All this talk of fluffies...

touchstone said:
I think this post actually proves what Wagtail is saying tbh; your oh may have a fantastic 'working' relationship with his horses, but wouldn't think twice about putting them in a hole????

I am certainly not fluffy when it comes to putting a horse to sleep when necessary and believe that there are many fates worse than death, but I do have compassion and empathy where my horses are concerned and don't make the decision lightly. To have the mentality of 'not thinking twice about putting them in a hole' doesn't sound like a good relationship to me.
Click to expand...


Have to disagree with you there, sorry. It's called being realistic and it means the relationship was there to see that the horse had unsolvable problems and the only way out was to end the suffering/dangerous behaviour and the decision was taken at the right time rather than it be allowed to continue either in pain or as a danger to anyone/thing else around it.

ETA have just seen your edited version of this "I also come from generations of horsemen who've had true working relationships with their horses,and still do. Not one of them has made the decision to destroy a horse lightly and been unaffected by it, and one of them was a slaughterman.

Where did it say the decision would have been taken lightly? Just because the phrase 'wouldn't think twice' was used it does not mean it was taken lightly; rather more that the person accepted what had to be done IMV.
 
Last edited:
I'm fluffy! I keep horses because with my anxiety and other problems I need to keep out the house as much as possible. They are not treated as pets they are treated the same you would treat any ridden horse but lunged/ longreined instead of being ridden. They don't get pampered or fed loads of treats, they don't get heavily rugged and they don't get treated like dogs!
I hope to one day get one of them driving as I really enjoy it but don't have the money at the mo.
 
Equilibrium Ireland said:
Pushed wrong button. End game is I love my horses. They are so important in my life. They will get everything they need but it is also my responsibility as an owner to remember they are horses and have needs to that go beyond what I as a human might want. They need certain things that make them happy horses. Things that may not make them my "pets". Hard to explain.

Terri
Click to expand...
Was trying to put into words what I was thinking and this says it all, spot on for me.
 
kirstykate said:
I am disagreeing with

"Whilst I agree with most of what you say, I do feel that those who view horses as just working animals could not possibly know the depth of relationship it is possible to have with a horse. If they did, then they would not view them the way they do."

:p:p:p

Like your family he wouldn't take the decision lightly but if its got to be done. I sometimes wonder when reading these posts if they have actually been involved with horses on a professional level??!!
Click to expand...

Maesfen said:
Have to disagree with you there, sorry. It's called being realistic and it means the relationship was there to see that the horse had unsolvable problems and the only way out was to end the suffering/dangerous behaviour and the decision was taken at the right time rather than it be allowed to continue either in pain or as a danger to anyone/thing else around it.

ETA have just seen your edited version of this "I also come from generations of horsemen who've had true working relationships with their horses,and still do. Not one of them has made the decision to destroy a horse lightly and been unaffected by it, and one of them was a slaughterman.

Where did it say the decision would have been taken lightly? Just because the phrase 'wouldn't think twice' was used it does not mean it was taken lightly; rather more that the person accepted what had to be done IMV.
Click to expand...

Ahh, my apologies then, I misinterpreted your post as saying there was no attachment or concern about the decision. I am in full agreement that often pts is in the horse's best interests and that prolonging life because of a too sentimental and selfish attitude is one that is actually harmful for many horses.

ETA I also think that the more practical horse owners who step in to pts to prevent a horse from suffering or facing an uncertain future are often labelled as 'horse killers' who can't possibly care, which probably makes me more sensitive about the whole thing, it's precisely because we care so much that we do the final thing we can for them.
 
Last edited:
Wagtail said:
I have put my boy through KS surgery. The difference in him is unbelievable. It is like he has a new life and loves every minute of it. Even his character has changed. There is so much more to his 'personality' now. I did put another of my horses through colic surgery a few years ago. If I had my time again I would have had him PTS at home rather than transport him two hours in a trailer to be prodded and poked and then paralysed by the surgery. But if he'd survived and gone on to live a few more years of quality life then obviously, I'd feel differently. I do sometimes wonder what I would do if my lovely mare got colic and needed the op. It would be the hardest decision of my life but I am 95% sure I would have her PTS at home.
Click to expand...

Colic surgery is something I think about a fair amount. Twenty years ago I lost a mare to it but there were other complications (bad worm damage from before I had her) and perhaps surgical technicques were not so advanced then. Three years ago I lost my beloved old boy who I had had from a 5 year old to a second bout of colic, caused by a strangulated lipoma. He had had colic surgery two years before that - not my decision, he was out on loan and there wasn't time to contact me so his loaners took the decision for him to be operated on. Whilst I was very grateful for the extra two years I had with him and that meant that I was there with him at the end, I always felt that if the choice had been mine I would not have put him through the surgery. I never want to see one of my animals in recovery hooked up to a drip ever again. This feeling is compounded by the fact that I lost him to the same problem only two years later.

My current horses are both only six. I don't know what I would do if I were faced with having to choose between operating or PTS there and then. There's something about using "human medical treatments" on animals that personally doesn't sit right with me (don't get me started on diabetic cats having injections). But that's just me. It's interesting reading people's differing perspectives on this.

I love my horses to bits but I try not to forget they are animals. I always remember Henrietta Knight saying after the death of Best Mate "if you have livestock, you will have deadstock" - it's a fact that we all have to deal with at some point but that doesn't make it hurt any less.
 
Wagtail said:
Thank you Amy. But I do often think that people who show compassion for their horses are branded as fluffies when people start to run out of arguments.
Click to expand...
I think this is true and 'fluffies' tends to be a derogatory term and used to dismiss and demean.
 
Equilibrium Ireland said:
I may be considered a fluffy but while some work and some don't, my main importance is that they get to be horses as well and get to live the most normal life I can give them of being a horse. Such as socialising and turnout. They get what they need and are treated fairly.

What I can't stand is being told that I can't possibly have a relationship with my horse because he/she does not have 45 blankets, they get muddy, they do not have weekly appt's with vet, dentist, herbalist, Chiro, barefoot trimmer, animal communicator, Monty Roberts, ect ect. .
Click to expand...

Equilibrium Ireland said:
Pushed wrong button. End game is I love my horses. They are so important in my life. They will get everything they need but it is also my responsibility as an owner to remember they are horses and have needs to that go beyond what I as a human might want. They need certain things that make them happy horses. Things that may not make them my "pets". Hard to explain.

Terri
Click to expand...


same here:) my horses are very important to me and some might say i am slighty fluffy round the edges;) i get very attatched to them but i am also one of those that refuses to put a horse (or dog) through endless surgical procedures to keep them as a field ornament buted up to the eyeballs, to me that would be purely for my benefit and selfish desire to keep them alive.
 
Fluffies in my eyes are those that allow their human emotions to overtake and cloud their judgement of how to care for an animal based on ITS OWN needs. This to me is where the line is drawn, as this actually allows the animal to suffer more in some cases.
 
ETA I also think that the more practical horse owners who step in to pts to prevent a horse from suffering or facing an uncertain future are often labelled as 'horse killers' who can't possibly care, which probably makes me more sensitive about the whole thing, it's precisely because we care so much that we do the final thing we can for them.[/QUOTE]

He ended up with the "Killing Machines"!!! All of which had been screwed up by people, some just needed a good skelp!!! Others took time and a wee bit of TLC.
 
Equilibrium Ireland said:
I watch one horse here stand in a box 24/7 and most days no work. It's too muddy, too rainy, too cold ect for him to go out. She has no interest in him socialising him with other horses and makes up stupid stories to go along with the myth that is her horse. And then tells me I'm not a good owner. The horse world is full of those whack jobs for some reason.
Click to expand...

She is not a 'fluffy' she is just cruel IMO.
 
kirstykate said:
ETA I also think that the more practical horse owners who step in to pts to prevent a horse from suffering or facing an uncertain future are often labelled as 'horse killers' who can't possibly care, which probably makes me more sensitive about the whole thing, it's precisely because we care so much that we do the final thing we can for them.
Click to expand...

I agree, I agree, I agree!!!!
 
Equilibrium Ireland said:
Pushed wrong button. End game is I love my horses. They are so important in my life. They will get everything they need but it is also my responsibility as an owner to remember they are horses and have needs to that go beyond what I as a human might want. They need certain things that make them happy horses. Things that may not make them my "pets". Hard to explain.

Terri
Click to expand...

Well no, a horse cannot be a pet in the same way a dog can. They have needs which mean they should be with others of their kind (whereas a dog is happy with human company so long as they are not left on their own for extended periods). A horse cannot live with us in our houses, sit on our knees or travel with us in our cars. But they can still be pets as well as working animals, just as a sheep dog can also be a pet and yet it works for its owner. We can still love them and care for them like you do.
 
kirstykate said:
:mad::mad::mad:Absolute crap, I wonder if you have ever met a true horseman?? My other half many years ago swore an oath to a horse and has a relationship with any horse that most of us can only ever dream of. He is amazing to watch on the ground with them. Only one horse has been unbackable, due to broken withers and he was the last port of call before the blood bank and he had some bad ones. He is by no means a fluffy a horse to him is a horse and he wouldnt think twice about putting one in a hole.
Click to expand...

I hardly think that a person who 'swore an oath to a horse' views them as just 'working animals'.

ETA: But then if he wouldn't think twice about putting them in a hole - sounds a bit mixed up and contradictory to me.
 
Last edited:
amymay said:
Now this I really do disagree with. There are many 'professional' riders and trainers out there who absolutely adore the animal(s) they have 'working' for them. And have been left devastated when they have lost them.

You can have the most wonderful relationship with an animal - be it pet or worker - it just depends on you and your outlook.
Click to expand...

There are professional riders and professional riders. They don't all view horses as 'just working animals'.
 
ThePony said:
Agree with this so much.

I am fluffy in so much as I utterly adore my girl and quite frankly think alot more of her than I do many children!! I do ride her, but that has nothing to do with the high regard I hold her in! That said, she is expected to act in a safe and mannered way and is corrected (sternly if required) if she steps out of line. Heart breaking as it will most certainly be, I would consider myself lucky to be able to choose my mares time of passing, and expect to be able to offer her a home for life regardless of length of ridden career.

I think a true 'fluffy' is so blinded by adoration for their equine that they allow them to act in a rude and dangerous way but because the equine must love them they can never bring it into line. In those cases the owners misguided 'love' for their equine actually causes them to be a worse owner in the horses eyes as I truly believe that a horse needs clear and fair boundries that are calmly and consistenly kept too.
Click to expand...

Agree absolutely.
 
I wouldn't class myself as fluffy by a long chalk - for me, I have horses for a reason and I expect them to work in so far as they are capable, and I won't tolerate any nonsense. If any of mine tries to evade working, my first response is to insist that he works, by whatever means necessary - not to presume there is an underlying problem. However, I know my horses and I can tell if they're not offering something for a physical reason. I'm not afraid to slap, kick, shout out, spur, whip my horses if they need a reminder not to step out of line - I strongly believe they understand the difference between a swift, sharp reprimand and an unfair beating. By some people's standards, I'm harsh on them - they get fed straw and even that isn't ad lib, they don't get hard feed (unless I need to worm them or similar), they're naked or rugged only to keep them clean (except J who's a wuss), they live out despite being fully clipped, etc.

However, all of them follow me around like dogs, they love their work - despite the occasional smack - they love to be around humans, they're not whip shy, they're in good condition and they're happy. They will also all be allowed to retire for as long as they are sound and happy to be retired.

For me, the dangerously "fluffy" are those who are afraid to reprimand their horses (either fear of ned's reaction or fear of being hated) and end up with rude, ill-mannered sometimes dangerous brutes. They're also the owners who feed up / over-rug / underwork their horses to the point of obesity - because darling pony would be cold / hungry / sad to see his friends having dinner when he hasn't got any / doesn't like working. Those who keep unsound/pained animals because they can't bare to lose them. Those who teach their horses to misbehave under saddle by presuming every misdemeanour is a physical problem and never riding them through it (fine until ned becomes obese from lack of work / they sell it as dangerous / etc).

People who call themselves their pony's "mum" make me feel slightly nauseous, but calling your pony "mummy's ickle fluffy teddie-poo", while slightly vomit-inducing, is not a crime, nor does it make you dangerously fluffy, in my book. I might describe that sort of behaviour as "fluffy", but not in an insulting way :p

I think I'm rambling...
 
Last edited:
Suziq77 said:
I always felt that if the choice had been mine I would not have put him through the surgery. I never want to see one of my animals in recovery hooked up to a drip ever again.

I love my horses to bits but I try not to forget they are animals. I always remember Henrietta Knight saying after the death of Best Mate "if you have livestock, you will have deadstock" - it's a fact that we all have to deal with at some point but that doesn't make it hurt any less.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with this, I believe that there is fine line not just in regard to the above comment on where do you draw the line but also in the term 'fluffies'.

I think it is one thing to care, love, cherish your horse by giving them the best whether that be the cleanest bed, a new rug or a treat to also taking responsibility for putting them in a stravation paddock if needed or keeping wormer up to date. Giving the best for your horse isnt always about the material things but letting him get muddy in the field or keeping his weight healthy for example.

It really irritates me when owners believe they are doing 'the best' for there horse just because they buy them lots yet neglect there health or well being through sheer stupidity!

I admit im probably a 'half fluffy' but my horses are well cared for in every way (and maybe just a little spoilt ;) ) .
 
Wagtail said:
I hardly think that a person who 'swore an oath to a horse' views them as just 'working animals'.

ETA: But then if he wouldn't think twice about putting them in a hole - sounds a bit mixed up and contradictory to me.
Click to expand...

Do you know what an oath to a horse is???? :p:p:p
 
what annoys me on here are people who are 'fluffy' (for want of a better word) who stand in judgement of those who aren't and claim they are selfish or don't care for their horse.

I don't see my horses as pets. End of. I love them on a certain level, but it's a different love to that I have with my dogs, who are with me for life. I also have many trials and sheepdog friends conversely who wouldnt think twice about selling a dog they weren't getting on with, or sending them to auction. I don't stand in judgement of them, they wonder why I have multiple 'free loaders' who can't work due to health problems and cost me a fortune in ongoing meds and therapies lol.

I have bought and sold 6 horses in as many years due to various reasons; my requirements changing or the horse just not being what I wanted. Every horse I own is pampered! However if its not working then I will sell! Big deal! I wouldn't have sold any of them to the first person who walked on the yard... infact I've turned down buyers. I've always made sure any horse I've sold has gone to what I consider to be the right home, a GOOD home. I'm still in touch with most of them. I've always had a cry when I've sold a horse, I'm not emotionally detached but I do see them as a working animal, yes a luxury commodity to do a job! You can still have an awesome relationship with a working animal without viewing it as your 'pet' or surrogate child. If, however that is the way you choose to keep your horses then good on you! go for it! Enjoy and let live! However dont go wagging your fingers at those who god forbid say they are selling a horse because it isnt what they want, call them selfish and accuse them of showing no care for their animal. Unless of course they ARE about to shoot it and throw it in a hole, but in threads I've seen here we are talking about well cared for animals who the owner is taking responsibility for and will ensure they move on somewhere lovely!

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=517278 ;)
 
Some fluffiness isn't a bad thing. Pure fluffiness is about being too sentimental, unrealistic and yes, in need of toughening up. Sometimes taking care of animals means doing stuff which is not very pleasant for us and facing up to harsh realities. Also fluffiness to me is the whole rose tinted glasses view of life with all the rainbows and sunbeams you could want - great while everything is rosey but you need to be tougher than that to live your life.

kirstykate, I totally agree about great horsemen. They are not very fluffy but horses certainly like them.
 
given that my beloved [ & not in a fluffy way :p] 22 yr old mare was PTS last week as i was not prepared to heavily bute her so that she could go out in a paddock every day - i guess i'm not fluffy - but i hope i loved her & had enough respect for her as a horse to ensure that she lived a life of dignity, with her physical needs met and boundaries clearly kept,
in my mind fluffy tends to equate to a style of ownership which involves treating horses like over-sized toddlers
 
Maesfen said:
That is all well and good if the owner faces up to facts and does the decent thing for their 'pets' when or before it needs to happen without putting them through often painful and needless treatment because they can't bear to lose them. That is totally unfair, irresponsible and extremely fluffy. Unfortunately there seem to be a lot of them about on here.

Non-fluffies are those that face up to their responsibilities and always put their animals far before their own feelings even though it might be their saddest moment but they are fair to their animals, that's what counts.
Give me a non-fluffy every time.
Click to expand...

Total sense yet again from Maesfen.

I am a practical fluffy, my horses work for me, in return I feed them what they need, give them shelter and veterinary care when required. In return I expect good manners and a willingness to do their best when they are asked.

I have been seen to shed a tear after a big win. I have silly names for some of them, never in public of course, my big boy would be mortified to be called Twinkle in public !

I have cried when retiring a loyal servant -yes I said servant - then I gave him 8 years of feed, shelter and medical care before the time came to hold his head to enable him to go hunting in the sky. Then I cried a fluffy bucketful of tears and have never allowed another horse to wear his headcollar. Of course when he couldn't work for me I could have passed him on as a hack to someone and not told them he had issues, fluffy irresponsibility I call tricks like that.

The vast majority of us work long hours to earn enough money to keep a horse or two, so why shouldn't our horses do as they are told for the few hours we expect them to work for us, there is nothing wrong with a tired, muddy horse with the odd war wound on it at the end of the day. We must not put human thoughts and feeling into horses. Horses want for very little in reality, they don't care if they are wearing sparkly browbands and matching boots. All they need are the basics and a dignified end with the people they know and trust.
 
Really interesting points here!!

I am a half "fluffy" - have had Blue for so long that he is just a pet who I love taking care of, bushing, walking out etc. I cuddle him and give him treats and tell him i love him :D

But with him and our other ponies we have taught them manners and we expect them to remember these - we never hit them or shout but we do expect them to do as we ask - with a gentle reminder when needed.

In return I read and research everything on horse care i can get my hands on, feed him and exercise him appropriately, listen to what he is telling me and gain information in anyway I can so i can look after him to the best of my abilities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top