1s 17year old horse too old to buy as a first horse?

adamant3 · 30-12-2012 08:10PM #1

Hi all,
a friend of mine is looking at buying his first horse. He has seen one he is interested in but the horse is 17. He has leased horses from time to time so is used to riding and caring for a horse. I think he would be better with a 8-10 year old horse as his first horse, I just worry about what vet bills he might face with an older horse like this, anyone on here have an older horse?

What are your views on a good age for someones first horse? The horse will be used for hacking, light riding work and popping a few poles, no competition work.

byhookorbycrook · 30-12-2012 08:33PM

A friend got an 18 yr old last year and is having the greatest of fun with it, but a lot would depend on the horse and its health, of course. Personally, my guy was 8 when I bought him,but my needs were extremely specific and I knew where he was coming from, got him on trial for a month and most of the province could vouch for him!!I hope he will see us both into retirement so I didn't want anything older than 12.

I'd be wary of a an aged horse on a white passport as there is no accurate way of telling exactly how old the horse really is.

adamant3 · 30-12-2012 10:08PM

thanks for that, not sure if the horse has a passport, friend was just in touch with the seller and hasnt viewed the horse yet apart from photos. Seller said horse hasnt had any injuries etc., no vices, fit, can be left off for a week and doesnt get fresh (normal I imagine for an aged horse). Just dont want friend making a mistake with his first horse

byhookorbycrook · 31-12-2012 12:05AM

White passports can be used to declare a horse any age, so be careful.

silverfox88 · 31-12-2012 12:56PM

Too old!! My girl is 20 now and 15 when I got her, the years fly by and to be honest it just breaks your heart as they get older. Also I have the issue that I won't sell her because of her age, I don't know where she'll end up, and because I have a young horse now too it just means more money!

marley123 · 31-12-2012 03:29PM

Have to agree with silverfox - UNLESS your friend has their own land as if needs to be put on livery it could prove quite costly further down the track.

silverfox88 wrote: »

Too old!! My girl is 20 now and 15 when I got her, the years fly by and to be honest it just breaks your heart as they get older. Also I have the issue that I won't sell her because of her age, I don't know where she'll end up, and because I have a young horse now too it just means more money!

byhookorbycrook · 31-12-2012 07:09PM

Going slightly off-topic,what do people feel about "retiring" an old horse?I rode my guy right up to the day before he was put down, due to a shattered pastern-caused by arthritis/old age/wear and tear. If he had been retired to a field ,he would have just wasted away. I always regret not having him put down the year before, as we had to try to get him out of the stable for the vet to do the deed and his groans and the later of sweat he was in always stay with me.

mystika121 · 31-12-2012 07:12PM

I don't think that 17 is too old at all. My first horse was 16 when I had him and he taught me so much. He had done it all and that was a great confidence giver. He had not slowed down at that age and I had ten great years with him.

He suffered a tendon injury in the end but that can be career ending for a horse at any age.

The workload that your friend has in mind sounds fine for a older horse. It's better for them to be kept in work where possible.

Obviously the usual vet checks become even more important and a lengthy trial should be asked for but the age of the horse shouldn't put off someone just starting. I think it's much worse for a novice to buy a young horse to 'bring on' themselves. In my experience these are the partnerships that can go quickly wrong.

adamant3 · 31-12-2012 09:06PM

Thanks for all the responses guys, have mentioned them to my friend and I think its given him some more things to think about. He would be putting the horse in a livery yard so in the long run it could work out very costly if the horse becomes injured or too old due to wear and tear to ride and he is basically paying to keep the horse in a livery yard and not being able to ride etc. I know that if he bought the horse he would keep it no matter what and look after it, I just see him running into trouble if its getting on in years right from the start. Totally get silverfox, with not selling on an aged horse and thats how he would be too.

I think alot of the time when a horse is retired they go down hill very quickly better to keep them working.

silverfox88 · 03-01-2013 08:39PM

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Going slightly off-topic,what do people feel about "retiring" an old horse?I rode my guy right up to the day before he was put down, due to a shattered pastern-caused by arthritis/old age/wear and tear. If he had been retired to a field ,he would have just wasted away. I always regret not having him put down the year before, as we had to try to get him out of the stable for the vet to do the deed and his groans and the later of sweat he was in always stay with me.

I honestly feel that unless the horse is clearly unable for the work, keep riding! (I know this may sound like a contradiction of my earlier post, but I'm more coming from the point of view of someone who has had their horse for some time and they are now older) As I said, my mare is 20 and I agree with the above that had I chucked her out into a field to "retire" she wouldnt be in the same shape she is now. While she doesnt do a huge amount of jumping anymore she is still ridden 5/6 days a week for 40/45 mins and is in good condition because of it. I had decreased her workload a while ago because I thought it would be better for her age and she simply became stiff and kept going lame. Work back up again and she is now staying sound (fingers crossed!!!)

fits · 04-01-2013 01:26PM

If the price is right and the horse is good I would say go for it.

As an aside if the horse becomes unrideable for any reason I wouldn't think there's any shame in having it put down rather than paying livery. Horses are too expensive to keep as pets.

silverfox88 · 06-01-2013 10:04PM

fits wrote: »

If the price is right and the horse is good I would say go for it.

As an aside if the horse becomes unrideable for any reason I wouldn't think there's any shame in having it put down rather than paying livery. Horses are too expensive to keep as pets.

fits thats pretty harsh! I personally really dont like the idea that someone would take on an older horse, get what they can out of them and then put them down when they become too old to be of any use anymore?! Bit of a "dogs are not just for Christmas" situation? While I agree that horses are very expensive, they are not to be thrown away- I will try to find the most economical solution when my mare becomes unrideable, but the idea of putting her down rather than paying for her when she is of no more use to me is frankly upsetting. She owes me nothing and if she was unrideable but not in pain and able to live out her life but not be ridden I would never see putting her down as a viable option. If you take on a horse, of any age, you are aware that they are expensive and time consuming. if you are not willing to look after them, whether by selling/loaning them on to a new home more suited to their needs, or retiring them and looking after their upkeep, then don't take on the commitment.

convert · 06-01-2013 10:36PM

I don't think fits is saying that a horse is disposable, but just highlighting the fact that if an older horse gets injured/arthritis/other serious/severe illness/complaint, that someone may not feel as bad putting down an older horse as perhaps a younger horse who was injured and had to be retired or put down.

I really don't like the idea of people keeping old, arthritic or injured horses in 'retirement' simply because they feel it's kinder htan putting htem down. I had a young horse who was severely injured and couldn't be ridden again. I kept her for a few years, but she developed arthritis and had a relatively poor quality of life, and therefore I had to put her down. Could she have lived longer if she received huge amounts of pain relievers? Yes. But I felt that putting her on pain killers and leaving her live a life where she was restricted in what she could do was not a great life for her. She enjoyed competing, jumping, going out for a hack, and just being ridden in general. She was bored just being out in the field watching the others being exercised while she couldn't enjoy that.

Would people say that I was harsh not to simply pay for pain relievers and keep her into old age and leave her die naturally? Yes, they would. But having given the situation a lot of consideration and put myself in her shoes, and asked myself how I would feel if I was her, and if I couldn't make the decision for myself, how I would like people to treat me, I decided it was kinder for her to be put down than left to suffer.

I personally feel that putting down an older or injured horse and giving a younger horse a chance is far kinder in the long run, than keeping the older horse when they're not enjoying life. It's very hard to explain without coming across as somewhat callous, but I know if I was old and having a poor quality of life, I would much rather have the option of assisted suicide (very hot topic and perhaps somewhat touchy subject at the moment), rather than being made live out the rest of my life on a huge amount of medication, and possibly in a 'home', unable to look after myself properly, simply melting away. Old age is probably the most horrific 'disease' out there as we (humans and animals) are literally slowly going back to needing constant care and attention like when we were young.

07-01-2013 01:59AM

I understand what fits is saying but I don't think just because a horse becomes unrideable it should be PTS.

There's a few oldies in my yard (25+ and some in their 30's) who are still cared for by their owners. The horses are no longer ridden but still enjoy turn out and walks on lead rein.

I like what silverfox said, my horse owes me nothing. If she was horribly injured or ill and had zero quality of life I would make the decision but I am quite prepared to, and hopeful, that I will still be paying livery for her 20 odd years from now.

I'm an awful softie

fits · 07-01-2013 04:24PM

I have a 24 year old mare in my field who owes me nothing. She is a great companion to the other two and will be there as long as she is healthy. She sees the farrier and dentist regularly. However, if she gets sick I won't treat her. She will be put down.

I had another horse a couple of years ago who was injured six months after I got him. He got field sound but was unrideable and unsellable. I kept him for a year in the field but he kept on injuring himself so in the end I had him put down before he incurred any more vet bills. I am a pragmatist when it comes to these things and money spent keeping that sort of horse is better spent elsewhere imo.

1s 17year old horse too old to buy as a first horse?

Comments