[KASHA'S MOM]

our world is filled with people wanting bigger paychecks, bigger houses, bigger cars, more more more. But for heavens sake don't get a bigger waist line... I have a few friends and a sister who battle weight and society is of no help.. I am 5'2" and of proportionate weight and even I have trouble finding clothes that don't fit like a second skin, how skinny do we want people to be? What kind of example is this setting for our daughters?

This is a great post, thanks for taking the time to discuss this. As for riding, I think you make a great arguement.

[oldhag]

No, it's quite normal for members of the same family to have weight problems. Too fat or anorexic, both are eating disorders. They are genetic.
My sister is huge my father had bulimia, so did me and my sis.

She has two daughters, one too skinny one even huger than herself.

[Lou3]

I think its a very good point to bring up.
However I would like to say that your information of 25-30% is not accurate. Latest studies have shown that 15-20% is "manageable" for the average horse, 25% is "very stressful" on their joints and backs and 30% considered "unmanageable" by virtue of the strain put on them by this weight. Horses asked to carry 25% of their weight developed arthritis earlier, had a greater tendancy towards back problems and developed splints and windgalls more often than horses only asked to carry 20% of their body weight.
acknowledgements were made that this varied with type with pony types and stock types being capable of carrying a higher percentage of their own weight (recommended limit 23%) than breeds such as TB's, arabians and warmbloods or their crosses (recommended limit 20%).
As an overweight rider myself I am sympathetic to the problems faced by larger women. But while society has no right to discriminate against us for our weight we ourselves MUST be sympathetic to the welfare of our horses. This is the one case where i have to say that the "just because I'm bigger doesnt mean I cant do it" doesnt fly when it comes to being too heavy for a horse the limits are not imposed by society but by the horses themselves. As such I would urge anyone who weighs more than 20% of their horse's weight to consider a bigger horse - for the sake of their horse's welfare.
Also please note that 20% is only for a horse with GOOD conformation. This figure drops if the horse has conformation faults with their legs - even relatively minor ones with sickle hocks being the worst flaw for weight-carrying horses.

[realitycheck]

No, it's quite normal for members of the same family to have weight problems. Too fat or anorexic, both are eating disorders. They are genetic.
My sister is huge my father had bulimia, so did me and my sis.

She has two daughters, one too skinny one even huger than herself.

When I was riding as a teenager, every single one of the girls my age was either anorexic or bulemic, and there were 7-8 of us at my barn. Thin thin thin, that was the key. Thin riders are pretty riders, they say. You tell that to an impressionable teenager and they take it to the extreme.

I was also raised in a house where we always ate healthy foods and were required to participate in at least one athletic activity, and my parents are absolute health fanatics. No eating disorders for them, but I would say more of issues with body image. My mother in particular has a very mean view of overweight people, to the point where my sister no longer speaks to her. Maybe that is why I am more sympathetic.

[cowgurly02]

I do agree that heaviness is not a problem. I know many steer wrestlers, most who ride stocky little QH's 15.2 hh or under. The vast majority of steer wrestlers are well over 200 lbs, and I tell you what the saddles they use are NOT light.

I do feel that riders who are in good shape tend to be more successful competing, and take less out of their horse in competition. I feel that if my horse has to be in great shape for barrel racing, I should be too! Fair is fair! It does take stress off your horse when competing in events such as barrel racing.

[Lindsayanne]

Funny we evaluate by percentage of the horse's weight...

Makes it sounds like an obese, out of work arab would be a better mount for a larger rider than a horse in top physical shape with good bone. BIG difference.

I always point out to larger riders HOW you ride your horse- not just seat and balance- but how you ask them to carry you- makes a HUGE difference.

When ANY rider rides on a horses back, they're sitting on spine and muscle stretched between the front and the back end. Their back is basicly a bridge over the weakest part of their body. The VAST majority riders- big and small- allow their horse to move hollow, head up, back hollowed, spine under pressure, and carrying the rider's weight on muscles that break down and hurt. Have you ever seen a weight bearing bridge built from point A to point B by sagging down? No, it's one of the weakest structures.

Engineers know that an arched up bridge can hold many times more weight with a fraction of the strain on the structure. Our horses are the same. When we teach them to collect and round up under their rider their burden is decreased significantly. Instead of feeling the strain of holding up a rider with their back muscles, they can support their rider with their spine and skeletal structure.

A 175lb rider on a hollow horse can do MUCH more damage much sooner than a 250lb rider on the same horse working round and correctly.

[Lou3]

Originally Posted by Lindsayanne

Funny we evaluate by percentage of the horse's weight...

The evaluation should be made by a percentage of the horse's IDEAL weight at a BCS of 4.75 - 5.25

[No1Dazy]

Originally Posted by Lindsayanne

I always point out to larger riders HOW you ride your horse- not just seat and balance- but how you ask them to carry you- makes a HUGE difference.

So true! My trainer also makes a point of saying that a rider in BALANCE and able to carry her own weight gets to take off 20 pounds. So, minus those 20 pounds, I get to be one of the "average" girls!

[Super_Trooper]

Unless we can ask the horse itself, I dont know how we could come up with % on what they can carry and how long etc. I know carrying a backpack on MY back can cause some discomfort depending on weight/time...etc.

I am not a "light" rider. At 5'8" my "skinny" weight is 150 pounds and flucute between that and 180 pounds...and I ride my 15.3-17 hand horses.

Horses, like people, are built differently too...

[DesertBred]

Everyone has very good points and perceptions. I have only witnessed one "significantly overweight" person use this against the horse. It was a man that an Arab farm hired to break their youngsters. This man had to weigh 350 lbs, and I am not exaggerating. I dont know how he managed to get on them...it was a chore for him. He would lunge them until they were exhausted then climb on and the horses couldnt even begin to buck or have a fit, one because he was so heavy and two because they were exhausted. A poor excuse for "breaking" a horse IMO.

Other than that, I have never seen a heavy woman hurt a horse due to her weight, I think that most women are concerned about the animal. Men seem not to be as concerned.

I give you big props for bringing this up, and I agree with you for the most part. As long as the horse is in shape and proportional to the rider (within reason) I feel that larger people should ride and have a good time. I do feel it is important for them to find a horse that suits their needs....like someone said, an overweight arab wouldnt be who I would put a heavy person on