodies of these “chargers.” Sugar is frequently issued in barrels, too. The heads and necks of the wooden horses can be made from the boxes which contain such items as canned goods, soap, candles, etc. A few sturdy limbs cut from trees, or small logs, will suffice to take the place of “two by fours” or other dressed heavy lumber needed for the “legs” and supporting framework. Lack of animals should not prevent drills in the preliminary mounted work in suppling the rider, and these exercises should be of genuine value if suitable, thorough, exacting, conscientious, and well-devised schedules be carried out on these substitutes.

Bending Exercise on Wooden Horse

Enough is enough. Sometimes I get a little bit over whelmed at the crock that is dumped on us by the U.S. government and the crock I’m fed up with this time is titled “American West running out of room for wild horses, officials weigh options”  by Kelly David Burke 3/26/13  from Fox News.com

You can read it here: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/26/american-west-running-out-room-for-wild-horses/?test=latestnews#ixzz2Okjnw454

So that I don’t leave any doubt in your mind how I feel about this article let me say loud and clear that it is another in a long series of propaganda put out by the BLM to brainwash the general public into accepting the destruction of the wild horse.

BLM is the acronym for the Bureau of Land Management.  It’s part of the Department of the Interior of the United States and is in charge of managing federally owned land in the U.S. The federal government owns almost 30 percent of the land of the United States, most of it in the Western states.

In 1971 Congress passed the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act (Public Law 92-195) 

The opening statement is “To require the protection, management, and control of wild free-roaming horses and burros on public lands.

You can read the law on the BLM site here http://www.wildhorseandburro.blm.gov/92-195.htm

The Bureau of Land Management, which administers about 245 million acres of public lands, manages livestock grazing on 155 million acres of those lands, as guided by Federal law.

In 1971, when Congress passed the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, these animals were found roaming across 53.8 million acres known as Herd Areas, of which 42.4 million acres were under the BLM’s jurisdiction.  Today the BLM manages wild horses and burros in 179 subsets of these Herd Areas (known as Herd Management Areas) that comprise 31.6 million acres, of which 26.9 million acres are under BLM management.

The article makes the following points:

1. There are too many wild horses on the range. BLM needs to capture more.
2. Once the BLM captures them, they cost the government too much money to keep in long term holding
3. They are destroying the habitat and will soon starve to death.
4. There numbers need not only to be reduced but they need to be kept from reproducing so much.
5. Maybe wild horses should be hunted . . . or eaten
6. The poor BLM is trying hard  but soon they won’t be able to help

Whew! Where to start here in order to put this into an organized post!

1.  There are too many wild horses on the range. BLM needs to capture more.

Currently there are about 37,000 wild horses running on the 155 million acres of livestock grazing land managed by the BLM.  This land is meant for multi use grazing, so it is not only for horses.  The BLM only wants 27,000 wild horses on the land and is worried that there will be 7,400 new foals this spring. So the BLM wants to capture 10,000 more horses and add them to the approximately 50,000 horses that are currently in holding facilities in the United States. There are 16 long term holding facilities, mostly in Oklahoma and Kansas and the BLM plans to open 4 more this year, the newest being in 15,000 acres Ennis, Montanna which will house 700-1000 geldings.

According to the Land Report one of the Oklahoma facilities is owned by the Drummond family who owns approximately 120,000 acres which Debbie Collins of the BLM, says 24,292 acres are allotted to about 3400 wild horses.

Currently there are more wild horses in captivity than there are in the wild.

2.  Once the BLM captures them, they cost the government too much money to keep in long term holding.

When the mustangs are captured they go into short term holding facilities where they are gelded, vaccinated, and wormed and then are housed until the BLM decides whether they should be adopted or go to long term holding pastures. The BLM claims that it costs about $5.50 per day per horse for this care.

According to BLM representative, Collins, ranchers are  paid $1.35 to $1.50 per head, per day for housing the mustangs on their long term properties..  For these 3400 horses at the Drummond land & Cattle Co. mentioned earlier that’s about $4590-$5100 a day or $1,675,3500-$1,861,500 a year.  The ranchers have to maintain the pastures and fences and might have to supplement with hay in extremes but for the most part the equipment required (chutes, corrals, fence panels) is the same equipment they use for their cattle. (You can read more about a visit to this facility in RTFitch’s blog http://rtfitchauthor.com/2010/11/12/blm-long-term-holding-wild-horse-heaven-or-hell/ In my book these ranchers are making out pretty well housing wild horses.

OK so before I go any farther let’s talk about the ranchers. In 1978, the Public Rangelands Improvement Act (PRIA) instituted a grazing fee based on the economic value of the land being grazed.  That grazing fee was assessed for grazing leases and permits to certain ranchers who owned or leased ranches near federal lands. The current fee is $1.35 per AUM.  An AUM is the amount of forage needed to sustain one cow and calf, one horse, or five sheep or goats for a month.

The average grazing rate for a rancher to graze cattle on private lands is currently $14.50/animal unit month (AUM) as opposed to $1.35 that the BLM assesses for public land. The private grazing rate is about 10 times as much as the government grazing rate.

Incidentally, and this ought to make your heart do flips over the fiscal capabilities of our government, a 2005 federal report found that the government collected $21 million in grazing fees for land that cost about $144 million a year to manage. So grazing rights for big ranchers are nothing more than another government subsidized welfare program but this time not so much for the poor. And lest you believe these cattle are ending up on the plates of Americans or in the tummies of starving children, think again because most of this is exported.

Another interesting search would be how many Senators have grazing rights, but I don’t have time for that right now, but how about starting with Nebraska Senator Bob Kerrey? http://www.omaha.com/article/20120806/NEWS/708069921

What the BLM isn’t telling the public is that as soon as the horses are removed via a round up, herds of cattle are being turned loose to graze in the very same area that the horses just got removed from.

OK in case you’re not seeing my point:

1 AUM (animal unit per month) on our Federal land costs $1.35
1 AUM grazing on private land costs $ 14.50 per month
1 wild horse in short term holding costs $165.00 per month
1 wild horse in long term holding  costs $ 40.50 to $45.00 per month

In 2012 holding care for wild horses cost $43 million

The only accounting I could find for total grazing fees was for the 2005 report that the government collected $21 million in grazing fees (money which by the way is distributed to the Federal Government and certain states) for land that cost about $144 million a year to manage, a loss of $123 million dollars in order to subsidize ranchers.

Not only do I think the ranchers should pay the total $144 million for the land they use, I think they ought to have to pay the $43 million it costs to house the wild horses.  In fact, maybe the ranchers should pay the whole $74.9 million dollars that Congress budgeted for wild horses in 2012.  And here’s why:

The BLM is currently managing 37,000 wild horses on public lands and approximately 50,000 in holding, so 87,000 wild horses.

Meanwhile the BLM has issued permits for 8.9 million AUMs in 2012.  Since an AUM is a cow and calf, or 5 sheep the number of actual bodies is way higher than 8.9 million.

87,000 horses verses more than 8.9 million cows and sheep on 155 million acres designated for grazing although the horses are only occupying 31.6 million of those.

So let me make this really clear.  Our government leases grazing rights to ranchers at one tenth what it normally costs and at a loss of $123 million to the American people.  Then they capture the horses who were given the right to graze on the land and put them in holding where they pay other ranchers $43 million dollars for their care. Plus the cost to the American people is actually $74.9 million when you include the round up process and advertising and events.

And after all that I can go to purchase a wild horse that has been turned down for adoption 3 times or is over 10 years old and it will only cost me $25.

3. They are destroying the habitat and will soon starve to death.

With all of the videos, photos and eye witness reports that I have researched, very few of these horses are even thin, much less starving. But ahhh, tell the American public that something is going to starve and watch the people start to listen. After all nothing should starve in America.

The truth is that some of the horses suffer for water and that is usually due to their water sources being fenced off by ranchers who lease grazing rights.

Have you ever seen what cattle do to a water supply? They wallow in it, lie down in it. . .

Oh, by the way, if the horses are starving shouldn’t we also see cattle and sheep starving? After all there are at least 240 times as many cattle and sheep as there are horses.

4.  There numbers need not only to be reduced but they need to be kept from reproducing so much.

The BLM has experimented with PZP, porcine zona pellucida, a birth control drug that can last up to two years. Mares have been treated and returned to the wild. At one point I was for wild horse birth control until I learned about the implications of small herd size.

The trouble with birth control and also with reducing herd sizes is that it reduces the gene pool dramatically and that will cause inbreeding which will reduce the strength , health and quality of the wild horse.

5.  Maybe wild horses should be hunted . . . or eaten

or in the words of Fox News

“When it comes to other grazing animals like deer, elk and bison, hunting acts as a substitute for natural predation.
Hunting horses, though, is prohibited.
And while horse meat is consumed by humans in much of the world, selling any of the horses to slaughter houses is a public relations nightmare the Bureau is determined to avoid.”

First of all slaughtering horses for human consumption is a bad idea without even going to the emotional side of it. Even horses that have only gone through the BLM hands, and that would be the 50,000 in long and short term holding, have been vaccinated for flu, rhino, west nile virus, strangles, eastern and western sleeping sickness and tetnus.  They’ve also been wormed and in the case of geldings they have had tranquilizers and in the case of mares, well, she just might have received the PZP. Eating meat with all of that residue in it is just plain unhealthy.

The whole wild horse issue is an emotionally charged but since there is no real solution to this problem perhaps hunting should be considered. After all the wild horse in the wild is free of chemicals, except for the mares that have been treated with PZP.  But more importantly, when the horse is in the wild he is still just that, a wild animal.  He hasn’t been touch or handled.  He hasn’t even incurred expense.  While hunting is never a fair game at least the horses would not have to be chased by helicopters, terrified, crippled, winded and lame, separated from families, and relegated to pens and human handling.  I think it could be a less barbaric option, if it was controlled by a draw at a certain time of year, so many from each HMO, with rules followed.

As far as eating horse meat goes, Americans in general are not a horse eating people, even though Wyoming’s State Rep. Wallis, also known as  “Slaughterhouse Sue”, would like it to be otherwise.  The only Americans that I have known that ate horse meat were Native Americans. But in the event that people hunted horses and chose to eat the meat at least wild ones would not be ladened with chemicals.  Personally I’ll never intentionally eat horse meat.

I’m not a fan of hunting but then I’m not a fan of slaughter or of any torture or abuse that the wild horses receive.  But I’m smart enough to understand that any animal population that is left without a natural predator could grow to a unmanageable population. I just don’t think 37,000 wild horses are unmanageable.  Unless the government decides to end range welfare ranching and remove millions of cattle (sic) and return the wild horses, some other solution needs to be found.

I’m not sure we have another animal that is domesticated to the degree a horse is and is also hunted.  It would give me the creeps to enter someone’s home to see a horse head mounted on the wall in the same way a deer is mounted.

Personally I would love to read a genuinely innovative idea that would save the freedom of all the wild horses.

6.  The poor BLM is trying hard  but soon they won’t be able to help. 

The BLM is an agency made up of ranchers who serve ranchers.  They have mucked up the wild horse issue from the beginning and show no signs of improving.  (But I have to add a caveat that the BLM employees that I have met on the local level have been caring, concerned horse lovers.)

But the story line that the BLM is pushing is intended to desensitize the American public to the wild horse. In my opinion they are paving the way to send thousands upon thousands of wild horses to destruction and if reporters like Fox New’s Kelly David Burke just buy the story line and don’t go looking for what lies beneath the surface, Fox news becomes part of the problem.  Fox News needs to research the facts rather than listen to stories.

Listed below are a few of the web sites I visited to research the wild horse problems mentioned in the Fox News article.  Visit them if you want to learn more.

http://www.thebeckoning.com/environment/cattle/grazing.html#2-3

http://www.blm.gov/or/resources/rangelands/index.php

http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/grazing.html

http://www.omaha.com/article/20120806/NEWS/708069921

http://beefmagazine.com/business/rising-lease-rates-decreasing-prices

http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional/blm-moves-wild-horses-to-ranch-in-ennis-mont/article_3297051f-50ea-50d4-84e2-5266935ace84.html

http://elkodaily.com/lifestyles/nature-notes-montana-is-home-to-new-wild-horse-facility/article_6d39174c-8dac-11e2-bcc1-0019bb2963f4.html

http://m.farmandranchguide.com/news/equine/blm-plans-to-move-wild-horses-to-ranch-near-ennis/article_e58ff51b-36d9-5328-a29a-e94a9d70103b.html?mode=jqm

http://rtfitchauthor.com/2010/11/12/blm-long-term-holding-wild-horse-heaven-or-hell/

http://www.wildhorseandburro.blm.gov/92-195.htm

http://www.omaha.com/article/20120806/NEWS/708069921

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/26/american-west-running-out-room-for-wild-horses/?test=latestnews#ixzz2Okjnw454

Thanks for reading this and thanks for joining me on U.S. Horsemanship,

Barbara Fox

http://www.ushorsemanship.com

Although my first loves in the equine world are the Thoroughbred and the Arabian, two breeds that have many of the same characteristics, I also greatly admire the American Saddlebred.  The American Saddlebred is as much “America’s Horse” as is the Quarter Horse.

Long named the Peacock of the Show ring, the Saddlebred has always been a thrill to watch. My first  opportunities to watch them in action occurred at the old Madison Square Garden in the ‘60s. Later on, after moving to Missouri, I became more familiar with them in their show ring setting. Sadly the American Saddlebred has not been one of the more kindly treated breeds in our history. And while the Saddlebred, as a registered breed, has been developed for the show ring from the beginning, it is far more versatile than it may appear.

I grew up in a riding program on Long Island that was based on a combination of  Chamberlin and Littauer.  I just want to be clear that I didn’t grow up riding saddle seat. Several of the horses in this lesson program were American Saddlebreds and I rode them frequently. They were solid over jumps, had lovely gaits and everyone of them was beautiful with an outstanding disposition.  I think the Saddlebred disposition is one of it’s most awesome qualities.

One of the horses, we called him Gingerbread, was ridden to the Long Island Professional Horseman’s Association Jumper of the Year multiple times by his owner.  Gingerbread was also a mount at summer camp and in the weekly riding lessons. And while doing all of this, Gingerbread took another rider through try outs for the United States Equestrian Team.  Try outs with the team were the basis of selection at that time.

Looking through the 1908 Register of the American Saddle- Horse Breeder’s Association I was interested in finding out more about this breed than what I’d learned as a child.

Towards the end of the 18th century an easy gaited type of horse was developing and it was referred to as the American Horse.  Breeders had been combining Thoroughbreds with the American Horse and pretty soon a clear type began to emerge. In the 1880s breeders began expressing interest in forming an organization for their horses and the American Saddle-Horse Breeder’s Association was formed in Louisville, Kentucky on April 7, 1891.

Godolphin Arabian
George Stubbs

Initial registry allowed horses that could perform the five gaits: walk, trot, rack, canter and either a running walk, fox trot, or slow gait. It also allowed the horse whose sire, grandsire, dam or grand dam was of the strains of blood recognized by the association. Mares that produced 2 or more performers and stallions that produced 5 or more performers could also be registered.  And of course progeny of a horse that was already registered could be registered as well.  Registration, or entry as it was referred to, was $1 for members and $2 for non members with transfers costing fifty cents each.

During the first register colors of horses were referred to with descriptions such as “satin” black, “cherry” red and dark dappled steel gray.

By the time the third and fourth registries came out, geldings could be registered on the merit of five gaits. Also, the progeny of mares recorded in the American Stud Book and by registered Saddle-Horse stallions were accepted into the registry.  The  purpose of the American Stud book was to record Thoroughbreds.

When considering breed registries, particularly in the U.S., keep in mind the young age of our country at the time.  The American Stud

Eclipse
by George Stubbs

Book for Thoroughbreds began in 1868 and in 1898, two years after the Jockey Club was formed, the Jockey Club took it over.

Fifteen horses were originally designated as foundation bloodlines in the American Saddle-Horse Association Registry and three more were added in successive years. There was a variety of blood in these foundation horses ranging from Standardbred, Morgan, Thoroughbred and a few other interesting breeds.

By 1908 the association had determined that there was only one horse worthy of recognition as the foundation of the American Saddle -Horse and that was a horse named Denmark, a brown 16 hand stallion, foaled in 1839.  A little searching through Denmark’s pedigree revealed horses such as, Eclipse (a great grandson of Godolphin Arabian and a Great Great Grandson of the Darley Arabian), Symes Wildair (another Great Grandson of Godolphin Arabian), and many more with crosses to Leedes Arabian, Darley Arabian, Godolphin Arabian, and Byerly Turk.  Even though I learned about three foundation horses of the Thoroughbred breed as a child (Darley Arabian, Godolphin Arabian and Byerly Turk) it was fun to see how they effected the Saddlebred Horse.

Denmark was a consistent race horse at 4 miles.  The description of him says he was beautiful but his biggest achievement was his

Gaines Denmark

prepotency.  Two of Denmark’s off spring, Gaines’ Denmark and John Willard, both stallions, served courageously in the Civil war in Gen. John Hunt Morgan’s command, known as Morgan’s Raiders. The American Saddle Horse was also ridden by Lee on Traveller, Grant on Cincinnati, Sherman rode Lexington, and Stonewall Jackson rode Little Sorrell. Grant’s horse, Cincinnati was said to have stood 17 hands tall and was recorded as a Thoroughbred. The American-Saddle horse was used in great numbers by the Confederate Cavalry during the Civil War and was also used by troops during the Mexican wars.

The influence of the American Saddle-Horse continued after the Civil War, as America expanded carrying settlers and explorers throughout the West. It’s popularity also grew because horse shows were a huge source of entertainment for the public. Rivalry between the American Saddle-Horse Breeders in Kentucky and Missouri became pretty fierce and Missourians adopted the slogan, “If Kentucky made the Saddle Horse, then  Missouri made him better”.

In 1908 fifty five and a half percent of all the American Saddle-Horses that were recorded in the Register had a direct male line to the Thoroughbred Denmark. And in 1991, at the ASHA Centennial, Harrison Chief was designated a foundation sire along with Denmark. Harrison Chief was well endowed with Thoroughbred blood  through Messenger, multiple times in his bloodlines. Messenger sired good runners but was exceptional at siring horses who could trot at blazing speed. Messenger was recognized as the most important foundation of the Standardbred breed. Messenger was a great great grandson of Godolphin Arabian two times and also carried the blood of Darley Arabian, Leedes Arabian, and Byerly Turk.

The American Saddle-Horse has only recently been referred to as the American Saddlebred, none the less this breed of horse played a big part in the settling, growth, development and leisure activities of our Nation. Not only has the American Saddlebred entertained us in the show ring, we have watched the horse in the movies and on TV as they took lead roles in My Friend Flicka, Fury and versions of National Velvet and Black Beauty. The horse used in Gone With The WInd that Ashley WIlkes rode off to war was an American Saddlebred named Anacacho Rebel.  And who could forget Bamboo Harvester, the American Saddlebred cross that played everyone’s favorite talking horse, Mr. Ed.

Mr. Ed

Over the years we’ve watched them in parades and movies, and of course, the gaited show ring.  They are beautiful when hitched for combined driving and are lovely in the dressage arena.  They are bold and brave enough for cross country riding too.  Most of the time the Saddlebred is easy to handle and care for because their dispositions are naturally forgiving and stable, especially when they’re treated well. I guess they pretty naturally fall in line with my favorite breeds, the Thoroughbred and the Arabian because they are, after all greatly influenced by both.

Thanks for reading U.S. Horsemanship,

Here’s wishing you hours of quality time in the saddle,

Barbara Fox

http://www.ushorsemanship.net

Normally I don’t repeat blog posts from the Riding Instructor to U.S. Horsemanship but this one has significance for everyone.

On a day to day basis we don’t usually notice the changes.  We’re sort of like the frog in the boiling water.  The water is cool when he’s first in the pot and as the temperature increases, the frog doesn’t notice until it’s too late and he’s become a gumbo base. Likewise, when you stand in 2013 and look back to the 1960s or the 1900s or before, the changes you notice are staggering.

One of the most noticeable to me is the large number of horse gurus available through media and in person who are ready to help teach us everything we need to know to become their apprentice.  (And they sure aren’t shy about what they will charge you for it.)

Everyone is looking for a leader, someone to take them down the path of great horsemanship knowledge into some kind of horse education euphoria at the end. We have become a society of people who lack the ability to reason and think for ourselves. And the slick marketers are having a hey day with it. The marketer guru horsemen lead scads of fledgling horse lovers down the rosy trail of  the “Follow My Way Only” School of Horsemanship. They sell them videos and ropes and sticks and halters and fancy bits and round pens and methods and good ole’ boy wisdom while the newby’s eyes glaze over and they begin to chant the guru’s name.

My cynical side says that you can’t do much about it.  People who want to be suckers will be suckers because they are usually too mentally lazy to question anything. But sometimes I just can’t stand by and watch.  This is one of those times.

All this and it’s about helmets? Yes.  Obviously you have to make your own choice about whether or not to wear a helmet when you ride.  It’s your life. You can decide whether to risk cracking your head and becoming a burden to your friends and family.  After all, it only effects …well, everyone that cares about you. But if that’s the decision you make, I hope you’re smart enough and have the shreds of decency required to teach the people who look up to you to wear a helmet when they ride.

The following is my blog post from The Riding Instructor.  Thanks for reading.

•  She’d taken the polo pony out for a trail ride when the mare bolted toward home. As the mare made a sharp right down the lane at a gallop, Merri lost her seat and parted company from the horse; head first into a telephone pole. Meri wasn’t wearing a helmet. She never recovered from brain trauma.
• A few years later the scenario repeated itself only I was a teenager on my own horse.  At the edge of a huge field my friend said “Let’s race!” and before I could say no my horse was at a gallop and out of control.  At the end of the field he veered left and ran toward the canal. Almost to the end of the pavement he turned to the right.  I didn’t lose my seat until we both hit the pavement, me on my head and him on his knees.  When  I was next aware, someone had brought me home and I was on the way to the hospital. My thin helmet, in England they call them Beaglers, was enough to keep my brains in my skull.
• He was going to be the next big name in Arabian trainers. All the stars were lined up for him. He was riding a student’s quiet pleasure horse when a stable hand snapped the arena fence with the front of the tractor. The horse went over backwards and slammed Mike’s head into the soft arena dirt. He was pronounced dead 2 times. Mike spent the rest of his life learning to walk and talk and take care of himself.  His brother and parents and wife wished he’d been wearing a helmet
• I had a “laid back” feeling this day as I led my National Champion Dressage horse into the arena.  My pre school aged daughter looked on while I put my foot into the stirrup to mount. The next thing I knew I was being loaded into the ambulance, strapped to a back board, an oxygen mask over my face.  I’d been out for at least 20 minutes, horse running loose, small child terrified, alone and in tears. I was lucky. I spent the next few years with vertigo that would throw my body so out of control that I’d careen across a paddock out of balance, just from bending over to do up the surcingle on a blanket. It was the one time I rode my champion without a helmet.  I wished I hadn’t been so foolish.

These 4 personal proofs in my lifetime taught me that it’s sheer vanity to think you’re ever so skilled that you don’t need a helmet when you ride.

Proof:
According to www.riders4helmets.com and the NEISS data report from 2007 – Head injuries comprise about 15% of the riding accidents that were reported to emergency rooms and are the number 1 cause of death among equestrians.  The rate of concussion for equestrian sports injuries is more than double that of any other sport.

Mounted on even a small horse (15 hands), your head is 7-8 feet off of the ground.  Depending on the size of the horse your head could be as high as13 feet off of the ground. The American Association of Neurological Surgeons (www.aans.org) tells us “. . . it is the height from which the rider falls that most significantly impacts the severity of the injury” and “a fall from just two feet can cause permanent brain damage. Riders ages 10-14 are most likely to be involved in an accident with a horse.” and “While serious head injury can occur while wearing a helmet, the data very clearly shows that the severity of the head injury can be decreased through helmet wear.”

And riders rarely fall off their horse while it is standing still.  When you consider the velocity factor added when a rider falls from a bucking or galloping horse…it just makes you wonder why anyone would question the need for a helmet.

You Can Be Smarter Than Parelli:
There has been discussion around for several years about the stand  Parelli’s Natural Horsemanship has taken about helmets. It came up on Facebook again and personally, I think the topic should stay in play. I’ve included the statement that circulated written by from Parelli below, and then one from the staff at Parelli Centers.

“LINDA: Personally speaking we feel very uncomfortable wearing helmets because it affects our balance and perceptiveness. Pat wears his cowboy hat and I would wear a helmet if I engaged in extreme sports such as high jumps or eventing. As far as our students are concerned, we are ‘pro choice’, meaning we respect their choice to wear one or not, and we put a lot of emphasis on safety through savvy. Many people are accidents waiting to happen. I think about what I used to do before meeting Pat and starting the Parelli program, I was one of those. I didn’t have a clue and I should have been wearing a helmet because it was just a matter of time before I was going to hit the ground! I was getting on a dangerous horse every day, one who was mentally, emotionally and physically out of control. He didn’t trust me and reacted badly to all kinds of situations. I wasn’t even safe on the ground! I made bad decisions because I did not understand the horse’s nature and especially because I didn’t know how to get him to be calm and left brain. Many people climb on horses who are right brain and acting like prey animals, or who have the propensity to do so in even mildly alarming situations. They put on helmets and mount up, thinking they are safe, and they try to stay on no matter what. Helmets do not keep people safe. We don’t get on unsafe horses. We put a lot of time into preparation. We get off immediately the situation becomes unsafe. Most riders don’t do any of that, but it’s what we practice religiously and teach our students to do too. This is the example we set and the one we want them to follow.”

From Parelli Centers-

“Thank you for taking the time to write us. We understand your views and concerns. As quoted by the faculty at our ranch:

“You are quite right – helmets are fabulous things and they save many lives. Tragically though, people who ARE wearing helmets also die or suffer serious head injuries in accidents with horses.

Our program is intended to address the safety problem at its root – which is behavioral – rather than address the symptoms of it. Our message is about developing the relationship with the horse, and the savvy level of the rider, so that unsafe behavior is addressed long before the rider gets on the horse – rather than allowing the unsafe situations to continue to occur and hope that the helmet, body protector, etc, will protect us from the consequences.

The reason you do not see our people wearing helmets is because we try to teach people that rather than be brave because they are wearing a a helmet to protect them, they would be better off not riding until their horse is behaving safely.

People have called us brave for not wearing helmets, but we say they are a lot braver than we are. We would not get on their horse until we had addressed the issues that cause it to behave in unsafe ways.

We hope this helps,

From the Faculty, Parelli Centers”

Linda and Pat Parelli don’t wear riding helmets

What Do The Polls Say?

I have to admit that when I say these two letters my mind took an involuntary leap back to the dark ages. Who could possibly agree with this view on saving ourselves, friends and loved ones from possible brain damage? And how could a statement like this come from someone who is admired and followed by hundreds of thousands of unsuspecting horse lovers who want to improve their riding and keep safe while doing it?

I’m happy to tell you that in my research I read hundreds of responses to theses posts and found only one person who came to the defense of Pat and Linda Parelli. All I can say is that that person was blinded a lack of critical thinking skills and had been “drinking the Kool-Ade”.

In view of the statistics I’ve shown you, in my opinion the Parellis do a disservice to everyone who listens to them. It’s worse than a disservice- in my opinion, it’s clowns like this that get people killed and crippled.

 Let me high light the statistics:

• Head injuries are the number 1 cause of death among equestrians.
• The rate of concussion for equestrian sports injuries is more than double that of any other sport.
• “it is the height from which the rider falls that most significantly impacts the severity of the injury”
• “a fall from just two feet can cause permanent brain damage.
• “…the data very clearly shows that the severity of the head injury can be decreased through helmet wear.”

Let Us Demonstrate By Example:

And as an illustration of how illogical the Parelli statements are, not too long after Linda Parelli made her statement her own horse tripped and fell with her.

Here is the official notice From the Savvy Club Forum:

“Linda was cantering Remmer in a field when he tripped and stumbled for about 20 feet trying to regain his balance. At the end he fell and pitched on his nose. Linda was knocked out for a few minutes and under his feet when he tried to get up. So she was bruised on her body and legs and got 4 broken ribs. Remmer is fine. Thanks to speedy attendance and good care at the hospital (plus the red light – photonic therapy), she was discharged home after the second day as she was recovering quicker than expected and could now walk by herself as well as get up and down from bed. She is at home continuing her recovery and as you know with broken ribs, it will be some weeks before she can ride again. But she is in great spirits and not much pain.”

I’m writing this calmly but inside I am screaming: If Linda Parelli had been wearing a helmet she may not have been knocked out (read- concussion) and under her horse’s feet when he got up.  A helmet may have saved her from a concussion and it may also have saved her from bruises and 4 broken ribs. I wonder if that was extreme enough for Linda Parelli. I wonder what she considers a safe horse.

In my opinion the Parelli’s attitude about horses and helmets is so unrealistic, so off in na na land, so wrong  and so obviously dangerous that it makes me wonder what other completely wrong concepts they teach to their followers. In my opinion this stand puts Parelli at the bottom of the pecking order demonstrating a lack of regard for human life as well as a lack of “saavy”.

Time For My Soap Box:

One of my “bones to pick”  has always been the responsibility of people who promote themselves to star status and become the “word” for the industry.    When people become the “name”, the public puts them on a pedestal. They receive accolades for all of the wonderful things they achieve.  But if they are not ready to be responsible to the people who “believe” in them and hang on their every word trying to emulate them, then I believe they should be called out  and taken to task for their errors. Or better yet knocked off their pedestal. In other words, those people who seek to be the leaders and teachers of others better be willing to watch out for their followers and try to diminish the collateral damage that will come from their fame. It’s part of the price you pay for the accolades.

In the case of Parelli’s, it appears to me  they demonstrate that their image is more important than the people they serve. They need to take a positive stand on helmets and set an example for Parelli wannabees who copy every thing Parellis say and do, because “…the data very clearly shows that the severity of the head injury can be decreased through helmet wear.”

My heart breaks for the families of the people who let the Parelli’s play their mind “GAMES”  and are led down the treacherous no helmet path. I have to ask this question. If wearing a helmet is a personal choice and the statistics prove how dangerous it is to go without, why would a high profile professional encourage people to make stupid choices?

Are You Tough Enough?

Here’s  the lead line for a New York Times article about bull riders: “There were so many helmets strewn about behind the chutes at the season-opening Professional Bull Riders event that the bull riders could not always tell them apart.” Read the article. And you’ve got to admit there just aren’t too many riders tougher than these guys.  They’re saving their cowboy hats for between rides. They’re thinking about families and loved ones. They are wise enough to see down the road. And they’re not going to be telling you that helmets effect their “balance and perceptiveness” either. Personally I think they are a very cool group of people.

Bull Riders Wear Them

Mounted Police Wear Them

Are You Good Enough?

Another topic of conversation that has been on the internet for several years is the story about Courtney King Dye. C
The following is from Courtney King Dye’s web page

“Courtney King Dye is a USDF Certified Dressage Instructor and USDF Gold Medalist.  As a competitor she represented the United States in the 2007 World Cup in Las Vegas, the 2008 World Cup in The Netherlands, and the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Courtney is a graduate of Columbia University in New York and holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in literature.

On March 3, 2010, a horse Courtney was riding tripped and fell. Courtney was not wearing a helmet and suffered a Traumatic Brain Injury. She spent 4 weeks in a coma and 3 months in in-patient rehabilitation re-learning how to walk and talk. She was the catalyst and is an avid supporter of riders4helmets.”

Watch Courtney’s video at the top of this blog and she will tell you why wearing a helmet should not be a personal choice.

Be Daring In A Way That Counts

At the 2012 Olympics Dressage rider Charlotte Dujardin won the Gold Medal in dressage and set an Olympic Dressage record with her score. And she was the only rider wearing a helmet.

Dressage Team Gold Medal
Charlotte Dujardin in the middle

Good News About Helmet Use:

The United States Equestrian Federation has put in place a new helmet rule that effects eventing and dressage riders at competitions.  Basically it says that anyone who is competing in National (USEF) level events or dressage classes is required to wear a helmet. Only riders who ride in FEI only classes are exempt. Aside from FEI, everyone has to wear a helmet while mounted every time they ride at a competition whether it is for schooling or showing. It does not matter how old you are.  If you ride you wear a helmet at National shows for eventing and dressage beginning April 1, 2013.

Canada was the first country to make this kind of requirement, the U.S. is the second. I hope it is just the beginning and that we see many more countries  follow suit.  We still have a long way to go to convince people to wear helmets but progress is being made in spite of the cavalier and the stupid.  Just my humble opinion.

Help make our sport as safe as possible.

Thanks for joining me on The Riding Instructor,

Barbara Fox

PS Thanks for reading US Horsemanship too!

The following article titled, Equitation,  is from the class of 1912  Rasp and is compiled by Captain Guy V. Henry. It’s an interesting account of the changes in thought and need that transpired over a 9 year period. After World War I the school was renamed the Cavalry School and became the finest training program of it’s kind in the world.

 Interesting to me are the types of horses used, the development of instructors and how candidates were chosen to attend the famed French School at Saumur. You’ll enjoy the photos that show the Saumur influence before the Italian style of jumping was added to the program.

If you are an advocate for the Military Seat you’ll enjoy this article.  It’s rather long but better in one reading than in two parts.

Thanks for joining me on U.S. Horsemanship. May you have the best of riding this winter season.

Barbara Fox

EQUITATION

What is now the Department of Equitation of the Mounted Service School made its humble beginning on January 11, 1904, as a part of what was then the School of Application for Cavalry and Field Artillery. This latter school had been established in 1887 by an act of Congress, which stated that the Secretary of War was authorized “and directed to establish upon the military reservation at Fort Riley a permanent school of instruction for drill and practice for the cavalry and light artillery service of the Army of the United States.”

Based on the lines of a practical school of application, a minimum amount of theoretical work was required of the officers until the appearance, in 1902, of General Orders 102, War Department, which established post schools for officers, and made Fort Riley no exception to the rule. During 1902 and 1903 this order remained in effect against the recommendations of the School Board, which felt that Fort Riley should fulfill its vocation of a practical school of application for the two mounted arms.

In 1902, during a conversation between General William H. Carter and Colonel C. C. C. Carr, then Commandant of the School, the question of establishing a course in equitation came up. The outcome of this conversation was, that in 1903 Captain Walter C. Short, 13th Cavalry, was sent to Fort Riley, with an idea of his services being used as an instructor in horsemanship. Captain Short remained at Fort Riley a number of months engaged in drilling recruits and later on in the establishing of the Farriers’ and Horseshoers’ School.

For the school year 1903-04 the School authorities convinced the War Department that the application at Fort Riley of General Orders No. 102 was not for the best interests of the Service, and they were allowed to substitute a one-year course more suited to the needs of the School. This course was for officers with less than ten years’ service, both artillery and cavalry, and consisted of minor tactics, drill regulations, topography, hippology, theoretical horseshoeing for officers of field artillery, theoretical and practical horseshoeing for officers of cavalry, and equitation and horse-training for officers of cavalry.

As stated before, instruction in equitation commenced on January 11, 1904. and was given to a class of seventeen cavalry officers for one and one-half hours per day, Saturdays and Sundays excepted, from that date to April 8th of the same year, or about ninety hours of instruction in horsemanship. Each officer furnished his own mount or obtained one from his troop and later on secured from his organization a second horse capable of jumping. As to what the work consisted of, I can do no better than to quote from the report of the instructor for that year, which reads:

” 1. Using the snaffle bridle, the jaw, neck, back, and loins of the horse were suppled; on foot, using the excellent method of Mr. Edward L. Anderson, author of ‘Modern Horsemanship.’

1. The bending lessons, combining the leg aids, were then taught, mounted. The horse was taught all the turnings on the forehand and haunches. The McClellan saddle, with open iron stirrups, was used, the foot being shoved clear through, so as to correct the seat and teach the rider to avoid depending on stirrup-riding, thus encouraging knee pressure.
2. The collected walk and trot were next taught, and the horse educated to go into the bridle. As soon as the horse became handy, he was taught the passage at the walk and then at the trot. The horse was then taught to back and finally to canter and to change leads. “
3. The double bridle, consisting of curb-bit and snaffle, was put on the horse, and he was taught bending lessons with the curb. Here every effort was made to put the horse’s head into a position so that the animal would be balanced for collected work. All the foregoing work of the snaffle was thoroughly taught to the horse with the double bridle, using the curb as much as possible, thus preparing him for the curb alone, as is prescribed in the military service. These exercises very soon trained the horse to guide by the neck and the pupil to handle four reins. As horse and man advanced in training, the horse was educated to extend himself in the different gaits and to do the changes of direction and lead and the turning on different legs while moving at different gaits. The oblique gallop was taught to such horses as advanced in handiness.
4. Jumping was taken up as soon as the horse would go collectedly. The first lessons, were given over small obstacles, in a chute,
   

   Lieutenant Graham on Quandry Class of 1912

   and on the longe. Next, the horse was ridden over the jump in the chute, using the snaffle bridle. After the seat was confirmed, the double bridle was again used, and the horse was required to jump obstacles as high as his power permitted. The in-and-out was used successfully, and is a good means of confirming the seat.

5. The English saddle was then used, the purpose being to educate the officers to ride it in case at any time they should be unable to obtain the McClellan saddle—for example, when on leave or when detailed as military attaché. Some form of the English saddle is ridden in almost every country, and the style of riding is so different from that of riding the McClellan saddle that a man is liable to make himself ridiculous in the attempt, unless he has had experience in riding it; and it is expected, of course, that the American cavalry officer is an expert rider. Students were taught to do the same work in the English saddle as in the McClellan saddle.
6. A number of horses that were fairly high-jumpers were used for high jumping; the English saddle was ridden for this, as being especially adapted for that purpose. The jumps ranged from 4 to 5 feet 8 inches in height.
7. A difficult course was then used for gaining proficiency in handling the pistol and saber on horseback. The course contained two pistol-heads, a three-foot jump, two head-posts, and a ring. Wax-covered paper bullets and revolving targets were used. All this work was done at a brisk gallop, with strict attention to handling the horse.
8. The tedious school-training was varied almost daily by instruction in the handling of horses that had acquired bad habits, and the students were instructed in the devices and methods of correcting these habits. I wish to state in this connection that the class handled and corrected several horses that had bad habits. I considered this part of the course very valuable to a cavalry officer, as one lesson given to a horse the first time he exhibits a bad trait will usually prevent the habit from becoming confirmed. The students got a great deal of diversion, and some of them a great deal of experience, from the riding of bucking horses by those who desired to do so. Most of the class rode the trained buckers very successfully. An exhibition of the results of the work was given on March 29th for the benefit of the School staff. From that time until April 8th the class handled a bunch of new horses that had just arrived at the post. I have applied for twenty unbroken horses—that is, horses that have never had a strap on them—to give the students experience in carefully handling unbroken horses. I believe this experience at the School will be of much value to the student-officer, and that they will be able, by learning to carefully handle remounts, to save many horses for the Government.”

In looking back upon the work of this class, with its ninety hours given to horse-training and the methods used and the results obtained, they appear very crude compared with the classes of to-day. Speaking from the standpoint of equitation, it really had very little; but from the standpoint of horse-breaking, using the various devices of the West and of the professional horse-breaker in general, such as war bridles, throwing riggings, hobbled stirrups, use of the lasso, etc., the class did excellent work.

There was no member of it, however, who did not learn and who was not a better horseman at the end of his course than at the beginning. The visit of that excellent horseman, Mr. Edward Anderson, had a marked effect upon all, and did much toward advancing the work in equitation and in giving improved methods by which to work. All officers who had completed this one year’s course and who left the post before the beginning of the next school year were for the first time carried in the Army Register as graduates of the School of Application for Cavalry and Field Artillery. In this connection, however, it must be remembered that only the officers of cavalry had received instruction in equitation and horsemanship. Of the nine graduates so carried, only three are from the cavalry and can be considered as forerunners of the present Mounted Service School.

THE SCHOOL YEAR 1904-05 

This year saw many improvements in the School. The course for 1903 and 1904 had been of but one year’s duration. As the normal tour of duty for troops at the School was three years, this one year’s course meant to the officers a repetition of the same thing for two more years or two years of stagnation. In order to avoid this, the School Board expanded the one year’s course into a progressive one, covering three years. This applied to equitation and horse-training as well as to the other subjects covered at the School. The students still continued to be officers of less than ten years’ service. Those who had been through the preceding year’s course became the Third Year Class (eight officers). Those who had not been through the preceding year’s course were divided into First and Second Year Classes, and for equitation purposes were combined (twenty-three officers). The officers of field artillery were now required to take the equitation course with officers of the cavalry. For the First and Second Year Classes ninety hours were allotted, beginning January 10th, with work for one and one-half hours per day.

A series of recitations on the theory of bits and bitting, seats and saddles, etc., had previously been a part of the course in hippology. These recitations were transferred to the course in equitation in order that theory and practice should be under one instructor.

All student-officers were required to select from their organization two horses; first, one of good conformation, showing intelligence, uninjured mouth, a minimum of weak points, preference being given to animals having had the least handling; second, a horse to be used in high jumping.

In the First and Second Year Classes, starting with these comparatively” green” horses, and following the general principles of the preceding year, the student was required to properly bit, supple, and train them, carrying his work as far as the time available- would permit. While these two classes made much progress and on the whole showed great enthusiasm, the system of taking all the young officers on duty at the post commenced to show its defects. Many were not natural horsemen, either by physique or disposition, and the idea first arose of bringing specially selected officers from the various regiments to the School for instruction in equitation. This was strongly urged by the Commandant in his annual report, as well as was the building of the necessary quarters for them, the building of a riding-hall for the use of the School itself, and the building of School stables.

The Third Year Class continued its work with the horses of the preceding year, and the instructor in equitation says of them:

“Each student at examination was able to show a creditable high-schooled horse and a trained jumper. It is proper to state here that the object of teaching the high school is to give the student a thorough understanding of the mechanism of the horse and to thoroughly interest him in the results that can be obtained by careful handling. I find the scheme successful.”

THE SCHOOL YEAR 1905-06. 

The general instruction for this year followed that for the preceding year, except that only the Third and Second Year Classes took equitation and horse-training. Their schedule for the year was as follows:

Third Year Class of each arm, one hour daily, from December 1st to December 22d, inclusive, and from January 8th to March 14th,

inclusive. Instruction in the use of the cavesson and longe; bits and bitting; bending lessons; military seat; the park and jumping seat; collected gaits; school riding; correction of vices. For the Second Year Class of each arm the dates for instruction were the same, with one and one-half hours per day, and instruction in school and high-school training; high jumping. There were about twenty officers in each of these classes.

Schooled Horses 1912

Two events, however, stand out prominently and mark a great advance for this year. The first was the purchase of twenty unbroken well-bred colts and their training by the Third Year Class; the keeping of these colts together in an old abandoned stable as special horses belonging to the School, and the detailing of selected men on special duty for the care of them.

The other great advance was the sending to the School of eight specially-appointed officers to take a seven-months course in equitation and horse-training, hippology, packing, and horseshoeing. This class consisted of the eight senior graduates of the Military Academy for that year who had been assigned to the cavalry. The Commandant, in his annual report, says of this class:

“The work of this, the first specially detailed class of student-officers to enter the School, was so superior as to clearly demonstrate the wisdom of utilizing the facilities of the School for the instruction of specially selected officers. The zeal and enthusiasm with which these young officers entered upon their work resulted in remarkable progress being made, and I doubt if an equal number of officers ever before entered the Service at one time so well equipped for their duties, so far as educational attainments are concerned, as were the members of this class. At the same time, careful observation during their stay at the School convinced me that it would be an improvement to send here officers who have some familiarity with the Service and who have had instruction in the garrison schools, rather than men just from West Point.”

The general instruction given this class followed that which was given to regular classes, but was carried to a greater extent, because of more time being available, and took in a certain amount of cross-country work, together with stable-management, grooming, feeding, etc. Much time was spent, however, on what was called “high-school work,” and of this the Commandant says:

“During the year I became convinced that this valuable course of instruction would be improved by the elimination of some of the high-school training and by increasing the instruction in more strictly military riding and horse-training; the course for the coming year is being prepared accordingly.”

THE SCHOOL YEAR 1906-07

The success of the class of eight young officers directly from West Point had been so marked, and the difficulties of maintaining the three-years course of instruction with the post officers had been so manifest, that this latter was done away with. The course was changed to one year for such officers as the Commandant saw fit to detail from the post and for specially selected officers sent to the School from the different cavalry and field artillery regiments. The School Board felt that by eliminating most of the theoretical subjects taught at the ordinary post schools and keeping only special subjects for this School, with the one-year course, the results obtained would be far greater than under the old three-years course, and the number of graduates would be multiplied by three. This was felt necessary, as the crying need in the Service was a system of equitation—a school of instruction, where that system could be properly exemplified and taught, and from which graduates could be distributed throughout the mounted service to become instructors of others.

To carry out the above, seventeen specially selected officers from the different cavalry and field artillery regiments and twenty-one officers from the post were detailed for this year. A portion of the latter were officers completing the third-year course of the old scheme of instruction. The scheme of instruction for this class followed in general the lines laid down for the special class of West Point graduates during the preceding year.

Great improvements were made in the equipment of the School: a large new stable was built; two old stables remodeled; a School riding-hall commenced; an additional number of young horses bought; the School pastures enlarged and re-built; and also the relief of the special-duty men effected by the detail of Troop M, 10th Cavalry, for the purpose of taking care of the horses of the School. All together, it was a successful year, especially from an organization standpoint and from making the equitation work a special department in the School.

THE SCHOOL YEAR 1907-08

This year saw many changes in the organization, equipment, and methods of instruction at the School. The name was changed from the “School of Application for Cavalry and Field Artillery” to the ” Mounted Service School,” the former being abandoned as a school. This year saw also the virtual separation of the Mounted Service School from the post. All technical subjects not strictly connected with the horse, except topography, were eliminated from the course. The Department of Equitation was created as a distinct and separate department, and the number of instructors increased from one to three. It was generally reorganized and its methods of instruction changed so as to more or less closely follow those of the French Cavalry School at Saumur, France.

In order that the work in this department for this and succeeding years may be well understood, I will go into it rather fully. The aim of the instruction during the entire year was to make the ideal mounted officer—i.e., the officer who under-stands and can put into practice the correct principles of equitation; who knows the strength and weakness of his horses; who is a judge of the proper type of horse; who thinks and acts quickly; and who can ride fearlessly and well at all speeds across any ordinary country.

Lieutenant Robinson on Clarence, Lieutenant Stevenson on Bay Averill, Lieutenant James on Tommy Class of 1912

With this in view, the course was so arranged as to endeavor to give thorough instruction in the riding-hall in breaking and training, in acquiring a firm seat, and a knowledge of the aids, following this up, as the student progressed, by hard and fast gallops across country, taking such natural and artificial objects as were found in the way, and by the playing of polo.

The following scheme for the purchase, training, and disposition of School . horses was approved by the Secretary of War and was carried into effect as far as possible: All horses bought for the School were purchased with the idea of becoming officers’ chargers; when trained, they were to recruit the necessary classes kept at the School; the remainder were to be available for purchase by officers. They were divided into four classes:

First-Year Colts.—Horses when received entered this class, and during the first year at the School were taught the use of the cavesson and longe, to carry the rider straight ahead, and to make the simple turnings.

Second-Year Colts.—Colts that passed through the first year’s training entered this class to have their education as officers’ chargers completed.

Jumpers.—This was a class of aged horses, recruited annually from the second-year colts, on which the student-officer was taught to jump, to ride across country, the use of the aids, and given general experience by riding many different horses.

Service Mounts.—This was a class of aged horses, recruited annually from the second-year colts, and were well trained mounts, on which the student practiced the use of the aids and the various movements which he was to teach to his training-colts. One of this class of horses was assigned to each student, which he looked upon as his own and took out for a run after the hounds or a ‘cross-country ride whenever he was so disposed.

Polo Ponies.—Used for instruction in this subject.

In the different classes enumerated above there were 155 horses, and in addition thereto 20 horses were obtained and trained for use of the cadets of the United States Military Academy.

During the school year the student-officers averaged over four hours per day in the saddle; in the spring months this average was over six

hours per day, and, as many of them owned private mounts, the time frequently ran up to eight hours or more. In all, 892 hours were spent in the saddle under the eye of the instructors.

Lieutenant Thorpe on Little John class of 1912

Each student-officer completed the training of one “second-year colt” as an officer’s charger. These colts, as a rule, were horses which had been worked with by the preceding year’s class. Their training comprised: training with the cavesson and longe; jumping; suppling of the horse; general use of the aids; gaiting; work on two tracks; turning on the forehand and haunches; backing; galloping right and left; counter-gallop; changing of lead at the gallop at will on a circle or on a straight line; and jumping of ordinary obstacles in the hall or on ‘cross-country work. Each officer was given one “first-year colt” to break; this included training with the cavesson and longe, saddling and bridling of the colt, teaching it to go straight to the front at the walk and trot with the rider, and making simple turnings. These colts had been bought especially for the School, the majority of them being thoroughbreds. In addition, each officer trained one cavalry horse for the use of cadets at the U. S. Military Academy; this training included all the work required of “second-year colts,” but not carried to the high degree that their training was, and in addition included the ordinary cavalry drill and the various mounted exercises as laid down in the Cavalry Drill Regulations; also a road-march of four days was taken.

The “jumpers, service mounts, and polo ponies” were used daily by the students for the purposes indicated above under the classification of horses. With these horses the student-officers were required to change daily for the practice obtained in riding different horses and saddles. In this way the students rode between fifty and seventy-five different horses during the school year, either in the hall, at polo, or across country.

Lieutenant Wilbourn on Santa Claus

The time devoted to the use of the service and English saddle was about equally divided. Most of the training-work was done with the latter, as the former was unsuited for this purpose, because of the large knots under the rider’s leg. A very large amount of the ordinary riding was done with the English saddle without stirrups, and most of the instruction in jumping was done with horses thus equipped; this in order that the rider should acquire a firm seat and the proper use of the.legs. It was found that about five months’ instruction was required to give the average student the proper relationship between the hands and legs when used as aids; also, that about 20 per cent of each class were men who would make excellent horsemen and who should be kept for a second year’s instruction for the purpose of qualifying them as instructors of officers and cadets. It was found to be absolutely impossible to properly fit an officer for such duty with only one year’s instruction, commenced with the knowledge of equitation possessed by the average American officer when he arrived at the School.

Instruction in polo was carried on from April 1st until the end of the school year. In this work the officers took great interest, many of them owning then-own ponies and many of them playing during the entire year. An effort was made to develop the proper stroke and to teach all the rudiments of the game. The beginner was started in learning the stroke on a wooden horse and he advanced from there to a place in the game.

Cross-country work was made a special feature; twenty-three jumps of various characters were constructed and arranged into a course on the Smoky Hill flats; fourteen others were placed in convenient positions around the garrison. The obstacles included stone walls, hedges, post-and-rail fences, double barriers, logs, ditches, “ins-and-outs,” and combinations of the foregoing.

The ‘cross-country work was largely instrumental in producing the strong, close seats which were so noticeable in this year’s class. In the hall no attempt was made to teach high-school work. The light of experience showed that the young officers were unable to reach this grade with one year’s instruction.

Packing was introduced into the Department of Equitation and two afternoons per week were devoted to it during April and May and one during the month of June. An effort was made to make it as thorough and practicable as possible. Instruction was given in the selection of sticks for the setting up of and fitting the aparejo, selection of cargoes, lairing, slinging, and tying the same; the packing of all classes of camp equipage; tying on a load without cincha; one man loading mule; litters for wounded; carrying bedding-rolls without saddles; arranging and packing of troop mess-boxes; relieving of bunches; the handling, care, and capabilities of the pack-train. At the end of the course the class was divided into squads of four officers, one civilian packer, five saddle animals, and eight pack-mules, and were sent on a four-days road-march. The student-officers were required to do their own packing and cooking and to care for their own animals—in short, to perform all their own work.

Referring to equitation and horse-training, the Commandant says in his annual report for the year, “This course, which has been extended and systematized, has been an unqualified success this year.”

THE SCHOOL YEAR 1908-09

Instruction for this year followed the general plans of that of the preceding year. The department, however, was in better condition as

The Riding Hall at Fort Riley

regards plant, equipment, horses, etc., and it was therefore possible to give the class a more systematic line of instruction. The School riding-hall was completed and the number of hours of instruction was increased from 892 to l, 126, or a daily average of 4X hours per day for the 236 working-days of the school year. A general improvement was made in the School pastures and stables; also a large number of additional jumps for ‘cross-country purposes were constructed. The designation of the School horses was slightly changed—i. e., “first-year colts” became “breaking-colts,” “second-year colts” became training colts, “service mounts” became “schooled horses.”

Five of the best horsemen in the preceding year’s class were retained for a second year’s course, with the object of making them instructors in equitation. In addition to their riding-work, they were given instruction in care of horses, stabling, pastures, forage, and saddle equipment. The use of the McClellan saddle during this year was done away with. An innovation introduced during the year was the training of a sauteur—i. e., a horse that rears, kicks, or bucks upon signals, and the riding of this horse by the student-officers. The course of this’ year commenced October 1st and ended June 30th.

THE SCHOOL YEAR 1909-10.

The course this year was marked by the dropping out of all subjects which were not absolutely and distinctly connected with the horse. In addition, the courses in packing and polo were eliminated; the former, it was believed, could be taught at other posts, and the latter did not seem to give commensurate results for the time necessarily spent on the subject. It was allowed, however, to continue for such student-officers as desired play outside of their regular school-work, but was not a prescribed course for the entire class. Heretofore student-officers had been al-lowed to bring their private mounts to the School; this, for a number of reasons, had been found disadvantageous and was prohibited for the future. Troop M, 10th Cavalry, was relieved from detail with the School, and in its stead the Mounted Service School Detachment (colored), with a strength of one hundred and forty men, was organized. This detachment belongs almost entirely to the Department of Equitation and is. commanded by the senior instructor in that department. In addition to the usual supply of thoroughbreds, a number of Western horses were bought. The dropping out of packing, polo, topography, and the course of the Cooks’ and Bakers’ School allowed more hours for instruction in equitation and horse-training.

Of the year the senior instructor says:

“The results of the instruction were very satisfactory, and, on account of the increasing number of hours devoted to equitation, the instruction was carried further and the results obtained were correspondingly better than those of the preceding class.

” I consider that the method which has been strictly adhered to the last two years meets the needs of our Service, and should not be departed from in any particular. Many methods of training are good, but it is necessary that one should be used without variation, in order that a method will become universal throughout the Service, especially when the regiments change mounts so often.

“The method used at this School is followed with the one idea of making a charger—eliminating, as far as possible, the necessity of having equestrian tact on the part of the trainer. The training stops at a reasonable point with the troop-horse and is carried further with the officer’s charger.

“An attempt is made to give the student-officer the experience of handling a blooded horse and a Western horse, thus fitting him to handle any kind that may come under his training. The unbroken Western horse fits him for handling the hardest mount that may be assigned to his troop, and the blooded horse educates his taste for a superior mount for himself, which the Government has made possible for him to have by its generous allowance of mounted pay.”

The Second Year’s Class was continued during this year, but was not continued for the ensuing year.

THE SCHOOL YEAR 1910-11

The general instruction of this year was founded exactly upon that of the preceding year. It was marked, however, by several points. Two additional in-structors were added to the Department of Equitation. The re-establishment of the second year’s course was recommended, and in addition to the regular class of company officers, a class of field officers was sent to the School for a special course in equitation, beginning April 1st and continuing until June 15th. This class consisted of ten field officers. Of them the Commandant in his annual report says:

Lieutenant Cootes on Clumsy Class of 1912

“The programme of instruction for the year did not include a course for field officers, as the proposition to establish such a course came up later in the year, and an improvised but quite appropriate course of instruction was given along the following lines: Every day the class was mounted on a section of trained horses and a section of jumpers, changing these horses almost daily. The method of breaking an entirely’ green” horse to ride was taught by observing the regular class. The seat in the flat saddle was taught, the rise to the trot on each diagonal. The steps in the method of training the young horse were taught practically and drilled into the memory by daily review. The action and use of the snaffle and reins, used in conjunction with the lower aids; the use of the double bridle, and when to begin its use.”

“The jumping was begun very low and worked up to four feet, with very satisfactory results, considering everything. After the class began to get confidence in the horses, ‘cross-country gallops over the jumps were taken from two to three times a week, some of the officers taking the high side (four feet) of the jumps.

“Many long gallops were taken to demonstrate the condition of the horses. Lectures, with practical illustrations, were given in horseshoeing, hippology, con-formation (good and bad), and in relation to training, unsoundness, blood-lines, stable management, feeding, and conditioning.”

He also says in referring to the School:

“The Mounted Service School is now the recognized school of equitation of the Army. This being the case, everything should be done to improve the School and to extend its influence. The School is now made. It has the ideas and methods that have had the test of years at the French school at Saumur. The time is at hand for the adoption of a policy settled and certain—a policy which will insure the retention of that which has been gained, as also a policy that will mean progress and improvement.”

Most of these latter remarks referred to a fixed policy for the training and obtaining of instructors for the School. Referring to these, he says:

“These officers should be specialists, either developed or in a process of development. They should be selected as follows: Not to exceed three of the most skillful horsemen in each class that completes the course should be retained at the School for a second year. Their work for this year should be:

” 1. Development and training selected horses that should, when authorized by the War Department, enter competitions, horse shows, steeplechases, etc. Success in such events would be a credit to Army horsemanship and to the Mounted Service School; it would stimulate, throughout the Service and the whole country, greater interest in horses and horsemanship, and at the same time it would give future instructors much valuable experience. Furthermore, this work, very desirable and important in its place, would not, if conducted in this manner, be interfering in the slightest degree with the work of the regular class under instruction.

2.  Assisting in the capacity of instructor; this under the direct supervision of a more experienced instructor.

“After the second year, such of these officers who have been most successful or who have shown greatest promise of becoming instructors should be retained for a third year; this year they should be given greater opportunity to act as in-structors, and they should also be considered as available for competitions, etc., as in the previous year.

” Every opportunity would be afforded them to engage in polo and to make as creditable a showing in the department of horsemanship as possible. An excellent team would unquestionably be a credit to the School and encouragement to polo throughout the Service. By retaining these officers, as recommended above, polo would have a place in the School; at present such is not the case, for it should not be allowed to take the place of more serious and more important work outlined for the regular class.

“It might further be remarked that to retain officers as outlined above would add zest and interest to the regular course. During each three years there would be a goal ahead for the ambitious young horseman. At the end of the second year the Commandant would be able to determine, with a great degree of certainty, whether or not an officer would make a capable and efficient instructor; if so, he should then be sent to Saumur. In case two or more officers had completed with credit the third year (or probationary year), the most suitable or most promising one should be given the Saumur detail.

Having returned from Saumur with that course creditably completed, the officer could then be considered as a specialized horseman; he would then be available for detail to the Mounted Service School, or West Point, Fort Leaven-worth, or other place where the policy of the War Department provides for instructors in horsemanship. To have the Saumur candidate selected in this way should be the adopted policy of the War Department; it would then be a reward of merit and it would eliminate multifarious applications. By selecting instructors in this manner, when it became necessary to change the head of the department, an officer of many years’ experience would step into his place, and the whole machinery would move on exactly as if no change had occurred. Continuity of method would then follow as a matter of course, and uncertainty as to policy would not be experienced as it is being experienced at the present moment.

” Practically these same recommendations were renewed for the succeeding year and with every prospect of their approval.

Lieutenant Adair on Santa Claus class of 1912

THE SCHOOL YEAR 1911-12

The methods of the preceding year were followed during this year’s course, with the exception of an additional amount of instruction in jumping and general outdoor and ‘cross-country work, which consequently increased the number of hours spent in the saddle.

The effect of the Mounted Service School is now being felt throughout the Service; this shows itself by the fact that this year’s class upon arrival at the School, consisted of better horsemen than the preceding years’ classes contained; this resulting in a more rapid progress than that shown by any of the previous classes.

One innovation was introduced—i. e., an additional training-colt was given to each student-officer to train during the year, thus making him handle three colts during his course. The first was taken up on his arrival at the School in October, the second in the middle of February, the third in the middle of April; the last, to be broken and gentled only, for the use of the succeeding year’s class.

The general work of the Field Officers’ Class was similar to the preceding year, but more time was spent in riding. The course was enlarged upon, and a considerable increase made in the outdoor and ‘cross-country work. An average of three hours per day was spent in the saddle, three-quarters of an hour was used in observing the work of the regular class, and about three-quarters of an hour per day in hearing lectures and discussing various subjects connected with the horse, his care, stabling, training, etc.

In addition to the regular work during the year, a team was trained to participate in the National Horse Show at New York and another to participate in the military events of the Olympic Games at Stockholm, Sweden. Each of these teams consisted of about six officers, two of whom were instructors at the School, the other four members being selected from the graduates of preceding years’ classes.

In the nine years from 1903 to 1912 the Department of Equitation has changed from a makeshift affair, with borrowed horses, the using of the post riding-hall, one instructor, student-officers taken at random from a portion of the garrison, and receiving only ninety hours’ instruction to be graduated, to the excellent institution which it is to-day, with its own stables, its riding-hall, its pastures, ‘cross-country courses, detachment of grooms and caretakers, one hundred and seventy horses—far above the average of those found throughout our Service; four instructors, two of whom are graduates of foreign schools, the other two graduates of both first and second year courses of the Mounted Service School; a student class of about thirty officers, receiving about twelve hundred hours of instruction during the year, each student officer riding about seventy different horses; and a Field Officers’ Class of fourteen officers, receiving two months’ instruction.

While the department has made all of these strides, it is still open for improvement and can be perfected in many ways; to do this, however, it must not only work within itself, but must have in the future, as it has had in the past, the continued support and interest of the Mounted Service.

suppling at the gallop, lying back with no reins and no stirrup class of 1912

STATISTICS

Senior Instructors.—January, 1904, to September, 1907, Captain Walter C. Short, 13th Cavalry; September, 1907, to September, 1908, Captain Guy V. Henry, 12th Cavalry; September, 1908, to October, 1910, Captain Walter C. Short, cavalry; October, 1910, to March, 1911; First Lieutenant Gordon Johnston, 7th Cavalry; March, 1911, to September, 1911, Captain Walter C. Short, Cavalry; September, 1911, to date, Captain Guy V. Henry, 13th Cavalry.

Instructors.—September, 1907, to date, First Lieutenant Gordon Johnston, 7th Cavalry; September, 1907, to September, 1909, Second Lieutenant Joseph F. Taulbee, 2d Cavalry; September, 1910, to date, First Lieutenant I. S. Martin, Cavalry; September, 1910, to date, First Lieutenant John C. Montgomery, 7th Cavalry.

Graduates Second Year’s Course, Class 1908.—Captain John D. Long, 12th Cavalry; First Lieutenant E. H. De Armond, 6th Field Artillery; Second Lieutenant Allen M. Pope, 2d Cavalry; Second Lieutenant I. P. Swift, 10th Cavalry; Second Lieutenant Adna R. Chaffee, Jr., 15th Cavalry.

Class of 1909.—Captain Henry R. Richmond, Cavalry; First Lieutenant Eben Swift, Jr., nth Cavalry; First Lieutenant Isaac S. Martin, 14th Cavalry; Second Lieutenant John C. Montgomery, 7th Cavalry.

Graduates of Regular Classes. 

Classes.                                                                              Officers.

1904 …………………………………………………………….3

1905 …………………………………………………………….11

1907 …………………………………………………………….31

1908 …………………………………………………………….18

1909 …………………………………………………………….14

1910 ……………………………………………………………..22

1911 ……………………………………………………………..22

1912 ……………………………………………………………..27

Total …………………………………………………..148

Horses Since 1905

*********************************************Received….Disposed of… Remaining in School.

Breeding unknown ……………………………93…………….54……………….39

Saddle-bred …………………………………..105…………..100………………..5

Range-bred ……………………………………59…………….33……………….26

Thorough-bred ………………………………102…………….23……………….79

Half-bred ………………………………………21……………..6…………………15

…………………………………………Totals    380………… 216 ……………. 164

*******************************************Received. Disposed of. Remaining in School.

Polo Ponies ……………………………………….43             39                              4

Method of Disposition. 

************************************************************Horses. Polo Ponies.

Sold to Officers …………………………………………………………69…..14

Condemned …………………………………………………………….25…… 4

Died ……………………………………………………………………….9

Transferred—Infantry ………………………………………………….11…..9

Cavalry …………………………………………………………………..38…..6

Artillery …………………………………………………………………..4……5

Quartermaster ……………………………………………………………8…..1

U.S. Military Academy ………………………………………………….35

Fort Leavenworth School ………………………………………………17

Totals ……………………………………………………………………..216     39

GUY V. HENRY, Captain 13th Cavalry, Senior Instructor, Department of Equitation.

Anything that can make life a little easier for our horses is great by me and this new saddle from Wise Innovative Saddles, the Dutton RZ has some pretty “cool” ideas. Plus it’s the new official saddle of the USEA.   But I really had to stop and smile at this design. How about you?

You can find out more about the Wise Innovative Dutton RZ at https://www.wise-equestrian.com.  You can find out more about the McClellan at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McClellan_saddle.

McClellan’s Innovative Military Saddle

Wise’s Innovative Cross Country Saddle

In terms of dates the Combined Driving is a newer sport in the U.S. horsemanship world, but in terms of history, it is not. In 1970 Prince Philip, after retiring from playing polo, developed the first International rules for Combined Driving which were set in play at the Royal Windsor Horse Show. The sport has roots in the maneuvers military teams cross country and in crowded spaces, the elegance of the days before our highways were filled with cars, and the excitement  of an old western stagecoach run.

The Combined Driving sport in America grew out of the efforts of the American Driving Society  which was established in 1974 to create guidelines for judging driving skills and driving horses.  Until that time the Carriage Association of America placed important emphasis on the restoration and turn out carriages and horses but did not have a huge interest in how the teams were driven or how well they handled. The ADS developed rules and patterns which they submitted to AHSA (now USEF) for the rulebook in 1975/76.  Then they wrote a guidelines pamphlet and pointed officials.  ADS was a small group of people who were devoted to the love of driving.

Marathon at Longview

Around the same time Philip Hoffman purchased a 4 in Hand and went to England where he met HRHPrince Philip who was helping to develop his new love Combined Driving. Combined Training (3 day eventing) rules were used as a structure for the new Combined Driving Event. Philip Hoffman liked this new idea and brought it back to America where he became the first president of ADS. He organized the first Combined Driving Event (CDE) in Bedminster, New Jersey. This first effort had the ripple effect and now CDE is help throughout the U.S.

The first handbook that ADS published only contained the rules for pleasure driving so the combined driving rules where published in prize lists and were not always consistent.  Around 1980 the suggested FEI rules were added to ADS pamphlet.

CDE is not a huge sport like hunter/jumper or reining but the participants are dedicated horsemen and women.  CDE competition offers a huge range of opportunities for participation from beginners through FEI and for all kinds of horses from minis to huge carriage horses.

Early this fall I attended CDE at the beautiful Longview Horse Park put on by the Carriage and Driving Society of Greater Kansas City. If there was ever an appropriate spot for a driving competition, Longview Horse Park is it.  Longview was the home of Lula Long Combs, who bred, raised, trained and competed her champion driving horses all over the world from 1911 into the 1930s. (You can read more about this grand horsewoman in my blog post Lula Long Combs) And event at Longview combines beautiful horses, good competition, breathtaking views and historical ambiance. We were fortunate to meet up with a competitor who took us on her cross country “walk” in a gator explaining the game to us as we went. Pam had just returned from Netherlands where

Pam coming out of the water

she’d competed in a Para equestrian CDE.  A former eventer, Pam had MS.  She told me that as long as “they” could get you in a cart you could keep going in CDE!

Not unlike a 2 day CT,  this CDE had the dressage and the agility tests running simultaneously.  The first thing you notice about the dressage test is the huge arena, which makes sense when you consider a horse  or horses and carriage have to navigate this area following a prescribed test. At 40 x 80 meters it is twice the size of the small 20 x 40 meter dressage arena used for eventing. In dressage the horse is tested for obedience and suppleness while the rider is scored on their skills.  Just like eventing tests there are multiple levels of dressage tests and each horse is scored according to its level and division.  Turn out is elegant for dressage.

The agility test (called Cones) for CDE is comparable to stadium jumping in eventing only the driver must maneuver the horse through a series of “gates” which are defined by cones with balls on top of them.  As the horse progresses up the levels in his career the space between these cones becomes less.  The slightest bump will cause a ball to fall from a cone which adds 5 points to the score and just like eventing, low score wins. There can be up to 20 sets of cones or gates to navigate.

After a section that is quite like the old roads and tracks, comes the marathon which is the cross country equivalent for CDE. And just like eventing, the marathon brings out the competitive best.  Off come the elegant black and whites from dressage and on go the colors, the helmets and the high powered tough terrain vehicles. The obstacles are called hazards and the drivers weave their horses in and out up to 6 different gates, labeled with letters. The hazards must be completed in a certain time which has to be balanced with overall time.  Sometimes you wonder how the horses make the turns or how their navigators stay on.  The navigator is a person who stands on the back of the carriage and helps the driver with directions  They are also very helpful for weight displacement on fast turns! And just like in eventing we stationed ourselves by the water hazard.

The internet is loaded with information about CDE. I’ve included links to a few but a quick search will reveal many more sites.  And don’t forget to visit you tube for exciting videos of CDE coast to coast and all over the world, or take a look at the two below. And if you compete in this exciting sport write and tell me about it.  Send a picture, too!

Thanks for reading U.S. Horsemanship!

Barbara Fox

Click here to view the embedded video.

Click here to view the embedded video.

My post for U.S. Horsemanship is taken from the Oct.-Dec. 1911 Field Artillery Journal. In his article “The International Competition for Officer’s Chargers; Rome, May, 1911” author Lieutenant Colonel T. Bentley Mott, discusses not only the competition but the differences between the French and Italian Seats.  It’s interesting to hear from someone living when Caprilli’s ideas were still warily watched and the French School was also determining if it had a place in their teaching. The U.S. Military having sent officers to both schools was also still in the decision phase although leaning more toward the French school.  Interesting also is the reference made to the American seat invented by our jockeys. Also visible is  the beginning of conflict between “indoors”, “shows” and “cross country”.

Mott also compares the mindset of horsemanship in the U.S. Military to that of England, France, Italy and Germany. The competition, which had no American riders participating, serves as Mott’s platform for the comparison. One can sense that he hopes the comparison will ignite enthusiasm for riding in the U.S. Military. However, it’s only fair to remind readers that at the time that Mott wrote this article the U.S. Cavalry School didn’t exist; instead we had a Mounted Service School at Ft. Riley. Also remember that this was right before the full blown inclusion of horses in the Olympic games.

The Competition for Officers’ Chargers was a grueling test of horse and rider in which we can see glimpses of other competitions.  The test on day one was over 31 miles of road and fields with 5 jumps. It wasn’t a race but had to be finished in 3 1/2 hours. On the 2nd day riders competed over 22 obstacles spread out over just under 2 miles.  Again not a race but had to be done in 6 minutes.  I especially like the description of jump # 7 “…the horse had to clear a little ditch and land on an earth bank five feet wide, then clear six and a half feet, landing on a higher bank seven feet wide and jump off this over a small ditch to the level, a drop of a little over five feet.”

On the third day the 30 top riders and their horses competed cross country over 15 1/2 miles of rough going that included tall grass, mud, ditches, creeks rough ground, and 15 jumps. This time it was a race. The allotted time was 2 1/2 hours but the winner finished in 49 minutes. Nothing mattered but time and the second place horse came in covered with mud after it had fallen 3 times.

Even though this is a long article, I chose to include the whole thing in one post because the continuity is valuable.  I hope you enjoy it as much as I did

THE INTERNATIONAL COMPETITION FOR OFFICERS’ CHARGERS: ROME, MAY, 1911. 

LIEUTENANT COLONEL T. BENTLEY MOTT, 2D F. A. 

This friendly riding contest, open to officers of all nations, was by far the most interesting, the most instructive and the most difficult that I have ever witnessed. It was a genuine military event, stripped of every feature that was not practical and soldierly, and it may be said that any man who completed the tests of the three successive days, no matter how low may have been his final classification, showed himself a capital horseman. As will be evident when we come to describing each day’s features, a man had to have not only courage and a firm seat, but good hands and excellent judgment, to complete the course at all. It goes without saying that he had to have a first-class horse, a frank and willing jumper over all sorts of obstacles, clever as well as powerful, always under control and with good staying powers.

I have frequently seen the horse shows of Paris, New York and London, and I believe that no lover of cross-country riding, especially no military man, could fail to agree that the Italian idea of a mounted competition is in every way superior to the French, American or English. The latter are all indoor affairs, frequently under electric light, the former is held by daylight in a 60-acre field and its surrounding territory; the sole object of the Italian competition is to compare practically the skill and endurance of rider and horse, while the others are “shows” in the real sense of that word, depending for existence upon a large attendance and heavy gate receipts; the one puts rider and horse face to face with fairly natural situations, the others in the presence of utterly artificial ones; it would be quite possible for a horse useless for any practical purpose to triumph at the London horse show, but the winner of the Italian contest must be a grand animal, fit for any work.

If we ever institute a contest for military chargers in our country, we could hardly do better than follow the lines laid down in Italy, and this reason alone would justify the description which will be given with some detail in the pages which are to follow.

The first test consisted in a march of thirty-one miles, partly on roads and partly across country. The course was not made known until the evening before the start. This was not a race; but each competitor was expected to ride the distance inside of three and one-half hours, or be penalized one point for each minute in excess. The cross country part of the course was five miles in length and comprised only six obstacles.

There were 126 entries, two of them Chinese officers who did not start. Of the rest, there were one colonel, twelve captains and 111 lieutenants. Spain sent five competitors, Roumania two, France sixteen; the rest were Italians.

Ninety-two competitors finished the first day’s ride inside the time limit, the others falling out or being penalized for one reason or another. The best time made was by an Italian riding an Irish horse—three hours and five minutes. All merely tried to get in on time, the desire naturally being to save the horses as much as possible for the work of the two succeeding days.

The day following the thirty-one mile ride, the competitors had to go over an outdoor course on the cavalry training ground of 3,280 yards, say one mile and seven furlongs, jumping twenty-two obstacles. A good idea of the character of the jumps can be had from the photographs. The competitors started singly, the start of each being given as his predecessor finished.

This also was not a race against time, the only condition being that the fifteen furlongs must be covered in six minutes. For every two seconds over this limit a penalty of one point was marked up. Knocking down part of an obstacle entailed a loss of two points, as did a refusal; fall of horse or rider, or both, entailed a loss of three points. The top rails of most, but not all, the fences were tied with cord, and a considerable blow was required to cause their fall and the resulting penalty. The stone walls were topped with rows of loose but heavy brick, which were often hit without being displaced. Merely hitting rail or bricks was not penalized.

Each competitor was assigned 100 points, and from this was deducted the total of his penalties.

The ninety-two officers who had successfully finished the thirty-one mile ride of the day before started in this race; and he would have to be a cold-blooded man indeed who did not grow enthusiastic in watching their performance. First came a straight gallop over an easy hedge, then a simple double, the fences only three feet high and twenty feet apart. After a sharp turn to the right about, an easy three-foot gate was met, and then a three-foot bank, with a tricky little ditch on each side, surmounted by a very thin hedge five feet high, which, of course, was dashed through, the bank alone being cleared. A sharp turn to the right was immediately followed by a stout three-foot fence with a very small ditch on the far side, after which the severe business began.

Nos. 6, 7 and 8 are in or on the crest of a hollow with irregular slopes of about two on three. An idea of the look of the ground at

NO. 8. (FRENCH). NOTE LOOSE BRICK ON TOP AND SIDES OF JUMP.

these jumps can be had in the photograph marked Jump No. 8. The approach to No. 6 is level, the fence is two feet nine inches, and the horse lands on a sharp downward slope. I could get no photographs of No. 7; but the horse had to clear a little ditch and land on an earth bank five feet wide, then clear six and a half feet, landing on a higher bank seven feet wide and jump off this over a small ditch to the level, a drop of a little over five feet. The French horses jumped this obstacle without difficulty, but it was evident that they did not take to it with the easy confidence of the Italian mounts, which, though seeming heavier and less agile than the French, were perfectly accustomed to this kind of an

NO. 8. (ITALIAN). THE GROUND ON THE FAR SIDE HAS EXACTLY THE SAME SLOPE AS ON THE NEAR SIDE

obstacle. Jumps not unlike this are met with in the Pau fox-hunting country in the south of France, where I have hunted a great deal.

Jump No. 8 looked very trying, but few horses made faults at it. The wall was of solid masonry two feet two inches high, topped with loosely laid tiles.

Nos. 9 and 10 were simple water jumps, one eleven and a half feet wide, the other a double water jump, eight and a half feet for each ditch; they were in no sense difficult, but as they were placed side by side, and the course to be followed between formed a complete circle, they were a test of the horse’s suppleness and of the fact that he was wholly in hand. No. 11 was a three-foot wall with a small ditch on each side, followed thirty feet away by a water jump six and a half feet wide. No. 12, a ditch with a hedge on the far side, offers nothing unusual.

The next obstacle, No. 13 (see photographs) was a steep hill in the base of each slope. Obstacles of this nature are met with in

NO. 13. (FRENCH.)

going across country, and in the last day’s test some of them had to be taken, and they looked more difficult than this one artificially erected on the training ground. I did not see or hear of a single horse making a fault at this obstacle.

No. 14 was an Irish bank six feet high, to be taken on and over; No. 15, a simple fence; No. 16, a jump from the level over a stone wall two feet nine inches, landing on a sharp downward slope similar to No. 6, of which there is a photograph. A sharp turn brings up at No. 17, which is No. 6 reversed; the horse had to take off on a steep slope of two on three and clear a fence two feet nine inches high.

NO. 13. (ITALIAN.)

No. 18, a mound with a fence and ditch on each side, appeared to be the most artificial and unnecessary jump on the course. It looks very tricky, but it was cleared nearly every time without error. The mound was six and a half feet wide on top, and each fence three feet two inches high. The photograph shows this obstacle perfectly.

No. 19 was a simple hedge, followed immediately by a turn at right anywhere else, especially by the French officers in the team competition, when the process was reversed—the gate being jumped, the sharp turn following, and then the hedge. For fear of overriding the hedge, several officers slowed up too much at the gate, with the result that the horse had not enough speed and knocked down the top rail. On the other hand, one Italian officer went at the gate too fast, and could not turn in time to take the hedge. It was an interesting obstacle and a useful one.

No. 20, a hedge and ditch followed by a ditch and hedge, was a Italian specialty, taken, I am told, from a jump sometimes met with in the Campagna. It is taken in both directions, as the photographs marked No. 21 show. The wall is not quite three feet high; but in clearing it going in the direction shown in 21 A, if going too fast there is

NO. 21 A. (FRENCH.)

danger of tripping at the ditch on the far side, and if too slowly, that the wall may not be cleanly cleared. If going in the direction shown in 21 B, corresponding difficulties are met.

No. 22 required a sharp turn to the left, followed by a jump over a fence two feet nine inches high. Many took it diagonally, as the fence was so low.

As can be seen, Nos. 9 and 10, 19 and 20, were devised especially as tests of judgment in speed and of handiness.

In looking over these obstacles on the ground before the contest began, they appeared difficult rather than formidable, though I anticipated many more faults and falls than occurred. After seeing horse after horse go over the course, this impression, due to unfamiliarity, wore off, and I realized that any good rider on a horse previously trained to these jumps should be able to get across, even if not brilliantly. Most horsemen hate to take off on a sharp rise

NO. 21 B. (ITALIAN.)

or land on a slope, yet it seems quite practicable to do both with entire safety to man and horse, and the ability to do so seems useful.

At the conclusion of this two-mile jumping contest the thirty officers having the highest rating were selected for the final cross-country contest the next day, this being a veritable point-to-point race against time. The course was fifteen and a half miles, partly on roads and partly across country, and it was not disclosed to the participants until the moment of starting. The maximum time allowed was two and a half  hours. There were fifteen natural obstacles to be jumped, and the cross-country part was over rough ground, comprising steep ascents and descents, ditches, brooks, post-and-rail fences, crossings of roads with fences on each side, etc. The grass on most of the course was very high, and there was much mud. No account was taken of anything except elapsed time; the horse could refuse or fall any number of times, provided he went over the obstacles and the course inside of

NO. 22. (ITALIAN.) JUMP NO. 3, TAKEN IN OPPOSITE DIRECTION. SMALL DITCH ON NEAR SIDE—MERELY A SLIGHT ANNOYANCE WHEN GOING AS SHOWN.

two and a half hours.

The thirty horses having the fewest faults, which alone could compete in the final tests, were ridden nineteen by Italians and eleven by Frenchmen. It is very much to the credit of the French that, having sixteen horses in a total of 126 entered, eleven of these were classed in the first thirty at the end of the scond day, and in the final classification nine of these were classed in the first twenty-five. The French horses had made the long and rough journey from Paris to Rome, having certainly been more than forty-eight hours on the cars; they were comparatively new to these obstacles, having merely been trained over similar ones only a short time before leaving France, and in the final test neither they nor their riders were familiar with the nature of the country and the obstacles, as the Italians naturally were.

No Spanish or Roumanian officer was classed in the first thirty at the close the close of the second day, and so none rode in the final test. It may be remarked that the Spanish officers competing were all graduates of the Italian or French cavalry schools, and used the methods of their respective instructors. The Roumanians follow the French methods, and their riding instructors are all graduates of Saumur. The performance of these officers was extremely gallant, and while they seemed less experienced than their French and Italian competitors, they also, especially the Spaniards, had hard luck, and deserved more success than fell to them.

Before the contest a general impression prevailed among the Italians that the best time in the point-to-point would not be less than seventy minutes. The best time was actually forty-four minutes, made by Lieutenant d’Orgeix, 2d Hussars (French), on his little Anglo-Arab “Romeo.” The next best time was made by Lieutenant Gonnet-Thomas (French), on “Eclair,” Anglo-Arab, in forty-nine minutes, in spite of three falls; he and his horse were literally covered with mud when they arrived. The next best time was by an Italian, Lieutenant Ubertalli, on “Camerata,” Irish half-bred, in fifty-one minutes. The rest of the thirty one hour and seven minutes.

The final classification for the three successive days’ test was as follows:

1. Lieutenant Ubertalli (Italian), riding an Irish half-bred.

2. Lieutenant Gonnet-Thomas (French), riding an Anglo-Arab.

3. Lieutenant Cappi (Italian), riding an Irish half-bred.

4. Lieutenant d’Orgeix (French), riding an Anglo-Arab.

5. Lieutenant Caretti (Italian), riding an Irish half-bred.

The Giornale d’Italia, a much-read newspaper in Rome, makes these remarks on the classification: “It is to be noted that the winner, Lieutenant Ubertalli, owes his victory to the points made by him in the obstacle jumping contest on the hippodrome (perfect performance, 100). The superiority of the French officers in the last day’s cross-country race did not count enough to overcome their slight inferiority in the second day’s jumping, ‘precision jumping.’ Our officers are too generous and capable not to disapprove of conditions which place visiting foreigners at a disadvantage.”

Of course, no contest of this kind ever takes place without something being criticised, but in spite of the extraordinarily good management and generous intention which characterized the Italians’  arrangements, it is not unfair to say that the above remarks seem well founded. Lieutenant d’Orgeix went across a most difficult fifteen and a half miles of perfectly unknown country in the wonderful time of forty-four minutes. Lieutenant Ubertalli took fifty-one minutes, or sixteen per cent longer, to do the same thing. D’Orgeix had lost four points in the hippodrome jumping, that is, his horse had knocked down a top rail twice; Ubertalli had no faults against him. But the system of marking penalties was such that this loss of four points in precise jumping outweighed to such an extent the seven minutes by which d’Orgeix beat Ubertalli in doing fifteen and a half miles across country, that the former officer was placed fourth and the latter first in the final classification.

Likewise as between the two Frenchmen classed second and fourth, Gonnet-Thomas took five minutes longer to go the fifteen and a half miles than d’Orgeix, but he had only one fault marked against him over the hippodrome jumps, while d’Orgeix had two. This placed Gonnet-Thomas number two in the final classification, and d’Orgeix four. I notice that French officers in general give more credit to d’Orgeix than to Gonnet-Thomas, and consider his performance superior.

Having watched this outdoor riding and jumping during ten days (for there were many other events in which Italian and French officers were the chief participants), two questions inevitably arose in the mind:—first, which seat is the superior for military purposes, the Italian or the French; and second, what is the value of such contests in general, and to our army in particular?

The Italians ride with quite short stirrups, both officers and enlisted men, whether in the military or English saddle, having approximately the same position. When riding over jumps or in general across country, they lean far forward like jockeys, the leg from the knee down sloping back toward the horse’s flank. The photographs of Italian and French officers taking the same jump will best indicate the Italian seat as compared with the French.

In Jump No. 8, the full exaggeration of the Italian position is indicated. It is quite evident that for this jump, a most unusual obstacle, the position is intelligent, for the horse must be given every chance to get his hind legs over and the man has to look out for himself; but at jump No. 6, where the approach was level ground and the landing a sharp slope, the same position of the body was observed, only not so extreme. The photograph marked Jump No. 21-A illustrates the French seat in its classic purity; No. 18, the same seat slightly modified to meet special contest conditions, but still vastly far from the Italian position as seen at No. 22.

It would be unintelligent to dismiss the Italian seat because it offends ideas of cross-country horsemanship long accepted in both England and France, and believed in and practiced by our Mounted Service School. The Italian officers ride boldly and well, both over prepared obstacles and in the hunting field. The timber jumps in the Campagna, where much fox-hunting goes on, are second in stiffness only to those met with on Long Island and in Virginia. Nothing that I have seen in England—and I have hunted there with six excellent packs—was as stiff, for most English obstacles are hedges, and if you don’t go over you go through, or else have your fall considerably broken. But Italian “stationata” resemble post-and-rail fences; you go over, or you get a very nasty spill.

The Italian seat is probably a superior seat for races and exhibition jumping. It is more dangerous to the man, but it takes weight off the horse’s hind quarters and reduces by that much his chance of tipping with the hind legs. But is it a good seat to teach officers? I believe not, and this opinion is supported by the best authorities in France.

At Tor di Quinto this year were Colonel Blacque-Belair, the head riding instructor of Saumur, Major Détroyat, instructor at the same school, Major de Colbert, formerly of the cadre noir, and other eminent masters. We talked of this point in all its aspects, and while admiring what was accomplished by the Italians and confessing that results alone count, these officers believed that their seat was not the proper one to reach military men.

The reasons may be briefly alluded to. An officer, on service at least, should use the seat most suitable for all-round military work, the seat he teaches his men and expects them to copy from him. If he is a man of rank or eminence in horsemanship, his example is a matter of great importance to those about him. In going across country in campaign, whether on reconnaissance or carrying a message, an officer’s first thought is to arrive surely at the place he starts for. Speed is important, but not all-important. The Italian seat does not appear to be as safe for either man or horse as the French. In going across country, even at top speed, an officer must see—must observe the ground, the enemy if there be one, the military features of the terrain, the landmarks. If a man habitually gallops with his body inclined far forward, his head is inevitably down, and he sees about him only with an effort.

While these considerations apply to almost all fast work across country, when we come to the every-day work of the mounted soldier there is still less reason for adopting the cramped far-forward position preferred by the Italians. In mounted combat a man in that position is far less free to use his weapons and less secure on his horse than when by long habit he sits well down in the saddle, his body inclined only slightly forward and the stirrups long enough to enable the calves of the legs to grip the horse.

This much is insisted upon for the reason that many young French officers, enthusiastic riders in horse shows and cross-country races, have become seduced by the “American” seat, as it is called, from our jockeys who invented it. These young men, admirable and daring horsemen, lose sight to a certain extent of the special nature of the work in which this seat is an advantage, and are tempted to practice and teach it for other work for which it not so well adapted. The best authorities in military horsemanship in France are inclined to react against this sporting tendency. With that great liberty which is characteristic of French army methods, where results only are asked for and the means never rigidly prescribed, the colonels of cavalry regiments are inclined to let skillful and enthusiastic young horsemen ride any way they like, but they do not permit them to teach the men a system believed faulty for military work. These matters have been considered at Saumur, and the instructors there are careful to indicate the narrow limits within which they believe the Italian seat finds a useful application.

As our ideas in military horsemanship now closely follow the French, it seems well to have enlarged upon this point. I can only add as a personal conviction that nothing which was to be seen at Rome last May or in London last June, where French officers made so brilliant an impression, is calculated to make us feel anything but satisfaction in having chosen the French as our models. The French officers who took part in these events, and in others hardly less important, were in no case the same. A few specialists are not chosen to represent France at these various contests, but great numbers of youngsters from many different regiments, stirred by a fine desire to distinguish themselves, work hard to train a good charger and ask to be allowed to compete for the French uniform. The War Department—it is, I confess, surprising to see—does not give very great encouragement to these efforts either in the way of leave or financial aid. I believe this is simply because it does not have to.

What, now, is the military use of these contests? Very much the same, I should say, that a first-rate base ball nine is to a battalion of infantry, with this advantage added, that proficiency in mounted sports has a more direct application to cavalry training than has foot ball or base ball to infantry excellence.

Throughout the younger grades of the British, French and Italian cavalry there exists a veritable passion for riding over obstacles. In England, Ireland and a few parts of Italy this passion is largely gratified by riding to hounds, and the value of daring cross-country riders in campaign is too evident to make it necessary to quote the experiences related by Marbot when describing the Peninsular campaign. But in France, with little exception, all stag and boar hunting is in forests and other country devoid of obstacles. There are only two packs of fox-hounds in the country. Therefore, in most of France and Italy this passion of young to middle-aged officers for riding over obstacles is gratified in an artificial way. Leaving out steeplechases, there are obstacle courses built on every garrison drill ground, and there are any number of military cross-countries where the hot blood of young soldiers can meet and test its merits in the excitement of physical struggle. These contests are encouraged on every hand by horse raisers, by societies for improving horse breeding, by the military authorities, by sweethearts and wives. All the forces, and others besides, which go to encourage athletic sports in our army, lend their influence to horsemanship contests in France and Italy. The result is that those countries have a body of mounted officers who are well mounted, who ride constantly, who are ready every day in the year to take the field, who have a most amusing and exciting form of physical exercise, and who grow into middle age, and even old age, still interested in the horse, keeping up their riding through mere force of habit or force of pride, refusing as long as possible to grow old or give up. This is a distinct advantage to any service.

War is movement, and movement intelligently directed means victory. No amount of passive courage or mental activity can replace it. The habit of movement, of physical exertion, must be acquired in youth and preserved through middle age. It can no more easily be acquired in the course of a campaign by oldish men than can a foreign language. To be really useful it must have become instinctive. That, as I take it, is what we mean by “training.”

How does this apply to us?

Few will contend that physical activity has been or is even now a characteristic of our officers. Each one of us will readily recall the men who were our field officers six or eight years ago. How many of them ever spent five hours at a stretch in the saddle except for a practice march? How many ever amused themselves with out-door games of any sort? What sort of reception was given Mr. Roosevelt’s order requiring a pitiful little test of ninety miles in three days? Was there an explosion of anger that such a puerility should be exacted of healthy men?

When we turn to the younger mounted officers, men from thirty to forty years old, the difference is not enormous. I can remember very few at my stations, even in the last six years, for whom an hour or two of dull mounted drill did not fully satisfy the craving for the pleasures that come through the horse. Nor are the reasons hard to find. Going for a ride day after day out along a road, especially on an indifferent horse, is dull business when a man has had an hour or two of about the same thing during drill. Excitement and difficulty are lacking to the sport. Few do it; no example is set by the field officers, and the newcomers fall into the habits of the large majority. Riding for pleasure at our mounted garrisons is confined mostly to officers’ daughters and young men who find an interest in accompanying them.

Polo is gradually changing this mental attitude of the younger element in some regiments, but many reasons prevent polo from becoming the sport of the majority in any garrison, and it can not be played during much of the year. The same remark applies with added force to racing. This brings us back to horse shows and jumping competitions such as the one at Rome which we began by describing.

Every officer of our service can afford to own a first-class charger. Every subaltern could fairly be required to spend from $400 to $600 for a horse, since in three or four years this amount is returned to him by the government, and for the succeeding years be gets $150 a year as a simple bonus. I believe that the government should mount officers and withdraw the $150 allowance, but that is another story.

Now, as soon as every mounted subaltern—to go no higher—owns a first-class horse that can jump or can be taught to jump, and there is an obstacle course laid out on the reservation, if the man has any blood in him at all he is going to amuse himself by riding out to school his horse over these obstacles. Jumping is very exciting sport and most men will ride a long way to enjoy it, and even those who do not love it think they ought to, and that leads to the same end. This is the whole secret of the passion so prevalent in England for fox-hunting. That country, more than any other, is full of obstacles that can be jumped, and has very few that can not. The whole country seems organized for the sport; it has become a tradition, and a useful one for health and pleasure, at the same time leading to the production of great numbers of splendid horses, ideal for military purposes. I have ridden across country with many Englishwomen between fifty and sixty years old, and men of that age going hard excite no comment whatever.

In almost all parts of America this sport is quite out of the question, owing to the nature of our fences; but being the greatest incentive to riding yet devised for people of all ages, some form of obstacle jumping can be artificially arranged. This is what has been done in France, Italy and Germany, where hunting across an obstacle-strewn country can not exist. In these countries the military authorities some years ago deliberately set to work to stimulate the interest of its officers in riding for riding’s sake and not as a mere military drill. They recognized that to be successful something more exciting than mere walk, trot and gallop on the flat had to be provided—something, indeed, approaching English fox-hunting. What has been offered is the pleasure and stimulation of jumping obstacles, and how successful the effort has been can be estimated by any one who compares the amount of riding that is now done by officers of every age in France, Germany or Italy, with what prevailed thirty or even twenty years ago in the same countries when the present movement started, or with what prevails now in countries like the United States, where military men still ride almost exclusively as a military duty.

This stimulus to physical exertion along lines useful in military life has been just as artificial as that furnished by staff academies and war colleges to increased mental exertion; in the one case professional advancement has been the incentive, in the other pleasurable excitement. Each has been effective in vastly raising the standard of efficiency.

The time seems now to have come when we ought to bend our efforts in the same direction. Our service seems at last awake to the fact that it is very badly mounted, but the prospects of a steady improvement are so bright as to seem a certainty. We have a school of equitation that has about passed through the diseases of infancy and will soon become an acknowledged source of authority; we have a number of officers who already own and ride good horses; above all, we have a Chief of Staff who, more perhaps than any of us, appreciates the value of physical fitness and of hard riding as a means to that end. In a few years, then, we may expect our army to be largely provided with good horses; but I can not help urging that all our energies at this time should be concentrated upon mounting the officers well—when this is accomplished the men’s mounts will improve as an inevitable consequence. But it is almost idle to mount the men on superior horses unless the officers have even better ones. Excellence almost always flows down hill.

When it is urged that officers be mounted “well,” it is not meant that they should have merely better horses than at present, but better than those of any other service. We spend the money, and horseflesh is purchasable; why, therefore, should we not get the results?

Supposing, then, our officers distinctly well mounted (and that insures that the men will be), what are we going to do to keep up that condition and make them use the superior horses provided them? The answer, I think, is found in Rome. Provide an incentive. Lay out on every reservation a course over obstacles where the qualities of these horses may be exploited in the most delightful sport imaginable. Have contests, paper chases, races, and competitions in training, in the garrison and between regiments, for teams and for individuals. The younger men will take to it with enthusiasm, we may be sure, and it must not be forgotten that these subalterns will soon be field officers. Once we have a body of colonels who, in their younger days, have known the joys and excitement of riding straight over stiff country, we need harbor no further fears for the horsemanship of our mounted service or of our general officers.

Garrison life in America does not abound with pleasures. Certainly the variety is limited. We are far from towns and the usual excitements and interests craved by educated men. For the young officer life is often dull, but for those who have horses the outdoor amusements need not be confined to watching eight men play polo or eighteen play base ball. However, these horses must be good, or there is no interest in riding them, and some difficulty or danger must be offered to overcome, or no enjoyment ensues. A man generally does well what he enjoys doing, and others who have not the taste or the ability rarely know it—they follow the fashion. It is important, then, that the fashion established be a useful one.

It was very instructive to me to note that the eleven-day horse show at Rome was almost wholly a military affair, held on government land under War Department auspices and largely paid for out of military funds. There were gate receipts, it is true, but they could not have begun to pay the expenses. There were events for hunters and for gentlemen, but most of the entries even here were by officers, and the public interest centered chiefly upon them. The competition amongst regimental patrols of six men, representing thirty-one regiments, was one of the features of the show. We can well imagine the stimulus the prospect of going to Rome to represent the regiment must have been to all the enlisted men in every squadron throughout Italy.

The horse show in London is a very different affair. Here the civilian element is all-important, the military features, in comparison, insignificant. Italy has an elaborate military competition every year for the purpose of encouraging riding in the army; England does not need this, since her mounted officers have every inducement to ride, and they live in a community of hard-riding and horse-loving civilians.

The Paris horse show was at one time far more of a military event than it is now, when riding has spread into civil life. Moreover, horsemanship in the French army is now established on such a firm basis that the horse show stimulus is lost sight of. Nevertheless the military features are still a most important factor in the popular and financial success of the show, and much of the best riding is done by officers or ex-officers. Unfortunately, our service is in the same situation as the Italian as regards the need of an external incentive to riding, and this stimulus will have to be provided, as in Italy, by and within the army itself, until we become able to do without it as has happened in France.

It may seem that this discussion has gone far afield, but an examination of conditions in other countries is the best way to comprehend our own, and see in what manner improvement may be accomplished most quickly. I also feel like offering an excuse for insisting upon points that to many are self-evident. But I fear there are still numerous officers of our mounted service who believe that this riding is a fad and this jumping all fol-de-rol. What practical good will it do in war? they very properly ask, and if there were no ready answer they would be right in sitting down in placid satisfaction with the situation as it has existed since the Civil War. For that reason I have endeavored to furnish historical arguments for those who are not content with present conditions and are trying to improve them.

There is little doubt that habit is a factor of first importance in determining the output of all human endeavor. The habit of riding has not existed in the American army since the opening of the West and the close of our Indian campaigns. Even in those days it existed only in the cavalry, leaving the artillery, the general officers and the mounted staffs wholly unaffected. How, then, can this habit be revived, intensified, and spread to all who need it?

First, it is submitted, by taking measures to insure that every officer shall have one really first-class horse. This must be an act of authority, and not left to the individual to decide.

Second, by providing a stimulus which will insure that these horses will be ridden by their owners outside of the short hours of drill which prevail during most of the year. This stimulus is most readily furnished by the pleasure which all young men find in jumping good horses over difficult obstacles. Experience in other countries proves, if proof be needed, that this instinct can be relied upon as surely as that of the dog to chase a rabbit.

These ideas found a place in the scheme of rehabilitation imposed upon the French cavalry by its lack of success in the Franco-German war, and they have been amply justified. Much later the same process is to be traced in the progress made by the Italian cavalry, progress which in eight years has brought it to a place of formidable rivalry with its French competitor. The watchword has been, provide really superior horses, teach young officers to ride them over stiff obstacles, and no orders will ever have to be issued requiring officers to ride; they will do it joyfully and hence well. Italy is notoriously poor; she maintains an active army of 290,000 men and 54,000 horses for just half what our army costs us; yet she finds it wise to pay for officers’ mounts sums far superior to what we consider necessary. Officers themselves spend freely to insure having for their pleasure really first-class horses, but there must be no mistaken notion that these officers are wealthy. Many a man pays out of his own pocket $500 toward getting a good horse, who has not the income of our lieutenants. It is merely that prevailing sentiment in the service leads him to prefer this pleasure to another.

Returning to our own case, it may be said that once first-class horses and cross-country courses are provided, instruction in the use of both can be given by officers who have become proficient in the sport at Fort Riley or elsewhere. Contests can then be instituted, and there seems little reason to suppose that American youth will greatly differ from that of other nations in its enthusiasm for this form of exercise and progress toward excellence in it.

It is not my belief that being able to jump fences, hedges and stone walls will have any extended application in war, whether in our own country or any other; but peace practice in this amusement, interest and rivalry in it, has so far proved the greatest inducement yet discovered to make mounted officers serving at distant, dull garrisons, spend their leisure hours in the saddle rather than at the club.

 

 

 

 

The following is the final part of the 1913 “RASP” article “American Officers in the Riding Competitions, Stockholm, Sweden” by Captain Ben Lear, Jr., Fifteenth Cavalry. Captain Lear’s description of the problems that the team faced during preparation and competition show the grit and determination of our first Olympic equestrian team.  I part 3 he compares the preparations made by other competing countries and talk about methods of selection.  He makes a point of letting the reader know that the U.S. team did not have the numbers nor the quality of horses to choose from that he felt are required to produce a wining team.  While I have no doubt that this was the case, I find it interesting that lack of good horses has been the cry of the USET for as long as it has been in existence.  As Captain Lear notes , “no one will deny that many fine horses can be found in the United States”, which might make one think that there is some other reason for the shortage of superior horses available to our Olympic teams.

Part 3…
From what we learned in Stockholm, Sweden started in a general way to prepare for the Olympic Games several years ago, their regular training beginning eight months prior to the date set for the games. In the spring of 1912 five large tests were held. In the first of these about eighty-five officers competed, sixty-five horses completing the test. In the succeeding competitions the numbers were gradually reduced until the six best men and horses for the various competitions were selected. Germany had about sixty-five horses at the Hanover School in training for this competition. They arrived at Stockholm with about eighteen horses and used different horses for the military test, and the prize riding and prize jumping competitions. Russia brought some sixteen horses to the games. For some unknown reason they withdrew entirely from the military competition, entered only one man in the prize riding, but centered their efforts on the individual and team jumping events.
The horses entered by the different nations would rank in excellence about as follows: Germany, Russia, Sweden, Great Britain, Belgium, France, America, Denmark.
“It is due, however, to Captain Henry, Captain Lear, Lieutenant Montgomery and Lieutenant Graham to emphasize the fact that they entered this contest under the embarrassing condition of being very much outclassed as to horseflesh. They had few animals to select from, and these not of a high character; their time for preparation was short, and as they were not relieved during this preparation from their regular duties it involved excessively hard physical work, the effects of which they all showed when they sailed from NewYork, but from which the favorable voyage enabled them to a great extent to recover before arriving at Stockholm.
“The work of our horses and riders was excellent and elicited great praise from foreign officers. Our standing as second in the long distance ride, the cross-country ride, the steeplechase, and the jumping is something of which we may well be proud ; and we dropped to third place only on the judges’ estimate of the schooling, which involved appearance of horse and rider at walk, trot and gallop, and which therefore gives unlimited scope to the individual opinion of the judges. These opinions might very reasonably be influenced by a preference for a particular style of riding or of horse-flesh on the part of the officers judging, of whom three were Swedes, one German, one Norwegian, one Russian and one French.” (From Colonel Foltz’s report.)
A comparison might be made between the “Horse Riding Competitions of the Olympic Games,” and the New York Horse Show. Both are most valuable to the Mounted Service, but the former partakes more fully of the requirements of a high class type of officer’s charger, while in the latter any horse with only ability to jump could go in and carry off many valuable prizes and ribbons. But he could not be ridden with troops.
The experience our officers get in judging the conformation of the many fine animals seen at the Horse Shows, watching their training and the work of the riders should well repay the Government for all the expense in sending its officers.

Now, what about the next Olympic competition which will be held in Berlin in  1916?

Were you not surprised to learn that Sweden had spent several years in preparing for the 1912 games? They did, and they won. I can see no good reason for our not winning in 1916. We must not be satisfied with any place except first place. It seems to me it is “up to” the graduates of the Mounted Service School to accomplish this.
Good horses are hard to get and “come high” but no one will deny that many fine horses can be found in the United States. Any officer to whom the Government has given a course of instruction in equitation and horse training at the Mounted Service School, can well afford to spend from $500.00 to $800.00 for a first class hunter. At that price he may get only an unmade or green hunter. Then, if after training the horse is not good enough for Berlin, he could be sold for more than he cost and another one tried.
In my opinion the time has come when the old stereotyped excuse of “inferior horses” must be dropped. We must buy them ourselves, in the green if necessary, give them a long and careful course of training and then go in and win! We should begin without further delay.
In preparing this article, I have freely copied many paragraphs contained in Captain Henry’s official report made to the War Department on his return to the United States.
It is putting it mildly to say that the junior members of the team are grateful to Captain Henry for the very excellent instruction given us during our many months of training, for his consideration while en route to Stockholm, at that place and during the part of the return journey we remained together.

This is the 2nd of 3 blogs from the 1913 “RASP” article “American Officers in the Riding Competitions, Stockholm, Sweden” by Captain Ben Lear, Jr., Fifteenth Cavalry

The ship arrived at Stockholm, June 30, horses unloaded and taken to the military stables of one of the artillery regiments. Here we found conditions most excellent and everything possible was done by the Swedish officers to make officers, men and horses comfortable. Forage and stabling was of the best, and the former far superior to that which is obtained in our country.

The competitions were to start on July 13, thus giving us thirteen days to get our horses into condition for these severe tests.

We found the horses very soft after their trip and capable of doing nothing but slow work for some days. This we tried to make as hard as possible by climbing hills, going through mud and various things to gradually draw out and harden the muscles.

The official report of the Olympic Games (Horse Riding Committee) shows the following results for teams completing the Military competition:-(see the enclosed chart- Barbara Fox)

Each nation was allowed to start four competitors; the scores of the three highest competitors upon completion of the test counted as the team’s total.

Russia, Chile and Norway withdrew from the Military test, while Belgium, Denmark and Great Britain failed to complete the test through falls, faulty riding of the courses, injury to horses, etc.

Captain Henry rode “Chiswell,” Captain Lear, “Poppy,” Lieutenant Montgomery, “Deceive,” and Lieutenant Graham, “Connie.” Each animal was required to carry 176 1/2 pounds weight.

Three days before the competition commenced, all competing officers were taken out and shown the cross-country course. The open part of the course was plainly laid out by flags, while a section through some woods was marked by ribbons. The following day the team inspected the long distance course by automobile. We found the course to be over very hard Macadam roads, with many places filled with small stones.

The cross-country course, which started after some 20 odd miles of the long distance ride had been ridden, was a reasonably hard test for a good military horse. There were about twenty obstacles in all, probably half of which were small ditches. The first obstacle was a three and one-half foot fence with about a five foot ditch on the near side ; it was at the foot of a slight decline and approached rather suddenly. Many penalties were given at this jump. Another similar obstacle was near the finish of the course but the fence was not quite so high and the approach was very good. Among the other serious obstacles were three large ditches and an “in-and-out” over Swedish fences. These ditches were from 12 to 15 feet in width and with poor approaches. The bottom of one of the ditches was filled with plank, which frightened many horses and caused quite a number of refusals.

At the end of the cross-country run Captain Henry found that his horse had lost a shoe. The delay in reshoeing made it necessary for him to gallop the remaining twelve miles of the long distance course.
Prior to the day set for the first event we had decided that in each hour of the long distance course the horses should be ridden 18 minutes at the walk, 18 minutes at the trot and 18 minutes at the gallop. This allowed a rest of six minutes in each hour. However, after finding what the course was to be. the hard Macadam roads with the heat of the day. Captain Henry instructed the team to ride the greater part of the course at the trot, and to dismount and lead the horses five minutes before reaching the cross-country course. The day was exceedingly hot, and both Captain Lear and Lieutenant Montgomery lost over five pounds in weight during the ride. The American officers completed the long distance ride and cross-country course with from nine and one-half to three and one-half minutes to spare. Our horses were in good condition, but tired.

All horses were washed off with hot water and alcohol, and then all their muscles massaged with alcohol and witch hazel three times during the afternoon and evening. Bandages containing a cooling lotion were placed on all of the legs from the knees and hocks down, and the horses stood in cold water. Great care was taken in the watering and feeding. The first watering and feeding was given about an hour after the massaging, and consisted of but a few swallows of water and one pound of grain. Two hours later they were again watered and fed, this time receiving about twice the amount of water and grain.

The next morning we found our horses pretty stiff and sore in both legs and feet. Connie was in the poorest condition of any of our horses, while Deceive was hardly affected. Chiswell and Poppy showed the hard work, but not so badly as Connie. Fortunately this was a day of rest. The horses were led at a walk for half an hour in the morning and afternoon, and there was a continuation of the massage, bandage and water treatment. The animals were also re-shod, as most of the shoes had been worn almost as thin as paper by the hard Macadam roads.

The horses of other nations also suffered from the heat and excessively hard roads. A French horse was nearly dead when it reached the stables at the end of the first day’s work.

After the day’s rest referred to the riding over the steeplechase course was held. In this the various riders rode over the course separately against the maximum time allowance. The same weight, 176 1/2 pounds was required to be carried. The day was very hot, and most of the horses showed more or less signs of exhaustion upon completing the test. The American team had carefully laid out the exact points which they should reach at the end of each minute’s riding, and carried stop watches on their wrists where they could be easily seen, and tried to ride accurately according to time. The result was that all completed the test within the prescribed time and with their horses in very good condition, although stiff and sore from the preceding tests. In this test England was eliminated from further participation by one man falling and being too seriously injured to continue, and another man being disqualified for passing on the wrong side of one of the marking flags. The other nations with the exception of Germany and Great Britain, completed the test with perfect scores, one German and two Englishmen being penalized for not arriving within the maximum time allowance.

The same treatment as to massaging and so forth was given the horses upon the completion of this test, and continued until the next day for Test 4, which was the jumping of obstacles shown in the plan attached. These obstacles were placed in the Olympic Games Stadium and were beautifully constructed and the whole of the surroundings magnificent.
Everything connected with the horse-riding competitions was handled by the Swedish Army in a perfect manner.
In the fourth competition, the following nations entered: Sweden, France, Germany and America. Great Britain. Belgium and Denmark having been eliminated. Lieutenants Graham and Montgomery each made nine faults. Captain Henry thirteen faults and Captain Lear fourteen faults. The close of this test found Germany in first place with 118.20 points for the team, America second with 117.19 points, Sweden third with 117.07 points and France fourth with 115.69 points.
The best individual score in this event was made by Lieutenant Casparrson, a Swede, and contained five faults. Most of the faults made by the various riders were at obstacles Nos. 4, 8 and 14, one hundred and twenty-five points being lost at these jumps.
On the last day of the Military event came the prize riding.   The Americans had spent a great many hours in training their horses and they hoped to do well in this event. The horses were to be shown “standing at attention, at the walk and the trot, turning on the haunches to the right and left about at the trot, backing from the trot, turnings of the forehand from the trot, collected and fast trots, the gallop from the halt, walk, trot, and backing, with either lead ; galloping on small circles, changes of lead, halt from the full gallop, etc.” Our horses did their work well and we felt that we had at least held our place.
The rules governing this event said: “For riding by holding the reins in two hands the highest number of points is 7. For riding holding the reins principally with one hand the point can be added for walking and trotting with 1 and for gallop with 2 further points.” The American riders held their reins in one hand in all their schooling, while the three Germans having the highest scores of their team rode with the reins in both hands. Thus, we counted on gaining nine points over the German team.
However, the inferiority of horses evidently caused the judges to give us a very low mark, for when the final decision was announced Sweden was first, Germany second, America third and France Fourth. Still, we were mightily pleased to be placed, and felt that the five months of very hard training we had gone through had been well repaid.
Besides the military competition there was prize riding competition and the prize jumping competition for individuals and for teams. In the prize riding competition Captain Henry and Lieutenant Montgomery entered with Chiswell and Deceive. Chiswell put up a remarkable performance and his rider was heartily complimented by many present upon the work done. However, the horse as an animal did not rank with the magnificent animals entered in this competition by Germany and Sweden, the result being the Swedes won the first three places, Germany the next, Sweden two more and America thirteenth out of twenty-one entering.
The next competition was the individual prize jumping. In this the United States entered no horses as they could hardly compete as individuals over a more difficult course than the military with the great jumpers ofEurope, especially as these great jumpers in most cases were fresh and had not been through the military contest. The competition was won by France with Germany second and Belgium third.
The next competition was prize jumping for teams of four each, the highest three to count. With the exception of the Americans all the other nations had four riders on their teams. This required our team of three to compete against the selected scores of three riders out of a team of four. The United States entered this with Connie ridden by Captain Henry, Poppy by Captain Lear, Deceive by Lieutenant Montgomery. None of these horses had ever jumped this more difficult course, as we had always attempted simply to train them for the course as laid down in the military competition. We were unable to enter the fourth man as we did not consider that we had a fourth horse capable of going over this course. However, we more than surprised ourselves, for we held third place in the competition until the last horse had jumped. In this the American horses went over with Deceive, ten faults, Connie sixteen, Poppy seventeen, a total of forty-three. The total faults of the best three horses of the other nations being Sweden, twenty-five; France, thirty-two; Germany, forty; United States, forty-three; Russia, fifty; Belgium, sixty; Chile, Great Britain, Norway and Denmark not entering teams.
This completed the horse riding competitions. In addition to these the members of the various nations went in the Stadium on several occasions for presentation to the King of Sweden display of horsemanship and the presentation of the medals to the winners.