-- This editorial first appeared as a Newsletter blog on 5 December 2025. If you want to receive our newsletters, sign up for free.
Last week Friday I photographed a full day at the CDI Kronenberg after a three-month break from horse shows and photography. I felt that not only my camera's batteries were recharged, but also my mind rebooted. With a fresh pair of eyes I was able to watch the horses, note their progress, or with some a decline or lul in their training.
In Kronenberg I was amazed to see how many older horses were still competing at the end of this show year. Usually after the summer most riders decide the winter is the moment to slowly decompress the training of their senior horses and ease them into retirement. At this CDI, however, rhere were more than a handful of 18 and even 19 year olds still ploughing through the test. I couldn't help but wonder.. when is enough enough?
Some of these horses have had illustrious careers, competing a decade at international Grand Prix level and they keep on ticking. These horses have been active in sport much longer than that: a whole young horse career precedes before hitting FEI level, and for some the tachometer also includes a whole licensing process and performance test at the ridiculously young age of 2.5. Much has been asked from them in their lifespan. I have to admit that in Kronenberg they didn't looked lame nor worn out; most were fit and healthy and fresh enough for the test, but it makes you reflect on the fact that some riders draw the line at 16, others at 18, and for some there is no problem with 20 or more.
Maybe it's my morals, but after the age of 18, hasn't your horse done enough? Why drag it on? It almost looks like ego takes the better of the rider. Sure they love their horse and treat it well, but they seem to love their career and the spotlight a little bit more. Or is that a cruel thought of mine?
It is not the first time that I have seen a rider leave the arena doing the "'walk of shame," because they couldn't put a halt to their horse's sport career and instead it was the judge at C who gave them the confronting sign the end has been reached by publicly ringing them out. Why wait for that point to come, walking a threadbare horse out of the arena, and humiliate yourself for misjudging your own equine and being a zealot.
This week Carl Hester announced the joint passing of legendary dressage horses Valegro and Uthopia and social media blew up, screaming murder. They were 23 and 24 and according to some moral crusaders that's too young to go. Others couldn't understand why both were put to sleep at the same time, not given the other horse the chance for a longer life, simply because they spent their retirement as a duo (assuming one was in a better condition than the other).
Carl's statement did not include many details on the health condition of both and he kept it deliberately vague by referring to "health challenges" (which is his prerogative). As the owner of the horse you have the responsibility and authority to decide over the life and death of your animals. Any sensible owner puts his horses to sleep in close communication with his veterinarian. Some argue that euthanasia is only ethical when the horse is suffering unbearably, but who is to draw the line of what is "unbearable"? The owner, the vet? An ethical committee? A country's government as part of its legislation?
I personally feel it's nobody else's call but the owner, who - in principle - knows the horse best. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.
-- Astrid Appels