Clinging to a horse that is not going to work for you may cost more than just board and maintenance. While there are inherent risks in handling any horse, those risks are increased with a horse that you are afraid of, or one that exhibits particularly dangerous behavior. Plus, horse ownership is supposed to be fun. If you are not enjoying your horse and the time you spend at the barn, you are defeating the reason you purchased a horse in the first place.
YOUR DECISIONS AFFECT YOUR HORSE’S AFFORDABILITY
Cost-Benefit Analysis
“If you understand the motivation for your decisions, you can make good decisions,” says Ernest M. Swartz, M.S.W., a licensed clinical social worker. According to Mr. Swartz, “balanced” persons “are self-aware and know why they are doing what they are doing.” If you take this rule for your personal decisions a step further and always do a cost-benefit analysis—a comparison of the positive and negative aspects of a course of action—you can make good financial decisions as well.
A cost-benefit approach should be used in all resource allocation decisions. Resources♦, including both time and money, should only be spent if the expected benefits from using those resources will exceed the expected costs of those resources. Benefits should outweigh costs. In other words, if you spend a dollar, what you’re spending it on should be worth more than a dollar to you.
Let’s say you are flipping through the livestock catalog because you need to purchase fly spray. Do you purchase the economy brand for $4.20 per bottle, or do you purchase the premium fly spray, which lasts ten minutes longer than the economy brand, for $13.50 per bottle? If you don’t ride your horse for very long, or flies don’t really bother him, there is no real benefit gained from spending the extra $9.30 a bottle. However, if you have a horse that goes into a bucking fit when a fly lands on him, then the benefit justifies the extra cost (and you get to dismount in one piece.)
SO YOU KNOW…
♦ A resource is a source of supply of revenue or information or something else that adds “value” to human life.
To give another example, perhaps you have to choose the type of fencing for a piece of land you intend to use as a paddock. Fencing an acre with three-board sections would cost approximately $1,300 (not including labor), and electric-tape fencing with wooden posts, approximately $950. Both are safe and effective for horses. If you absolutely love the idea of a wooden fence and know you will smile every time you see it from your kitchen window, then the extra $350 is worth it. However, if you don’t have an aesthetic preference, the electric tape is the better choice.
A good financial decision is one that survives cost-benefit analysis and fits into your budget. You need to have both for your choice to make sense financially. Whether you have the option to spend the $13.50 on fly spray depends on the amount of resources you have available to devote to your equine pursuits.
Does Your Decision Make Sense?
If a person making approximately $40,000 annually, boards her horse at a stable for $400 per month, takes weekly lessons, and competes twice a month at horse shows, she could easily spend over $1,000 per month. That means 40 percent of her take-home pay is consumed by the cost of caring for her horse and related activities. That is a huge financial commitment.
Budgeting is the prioritization of your spending, which means dealing with limited resources and allocating those resources to achieve maximum utilization. Maximum utilization can only be achieved when you consider your complete financial picture. Viewing the full scope of financial goals and obligations enables you to make informed budgetary and management decisions that will benefit both you and your horse. (To learn how to create a household budget, see p. 24.)
When making an equine-related financial decision (EFD), it is helpful to ask yourself three simple questions:
1 Does my decision benefit me?
2 Does my decision benefit the horse?
3 Does my decision make good sense financially?
If the answer is “yes” to all three questions, chances are you’re making a good decision for all parties involved. And, as long as the answers to numbers 1 or 2, as well as number 3 are “yes,” then you are at least making a financially sound decision.
To illustrate this point, consider Dr. Denise Gorondy’s example of an extremely old and debilitated horse that was in a tremendous amount of pain and could barely walk, yet the owners couldn’t bear to lose him and would not end his suffering. If the couple asked themselves the three EFD questions, they may have come to a different conclusion:
Did the decision to prolong the horse’s life benefit the owners? Yes. The owners were not emotionally ready to let go of the horse.
Did this decision benefit the horse? No. The horse was suffering from extreme pain and could not eat properly.
Did this decision make sense financially? No. It did not fit in the couple’s budget, and they had to resort to paying vet bills with credit cards. And, because the horse was not a vibrant young animal with a chance of full recovery, but old and debilitated, the expected benefits of their decision did not exceed the expected costs.
Because the only “yes” was to Question 1, the owners’ decision to prolong the horse’s life was neither good for all parties, nor financially sound.
In a different example, Dr. Gorondy had clients whose horse suffered a puncture wound in a joint. Though they had financial resources available, the owners chose to treat the injury themselves for two weeks. By the time Dr. Gorondy was called to examine the horse, the infection had spread to the bone and there were now only two options: perform surgery, or put the horse down. Had the owners asked themselves the three EFD questions when the horse was first injured, they may not have waited as long to call the veterinarian:
Did the decision to treat the puncture wound involving a joint themselves benefit the owners? Yes. They didn’t like the horse and intended to sell him and buy another. They, therefore, couldn’t justify spending money on a veterinarian if they didn’t need to do so.
Did this decision benefit the horse? No. There are some wounds an owner can safely treat, but a puncture wound involving a joint capsule is not one of them. (Puncture wounds are difficult to treat because the outer layer of skin heals over a pocket of infection that can quickly spread.)
Did this decision make sense financially? No. Putting off necessary veterinary care for an injury to a critical area does not follow the principles of asset management. For example, the property manager of a large office building pays to have the walls painted, carpets cleaned, and landscaping maintained. These are costs associated with operating the office building and continuing the flow of rental income associated with that building. In the same way, you should manage and maintain a horse to increase his value, performance, and happiness, which will, in turn, increase the benefits you derive. Your horse is an asset to you, whether a monetary asset because of resale worth or an emotional asset due to your enjoyment of horse-related activities.
Because the only “yes” was to Question 1, the owners’ decision to treat the puncture wound themselves was neither good for all parties, nor financially sound.
Brio’s Story
Nothing is black and white when it comes to horses. Decisions made where the health and welfare of any animal are