A plea to all of those with 'problem' horses

B

Benji1

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 March 2010
Messages
965
Visit site
A friend of mine has just told me the sad tale of 4 horses, Bobby, Johnson, Brambles and Sammi, all of whom have been PTS in the last week due to owners not wanting to 'deal' with them. Two of these horses used to be at said friends riding school, neither of them were particularly problematic, one would occasionally nap out hacking, the other was a little excitable infront of a fence. I've met Bobby and Brambles myself. They were by no means 'bad' horses.

4 horses died because two different owners 'couldn't be bothered'. They were taken for by the 'meat man'.

I'm desperately saddened by this, I fought like hell with two of mine, one whose story you may have read here, Benji, the other a dear pony to me Wizard, who had 'issues'. I would never had had either of them PTS.

So for those of you struggling with minor 'issues' please don't go down this route, there is another way :(

I'm sat in floods of tears writing this
 
Sad but it doesn't quite ring true. Would the owners not have sent them to the market or to a dealer rather than have them PTS?
 
Maybe the issues they had got worse over time?
While the death of any horse is sad, sometimes we have to leave the sentimentality asie and accept that some horses (especially those with issues) are better of being PTS than with the wrong owner or being passed from pillar to post.
 
Diva - saldy not. I've known of a couple who'd spend £££ on what was a decent horse, ruin it and rather than give it away or sell it to someone and see it able to be sorted, had it shot instead sadly :(
 
I don't agree with shooting a horse that could be rehomed happily, including those with minor issues. Particularly if the owners were too damn lazy to put in the effort to find a suitable home. I'm not condoning what these horses owners have done, if indeed their issues were minor and there isn't more to the story that we don't know about.

But, putting sentimentality aside for a moment, the horses will have known nothing about it. They'll never suffer at the hands of an unsuitable owner, they'll never be neglected, or passed from sale to sale, home to home, unwanted and uncared for.

Its been said lots of times on this forum, there are many fates worse than death for a horse.
 
Id never do this, why dont people re home them as a problem horse, even if they just put them out on full loan, and give someone the chance to work with them.
I imagian they just do it for the insurance money,although I dont know if they would pay out if you just said the horse was too mad would they?
Very sad though :(
 
Okay, I'll bite. ;)

Maybe the horses were the way they were because of incurable physical issues? I know your contact told you otherwise but the grapevine in not exactly reliable.

Personally, I think if people have a "problem" horse they have an ethical responsibility to try to sort out EXACTLY what the problem is, up to and including getting specialised professional help to assess it and either cure the problem or develop a reasonable management program to sell it on with.

Yes, many good, knowledgeable people buy off Problem Horses, auctions and the like, but we all know that's not always the case! Like it or not, a lot of the people who "like a challenge" are the least suitable to take one on. It's all very well to say "rehome" but isn't that exposing the horse to more risk and potentially passing the problem on? I'm not saying "kill the bad horses" - trust me, I'm the LAST person to say that, particularly as I make my living fixing them - but I can see why someone would struggle with sending a horse out into the world knowing it might end up even worse off, just on the chance it wouldn't.

Loaning would be a great option but again, why should someone else take the risk, spend the money etc to solve someone else's problem? Great if you can sort it but how often does it work out?

As above, there are fates worth than death.

Out of curiosity to the OP, would you have taken these 4 horses on if they'd been offered to you?
 
I also think that there may be more to the story than what you've stated.

I've had alot of problems with my boy due to other people's bad habits being imprinted on him and seriously would not want another person to go through it again with him because it's not fair on either party.

I can fully understand if the problems were quite extreme then in the long run, I think it could be considered fairer to the horse than be passed from pillar to post.

I'd like to think that most of us do the best that we can and act in the horse's best interests.
 
Without the cancer, in a heart beat.

With the cancer, in a heart beat would have to have them either 'loaned' to one of my most trusted friends - who are all looking for horses at the minute - or put on full livery until I've recovered
 
While it could well be that there were very good reasons for having these horses PTS - there is also a horrible throwaway culture in this country with animals. Just have a look at the dogs dumped onto rescues who just do not have the room to cope. On a more positive note, I have friends who have put an awful lot into their horses/other animals to get them right when most people would have given up and I would prefer to think that there are more of the former than the latter!
 
While not knowing the full story, as neither does the OP, have people seen the number of horses and ponies for sale at the moment? It is not a sellers market and people are having trouble selling good horses without problems. I think it is more responsible to have PTS rather than the animal having less than adequate care (if as is possible the owner is having financial difficulties), or sell to less than optimum homes. So I have no problem with this outcome. To the poster who pointed out dumped dogs, at least the owners have not tried to get a charity to sort out their problem, in this instance.
 
Binky01 said:
Diva - saldy not. I've known of a couple who'd spend £££ on what was a decent horse, ruin it and rather than give it away or sell it to someone and see it able to be sorted, had it shot instead sadly :(
Click to expand...

Quite! it's often the owner not the horse, how many times have I seen that (thay are not machines..) some people do not deserve to own them
 
Benji1 said:
Thats what I'd have done :(
Click to expand...

Let me make sure I understand... you would prefer that the problem horses were sent to a dealer or to auction?

Sorry but I think the people you posted about in your OP were being more responsible than that. The only way to truly secure the future of a "difficult" horse is to PTS. It could end up anywhere if you send it to a dealer. That's just passing the buck.

Also but I really don't believe that someone sent their horse to the meat man just because it was "a little excitable in front of a fence".
 
Kelly had major issues and is now such a brilliant horse (although she still reminds us about what she went through at times!!)
however having a horse passed around from pillar to post and back again surely isn't going to make the issues any better and something dangerous will happen.
K x
 
Make no mistake it is sad when a horse which is fit and healthy but perhaps has a problem is PTS. But I would rather have them PTS by an 'uncareing' owner than sold for a pitance to a series of unsuitable homes.
This winter there are going to be so many horses flooding the market. My troope are going to cost me 3 times what they normally do. I am fortuate I have time and a job and can work more to pay for them, there are many that do not have that choice.
 
Unless an animal was suffering I would not consider PTS. I know I am putting the human element into it but if you had a teenager that misbehaved by being anti-social, taking drugs etc would you PTS if it was legal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top