Been thinking folks

[JM07]

.....as for the poor ones M_G, you know yourself, through experience, how quickly an animal can lose weight...and how quickly they pick up...


it has been stated that most of these animals were semi-feral.....go to the New Forest...nd about this time of year, a fair few of the animals running there would make JG's animals look obese!!!!!

 

[dozzie]

[ QUOTE ]
JM; you know as well as I know that if there were 32 dead horses there amongst the other horses, there would have been photos.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you. I think had there been photos they would have been leaked to the press to gain further public support. They are in other cases, why not this one? So I too would like to see photos.

[ QUOTE ]
I jumped on the bandwagon when it first came to light however reading posts by JM7, Tia & Myjack has made me step back and look at this from an objective and business point of view IMO it makes no sense for JG to mistreat the animals I would love to know how long he had owned the very poor ones

[/ QUOTE ]

I totallly agree.
I too jumped on the bandwagon as I believed the RSPCA to be an honest organisation. When MJ appeared I began to question. I went away and found out about SHG and tbh this is what began to make me question the whole case.

It also made me realise that at anytime the RSPCA could swoop on any of us with a sick or elderly pony, dog,cat cow whatever. Despite what our own vets might say, we could be facing a court battle over an animal that the RSPCA PTS without consultation.

The only person who really knows the whole truth is Jamie Gray.

 

[M_G]

[ QUOTE ]
.....as for the poor ones M_G, you know yourself, through experience, how quickly an animal can lose weight...and how quickly they pick up...
<font color="blue">they can end up sceletal in a very short space of time and can pick up again in a few short months with the correct care, which makes me wonder how long JG had owned the semi ferals (probably not long) </font>



it has been stated that most of these animals were semi-feral.....go to the New Forest...nd about this time of year, a fair few of the animals running there would make JG's animals look obese!!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

<font color="blue"> It is the way it goes with feral/semi feral horses and again you are 100% correct </font>

 

[weevil]

[ QUOTE ]
I would love to know how long he had owned the very poor ones

[/ QUOTE ]
This is what I have been saying from the start. If JG is guilty of mistreating horses I would like to see him punished as much as the next person. But right now nobody KNOWS for certain what the facts are and I am not going to join in the condemnation of a man based on what has been reported in the tabloids and what the RSPCA (who people on here are so quick to dismiss when it suits them) say.

 

[myjack]

Very well said.

 

[Donkeymad]

Couldn't agree more, well said.

 

[SirenaXVI]

You know what? When this thing first started, I felt, like we all did, that JG should burn in hell for his actions.

My first doubts started when I read in the newspaper that the live horses had tried to eat the dead horses - now we all know that has to be complete twaddle - made me think, briefly I'll admit, but made me think all the same.

Having read Myjack's postings, I have to say something is not right in the JG case, where are the photos of the 32 dead horses for instance? The RSPCA are very quick to publish photos normally, why not in this case?

How long had JG had the malnourished horses in his care? Is it possible he had only just got them having bought them in that condition?

Why were the shetlands and the donkeys in good condition?

I am impressed with Myjack's postings, she has never, ever got personal, just calmly asked pertinent questions, despite less than polite and often abusive postings from others with a less effective grasp of the english language.

So - thanks Myjack, you have given me food for thought.

 

[myjack]

I hold nothing against those who show their obvious dislike of me. If people are willing to believe the rubbish that sells papers then thats up to them. However, it's those members who tell blatant lies that do upset me tbh. The rspca cannot show pictures of 32 dead animals because there were not 32 dead animals to take pictures of. I don't expect people just to read what I say and believe me. But I do expect grown adults to have common sense and to be able to think logical. Most of the adults on here have the ability to hold down jobs - own and care for a horse/s which is dependent upon them - have children - run a home - ect....and probably have been to collage/uni - yet where logical thinking and common sense is needed to stop them in their tracks from condemning a man who has not yet been found guilty/not guilty of a dreadful crime, they just don't seem to want to know. What I am trying to say is that these people are not stupid - they know the media publish rubbish, and the rspca are NOT whiter than white, yet they CHOOSE to believe every bit of tripe the media and the rspca want to come out with next. They don't see the contradictions in what has been published, or they just turn a blind eye to them. It actually disturbs me that these people are horse lovers but when someone is trying to tell them that the amersham animals had not suffered they would rather believe different. If I were them, as an animal lover myself, I'd be praying that the media etc was wrong in what they have been reporting.

Anyway, I'd better stop before this turns into a rant....

Thanks for your valid input.

 

[JM07]

[ QUOTE ]
You know what? When this thing first started, I felt, like we all did, that JG should burn in hell for his actions.

My first doubts started when I read in the newspaper that the live horses had tried to eat the dead horses - now we all know that has to be complete twaddle - made me think, briefly I'll admit, but made me think all the same.

Having read Myjack's postings, I have to say something is not right in the JG case, where are the photos of the 32 dead horses for instance? The RSPCA are very quick to publish photos normally, why not in this case?

How long had JG had the malnourished horses in his care? Is it possible he had only just got them having bought them in that condition?

Why were the shetlands and the donkeys in good condition?

I am impressed with Myjack's postings, she has never, ever got personal, just calmly asked pertinent questions, despite less than polite and often abusive postings from others with a less effective grasp of the english language.

So - thanks Myjack, you have given me food for thought.

[/ QUOTE ]

the whole mess has made quite a few folk think, i'm sure..

i've had endless PM's this weekend about markets/ponies/abattoirs/markets/sales/abattoirs....

i've had ponies die in my fields..it happens..they are disposed of..end of..

trouble is, these days, the paperwork is horrendous if an animal is found dead on your property....
i can empythise (sp) with JG on this as its just as "easy" to write up for 1 pony as it is for 21.....so if he had a few poorly ponies which passed away, then to get the paperwork sorted, i'd wait til the "problem" ie numbers, was sorted, before disposal...

they can't just be buried as before...unfortunately....

 

[PennywithHenry]

Well I've stayed out of the arguments, refused to jump on the bandwagon, but I said all along if there were dead and emaciated animals on the property, those would have been the pics used to shock the nation by the RSPCA, and if not them directly then they'd have been 'leaked' out....I let MJ know my opinions on the matter but refrained from posting due to (to be totally honest) fear of persacution (sp) I admire MJ's strength of character for standing by what she believes in.

The horses I saw weren't half as bad as Henry is now, 2 months on from purchasing him, and if you go through my posts (I'm reasonably new, there aren't many) you'll see the Hell they put me through a few weeks ago.

 

[myjack]

A SANCTUARY WORKER SAID.

10th January 2008
"We have a donkey that does not have the strength to stand up and a blind, deaf mare who is just terrified.

“And yet the RSPCA accepted that all of the donkeys and ponies were in "good condition”

This is just ONE contradiction.

......and btw, the mare is not competely blind (her sight is not good in one eye) and she ISN'T deaf....I found this out yesturday.

 

[spaniel]

Whilst I respect what you are saying I do feel that to state that these photos do not exist may be being a bit naive. There are countless court cases going on right now where pertinent evidence, if leaked to the press, would completely prejudice the outcome. So I for one am prepared to accept that these photos DO exist but are being witheld as court evidence. If this is the case then i suspect we will never see them publicly.

 

[myjack]

[ QUOTE ]
Whilst I respect what you are saying I do feel that to state that these photos do not exist may be being a bit naive. There are countless court cases going on right now where pertinent evidence, if leaked to the press, would completely prejudice the outcome. So I for one am prepared to accept that these photos DO exist but are being witheld as court evidence. If this is the case then i suspect we will never see them publicly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Such photos DO NOT exist. I'm not expecting anyone to believe me but it's the truth. There were no 32 dead horses so that why such photos cannot be 'leaked' to the press.

The head of the rspca media is parners with someone from the BBC - and also very good friends with the editor of the sun newspaper. They scratch one anothers backs so to speak.

Those photos would have been 'leaked' for shock value to recieve max impact of pulic out cry and to sell papers.

I'm sorry but they have shot themselves in the foot with that rubbish.

 

[brummel]

I'm not going to get into this whole JG debate, except to say, if he's found guilty..I hope he gets his just deserves. If, on the other hand he's found innocent, then the RSPCA have hell of a lot of explaining to do and questions to answer.

However, I was totally gob smacked by this remark regarding fallen stock.
[ QUOTE ]
trouble is, these days, the paperwork is horrendous if an animal is found dead on your property....
i can empythise (sp) with JG on this as its just as "easy" to write up for 1 pony as it is for 21.....so if he had a few poorly ponies which passed away, then to get the paperwork sorted, i'd wait til the "problem" ie numbers, was sorted, before disposal...

[/ QUOTE ]
I really can't comprehend that to save on paper work, anyone would be prepared to wait until all their ill animals died before arranging disposal of their bodies.

I for one couldn't ever consider leaving fallen stock lying around until the numbers mounted up, but you can guarantee that if I or any other cattle/sheep farmer left dead animals lying around, they'd soon be jumped on by the powers that be!!

Guess I'm in for another rollicking now for speaking my mind.

 

[Tinypony]

There is a well known dealer near me who is often discussed as being a terrible person and to be steered clear of. Whatever else he is guilty of, he buys the horses in and sells the ones on that he can within a week. Many people still accuse him of neglect because of their condition, but obviously with his quick turnover he did not cause their sorry state. I have wondered if JG was in a similar situation.
Of course having so many dead bodies about would be unforgivable, if that was the case. I guess it will be up to the RSPCA to prove that in court.
I must admit, when I heard that a vet stated there was no evidence of neglect by JG and animals could go back to him it shook me, because quite honestly what vet would risk their reputation if it wasn't true?
The evidence (or not) will come to light in court. I hope people can stand by the decision of the court, whatever that might be.

 

[JM07]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not going to get into this whole JG debate, except to say, if he's found guilty..I hope he gets his just deserves. If, on the other hand he's found innocent, then the RSPCA have hell of a lot of explaining to do and questions to answer.

However, I was totally gob smacked by this remark regarding fallen stock.
[ QUOTE ]
trouble is, these days, the paperwork is horrendous if an animal is found dead on your property....
i can empythise (sp) with JG on this as its just as "easy" to write up for 1 pony as it is for 21.....so if he had a few poorly ponies which passed away, then to get the paperwork sorted, i'd wait til the "problem" ie numbers, was sorted, before disposal...

[/ QUOTE ]
I really can't comprehend that to save on paper work, anyone would be prepared to wait until all their ill animals died before arranging disposal of their bodies.

I for one couldn't ever consider leaving fallen stock lying around until the numbers mounted up, but you can guarantee that if I or any other cattle/sheep farmer left dead animals lying around, they'd soon be jumped on by the powers that be!!

Guess I'm in for another rollicking now for speaking my mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

have you ever, personally had to deal with "deadstock", smallholder??

Defra/vets..calling in the "meat waggon"..

it all takes time...sometimes DAYS...and yes, the paperwork is Horendous, beit horses/ponies/sheep/cattle or even your much loved Granny...................

so no, i personally don't see a problem...except the problem of all the rules and regs of disposal these days....

 

[brummel]

[ QUOTE ]
have you ever, personally had to deal with "deadstock", smallholder??

Defra/vets..calling in the "meat waggon"..

it all takes time...sometimes DAYS...and yes, the paperwork is Horendous, beit horses/ponies/sheep/cattle or even your much loved Granny...................

so no, i personally don't see a problem...except the problem of all the rules and regs of disposal these days....

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I've had to deal with fallen stock on quite a number of occasions over the years.

I do agree there's a lot of red tape and form filling to complete, but as much as I detest having to do it, that's part and parcel of farming in general I'm afraid.

Besides the risk of possible contamination to waterways and farmland, I wouldn't put my families or animals health at risk by holding on to dead animals just for the sake of saving a little time and money.

Although you don't see a problem with keeping dead animals on your land until the numbers build up, I think most of the farming community would disagree with your actions.

There again. it's up to you at the end of the day how you decide to conduct your own business..so best if we agree to disagree on this one.

 

[JM07]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
have you ever, personally had to deal with "deadstock", smallholder??

Defra/vets..calling in the "meat waggon"..

it all takes time...sometimes DAYS...and yes, the paperwork is Horendous, beit horses/ponies/sheep/cattle or even your much loved Granny...................

so no, i personally don't see a problem...except the problem of all the rules and regs of disposal these days....

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I've had to deal with fallen stock on quite a number of occasions over the years.

I do agree there's a lot of red tape and form filling to complete, but as much as I detest having to do it, that's part and parcel of farming in general I'm afraid.

Besides the risk of possible contamination to waterways and farmland, I wouldn't put my families or animals health at risk by holding on to dead animals just for the sake of saving a little time and money.

Although you don't see a problem with keeping dead animals on your land until the numbers build up, I think most of the farming community would disagree with your actions.

There again. it's up to you at the end of the day how you decide to conduct your own business..so best if we agree to disagree on this one.

[/ QUOTE ]

but we are agreeing....

as for the supposed deadstock at SF....of which i doubt there were 30+...maybe as JG himself has said he had a logistical problem over xmas and new year, there were a few, that could be as little as 4...or as many as 10..which the former would be, for me enough to call execptable to wait 2/3 days for the collection waggon....in any NORMAL? circumstance, which probably you and me would come under, i'd ideally like animals shifted within 24 hours..which isnt always possible when DEFRA are involved....

i'm not just talking Horses here, as its difficult to lump them in with other livestock/deadstock as horses are rarely kept in numbers such as those at SF..and i certainly dont have anywhere near those numbers.....

 

[brummel]

We're agreeing in so far as the amount of red tape etc. involved when a farm animal dies, but our opinions still differ on what we personally find acceptable with regards to holding onto to fallen stock purely to save time on paperwork.

Until the case is heard, thrown out or what ever happens, only the RSPCA, JG and his family know the exact number of dead horses found at SF... so I'd rather not comment on that situation. I will say though, the governing bodies and abattoirs in my area only ever close for a few days over the Christmas and new year period, but I accept this may be different in other areas of the country. Either way, the only time I've personally had more than one animal die over a space of a few days is at lambing, and on each occasion, the carcasses have been removed from my land within twenty four hours.

If I'm ever in the unfortunate position to have a few really ill animals on my hands, rather than prolong their suffering, I'd have them all put down and disposed of at the same time. Admittedly I'd have the extra vet fee's but I would also be saving on transport costs and paperwork.